How Much is an Extra Mile Per Hour on Your Fastball Worth? - Caretaker Exclusive

[John Foley]

Every year, we get excited about pitchers who are throwing harder than before. How much on-field impact does that extra velocity (real or perceived) make? Does it make up for increased injury risk?

Image courtesy of © Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports

Hope springs eternal at the start of the season. Players who have spent the winter improving themselves finally get to showcase their gains. For many position players, that often comes with proclamations that they're in "the best shape of his life.” Sometimes that is true for pitchers, but more common in recent years is “he went to Driveline” (or a similar place).

For the hurlers, those winter visits to the private science-of-baseball labs might result in new or refined pitches in their arsenal. They also might result in the always-coveted increase in velocity.

For the Twins this spring, starting pitchers Bailey Ober and Simeon Woods-Richardson and reliever Jorge Alcalá garnered attention with their newly augmented fastball velocity. Before that, it was Griffin Jax and Joe Ryan.

While it remains to be seen if those gains will translate into regular season impact, they offer reasons to believe that the players might have another gear than they previously showed. Woods-Richardson’s velocity increase has been present in his first two starts in Triple-A, and Ober was a full tick above last year’s average in his first start, despite struggling mightily. Alcalá’s bump has come north, too, averaging 96.6 mph in his first few relief appearances.

We believe that more velocity leads to better results, but is that true? What is that worth in practice? Does increased fastball velocity result in better run prevention? Is a velocity uptick more impactful for some hurlers than others? Let’s see if we can find out.

Getting Grounded
Velocity is increasing throughout MLB, and has been for a while. The league-average four-seamer in 2008, when pitch tracking was implemented, was 91.9 mph. Last season, it was 94.2 mph. That increase has been driven less by increasing maximum velocity (no one has topped Aroldis Chapman’s 105.8 mph from 2010), than by an increasing number of pitchers throwing hard. 

Sixty-four different hurlers touched 100 mph or better last season, per Statcast, and 38.0% of all four-seamers thrown were harder than 95 mph (more than double the same figure for 2008). The upper limit isn’t going up, but things are getting more crowded near it.

With the help of Statcast search, I binned every four-seam fastball and sinker thrown over the last 3 seasons (2021-2023, more than 1,000,000 of them combined) into one-mile-per-hour increments. The average Major League four-seamer in that period was 93.9 mph and allowed a .256/.345/.447 triple-slash line and a .344 weighted on-base average (wOBA). Sinkers have averaged 93.2 mph, while getting hit to .283/.360/.424 and a .344 wOBA.

The two dominant fastball types at the league level have allowed the same production, albeit with different shapes. Four-seamers suppress batting average and on-base percentage better than sinkers, but are more susceptible to slugging. That makes sense intuitively — sinkers tend to generate ground balls, which can sneak through infields for singles, boosting batting average and on-base percentage; and four-seamers tend to generate flyballs that are either caught for outs or go for extra bases, suppressing average and increasing slugging.

Around those averages, the distribution of velocity of those pitch types at the league level looks like this:

About 60% of the four-seamers thrown in the last three seasons have been between 92 and 96 miles per hour. Sinkers are just a tick lower on the velocity scale, as you can see above, and about 55% of those have fallen between 91 and 95 miles per hour.

View full article

[Guest]

Nice start, really.  A note about funding.  The Athletic costs $1/month.  It's good.  I'd consider Caretaker status if it was price-competitive and if I could be assured no portion of my payment would end up, directly or indirectly, with BLM.  This website says it supports BLM.  I don't.

[chpettit19]

37 minutes ago, Minderbinder said:

Nice start, really.  A note about funding.  The Athletic costs $1/month.  It's good.  I'd consider Caretaker status if it was price-competitive and if I could be assured no portion of my payment would end up, directly or indirectly, with BLM.  This website says it supports BLM.  I don't.

If you're paying $1/month for The Athletic it's because you're on a special introductory rate. That is not the cost of a regular Athletic subscription. 

