Brandon League's pitch selection by count, 2011 season: 
I/O: Sully says that Brandon League hasn't been quite as good as he's looked. He's right.
CRUNCH: I've been real pleased with League's outings, and have said so, though just in quick-takes. You don't have time to tear apart every car that comes in for an oil change :- )
League's BB's are down to a miniscule 1.6 per game this year. My enjoyment of League's outings has been based on the intersection of (1) a top-10-in-baseball fastball, (2) a true wipeout slider, and (3) zero walks.
Instinctively, I react to that trifecta as providing an automatic 35-save man.
........
But on second glance, it is indeed weird (as Sully says) that League has only 6% swinging strikes and only 5K per game. Elite closers don't sustain 5K rates, period. There's no such thing. League's K rate, or his effectiveness, one or the other will give.
Also, hitters' contact is wayyyyy up -- assuming it is a hittable pitch (a strike) and that the batters swing, they make contact 96% (!!) of the time.
Their contact on unhittable pitches (balls) is simply crazy -- 65% (same as ML average), when League's normal rate is 50% (fishing at the splitters). Seven games in, League isn't getting wipeouts with his splitter.
.
=== Reality Check, Dept. ===
All of this is a reminder to Dr. D that League tends to throw a fastball that is oddly hittable.
He learned this lesson with Paul Spoljaric and Scott Sanders, and in 2010 he remembered that League threatened this category. Just for whatever reason, a 96 fastball from Brandon League is more like a 93 fastball from (say) Lee Smith.
Also, League's grounder rate has gone from 2-3 per flyball to 1:1.
I wonder why this is ...... hm, let's order the MRI's.....
.
=== Description of Syndrome ===
Despite two scary pitches, and 0 walks .... the hitters are getting League early in the count, and they're putting the ball into play solidly.
Early in the count? Ya, 5 K, 1 BB, that means they're going after him early. ... why would they be succeeding? ....... hmmmmmm.....
.
=== Cause of Disease ===
Here are League's pitch selections by count on the batter. Here, let's chart it real quick:
According to Fangraphs, the 2011 Brandon League has never thrown anything but a fastball in any hitter's count. Think about that.
The first pitch, he also treats as a hitter's count, always* throwing a fastball.
.........
Once he's ahead, fine: he throws 50% splitters and 50% fastballs (and destroys the enemy for a 31 OPS+).
If you don't think that the enemy has access to this chart, you are sadly mistaken.
.
=== Pineda ===
Let's chart the catchers' pitch selection when Pineda is in a hitter's count. He has thrown 480 pitches so far, and practically zero of them have been sliders in hitters' dream counts.
The enemy also has broken our Wind Talker comm system and it has access to this chart. A few excerpts:
If Michael Pineda hasn't thrown a strike yet in the AB, the hitter knows a FB is coming, period.
.
.
http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110503&content...
Also, James Paxton did not make his second start, but there is no explanation as to why not.
Also, Guti played CF for 5 innings for Tacoma tonight, went 0-for-3.
in his Clinton (low-A) debut.
4.0 IP, 7 H, 4 ER, 2 BB, 5 K
He doesn't turn 19 till August.
I notice the 5 K's more than anything.
.
As far as the 7 hits... we remember Jeff Fassero going down to low A and getting smashed. "The kids can hit a fastball, I'll give 'em that," he said.
Still amazes how many folks believe that A- hitters, much less AAA hitters, can't hit good velocity. Those guys wouldn't be prospects if they couldn't.
Player development is about dealing with pitch sequences, not learning how to swing quicker. :- ) Jason Verlander would get hit in A ball if he threw fastballs down the middle.
Shannon Drayer on the pre-game tonight, paraphrasing: 'Credit to Jeff Sullivan, who noticed that Leagues pitch selection in certain counts has gotten extremely predictable'. Not even an honorable mention for the swami Jemanji.
She mentioned specifics, about his fastball coming 99% of the time in certain situations, and that that was as good as tipping his pitches. She also asked pitching coach Carl Willis (IIRC - might have been another coach or manager) about this, and they said that they were indeed looking to have him mix up his pitch selection, that he may be too predictable.
I wonder if that was my fault...on this blog, I credited Sullivan with the scouting report when Doc was the one who actually scouted the pitch types. I wonder if Shannon reads these blogs. But it is cool that Willis was asked about this directly and they actually may talk to League about it.
LL is higher profile, and JS made no effort to convince his readers that Brandon League's predictability was anything other than his own brainchild. While his article (11 days after Dr. D's, which was admittedly triggered by a JS post) referenced the SSI article, it was done in an offhand, even mildly dismissive fashion. Kinda bush league IMHO
Sully linked us in his original post, which probably gave us some traffic, so I was okay with that.
Then he responded to Drayer's mis-credit by linking us again today. More than most amigos woulda done. Tip o' th' kelly Jeff.
...........
A little annoying, though, is Drayer's preference to credit LL.
... if she read his first post, she saw the hyperlink that Jeff put in the first paragraph. She's a journalist, and clicking through one link to find the real source is pretty minimal due diligence.
