Red Sox sign David Price
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
A 10 yo could tell the difference if you showed him 2 video clips from last year and this year. Of course, maybe because I knew what to look for (just having done it myself). However, I just don't believe this was not noticed by anyone unless nobody was even looking at videos before this.
I would think with the investment the Sox have in Price, most of the coaching staff should be watching prior video of his pitching. The way Pedroia's "find" on Price occurred seemed like happenstance. A drop in velocity, a lack of control, and those are the two staples that had made Price worth in excess of two hundred million on the open market last winter.
Yeah, I mean, not to take anything away from Pedroia and he deserves credit for spotting an issue, but why aren't Willis and Farrell watching these videos? I know that they have plenty of other responsibilities other than fixing Price but one would think it would be near the top of the list.
Was wondering this myself. Some guy on Reddit collated Price's career starts by temperature:
https://www.reddit.com/r/redsox/comments/4hk4eh/david_price_stats_by_outside_temperature/
Not sure what the temperatures have looked like this month during his games, but seems like its been a pretty cold month overall. I think he's going to be OK, personally.
https://www.reddit.com/r/redsox/comments/4hk4eh/david_price_stats_by_outside_temperature/
Not sure what the temperatures have looked like this month during his games, but seems like its been a pretty cold month overall. I think he's going to be OK, personally.
And you're talking about 5 starts out of 223 by those numbers. That's not a sample size that is going to tell you much of anything, except that small sample sizes can give you huge variances. The 6 90+ deg starts don't look so great either. But again, only 6 of them. About half his starts were indoors. We're not talking about nearly enough data to overcome uncertainty.
2.93 FIP, 54.2 LOB%, .373 BABIP.
Nothing wrong with Price that won't be solved with a sacrifice to the BABIP Gods, although if there's something about the way he's working out of the stretch that would be worth looking in to.
Nothing wrong with Price that won't be solved with a sacrifice to the BABIP Gods, although if there's something about the way he's working out of the stretch that would be worth looking in to.
Both of those videos are from the stretch. Is that the only issue?
Also, I wonder if there was a different type of runner on 2nd base in the 2016 clip. Mostly, I'm wondering if this is a consistent difference.
Don't get me wrong, the clips are really instructive about what he was referring to.
Also, I wonder if there was a different type of runner on 2nd base in the 2016 clip. Mostly, I'm wondering if this is a consistent difference.
Don't get me wrong, the clips are really instructive about what he was referring to.
All the videos they showed on the MLB Network were out of the stretch. At least the ones on the segment I saw which detailed this issue.
I just reviewed some tape of his out of the wind-up. Same story, not nearly as high of a kick and the hands stay further down. He seems much more upright and not driving off the back leg as well.
That would explain the loss of velocity. The only question is how long will it take for him to work this back into his delivery consistently.
He also is being hit very hard with runners on compared to bases empty and is having more issues with guys on base.
According the article below his hard rate goes from 38.6% with bases empty, to 43.9% with runners on, to 50% with runners in scoring position. His soft contact rate is only 2.9% with runners in scoring position and down from 21.1% with bases empty.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-mostly-good-news-about-david-price/
According the article below his hard rate goes from 38.6% with bases empty, to 43.9% with runners on, to 50% with runners in scoring position. His soft contact rate is only 2.9% with runners in scoring position and down from 21.1% with bases empty.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-mostly-good-news-about-david-price/
Not a big Carl Willis fan. Pedroia shouldn't be identifying this issue, it should have been the pitching coach. Willis also didn't identify Erod's tipping pitches issue last year, Remy did. Clay is still an enigma and Willis has provided no added value there either.
Price has changed his wind-up delivery considerably over his career, namely, he used to pitch from the a full wind up. He seems to have made a change around 2012, and continued to tweak into 2013.
Some folks have correctly pointed out this kind of abbreviated windup he has now, as well as the now well-documented shorter leg kick. He didn't used to have it. Here are some older videos, I highly encourage you to mute these as the audio is often terrible:
2010: Notice the higher leg kick. Get to about 21 seconds in, and you can see he's using a full windup:
2011: can't see his legs, but you can tell it's more of a full windup):
2012: the abbreviated windup seems to be the norm now:
2013 (Spring Training?): This is weird... he's raising his hands above his head, he's still in a full delivery, though it might be a little shorter - my guess is that he was making changes during this off-season and the video highlights just one possible change he was making:
2015: announcers mention the abbreviated wind-up, and it's got very small steps at the beginning:
Additionally, I haven't had the chance to look through enough video, but I recall Price falling off towards third base more when he was younger, where as now he ends more up-right/kind of recoils back after releasing and landing on his right leg. I'll look for more video there, but if it's the case, that can 1. lower velocity because you're not driving through your front leg 2. lead you to miss high, because your legs are landing before you arm/hips have come fully through (I recall several bad moments when Price missed high and in to lefties) and 3. Screw up the timing on off-speed pitches = less movement and more up-in-the-zone.
Some folks have correctly pointed out this kind of abbreviated windup he has now, as well as the now well-documented shorter leg kick. He didn't used to have it. Here are some older videos, I highly encourage you to mute these as the audio is often terrible:
2010: Notice the higher leg kick. Get to about 21 seconds in, and you can see he's using a full windup:
2011: can't see his legs, but you can tell it's more of a full windup):
2012: the abbreviated windup seems to be the norm now:
2013 (Spring Training?): This is weird... he's raising his hands above his head, he's still in a full delivery, though it might be a little shorter - my guess is that he was making changes during this off-season and the video highlights just one possible change he was making:
2015: announcers mention the abbreviated wind-up, and it's got very small steps at the beginning:
Additionally, I haven't had the chance to look through enough video, but I recall Price falling off towards third base more when he was younger, where as now he ends more up-right/kind of recoils back after releasing and landing on his right leg. I'll look for more video there, but if it's the case, that can 1. lower velocity because you're not driving through your front leg 2. lead you to miss high, because your legs are landing before you arm/hips have come fully through (I recall several bad moments when Price missed high and in to lefties) and 3. Screw up the timing on off-speed pitches = less movement and more up-in-the-zone.
Thanks much.
That Blue Jay video shows him doing exactly what he claims is hurting him now, doesn't it? Glove down at the belt and staying there (i.e. the "string" analogy doesn't seem to be in play)
That Blue Jay video shows him doing exactly what he claims is hurting him now, doesn't it? Glove down at the belt and staying there (i.e. the "string" analogy doesn't seem to be in play)
Yea, the 2015 Blue Jays video looks extremely similar to the current David Price.
And I'm going to add, I don't think Daivd Price is broken. The velocity is worrisome, but all of his advanced pitching stats are showing a pitcher who is just as good as before. His SEIRA, K Rate, Swinging Strike Rate, and Contact rate all rank in the top 10 of the league.
It think he's going to be fine.
And I'm going to add, I don't think Daivd Price is broken. The velocity is worrisome, but all of his advanced pitching stats are showing a pitcher who is just as good as before. His SEIRA, K Rate, Swinging Strike Rate, and Contact rate all rank in the top 10 of the league.
It think he's going to be fine.
Absolutely, it's pretty much the same pitcher. And important to note - Price started making these changes in 12/13, then won the CYA in 2014... so... something worked. Maybe he's kept slipping into a lower and lower leg kick, or maybe he tried to shorten things up in the stretch to catch more baserunners:
I might be commenting above my pay grade, but I find it really interesting that Price gave up exactly 0 stolen bases last year. Zero. He'd given up over 10/year in the five previous years. Now, Detroit and Toronto the #3 and #1 backstops, respectively, in terms of SB/CS last year, but only 2 people even TRIED to steal against Price. Now, at least for Detroit, James McCann was a big improvement over Alex Avila, and in Toronto Russell Martin led the majors... but you've got to wonder if Price has been shortening and shortening his delivery from the stretch, maybe in an effort to induce less steals (or just in general and this is a symptom). I could be really wrong and people are that scared of Martin and McCann, but it could be part of his tweak in shortening that leg kick.
I might be commenting above my pay grade, but I find it really interesting that Price gave up exactly 0 stolen bases last year. Zero. He'd given up over 10/year in the five previous years. Now, Detroit and Toronto the #3 and #1 backstops, respectively, in terms of SB/CS last year, but only 2 people even TRIED to steal against Price. Now, at least for Detroit, James McCann was a big improvement over Alex Avila, and in Toronto Russell Martin led the majors... but you've got to wonder if Price has been shortening and shortening his delivery from the stretch, maybe in an effort to induce less steals (or just in general and this is a symptom). I could be really wrong and people are that scared of Martin and McCann, but it could be part of his tweak in shortening that leg kick.
