Daily Astros News and Notes
I'm always coming up with crazy ideas, I know. This one may take and it may not. I'm going to throw it at the wall (you readers) and see if it sticks. Evan is going to handle many of the game recaps this season (and a very big thanks to him for that). What I'm thinking about with this story each day is part extended recap, part link dump and part open thread for discussion. We can talk about the upcoming game some days, what happened the night before on others or something like the draft when it gets closer to time. It's going to be a notes column like you've never seen.
One thing we'll do in every story, though, is look at the pitchers from the night before through Pitch F/X data. Over at Brooks Baseball, they have a tool that lets you pull game-by-game data. It's pretty granular at that level, so we won't be able to draw lasting conclusions from it, but I think there is some great possibility to see how guys do. Let me show you what I mean:
Roy Oswalt - The starter went six innings while giving up three earned runs, two walks and striking out two. He threw 85 pitches, including 32 two-seam fastballs, 24 four-seam fastballs, 14 sliders, 12 curveballs and three changeups. As you'll see, some of those sinkers were probably four-seamers and vice versa. But, let's look at the data as-is.
Here's a chart of Roy's speed, selection and percent strikes:
Pitch Type
Avg Speed
Max Speed
Avg H-Break
Avg V-Break
Count
Strikes / %
Swinging Strikes / %
Nibbleness
Time to Plate
FF (FourSeam Fastball)
93.14
94.7
-3.05
8.47
24
19 / 79.17%
4 / 16.67%
4.99
0.406
SI (Sinker)
92.92
95
-5.92
6.87
32
20 / 62.50%
1 / 3.13%
6.20
0.408
CH (Changeup)
83.17
84.2
-7.85
6.49
3
0 / 0.00%
0 / 0.00%
10.39
0.453
SL (Slider)
85.01
87.1
1.44
2.34
14
7 / 50.00%
1 / 7.14%
5.02
0.440
CU (Curveball)
72.48
80.8
3.55
-7.72
12
7 / 58.33%
1 / 8.33%
7.85
0.524
He showed pretty good velocity on the fastball, getting a couple up to 95 at best. His slider was also coming in at the speed of a Greg Maddux fastball and his curve was veery slow. Look at that for a second. His curve was 20 MPH slower than either of his fastballs. Is it any wonder that Kung Fu Panda couldn't hit that hanging curve solidly in the first inning?
The other thing to note here were the strike percentages. His slider and two-seamer gave him trouble. He just couldn't get enough strikes on those pitches, though that could have been by design. It's still somewhat of a departure from the Roy of old, who would go after a hitter no matter what was going on in the game. On the positive side, Roy's four-seamer got four swings and misses, the most of any pitch this game.
Let's look at his location charts real quick:
It's hard to see too much on this small chart, I know. But notice how all his curveballs were right down the middle? He elevates them or keeps them down in the zone, but didn't throw the curve on either side of the plate. Just an interesting sidenote, I guess. Anything else stand out about this start?
The last thing we'll look at with Roy is a graph of his velocity over the game.
To me, this says that Oswalt wasn't being bothered by his back, nor was he laboring when Mills took him out. He hit 95 on the radar gun around his 75th pitch. That's pretty good. The other thing this graph shows is just how severe that change in speeds can be. Roy stays mostly in that 85-95 range, but when he does break out that yakker, he can really make a hitter look bad.
As for the other guys?
Chris Sampson - Though he didn't hit 90 on any of his pitches, Sampson did throw five curveballs, the most of any of his pitches. He also only used one changeup, which was reportedly the pitch that turned around his 2009 season after Roy Corcoran taught it to him in Round Rock. Sampson threw a lot of strikes but didn't get one swing-through (though he did have very few pitches thrown). it's still a pretty positive return for injury at the end of 2009.
Tim Byrdak - Could I be more down on the lefty from Rice? Probably not. Nothing stood out too much in his Pitch F/X data. He threw a bunch of strikes, but probably got too much of the plate with many of those pitches.
Sammy Gervacio - Surprise, surprise. Gervacio's most used pitch? The slider. He threw five of them and got two whiffs. That's a pretty good percentage, no? His one fastball clocked in at 92, but since he only needed 11 pitches to work through the ninth inning, we don't have a ton of data. His slider averaged 86 miles an hour with a max speed of 86.5. That's pretty consistent. Unlike Byrdak, Gervacio managed to hug the sides of the strike zone with all but one of his pitches. That slider painted the outside of the plate three times and twice got Gervacio a strikeout. It was a good first outing, indeed.
