Getting Strasburg To October
Last season, the Nationals stuck to a strict plan with Jordan Zimmermann’s workload. This season, the team has another workload to manage with intense scrutiny in the person of Stephen Strasburg. While the Nats have hinted at to how they will proceed with him — they don’t want to jerk him around, they will likely keep him to the same 160-inning cap as Zimmermann last year — they have not laid anything down in stone. The reason for that is likely twofold — one, they can’t predict the future, and don’t know how Strasburg will respond as the year progresses, and two, the Nationals are thinking playoffs this year. So the question is, can the team spread out Strasburg’s innings in a streamlined fashion and still be able to use him in the postseason?
There are a few ways that the Nats can play this. Before we dive in, let’s get the caveat out of the way — we really don’t know what the best way is to measure pitcher fatigue, and it probably isn’t by innings pitched. It probably isn’t by total pitches either. Every pitcher is different, and their thresholds should be set differently as a result. But I’m not a doctor, and even if I was, I don’t have access to Strasburg or his medical records, so for the purpose of this exercise, we’ll stick with innings pitched.
The first, and simplest, is to do what they did with Zimmermann last year, which is to just let him pitch the way nature intends things, and let him work until he gets to 160 and shut him down then. Last season, Zimmermann hit 161.1 innings on August 28th, and was shut down at that point. He made 26 starts, and averaged slightly more than six innings per outing. But the decision to shut him down at the end of August was an easy one to make since the Nationals were not contenders last season. They were well out of the playoff picture, and another 20-30 innings from Zimmermann wasn’t going to change that. That might not be the case this year. Not only have the Nationals fortified the team with the additions of Gio Gonzalez and Edwin Jackson, but healthier seasons from Ryan Zimmerman and Strasburg should make a significant difference as well.
One way to get Strasburg innings in September would be to go to a six-man rotation. Under a scenario where the Nats start Strasburg on Opening Day and then strictly on a rotation in which everyone gets their turn one through six from there on out, he would not cross the 160-inning plateau until the last week of the season, assuming that he averaged six innings per start and didn’t pitch in the All-Star Game (for all scenarios, let’s just assume that he doesn’t pitch in the ASG). That sounds pretty good, right? Well, for Strasburg, sure. But what about the other guys? The Nats do have good depth on the bump this year, with John Lannan and Ross Detwiler being capable of starting but not having slots in the rotation at present time. But six-man rotations don’t happen all that frequently, or ever, and adjusting to that schedule could affect the performance of everyone in the rotation. Furthermore, there is the question of value. Do you want to hand 150-160 innings to a guy that wouldn’t normally be good enough to make the rotation?
So then, maybe the idea isn’t a full six-man rotation, but a modified one. Strasburg would throw every sixth day, and the rest of the rotation would fit in around him. In this scenario, averaging six innings a start, Strasburg would hit 160 innings on 9/11 in Flushing against the Mets. If you lowered the bar to five innings a start, you would get through the season at 150 innings, but that doesn’t seem like a practical plan. In that scenario, you need an extra starter, and you are taxing the bullpen for four innings per Strasburg start.
But the five innings threshold is intriguing. While a strict every five days plan wouldn’t be much better — he would cross the 160-inning threshold on September 12th — a plan where you stuck to a strict five-man rotation, i.e., not skipping starts because of off-days, and let Strasburg pitch every time his turn in the rotation came up, he would hit 160 innings on September 27th. Under this scenario, you would use Lannan or Detwiler as kind of a shadow starter. You would get them up in the second inning or so, with the intention of bringing them in for the sixth inning, and pitching at least two innings, but maybe more depending on how the game is going and how taxed the bullpen is. You wouldn’t necessarily need to carry a 13th pitcher in order to make that happen — on most teams, whoever the 12th man on a pitching staff is at any one time is generally underutilized. It uses a de facto sixth starter, but it doesn’t alter the schedule of the other rotation mates, and it reduces the number of innings Lannan or Detwiler would be counted on from the neighborhood of 150 down to 80 or so.
It’s not perfect — rain is going to intervene and force doubleheaders at some point. And it’s not the only other option. You could devise a plan where Strasburg only pitches at home, for instance, but again, the schedules of his rotation mates would need to be altered to accommodate that, and the team has already said they don’t want to jerk Strasburg’s schedule around anyway. Not jerking him around would also likely eliminate a move to the bullpen, as it is much more difficult to regiment bullpen usage. If the Nats want to look at a regimented plan that will spread out Strasburg’s innings throughout the year, the “five innings whenever his spot in a five-man rotation comes up” plan is likely the closest they could get with a streamlined, fairly simple plan.
