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 James Dunne on Feb 12, 2016 13:16:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 12, 2016 14:37:04 GMT -5
No one should miss this article. Thanks for posting!
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Post by nomar on Feb 12, 2016 15:32:47 GMT -5
Wow, great stuff. Glad we have Bannister aboard.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Feb 13, 2016 11:44:53 GMT -5
Everyone is always in search of that new market inefficiency. If he's as good and impactful as it seems/people say he is, I think they may have found a new inefficiency in the market, something that is harder and harder to find
|
|
|
Post by theghostofjoecronin on Feb 13, 2016 13:52:34 GMT -5
Interesting article, thanks for posting. I wonder if Brian can help Trey Ball reach his potential, as he is someone who is still relatively new to pitching and still learning the intricacies of how to attack hitters.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,667
|
Post by gerry on Feb 13, 2016 13:58:56 GMT -5
Aprops of his Immediate impact on the 2016 Red Sox aspirations, Rich Hill's comment that he may not have understood the message at age 25 is significant. Sometimes, despite its obvious value, complex information is incomprehensible and/or resisted by immortal youth.
Beyond the older and seemingly cerebral Price, Buch, Koji and Wright, this is a pretty young MLB staff (porcello, Erod, kelly, owens, johnson, elias, kimbrel, smith, ross, barnes, light, etc.). Hopefully, Bannister, Willis, Farrell, Price, Buch can create, translate, and sustain such an out of the box pitching culture at Fenway. Starting this potential paradigm shift at the top may be the best way to insure it is accepted at the lower (younger) levels. This is such a good move.
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,418
|
Post by ianrs on Feb 13, 2016 15:39:58 GMT -5
Excellent article, thanks for the share! Very happy that we have Bannister on board. Should dispel the notion that Dombrowski is somehow anti-analytics.
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Feb 13, 2016 17:02:38 GMT -5
... Should dispel the notion that Dombrowski is somehow anti-analytics. I don't know if that's true. He was a MLB pitcher. I doubt he'd have gotten the gig if he was just a nerd.
|
|
|
Post by ryantoworkman on Feb 13, 2016 17:08:49 GMT -5
He was my UTR "hope" and I believe he is that kind of "separator" the Sox have been so good at discovering in the JH era. I like the out of the box thinking by these guys.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Feb 13, 2016 18:02:17 GMT -5
... Should dispel the notion that Dombrowski is somehow anti-analytics. I don't know if that's true. He was a MLB pitcher. I doubt he'd have gotten the gig if he was just a nerd. You've got a point, but after the nerdish side of him turned Rich Hill around, Dombrowski probably saw him - from that angle - in a new light. If he had anything to do with Kelly and Porcello and their end of season revival, that would only have turned the wattage up. He's been thinking about this stuff for a very long time.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 13, 2016 18:21:17 GMT -5
People like Dombrowski don't get to where they're at if they are stubborn and never change. When I say people like Dombrowski, I mean people who are respected for the way they work, not just their reputation from 30 years ago. He had the reputation of either not being able or willing to build a good bullpen before we got him. He is capable of change. He also held onto the top 4 despite everyone trying to pry them away.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 14, 2016 8:50:05 GMT -5
... Should dispel the notion that Dombrowski is somehow anti-analytics. I don't know if that's true. He was a MLB pitcher. I doubt he'd have gotten the gig if he was just a nerd. It's not just that Bannister got a job/promotion, but Dombrowski created a whole new position, one that's not generally in the front-office hierarchy, focused on bringing the use of analytics to the development of pitchers.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Feb 16, 2016 0:55:27 GMT -5
