Analyzing a pitcher’s “stuff” — velocity, movement, spin rate — is often linked to their success. However, some pitchers defy this correlation, succeeding with less impressive metrics while others underperform despite possessing exceptional “stuff.” This article delves into a statistical comparison of pitching “stuff” versus results, using a custom calculation based on data from 2015 onwards, and explores where pitchers like Justin Verlander and Max Scherzer might fall within this analysis.
Quantifying “Stuff” and Results
To understand the relationship between a pitcher’s raw talent and their on-field performance, we need to quantify both “stuff” and “results.” This analysis uses a weighted calculation based on several factors for four-seam fastballs:
- Stuff: Velocity, spin rate, horizontal movement, and vertical movement are combined to create a “Stuff Sum.”
- Results: Exit velocity, launch angle, and swinging-strike rate are used to calculate a “Results Sum.”
This approach, inspired by Eno Sarris’s pitch arsenal score, aims to provide a comprehensive evaluation of a pitcher’s fastball effectiveness. Each factor is weighted and summed to create a final score for both “stuff” and “results.”
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13375373/Screen_Shot_2018_11_02_at_8.04.41_AM.png)
High “Stuff” Pitchers
As expected, pitchers renowned for their exceptional fastballs, like Aroldis Chapman and Justin Verlander, consistently rank high in the “Stuff Sum” calculations. Notably, Verlander frequently appears in the top spots, highlighting his consistently elite fastball. This ranking system allows for a direct comparison of “stuff” across different pitchers and seasons. While Scherzer isn’t explicitly mentioned in the top 20, his reputation suggests he’d likely rank highly, facilitating a comparison using this framework.
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13375381/Screen_Shot_2018_11_02_at_8.08.19_AM.png)
“Stuff” vs. Results: The Correlation
While a strong correlation exists between “stuff” and “results” (r = 0.41), it’s not absolute. This indicates that while high-quality “stuff” generally leads to better results, other factors play a significant role. Pitchers like Darren O’Day and Kyle Hendricks, known for their craftiness rather than overpowering fastballs, often outperform their “Stuff Sum,” demonstrating the importance of command and strategy. Conversely, pitchers like Blake Treinen, despite possessing excellent “stuff,” sometimes underperform, highlighting the impact of factors beyond raw talent. This framework allows for a comparative analysis of Verlander and Scherzer, examining how their “stuff” translates into tangible results and whether they over or underperform based on their calculated “Stuff Sum.”
Conclusion: Beyond the Numbers
This analysis offers a quantitative method to compare pitchers based on their “stuff” and “results.” While not a definitive measure of a pitcher’s overall ability, it provides valuable insights into the complex relationship between raw talent and on-field success. Further research incorporating additional pitch types and expanding the timeframe could enhance the model and allow for even more nuanced comparisons between pitchers like Verlander and Scherzer, considering their entire arsenals and career trajectories.