The reward to such a plan is that it gives the Nats an opportunity to measure the risk of crossing that 160 inning plateau if the team finds itself in the hunt. If Strasburg hit 160 innings on September 27, he could make one make one more start during the regular season — in the penultimate game of the year — on regular rest. Or, if the Nats have a spot already locked up, he could be saved for their first postseason game. In other words, the team would have the option of considering letting him go significantly past 160 innings. Under the other scenarios, or if they just do what they did with Zimmermann, then he will hit 160 innings so early that the layoff between when they shut him down and the start of the postseason would be too significant.
Stephen Strasburg may be one of the best pitchers in the game, and the Nationals are unlikely to reach the postseason without him. No matter what course of action they choose, if they are set on 160 innings as his threshold, they are going to have a difficult decision to make at some point during this season. But if they can be disciplined with not only his starts, but everyone else’s as well, there is a way to keep Strasburg in the rotation all season long and give themselves the option of squeezing another 20-30 innings out of him should they qualify for the postseason should he be healthy enough to throw them.
Why not just have him start the season a month later?
I’ve been saying this since last October. It’s the perfect solution IMO.
Because he’s still got to throw during that “month off.” Unless you completely shut him down, he’s still got to throw bullpen sessions and simulated games, etc. so that he’s warmed up and stretched out and ready to start the season in May. All those innings count as work, too – not as high leverage as game situations, but it’s still pitches on the reconstructed ligament.
I think you just have to come to terms with the fact that a playoff push this season with Strasburg and Zimmermann’s recovery is poor timing. They need everything to go right to even be a late season consideration. Why jerk around your staff in 2012 for something that’s maybe still a bit too far out of reach.
sorry that one was for scott…
This is all so stupid. 160 innings is completely arbitrary. You let the kid pitch as long as he’s pitching effectively. No ridiculous pitch counts. Keep him under 110 and he shouldnt strain. He’s efficient enough he could go 7+ innings regularly without going too much over the century mark.
I tend to agree. His elbow is as strong right now as it’s going to be, and given he signed a MLB contract out of college and already has accrued a decent amount of service time, I’m not sure why the Nats have much motivation to be so protective.
Inning limits really are completely arbitrary. If you’re going to limit him, at least use something a little more sophisticated like pitcher abuse points.
Some guys know how to pitch through fatigue and some don’t. Do you know for sure what Strasburg is capable of?
I wonder what’s magical about 160 innings? That said, it would be short sighted by the Nats to push Strasburg beyond 160 just because they’re in the playoff hunt. 2012 isn’t their year unless the planets align. This team is built to contend between 2013-2016 or so.
It really is absurd. I guess people (and managers somehow) don’t realize how much these guys throw outside of actual innings. Pregame warmup, pitches before each inning, side sessions, and they throw in between starts……all that to nitpick what might be an extra couple hundred in game pitches?
Those in game pitches are far more stressful on the arm than what guys are doing in pre-game warmup, pitches before each inning, side sessions, and in between starts.
I thought I’d seen Nolan Ryan endorse the 160 IP max after TJ.
Yeah managers and coaches have no idea how many pitches the pitchers actually throw in pre-game warmup. Good grief, do we even read some of the stuff we type?
Do we all understand the difference in intensity between a shoot around and a game? Apply the same understanding to bullpen sessions and in game pitching.
I recall a story from a conference where the coach was fed up with a certyain pitcher always asking “How many have I thrown? How many have I thrown now?” and on and on. So, one day the coach kept track of every throw the pitcher had thrown that day from playing catch to bullpen to game. When the pitcher asked midway through the game, the coach said “312″ … and that was that.
There’s a lot of unquantified stuff being said. Some are saying the 160 IP limit is simply arbitrary, but how do we know that? You think coaches just sat around and rolled dice or played cards to come up with the number? maybe they did, maybe they didn;t.
