I know, it souns a little silly, but AstrosAndy made a very good point that I'd like to expand on and investigate in last night's game thread.
The more I think about it the more I like the idea of giving the ball to Hawkins a little more often in 9th inning situations.
Valverde could very likely be way too expensive for us next year, and it’d be nice to know if Hawkins can step in as closer. I know some people have mentioned that Hawkins hasn’t fared too well as a closer before, and I don’t have the working knowledge of things like leverage stats to actually investigate this.
I know that just looking at traditional statistics, Valverde has been a better pitcher than Hawkins, but I’m wondering if the drop in quality would be justified by the cash savings…especially if we were able to use that cash to beef up other areas of the team.
I want to explore the leverage idea, but I want to look at something that I've really credited the Astros scouts with in the Hawkins acquisition before I make my brain hurt interpreting leverage indices:
Let's look at that claim, after the jump.
The wonderful folks at FanGraphs actually have everything I needed to make some objective judgements about Hawkins legitimacy since joining the Astros.
With their new pitch/fx numbers and graphs, we can check the scouts' claim before we jump into the trickier leverage discussion at a later date.
First off, let's look at the velocity on Hawkin's fastball that allegedly is helping regain his former status as a legitimate late innings guy.
There is definitely a gradual trend upwards in his fastball's velocity throughout the course of 2008, and perhaps that added velocity gave him confidence to reach back and throw it. Either way, a lose oberservational correlation exists between increased fastball velocity in 2008 and success. To put specific numbers to it, Hawkin's fastball's average velocity with the Yankees was 92.5 MPH, but with the 'Stros it was 94.4 MPH. That's a lot of speed to add.
But did he actually use it more?
This chart is a little more hectic, but after staring at it for a solid ten minutes, I finally came to the conclusion that most of his outings in the second half are all ridiculously high on fastball percentage relative to the first half. It's fuzzy, but I think it's there. The numbers on the split, however, are 63.8% with the Yanks, and 62.7% with the 'Stros (proof that subjective judgements are problematic). Take from that what you will because average isn't the best measure of central tendency, and the graph is tough as nails to make heads or tails of (two analogies, one subject).
The only other change I can observe between the first and second half is that his horizontal velocity starts to drift back in towards the plate, but not too much. It seems like that would enable him to keep righties guessing on the inside pitch, and make that outside corner all the more tantalizing, but not quite juicy enough, for lefties.
(as a reference point, 0 is the center of the plate, negative is in on righties, and positive is out on righties)
Not much, if anything changes vertically; so I'll spare you the laborious to read graph.
Something seems to have changed on Hawkins fastball and seems to have used it to his advantage in 2008. So far, so good for Hawkins in 2009—which is good. Hawkin's success could be a huge cost savings for us. Not only could he likely be signed to a fairly reasonable contract compared to a potential free agent closer, but even more important: someone we'd acquire through a**GASP**trade. Further, it would buy a little more time before Bud Norris to become the closer in waiting—allowing him get some less stressful appearances at the big league level. Perhaps Hawkins and Norris could be the new Dotel and Lidge?
0 recs | 14 comments
Actually
comparing Hawkins and Norris with what Dotel and Lidge were able to do is a pretty decent analogy.
One thing I’m thinking though: if the club does go forward with this, do they try and deal Valverde at the deadline if they’re not in contention (quite likely) or just take the picks?
jonthefon - April 23, 2009
I think this team has a very liberal definition of “in contention”, so we’d have to have an extremely terrible record to deal him mid-season.
AstroAndy - April 23, 2009
Really cool analysis DQ
Those graphs are nuts, so I’m glad someone else tried to decipher them.
AstroAndy - April 23, 2009
Hawkins has big platoon splits....
That is why I jokingly suggested last year that he should be a ROOGY. Cooper was aware of his splits, judging from the way Cooper used Hawkins last year. Sometimes Cooper chose to walk tough LHB when Hawkins was pitching late in games.
Hawkins had almost a 400 point platoon split for OPS-against last year (.839 vs. LHB and .450 vs. RHB). His platoon split on a career basis is about a 100 ponit OPS difference.
On a career basis, Hawkins has the following OPS+ : 118 vs. LHB; 88 vs. RHB.
That’s why a more appropriate use for Hawkins in a closer role would be to share the role with a tough LHP. I don’t have any candidates for that LHP part of the role right now, though.
clack - April 23, 2009
Yeah, I totally forgot about those splits
I could imagine us in a closer-by-committee situation next year with Hawkins, Wes Wright, Bud Norris, and if he doesn’t stick in the rotation, Felipe Paulino (but I’m hoping he ends up being a good, solid starter).
The only problem is who would complement Wright in the lefty role, especially given Hawkins’s big splits. I’m not a big Byrdak believer and I’m not aware of anyone down in Round Rock who could handle the job. That being said, a free agent lefty is likely going to be a lot cheaper than a closer who has twice been the NL saves leader.
Anyhow, I realize it may seem premature to be discussing the offseason and the 2010 bullpen, but seeing Hawkins come in and nail down the ninth inning got me thinking. I certainly hope Valverde kicks butt this year and earns himself a big payday for next year and beyond. I just don’t want it coming out of the Astros’ pockets. Carlos Lee’s salary is no longer ballooning, thankfully, but I can’t see us improving as a team without clearing up some room in the budget.
AstroAndy - April 23, 2009
I know this means ridiculously small sample sizes
But some food for thought. With the Astros last year, Hawkins only allowd a .408 OPS. So he wasn’t getting lit up too hard by the lefties, and unless they’re bunched in a line, it seems like he’d go back to normal.
The the other thing that comes to mind is that this kind of freak platoon split is the case for his career platoon split.
Stephen Higdon - April 23, 2009
that career platoon split is still pretty bad.
the difference in OPS+ is pretty substantial (like the difference between Geoff Blum and Aramis Ramirez, career 82 OPS+ vs. 114 OPS+). when you’re talking about a guy with that many seasons and teams, the OPS+ is probably the best comparison. Hawkins’ OPS+ for lefties means that the typical lefty against him hits better than Carlos Lee (117).
clack - April 23, 2009
Do not trust Jose
Over the past 15 or so months I’ve watched Valverde’s split become less and less effective. Resulting in higher frequency of fastballs. At one point last September, I sat and watched Jose throw 22 straight fastballs. His split is what make hims good and if the batter realized he wouldn’t get an offspeed near the zone he could load up on the fastball.
His last outing, was the first time in a LONG time I’ve seen him try to be effective with his split. Mechanically, it’s turned into a duck, but hopefully he is working on that.
Long story short, I don’t trust Jose and welcome other options. (The main reason I wanted us to trade him in the off-season and sign Wood)
baggs - April 23, 2009
valverde's fastball is very difficult to hit.
it’s an example where movement is more important than velocity. there are closers who throw harder than valverde, but his fastball is still tougher to hit. I saw valverde’s quote in the paper today, where he said that he isn’t worried about throwing his FB for strikes. He said most of his FBs are out of the strike zone, because his intent is to get the FB close to, but not in, the zone, so that he can get batters to swing at it. that is an interesting observation for all of us who watch him, but I worried about batters seeing that quote…since it implies that they should quit swinging and make him throw strikes.
clack - April 23, 2009
Maybe it's trix
entropic soul - April 23, 2009
Stupid question
But couldn’t the difference in Hawkins’s velocity between NY and Houston be due to different guns?
Austin Astroholic - April 23, 2009
what was the difference?
I recall reading general comments that Hawkins’ velocity was down with the Yankees. But I don’t recall reading what they claimed the velocity was in NY.
clack - April 23, 2009
1.9 MPH
Stephen Higdon - April 24, 2009
didn't see the speeds referenced in the article.
back to the question…if fangaphs is using pitch f/x data, my understanding is that it isn’t based on a radar gun. instead it uses video to time the speed. and that is supposed to be more accurate than the radar gun. if that’s all correct, then the difference isn’t likely to be due to measurement error.
wasn’t Hawkins battlling some nagging injuries early on with NY? I vaguely recall something to that effect. that could account for the FB differences.
clack - April 24, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of The Crawfish Boxes to post a comment.