Mills Watch, Day One: Well, it's only one game, but we finally have something meaningful to discuss about Brad Mills. For instance, anyone else think it was odd that he used his only left-handed bat off the bench to lead off the bottom of the sixth? Sullivan struck out against Lincecum, but is this an indicator of Mills' preference or a desire not to throw a guy like Michaels out there to start the frame?
Speaking of Michaels, he was the third bat off the bench, entering the game in the ninth inning against closer Brian Wilson. So, Mills thought Kepp and Sullivan were better bets to pick up hits before Michaels? And is there a reason why he didn't try to get Johnson in the game in the ninth inning, to give the Astros a little more power in the lineup?
As for the pitchers, his decision to pull Oswalt couldn't be second-guessed too much. Bringing in Byrdak? Yeah, I'll second guess that. At the time, the Astros were still in grand-slam reach. Byrdak gave up one of the few extra base hits by the Giants on that home run to right field. The lefty didn't have a great spring and didn't look that great in this game. Let's hope Mills used him more situationally this time instead of as a preference thing.
Rookie debuts: Both Tommy Manzella and J.R. Towles got hits in their first Opening Day starts. Manzella looked bad a couple of times against Lincecum, but his single up the middle was scalded and he made a very nice play going first to third on Matsui's single. Plus, Manzella showed decent range at short and made two strong relay throws on the double plays. He gets a solid B grade.
As for Towles? He didn't get much chance to show his defensive acumen, as the Giants don't have many speedsters on the basepaths. He did, however, have a good day at the plate. Sure, he only got the one hit. His double in the ninth inning did drive in a run, but more importantly, Towles hit the ball well in all three plate appearances. He was a fingertip away from another double in his first at-bat, when John Bowker ran a ball down in the deep right field corner. I'd bump his grade up to a B-plus.
The strongest performance of the night had to be from Sammy Gervacio. Slingin' Sammy struck out two on a steady diet of sliders off the plate and had the entire Giants dugout cracking up with laughter at his delivery. Granted, that could have been because they were leading by five runs at the time. But, it's still an important point. After seeing his first outing, I'm feeling better and better with Gervacio as the eighth inning guy to Lindstrom's closer. I guess that leaves Brandon Lyon in the seventh inning role? Could that even happen? What would the over/under on critical FanGraph columns be? 20? 30? How many rhetorical questions can I ask to end this section? (that answer is six)
Defensive returns: When the Astros signed Pedro Feliz this offseason, it was seen as a move by the team to emphasize defense. After all, that's why they didn't try harder to bring back Miguel Tejada right?
That defensive philosophy was on display Monday night, as guys like Manzella, Roy Oswalt, Michael Bourn and yes, Carlos Lee all made good plays to help limit the runs San Fran scored. Oswalt didn't have any plays as spectacular as Mark Buerhle, but he did start a nifty 1-6-3 double play. Bourn made a couple nice running catches, including one up against the bullpen in right.
Lee even got in on the action, but not in the way you might think. Lee played a couple hits off the wall in left well enough to hold at least two Giants hitters to singles, when they could have easily gotten doubles if he had overpursued the ball.
It wasn't the most spectacular start to the season defensively, but it was a move in the right direction. Am I forgetting any plays?
Comment of the Day: This is a new feature we'll be adding. Right now, we'll just highlight the best comment from the previous night's game thread. In the future, we'll also add a leaderboard to show who had the most comments each day in the game threads.
Today's top comment? Courtesy of Joe in Birmingham:
AAARRRRGHHHHHH
I’m about to puke up my nachos
Astros fan for life
That's in response to this story that the Astros will be adding a Taco Bell Sauce Race this season. It's also funny, because one of Joe's nicknames for Mills is Nacho. Maybe that's only funny to me, but it still gets to be Comment of the Day.
Let's talk about HGH: We've talked about performance enhancing drugs at various times here. In fact, the last time we did, it was one of the most heated discussions I've seen on TCB. I wonder if this post will generate the same type of conversation.
What this articledoes is make my case for me. Basically, it cites a number of articles to prove that there is NO PROOF that HGH actually enhances an athlete's performance. The article also helps set out the problems with developing a test for HGH and whether it could be reliable.
