The Chicago Cubs are relying on Carlos Marmol to be their closer in 2010. Is this a good idea?
Well, Marmol is incredibly tough to hit.
(via www.fangraphs.com)
Marmol was tough to hit primarily due his ability to get strike outs at an incredibly high rate.
(via www.fangraphs.com)
In addition to striking out batters, Marmol also doesn't give up many home runs.
(via www.fangraphs.com)
So he's a great pitcher, right? He doesn't give up many hits or home runs, and he strikes out lots of opposing batters. I think everyone reading this blog knows Marmol's main issue. Control. Follow me past the jump to find out more...
Here is Marmol's BB rate chart:
via (www.fangraphs.com)
Yikes. That line is literally off the charts.
Marmol has been bad the last few years when it comes to getting his pitches into the strike zone. (Note the rest of the graphs are not from fangraphs. They're my own creations. I replicated their style so things would match up nicely.)
Unfortuantely, it gets worse. Marmol was pretty good at finding the strike zone in 2008. But he had a low (for him) walk rate rate in 2007, a year in which he was just as bad at finding the strike zone as he was in 2009. So what caused the discrepancy between 2007 and 2009? Well, take a look at the rate at which Marmol got opposing hitters to swing at pitches out of the zone:
So now we see that over the last 3 seasons, there were 3 different versions of Carlos Marmol. In 2007, Marmol missed the zone a lot. However, he was able to compensate for that by getting hitters to swing at his pitches out of the zone. In 2008, fewer batters chased his bad pitches, but he managed an above-average ability to find the strike zone. Then in 2009, he missed the plate and hitters weren't swinging at his pitches out of the zone.
What can we expect out of him in 2010? I consider his control in 2008 to be an aberration. As such, in my opinion this question boils down to whether Marmol exerts some... cough... control over whether or not batters are swinging at his pitches out of the zone. I took a quick look at the break on his pitches over at fangraphs, and didn't see any trends that jumped out at me. So I grabbed the pitch FX database and ran a query on the locations of all his pitches from each of 2007, 2008, and 2009. First, I'll show you the location of his pitches in the vertical direction. The following chart shows the number of pitches at each height, with the strike zone shown as dashed lines.
Hrmm... If anything, Marmol appears to exert better than average control in the vertical direction. He does this by avoiding putting his pitches low and out of the zone. What about the horizontal location? Well, here's the same plot for the horizontal axis, from the catcher's perspective (in other words, a right-handed batter would stand on the left side of this chart):
This is where Marmol's control issues show up. Pay particular attention to the right side of the figure. Marmol throws a lot more pitches to the right of the dashed line (outside to a right-handed batter) than the average pitcher. Perhaps more damning than the "normal" outside pitches are those that are -- as Harry Doyle would sarcastically say -- "just a bit outside." Marmol regularly misses the outer edge of plate by a foot or more. The average pitcher throws pitches a foot or less outside 19.5% of the time. Marmol did this 27.9%, 24.4%, and 20.9% of the time in 2007, 2008, and 2009, respectively. In other words, Marmol has an issue in that when he misses he often misses by a mile, and this allows other hitters to easily identify which pitches to swing at.
To be honest, these numbers scare me quite a bit. I don't see a ton of variation in his pitch location distributions from year to year, other than the spike in strikes in 2008. I fear that spike was an aberration. And in all 3 years, he showed an increasing tendency to throw the ball waaaaay outside. If that wasn't enough, teams have written the book on him. They know that hitters should be able to easily identify the pitches that are far off the plate, allowing them to take balls and swing at strikes. The bottom line is that Marmol either needs to put the ball close enough to the plate to entice hitters to swing, or he needs to put the ball over the plate more often, like he did in 2008. Unfortunately, I don't see any reason to think either of those things will happen in 2010.
Cubs fans should stock up on the Pepto Bismol... and someone should warn Ron Santo to take 9th innings off next year.
0 recs | 69 comments
I'm off to bed...
I’ll be in and out throughout the day to reply to comments in this thread.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
2009?
The Chicago Cubs are relying on Carlos Marmol to be their closer in 2009.
What can we expect out of him in 2009?
You mean to say 2010 I would think.
eths - November 12, 2009
Or this was a very slow post stuck in hypersleep...
Zeke - November 12, 2009
But then how would we have his 2009 stats...
WOAAAAAAAAA
Musicdude10 - November 12, 2009
LOL
I fixed it.
Al Yellon - November 12, 2009
lol...
thanks!
The funny thing is I made the same mistake at the end of the post, and caught that one.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
♪♪♫ Time meant nothing, never would again, Let's do the Time Warp again! ♫♪♫
eths - November 12, 2009
If only...
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
I found for the most part when he closed this year
That we saw the Marmol of 2007 and 2008.
This is a long shot but maybe he lost his motivation when he wasn’t given the closer’s role in Spring Training. I know that no player should ever have that happen to him but that’s been my theory all along. He was much much better once Gregg was relieved of closing duties.
Yes Marmol had a couple blown saves but he was much much better.
ak123 - November 12, 2009
Great Analysis
Thanks for doing this. I like how precise the information is.
Good thing they don’t have metrics this precise where I work.
mph3 - November 12, 2009
Good stuff....thanks
You have to wonder if when he is missing the zone “by a mile” it’s becuase he isn’t confident with his slider at the time. He needs to trust that fastball more and get ahead.
JB 23 - November 12, 2009 via mobile
From what I remember
Marmol’s struggles have had more to do with his fastball than his slider. His slider is usually all over the place, that’s why people swing at it (and still miss when it actually is a strike). His fastball has great movement too but it needs better control to set up his slider
berselius - November 12, 2009
I can split that up.
I’ll try to do this later today or tonight.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
here ya go...
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
Thanks, shawn
Interesting to see that he’s pretty much missing right with both pitches in a similar way
berselius - November 12, 2009
Yeah, and it's a relatively consistent miss.
If you move the Mamrol distributions by 4 inches, he’s got decent control. Hmmmm…
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
I'd like to see a graph...
…showing how many times his name is pronounced MAR-mol, mar-MOL, and however Santo decides to pronounce it.
Scruff0082 - November 12, 2009
The question is...
… how do you fix this issue?
Al Yellon - November 12, 2009
Trade him to Detroit for Curtis Granderson
nji232 - November 12, 2009
Then who closes?
Al Yellon - November 12, 2009
I'm intrigued by Caridad.
Maybe because he reminds me of Marmol. Not sure if he could close right now but I think he migt be the answer, just maybe not for 2010.
However, teams have gone with young closers and have been success. As I recall, Huston Street won the ROY as the A’s closer.
cowsarecool220 - November 12, 2009
I would love to see Caridad given a shot.
He was a starter in the minors, right? Besides giving up the longest foul ball I’ve ever seen to Troy Tulowitzki, I have good memories of him and the numbers back me up.
He hasn’t shown great things as a starter in the minors, but he’s only had two years in the minors. Either put him in the ML bullpen now or try to see if he can improve as a starter in AAA.
mykalmorgan - November 12, 2009
I think he has a real shot at the ML bullpen in 2010.
I’d like to see that. I was impressed by him, and also by Justin Berg.
Al Yellon - November 12, 2009
I think you figure that out in ST...
or you try to sign someone as a FA. I don’t think Marmol is the answer to that question. So you’re not losing much by trading him.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
Pick up Billy Wagner off the scrap heap
Have Guzman do it, sign Mike Gonzalez or Rafael Soriano, let Caridad do it.
Marmol isn’t near lights out enough as closer to make me hesitate in dealing him for a player of Granderson’s ability.
nji232 - November 12, 2009
Exactly.
You go from having a closer with horrible control and no CF to having no closer and a very good CF.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
If the Cubs could do a straight-up trade of Marmol for Granderson
There’s absolutely no reason not to do that.
mykalmorgan - November 12, 2009
I think it would be something more like...
Theriot and Marmol (and a prospect?) for Granderson.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
Or maybe Fontenot.
Al Yellon - November 12, 2009
The problem with Fontenot
is that the Tigers supposedly have a 2nd base prospect coming up.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
every team needs a scrappy player
jesus christos - November 12, 2009
IMO, tigers don't make a deal without Castro as the main piece
Andronicus - November 12, 2009
in that case
No.
Archie - November 12, 2009
I'm torn on Castro...
on one hand, he’s a prospect with both a high floor (because of his defense) and a very high ceiling (because of his success at a young age for his levels of play). On the other hand, he’s still a prospect and as such is a long shot for realizing his ceiling. It’s quite possible his value will never be higher than it is right now, as he’s in the middle of tearing up the AFL.
That said, I’m not sure I’d trade him, either. He’s a great defensive player at a premium defensive position. And his bat has potential. You don’t find guys with that combination often.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
the decision to keep of trade Castro might reveal...
whether the Ricketts feel pressure to win in 2010 at all costs or whether they have the patience (and stomach) to wait for a youth movement (presumably led by Castro, Vitters, etc.) to crystalize.
Andronicus - November 12, 2009
Yep, I've been pondering this, too.
daver - November 13, 2009
I like that idea.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
i think the whole point of the analysis is: it's very unlikely that you can
Andronicus - November 12, 2009
Probably not...
but i’ll take a look at a couple suggestions. The idea of moving him to the right half a foot or so is intriguing.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
It would be more interesting, to me,
to see a more specific comparative metric than the MLB average. I don’t know how hard this would be to get, but I am thinking that if you could graph the MLB average of just closers, then I would guess some of the deltas between Marmol’s numbers and the cumulative closer’s numbers would be less significant.
BatCubFan - November 12, 2009
That's a good point.
I’m not sure how to do that, though. Maybe I could just limit things to the 9th inning? If I did that I would also do a fairly good job of sub-selecting those appearances when Marmol was the closer. That would also address the issue ak brought up above, namely that Marmol seemed to do better as the closer.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
In the admittedly small sample size we have from the last month and a half of the season
Marmol could hardly be said to do much better.
Gregg was removed as closer on August 18th.
From that time on, here are Marmol’s numbers
Again, this is only 17.2 innings, but his BB/9 rate went up as did his K/9 rate as compared to the rest of the season. I could include the other ten games throughout the year he finished prior to being named “closer,” but from that time on, every game in which he pitched he also finished.
His seaason ERA: 3.41
ERA as closer: 3.06
Not much difference. The problems weren’t solved when he became “closer.” Hopefully, the Cubs will be able to spend a lot of time looking at tape, or talking to him, or something to figure out how to get him to command his stuff. Because even when he throws strikes, the results will be better than Marmol as a wild man.
mykalmorgan - November 12, 2009
Again, this is only 17.2 innings, but his BB/9 rate went up
That’s the problem…. His lower ERA in that span was a fluke. He walked 13 batters and hit another in 17.2 IP. That’s 7.3 free passes per 9 innings. (If you don’t include the HBP it’s still 6.8 BB/9). Those numbers are way too high. I don’t think anyone can be a successful closer with a walk rate that high.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
Agreed.
mykalmorgan - November 12, 2009
Here's just the 9th inning...
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
That's such a strange shift...
I wonder if Marmol literally shifted himself 4 inches to the right on the rubber what would happen. Even if it’s just psychological… I’d like to see it.
What I’d REALLY like to see is Marmol learn a cutter or a splitter. That takes a hell of a lot more time and effort than sliding over a few inches on the rubber though.
PacificCub - November 12, 2009
That's a really good idea...
and I’ve got a test for it. If it’s his position on the mound that’s causing his problems, the pitch location should be correlated to the release point. We can calculate that from the pitch FX data. I’m at work now, but check back tonight. I’ll try to produce a chart for you.
The other way to do this is to have Soto just move the target over by 4 inches. If you want Marmol to paint the outside corner, have Soto put his mitt over the heart of the plate. If you want Marmol to throw it on the inside corner, have Soto set up way inside.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
I'm half-kidding when I ask this...
…but I’m also half-serious.
Do they have charts like this that show what Soriano swings at vs rest of ML? I gotta think his blue line would also be a classic Harry Doyle just a bit outside chart.
ballhawk - November 12, 2009
"They" don't have that...
but I can make one of those. I’m doing a piece on Soriano for Al’s annual. I’ll probably include something similar to what you’re asking for, if not this exact chart. I’ll probably do it in two dimensions though, with “hot zones” and stuff.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
well, I guess I'll just have to buy a copy when it comes out... ;-)
Al, make sure Shawn gets credit for this sale!
ballhawk - November 12, 2009
lol...
I think that’s the first thing I’ve ever gotten someone else to buy.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 13, 2009
A little late, but here you go:
There’s almost no correlation between release point and final pitch location. But it’s still worth trying, as there is a lot of scatter in both data sets. It may also help to have Soto move his target over a few inches so that when Marmol misses he’s where you want the pitch to be.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 13, 2009
wow
That looks like a chart I produced for work today…
The lack of correlation itself is kind of interesting. Seems to me that if your release point doesn’t dictate your pitch location EVER, you have a pretty big mechanical flaw, and are headed to the DL sooner rather than later. Or you need to loosen your grip.
Very interesting analysis – thanks Shawn.
PacificCub - November 13, 2009
IMO Marmol is all about confidence
It seems like anytime he meets adversity he goes into a mental slump and his pitching suffers. Rich Harden’s debut in 2008 when he got booed really set him back I think, but then he got named to the All-Star team, had a solid inning, and next thing you know he’s back to being good.
This season the stupid waste of time WBC he was the goat when he blew a save and then he came back to find out he wasn’t the closer. You could see in his pitching he just wasn’t the confident, almost cocky, Marmol we are used to. Then he got the closer position and was back to being really good.
Now the numbers might not back me up on this theory, but I do think with a prolonged period of time as the closer Marmol will be really good because he’s in the big position and has the spotlight on him that he wants.
nji232 - November 12, 2009
Let's assume you're correct...
then there’s a positive feedback loop here. Once Marmol misses the zone (and he will miss the zone), his confidence will go down. According to this line of thought, that will cause his ability to decline, and he’ll miss the zone more… which will cause further erosion of his confidence and even worse control.
That’s not the type of pitcher you want to go into the season penciled in as your closer.
The other problem with this theory is that the numbers don’t back it up. Marmol still exhibited horrible control as the closer last season. His topline numbers (like ERA) were better but that’s probably due to a small sample size more than anything else.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
Bingo
I don’t really care for Marmol even though he has great stuff. You just don’t know if you’re going to get Meltdown Marmol when you really need him to be Lockdown Marmol.
Ace Venom - November 12, 2009
Nice job, Shawn. This is very illustrative
And frieghtening.
Piniella kind of hedged on Marmol late last year . . . maybe they would consider a swap for Granderson.
Shanghai Badger - November 12, 2009
2 years ago we talked endlessly on brian roberts coming to the Cubs. Last year it was peavy. I think this year we will talk and talk and talk about Granderson and he will not be traded to the Cubs.
drodd - November 12, 2009
You're probably right.
The chances are never great that the Cubs will acquire any one player. That doesn’t mean they aren’t trying.
Shawn Domagal-Goldman - November 12, 2009
Well, at least we know what to expect.
daver - November 13, 2009
We should have talked about Milton Bradley a hell of a lot more.
santoswoodenlegs - November 13, 2009
Interesting, and worrying.
It makes me wonder how detailed pitching coaches graphs, stats, player bio’s must become, nice work.
Lou and Larry need to maybe bring it back to the basics, and throughout ST have Marmol focus on throwing strikes more than getting hitters out.
slocs55 - November 12, 2009
What's with the spike?
In the middle of the distribution of the MLB avg horizontal pitch locations, there is a spike in what would otherwise fit a Normal distribution very nicely. That makes me doubt the data, since such a spike is probably unlikely.
Shawn, any explanation? Perhaps batted balls are counted as those?
jbau - November 13, 2009
Obviously those are the games where Joe West is behind the plate...
ballhawk - November 13, 2009
This demonstrates Lou's hesitancy to let Mármol close last year.
Now the Cubs have no other choice. It’s not like you can find a decent closer easily out there. Mármol is the best option for now.
Excellent job, Shaun.
I’d like to see a split of his control last year separating his outings after he was appointed as closer. He appeared to pitch better then.
Fraggin Judge - November 13, 2009
I'm a little late to this thread...
…but I’ll chime in and say great analysis, too. It certainly jibes with my fuzzy memories from this past season in which I see many, many of Marmol’s pitches missing outside – badly. So badly that even the free-est of freeswingers wouldn’t bite.
I’d also add my support to the notion stated above that the Cubs shouldn’t consider Marmol untouchable in any trade considerations. I still find it doubtful they’ll deal him, however, as it seems like many (most?) teams are hesitant to deal away a closer once they’ve settled on one.
daver - November 13, 2009
Nice post.
Just wanted to let you know that even a numbskull like me understood it.
Although Marmol sometimes scares me, I still like him and hope he stays on the team.
katie casey - November 13, 2009
if he
stops hitting and walking so many people it will be. lets just hope he does not come down with latroy hawkins disease.
NOMAR - November 14, 2009
Awesome stuff shawn
I love me some Pitchf/x
vivaelpujols - November 15, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bleed Cubbie Blue to post a comment.