I’ve been doing a lot of research lately in preparation for a proposal to help limit young pitcher overuse/abuse where the players are pitching in two leagues at the same time. One of the recommendations of Andrews and Fleisig is a hard “100 IP limit” for a claender year for pitchers under 14. Sure, it sounds arbitrary, but according to their research the risks of serious injury jump up to 3 times the normal level once a young pitcher crosses 100 IP for a calendar year. So, it’s not always arbitrary.
It’s pretty arrogant, and well naive, for us to just assume that professional managers and coaches have no basis for some of the limits and guidelines they utilize.
Geez, Steve, really? You’re blaming the managers on enforcing pitch counts? Like it was their idea? This stuff is coming straight from the top. I don’t know exactly how the Nats are going to handle Strasburg, but I’m 100% certain Davey Johnson is not going to be the decision-maker.
Yea i dont necessarily agree with that. Some pitches maybe. Certainly not all. Those bases loaded no out pitches, sure.
Nobody on and up a couple runs, don’t think so.
These guys also have to pitch with 100% effort at some points outside of games…..guarantee the managers arent including those pitches in the yearly total.
Pitching stress isn’t just about the difference between throwing at 100% or 80%. It’s about dealing with an umpire, a batter, and the defense behind you. A substantial difference.
The innings count is just simplification. They are PROMOTING a 160 IP limit, but that doesn’t mean there’s a lot more thought going into his treatment.
It’s probably not a big deal if he throws a 9 inning game… or
If he has a 130 pitch start… or
If he has a 4 inning start that includes 2 40 pitch innings… or
If he throws 180IP for the season… or
If he goes on 4 days rest a few times… or
If he shows shoulder fatigue from time to time… or
etc…
What the 160IP limit does, is it simplifies the decision of shutting him down, to compensate for the immeasurable variety of unusual situations he may experience. The greatest pitching complication during TJ recovery is supposedly reestablishing command. Pitchers go through wild phases, and in the case of Strasburg, this would be something quite new to him. It’s something he may have to learn to deal with in the beginning… maybe forever… and because of that, it’s not out of the question to suggest that there will be moments when he’s using his body in ways that he’s not quite used to.
This is where some suggest that fatigue can become a dangerous situation. When a pitcher is experiencing fatigue in way he’s unfamiliar with, you get concerned with how he physically/mentally compensates to overcome that. It’s what might contribute to a TJ recovery experiencing shoulder problems, back problems, leg problems, etc… The elbow might be stronger than ever, but the elbow isn’t the only concern.
When’s the last time Strasburg has been on the mound when he hasn’t been in total control? If he struggles, it’ll be something he has to deal with that he probably hasn’t thought about in years.
baty, there is entirely too much common sense in that post.
RABBLE RABBLE RAABBBLE 160IP is DUM!
Well said, Baty.
The hard and fast ’5 (or 6) innings every single start’ is pretty silly, too. There’ll be a game or three where he gets whacked around early such that you’ll get him out of there.
And there will be others where he cruises and goes 7 or 8
If Strasburg is healthy (and pitching like a healthy Strasburg) then going to a six man rotation or yanking him out after five innings no matter how well he is throwing is going to cost the team a handful of wins. Because those pitchers picking up those innings aren’t as good as Strasburg. And that extra handful of losses likely leaves the Nationals with Strasburg ready in October – but no playoffs. Congratulations!
Here’s a thought: Have Strasburg throw like a regular starting pitcher. Since the Nationals are believers in the Verducci rule and want to cap him at 160 innings, keep your options open. If they are in contention in July, sign Roy Oswalt or make a deal for a #1 starter who is facing free agency (Zach Greinke, Dan Haren, etc).
The Nats also have CM Wang and Zimmermann who could benefit from some less abuse. Even though JZ should be good for 190 IP this year, and CMW is not a long term asset that needs to be conserved, you could see some benefit from a 5 1/2 starter rotation. Whenever Strasburg, Wang, or Zimmermann would be due to pitch for the 3d time in a row on 4 days rest, slot in Lannan or Detwiler for a spot start to shift most of the rotation back a day. This has the benefit of concentrating the starts not made by the top 5 pitchers in the team’s 6th best pitcher, rather having the extra starts spread out among the 6-7-8 pitchers later in the year. With planned use of a spot starter, you could easily stretch Strasburg further in September and have Zimmermann available for October if the Nats go that far.
I mean 3d rotation cycle with 4 days between starts 1 and 2 and 4 days before the otherwise scheduled next start. Essentially, every other start with an extra day’s rest.
