SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 3, 2016 12:52:50 GMT -5
Of note - four of Owens' five K's yesterday were on fastballs.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 5, 2016 1:13:22 GMT -5
So, why was Owens' K rate so low last year, given his tremendously low Z-Contact%? And what can we expect from him this year?
Geekage you can skip if you want: I derived a very nice model for predicting K rate in Year 2 from Plate Discipline stats in Year 1 (based on 533 pairs of seasons, minimum 80 IP as a starter, from 2010 through 2015). It turns out that there are actually factors, leading indicators of sorts, that are significant above and beyond last year's K rate. So I wanted to include those, and also I wanted to add some noise by deriving next year from this year, rather than just trying to predict a given year's K rate from that year's plate discipline stats.
(Basically, pitchers with high O-Contact Rates tend to fan fewer guys the next year. There are also near-significant tendencies for guys who had a high Z-Swing% and high Zone% to strike out more. I'm not sure yet about why any of that happens).
So, the short answer: mostly (75%, more or less) bad luck, but he did do a couple of things that limited his K rate: not throw enough strikes (duh), and give up a higher-than-average O-Contact% despite a very high O-Swing.
Owens had a .184 K rate, which would have ranked him 90th among 157 starters with 70 or more IP last year. The model predicts .219 for him this year if he repeats all of his Plate Discipline numbers, which would put him tied for 42nd. That's going from the 43rd percentile to the 74th, and I don't see where the difference wasn't essentially luck -- not calling for the right pitch with two strikes, etc.
But that K rate would be .230 given his Z-Contact rate if the rest of his PD rates were average. Now you're ranking 33rd, between Felix Hernandez and Clay Buchholz.
He lost .008 by not throwing enough strikes. One of the K rate factors is Zone% * (O-Swing% - 3.9 * Z-Swing%); the Zone * -ZS makes perfect sense (pound the zone and have them take pitches, and you'll strike guys out), while O-Swing% shows up in three different factors and hence is pretty darn tricky. Owens is above average in his (OS - 3.9ZS), but his Zone% was a terrible .421 where .498 was the average in my sample. If he can get it to just .460, he gains .004.
But his big negative factor is getting lots of swings outside the zone but not a lot of misses. That factor, O-Contact% * O-Swing%, is knocking .022 off his K rate (although much of that may be recoverable by weaker contact). He can get guys to chase out of the zone; they're just not chasing and missing. His below-average OC is puzzling given his crazy good ZC.
He has one more very positive factor which recovers all but .004 of the previous: O-Swing% * Z-Swing%. It makes some sense that getting guys to swing a lot at both pitches in and out of the zone leads to high strikeouts, and he did that in spades.
One more thought experiment: drop his O-Contact% to 75th percentile, which seems reasonable given how great his Z-Contact% is. Give him an average Zone%. Keep everything else the same. Now he's got a .246 K rate, which is 22nd and more or less above 9.0 K/9.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 5, 2016 19:04:21 GMT -5
Interesting. That said, control and not missing bats when, say, he's up in the zone aren't new problems either for him. You got any idea of which pitches out of the zone were getting hit? If it were, say, the changeup, that'd be worrisome. If it were the fastball, then yeah, that'd basically be what we've been saying all along.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 5, 2016 20:00:30 GMT -5
Interesting. That said, control and not missing bats when, say, he's up in the zone aren't new problems either for him. You got any idea of which pitches out of the zone were getting hit? If it were, say, the changeup, that'd be worrisome. If it were the fastball, then yeah, that'd basically be what we've been saying all along. From BrooksBaseball. .650 was the average O-Contact rate in my sample. FB outside the zone: .796 Contact on 93 swings. 44 balls fair, 30 fouls. .318 BA, .364 SA. Yeah, that's probably terrible (Contact% for FB outside the zone is probably higher for everyone, but not that high). Lots of pitches missed to spots where free-swingers can handle them. CH outside the zone: .520 Contact on 75 swings. 35 balls fair, 4 fouls. .229 BA, .286 SA. CU outside the zone: .632 Contact on 19 swings. 1/9 with 3 fouls. SL outside the zone: .556 contact on 9 swings. 1/5. All but 2 of his 156 changeups that missed the zone either missed down or to his arm side, or both. He had a .481 O-Swing; average in my sample was .295. Great numbers.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Mar 6, 2016 14:33:24 GMT -5
