PITCHf/x Profiling: Robbie Weinhardt

One of the 308 college relievers that the Detroit Tigers took in the 2008 draft is Robbie Weinhardt. He spent the last couple of months in the Arizona Fall League pitching for the Peoria Javalinas. Because of this, we get some decent-sized amount of data on how good of stuff the former Oklahoma State Cowboy features as parks in Peoria and Surprise, Arizona were fitted with PITCHf/x cameras.

Before we start, I will say that the following post is using only the data from Peoria as I haven't learned to correct for park differences. Also, I did not break up the fastballs between two- and four-seam fastballs. I feel that the change-up's were all labeled correctly -- except one, which I believe was a breaking ball. Speaking of the breaking ball, I've elected to go with labeling them as a Slider. Whether it's a slider or a curveball ... I don't know. I'm not sure it matters so long as the labeling is consistent.

Now, on with the PITCHf/x graphy goodness after the jump

Scouting Andrew Oliver with PITCHf/x

The Arizona Fall League started up and there will be PITCHf/x cameras turned on in Surprise and Peoria, ARI. Tigers 2009 draft pick, and one part of the Big Four they signed to over-slot deals, Andrew Oliver has made his debut under the bright, uh, lens of the cameras. Before that though...

Andrew Oliver is probably best known for his battle with the NCAA over representation and the MLB draft. On the diamond, he's a lefty with a good breaking ball and low-to-mid 90's fastball. From the left side, what more can you want, really?

PITCHf/x data and graphs abound, after the jump.

Jeremy Bonderman PITCHf/x

Jeremy Bonderman's had a couple of relief appearances in September and I've been meaning to put the PITCHf/x nerd in me to good use with his couple outings. Billfer's covered the raw numbers, so I'm here to bring the visuals. Last time we saw Bondo, he was bad in a June start against the White Sox. I took a look at Bonderman through the PITCHf/x lens in July when he was reported to be a potential relief candidate in the future. Here's his pitch flight path from that start:


Now, here's his pitch flight path from his two relief outings thus far:

In eyeballing the graphs, his fastball seems to have some more arm-side run and his slider's been getting more sink. Billfer's raw numbers he posted back this up, as well.

And now for enough graphy goodness to last you through the night, first, his average release points in relief:

Pretty close cluster together. Consistent release points are a good thing.

Here's how his release points look on all 36 pitches in September from Bondo:

Re-confirming the tight cluster of release points.

Here's the strikezone plot:

This is from the catcher's point of view (as all the release points are, as well), so he's really working inside to the left side of the plate a.k.a. to right-handed batters. Speaking of that, here's how he's worked right and left-handed hitters:

The number inside of each slice of the pie graphs is the actual number. I forgot to include the percentage for the total pitch selection, but thus far he's gone with 72% fastballs, 28% sliders. Also, I did not correct for varying park factors that could be coming into play. PITCHf/x in different parks is not created equal, unfortunately. So, things can be skewed due to multiple parks we're pulling this data from. All other caveats apply.

Like Bill said, small sample alarms are sounding pretty loud. Let's not read too much into this, but given how flat and non-sinking his pitches seemed to be in his start against the White Sox back in June, it's nice to see him making some improvements and hopefully build upon the great 19 starts he had in the beginning of 2007.

I plan to have a similar post on Nate Robertson in the next couple of days. At least, that's the tentative plan.

Rick Porcello's Start Through PITCHf/x

Rick Porcello didn't get the win after being rightfully taken out for Fernando Rodney (yes, I do back the move Jim Leyland made), but he had a great start. First, the numbers:

8 IP, 4 H, 1 ER, 1 BB, 3 K, 91 pitches (67 strikes), 15 groundouts, 6 flyouts.

Porcello was dominant tonight and kept the ball on the ground when he didn't record a strikeout. Now, because I love graphs and am trying to learn the best routes to graph the things I want to look at (a.k.a. would like to be a Harry Pavlidis clone!), I've got an abundance of graphs.

First up, his selection of pitches to both right-handers and left-handers tonight. Click all images to enlarge:

I'm hoping I split up his fastballs correctly (I think I'm close, but I'm not entirely sure). Splitting two and four-seamers apart seems to be tricky. Same with curveball's and sliders -- Porcello's seemed to be identical so I lumped them in together as sliders, but don't take that moniker for 100% accuracy.

Anyways, you can see he abandoned the slider to LH hitters, although PITCHf/x only recorded 86 of his 91 pitches tonight. He did the same with RH hitters, but swapped out the slider for abolishing his change-up.

Now, his release points total:

I wish I'd gone with a different dot set and not this 2-D one (Harry's 3-D dot sets are much more clear). Live and learn. It's late and I'm tired and don't want to go back and change it. I've noticed it in the various times I've privately looked at his PITCHf/x data, but Rick Porcello releases his breaking ball a touch higher than his other pitches.

The strikezone plot really shows how much he pounded the zone tonight:

When he missed, he missed above or below the zone. I count 5 or 6 pitches being off the edge but between the chest and the knees. He really, really attacked the zone with all of his pitches, tonight.

