Article: On Phil Hughes And Regression

[Parker Hageman]

Phil Hughes’ first season with the Minnesota Twins was pretty damn good.

 

So much so that the Twins tore up his old contract and presented him with a longer, more fruitful agreement; compensating Hughes closer to what his Fangraphs.com value suggests his performance was worth in 2014. Nobody forced the Twins into making that decision but they felt like they had something special.During the team’s conference call with the media, when asked about the additional years, general manager Terry Ryan said that there are always risks associated with pitchers. Signing a pitcher is like buying a used car -- eventually something is going to break and you just hope it is nothing major. Ryan, however, felt like the team was making a relatively safe investment in Hughes, citing his age (28) and his mechanics as reasons why the front office felt confident in extending the pitcher.

 

When it was Hughes’ turn to speak, he began by offering up his thanks to his former pitching coach. “I would feel guilty if I didn’t thank Rick Anderson for all he did for me last year,” Hughes said.

 

Hughes’ success in 2014 has been attributed to many different elements -- from his revamped repertoire to a more spacious stadium to remaining focused on the task at hand. Some of it may have been from Anderson, some may have been his own doing but all played a significant factor in his outcome last year: The remodeled arsenal, which featured the addition of a can’t-touch-me cutter, led to more strikeouts, the roomier configurations reduced the number of fly balls escaping the playing surface, and his regained confidence allowed him to attack the strike zone better than he ever did in New York.

 

Even with the positive strides he made last season, it is hard for baseball analysts not to conjure up the r-word: regression. Career low in walks? Bound to increase next season. Lowest rate of fly balls leaving the yard? That will bounce back hard. When all the regressing is said and done, the Twins will rue the day they extended Phil Hughes.

 

Hughes obviously disagreed.

 

While there are elements of his game that might experience some regression, Hughes said on the conference call that he made enough tangible changes to his approach that 2014 was not an outlier but rather the new direction of his career. And the repertoire, reduced home runs and added confidence all stemmed from his improved mechanics.

 

What is interesting about Ryan’s trust in Hughes’ mechanics is that it was his mechanics that were to blame for the the up-and-down seasons with the Yankees. As Andy McCullough wrote in The Star-Ledger in September 2013 “scouts observed the same flaws in his delivery this season. One talent evaluator referred to the motion as “herky-jerky.” Hughes lacks the sort of fluid arm swing that is easily repeatable.” One baseball executive called Hughes’ mechanics “high maintenance”. Meanwhile, in just one season Hughes is being well compensated for his mechanics.

 

Upon arriving in Fort Myers, Hughes and Anderson consulted on his mechanics. There would be no major overhaul, just streamlining the process that focused on smoothing everything out. "I've just been trying to stay on my back side taller, because I have a tendency when I get over the rubber on my leg kick to just collapse and kind of drop and drive," Hughes told MLB.com’s Rhett Bollinger this past spring. "So I'm just trying to stay back. It puts me in a better position to throw the baseball in."

 

The results of the tweaks is a more fluid, repeatable delivery.

 

Reviewing clips of Hughes this year versus last, you can see he worked diligently to implement this into his delivery. Though the center field cameras are not the ideal shots (a better view would be from the side), this one example of Hughes’ motion in 2014 represents the overall changes he made in terms of being able to stay back and stay taller at his release point. In 2013 by dropping in his delivery, his mechanics had him often releasing the ball too far out front of his body.

 

Watch his upper body/head in the two clips:

 

http://i.imgur.com/CEt7cDC.gif

 

http://i.imgur.com/RlbxTQU.gif

 

The 2014 version is much more fluid, much more in control.

 

Going forward, Hughes certainly may experience regression in 2015. When you set the standard for all-time highest strikeout-to-walk ratio the previous season, it will be difficult to top the following year. Yes, the home runs-to-fly ball percentage might grow and he may allow a few more runs to cross the plate. That being said, Hughes is simply not the same pitcher he was in New York. If he is able to maintain the consistent mechanics (while remaining healthy), there is no reason to anticipate any significant regression next season for Phil Hughes.