[mikelink45]

See Ken Rosenthals essay today in the Athletic - the pitchers who went nine, induced ground balls and DP also lasted longer and had less surgery.  Time to figure this out. If pitchers are going to get contracts like Cole, they have to be on the field. 

[jkcarew]

I’d say it’s usually worth…

Higher K%…

With fewer overall innings pitched…

and at least one Tommy John surgery.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

If you're paying $1/month for The Athletic it's because you're on a special introductory rate. That is not the cost of a regular Athletic subscription. 

True.  However the cost of the intros don't compare, and the value for money for the regular subs don't compare.  

[Karbo]

I'd be interested to see how much the increased velocity and spin rates are tied to the increase in arm type injuries.

[TwinsDr2021]

1 hour ago, Karbo said:

I'd be interested to see how much the increased velocity and spin rates are tied to the increase in arm type injuries.

Cole was saying it is combination of less sticky stuff, throwing harder, and the pitch clock rushing pitchers. I would add I think it might have something to do with are pressure filled those mid innings are on guys, knowing if they even give up a hit, there is a chance of them being pulled. No cruising through the middle innings giving up a run or even a couple of base runners.

[Parker Hageman]

11 hours ago, Minderbinder said:

True.  However the cost of the intros don't compare, and the value for money for the regular subs don't compare.  

Obviously what is value to one person might not be to the next. 

We're clear that our Caretakers program is not entirely about the content -- although I would argue that you get access to in-depth analysis in this space from John, Matthew and myself that you will not get anywhere else, Athletic included.

But that is not for everyone. 

Obviously as a non-subscriber, you have not had the full Caretaker experience so you are basing this on a partial and a slightly misguided view of what our funding supports. 

Our Caretakers -- over 250 strong (thank you @Karbo) -- have supported our efforts to deliver events, pay writers, and get additional content in return. The funding from Caretakers has also helped us add TruMedia's database to our toolbox, giving us access to more data that other mainstream outlets do not have access to. 

In the end, we will always offer free content from our great stable of creators. That will never go away. You can always find topics to comment on. We know people are asked to pay for various subscriptions in life and adding one more is not always palpable for everyone, so the Twins content will keep flowing from our end. That's why we are extremely appreciative for those who choose to help make this a better community. 

 

[bean5302]

While the direct cause/effect relationship between UCL tears and velocity hasn't been proven, the direct relationship between velocity and stress on the arm and elbow have been proven.

There are so many variables out there it's hard to get enough concrete, pure, data. How many 6'0" tall pitchers with similar builds and 93mph fastballs vs. 94mph fastballs are out there to compare? It's funny how much quality research has gone into this vs. how quickly we see half-hearted studies and datasets published and referred to as gospel on other stuff (like salt intake, alcohol or coffee consumption)

The question which will eventually be answered by MLB teams is in regard to value. Performance vs. velocity vs. durability. Does that 1mph increase cost you 1 start per year, 5 starts per year or 10 starts per year. How much performance did you gain for how much time did you lose?
99mph 20 starts, 2.80 ERA, 115 innings = ??? WAR
97mph  25 starts, 3.00 ERA, 150 innings = ??? WAR
95mph 28 starts, 3.20 ERA, 168 innings = ??? WAR
93mph 32 starts, 3.40 ERA, 200 innings = ??? WAR

[USAFChief]

8 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

... the direct relationship between velocity and stress on the arm and elbow have been proven.

 

They have?

 

[John Foley]

17 hours ago, USAFChief said:

They have?

 

Yes, multiple peer-reviewed studies have shown velocity is a direct stressor on the elbow. I linked to a good round-up on the topic from Driveline in the article and below are a few others. It's very difficult to control for other confounding variables, so pinning the elbow injuries on any one specific thing isn't something the research has done. 

https://www.drivelinebaseball.com/2017/02/fastballs-offspeed-pitches-comparative-relative-elbow-stress/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30721094/

https://www.drivelinebaseball.com/2017/03/bullpens-tracking-elbow-torque-and-mstress/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26983459/