Bannister articulates something I've thought about for many years, each pitcher has uniqueness of expression more so than other players, specifically in how they "shape" their pitches, and never more so than with curveballs as those can vary so greatly in both velocity and shape. I remember, as mentioned in another post the hard sharp break of Mark Clear, but also the hard tight curve occasionally thrown by Rich Gossage. And Pedro, in reality had closer to 15 pitches when all the variations are considered. Pitching "Backwards" is nothing new of course, thinking about Pat Dobson, or Jamie Moyer who was so successful. Bert Blylevens curve practically went from behind hitters heads to the strike zone. I saw Bernie Williams flail uncharacteristically at a diving Tom Gordon curve. About the greatest pitch I ever saw was a Daniel Bard 2 seamer against the Yankees at 99mph with explosive lateral movement. Bannister sounds like he could make a difference in the approach for a number of pitchers over the coming years.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Feb 16, 2016 12:07:18 GMT -5
Obviously Bannister is going to have a huge hand in our pitching. I assume he will be working with our ML pitchers as well as our minor leaguers. That would seem like quite a workload with 50 or so guys to work with. I was wondering why we don't carry an asst pitching coach on the big club as we have in the past.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,321
|
Post by radiohix on Feb 16, 2016 12:54:12 GMT -5
Bannister articulates something I've thought about for many years, each pitcher has uniqueness of expression more so than other players, specifically in how they "shape" their pitches, and never more so than with curveballs as those can vary so greatly in both velocity and shape. I remember, as mentioned in another post the hard sharp break of Mark Clear, but also the hard tight curve occasionally thrown by Rich Gossage. And Pedro, in reality had closer to 15 pitches when all the variations are considered. Pitching "Backwards" is nothing new of course, thinking about Pat Dobson, or Jamie Moyer who was so successful. Bert Blylevens curve practically went from behind hitters heads to the strike zone. I saw Bernie Williams flail uncharacteristically at a diving Tom Gordon curve. About the greatest pitch I ever saw was a Daniel Bard 2 seamer against the Yankees at 99mph with explosive lateral movement. Bannister sounds like he could make a difference in the approach for a number of pitchers over the coming years. Anytime I'll have a chance to post this gif,I'll do it! #HepatitisK
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Feb 16, 2016 13:05:53 GMT -5
He also held onto the top 4 despite everyone trying to pry them away. Not to get too off topic, but I hate this argument. It's like saying, "The Angels acquired Andrelton Simmons, and they didn't even have to give up Mike Trout! Automatically a good trade!" None of the big four would even be a consideration for anyone we traded for this offseason.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 16, 2016 13:14:47 GMT -5
He also held onto the top 4 despite everyone trying to pry them away. Not to get too off topic, but I hate this argument. It's like saying, "The Angels acquired Andrelton Simmons, and they didn't even have to give up Mike Trout! Automatically a good trade!" None of the big four would even be a consideration for anyone we traded for this offseason. It's not like that at all. It's more like "The Angels tried to trade for Carlos Carrasco but Cleveland wanted Mike Trout so they told them to go to hell." I was praising the trades not made. Dombrowksi even said that they weren't going to trade for a starting pitcher because the prices were too high. In other words, they were asking for one or more of the top 4. The point is that he valued prospects when some were worried that he didn't.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Feb 16, 2016 17:58:51 GMT -5
Fair enough. It was a common argument but you weren't really making it specifically.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Feb 16, 2016 18:41:50 GMT -5
Fair enough. It was a common argument but you weren't really making it specifically. True, but losing say prospects 5 & 6 for Kimbrel hurts a lot more if he then went and dealt anyone from the top 4, which by most accounts are consensus better than Margot or Guerra. It now allows them to either use one as a chip at the deadline or next year, or let them develop and hope to get multiple potential elite big leaguers
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Feb 17, 2016 15:12:57 GMT -5
Radiohix thanks so much for the pic! I love this site.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Feb 19, 2016 16:34:00 GMT -5
