169 replies to this topic

[Snodgrass'Muff]

I agree it was frustrating to see Bobby V send him out for the 9th, especially since the 8th was by far his most difficult inning. He threw 12, 14, 10, 12, 16, 15 and 10 pitches in his first 7 innings. Then he came out and threw 22 to get through the 8th to get him to 111 pitches. He was clearly getting tired at that point.

It worked out, but I was definitely not happy with that call and if he struggles in his next outing, I won't be surprised.

[Bucknahs Bum Ankle]

Thanks for putting in the work JMD! That's interesting, if inconclusive, stuff.

Abs, your link goes to an abstract for a study on "Calcitonin gene-related peptide in primary afferent neurons of rat".

I assume this is the study you were referring to:

http://www.scribd.co...h-Counts-Revise

Conclusion:
There is a negative relationship between past pitches thrown and future performance
that is virtually linear. The impact of the cumulative pitching load is larger than the impact of a
single game. Rest days do not appear to have a large impact on performance. However, given that
few pitchers in the sample pitched after less than three days of rest, the results should not be
extrapolated to shorter rest periods.


Relevance:
This study supports the popular notion that high pitching loads can dampen future
performance; however, because the effect is small, pitch-count benchmarks have limited use for
maintaining performance and possibly preventing injury.

And this finding that is more specific to the pitch count range we are discussing:

Discussion

The finding that pitches thrown were negatively correlated with future performance should be
interpreted with caution. Though the estimated effect was statistically significant, it was small.
Escamilla et al [5] found few differences between pitches thrown and biomechanical changes as
pitchers reached between 105 and 135 pitches. The range is within the upper range of pitches
thrown that modern pitchers are typically allowed. The ERA difference in a game following 105
pitches versus 135 pitches is approximately 0.19—a small effect of 0.33 percent at the average
sample ERA that is consistent with Escamilla’s finding.

Edited by Bucknahs Bum Ankle, 08 June 2012 - 09:40 AM.

[luckysox]

I do think there was an effort by V to get him the complete game and I think it was for psychological - maybe confidence is a better word - reasons. I was at the 4/30 Oakland game where he got through 6 innings with an 11-1 lead and his line to that point was: 6ip, 4 hits, 4 walks, 1 run (earned) on 72 pitches. I remember thinking he was lucky more than good that night (lots of loud line outs and still too many walks), but hey, 1 run after 6 was looking good to anyone.

In the top of the 7th, he went single, walk, line-out, ground out, walk. That's 2 outs with the bases loaded, and he then gave a up a 2 run single on his 95th pitch, and then a 3 run homer to Reddick on his 99th pitch and all of a sudden it was 11-6 and out came the V. I remember in his post game, Buchholz pointed out that he was disappointed because he was, even in the 6th inning, thinking about a complete game. He thought this game was going to be the turning point, and it went from, in his mind, a complete game 4 hitter (with 4 walks) on about 115 pitches to another dud. I truly believe that the complete game is something that some guys really strive for once they are at a certain point with a low number of pitches. And a 9 inning complete game shutout is a feather in a guy's cap; it means he's a hell of a pitcher, at least that day. Clay may well have needed that feather from V as a signal that he trusts him and he knows he's back (even if we don't). I was not thrilled with it last night, especially after the walk, but Clay then got two easy outs and walked away with a big hug from Shop and that fancy feather for is cap. (Did you guys see Shoppach with a HUGE fist pump as the ball was popped into the outfield for the last out? That alone tells me how psychological it was).

[sachilles]

I hadn't noticed this before, but in the fifth out of the stretch he changed his starting point on the rubber against different hitters. Has anyone else noticed him doing this before?

IIRC, they had mentioned that during the NESN telecast last season, maybe during spring training. However, I don't recall seeing it this season from him. I'd be interested to see if it was a tactic he was skipping early on this season as he was struggling.

[absintheofmalaise]

Thanks BBA. I changed the link. The phone sucks for linking.

[czar]

IIRC, they had mentioned that during the NESN telecast last season, maybe during spring training. However, I don't recall seeing it this season from him. I'd be interested to see if it was a tactic he was skipping early on this season as he was struggling.

I look at his release point clusters on Brooks and they have roughly the same horizontal spread as they did the last couple years. I don't think him moving around on the rubber is something brand new.

However...

I hadn't noticed this before, but in the fifth out of the stretch he changed his starting point on the rubber against different hitters. Has anyone else noticed him doing this before?

Betemit LH he started off on the 1B side of the rubber.
Flaherty LH he started off on the 3B side of the rubber.
Andino RH he started on the 1B side of the rubber.

To start the 6th, all out of the wind up he started off against all the hitters from the middle-1B side of the rubber.

