Q about baseball pitching from a cricket fan

The Game Room
41

Pitchers don’t have the ability to make a batter hit a ball to a particular spot. They do have some control over which side of the field the batter will hit to, and whether the batter hits a fly ball or a ground ball.

An inside pitch (one that is on the side of home plate closer to the batter) tends to cause the batter to pull the ball. For a right-handed batter, that means hitting it toward left field, and for a left-handed batter it means hitting it toward right field. An outside pitch (one that is on the side of home plate father from the batter) tends to cause the batter to hit to the opposite field, which for a right-handed batter means hitting it toward right field and for a left-handed batter means hitting it toward left field. Low pitches tend to induce ground balls, while high pitches tend to induce fly balls.

The motion of the pitch is also important. A sinking pitch (such as a split-finger fastball) will tend to induce a ground ball. There’s no such thing as a rising pitch, but a four-seam fastball thrown with enough backspin won’t drop as much as the batter expects, and will tend to induce a fly ball. A batter is more likely to hit an opposite field ground ball off a pitch that curves away from him, and more likely to pull a fly ball on a pitch that curves toward him.

Then there’s pitch speed. If the pitch is faster than the batter expects, he will tend to swing late. For a right-handed batter, this means he’ll be more likely to hit it to the right side (i.e. opposite field). If the pitch is slower than the batter expects, he’ll tend to swing early. In this case, a right-handed batter will tend to pull the ball. If the batter uses an uppercut swing (and almost everyone does these days), an early swing will tend to produce a ground ball, while a late swing will tend to produce a fly ball.

There are common pitching patterns that help get batters out. One is up-and-in versus low-and-away. For a batter to hit a high inside pitch, he must start his swing early. But if he starts his swing early, he’ll have a hard time hitting a pitch that’s low and away. This difference is more pronounced if the high-and-inside pitch is a fastball, and the low-and-away pitch is an off-speed pitch or a breaking ball. If the batter doesn’t do a good job of reading the pitches and adjusting, he’s likely to strike out, or hit a weak ground ball or a pop-up.

Another common pitching pattern is called “climbing the ladder.” Here the pitcher starts off with low pitches and throws succeeding pitches higher and higher in the strike zone. The goal is to get the batter to swing where the last pitch was, rather than the current pitch. Again, if the batter doesn’t do a good job of reading the pitches, he’ll swing under the pitches for strikes, or he’ll hit the bottom of the ball for a pop-up.

Yet another pitching pattern has to do with changing speeds. A pitcher will throw a series of inside fastballs, for which the batter has to swing early if he has any hope of making good contact. Once the batter has adjusted to this pitch speed, the pitcher will throw a change-up or other off-speed pitch. If the batter doesn’t adjust he will swing too early, which results in either a strike or in weak contact.

42

It’s theoretically possible for a pitch to rise, but it’d take a heck of a lot of spin on the ball, probably more than any human pitcher is capable of.

43

Yes. I was speaking in practical terms.

It is possible for a pitch to rise if the pitcher throws underhand. I’ve seen a few pitchers with motions so extreme that some of their pitches could have ended up finishing higher than they started. Chad Bradford was one. It’s rare, though.

44

Ah yes, Chad Bradford.

45

The pitch at 0:49, especially.

46

For the information of the OP, and other cricket fans reading the thread:

Chad Bradford is an example of a pitcher with a “submarine” pitching delivery. It’s a pretty uncommon style: at any given time, there aren’t more than a handful of submarine-style pitchers in MLB. (The Wikipedia article lists a bunch, but it looks like it includes sidearm pitchers as well.)

A submarine pitcher has an advantage of a delivery style that batters rarely see, and the pitch comes in to the plate at a different angle and rotation than from a traditional pitcher (most pitchers use something between a fully overhand to a three-quarters overhand delivery). You’ll also occasionally see sidearm pitchers, who have a similar (though not as extreme) advantage.

It’s not a particularly natural throwing motion, and as relatively few players (and coaches) know how to use it, it’s pretty uncommon for a young pitcher to be trained to pitch using it, despite the advantage it might conver. Similar to the knuckleball, a number of submarine pitchers adopted the motion because they weren’t successful pitching with a traditional motion.

