These guys are experts?

There is a difference between stats and stuff. Just ask Greg Maddux.

Yea thats the other thing, I went and checked his P/Fx movement and data and theyre was no drop between last year and this year. His vertical and horizontal was almost identical. Also Kels there is a difference between stats and stuff and simply put the numbers that tell about the "stuff" dont support the claim here. By their comments you would assume he was getting hit harder and striking out fewer guys, which is clearly not the case.

Rawb,

Sabermetrically speaking, yes, they are. Reality wise, no. Pitchers take stuff off their pitches intentionally, which can't be measured by a stat. The radar guns pick up the differences but they can't seperate or differentiate situations.

I didn't see the show, so I can't answer to what context they were speaking. In scouting, "seperation" can mean alot of things, although the difference between fastball and change isn't one of them.

Your reference to Billy Koch was spot on. Twenty five years ago, people were saying the same thing about Doc Gooden. He had ridiculous numbers his first few seasons, but his fastball was as straight as a string. Once he began losing velocity, he became easier to hit.

Fifteen years ago, Hoffman might have hit 98 for his top speed, with an average of, say, 94. Today, his average may still be 94, but his top speed is might be 95-96. His lower speed is probably the same as it always was, he just doesn't have the strength or arm speed to rear back and gas one up there at 98-99.

Numbers one and two are a reflection of him being a pitcher now instead of a thrower, and they tie into #'s 3 & 4. If you see a guy leaning in, why throw 96 down when 92 up is a better pitch?

Make sense?

Ok I see the premise of what you are saying but you are ignoring some key points here Kels. These guys who needed a grand total of what? One minute of research? To see what they were saying would be complete hogwash. He generated his highest K/9 in over 5 seasons! That is the truest measure of pitching success their is. Also his Swinging strike percentage has risen each of the last three seasons and was over 11% this season. That is outstanding.

I understand that, Mike. But Harold Reynolds and Al Leiter PLAYED the game. They have a lifetime of research. They notice things the average fan wouldn't even think of. Especially Lieter, because he was, after all, a pitcher. K/9 is the result of pitching, which encompasses everything, velocity, movement, pitch selection and location. Because he has lost velocity and effectiveness off his fastball, he's throwing more breaking balls and changeups. Hitters over the years develop patterns on pitchers, if Hoffman would throw a change up 75% of the time with two strikes and all of a sudden he's throwing it 65% of the time, the 10% difference is a swing and miss because he threw the batter's timing off. Again, that has nothing to do with velocity or seperation.

Ok, Leiter was the one guy actually supporting him still being effective but again you didnt see the segment and I didnt point it out. However I dont think their is a lot of substance with your commment here. He clearly proved his "stuff" was just as good as ever. you dont see an increase in swinging strike percentage over a whole season and an increase in three consecutive seasons off of smoke and mirriors. Furthermore they were basically translating stuff to effectivness an clearly he is still very effective and for these guys to totally miss this and suggest he retires is a joke. It is also further proof that the mass media, whether it be former players or not simply put to much stock in things that a pitcher has little to no control over. They see a spike in ERA and assume the pitcher is declining? It is simply ignorant and a joke that they get paid to go on TV and lie to the public.

It's not that they are lying to the public, Mike, its that the majority of the public is clueless to what they are talking about. Should Hoffman retire? I don't know, he's a closer, considering guys like Bob Wickman and Jose Valverde have major league jobs, then maybe not. Seventy five percent of Hoffman is better than 100% of those two stiffs, so, why should he?

I'll throw in my 2 cents for what it's worth, and it's basically more about my philosophy on stats in baseball.

I don't think I actually saw Trevor Hoffman pitch once this season, on TV or in person, or on a highlight reel. And there's no number you can show me to convince me of any claim (good or bad) regarding his stuff. I don't think one can make an accurate assessment on a pitcher's stuff without actually seeing it. And statistics are support for an argument, not arguments in and of themselves.

Furthermore, I remember getting to see Justin Verlander face the Red Sox, and my seats were 5 or 6 rows behind home plate. I think that was the first time I'd ever felt what a Major League fastball was truly like. He hit 100 twice that night, but the dive and cut on the ball impressed me the most. If I hadn't sat where I sat, I wouldn't have had been so floored by his stuff.

In this case, Mike, you make excellent points that the numbers don't show this panel of experts to be right. And like most sports experts, they're probably wrong a great deal. It's very interesting that all the numbers you've mentioned go against their argument. But something that frustrates me and apparently Kelsdad is that numbers aren't the be all and end all in baseball.

Raw, it is true numbers are not neccesairly the end all be all. However are you familiar with Pitch/Fx? http://mlb.m...amp;c_id=mlb check out that link for a description. Their is also sits that track each pitch thrown. Just to be clear we can now actually see the movement of each pitch in terms of break, tilt, speed, etc. Furthermore I do believe in scouting and how it can work hand in hand with stats. For example, arm action. If Hoffman had shown a considerable difference in either seperation or end result of a pitch you could say his stuff is slipping and his arm action is slowing down. Well that simply is not the case as the numbers (k/9,SwingK%, FBV,CHV) show.

