DJL44 Verified Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 I always thought of command as being able to get the movement you need to make the pitch effective and control was being able to locate. If you can't "command" your breaking pitch, you can't get it to break. If you leave your curveball up, you couldn't "control" it. I agree that they are used sloppily.
Mike Sixel Old-Timey Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 (edited) from fangraphs: Some teams will grade for components of command (throwing quality strikes) with control (throwing it in the strike zone, usually closely following walk rate) from ESPN:A pitcher with control can throw strikes. He'll usually get the ball over the plate, doesn't often fall behind a hitter, and will rarely hand out free passes to first. In that manner, he remains in control of the at-bat. Hitters often get defensive against control pitchers, expanding their strike zone and chasing pitches they might lay off when facing pitchers with less control. Command more specifically describes a pitcher's ability to hit the catcher's target seemingly at will. If the catcher sets up on the outside corner at the knees, a pitcher with good command will deliver the ball right on target and the catcher will hardly have to move. If a pitcher has command, he's less likely to fall behind a hitter and issue walks, but he's also rarely going to leave a pitch over the middle of the plate. or here:http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2011/9/2/2400473/another-scouting-primer-how-to-scout-pitchers Edited September 10, 2015 by mike wants wins
Willihammer Provisional Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 (edited) The distinction implies that pitchers can throw strike after strike after strike and somehow have lousy command and vice versa, throw a ball outside of the zone on purpose but have no control. Its stupid. Does the ball end up where the pitcher is trying to throw it or not? In other words, what are his K and BB rates? 90% of "command" or "control" or whatever you want to call it will be captures by those two stats. Edited September 10, 2015 by Willihammer
Mike Sixel Old-Timey Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 I was merely answering the question of what the difference was, not opining on it at all.......You can call it stupid all day, scouts have used this for years, and they think it works. Even the stats geeks talk about it, so the two sides agree.......maybe it has value and isn't stupid.
Willihammer Provisional Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 I was merely answering the question of what the difference was, not opining on it at all.......You can call it stupid all day, scouts have used this for years, and they think it works. Even the stats geeks talk about it, so the two sides agree.......maybe it has value and isn't stupid.Yeah I know you were. I'm annoyed by it because all I've ever seen the distinction do is introduce an unhelpful level of semantics. If I'm wrong then I'd welcome an example where the distinction is actually useful.
Mike Sixel Old-Timey Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 Yeah I know you were. I'm annoyed by it because all I've ever seen the distinction do is introduce an unhelpful level of semantics. If I'm wrong then I'd welcome an example where the distinction is actually useful. There are lots of articles about the difference, with examples of pitchers. I just didn't quote them all.....if you really want, you can find them pretty fast. I was surprised that it did matter all that much, frankly.
USAFChief Twins Daily Contributor Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 Yeah I know you were. I'm annoyed by it because all I've ever seen the distinction do is introduce an unhelpful level of semantics. If I'm wrong then I'd welcome an example where the distinction is actually useful.I think all you have to do is watch the difference in what happens if Tommy Milone issues no walks but throws many pitches that cross the middle of the plate, thigh high, and what happens if Tommy Milone throws many pitches that cross the very outside corner of the plate, knee high. Both are strikes, but they are very different pitches. Control, vs. command.
Willihammer Provisional Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 I think all you have to do is watch the difference in what happens if Tommy Milone issues no walks but throws many pitches that cross the middle of the plate, thigh high, and what happens if Tommy Milone throws many pitches that cross the very outside corner of the plate, knee high. Both are strikes, but they are very different pitches. Control, vs. command.What if the catcher was setting targets under the batter's hands?
Craig Arko Old-Timey Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 Accuracy vs. precision. Lots of examples if searched for. Mike Sixel 1
drjim Provisional Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 The distinction implies that pitchers can throw strike after strike after strike and somehow have lousy command and vice versa, throw a ball outside of the zone on purpose but have no control. Its stupid. Does the ball end up where the pitcher is trying to throw it or not? In other words, what are his K and BB rates? 90% of "command" or "control" or whatever you want to call it will be captures by those two stats. You do draw one important distinction though, in reality no pitcher has command without control. But of course the opposite can be true. I can always hit a dart board, but don't often hit the triple 20 I'm aiming for. I can certainly control the dart, but don't have great command of it. At least not until I have a couple more beers.
