The Mazzone Effect

[George_Foreman]

.500 for the Braves? I'm not even going to comment, that's awful...

I think the big issue for the Braves is the Mazzone effect and the back end of the rotation. ZiPS did include an upward adjustment in all Braves pitcher ERAs due to the loss of Leo. And, I have a hard time believing they'll get anything close to league average ERA out of the back two slots in the rotation. In fact, I would not be surprised at all if both of those slots ended the year with an ERA >5.00

They only won 90 games last year. If the loss of Leo and the performance of the backline starters and relievers costs them 60-90 runs, they are a .500 team.

While there area few other things in here that I disagree with, I'd like to discuss "The Mazzone Effect." First off, I've actually seen a few statistical analyses done demonstrating an observable effect on pitchers who come to Atlanta from other places. Just casual observation will give you names like John Burkett and Jaret Wright, who flourished in Atlanta after mediocre to bad years elsewhere.

Of course, none of that be directly tied to Mazzone. While it certainly seems logical that the pitching coach would be the cause of the good numbers, all we really have to go in is that before and after these guys joined the Braves they weren't very good, but while they were here they were spectacular. I mean, it could just be an organizational thing for whatever reason. Perhaps it is really "The Cox Effect" or "The Ted Effect" or whatever.

But additionally, Mazzone just never seemed to have a way with younger pitchers. After Glavine and Smoltz, the Braves really didn't develope ANYONE from within the system who was any good (GL with Bruce Chen there, Baltimore. ), and now, they're awash in young guys. Names like Davies, Sosa, McBride, Devine, and Boyer are already in Atlanta, with guys like James and Lerew to join them soon. With all of this young pitching talent and Mazzone having little track record with younger pitchers, perhaps the Braves won't be hurting so bad after all.

Moreover, it has been apperant in various quotes that Braves players and management weren't that miffed to see Leo go. Apperantly, Leo just rubs some people the wrong way. I'm not saying that his departure is a good thing, but I think it's unreasonable to expect Atlanta's team ERA to clime very much due to the coaching change.

Finally, I'll just add that if it truly was Leo's pitching regime that was getting the most out of his starter, why on earth wouldn't other clubs have picked up on it? I mean, he's been doing it in Atlanta for 15+ years now, and you're telling me no one has tried to copy his proceedure to get the same results? I find that a bit unbelievable.

[Ender]

Finally, I'll just add that if it truly was Leo's pitching regime that was getting the most out of his starter, why on earth wouldn't other clubs have picked up on it? I mean, he's been doing it in Atlanta for 15+ years now, and you're telling me no one has tried to copy his proceedure to get the same results? I find that a bit unbelievable.

Mike Maddux learned from Mazzone and he's having the same effect on the Brewer pitchers. Guys like Turnbow, Kolb, Davis were all guys other teams had given up on before he 'fixed' them.

I do agree the effect is a bit overstated though, I won't be pumping up Oriole pitchers on my rankings or sliding Braves pitchers.

[George_Foreman]

Mike Maddux learned from Mazzone and he's having the same effect on the Brewer pitchers. Guys like Turnbow, Kolb, Davis were all guys other teams had given up on before he 'fixed' them.

I do agree the effect is a bit overstated though, I won't be pumping up Oriole pitchers on my rankings or sliding Braves pitchers.

It's surprising then that Kolb had such different results under Mazzone than under Maddux.

[Ender]

Mike Maddux learned from Mazzone and he's having the same effect on the Brewer pitchers. Guys like Turnbow, Kolb, Davis were all guys other teams had given up on before he 'fixed' them.

I do agree the effect is a bit overstated though, I won't be pumping up Oriole pitchers on my rankings or sliding Braves pitchers.

It's surprising then that Kolb had such different results under Mazzone than under Maddux.

Mazzone tried to turn him into more of a power pitcher than he was. Lead more with his fastball and strike people out. Kolb did much better trying to pitch to contact. I think Kolb was as lucky as he was good as a Brewer though, so I'm not surprised he didn't have a great year though I would have expected a high 3 ERA, not a 5+.

[TheYanks04]

Mazzone is good...of that there is no doubt. But he is overrated. You can only do so much with trash. He did not do much with Andy Ashby, Denny Neagle, Russ Ortiz, Kolb, Rocker, etc.

It pays to be lucky sometimes and if I was given a staff of Maddux, Smoltz and Glavine for years I think people would be calling me a great pitching guru too. When you have 3 HOF'ers on your staff for that long, it is really hard to mess up.

[HOOTIE]

He is a plus, but probably overrated. He didn't help Steve Avery, John Rocker, Kent Mercker very much.

[dcskater619]

of all the young pitching talent baltimore has, u use only bruce chen as an example and make it look funny? rodrigo lopez, eric bedard, hayden penn, bruce chen, and daniel cabrera will all get better with mazzone..i think he will help cabrera get better command of his 100mph fastball and become a dominant pitcher this year or next.

[quack quack]

I agree with Cabrera I am looking to take him in the late rounds in hope of a breakout year

[GotowarMissAgnes]

While there area few other things in here that I disagree with, I'd like to discuss "The Mazzone Effect." First off, I've actually seen a few statistical analyses done demonstrating an observable effect on pitchers who come to Atlanta from other places. Just casual observation will give you names like John Burkett and Jaret Wright, who flourished in Atlanta after mediocre to bad years elsewhere.

Of course, none of that be directly tied to Mazzone. While it certainly seems logical that the pitching coach would be the cause of the good numbers, all we really have to go in is that before and after these guys joined the Braves they weren't very good, but while they were here they were spectacular. I mean, it could just be an organizational thing for whatever reason. Perhaps it is really "The Cox Effect" or "The Ted Effect" or whatever.

Agree completely, George. It's an "Atlanta" effect, and we have no idea whether it's Cox, Mazzone, Ted, Schueholz, or some combination of all of them.

But additionally, Mazzone just never seemed to have a way with younger pitchers. After Glavine and Smoltz, the Braves really didn't develope ANYONE from within the system who was any good (GL with Bruce Chen there, Baltimore. ), and now, they're awash in young guys. Names like Davies, Sosa, McBride, Devine, and Boyer are already in Atlanta, with guys like James and Lerew to join them soon. With all of this young pitching talent and Mazzone having little track record with younger pitchers, perhaps the Braves won't be hurting so bad after all.

Well, three of their starters are Hudson, Smoltz, and Thomson, and Obermueller is in the mix, too, so I think you over-estimate their use of young pitchers.

As for youngsters, I know Sosa credits Mazzone with his improvement.

Finally, I'll just add that if it truly was Leo's pitching regime that was getting the most out of his starter, why on earth wouldn't other clubs have picked up on it? I mean, he's been doing it in Atlanta for 15+ years now, and you're telling me no one has tried to copy his proceedure to get the same results? I find that a bit unbelievable.

Since we don't know what it is that causes the effect, why should we be surprised that no one has copied it?