Bang @Christianthrow

100% Commited, Go Cougars!! @AverettBaseball @GVLHSBaseball @BB_Perform @athletesbase

I believe that with these changes, Hicks can bounce back from his down year in 2025 and breakout in 2026. Drop your thoughts in the replies! . . . #JordanHicks #RedSox #DirtyWater #MLB #TreadAthletics #Velo #Sweeper #Gyro #Splitter #Sinker #Velo #Baseball #Performance

All 3 comps primarily use their curveballs in count leverage situations, with Cabrera and Smith using it more vs lefties, and Lopez being more platoon neutral.

a curveball. While I don’t see it becoming his primary breaking ball, adding it could stretch the plot vertically, giving hitters more to defend against, and also giving the 4-seam something else to work off of north/south.

I looked at a few comps — pitchers with similar release angles and spin characteristics who found success in 2025: Edward Cabrera, Shane Smith, and Pablo López. In addition to some other things I’ve already mentioned, they all share something that I believe Hicks should add, -

If the cut-split was not a conscious choice, he may have to adjust the leverage on the seams to try to create more consistent sidespin, instead of gyro spin.

While the cutty split had more of a purpose in 2024 when he didn’t have the gyro, it now makes more sense to let this pitch have a more traditional splitter profile. Splitters with >10 HB performed better for him in 2025.

The gyro shape will likely end up close to where it was in 2023, and even if it drifts into more slutter territory, higher velocity and cleaner separation should help performance.

Adjusting the grip to get the sweeper closer to where I’ve highlighted in the proposed plot (an area that performed well for him last year), and a combination of pushing velocity and tweaking the gyro grip, should help define these pitches and improve results.

This isn’t just a command issue, though. When looking at sliders and sweepers he threw in the “blend zone” last year, those pitches performed poorly — with wOBA’s against north of .620 and lower whiff rates than breakers landing in more clearly defined zones.

If Hicks is able to separate all 3 of these pitches into more clearly defined profiles, I believe commanding all of them will not prove as difficult.

First touching on command, when pitches start to blend, it’s harder to have unique focal points to aim for. When profiles are more defined, one can more easily find where they need to set their sights to land it where they want to.

Moving on to movement volatility, this factor affects Hicks in a few different ways. His offspeed pitches have a tendency to blend, the splitter likes to cut and get into gyro territory, and the gyro and sweeper sometimes found their profiles overlapping last year.

Right now, he uses it primarily around and above the top of the zone, which generally makes sense given how it plays off the sinker. Slightly upping its usage and utilizing it more to cover the top of the zone should serve him well moving forward.

However, I believe this trade-off is worth it if it gives Hicks another pitch to zone.

There is nuance to this, as the sinker is used at a much higher rate. It’s natural for the element of surprise to boost the 4-seam’ numbers a bit, and the 4-seam shape isn’t excellent either, so one can expect it to regress if it’s used more.

pitches in 2025, they performed poorly, however, the 4-seam actually outperformed the sinker- and not only when thrown for a strike. The 4-seam has had a lower wOBA and higher whiff rate than the sinker in each of the past 3 seasons.

The sinker is the only pitch he consistently throws in-zone. Out of all pitches Hicks threw in-zone in 2025, 66% were sinkers. Right now, it feels like it’s the only pitch Hicks feels comfortable throwing for a strike. When looking at the in-zone numbers for all 3 offspeed

Throughout his career, Hicks has consistently struggled with command – his walk rate has been above league average every year. There are multiple angles as to why this is the case- I believe a lot of it comes down to approach and movement volatility. Let’s look at approach first.