Yet it's been a different story for the two pitchers lately. Lincecum has been struggling on the mound, while Cain is excelling. You can point out the traditional numbers. Lincecum has pitched 15.1 IP and is 0-2 and has allowed 14 ER in his last three starts against Arizona, Washington and Colorado. Cain has pitched 25 IP and is 2-1 with two complete games and only allowed one ER in his last three starts.
When you look at the numbers, it's hard to see which Giants pitcher won the last two Cy Young awards.
So, what is up? Why is Lincecum performing so poorly and why is Cain suddenly looking like a Cy Young candidate again? (Though it's kind of a losing battle when your competition is Ubaldo Jimenez and Roy Halladay.)
I can point to three possible reasons:
1.) Walks (Increase for Lincecum; drop for Cain).
2.) Pitch counts (Lincecum throwing too many pitches; Cain pacing himself well).
3.) Luck (Cain's been getting lucky; Lincecum hasn't).
In terms of the first point, Lincecum's walk totals have been ridiculous the past three games. He has given up five walks in EACH of his past four starts (a total of 20 BB). Before the Houston game on May 15? Lincecum had only allowed 10 walks in his seven previous starts COMBINED.
Cain on the other hand, has been the polar opposite. Cain has only allowed four walks total in his past three starts (which explains why he is 2-1, and should be 3-0 had his offense showed up against Oakland).
What has been the reason for Lincecum's tremendous number of free passes in comparison to Cain? Cain has been better throwing strikes the past few starts, while Lincecum simply can't find the strike zone.
In his past three starts, Cain has thrown 63, 68 and 60.5 percent of his pitches for strikes. As for Lincecum? In his last few appearances, he has only thrown 59, 58 and 60.3 percent of his pitches for strikes.
Look at the Pitch F/X statistics from Brooks Baseball for Lincecum and Cain in their last starts alone:
Lincecum against Colorado on May 31.
| | |||||||||
| Pitch Type | Avg Speed | Max Speed | Avg H-Break | Avg V-Break | Count | Strikes / % | Swinging Strikes / % | Linear Weights | Time to Plate |
| FF (FourSeam Fastball) | 90.94 | 93.8 | 0.30 | 8.92 | 48 | 28 / 58.33% | 0 / 0.00% | 0.9153 | 0.410 |
| CH (Changeup) | 83.70 | 85.7 | -2.65 | 2.98 | 32 | 25 / 78.13% | 8 / 25.00% | -0.2762 | 0.443 |
| CU (Curveball) | 78.19 | 81.1 | 2.25 | -6.62 | 27 | 12 / 44.44% | 3 / 11.11% | -0.0760 | 0.480 |
| FT (TwoSeam Fastball) | 92.65 | 97.7 | -6.95 | 8.32 | 13 | 10 / 76.92% | 1 / 7.69% | -0.4363 | 0.404 |
| Pitch classifications provided by the Gameday Algorithm and may be inaccurate. Pitch Type LWTS correspond to how many runs were likely to score on a particular pitch based on average run expectancy when each pitch was thrown and what happened as a result. Negative scores indicate more effective pitches. Time to Plate is the time, in seconds, that it takes an average pitch of this type to reach the plate. This is strongly correlated with velocity, but also factors in movement. | |||||||||
Cain against Colorado on June 2.
| | |||||||||
| Pitch Type | Avg Speed | Max Speed | Avg H-Break | Avg V-Break | Count | Strikes / % | Swinging Strikes / % | Linear Weights | Time to Plate |
| FF (FourSeam Fastball) | 90.96 | 93.1 | -4.96 | 10.40 | 67 | 40 / 59.70% | 5 / 7.46% | -0.2139 | 0.413 |
| CH (Changeup) | 84.67 | 90.6 | -7.53 | 3.76 | 27 | 17 / 62.96% | 5 / 18.52% | -1.5402 | 0.444 |
| SL (Slider) | 85.40 | 85.4 | 2.05 | 1.36 | 1 | 0 / 0.00% | 0 / 0.00% | 0.0421 | 0.435 |
| CU (Curveball) | 76.39 | 82.7 | 3.59 | -5.12 | 16 | 10 / 62.50% | 1 / 6.25% | -1.3495 | 0.492 |
| FT (TwoSeam Fastball) | 92.20 | 92.9 | -6.96 | 7.78 | 2 | 1 / 50.00% | 0 / 0.00% | -0.0183 | 0.403 |
| Pitch classifications provided by the Gameday Algorithm and may be inaccurate. Pitch Type LWTS correspond to how many runs were likely to score on a particular pitch based on average run expectancy when each pitch was thrown and what happened as a result. Negative scores indicate more effective pitches. Time to Plate is the time, in seconds, that it takes an average pitch of this type to reach the plate. This is strongly correlated with velocity, but also factors in movement. | |||||||||
Judging by the graphs, Cain was extremely efficient with his fastball, slider and curve balls, throwing the latter two pitches for strikes over 60 percent of the time. As for Lincecum, he was efficient with his two seam fastball (he threw it 76 percent of the time for strikes) as well as his changeup. However, you couldn't say the same out of his curveball (only a 44.4 percent strike percentage).
To make matters worse, Lincecum didn't make a lot of Rockies hitters whiff with his pitches, especially the fastball. Sure, his changeup was effective in terms of making batters whiff, but his changeup has always been that valuable this season (According to Fangraphs, it is valued at 3.97 runs above average per 100 fastballs). His fastballs though? He threw 38 total fastballs (four and two seamers combined) and only got Rockies hitters to whiff once.
