On Pitching Coaches

The other day we were discussing whether we, as outsiders, can tell whether a pitching coach is doing a good job.  I decided to ask John D'Acquisto about it.  His answer, paraphrased, is below the fold.

First, he said it is pretty hard to tell how good a pitching coach is from the outside.  He said there are a few things we can look for, though.

1.  Injuries.  Obviously, not every injury to a pitcher is fault of the pitching coach, but if they have a lot of them, that could be a cause for concern about the coach.

2.  Balance in the staff.  Are a couple of pitchers carrying the whole load, or is everyone getting enough work to stay sharp?

3.  Defined roles.  Does he know who the starters are, who the seventh inning guy is, who the eighth inning guy is, who the closer is?

4.  Does he recognize when a pitcher needs to come out of the game and when he can go another couple of innings?

5.  Walks.  Again, that's not the sole responsibility of the pitching coach, but if you have a staff full of guys who can't throw strikes, it may be a cause of concern about the coach.

6.  Conditioning.  Are the pitchers doing enough work between appearances?

Some of those things, of course, have to do with the manager, but when the manager and pitching coach have worked together for years, like Gardy and Rick Anderson have, they should be on the same page.  Anyway, it's some food for thought the next time we hear about what a great pitching coach Rick Anderson is.  Again, I'm not saying he's terrible.  I do think, though, that his reputation may be a little greater than he deserves.

19 thoughts on “On Pitching Coaches”

  1. 4. Does he recognize when a pitcher needs to come out of the game and when he can go another couple of innings?

    I think this one is big and really hard for outsiders to tell, at least without Pitch F/X data handy. If I'm the coach, I get to know my catcher really well and make sure he's honest with me about the pitcher's stuff as well as the pitcher's confidence.

  2. Thanks for this. I'm curious about his thoughts on first-inning runs, since that seems to be a huge issue for the Twins (and indeed, has historically been an issue for them, if I'm not mistaken), and whether that's an issue of approach to the batters, being properly warmed up, etc.? Any chance for a follow up question?

    1. Isn't the 1st inning the highest scoring inning in baseball historically because most teams put their best hitters up first?

      1. I think that's true, but I think the Twins historically have more runs against than league average for the 1st. (I haven't looked it up for a while).

        1. If by "historically" you mean in the Gardenhire era, wouldn't you want to control for whether the Twins were an above-average offensive team? I'd guess that the explanation for the Twins scoring above-average first-inning runs would be because good teams (on average), not good teams because above-average first-inning runs.

          1. Yes, I mean the Gardenhire era.

            Runs against is what I'm concerned about, not the differential.

  3. I'd look for the "little things" too. How well do the starters hold runners on base? Do they consistently get ahead in the count early or are they nibblers? Do they work fast?

    The Twins have always emphasized pitching "to contact", i.e., avoiding walks. I appreciate that in a staff. Free passes are distracting to a defense, at least according to conventional wisdom and my limited recollection from playing ball as a kid (both as a pitcher and as a fielder). Fielders want to field, not stand around.

    When I think of great pitching coaches, I always think of Ray Miller with the Orioles. He may not have been a great manager with the Twins (although he didn't have a ton of pitching talent to work with), but the Orioles Way was pretty damned successful.

  4. I remember an article a few years' back that looked at managers and their bullpen management. It showed, based on the numbers the writer used, that Gardenhire was the best in baseball at bullpen management. That would seem to reflect very well on Anderson as well. How much would depend on how much you believe Gardy relies on Anderson. I also think the Twins have pretty much led the world in fewest walks allowed since he took over as pitching coach.

      1. For some of those years it was pretty easy for Gardenhire to manage the bullpen. Now you've got Perk & Burton and more or less a bunch of flotsam. I don't know what he could do better short of never putting some of these guys in the game, but who out there can you trust to get an out besides Perk & Burton?

        1. For some of those years he had starters that could go at least 7 innings. Then he just had to worry about getting his bullpen innings now and then, instead of worrying about getting them rest.

          1. I think Nathan was underutilized at times, and I think the Twins lost a game here or there because he would save Nathan for a lead that never materialized. But I don't think it seriously hurt the team and it would be hard to measure that anyway.

            I also think he overworked Guerrier a tad, but I might have too.

  5. Don Cooper of the White Sox also has a pretty strong reputation. I think the Sox traded for Liriano largely because they thought Cooper could do for Liriano what Anderson could not. Didn't turn out so well for them.

    1. Also Leo Mazzone, until he stopped getting Braves prospects and started getting O's free-agent signings and poorly-thought-out trades.

    2. I agree with you on Cooper. He could fit right in on the Twins coaching staff because it seems like he stresses the same things the Twins do: work fast, dont walk people.

Comments are closed.