I'm not an exercise science major nor do I want to be an expert in that field. So, I'm not going to wax poetic about biomarkers. I do think it's interesting, though, in how similar this is to how they test for steroids. After all, the steroid screenings don't look for Wistrol or whatever anabolic steroid an athlete is using. Instead, it looks for the biomarker of raised testosterone levels. If that level is a certain percentage above normal, then the test comes back positive. So, there is a precedent for this kind of test. However, I'm not so sure they NEED to perfect such a test for HGH. Seems like that money could be used in many more useful ways.
The 'Character' Concern: Another really cool link I found in the past few days was this one on THE BOOK blog. One of its authors, MGL, did a study on whether 'good' character guys helped their team more than 'bad' characters. Surprisingly, he found that there IS a correlation.
Does this validate the Astros for how they have conducted business in the McLane era? After all, both Biggio and Bagwell were pretty good character guys. At the same time, the club had its most successful run with notable 'bad' character guys like Jeff Kent and Roger Clemens.
Does this also validate the draft strategy of passing over questionable character guys? Will it lead to the Elijah Dukes in future drafts slipping or becoming the exploited resource for smart drafting teams? There are a ton of interesting questions that studies like this generate. My favorite part of this all? Knowing that I can feel good about 'rooting for the good guys.'
33 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I couldn’t find the link to MGL’s study.
Also, I wouldn’t agree with the inclusion of Kent and Clemens as bad character guys. I’ve always liked Kent, and I think he is generally viewed as a positive influence from a clubhouse standpoint. I always felt that he helped the 2004 Astros team when he came to the defense of Oswalt during the Cubs’ hit by pitch incidents. I don’t see how Clemens and his competitiveness could be viewed other than as a very positive impact on the clubhouse. He was viewed as particularly helpful to the young pitchers. I suppose “character” questions are subjective, in the eyes of the beholder, and I would be interested in seeing how MGL could define those players for purposes of a study. The more I think about it, the more difficult I think it would be do so. I think there is a difference between a guy like Dukes and a player like Bradley, even though both are probably labeled with character issues. We remember that Carl Everett, who was labeled that way, fit in well with the Astros’ clubhouse. That said, I probably agree with the premise of your argument that the Astros’ focus on acquiring good clubhouse guys is beneficial to the team’s winning ability. I just think it would be hard to prove.
I agree about Clemens (and Carl Everett now that you mentioned him)
Clemens was a standup guy for his team and his teammates.
I do agree that some guys can hurt a team. Last season I predicted accurately that Milton Bradley would destroy the Cubs. He more or less did. I’m drawing a blank on his name but a decade or so ago there was a power hitter named Albert Belle, who was an A-1 jerk. Despite his numbers he alienated his eammates and his eams lost, season afer season.
Fact is , most baseball players are good character guys. Maybe the bad ones don’t stick around very long.
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on Apr 6, 2010 8:23 AM CDT up reply actions
MGL study was apparently an April Fool's joke.
I surmise that after following the link after it was posted.
Yep, I didn’t think it was on the up-and-up either. But I had it lying around in the hopper for a while now and wanted to use it at some point.
BTW I didn’t think Clemens or Kent were bad characters guys. Was just making the point that they may have been perceived as that by some people (namely the media that covered them in Boston and San Fran).
by David Coleman on Apr 6, 2010 8:41 AM CDT up reply actions
By the way, as far as pinch hitting choices—I’m not surprised that Chris Johnson wasn’t used. I suspect that Chris Johnson will be targeted against LHP, and the Giants didn’t use a lefthander in Monday’s game. That’s probably extra-true in the case of Lincecum, who fits the “very tough RHP” label. The Astros have a RH heavy lineup without Berkman, and Mills may have felt that characteristic was helping Lincecum dominate….which would explain using Sullivan as the first PHer. The sequencing of using Keppinger and Michaels probably reflects that Keppinger is more of a “get on base” pinch hitter (just guessing here).
I thought Sullivan had a good at bat against Lincecum, I know he didn’t reach but come on it’s “the freak”. Anyways it was a breath of fresh air to watch Sullivan’s as opposed to Erstad hacking at balls.
by Timothy De Block on Apr 6, 2010 8:08 AM CDT up reply actions
I thought Sullivan looked terrible.
The strikeout swing is burned into my memory as missing the ball by at least two feet.
