An Examination of the Sustainability of Lester's 2014 Performance

GilaMonster

New Member
Nov 30, 2014
63
Jon Lester is a Cub. Lets us all cry together. What went wrong? Why did the Red Sox "lowball him"? How much did he raise his stock him 2014? Where was the 2014 Lester from 2011-2013? Let dig into this. Here I will try to figure out what happened…..and why the Red Sox maybe regret losing him
 

Table 1

Jon Lester

fWAR/Season

fWAR rank

FIP

FIP rank

K%

K% rank

Contact %

Contact% Rank

2009-2010

5.75

9th

3.14

10th

26.4%

2nd

76.1%

7th

2011-2013

3.63

16th

3.84

60th

20.4%

48th

80.9%

68th

2014

6.1

6th

2.80

9th

24.9%

12th

78.6%

29th
 
Lester was one of the top pitchers in the game during the 2009 and 2010 seasons, and even placed 4th in AL Cy Young voting in 2010. His peers were Felix Hernandez and Adam Wainwright, along with Lincecum and Sabathia (before they became husks of their former selves on the mound). While WAR still treated Lester well in 2011-2013, partially due to the sheer number of IP and park and league statistical adjustments, his FIP placed him in the leagues of Kyle Lohse, Homer Bailey, Yovani Gallardo and Ian Kennedy. During that period, Lester’s opponent contact rate and swinging-strike rate were the same as those of Clay Buchholz. So comparing a theoretical Lester deal to the Bailey extension, which was looked at as an overpay by some, didn’t seem unfair.
What caused Lester to fall from the ranks of the elite and become more of a number-two starter? The strikeouts disappeared.


The problem was especially apparent against righties, whom he struck out at only a 17.9% clip in 2013 (compared to 26.3% in 2010). What caused this decline? Let’s take a quick look at the Pitch F/X data. A lot of people are under impression that the decline was due to velocity loss that occurs with aging. This isn’t really the case for Lester. Lester’s fastball velocity has declined by less than one mile per hour, from 94 MPH in 2010 to 93.2 MPH in 2014. While the cutter and curveball have lost velocity, they aren’t as dependent on velocity as the fastball:

If we take a look at his pitch usage, we notice two things: He has for the most part ditched the sinker and changeup in favour of the fastball, cutter, curveball combination that our Matt Trueblood detailed in his recent piece.
Let’s take a look for the most telling data for any pitcher: The ability to get hitters to swing and miss.

Lester’s fastball generated whiffs on 16.3 percent of all swings in 2014, his best mark since 17.8 percent in 2010. That is around the league average of 16.4 percent, according to Eno Sarris’s benchmarks. The cutter, which he is throwing at a career-high frequency of 31.0% of all his pitches, is generating a whiff-per-swing rate of 23.8 percent (5th in MLB, minimum 500 pitches thrown), above the league average of 21.4%. The pitch isn’t as good as it used to be, when it generated whiffs on over 28 percent of swings, for reasons Sarris detailed last year. However, it’s still a very good pitch that was even better in 2014 due to improvements in the horizontal movement.
The curveball, though, is what’s special. In 2014, Lester’s curveball generated whiffs- per-swing on 40.81 percent of opponents’ swings, the highest mark of his career—and 12 percentage points more than in 2013, when his curveball was league-average in that regard. It was the best curveball in the league in terms of whiffs per swing, with pitchers like A.J. Burnett, Adam Wainwright and Sonny Gray behind him.
Now what happened to the curveball? It didn’t gain velocity. It didn’t gain movement. It gained a more consistent vertical release point. Look at 2014. Lester changed his release point on all pitches, but as you can see, the release points of the fastball, cutter, and curveball are tightly grouped together. Now look at 2009 and 2010, and compare it to 2011-2013. It appears that in his “peak years,” Lester maintained a better-disguised release point on the curve than he did in 2011-2013.
If the curveball was being tipped or was less deceptive, righties would have the best look at it.  Let’s check that out:


 

