Fangraphs piece on Michael Lorenzen

[Inside Pitch]

3 hours ago, totdprods said:

This still doesn't seem very good. And now there's more than one bad start in there.

Will you be doing all season long or just when he has bad games?   

SIX WEEKS AGO, you chimed in that he looked hittable.  I asked you to define what you meant because at the time NONE of the data really argued he was hittable.  FOUR WEEKS later, AFTER a bad game that skewed the numbers, you finally popped off with an update (I genuinely LOLed), and while you still wouldn't define what you saw as "hittable" I DID actually argue that he needs his velocity to succeed or he'd be toast.  Dude bounced back from that bad start to maybe post his best game as an Angel (against the same team that trounced him), and more silence from you.

If you think you're scoring points, fine but this is just chickenshit.

I'll say it again..  If his velocity isn't there, he's in trouble.  He's never had the spin (movement). his fastball has always been pretty flat but at 98 it didn't matter.

[totdprods]

3 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

Will you be doing all season long or just when he has bad games?   

SIX WEEKS AGO, you chimed in that he looked hittable.  I asked you to define what you meant because at the time NONE of the data really argued he was hittable.  FOUR WEEKS later, AFTER a bad game that skewed the numbers, you finally popped off with an update (I genuinely LOLed), and while you still wouldn't define what you saw as "hittable" I DID actually argue that he needs his velocity to succeed or he'd be toast.  Dude bounced back from that bad start to maybe post his best game as an Angel (against the same team that trounced him), and more silence from you.

If you think you're scoring points, fine but this is just chickenshit.

I'll say it again..  If his velocity isn't there, he's in trouble.  He's never had the spin (movement). his fastball has always been pretty flat but at 98 it didn't matter.

He was pretty good last night. I was surprised to see this data looking so poor still.

I do not care about scoring points - just have thought since ST that he did not look like he was missing enough bats, nor had enough velocity, to avoid being hittable, and so far he hasn’t really had any consecutive starts that made me feel differently, and I didn’t buy that his solid start to the year was accurate (hence one start skewing things so dramatically - he wasn’t as good as reflected then, he wasn’t as bad as reflected after) or sustainable. 

I’ve been tempering my expectations since spring with Syndergaard. 

Edited June 7, 2022 by totdprods

[Inside Pitch]

Just now, totdprods said:

He was pretty good last night. I was surprised to see this data looking so poor still.

Data takes forever to rebound after two quick exits..  So, not really surprising.

5 minutes ago, totdprods said:

I do not care about scoring points - just have thought since ST that he did not look like he was missing enough bats, nor had enough velocity, to avoid being hittable, and so far he hasn’t really had any consecutive starts that made me feel differently, and I didn’t buy that his solid start to the year was accurate (hence one start skewing things so dramatically - he wasn’t as good as reflected then, he wasn’t as bad as reflected after) or sustainable. 

See, you could have said that 6 weeks ago.  I'd have agreed.   He's always been a pure octane guy, almost zero movement/spin.  

What I do find interesting is how he changed his entire attack plan in the follow up game with Texas.  If that's an indication of someone who is learning to pitch with diminished stuff, he might yet find success albeit not at the front of a rotation.  But he simply can't get away with flat fastballs when batters don't have to worry about 98 down the pipe -- he's in trouble.

Given how things have gone, I just want him to do well enough to warrant attention at the deadline.

[Taylor]

More like FanCraps mirite?