Some Braves raved about the Indians' Jake Westbrook, who has become the rare bread-and-butter sin...

Some Braves raved about the Indians' Jake Westbrook, who has become the rare bread-and-butter sinker baller who ascends to something much greater than that, by implementing an improved changeup. For years, Westbrook has been a pitcher who has pitched to contact and gotten a lot of ground balls, and this spring, he is missing bats. "The best we've ever seen him," Braves manager Bobby Cox said.

Buster Olney @ ESPN.com

about 1 month ago Jay Comment 40 comments 0 recs |

Read Related

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

drool...

by APV on Apr 1, 2008 12:50 PM EDT 0 recs

go westbrook

Sizemore-Shapiro 2008. The Official Red Bull of Let's Go Tribe Game Threads.

by Gradyforpresident on Apr 1, 2008 1:12 PM EDT 0 recs

Any chance we can get the "# new" comments on Fanshots be bolded black like the FanPosts currently do on the main page? Would make it easier to distinguish which posts have new comments to look over.

by talonk on Apr 1, 2008 1:18 PM EDT 0 recs

I second that motion.

by ken from alexandria on Apr 1, 2008 1:56 PM EDT up 0 recs

I third.

by Voltaire on Apr 2, 2008 2:19 PM EDT up 0 recs

He added to it today:

Wrote here Monday that the Braves' hitters had very good things to say about the Indians' Jake Westbrook and the changeup that they say has transformed him, in spring training, from a ham-and-egg sinkerballer into a big-time swing-and-miss pitcher. Consider that for his career, Westbrook has averaged 4.9 strikeouts per nine innings in his eight-year career. His numbers from this spring: 18 innings, 20 strikeouts, a 0.00 ERA, with opponents' hitting .190.

He's my pick to click this year on the pitching side.

by MikeCP on Apr 1, 2008 1:41 PM EDT 0 recs

The transition commenced before our eyes in the second half of last season. The strikeout numbers didn't necessarily translate, but we certainly saw more of that changeup.

The Indians could use a big year from Jake. Cliff Lee aside, he's the one Tribe starter who stands a realistic chance of improving upon last year (not that there was anything wrong with the way he pitched when healthy).

by xrickx on Apr 1, 2008 1:52 PM EDT 0 recs

Hmmmm ... K per batter ...

April/May - 18 / 126 = 14%
June/July - 22 / 190 = 12%
August - 23 / 166 = 14%
September - 31 / 166 = 19%

I'm squinting, can't see too much, though.

by Jay on Apr 1, 2008 2:26 PM EDT up 0 recs

Remember that incredible 6 week stretch of starts that Jake put together last year? There is no reason why he can't do that again this year over a much longer time period. It's his time to shine.

by Toxicadam on Apr 1, 2008 2:01 PM EDT 0 recs

He did have the 9th best ERA in the majors last year after the all-star break (100 innings min).

by supermarioelia on Apr 1, 2008 2:09 PM EDT 0 recs

Exciting stuff about Jake. I'm really looking forward to having two premier sinkerballers in our rotation.

And this is a little OT, but can anyone explain exactly what a FanShot is supposed to be?

Burn on, big river, burn on...

by Turkmenbashi on Apr 1, 2008 2:24 PM EDT 0 recs

More something you want to show to everyone, rather than something you want to tell everyone.

Meant to (a) get around the old minimum-character limit, and (b) keep from clogging up the FanPosts with simple link posts.

Flip through the different "types" of FanShot, and it will become clearer.

by Jay on Apr 1, 2008 2:28 PM EDT up 0 recs

Ok, cool. Thanks for clearing that up, Jay.

Burn on, big river, burn on...

by Turkmenbashi on Apr 1, 2008 3:08 PM EDT up 0 recs

Do we still have to give them a bit more thought?

by FranklinScott on Apr 1, 2008 4:56 PM EDT up 0 recs

What's outstanding about this is that Westy already had enough confidence in his stuff; witness the ALCS, in which only Jake had the stones to start Sox hitters with a strike.

It must be somewhat rare to see a pitcher at his age undergo any kind of significant transformation in K rate, bats missed, and ERA+. But it sure will be fun to see how it plays out.

by tabler84 on Apr 1, 2008 5:04 PM EDT 0 recs

A year ago, in discussing Jake's contract extension, I made reference a few times to his PECOTA comparables. In general, they were not terribly encouraging, suggesting a likely collapse before the end of even a three-year extension (through 2010). In stark contrast to his overall, aggregated comps, however, was his number-one comp entering age 30, Kevin Brown.

