That means expecting him to improve there might be wishful thinking.

Not necessarily.  It means that he needs to do something to improve his GB rate.  IOW, he isn’t going to just improve luck evening out (though there may still be some correction coming this year).  But it doesn’t mean he can’t improve by limiting his FB, and I doubt highly that it is unprecented for pitchers around Hughes’s age to improve their GB% w/o “reinventing” themselves.

Now, whether Hughes can do that or not, IDK.  Maybe he’s really close to harnessing the pitches necessary to get his GB% up around 40% w/o killing his K rate.  Or maybe he’s as good as he’ll get, which is still a fine pitcher, if not up to his previous billing.

The chart doesn’t seem particularly promising.  Just one “L”, as many “ND"s as “JE"s.
Doesn’t mean there’s no correction coming, but certainly doesn’t support the argument that one WILL be coming.

You guys are right - it’s not about waiting for Lady Luck, it’s about making some kind of adjustment.

Phil will be a free agent after 2013, so I’ve been wondering what happens to him. Does he sign a cheap deal with an NL club to build up some value? What kind of deal would a guy like him even get?

I’d be pretty surprised if he stays with NYY, considering 189, their unwillingness to sign him to a longer deal after 2010, his injury history, and the presence of younger/cheaper arms in the minors, but then I guess he’s our #3 in the Projected 2014 rotation right now so who knows.

It means that he needs to do something to improve his GB rate.  IOW, he isn’t going to just improve luck evening out (though there may still be some correction coming this year).  But it doesn’t mean he can’t improve by limiting his FB, and I doubt highly that it is unprecented for pitchers around Hughes’s age to improve their GB% w/o “reinventing” themselves.

Good point.  Maybe he needs to work on a two-seamer or a splitter?  Seems like the splitter is a dying art, maybe they don’t like the impact on a pitcher’s arm?

Does he sign a cheap deal with an NL club to build up some value? What kind of deal would a guy like him even get?

It really depends on his 2013.  If he has a year like 2010, I wouldn’t be surprised to see him get something like 4 yrs/$40M.

I think he’d be a monster in PETCO.  Then again, a lot of pitchers would be.

It’s so strange to think that Hughes was a GB guy in the minors.

And for a rather weak defense of Hughes: at least one of those HRs came off a pretty good pitch - looked like a curve that the guy got a hold of at about shin level. I didn’t catch the whole game so I can’t really speak to the rest of the HRs but I’m prepared to give him a pass on that one.

2012 is the ultimate Hughes year: starts off terrible, then looks mediocre for a while, is the best pitcher on the Yankees for a string of starts and then gives up eleventy billion HRs. Who can’t wait to see what the rest of the year looks like?

I’m betting on some sort of strange injury right after the All-Star break. Then he’ll come back in mid September throw gas out of the BP and fail horribly in the post-season.

Wow. The idea of paying that much for that long for Hughes downright scares me. Then again, according to FG, he was worth about $10 million in both 2009 and 2010. Still it just sounds like an ungodly number for him. If teams think he’s worth that contract then that says a lot for how much profit potential they think there is in producing a winning team.

[5] I think I got this from RAB - it isn’t unusual for elite pitching prospects to have high GB numbers in the minors. It basically comes down to their stuff being so good that minor league hitters can’t square up, producing weak contact. It’s basically unrelated to whether they become GB or FB guys once they start facing better hitters in the majors.

[5] I recall that too.

I just had a rather long post full of numbers on Hughes from this year, but basically Hughes is doing a lot of things right this year, striking out more than average, walking less than average, his BABIP is exactly average but his LD% way under average and he has a really high FB rate, so he might actually be getting unlucky in terms of BABIP. The only really bad number he has is his HR rate/HR/BIA rate which is probably unsustainably high (it’s about double his rate from last year). I’m not sure if the Hughes we saw in the previous 3+ starts is the real Phil Hughes, but the numbers say that he’s far closer to that than he is the Hughes we just saw.

Also interesting tidbit - Hughes gets more swings and misses in the zone than average, but less out of the zone than average. Which seems strange to me.

Hey SG, looks like the guys over at Pinstripe Alley have figured out how Girardio solved baseball this off-season:

Yankees record without Jayson Nix: 13-11 (.542)
Yankees record with Jayson Nix: 28-16 (.636)

Basically, what I’m seeing here is that over a full season, Nix is a +15 win swing.

[8] Interesting. Putting aside the numbers I still don’t see how he does it. Average/plus fastball, averageish curve, fringy change, bad cutter, OK control. This is why I’m still down on him in the long-term, I’m not sure the tools are really there to build on for him to be anything more than a disappointing back-end guy.

His FB velocity is up, you have to give him that. And his numbers seem to demonstrate better control, but I think maybe it’s an illusion. Maybe instead of nibbling and walking guys like he would have last year, he’s just throwing meat down the middle. Then his walks go down and his homers go up and we who wear the pinstripe-colored glasses say his control is improving and his HR rate is unsustainable.

[10] Maybe, but his current HR/BIA is over 11% which is pretty insane, his previous high was something around 6. And if he were simply laying out hittable pitches all the time you would expect to see a much higher LD rate (something around 20+ instead of the 15-16% he’s showing now. The raw numbers point to Hughes being unlucky. I’m not sure I buy that but I am encouraged that his HR rate will come down a bit. Is he the frontline guy he had the potential to be way back when? probably not, but he can still grow into more than a back-end pitcher.

[9] Not having Nunez is really significant. He is one of the worst ballplayers I ever seen.

[11] See now you’re just taking the numbers and changing them around in a way that makes Phil look better.

You may be correct about his homers coming down, I certainly hope you are. I still think I’m right about his chances for sustained success, given his pitcher profile. Of course if he goes to Oakland or some other NL club he’ll do great.

EDIT: You know what, that’s a tad too strong. I don’t feel completely confident that Hughes will suck long-term. I am just highly, highly suspicious of him as a viable pitcher. I don’t know of any lousy pitchers that necessarily share his profile, but I also don’t know of any good ones who do either.

[13] Let me put it this way, right now more than 1 out of ever 10 non-GB Hughes gives up goes over the fence, which an extremely high amount. Also, Hughes gets an inordinate number of IFF (a very good thing as they are converted into outs like 99% of the time) - ~12%. By definition, IFF cannot end up as an HR (barring gross incompetence - Nunez) which means that Hughes’ HR/rBIA (Hr/reasonable Ball In Air) is even higher. Maybe Hughes’ HRs have not been lucky but it seems pretty unlikely that he will continue to get crushed by HRs the way he has.

Right now, IFF not included Hughes is probably giving up HRs on something close to 15% of non GB, non-foul contact off of him. I don’t see how he can continue to be so bad at giving up HRs while displaying good K and BB numbers and the LD% he curently has.

And RAB has an article up about this very topic.

[13] I don’t know of any lousy pitchers that necessarily share his profile, but I also don’t know of any good ones who do either.

From the RAB article:

“Hughes is, by statistical standards, turning in a unique season. Looking at all pitchers with at least 50 IP from 1901 to 2012, only three other pitchers have had a K/BB ratio of 3.5 or greater, with a HR/9 of 2.0 or greater. The other three aren’t exactly power pitchers, though. If we look at pitchers with a K/9 of more than 8.5 per nine and a BB/9 of lower than 2.5 per nine, Hughes stands alone. Yes, using a mere 50 IP qualifier, he is the only pitcher in modern history to feature his current statistical profile”

Interesting. Are you secretly Mike Axisa?

And I liked this line from that article: “Yes, using a mere 50 IP qualifier, he is the only pitcher in modern history to feature his current statistical profile.”

This ties in nicely with what I just said above. And at least we can feel justified in our frustration with Phil, now that we know he really is an enigma.

EDIT: Wow, neither of us has much to do at work today apparently.

Good point.  Maybe he needs to work on a two-seamer or a splitter?  Seems like the splitter is a dying art, maybe they don’t like the impact on a pitcher’s arm?

I’ve wondered about Hughes throwing a splitter too.  Seems I read somewhere quite a while ago that splitters were mostly for pitchers who had difficulty throwing a change up, since they have similar action.  I think the jury is still out on Hughes’s change.  Some days it looks good, some days not.  I think he could either develop another pitch (sinker or splitter), OR get better command of his change/curve.  Those can be ground ball pitches too.

FWIW, I don’t really like K/9 because it can be “artificially” inflated by long innings, but Hughes’ K% backs up his K/9 numbers quite nicely at 22.6%, well above average.

[17] I’m performing the exciting task of copying data onto a HDD.

On the topic of “what is Hughes”, he seems like he could be a perfectly good #3/#4 starter.  That is, a guy who could throw 180-200 IP per year (if healthy, which he hasn’t demonstrated *yet*).  He’s also going to put up somewhere between 1.5-2.5 WAR (I’d guess ERA+ between 95 and 105).  And yes…that’s worth roughly $10M per year.  I think he’s still got more ceiling than that, IF he can make an adjustment of some sort (e.g. new pitch).  I think he won’t be much lower unless it’s for continued injury.

He’s still got a lot of season left to show he deserves a guaranteed spot next year, and a lot of Yankee career for if he deserves a contract going forward.

[12] You much not watch much baseball.  You certainly must not have followed the Yankees from 1989-1992.

[21] I suppose.  But I don’t waaaaaant that.  I want my shiny homegrown Ace, damnit.

[21] I’m not even sure he has to add a new pitch, but he does need to adjust usage and tighten up his command. The curve and change have both looked really good at times but simply aren’t consistent enough, and it shows in his pitch values (only his FB is positive, but the curve and change are just under even).

Found an old VCR tape that my Dad had used to tape some stuff years ago. I found part of a Yankee game vs Royals from 1991. Boy, were those hard times. Lineup included a rookie named Bernie Williams wearing some glasses, Steve Sax, Mel Hall, Donnie Baseball- first year back and he had some weird batting style, no power and a mullet, Pat Sheridan, Matt Nokes, Lee Guetterman, Pat Kelly. They lost a double header that day at Yankee Stadium and most of the crowd posed as empty seats.  Those were the Years that brought us Jeter and of course Bernie got better from there. I think I witnessed Bernie’s first homer at Yankee Stadium. I visited in 92 I think in August.

That last number is the one that worries me.  It tells me that Hughes hasn’t necessarily been all that unlucky at home relative to his fellow pitchers.

It doesn’t? He’s given up 13.1% at home, and the Yankees have hit 13.5% at home. But the Yankees have been one of the best, if not the best, home run hitting team in the majors for the last several years.

[7] I think I got this from RAB - it isn’t unusual for elite pitching prospects to have high GB numbers in the minors

.. which goes to the larger issue of batted ball data being discretized and use for analysis, or what I once called ‘standard fangraphs churn.’ Not all batted balls in those discrete categories are created equal.

It doesn’t? He’s given up 13.1% at home, and the Yankees have hit 13.5% at home.

No, the Yankees pitchers have allowed a 13.5% HR/FB rate at home.  I forgot the word pitchers I guess.  Or the word allowed.  I forgot something anyway.

[28] So Hughes is actually out-performing Yankees pitchers as a whole? Go Hughes! Woooooooooooooo!

[24] Right, doesn’t *have* to be a new pitch.  But that is something that could work.  And new could also mean a new grip (which he apparently just switched the grip on his change) on an existing pitch.

Basically, Hughes right now is okay.  He’s probably around an average pitcher, give or take.  That isn’t bad at all, though definitely a lot less than we were hoping for.  He needs to make *some* change though, to get beyond that.  New pitch, better command of existing pitches, maybe just a different pitch sequence.

[30] If you extrapolate his results so far over the rest of the season, he’ll be lucky to hit 1 WAR. But I feel comfortable saying that his early season terribleness is over, so it’s more likely we see something approaching 1.5 WAR.

If something suddenly clicks he might have an outside chance at 2.5 WAR.

So, average seems pretty reasonable.

[29] That’s the thing; Hughes in the past has typically had a HR/FB rate slightly below league average.  That’s something that gives me a bit of hope that it will come down from where it’s been thus far.  It’s POSSIBLE that the things he’s doing which are reflected by a better K and BB rate are also responsible for his HR/FB rate getting worse.  But unlikely.  So I imagine it will come down some.  Not a ton, but enough that his ERA will start to approach his xFIP.

The problem of course - he gives up a lot of fly balls.  So even a league-average HR/FB still lets up a ton of HR.

[31] Right, precisely.  For what he’s making this year still a bargain, and for what he’ll get in arbitration/project to do next year a bargain then as well.  To get *another* contract with the Yankees though, he’ll definitely need to be at the top of that range or better.  I think.

[32] Which, if he maintains OBPA similar to his current numbers, is fine since he’s not letting tons of people on base (which is one of the advantages of being a fly-ball guy - BABIP on flies is way lower than BABIP on GBs).

[34] Yes, definitely.  Or if he can cut his BB rate any more w/o adverse impacts (more flies relative to other BIP) he could make the jump from “roughly average” to “solidly above average”.

I think we better find something to complain about before SG bans us…

[35] I’m going to stick to my complaint about Hughes being very confusing. I also blame Joba.

Also, if Hughes can sharpen his command, it is possible the BB rate could drop without too much downside. But I don’t think it’s realistic to hope for too much improvement on the BB side, this year has already been a pretty large improvement over his historical numbers.

Well, cool. We’ve fixed Hughes. Maybe we can get halfway to world peace by 5.

[37] I know how to do that, it’s just not a very popular plan.

[36] Well, looking at some other recent power pitchers, he’s about at the age where their BB rates went from good to great, without a huge change in other stats.  Now again, I don’t know if Hughes has what it takes to do that.  But that is one possible path.  I guess I’m excited to see where he goes from here, but cautioned that he could be one of those guys that the best he’s going to be from here on out is a 2 WAR pitcher.

[38] I don’t think we can deploy the warheads by 5, do you?  Or are we talking 5 Pacific time?

[40] We only need to get halfway by 5. I think we’re doing OK.

[39] I’m always surprised when I check Hughes’ stats and see that he’s 25. It’s really easy to lose sight of the fact that he’s still reasonably young.

Everything said on this thread, all the analysis, all of the different opinions, possibilities, and permutations, have a ring of truth about them. Which is why Phil is so damn frustrating.

The most interesting observation, to me, was Snugs’ point that the “more BBs & Ks because he’s grooving pitches” fails because of the LD%.

Which makes it more enigmatic, but it’s vastly preferable to “unable to succeed in the zone”.

Also, given the report on PH’s swing-&-miss effectiveness in and out of the zone, it may be that what’s really needed, what’s really lacking, is deception - a pitch that’s tempting when out of the zone, a pitch that starts in the zone and ends out of it.  That seems typically to be a big part of a front-line ML pitching arsenal.

42. Chien-Ming Wang’s rookie year was 25. Very different pitchers, though. With Phil’s control and curve ball, if he ever developed a nasty sinker it would be game over. Easier said/thought than done, though.

[45] I think that really has to be his curve. We know Hughes can get guys with high heat, but he has to turn his curve into a weapon. If he can start burying that in the dirt when he needs a strike the change really doesn’t need to develop further than a usable pitch that he can flash 10 percent of the time.

[46] sinker, 2 seamer, splitter, the mythical slider he used to throw. Really, anything hard enough to bridge the gap between his curve and FB. I’d really like to see him using the change more, he’s thrown a few really nice ones, even early in the season when he was being brutalized.

WP - I don’t think this really holds water. Is there a real correlation between LD% and anything else? Intuitively you would think that a guy who’s been grooving pitches and getting hit around would have a huge LD% rate, but I don’t think that’s necessarily so.

Hughes’ LD% for 2012 is 17.6%. Jamie Moyer’s is not much worse at 18.9% and he just got DFA’d by the Rockies. The top 10 for highest LD% so far this season has guys like Santana, Doubront, Johnson, Greinke, Arrieta, Dempster, who are all having pretty good years I think, while Barry Zito has the 2nd lowest LD% in the league.

What I’m saying is I don’t think it really proves anything. Maybe Phil’s meatballs are turned into flyballs, not line drives - he does have a career high 50% FB this year and a league high HR/9. Or maybe batted ball profiles for pitchers are not really reliable for analysis year-to-year.

http://deadspin.com/5920340/david-ortiz-boston-is-becoming-the-shithole-it-used-to-be

Here’s something for a little levity.

Everyone should be a lifelong learner. Enrich your life by learning something new every day. You’ll be enriched. In your life, not actual riches. Not necessarily. Actually, better not to count on this at all. Anyway.

What did I learn today ? I learned that Phil Hughes, at 25, the same age as fellow home grown rookie flop Chin Ming Wang, has already reached the point in his career where he needs to re-invent himself because he ain’t the young phenom he used to never be in the first place and can’t maintain the non-performance to his unrealistic expectations.

He will, however, cash major bank from some self-delusional saps with more money than sense. Probably the Yankees.

Shit. I have batteries corroding in the bottom drawer that are older than Phil.

[50] Yoink !

50 what is it that leaves you with a small fuse and smaller testicles?

FU Marlins perhaps Minnows would be more appropriate.  Townies may never ever lose agai.

[14] Snugs, you can’t just separate IFB from OFB balls though.  Maybe the things he does that result in IFB also in some way result in OFB.  I can’t think of what that might be or even if it makes sense.  Maybe lack of command such that when he’s on hit pitches tail sharply, when not they fly straight?

EDIT:  NO wait that makes no sense, I’m positing that ONE thing produces BOTH results.  Anyway.

[50]  Oh, David.  Boston never stopped being a shithole.

51. Wang was the quickest to 50 wins since Dwight Gooden. I think you were joking around a little when you called him a flop, but still.

[57] Sorta. CMW was a bit of a flash in the pan, not only because of his injury. There was a lot of hype prospect love and hope that I don’t think he was able to live up to.

[57] Right. To the first point, he may not have been joking.  Or sober.  Though the wins themself aren’t useful, the fact that Wang came up at 25 and was very successful until he had multiple, serious injuries leaves a LOT of hope for Phil.  Basically, Wang developed in the minors until he was 25, and came to the bigs pretty well a finished product.  Phil developed (mostly) in the majors, and is almost 26.  He’s (hopefully) almost finished.  We’ll see if he can put the last touches on to become a very good (or better) starter.  Or if he’s one of those guys that is topped out, and this is as good as he gets.

If it’s the latter he can still have a very nice career, assuming he can stay healthy.  Wait and see I guess…

[55] in general, flyball pitches have more IFF than GB pitchers, but I don’t think the correlation was as strong as I expected it to be. I think of flyballs similar to weak groundballs. They tend to occur when the pitcher has really fooled a batter, just not enough to completely miss the ball. Either way the end result is basically the same - nearly no chance for a HR and very high probability of an out.

Think of it as quality of contact, IMO an IFF has more in common with a weak grounder than it does with a HR, despite the trajectory difference.