Article: The Key for Mike Pelfrey

[Seth Stohs]

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?r=1911-The-Key-for-Mike-Pelfrey

[Gernzy]

While Pelfrey is showing signs of improvement, Gibson is nipping at his heels. Currently I don't see Gibson replacing him. A few bad starts though...

[Winston Smith]

Pelfrey has never been anything but a mediocre pitcher. Career sub .500 record, mid 4 era in the NL and 1.5 whip, none of his numbers say anything about him being good. He is what he is probably a little better than what we've seen but nothing more than mediocre.

[Seth Stohs]

Pelfrey has never been anything but a mediocre pitcher. Career sub .500 record, mid 4 era in the NL and 1.5 whip, none of his numbers say anything about him being good. He is what he is probably a little better than what we've seen but nothing more than mediocre.

 

I can't imagine anyone would disagree with that.

[Mike Sixel]

so if he has no upside, really......why would you keep him around next year, when by then maybe Gibson will be consistent enough to be in MN, Worley might be fixed, Meyer might be ready, Albers maybe surprised us all? There is no strategic reason to have Plefry on the roster next year (nor am I sure there is this year.......). Me, I'd cut him. Call up Gibson, see what you have. I'd call up Albers after Gibson reaches his limit, and see what you have. having Pelfrey here does nothing for this team, this year, or next year.

[nicksaviking]

I would imagine a lot of pitchers who don't have the ability to strike out batters have a similar breakdown in regards to big innings. When guys get on base it's very difficult for them to stop runners from advancing even on routine outs.

[Oldgoat_MN]

Pelfrey is not going to make us all think we are watching a RH Johan Santana.

He has, however, been improving steadily (?) as he continues to come back from his surgery.

 

I am optimistic that he can give us mostly serviceable innings for the balance of the year.

[beckmt]

It was known the first half of the year might not be as good as hoped. He could be good the second half as he gets further away from TJ surgery. No one left in Rochester is forcing their way up here, so give it some time.

[nicksaviking]

Pelfrey is not going to make us all think we are watching a RH Johan Santana.

He has, however, been improving steadily (?) as he continues to come back from his surgery.

 

I am optimistic that he can give us mostly serviceable innings for the balance of the year.

 

 

How about just until the trade deadline?

[Kwak]

Pelfrey fits the Twins concept of pitchers: cheap, available to pitch, and "attacks the strikezone".

[chuchadoro]

so if he has no upside, really......why would you keep him around next year, when by then maybe Gibson will be consistent enough to be in MN, Worley might be fixed, Meyer might be ready, Albers maybe surprised us all? There is no strategic reason to have Plefry on the roster next year (nor am I sure there is this year.......). Me, I'd cut him. Call up Gibson, see what you have. I'd call up Albers after Gibson reaches his limit, and see what you have. having Pelfrey here does nothing for this team, this year, or next year.

 

Pelfrey is here to help this team reach its full 74 win potential. The Twins brass decided a full Houston-style rebuild (exceptions being Mauer and maybe Perkins) would be too big of a PR hit for a team that just got their shiny, new Section 8 housing a few short years ago.

[nicksaviking]

There is no strategic reason to have Plefry on the roster next year (nor am I sure there is this year.......). Me, I'd cut him. Call up Gibson, see what you have. I'd call up Albers after Gibson reaches his limit, and see what you have. having Pelfrey here does nothing for this team, this year, or next year.

 

I think you should start a Frey Mike Pelfrey thread.

[Shane Wahl]

What I still don't understand is how the Twins thought Pelfrey was actually ready to go at the beginning of the season. I remember being shocked that reports were good in March. Of course being able to pitch is not the same as being strong enough to pitch for over 5 innings. We are finally now seeing it work out a bit better. Too bad they didn't pitch someone else in April and May.

[Oldgoat_MN]

How about just until the trade deadline?

 

LOL. Perfect!

[Wookiee of the Year]

I would imagine a lot of pitchers who don't have the ability to strike out batters have a similar breakdown in regards to big innings. When guys get on base it's very difficult for them to stop runners from advancing even on routine outs.

Yeah, that's what I'm wondering--how does Pelfrey's breakdown compare to other pitchers? It's fairly meaningless to me in a vacuum. Does it mean Gardy should be quicker with the hook once Pelfrey allows a few baserunners, or surrenders a run? Is it par for the course with a pitch-to-contact pitcher?

[Seth Stohs]

Yeah, that's what I'm wondering--how does Pelfrey's breakdown compare to other pitchers? It's fairly meaningless to me in a vacuum. Does it mean Gardy should be quicker with the hook once Pelfrey allows a few baserunners, or surrenders a run? Is it par for the course with a pitch-to-contact pitcher?

 

I'd assume it's worse than the average pitch-to-contact pitcher... since his ERA is so high. I mean, 95% of pitchers in the big leagues are pitch-to-contact and most have ERAs south of 5.

[IdahoPilgrim]

To be honest, did the Twins brass ever see Pelfrey as any more than a placeholder getting them through to when Gibson (& Meyer & maybe May) were ready? I always saw him as insurance in case Gibson had a setback on his recovery rather than somebody the organization was planning to build around. So in that sense, if he can just not suck, he's giving the Twins what they paid for, and he's starting to not suck.

 

And I doubt we'll get anything for him at the trade deadline, not with him being a free agent next year anyway. He'll be insurance to the end of the year and then we'll part ways, hopefully amicably.

[nicksaviking]

I'd assume it's worse than the average pitch-to-contact pitcher... since his ERA is so high. I mean, 95% of pitchers in the big leagues are pitch-to-contact and most have ERAs south of 5.

 

That seems awfully high. I suppose we could go off-tangent and get down to what it actually means to be a pitch-to-contact arm but the overriding idea was that Pelfrey doesn't have the ability to bear down and strike guys out when he has runners on the bases. 95% of the pitchers in the league don't have the same issue. If Pelfrey had pitched one more inning he would be a qualifying pitcher and would be fifth from last in K/9. Of course Diamond and Correia are one and three, but that would be off-tangent too.

[Seth Stohs]

That seems awfully high. I suppose we could go off-tangent and get down to what it actually means to be a pitch-to-contact arm but the overriding idea was that Pelfrey doesn't have the ability to bear down and strike guys out when he has runners on the bases. 95% of the pitchers in the league don't have the same issue. If Pelfrey had pitched one more inning he would be a qualifying pitcher and would be fifth from last in K/9. Of course Diamond and Correia are one and three, but that would be off-tangent too.

 

My definition of pitch-to-contact may be different from others and may vary depending on the day. I think pitch to contact equals lack of walks, so maybe something like a BB/9 of less than 3.7 (or 3.5 or some number)... other days, I might say it is a starting pitcher with a K-rate of less than maybe 9 (or 8.5 or something). (Note - I also only include starting pitchers who have to work for more than one inning at a time in this... for relievers, I would hope for more Ks.)

 

I don't think it has anything to do with "bearing down"... 95% (or whatever number you want) aren't going to get a strikeout all the time in that situation, but they may get a weak pop-up, or a double play or something good). "Bearing down" sounds like a form of effort, and I certainly don't question his effort.

[nicksaviking]

I don't think it has anything to do with "bearing down"... 95% (or whatever number you want) aren't going to get a strikeout all the time in that situation, but they may get a weak pop-up, or a double play or something good). "Bearing down" sounds like a form of effort, and I certainly don't question his effort.

 

I don't think it's a lack of effort, it's a lack of ability. However many pitchers with the ability to miss bats do have higher strikeout numbers in high leverage situations, which tells me they in fact can bear down and dial up the heat or make a pitch break a little bit more in a clutch situation.

 

There are curretnly 100 qualifying starting pitchers. 55 of them have a K/9 over 7.00, 45 of them have a K/9 of 7.5. So I guess I'd give a satisfactory chance at acquiring a strikeout in high leverage situations to roughly 50% of the pitchers in the league.

[Willihammer]

I may be misinterpreting the philosophy, but PTC seems to stress the importance of inducing double plays as a means of working through jams, without taking into account all those times where contact is induced and a double play isn't the result.

 

In my opinion, when a runner gets on base, that's the worst time to try to induce contact. I don't care how many outs there are, you should be looking to get strike one over and then your goal should be to strike that batter out.

[nicksaviking]

Digging a little deeper into the inability to get a strikeout with men on base I found this trend. For his career, Mike Pelfrey has performed much different in low, medium and high leverage situations.

 

Low: 221K in 1466 PA = 15.0% K rate

Medium: 243K in 1971 PA = 12.3% K rate

High: 77K in 785 PA = 9.8% K rate

 

Then trending upward

 

Low: 93 BB in 1466 PA = 6.3%

Medium: 173 BB in 1971 PA= 8.7%

High: 73 BB in 785 PA = 9.2%

 

It should go without saying we would all prefer those numbers to be going the opposite direction. He has a 77/73 K/BB rate in high leverage situations. It seems to me that this is at least a factor in his struggles.