If his stuff had vanished his numbers would too right?

Not really.

Veteran pitchers stay in the game because they learn how to adjust for the loss of stuff. Some, like Randy Johnson and Roger Clemens, pick up new pitches. Others, like Greg Maddux and Kenny Rogers, use what they have differently.

Like I said before, hitters and pitchers develop patterns on each other. If I'm expecting one thing and get another, my swing and miss % will go up. That's on ME, not the pitcher.

If you like looking at charts and graphs, the link Mike gave is pretty cool, but in reality it's not a viable tool to understand pitching.

lol Really not valuable? Ok so just so we are clear

He struck out more batters per 9IP then he had since '03

He had his best K/BB ratio since "02 i believe

And he had stats were pretty much in lign with his career trends. the one taht was out of whack? Hir HR/9 which doubled which is simply a result of luck, bad luck in this case. We have all this info and for someone to say it is a useless tool in evaluation is foolish. It is revoulitonary and has been talked about for months now.

Do people watch baseball games and think stuff like "hey, that was a nice hit" or "that was a great catch" anymore? Or is it all - "let me go to my computer and see what this guy's error percentage per fielding attempt when there are two cumulonimbus clouds in the sky?"

Sorry if that sounds condescending, but I find that I enjoy the games more if I just watch them.

The info is readily available without the tool, Mike.

The website may be relatively new, but the info it contains is hardly revolutionary, teams and pitchers themselves have been tracking this stuff for decades.

The chart is only useful to those who don't understand what Reynolds and Lieter were saying, or trying to. If that brings baseball more fans, then yes, it has merit.

Kels u r serious right now? And I get that common fan might not care about the stat however, some do and when "experts" go on an make statements that are false we as a viewing public should not simply understand it.

And why you might say some hitters dont care, well then some do. Have you never read a reports about the scouting technigues new age GM's and baseball ops are providing players? Teams like the Sox are constantly reciving praise from the players.

Also if this doesnt matter why are more and more MLB teams recruting and hiring guys like Bill James, Tom Tango and Nate Silver?

If these numbers are simply for the fan why do they higher these guys for their baseball ops and make them keep there info exclsuive to that franchise now?

http://www.s.../id/2172223/

Yup it was already around right?

The fact that you repeatedley make this absurd comments and no one calls you on it drives me up a wall. I dont even care that we have different opinions, that is cool. But when you baisiclly lie to make yourself sound smart. Well. That simply pisses me off.

U r a clown man, a true clown. You take everything these guys sayd apparentley and accept it. I want to look a little deeper and if they turn out right then so be it. In this case their is not one thing that proves they were correct. His Hr/Fb rate was absurdly high compared to what his career trend and the avg MLB pitchers trends are. Now for my "level of understanding" please give me a break what dont I understand, by all means enlighten me. We in this day and age have a ton of new information we never had. Rather then try and sift through and make yourself more knowledgable or simply decide you dont want that level of understanding you try and discredit it and make other B.S. up. Matter of fact lets go back and look at some of the things you and "your level of understanding" have shown. Do you remember my first post when I said the Yanks are in trouble and you called me crazy? Well I guess I wasnt so crazy after all. How is that understanding looking now.

That's what I thought....blowhard.

What did you think? You did lie "The info is readily available without the tool," It was not available and maybe you dont quite grasp what it is. But it was a big deal when first revealed their is a lie you idiot.

Ok, fine.

"The info is readily available to TEAMS AND PLAYERS without the tool."

Happy now?

Ok so just so we are clear. You are saying that the motion capturing cameras that give the pitch F/X data was around for years prior to 2007? I just want to be clear? Please dont back down now clown.

"The website may be relatively new, but the info it contains is hardly revolutionary, teams and pitchers themselves have been tracking this stuff for decades.

And I actually referenced that.

Guess that makes you the idiot..

How come you post here, Mike? Is it because your site gets no attention?

With crap like this, no wonder....

Why dont you all read this great article and see why Pitch F/x is good. Tell me if this is not ground breaking stuff? http://www.b...ticleid=7641

Lol you are funny man. Players have had the ability to have a special camera that transaltes the movement and velocity of every pitch? Realy dude you are lying. LYING! it is new I mean what in 2000 did one team have this and they somehow kept it? Sure guys had scouting reports and radar gun readings but this cmaera and technology is basicaly brand new. Now I get cause I am the one mentioning it you want to discredit it.But again give me one example how it was used prior to 07 please. Oh wait you cant so you will make some other irrelevat comment. Lame.

Thank you Ju,and again I get not every one likes and or cares about everything. But Kels just is so friggin ignorant to anything that goes against his old school way of thinking. He is such a clown and he gets away with it. Why? Why do people accept his bogus facts and opinions and shallow, hollow responses?

Ok so where is the reference? I dont see a link or a place I can find what you claim. Sorrys Kels I guess a spade is just a spade.

It's in the bold above. They've had their own video departments for along time.

There is no link there for me to click on.

