Posted by David Golebiewski on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 at 10:48 pm

In March of 2008, Ian Snell signed a three-year, $8.6 million contract extension with the Pittsburgh Pirates. The deal, which included club options for the 2011 and 2012 seasons, was supposed to be the culmination of Snell’s climb from 26th round afterthought in the 2000 draft to ace of Pittsburgh’s home-grown starting rotation. Newly-minted General Manager Neal Huntington told the Associated Press, “He [Snell] is in great shape and every single pitch he throws has a purpose behind it. He’s the type of player we want here, the type of player we feel we can win with.”

Flash forward to June 28th, 2009. Snell toes the rubber in front of the home crowd. His stuff is electric. The opposition can do little more than flail helplessly as the right-hander mows down batter after batter. Snell is in rare form, striking out seventeen…Toledo Mudhens. In the midst of a second bitterly disappointing season, Snell had been booted to the minor leagues. How strained had his relationship with the Pirates become? Consider the following:

- According to Pirates beat writer Dejan Kovacevic, Snell actually requested to be sent to AAA Indianapolis.   He felt there was “too much negativity” surrounding his performance in Pittsburgh.

- When Kovacevic asked Snell what he need to improve upon while in the minors, Snell responded, “nothing.”

- MLB.com’s Jenifer Langosch quoted Huntington as saying, “it’s tough  to bring a player back into a clubhouse with 24 other players when he’s been adamant he doesn’t want to come back.”

It didn’t come as much of a surprise, then, when Pittsburgh shipped Snell out of town this past July as part of a seven-player trade with the Seattle Mariners. After more mediocre pitching with the M’s, Snell now enters the 2010 season looking to hold off the likes of Doug Fister, Luke French, Jason Vargas and Garrett Olson for a rotation spot. How did the 28 year-old plummet so far, so fast? To try and answer that question, we must go back to the beginning.

As a smallish 5-11 righty pitching in Delaware, Snell did not garner a ton of interest as a prep prospect. Snell attended Caesar Rodney High School, as did former Pirate left-hander Dave Williams. Williams’ father actually recommended Snell to the Pirates, who decided to take a late round flyer.

Snell made a few appearances for the Gulf Coast League Pirates that summer, but he got his first extended action in pro ball in 2001. However, he did so with a new name on the back of his jersey. According to Baseball America, Snell changed his last name to Oquendo, taking his wife’s name after the two had a child in 2000 (he changed it back to Snell in 2004). Oquendo/Snell was impressive as a teenager, striking out 7.4 batters per nine innings, issuing 1.6 BB/9 and compiling a microscopic 1.18 ERA in 83.2 frames between the GCL and the short-season New York-Penn League.

In 2002, the diminutive starter dominated in his full-season debut. Snell posted rates of 9.6 K/9 and 2.9 BB/9 and a 2.71 ERA in 139.2 innings in the Low-A South Atlantic League. Though his slender frame had many pegging him as a future reliever, Snell continued to pile up the innings and the accolades in 2003. He started the year in the High-A Carolina League, whiffing 9.4 hitters per nine innings and handing out just 2.6 free passes per nine frames (3.33 ERA). A promotion to the AA Eastern League didn’t faze Snell: he posted a 1.96 ERA in 36.2 IP, with 5.6 K/9 and 2.5 BB/9.

By this point, Snell/Oquendo was a household name in the Pirates system. He won the club’s minor league pitcher of the year award in 2003, and ranked 6th in Baseball America’s listing of Pittsburgh’s prospects. BA noted Snell’s “lively fastball” that sat in the low-90’s and occasionally flirted with the mid-90’s, as well as a sharp breaking ball. Still, they expected him to end up in the ‘pen: “with his slight stature and two above-average pitches, he could wind up as a closer in the big leagues.”

Snell returned to AA Altoona (just a few short hours from PNC Park) in 2004, where he continued to baffle batters with his fastball/slider combo. In 151 innings, he had a 3.16 ERA and punched out 8.5 hitters per nine, displaying fine touch with just 2.4 BB/9. He made his major league debut late August. Snell posted a 9/9 K/BB and a 7.50 ERA in two relief appearances and one start, but he showcased a 92 MPH heater a low-80’s slider, a high-70’s curve and a hard mid-80’s changeup. Ian moved up to number three on Baseball America’s list of Buccos prospects, ranking ahead of Paul Maholm, Nate McLouth, Freddy Sanchez and Ryan Doumit.

Figuring that Snell needed more time to refine his changeup and breaking stuff, the Pirates had Snell open the 2005 season at AAA Indianapolis. He forced the organization’s hand by showing a superb combo of power (8.4 K/9) and control (1.8 BB/9), with a 3.70 ERA in 112 innings.

Reaching Pittsburgh in late July, Snell split his time between the bullpen and the rotation (15 games, 5 starts). In 42 frames, he struck out 7.29 hitters per nine innings, but struggled with his control (5.14 BB/9). His ERA was 5.14. According to Fan Graphs’ pitch data, Snell’s secondary stuff was actually pretty good. His curveball was worth +0.51 runs above average per 100 pitches thrown, and his slider (+0.03) and change (+0.50) also rated well. Snell’s fastball was scorched, though (-1.36 runs/100).

In 2006, Snell got his first shot at being a full-time starter in the majors. He took 32 turns in Pittsburgh’s rotation, logging 186 innings pitched. Ian’s ERA was middling at 4.74, but the underlying numbers were better. Snell posted rates of 8.18 K/9 and 3.58 BB/9. His fielders let him down though, as Snell’s batting average on balls in play (BABIP) was .322. His home run per fly ball rate was abnormally high, too, at 14.9 percent (the average for pitchers is around 10-12 percent). Snell’s Expected Fielding Independent ERA (xFIP), based on strikeouts, walks and a normalized HR/FB rate, was 3.99.

Snell continued to struggle with his fastball in ‘06. He tossed the 92-93 MPH pitch about 58 percent of the time, but it was battered for -0.88 runs per 100 pitches. Ian’s 84 MPH changeup (thrown nine percent) was hit hard as well (-1.06). Happily, his 81 MPH curveball (seven percent) was worth +1.78 per 100 pitches, with his 84 MPH slider (26 percent) coming in at +0.04.

With solid breaking stuff but no heater or changeup to speak of, Snell showed a sizeable platoon split. Baseball-Reference keeps track of a stat called sOPS+, which compares a player’s performance in a given split to that of the league average. 100 is average, with a mark under 100 meaning a pitcher did better than the league average. Snell had a 92 sOPS+ versus righty batters (eight percent better than average), but lefties blasted him for a 127 sOPS+ (27 percent worse than average).

Topping the 200 inning threshold in 2007, Snell appeared to quell concerns over his size and ability to handle a starter’s workload. He tossed 208 frames, with 7.66 K/9 and 2.94 BB/9. His 3.76 ERA outpaced his 4.14 xFIP, but he did show improvement in some respects. Ian’s outside swing percentage climbed from 22.9 in 2006 to 28.2 (25 percent MLB average), and his first-pitch strike percentage increased from 58.4 to a whopping 63.7 (58 percent MLB average).

With his heater again getting hammered (-0.46 runs/100 pitches), Snell relied heavily upon his slider. Snell threw his fastball about 53 percent of the time, one of the twenty lowest rates among starters pitching 150+ innings. He whipped out his slider 37 percent, and it was wicked (+1.11). That changeup (10 percent) remained a work in progress, with a run value of -0.57. Left-handed hitters still touched Snell up on occasion (104 sOPS+), though not to the same extent as in 2006. Righties were shut down to the tune of an 87 sOPS+.

Snell got the ball on opening day in 2008, with the ink still drying on that long-term contract extension. However, instead of building upon that big ‘07 season, Snell scarcely resembled the hurler who Huntington praised during the spring.

His K rate remained stable (7.39), though his contact rate climbed from 77.3 percent to 79.8 percent (80-81% MLB average). Snell’s control abandoned him, though (4.87 BB/9). After getting ahead in the count so often in 2007, Ian had a lousy 56.5 first-pitch strike percentage in 2008. Because of Snell’s wildness, opposing batters only swung at 23 percent of his pitches thrown outside of the strike zone. Perhaps that 200+ inning season caught up with him, as he served a DL stint with right elbow tendinitis in late June.

Granted, Snell wasn’t as bad as his 5.42 ERA in 164.1 IP would suggest. His BABIP was an astronomical .358. But Ian’s 4.78 xFIP was nothing to write home about. After tossing his fastball infrequently in 2007, Snell fired low-90’s gas 62 percent of the time in 2008. The results were gruesome (-1.03 runs/100 pitches). That plus slider (thrown 33 percent) went into the witness protection program (-0.41), and the changeup (five percent) was again pummeled (-1.78). Perhaps because of the increase in fastballs, Snell’s groundball percentage dipped from 46 percent in ‘07 to just 37.9 percent in ‘08 (the MLB average is about 43 percent). Both lefties (135 sOPS+) and righties (124 sOPS+) beat him to a pulp.

Though his 2008 performance was a letdown, at least Snell missed some bats. The same thing can’t be said about his 2009 season. Between the Pirates and the Mariners, Ian logged 145 IP. His K rate tumbled to just 5.52 per nine innings, with his contact rate spiking to 82 percent.

Not only was Snell not fooling batters like he used to, but his control actually got worse. He issued an eye-popping 5.15 BB/9, with his first-pitch strike percentage a paltry 51.8. That was dead last among starting pitchers. Hitters swung at just 21.2 percent of Snell’s pitches thrown out of the zone. Overall, batters swung at 43 percent of Snell’s offerings, compared to 48.8 percent in 2007 and 47.3 percent in 2008 (45-46 percent MLB average). Why take a cut when the pitcher will just back himself into a corner anyway?

