The Statcast Broadcast

[Frobby]

I just wanted to hear what everyone thought of last night’s broadcast, using the Statcast data and adding Alex Fast to the booth to discuss the use of the data.    Personally, I thought the idea was great as a one-time event, and well-executed.   I had to mute the broadcast for a couple of innings to take an important phone call, but I thought the dialogue between Alex and Ben about the science and art of pitching was fantastic.   And Kevin Brown did a fantastic job of prompting the discussion and asking detailed questions.   I wouldn’t want to do that every night, but as a one-time exercise it was extremely educational.   It was also kind of fortunate that the game was a laugher, since it allowed for a full discussion without distracting from a tense ballgame.  

My one regret is that I would have liked a little more focus on the fielding and base running metrics.   For example, what was the catch probability on Slater’s play that ended the game?   Seemed that 90% of the discussion was on pitching metrics.  But that’s okay, it was still very interesting to me.
 

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I just wanted to hear what everyone thought of last night’s broadcast, using the Statcast data and adding Alex Fast to the booth to discuss the use of the data.    Personally, I thought the idea was great as a one-time event, and well-executed.   I had to mute the broadcast for a couple of innings to take an important phone call, but I thought the dialogue between Alex and Ben about the science and art of pitching was fantastic.   And Kevin Brown did a fantastic job of prompting the discussion and asking detailed questions.   I wouldn’t want to do that every night, but as a one-time exercise it was extremely educational.   It was also kind of fortunate that the game was a laugher, since it allowed for a full discussion without distracting from a tense ballgame.  

My one regret is that I would have liked a little more focus on the fielding and base running metrics.   For example, what was the catch probability on Slater’s play that ended the game?   Seemed that 90% of the discussion was on pitching metrics.  But that’s okay, it was still very interesting to me.
 

I only watched a couple of innings.   My personal feeling is that type of discussion should be done separate from the game but that’s just me.   I actually think they missed a good chance when Ben brought up a “back up” breaking ball which is basically a breaking ball that doesn’t break.

Ben made the point that the hitter misses the pitch because he sees the spin, expects the ball to break, and swings where he thought the ball was going to be and it’s not there.

I think that was a great spot for the guy to say “hey the spin can’t be exactly the same or the pitch would have broken the same as his regular curve or slider.   Let’s explain why a backup curve/slider doesn’t break”.

[Jagwar]

I thought it was interesting, but became numb to it by the 5th inning. Perhaps it didn't need it to be the entire game?

I really wanted a statcast explanation of the sprint speed of all of the hotdog race competitors 

[Explosivo]

41 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I just wanted to hear what everyone thought of last night’s broadcast, using the Statcast data and adding Alex Fast to the booth to discuss the use of the data.    Personally, I thought the idea was great as a one-time event, and well-executed.   I had to mute the broadcast for a couple of innings to take an important phone call, but I thought the dialogue between Alex and Ben about the science and art of pitching was fantastic.   And Kevin Brown did a fantastic job of prompting the discussion and asking detailed questions.   I wouldn’t want to do that every night, but as a one-time exercise it was extremely educational.   It was also kind of fortunate that the game was a laugher, since it allowed for a full discussion without distracting from a tense ballgame.  

My one regret is that I would have liked a little more focus on the fielding and base running metrics.   For example, what was the catch probability on Slater’s play that ended the game?   Seemed that 90% of the discussion was on pitching metrics.  But that’s okay, it was still very interesting to me.
 

It was good but it was better on Sunday night baseball. It helps to have the graphics and percentage for pitches, batters’ hot zones, etc. it was still cool but just…not as cool.

[gtman55]

For a couple innings, sure I could see that. But, it seemed to wind up being less about the game and more about being a sort of analytics tutorial for the audience. At one point during the misplayed popup where two White Sox collided, the booth was busy chatting analytics and metrics. It's wasn't until after the play that KB chimed in on what we all saw on the field.

[Brian88]

Hopefully it was a one time thing, Alex was tough to listen to.

[Frobby]

11 hours ago, RZNJ said:

I only watched a couple of innings.   My personal feeling is that type of discussion should be done separate from the game but that’s just me.   I actually think they missed a good chance when Ben brought up a “back up” breaking ball which is basically a breaking ball that doesn’t break.

Ben made the point that the hitter misses the pitch because he sees the spin, expects the ball to break, and swings where he thought the ball was going to be and it’s not there.

I think that was a great spot for the guy to say “hey the spin can’t be exactly the same or the pitch would have broken the same as his regular curve or slider.   Let’s explain why a backup curve/slider doesn’t break”.

I agree, that was a missed opportunity.   But I still learned some stuff I didn’t know during the broadcast and I enjoyed Ben taking it in and relating what he was learning with his more colloquial understanding of the same concepts from his years playing the game.  

[Fiver6565]

i enjoyed the broadcast and thought it was pretty well done.  There was one moment where the three were on camera and Ben was showing how the wrist angle on the fastball grip can change in order to increase spin (ie change the angle of your wrist) and Fast was backing that up with how that affects the spin rates, what that means, etc.  It was pretty cool.

Agree with the OP that it was a good game to do this one though.  If this was a 2-1 nail biter vs another contender, I'd have been kind of annoyed I think.  But they also might have leaned into it a little less in that case, you'd think.  They may have done more than planned because the game felt like a spring training game.

[forphase1]

Overall I enjoyed it.   I wish the pitch info was a permanent thing,  really enjoyed that and felt it added to the game.   As to the booth and calling the game,  I don't think I'd want every game done that way,  but am occasionally thing wouldn't be bad.   Learned some stuff and enjoyed a Os win.   Hard to go wrong.   

[interloper]

Thought Alex was great.

Sig, on the other hand, is never a good interview, as much as I like the guy. He kind of says the same thing every time, and never gives any really interesting details. Keeps everything pretty locked up. And it's not all his fault - he tends to get asked the same broad-strokes questions, too. 

Edited September 4 by interloper

[Aristotelian]

12 hours ago, RZNJ said:

I only watched a couple of innings.   My personal feeling is that type of discussion should be done separate from the game but that’s just me.   I actually think they missed a good chance when Ben brought up a “back up” breaking ball which is basically a breaking ball that doesn’t break.

Ben made the point that the hitter misses the pitch because he sees the spin, expects the ball to break, and swings where he thought the ball was going to be and it’s not there.

I think that was a great spot for the guy to say “hey the spin can’t be exactly the same or the pitch would have broken the same as his regular curve or slider.   Let’s explain why a backup curve/slider doesn’t break”.

My understanding is that backdoor means starting outside the zone and breaking in for a strike instead of the typical pitch that starts over the plate and breaks to the corner or out of the zone. It still breaks IMO. 

[RZNJ]

4 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

My understanding is that backdoor means starting outside the zone and breaking in for a strike instead of the typical pitch that starts over the plate and breaks to the corner or out of the zone. It still breaks IMO. 

I know what back door means.  I think you misread my post.

[Aristotelian]

18 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

I know what back door means.  I think you misread my post.

I thought you said it doesn't break? Anyway, I agree detailed discussion of the pitch would be interesting.

[RZNJ]

29 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

I thought you said it doesn't break? Anyway, I agree detailed discussion of the pitch would be interesting.

A backup slider/curve.   Not back door.   They are two different things.

[Sports Guy]

I enjoyed it.  Fast is a good follow.

It was interesting to me the method of how they come up with some of the stats. Interesting talking about the base running stuff and how they factor the defensive players placement in determining some of that.