You need to eat up a reasonable amount of innings per game for it to work, and I just don’t think the rotation has enough depth.
Gio is the only guy they have to rely on putting together a true full season.
Jordan Zimmermann is still learning to go late into ballgames. He only has about 20 100 pitch games (fewer than half his games started) to his name, and has yet to go over 110. He’s only completed 7IP in a handful of starts. He’s a prime candidate for a significant IP jump, but I just don’t see the Nationals letting him loose yet. Because he is that good, a true 2012 full season should be 210+IP (230+ including a strong playoff showing). I just don’t see that happening. He’ll continue to be regulated to an extent. It’s quite possible that Zimmermann won’t be as effective as he soon will be.
Edwin Jackson is one of the most inconsistent innings eaters in the majors.
No matter how you space Strasburg’s starts, if you want him to go deeper into the season, he’s essentially a 6IP guy. If you replace him, you’ll get nearly the same from someone else.
You can’t expect more than 6IP a start from the 5th and/or 6th guy.
In my opinion, it’s going to take tremendous endurance from a deep and most likely overworked bullpen come September, and those guys have been used more than just about everyone else the last couple of seasons too.
Regarding the overworked bullpen concerns, I see a few differences:
1) The starting staff is improved and should lessen the workload on the bullpen
2) The bullpen for a vast majority of the season will include 3 guys who can go 4-5 innings if needed – Detwiler, Lannan/Wang, and Gorzelanny
3) Part of the reason the bullpen was overworked in the past is because starters like Gorzelanny would get knocked around and only go 2 or 3 innings. Not to mention the burden they had to bear when Zimmerman and Strasburg were being handled with kid gloves.
4) With Storen, Lidge, Clippard, and H-Rod all being legitimate closer-types, I don’t expect we’ll need to use as many relievers in a night. The overall innings won’t change, but guys will have more days off.
5) We have more “utility” guys this year, which enables you to carry an extra position player if needed. DeRosa can play 5 positions and Lombardozzi can play 2-4. We didn’t have the luzury of those super-utility guys last year.
6) Lastly, I’m guessing Stammen, Mattheus, and Kimball end up in AAA — all of those guys have the potential to add bullpen help in a pinch.
I guess that’s a long way of saying I’m less worried about the bullpen this year than I was last year.
They should be teaching him how to be a pitcher, not a thrower. You don’t have to strike everyone out to win.
yeah, let’s try and change the generational talent pitcher into a mediocre carl pavano type
Or you know… extend his career past the first 2 seasons by learning how to pitch…
Mr. AJ Burnett wants to talk to you about solely relying on your stuff and not learning how to pitch ever…
there is zero evidence strasburg “doesn’t know how to pitch” in fact, based on his FIP, i’d say he knows how to pitch very, very well.
also, comparing stephen strasburg to AJ burnett? really, dude?
Comments like these just crack me up.
Do you even know if SS is capable of “pitching to contact”?
We all understand that batters are TRYING to hit his pitches, right?
When it comes to SS, I’m more interested in how many elite level innings he threw before the age of 18. I lived in KC when he was in travel team nationals there (on a team from California). He has likely pitched a TON of innings in elite/showcase baseball and probably blew away the 100 IP per year advise each and every year as his travel teams were wanting him to lead them to Nationals. I would not be surprised if he, as living in a warm weather climate locale, pitched in multiple leagues either at the same time or one after another.
Given his less than ideal mechanics combined with his usage as a youngster, it wouldn’t surprise me if he’s already been used up to a degree.
The comments of “learn to be a pitcher not a thrower” are just simply ridiculous. Why is he a thrower? Because he throws hard? Because batters can’t hit him? We all saw the data here where he uses two different changeups, one that tails to lefties and one that drops to rights … both of which avoid the batter’s barrel. That’s pitching.
If people want to sound smart and say things like this, they need to come up with some evidence or ideas on how it is reality. It sounds like something “12 Beers Bob” would say as he sits behind you att he stadium. Sure it sounds awesome … but only because he doesn;t know any better.
jobastrasburg rulesLet’s sit here all day and think up ways to keep strasburg pitching until october so we can shut him down right when the playoffs start.
Might as well cap him at 140 innings during the season if you think you have a legit shot at the playoffs. Then he could actually make playoff starts.
Yeah, that was my thought. If you devise a plan that will have him pitching into September where he hits his 160 IP limit, then you don’t have him for the playoffs. If they really are thinking they’re serious contenders for a playoff spot, wouldn’t you want to hold him to around 130-140 innings during the regular season, so you would have him available in the playoffs?
Can you imagine the Washington Nationals making the playoffs and then not having Stephen Strasburg pitching?
That’s a good point. Suppose Strasburg does hit 160 IP in mid-September and the Nats somehow have a one or two-game lead for the final playoff spot. If anyone out there thinks he’s going to be “shut down” at that point, you’re crazy. Absolutely no way. The rules will get thrown out the window. What if the Nats then make the playoffs and have a one-game playoff? Who do you think is gonna pitch that game if available? What if they win that game and upset, say, the Cardinals or Reds in the LDS? Then Strasburg’s innings count is going to start looking like it’s closer to 200 than 160. It could happen.
Might as well just come to terms with the fact that there will be no playoff push for the Nats at all this year, no matter who is pitching.
This is very much the case. I’d set the odds of Strasburg reinjuring himself significantly lower than those of the Nats making the playoffs.
Come to terms? Conservatively, the Nats have an “A” bullpen, “A” starting pitching, “B” fielding, and “C” bats. Explain to me how they have no shot at the playoffs?
This is a team that finished 80-81 last year.
They added Gio Gonzalez, Edwin Jackson, Brad Lidge, Adam LaRoche, and Bryce Harper.
Ryan Zimmerman is now healthy.
Jayson Werth is a bounce-back candidate.
Henry Rodriguez, by all accounts, will be lights-out.
Danny Espinosa, Wilson Ramos and Ian Desmond all have a year more experience.
I’ll give you a significant Morse regression.
Zimmermann is 1 more year removed from TJ
Strasburg is 1 more year removed and will pitch a majority of the season
Even if you think last year’s team should have been a 75 win team and Morse will regress 5 wins, I still think the rest of the roster is 20 wins better, which leaves you with 90 wins.
If you don’t think we have a chance to beat Atlanta out for one of 2 Wild Card spots, I think you’re mistaken.
I thought the Verducci effect had been disproved. Am I mistaken?
Instead having a specified number of innings, why not start him out normally and then adjust if his arm is not holding up?
He could also be taken out early in routes, which managers seem curiously reluctant to do.
i believe the verducci effect isn’t taken to apply to injury recovery?
Good point.
It’s more that it hasn’t been proven than it’s been disproven. I believe many studies show there isn’t significant enough of a correlation to confidently accept the null hypothesis.
160 innings spread over 5 months is the approximate workload of a minor-league season. (Actually, it will be 162 innings so Stras can qualify for awards). That is what he will do, he knows it, and the fans know it. Starting him a month late or skipping a month midseason have been nixed, as that would mean “spring training” all over for him. All the other nonsense plans suggested by this author have been hashed out endlessly on Nationals blogs and shot down. If the Nats are in contention for a playoff spot in late July, they will get Oswalt or make a trade for whoever. .. But more likely the Nats will be a slightly above average team this year (have you seen the OFFENSE???) and 2013 will be our year.
By the way, it is NOT the case that pitchers who come in after Stras are lesser animals. Have you seen the Nats’ bullpen?????
For as good as Clippard and Storen are, they don’t hold a candle to Strasburg.
Tyler Clippard led all MLB relievers in WAR. He had a 1.83 ERA over 88 innings. That’ll hold a candle to anyone.
“Actually, it will be 162 innings so Stras can qualify for awards”
By “awards” I assume you mean ERA title, because there is no IP mandatory for actual awards.
I think the Nats have a strong future, but I place their playoff chances for this season around 7%. There is just too much competition and they aren’t ready yet. Basically, I’m saying this is a moot point.
Let’s face it. We just want Stras around for fantasy baseball H2H playoffs. The Nats could care less about our concerns.
Don’t play fantasy A2M games. Or whatever you are talking about. Sorry.
No, YOU want Strasburg around for some fantasy jerk-off, not everyone else.
The Verducci effect is not real, yet a lot of front offices still believe in it.
The Verducci Effect doesn’t have anything to do with Strasburg. He’s coming off an injury, not progressively increasing his work load.