 

Click here to view the article

[nytwinsfan]

Seems like we should be clear on what measures we're discussing regression. From a BB%, K%, HR% and FIP perspective, I think most of us agree he is likely to regress somewhat (although hopefully not too much!).  From an ERA perspective though, it is completely reasonable that he might improve, given better outfield defense throughout the year (although even with getting rid of YesPig, with Hunter now, that is not a given). I only say this because different people evaluate how good a pitcher is on different metrics. So people who give more credence to the former stats (myself included) may say Hughes is very likely to regress, while people who focus on ERA, innings pitched, and even W-L might be more likely to say he's not a big regression candidate. That being said, I'm still a big fan of the extension, even though I think he is likely to regress. If he even comes close to what he did last year in 2017, 2018, and/or 2019, it will have been worth it.

[gunnarthor]

Yeah, I think Hughes might have similar value this year although it might look slightly different.  Fangraphs has had a number of articles on Hughes as of late.  I think most everything can be summed up as "Hughes is a good pitcher" and the rest is semantics.  He should throw another 210 innings for us this year and be pretty good.

[Parker Hageman]

All good points. To me, the idea of regression as it applies to Phil Hughes is because people look at his past track record and believe he will regress to that. Those who have paid closer attention to how Hughes has approached the 2014 season -- the repertoire change, the mechanics, etc -- should see that the peripheral stats that he put up -- the lowered walk rate, the improved K rate, the lowered fly ball rate, etc -- are a direct result of that. ERA and record will fluctuate but with the new approach the peripheral stats should remain consistent.

[Mike Sixel]

Toward the mean.....but not to his past. that's what I think. he'll still be a legit number 2 starter, and that's darn good (since there are only about 15 or so number 1, imo).

[jimmer]

All good points. To me, the idea of regression as it applies to Phil Hughes is because people look at his past track record and believe he will regress to that. Those who have paid closer attention to how Hughes has approached the 2014 season -- the repertoire change, the mechanics, etc -- should see that the peripheral stats that he put up -- the lowered walk rate, the improved K rate, the lowered fly ball rate, etc -- are a direct result of that. ERA and record will fluctuate but with the new approach the peripheral stats should remain consistent.

The question is, can he sustain these new mechanics and approach?  I heard the same kind of comments about Suzuki's approach to batting last year and he went right back to having the same kind of results he had been having. In fact, we get these same kind of comments any time a player suddenly significantly improves upon his career norm. Most of the time, players fall back into old habits.  

 

So, I don't think believing he'll regress is unwarranted or due to not paying close enough attention. We'll see if 2014 was an outlier or the start of a new trend for Hughes.  I'm guessing he regresses some if only for the fact his season was so awesome, it'd be hard for too many pitchers to repeat that.  That includes pitchers who have a longer track record of very good than him.

Edited January 14, 2015 by jimmer

[Parker Hageman]

I heard the same kind of comments about Suzuki's approach to batting last year and he went right back to having the same kind of results he had been having. In fact, we get these same kind of comments any time a player suddenly significantly improves upon his career norm. Most of the time, players fall back into old habits.

 

 

The outcome of Suzuki's mechanical change (http://twinsdaily.com/articles.html/_/minnesota-twins-news/minnesota-twins/kurt-suzuki-makes-changes-at-the-plate-r2553) and Hughes' mechanical change are not comparable. Batters and pitchers.

 

But to address Suzuki, he maintain that mechanics change all year. He didn't fall back into old habits. There really wasn't an explanation for the sudden drop in production in the second-half. If you look at his batted ball figures, he kept a line drive rate above 20% while having similar K%/BB% rates. I would have to dig in more to how pitchers approached him differently in the second-half but, at first blush, I wonder if he just wore down as the season progressed -- it was the 2nd most innings caught by a 30+ year old and Suzuki had caught 300 fewer innings. 

 

To your point about Hughes, yes, it is possible that he suddenly loses the feel for new mechanics. He has a new pitching coach who might tinker again. Teams might adjust to his cutter or attack his first pitch offering more. He might wind up with an injury. These things *could* happen. I don't think they will but they could.

[TheLeviathan]

I worry he'll regress because the part of the defense he still needs most is awful.  I know it hurt him last year, but I worry he'll have some particularly bad luck from it with this group.

[HitInAPinch]

I've posted several times in the past that Hughes sharply regressed after and successful season in which he reached career highs in innings pitched.  Seeing the video evidence on his mechanics, the new season may be different.  The 1st video shows a delivery that's out of control.  The 2nd more controlled, but I'm concerned that it seems from this view that it's all arm.

