Injuries have thrust the reliever into the Red Sox rotation. Does he have the arsenal to be an effective starter?
Welcome back to another edition of The Anatomy of An Inning. My name is Jacob Roy, and I pretend to know pitching better than the pitchers themselves. If you’re new here or need a reminder of what this is all about, I take an inning from the previous week or so and break it down, one pitch at a time. Each pitch should have a purpose, I’m looking at each individually to try to go beyond the box score and tell the full story.
The Situation
With much of the Red Sox rotation taking up their own wing at Mass General (and with the release of relief ace Pablo Reyes), there’s a shortage of arms in Boston. Josh Winckowski has been thrust back into the Red Sox rotation. Coming into this game against the Cubs, the Sox have lost two straight, and it’s Winck’s responsibility to stop a losing streak before it starts. We begin in the top of the first.
AB #1: Nico Hoerner
Nico Hoerner leads off the Cubs and represents an interesting challenge. While he may expand the zone, his hit tool is strong enough to limit his strikeouts. Winckowski’s sinker/cutter combination should be able to induce weak contact in or around the zone.
Winckowski starts the outing with a 97 MPH sinker low and away for called strike one. While I’m normally not a fan of sinkers to the arm side against same-handed hitters, a strike is a strike.
Here’s a cutter that misses outside to bring the count to 1-1. Hoerner isn’t interested, but I still like the call here. Sinkers and cutters have a sort of synergy, allowing Winckowski to play with the outside edge of the plate. After starting the previous pitch off the plate and running it back in for a called strike, Hoerner may expect the cutter to do the same, inducing a swing and miss.
Same idea, although with the sinker this time. It misses below the zone, but Winckowski is still intent on manipulating Hoerner’s eye with pitches outside.
Once more, Wong sets up low and away for the sinker, but Winckowski misses inside. With the count at 3-1 and back-to-back sinker misses, I’d go back to the cutter away to attempt to induce weak contact.
Winckowski sticks with the sinker, hitting the outside edge to run the count full. With two strikes, Hoerner will have to be more defensive, so a sinker that starts middle and comes inside is a good option to generate weak contact.
Here’s a cutter that starts middle and moves away. Hoerner fights it off, and we’re left in the same situation as before.
Another cutter, but this one stays middle. Hoerner fortunately only manages to foul it off. To this point, Winckowski has only used two pitches. If he’s confident in his changeup or slider, it could be used to catch Hoerner off balance, but I would recommend going back to the sinker after two foul balls on two cutters.
It is the sinker, and it gets the ground ball we’ve been looking for. It’s a missed spot, but I actually prefer it on the inner half as opposed to low and away where the target was, for two reasons. The first is that hitters are very good at adjusting to pitches horizontally. If they’re beat on the sinker, they can often angle the head of their bat late, and poke the ball the other way with ease. The second is that there’s little margin for error. If the pitch misses at all to the arm-side, it ends up middle-in, in the sweet spot for many hitters. This time it works out because he misses up and in, but I’d like to see the down-and-away sinker eliminated from Winckowski’s game plans.
AB #2: Mike Tauchman
Nothing to see here. After going up 0-1, Winckowski plunked Tauchman with a slider. With the double play in order, look for Winckowski to go sinker-heavy in the next at-bat.
AB #3: Ian Happ
This could have been bad. It’s a sinker right down the pipe that Happ can’t make contact on. The swing early in the count should tell Winckowski that Happ is looking for a fastball. Because of this, he should be careful with his sinker going forward.
This is the first changeup of the outing from Winckowski, but Happ isn’t interested. To get a swing, this likely needs to start a little bit higher; Happ is too disciplined to chase.
As an aside, I’m not crazy about Winckowski’s changeup. While it has more drop than his sinker, the velocity is too close for my liking. If he could kill the velocity slightly while keeping the movement profile, I think it would be a more effective pitch.
Sinker this time, and it misses away once again. Down 2-1 with a runner on first, I’d look to the cutter to jam Happ who may remain aggressive towards the fastball.
Back to the changeup, and this one fools Happ. He’s out in front and fouls it off, once again tipping his hand that he’s looking for a fastball.
Another sinker, and again it’s a miss to the arm-side. He wants to throw this to the front hip, running it back over the plate. Again, I don’t love the call because Happ hasn’t seen anything breaking towards him in the at-bat, and likely wouldn’t be frozen by the front door two-seamer. Winckowski located his cutter well in the first at-bat of the game, I’d love to see him go back to that here.
Winckowski continues with the sinker, and Happ is ready for it. Again, I don’t love the sequencing here. Happ has made multiple swings looking to hit a fastball, and Winckowski gives him a decent one to hit. Fortunately, it’s right at O’Neill for the second out.
AB #4: Christopher Morel
Cutter, outside for ball one.
He follows it up with a sinker that gets by Morel. It’s meant to be down and away (please stop) but ends up in an iffy location. Much like Happ, I wouldn’t go back to the sinker with Morel ready to hit one.
This is a great example of why I don’t like the low-and-away sinker. With the ball coming back towards the hitter, it creates bad misfires. Anything that misses to the arm side will come back over the middle of the plate. Morel, having seen the same pitch about 30 seconds earlier punches this one the other way. Valdez probably should make the play, but it’s sharply hit and skips past him.
AB #5: Michael Busch
First pitch cutter is a little too far inside. I like the idea of trying to jam Busch, who’s had issues lifting the ball in the past. It just misses a little bit too far inside to get a swing.
Another cutter, this time a little better, but still not a strike. At 2-0, Winckowski has to be more careful with the hitter.
Here’s a changeup, and it’s not a great one. It stays middle-middle and Bush fortunately can only foul it away for strike two. If Winckowski goes back to that, he has to be sure to bury it or else it will likely be punished.
Finally, a good pitch. Right on the edge and cutting further inside. Even if Busch was to connect, it’s a very difficult pitch to keep fair. Busch is still timed up for the sinker though and misses this one to bring the count to 2-2.
Here’s the pitch I’ve been looking for. It runs in on Busch’s hands, and once he commits to the swing, there’s little he can do outside of making poor contact.
Overall, this wasn’t the best inning from Winckowski. While I believe the stuff is there, the execution and game plan need to change. Here’s a look at Winckowski’s sinker against righties locations versus Tanner Houck’s.
As you can see, Houck gets the ball down and to the glove side much more often, resulting in much weaker contact against his sinker. While Houck doesn’t have the best sinker in the league, he’s been able to execute a more traditional game plan, driving me to use him as an example. On the other hand, Winckowski’s arm-side targets lead to more pitches in the middle, leading to harder contact. If Winckowski can’t consistently hit the low corner on the arm side, he’ll need to adjust his game plan to minimize the risk of his misfires. If Winckowski can’t hit his spots consistently, he’ll likely remain in the bullpen long-term, where his manager can pick and choose his matchups on a game-by-game basis.