Nationals will not be in contention come late season, the team just has too many flaws. There won’t be any reason to not shut him down and his mechanics are so terrible it is unlikely he stays healthy even if they give him 200 innings. No reason to draft him unless he falls way under ADP.
Elaborate on his ‘terrible mechanics’……….
Just do a search on Strasburg mechanics and you’ll find loads of information on it that will go into better details than I ever could. His mechanics are a mess and he didn’t change them post injury so they will remain a problem.
They’re not a mess (like Zumaya), but there are some aspects that are not ideal, such as exaggerated scapular rotation … he takes his pitching elbow toward 1B, like Jake Peavey.
Stephen Strasburg is no Clayton Kershaw!
and vice versa. What’s your point?
I don’t especially wish Strasburg ill, nor do I have a rooting interest one way or the other in the Nationals. But it’s for thought exercises like this, that I wish there was some divisional rival who lineup included several players with exceptional bat control, players who went up to the plate with the deliberate intent to foul off everything under the sun and drive Strasburg’s pitch count way up. Imagine Strasburg seeing that lineup 3, 4, even 5 times in a season.
I know it’s not that straightforward, but when I hear of pitchers being put on innings limits and pitch counts, all I can wonder is, why don’t more teams try to take or foul off as much as they can, with the goal not being necessarily to get hits but to drag out at-bats and exhaust the pitcher?
Because the benefit to that team would be marginal at best.
So you make Strasburg throw an extra 20 pitches, or get him yanked an inning or two earlier over a few games… Best case scenario, that causes him to pitch 2 fewer starts. In the meantime, your team just lost a couple games, because the batters worked themselves into terrible counts by intentionally fouling off pitches instead of hitting them into play.
A six man rote with a hard five inning cap could create bad feelings among Stras’ peers. Personally I wouldn’t go that way. Perhaps just unplugging him from one start per month would be an option. That would create other issues but structuring the entire team’s season around an inning limit doesn’t feel like a chemistry builder.
Why not just put him on a pretty strict 80-90 pitch count limit per start and be done with it? Seems pretty reasonable, and likely to give him whatever benefit he could get from taking it easy.
I would think that he would then adjust his game to throw harder (see: relievers decrease in FIP/ERA). I think not telling him exactly what is going on could also be beneficial.
It’s gonna be hard to yank him after 80 pitches in the bottom of the fifth inning if he’s allowed no runs and 3 hits, and the Nats are leading 1-0.
I recall Baseball Between the Numbers suggesting pitching isn’t a threat to arm health and that pitching while fatigued is the true threat. Doesn’t this suggest an inning count across a season is useless? I think a pitch count makes far more sense.
That is how teams really do it, it is just easier to tell the media an IP limit.
Since most pitchers average a simialr number of pitches/IP, a general IP limit is easier to manage.
The Nats have said they’re going to treat Strasburg just like any other pitcher and when they feel he’s done (at about 160 ip, but they’ve said it won’t be quite that simple), he’ll be shut down.
If the Nats have a chance to make the playoffs, that means more is going right with their team than just Strasburg. It means their other starting pitchers are pitching well and can probably handle Septemnber and the playoffs as needed. Yeah, it’d be disappointing to not have Strasburg available for the Nats first playoff appearance, but if it came to that, he’d be sitting in the dugout and cheering on the team knowing that he helped get them to where they are.
Can you imagine the pressure to use him in a relief role in an actual game5/7 situation?
No way, cass. No way Stephen Strasburg sits in the dugout and watches from the dugout if they make the playoffs. That’s just not going to happen.
The team will shut him down just like they said. The fallout from pitching him beyond that and him getting injured would be too great. There’s absolutely no way he’ll still be able to pitch in October.
Remember, the Nats lineup isn’t going to be great. At best, they’ll be able to cobble together an average to slightly above average offense. So if the Nats make the postseasn, they’re pitching will have to be absolutely tremendous, best-in-the-league type stuff. That will involve pitches other than Strasburg performing like aces. Those pitchers (Gonzalez and Zimmermann, likely) will be able to pitch the big games.
I wonder if anyone tracks pitches per inning?…I would think it would be a better tracking system as far as fatigue is concerned and could be a way to prevent arm injuries to the younder guys like Strasburg
step 1: go fangraphs pitching leaderboard
step 2: go to “batted ball” tab
step 3: if you can’t figure it out from here, you’re beyond our help