Charlie Morton's Sinker Returns
There's already a fanpost on Charlie Morton's implication that Joe Kerrigan had him scrap his sinker last year, but just to put in my two cents here: the Post-Gazette has the audio of the interview where that came out, and it's really good stuff. I highly recommend you go listen. I was starting to write a comment on the fanpost before I listened to it, and essentially what I was going to say was this:
1) It's entirely possible that Morton's rediscovery of his sinker will have little to no impact on his performance this year. This is the time of year where, if you're a team in the Pirates' position, reasons for last year's failures suddenly come out of the woodwork, especially when coaches are fired, and these reasons are used to show why last year won't happen again. Some of them might turn out to be important, but some might not.
2) Nonetheless, this particular story is interesting, in part because Morton just looked so uncomfortable last year. I don't know how important the sinker is in isolation, but in the context of Morton's repertoire, it could mean a lot. It would be like if you asked me to have a conversation with you without the words "I" and "it." It would be possible, certainly, but I would be stuttering and second-guessing myself. Morton had good stuff last year, but if he felt like he was out of his element because he didn't have one of his pitches, that might help explain why he might look great for a couple of innings and then suddenly leave a fastball hanging up in the zone for an opposing batter to crush.
Here are some quotes from the interview:
I think when I get that good sinker action, it allows me to be more aggressive in the zone. I don't have to be too fine, I can just be more over the plate, just down in the zone ...
I'm not, those pitches that I'm making for double plays [in Spring Training this year], those aren't well-placed pitches, they're just down in the zone with good action, and they're just hitting them into the ground, so it kind of leaves a little room for error ...
There's more of a sense that I'm more working on a way of pitching in one specific direction as opposed to trying to figure out what might work and what might dig me out of a hole, it's just kind of, I think I feel like I'm working on something that's me on the mound ...
Morton also talks about how he can use his four-seamer and his sinker to balance one another, and how he can rely on the sinker to generate grounders when he gets behind in the count.
Like I said, all this might turn out to be nothing. But this looks to me like a pretty compelling story about why Morton looked so confused last year, why he might throw lots of fastballs at certain times and very few at others, and why he occasionally would seem to lose it and give opposing batters complete cookies. It sounds like the sinker is the more reliable pitch for him, one he can depend on when he needs a strike. And more than that, I doubt it even has much to do with whether the sinker is, in isolation, a good-looking pitch - the way Morton's describing it, it's an important pitch because it gives him variety and makes his four-seamer harder to hit.
I'm not sure I'd blame Kerrigan too much without hearing his side of it. He was trying to coach, which is what he's supposed to do, and it's easy to second-guess him now that he's gone, especially when the season hasn't started yet. But I do hope this narrative will turn out to be meaningful once the regular season begins.
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think there is still a lot of potential for Morton
In terms or pure talent, I truly believe his upside is only matched by McDonald out of our current 6, and it may be higher. It all depends if he can get his head in order. If he gets some good bounces, good strand rates, decent defense, decent BABIP and a decent HR/FB I would not be surprised if his xFIP was 3.50. That being said there is also a decent chance it is 5.5 or higher. I’m really rooting for him.
by Kosstic518 on Mar 4, 2011 7:25 AM EST via mobile reply actions
His xFIP...
doesn’t care about those things, actually. The point of xFIP is to ignore all that stuff.
The HR/FB%...
is a major component of xFIP. HR rates are regressed to a league average HR/FB% which I believe was 10.6% last season.
Right.
So all other things being equal, his xFIP will be the same whether he has a decent HR/FB or not. The original poster implied the opposite.
Here are the comparable stats again....
2008 Season (Pitching Coach – Not Joe K)
Staff ERA – 5.08
Hits allowed – 16th in NL
Earned runs allowed – 16th in NL
Strikeouts – 15th in NL (14 other teams struck out more opposing batters)
WHIP – 1.573
Hits/9 IP – 10.1
K/9 – 6.0
Joe Kerrigan was hired as pitching coach in October 2008.
