Badenhop and the Future

[nny]

So goes without saying Badenhop had quite a breakout season. You could make the argument that he was our second best reliever behind Kiko.

Coming up through the minors, the report on him was simple: a good control GB pitcher. These aspects certainly translated to the majors; His 3.00 BB/9 is well below the 3.46 league average, and he finished first on the staff with a 54% ground ball rate.

But something else occurred. He struck players out. He would finish the season with a slightly above average K/9 of 7.13 after having a slightly below average K/9 last year of 6.65, meaning his career sits on an average rate of 6.94.

This is a far cry of what to suspect. The season before breaking into the Marlins' staff, he would post a 5.3 K/9 as a 24 year old in A+ ball. Excluding rehab starts, his minor league K/9 sits at 5.99.

Which then brings up quite an obvious question: if his stuff is good enough to strike out major league hitters, how is it not good enough to strike out minor league hitters?

The quickest answer would be: His stuff has changed. But there have been no reports of Badenhop trying something new, throughout the minors he was reported as being a Sinker/Slider/Change Up pitcher, which is exactly what he has been in the majors.

However, that slider. Both Dan Meyer and Ricky Nolasco credit a lot of their success to a slider taught to them by Mark Wiley. Perhaps it's a different slider then?

It certainly wouldn't appear so. Looking at Pitch/FX data, both Meyer's and Nolasco's sliders are of the "slider-cutter" variety. Badenhop's has more movement, being more of the "slider-curve" variety.

Now the biggest argument to be made is his move to the bullpen. In his career as a starter, he's sitting on a K/9 of 6.16, not much of a reach from his 5.99 MILB K/9. As a reliever, it has jumped all the way to 7.42. An increase in K's from starter to bullpen should be expected. So are his K-rates simply just from now having an ability to go more full-tilt? Right now that appears to be the case, though it still seems strange that a pitcher with a inability to strike out MILB hitters could sustain a pretty above average K rate against ML hitters.

But this brings up another question regarding Burke Badenhop: If he is so effective as a reliever, and the fact that the Marlins only have one pitcher without a question mark next to his name (regardless of the size of the Q), why not try him again as a starter?

Fact remains he has sucked as his time as a starter. His career ERA as a starter is 6.95, compared to 3.28 as a reliever. And his K/9 is far from the only rate change. His BB/9 are not even comparable; 4.57 v.s. 2.68 (He basically turns from Josh Johnson to Andrew Miller). He has given up 2 more HRs and 4 more doubles in 30 less innings, good for a ISO battle of .179 and .087.

Fact also remains that we're talking about a grand total of 45 innings as a starter, far from a decent sample size. You're looking at the fact that most of those innings came last year as a rookie trying to adjust to the ML level. He only made two starts this year, one of which was a horrible start against the cubs. But he was also injured and uncharacteristically walked 4 in 1.2 innings, showing that his location wasn't there. And in his other start, he went 5 innings (He could have gone more, but his arm was not stretched out and was pulled after 80 pitches) while only giving up 1 run (a HR), while striking out 3, walking one, and getting a GB 60% of the time against a very potent philly offense.

And for as much as you can talk about how he's going more full tilt in a reliever roll, it's not like he is a 1 IP guy. He has averaged 2 IP per relief appearance. Only 8 of his 33 relief appearances this year were for 1 inning or less. He had a 3.94 ERA in the 11 outings where he went more than 2 IP.

Based off his bullpen numbers, is it really pompous to assume he could have a K/9 of 6, a BB/9 of 3.5, and a HR/9 of 0.9 as a starter? We're still talking about a significant drop in rates there compared to his BP numbers. It would put him at a 4.33 FIP, which is above average for a starter (which is normally around the 4.5 range). You could do quite a lot worse in the back of the bullpen.

It also brings up another rather large thought process. Those rate numbers are basically what we are to suspect from Volstad. If you truly believe Badenhop can do that as a starter, and considering Volstad's rightfully superior trade value, would it be so wrong to trade Volstad and give Badenhop his spot?

Certainly Volstad has more potential, as you really hope he can start locating his pitches better and have a BB/9 more towards the 2's. But we're not talking about ace potential here.

And then a second thought process: If he was our second best reliever this past season, and our first is leaving via free agency, why should he not be the lead candidate for the closer roll? Hell, especially with his ability to go multiple innings. It'd never actually happen in the real world, but could imagine how great a closer that can go 2 ip regularly be? With his arm stretched out like it is, it shouldn't be that much of an issue.