There is something incredibly satisfying in finding the results we might expect. The Curveball generated 41.4% Whiffs/Swing vs. righties compared to the 25.8% in 2013. Lester’s Curveball caused 25 Ks against righties, 6th in baseball compared to 2014 when it only caused 6. This is exceptional because he only generated 55 Whiffs on the CB vs. RHH. When righties do make contact, they aren’t hitting it hard, only slugging .151 against the hook last year, compared to .338 in 2013. Righties aren’t picking up the curveball like they were before, and in 2014, that solved the platoon issues he had against them in previous years. Trueblood said, “Lester might have tapped into something that will allow him to dominate right-handed batters in the future.” That something is the curveball.
The gist is that 2014 Jon Lester was more like 2009-2010 Jon Lester than 2011-2013 Jon Lester. A mechanical adjustment allowed the curveball to reemerge as an elite weapon in Lester’s arsenal, complementing a very good cutter and an above average fastball. It also allowed him to enjoy success versus righties again. The question is: How sustainable is this change? If Lester can lose his mechanics for years, is there serious risk of him losing them again? Can he continue to improve? If he can bring the curveball back to its former glory, can he regain a bit more movement on the cutter again? Can he bring back an effective sinker, giving him a deeper arsenal? These are the questions on which the Cubs will be betting $155 million on. Lester simply bet on himself and made real changes that the Red Sox might have not seen until it was too late. If these changes can be sustained, it wouldn’t surpise me if Lester is easily worth the contract barring injury. Just one 5 WAR season can be worth $40M on this market. So long Lester....It really is a shame because I really like what I see and. hope you continue to dominate.
 
 

GilaMonster

New Member
Nov 30, 2014
63
Cellar-Door said:
You want the TL:DR version?
 
Maybe.
 
Yeah. We really don't know much on year to year correlations of mechanical changes from my understanding. If I had a predictive model on release point change vs. effectiveness, I'd be making the big bucks in a front office. If I could tell from just video, I would have been a better baseball player. 
 

NickEsasky

Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2001
9,213
If I was the Cubs I would be concerned that Lester's reemergence coincided with finding a more overhand release point on his curveball. As he ages, like any pitcher, his release point is going to continue to drop as he putts more wear and tear on the shoulder. 
 

DavidTai

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
1,258
Herndon, VA
Wait, if you don't know about the sustainability of that, why do you think the Red Sox are absolutely going to regret losing Lester? If that pitching point of his isn't sustainable, then they may ultimately -not- regret it.
 
Could it -remain- sustainable without Farrell about?
 

iayork

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2006
639
Lester has gradually changed his pitch mix over the past three years: 

He's swapped a cutter for his sinker, and reduced use of his change.  The latter especially is even more obvious when looking over the course of the last season (rolling 3-game averages):
By the end of 2014, he'd almost completely abandoned the change, especially to lefties.  
 
His cutter and sinker are both fairly effective pitches, but the cutter looks more sustainable in that it more consistently avoids regions of good contact.  The following charts show pitch distribution for non-balls as size, with hit percentage in the particular sub-zone as color (green is lower, red is higher hit percent) for his common pitches:
Four-seam fastball
Cutter
Sinker
Curve
Change
 
Is this sustainable? On the one hand, he's able to mix in stronger pitches as some lose effectiveness, but on the other hand, that can't keep on forever.  
 

ALiveH

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,104
This thread seems mis-titled.  The answer is inherently unknowable.  Is it going to rain one month from today?
 
Qualitatively, he seems like he has good consistent mechanics.  He seems to have a relatively "easy" delivery.  And, his history has been one of impressive durability, if somewhat inconsistent results.  All this bodes well, but still the length & size of the contract for a starting pitcher at his age is a heck of a gamble.  Just my opinion, but I would take the other side of the bet that he earns his contract. 
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
I changed the title so people would stop getting hung up on the question and just talk about this data, though it seems more appropriate for the MLB forum to be truthful, and I will probably move it there after a while.
 

threecy

Cosbologist
SoSH Member
Sep 1, 2006
1,587
Tamworth, NH
GilaMonster said:
If the curveball was being tipped or was less deceptive, righties would have the best look at it.  Let’s check that out:

 
 
 
 
I find this chart quite compelling.
Another series that could be plotted on that chart:  John Farrell.  The curveball release point starts to vary from the other pitches after Farrell leaves after 2010, then starts to return to the slot of other pitches when Farrell returns in 2013.
 

