Jump to content

Matusz article and chart


Frobby

Recommended Posts

As far as my pitching analysis I never made any attempt to suggest it to be a matter of fact. It was just what I thought-thats it. I am not saying you should give me credit or not, although I think any analysis that anyone puts time and effort to type up for the board to enjoy should be applauded. I never gave anything but the truth in the sense of me being an expert and welcome others baseball thoughts on the subject. When people like SG laugh when I say it's legit analysis, it makes me mad because who is he to belittle someones opinion. He can agree or disagree with what was said but to belittle it is wrong. I also think if people gave it an unbiased look then they would be reacting very differently. If my tag name was different or whatever but that's neither here nor there. I have been following this board almost half my life and have played and watched baseball my hole life. I have sat down and had 2 hour long talks with Ray Miller about baseball and really enjoyed them.

I know I am a smart guy. I know I have a vast amount of knowledge about baseball (that is surpassed by many, of course), which I had every intention of growing and developing within this community. I cannot pinpoint when or how my reputation on here got so bad that every thought I have is routinely doubted (even when supported greatly imo), but whatever the causes of those issues, I have tried to rectify them recently and to my knowledge it has been a futile attempt.

I'm sure there are many people that believe this of themselves, they just don't say it publicly. Humility....or at the very least don't try so hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I just reread the whole thread and renege all posts not directly related to baseball, all posts unrelated to baseball should be ignored/stricken from the record, all posts baseball related should be taken as gospel or included in the next baseball abstract. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Common sense would dictate BM + Old Mechanics = Very effective, above average SB against. Wieters = Below average SB against. The two together should balance out to around league average anyway, so why wreck the pitcher being paranoid about steals. I'd rather have a guy give up a steal to every baserunner, but only allow 5 hits a game versus a guy that gives up 10 hits a game worrying about allowing steals.

Of course and that's what led me to look at old tape which (to me) showed his mechanical flaws of ST and last year....I don't think anything I said was groundbreaking or anything even remotely hard for anyone watching to pick up....I think losing velocity and command without injury points you to mechanical flaws. Idk that anything I said wasn't common sense stuff. Anyone who looks at old video and then his first game March 5 on pitches he left up or lost velocity would prolly agree with what was said I would think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course and that's what led me to look at old tape which (to me) showed his mechanical flaws of ST and last year....I don't think anything I said was groundbreaking or anything even remotely hard for anyone watching to pick up....I think losing velocity and command without injury points you to mechanical flaws. Idk that anything I said wasn't common sense stuff. Anyone who looks at old video and then his first game March 5 on pitches he left up or lost velocity would prolly agree with what was said I would think.

I haven't really examined anything recently, but I saw him a ton in the minors and he was slow to the plate and landed with this real stiff leg, which has to make him slow to field anything on the left side of the INF, I'm sure that's what bothers Buck. The trade off of having him all-star level effective is well worth it to me though, and I wouldn't have tinkered.

I wouldn't even bother examining for the first couple weeks of spring because they are working on various things at various times, so the mechanics may vary a bit depending on what they are working on that day. Next Thursday is when I'd start keying in, usually the 15th is when they start trying to get into their routine and prep for opening day. If they are STILL pushing him to be faster to the plate and he's still not doing well, I'd say it's a bad coaching issue more than a mechanics issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't really examined anything recently, but I saw him a ton in the minors and he was slow to the plate and landed with this real stiff leg, which has to make him slow to field anything on the left side of the INF, I'm sure that's what bothers Buck. The trade off of having him all-star level effective is well worth it to me though, and I wouldn't have tinkered.

I wouldn't even bother examining for the first couple weeks of spring because they are working on various things at various times, so the mechanics may vary a bit depending on what they are working on that day. Next Thursday is when I'd start keying in, usually the 15th is when they start trying to get into their routine and prep for opening day. If they are STILL pushing him to be faster to the plate and he's still not doing well, I'd say it's a bad coaching issue more than a mechanics issue.

I can see why Buck would want to improve that be I agree that the trade off is silly. Let the guy do what got him here, tinkering is fine but when he had such issues last year I think getting back to the basics is important.