... what abs did post is interesting (and I don't have time to go back to MLB.tv to verify) in that he used different sides of the rubber for two LHB. I have never seen that either when I played or in anything I watched. I was taught (as a relatively low-slot RHP without anything that bore in on lefties) to move to the right side (from pitcher POV) for RHB and left side for LHB -- and most people I see who do this (someone did last year and we talked a lot in a thread about it -- Bard?) do the same thing.

It'd certainly be an interesting wrinkle if the Sox (or less likely, Shoppach) are positioning him based on individual batter splits or spray charts or whatever.

EDIT:

Betemit:



Flaherty:



Andino:



Definitely does look like he went left-right-left (sides or rubber) to LHB-LHB-RHB. Very interesting catch.

EDIT2: For quantification sake Buchholz was

-0.78 ft
-1.24 ft
-0.50 ft

horizontally (using raw PFX data to average x release loc) to the three batters, so 6-9 inches difference during each at bat.

Edited by czar, 08 June 2012 - 11:29 AM.

[joe dokes]

He did have an extra day before last night, and with off days on 6/14 and 6/18, he's likely to get more of them if the Sox so choose.

I wonder if pitching deep into the game with good stuff is an analog to "pitching without your best stuff," an important skill that he can certainly improve.

We are conditioned to treat 115+ or the 8th and 9th innings as being in Everest's death zone when its far from that simple.

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

As there is much gnashing of teeth about the lack of a true ace on the Sox, is it possible Clay is the guy we've been looking for all along?

He found something in his May 27 game against the Rays and now in the last four games has put up the following line:

31 IP, 23 H, 6 W, 28 K, 1.45 ERA, .625 OPS against. After not striking out more than five in any appearance, he's now struck out 6, 7, 6, and 9 batters in those four games. After only being in double digits in swinging strikes once all season, he's recorded 11, 10, 11, 11 in the last four games.

So, is it a mirage, or is this the Clay we've all been waiting for. Possibilities for regression exist. The 3 home runs allowed project out to 26 for a full season and there's some luck involved with them all being solo home runs. His BABIP is only .260 for the four-game run, vs. .313 for the season as a whole, so it's possible he's been luckier there as well.

What might he have found to explain the turnaround, assuming it's not luck? I only spent a little time over at Brooks, but I did find this one chart looking at his horizontal release point that seems to be a major change:



Pretty clearly, that release point had been moving in a particular direction, then, suddenly, a few games ago, it jumps. That looks like something that's been fixed or altered to me, but maybe it's a glitch in the system or something.

Would hope others could weigh in here.

[Lefty on the Mound]

According to this article by P. Abraham, Buchholz learned a splitter from Beckett in a before a game in May against the Rays:

http://www.boston.co...one_inning.html

Beckett taught Buchholz a split-finger fastball before his start against Tampa Bay May 16. Buchholz threw 11 of the pitches on Tuesday, using the off-speed pitch thrown on a sharp downward plane to keep the Marlins from timing his fastball.

It seems unusual that a pitcher could learn and master a pitch so quickly but this could account for the Buchholz's newly found effectiveness.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

It appears that what he's found is his changeup and mechanical stability. The release points graph is really interesting to see and certainly does suggest a mechanical fix. Here are a couple of graphs from each of his last four starts that show just how effective his changeup has been.

5/27



6/1



6/7



6/12



This is the Clay we all got so excited about in 2007. Let's hope he's there to stay.

[absintheofmalaise]

If people wouldn't mind helping to track this I'd appreciate it. I noticed in the game before this one that he was starting off in the stretch from different sides of the rubber, even against the same handed batter. I hadn't noticed it before. Maybe it's a new wrinkle. It would also help to account for his release point being more horizontal than vertical. In the long run, it might not be that important, but it would be interesting to track. Thanks

[czar]

According to this article by P. Abraham, Buchholz learned a splitter from Beckett in a before a game in May against the Rays:

http://www.boston.co...one_inning.html

It seems unusual that a pitcher could learn and master a pitch so quickly but this could account for the Buchholz's newly found effectiveness.

Some of this was covered in the other Buchholz thread (which maybe this should be merged with?), but Buchholz hasn't been throwing it more than a few times per game.

He told Brian MacPherson that he originally started toying with it when he still didn't have feel of the changeup, and he wanted something offspeed he could keep down if his changeup was up in the zone. He's continued to throw it over the last few starts, but relatively infrequently (2/108 pitches vs. TOR, 5/125 vs. BAL)

Now as I say that, I was ready to come here and post "well, he has only used it on like 10 total pitches over his last 4 starts, so it's probably not too related to his recent run of success." And it probably still isn't the driver seeing as he only used it a few times the last few starts when he WAS good.

But he certainly threw it a lot last night.



That clump on the left side between 83-88 mph certainly look like splitters to me.



It looks like he threw 11 of them, 8 for strikes (3 that were outs in-play, 3 fouls, and 2 swinging strikes).