Willihammer Provisional Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 You do draw one important distinction though, in reality no pitcher has command without control. But of course the opposite can be true. I can always hit a dart board, but don't often hit the triple 20 I'm aiming for. I can certainly control the dart, but don't have great command of it. At least not until I have a couple more beers.Again, what if I aim for the same target and hit a bunch of double 17s on the other side of the board while you are hitting single 1s and 5s right around the triple 20. I win, you lose. But who has the better command/control?
USAFChief Twins Daily Contributor Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 Again, what if I aim for the same target and hit a bunch of double 17s on the other side of the board while you are hitting single 1s and 5s right around the triple 20. I win, you lose. But who has the better command/control?Is it possible you are intentionally missing the point?
Mike Sixel Old-Timey Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 Accuracy vs. precision. Lots of examples if searched for. Ya, really, that is what they are saying, isn't it. I wish I was as smart as you and thought about that.
Brock Beauchamp Site Manager Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 Again, what if I aim for the same target and hit a bunch of double 17s on the other side of the board while you are hitting single 1s and 5s right around the triple 20. I win, you lose. But who has the better command/control?Play nine games that way and see who wins more consistently. Come on, you're being intentionally difficult. This is baseball. Sometimes games are won with a swinging bunt. That doesn't mean you train your players to rely on swinging bunts. The pitcher who can put the ball where he wants it (command) is going to beat the player who can throw it in the strike zone (control) more often than not.
Willihammer Provisional Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 (edited) Is it possible you are intentionally missing the point?I'm really not trying to be difficult. There's something I'm not getting across. The control-command distinction suggests to me that a pitcher has a say in the direction he misses his target which seems wrong for a couple reasons. One, even if a pitcher missed to a certain side - say he was opening up early and missing high and to the arm side. That will miss for a strike and miss for a ball depending on where the catcher is setting up and depending on the handedness of the batter. But more likely, IMO, is that the misfires are random in direction and the only consistency is how far away from the target the pitcher misses. And since a catcher always sets up on one corner of the zone (and never outside it) this is almost entirely captured by BB and K rates and can be described simply as "control" or "command" along one scale. Edited September 10, 2015 by Willihammer
ashbury Verified Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 I always thought of command as being able to get the movement you need to make the pitch effective and control was being able to locate. If you can't "command" your breaking pitch, you can't get it to break. If you leave your curveball up, you couldn't "control" it. I agree that they are used sloppily.However, this kind of overlaps on a third characteristic, "stuff", doesn't it?
Mike Sixel Old-Timey Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 I'm really not trying to be difficult. There's something I'm not getting across. The control-command distinction suggests to me that a pitcher has a say in the direction he misses his target which seems wrong for a couple reasons. One, even if a pitcher missed to a certain side - say he was opening up early and missing high and to the arm side. That will miss for a strike and miss for a ball depending on where the catcher is setting up and depending on the handedness of the batter. But more likely, IMO, is that the misfires are random in direction and the only consistency is how far away from the target the pitcher misses. And since a catcher always sets up on one corner of the zone (and never outside it) this is almost entirely captured by BB and K rates and can be described simply as "control" or "command" along one scale. One of the articles I linked talks about why command and control are not on the same scale. Also, see the web for the distinction between accuracy and precision, as pointed out above. They just aren't the same thing, even though we sometimes think they are.
Willihammer Provisional Member Posted September 10, 2015 Posted September 10, 2015 (edited) One of the articles I linked talks about why command and control are not on the same scale. Also, see the web for the distinction between accuracy and precision, as pointed out above. They just aren't the same thing, even though we sometimes think they are. I read it, and I understand the difference between accuracy and precision. The difference in baseball is that you have a bullseye that moves along the periphery of a rectangular target instead of a conventional circle inside concentric circles which could be more *accurately* used to describe the degree of accuracy. With a strikezone you have to assume the pitcher can control the direction he misses his target in order for the grade to have any meaning. I don't believe there's any evidence that's the case over a large enough sample. Edited September 10, 2015 by Willihammer
Hosken Bombo Disco Community Moderator Posted September 13, 2015 Posted September 13, 2015 On 3-2 count, Tyler Duffey throws a curve off the plate and six inches in the dirt. Command is when the batter swings and misses,Control is when the batter makes contact,Lack of control is when the batter takes for ball four? ashbury 1
Billy Amick Wichita Wind Surge - AA 1B/3B Despite hitting just .194, the 23-year-old ranks fourth in the Texas League in Home Runs (17) and sixth in RBI (50). Explore Billy Amick News >
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now