2009 showed improvement (of course, it would be hard not to improve on the numbers above)
Staff ERA – 4.59 (14th out of 16 NL teams)
Hits allowed – 13th
Earned Runs allowed – 14th
Strike Outs – 15th
WHIP – 1.448
Hits allowed/9 IP – 9.5
K/9 – 5.8
2010 Season – the staff has a rebound
Staff ERA – 5.00
Hits Allowed – 16th
Earned Runs Allowed – 16th
Strikeouts – 16th
WHIP – 1.491 WHIP
Hits allowed/9 IP – 10
K/9 IP – 6.5
"Who is John Galt?"
Not really comparable
You have to take into account differences in personnel. In 2008 the Bucs had 22.1 IP by JvB with a 10.48 ERA, 18.1 IP by Yoslan with a 9.82 ERA, and 22.1 IP by Zombie Matt Morris with a 9.67 ERA; not to mention Gorzo’s 105.1 IP at 6.66 and Phil Dumatrait’s 78.2 at 5.26. None of the first three were on the club in 2009, and Dumatrait was down to 13.0 innings (6.92 ERA) and Gorzo 8.2 innings (5.19 ERA).
Judging by ERA alone (which isn’t the best stat), Duke showed a big improvement from 2008 to 2009, Maholm showed a big regression, Snell about treaded water — those are the three 2008 rotation mainstays who were still there in 2009.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Mar 4, 2011 8:30 AM EST up reply actions
Well Unless we traded CC Sabathia
and I missed it, differences in personnel is a variable that gets evened out by looking at aggregate stats. If Kerrigan were a positive impact on the staff (which he presumably helps to shape by recommending pitchers to cut and add), you’d expect to see continued improvement at the staff level-metrics from 2008 through 2010. If there were circumstances clearly beyond his control that negatively affected these stats, you’d expect him to clearly articulate those circumstances and possibly hold onto his job notwithstanding the slump in his second year of coaching. (E.g., “John, it doesn’t matter how well I get my guys to pitch, if you keep sleeping through games and having the batters bunt too much, it won’t mean a damn thing.” “Thanks Joe – you’re fired!”)
Clearly a few aggregate stats like these don’t tell the whole story and can be misleading, but I’ve neither the time nor the expertise to draw out the lessons from looking at Kerrigan’s impacts on LHP v RHP, day v. night pitching, power pitchers v. finesse pitching. They were a starting point for the discussion.
"Who is John Galt?"
Yeah, it's a good starting point
Sorry, didn’t mean to suggest anything more than that it wasn’t the ending point. And really I don’t know how to judge Kerrigan’s impact myself. Just that, when we’re comparing 2008 and 2009, we really have to think about what a train wreck our #5 starters were in 2008, which is something that’s beyond any pitching coach.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Mar 4, 2011 9:02 AM EST up reply actions
z'allright
We all tend to write blunt and direct here (I was worried that my reply sounded snarky). We need an “un-snarky” tag to give the context that’s missing from conversation.
In the blogpost I asked whether these three years stats were due to bad coaching or pitchers who suck. I mean, pick the top-of-rotation ace for any other team from this list of Pirates: Josh Fogg, Kip Wells, Kris Benson, Zach Duke, Paul Maholm, John van BenSchoten,….. and the beat goes on.
"Who is John Galt?"
Revisionist history
Joe Kerrigan didn’t take Morton’s sinker away until AFTER he began struggling. In particular, the sinker was taken away because Morton couldn’t locate any of his pitches, so Kerrigan had him focus on locating his fastball.
I’m sure Morton did feel uncomfortable without it, but in the same way a two-pack-a-day smoker feels uncomfortable after giving up cigarettes.
Look, I was Morton’s biggest fan after the acquisition, and I would like nothing more than for everything to click with him. I think you wrote, Charlie, that Morton represents the biggest chance for a “leap” (or something to that effect) on the team this year. His upside is a Cy Young Award. Unfortunately, he’s a guy that will be out of baseball in two years if things don’t start to click this season.
Kovacevic has implied — from his conversations with Charlie — that Morton may not really care about being great at baseball.
The reason Charlie Morton stinks has more to do with what is inside his head and heart than his pitch selection, IMO.
Didn't see that in the Pirates news articles
from last year, for example:
http://pittsburgh.pirates.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100420&content_id=9449616&vkey=recap&fext=.jsp&c_id=pit, which states that Charlie struggled with fastball location, then went more and more to breaking balls.
Not by any means saying your wrong. Off course, if he was struggling w/fast ball location, ML hitters would sit on breaking balls. Then taking away one of those options lets the batter focus even more.
"Who is John Galt?"
I don’t think Kerrigan took away his sinker because he thought Morton would put up better numbers in the short term without it. I think they did so as a learning tool — the same way the FO has discouraged sinkers by their minor league pitchers — so that he could become a better pitcher overall.
Obviously, it didn’t work. But I object to the idea that the loss of the sinker is the CAUSE of Morton’s struggles, as well as it becoming the cure.
It’s a great pitch. But it doesn’t do him any good if he can’t throw the sinker, fastball or curve over the plate for strikes.
but he WAS throwing strikes... a little bit TOO much...
batters were sitting on that moving fastball and teed off. you could see that in almost every game. by the end of the season, however, he was placing his pitches much better… plus he wasnt shaking off the catcher, which IMO is why he rebounded.
If I were to criticize Kerrigan with Morton, it would be around this point: around May (and you can find the PG article dated 4/22 that talks about how frustrated Kerrigan was with Morton not throwing first pitch strikes), Kerrigan had Morton pumping fastballs right over the heart of the plate with the first pitch. And he was getting crushed with that predictability. So, if that is what you are referring to, then, yes, I agree.
Surely you're not suggesting ....
hat professional hitters on other teams study the pitchers they will face to look for trends and prepare to face that pitcher in upcoming games. Wouldn’t Pirates batters do the same thing? ;-)
"Who is John Galt?"
but
isn’t the REAL question what happened to his command?
Throwing strikes is one thing. Having command of your pitches is another. Command is the difference between “middle-in” and “in”, and if movement on a pitch takes it from the outside corner to middle-away…the movement is worthless without being able to command it.
Was it Snyder being around? Was it Searage? Was it Kerrigan NOT being there?
I get the feeling that a lot of Morton’s problems are between his ears. Perhaps just changing the overall environment will benefit him.
by insane_sanity on Mar 4, 2011 10:21 AM EST up reply actions
This isn't correct...
they abadoned the sinker before the start of the season. The plan was to have Morton use his four seamer more often to generate more strike outs.
Kovacevic has implied — from his conversations with Charlie — that Morton may not really care about being great at baseball.
Things like this are silly. I’ve read DK and he has hinted that baseball isn’t Morton’s top priority. It pissed me off back when I read because unless DK is in Morton’s head how the fuck does he know what he is thinking. I remember a GM in Toronto saying he wouldn’t sign Adam Dunn because he didn’t like baseball…funny!
I do agree with you that a lot of Morton’s problems appear to be related to confidence. He just seems to unravel so easily.
Agreed
You will always find pitchers who know exactly what they want to do and think the catcher is useless (Bob Gibson).
Other guys have amazing arms and need to be coaxed.
Morton falls into the later.
But I think it’s way too early to say that he can’t be successful. I think the right catcher and pitching coach do make a difference with players like Morton.
Completely agree
Oh, I completely agree that the right catcher/coach can help Morton a ton. I tried to find some correlation in 2009 and 2010 to who was catching him, but couldn’t find much, but I still believe it can play a role.
My only point is that the sinker isn’t going to be some god-send pitch that catapults him back to respectability. He’s thrown the sinker and been hammered throwing the sinker. As Insane wrote above, his command has been terrible throughout his Pirates tenure.
I love McCarver's stories...
about visiting the mound when Gibson was pitching. Pretty much just, “shut up and get the eff back behind the plate.”
Isn’t that what you’d you say if Tim McCarver tried to talk to you? I know I would…
by King Oskar on Mar 4, 2011 1:25 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
More importantly ...
I would have left Bob alone on the mound.
He would have had no distractions from me.
I think this is huge
For a guy who couldn’t get a double play ground ball to save his life last season to suddenly have a new ground ball educing pitch is a big deal.
by ATribeCalledGreg on Mar 4, 2011 8:12 AM EST reply actions
Joe Kerrigan
didnt kerrigan mess with LINCOLNS delivery last year also? From what i hear in interveiws with pitchers this year, Seareage works with the pitchers and trys to help them the way they are and Kerrigan Wanted shit done his way or the highway and wanted mechanics a certain way.(article in post gazette on ray searege) Really who knows about all this but i think the staff will be better and RAY is going to be a better fit with these pitchers.
age of last winning season: 5
Well, I think Lincoln is a lost cause. . .
but I like Morton. I really thought he’d break out last year, but, unfortunately, that obviously didn’t happen. However, if you look at the peripherals, part of the issue was a pretty high BABIP and HR/FB rate. This, hopefully coupled with the return of his sinker, has me optimistic he can rebound this year.
Everything that guy just said is bullshit . . .thank you
Yeah, looking at the news articles from last spring
Are answer to troubles in the starting rotation were Burress, Jakubakis, and others. Not a lot of depth.
"Who is John Galt?"
Lincoln..
he may be useful yet. Word is his split finger changeup is coming along nicely and has a chance to be an above average pitch. He already has a plus curve and good velocity (though little movement) and if he can improve his command he can help the team.
I’m not comfortable with either the sample size (just 50 innings) or the Kerrigan meddling for Lincoln to draw much of a conclusion there.
by Adam Reynolds on Mar 4, 2011 11:39 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Actually the key question is:
will his sinker stay around for the regular seaon, or like an angry teenage son, is it just showing for a quick bite to eat and a cash w/drawal from the 2nd National Bank of Mom & Dad before disappearing again?
"Who is John Galt?"
Wow
It’s like I just saw 2013-2018 flash in front of my eyes. He’s got the anger part down, and he doesn’t turn 11 for a couple months.
All I can say in retrospect is
while you have to give ‘em room to grow, don’t forget to still have defined family time where it is the parents & the kids & no texting, cell phones, etc…. Good luck – it is the best job in the world.
"Who is John Galt?"
More important than whether the sinker is helping him or not...
is whether Morton thinks the sinker is helping him.
by jlk9697 on Mar 4, 2011 9:28 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
VERY good point.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Mar 4, 2011 11:23 AM EST up reply actions
Agreed
Also thinking that if you a pitcher is having confidence (aka mental) issues on the mound, you shouldn’t do anything to further those issues.
Removing a borderline pitch offering to focus on other pitches seems like a plausible technical change on paper. Morton’s confidence probably took another hit when they started taking pitches away from him.
It seems Kerrigan’s changes made sense technically when looking at just the change… maybe he had a problem focusing on the domino effects of his change and just focused on curing the immediate problem?
I think it would be pretty wild if both Morton and McLouth end up putting in solid seasons this year.
McLouth seems to be over whatever his problem was last year.
I never felt very good about this trade, though McLouth took a dive last year.
I guess it’s a race to see who can get themselves together be it Nate or Charlie.
by HonzaBednarik on Mar 5, 2011 12:36 AM EST up reply actions
I did
Dealing McLouth opened the door for McCutchen’s promotion to CF (and McLouth’s Gold Glove was a joke — he was never that good defensively).
Morton + Locke + G. Hernandez + $12.75m saved (don’t think it wasn’t about money…now, what they DID with that money may be a different story…)
(McLouth’s $5m last year + $6.5m this year + $1.25m buyout)
I understand hindsight is 20/20, but the Pirates simply could NOT have afforded to have McLouth to produce like he did last year for $5m. The Braves absorbed that much more than effectively than we could have — it would have been “another bad extension” for the Pirates.
by insane_sanity on Mar 7, 2011 11:16 AM EST up reply actions
With all due respect, I think you’re using alot of hindsight in your thinking (as you mentioned)
I would’ve like to have seen McLouth moved to RF after McCutchen was brought up.
It would of been interesting to see how that might’ve played out.
by HonzaBednarik on Mar 11, 2011 4:05 AM EST up reply actions
McLouth's real problem:
He wasn’t really as good as he played that one season
The glare of the spotlight is harsh, and the pressure that success breeds immense. We revere our heroes, but expect much. And criticism can come as easily as praise.

by 





