 

I'm still hopeful for another successful year, but they really need to pay more attention to the number of innings pitched.

[REPETE]

"Lowest rate of fly balls leaving the yard? That will bounce back hard."     I don't believe this is necessarily true.  The move from Yankee stadium was undoubtedly good, esp moving to TF, but the decline of "roided up" hitters he faces will keep that number in check.   HRs in general are going down.  

[jimmer]

Hughes FIPs this decade:

4.25

4.58 (half season)

4.46

4.50

 

Then last year 2.65.  That's a huge difference. More than a run and a half lower than his BEST season this decade and almost 2 runs better than his past couple years. I think it's unlikely that we can expect to see such a huge difference in performance from the rest of his performance this decade.   We all want that to continue but that FIP ranked him like 6th in the majors.  He's not the 6th best pitcher in the majors. He can continue to be very good but what would be sad is if he went to somewhere in the middle of what he had done prior to this year and what he did last year and people got disappointed because they were convinced he'd maintain that level of awesome based on one season.

Edited January 14, 2015 by jimmer

[Parker Hageman]

 

"Lowest rate of fly balls leaving the yard? That will bounce back hard."     I don't believe this is necessarily true.  The move from Yankee stadium was undoubtedly good, esp moving to TF, but the decline of "roided up" hitters he faces will keep that number in check.   HRs in general are going down.

 

Yeah, that was in jest. The point of the entire post is that those things *won't* happen.

 

Then last year 2.65.  That's a huge difference. I think it's unlikely that we can expect to see such a huge difference in performance from the rest of his performance this decade.   We all want that to continue but that FIP ranked him like 6th in the majors.  He's not the 6th best pitcher in the majors.

 

 

It's not a huge difference when you consider what FIP is comprised of. First, he greatly reduced the number of walks (lowest in MLB). Second, he greatly reduced the number of home runs (HR/9 ranked 25th). Last, he had an improved strikeout rate (31st). All three of those things are the basis of FIP. 

 

FIP rankings don't tell the entire story of a pitcher but if he's doing those three things well, there is a good chance he'll have strong numbers in the future.

[jimmer]

Yeah, that was in jest. The point of the entire post is that those things *won't* happen.

 

 

It's not a huge difference when you consider what FIP is comprised of. First, he greatly reduced the number of walks (lowest in MLB). Second, he greatly reduced the number of home runs (HR/9 ranked 25th). Last, he had an improved strikeout rate (31st). All three of those things are the basis of FIP. 

 

FIP rankings don't tell the entire story of a pitcher but if he's doing those three things well, there is a good chance he'll have strong numbers in the future.

I know all about FIP, and you seem convinced past the point of any chance of convincing you other-wise, so I hope you are right.

[nicksaviking]

Good stuff Parker.  One other thing that sticks out to me in the videos: He looks thinner in the later.  Perhaps white is just more slimming than grey, (I know jack about fashion but I thought black was the "thinning" color) but he looks like he's in better shape in 2014.  Not only is it logical to think that improved conditioning could help his game, but a concerted effort to get in shape usually indicates a concerted effort to better oneself in all stations of life, possibly including a more intense focus on his occupation.

Edited January 14, 2015 by nicksaviking

[Parker Hageman]

I know all about FIP, and you seem convinced past the point of any chance of convincing you other-wise, so I hope you are right.

 

 

If you are trying to throw shade on Hughes' potential, by all means go ahead but if the only thing you are citing is his past track record then it is not a convincing argument for all the reasons listed in my article. 

[jimmer]

If you are trying to throw shade on Hughes' potential, by all means go ahead but if the only thing you are citing is his past track record then it is not a convincing argument for all the reasons listed in my article. 

Again, I hope you are right.

[Parker Hageman]

One other thing that sticks out to me in the videos: He looks thinner in the later.

 

 

That's definitely something I noticed as well reviewing video. He's lost weight/in better shape. A lot of his offseason time with the Yankees he was frequently rehabbing. Maybe he had more time this past winter to condition. Either way, it will be a good conversation for someone to have with him.

[JB_Iowa]

The Twins will have to hire Rick Anderson to be Hughes' "mental coach."

[jimmer]

The Twins will have to hire Rick Anderson to be Hughes' "mental coach."

