Dodgers (Skubal) vs Cubs (Assad): 8/4/26, 7:05pm

[gflore34]

4 minutes ago, bukie said:

Sure, but if Pages makes a great play it's okay to call it a great play. PCA being historically good doesn't mean nobody else should get any praise for a good play.

It's probably more my irritation with the Dodgers' announcers, they make it easy to root for bad things to happen to the Dodgers.

[mul21]

3 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

But his under the hood metrics say that he’s vastly outperforming them even with a great pitch mix. So is the pitch mix helpful getting him out of jams more so than in bases empty spots?

Jason can probably answer this better with data, but from my perspective you've got 2 things happening.  The whole is greater than the sum of the parts, i.e., the combination of throwing all those pitches at different speeds with different break is more effective in reality than any of those pitches grade out individually.  Then, you've got the perception of added pressure on the hitter when there are guys on base, which leads to more guessing and more poor contact/whiffs.  I would be interested to see if he's throwing his sinker more with men on base to induce DPs than without.

[Jason Ross]

10 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

sorry, can you finish the thought here? neither of these guys get good results on an aggregate basis in the ways that you typically measure a pitcher. are they just saving some deeper bag of pitches for high leverage PAs?

I think my thought goes back to the Goldstein quote I used. "Getting away from the norm". It's mostly a thought process here, but I'm really curious about outliers in general. Maybe Rea wasn't my best example, I was more thinking about Rea last year and hadn't pulled his page up, so I'll own that one. How about instead, Tanner Bibee. We are on 630 IP of him, he's not a groundball guy, he's not a velo guy, he's not an ultra-walk guy....and yet he's still beating his xFIP constantly at a very real and significant way. He's also a kitchen sink guy. (I think Bibee is better than Assad, he out Stuff+ him so I don't want to really compare the two directly). 

I think there's a ceiling with a "kitchen sink" approach but I wonder if they achieve a concept of "getting away from the norm" by actively having a handful of pitches in their tool chest. 

Consider this a thought process and not a research piece. Mostly thinking out-loud in written form as I attempt to square analytics and outliers.

 

[Geographyhater8888]

14 minutes ago, mul21 said:

Jason can probably answer this better with data, but from my perspective you've got 2 things happening.  The whole is greater than the sum of the parts, i.e., the combination of throwing all those pitches at different speeds with different break is more effective in reality than any of those pitches grade out individually.  Then, you've got the perception of added pressure on the hitter when there are guys on base, which leads to more guessing and more poor contact/whiffs.  I would be interested to see if he's throwing his sinker more with men on base to induce DPs than without.

That’s what I was thinking. He attacks hitters differently in certain spots and nibbles at the corners with higher selection of pitches more than in low leverage spots where he throws it over the plate more. His sinker definitely plays into the strength of the middle infield defense. You’d expect it show up in the data though. He’s worth studying in depth.

Edited 7 hours ago by Geographyhater8888

[squally1313]

2 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I think my thought goes back to the Goldstein quote I used. "Getting away from the norm". It's mostly a thought process here, but I'm really curious about outliers in general. Maybe Rea wasn't my best example, I was more thinking about Rea last year and hadn't pulled his page up, so I'll own that one. How about instead, Tanner Bibee. We are on 630 IP of him, he's not a groundball guy, he's not a velo guy, he's not an ultra-walk guy....and yet he's still beating his xFIP constantly at a very real and significant way. He's also a kitchen sink guy. (I think Bibee is better than Assad, he out Stuff+ him so I don't want to really compare the two directly). 

I think there's a ceiling with a "kitchen sink" approach but I wonder if they achieve a concept of "getting away from the norm" by actively having a handful of great pitchers

Consider this a thought process and not a research piece. Mostly thinking out-loud in written form as I attempt to square analytics and outliers.

 

Yeah I don't know, I just struggle with it. Can totally get the argument that having 7 mediocre pitches is better than have 4 mediocre pitches, or even 2 good pitches. It's just....wouldn't that show up as strikeouts? Or at least weak contact? Neither of which you really see from Bibee or Assad unless you really parse the data. 

Maybe there's a strategy element to it. He's only going to throw his 5th pitch when he really needs it. There's probably ways to analyze pitch selection per amount of leverage or something. But otherwise...if he could do it consistently, why not do it more?

To use a bad analogy, if a guy came along that was a guaranteed grand slam if he came up with the bases loaded but would strike out every other time...there's plenty of value in that guy, sure, but eventually you'd be like 'hey, so, um, why can't you just hit home runs the rest of the time'

[Jason Ross]

8 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Yeah I don't know, I just struggle with it. Can totally get the argument that having 7 mediocre pitches is better than have 4 mediocre pitches, or even 2 good pitches. It's just....wouldn't that show up as strikeouts? Or at least weak contact? Neither of which you really see from Bibee or Assad unless you really parse the data. 

Maybe there's a strategy element to it. He's only going to throw his 5th pitch when he really needs it. There's probably ways to analyze pitch selection per amount of leverage or something. But otherwise...if he could do it consistently, why not do it more?