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on Apr 6, 2010 8:24 AM CDT up reply actions
“the freak” does that, it’s not like Pence’s at bats were any better.
by Timothy De Block on Apr 6, 2010 8:52 AM CDT up reply actions
yeah - Hunter Pence had a bad night
Chip Bailey said he expected Hunter Pence to lead teh Astros batting “wire to wire.” I chuckled at the commenrt since Hunter messed up the first "wire. "
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on Apr 6, 2010 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions
I definitely understood why he used Sullivan in that situation. Not only do lefties have a better chance of getting on against Lincecum, Sullivan is also fast enough to maybe bunt for a base hit. As the leadoff batter in that inning, that’s not a bad play.
As for Johnson, though, why shouldn’t he get a pinch hit opportunity here or there. I don’t mind Mills using him as a platoon guy against lefties, but his splits last season were based on a small sample size. Doesn’t it make sense to get him at bats against both lefties and righties?
by David Coleman on Apr 6, 2010 8:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Being opening day may of played a factor, sending him up for an at bat against Lincecum on opening day in front of a national audience isn’t the best way to instill confidence in a young player.
by Timothy De Block on Apr 6, 2010 8:53 AM CDT up reply actions
I think OremLK pointed out that Johnson’s damage in spring training seemed to come against LHP. I haven’t confirmed that, since I don’t know of any splits source for spring at bats. If that’s true, though, that is what Mills has seen from watching him in the spring. I’m not saying that Johnson will never be used against RHP, but I wouldn’t be surprised if Mills wants to give him the best chance of success initially against LHP. I think that is double-true when the pitcher is Lincecum. I agree with you on the small sample size issue, but I just get the feeling that Mills likes Johnson better vs. LHP.
Link fixed
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.
Is the pitch chart for Roy O backwards? (or from behind the plate?)
I recall him missing outside on right hand batters (to the left) a lot early, leading to a few walks. The chart shows only four wide pitches to the left.
P.S. I like the pitch breakdown. Very educational.
Except for the second for sure and the third innings, Roy had a strong outing – unfortunately – the second did him in.
Anyone else catch the statistic that Astros have lost five opening games in the past six years?
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on Apr 6, 2010 8:31 AM CDT reply actions
I believe the chart is from the catcher’s and umpire’s perspective, so it would be backwards if you were watching from Roy’s vantage.
by David Coleman on Apr 6, 2010 8:42 AM CDT up reply actions
Correct
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 Apr 6, 2010 8:54 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
The chart makes sense from that perspective .
Thanks
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on Apr 6, 2010 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions
Hunter Pence on Opening Days...
2008 0-4 1K 0BB -.094 WPA
2009 0-3 1K 0BB 1 sac fly -.29 WPA
2010 0-4 2K 0BB -.076 WPA
This supports my belief that Hunter gets too amped up on opening day.
oh, yeah….but I’ll add in my own scouting information. He has looked horrible on each of those opening days, as if he had zero plate discipline. He had tremendous springs before each opening day, which made it even more noticeable. As I mentioned awhile back, I still feel bad for my April Fools Day joke after the 2008 opening day, when I put together a mock press release with Cecil Cooper announcing that Pence should be be sent back to AAA.
That’s the whole point of April fools day =P
by Timothy De Block on Apr 6, 2010 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions
Not that it necessarily means anything, but Pence did say he felt like he was seeing the ball well; let me see if I can dig up the quote…
“Every time I’m up there I’m trying to see the ball and do the best I can and execute a game plan,” said Pence, who went 0-for-4 with a pair of strikeouts. “I got a good pitch to hit and got on top of it. It wasn’t really a day where things went great for me. I saw the ball well but didn’t make good swings.”
But yeah, he was definitely the goat of the game.
Mills' first day...
Richard Justice had an article on Mills as the perfect fit for the Astros. Now, I’ll admit that Justice goes overboard on the notion that a manager can make such a huge difference. Or maybe it’s just that I was irritated by Drayton McLane’s quote that “leadership is what gets you to where you need to be,” which almost makes it seem like the manager is more important than the team’s talent. That aside, I do like the difference that Mills brings.
I did find Blum’s comments interesting for what they might indicate about life under the previous manager.
"His energy level was the same the whole game," Blum said. "He didn’t freak out and start yelling at people. He kept cheering guys on."
Blum also like the fact that Mills told him that Chris Johnson would replace him in the lineup for the next day, instead of waiting until the day of the game to tell the players.
"Those are things that people like me appreciate," Blum said. "Chris Johnson doesn’t have to wake up tomorrow wondering what’s going to happen. It’s little things that are good."
