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.
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,026
|
Post by cdj on Jul 9, 2021 18:51:14 GMT -5
He really does remind me a lot of Pomeranz Hopefully the early 2016 version. Any version of Pomeranz is a win at this point, he’s a Bonafide MLB pitcher of what has to be like 10+ years I would be interested in an overlay of their delivery, off the top of my head The first half of it looks pretty identical to Pom’s
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Jul 9, 2021 19:32:41 GMT -5
Hopefully the early 2016 version. Any version of Pomeranz is a win at this point, he’s a Bonafide MLB pitcher of what has to be like 10+ years I would be interested in an overlay of their delivery, off the top of my head The first half of it looks pretty identical to Pom’s Honestly, I'm still holding out hope that the kid becomes what he was meant to be, but I get that anything of value is a win now.
|
|
|
Post by borisman on Jul 10, 2021 12:10:17 GMT -5
I think Groome gets shut down before August rolls around. He hasn't pitched in like 3 years. His innings may get capped at around 90 though that is just a guess. If he keeps up pitching well he'll get a shot at Portland (for a couple of starts) just to get a taste of what's to come next year.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 11, 2021 2:19:13 GMT -5
Updated, revised, and expanded splits, starting with his 3rd start.
Split PA BA OBP SA K% BB% HRC BABIP Empty 147 .168 .293 .256 .367 .143 .028 .275 1st, 1st & 2nd 31 .346 .452 .731 .226 .161 .158 .375 Other On 28 .130 .214 .261 .250 .107 .056 .118 His problem can't be bad stretch mechanics, as I originally guessed, because he weirdly pitches from the stretch all the time. So I broke it down by base situation. Except for one homer with runners on 2nd and 3rd, all the damage was done in two situations, and that homer was in his 3rd start. Furthermore, in his 4th start he got two outs in the 4th, then gave up a single and walked three straight batters, and was lifted, which certainly looks like fatigue. His BB rate subsequently is .096 in all runners-on situations.
Right now, my best guess is that he's trying to get double plays when there's a man on 1st with less than 2 outs, and my next guess is that he's working on holding runners in SB situations. I'll have to go into the game logs a third time to see which matches the results better, and I'll start with game 5 this time.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,397
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Jul 11, 2021 9:40:45 GMT -5
Updated, revised, and expanded splits, starting with his 3rd start.
Split PA BA OBP SA K% BB% HRC BABIP Empty 147 .168 .293 .256 .367 .143 .028 .275 1st, 1st & 2nd 31 .346 .452 .731 .226 .161 .158 .375 Other On 28 .130 .214 .261 .250 .107 .056 .118 His problem can't be bad stretch mechanics, as I originally guessed, because he weirdly pitches from the stretch all the time. So I broke it down by base situation. Except for one homer with runners on 2nd and 3rd, all the damage was done in two situations, and that homer was in his 3rd start. Furthermore, in his 4th start he got two outs in the 4th, then gave up a single and walked three straight batters, and was lifted, which certainly looks like fatigue. His BB rate subsequently is .096 in all runners-on situations.
Right now, my best guess is that he's trying to get double plays when there's a man on 1st with less than 2 outs, and my next guess is that he's working on holding runners in SB situations. I'll have to go into the game logs a third time to see which matches the results better, and I'll start with game 5 this time.
It doesn’t surprise me that having guys on could get in your head. I wonder if it messes up his rhythm. Does he take longer between pitches with men on than with no one on? Having a guy on means split attention, which, well, some guys handle better than others. And when you are lefty, that guy at first is right in front of you, making him potentially more distracting.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,977
|
Post by jimoh on Jul 11, 2021 10:27:45 GMT -5
Updated, revised, and expanded splits, starting with his 3rd start.
Split PA BA OBP SA K% BB% HRC BABIP Empty 147 .168 .293 .256 .367 .143 .028 .275 1st, 1st & 2nd 31 .346 .452 .731 .226 .161 .158 .375 Other On 28 .130 .214 .261 .250 .107 .056 .118 His problem can't be bad stretch mechanics, as I originally guessed, because he weirdly pitches from the stretch all the time. So I broke it down by base situation. Except for one homer with runners on 2nd and 3rd, all the damage was done in two situations, and that homer was in his 3rd start. Furthermore, in his 4th start he got two outs in the 4th, then gave up a single and walked three straight batters, and was lifted, which certainly looks like fatigue. His BB rate subsequently is .096 in all runners-on situations.
