Digging deeper on what Bud Norris can offer the Astros in 2010
*****My apologies for the sloppiness that was my handling of this post. In it's draft form, it managed to grace the front page here twice. C'est la via, though. Also, stay tuned to the Felipe Paulino addition that I'll get done at some point (hopefully it doesn't take me two weeks like this one did)*****
Throughout the first half of the summer, we were all a buzz about Bud Norris and his dominance of the PCL. When the Astros finally started to jettison their corps of reclamation projects in late July, Bud Norris, who had earned his call up, made his debut. His first official big league start against the Cardinals was easily in my top three most anticipated games to watch in 2009. Perhaps more so than any other Astro in their lineup, Norris' 2010 performance will be the harbinger of how this team will fair.
His projections and advanced metrics have already received their warranted attention here, but there is one tool that's yet to be fully employed on Norris: pitch/fx. Since Harry Pavilidus, SBN's resident pitch/fx guru, had already done some probing into what the latest and, in my opinion, greatest sabermetric tool available could allow us to infer about Bud Norris, he graciously provided me the raw data he had available.
What we know about Norris can be summed pretty quickly in a few stats: 4.38 xFIP in 2009, a projected FIP of 4.37 from Bill James, and a 4.43 projected ERA from CHONE, and a K:BB that either projected or from 2009 sits just above two (2.03 K/BB CHONE - 2.16 K/BB 2009). He's an above average strikeout pitcher that struggles with his command, and the latter is likely why all of the advanced metrics I just quoted fall below his ERAs—real or projected.
Those numbers, though, are pretty macro. With pitch/fx, and the people like Harry who are working with the data, we can meld that macro knowledge with more nuanced information gleaned from the actual repertoire of a pitcher. Formerly only the domain of seasoned scouts and pitching coaches, pitch/fx provides the kind of detailed information about how a pitcher pitches that our eyes just can't ever pick up on.
After the jump, we'll take a look at what the pitch/fx data that Harry provided can tell us about what Bud Norris might be doing for the Astros in 2010.
The first thing about Norris' repertoire that jumps out is that he has a distinct platoon approach. Below are a few graphs that illustrate Norris' mix of pitches broken down a few different ways by platoon.
First, Norris' selection based on the pitch count. As you can see, Norris is pretty dependent on his fastball and slider. His change-up is selectively used, and almost exclusively just against left-handed batters.
Norris vs. RHB
Norris vs. LHB:
Sandwiched in between the next two pitch/fx graphs is a charting of Norris game score by start. This corresponds to with the break downs of Norris' percentage breakdown's by start. The idea is to see if there's a discernible pattern.
Percentage pitch RHB
Game score by start
Percentage pitch LHB
I don't discern one. But perhaps someone out there might pick up on something that I missed. I'm moving forward, however, with the assumption that it isn't Norris' mix of pitches that impact his performance, both rather something about their actual quality, or perhaps even...luck.
A bold assumption, some might be thinking. Luckily, I had already looked at all the data before I tried to start making sense of it with Mr. Norris. For those of you aren't familiar with all of Harry's proprietary stats, or who don't remember the Brandon Backe piece from this summer, here's a quick refresher on what some of the stats you're looking at mean:
IWZ (rate of pitches in a zone defined by a two-foot plate and the hitter's top/bottoms averaged over all their PITCHf/x plate appearances) Chase(swing rate out of the wide zone) nkSLG (total bases divided by balls in play, includes home runs) Whiff (misses divided by swings) TBP (total bases per pitch - add up the bases on all the hits on a given pitch, divide by all the times that pitch was thrown - league is around .1)
A newer stat that Harry has added to his repertoire is rv100 and rv100E. rv100 is pretty simple. It's the actual run value of a pitch per one hundred pitches thrown. rv100E is interesting. Tied to the broadest of truths from DIPS theory, Harry is regressing the outcomes of batted ball types by one hundred percent to their three year league average (i.e. the stat assumes that a pitcher has zero control over the outcome a batted ball, but 100% control over the type of batted ball allowed). Harry admits that these are flawed assumptions, which they are, but they do key on certain truths of about how pitchers pitch. For both measures, a negative value is better for a pitcher.
| cfx | # | MPH | Swing | Whiff | Foul | B:CS | IWZ | Chase | Watch | nkSLG | GB% | FB% | PU% | LD% | HR/FBLD% | rv100 | rv100E |
| CH | 77 | 87.7 | 0.390 | 0.167 | 0.333 | 3.7 | 0.481 | 0.200 | 0.405 | 0.400 | 53% | 33% | 7% | 7% | 0% | 0.11 | 0.65 |
| F4 | 511 | 94.8 | 0.444 | 0.198 | 0.414 | 2.0 | 0.579 | 0.219 | 0.378 | 0.761 | 33% | 40% | 11% | 16% | 18% | 1.86 | 0.02 |
| SL | 345 | 88.4 | 0.446 | 0.370 | 0.266 | 2.0 | 0.542 | 0.272 | 0.406 | 0.375 | 50% | 18% | 14% | 18% | 0% | -1.60 | -1.28 |
| 933 | 91.9 | 0.441 | 0.260 | 0.353 | 2.1 | 0.557 | 0.237 | 0.390 | 0.591 | 41% | 31% | 12% | 16% | 12% | 0.44 | 0.41 |
Immediately, your eyes should dart tot he lower right-hand corner and the thought you should register is, "Holy crap his fastball is bad." That should be followed by, "But wait..." That but wait is because Bud Norris appears have experienced some bad luck with his fastball; the pitch he threw fifty-five percent of the time last year. OK, Norris seems to have experienced a TON of bad luck with his fastball. One need not look farther the nkSLG column to see why. Hopefully, Norris can either up his Whiff rate on the pitch...or hitters will just stop hitting the crap out of it. Indications are, though, that the latter should occur.