GilaMonster

New Member
Nov 30, 2014
63
smastroyin said:
I changed the title so people would stop getting hung up on the question and just talk about this data, though it seems more appropriate for the MLB forum to be truthful, and I will probably move it there after a while.
I thought it was relevant here because it shows that maybe the Red Sox should have bought into his 2014 performance more than it feels like they did.I mean if you thought he was a 5 WAR pitcher he might be worth $155M while a 3.5WAR pitcher might not be.
 

EricFeczko

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 26, 2014
4,852
Great stuff, Gila and Iayork. Thanks! I apologize for the disorganization of this post, I'm sort of processing the information while I'm writing.
One thing I have trouble figuring out is that Jon Lester does not appear to have reverted to his 2009-2010 approach, but is instead adopting a new one with increased cutter and decreased change-ups/sinkers. As Iayork states, perhaps the change-up has simply lost its effectiveness. Perhaps hitters started to figure out the change-up, therefore swinging more and making fewer outs. Lester has more vertical movement on the curveball than the change-up, and because the curveball and change-up typically come in similar count situations, players could use the difference in the release point to choose whether to swing or not; a curveball was more likely to be a ball than a change-up given the same initial location pre-break. This would lead to better contact when the pitch was a change-up, more swings on the change-up, and fewer swings on the curveball.
 
In fact, this is exactly what we see. Let's start by ignoring Lester's 63 innings in 2007. Given the amount of adaptation he had to the majors that year, I'm not sure that information is anything but noise in determining the present and future Jon Lester.
 
First, as Gila shows above, there's a huge difference in the release point between the change-up and curveball from 2008-2010. This difference was absent in 2008 and 2009, and numerically smaller in 2010. However, it was still present in 2010, suggesting that the difference in release point is a factor in Lester's effectiveness, but not the whole story regarding these two pitches. I think this difference in release point was picked up by hitters, because you can see a difference in swing preferences that matches the release point data.
View attachment 693
As the release point difference between the change-up and curveball increase, hitters started swinging at the change-up more and the curveball less. However, this started in 2010, when Lester still had a 3.1 FIP. Looking at performance, you can see a noticeable increase in slugging for the changeup from 2008-2014. Specifically from 2011-2013, this suggests that the change-up had lost effectiveness during this period, which may explain why a difference in release point in 2010 did not affect Jon Lester as much, though it did start to affect hitter preferences.
View attachment 692
This dramatic shift in slugging is driven in part by both fewer outs for balls in play, as shown by batting average:
View attachment 695
And by changes in isolated power:
View attachment 694
 
So, though Jon Lester was getting more whiffs per pitch on his change-up, he was also getting more swings and stronger contact when the whiff did not occur. This loss of change-up effectiveness, coupled with the difference in release point, allowed hitters to sit on the curveball, reducing the number of swings and inducing stronger contact for the curve. Note that performance against the curve, but not the change-up, decreased when the release points were similar in 2014; hitters also started swinging more at the curve, perhaps because they had to guess whether the pitch would be an ineffective change-up or an effective curveball.
 
I guess I'm reiterating the same conclusions as Iayork and Gila, but the fact that the development in hitter preferences reflects the development of hitter performance and pitching release point further reinforces the idea that the different release point between the change-up and curveball, coupled with the deteriorating effectiveness of the change-up, made both pitches ineffective.
 
