tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post4078340774754468600..comments2024-01-06T02:22:33.000-05:00Comments on Camden Depot: What's Wrong With Jim Johnson?Jon Shepherdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03521809778977098687noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-72644274210146745122013-08-16T16:05:09.905-04:002013-08-16T16:05:09.905-04:00Gotcha. Very informative. Thanks Jon!Gotcha. Very informative. Thanks Jon!stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12808900090584995792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-47883852609259099492013-08-16T15:39:48.722-04:002013-08-16T15:39:48.722-04:00@steve
Two things I would note: (1) pitch value i...@steve<br /><br />Two things I would note: (1) pitch value is not a statement of the quality of the pitch, but a description of how effectively the pitch has been used which can be a quality issue or a use issue or a small sample size and (2) I am unsure how to really use pitch values effectively because I am not sure whether they ever really stabilize in their worth. For instance, a two seamer can be bad because other pitches are not working. It is a complicated issue, so I tend to avoid those numbers.Jon Shepherdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03521809778977098687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-46339459879741450922013-08-16T14:59:19.175-04:002013-08-16T14:59:19.175-04:00I understand the caveat that pitch/fx classificati...I understand the caveat that pitch/fx classification type should be treated with caution, but JJ relies heavily on his 2 seam fastball. He threw it about 60% last year and 46% this year. His pitch/fx pitch value for this pitch has dropped from 6.8 to -3.9 this year. I'm assuming that's a severe drop in quality but I'm not sure how to interpret these numbers exactly so please correct me if I'm wrong Jon. The drop in quality in his bread and butter pitch most likely explain the greater % of HRs given up as well as his increase in BABIP this year (.321) in comparison to the past two years (about .260). stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12808900090584995792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-17856636393311705352013-08-16T11:41:00.460-04:002013-08-16T11:41:00.460-04:00that would definitely be a possible solution, but ...that would definitely be a possible solution, but what are the chances they even try it? Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05119567934749982333noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2893512317902577458.post-49229020136264568472013-08-16T08:55:49.504-04:002013-08-16T08:55:49.504-04:00Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting dif...Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results. While I understand that "closer by committee" is often considered a last resort, it's probably the least evil when there's no dominant reliever available. At the very least, you would get to spread out the risk by diversifying that way. A possibility is this:<br /><br />* Use Hunter for 2-inning saves;<br />* For one-inning saves, use O'Day vs. R and Matusz vs. L.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com