Bannister articulates something I've thought about for many years, each pitcher has uniqueness of expression more so than other players, specifically in how they "shape" their pitches, and never more so than with curveballs as those can vary so greatly in both velocity and shape. I remember, as mentioned in another post the hard sharp break of Mark Clear, but also the hard tight curve occasionally thrown by Rich Gossage. And Pedro, in reality had closer to 15 pitches when all the variations are considered. Pitching "Backwards" is nothing new of course, thinking about Pat Dobson, or Jamie Moyer who was so successful. Bert Blylevens curve practically went from behind hitters heads to the strike zone. I saw Bernie Williams flail uncharacteristically at a diving Tom Gordon curve. About the greatest pitch I ever saw was a Daniel Bard 2 seamer against the Yankees at 99mph with explosive lateral movement. Bannister sounds like he could make a difference in the approach for a number of pitchers over the coming years. Anytime I'll have a chance to post this gif,I'll do it! #HepatitisK Half of the reason I quoted was to increase the frequency of this gif. I would agree that this is probably the single nastiest pitch I have ever seen...or at least that I can recall. It looks headed for the heart of the plate and ends up what looks like 6 inches outside and about 2 inches off the ground. Bernie missed it by about a foot. I've read a few articles about Bannister's philosophy and I really think he'll be a big help. From the sound of it, Carlos Marmol got his shot because Bannister thought he was too over-the-top, and that he might be a lot more effective by dropping down some. If the velocity is still high-90s, and Bannister can work some magic, that's a nice pickup.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,931
|
Post by ericmvan on Feb 19, 2016 17:41:49 GMT -5
Echo, echo:
1) When DDo was hired I posted a theory which I admitted might be wishful thinking. It was that Henry felt the Cherington adminsistration had not been strong analytically, that DDo fel that analytics was the one tool he had not taken proper advantage of in his goal of being the best possible GM, and that they were both committed to being strong analytically. The Bannister promotion is the best evidence in favor of that theory yet.
2) When tonyc mentioned the Bard pitch, I said, man, I hope someone posts that gif!
I had to look it up at BrooksBaseball. August 9th, 2010, he fans Jeter and Nick Swisher on six pitches. That's not 99 mph. It's 100.9.
His previous pitch was a 4-seamer at 100 with 5.6" of armside run and 9.2" of rise. This one has 13.5" of run and only 2.7" of rise (which we perceive as relative to the 4-seamer rise). That's 8 extra inches of armside run and 6.5" of perceived sink. To put that in perspective, Jon Lester, who has very good separation between the two FBs, averaged 4" extra of run and 5" of sink that season.
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Feb 21, 2016 17:26:54 GMT -5
I don't know if that's true. He was a MLB pitcher. I doubt he'd have gotten the gig if he was just a nerd. It's not just that Bannister got a job/promotion, but Dombrowski created a whole new position, one that's not generally in the front-office hierarchy, focused on bringing the use of analytics to the development of pitchers. Listening to Hazen on The Baseball Show yesterday, it sure sounded like DD allowed the FO to continue on the course it had already set upon, which included hiring the likes of BB.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 24, 2016 6:53:43 GMT -5
I assume he will be working with our ML pitchers as well as our minor leaguers. That would seem like quite a workload with 50 or so guys to work with. I'm not sure what universe of players you think he'll be working with to come up with 50, but I'm not sure he's going to be working with individual minor leaguers on a one-on-one basis. That wasn't my understanding at least. Sounds more like in the minors it'd be a more general handling of pitchers thing, rather than a more player-specific "move your arm slot a little" sort of thing. He's apparently the one who suggested they sign Marmol and fix his arm angle, and if he's spending time doing things like identifying major leaguers to sign, I doubt he's spending a ton of time on, say, mechanical tweaks to Michael Kopech's delivery. Although perhaps he can do that on a special assignment-type basis. This also depends on what kinds of analytics they have on the minor leaguers too. They obviously have Trackman at all the minor league parks, but I'm not sure if the data is as extensive on the minor leaguers as it is on the major leaguers. Edit: actually, maybe he will be working with some individuals.
|
|
|