Interesting. That said, control and not missing bats when, say, he's up in the zone aren't new problems either for him. You got any idea of which pitches out of the zone were getting hit? If it were, say, the changeup, that'd be worrisome. If it were the fastball, then yeah, that'd basically be what we've been saying all along. From BrooksBaseball. .650 was the average O-Contact rate in my sample. FB outside the zone: .796 Contact on 93 swings. 44 balls fair, 30 fouls. .318 BA, .364 SA. Yeah, that's probably terrible (Contact% for FB outside the zone is probably higher for everyone, but not that high). Lots of pitches missed to spots where free-swingers can handle them. CH outside the zone: .520 Contact on 75 swings. 35 balls fair, 4 fouls. .229 BA, .286 SA. CU outside the zone: .632 Contact on 19 swings. 1/9 with 3 fouls. SL outside the zone: .556 contact on 9 swings. 1/5. All but 2 of his 156 changeups that missed the zone either missed down or to his arm side, or both. He had a .481 O-Swing; average in my sample was .295. Great numbers. Good stuff, thanks for crunching.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 6, 2016 16:42:37 GMT -5
From BrooksBaseball. .650 was the average O-Contact rate in my sample. FB outside the zone: .796 Contact on 93 swings. 44 balls fair, 30 fouls. .318 BA, .364 SA. Yeah, that's probably terrible (Contact% for FB outside the zone is probably higher for everyone, but not that high). Lots of pitches missed to spots where free-swingers can handle them. CH outside the zone: .520 Contact on 75 swings. 35 balls fair, 4 fouls. .229 BA, .286 SA. CU outside the zone: .632 Contact on 19 swings. 1/9 with 3 fouls. SL outside the zone: .556 contact on 9 swings. 1/5. All but 2 of his 156 changeups that missed the zone either missed down or to his arm side, or both. He had a .481 O-Swing; average in my sample was .295. Great numbers. Good stuff, thanks for crunching. I think we have an answer to the argument "MLB hitters won't chase his changeup if he can't command his FB." He can command the changeup, and they can't tell it from the FB. They can't discriminate between FBs that are in the zone and changeups that are going to break out of the zone based on the relative infrequency of the former.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Mar 12, 2016 20:48:01 GMT -5
Anyone worried about Owens lack of command this spring?
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 12, 2016 22:00:39 GMT -5
Anyone worried about Owens lack of command this spring? As far as making the club in April, yes. As far as this being a long-term setback, no, not really. He needs more seasoning. I do think his command will improve but with him, it's going to take time and a lot of patience. He'll be trying to harness it in AAA and if he does and a spot opens up later in the season there's a good shot we'll see him. Meanwhile Wright and Elias will most likely battle it out for the #5 spot with the winner winding up in the rotation and the loser winding up in the bullpen as a long man. I think Johnson will wind up in AAA with Owens whether he pitches well or not, but he could wind up getting a call sooner than Owens.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 17, 2016 15:31:04 GMT -5
Not worried at all. Always thought he would start season in minors, with Kelly starting. But with EROD being injured I would start Owens over Wright and Elias. If you want Owens to improve the majors are his best bet for me. He proved last year that even with lack of command he can be a good #5 starter. I just think Owens is a much better pitcher then Wright and Elias and has a bunch of upside.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Mar 17, 2016 18:40:09 GMT -5
Owens has upside, but he hasn't proven much. Wright has no options and has been excellent this spring. Quite frankly, it's no contest. The concern with Owens isn't the results, but he continues to have control and command issues. I'm not overly worried, but starting Owens over Wright to begin the year (at this point in time) would be irresponsible.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Mar 17, 2016 20:02:35 GMT -5
It's the same old problem with Owens. Just think of it this way - how many soft-tossing lefties with *poor command* have proven themselves as sustainable starters. None come to mind. Chalk one up for the scouts
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 17, 2016 20:51:50 GMT -5
It's the same old problem with Owens. Just think of it this way - how many soft-tossing lefties with *poor command* have proven themselves as sustainable starters. None come to mind. Chalk one up for the scouts Eh, guys with that profile exist. Owens isn't 86 or anything-- he's 88 to 91, which is more like average velo for a lefty. It's not far off from mid-career Scott Kazmir, C.J. Wilson (the starter version), Ricky Romero, Wandy Rodriguez, John Danks, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 17, 2016 20:58:20 GMT -5
The issue is and has been command. When he's on top of it, he can be effective. He was that way last year in a few of his starts at the major league level. When he is not then he can get in trouble. These are major league hitters and they're going to wait for something they think they can handle. Working off the plate will not help him. He needs to get into good pitch counts and then he can use that stuff.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 6, 2017 19:17:16 GMT -5
Henry Owens put on waivers. What could have been. I’m sure he’ll clear at this point.