Snell’s 4.84 ERA might suggest that he was a little better than in ‘08, but his ghastly 5.38 xFIP says otherwise. His fastball, thrown 60 percent, was lashed for a run value of -0.24 per 100 pitches. After seemingly forgetting his curveball in 2008, Snell threw the 81 MPH pitch about 15 percent in ‘09. He probably shouldn’t have (-1.79). Only Snell’s 85 MPH slider (15 percent) and 84 MPH changeup (10 percent) avoided getting drubbed, with run values of +0.07 and 0.00, respectively. Southpaw batters managed a 109 sOPS+, and right-handers teed off for a 123 sOPS+. About the only promise he showed came in the International League (37.1 IP, 11.3 K/9, 3.1 BB/9, 0.96 ERA).

Within the course of two years, Snell has gone from a promising top-of-the-rotation arm to a guy who looks like AAA cannon fodder most nights. When his hard slider isn’t working, the erstwhile Pirate is left out at sea with a batting practice fastball and a fringy curveball and changeup. That “lively” fastball that Baseball America once praised has been worth -0.75 runs per 100 pitches in the big leagues.

Snell’s heat looks like it should be good. His fastball velocity has been around 92 MPH. According to Fan Graphs’ Pitch F/X data, Snell’s fastball tails in toward righties about six inches more than a pitch thrown without spin. That’s about average for a righty, so it’s not like the pitch is straight as an arrow. So what gives?

Eric Seidman of Baseball Prospectus (subscription required) offered some intriguing reasons as to why Snell’s fastball gets walloped so often. Through his research, Seidman determined that the velocity we see on the radar gun and the velocity perceived  by the batter may vary, depending upon how close to home plate the pitcher releases the ball and where a pitch is located within the strike zone.

Pitch F/X records a pitcher’s velocity at a uniform spot. However, not all pitchers release the ball at the same point. Seidman found that Snell releases his pitches further away from home plate than most pitchers, costing him perceived velocity due to the batter having more time to react. His fastball registers 91.7 MPH on the gun, but the batter sees an 87.6 MPH pitch. Snell technically sits in the low-90’s. But to the hitter, he’s throwing about as hard as Barry Zito.

In a later article, Seidman  explored how perceived velocity is also affected by location. Pitches thrown inside or up in the zone give  hitters less time to react and swing in time to achieve contact at the most favorable point. Conversely, pitches thrown outside or down decrease perceived velocity, giving the hitter more time to react.

As Seidman shows, Snell lives on the outside corner of the zone with his fastball. Courtesy of Trip Somers’ Pitch F/X Blog, here’s Snell’s 2009 location chart when he threw a four-seam fastball to a right-handed hitter:

Snell’s fastball vs. RHB

Snell just about never challenged a righty batter with an inside fastball, preferring to aim low and away. Seidman’s research showed that pitches thrown low and away to hitters lost four MPH of perceived velocity. Remember, Snell already releases the ball further away from home plate than most, making his 92 MPH fastball look about 88 MPH to the hitter. But when he throws a fastball away to a batter, the perceived velocity is closer to 84 MPH. Now, batters perceive Snell to be throwing about as hard as Livan Hernandez.

Here is Snell’s four-seam fastball location chart against lefties:

Snell’s fastball vs. LHB

Snell refuses to go inside, tossing low and away time and time again. And he’s often missing badly.

According to Fan Graphs’ pitch data, Snell’s fastball has been the tenth-worst among starters on a per-pitch basis since 2007. In ‘07, he thrived by throwing relatively few fastballs and mixing in a ton of sliders. Since then, he has thrown more heaters, with progressively poorer results. He threw fewer fastballs for strikes in ‘09, with fewer whiffs:

2008: 62.3 strike%, 5.4 whiff%

2009: 61.7 strike%, 4.8 whiff%

Perhaps that timid fastball has also cut into the effectiveness of his slider. After all, righties don’t have to worry about getting busted inside, and if lefties see something coming toward them, it’s probably a slider. Snell’s slider declined this past year as well:

2008: 65.7 strike%, 17.7 whiff%

2009: 61.8 strike%, 16.5 whiff%

If Ian Snell is to re-emerge as a valuable starting pitcher, he is going to have to make wholesale changes. His passive, pound-the-outside-corner fastball philosophy has resulted in plenty of crooked numbers for the opposing lineup.

Snell never handled left-handers particularly well, but it seems as though righties have caught on to the concept that they’re rarely going to get an inside header. Essentially, Snell works one side of the plate against same-handed batters. That’s an awfully predictable pitching pattern. It seems like Snell has strayed far from having a purpose behind every pitch he throws.