As far as working on things in ST goes, that honestly never really occured to me. I agree that later in the spring we will make much better assertions on where Matsuz is in regards to why his performance is what it is. But thanks for the advice, trying different things mechanics or whatever early in the spring went right over my head while making those observations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buck is big on improved times to the plate.

On Jason Hammel: "He was good. He's facing a team that obviously knows him and has seen a lot of him. He's working on getting his times to the plate faster. We've challenged our pitchers with Matt (Wieters) and (Taylor) Teagarden back there. He had a really good time to the plate from the stretch. Threw a lot of strikes. Some that were called balls, some that were called strikes. This was his first time out in front of everybody and he had a lot of the guys behind him that he'll be playing with. I think he presented himself well."

http://www.masnsports.com/school_of_roch/2012/03/showalter-speaks-after-2-1-victory.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "time to the plate" thing absolutely reeks of old school manager talk, the kind of talk that's on the opposite end of the forward thinking management/leadership/FO that this team needs.

It's important, but I'm willing to bet it's impossible whether to tell it'll make or break a season, or what two tenths of a second faster to home plate means for a pitcher over a course of a season. And when they're struggling to win 70 games, there are much bigger things to worry about. Lastly, when they've got a guy back there like Wieters who has a rocket in his socket, who cares?

I remember reading about how when Dwight Gooden came up and how amazing he was. Then Mel Stottlemyre started tweaking and tinkering and tried to get him to stop going for so many strikeouts, or teaching him a new pitch (slider?), I don't remember the specifics. He just thought that if he coached Gooden up some more, he could be even BETTER. How could Gooden be any BETTER? His first two seasons were absolutely ridiculous. He should have just left him alone, he was great as he was. Of course the booger sugar and the alcohol ruined him but a lot of people involved with those Mets teams think Stottlemyre didn't do him any favors, either.

So why would anyone tinker with Matusz's mechanics? This also reminds me when Sherrill's relative was posting here and clued us in on the change in mechanics the Orioles made from one season to another. Very slight, yet they had a big impact on him for awhile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about this gem from Palmer?

“Somewhere along the line, there’s probably been complacency, injury, it’s a confluence of all of these,” said Jim Palmer, a Hall of Famer and Orioles broadcaster. “Maybe he thought it was easier than it really is. This is a tough game, especially playing on this team. You don’t get as much support as you probably would on other ball clubs."

Quote of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about this gem from Palmer?

Quote of the year.

Where does this quote come from, and what is the context? It's such a vague comment that I really don't know what he means when he says "[y]ou don't get as much support as you probably would on other ball clubs." What kind of support is he talking about? Coaching support? Medical support? Run support? I frankly find the comment annoying due to its lack of specificity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does this quote come from, and what is the context? It's such a vague comment that I really don't know what he means when he says "[y]ou don't get as much support as you probably would on other ball clubs." What kind of support is he talking about? Coaching support? Medical support? Run support? I frankly find the comment annoying due to its lack of specificity.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/07/sports/baseball/brian-matusz-orioles-pitcher-builds-a-stronger-foundation.html?_r=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does this quote come from, and what is the context? It's such a vague comment that I really don't know what he means when he says "[y]ou don't get as much support as you probably would on other ball clubs." What kind of support is he talking about? Coaching support? Medical support? Run support? I frankly find the comment annoying due to its lack of specificity.

If it's any of those things, it's unacceptable. I find it more infuriating (yet, unsurprising) than annoying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's any of those things, it's unacceptable. I find it more infuriating (yet, unsurprising) than annoying.

I'd just like some specifics. What kind of support does Palmer think the Orioles don't provide that other teams do provide? He doesn't say, and he also tosses in the word "probably." If I knew exactly what he meant, and it was backed up with some specifics, I'd probably be infuriated, too. But as it is, I don't really know what to make of the statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does this quote come from, and what is the context? It's such a vague comment that I really don't know what he means when he says "[y]ou don't get as much support as you probably would on other ball clubs." What kind of support is he talking about? Coaching support? Medical support? Run support? I frankly find the comment annoying due to its lack of specificity.

Run support, defensive support, constant losing environment, pressure to succeeed, tougher competetion and less positive reinforcement. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...