[Seth Stohs]

In my opinion, when a runner gets on base, that's the worst time to try to induce contact. I don't care how many outs there are, you should be looking to get strike one over and then your goal should be to strike that batter out.

 

And that's fine, but the only way to do that is to throw pitches, and when you throw pitches, there is a chance that the ball is put in play, especially with better hitters up. The pitches you strike people out on, are also often the pitches that hitters make some contact with, or they take for a ball.

[Seth Stohs]

Digging a little deeper into the inability to get a strikeout with men on base I found this trend. For his career, Mike Pelfrey has performed much different in low, medium and high leverage situations.

 

Low: 221K in 1466 PA = 15.0% K rate

Medium: 243K in 1971 PA = 12.3% K rate

High: 77K in 785 PA = 9.8% K rate

 

Then trending upward

 

Low: 93 BB in 1466 PA = 6.3%

Medium: 173 BB in 1971 PA= 8.7%

High: 73 BB in 785 PA = 9.2%

 

It should go without saying we would all prefer those numbers to be going the opposite direction. He has a 77/73 K/BB rate in high leverage situations.

 

These are certainly numbers we don't want to see...

[Willihammer]

And that's fine, but the only way to do that is to throw pitches, and when you throw pitches, there is a chance that the ball is put in play, especially with better hitters up. The pitches you strike people out on, are also often the pitches that hitters make some contact with, or they take for a ball.

 

But that doesn't appear to be the goal. Look at Pelfrey's zone charts with two strikes. There are a lot of meatballs there.

None of them is a strikeout pitcher but I think the goals are different and so are the results.

 

edit: pics in another post

[jay]

But that doesn't appear to be the goal. Look at Pelfrey's zone charts with two strikes. There are a lot of meatballs there.

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?s_type=2&gFilt=&time=month&player=460059&startDate=01/01/2013&endDate=01/01/2014&minmax=ci&var=count&balls=-1&strikes=2&b_hand=L

 

 

That's an ugly chart, but why does Pelfrey only get a sample size of this year vs LHH and the other two get samples since '07 vs both RHH and LHH?

[twinsnorth49]

I think the key with Pelfrey is us finding the right team to trade him to at the best price.

[Nick Nelson]

Nice writeup Seth. But I have to wonder how much less we'd be straining to find positives if Kyle Gibson had made Mike Pelfrey's last five starts.

[Willihammer]

That's an ugly chart, but why does Pelfrey only get a sample size of this year vs LHH and the other two get samples since '07 vs both RHH and LHH?

 

Because I screwed up. The charts vs. both LH and RH for 2013 are as follows:

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?s_type=2&gFilt=&time=month&player=460059&startDate=01/01/2013&endDate=01/01/2014&minmax=ci&var=count&balls=-1&strikes=2&b_hand=-1

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?s_type=2&gFilt=&time=month&player=502032&startDate=01/01/2013&endDate=01/01/2014&minmax=ci&var=count&balls=-1&strikes=2&b_hand=L

 

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/plot_profile.php?s_type=2&gFilt=&time=month&player=279824&startDate=01/01/2013&endDate=01/01/2014&minmax=ci&var=count&balls=-1&strikes=2&b_hand=L

 

Not as stark but there's still a visible difference in approaches I think

[Jim H]

Quote from nicksaviking

I don't think it's a lack of effort, it's a lack of ability. However many pitchers with the ability to miss bats do have higher strikeout numbers in high leverage situations, which tells me they in fact can bear down and dial up the heat or make a pitch break a little bit more in a clutch situation.

 

There are curretnly 100 qualifying starting pitchers. 55 of them have a K/9 over 7.00, 45 of them have a K/9 of 7.5. So I guess I'd give a satisfactory chance at acquiring a strikeout in high leverage situations to roughly 50% of the pitchers in the league.

 

 

I'd just like to point out that with a 7 K/9 a pitcher is still getting 74% of his outs some other way than a strikeout. As opposed to getting 80% of your outs some other way with a 5 K/9 rate. It is nice to get a strikeout when you need it, but even for guys with strikeout rates at 9 K/9 rates, you get 67% of your outs some other way.

 

 

It may be a more satisfactory chance but it really is not that high a chance.