Easily the most frequently he's used the splitter since he started throwing it.

[absintheofmalaise]

I am merging the two threads. I think it would be good to have all this in one place to make it easier to track the changes he's made.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Yeah, pitchfx is having trouble classifying it so far, but that cluster you pointed out certainly looks like it's a splitter. What's great is that it closes the gap between his other fastballs and his change up, allowing him to hit any point on the line between 94 and 78 or so with pitches that all looks similar coming out of the hand. And these graphs...




...give us a great look at what he can do to a hitter. He now has 4 pitches that spin similarly, come out of the hand similarly, and move similarly both horizontally (see czar's post) and vertically but run the gamut through his entire range of velocity, plus a curveball that comes in at the bottom end of that range but moves very differently to keep hitters off balance. It's an excellent arsenal.

And one more graph, looking at the spin x rotation shows us even more deception.



If the hitter is looking at spin on the axis, there are 4 pitches overlapping. If they're looking at rotation, there are 5.

[Sprowl]

That clump on the left side between 83-88 mph certainly look like splitters to me.



It looks like he threw 11 of them, 8 for strikes (3 that were outs in-play, 3 fouls, and 2 swinging strikes).

Easily the most frequently he's used the splitter since he started throwing it.

I agree that those 11 pitches with significant horizontal movement must be splitters. I thought that Buchholz would be using the splitters primarily to lefties, since his changeup over his career has been somewhat more effective against RHB, but that does not appear to be the case: he threw both splitter and changeup to both sides of the platoon.




A few other difference-makers for Good Clay: sustaining velocity at 93 mph throughout the game. He is getting stronger. Against LHB, who have hit Buchholz very hard this year (FIP vLHB = 6.03), Clay kept the ball out of the power zone. Most of the 2-seamers down and away on the 2nd and 3rd pitches of the at-bats are really splitters.



While he pitched cautiously against lefties, he challenged righties often with the cutter and curve, while keeping the fastball low or on the outside edge.

[Reverend]

What might he have found to explain the turnaround, assuming it's not luck? I only spent a little time over at Brooks, but I did find this one chart looking at his horizontal release point that seems to be a major change:



Pretty clearly, that release point had been moving in a particular direction, then, suddenly, a few games ago, it jumps. That looks like something that's been fixed or altered to me, but maybe it's a glitch in the system or something.

Would hope others could weigh in here.

Looking at release point from PitchFX is somewhat complicated here because he appears to completely changed his position on the rubber (which may also be significant).

April 20:


June 7:




There are location changes from the stretch too:





Note that on April 20, he's on the far right for both lefties and righties.

Also, as abs noted, he's been seen moving around within an at-bat:

[Reverend]

And one more graph, looking at the spin x rotation shows us even more deception.

That's not all it shows:



Hello.

[Eric Van]

Quick note, with more detail to follow next week:

There were only three MLB starters last year who threw both a change and a splitter, which makes sense given that they tend to behave the same way, which is to say that most guys who throw a splitter use it as their change.

Freddy Garcia and Brad Penny had splitters that broke more vertically than most and hence resembled their four-seamers, and used them in tandem with conventional changes that had the usual run in on RHB. Tim Hudson's change was a bit like Buchholz's, with less armside run than usual (intermediate between his two- and four-seamer, though), so he was able to pair it with a splitter that had a lot of run.

But none of these guys had a velocity separation between the two pitches of more than about 1 MPH, which is to say, negligible.

Buchholz is throwing an unusually slow change with (even more unusually) even less armside run than his 4-seamer, and a somewhat hard splitter with good, typical run in. There's no velocity overlap at all between the pitches. This seems to be unprecedented, and given the quality of the pitches, and their very different movement, could be a deadly weapon and all he needs to lift himself from #2 / #3 starter to ace, even if his BABIP normalizes somewhat from 2010. MLB hitters may well have no experience at all with a guy with his repertoire.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

While I had realized the incredible overlap among his pitches with both velocity and spin, I had no idea how rare an arsenal like this was. It's really interesting to see this developing and it makes me wonder how much more of the splitter we're going to see going forward. If he can maintain consistency with it (and in general) he really could be in the middle of becoming the ace we all dreamed about back in 2007. The rest of his season is going to be really interesting to follow.

[Sprowl]

The latest version of Clay Buchholz throws only a few straight changeups, but lots of splitters -- the cluster of pitches between 83 and 86 mph with horizontal movement between -4" and -7" is a new, and effective, addition to his repertoire for dealing with left-handed batters. Buchholz's circle change has historically worked better against right-handed batters, so Buchholz was left without a pitch that worked against lefties. To supplement the fastball, he converted his slider to a cutter in 2010 and added the splitter in 2012. So far it has worked very well for him, including six swinging strikes from the Tigers' LHB.