How did Cain do with his fastballs? Out of the 41 fastballs he threw, he got Rockies hittes to whiff five times. That's not exactly mindblowing, but it certainly is better than Lincecum.
Hence, Lincecum's stuff just isn't blowing hitters away, and that may be reason why Lincecum is being more nitpicky, trying to paint the corners when he really should be just throwing, which I believe is what Cain is doing when you look at his Pitch F/X (Cain isn't K'ing guys, but he's throwing strikes, which is important). Unfortunately, this has only produced more balls for Lincecum, and more walks as a result.
It has also caused Lincecum to throw more pitches per inning.
Here is a look at Lincecum and Cain's pitch by innings in their last starts:
Lincecum
| | ||||||||
| Inning | Pitches in Inning | Strikes in Inning | Strike% in Inning | Cumulative Total Pitches | Pitch LWTS in Inning | |||
| 1 | 11 | 8 | 72.73 | 11 | -0.834 | |||
| 2 | 35 | 21 | 60.00 | 46 | 0.467 | |||
| 3 | 14 | 10 | 71.43 | 60 | -0.862 | |||
| 4 | 19 | 10 | 52.63 | 79 | 0.505 | |||
| 5 | 22 | 14 | 63.64 | 101 | 0.592 | |||
| 6 | 19 | 12 | 63.16 | 120 | 0.258 | |||
Cain
| | ||||||||
| Inning | Pitches in Inning | Strikes in Inning | Strike% in Inning | Cumulative Total Pitches | Pitch LWTS in Inning | |||
| 1 | 10 | 6 | 60.00 | 10 | -0.834 | |||
| 2 | 20 | 13 | 65.00 | 30 | -0.350 | |||
| 3 | 17 | 8 | 47.06 | 47 | -0.532 | |||
| 4 | 11 | 6 | 54.55 | 58 | 0.611 | |||
| 5 | 21 | 13 | 61.90 | 79 | -0.034 | |||
| 6 | 7 | 5 | 71.43 | 86 | -0.561 | |||
| 7 | 13 | 7 | 53.85 | 99 | -0.532 | |||
| 8 | 14 | 10 | 71.43 | 113 | -0.848 | |||
Because of Lincecum's inability to throw strikes, the pitch counts have been massive in certain innings. He threw 19 or more pitches in four of the six innings pitched on Memorial Day (including a Jonathan Sanchez-esque 35 pitches in the second). Cain has been much more efficient, for he only threw 19 or more pitches in two of the eight innings he pitched in last night's win.
Thus, the more efficient pitching style of Cain in the past few starts (to compare, Lincecum went 5.2 IP and threw 121 pitches; Cain went 8 IP and threw 113 pitches) has been more effective for Cain and the Giants in general (the Giants are 2-1 in his last three starts; the Giants are 0-3 in Lincecum's last three starts).
That being said, not all hope should be lost on Lincecum, and Cain shouldn't be raised too quickly as the Giants ace this season. Yes, Lincecum isn't blowing guys away with his fastball. Yes, Lincecum is throwing too many pitches. Yes, Lincecum is having trouble with his command and finding strikes.
However, Lincecum hasn't been getting lucky (in comparison to Cain, who has).
For starters, the numbers that really jump out with Lincecum are his groundball and flyball numbers. You think, considering he has allowed 14 ER, Lincecum would be allowing a lot of big flies, right?
Actually, that hasn't been the case. Lincecum has induced 23 groundballs and 15 flyballs in his past three starts. He has also allowed nine line drives in the last few starts as well.
What's more interesting though is the fact that over the past three starts, his flyballs and line drives allowed have gone down, and the groundballs have gone up. (For example: he induced 14 groundballs and allowed only four flyballs and one line drive in his last outing.)
Despite that improvement, Lincecum just hasn't gotten lucky. He has allowed 17 hits, which gives him a BABIP of .361 in his last three starts. Lincecum is not going to carry a BABIP that high for the rest of the season, especially considering his career BABIP (.302) hovers around the league average (.300 give or take a couple of points each year).
As for Cain, he has allowed 34 flyballs, 20 groundballs and 10 line drives in his previous three starts. How many hits has Cain given up? Only 10, which gives him a BABIP of .156 in those starts. Now, pitchers are going to have good stretches, but to have that low a BABIP and to only average six strikeouts a game during that three game span? Well...you have to credit that more to luck than anything else (but considering Cain's history, he deserves all the luck he can get).
So Cain is up, Lincecum is down. The important thing to remember? They both are fine. Sure, Lincecum's stuff isn't dominant (especially his fastball), but that was the case in the beginning of the season, when he was dealing, as well. The only difference is that unlike in April, Lincecum is overpitching and isn't throwing strikes. The strikes will come, and eventually, so will the efficient innings, and considering Lincecum's strikeout ability (he still has a 10.42 K/9 this year), Lincecum will look like his Cy Young form again.
As for Cain, he's looking solid and his efficiency is comforting, especially considering that has been an issue with some Giants starting pitchers this year (Lincecum, Sanchez especially; Zito not so much). However, Cain isn't a dramatically better pitcher than Lincecum, even during this three game stretch. Cain has just been better at throwing strikes and is getting lucky. Just as Lincecum is bound to turn it around and look closer to his career form, the same should be expected of Cain: he'll get less lucky, regress and return back to career form (though Cain's career form still is pretty good).
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment