Honest Question about Kershaw

[CoolBeans]

Being a Dodger fan in WV, it is hard to see the games. I listen to some games on the MLB app, and watch the "Condensed Games" often there as well. Long story short, my question.

- What is wrong with Clayton Kershaw? This is not a panic question, it is just a question. He does not seem like himself as much. Is it mechanical, is he fighting arm problems, a nagging injury? From what I have seen of him (which is honestly limited), his pitching motion does not seem as smooth. Am I wrong?

 

[lasportzphan]

It's baseball more than anything. Kevin Kennedy (radio road commentator with Monday) has noted his slider flattening out on occasion. However, this sums it up fairly well post his last game:

It may not be what Kershaw is doing as much as what opponents are doing. He’s throwing his fastball-slider-curveball repertoire in similar numbers and similar patterns. There have been vague references to a slider that hasn’t been quite as sharp, but his stuff generally looks sound judging from his 56 strikeouts, most in the majors.

So, what we’re really left with is a combination of bad luck -- the batting average on balls put in play against him this season is .342 -- and, perhaps, a league that spent a lot of time and money figuring out how to beat him.

Clayton Kershaw's struggles continue - Los Angeles - Dodgers Report - ESPN

Sabermatricians would look at his BABIP and suggest what this article infers: Kershaw had some good fortune last year and some bad fortune to start this year. But as Ellis notes, guys are being aggressive early against him.... If that continues, Kershaw will benefit over the long season.

 

[Villain]

Being a Dodger fan in WV, it is hard to see the games. I listen to some games on the MLB app, and watch the "Condensed Games" often there as well. Long story short, my question.

- What is wrong with Clayton Kershaw? This is not a panic question, it is just a question. He does not seem like himself as much. Is it mechanical, is he fighting arm problems, a nagging injury? From what I have seen of him (which is honestly limited), his pitching motion does not seem as smooth. Am I wrong?

Kershaw is 100% fine. There is nothing to worry about.

His batted ball velocity is 5th lowest in MLB, so anyone saying that he'.s getting "hit hard" is 100% wrong. Only 4 other pitchers are getting hit "softer."

Right now in the NL, Kershaw is:

First in SIERA
First in xFIP
First in K-BB%
First in K%
2nd in K/9

These are what most people are referring to when they talk about a player's "peripherals." These numbers, combined with the batted-ball velocity, indicate that weakly hit balls are squirting through (aka - bad luck). For the most part, these numbers are right in line with his career averages (if not a little better).

The peripheral numbers that are not in line with career averages are primarily his HR/9, and baBIP. These numbers being abnormally high, while the others being right in line, suggest that... yeah... He's just been unlucky. He's not "broken" or suddenly a scrub or anything like that. His mechanics are fine. There have been zero reports about injuries. His velocity isn't down. There is nothing to point to that will indicate that there's a physical problem of any sort.

So, don't worry about Clayton.

If you're stuck on ERA, I'd like to remind you that in 2014 his ERA was 3.57 through his first 35.1 innings pitched. 38.2 innings pitched into 2015 and his ERA was 3.72.

 

[lasportzphan]

Being a Dodger fan in WV, it is hard to see the games. I listen to some games on the MLB app, and watch the "Condensed Games" often there as well. Long story short, my question.

- What is wrong with Clayton Kershaw? This is not a panic question, it is just a question. He does not seem like himself as much. Is it mechanical, is he fighting arm problems, a nagging injury? From what I have seen of him (which is honestly limited), his pitching motion does not seem as smooth. Am I wrong?

From the horse's mouth:


"That stuff is one thing, which is fine," he said of the more sabermetrically inclined. "But, for me, my pitch execution hasn't been good. That's what I look at. I know, for me, I haven't pitched as well as I can."

"Sometimes it feels like it's your year – the line drives are getting caught. Sometimes it feels like it's not your year and the ground balls are getting through."

 

[Villain]

Kershaw has been notoriously hard on himself throughout his career. He would never say, "well the guys behind me let the balls get through." He takes credit for everything.

Really love the guy.

 

[CoolBeans]

Thanks guys.

I love the Dodgers and my dad and I often talk about them. I appreciate the comments from someone who gets to see more of the pitch by pitch sequence, etc. Like I said, I generally see the "Condensed Games" and listen to the AudioCast at night here on the east coast as I drift off to sleep. Nothing gives you sweet dreams like Vin and Rick talk about the Dodgers. This will give my dad and I some talking fodder, which is even better. My dad raised me right....A Dodger Fan!

