The Baseball Economist: The Real Game Exposed (10 page)

Table 9 lists the impacts of Leo Mazzone on the ERAs for all pitchers’ seasons in the sample.

Overall, Leo Mazzone’s presence lowered a pitcher’s ERA by about 0.64 ERA points. To put the effect in perspective, for the average 2005 National League pitcher (4.22 ERA), Leo’s impact on earned runs is about 15 percent of the NL average. That is about the same as Coors Field in the opposite direction.

When separating pitchers into their defined roles, relievers appeared to benefit more from their time under Mazzone than starters did, though not by much. For starters, having Leo Mazzone as a pitching coach was worth about 0.41 earned runs per nine innings, or 1 earned run every twenty-two innings. For relievers, Mazzone was good for about a 0.71 reduction in earned runs per nine innings, or 1 run every twelve and two-thirds innings. It’s pretty clear that he helps both classes of pitchers quite a bit.

One of the keys to Mazzone’s success is a more frequent off-day throwing program for starters. At least so he believes:

The general philosophy in baseball then was that pitchers should do one session of throwing off the mound in between starts. I wanted to do two. The reason for this is to close the gap between the four- and five-man rotation. The baseball world has now gone to a five-man rotation for health reasons. I’ve always felt you stayed sharper in four. So, I wanted to combine that, so they would stay sharp as though they were in a four yet healthy in a five.
²⁹

But if this were Mazzone’s secret to success, we would expect his impact to be more pronounced for starters. At first glance, this does not appear to be the case, as relievers seem to benefit more from his coaching. On the other hand, just because the throwing program is designed for starters doesn’t mean that relievers don’t benefit from the philosophy. First, a good starting rotation means that relief pitchers can be used more sparingly. This ensures that relievers are not overworked, and allows the manager to save pitchers for spots in which they excel. Second, though it is not widely discussed, Mazzone also applies his frequent-throwing philosophy to his relievers. He states, “If a reliever goes more than two days without getting into a game, I try to really insist that they come over to a side session and throw a little bit.”
³⁰

How does Mr. Mazzone work his magic? There are three main areas that pitchers have direct control over in preventing runs: strikeouts, walks, and home runs. Let’s compare how the rates at which pitchers produce these outcomes with and without Mazzone.

Table 10 shows Leo’s effectiveness in two areas: strikeouts and home runs. He does not seem to impact pitchers’ walk rates versus what they were when he didn’t coach them. Measured as a percent of the NL average of the statistics from 1991 to 2005, which are listed in the last row, the largest impact is in home runs. First, let’s look at all of the players in the sample—this includes pitchers who did not meet the games started criterion to be classified as a starter or reliever. For a league-average home run pitcher, having Mazzone as
your pitching coach lowers your home run rate by about 23 percent from the average. In terms of strikeouts, a league-average strikeout pitcher under Mazzone increases his strikeout rate by about 10 percent.

The results mirror what Mazzone expresses as his advice to pitchers:

Don’t give in to the strike zone. This is about making pitches and trying to execute a good pitch. So forget about walks. And don’t throw one down the middle just because you walked a guy. I’d rather you be off the plate a little than give up a three-run bomb.
³¹

His effectiveness through areas of performance differs slightly between starters and relievers. Starters improve on their strikeouts much more than relievers, while relievers experience a much stronger impact on home runs allowed than starters. However, both classifications of pitcher gain in each area. One reason for this change is that starters and relievers become what they are largely because of the way they pitch. Relievers tend to throw hard and fast—trying to get strikeouts— while starters must pace themselves. If a pitching coach is going to have an impact, he is going to have to improve in areas where pitchers have been less successful in the past.

Relievers tend to have high strikeout rates; therefore, there is less room for improvement here. A good pitching coach might say, “I know you can strike guys out with the heat, but let’s be careful as to how you place the ball, so that when you make a mistake—and you will—it won’t go over the fence.” A starter who is pacing himself, and being careful not to give up the long ball, probably has more room to improve in getting strikeouts than a reliever. A good pitching coach might be able to help starters by pointing out strategies and methods for conserving energy so that pitchers can rear back for an extra strikeout when they get in tight spots. So it’s not surprising to see different pitcher types improving differently.

What about the ability of players to retain what they have learned from Leo? After all, many teams have hired away some of Mazzone’s best performers. The above analysis tells us only how pitchers perform with and without Mazzone. Is he imparting secret knowledge of techniques or a workout regimen that was previously unknown, or is his presence important for suggesting immediate adjustments throughout the season? If it’s some big secret, then we should see pitchers improve when they become his students, but also continue their success when they leave him. If the coach’s everyday oversight is important, then a player should improve when he arrives, but revert to his prior form when he leaves.

The results in Table 11 indicate that pitchers of both classifications suffered when they left Mazzone. If Leo is just spotting problems and fixing them, pitchers should retain the advantage they received when they joined the team. It turns out that whatever inspiration Leo provides, you can’t take it with you. Those coming to Mazzone increase their strikeout rates and lower their home run rates, thereby lowering their ERAs by about half a run per game. There is no identifiable difference in walks. However, when players leave, they typically pitch
worse
than they did before they pitched for Mazzone. Interestingly, the effect from joining Mazzone differs slightly by pitching classification. Starters don’t benefit as much as relievers in terms of ERA and home runs, but all classes decline in strikeouts, home runs, and ERA upon their departure.