HGH
I first want to point out that the HGH article does a good job of explaining some basic issues regarding HGH, its not entirely credible. He calls himself credible and believable because he linked articles and what not, but he links to wikipedia multiple times and any college professor or scientist will laugh at that because wikipedia is not credible, anyone can make a wikipedia article. But, he is entirely correct about about the perception that HGH works is a big deal. Its called the placebo effect. There was a study done to illustrate this. 7 subjects who were active weightlifters were told to go on a 4 month training program and the top 4 who increased their strength the most would be in a steroid study. This gave them motivation to train hard. Now those top 4 were given a placebo instead of real steroids but they had 7 times increases in strength compared to the pretrial training period. While HGH doesnt work, it does have this psychological effect.
As far as the test is concerned, i dont think its likely to be effective. There is too much variation between person to person. So a measurment of IGF-1 is unlikely. A person who naturally has lower levels of HGH or IGF-1 could take HGH and still be in the parameters of “normal” because there is a wide range of how much people secrete. Age variation is also wide in regards to secetion rates. IGF-1 is also affected by other factors like the mentioned exercise. There are exercise programs designed to stimulate HGH and IGF-1 release by high intensity low reps heavy weight and certain rest intervals.
I see it as a lost cause to me at least because i am graduating with an ex. Science degree in may and no research indicates that is an ergogenic aide. My professor didnt even mention it in lecture, although there is a short section in the text book, because HGH has been degraded to the point that this field doesnt even think about because its been disproven time and time again.
by Subber10 on Apr 6, 2010 12:14 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
I'll second-guess pulling Oswalt
after only 6 innings/84 pitches. I think the Giants had the bottom 2 of their lineup coming up next inning before it rolled back around.
At the game, the best explanation I could come up with was that Mills was playing it safe with the recent injury and Roy not being stretched out enough in ST in terms of pitch counts. I think I read Mills’ explanation was that he pulled Oswalt because he thought we needed offense to start the bottom of the 6th.
I’ll be interested to see how Mills handles Oswalt in his next start. If he’s pulled after 6 for offense, I guess it really does mean that he’s not an ace anymore.
I, too, was surprised that Mills pulled Oswalt after 6 IP, and I might have done it differently. However, I think it was more a sign of frustration with the offense than a knock on Oswalt as the ace.
that’s what I took away, considering Oswalts spot was the first spot due up in the bottom of the 6th.
by Timothy De Block on Apr 6, 2010 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions
of course you'd have to ask the guy sitting next to me
… but I was against it while Sullivan was walking up to the plate.
The reason I think it is a knock on Oswalt is this. If the situation in last night’s game were reversed, do you think Bochy pulls Lincecum? Maybe he considers it, but I doubt it, offense be damned. Do that for any of the top pitchers. Maybe Roy is the best pitcher on our staff and while his stuff still seems to be good, it’s been a while since I’ve felt confident that he will shut down an opposing team for an entire game.
===
So while I’m writing this comment, I decide to actually go look at last year’s game logs.
Oswalt Baseball Reference game logs 2009
He had some dominant starts and he had some bad ones. I think what my gut feeling above is reflecting is the inconsistency. I think Roy has probably passed his peak performance years, so I guess this is what we can expect going forward.
Is Oswalt as dominating a pitcher as Lincecum? On a consistent basis, no. But that could be said of almost all No. 1 pitchers in the NL. If the roles were reversed, i.e., Oswalt had a shutout and had allowed only 1 hit or whatever, and Lincecum had allowed a 3 spot in the 2d, I wouldn’t be surprised if Lincecum were lifted.
I'll second-guess pulling Oswalt
after only 6 innings/84 pitches. I think the Giants had the bottom 2 of their lineup coming up next inning before it rolled back around.
At the game, the best explanation I could come up with was that Mills was playing it safe with the recent injury and Roy not being stretched out enough in ST in terms of pitch counts. I think I read Mills’ explanation was that he pulled Oswalt because he thought we needed offense to start the bottom of the 6th.
I’ll be interested to see how Mills handles Oswalt in his next start. If he’s pulled after 6 for offense, I guess it really does mean that he’s not an ace anymore.
Oh, great. It appears the Astros game isn't scheduled on Austin cable...
Do the have to start doing this crap this early in the season?

by 

























