What Makes a Breaking Ball Effective?

A bit of pitching philosophy and a Trevor Megill case study

Pitch design and the relationship between the pitches in a player’s arsenal is easily my favorite part of baseball. Every athlete is built different from the next, so it makes sense that the things that work for one pitcher won’t always work for another. My favorite question to ask when looking at a pitcher is, “What makes them effective?”

The more I’ve asked this question, the more I’ve come to understand that there is too much to learn. Being a lifelong learner is an endless journey. There will always be another frontier. Nobody has all the answers, so it’s much more important to ask the right questions.

One question I’ve been mingling with lately is, “What makes a breaking ball effective?”

There are dozens of data points we have at our disposal to attempt to answer that question with possibly hundreds more that we don’t even know we should be looking at yet. There really isn’t a hierarchy among the different data points either, so being able to look at different data points as pieces of a larger puzzle is maybe more important than examining certain traits under a microscope or in a vacuum.

So what makes a breaking ball effective? Recently, I’ve been exploring how different angles and locations of pitches can help generate different outcomes.

Trevor Megill and his outlier breaking ball

If you’ve talked to me about baseball at some point since June, you’re probably aware of my interest in Trevor Megill. I thought he would end up being a big time acquisition at the trade deadline because he doesn’t appear to be a significant part of the Milwaukee’s future plans.

Megill is a 29 year-old RHP currently with the Brewers. His large frame at 6'8 allows for a unique delivery with above average extension that adds roughly half a mile per hour to the perceived velocity on his pitches. Megill’s upper 90s fastball has above average velocity and has slightly above average vertical movement. Fastballs with more of a rising shape than a running or sinking one tend to be platoon-neutral — making him someone who could eventually pitch in a multi-inning role or higher leverage. His breaking ball, labeled as a knuckle curve, is one of three breaking balls this year to average a vertical approach angle steeper than -9.5 degrees at a velocity of at least 85 mph. Megill’s curveball is on the extreme end of a spectrum of steeper and harder than average breaking ball shapes that have helped some players find success; like Zac Gallen, Tyler Glasnow, and David Robertson.

Megill put together some respectable numbers this season and has been fairly serviceable throughout his career, but I believe some minor adjustments could help him reach a higher level. The following suggestions are easier said than done, but I’m confident they could increase his effectiveness. The data only helps if it can be turned into actionable steps and development. Sometimes a subtle shift in mindset or philosophy on the back-end of game planning can lead to significant strides when it’s put into action.

First, his breaking ball is his best pitch and needs to be thrown more. Megill threw his less than 30% last season while he may have relied a bit too much on his fastball — throwing it a little more than 70%. Even a 60/40 split would likely keep enough hitters from sitting on the fastball. However, it needs to be determined why Megill is throwing his best pitch at such a small percentage of the time. The reasons could range anywhere from not feeling confident in himself or his catchers, or maybe he’s not fully aware of how unique his breaking ball is. Answering this question is the first step towards creating actionable steps to increase his breaking ball usage.

Megill’s average pitch locations could use some adjusting as well. His fastball would be more effective up in and above the zone while he could take advantage of the unique depth on his breaking ball by getting it below the zone more often. Throwing the breaking ball in the zone can be effective on the first or second pitch of an AB to steal a strike, but an average location below the zone would generate more swing and miss and poor contact because hitters have to protect against Megill’s upper 90s fastball. Additionally, a lower breaking ball location would play into his strengths by creating an even more steep VAA. The potential barrier to sub-optimal pitch locations could be helped with a universal target from a team’s catchers or targeting optimal locations for different pitches in various counts.

If a transformation into a multi-inning or even starting role is something Megill would be comfortable with, he would have to get a feel more for a cutter or slider to “bridge” the gap between his fastball and breaking ball. The implementation of bridge pitches has been interesting to watch unfold across the league over the last few years. Megill had a cut-slider shape he used a bit in previous seasons, but almost completely abandoned it last season. That’s fine for a short relief role because his other pitch shapes are naturally fairly platoon neutral, but implementing a cut-slider pitch again would be necessary if he’d like to explore a more stretched-out role.

The issue with the cut-slider in the past has been the shape; it hasn’t been distinct enough from his breaking ball in its movement. Again, this data doesn’t mean much if it can’t be translated into actionable steps from a coaching staff or player development team. Megill’s unique build and natural tendencies would ultimately determine the next steps for him in designing an effective bridge pitch.

For what it’s worth, he did alter his horizontal release point towards the end of last season to create less of a horizontal angle to the plate. There were no significant changes to his pitches, but this adjustment could theoretically help him be even more platoon neutral. Megill really only started doing this in August, so the sample for him isn’t large enough to draw any significant conclusions yet. Nonetheless, it could be effective in theory to neutralize LHB.

While his future role in Milwaukee is a bit unclear at the moment and he has played for three different organizations over the last three seasons, Trevor Megill looks like a strong candidate to take a step forward in 2024.

All data and graphs came from either Baseball Savant or Alex Chamberlain’s Pitch Leaderboard v5, but I made the first graph myself using Google Looker Studio.