Thursday Discussion

Also, the "Holy Roman Empire" line is originally Voltaire.

underated: Kyle Davies, Adam Miller, Jeff Francis, Ubaldo Jimenez, Steven Shell. Most underated I'd go with Kyle Davies

I think he's a very good prospect, but imo he's being seen as 'too' good. That can very well change after next season.

I'll go with Ryan Howard and Huston Street as the two most overrated prospects.  

Underrated would be Ambiorex Burgos.  Legit 96 MPH fastball with movement, good mechanics for his age, 11.6 K/9 in the Midwest League as a 20-year-old, and never gets mentioned as a legit arm to watch in the future.  His command needs work and he has some growing up to do, but you could say that about a ton of minor league pitchers who get far more recognition with less impressive stuff.  

For under-rated: Ryan Church.  I have never understood why this guy doesn't get a legit shot.  He tore up the PCL last year -- yes, it was the PCL, but .343/.428/.620 is impressive, even if he put up those numbers on the moon.  In 347 AB: 54 XBH, 51 BB, 62 SO, with only four GIDP's.  That, and supposedly he has a plus arm and is at least an average defensive player.  It seems the negativity surrounding his future stems from his brief trial at the end of last year, in which he hit .175/.257/.238 in 63 AB's.  The thing is, those 63 AB's came over the course of 30 games, so he was getting a lot of pinch-hitting AB's and defensive replacement AB's, both of which only give the batter one shot at the pitcher, hardly a fair way to judge a player with Church's track record.

Those two seem to be the most consistently over- and under-rated, respectively.

Memo to Scott Boras...Already overrated: Jered Weaver and Stephen Drew!

Underrated: Delwyn Young, Adam Miller, & (oddly enough) Edwin Jackson.  Jackson is still only 22 years old - I think we have seen what he should do and cut him some slack for one bad season.

Because he's a relief prospect, and not a special one.  There are maybe four or five relievers in baseball who are dominating enough to have value comparable to a good starting pitcher; Eric Gagne, Brad Lidge, Mariano Rivera, Francisco Rodriguez, and if he can sustain his 2004 performance, maybe Joe Nathan.  

Street can't even come close to touching those guys in raw stuff.  He just doesn't have that kind of dominating, lights out repertoire that will allow him to be a dominant, multi-inning horse at the end of the bullpen.  

Street's a pretty safe bet to be a nice reliever, but nice relievers are literally laying around on the scrap heap just waiting for a chance to throw 50 innings in the show.  With all due respect to John, there's just no way he's one of the few best pitching prospects in the game.  

How do you know (that Loney is a good hitter)?

Scouting.  I've watched him hit pretty extensively, and wrote up my thoughts at Prospectus last spring.  On a mechanical basis, there's almost nothing wrong with his swing.  He has terrific bat speed, good plate coverage, solid understanding of the strike zone, developing power, and an ability to drive the ball to all fields.  

Obviously, his 2003 performance didn't show that, and as I mentioned in my first post, injuries are a concern.  But prospect analysis is not simply evaluating past performance and ranking by numbers; we're trying to find out who is the best bet going forward, and skills not reflected in performance still count.  

Obviously, I'm not arguing that Loney's 2003 performance doesn't matter.  I was as disappointed by it as anyone, though the injuries are a pretty clear mitigating factor.  I just feel like a pretty big part of the analysis of James Loney's talent is being overlooked in the rush to evaluate him by his 2003 performance.  And, well, that's not good analysis.

1. Dallas McPherson. He has great power, but if i were an Angels fan, i would be shitting my pants over his strikeouts. Maybe I'm exaggerating. During his september callup, including playoffs, he was just overmatched. He had 3 homers in 40 at bats, which is good. But the rest just stunk. Im a little skeptical.
2. Chris Nelson. For God's sakes, he has played less than 40 games in rookie league, yet im reading how this guy is gonna be huge and all this stuff. I wanna see him in higher levels.

1. Casey Kotchman. Except for him being in John's top 10 prospects, i haven't really heard anyone that excited about him. He's such a polished hitter. He's got a great eye, and gap power.

Underrated would be Robinson Cano, he had a great run in AA, struggled some in AAA, but was still young for the level at 21 and then went on and had a very solid DWL campaign yet he never seems to get mentioned on the RARE occasions where 2B prospects are discussed.

Yes.  Many times.

Do you know what your talking about?

Yes.  

He's arguably the most polished reliever in the minors.  

Like I said, he's a safe bet to be a nice reliever.  This has nothing to do with my assertion that he lacks the kind of potential to be the kind of impact reliever that he would need to be to justify a ranking as one of the best pitching prospects in the game.

Along with his pin-point accuracy where he can spot his fastball anywhere he wants, he has this great sharp slider. Like Jesse Crain.

That's pretty ridiculous.  His slider is nowhere near the Jesse Crain level.  It's an above average pitch.  Crain, along with Nageotte, has one of the best sliders in the game.  

He doesnt have Mariano Rivera's stuff, but can you prove to me somehow how he's NOT one of the best pitching prospects?

It's almost impossible to prove a negative, especially to someone who clearly has their mind made up.  I could, if you'd like, give you a list of about 15-20 pitchers I would much rather have in my organization.  In no real particular order...

Felix Hernandez
Matt Cain
Michael Hinckley
Anthony Reyes
Adam Miller
Chad Billingsley
Edwin Jackson
Kyle Davies
Scott Olson
Gavin Floyd
Jeff Francis
Merkin Valdez
Jose Capellan
Dan Meyer
Thomas Diamond
Scott Kazmir

There's 16 off the top of my head without giving it too much thought.  

You're talking about the 11 innings he threw in Kane County, 13 innings in Midland, and 2 innings in Sacramento? I'm sorry, but you can't dominate a level in that short of a period of time.  

Street has neither the pure stuff or the long track record of success of most of the other guys I named.  When Keith Foulke, who was traded twice for mediocre pitchers, is your best case scenario, you're probably not one of the best pitching prospects in the game.  

I guess the real question is how valuable an indicator minor league performance is in light of a pitcher not having knock-your-socks-off stuff.

I think tools matter a lot more for pitching prospects than for hitting prospects, and I'm a lot more likely to value a hitter who has good numbers but poor scouting reports than a pitcher who scouts aren't fond of.  I'm not nearly as high on Yasmeiro Petit as some others, for instance.  It is just too easy to breeze through the minors with a good changeup or a breaking ball that minor league hitters will chase that major league hitters will not.  For years, statistical analysts have been hyping soft-tossing guys with good BB/K ratios, and for years, they've been consistently off base.  

Guys like John Stephens, Jason Arnold, and Bud Smith have been sabermetric poster boys for undervalued pitching prospects and fallen flat pretty quickly.  Even a guy like Craig Anderson, who barely cracked 80 MPH and is now out of baseball, posted tremendous walk-to-strikeout ratios and garnered some support as a top prospect.  

We can talk about blending scouting and statistical analysis all we want, but we have to actually do it.  And we'd be well served by noting that the mediocre stuff but good performance types haven't exactly been the stars that we'd have hoped.  

Another player who seems to always be mentioned on underrated and overrated lists is Nick Swisher.  I hope he belongs on the underrated.

One thing I wonder about is how likely even these pitchers' (i.e., Street and the 16 mentioned above) "stuff" is likely to carry forward to the big league level.  I'm sure that a lot of them will still have it, but it seems like there's a pretty hefty attrition rate for fastballs in the minors; someone and his purported bread-and-butter "92-94 mph fastball" who comes up throwing 88-90, a la Mark Mulder, off the top of my head but there are countless others.  Not that this loss in "stuff" necessarily will hurt the pitcher, of course, but if THAT (i.e., "stuff") is ALL he has, then a substandard performance record in high minor league ball would seem to predispose that player to "bust" status more often.

If they care to, I'd like to see John and David answer that.

As was pointed out, it's easy to breeze through the minors when you have a pitch or two that's too advanced for minor-league competition.  Maybe that's the case with Street, who knows at this point.  Yet, does not a 90-odd MPH fastball that the pitcher can barely harness qualify as one of such pitches?  For instance, it's hard to get too excited about a Matt Cain, an Edwin Jackson, a Chad Billingsley, a Merkin Valdez, or to a lesser extent Dan Meyer (in AAA), when they have shown trouble throwing strikes in the minors.  As I understand it, it doesn't get any easier to throw strikes the higher up the ladder you go.  John Maine, anyone?  Bobby Jenks?  Adam Loewen (low minors)?  

I know that command is usually the last skill to come around for a young power pitcher, but since we're trying to divine projections, good peripherals seem to carry over to a certain extent, too, right?  A bad BB rate is a bad BB rate, and it's something a pitcher will obviously have to actively correct in order for it to get better; it's not like pitches that were balls in AA or AAA are suddenly going to become strikes in the Show simply by virtue of "stuff".  And, since Street started this whole thing, as John points out, his stuff isn't bad, anyway, unless one considers 92-94 mph "mediocre", which seems pretty idealistic to me.

The above-discussed points represent several things I do not understand about player evaluation, and hopefully someone can shed some light on them for me.  Thank you in advance.

No. I'd rate his stuff as slightly above average, mostly because of the lack of a third pitch.  My comments about Stephens, Smith, and Arnold were in response to Cletus' specific question of "how valuable an indicator minor league performance is in light of a pitcher not having knock-your-socks-off stuff."  

I should have been more clear, but that second paragraph wasn't still talking about Street.  I was attempting to answer Cletus' question about my valuation of stuff vs performance, and used examples of guys with below average stuff to defend the assertion that stuff matters.  I wasn't in any way trying to lump Street into that group.  

know that command is usually the last skill to come around for a young power pitcher, but since we're trying to divine projections, good peripherals seem to carry over to a certain extent, too, right?

Not really.  The correlation of minor league and major league walkrates is not very good.  With a guy like Jenks, who has awful mechanics, its a legitimate criticism.  With a guy like Cain or Meyer, where their command is at least average, the high walks are more a function of hitters simply not being able to hit their best stuff, leading to a lot of deep counts and inferior hitters taking a lot of pitches.  This is where scouting has to play a role, determining whether a pitcher is walking a lot of batters because he can't throw strikes or because hitters can't hit what he throws.  

From my research, it's clear that there's a range of walk rates for minor league pitchers that is basically equal in projecting future command.  If you fall between 3-5 walks per 9, there's really no difference between 3.1 or 4.9.  Once you start getting into the 5.5-6.5 BB/9 area, there's a good chance you're looking at a guy with mechanical issues, and that could be a real problem.  

So, no, I'm not concerned enough about Cain or Valdez being able to consistently throw strikes in the majors to alter their future potential.  They might not have quite the command that Street or Greinke or even Blanton does, but their stuff is significantly better.  

Given two pitchers of equal performance, health, and age, but faced with a choice of command or movement, I'm taking the guy with movement.  It's a lot easier to learn to hit your spots than it is to make your ball dance.  Note, however, that movement and velocity aren't the same thing, and I don't think every guy with a 98 MPH fastball has good stuff.  Matt Anderson, Colt Griffin, to a point Jose Capellan, these guys are one trick velocity guys, and I don't think they have great stuff.  92 with movement is a lot better than 97 and straight.  

Also, Delwyn Young is a butcher at second base.  Keith Ginter is my favorite comparison for him.

Most Overrated: Jose Capellan, Jeff Francouer (Weeks and Guzman have been done enough).

Stuff is an all encmpassing word for a repertoire of pitches.  I wouldn't try to classify a pitchers stuff with a velocity number.  Here's my take on Street's stuff from what I've seen:

Fastball: 87-92 with downward break.  Will be referred to as a sinkerball a lot.  When located well, its a tough pitch to drive.  Command of fastball is very good, making up for average velocity.  