To use a bad analogy, if a guy came along that was a guaranteed grand slam if he came up with the bases loaded but would strike out every other time...there's plenty of value in that guy, sure, but eventually you'd be like 'hey, so, um, why can't you just hit home runs the rest of the time'

I think all of this is fair. Truly, a lot of this is wondering aloud and talking into the void about something I don't understand, It's easy to figure out why Tarik Skubal is good. And most of the time it's easy to predict regression. And then there is Javier Assad who just...refuses to regress. And I can't figure out if he's an outlier in that he's just managed to be not-very-good and he's just had a longer clock on turning into a pumpkin or there is a reason why he's able to stem off regression due to some sort of active skill. 

He seems like the kind of player we might be able to look back on in 15 years and understand him more (though like I said, I'm not sure he's not just a pumpkin and it's taken longer). There are lots of players (hitters more than pitchers) with the tools we had 15 years ago that I liked/disliked that I go back on and think "Oof, buddy. Bad take." And Assad feels like he might fit into that category (and he very well may not).

[Bertz]

I do not know where to find this, but I suspect Assad leaves a disproportionate number of games with guys still on base and the Ryan Rolisons of the world clean up his messes.  And that (plus some Cubs defense plus a sprinkling of luck) is why his LOB% is so high.

That said the "way more strikeouts with men on base" thing sets off my spider sense.  That is not normal.

[We Got The Whole 9]

I mean can we break down pitch usage by situation?

[ILMindState]

FWIW 

 

[Tryptamine]

I really hope they bring Seiya back, even if it takes  4th year.  His defense has been significantly improved, he's up to a 135 wRC+ and on pace for his best season in the major by fWAR. Does throwing 4/100 at him land him or is that not enough in a FA class so woefully lacking as the one coming up?

[PeanutPunch33]

3 hours ago, Jason Ross said:

He's had some chances to be a starter. Over his career he has a 4.70 FIP and a 4.57 xFIP. This doesn't entirely square with his ERA which is under 3.50 and I think there's a fear that the ERA isn't real. Most of the time when we see a low ERA and a high xFIP, the way you can get there is either "positive luck" in that...you're going to regress sooner rather than later or you are doing something that allows you to beat it like a really low walk total or a lot of ground balls.

The weird thing is...he maintains a low ERA but doesn't do the traditional FIP-beating things. He's a ~44% ground ball guy in his career which is alright but not elite. He's a career 9.1% walk rate...not amazing. So I think the fear has been "this guy is about to blow up" because a 4.57 xFIP...is bad. That would be 8th worst in baseball for qualified starters. 

But here's the swerve; he's been doing this long enough that...maybe he just beats his xFIP? Maybe this is just who he is? He's at 400 innings, it's enough of a sample that you can argue it might be real. He just keeps doing it. And if he throws as hard as he did last night, he's probably better than we thought. You can understand why the Cubs have been and are probably a little hesitant; that velo hasn't always shown up and the underlying data tells us to be hesitant. At the same time, he's probably at a point where you could feel semi-confident about entering a season with him as a #5. He'd be upgradeable at the deadline if it doesn't work out, he wouldn't likely be *so* bad that he's a disaster. 

I think so too.  Not comparing him to Kyle Hendricks but I recall that he was that type of player where the ERA was always better than the under-the-radar stuff.  I was also surprised to see him hit 96 on the gun last night.  I also think he'd be even better if the Cubs stop shuffling him around to Iowa and the bullpen and just let him focus on that #5 starter role.  

[CubUgly]

3 hours ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Because he gets himself out of a ton of jams a lot more often than not, clutch!!!!

Again, that's the unmeasurable, the competitiveness.  Stats can't explain it.  They just can't 

[squally1313]

4 minutes ago, CubUgly said:

Again, that's the unmeasurable, the competitiveness.  Stats can't explain it.  They just can't 

if you knew he was capable of pitching to that level, wouldn't you be mad he so rarely does it with nobody on base?

[Jason Ross]

20 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

I think so too.  Not comparing him to Kyle Hendricks but I recall that he was that type of player where the ERA was always better than the under-the-radar stuff.  I was also surprised to see him hit 96 on the gun last night.  I also think he'd be even better if the Cubs stop shuffling him around to Iowa and the bullpen and just let him focus on that #5 starter role.  

Now see, Hendricks is your typical FIP beater, though. Your traditional FIP beating profile is someone who throws a lot of strikes, gets a ton of ground balls, doesn't walk people, limits home runs. Sound like anyone? That's literally his entire game. Hendricks is *the* FIP beater. 

Assad...isn't. He doesn't really limit walks a ton. He doesn't get a lot of ground balls. And yet he's beaten his FIP his entire career. He is an enigma in that sense. By this point we would usually see that regression. And why I find him such an interesting case. 

[Jason Ross]

1 hour ago, ILMindState said:

FWIW 

 

A perfect example of the limitations of the eye test for defense. 

[I owned a Suzuki]

I still believe the more Assad pitches the less likely he will be successful. I think the best thing that has happened to him is he has generally pitched in front of a great defensive team....and that team does not believe in his results. 

That being said, to me a good "pitcher" historically out performs conventional wisdom.  But a good "pitcher" is often hard to define

[CubUgly]

23 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

if you knew he was capable of pitching to that level, wouldn't you be mad he so rarely does it with nobody on base?

To some extent, but it's in there for him - some - in fact I would say more than not for someone of his peripherals- they never find that extra whatever it is in regardless of the situation,  He can.