And finally, the flight paths graph:

I know it's sometimes tough to read/comprehend when there's more than 3 or so pitch flights, but I included them all. But, his four-seamer (FF; blue line) was pretty straight tonight, and you can see the sink and arm-side run on the two-seamer (FT; orange line) that makes it such an effective pitch for Rick. His change-up (CH; white/yellow-ish line) mirrored his two-seamer almost identically. There's a gap of about 9 MPH between the two and giving a glance back to the release point chart shows just how tough his change-up is to recognize. Same release point + same flight path + 9 MPH difference between the two = great, great pitch. I think his change-up would grade out as a plus pitch on the scouting scale. Then again, I'm just a kid who's pretending to be a PITCHf/x guru, let alone know a lot about scouting. And the slider/curveball/breaking ball (SL; red line) has a bit of sweeping action but great downward movement.

All in all, this will be what Rick Porcello provides at the major league level at his best. I feel the strike outs will come with more regularity later in his career, but the Josh Beckett comp Scott Boras and the media was throwing out before the 2007 draft is completely false. He's a ground ball machine with above-average to plus ratings on his 2-seam, change-up and breaking ball and he can dial it up when he wants to the middle-90's. He's very much apart of the new hybrid of guys like a Roy Halladay or Brandon Webb that get gobs of ground balls and incorporate enough strikeouts to be a legitimate good K pitcher.

In short: Roy Halladay/Brandon Webb at his best, Derek Lowe at his worst. Yeah, I said it. Lofty expectations.

Revised Casey Fien Scouting Report

In the comments of my Casey Fien Scouting Report, Harry Pavlidis had some insight. Since he knows how to better classify pitches than myself, I heeded his advice and re-classified the pitches.

First, the strike zone plot:

The differences were that the "change-up" is actually a slider. Harry also said that he threw two four-seam fastballs (FF) and the rest of the heaters were of the two-seam variety (FT), while the rest were sliders. I've changed that.

The release points:

And now here are the pitch flights:

Hopefully, if I classified the wrong fastball's as four-seamers, Harry can correct me again. If not, I'll just compare the pitch flights to his New Arms of the Week post at Beyond the Boxscore.

What To Expect From Jeremy Bonderman (Graphs Galore)

There's been talk of Jeremy Bonderman possibly getting into the Detroit Tigers bullpen when he's ready to return to Major League action. First question is: Can he be effective? Second question is: what should we expect?

Well, to answer the first question, I figure we must look at some PITCHf/x data.

First, let's look at the average pitch flight for Bondo's pitches in 2008 (click all images to enlarge):


It gets a bit fuzzy to see, but his 2-seamer (FT; orange line) had absurd amounts of arm-side run -- also called "tailing action." His 4-seamer (FF; blue line) had less and both had okay downward movement -- he's not a big time ground ball pitcher, so we wouldn't expect great downward movment.

His slider (SL; red line) comes with sweeping action, but not a lot. The amount of drop he gets on it is what made it such a good swing-and-miss pitch. The first base view shows it leaving on the same layer as his fastballs, but it finishes at home plate at the closest to the ground. Just great diving action it as it falls off the table, if you will. His change-up (CH; white line) had some okay arm-side run and decent sink. It's what fans and the Tigers alike felt was his worst pitch, and I think I'd tend to agree with that.

Now, he's made one appearance in 2009 -- a start in a double-header against the White Sox in Chicago. Firstly, here's his strikezone plot:

Here's the pitch flights from that lone outing:

I can see some differences, but to make it an easier graph to read, I'm going to compare each of his pitches to their counterparts. Up first, a comparison of his 4-seam fastball from 2008 and 2009:

Here, we see that his 2008 4-seamer has more arm-side run on it, and a bit more sink. So, his 2009 version has less movement overall -- both tailing and diving action.

The difference on the 2-seam fastball is much more pronounced. He didn't throw many in his 2009 start, however, you can clearly see his 2008 2-seam fastball had a ton of arm-side run and okay sink, while his 2009 version is much less in both.

His 2009 change-up seems to have some more tailing action, but not much. The sinking action goes to his 2008 change-piece. So, it's gotten a little more flat, but it's still his worst pitch to throw.

The slider, also, seems to have lost a tick of sweep and some downward movement.

Conclusion

So, to answer the questions from before:

1) Can he be effective?
A: I don't know. My gut feeling is that his stuff doesn't look to be markedly better than the relievers we have in the bullpen at the moment. Then again, relievers are unpredictable and maybe there is lightning in a bottle to be had. An extra arm is never a bad thing, so long as they aren't over used if they're ineffective.

2) What should we expect?
A) Honestly, not much. The usual caveats apply: his 2009 sample is pretty small, but if they give any of the slightest indication, his stuff's obviously declined (and you don't need PITCHf/x data to tell you that). Unfortunately for Bonderman, the Tigers, and myself (been a staunch supporter and driver of the Jeremy Bonderman Will Turn The Corner This Year bandwagon), I don't think his stuff will make him a top-notch reliever in short bursts. I'm not so sure it even makes him better than a Brandon Lyon at this point.