47

Well this is sort of silly. I can pitch overhand and make a pitch rise like Chad Bradford, too, as long as I aim up with it like he certainly was on the pitch at 0:49 (though not necessarily intentionally). That’s certainly not the same as a pitch getting lift from its spin.

48

A pitch ending up higher than it started just means that you’re throwing upwards. That’s easy. But a “rising” pitch means that it’s actually accelerating upwards, which means you need a lot of aerodynamic lift.

49

Of course not. (And of course that pitch would sail over the catcher’s head if you tried it overhand.)

50

And, honestly, I don’t know how much of a difference it makes. Whether the rise is imparted by spin or by trajectory from an extreme submarine style, it’s a weird-ass pitch to the hitter with a trajectory opposite of the norm. Yes, a traditional “rising fastball” is one that does not rise, but rather doesn’t drop as much as would be expected, giving the illusion of a rise, but I would also call pitches thrown from that submarine style as risers because, well, they actually do rise.

51

Of course, if there were more submarine or sidearm pitchers, they’d all be less effective. Batters could adjust to it.

52

Well, of course, but that’s not the point. It’s a unique pitch, regardless of whether everyone can hit it or not, and I’d call it a riser.

53

One thing I’ve noticed about sidearm pitchers is that they tend to have big platoon differentials.

For those who aren’t baseball fans: pitchers tend to be more effective against same-handed batters, and less effective against opposite-handed batters. For example, a right-handed hitter will hit better against a left-handed pitcher. There’s a practice by some managers to divide up their players into platoons: one to play against right-handed pitchers, and one to play against left-handers. The practice is called “platooning,” and the advantage that a hitter has against an opposite-handed pitcher is called his “platoon differential.” The same term is applied to the advantage that a pitcher has in facing a same-handed batter.

Platooning is hardly done any more. Managers these days tend to change pitchers within a game frequently, so there’s less room on a 25-man roster for non-pitchers. Also, the advantage of platooning tends is reduced because opposing managers use same-handed relief pitchers so frequently. Despite this, the difference between facing a same-handed and an opposing-handed pitcher or batter is still called the “platoon differential.”

So, anyway, sidearm pitchers tend to have big platoon differentials. I think a same-handed batter tends to see the ball in the pitcher’s hand a little later. Also, the horizontal curve on a breaking pitch may be more exaggerated, and it’s easier to hit a pitch that’s curving toward you than one that’s curving away from you.

54

Not too surprising, given that a sidearm delivery increases the left-right asymmetry.

55

Someone should bring in softball pitching, to confuse the cricket crew even more…

56

I suspect that anyone brought up on cricket probably finds baseball and softball a much simpler game to understand seeing as it basically follows the rules of rounders that all kids play in the playground.

I promise that cricket deliveries are every bit as confusing as baseball. There is probably even more variety as well seeing as the target area is larger and you have further variability from the bounce (or not) and deteriorating conditions of ball and pitch. Plus the potential target area in cricket is much larger (and you can legally bowl for the head!) On the flip side though, the cricket batsmans has more variety in what they can do to the ball.

The great skill in baseball seems to me to be making the ball do more within a more limited “fair” area and I’m sure that in terms of trying to “set” a batsman up and induce false shots etc. both games are employing similar levels of skill and tactics. The best players at the top of those sports will be playing mental games as much as physical.

At the end of the day you have one person with a ball throwing it fast at another person with a bat and a target.

57

I’m curious as to how the target area would be larger in cricket. Doesn’t the bowler mainly aim for the wicket? And if so, isn’t that smaller than the strike zone in baseball, which is as wide as home plate (17 inches, or a little over 43 cm) and extends from the knees to the chest (perhaps two feet, or about 61 cm)?

While it may be legal in cricket to bowl for the head, what does this accomplish other than scaring the batter? Is it possible to get someone out this way?

One of the big differences between baseball and cricket is in the ease of scoring runs. Googling “cricket scores” shows over 100 runs scored per team in all matches, with over 300 runs scored in some matches. Baseball scores are usually in the single digits; more than 10 runs is a lot, and more than 20 is rare. In cricket, the idea for a batsman is to score as many runs as possible before being put out, and being dismissed without scoring is considered a failure. In baseball, most trips to the plate are unsuccessful. Scoring a single run in cricket isn’t as big a deal as getting someone out, while in baseball scoring a run is usually a bigger deal than getting someone out.

Some reasons for this difference include the fact that a cricket bat is flat while a baseball bat is round, baseball fielders wear gloves while cricketers don’t in most positions, in baseball a batter must run whenever a ball is batted into fair territory while in cricket a batsman can stay put on any batted ball, baseball has its fielders closer together in fair territory while in cricket their spread over a wider area (there is no concept of foul territory in cricket), in baseball an offensive player must make it around all four bases to score a run while in cricket a run is scored every time the batsmen change ends.

By the way, baseball is a very different game from rounders. Rounders has no balls and strikes (and accordingly, no bases on balls). There’s no tag-up rule in rounders (in baseball, all baserunners must retouch their bases after a fly ball is caught). In rounders, there’s no such thing as tagging a runner out, and there’s no distinction between a force play and a non-force play. There’s no such thing as a stolen base in rounders. Baseball is a much harder and subtler game than rounders.

58

The wicket is smaller (c.70cm x c.23cm, so a bit taller but much narrower) but in fact the bowler doesn’t mainly aim for the wicket. A bowler can induce a catch by a) bowling slightly wide of the wicket so that the batter only gets a faint nick on the ball and it flies to the fielding cordon behind him or b) fending off a high bouncing ball so that it loops up on the air for a catch from close fielders or c) attempting to play a scoring shot off a ball that’s above their eyeline, which then goes high and wild. A batter will do this because a shot that connects with a fast moving high bouncing ball has a great chance of reaching the boundary and scoring 4 or 6 runs in one shot. Scaring the batter is also a legitimate aim, in that they will subsequently play hesitantly, wrongly anticipating the next bouncer.

This, and everything that follows, is absolutely true and I think is the big difference for fans of one trying to get their heads round the other. As you say, scores of less than 100 indicate a calamitous failure by the batting side. The idea of a shut-out, no-hitter or perfect game just doesn’t translate into cricket at all - it could only ever happen in a ludicrous mismatch, internationals vs village amateurs kind of situation.

One of the ideals of cricket is that the match should be a “fair contest between bat and ball”. This isn’t just down to how the teams match up; a lot of it is down to the preparation of the pitch. This is the other big difference between baseball and cricket - the fact that the ball bounces on its way to the batter means that the surface it bounces on is a critical factor in how the game plays out. If the pitch is “flat” life is too easy for the batter - the bounce of the ball is predictable and scoring is easy. At the other extreme, a pitch which offers extreme variation in how two apparently similar balls bounce off it makes life much easier for the bowlers.

One implication of this is that the home team, whose groundsman will prepare the pitch, have an advantage in that they can skew the pitch to suit their particular strengths. On one level, this adds a further tactical dimension, but it can be and arguably has been overplayed recently leading to too much home field advantage. Is there any equivalent in baseball, beyond the usual advantages to playing at home, of the home environment/conditions being manipulated in some way? Are their grounds which are more or less friendly for batters, and why?

59

Yes. A team with a sinkerball pitcher starting that day, who will throw a lot of ground balls, can water the infield to deaden it and keep balls in play, and even let the grass grow a little higher. The ground along the foul lines can be slightly sloped to keep slow grounders in play or make them roll foul, depending on what type of batters they and the opponent have.

60

There’s also variation in the distance to the back fence, though that’s not something you change from one game to the next. A hit that goes over the back fence in fair territory is a home run, which scores for the batter and for anyone who happens to be on base at the time (it’s theoretically possible to get an “inside-the-park” homer, but that’s very rare at the pro level). Ideally, I suppose, if your roster is stable enough for a long enough period of time, you’d want a fence that’s just a little bit closer than what your players can consistently hit to. But there’s a lot of variation in hit distances.