The fact that pitchers seem to lose the Leo magic when they leave the Braves indicates that part of the Mazzone method involves handling pitchers from day to day. This might seem surprising, but Leo describes correcting problems every year:

It’s amazing. I’ve been with [John] Smoltzie 13 years and I had Tommy [Glavine] for 12. And yet I had to restart it all over again whenever they started throwing. Their mechanics would be off. Usually, I’d have them pitch two days and then take one off. All we do is get on the mound and get some touch on the pitches. It’s pretty much what we do in between starts in the regular season.
³²

Also, a potential downside of Mazzone’s more-frequent throwing program is that pitchers may tire themselves out. Mazzone feels that his monitoring of these side sessions is key, as pitchers may have a tendency to throw too hard while practicing their pitches. But Mazzone says, “That’s what the hell they pay you for, to regulate effort.”
³³
Because the Sain-Mazzone method is so unique, pitching coaches on other teams may not be able to replicate the in-season instruction required by the throwing program.

There is also the possibility that Mazzone and others on the Braves know when pitchers are about to lose it and, therefore, don’t mind letting these players go. But, even if you ignore the decline, there is no doubt that pitchers improve when they arrive.

Another problem in determining exactly who is responsible for the success of Braves pitching is that the team has had stable management during this era. The same general manager, John Schuerholz, and manager, Bobby Cox, have overseen the Braves pitchers throughout Mazzone’s tenure. Isolating Mazzone’s individual influence from the rest of the management is impossible with the data so far discussed. But with Mazzone leaving to go to the Orioles for the 2006 season, we ought to be able to separate out his contribution after a few years with another set of coworkers.

However, Leo was in charge of the pitchers in Atlanta, and the rest of the management stuck by him for nearly two decades in the Braves organization. Surely we can attribute much of the pitching success to Mazzone even though other members of the Braves probably contributed to the consistent pitching success.

Though the data may not tell us exactly how important Mazzone is to his pitchers versus the rest of the organization, the pitchers themselves have quite a bit to say.

John Burkett, who had the best season of his fifteen-year career under Mazzone, said:

I think the best thing about Leo is, he has this sternness and his belief in what he’s doing. He’s very convincing and he has the track record to back it up. When you look at some of the guys who were washed up when they came over—me being one of them, because I was done—maybe I was even starting to believe it at that time. But I remember throwing on the side one time when I first got over there and Leo told me, “You have the best control I’ve ever seen on the side, besides Greg Maddux.” And then he said, “And your slider sucks. When you get behind in the count, quit throwing that thing. Throw your fastball down and away.” And I did that. I mean, there were times when I was thinking, “Man, I can’t throw this guy a fastball down and away. He’s going to kill it.” And I’d throw one and he’d take it for a strike. That went a long way for me. I kind of took off after that.
³⁴

Charlie Leibrandt, who pitched for Mazzone near the end of his career, said:

He’s able to communicate what he sees and kind of get you to throw the ball like you should be throwing. A lot of pitching coaches I had weren’t able to do that. They’d always say, “Nice pitch, nice pitch.” That can’t help me. One pitching coach I had, the relationship got so bad, I wanted to throw before he came to the park! I didn’t want to hear that kind of stuff, because I knew it wasn’t true. Leo would just say, “You can’t get guys out with that.” And we’d work on it, and we’d try to sharpen things up so that, when you go into a game, you’d have some confidence.
³⁵

Jason Marquis, who spent his first four years in the majors with Mazzone, said:

I know when a young guy comes in Leo tries to be a little harder on him because he wants to instill in him the values that he did with the Madduxes and the Smoltzes and the Glavines, when they were young. Some guys take it the wrong way. I tell you what, he’s helped me a lot.
³⁶

Mike Remlinger, a middle-relief specialist, said:

Even he and I butted heads a couple of times. But the next day, he didn’t hold things against you and it was time to get back to work. He helped me tremendously. A lot of guys don’t want to hear the truth. Sometimes you need to hear, “You’re not very good right now.” Sometimes you have to face that reality and get things fixed.
³⁷

John Rocker, who needs no introduction, said:

The best thing he has going for him, as far as a teacher of pitching, is pitch selection. He’s a big stickler on pitching away to hitters, coming in for effect, basically. Not a lot of pitching coaches or managers really teach that way. And it’s really kind of funny that the Braves continue to have success year-in and year-out, no matter what kind of pitchers they seem to have, and a lot of it has to do with Leo’s pitch-selection philosophy.
³⁸

Pete Smith, who had an unspectacular career, said:

Leo just seems to have every aspect covered. He can communicate. He knows mechanics. As a pitching coach, I think he has a pretty good case for the Hall of Fame. I’d put him in the Hall of Fame.
³⁹