And again. I am not saying video That is not what Pitch F/X is all about. Pitch F/X charts the plane of the pitch. Making it available visually with computer graphics in a replay. It is one thing to see a pitch on a tv. It is a completley different thing to be able to track the movement and compare it to others pitches throughout the start, compared to other pitces etc.

And I post here because a long time ago I got some email from some guy inviting me to. That is all and my site is doing just find thank you.

What do you need a link for?

Ok all I see is bold text, you said that it was referenced to something. What is it referenced to? All I see is a sentence in bold. No name, nothing.

Quote from the article posted above:"The crowning achievement of the Gameday researchers and, I would argue, one of the greatest moments for nerdom since Ric Ocasek married Paulina Porizkova, occurred earlier this summer in Seattle. Dave Cameron, a writer for the U.S.S. Mariner blog, was trying to figure out why hitters were getting to M's ace Felix Hernandez in the early innings. Cameron turned to Gameday's database, which helped him figure out that King Felix's problem is pitch selection: The dude throws too many fastballs. So, Cameron posted his findings in a beautifully argued open letter to the Mariners pitching coach. The coach printed out the post and handed it to Hernandez. Next time out, the pitcher laid off the fastball and threw eight innings of shutout ball. Bloggers around the world should tack up portraits of Cameron in their living rooms." Yup Kels us "stat" guys have no idea and this has been around for years. Try again you meat head.

Are you honestly telling me you have never heard/seen references to this stuff before?

Curt Schilling's pitch chart?

Tony LaRussa turning Eckersley into a HOFer with video?

Greg Maddux's 2000 sq foot video library in his house?

No What I was telling you was that you typing some words in bold and not telling me where they came from hold no weight. And are you really telling me that these video librarys are the same as pitch f/x like you claimed earlier? Or are you finally realizing they are different?

I've always known they're different, and I never said otherwise. Bbut that doesn't make pitch f/x revolutionary, because video was already used.

But as has already been stated, and not just by me, it's flawed, because it doesn't cover intent.

The point of the discussion is you're taking Hoffman's stats and using them to discredit what Reynolds and Lieter said, when there is no correlation between them. Hoffman's stuff has diminished, he has lost something off his fastball, and I'm pretty confident you don't even know what seperation is.

Just because a guy, on the surface, had a year better than the past few, it doesn't mean his stuff, or lack thereof, was a contributing factor, or the ONLY factor.

The batters play more of a role in Hoffman's swing and miss % than does his stuff, right?

Ok I am going to list this for you one more time, really dumb it down for you.

2008 FB Velocity (86.MPH) 2008 CH Velocity (74 MPH) 2007 FB Velocity (85.1) 2007 CH velocity (73 mph) 2006 Fb velocity (85 MPH) 2007 ch velocity (73 mph)

Looks pretty consistent to me. And those are not stats. Further more pitch F/X tells as much about context as anything else available as you can see how pitchers attack hitters in every situation and in each an every at bat.

Try this, shitforbrains..

"speed" and "stuff" are not the same thing.

Baseball's not played on a computer.

I've always felt that stats can suggest ideas, but not confirm them. And that's true for baseball. Because in the end, whether or not Trevor Hoffman has lost his stuff is such a subjective (and extremely vague) notion, that it's unprovable.

And in this case, you have stats suggesting one thing, expert analysis suggesting another. Which is right? No way of knowing with certainty. It's all opinions.

Not true, Rawb.

Robinson Cano played 159 games, had 597 at bats, 162 hits and hit .271.

Carlos Delgado played 159 games, had 598 at bats, had 162 hits, and hit .271.

The stats say they are essentially the same player, right?

We both know that's not true, in certainty, therefore opinion becomes fact.

Oh ok

Just a recap I have shown that their has been No dip in velocity or separtion No change in his results

and no change in his pitch movements from 07 to 08. All these things are facts. Yet you have said they are wrong based on what exactly? See how you make no point but keep talking, it truly is a talent for you.

The point that keeps getting lost in this whole thing is that Hoffmans season can be explained very easily. He saw a freakish increase in his HR/9. It was 1.59 compared to a career mark of .80. Pretty much it doubled, this happens sometimes. Rather then take the time to look at that and realize why he was "percived" to have struggled they figured it would be easier to give blame to stuff. Which is off base as his "stuff" has not changed at all.

"Which is off base as his "stuff" has not changed at all. " But his location has, which goes to control and command, so, yes, it did.

Oh his location and command has? Really..hmmm thats odd I could swear..wait thats right I did. He posted his best! K/BB ratio in years! He posted his best BB/9 since 2004 and his best K/BB since 2004! So try again please. Oh wait let me guess now walks and strikeouts have nothing to do with location and command.

Mike, you are without a doubt the dumbest mutherfacker I've ever run across. You attribute sabermetrics to knowledge, and get all pissy like a little girl when people come back and question your idiocy.

It's my own fault for trying to talk with someone suffering from frontal lobe issues, so for the point of this discussion, and everything in the past, you are right.

There will be no future discussions.

You're tha man!!

Feel better?

Hahahaha. My god, you say command an location. Well tell me how else should I gauge these? If he is walking less guys is that not a sign of command and location? I mean all I am doing is trying to follow your drool bib babble. Help. Please.