LL doesn't need the traffic off the radio, but my admins would have liked to have had it. Here SSI's welcome little traffic boost is instead given to LL. That part is not cool, if you ask me.
.
Willis comes out publicly today and confirms that League's pitch-count tendencies are as good as tipping, and that they need to fix it.
Also, Ron Fairly was quoting our May 4 Sasaki Syndrome stuff verbatim on the radio. If Fairly is relaying it, then it's common knowledge around the clubhouse.
Ron, as a visiting announcer, isn't the first person to get this kind of info. If he's relaying manager's-desk stuff, it is a big item on the desk.
.........
Two things that were a bit odd to me:
1. League appeared to stick with his tendencies on Tuesday, despite the hubbub over his pitch-count tipping, despite the fact that Willis/Wedge would have 'chewed him out' over it. Then League goes out and does the same ol', same ol'.
What do you think of that?
...........
2. Not wishing to knock anybody, am honestly surprised that this was under the M's radar. (I figured that they believed as Sandy opined - that first-pitch location would trump the batters sitting dead red, or somesuch.)
Would have thought that an intern or two was assigned to capture this kind of stuff. Naive on my part?
..........
By the way, I found that I like Ron Fairly a LOT as play-by-play man, when he's not paired with his old partner. He's smooth, authoritative, has the right word density for me, has a pleasant personality. Fairly in this context is a different announcer IMHO.
.
... and why is Olivo absent from the discussion?
Was League equally as predictable in 2010?
Maybe League feels SO uncomfortable with anything but FB 0-0 or behind in the count that that's what he's going to throw. Regardless of what Willis and Olivo want him to throw, they need a pitcher to go along with it. Anyway that's one thought.
And do we know for sure this was under the M's radar? Obviously they hadn't 'fixed' it, but that doesn't mean it wasn't something they weren't aware of.
If it WAS under the radar, then add that to the (relatively) short list of things that make me scratch my head about this org. The main other thing being, how poorly they seem to train/coach their players on media relations.
And I'll second you on Ron Fairly. Although I've always liked him, even with Niehaus. He tends to repeat himself a lot, but I agree that his tempo and demeanor are just right.
Was that the M's were trying to figure out what was wrong with League. That was what Baker, Drayer etc were reporting.
Then there were "rumblings" that they thought League was tipping (no doubt because of the swings the Indians took on him).
Then all of a sudden, last night, Fairly and Drayer are on the radio talking confidently about problem identified.
.........
By the way, thanks for sticking up for SSI on this one, GL. Any POTD's you're after? ;- )
This year, it became even a little worse, because he's been throwing his fastball so super-great.
This cemented him in using his favorite approach, since he was executing it so well.
...........
My guess is that Olivo can't call for a split first pitch. (1) It's obviously annoying for the pitcher to come into the game and shake off the first pitch. (2) When a Mariner pitcher, other than Bedard or Felix, shakes off a pitch, it tips a fastball coming.
ML catchers are essentially guessing what a pitcher wants, not coaching him in what to throw.
If League trotted in from the bullpen, shook off the first pitch, and then threw his predictable fastball, it would have a pretty embarrassing feel to it from field level.
Like you were trying to help League out a little bit -- right on the first pitch -- and he resented the condescension. The other dugout would probably be chuckling at the situation.
You want your closer to exude an air of dominance, like "how many pitches is this going to take." The pitcher-batter squabble isn't the way to start that off :- )
.
Regardless of what Willis and Olivo want him to throw, they need a pitcher to go along with it. Anyway that's one thought.
A valid thought, my man.
We remember the battles the M's pitching staff had with Randy Johnson (and the Big Unit was right about most of them). It's a constant struggle, how "coachable" any given pitcher is.
...........
Willis today came out publicly and stridently (unusual...) that Brandon League's predictability was as bad as tipping his pitches. (Another paradigm that SSI emphasized, to clarify how severe the issue was. Very.)
The staff has final say, and it is not going to send a guy out to close, if he's tipping. Something has to give here.
........
I'd prefer to believe that it wasn't under their radar - that they were trying to keep it close to the vest, until the media figured Sasaki Syndrome out, and pressed them on it.
Possible.
But their sudden change in tone is telling. A few games ago, Wedge was covering for League, explaining away his losses as just one of those things.
.
I agree the change in tone is significant. The challenge is determining why the tone changed. Hear are my thoughts:
(1) My assumption is that the M's fully understood the predictability of League pitch patterns.
(2) The pattern is old (as you demonstrated). The recent success of the league versus League is not because of a league wide epiphany about League's pitch patterns.
(2) I think League has the opinion that if he makes his pitch, it doesn't matter much whether the hitter guesses right or not. His prior success, despite pitch patterns from Rosencratz and Guildenstern are Dead (heads... heads... heads... ), supports his position.
(3) I think League, the team, or both don't think League can throw any of his other pitches over the plate consistently. He has problems with fastball control, much less command.
(4) I think Willis is embarassed by the questions. The last thing he wants is for a blogger to appear more clued in about the situation than he does.
(5) As stated above, I don't think your post was a revelation for the M's. Therefore, I think the tone changed because Willis is ticked that League's stubborness has made Willis look foolish in public. Something closer to the truth comes out now, because the prior misdirection has made a fool of Willis.
Where the ticked-off tone was a bit put-on, and only after the public heat was applied.
I could see it, and yours is probably the most feasible way to reconcile our presumption that the M's would be well aware of League's issues.
I like it. Not sure it's the case, but it's the scenario I'd prefer to be the case.
One thing corroborating your take, would be Geoff Baker's report several days ago. Baker said that, when he asked about League tipping etc., Eric Wedge seemed to want to avoid the subject. In an evident desire to keep his information close to his vest.
.
I *am* sure you're right Kelly that --- > League pitches into the teeth of batters sitting dead red because --- > he doesn't have any confidence in a splitter thrown up in the zone.
The Indians game, though, the swings they took were those of a team that had recently acquired League's pitches. That's a bit of cognitive dissonance.
And no Mariner reliever, not even Ayala or Sanders, has ever had 4 L's in 4 consecutive outings. If we didn't know better, we'd think that League's cover was recently "blown."
.
Brandon League is going to have to throw splitter for called strike ones whether he likes it or not. He can console himself with the fact that Sasaki faced the same problem.
.
...or at least that is my guess. You saw the pattern, went to fangraphs to see if you were correct, and were suprised to see it even more pronounced than you expected.
I just don't understand how the M's didn't know about the pattern. How does Olivo not know what he's called first pitch every.single.time?
However, I think we should be concerned about the M's commitment to intelligent strategy versus comfortable execution. I think it is every bit as troubling that the M's let the situation persist until a couple blown saves and bloggers made them look foolish, as it would be had they not even been aware of the pattern
============================
It reminds me of an issue the Sonics used to have that should have resonance for you Doc, if not most of your readers. Gary talked about how the Sonics missed Derrick McKey because when George would call for endless half-court trapping during the playoffs, Derrick would just insist on the team playing strong straight-up defense (which was harder to do well with Detlef).
While the traps worked well in the regular season and in the first game of each playoff series, they were gimicky and gave up a lot of easy shots once teams got used to them in a long series. Sadly, the Sonics had no consistent offense without turnover derived easy shots.
============================
Anyway, back on topic. I think it is funny that we ditched Morrow in large part because he was too vulnerable and fragile to reach his potential, but we may have replaced him with a pitcher too stubborn to reach his potential. I want Morrow back, but I never wanted him to leave.
First paragraph = dead-on ...
Second paragraph = that's exactly the same problem I see... it's possible to be non-SELF-aware but how is Olivo not aware?
Third paragraph = my macro frustration as well... as mentioned, the M's might have been 21-20 rather than 16-23 had they been proactive about it... the coaches always have to battle the players, but here's one that just meant 10x the work later, caused by avoiding 1x the work now...
Sonics = I didn't know that... absolutely perfect analogy ...
Morrow/League = one of the great punch lines in M's history... dealing a guy too weak-minded for one too strong-minded...
Somewhat high ERA (4.85, plays in ALE, though).
But WHIP of just over 13, HR/9 0.3, K/9 a tick under 13, walks still kind of a problem, but even with that a K/BB of 3!
Several times they were quoted with barely-disguised contempt for Morrow's makeup (which SSI also condemned in the pre-draft writeup. SSI would have avoided drafting Morrow because of that).
In this specific case, once Morrow was here, I'd much preferred the M's had accepted the responsibility of coaching him through that issue. How about you, DaddyO?
.........
Amusingly, it might not be POSSIBLE to coach LEAGUE through the makeup issues. Dr. K noted a tremendous irony there.
..........
PS the M's had an over-arc'ing problem with chemistry to fix, and Morrow's weakness of mind does have to be considered in that light.
.
... sent a super classy e-mail about the radio pub mixup. He sent it this morning, before the discussion here, though I just saw it.
As y'knew, Jeff's a good guy - here's the FYI on this one.
Sadly, it's hard to stay patient with "makeup issues" guys or head cases when your team is drowning. You can't possibly know if the guy will EVER figure it out, and even if he DOES, whether it will be too late to impact your predicament in any reasonable time frame.
Yeah, you might get lucky, and sometimes teams do, but I wouldn't PLAN for it. I'd just consider it serendipitous if I got some OTHER team's head case to blossom on my team while he was here. My experience? Head cases are head cases. Even if they figure it out for a while, the issue resurfaces. I wouldn't want to go into battle with 33% of my energy and focus devoted to one guy who can't get his act together.
Of course, like everything, these types of things must be judged on a case-by-case basis. And the fallout from decisions in those cases can't properly be judged until enough seasons have played out to allow for the fact that brief periods of production after a player leaves may prove to be illusory.
I should add the flip side. If I was going to take on a head case project, it would be from a position of strength, when your team is NOT desperate. You can afford then to be patient and pick your spots to employ the guy to HIS best advantage, giving him the best chance to have the kind of repeated success that proves himself...to HIM!
...I am glad to provide content.
For political reasons you might want to edit the front page article at the bottom with this FYI. I know it shouldn't matter, but...