Jump to content

Bundy shines in win over the Blue Jays


Tony-OH

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Aristotelian said:

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?

Something is not right with it, that's for sure. It sucks because Brooks baseball must use Pitch FX so they are off as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply
43 minutes ago, Cumberbundy said:

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. 

That's the changeup. The changeup should have some run (movement back towards the RHB) and sink. The slider/cutter will have sink and movement away from the RHB which must of Bundy's  86-87mph pitches did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

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.

Thanks for looking into that. I was wondering about it on Opening Day, when some Gausman pitches in the mid-80s were being called fastballs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

That's the changeup. The changeup should have some run (movement back towards the RHB) and sink. The slider/cutter will have sink and movement away from the RHB which must of Bundy's  86-87mph pitches did.

Looked like curve or slurve to me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tony-OH said:

Something is not right with it, that's for sure. It sucks because Brooks baseball must use Pitch FX so they are off as well.

I had some emails with Dan Brooks of Brooks Baseball today and his responses lead me to believe that the glitches in the data he gets will get fixed.    Hopefully sooner rather than later.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I had some emails with Dan Brooks of Brooks Baseball today and his responses lead me to believe that the glitches in the data he gets will get fixed.    Hopefully sooner rather than later.  

Good, I love his site and that's ashamed he data is screwwy this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, dan-O said:

And is usually more fastball speed, no? Like upper 80s, 90, 91.

It can be. Bundy was throwing what traditionally would be called a slider by the grip he was holding the pitch. Sometimes it didn't move as much and looked like a cutter. Almost all of the were in the 86-87 MPH range and almost all had some movement down and away from the right-handed hitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, dan-O said:

And is usually more fastball speed, no? Like upper 80s, 90, 91.

My understanding is that what is called a "cutter" is essentially a slider thrown at near fastball velocity. Same grip, same spin, just thrown harder. Bundy's new pitch appeared to be 84-85 with a lot of break, so I would call it a slider.

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...