Surprisingly, Norris' change-up should be less effective than it is, in spite of its strong seven-mile per hour gap, which is one of the most important aspects of the change-ups effectiveness. However, I guess the effect isn't all that important unless Arnsberg is going to have Norris work his change-up more. In the end, the thing to be thankful for is that Norris' rv100E indicates that he should be in the negatives; or he's an above average pitcher.
10 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm not sure that's to blame
And this should have been included in the article: His average movement on his fastball was 5.5 inches in on a right handed hitter and 10.5 inches up from the middle of the zone. That’s pretty good (compare with Roy Oswalt, Norris actually gets more up and in on batters). Of course, it’s the average, so it could be that he’s getting shelled on the outliers, but I’m wary of just closing the case by saying that.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by Stephen Higdon on Jan 13, 2010 10:15 AM CST up reply actions
For whatever it’s worth, Bud Norris had a reverse platoon split in his Astros season. Of course, platoon splits, particularly for a partial season, may not be helpful due to sample size. But his OPS-against is .940 vs. RHB and .600 vs. LHB. His K rate was better vs. LHB (27 Ks on both sides, but about 30 more at bats by RHB). However, he also walked a lot more LHBs, leaving him with a better K/BB ratio vs. RHB. Norris has a much better BABIP vs. LHBs than RHBs (.266 vs. .355). So perhaps the platoon split is just luck. Or perhaps he has a pitch vs. LHBs which is inducing weak contact (change up?).
Just to complete the platoon split issue, Norris has a similar FIP vs. RHB and LHB in Round Rock last year and over his career. However, if you neutralize for “luck,” Norris in fact develops a significant platoon split which is significantly worse in performance vs. LHB (almost 1 run worse for both his Round Rock and career minor league pitching). Is that a coincidence of bad luck or does it mean that he does something which makes LHBs get back contact? I don’t know
The only reason I looked this up is because I was I wondering about Norris’ exclusive use of change ups vs. LHB, and then the platoon split intrigued me. We know that Dewey Robinson is a big proponent of throwing the change up (well, probably a lot of pitching coaches are). And he was pushing Paulino to throw more change ups. Given that Paulino has some problems with LHBs, maybe they hoped the change up would help keep LHBs off the fastball. Maybe Norris was encouraged to throw change ups to LHBs for the same reason. I’m just throwing out ideas here. I really don’t have any conclusions.
correction
in the last line of the second paragraph above, it should read “bad contact” rather than “back contact.”
Is anyone else concerned...
that Norris only uses two pitches? Yes I know he throws the change-up but overall not really. Now I’m not the most stat savvy guy, but isn’t it true that generally pitchers with two pitches should be in the bullpen?
Miss-placed Houstonian living and going to school in the wilderness of Wyoming. Fresno St. 28 - Wyoming 35 (2 OT)!!! Hands down best game I have ever been to.
I'm with you
I’m not a big stats guy. In fact some of these stats fly right over my head (or I just don’t feel like understanding them) but I have always thought of Norris as a bullpen guy. He’s a great pitcher and our best young pitcher and I think that’s one of the reasons he’s getting a shot at the rotation. In the end I think he’ll be in the bullpen and I truly think he’ll be a great set up man or closer. I definitely think that’s his future in Houston. Who knows, if he falters this year he might land in the pen by the end of the season. We do have a couple of other players who are waiting for their shot at the rotation anyways. Either way I think we’ll be glad he’s on our side.
Changeups are typically used much less than power pitches, less even than curveballs, depending on the quality of the pitch. Bud could stand to work his in a little more as he gains more confidence in it. Personally I think he’ll be fine as a starter, though he may not ever develop into a #3 or better.
That is a general rule-of-thumb, based on the idea that you need to be able to change your plan of attack to make it through the lineup 3+ times. It’s not a hard and fast rule, though, and some starting pitchers manage to make a good living using their third pitch sparingly.
Our very own Wandy primarily uses Fastball/Curveball, with his changeup coming in 6-8% of the time. This is because his curve is excellent. Ryan Dempster leans on his fastball/slider combo for almost 85% of his pitches. Ross Ohlendorf is another guy who has had some successful seasons despite using his 3rd pitch rarely.
But your overall point is a good one…these kinds of starters are rarely found at the top of the rotation. If it weren’t for the fact that starters are so much more valuable than relievers and that the farm system doesn’t have many starters knocking at the door of the majors, Norris would likely be groomed for a closer job. He spent much of 2009 developing his changeup in Round Rock, so for the time being, he’ll be given every opportunity to succeed in the rotation.
I think a good comparison for Bud’s peak potential might be Josh Johnson. Hard throwing right-handed power pitcher, relies heavily on a good fastball/slider combo, and works in a changeup occasionally. (He’s only thrown the change 7.3% of the time over his career.) Struggled with command a bit early in his career, but seems to have figured it out now and had a dominating season and a half with the Marlins.
He does get a pretty good amount of groundballs, but Norris’ minor league numbers (if they’re reliable, which is a fair question) suggest he did too, and you would think that would be the case given how much movement his fastball has. Bud hasn’t managed a good groundball rate yet at the major league level, but it’s a small sample size, so I think that might change.
If Bud can work out his command issues like Johnson did, he could peak as a top of the rotation pitcher. At his current level of play he profiles more as a #4 starter. Ace starters are rare, so I wouldn’t put any bets on him improving to that point, but it’s certainly not impossible.

by 



