Color me skeptical whether tonight means he's fixed. Tonight seems consistent with what today's fan graphs article posits -- that his contact management is poor so far this year. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/is-it-time-to-worry-about-david-price/ When he doesn't k guys, they are hitting it hard a decent percentage of the time. If he consistently gets 11 ks a game, then he hopefully will be able to spread the hits out. And he has a good defense behind him -- Mookie made a real nice play on a line drive. Lots to be cautiously hopeful about. Two hits against were fortunate for the Astros. And velocity seems up. But we still need to see a little more weak contact, because you can't count on 11 ks in 6.2 innings every night.
Is "contact management" a skill independent of K and BB rates? To what extent? How do you measure it and predict it?
According to
Edit: Typo on the season LD% number.
Whether he has control over it or not, there have only been 3 qualified starters with a higher line drive percentage than Price this year. His LD% tonight was 30.8%, which is higher than his 29.1% season rate by a touch. If the velocity really is back up around where it was last year, I'm guessing that rate will come down some, but it's worth keeping an eye on.
Edit: Typo on the season LD% number.
Last edited:
I agree. My question's legitimate, not dismissive. It's basically a question of to what extent FIPS theory holds, in different clothes.
I don't think I would do the full article justice by trying to summarize it in response, but they appear to be generating contact scores deviating from average (both adjusted and context adjusted) for each kind of BIP type. I can't vouch for the methodology but it seems reasonable. Certainly meets the eye test for Price this year -- when batters put the ball in play against Price they are often hitting the type of balls that either cannot be caught for outs or that are hit hard enough that a less than optimally positioned fielder has a relatively lower chance of fielding.
It doesn't seem to follow that a pitcher would have some level of control over making a batter swing and miss at the ball, but have no level of control over making the batter strike the ball poorly. "Contact management", as a thing, probably has to be attached on a string to K rate (or maybe more precisely O/Z-Contact %), but it has to exist. As for measuring and predicting, well, come at me in 2025 I guess.
I agree, the question is to what extent there is a contact management skill that's not correlated strongly to K rate (as Price's K rate remains high). Clicking through they have some discussion about it in the links for AL contact from 2014, but those offer only a hand-waivy "line drive rate isn't strongly correlated from year to year but other BIP types are" without showing the work. Still searching...
The money part of the hypothesis seems to be that good contact managers have a "go-to frequency skill" that induces ground balls or pop ups. If that's true, you could imagine at least theoretically a type of strike out pitcher -- one who lives in the strike zone -- who gets misses by mixing a plus fastball with a deceptive change but who does not induce vertical plane weak contact because he does not feature good sinking action or whose high pitches are easier to identify as fastballs.
Edit: This seems to be the most recent deep dive on contact management my google skills allowed.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com/2014/9/15/6143809/sabermetrics-looking-for-weak-contact
Edit: This seems to be the most recent deep dive on contact management my google skills allowed.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com/2014/9/15/6143809/sabermetrics-looking-for-weak-contact
Last edited:
Cy Young pitchers don't seem to go through slumps during their CY season.
Every other pitcher needs to be judged in discrete pieces. I'm not going to pay attention to Price's (or Greinke's) early stats if he shows that that stretch was not indicative of what he can do. If Hammel or Zimmermann go through a 4-5 game slump, no one's going to panic - because they've started so well. OTOH, guys like Arrieta and Kershaw will probably maintain excellence all season long.
Long way of saying tonight's performance could be the start of a good run for Price. I think so.
Every other pitcher needs to be judged in discrete pieces. I'm not going to pay attention to Price's (or Greinke's) early stats if he shows that that stretch was not indicative of what he can do. If Hammel or Zimmermann go through a 4-5 game slump, no one's going to panic - because they've started so well. OTOH, guys like Arrieta and Kershaw will probably maintain excellence all season long.
Long way of saying tonight's performance could be the start of a good run for Price. I think so.
Clemen's was in the booth last night and he had some interesting insight describing a split screen of Price Vs the Yankees last week and last night. I found a link to a video of it aired on NESN:
Edit.. cleaning up.
Edit.. cleaning up.
Nobody in the history of the game, long term, ever had a K/BB ratio as good as Price's with a BABIP/LD%/(etc.) as poor as his has been. If you can find someone who had a 5:1 K:BB with an ERA+ less than 100 over at least a ~5 year career, knock yourself out (adjust for era norms too if you wish).
Now, if you instead mean to say that this might be a lingering issue for him, then I am more in agreement. But almost certainly a lot of the BIP events for him are unsustainable given that high K:BB ratio, and we should definitely expect a downward regression in his ERA.
Well, since only one player has ever had a career K/BB ratio of over 5 with at least 1,000 IP (the immortal Tommy Bond), I'd say you need to reset your standards. And before you arbitrarily drop it to 4:1, there are only 6 more players at that level and 2 of them are still active and have a good chance to knock it down below that level (the list is Schilling, Bumgarner, Pedro, Mariano, Dan Haren and Jordan Zimmermann).
All I'm saying is that for 8 games for the Red Sox he seems to be a highly strike out dependent pitcher, and the fangraphs article gives a theory as to why, that is worth watching. If he continues to k a lot of people, then, yeah, even if you believe that poor contact management is a thing, there are fewer balls in play to worry about.
His leading the league in both ER and Ks is likely just a funny anomaly that is unlikely to persist. But for all the talk about his mechanics changes, again last night balls put in play were hit hard. Doesn't matter when you're striking out nearly two of every three batters, but I'm still curious to see what effect these mechanical changes will make on nights when he gets five or six strikeouts.
His leading the league in both ER and Ks is likely just a funny anomaly that is unlikely to persist. But for all the talk about his mechanics changes, again last night balls put in play were hit hard. Doesn't matter when you're striking out nearly two of every three batters, but I'm still curious to see what effect these mechanical changes will make on nights when he gets five or six strikeouts.
Big Rog makes a great point about the tilt that Price had last night that he didn't have in the previous start, the video shows it pretty clearly.
I still hate Clemens, but he had some useful insight there.
I still hate Clemens, but he had some useful insight there.
Not sure if that is a nitpicky dig at me, or a dig at DDB, but I guess you missed the part where I said you can adjust for era (vs. ERA) norms. Since Price is around 4:1 for his career (but over 5:1 for his prime-last 4 [inclusive] seasons), and even if I thus decide to drop it down to 4 or 3:1, the broader point remains even if I failed to cover every possible conceivable angle to your satisfaction.
Hardball times had an article on it recently. It suggested some news ways to look at the issue but didn't come to any conclusions. http://www.hardballtimes.com/can-pitchers-prevent-solid-contact/
I am in the same boat. I found him, actually better than Schilling, albeit for an inning. He was low key, concise and meshed with the other announcers. I like that he pointed out the tilt, etc, was applicable to kids pitching not just MLB, simplifying the analysis rather than making it sound overly complex.
Pretty much anytime he's shown up in a booth and talked baseball he's been great. It's fucking annoying.
Agreed. I have heard him on radio a few times the last few years with Joe and whomever, and I have to admit that he does come off well, both analytically and personally. He's a gracious guest and when he talks baseball its detailed and coherent without being condescending. Last night wasn't much different.
Yeah. I kind of wouldn't hate Rog in the booth fulltime. A "rule of thumb" I learned was that the ones who worked hardest to learn & execute - the Schilling types - are better at explaining/teaching than natural talents. It's striking that Clemens was able to break it down so nicely if this is true.
Now I'm also pissed again at Duquette for driving him out of town while simultaneously loving him even more for Pedro (Duke never made things easy on us, did he)...
Dan Duquette did not drive Roger Clemens out of town. Dan Duquette looked at a pitcher who was 33 and who, while still pitching effectively, wasn't the same pitcher he was when he became a team icon. Dan Duquette offered him a lifetime contract. Clemens didn't bother to read it, went off to Canada, and started taking steroids.
Dan Duquette is not the villain in this story.
Are you suggesting that Clemens is a exception to the rule of thumb rather than an example? Roger worked hard - he was punching barrels of rice in an era when the vast majority of pitchers were still spending the offseason figuring out how to duck their spring training laps. It's funny you term the workers 'Schilling types', since Schilling specifically credits Clemens' advice on conditioning and work as the key turning point in his 1997-1998 career leap.
You're right. Poor phrasing of poor thoughts.
I'm suggesting that people for whom work --> desired results happens more easily have a harder time communicating how it came to them. I don't think it's unfair to claim that Schilling had a harder time translating work into desired results than Clemens, and had a harder time maintaining a level of success (PED callout also well-taken). Some people who work just as hard may never see the bigs, so I guess it's a matter of degree, not kind here.
Now this is interesting .. according to this article over on BP the opt-out in Price's contract was Dombrowski's idea and not Price's.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=29315
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=29315
Opt-Out fans have at it ..