Like Westbrook, Brown was a good-to-very-good sinker-baller through age 30, in 1995. And then, kind of suddenly, he just started dominating. You can look for yourself, he was just incredible 1996-2000, age 31-35. He gave up 338 ER in 1170 IP over 168 starts.

That's a 2.60 ERA, 33.2 starts per season, and 6.96 innings per start. Granted, this was the NL, but it was also a heavily offensive era (take that however you want). And what makes this interesting is that I wasn't the one saying Westbrook is a lot like Brown at the same age, PECOTA was.

So that's the deal on Jake ... the great majority of pitchers of his type decline steeply in their early 30's ... but then again, there's Kevin Brown.

by Jay on Apr 1, 2008 6:15 PM EDT up 0 recs

Which just goes to show if you have a large number of comps you're bound to get at least one of 'em right.

"the most vehement Yankee-hating guy I know" - Jay

by mauichuck on Apr 1, 2008 7:36 PM EDT up 0 recs

Great stuff, Jay. I was one of the folks who was not enamored with his contract extension, but if this new-fangled changeup is really the gyroball that some think it might be, well, that contract will be a steal.

But really, I'd gladly settle for something in between.

by tabler84 on Apr 1, 2008 7:36 PM EDT up 0 recs

Is it that or has Kobiashi started to teach the staff how to throw the death ball

"It's hard to win when you don't score." Cliff Lee, 9/28/05.

by Harry Doyle on Apr 2, 2008 10:34 AM EDT up 0 recs

I'm a huge fan of PECOTA, but it still has trouble with pitchers as it really doesn't know about the pitcher's "stuff". Brown threw *hard*, sort of like Carmona and Wang. Objectively, I don't see Brown as a good comparable. This being said, there have been times in the last 4 years were Jake has been absolutely unhittable. He cruises for 3-4 innings, making hitters look bad and just pounding the zone. Then he loses command for an inning, walks a couple guys and gives up hard hit balls. So if he somehow gets rid of the times he loses command, he can really improve. But if spring stats mean nothing when someone is struggling, they also mean nothing when someone dominates; I'll check back at the end of April.

by oxforddave on Apr 1, 2008 9:14 PM EDT up 0 recs

Can't really argue with any of this. PECOTA is making note of K/BB and G/F rates in picking comps, but it is true that Brown simply threw 2-4 mph harder.

by Jay on Apr 1, 2008 11:59 PM EDT up 0 recs

This reminds me, during the Jays-Yanks game tonight, Pat Tabler remarked that Wang has the best sinker in the game. I guffawed good.

by supermarioelia on Apr 2, 2008 12:38 AM EDT up 0 recs

What's the line on number of Wang strikeouts this season? 70ks? 100ks?

by gte619n on Apr 2, 2008 10:57 AM EDT up 0 recs

I dunno, Wang's GIDP numbers, per inning, over the last 2 years of starts are about 0.15 (82 over 533 ip). Carmona's numbers are 0.14, over about half as many innings over the same period (41 over 289 ip). So there is a basis to say that Wang is the more effective pitcher at getting people out with ground balls. That doesn't necessarily correlate to having a 'better' sinker, but it is at least a peripheral comparison.

We know, from having watched Fausto all year last year, that he has a devastating sinker, dropping like 6 inches at the tail end of a 96 mph heater. But even with his "better" stuff, it doesn't seem to project into the numbers.

I wanted to get a better split for comparison, but I haven't paid for baseball-ref (yet.. I dunno...) so I couldn't get a good look at the GIDP leaders for the last 10 years or so to do more analysis.

Formerly known as "tribefan stuck in boston"

by BostonWahoo on Apr 2, 2008 12:15 PM EDT up 0 recs

So you think that a 6% difference between the Wang and Carmona's DP numbers is statistically significant? I don't. Could have something to do with the defense behind 'em too, don't you think?

"the most vehement Yankee-hating guy I know" - Jay

by mauichuck on Apr 2, 2008 12:20 PM EDT up 0 recs

No, and that is exactly my point. While it is silly to suggest that Wang has "the best sinkerball in the majors" it is equally silly to bluster back, "bbbbbut... Carmona."

Of course it could have to do with defense, but we're not talking about stellar defense from either team. Cano is good. Jeter is average (some argue less so). Barfield was good. Cabrera is better, but he is not reflected in a significant way in the numbers above. Peralta is maybe a touch better than Jeter, maybe more than a touch? I dunno.

So of course defense matters, but I don't think that the middle infield of the Tribe from last year is going to vary wildly from that of the Yanks of the last 2+ years.

Formerly known as "tribefan stuck in boston"

by BostonWahoo on Apr 2, 2008 12:27 PM EDT up 0 recs

barfield was not good defensively.

Sizemore-Shapiro 2008. The Official Red Bull of Let's Go Tribe Game Threads.

by Gradyforpresident on Apr 2, 2008 12:52 PM EDT up 0 recs

You are correct. I have a revisionist subconscious, I suppose. He was actually the worst starting second baseman in the league, in terms of fielding pct, but had better than average range. But he was only 1% worse than league average (.975 vs .985) meaning he made one fewer out per hundred than the average 2B.

I don't believe that this invalidates my argument, in any case, because the difference between Cano and Bar-brera is greater than, but largely negated by the difference between Peralta and Jeter, when you look at fielding pct and DPs made.

Formerly known as "tribefan stuck in boston"

by BostonWahoo on Apr 2, 2008 1:29 PM EDT up 0 recs

I don't know how you're measuring range, but according to RZR he had the worst range of any AL 2B.

by Jay on Apr 2, 2008 1:31 PM EDT up 0 recs

I was using baseball-reference's range factor, which shows him at a tick above average.

Formerly known as "tribefan stuck in boston"

by BostonWahoo on Apr 2, 2008 1:33 PM EDT up 0 recs

Range Factor is pretty crude. Better than nothing, arguably better than fielding percentage, but not very good.

by Jay on Apr 2, 2008 1:36 PM EDT up 0 recs

Actually, now that I'm thinking about it, range factor is going to reward both guys merely for playing behind groundballers. And Barfield was behind not only Carmona but Westbrook, too.

by Jay on Apr 2, 2008 1:36 PM EDT up 0 recs

That's fine, but all of this goes back to trying to objectively deal with a largely subjective question:

Who has the better (or best) sinker?

Why don't you help us out, cap'n.

Formerly known as "tribefan stuck in boston"

by BostonWahoo on Apr 2, 2008 1:37 PM EDT up 0 recs

It's Carmona. Guys can't hit it, feel hung over. Gets the most groundballs and gets some K's, too. Gets more guys out.

by Jay on Apr 2, 2008 1:38 PM EDT up 0 recs

Ok, can you quantify that?

Formerly known as "tribefan stuck in boston"

by BostonWahoo on Apr 2, 2008 1:39 PM EDT up 0 recs

Well, I can tell you he induced more groundballs, had a lower OBP-against (meaning more outs) and got more strikeouts. Those are all quantified.

by Jay on Apr 2, 2008 1:40 PM EDT up 0 recs

Brandon Webb is the best sinkerball pitcher in the majors, one of the best pitchers, and one of the most extreme G/F guys with a long history of a high level of success. Fausto may have a better (faster) sinker when he's really got it going, but that's only part of the equation to being a great pitcher, obviously.

I think Webb has the title, and i think a handful of guys (Hudson, Westbrook, Wang, Carmona) are all packed in behind him to various degrees.

by Thommy on Apr 2, 2008 8:51 PM EDT up 0 recs

Even better.

I might take Peralta over Jeter, but it's close. Overall, Wang has a better middle infield.

by Jay on Apr 2, 2008 1:34 PM EDT up 0 recs

I can't imagine what GIDP numbers have to do with anything. Carmona induced many more groundballs than Wang did in 2007 and got many more batters out overall. Carmona also had K rates rising through the season, unlike Wang, and Camrona is nearly four years younger than Wang.

You know which teams generally rack up the most GIDP? The ones who allow the most runners to get to first base. It's not a useful metric for defenders (unless you set up an "expected DP" threshold first) and I can't imagine it's any better for pitchers.

Carmona allowed 224 batters to get to first base, while Wang allowed 213. (I'd like to tell you how many were with less than two outs, but the B-R splits are kind of on the fritz right now.)

Why did Carmona have more? Well, they each allowed exactly 199 hits, but more of Wang's were for extra bases. Also, Carmona faced 56 more batters.

So why did they each get exactly 32 DP balls? Hard to say without the splits, but my guess is that it has something to do with Carmona having 34 more K's. I was happy with Carmona's sinker inducing ground balls all day long, but when he started to strike out guys with it, that's fine, too.

And let me say for the record, I'll take a strikeout in a DP situation any time. With a strikeout, you're out of trouble entirely 2/3 of the time, and I doubt the conversion rate of grounders into DP's is that high.

by Jay on Apr 2, 2008 1:29 PM EDT up 0 recs