Talk Arrieta here

[David]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

 

this is interesting

[We Got The Whole 9]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

 

this is interesting

Just read that as well. I think it's a bit much to say his best days could be ahead of him but no doubt I'd felt like he'd been rounding back into formidable form before yesterday's outing. I didn't watch or even get to follow the game but he was pretty solid for the first 4 innings before the wheels fell off. He's been very encouraging over his last 7 or so starts.

[David]

yeah, i noticed that horrendous wording about a guy who was basically pedro martinez for a little while, but i figure he really just meant this year or was very sloppy with word choice.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

 

this is interesting

Just read that as well. I think it's a bit much to say his best days could be ahead of him but no doubt I'd felt like he'd been rounding back into formidable form before yesterday's outing. I didn't watch or even get to follow the game but he was pretty solid for the first 4 innings before the wheels fell off. He's been very encouraging over his last 7 or so starts.

 

Apparently he had a cut open up on him in that 5th inning. Hope that was all it was.

[ConstableRabbit]

yeah, i noticed that horrendous wording about a guy who was basically pedro martinez for a little while, but i figure he really just meant this year or was very sloppy with word choice.

Speaking of horrendous wording and sloppiness, he misspelled the subject's name in the second word of the article.

[jersey cubs fan]

yeah, i noticed that horrendous wording about a guy who was basically pedro martinez for a little while, but i figure he really just meant this year or was very sloppy with word choice.

Speaking of horrendous wording and sloppiness, he misspelled the subject's name in the second word of the article.

 

is that bad?

 

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1423

[ConstableRabbit]

yeah, i noticed that horrendous wording about a guy who was basically pedro martinez for a little while, but i figure he really just meant this year or was very sloppy with word choice.

Speaking of horrendous wording and sloppiness, he misspelled the subject's name in the second word of the article.

 

is that bad?

 

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1423

To be fair, it's one of the easiest names to misspell on the club.

[jersey cubs fan]

Speaking of horrendous wording and sloppiness, he misspelled the subject's name in the second word of the article.

 

is that bad?

 

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1423

To be fair, it's one of the easiest names to misspell on the club.

going E before I is one of the craziest ways to do it, though.

[ConstableRabbit]

 

is that bad?

 

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1423

To be fair, it's one of the easiest names to misspell on the club.

going E before I is one of the craziest ways to do it, though.

I before E, except after a incredible and largely unexpected run of performance that's unlikely to continue over your next contract.

[We Got The Whole 9]

Came across this while reading about Kershaw's sudden home run problem. The author mentions Arrieta's rising HR9, and that 4 of the HR would not have been HR in any ballpark without wind aiding them.

 

http://www.hittrackeronline.com/detail.php?id=2017_356&type=pitcher

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Arrieta now has 15 starts on the year.

 

First 8 starts: 44.2 IP, 5.44 ERA, 1.46 WHIP, 49/13 K/BB, 8 HR

 

Last 7 starts: 40 IP, 3.15 ERA, 1.10 WHIP, 40/12 K/BB, 5 HR

[Aaron_Kennelly]

Arrieta now has 15 starts on the year.

 

First 8 starts: 44.2 IP, 5.44 ERA, 1.46 WHIP, 49/13 K/BB, 8 HR

 

Last 7 starts: 40 IP, 3.15 ERA, 1.10 WHIP, 40/12 K/BB, 5 HR

 

Judging by the WHIP disparity and the K/BB being similar, it looks a lot like he was getting BABIP'd.

[Sammy Sofa]

I don't trust him because he looks so shifty.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I don't trust him because he looks so shifty.

I can barely tell them apart

http://mlb.mlb.com/images/2/3/6/152011236/092715_chc_arrieta_push_ups_med_mnlz0f3d.gif

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Arrieta now has 15 starts on the year.

 

First 8 starts: 44.2 IP, 5.44 ERA, 1.46 WHIP, 49/13 K/BB, 8 HR

 

Last 7 starts: 40 IP, 3.15 ERA, 1.10 WHIP, 40/12 K/BB, 5 HR

 

Judging by the WHIP disparity and the K/BB being similar, it looks a lot like he was getting BABIP'd.

 

Now that last night is in the Fangraphs split tool, it's a little easier to tell. That's definitely a big part of it, in the first 8 starts he had a BABIP over 100 points higher even though his soft/med/hard contact didn't change much. HR/FB is slightly higher and his pop up rate lower in the latter half too so that's not a contributing cause. The main improvement is his GB% jumped from 40% to 48%, which is probably emblematic of having better command. He's getting squared just as much, but they're on pitches that lend themselves to being smashed into the ground and not going for extra base hits.

[jersey cubs fan]

here come the steroid accusations

 

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[Tryptamine]

I wonder if Jake is still going to foolishly pursue 7/200 or if his 3/4 of a year being not so good would scare him into accepting a much more realistic 4/90 or 5/115 deal.

[javy knows my name]

I wonder if Jake is still going to foolishly pursue 7/200 or if his 3/4 of a year being not so good would scare him into accepting a much more realistic 4/90 or 5/115 deal.

 

He can pursue 7/200 all he wants. I certainly don't want him for more than 4 years and I can't imagine many other teams do, either.

[bauermj]

I wonder if Jake is still going to foolishly pursue 7/200 or if his 3/4 of a year being not so good would scare him into accepting a much more realistic 4/90 or 5/115 deal.

 

IMO not a chance he gets deals that low. Agreed 7 years is unlikely, 200M is nuts. But he's going to get 5 or 6 years, and an AAV that's 25M+. Shark, Wei Yin Chen, Mike Leake, Jordan Zimmermann, Ian Kennedy all got 5 years. Cueto, Greinke got 6.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I wonder if Jake is still going to foolishly pursue 7/200 or if his 3/4 of a year being not so good would scare him into accepting a much more realistic 4/90 or 5/115 deal.

 

IMO not a chance he gets deals that low. Agreed 7 years is unlikely, 200M is nuts. But he's going to get 5 or 6 years, and an AAV that's 25M+. Shark, Wei Yin Chen, Mike Leake, Jordan Zimmermann, Ian Kennedy all got 5 years. Cueto, Greinke got 6.

 

Arrieta is going to be 32 on opening day next year, that's going to dampen a lot of enthusiasm. Unless he pitches much better for the rest of the year, like much better than even his improved self over the last 6 weeks, then I'd be a little surprised if he exceeded 5/100.

[mul21]

Unless someone gets desperate, which dumb GMs have been known to do, I'd be pretty surprised if he gets more than 5 years, regardless of $$$$.

[Aaron_Kennelly]

Cocky Jake is back.

 

[tweet]https://twitter.com/laurencomitor/status/890429368392175617[/tweet]

 

[Brian707]

Cocky Jake is back.

 

[tweet]https://twitter.com/laurencomitor/status/890429368392175617[/tweet]

 

 

[Thed Hoyerstein]

Cocky Jake is back.

 

[tweet]https://twitter.com/laurencomitor/status/890429368392175617[/tweet]

 

 

http://wrigleyville.locals.baseballprospectus.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/08/USATSI_8606040_168381444_lowres.jpg

[David]

http://www.cubsinsider.com/2017/08/03/jake-arrieta-just-something-hes-never-done/

 

 

Arrieta’s fearsome breaking ball has been described as baby slider or “slutter” because it doesn’t sweep across the plate like normal sliders do. Rather, the sharp-moving pitch is thrown upwards to 92 mph and with around 3.5 inches of horizontal movement. Brooks Baseball’s pitch classification algorithm categorizes Jake’s slutter as a slider, not cutter. That changed Wednesday night.

 

For the first time in Arrieta’s career, his slutter was categorized as a cutter.

 

Why did Brooks Baseball suddenly change its classification of the pitch? Could it be velocity? Or horizontal movement? Vertical movement? No to all. Using those three measurements, there is no significant difference between Arrieta’s cutter from Tuesday night and what has been called a slider throughout his career.

 

The difference was his release point.

 

 

Again, Brooks Baseball has never before classified Arrieta’s slutter as a cutter, and the reason for this new classification likely has to do with the ginormous release point difference between Wednesday night and every start prior to it. Since his release point was so significantly different from his career norm, perhaps Arrieta made a conscious effort to change something.

 

The cutter classification of Arrieta’s slutter night makes it one of the rarest pitches in MLB since the league started tracking this kind of data. The bearded righty’s cutter release point hewed more toward third base than over 99.9 percent of cutters thrown since the genesis of the PitchFX era. Hitters simply have never seen something like this before. Ever.

 

This is a big deal.