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Dec 6, 2017 20:32:32 GMT -5
Henry Owens put on waivers. What could have been. I’m sure he’ll clear at this point. I'm not too sure he clears. Obviously he has major flaws in his game, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if a team claims him. If his BB% was even league average, he'd be at least a back end starter for someone. I'm sure there's a team out there that thinks they could fix him.
|
|
|
Post by swingingbunt on Dec 6, 2017 20:54:40 GMT -5
Henry Owens put on waivers. What could have been. I’m sure he’ll clear at this point. I'm not too sure he clears. Obviously he has major flaws in his game, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if a team claims him. If his BB% was even league average, he'd be at least a back end starter for someone. I'm sure there's a team out there that thinks they could fix him. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets claimed too. With an option remaining, his claiming team would have plenty of time to figure out if they can fix him. Really no downside for some teams.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 6, 2017 22:46:18 GMT -5
There's usually a team out there willing to take a chance on fixing a guy who is still relatively young and has options left.
|
|
|
Post by Addam603 on Dec 6, 2017 23:28:59 GMT -5
The Red Sox have had issues developing pitchers recently. How much blame is on the organization for Owens’s struggles? Obviously not all of it, but if he ends up in another system and flourishes that would look bad.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Dec 7, 2017 0:25:07 GMT -5
The Red Sox have had issues developing pitchers recently. How much blame is on the organization for Owens’s struggles? Obviously not all of it, but if he ends up in another system and flourishes that would look bad. I don't think the Sox are to blame for any of Owens' issues. They literally tried everything to help him with his walk issues. I think the Sox have had more issues identifying pitching talent as opposed to developing it. I mean, Barnes, Ranaudo, Owens, Bowden, and Johnson isn't really all that inspiring of a group (I still have some hope for Johnson someday though). The best luck they've had is identifying guys in the upper minors like Eduardo Rodriguez and Stephen Wright. Edit- Kopech and Espinoza seem to be good finds however and were very valuable in terms of trade. In hindsight, the Sox were better off trading the likes of Owens, Ranaudo, and Bowden before their stocks dropped through the basement floor.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,298
|
Post by radiohix on Dec 8, 2017 13:36:01 GMT -5
Of course
|
|
|
Post by Addam603 on Dec 8, 2017 13:37:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Dec 8, 2017 13:49:07 GMT -5
The Diamondbacks claimed Owens. Not surprising given who runs their dugout and front office.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Dec 8, 2017 14:20:20 GMT -5
Henry now a snake. Reunited with Lovullo and Mike Hazen.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuizzy on Dec 8, 2017 14:22:26 GMT -5
The Diamondbacks claimed Owens. Not surprising given who runs their dugout and front office. Owens wasn't that great. He really fell off. But what was the reason of completely removing him from the 40 man? DD couldn't get something from a team that was pretty quick to claim him? Kind of crappy asset management. Even though he wasn't much of an asset anymore. Cash? Someone who was left unprotected in the Rule 5 draft? International Signing money?
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Dec 8, 2017 14:30:15 GMT -5
The Diamondbacks claimed Owens. Not surprising given who runs their dugout and front office. Owens wasn't that great. He really fell off. But what was the reason of completely removing him from the 40 man? DD couldn't get something from a team that was pretty quick to claim him? Kind of crappy asset management. Even though he wasn't much of an asset anymore. Cash? Someone who was left unprotected in the Rule 5 draft? International Signing money? Why would any team give the Red Sox back anything for Owens? Don't blame Dombrowski for not getting anything back for Owens, blame Cherington for not selling high on Owens when he could have if you want to blame somebody.
|
|
|