If you’re gonna spend this much time digging through metrics to equate Hickey with declining pitching performance, why not take the extra time and search for an answer of WHY?

If Hickey really is a factor in pitching decline, shouldn’t there be more specific evidence? Can’t we get down to the bottom of this, whether it’s a certain pitches no longer being used, a change in approach, too many first pitch fastballs, et cetera?

Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t feel like we’re finding anything remotely conclusive about this, particularly when we’re only half way through the season. If three or four of our starting pitchers go on a tear and end up matching or improving upon last year’s FIP/tRA, what is our conclusion then?

Just a comparison… A steep decline between 2003 and 2004.

The Rays were only the second team in the last twenty years to have five pitchers 27 or younger start at least 25 games. They were the only team in the last twenty years to have five young starters who were 27 or youner and an ERA+ of 100 or better. The second closest team was the 2003 A’s who had four (the 2005 A’s also had four but they aren’t as fun).

The 2003 A’s had the dominant core of Hudson, Zito, Mulder. They all pitched extremely well in 2003. The same three came back and struggled in 2004. Hudson was the closest to maintaining his 2003 form, but the two others really dipped in performance.

These things happen. The Rays were very lucky last year to have five young pitchers pitch so many games and pitch so well. Everything went right. This year reflects the flip side.

I wouldn’t expect a violent correction, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see a general trend in the right direction. Allow them to make adjustments and see what happens. Their season stats will always be weighted down by how bad they were early in the year, but I’d expect a more normal output from here on out. Even without ousting Hickey.

This is a matter of looking at Hickeys entire career. Pitchers see their FIP increase when they go to him and when they stay with him. Pitchers throw more curveballs with him and increase that usage as they stay with him. On the other hand changeup usage has gone down.

Of course there is really no way I can say this with 100% certainty. It may just be random chance and luck. That is the nature of statistics.

Perhaps they can be indifferent, but even then I don’t see the logic.

You either:
1. Think PCs have an impact
2. Think PCs do not have an impact

If you think they have an impact then quite clearly Hickeys career track record is not very good. Yes there is a chance the declines under Hickey have been due to horrible luck and coincidence, but it is far more likely something else is going on. The odds of getting a pitching coach that would do worse than Hickey would be slim.

If you think PCs do not have an impact then why not fire Hickey. No harm no foul. And if you think there is a tiny bit of a chance that they do have an impact then that even emphasizes the need further.

There is literally close to no downside. The only downside is the Rays get a reputation for firing a coach and Hickey has no job. The benefit of the possibility of better performance, even if it is small, far outweighs those downsides because there is literally close to no chance the pitchers could get worse.

But, seriously, look at pitchers under Peterson. There is zero question Rick Peterson is a fantastic pitching coach and I would prefer him over Hickey (though that’s not an indictment of Hick).

There are simply too many factors in play with the individual ability to successfully pitch that even bringing the pitching coach into discussion is a pretty much a waste of time. Unless Shields and Garza suddenly break down to injury or their performance completely falls apart, I just don’t see the point in bringing Hickey into discussion.

Pitching is volatile, and on a year-to-year basis there is a lot of statistical noise. All there is to say is that our starting pitching has underperformed this year, but at the same time, I don’t think there’s really any denying that it could drastically improve over the second half.

I do find the curveball usage interesting, but again, it’s hard to pinpoint where Hickey’s influence enters the pitcher. As I mentioned with Garza, Maddon continues to harp on Garza pounding that fast ball, yet the fastball usage has gone down and the curve usage has gone up. I would bet money that there is a very tiny disconnect between Hickey and Maddon, if any at all. Hickey wouldn’t be here if he wasn’t on board with the FO and Maddon’s game plan. To me, that means it falls on the pitcher (I know everyone believes that the catcher has an impact on pitch selection, but ultimately it’s on the pitcher – he can shake the catcher off, not the other way around.)

And if that trend with Hickey is a reality, then why hasn’t it rubbed off on Niemann? And considering Shields change-up value has been in decline since he came up to the big leagues (pre-Hickey) as well, wouldn’t it make sense for him to incorporate the curve and slider more (which both have been effective, -1.5 for the curve, 0.3 for the slider, both better than the change up and cutter)?