Slider: 80-85 with sweeping movement.  Not a tight slider, more of a breaking ball.  Could be considerd a slurve.  Needs to locate it well for it to be effective; down and out of the zone, its an out pitch, but if he keeps it up, its a meatball.  

The fastball would rate as something like a 65 on the 20-80 scale, and the slider would be a 60, maybe a 65.  His command would be a 70 or so, which means he's likely to outpitch his overall stuff.  

I don't hate Huston Street.  Like I've said, I think he'll probably be a pretty solid relief pitcher.  I just don't think pretty solid relief pitchers are all that hard to find, and I don't think Street has the kind of stuff necessary to make the leap into that upper echelon of relief ace status.  

You know, thats odd that you mention that seeing as how Huston Street throws 92-94 with movement.

Also, Phil Avlas just destroyed A ball this year. His SLUG is inflated by his 3B which seem sure to go down, and it was his second year in A ball, and hes 21, but everything I have read about him says he is "known for his defense" which must mean he is decent there, and his command of the K zone is solid, what's your take on him.

Leaving aside the fact that he doesn't throw 92-94 consistently (I've seen him on several occasions, always 87-92, and have many scout friends who have seen him and report the same thing.  I'm confident in that as his actual range of velocity), I'm not claiming he's worse than guys who throw 97 but straight.  Despite being the voice of negativity in this thread, I actually like Huston Street.  I think he's going to be a good major league pitcher.  I just don't think he's one of the best few pitching prospects in the game, mostly because he's limited to relief work.  

If a pitcher has great stuff but opposing hitters are better off not swinging at it (as evidenced by the higher BB totals), then won't the even more disciplined MLB hitters simply do the same (work the count) and get the pitcher into trouble anyway?

No.  I'm not referring to having great stuff outside the strike zone.  I'm referring to having dominating enough stuff that minor league hitters won't swing at hittable strikes that major league hitters definitely will.  The higher percentage of taken pitches that opposing batters face, the higher your walk rate will be, for two factors: more outs being made in deep counts, leading to more opportunities for walks, and mediocre minor league umpires missing calls.  

The effect that I'm referring to is basically a pitcher having good enough stuff to turn the opposing hitters into a lineup full of Rich Becker types; they just won't swing unless they have, which serves to raise both the walk and strikeout rates while deflating hit and home run rates.  This isn't an effect that will carry over to the major leagues; you aren't going to have too many major league hitters staring at strikes consistently, but in the minors, it's not that uncommon.  

This is an instance where more complete data would be helpful, because I don't believe raw walk totals sufficiently explain the difference between a guy like Cain and Jenks.  And this is where scouting can really supplement a statistical analysis well.

Can you define several? Seeing as how he didn't spend much time in one place, I'd like to know what "several" means. If you're talking about NCAA, than take into account his groin injury that took 3-5 MPH off.

John, can you please chime in and tell us how hard Street was throwing in the AFL?..Maybe add on a note of how many innings you saw Street throw. I'd appreciate it

As a Dodger fan, I think of Jonathan Broxton who projects to be a solid reliver.  Why not consider them strong prospects?  Perhaps if closers like Gagne were developed as a relivers then they would not have lost time in their careers trying to make it as starters.

I agree that I would rather have a Felix Hernandez or Chad Billingsley. but I don't think we can say someone is not a top prospect simply from looking at their position.

In general, I think guys who are "toolsy" come very overrated.  I mentioned Franklin Gutierrez in an earlier post as overrated because he is such a free swinger.  Also, prospects whose bodies have already developed - Prince Fielder - seem overrated to me because they cannot be projected to hit for too much more power.  If a guy has developed and tears up Class A, who cares?

The thing about Street vs lefties seems to be 100% assumption. I've seen his lefty splits, and his BAA is actually lower vs left handed hitters.

And to inning calculators, add on 5 shutout innings in the PCL playoffs. 5 hits, 1 walk, 5 K's