Jump to content

Bundy shines in win over the Blue Jays


Tony-OH

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply
7 hours ago, InsideCoroner said:

Bundy had command of all his secondary pitches tonight. Morales put up the best AB against him. That was no small victory striking him out.

What was obvious tonight was that Bundy's change was completely unrecognizable to Toronto hitters. That pitch had them lunging on their front foot all night.

Funny thing was, they weren't changes. They all broke away from the right-handed batter. I know pitch track kept calling them changes but I think they were more of a cutter/slider that dove down. Those pitches were what the scouts called an 80 cutter when he was in high school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Funny thing was, they weren't changes. They all broke away from the right-handed batter. I know pitch track kept calling them changes but I think they were more of a cutter/slider that dove down. Those pitches were what the scouts called an 80 cutter when he was in high school.

Thanks for the clarification. I was sitting on the first-base side so I couldn't see the lateral movement, just the off-speed delivery and how helpless it made the Jays look. His command was simply outstanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, InsideCoroner said:

Thanks for the clarification. I was sitting on the first-base side so I couldn't see the lateral movement, just the off-speed delivery and how helpless it made the Jays look. His command was simply outstanding.

I'm trying to get to the bottom of the pitch identification on the displays at Camden Yards. In years past it was a person, but I was told this year it done through statcast. If it is, there is something wrong because on opening day it called three different types of pitches cutters, and none moved away from the right-handed hitter. Last night it was calling his cutter/slider a changeup. He did throw some changeups but they weren't very effective. I'll see what I can dig up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fangraphs has a big discrepancy between "PitchFX" and "Pitch Type" for Bundy 2017. PitchFX appears to see Bundy's Slider/Cutter as a changeup, and only gives him 3 pitches (FB, CH, CB), with 37% CH! "Pitch Type" gives him a Cutter (29%) with CH as the 4th pitch (7%0.

I noticed Gausman has some discrepancies this year too. Is PitchFX broken?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, InsideCoroner said:

Bundy had command of all his secondary pitches tonight. Morales put up the best AB against him. That was no small victory striking him out.

What was obvious tonight was that Bundy's change was completely unrecognizable to Toronto hitters. That pitch had them lunging on their front foot all night.

To get a swing and miss, on 3-2, from a lefty, on a fastball, after 85 pitches, in start 1, of his first April start in the bigs, was a special thing to see. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tony-OH said:

Funny thing was, they weren't changes. They all broke away from the right-handed batter. I know pitch track kept calling them changes but I think they were more of a cutter/slider that dove down. Those pitches were what the scouts called an 80 cutter when he was in high school.

He threw one that, due to the camera angle, appeared to move like a screwball back into Tulo as it fell off the table with Tulo missing badly in the 7th. He left several spinning and a couple that simply moved laterally, I wonder if he is trying to do two different things or if it just works out that way. One thing I noticed was he put more effort into a few of those pitches than he does his others, he doesn't typically fall off but he threw a few that looked like they'd cause an arm to fall off...Harry Dunns pets heads fell off, I don't think we Os fans would rebound as well as he did if our pitchers arms start falling off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
    • What if they don’t want to be extended?
    • I don't want the O's to lose much, but I do want there to be a massive streaming deal with Amazon or some other company the O's are left out of.  This blackout nonsense is bullsh!t. 🤬
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...