 

[Villain]

 

[Villain]

His batted ball velocity is 5th lowest in MLB, so anyone saying that he'.s getting "hit hard" is 100% wrong. Only 4 other pitchers are getting hit "softer."

Source: Baseball Savant

 

[lasportzphan]

Source: Baseball Savant

Maybe the "hit hard" camp is referring to his home runs he has given up this year versus last?

"He's allowed five already this season, compared to nine last year and 11 in '13, and his 20.8% rate of home runs per fly ball is more than triple his 6.0% from those two seasons."

I listen to the games, so I cannot superficially say if he has been "hit harder." All in all, baseball is a game of adjustments. Kershaw will adjust as he has all of the tools required to do so effectively. But ultimately, the averages will play out over the long haul and this conversation will seem silly in August.

 

[Villain]

That list includes all of the home runs. Also, I addressed his HR/9 in in my post.

The same list, by BABIP Kershaw is near the bottom, even though he's put some of the fewest balls into play - 21 less than Grienke.

You can't just cherry pick a single stat, like ERA or Home Runs. With the huge availability of stats available, it's more important to take a look at several different numbers and do what you can to put them into perspective, which is exactly what I did earlier.

 

[lasportzphan]

That list includes all of the home runs. Also, I addressed his HR/9 in in my post.

The same list, by BABIP Kershaw is near the bottom, even though he's put some of the fewest balls into play - 21 less than Grienke.

You can't just cherry pick a single stat, like ERA or Home Runs. With the huge availability of stats available, it's more important to take a look at several different numbers and do what you can to put them into perspective, which is exactly what I did earlier.

I was trying to give insight to your comment of "so anyone saying that he'.s getting "hit hard" is 100% wrong." I understand that you addressed the home runs per 9 and I was giving insight to an aspect that writers might be clinging onto.

Meanwhile, nobody on this thread alluded to it in their post or suggested that Kershaw was being hit hard.

You then reposted your own quote (baseball savant) to further drive home the point about being "hit hard." So you clearly have an agenda here even though nobody mentioned it, believes it or disagrees with you.

I was surprised by your "hit hard" comments because I had not read anything from anyone suggesting he was being hit hard NOR DO I BELIEVE HE IS BEING HARD MYSELF. So for the sake of dialogue I recalled this SI article I read this morning which I quoted above as it related to home runs.

Hit and Run: What's behind Clayton Kershaw's struggles? - MLB - SI.com

This was the closest I had come to someone suggesting "hit hard" outside of you. Writers tend to glom onto one aspect to create their thesis. Easier for the reader to digest, I suppose.

I agree, there are many statistical levers that determine effectiveness. But instead, I get stuck with a lecture on stats and how to properly read stats. Jump all over me for simple baseball dialogue, WTF? Even though you think I'm a half-wit per previous dialogue, I take the high road and engage politely and you're still a prick.

While we are on that note: Go fuck yourself. You are a condescending, didactic prick that has no interest in dialogue. You post as if you are some enlightening authority when most people are on post boards to engage in dialogue. You read into others posts to satiate your agenda of being self serving, creepy statistical uber-being to trump any dialogue that does not conform to your conclusion and/or agenda. If you've got it all figured, if you see what we cannot see - why not find a more enlightening place to post? I'm the only one who posts here and I'm clearly not on the same page with your analytic musings. So what's the point?

 

[OutlawImmortal]

Thanks guys.

I love the Dodgers and my dad and I often talk about them. I appreciate the comments from someone who gets to see more of the pitch by pitch sequence, etc. Like I said, I generally see the "Condensed Games" and listen to the AudioCast at night here on the east coast as I drift off to sleep. Nothing gives you sweet dreams like Vin and Rick talk about the Dodgers. This will give my dad and I some talking fodder, which is even better. My dad raised me right....A Dodger Fan!

Have you considered watching the game on streaming websites?

 

[Villain]

I was trying to give insight to your comment of "so anyone saying that he'.s getting "hit hard" is 100% wrong." I understand that you addressed the home runs per 9 and I was giving insight to an aspect that writers might be clinging onto.

Meanwhile, nobody on this thread alluded to it in their post or suggested that Kershaw was being hit hard.

You then reposted your own quote (baseball savant) to further drive home the point about being "hit hard." So you clearly have an agenda here even though nobody mentioned it, believes it or disagrees with you.

I was surprised by your "hit hard" comments because I had not read anything from anyone suggesting he was being hit hard NOR DO I BELIEVE HE IS BEING HARD MYSELF. So for the sake of dialogue I recalled this SI article I read this morning which I quoted above as it related to home runs.

Hit and Run: What's behind Clayton Kershaw's struggles? - MLB - SI.com

This was the closest I had come to someone suggesting "hit hard" outside of you. Writers tend to glom onto one aspect to create their thesis. Easier for the reader to digest, I suppose.

I agree, there are many statistical levers that determine effectiveness. But instead, I get stuck with a lecture on stats and how to properly read stats. Jump all over me for simple baseball dialogue, WTF? Even though you think I'm a half-wit per previous dialogue, I take the high road and engage politely and you're still a prick.

While we are on that note: Go fuck yourself. You are a condescending, didactic prick that has no interest in dialogue. You post as if you are some enlightening authority when most people are on post boards to engage in dialogue. You read into others posts to satiate your agenda of being self serving, creepy statistical uber-being to trump any dialogue that does not conform to your conclusion and/or agenda. If you've got it all figured, if you see what we cannot see - why not find a more enlightening place to post? I'm the only one who posts here and I'm clearly not on the same page with your analytic musings. So what's the point?

Whoa. This is a lot of text to take in. I wasn't even arguing with you in my first post. I was answering the question from the OP. Okay. I'm going to have to parse your comment into pieces to try and sift through it all.

I was trying to give insight to your comment of "so anyone saying that he'.s getting "hit hard" is 100% wrong." I understand that you addressed the home runs per 9 and I was giving insight to an aspect that writers might be clinging onto.

Meanwhile, nobody on this thread alluded to it in their post or suggested that Kershaw was being hit hard.

Thanks for helping with the insight, I guess? I was referring to the national narrative that people believe Kershaw is getting hit hard. This is not a thing I'm making up.

You then reposted your own quote (baseball savant) to further drive home the point about being "hit hard." So you clearly have an agenda here even though nobody mentioned it, believes it or disagrees with you.

I meant to add it into the first post, but I was too late to go back and edit it. So I quoted myself to add the source.

I was surprised by your "hit hard" comments because I had not read anything from anyone suggesting he was being hit hard NOR DO I BELIEVE HE IS BEING HARD MYSELF. So for the sake of dialogue I recalled this SI article I read this morning which I quoted above as it related to home runs.

Hit and Run: What's behind Clayton Kershaw's struggles? - MLB - SI.com

This was the closest I had come to someone suggesting "hit hard" outside of you. Writers tend to glom onto one aspect to create their thesis. Easier for the reader to digest, I suppose.

Yeah... Like I said earlier, I wasn't trying to argue with you. Why are you taking this so personally?

Kershaw is surrendering more hard hit balls - TSN
Kershaw does have the highest hard-hit ball average of his career - CBS

Go to twitter and you'll find more. If you don't believe the same myth, great! That means we agree!

I agree, there are many statistical levers that determine effectiveness. But instead, I get stuck with a lecture on stats and how to properly read stats. Jump all over me for simple baseball dialogue, WTF? Even though you think I'm a half-wit per previous dialogue, I take the high road and engage politely and you're still a prick.

While we are on that note: Go fuck yourself. You are a condescending, didactic prick that has no interest in dialogue. You post as if you are some enlightening authority when most people are on post boards to engage in dialogue. You read into others posts to satiate your agenda of being self serving, creepy statistical uber-being to trump any dialogue that does not conform to your conclusion and/or agenda. If you've got it all figured, if you see what we cannot see - why not find a more enlightening place to post? I'm the only one who posts here and I'm clearly not on the same page with your analytic musings. So what's the point?

I'm the bad guy, but all I'm doing is talking baseball? In the meantime, you've now called me a prick, told me to go fuck myself, and made all other kinds of leaps that you seem to think I'm coming at you personally. Why else would you have called me names in multiple threads?

I literally wasn't trying to disagree with you in the thread. I was just answering the question in the OP and here you are quoting me and turning this into some kinda personal battle or dick-measuring contest.

I'm sorry if I think you're wrong all the time. I'm sorry if that comes off as condescending to you. But I'm not sorry that you have your feelings hurt and I think you're childish and immature to be calling me out personally in different threads when all I'm doing is disagreeing with you.

I don't know, maybe I'm not good at inserting a friendly tone into my comments? Who cares? Why are your panties in a bunch? You seem to read what I'm writing as if I'm typing insults at you. I'm just debating sports. This is a discussion board for sports, so that's what I'm doing. Get over it.

Congratulations on de-railing an otherwise peaceful thread. We are very obviously watching sports through different lenses. I can't help it if my vantage point leads me to conclusions that are different than yours. I also won't stop, because I love the Dodgers, I love watching baseball, I love talking about baseball, and I couldn't care less if you're going to get your feelings hurt every time I think you're wrong.

 

[lasportzphan]

Whoa. This is a lot of text to take in. I wasn't even arguing with you in my first post. I was answering the question from the OP. Okay. I'm going to have to parse your comment into pieces to try and sift through it all.



Thanks for helping with the insight, I guess? I was referring to the national narrative that people believe Kershaw is getting hit hard. This is not a thing I'm making up.



I meant to add it into the first post, but I was too late to go back and edit it. So I quoted myself to add the source.



Yeah... Like I said earlier, I wasn't trying to argue with you. Why are you taking this so personally?

Kershaw is surrendering more hard hit balls - TSN
Kershaw does have the highest hard-hit ball average of his career - CBS

Go to twitter and you'll find more. If you don't believe the same myth, great! That means we agree!



I'm the bad guy, but all I'm doing is talking baseball? In the meantime, you've now called me a prick, told me to go fuck myself, and made all other kinds of leaps that you seem to think I'm coming at you personally. Why else would you have called me names in multiple threads?

I literally wasn't trying to disagree with you in the thread. I was just answering the question in the OP and here you are quoting me and turning this into some kinda personal battle or dick-measuring contest.

I'm sorry if I think you're wrong all the time. I'm sorry if that comes off as condescending to you. But I'm not sorry that you have your feelings hurt and I think you're childish and immature to be calling me out personally in different threads when all I'm doing is disagreeing with you.

I don't know, maybe I'm not good at inserting a friendly tone into my comments? Who cares? Why are your panties in a bunch? You seem to read what I'm writing as if I'm typing insults at you. I'm just debating sports. This is a discussion board for sports, so that's what I'm doing. Get over it.

Congratulations on de-railing an otherwise peaceful thread. We are very obviously watching sports through different lenses. I can't help it if my vantage point leads me to conclusions that are different than yours. I also won't stop, because I love the Dodgers, I love watching baseball, I love talking about baseball, and I couldn't care less if you're going to get your feelings hurt every time I think you're wrong.

Hahahahhahahahahhhhaaaaa. This is funny. Thanks for the laugh.

 

[chappee11]

Being a Dodger fan in WV, it is hard to see the games. I listen to some games on the MLB app, and watch the "Condensed Games" often there as well. Long story short, my question.

- What is wrong with Clayton Kershaw? This is not a panic question, it is just a question. He does not seem like himself as much. Is it mechanical, is he fighting arm problems, a nagging injury? From what I have seen of him (which is honestly limited), his pitching motion does not seem as smooth. Am I wrong?

You know what's crazy? You are in WV and you can see more of the games than people who live in Los Angeles can. I've been addicted to Vin Scully for years, but this stupid cable battle has made it impossible to see the Dodgers for the last 2 seasons now(unless you have Time Warner-which nobody does). It's been really frustrating and I'm missing Vin's last season as a result.

 

[chappee11]

Oh, as for Kershaw? He'll be fine. He's going to have a stretch of 10 starts where he allows something like 3 earned runs the whole time. Just like Jon Lester started out awful and has been great since. Kershaw is too good to regress this far, this fast.

 

[LASports96]

Absolutely nothing.

 

[Villain]

Unlucky Kershaw will be just fine | FOX Sports

TL;DR - Basically what I said, plus he's been missing his spots and getting punished for it.

Hitters tend to jump on belt-high, first-pitch fastballs in the middle of the plate and that shows in Kershaw’s stats this year. Even though hitters are swinging on his first pitches at the same rate as last year (around 22 percent), they’re going for hits more often.

 

[Villain]

Dodgers Digest / Clayton Kershaw and Being Hit Hard

 

[CoolBeans]

No scoring hurt him this last start against the Giants. Wow, the offense going cold.