@noah, u got a shoutout on your article and they discussed it over the last 7 or 8 mins if this episode. Thanks for putting out thought-provoking, conversation starting type of material! In case you csnt click the link in this format, it’s the latest episode of “seeing red” which is a cardinals pod hosted by will leitch and Bernie miklasz
You’re gonna get a lot of reads from stl on this! Hopefully a radio or podcast interview or two as well. You’re the first I’ve seen to actually EXPLAIN some of what he was doing wrong, cause lord knows Mo n Oli have not spoken in any specific terms. I think it only hurt them, honestly
"With fastballs, pitchers tend to miss laterally more than vertically..." where does this come from? Just based on most fastball pitch shapes not exhibiting huge lateral movement? Or more of a pitcher psyche issue?
Great question - always there to catch my sweeping generalizations. To answer this fully, I'd have to write something that draws on catcher target data - maybe I'll do that soon.
There are a few factors at play, but it actually has to do less with pitch shape and arm slot than it does pitch execution.
Most pitchers (particularly right-handed pitchers) receive way more fastball targets to their gloveside (away from a RHH) than armside (in to a RHH). And the gloveside target is executed at a much lower rate than the armside target is. When pitchers miss gloveside, they tend to miss over the plate more often than off the plate. Gloveside targets require better extension from a pitcher; that's one reason. A pitching coach would be more qualified to outline the other reasons why they're harder to execute.
To get a sense for how this "common miss" is shared across pitchers of different types, try pulling up visuals of pitch location heatmaps for different types of pitchers (I can't paste an image here). For the low-slot arms, you'll see more of a 9 o'clock - 3 o'clock pattern on breaking balls. For high-slot arms, breaking ball heatmaps will look more like 12-6. When you run the same heatmaps for fastballs, you won't see a ton of differences - pitchers just tend to miss armside more than gloveside.
Absolutely! It's a good question - the short answer to that is that down/away from a RHP to a RHH is a lot safer than down/in. That may not be true if a RHP is missing those down/away targets and leaving everything over the middle, but that's generally what you'll see. But that's where targets come into play - if you see a pitcher repeatedly missing a certain direction, you'll see some catchers move the target to try to help out. Sometimes that means setting up middle.
Terrific analysis. It would seem to me that issues regarding setup would be relatively easy to address, no? (Perhaps the knee-down approach would take work, but I’m talking about positioning and glove placement.)
Also, what seems odd about all this is that Contreras’s framing deficiencies have been known for some time - certainly I was aware of them as a Cubs fan, so I’m sure the Cards knew about them as well. For them to make such a public gesture about it just weeks into a 5yr deal seems ... ill advised. (So did Marmol’s public shaming of Tyler O’Neill last month, for that matter.)
It seems particularly odd that these issues are coming from the Cardinals organization, one generally considered to be so good with these kind of management issues.
Targets are easier to change - we saw a bit of that last night with Contreras. And you're right - changing a setup (to a knee-down) takes a lot more time and effort. All of the position's actions (throwing, blocking, etc.) have to kind of be re-learned.
This is great work, and not to diminish it by any means, but it doesn't seem Contreras' setup/overprioritization of the runner is something that would take an inordinate amount of effort to detect and fix. Is there any potential explanation for why the Cardinals themselves haven't addressed it?
I wouldn't be in a good position to answer what might or might not be happening, but I think you're right to point out that it isn't any kind of "skill" deficit. Targets and gameplans don't take a ton of time to tweak.
@noah, u got a shoutout on your article and they discussed it over the last 7 or 8 mins if this episode. Thanks for putting out thought-provoking, conversation starting type of material! In case you csnt click the link in this format, it’s the latest episode of “seeing red” which is a cardinals pod hosted by will leitch and Bernie miklasz
https://open.spotify.com/episode/7m1WeCKujd2yfSYgzVE2RP?si=RDW5PvaeSM6jiCbig6bgHQ
You’re gonna get a lot of reads from stl on this! Hopefully a radio or podcast interview or two as well. You’re the first I’ve seen to actually EXPLAIN some of what he was doing wrong, cause lord knows Mo n Oli have not spoken in any specific terms. I think it only hurt them, honestly
Noah fantastic stuff as always.
"With fastballs, pitchers tend to miss laterally more than vertically..." where does this come from? Just based on most fastball pitch shapes not exhibiting huge lateral movement? Or more of a pitcher psyche issue?
Great question - always there to catch my sweeping generalizations. To answer this fully, I'd have to write something that draws on catcher target data - maybe I'll do that soon.
There are a few factors at play, but it actually has to do less with pitch shape and arm slot than it does pitch execution.
Most pitchers (particularly right-handed pitchers) receive way more fastball targets to their gloveside (away from a RHH) than armside (in to a RHH). And the gloveside target is executed at a much lower rate than the armside target is. When pitchers miss gloveside, they tend to miss over the plate more often than off the plate. Gloveside targets require better extension from a pitcher; that's one reason. A pitching coach would be more qualified to outline the other reasons why they're harder to execute.
To get a sense for how this "common miss" is shared across pitchers of different types, try pulling up visuals of pitch location heatmaps for different types of pitchers (I can't paste an image here). For the low-slot arms, you'll see more of a 9 o'clock - 3 o'clock pattern on breaking balls. For high-slot arms, breaking ball heatmaps will look more like 12-6. When you run the same heatmaps for fastballs, you won't see a ton of differences - pitchers just tend to miss armside more than gloveside.
I comment because I care. And because your writing is so thought-provoking!
Thanks for the "further reading", I'll definitely investigate. Food for thought next time I'm watching!
If you have time to answer, I'd love to know why gloveside targets are given way more if they also fail way more too.
Absolutely! It's a good question - the short answer to that is that down/away from a RHP to a RHH is a lot safer than down/in. That may not be true if a RHP is missing those down/away targets and leaving everything over the middle, but that's generally what you'll see. But that's where targets come into play - if you see a pitcher repeatedly missing a certain direction, you'll see some catchers move the target to try to help out. Sometimes that means setting up middle.
Terrific analysis. It would seem to me that issues regarding setup would be relatively easy to address, no? (Perhaps the knee-down approach would take work, but I’m talking about positioning and glove placement.)
Also, what seems odd about all this is that Contreras’s framing deficiencies have been known for some time - certainly I was aware of them as a Cubs fan, so I’m sure the Cards knew about them as well. For them to make such a public gesture about it just weeks into a 5yr deal seems ... ill advised. (So did Marmol’s public shaming of Tyler O’Neill last month, for that matter.)
It seems particularly odd that these issues are coming from the Cardinals organization, one generally considered to be so good with these kind of management issues.
Targets are easier to change - we saw a bit of that last night with Contreras. And you're right - changing a setup (to a knee-down) takes a lot more time and effort. All of the position's actions (throwing, blocking, etc.) have to kind of be re-learned.
This is great work, and not to diminish it by any means, but it doesn't seem Contreras' setup/overprioritization of the runner is something that would take an inordinate amount of effort to detect and fix. Is there any potential explanation for why the Cardinals themselves haven't addressed it?
I wouldn't be in a good position to answer what might or might not be happening, but I think you're right to point out that it isn't any kind of "skill" deficit. Targets and gameplans don't take a ton of time to tweak.
Fantastic stuff
Really appreciate this kind of detailed analysis. Thanks.
This is so great!