As to why the change-up is less effective? Perhaps that's due to the decline in the difference between change-up and fastball velocity. Here's the difference in average velocity from 2008-2014 (not in chart form, sorry): 9.62, 8.79, 8.32, 8.25, 6.98, 7.6, 7.24.
The fact that the change-up continues to ineffective may not matter if Lester can keep hitters from recognizing a change-up vs. a curveball. It also suggests that if another pitch, which is used in the same way as another more effective pitch, becomes ineffective Lester can maintain overall effectiveness by increasing the usage of the more effective pitch and matching the release point (if possible).
 

iayork

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2006
639
Just for fun, and maybe to help visualize the pitches, here are animations I made of all of Lester's fastballs, cutters, etc for 2014.
 
Fastball
 
Cutter
 
Sinker
 
Curve
 
Change
 

fineyoungarm

tweets about his subwoofer!
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2011
9,187
New Orleans, LA
smastroyin said:
I changed the title so people would stop getting hung up on the question and just talk about this data, though it seems more appropriate for the MLB forum to be truthful, and I will probably move it there after a while.
 
The man is no longer associated with the Boston Red Sox. Move the thread and move on.
 

FanSinceBoggs

seantwo
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2009
937
New York
I would think that Lester's success is sustainable for a few years, but what kind of pitcher will he be in year 4 of the contract (at 34 years old)? Or year 5? Or year 6? Or option year 7?  We also have to wonder if Lester will remain healthy through the duration of the contract.  If not, what kind of injury and how will it impact his performance?
 
What about Lester's velocity?  Has his velocity started to drop?  I don't know where to go for that kind of information. . . .
 
If he hasn't already experienced a decline in velocity, he is probably very close to it.
 

GilaMonster

New Member
Nov 30, 2014
63
FanSinceBoggs said:
I would think that Lester's success is sustainable for a few years, but what kind of pitcher will he be in year 4 of the contract (at 34 years old)? Or year 5? Or year 6? Or option year 7?  We also have to wonder if Lester will remain healthy through the duration of the contract.  If not, what kind of injury and how will it impact his performance?
 
What about Lester's velocity?  Has his velocity started to drop?  I don't know where to go for that kind of information. . . .
 
If he hasn't already experienced a decline in velocity, he is probably very close to it.
 
 
Look at the graph in the first post. He has lost a bit, but not a lot.
 

GilaMonster

New Member
Nov 30, 2014
63
threecy said:
I find this chart quite compelling.
Another series that could be plotted on that chart:  John Farrell.  The curveball release point starts to vary from the other pitches after Farrell leaves after 2010, then starts to return to the slot of other pitches when Farrell returns in 2013.
 
You'd THINK that. But it only started in 2014. The way the year-year graphs is makes it seem different
 

threecy

Cosbologist
SoSH Member
Sep 1, 2006
1,587
Tamworth, NH
GilaMonster said:
 
You'd THINK that. But it only started in 2014. The way the year-year graphs is makes it seem different
I suspect they were working on it during 2013 (Farrell's first season back), and that if you were to look at 2013 in detail, it would show progression.  His 2013 stats certainly show it (such as a 4.58 1H ERA vs. a 2.57 2H ERA).
 

iayork

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2006
639
GilaMonster said:
 
You'd THINK that. But it only started in 2014. The way the year-year graphs is makes it seem different
 
threecy said:
I suspect they were working on it during 2013 (Farrell's first season back), and that if you were to look at 2013 in detail, it would show progression.  His 2013 stats certainly show it (such as a 4.58 1H ERA vs. a 2.57 2H ERA).
To be honest, I think you're mostly seeing noise in the system.  Here's a gif showing Lester's release points for each of his games over the past 3 years - curves in red, all other pitches in green.  While there are a couple trends -- he may have moved his release point in a little for part of 2013 -- his curve release point relative to his other pitches hasn't changed that much.  Maybe there are a few games in 2013 when he had more separation, but it didn't last long.  What does happen is that the release point jumps around a little game to game, perhaps for real, perhaps because of slight changes in PitchFX, and that noise may be making things look bigger than they are.