If that's what it takes to have Hughes have another season where his FIP is better than Kershaw's (the only current SP with 1000 IP or more and a career FIP under 3.00), King Felix's, and Pedro's career FIPs, then DO IT! :-)

Edited January 14, 2015 by jimmer

[gunnarthor]

Again, I hope you are right.

I think the point he's trying to make is that some stats are predictive and some stats tell us what happened.  FIP isn't a very good predictive stat although you can argue that the ingredients in FIP are.  That's why the changes in those rates might better explain Hughes outside of Yankee stadium.  Most of the recent articles on fangraphs go in that general direction - "he's a good pitcher but real changes have made him better, etc, etc".  I don't think anyone rationally expects him to be a 6 WAR pitcher again but he shouldn't fall back to the 2 WAR Yankee pitcher either.  

[jimmer]

I think the point he's trying to make is that some stats are predictive and some stats tell us what happened.  FIP isn't a very good predictive stat although you can argue that the ingredients in FIP are.  That's why the changes in those rates might better explain Hughes outside of Yankee stadium.  Most of the recent articles on fangraphs go in that general direction - "he's a good pitcher but real changes have made him better, etc, etc".  I don't think anyone rationally expects him to be a 6 WAR pitcher again but he shouldn't fall back to the 2 WAR Yankee pitcher either.  

Exactly, FIP isn't predictive.  We shouldn't be using that to predict next year. xFIP is better for that and it had last year at 3.18

 

Somewhere in between last year and what he's done before is where I was saying we should expect him to be. And that I hope people won't view that as a negative.  Look at it this way, he had the 6th best FIP and that resulted in like the 42nd or so best ERA due to our defense. Imagine what happens to his ERA if he even goes to a 3.50 FIP (which is still quite good), with the defense behind him, he's looking at a mid 4.00 ERA and some people will freak.

Edited January 14, 2015 by jimmer

[jimmer]

Steamer predicts Hughes to 3.89 FIP and a 2.5 WAR.

[youngpadawan]

I'm shocked! No one seems to notice the biggest difference between Hughes from NY to MN... it is so obvious that it must go overlooked. The Yankees failed to notice that what Hughes needed the most was in fact a beard. That thing reeks of confidence.

[jimmer]

I'm shocked! No one seems to notice the biggest difference between Hughes from NY to MN... it is so obvious that it must go overlooked. The Yankees failed to notice that what Hughes needed the most was in fact a beard. That thing reeks of confidence.

Well, as a young padawan, you should know that having a beard was the reason Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon were so confident :-)

[gunnarthor]

Steamer predicts Hughes to 3.89 FIP and a 2.5 WAR.

I don't think that sways many people - Steamer usually predicts low.  In fact, they predicted 6 pitchers to be above 4 WAR and only 3 to pitch 200 innings (unless they haven't issued all players/teams yet.  I confess to not caring).  Hughes' projection is the 29th best WAR in MLB.

[Parker Hageman]

Where the hell did all the FIP talk come from?

[jimmer]

I don't think that sways many people - Steamer usually predicts low.  In fact, they predicted 6 pitchers to be above 4 WAR and only 3 to pitch 200 innings (unless they haven't issued all players/teams yet.  I confess to not caring).  Hughes' projection is the 29th best WAR in MLB.

ZIPS is the most accurate projection model for baseball out there.  I look forward to seeing theirs.  And, I need to note, I said Steamer 'predicts' in my previous post.  These models don't actually predict.  They project. It's a subtle difference.  I've seen projections for next year where no team is projected to win 90 or more games in the AL.  I really don't think that the people who do the projections are really predicting every AL team to fall short of 90 wins. So, yeah, grains of salt for sure.

[Mike Sixel]

Except the MOST LIKELY outcome for each team is that they not win 90 (except maybe WAS).....but if you asked the same system to project/predict if any team would win 90 or more, the answer would probably be yes. Those are two different questions, though.

[ashbury]

Watch his upper body/head in the two clips:

That little crow-hop at the end of his delivery, in the "Before" picture, can't signify anything good either, can it?

[Linus]

His GCTWTG percentage last year was 75%.  The last projection I saw for this was the same so I am not looking for a huge regression.

 

This is much more accurate than FIP, Zips or Steamer.