Prospect Retro: Allan Anderson

Allan Anderson
For those of you too young to remember, Allan Anderson was a pitcher for the Minnesota Twins in the late 80s and early 90s. He is a perfect illustration of the importance of strikeouts in projecting a pitcher's future.
Anderson was drafted by the Twins in the second round of the 1982 draft, out of high school in Lancaster, Ohio. He split the '83 season between Elizabethton in the Appy League and Wisconsin Rapids in the Midwest League, posting an ERA in excess of 7.00. But in '84 he had a great year, going 12-7, 2.86 for Visalia in the California League, with a 151/105 K/BB ratio in 189 innings, at age 20.
The Twins skipped him past Double-A in '85, moving him directly to Triple-A, where he went 7-11, 3.43 for Toledo in the International League. His K/BB was 94/79 in 176 innings, an unimpressive K/IP. Still, he was young for the level, and the Twins considered him one of their top prospects. He split '86 between Toledo and Minnesota, posting a 5.55 ERA for the Twins in 21 games, 10 starts. A weak '87 season for Triple-A Portland (4-8, 5.60) seemed to put the kibosh on his prospect status, at least if my memory serves correctly. He was regarded as a disappointment at that point.
But in '88, something clicked. He began the year at Portland again, going 1-1, 1.26 in 3 starts and earning his way into the Major League rotation when the Twins needed a starter. The key seemed to be an improved changeup, and for a time Anderson was being called "the next Frank Viola," who was the Twins ace at the time. Indeed, Anderson pitched brilliantly the rest of the year, going 16-9, 2.45 in 30 starts for the Twins, leading the American League in both raw ERA and ERA+. He also led in fewest walks per nine innings.
But there was a huge red flag: in 202 innings, his K/BB was 83/37. The walk rate was tremendous, but he didn't strike anyone out. Frank Viola, in contrast, racked up the strikeouts (193 in 256 innings that year) in decent quantities.
Anderson won 17 games in 1989. But his ERA rose more than a full run to 3.80, and his K/BB slipped further, to 69/53 in 197 innings. I remember thinking at the time that he was living on borrowed time, and that the Twins would do well to trade him. They didn't, and with Viola traded to the Mets, Anderson became the defacto "ace" for 1990. And then the collapse came, as Anderson went 7-18, 4.53 in 189 innings. Interestingly, his K/IP actually improved that year, with an 82/39 K/BB in 189 innings. But his H/IP slipped and his home run rate deteriorated. The league was definitely catching up with him.
The season after that, in '91 Anderson went 5-11 in 29 games, 22 starts, 4.96 ERA, with a dismal 51/42 K/BB in 134 innings. His control remained good, but "good" wasn't good-enough, it had to be perfect. Hitters had learned to lay off his changeup, and he didn't have enough other stuff in the arsenal to compensate. Overshadowed by Jack Morris, and youngsters Kevin Tapani and Scott Erickson, Anderson lost his rotation spot late that summer, and did not see action in the post-season for the eventual World Champs. He never pitched in the Major Leagues again.
The problem with Allan Anderson was not that he didn't have a great fastball. The problem was that he didn't strike anyone out. For awhile his control was good enough to compensate, but in the long run it was not enough. There are pitchers who have mediocre fastballs but who strike people out on a consistent basis. Two southpaw contemporaries of Anderson, Jimmy Key and John Tudor, didn't bust the radar guns, but they did have decent strikeout rates during their years of effectiveness. And there are pitchers who burn radar guns but don't strike anyone out. How many of them are successful for long periods of time? Not many.
Anderson had a nice two-year run with the Twins. But his poor strikeout rate showed that he didn't have much slack to work with. Even slight slippage in his skill, or adjustments by the hitters, were lethal to his chances of having long-term success.
0 recs |
11 comments
Comments
1987 NL Rookie Pitcher of the Year
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/player.php?p=dunnemi01
by Candymanfan on Jun 15, 2005 6:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Carlos Silva
Obviously he has otherworldly control, but do you think that could possibly countervail his inability to miss bats?
by Sulla on Jun 15, 2005 6:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
silva
I mean, his strikeout rate isn't even mediocre.
by John Sickels on Jun 15, 2005 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the topic of Twins with low K rates...
by Sulla on Jun 16, 2005 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
crain
And yes, I am concerned that he won't be able to sustain this kind of success without more strikeouts.
by John Sickels on Jun 16, 2005 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
tim hudson
The same sort of thing happened with Lowe.
It seems like both pitchers were good for a couple years after their K rates declined, and then the league started to catch up.
by Alien on Jun 15, 2005 7:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hey John
by Sirius Black on Jun 15, 2005 7:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
blanton
Sometimes guys can improve their K-rates. Brad Radke for one...he didn't strikeout anyone his rookie year. But he improved and grew and his K-rate grew with him.
by John Sickels on Jun 15, 2005 9:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Home runs, not Strike outs
Because if you aren't, then I disagree with your premise. Anderson's problem was his home run rate- it went up every year:
HR/BF
88 0.017
89 0.018
90 0.025
91 0.041
Had he kept the same rate, he might have had a shot at maintaing his success. Guys who don't strkie out a lot of hitters, but keep they walks and HRs to a minimum can do ok. A ball in play is turned in to an out about 70% of the time. In fact, check out his numbers on Balls in Play-
OBP SLG
88 0.274 0.332
89 0.283 0.352
90 0.298 0.370
91 0.268 0.333
MY red flag goes up when I see the 0.274 batting average on balls in play. That was probably lucky. And not sustainable. Joe Mays saw that type of number a couple of years ago right before his big payday.
A 0.024 rise in BABIP (batting average on balls in play) from 1988 to 1990, along with the increased HR rate caused Anderson's demise. I have no idea if that is related to strike outs. Maybe hitters knew they wouldn't get fooled, and could key for one pitch to take deep, without fear of eventually striking out.
Carlos Silva is very similar. It is harder to make any conclusions based on two years in relief and 1.5 years of starting, but I'll try :)
Last year, Silva allowed 84% of the batters he faced to put the ball in play (BF-K-BB-HBP-HR)/BF.
In those situations, he had a 0.318/0.394 OBP/SLG against. I would argue he was even unlucky in allowing a .318 BABIP. Every other starter on the Twins had a lower average, and as a semi-believer in DIPS, I would think Silva was not completely at fault for that batting average.
This year, 87% of the batters put the ball in play against him, and he is getting a higher % of them out (0.290 BABIP). However, his home run rate is increasing:
2004 0.026
2005 0.035
Egads! Maybe hitters do figure out these low BB/low K pitchers. It is still early, but if that home run rate stays up there, then I would start to worry.
If Silva can lower his home run rate back down to last years level, I see no reason why he would struggle in the future. Of course, his ceiling isn't very high based on his low strike outs, but I would enjoy having an innings eater with an above average ERA in my rotation.
Balls in play are good for the pitcher. The Twins have an excellent defense, and it is no surprise that their pitching philosphy is to cut down on the walks and let the defense do the work.
The only problem with this type of pitcher, is that he will be prone to highs and lows during his career. With so much of his value based on balls in play, his variation could be enormous. Strike out pitchers generally have low variation: their K/BF or K/9inn stay somewhat similar over their careers and make up a higher % of their total batters faced. But a ball-in-play pitcher has to deal with high variation.
So, long story short- Carlos, stop giving up homers!!
by drew on Jun 17, 2005 4:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Anderson's hit lucky 1988 season
If we assume that each extra hit allowed is like an error committed, we can get an idea as to how much Anderson was affected.
The difference between a 0.274 and 0.298 BABIP is about 16 hits over the course of a season (for Anderson). Doesn't sound like much, does it? Just about 1 hit every other start. But think about this... the 9 runners that reached on an error in 1988, led to 15 unearned runs for Anderson. If we use that rate to substitute in his 'hits removed', we end up with 27 extra runs. Add those runs to his 1988 season, and his ERA jumps from 2.45 to 3.63.
by drew on Jun 17, 2005 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
54
by art7 on Jun 4, 2006 1:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs









