I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

[tvman]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

They people who go out for cumminity days don't worry about that.

Well apparently someone doesn't or it would have been fixed by now.

[Knight165]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

They people who go out for cumminity days don't worry about that.

Now we don't.:wink:

M.K.
Knight165

[seanjeezy]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

Now we don't.:wink:

M.K.
Knight165

Why would you guys? If you did I would have nothing to do

[Russell_SCEA]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

Ramone@SCEA has indicated that they use the Baseball Info Solutions data at least in the past, but I don't know if BIS collect pitch f/x type of data... And even though the data are available publicly, the terms and conditions of usage may actually prevent SCEA from using the data for profit... but I don't really know why things have been that way.

I would imagine if the dev team actually used pitch f/x info, it wouldn't take them 1 - 2 months to rate all players. That kind of thing can be totally be automated, so I suspect there are other reasons.

We have switched companies this year BIS did an wonderful job providing us with the most accurate information they acquired. Also this isn't nearly as easy as some people make it out to be. A vast majority of all the companies out there loop most fastballs into one category..................fast balls not 2SFB etc..... Also how do you know if it's slurve or slider? You don't unless you ask the pitcher it's not an exact science nor will it ever be.

There is also the issue of the computer or human taking down the information could be wrong. Even pitch/fx isn't 100% accurate the only way you know for sure what a guy throws is you walk up to him and ask. I can't tell you how many times the whole world thought so and so threw a slider and it's actually a curve ball.

With that said hopefully pitcher repertoire will be better in MLB 13.

[seanjeezy]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

We have switched companies this year BIS did an wonderful job providing us with the most accurate information they acquired. Also this isn't nearly as easy as some people make it out to be. A vast majority of all the companies out there loop most fastballs into one category..................fast balls not 2SFB etc..... Also how do you know if it's slurve or slider? You don't unless you ask the pitcher it's not an exact science nor will it ever be.

There is also the issue of the computer or human taking down the information could be wrong. Even pitch/fx isn't 100% accurate the only way you know for sure what a guy throws is you walk up to him and ask. I can't tell you how many times the whole world thought so and so threw a slider and it's actually a curve ball.

With that said hopefully pitcher repertoire will be better in MLB 13.

The pitch classification problem is solved by looking deeper than what the f/x database shows on sites like Fangraphs, the more advanced stuff like spin rate, spin deflection, cluster charts, etc. are real difference makers when determining pitch type. Brooks Baseball does an amazing job of sifting through all the data and coming up with manual classifications, and until they removed all the meaty stuff from their player cards, it was pretty easy to distinguish, for example, a slider from a slurve (RPM, velocity, and movement are the key differences). Hopefully you guys signed on with Sportvision... Pitch f/x has its quirks but at least those quirks are easily fixable.

[Russell_SCEA]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

The pitch classification problem is solved by looking deeper than what the f/x database shows on sites like Fangraphs, the more advanced stuff like spin rate, spin deflection, cluster charts, etc. are real difference makers when determining pitch type. Brooks Baseball does an amazing job of sifting through all the data and coming up with manual classifications, and until they removed all the meaty stuff from their player cards, it was pretty easy to distinguish, for example, a slider from a slurve (RPM, velocity, and movement are the key differences). Hopefully you guys signed on with Sportvision... Pitch f/x has its quirks but at least those qui95%rks are easily fixable.

If it was that easy we wouldn't have any issues regarding pitch types right? I mean we are an officially licensed game for the MLB we should have access to more information than the average individual right?

Also it's not that easy to distinguish a slider from a slurve in all cases same with a 4SFB and Cutter or a 2SFB. If this was the case every company out there would have accurate information on guys, but the truth of the matter is they don't it's not an exact science. There are only a handful of companies who can say they are 95% sure this pitcher throws this and that.

[seanjeezy]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

If it was that easy we wouldn't have any issues regarding pitch types right? I mean we are an officially licensed game for the MLB we should have access to more information than the average individual right?

True, but even the average joe () has access to the entire pitch f/x database nowadays and is able to dissect it...

Also it's not that easy to distinguish a slider from a slurve in all cases same with a 4SFB and Cutter or a 2SFB. If this was the case every company out there would have accurate information on guys, but the truth of the matter is they don't it's not an exact science. There are only a handful of companies who can say they are 95% sure this pitcher throws this and that.

Wanna bet?

What separates a slider from a slurve:

Sliders will have lower spin rates, due to the nature of how the ball is thrown. Yanking the side of the ball does not promote a clean spin like a fastball or a curveball, so a slider is by far the easiest breaking ball to distinguish. Some pitchers have slow, sweeping sliders, but these aren't classified as slurves due to the amount of lateral amount of movement. Slurves have spin rates in-between sliders and curveballs (usually closer to curveballs), accompanied with curveball-like speed and movement. How to distinguish a curve and a slurve? The key here is the amount of vertical movement, 40+ inches (with gravity included) signifies topspin, aka a curveball. Anything less is more of a slurve, regardless of what the pitcher says. Of course there are freaks like Kimbrel who throw 86 mph curveballs, but luckily he's one of the very few...

How to distinguish fastball types:

The amount of rise (or lack of vertical movement) and the direction+length of lateral movement, simple as that


Maybe I have too much time on my hands, but this stuff has pretty much become second nature to me. I wholeheartedly acknowledge that you guys have access to more information and resources than I would ever hope to have, but it still takes a human eye to actually look over the data and correct it's faults, which is exactly what Brooks Baseball does, and in regards to this game, I do... and I don't mind it one bit because for some odd reason I find this to be fun and engaging, and when I'm at work it makes me look busy

[Unit303]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

Yeah, I would have to agree I guess. With Brooks and Pitch F/X there is no excuse anymore. Many of us were doing this manually in 10, I was one of those nutters using pitch F/X back then, and it does seem a bit odd the game is off as much as it is.

I mean, guys, nobody uses your normal rosters for a reason because they simply are not accurate enough. Not a problem though. That is what people are here for.

They have been getting better though people got to give them that.

The slider slurve thing comes down to a lot of what the pitcher wants to say.

As for fastballs those are very HARD TO DISTINGUISH and that is not arguable.

[nomo17k]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

True, but even the average joe () has access to the entire pitch f/x database nowadays and is able to dissect it...

Wanna bet?

What separates a slider from a slurve:

Sliders will have lower spin rates, due to the nature of how the ball is thrown. Yanking the side of the ball does not promote a clean spin like a fastball or a curveball, so a slider is by far the easiest breaking ball to distinguish. Some pitchers have slow, sweeping sliders, but these aren't classified as slurves due to the amount of lateral amount of movement. Slurves have spin rates in-between sliders and curveballs (usually closer to curveballs), accompanied with curveball-like speed and movement. How to distinguish a curve and a slurve? The key here is the amount of vertical movement, 40+ inches (with gravity included) signifies topspin, aka a curveball. Anything less is more of a slurve, regardless of what the pitcher says. Of course there are freaks like Kimbrel who throw 86 mph curveballs, but luckily he's one of the very few...

How to distinguish fastball types:

The amount of rise (or lack of vertical movement) and the direction+length of lateral movement, simple as that


Maybe I have too much time on my hands, but this stuff has pretty much become second nature to me. I wholeheartedly acknowledge that you guys have access to more information and resources than I would ever hope to have, but it still takes a human eye to actually look over the data and correct it's faults, which is exactly what Brooks Baseball does, and in regards to this game, I do... and I don't mind it one bit because for some odd reason I find this to be fun and engaging, and when I'm at work it makes me look busy

Did you actually use Vita to do edits while at work? I found it was painful to do edits on Vita since the interface is sluggish (on PS3 it's snappier)....


Anyways, while the recipe seems to work well and I'm sure (or hope) SCEA is doing something similar to determine pitch ratings, we also have to recognize that pitch recognition is not necessarily exact science... since we have to ask "what's in a name??"

For example, a sinker with little break and a decent 2SFB are pretty much indistinguishable to most eyes... that sort of thing. *If* the Show is truly purely physics-based game, then those pitch distinctions should be done by all the parameters you mentioned (speed, spin/spin direction, etc., etc.), but it's not and for convenience of calling people want to label them as if they are really very distinct things (they aren't).

In the game, on the other hand, each pitch has kinda hard-coded break that is distinctly different from others. How do you reflect what is really the continuum of pitch breaks in real life to the pitch type in the game? Is everything so clear cut?

So I could see for some pitches it'd be difficult to label clearly, especially if done automatically without human intervention.


Also, pitch speed difference is partly caused by the Show's tendency for a pitch to add 1 or 2 MPH when it goes high in the zone and to lose 1 or 2 MPH when it goes low. (I think IRL it's actually opposite... a fastball is 1 - 2 MPH faster when thrown low.) So overall we can easily see +4 mph added to the differential between high fastball and low changeup. Even if pitch speed ratings are meant to cause average speed difference of only 5 mph, pitchers in the Show can add +4 mph to it simply by varying the location. (And another factor is variable "effort"...)

[Br_Mac16]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

Actually, The Show has this right. Generally fastballs thrown up in the zone usually carry a little more velocity.

Craig Kimbrel is one of the only pitchers (Aroldis Chapman) I've seen who can throw a fastball low in the strike zone as hard or harder than up in the zone.

I'm not just saying this because Kimbrel is a Brave, he's a freak no matter what uniform he wears...

[seanjeezy]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

Still waiting for the day when Kimbrel's elbow explodes and his arm goes flying towards the plate lol

Bad jokes aside, it is true that a ball thrown low in the zone is faster than a high ball, but that difference isn't reflected in what we see on the radar gun. When a pitcher throws the ball, the gun picks up the speed of the ball as soon as it leaves the hand, but as we all know (hopefully), due to the magic of physics the ball loses some steam as it reaches home plate, for fastballs its usually around 6-9 mph. Low fastballs will have a higher final speed, due to the nature of gravity. What we see on the gun is a product of pitcher approach, when pitchers air it out they tend to miss up in the zone, as is the nature of trying to throw harder.

[seanjeezy]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

Did you actually use Vita to do edits while at work? I found it was painful to do edits on Vita since the interface is sluggish (on PS3 it's snappier)....

I was referring to compiling the f/x data from brooks and converting it into the Show pitch types and ratings, no way I could get away with playing games at work but messing around with excel is a different story lol

Anyways, while the recipe seems to work well and I'm sure (or hope) SCEA is doing something similar to determine pitch ratings, we also have to recognize that pitch recognition is not necessarily exact science... since we have to ask "what's in a name??"

For example, a sinker with little break and a decent 2SFB are pretty much indistinguishable to most eyes... that sort of thing. *If* the Show is truly purely physics-based game, then those pitch distinctions should be done by all the parameters you mentioned (speed, spin/spin direction, etc., etc.), but it's not and for convenience of calling people want to label them as if they are really very distinct things (they aren't).

I'll stop you right here first. The first step is to classify on the most basic level - fastballs, sinkers, cutters, changeups, sliders, curveballs, screwballs, knuckleballs (did I miss any?). From there, I dissect the data and convert it into the pitch types in the Show (RFB, SCV, CIR, etc.) based on certain perameters (velo, spin, movement). Using sinkers as an example, based on how it is described (or was, until they removed the pitch charts), I would give a pitcher a sinker if
his had at least twice as much vertical movement as horizontal movement. If you look at my spreadsheet, every pitcher with a sinker as their primary or secondary pitch is a well known sinkerballer or a pitcher with strong groundball tendencies...

In the game, on the other hand, each pitch has kinda hard-coded break that is distinctly different from others. How do you reflect what is really the continuum of pitch breaks in real life to the pitch type in the game? Is everything so clear cut?

Answered above

So I could see for some pitches it'd be difficult to label clearly, especially if done automatically without human intervention.

That's exactly my point, human intervention is very necessary, which is why I originally said that outsourcing the work is a smart thing to do since it takes a lot of time...


Also, pitch speed difference is partly caused by the Show's tendency for a pitch to add 1 or 2 MPH when it goes high in the zone and to lose 1 or 2 MPH when it goes low. (I think IRL it's actually opposite... a fastball is 1 - 2 MPH faster when thrown low.) So overall we can easily see +4 mph added to the differential between high fastball and low changeup. Even if pitch speed ratings are meant to cause average speed difference of only 5 mph, pitchers in the Show can add +4 mph to it simply by varying the location. (And another factor is variable "effort"...)

Yes, variability is good, not arguing against that. The point is more in line with the fact that the averages (what is shown in the edit screen) are just flat out wrong. Don't know how anyone can defend Michael Pineda being given an 80 mph changeup when his averaged 88 mph in 2011...

Answers in bold

I think the main thing to take away from this is that the f/x database gives all of the tools necessary to determine pitch types, but it is necessary to possess the knowledge capable of deciphering what is given (which is also easily obtained, there are tons of tutorials out there on how to read f/x data). Seriously, pitch classification is not nearly as hard as you guys are making it out to be, it just takes a willingness to learn the process.

[doubledeuceR6]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

I'm hoping the speed differential between fastball and change up is fixed. I haven't done the research but I don't know many guys who throw 93-95 mph fastball and 77-79 mph change up. And it seems the worse a pitcher is, the bigger the difference in speed(which makes them harder to hit). U would think a worse pitcher would have those pitch speed closer together

+1 This is one of my biggest issues with the game.

[Jordan93]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

This might be the problem for SCEA maybe they're not aloud to use sites like Fangraphs, Baseball Reference, baseball prospectus, Cot's. Fangrpahs has a break down of every ptich thrown in every game during the course of the season including ball and strikes, MPH, types of ptiches, location. SCEA pay soem guy on this site who does pitch edits for free, some sort of compensation and get him to work on the Pitchers. Because if you have people on your team that don't know what the difference between fast balls Four Seamer, Two Seamer, Cutter, Cut Fastball. Breaking pitches Slurve, Curve, 12-6 Curve, Curveball: then that might be the problem. You guys have a Knuckle Curve and Knuckle ball move way to dramatically. Now that Dickey is a Cy young, can we please have him throw the Knuckleball he actually throws hard 84 MPH has hit 86MPH, not 67 MPH. His Knuckle ball doesn't have as much movement as Wakefields.

[nomo17k]

Re: I hope better scouting research has been done for pitchers this year

Answers in bold

I think the main thing to take away from this is that the f/x database gives all of the tools necessary to determine pitch types, but it is necessary to possess the knowledge capable of deciphering what is given (which is also easily obtained, there are tons of tutorials out there on how to read f/x data). Seriously, pitch classification is not nearly as hard as you guys are making it out to be, it just takes a willingness to learn the process.

Did you ever post your method somewhere in the forum? If so, can you post a link again?

I understand your point, but I'm curious how some pitchers would be rated for something like sinker and 2SFB. Are they clearly distinguishable in pitch f/x, when the pitcher throws both pitches? (was going to start looking at pitch f/x last summer but didn't manage to do it myself.....)