Right now, my best guess is that he's trying to get double plays when there's a man on 1st with less than 2 outs, and my next guess is that he's working on holding runners in SB situations. I'll have to go into the game logs a third time to see which matches the results better, and I'll start with game 5 this time.
It seem to me that although his windup is not too different from when he pitches in the stretch, still in the K video above there is only one third strike where he pitches from the stretch and it is definitely distinct from his windup.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 11, 2021 11:32:43 GMT -5
In 31 and 28 PAs, odds are the right take is “something to keep an eye on, but probably just small sample noise.”
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Jul 11, 2021 11:49:22 GMT -5
In 31 and 28 PAs, odds are the right take is “something to keep an eye on, but probably just small sample noise.” I'd also say in 59 PAs there's always a way to split the data to find something good and something bad. It just seems like BABIP is the culprit here.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 11, 2021 13:10:44 GMT -5
In 31 and 28 PAs, odds are the right take is “something to keep an eye on, but probably just small sample noise.” I'd also say in 59 PAs there's always a way to split the data to find something good and something bad. It just seems like BABIP is the culprit here. The 59 are sufficiently different from the 147, so you start to speculate on a cause other than random. For the combination of decline in K rate and the increase in HR per contact, p = .013. I believe it's even lower if you start at game 5.
But you're both correct that the sub-split may be random, which is why I'm going to look at the data one more time (compile a spreadsheet of all the PA, in fact). Not just the breakdown by GDP situation versus not, but I'll also break down the BABIP by batted ball type and note when the PBP says "sharp" or "soft" contact. I'll also look at thew data starting at game 3 and at game 5, and I can do paired t-tests for the individual starts.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 11, 2021 13:30:22 GMT -5
P values are a nice tool for testing a single hypothesis made in public while completely ignorant of the data.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 11, 2021 14:09:05 GMT -5
P values are a nice tool for testing a single hypothesis made in public while completely ignorant of the data. To be more explicit about it, citing a p value for this kind of post hoc analysis, especially one that requires linking two separate metrics, is statistical tomfoolery. I mean, you’re openly admitting to opening spreadsheets and looking for patterns. That can be a useful avenue for baseball analysis, but you absolutely cannot then start citing p values to defend it.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 13, 2021 9:06:34 GMT -5
I think Groome gets shut down before August rolls around. He hasn't pitched in like 3 years. His innings may get capped at around 90 though that is just a guess. If he keeps up pitching well he'll get a shot at Portland (for a couple of starts) just to get a taste of what's to come next year. So this isn't quite true - he was healthy all of last year (and the very end of 2019) and was pitching at the alternate site. I don't think they're going to let him pitch deep into games necessarily, but I don't think he is in any more danger of getting shut down than anyone else. ------- As for the whole runners on thing, as we've documented, he has had -- and has gotten progressively better with -- issues of losing his control for stretches and letting innings get big on him. That being the case, yes, he's going to have worse numbers with runners on, because he's in the middle of fighting his control/command. I would push back strongly on the suggestion that these numbers show that "runners on 1st or 1st and 2nd specifically cause him problems." I'd proffer that instead the issues start with him putting the runner(s) on and continue through the runners being on until he gets out of it.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 13, 2021 9:13:55 GMT -5
P values are a nice tool for testing a single hypothesis made in public while completely ignorant of the data. A p-value is the result of a test, not a tool.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 13, 2021 10:17:53 GMT -5
P values are a nice tool for testing a single hypothesis made in public while completely ignorant of the data. To be more explicit about it, citing a p value for this kind of post hoc analysis, especially one that requires linking two separate metrics, is statistical tomfoolery. I mean, you’re openly admitting to opening spreadsheets and looking for patterns. That can be a useful avenue for baseball analysis, but you absolutely cannot then start citing p values to defend it. I take the p value as a test of whether something is worth looking into. The p value of getting the result in a random simulator -- where you would absolutely generate a random number to determine strikeout versus contact, and another random number to determine homer versus ball in play -- is a measure of the size of the effect. It's that and nothing more. Sometimes when I run that test I decide that the split was probably random, and look no further at the data.
Now, we know that pitchers not only change their approach with runners on base, they change it for each base-out situation. The numbers for the whole league in the 24 base-out-situations differ from one another with a titanic effect size. So we have a result that is very unlikely to show up in a random simulation, and we know that this sort of difference really happens. So you look further into the data to see if you could find a specific cause, that makes sense, baseball-wise and otherwise.
And I have a hypothesis in mind to test: that the bad results are from trying to get double plays. That makes two specific predictions: that the somewhat arbitrary split I identified will get better when I refine it into GDP situations versus not, and that his GB rate in GDP situations will be higher in those situations. (Note that apparent GDP situations with 0 outs and the tying or go-ahead run on 3B are ambiguous and will be put into their own bucket, if there are any.)
A lot of the effect here is the homers he's given up with men on, and I can and will look into the HR/Contact figures of the guys who homered off him. I've already looked at who was running at 1B in SB situations and there was no tendency for them to be SB threats, so the hypothesis that he was concerned with the runner was tested and had no evidence to support it.
As I noted earlier, I'll be looking at the data starting both with start 3 and start 5. I also won't rule out that a different hypothesis might occur to me, but that would need two different lines of evidence to be convincing.
I'm actually not that optimistic that the data will be conclusive, but I'm too curious to not look further, in part because I just enjoy doing this kind of detective work.
A true story: Winston Churchill once entered the men’s room at Parliament and discovered that Labor leader Clement Attlee was already at one end of the long trough urinal. Churchill pointedly took up his position at the other.
Atlee remarked, “Feeling a bit stand-offish, are we, Winston?”
Churchill replied, “Any time you see something big, you want to nationalize it.”
Any time I see a split that's big, I want to analyze it.
|
|
|
Post by 1980bornsoxfan on Jul 20, 2021 9:51:51 GMT -5
When is Groome scheduled back on the mound? I know he was off due to wife having a baby. Are they just giving him some rest, as he hasn’t thrown more than x innings in 2 years? Just really interested to see how he looks after the layoff.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 20, 2021 10:19:58 GMT -5
Would he be an AZ fall league candidate to get innings?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 20, 2021 10:25:39 GMT -5
When is Groome scheduled back on the mound? I know he was off due to wife having a baby. Are they just giving him some rest, as he hasn’t thrown more than x innings in 2 years? Just really interested to see how he looks after the layoff. They're in the midst of scheduled skips, so I'm sure they just scheduled his on purpose for when his wife was due. I'm in the process of getting the Greenville starters for the week. Would he be an AZ fall league candidate to get innings? So there's certainly an argument for it, but I'd lean against that for him this year - just let him get through a full year healthy and then maybe use it to ramp him up further innings-wise next year. And for whatever it's worth, it's not even clear there's going to be an AFL this year - they haven't said one way or another that I've noticed, and I figure that having enough arms to do it might be an issue.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Sept 5, 2021 21:29:45 GMT -5
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,397
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Sept 5, 2021 21:40:37 GMT -5
Oh my gosh. I am so excited about Groome that I’ve decided to move him to #1 in my prospect rankings.*
*not really**
** maybe really.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Sept 5, 2021 22:16:31 GMT -5
Oh my gosh. I am so excited about Groome that I’ve decided to move him to #1 in my prospect rankings.* *not really** ** maybe really. I've been holding out so much hope for him.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,771
|
Post by mobaz on Sept 8, 2021 7:14:55 GMT -5
I'm out of MassLive articles so don't have more detail, but I'm feeling good about Jay. Hope a "normal" year is enough to springboard to next year and he can start consistently hitting potential!
|
|
|
Post by beantown on Sept 8, 2021 9:23:47 GMT -5
The stuff is encouraging. Also you would have to think he'd benefit from an improved diet and conditioning routine, maybe another Spring hitting the weights with Chris Sale in Fla
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,771
|
Post by mobaz on Sept 8, 2021 9:42:43 GMT -5
The stuff is encouraging. Also you would have to think he'd benefit from an improved diet and conditioning routine, maybe another Spring hitting the weights with Chris Sale in Fla His goal should be to out-compete Kutter Crawford as Sale's favorite. Get a friendly rivalry going.
|
|
|
Post by bcsox on Sept 8, 2021 12:58:00 GMT -5
I wonder if he ever got hit with a line drive right back at him. The reason I mention is that he a very unusual jump back whole throwing his hands in front of his face reaction every time a hitter swings. I dont think I have ever seen that before.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 8, 2021 13:14:10 GMT -5
We talked about Groome on last week's podcast, and his scouting report is updated from Ian's look at him: soxprospects.com/players/groome-jay.htmHe's a very different pitcher than he was before surgery. Used to be potential for 2 plus pitches but unclear what else was there. Now has four averagish or maybe better pitches that he mixes.
|
|
|