But comparing him to Leo, who's completely ineffective XBH/HR, and Lindstrom, who's completely ineffective in everything outside of XBH/HR, why should he not be a leading candidate? Yeah, you should certainly expect some regression in his rate stats. Even then he performs better though.

And I'm sure the first argument will be we will then need to fill the long relief role. However, is it really that big of a hole to fill? The roll is mostly used when the starter was knocked out early, meaning the other team likely already has a lot of runs. We also already have another cost controlled serviceable pitcher who has shown he can go multiple innings in Brian Sanches.

mmm I think that's it.

[THE_REAL_MIBS]

The problem with making Badenhop into a starter is, and you've said this yourself, he's sucked as a starter. His value is in being the guy that comes in and gives hitters a different look when the starter has struggled.

Why would you want to trade a guy that put up a 2.88 ERA is his rookie year and really only struggled for about a month and a half toward the end of last year to roll the dice on a guy that has not shown that he can cut it as a starter? You want to trade a potential #2-#3 starter and is not even arbitration-eligible for two more years to put a guy that's only shown that he can be a long reliever in the rotation?

As for the closer thing, that's a different mentality and he doesn't have your typical closer "stuff".

Badenhop is good in his role as a long reliever and there's no reason to mess with that. As we saw this year, we need a guy like him that can come in and get outs whenever the starters have an off night. It's the old "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" thing.

[Nick]

I've always said I thought he could be a solid 5th starter for us sometime in the future. I wouldn't put much credence into his numbers as a starter as he was thrown into a situation that he clearly wasn't ready for and shouldn't have been put in, in the first place.

If he's not in the rotation then his usefulness only extends to long relief I would say, I just don't see him as a late-innings guy.

[SFiercex4]

The problem with making Badenhop into a starter is, and you've said this yourself, he's sucked as a starter. His value is in being the guy that comes in and gives hitters a different look when the starter has struggled.

Why would you want to trade a guy that put up a 2.88 ERA is his rookie year and really only struggled for about a month and a half toward the end of last year to roll the dice on a guy that has not shown that he can cut it as a starter? You want to trade a potential #2-#3 starter and is not even arbitration-eligible for two more years to put a guy that's only shown that he can be a long reliever in the rotation?

As for the closer thing, that's a different mentality and he doesn't have your typical closer "stuff".

I agree with the trading idea being on the unfavorable side; Volstad is too young to be give up on and he's still cost-controlled. Presumably, if you see another season like this one, where he struggles with his home runs, perhaps then it's time to consider your options.

However, the reason why nny brings the possibility of moving Badenhop up is that, if a reliever can make the jump to starter, it helps his value tremendously. Relievers and starters have different replacement baselines, and starters pitch far more innings and face more batters, so Badenhop as an average or even slightly below average starter would be worth more than his performance in his current role. Consider that Badenhop pitched 65 innings of relief with a 3.46 FIP and was worth about 1 WAR. Sean West pitched 103 innings as a starter with a 4.49 FIP (a bit below league average) and was worth about 1 WAR as well (closer to 0.9).

The rule of thumb is that relievers give up an extra run per nine innings going up to a starter role, though this may be less so for Badenhop since he's a "long reliever." Even a FIP of 4.46 in our environment should be worth 1.5+ WAR in 150 innings (I don't feel like doing the math). It may be worth a shot if the team is short on starters.

[nny]

I agree with the trading idea being on the unfavorable side; Volstad is too young to be give up on and he's still cost-controlled. Presumably, if you see another season like this one, where he struggles with his home runs, perhaps then it's time to consider your options.

It's not about giving up on him, it's about relocating resources. I mean, the quick thought process of "trading pitching for a 3b" goes right to MIL with Gamel but plenty of other things or other areas we could upgrade (especially if they're hell bent on keeping Cogs in LF).

I mean, look at Volstad's career numbers insofar, which basically equals out the luck of the two years, and you're looking at a #4. He likely will improve to being an ok #3. he has a chance if he can really up his GB rates and improve his control to become a #2. But all in all, when talking about him, you're basically saying "ok, he's a #3".

We're sitting on JJ #1, Nolasco #2. We're then looking at, what

Sanchez
West
Volstad
RVH
Miller

as your base competition for the last 3 spots. You then have Badenhop (possible #3 but likely #4-#5), Winters (Possible #2-#3 [omg if he turns into Nick Blackburn/Mark Buehrle/ect] but likely #4-#5), and Penn as a longgggg shot but still has potential tatoo'd on him and he a pretty good year in NOLA (though he's set to be a MILB FA if we don't protect him soon) as other possible competitors. For all intents and purposes, we'll just exit out Penn (completely and utter ineffectiveness so far displayed at the ML level) and Winters (They'll probably want him getting a full year in AA at the least).

To me, RVH is guaranteed a spot. He's out of options so he's on the staff, and he was too good this year and has too much potential to already label him a bullpen arm. Sanchez is guaranteed a spot, because of how effective he has been when healthy, but obviously the question is "is he healthy".

That means you then have Badenhop, Volstad, West, and Miller for one last spot. If the difference between Badenhop and Volstad is not that much, and we're talking about the #5 spot on a staff, would it not be better to move Volstad to get us a very good cost controlled 3b?

Yes it does hurt our sp depth but I also hope the org is better about getting some MILB arms (I really hope Hensley returns for NOLA). And we're also talking about still being a pretty comfortable 7 man deep in the rotation without Volstad. Plus our depth in Jax in Jup really improve (Sanabia should be in Jax, Kaminska, Hand, and possible Johnson in Jup) should someone have a break out.

[THE_REAL_MIBS]

Why do you assume RVH will go to the rotation because he's out of options? His career high in innings pitched is just 6. He doesn't miss a lit of bats causing him to rack up the pitch count. To me, he seems destined for the bullpen or he would be a trade option.

If I were to guess what the rotation would be for next year, I highly doubt it will be much different than our opening day rotation from this year. The only questionmark would be that 5th starter spot which would be a competition between the two lefties. JJ and Ricky are locks, Anibal probably has a spot assuming he's healthy and I think Volstad would have to have an absolutely abismal spring for him to not be in the rotation, either. Yes, he did not end the season well but he's a first round pick who was our second best pitcher to start the season last year. Just as Ricky was made the opening day starter this year based on performance last year, Volstad should get another shot as well.

That brings us to Miller and West. This is pretty much a toss up because they both had some good starts and some bad starts. That's really the only competition I see for the rotation.

[SFiercex4]

VandenHurk's 2009 K%: 19.1%
VandenHurk's 2009 BB%: 8.2%
Vandenhurk's batters faced: 256

Small sample, but he isn't doing a bad job missing bats (a bit above average this season). Career 21% K%, though his walk rate career is too high (11%) to carry on as a starter. I heard about his work with Bert Blyleven this offseason, and he's apparently dropped using the "Holland Hammer" curve, opting instead to use a slider. I was initially going to write something up about that using some Pitch f/x data.

Even though West improved over the course of the season, I doubt he starts in the majors. I wouldn't be surprised if it's Miller or VandenHurk for the last spot.

To nny's point, I think you'd be giving up the pitcher with the highest potential here in Volstad and banking on guys who aren't as highly touted. Of course, potential means nothing if you don't put it together, but I think Chris can put it together. He does still get his ground balls, and with a league average home run rate, xFIP had him this year at 4.40, last year at 4.66. Sure, that's league average, but he's much younger than the other pitchers mentioned (Miller and VandenHurk are almost the same age, Sanchez a bit older).

Consider that the team's pitching depth in the minors is actually considered weak, and that it's likely the Marlins would have to give up Nolasco eventually once his price becomes too high. After West and Ryan Tucker, there's almost no one that's regarded, according to the minor league reports (BA, John Sickels, Kevin Goldstein from the little I've read of him). Then consider that the club has Dominguez in the minors ideally as the replacement at third, though he's been questionable for the last two years.

Let's see the return we get from dealing Uggla, Cantu/Ross, and perhaps Hermida along with them. If we can get some minor leaguers who may be a year away from being ready, then we can consider trading away what little organizational pitching depth.

[Bobbob1313]

Can someone photoshop RVH's head onto Michael J Fox's body from a scene from Back To The Future for me?

[PitchingWinsGames]

When I'm not in class, remind me later

[nny]

To nny's point, I think you'd be giving up the pitcher with the highest potential here in Volstad and banking on guys who aren't as highly touted. Of course, potential means nothing if you don't put it together, but I think Chris can put it together. He does still get his ground balls, and with a league average home run rate, xFIP had him this year at 4.40, last year at 4.66. Sure, that's league average, but he's much younger than the other pitchers mentioned (Miller and VandenHurk are almost the same age, Sanchez a bit older).

Consider that the team's pitching depth in the minors is actually considered weak, and that it's likely the Marlins would have to give up Nolasco eventually once his price becomes too high. After West and Ryan Tucker, there's almost no one that's regarded, according to the minor league reports (BA, John Sickels, Kevin Goldstein from the little I've read of him). Then consider that the club has Dominguez in the minors ideally as the replacement at third, though he's been questionable for the last two years.

Let's see the return we get from dealing Uggla, Cantu/Ross, and perhaps Hermida along with them. If we can get some minor leaguers who may be a year away from being ready, then we can consider trading away what little organizational pitching depth.

I disagree about Volstad having the most potential, and him being so highly touted is why I'd be for it (if someone is viewed to be more valuable than they actually are, you receive more then you give up).

RVH has the potential to turn into a Ricky-lite if he can continue to improve his control. You look at their repertoire, they have the same 4 pitches (Fastball, Slider, Curve, Change), all outside the curve have idential velocities, although RVH looks like he might just abandon the curve, having thrown it just a couple dozen times this year.

No, RVH's stuff don't match ricky's, but the biggest difference between the two is also location. And the difference between this year and last year is the fact that RVH has taken a major step forward with his location, being just 24 years of age he could continue to take step forwards. Even if he doesn't, he still displayed above average control this season.

Factor in his ability to rack up K's and he should have a very decent K/BB rate. Much like Ricky his problems are going to be FB's and XBH. But, I mean, even if he doesn't become Ricky, what's he likely to become? A #3-#4 just like Volstad?

And it's not like RVH wasn't touted. If it wasn't for the fact he broke his Rookie eligibility in 07 he'd have been in probably our top-5 the past couple seasons. BA Ranked him our #7 prospect going into 07 season even though almost his entire '06 was lost, a lot due in part to him having a great Hawaii showing. Scouts have been enamored with his stuff for awhile now.

Same with Anibal: Both him and Volstad were rated as high as the 40th best prospect in the majors (Anibal going into the '06 season, Volstad the next). And based off what both have done in the majors, I'd certainly say Anibal's upside far out-reaches Volstad's. Again, major difference between the two in ability to miss bats.

And for Sean West, he was ranked above Volstad prior getting injured. And you're looking at a strike out ground ball pitcher who showed massive improved control. He easily has the most potential out of the group.

And Andrew...who even knows with him anymore so not going to touch him. Given the choice I'd rather trade him, but I don't think he has much value right now.

Getting back to Volstad, even with all said above, it's not about former prospect rating, it's about what he is and what he can become.

Ignoring an outside variable happening (i.e. he learns a new pitch)

He does not miss bats. He has a career MILB K rate of 6.3 and it was just 5.5 in AA before being called up. To me I don't even know how much you can say going forward he'll be the 6 K guy he was this year: after his amazing April which had me wondering if he was the next Brandon Webb, his K rate was just 5.59, after it being 5.50 last season, and chone predicting a 5.28 rate. Regardless it's not like there's that much of a difference between saying he'll be a 5.6 guy or a 6 guy, but still worth noting to me.

He is a GB pitcher but he does not get severe ground balls. Coming up he was suppose to be a sinker ball (60%+) guy. Instead, he's only been a ground ball (~50%) guy. This is a major difference when talking about HRs and XBH.

He's also only displayed average control. Yes, that should improve, but that improving means he goes from a #4 to a #3. He doesn't become a Derek Lowe #2 unless he adds nearly 15% to his GB rate and a full walk off his BB/9.

Yes, the upper minor league depth is weak. But we're also currently sitting on 8 guys who could start in the majors. Yes, that's far from a problem. Have some combination of Miller/West/RVH/Badenhop/Volstad in either the bullpen or minors (if they can be optioned), and you have a starting 5 with 3 who can come if need be. I'm far from saying we should trade Volstad, especially if we fill holes elsewhere by things like Uggla's trade or in FA. I just think it's something to look into, especially since Badenhop should be able to replicate what Volstad is currently doing, just without the upside.

[THE_REAL_MIBS]

Again, nny, why are you so eager to write off Volstad? He just turned 23 a couple weeks ago. He is far from a finished product. Besides, Volstad has the better numbers AT THE MAJOR LEAGUE LEVEL than both VandenHurk and West did at the same age.

You brought up ratings, when VandenHurk was rated #7 in 2007, who was number 1? I believe that would be Volstad.

Regardless of how much RVH has improved, he still has yet to pitch more than 6 innings at the major league level. Miller, West and Volstad all have. While Volstad does not have the high k rate, he is able to keep his pitch count low by getting groundballs. VandenHurk runs into a lot of deep counts with batters fouling off a bunch of pitches.

I'm also fairly sure that if Volstad had struggled early in the year instead of late in the year that we would not be having this conversation. The fact is Volstad has the better numbers at the major league level, is a year and a half younger than VandenHurk and has the higher ceiling. Like SFiercex4 said, the only reason to trade him would be if you don't think he'll improve and it's way too early to give up on him.

[SFiercex4]

RVH has the potential to turn into a Ricky-lite if he can continue to improve his control. You look at their repertoire, they have the same 4 pitches (Fastball, Slider, Curve, Change), all outside the curve have idential velocities, although RVH looks like he might just abandon the curve, having thrown it just a couple dozen times this year.

No, RVH's stuff don't match ricky's, but the biggest difference between the two is also location. And the difference between this year and last year is the fact that RVH has taken a major step forward with his location, being just 24 years of age he could continue to take step forwards. Even if he doesn't, he still displayed above average control this season.

Factor in his ability to rack up K's and he should have a very decent K/BB rate. Much like Ricky his problems are going to be FB's and XBH. But, I mean, even if he doesn't become Ricky, what's he likely to become? A #3-#4 just like Volstad?

You've put a lot of emphasis on RVH's performance in 256 batters faced this season. I don't think it's a big enough sample size to be conclusive about any change. I do agree that him abandoning the curve and going with the slider more has helped him with his control, in that RVH could not put the curve over the plate at all.

However, it takes about 7 K's to even out a homer, and even though home runs are a lot less predictable than K's, the difference in GB% (which is more stable and is a more verifiable skill) could be enough to make up for the bats missed. We don't know if RVH will be striking out hitters at the 19.1% rate of this year or the 21% rate of a few years ago with this change to a slider. Neither do we really know how much Volstad's HR's will regress, but 10% HR/FB% is a fairly safe bet.

Same with Anibal: Both him and Volstad were rated as high as the 40th best prospect in the majors (Anibal going into the '06 season, Volstad the next). And based off what both have done in the majors, I'd certainly say Anibal's upside far out-reaches Volstad's. Again, major difference between the two in ability to miss bats.

Sanchez's career K%: 16.6%
Volstad's career K%: 15.2%

Of course, Sanchez has K'ed more this season, but so has Volstad. Without doing any weighted projections, of course Sanchez you would expect to have more K's, but I'd expect more home runs from him as well. If you kept their walk rates equal (at the moment, Sanchez is more "wild" with a career rate of 11%, so that's not a guarantee), you'd expect to see Volstad on top. I'd say 20 more K's from Sanchez is balanced by three less home runs expected from Volstad (these are made up numbers, but my presumption is that they're not far off).

I'll look into a projection for these things. You've also inspired me to snag RVH's Pitch f/x data and play with it a bit to see any differences. Damn you nny and your ideas for articles!

[Swifty]

Again, nny, why are you so eager to write off Volstad? He just turned 23 a couple weeks ago. He is far from a finished product. Besides, Volstad has the better numbers AT THE MAJOR LEAGUE LEVEL than both VandenHurk and West did at the same age.

You brought up ratings, when VandenHurk was rated #7 in 2007, who was number 1? I believe that would be Volstad.

Regardless of how much RVH has improved, he still has yet to pitch more than 6 innings at the major league level. Miller, West and Volstad all have. While Volstad does not have the high k rate, he is able to keep his pitch count low by getting groundballs. VandenHurk runs into a lot of deep counts with batters fouling off a bunch of pitches.

I'm also fairly sure that if Volstad had struggled early in the year instead of late in the year that we would not be having this conversation. The fact is Volstad has the better numbers at the major league level, is a year and a half younger than VandenHurk and has the higher ceiling. Like SFiercex4 said, the only reason to trade him would be if you don't think he'll improve and it's way too early to give up on him.

Eeeeeeeh, let's not go crazy there.

There's a difference between "most likely" to reach their ceiling and having the higher ceiling. Vandy, even at his most mediocre, is going to be around a 7 or 7.5 K/9. Kid goes on a tear, he starts putting up K numbers on par with Nolasco or JJ. Even now, Vandy out performed Volstad in terms of K/9 and K/BB. Now, I'm not saying Vandy's suddenly going to turn into a mini AJ Burnett, but the potential is there, you don't just discard K totals like that. Volstad's ceiling is a #3, he's pitching like a 4/5 on a budget conscious team, AAA insurance on teams that spend money...Vandy's ceiling (which I doubt he reaches) is a solid #2 and he's pitching like the bullpen's 4th arm. Vandy should go into the bullpen, and just go Jason Isringhausen on everyone. Volstad's pure stuff is just not good enough that we can look at him and say that if we allow him to be a 1 inning max effort pitcher everything gets fixed.

[nny]

Sanchez's career K%: 16.6%
Volstad's career K%: 15.2%

Of course, Sanchez has K'ed more this season, but so has Volstad. Without doing any weighted projections, of course Sanchez you would expect to have more K's, but I'd expect more home runs from him as well. If you kept their walk rates equal (at the moment, Sanchez is more "wild" with a career rate of 11%, so that's not a guarantee), you'd expect to see Volstad on top. I'd say 20 more K's from Sanchez is balanced by three less home runs expected from Volstad (these are made up numbers, but my presumption is that they're not far off).

I'll look into a projection for these things. You've also inspired me to snag RVH's Pitch f/x data and play with it a bit to see any differences. Damn you nny and your ideas for articles!

With both RVH and Sanchez, also referencing the minors. RVH had a great 2.4 BB/9 in AAA, easily the best in his pro career. Still a small sample size regardless, as we're talking about roughly 120 IP combined on the year.

However it does bring up one issue: He also only had a 7.7 K/9 in NOLA (I thought he was still posting 9+ down there, my bad on that). So maybe the K's don't start going back up. And with his severe FB and HR tendencies, if his K/BB doesn't get better he won't be anything more than a #4-#5, which then means BP for him.

For Anibal I think with his stuff and minor league track record of K's that improvement from his rookie year is no surprise.

As far as comparing Anibal and Volstad, I think 3 more HRs is right over 200 IP (Giving Anibal a career 10% rate puts him at 1.05, Volstad at 0.89. I assume you did this yourself to get the 3 HR mark but just posting incase/for others). If we call Volstad a 6 k/9 guy, that's 133 K's, meaning Anibal would have to best only 6.9 K/9, something I'd bet money on Anibal passing. Even if he's not the 8k/9 guy he's been combining the last two years, he's should at least be the 7.5k/9 guy he's been this year.

Control is definitely the wild card. Anibal showed he could be a 3.5bb/9 guy in 06. But I doubt I need to go into what's happened since then. A positive is that outside his 8 walk game, he was a 3.5bb/9 after coming back from injury this year. The downside is, that's 8 starts, far from something to actually look at and say "he can do it!" The only thing we can say at this point is he definitely has the potential to, the question is can his arm get back to that point. Give Anibal 11 more walks, that's 33 more strike outs needed, that's a 8.37 K/9.

But I think they're basically even without improvements (going by xFIP Volstad was at 4.66/4.40, Sanchez at 4.54/4.58 the past two years) they're equal. The difference is Anibal has a lot more room for improvement than Volstad does. The difference is also Anibal has not been able to stay on the field and Volstad has had no injury problems what so ever. And a club in our position certainly has a bigger need for players that can stay on the field than someone like, say, Boston, who can run a rotation 30 men deep.

But again my thing of trading volstad was not giving up on him or "he's worse on staff", but he has the 3rd most value behind Ricky/JJ, while even saying better than everyone else, he's not significantly better. If you look to move pitching to fill other holes, I think he's the piece.

And can't wait to see the RVH piece }:> That's something I actually need to talk to you about, how to use pitchFX for a pitcher rather than just a game. The only way I see doing it now is loading up every game in Brooks and exporting that XML than combining them, which just looks like a ton more effort than it's worth to me

[SFiercex4]

And can't wait to see the RVH piece }:> That's something I actually need to talk to you about, how to use pitchFX for a pitcher rather than just a game. The only way I see doing it now is loading up every game in Brooks and exporting that XML than combining them, which just looks like a ton more effort than it's worth to me

At the moment, that's what I've been doing, DL'ing the tables and sticking them on Excel. I have been tinkering with SQL, and I do have a database to try out when I get a chance. If I can do that, the machinations of counting up stuff like In Zone% and Chase% become a lot easier. Over the offseason I'll be working on seeing if I can manipulate the database on SQL to fit my graphical needs, but for now, DLing a pitcher's table from Brooks is what I've done.