Minor League Ball: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: Sounder At Heart for Seattle Sounders Fans!

2007 San Francisco Giants Prospects

2007 San Francisco Giants Prospects

  1. Tim Lincecum, RHP, Grade A  (terrific)
  2. Jonathan Sanchez, LHP, Grade B  (a solid pitcher if he stays healthy)
  3. Marcus Sanders, 2B, Grade B (this assumes that his shoulder injury was the cause of his problems last year. I am not certain of this grade and am open to arguments either way).
  4. Billy Sadler, RHP, Grade B- (I like him best of all the middle relief candidates)
  5. Kevin Frandsen, 2B, Grade B- (is this too high?)
  6. Eddy Martinez-Esteve, OF, Grade B- (this assumes good health)
  7. Emmanuel Burriss, SS, Grade B- (borderline C+ but draft status boosts him a bit)
  8. Fred Lewis, OF, Grade C+ (I like him better than this grade implies but he's getting old for a prospect)
  9. Nate Schierholtz, OF, Grade C+ (I keep going back and forth on this guy)
  10. Travis Ishikawa, 1B, Grade C+ (Good glove, mediocre bat for a first baseman)
  11. Brian Wilson, RHP, C+  (another middle relief candidate)
  12. Brian Anderson, RHP, C+ (another middle relief candidate)
  13. Eugenio Velez, OF, C+ (added to 40-man roster after strong '06 but already 24)
  14. Ben Copeland, OF, C+ (possible fourth outfielder eventually, perhaps should be grade C)
  15. Osiris Matos, RHP, C+ (another middle relief candidate)
  16. Clayton Tanner, LHP, C+ (young pitcher a long way away)
  17. Antoan Richardson, OF, C+ (speed demon but can he hit at higher levels?)
  18. Justin Hedrick, RHP, C  (another middle relief candidate)
  19. Joseph Martinez, RHP, C  (good control)
  20. Jesse Floyd, RHP, C  (interchangeable with guys below)
Others to Pay Attention To: Joe Bateman, RHP; Chris Begg, RHP; Manuel Cabeza, RHP; Brian Horwitz, OF; Mike McBryde, OF; Pat Misch, LHP; Mike Mooney, OF; Matt Palmer, RHP; Nick Pereira, RHP; Kelvin Pichardo, RHP; Kevin Pucetas, LHP; Sharlon Schoop, SS; Ben Snyder, LHP; Erick Threets, LHP; Clay Timpner, OF; Merkin Valdez, RHP; Dan Ortmeier, OF.

Young pitchers Pichardo and Pucetas are being considered for the Top 20; this is all a work in progress.

The Giants in a Sentence: The Giants have some interesting relief arms after Lincecum and Sanchez, but have shown little ability to develop hitters with plate discipline or plus offensive potential.

This list took forever and it is really not done yet, but I wanted to get it out there since it is already late. There is a large mass of Grade C type guys who are marginal prospects or just too far away to tell for sure. The only guy I'm really certain about at all is Lincecum, which is a no-brainer. I like Sanchez a lot, but all the other guys have at least one question mark and in some cases several. Injuries were also a huge issue. I may also be too generous with some of those C+ grades and some of them may get reduced to regular Cs later on.

Note: Remember that ALL GRADES ARE PRELIMINARY. There is a lot of slack in the B-/C+/C range and players may move up and down depending on how my thinking progresses. Feel free to make comments, point out sleepers I may have missed, etc. Note that there is only a limited amount of space in the book, and the max I can do is 35-36 players per team.

Of course, the best thing you can do is buy my book

0 recs  |  Comment 163 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

re
I don't know much about Lincecum, but wasn't this year the first time he's ever had a BB/9 rate below 4 (including college obviously)?

by bootsy on Nov 26, 2006 6:31 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

yep
i cant grasp a solid A grade for Lincecum

by PooNani on Nov 26, 2006 6:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah as good as Lincecum
can be I don't think he's proven that high of a grade. I still have serious injury doubts about his size and build combined with his reported velocity and stress he'll put on him arm during full MLB seasons. I did read on here that he was working in the 94 mph range instead of of the 97-100 mph which I think is far better suited for his stature. But there aren't many successful major league starters his size and even the ones that are his size have had trouble avoiding injury. Just a few too many questions to warrant that grade imo.

by Havok1517 on Nov 26, 2006 7:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

94 MPH
That was one game that I saw Lincecum in person.  Other eyewitnesses from his Cal League campaign swear he was 96-98.  I do think he works in a range of velocities and 98 is close to his max.  92-98 depending on what day you catch him maybe.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 26, 2006 8:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

drB
Exactly, the day I saw Lincecum, he worked around 94mph but I saw him dial it up and hit 98 several times.  
Giants '08

by z4 landshark on Nov 26, 2006 8:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Lincecum
One other thing I'd like to say, once again, is on the day I saw him, Lincecum threw about 60% curveballs and that was actually his better pitch.  It's the fastball/curveball combo that's going to get him wherever he's going, not just the fastball.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 26, 2006 8:53 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Lincecum
He was throwing 95-96 regularly in his first start at San Jose, but 94 was more common later in the year.  He also hit 98-99 several times in each start I saw.

by BruteSentiment on Nov 27, 2006 3:04 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Lincecum
Given his draft status followed by him validating it with the gaudy numbers he put up this summer, there is no reason to say a grade A is too high.  The size arguement doesn't hold much water for me.  Plenty of good players, not just in baseball, have been passed up because they didn't match a physical archetype - if you can play, you can play. Until he has persistant injury problems (if/when he actually does) it's nothing more than speculation and is far less tangible than the praise he is getting from scouts, not to mention the very real numbers he has posted to date.

by slurve on Nov 27, 2006 8:04 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Size
To make the obvious comparison, his size is very very comparable to Roy Oswalt, who was very underrated by scouts because of it. Oswalt's listed at 6'0" and 170, and Lincecum's listed 5'11" (although he used to be 6'0" on the UWash site), but listings aren't always gospel and I imagine if you stuck them next to each other they'd be pretty close in stature.

Remember Pedro was shipped off in one of the worst trades in baseball history because Tommy Lasorda thought he was too small to be a decent starter.

by Roger on Nov 27, 2006 11:48 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Cowart?
any thoughts on him?

Also, Adam Witter?

by nostocksjustbonds on Nov 26, 2006 6:40 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I'm not a pacifist, I'm a...
Cowart strikes me as the kind of guy whose stuff is so marginal that he's going to have to prove it every single step of the way.  Same with Frandsen--the kid destroys the AFL in his second pro year, and the scouts are still grumbling, "Utility guy at best."  When you don't have the tools, you keep having to plop up the numbers.

Personally, I wanted to see McBryde in the top 20.  BA went sorta bonkers over him a couple weeks ago, and he does seem to be totally injury free, not to mention tool-laden.

by multiphasic on Nov 26, 2006 7:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Cowart
Adam Cowart is a fascinating case.  I haven't seen him pitch, but he's reportedly a sidearmer/submariner who apparently has some very unorthodox arm angles/release points.  He could hit 92 MPH over-the-top early in college, but an injury took his velocity and it never came back.  His college coach worked with him on alternative deliveries and his max velocity now is reportedly 84-86 MPH.  He apparently depends on his unusual looks, ball movement, and a lot of groundballs, and great control.  His results in the NWL were nothing short of phenomenal.  Whether he can take that up the ladder is a very interesting story to watch.  My guess is that his ceiling is as a middle reliever, hopefully in the majors.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 26, 2006 8:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Cowart's delivery
I'm pretty sure I read a quote from him wherein he said he wanted to change his delivery to a more conventional one. That could increase his velocity, though it may hamper his deceptiveness.

I do think that he could make it as a starter if he gets to the majors, a la Reuter. He'll definitely be interesting to follow. Does he start 2007 in San Jose, Augusta or...Connecticut? I'm guessing San Jose, but sometimes I can't tell how they decide those things.

by nostocksjustbonds on Nov 26, 2006 10:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Cowart, Witter and McBryde
Cowart: He had a staph infection in his left knee which was the reason for his change to this motion.  Its one of the first motions I've seen where his plant food barely moves.

When he comes set, he's bent over at the waist, almost like he's in a three-point stance in football, but his left leg is halfway down the mound.  He lifts the foot barely, doing practically a toe-tap, and then he pushes off with his rear leg.  The motion is a true underhand, dirt-scraping with the knuckles.

He probably has no more power to gain off his pitching unless he does a real change to his motion, but then he may lose his control.

I agree that he probably won't be an effective starter at the highest levels, but with his motion, his superb control and his ability to throw a couple of pitches with consistency, he's a very intriguing relief prospect.  And I wouldn't say never about the starting.

Witter: I didn't get to see much of him.  Natural power swing, though it's not heavily projectible.  I've heard reports that his defense is lacking, but unlike Sandoval before him, the Giants don't plan to move him elsewhere.

McBryde: The funny thing is, he might be a better reliever than an outfielder.  But he's a very good outfielder with plus defense and speed tools, and solid enough hitting.  He'll probably never become a power guy, but he's not the type who needs to be to be successful.  He will have to stave off lingering doubts about his legs and health after missing most of 2006's college year with a severe Hamstring injury.

by BruteSentiment on Nov 27, 2006 3:13 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Valdez?
Isn't Valdez out of option next year?

How does the TJ surgery effect his roster standing?

by Bhaakon on Nov 26, 2006 6:46 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Daniel Griffin
You must have missed him - but hes just 22, 6'7, throws hard, and had solid K rates the last 2 years. I am not saying he's Lincecum - but hes a better prospect than half the guys on the list. He was # 9 last year - I know that he had an ERA over 4, but that hardly drops him off the map IMHO.

by tupelodylan on Nov 26, 2006 6:50 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

griffin
Injury thing there. I'm trying to find out more details about it. I bet Dr.GiantsFan knows more than I do about Griffin's status. :)

by John Sickels on Nov 26, 2006 7:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Sorry, John
I'm in the dark on Griffin too.  

I know Whitaker pulled an oblique very early in the year.  He came back briefly then, according to a knowledgeable source over on mccoveychronicles.com,  he developed some kind of elbow problem and had surgery.  Must not have been TJ because he's supposed to be ready for spring training.  I'm not sure non-TJ elbow surgery is reassuring.  As raw as Whitaker is, he can ill afford to lose development time to multiple injuries.  Not ready to say he's a bust, but he's skating darn close to the edge.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 26, 2006 8:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Griffin
All I am close to knowing is that it was an elbow issue, and that's me extrapolating from off the cuff remarks I heard.  No one I talked to knew (or would say) more than that.

However, since a lot of Griffin's upside depends on his curve, any injury will be very, very impactful on his rating.

by BruteSentiment on Nov 27, 2006 3:15 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Good Job!
That's about as good a list as anybody is going to come up with.  

IMO, you are being generous with the C+'s.  Thank you.

I would rank Frandsen higher, not lower.

I would probably rank Burris higher.

I would probably put Schoop in the top 20, more by default than anything.

Craig Whitaker and Dan Griffin are two injuries that could come back strong, but very iffy.

I know Angel Villalona has not played yet, but just reading the tea leaves, a top Dominican prospect, high signing bonus, Scott Boras throwing dust in the air..........I would rank him #2 just because everyone else below Lincecum is just so bad.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 26, 2006 6:57 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Agreed on Frandsen
If I had to choose straight up between Frandsen and Dustin Pedroia, I'd take Frandsen.

by StickRat on Nov 26, 2006 8:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Toronto or San Francisco?
I'd honestly rather have Toronto's system.  Especially given EME's lack of progress.

by Jurgen on Nov 26, 2006 6:59 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

toronto
well is Adam Lind supposed to be a stud?? I am a Giants fan, but Lincecum has the possibility of being a major league stud pitcher. Almost on the basis of that alone, I would have to lean towards the Giants.  

I just dont know if Ricky Romero has what it takes to be a starter in the majors.  Maybe, a reliever..?

Giants '08

by z4 landshark on Nov 26, 2006 8:10 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, but...
Look, it's kinda like deciding would you rather be kicked in the teeth or punched in the groin.  Both systems blow.  But I'd take my chances with 3 of Lind, Snider, Romero, Thigpen becoming solid big-leaguers than Lincecum getting his walk rate under control.

by Jurgen on Nov 26, 2006 10:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

EME
I'm assuming that Martinez-Esteve's rank factors in his terrible defense. If this is the case, what rank would you just give to his bat? Is he B+, A-?

by cinqua on Nov 26, 2006 8:49 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

No way
EME had a .770 OPS to start the year at AA.  He'll be 24 in July and a year behind in development.  Colour me unimpressed.  Even if he's healthy, B- is being optimistic.

by Jurgen on Nov 26, 2006 10:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

EME
I've said this a lot on the Giants boards, and I'll say this here:

If Manny Ramirez can play left field for an AL team, EME's defense is nothing that makes him a so-called 'AL Player.'

His health is the more pertinent issue, and how he'll come back from labrum surgery is a big deal.  That said, he came back from labrum surgery on his throwing shoulder in 2005 and had a very good year, so coming back from the labrum surgery on his non-throwing shoulder this year, with more time in the offseason to rest, shouldn't be a problem.

As a hitter, he's one of the best I've seen in the Giants system.  Very good pitch recognition, sweet swing, solid power that can grow with health.  I think a C+ is a low ranking on him.

by BruteSentiment on Nov 27, 2006 3:19 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Nathan Pendley
Probably one of the best left-handed arms in the system ... Sanchez and Tanner being the exceptions. He was shutdown at the end of '06, and I don't know his health status, which could be the reason he isn't mentioned. If he is healthy though, he has potential ... perhaps from the Tom Martin mold?

by StickRat on Nov 26, 2006 8:54 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Lefty Relievers
One kid that John didn't mention who is kind of flying below the radar, but has pitched consistently well and is not old for his level is David Quinowski.  He's a small kid, so probably doesn't have a great arm, but I heard a rumor one time that he hit 95 MPH.

The Giants drafted a whole bunch of lefty reliever types in 2006.  Paul Oseguera, from UCLA, had a rough start at Salem-Keizer, but turned in some spectacular strikeout numbers in August.  Ryan Paul got a late start due to the College World Series with CS Fullerton, but he's another big lefty.  He had a high ERA, but that was inflated by a couple of terrible outings from what I remember.  He had some very good outings too.  Steve Calicutt is another LHRP who pitched pretty well for S-K.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 26, 2006 9:05 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Dr B. ...
You and I need to hit the yard together next year. Beers are on me.

I've been impressed with Quinowski's numbers. Haven't seen him pitch yet. It's tough to believe if he's pumping 95 that he'd still be an unknown, but stranger things have happen. I don't know how many people were raving about Brian Wilson a year or two ago. I really like Oseguera. He had a pretty heavy workload at UCLA, appearing in 29 games. I saw Ryan Paul in college. Not terribly impressed. Good velocity but he needs to rub some funk on it.

by StickRat on Nov 26, 2006 9:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd Love It
Do you read the Giants Message Board?  I usually post there when I'm going to a SJ game in SoCal.  I live near San Bernardino, so usually go there.  30 min drive from Rancho Cucamonga too.  I even drove up to High Desert one time just to see Merkin Valdez pitch.  Damn, he looked good too.  What a shame!  I guess just goes to show TINSTAAPP.  Lake Elsinore is withing driving distance for me too.  

I'm a teetotler so I'll have a coke while you have your beer.  How's that?

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 26, 2006 9:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Sounds like a plan
I'll have the make the trip from the Bay Area. I know what you mean about Valdez. I was at the ST game where they pulled him with elbow pain. It was the high (getting to see him take the mound) and the low (discovering he was damaged goods) of my trip to 'Zona that year.

by StickRat on Nov 27, 2006 5:10 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Quinowski
BTW.  Q graduated from Redlands High School, my hometown.  My Daughter is a senior there this year, so I'm really pulling for him to make it.  The 95 MPH rumor came from a kid I know who pitched for Chaffey College and heard it from some of his contacts.  Q was a DFE who played one year at Riverside City College.  My friend from Chaffey says they have a real good program there. The Giants have drafted or DFE'd several players from RCC including Ben Nieto and Thomas Neal.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 26, 2006 9:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Redlands High/Riverside CC
Heck of a football team you all have there. 12-0 and storming the playoffs. And who the HECK is the QB at Redlands East Valley who passed for 2690 yards this year?! Can that kid throw a baseball too?

Riverside CC is a perenial baseball power, and went through College Of San Mateo to win its last state championship. Both Scott Feldman and Mike Mooney played for that CSM team.

by StickRat on Nov 28, 2006 2:14 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

EME's health
What's the latest on his health?  Is he expected to be ready to go to start the year (presumably back in AA)?

by philly on Nov 26, 2006 8:56 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Move them all down
I would move down almost everyone on this list a half to full grade. No way Lincecum is a full A. SF has a weak system. I think there are way too many C+ there. I'm fine with Lincecum as a B+. John I think you were very gratious.

by RMF on Nov 26, 2006 8:59 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

B+?
That's ridiculous.  Lincecum had awesome numbers, not only in college, but in the Cal League, a high level for even a college draftee in their first pro summer.  Everyone who has seen him loves his stuff.  Crasnick or somebody went so far as to say if they were starting a team, Lincecum would be the first player they picked.

I agree that most of the C+'s are too high.  The problem with the Giants system is that it's very hard to figure out which ones are too high and whch ones aren't.  Most of these kids have some upside which could surprise a lot of folks.  On the other hand, most of them have significant warts too.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 26, 2006 9:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

tim
in all honesty, i think if the giants wanted he could be a major league reliever (if they chose to) by the second half of next year. however, they are committed to keeping him a starter, which i agree with, and so while he will get a cup of coffee next year, he will likely be fully up in 2008.
Giants '08

by z4 landshark on Nov 27, 2006 1:16 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Lincecum
At the worst he is an A-. The California league is the best hitters league in the minors. And he dominated in it.

by doublestix on Nov 26, 2006 10:19 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Cal League parity
Now wait just a minute, shouldn't we all be a little bit skeptical of a guy who (although he did have a great year) has only played 27 innings of A+ ball?

And this "hitters league" really didn't have any hitters in the league...
(Baseball America said in their write up that the "depth of talent was severely lacking", then cites these as the best hitters: Reid Brignac, Carlos Gonzalez, Travis Buck, Jonathan Herrera and Emilio Bonifacio)
...and much fewer during the time Lincecum was actually there.

From Aug. 1 to the end of the year:
Brignac was in AA
Gonzalez was in A+ for 37 AB's in AUG (never against Lincecum)
Buck was on the DL in AA
Herrera was there, but no ABs v. Lincecum
Bonifacio was there, but again not even 1 AB v. Lincecum

Now I do understand that it's a "hitters league" because hitters tend to put up better numbers there...It's still A+ and the hitters probably can't keep up with a high end fastball with other pitches to compliment it.

John, I would wait to see him play some ball at AA and put up more than 100 IP against a league before we just give a guy an A rating (There's no way he deserves the highest rating you can give a player based on these low numbers).  A- may be too high as well, I can see it though with all the excitement about him.

by phiago on Nov 26, 2006 11:53 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Lincecum
I don't know if I can get behind a straight A after ~40 professional innings below AA and a 3.90 BB/9.  Especially with the frame issues and delivery concerns.

I love Lincecum and he's got as much potential as anyone, but honestly, isn't his best-case scenario for him next year what Matt Garza did this year?  And wouldn't that be fairly extraordinarily rare outside of Garza?

I can't see Lincecum at a straight A and Garza at an A-.  If you ask me, it should be the other way around.

by limozeen on Nov 26, 2006 10:47 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Well...
if it's anything...Lincecum's best two pitches own Garza's.

What a crappy system. Didn't they sign some guy last year from the Dominican with a 98 MPH fastball and a sick slider? What happened to him?

by SenorGato88 on Nov 26, 2006 11:26 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Waldis Joaquin
He had Tommy John surgery, shortly after the AZL season started I believe

by Derelict on Nov 26, 2006 11:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Schierholtz
What is the story with him?  I have seen him ranked higher in other places.
The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. It reminds us of all that once was good, and that could be again.

by Savoy on Nov 26, 2006 11:42 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Schierholtz
Nate had a terrible first half in AA Connecticut as do many hitters in the Eastern League.  He got hot in the second half.  Unfortunately, he didn't help his cause with his HWBL performance this fall.  Nate's not young, but he's not old either.  He can afford another year or two in AA/AAA.  I think he'll be OK, but he ain't ready quite yet.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 27, 2006 1:27 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Schierholtz
A poor first half isn't entirely accurate.  He hit .307/.395/.413 in April, posting a better OBP than even EME.

He dealt with hand issues starting in May, and that plagued him most of the summer, but he came back with a strong August that made his overall numbers passable.

But then, he had a poor HWB stint, albeit in a league that heavily leaned towards pitchers.

Schierholtz has awesome power but the concern was his strikeout numbers.  To Schierholtz's credit, he dealt with them and focused on improving in Double-A, and in a pitchers league, dropped his K rate considerably although his power did suffer.

I think he's one of the best hitting prospects in the Giants system, but he's obviously not perfect.  He's prone to slumps and has had injury issues, albeit he's played through them.

by BruteSentiment on Nov 27, 2006 3:25 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Response
Love the A on Lincecum. It's not just a matter of looking at his pro track record, but his three years of college experience - there's plenty to go on, and everything says he's got dominant-level ability. If he had gone 1 or 2 in the draft like he should've, the grade wouldn't be debated nearly as much as it appears to be.

The only pitching prospects who are clearly superior to him in my mind are Hughes and (if eligible) Garza. Bailey may be better but it's a very competitive comparison. It wouldn't be surprising at all if Lincecum proves to be the best of them all.

by mrkupe on Nov 27, 2006 2:51 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Lince
I'm not necessarily opposed to the straight A grade, but it seems a tad backwards to have the prospect whose track through the minors mirrors Lincecum's best-case scenario rated a half-grade lower.

JMO.

by limozeen on Nov 27, 2006 3:19 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

My thoughts
I think the only thing I can say is that the Giants system is hard to rank and rate.  I finished my Top 50 list for the site I write for, and there are some considerable differences.  One guy that is on John's Top 20 didn't even make the Top 50 on my list, and there's one guy in my top 10 that John didn't even mention....although he's a controversial one.

I do think Wilson isn't just a middle relief candidate, but is a closer candidate and a very good one.  He has the so-called stuff, but he also has the mentality.

I wonder if it's telling that two of the top three pitchers in this list (the ones not named Lincecum) are ones with very consistent control issues, and if that doesn't rank as high of a red flag for John as it does for me?  I'm still very hesitant on Sanchez, myself.

It is nice to see Hedrick and Martinez get some recognition.

However, if I had one thing I'd argue about on John's list, it's Frandsen.  B-???  Come on.  No, he doesn't have the 'potential' that a lot people want to find on lists, but what he does have is no small bit of skills, and what's more important, he gets the most out of them, and has done so consistently.  He may never be an All-Star, but he will give some team a strong performance at second base, with good doubles power and be a threat on the basepaths, and he'll play better defense than he showed this past year.

I truly believe that, even if he doesn't have the 'potential', Frandsen will have a much more successful career than 2/3rds of this list.  And I could probably run that up to 3/4ths.

by BruteSentiment on Nov 27, 2006 3:34 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Tim Lincecum's Durability
Those of you who are worried about Tim Lincecum's future durability shouldn't be.  

Go to www.calleaguers.com and click on Tim Lincecum to see a 41-second clip of Timmy pitching against Cal this spring.  Look at the incredible pushoff he gets from the rubber.  It is said to be the best since Nolan Ryan.  Look at how he uses his whole body when he pitches, reducing the strain on his arm.

Go to dectovision.com and click on POTD pitchers at the bottom right of the home page.  Then click on Tim Lincecum and then Tim Lincecum mechanics to see how exceptional Timmy's mechanics truly are.

Timmy has never missed a start or even had a sore arm.  In his two-hit, 18-strikeout shutout over UCLA this spring, he threw 146 pitches.  Pitch #146 was delivered at 95 mph.  The following day Timmy was viewed easily playing long toss from foul pole to foul pole.

Timmy has never thrown an inning above High A, but in his regular-season professional career, he has struck out 58 batters while allowing only 14 hits.  That's a ratio of 4.14.  We're talking only Class A here, but the best career major-league record for K/H is 1.51 by Randy Johnson.  The single-season record is 2.22 by Pedro Martinez in 2000.  The Giants single-season record is 1.52 by Jason Schmidt in 2004.  Beginning to get the idea that Timmy strikes out a lot of batters and is pretty hard to hit?

Timmy isn't perfect by any means.  His control needs work.  It doesn't appear his fastball has the hop that Matt Cain's does, which means he may give up more homers than Matt.  But his fastball has touched 101 and he consistently throws it in the 94-97 range.  His waterfall curve ball comes in 15-20 mph slower and has a tremendous 11-5 break.  While both pitches are rated plus-plus, the curve is Timmy's best pitch.  Timmy is also said to throw a changeup, slider and knuckleball, but he's been pretty much a two-pitch pitcher as a professional.

Timmy's pitching at San Jose in the California League has been compared to Danny Almonte's pitching in the Little League World Series, so two pitches may be all he needs.

The most pitches Timmy has thrown in a professional game was 94, when he opened the California League Northern Championship series.  The pitch was a high, outside fastball at 96 mph that was swung on and missed.  Timmy went seven innings, also his longest professional stint in innings.  

If not for a dropped third strike, he would have been out of the seventh inning after only 84 pitches, although he more typically averages about 16 pitches per inning.  In that particular game Timmy was more efficient than dominant. He yielded five hits, walked one and struck out "only" 10.

One observer has nicknamed Timmy "The Future."  For Giants fans frustrated with the team's lack of position players at present, that's a pretty apt nickname.  Timmy also has been called the "Freak of Nature" and "Seabiscuit."  To relieve tension he does back flips or walks on his hands.

Timmy's dad, who taught Timmy his motion and whose own motion is said to have been indistinguishable from Timmy's was once clocked at 88 mph -- when he was 55 years old.  Likely beginning sometime next season Timmy should be relieving (as a starter) the growing tension of Giants fans.  With his solid mechanics, he should be doing so for a long, long time.

If he still throws 88 mph at age 55 as his dad Chris did, he could be Livan Hernandez 33 years from now.

Those of you who are worried about Tim Lincecum's future durability shouldn't be.  It seems to run in his family.

by sharksrog on Nov 27, 2006 3:59 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

cool family
Nice to see that Lincecum's mom visits this site and isn't afraid to defend her son!
Seriously, since I don't know much at all about the Giants farm system, I have enjoyed reading the comments, especially the debates about Lincecum.  Let's all hope he stays healthy and can reward baseball fans for years to come.
The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. It reminds us of all that once was good, and that could be again.

by Savoy on Nov 27, 2006 9:25 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Brute and Shark
Great Posts!!  You said a lot of things I strongly agree with much better than I can say them.

Love the story about Timmy's dad.  Sounds like Tim is already collecting a few nicknames.  Over at MacChron they're calling him Tim the Enchanter.  Wonder which one is going to stick?

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 27, 2006 9:30 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Thanks, DrB
I have to admit, you've beaten me to a lot of things I'd say on here myself.  I always enjoy chatting with you about prospects on the Chronicles.

Hopefully, next year will be a better year for Giants prospects than this year was, with most of the top guys suffering injuries and slumps.

by BruteSentiment on Nov 27, 2006 7:09 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'll have to disagree
I'll have to disagree with those who claim that Lincecum's "best-case scenario" for 2007 is Garza's 2006 season.

First off, Garza started 2006 in High-A which is the same level that Lincecum dominated in 2006. He was in the pitcher friendly FSL and posted a 1.42 ERA with a 5.48 H/9, 2.23 BB/9, and 10.76 K/9 in 44.1 innings.

Let's examine Lincecum last year in High-A in a hitter's league (it's the park factors just as much as the talent, so don't give me the BS that some guys were promoted to AA). Including the postseason, Lincecum posted a 1.81 ERA with a 4.67 H/9, 3.37 BB/9, and 15.05 K/9 in 34.2 innings.

Besides the walk rate, which was respectable, Lincecum dominated High-A and put up a far superior K/9 while allowing a hit less per 9 than Garza.

Based on that information and my opinion after watching both guys pitch that Lincecum's FB/CB combo is better than anything Garza brings to the table.... it's safe to assume that Lincecum is already just as good of a pitcher as Garza.

If the Giants wanted Lincecum in the majors to start 2007, I'm pretty sure he would put up respectable numbers.

Also note how major leaguers ripped Garza's stuff apart. His H/9 ballooned to 11 while his K/9 dropped below 7 and his BB/9 raised over 4... that means you're hittable and not dominant.

Lincecum's upside seems higher than Garza's and I'd be the first to bet that his 2007 season will be better than Garza's 2006 season.

Rays in '08....

by youALREADYknow on Nov 27, 2006 11:33 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Rumors
There are rumors of Manny going to the Giants, anyone think Lincecum could be headed there?
70% of the earth's surface is covered by water. The rest is covered by Endy Chavez.

by Metty5 on Nov 27, 2006 3:14 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

no
Lincecum can't be traded until June 2007.
Rays in '08....

by youALREADYknow on Nov 27, 2006 3:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Matt Palmer
From a friend of mine:  "For instance, go check out the AA, AAA and Arizona Fall League stats of Matt Palmer for me (yes, I know he was a former college teammate of mine, but the #'s don't lie).  Then let me know why he isn't top 5 on this list..."

Just wondering if anyone knows anything about Palmer so I have some ammo to smack back at him.  :)

by The Colonel on Nov 27, 2006 4:30 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Re: Matt Palmer
Simply put...he's old.  Or at least old-ish.

At 27, that's old for any prospect.  It's harsh, but hell, there are some people on sites like this who think 23 is old to be major league rookies.  Those people are foolish morons, but it's an example of how age affects how people see things.

To be more reasonable...Palmer had a spectacular year in Connecticut, but it was the 4th year he'd been in Double-A.  It's expected that when you repeat a level, you do better there, and he's been repeating (and yes, improving) at double-A since 2003.

Also, a reliever who repeats levels is often viewed with suspicion.  Palmer was a reliever until this year, the first year since his pro debut that he was primarily a starter.  Why didn't he move up to Triple-A before then?

The answer to that: injuries.  I'm afraid I don't know what afflicted Palmer in 2005, but he missed a significant portion of the season.  It is nice to see he came back, though.

And, finally, his numbers in Fresno, while good for the league, are not mind-blowing good numbers.

That's not to say Palmer doesn't deserve credit for what he did.  He stepped in for Sanchez in the rotation in Double-A and dominated.  And he finally made a push to get higher in the system.  That's no small thing, and his numbers in Fresno were solid.

But he doesn't have any one overwhelming major league pitch, nor does he have the plus plus control that a major leaguer with no great pitches would need to survive.

Palmer's got an outside shot of becoming a major leaguer, most likely in a long/middle relief role.  But he's not the type of player that should make the tops in a list like this.

He did fairly well on my list.

by BruteSentiment on Nov 27, 2006 7:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Linc
Until he proves that he can't stay healthy, I do not know that we can penalize him for it.

He wasn't just good this year. He was dominant and absolutely over matched hitters at A+. That was just the start.

by yoda1 on Nov 27, 2006 4:41 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

The odds are stacked
against him. How many starting pitchers his size have been successful in the MLB in recent years? Not many. Its like picking out models that are ugly, there aren't many. Pedro and Oswalt, both bigger, are the only ones that come to mind and they've had injury issues throughout their careers. Now, how many larger pitchers are more successful? Many. If he brings his working velocity down because of injury or fear of injury to around 94 mph I think he loses his elite pitching prospect status but will pitch much longer. I'm not saying that Linc won't be great as long as he can throw the way he's thrown so far but that 98-101 mph torque he puts on his arm and small frame will catch up to him eventually in my mind. He might have a steller career closing but too many questions for me to be ranked anywhere over B+ for a guy that has only pitched about 40 innings in the minors.

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?p=628595

by Havok1517 on Nov 27, 2006 4:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

So what?
Your post proves nothing. There is no evidence that small size leads to injuries.

by yoda1 on Nov 27, 2006 4:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

There is no evidence
that small size doesn't lead to injuries either. From what I've seen, most starting pitchers, regardless of size, that pitch high velocites have a higher risk of getting hurt than those that don't.

by Havok1517 on Nov 27, 2006 5:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Nowadays
any pitcher in any size with any mechanics can get injured pretty easily. To discount a pitcher with solid performance and talent based on his size is ridiculous especially it has not been a problem for him in 22 years.

by yoda1 on Nov 27, 2006 5:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Okay,,,
name how many small framed 5'10 155-170lb starting pitchers that can pitch in the high 90's currently in the MLB. Then name how many of them have been successful. Then look at the injury histories for these players. I don't think you'll like what you find.

...then look at the former starting pitchers that have turned relievers with same size and similar stuff. I think you'll find more similarities here.

by Havok1517 on Nov 27, 2006 5:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No need
because no matter what you or I say, Lincecum has always produced and will produce despite his height, weight, or whatever it is that you want to throw out there.

by yoda1 on Nov 27, 2006 6:05 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

How many are there?
There just aren't that many 5'10 165 pound type guys who can throw 95. So its pretty tough to draw conclusions based on the small sample size.

The fact that there are a few glaring success stories is what stands out in my mind. Oswalt, Hudson, and Pedro. That's arguably 3 out of the top 10 pitchers of the last six or seven years. Peavy is roughly that size, and Kazmir is pretty close. Maybe that points to only 4-8 years of ace-level stuff, but again, its a small sample size.

I'm sure there are a bunch of guys who got hurt or didn't work out, but I could make a list a mile-long of 6'5" 220 pounders in the same boat.

by hammystyle on Nov 27, 2006 6:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Linc is listed at
5'10-5'11 155-160lb and has a small frame. If you wanna compare him to the likes of Oswalt (6'0), Hudson (6'1), & Pedro (5'11) thats fine though all those 3 are taller but have similar frames to Linc.  

There are roughly 150 starting pitchers in the MLB and there are only 9 starting pitchers (mlb.com) in the entire MLB that are listed under 6'0 tall, though teams sites aren't always accurate. It has been rumored for years that Pedro is more like 5'9. Many guys including Lincecum might actually be smaller than listed and I think he's about 5'8-5'9 like Pedro.

M Hampton 5'10 195 90 mph fastball
B Colon 5'11 250 97-98 mph (not a small frame)
W Rodriquez 5'11 160 92 mph fastball
C Gaudin 5'11 165 94 mph fastball
G Chacin 5'11 195 92 mph fastball
P Martinez 5'11 180 96 mph fastball
C Hensley 5'11 190 92 mph fastball
I Snell 5'11 190 96 mph fastball
G Perkins 5'10 195 94 mph fastball

T Lincecum 5'10 160 98-100 mph fastball

So, according to team listings only 6% of the the 150 starting pitchers in baseball are under 6 feet tall and none of these pitchers except maybe Snell, Colon, and the Pedro of old can/could dial it up over 95 consistently, which makes it only 3 of the 150 (2%) pitchers in baseball under 6'0 that routinely throw it over 95 mph. Take Colon out because he obviously has a hefty body type and that leaves 2 pitchers out of the 150 (1.3%).

To clarify, only 1.3% of current major league starting pitchers are similar to Lincecum in terms of size, stuff, and frame. Now, Oswalt and a few other guys might actually be under 6'0 feet tall but that same rule should be applied to those SPs that are listed under 6'0 by their teams. Many of those guys, including Lincecum and Pedro could easily be smaller than their already small listings. That still doesn't take away the large injury risk associated with pitchers similar to Lincecum (even though he has not has any history). He also has not pitched much more than 40 innings as a pro and his arm certainly hasn't faced the rigors of an entire MLB season.  

There are far more comparable pitchers to Lincecum currently pitching and excelling in relief like Tom Gordon & Billy Wagner. I like Lincecum starting as long as he is able to pitch with the velocity he has shown but any decline there and his effectiveness diminishes. I like the guy a lot as he is now but I have to count the numbers against him.

by Havok1517 on Nov 27, 2006 8:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

This post proves nothing
there is nothing scientific about it.  At all.  If anything, I think it shows small-ish pitchers can be successful.

by slurve on Nov 27, 2006 8:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It proves that
It proves that 98.7 percent of major leaguer starters are pretty much different from Lincecum and he has to be an exception.

by Havok1517 on Nov 27, 2006 9:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Injury Risk?
Yes, jumped from saying he's pretty much of a unique pitcher to he's a huge injury risk with no connector in between.  You provided compelling evidence of his uniqueness.  You provided not one shred of evidence of that translating into an injury risk.  If you are trying to say the reason why he's unique is that all of the small, hard throwing pitchers go injured, well, who are they?

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 27, 2006 10:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

that would take too much time
but Pedro and Oswalt show that pitchers small in stature and high in velocity can be a be successful and I don't doubt for one minute that Lincecum could be successful but they also tell what the stress can do to their bodies as Oswalt & Pedro have had numerous injuries. Neither throw as hard as Lincecum does either. The only pitchers with a similar size that do are relivers.

Small List of current pitchers similar in stature with an injury history...

Pedro
Hampton
Oswalt
Kazmir
Chacin
Fossum
Hudson
Gordon
Wagner
Rivera
Street

Find one current regular starting pitcher with similar size that hasn't had an injured past.

by Havok1517 on Nov 27, 2006 11:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Size to a pitcher frame makes a difference but:
I also think that the size of a pitcher at times can be blown out of porportion. I mean look at guys like Wood, sure he's built like a linebacker but his machanics are terrible. To me if your machanics are great, you relieve more stress on the shoulder, elbow, forearm or triciepts and etc. I think that if Lincecum machanics are sound, he will be okay.

by NYYLover1000 on Nov 27, 2006 11:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Mark Prior
was supposed to have the perfect machanics and the perfect pitching body...it wasn't enough when Dusty got ahold of him. There are many more larger pitchers that have had injuries because there are a ton more larger pitchers in baseball. There aren't many small pitchers and pretty much all the small pitchers I've found have had an injury history.

This is a fact:

There is no current MLB starter that has the same body type, stature, and stuff that Lincecum does. There are barely any pitchers in major league baseball that are as small as Lincecum is without the stuff. But there are a few major league RPs that do. Maybe Lincecum is a throwback to the starting pitchers of old but I wouldn't bet on it.

by Havok1517 on Nov 27, 2006 11:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

"Thjat would take too much time"
That is a cop-out.  Unless you can show that smaller pitchers have have a dis-proportionate injury rate compared to pitchers of other size(s), you're wasting keystrokes.  Don't try and turn this around on everyone else - you're the one making the accusation - the burden of proof is on you my friend.  Like DrB says, all you have done is show that he is unique - you have not shown that he is an injury risk.  

That list again proves nothing.  Nada, zero, zip.  I can list medium sized pitchers or larger pitchers that have had injuries all day.  I doesn't mean their size has/had anything to with injury.  I can also list a bunch of pitchers that were born on Thursday with injury histories.  It doesn't prove anything that links high injury risk to what day of the week you were born.

by slurve on Nov 28, 2006 12:49 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I concur
While Lincecum's workload may be a slight issue, there is no doubt his size has absolutely nothing to do with future injuries.

by yoda1 on Nov 28, 2006 1:11 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pitch Count
I have identified the number of pitches Timmy threw in about a third of his starts in 2006, both college and pro.  Based on what I have uncovered, Timmy threw about 500 fewer pitches in 2006 than Matt Cain did -- and while Matt threw his pitches over six months (April through September), Timmy threw his over seven months (February 10th through September 9th).  

Timmy DID throw 146 pitches in his two-hit, 18-strikeout shutout of UCLA, but he threw pitch #146 at 95 mph.  Even more impressive, he was seen comfortably throwing long toss from foul pole to foul pole the following day.

by sharksrog on Nov 28, 2006 5:00 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I listed some
Not a cop-out its a question of desire. I did list some similar players with an injury history but I have no desire to go throughout baseball and find similar players that have had injury risks.

I proved that Lincecum is in the vast minority of MLB starters and in a league of his own in terms of velocity assosciated with his size amongst starters. There is no current starter that throws as hard as he does for his size, period. Whether that means he will suffer arm issues after not having any whatsoever I don't know. But a small guy throwing that hard over the course of a major league season doesn't bode well in my mind.

The 4 best case scenario pitchers comparable to Lincecum are Pedro, Oswalt, Gordon, & Wagner and all 4 have had numerous injuries. Pedro and Oswalt have had a lot of injuries and they don't throw as hard! Also, the only 2 to match Lincecum in velocity is Wagner and Gordon (converted starter), both RPs and both injury risks. People can take it as they want but Lincecum is an anomaly among current starters and that is a fact.

If I had to predict Lincecum's future I'd say he is an excellent to good starter for 4 or 5 years then has serious arm injuries and becomes a successful closer for many years after that. Maybe he becomes a stud starter for 20 years and I change my tune but that would come with no precedent for a guy his size, frame, and velocity.

by Havok1517 on Nov 28, 2006 1:25 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

pitchers have injuries
It's the nature of the beast.  I've been reading a lot where he's working in the mid 90's range most of the time.  I don't see this as more of an injury risk than a pitcher that throws breaking balls.  I'll take a pitcher that can dial it up w/ clean motion over a pitcher that relies on a wicked slider as more likely to stay healthy.  If Tim's future is to experience the amount of injury on average as the pitchers you've listed, it's not a reason to downgrade him.  It would put him the typical pitcher range.  I'll take it.  Most of those guys have been healthy enough to have very good, if not HOF careers.  Why are we downgrading this guy again based on size?

by slurve on Nov 28, 2006 2:33 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

4-5 years?
4-5 injury free years?  Wow! You really went out on a limb with that one!  I can't think of many pitchers who have had careers like that.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 28, 2006 9:16 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I can't think
of one current big league starting pitcher that is that small and throws with that much velocity.

by Havok1517 on Nov 28, 2006 11:46 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pedro Martinez did it...
remember when Pedro was throwing 95+ consistently?

He had horrible mechanics though, the way he violently ended his delivery messed with his hip and his shoulders alot.

by SenorGato88 on Nov 28, 2006 11:57 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pedro
still could never dial it up to Lincecum's velocity. Pedro has been oft-injured and I really don't think Lincecum deserves Pedro's earned respect. Not many small pitchers make it starting.

by Havok1517 on Nov 28, 2006 12:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pedro
He worked in the upper 90s during his peak. Give it up Havok, your argument does not hold water.

by yoda1 on Nov 28, 2006 1:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Okay
I think its dumb to compare Lincecum to a future hall of famer.  Pedro is surely the exception and not the rule in baseball. How many Pedro Martinez like players that have done what he has? None except Pedro so far.

by Havok1517 on Nov 28, 2006 4:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

OMG!!!
YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!!!

"I think its dumb to compare Lincecum to a future hall of famer."

....please meet....

Pedro
Hampton
Oswalt
Kazmir
Chacin
Fossum
Hudson
Gordon
Wagner
Rivera
Street

You have no problem tossing Pedro's name out there to show how small guys get hurt, then you claim sacrilege when someone else uses Pedro as a comp.

by slurve on Nov 29, 2006 12:28 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Sure I can
Which do you think is more realistic...

Lincecum mirroring Pedro's hall of fame career (btw Pedro will be the only righty since before WWII to be under 6'0 and be in the HoF) or Lincecum mirroring Pedro's injury history?

The choice is easily injury history when having to choose between the 2 options that would happen most likely. Unless, you're saying Linc will be a hall of famer, which I doubt you are.

by Havok1517 on Nov 30, 2006 3:22 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No dipshit
You're twisting it.  It was talking about Pedro's velo + size - not his numbers.  No one says he can or will be Pedro.  

What was said: "remember when Pedro was throwing 95+ consistently?"  

and...

"(Pedro) worked in the upper 90s during his peak."

To that you say it's stupid to compare Lincecum and Pedro.  In term of a smaller pitcher throwing hard - that was the comp and you yourself used it, then you try to discredit someone else using it by say we're talking about Lincecum putting up like numbers.

by slurve on Dec 1, 2006 11:48 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Wrong
and watch the mouth please.

by Havok1517 on Dec 1, 2006 12:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That's not wrong!!!!
You compared him to pedro in terms of a small guy throwing hard.  So did someone else and you then said "it's dumb" to compare Lincecum to a HOF'er.

HELLOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

YOU DID THE SAME F'N THING YOURSELF!!!!!

by slurve on Dec 1, 2006 12:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No
I was only comparing Linc and Pedro's tangibles. Best case in the world, Linc could meet Pedro's production but that would be a fool's bet.

I backed up what I said and my logic to support my opinion on Linc.

by Havok1517 on Dec 1, 2006 12:52 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Linc
throws with more velocity than Pedro ever could.

by Havok1517 on Dec 1, 2006 12:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

huh
Linc topped out at 101 and works at 94-98 right? That's at best 2 ticks above Pedro's working speed in his prime. And if his life depends on it. I'm sure Pedro can throw a 100 mph fastball.

Please stop with the 5'11 who throw 100mph. Because that is not Timmy's working speed.

by playingwithfire on Dec 1, 2006 9:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

for 1
Lincecum is clearly shorter than 5'11 but his frame is clearly the biggest question. I wish people would quit focusing on his just his height. His tiny build is obviously the bigger issue. I wonder what Lincecum could throw "if his life depended on it"? Which is irrelevant because neither Pedro and Linc's life ever will depend on it. 2 ticks faster is just that, 2 ticks faster than Pedro and can mean a lot. Also, DrGiants stated that Linc was mainly pitching curveballs when he said his was he witnessed him consistently thowing 94. He's likely working in the high 90's when he focues on his fastball more. 96-98 mph range would be more ideal when taking his fastball into consideration. I'm sorry if he's your top pitching prospect but I just know that other pitchers have less question marks.

by Havok1517 on Dec 2, 2006 5:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Lincecum's Build
I think you may be exaggerating a bit here again.  I would estimate that Tim is 5'10 to 5'11.  He actually has a pretty solid looking build and fits nicely on his frame.  Wirey, but not skinny is how I would describe it.  Don't get me wrong, he's small, but you're making it sound worse than it is.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2006 7:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I've met Tim for an interview...
And I've looked him in the eye.

He's no shorter than 5'10, and I'd say he's 5'11 even.  I know people under 5'10, and he is clearly NOT under 5'10.

Judging height by pictures of a guy on the mound is a lot like trying to judge someone's hat size by looking at a picture of them in a helmet...it's 'clearly' not accurate.

by BruteSentiment on Dec 5, 2006 6:42 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Thank you
I thought I was the only one to see how he was manipulating things to support himself.

by slurve on Dec 2, 2006 7:27 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No you are not the only one
Look at the posts and he is pretty much the only one still holding onto that argument.

by yoda1 on Dec 5, 2006 12:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Horrible mechanics
from his body's standpoint, but terrific mechanics from a pitch-action standpoint. Given that the mechanics create the action which creates the multi-million$ contracts and HOF career, I'm sure Pedro doesn't mind the tradeoff.

by Roger on Nov 28, 2006 6:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

4-5 Excellent Years
and then a successful closer? Hell, Eckerly made it to the HOF with that profile. You just described a hell of a successful career, one that minor league players dare to dream about, so I'm not sure how exactly it jives with your knocking Lincecum as a high quality prospect.

by Roger on Nov 29, 2006 9:35 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

He doesn't know why either
he's just painted himself into a corner and won't admit he doesn't have much to back up his feeling of what Lincecum will do in his career.

by slurve on Nov 29, 2006 12:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

There is no evidence
You say that from what you've seen most starting pitchers that have high velocities have a higher risk of getting hurt than those that don't.  Studies have shown just the opposite.  They have also shown that smaller pitchers are more likely to be injured than bigger pitchers, though.  

If not for Timmy's great motion, flexibility, conditioning and history, I too would be worried.  But the more I have studied Timmy, the less likely I think he is to become injured.  He indeed appears to be "Seabiscuit" and a "Freak of Nature."

by sharksrog on Nov 28, 2006 4:44 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

retarded
It just seems retarded to me to knock a player for being an injury risk when he has had absolutly no history of ever being injured.

I can see undervaluing Lirano because of his injury concerns or being skeptical about Matt Cain because he had problems early but Lincecum has never had an injury. Never. How can we say that he is an injury risk? Its not like he is 17 or anything either. He is 22 and has never missed any time due to injury.

Ya know... I am a little concerned about Phillip Hughes because apparently his great great uncle on his father's side had a nasty opium addiction and I think we can all say that due to that history he should probably be a B- prospect.

by caintastic on Nov 27, 2006 6:02 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

common sense
Common sense says innocent until proven guilty. Has Lincecum had this major arm damage? No.

Until he goes down with any significant arm injury, the injury talk is a load of BS. Unless you are the almighty God or whatever particular deity (if any) you believe in, you have absolutely NO PSYCHIC ABILITY to predict an injury out of nowhere.

Francisco Liriano, Adam Miller, Nick Adenhart, and more have gone through TJ surgery and people seemingly ignore their injury risk and would not hesitate to rank them among baseball's top pitchers.

When Lincecum gets injured, we'll cross that bridge. Until then, you can't hold your insignificant hunches against him.

Rays in '08....

by youALREADYknow on Nov 27, 2006 6:35 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Just fyi
Adam Miller never had TJ surgery.

by Havok1517 on Nov 27, 2006 6:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

thanks
I forgot whether he opted for TJ or decided to just rehab.

It still doesn't disprove the point I was making though, he was a guy who had a major arm injury.

Rays in '08....

by youALREADYknow on Nov 27, 2006 6:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It's funny
how nuts people go over pitchers like Liriano who's had arm/shoulder/elbow issues for years yet those same people argue against Lincecum due to his size. LOL

by yoda1 on Nov 27, 2006 7:00 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Injury possibilities
I've stayed out of this debate over Lincecum's injury possibilities quite a bit, since like yoda said, it's pretty stupid when people love the 'traditional' pitchers who have actually been injured, but then can't see other types working just because there haven't been many.

The point about Tim's father was kind of breezed by.

What he taught Lincecum wasn't just mechanics, it was a philosophy.  The philosophy was that flexibility is everything to a pitcher's health and ability.  An ESPN Mag article this summer related that most pitchers arm motions result in the body trying to throw the ball, and that the motion of the arm essentially results in the arm being pushed away from the body, fraying tendons and connections.  That's what causes injuries.

So what Tim's father taught Tim was physics, not strength.  Tim uses his body to put as much momentum as possible into his throwing motion.  The result is that his pitching is much more akin to him slinging the ball as if from a slingshot rather than push it like a shot put.

His pitching motion is unlike any other, so basing injury expectations on others who don't use the motion makes little sense.  To re-quote Hammy, "How many are there?"

Find me pitchers who have used the same motion as Lincecum and who have had major injury problems, and I'll consider that Lincecum might become an injury case.  Otherwise, I won't project anyone else's injury history onto a player who has none.

by BruteSentiment on Nov 27, 2006 7:24 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Confident?
I've kind of stayed out of this arguament too.  I refuse to be too confident about the injury risk of any pitcher because they are all risks as far as I'm concerned.  95 MPH is 95 MPH.  Why some pitchers seem to be able to pitch like that forever and not get hurt and why some don't is, IMO, still largely a mystery.  Still, people come up with the strangest explanations:  "See, told you so, Liriano threw too many sliders 6 years ago in the Giants organization," and poppycock like that.  I've read opinions that the Giants ruined Jesse Foppert by "rushing him to the majors," when all evidence points to him suffering his first UCL problems in the minors and that he intentionally hid his symptoms from the Giants staff.

Yes, Tim Lincecum is an injury risk.  So is Matt Cain, Felix Hernandez, Justin Verlander and any other pitcher you can think of.  I do think the higher velocity and greater break on breaking pitches SLIGHTLY increases risk due to more stress on the arm.  Until somebody can show me a statistic, I don't think size has much, if anything to do with it.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 27, 2006 8:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

If he's a pitcher, he's an injury risk
Will Carroll once said something to that effect.

That said, does someone who reads BP know if Carroll has weighed in on the Lincecum debate?  I can think of no man around that I think is more of an authority on health of baseball players.  What he says would be an opinion I'd trust.

I'd almost buy a BP subscription just to read his column.

by BruteSentiment on Nov 27, 2006 10:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Will Carroll
Isn't he the guy who reportedly said that if he could pick one pitcher to start a team with it would be Tim Lincecum?

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 27, 2006 10:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

from today's BP chat:
http://baseballprospectus.com/chat/chat.php?chatId=243

Q: Will, there has been a lot of talk about how Tim Lincecum's size is a big negative because it makes him an injury risk. While it make sense from a physics point of view, Has there been any study that links pitcher size to injury risk? Thanks

Will Carroll: No study I'm aware of. I'd love, love, love to see Lincecum in a high-speed study to see just how much stress he's putting on his joints. Odds of that happening are roughly that of me hanging out with supermodels. (Wait, I do that.) Actually, I'd like to see EVERY pitcher, especially the minor leaguers, have this type of study. Given the contracts being handed out now, the costs of these type of things become an even smaller percentage of payroll and potentially more valuable.

by irwin on Nov 29, 2006 11:24 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

This May Seem Strange
This may seem strange, but I wouldn't trade Timmy Lincecum and Angel Villalona for every other player in the Giants farm system.  And that's even though I happen to like Jonathan Sanchez, Billy Sadler and Clayton Tanner.

By the way, when you go to calleaguers.com and click on Tim Lincecum to see video of his motion, go to scouting reports at that same site.  Go to 2005 and to the San Jose Giants. Then look at the scouting report on Jonathan Sanchez (who pitched at San Jose in 2005).  At the bottom of the scouting report is a 20-second-or-so video of Jonathan.  

Look at his video and at Timmy's and tell me that Timmy doesn't look like less of an injury risk than Jonathan, as much as I like the slender southpaw.

by sharksrog on Nov 28, 2006 4:53 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Tim's curve appears to come off nice
but he sure does look small on the mound. Am I the only person that sees a lot of similarites between Tom (Flash) Gordon & Tim Lincecum? Granted, Gordon came out of High School instead of Lincecum getting polished at Washington University. Gordon actually went 17-9 his rookie season. Tom Gordon is the only player I can think of that is that short, has that small of a frame, and throws with that velocity.

by Havok1517 on Nov 28, 2006 11:45 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Also
both Gordon and Lincecum has the great fastball / curveball combo.

by Havok1517 on Nov 28, 2006 12:04 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Is it?
As dumb as saying height is a major factor in determining future injuries to pitchers?

by yoda1 on Nov 28, 2006 4:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

much more dumb
height isn't even as important as Lincecum's small frame and the velocity he pitches in terms of future injury. He's short and small framed but pitches with extreme velocity that tells me he'll fade out unless he does some Roger Clemens type workouts throughout his career.

Clemens has long said the reason he's been able to pitch as long as he's been able to is because of workouts he's put his body through and the build up of his legs. Lincecum is tiny and nothing anyone can say can change that.  

by Havok1517 on Nov 28, 2006 6:14 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Small
Yeah, he's small.  We get it already.  I've seen him pitch myself. Yes, he's small.  

I've read every single one of your posts and have yet to find anything in even one of them that links size of pitcher to injury risk.  It's real simple.  Give us a study that compares pitcher's size with injury risk that shows that correlation or give it up already.  Sheesh!!

BTW.  As I've said before, yes, Tim Lincecum is an injury risk.  He's a friggin' pitcher for crying out loud.  

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 28, 2006 7:05 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No studies
somebody else can do it if they actually wanna see if size equals injury but Lincecum sure is in the minority in terms of MLB sized pitchers.

by Havok1517 on Nov 28, 2006 7:13 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Well
based on your 'study and proof' size leading to injuries is about as relevant as hair color leading to injuries.  

by yoda1 on Nov 28, 2006 7:24 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

And by the way...
I'm sure Linc has been told 1000s of times that he won't be successful because of his small size. Yet in 22 years, all he's done is prove that he can flat out pitch while preserving his health. So no matter what you say, I will always give him the benefit of the doubt as long as he continues to put up sick numbers.

by yoda1 on Nov 28, 2006 7:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Check this out!
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/does-size-matter-part-5/

In my eyes, its the combination of Lincecum's short stature, small frame, and extreme velocity, therefore body stress, that make his major league prospects and lasting abilty cloudy.

by Havok1517 on Nov 28, 2006 7:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Finally!
That took a long time, but you finally came up with a pertinent study.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 29, 2006 1:43 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments On Article
  1.  Interesting that from age 25-32 is a 7 year career.  The category with the highest survival rate was 34% confirming that most pitchers haver fairly short careers no matter what.  Irrespective of whether they have injuries or not, pitchers like Pedro and Oswalt have already had much longer than average careers.
  2.  The study doesn't say why they dropped out, or whether the dropouts had their performances evaluated.  It's possible that many oif the dropouts did so due to performance issues rather than injury, that the performance stats and survival stats were done on different populations.
Not sure if these points prove anything either way.  It's still a very interesting study.  Just wanted to make note of possible pitfalls in it's interpretation.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 29, 2006 10:13 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yep
the article does not prove anything.

by yoda1 on Nov 29, 2006 2:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Proof
To be fair, it's almost impossible to find a study in any field of study that "proves" something.  

It's a very interesting study with some valuable information.  Like most studies, it appears to have some methodological limitations.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 29, 2006 2:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ummm
yeah that is why I said the article does not prove whether short pitchers have more injuries or not.

by yoda1 on Nov 29, 2006 5:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ummm....
No, you said it doesn't prove anything.  Maybe it doesn't, but I don't think it's fair to just dismiss it as being worthless which is what your dismissive response appeared to do.  If that is not a correct interpretation, please explain.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 29, 2006 5:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Well
the article does not prove Havok's point. Make sense?

by yoda1 on Nov 29, 2006 5:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It shows data
that short pitchers don't last as long as others.

by Havok1517 on Nov 29, 2006 5:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

sorry
I meant thin.

by Havok1517 on Nov 29, 2006 5:44 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Short, thin whatever
It doesn't show how hard these guys threw or if their stuff is as good as Lincecum's. It just groups pitchers into a category based on height and weight and that is it. It also doesn't show why their careers were shorter.

by yoda1 on Nov 29, 2006 6:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Proof
It doesn't prove his point, but it does lend some support to it.  I mean, the guy took a long time to produce anything that supported his position, gotta give him a bit of credit when he finally did, even if it isn't "proof."

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 29, 2006 5:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

So
Interesting article but it does not support his argument.

by yoda1 on Nov 29, 2006 5:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Did you actually read the article?
evidently not.

"...thin pitchers are much less likely to have long careers than any other group, and those that do stay around are much more likely to end up in relief..."

Lincecum is certainly thin.

by Havok1517 on Nov 29, 2006 6:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

yes
and your initial argument was due to his size, he would not stay healthy enough to be an elite starter. So you are not only wrong but you are jumping all over the place with your argument.

by yoda1 on Nov 29, 2006 7:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

What?
thin = small frame

I mentioned that many times and even said that was a greater influence on his durability than his height.

by Havok1517 on Nov 29, 2006 7:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

OK so it wasn't you
that posted this message up at the top:

"I still have serious injury doubts about his size and build combined with his reported velocity and stress he'll put on him arm during full MLB seasons."

by yoda1 on Nov 30, 2006 1:13 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yep, that was me
You might need to check a thesaurus because body build = frame. He has a thin frame (aka BUILD!!!) in addition to being about 5'9 with his extreme velocity on top of those features.

In order of importance to injury...

  1. build (think frame)
  2. velocity
  3. height

by Havok1517 on Nov 30, 2006 2:03 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Not everyone is equal
there are exceptions. Expecting a pitcher with no history of injuries to get injured is ridiculous beyond belief.

I used to be the biggest Oswalt critic mainly due to his size then mechanics (max effort delivery) and groin injury concerns. I did not believe that he would be successful for as long as he has been. So never again will I downgrade a pitcher due to his size.

by yoda1 on Nov 30, 2006 10:54 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Thin
Maddux.  Pedro.  Oswalt.  Wagner.  

I'd take any of those outcomes.  I can see downgrading him slightly - but until he he actually has an injury it's just something I'll keep in the back of mind.

by slurve on Nov 29, 2006 8:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Support
In fact, the article does support his argument, but does not prove it.  Big difference.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 29, 2006 8:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Whatever
What are you trying to prove?

by yoda1 on Nov 30, 2006 1:13 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Question is.....
What are you trying to prove?  You said the article didn't support Havok's position.  It obviously does.  Just change the word from "support" to "prove" and we're all square.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 30, 2006 9:40 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Profiling
can be a trap when it leads one to judge a group of people who share certain characteristics instead of assessing individuals based on their own merits.

As DrB points out, pitching is a risk factor for injury...period.  Just like driving is a risk factor for any driver on the road.

Let's take Driver A at 5'11" 160 lbs and Driver B at 6'4" 220 lbs.  Would either driver be at risk for injury behind the wheel of a moving vehicle?  Of course.  Would that risk increase if each were driving 98 mph?  Most definitely.  Would Driver A sustain more injuries than Driver B if both were to crash at 98 mph?  Perhaps, but this is a question of degrees rather than absolutes.  All things being equal, who would you rather have driving Miss Daisy?

Now let's say Driver A has a spotless driving record with no history of prior accidents while Driver B has had several crashes in the past.  Furthermore, let's also say Driver A is a focussed and careful driver, who has even taken a course on safe driving, while Driver B drives distracted and has had no special training. Let's even say that Driver A drives a Volvo, while Driver B putts around in a Yugo.  Who would you choose now?  Sure, this is a somewhat curious analogy, but is it totally off base considering the ongoing debate about Lincecum being an injury risk simply based on his physical characteristics?

Adding a further word about profiling, the article in the link that Havok provides actually weakens his/her argument.

"It's clear that height has no real effect on whether or not a pitcher can shape a long career for himself, but weight certainly does."

-While it is unlikely that Lincecum can increase his height, he certainly can take steps to bulk up, and I'm sure the Giants will look into "legitimate" methods to help him do so.

"One theory would be that some of the pitchers I bunch in as overweight aren't really fat so much as they muscular."

-The author brings up the point about muscularity being a factor in a pitcher's longevity.  I don't know about Lincecum's body type personally, but I would venture to guess he could be described as sinewy.  This brings to mind another small, thin, sinewy athlete who could hold his own against much larger opponents...Bruce Lee.

"thin pitchers are much less likely to have long careers than any other group, and those that do stay around are much more likely to end up in relief."

-I don't think the Giants would mind much if Lincecum's career followed the path of Dennis Eckersley rather than the path that a perfect physical specimen such as Mark Prior appears to be taking.

   

by baseballjunkie on Nov 29, 2006 10:22 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

one comment on the article
is that the numbers don't really combine height and weight/frame. It addresses them separately but not together. They also don't and probably can't track issues of velocity with the combination of size and weight. Also, Eck was much bigger than Linc so I think he'll be more like Tom Gordon or maybe Billy Wagner, tough Wagner has a very muscular lower body, unlike Linc currently.

I think Linc will be very successful starting if he can stay healthy and if he moves to the pen and keeps his stuff then I think he'll be successful there too. I just question his future durabilty. Call it a hypothesis or a hunch but it is just my feeling on the guy.

by Havok1517 on Nov 29, 2006 12:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Stamina
My own concern about Lincecum has less to do with injury as stamina.  Even though he threw a ton of pitches in college last year, he was pretty much pitching once a week.  After a 2 month layoff, he turned pro and was on strict pitch counts that were gradually advanced to a max of about 100.  

I've seen him, and I've gotta say he is real small for any player let alone a pitcher.  I wonder how he'll stay strong over the course of a full season pitching every 5 days.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 29, 2006 2:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Timmy's College Pitching Schedule
The comment that Timmy pretty much pitched once a week in college during 2006 is incorrect.  Without taking the time to go back and look at each University of Washington box score (which I have done in the past), I can tell you that Timmy had a somewhat varied work pattern.  

Once he started a game on just three days' rest, but in every other instance, he had at least the normal four days' rest between starts.  In a handful of cases Timmy DID start just once a week -- but in those instances he pitched anywhere from a third of an inning to two full innings of relief to keep him sharp.  

Timmy's college coach felt he was the best pitcher he had seen at the collegiate level, so he was reasonably careful with Timmy.  If Timmy was going to start again soon, he tended not to stretch him out too far.  And if he had a week between starts, the coach used him in relief between starts.  

Timmy threw 125 1/3 innings for the University of Washington in 2006, but he did so over nearly four months.  Timmy's first start came on February 10th, and while I can't remember the date of his last start for sure, I believe it was May 31st.  I'm virtually certain that it wasn't prior to that date.  

Timmy wound up throwing about 2600-2700 pitches in 2006 (college and professional combined).  He did so over precisely seven months (February 10th through September 9th).  In comparision, Matt Cain threw just over 3200 pitches over a little less than six months.  

From viewing the pitch count in about a third of Timmy's 2006 starts, I believe he averaged just over 16 pitches per inning.  Matt averaged 17.34 pitches per inning while striking out batters with little more than half the frequency Timmy did (although their competitive levels were far differnt).  

The most efficient I saw Timmy in the three starts I witnessed was his last one.  He wound up throwing 94 pitches over seven innings (13.4 pitches per inning), but if not for a passed ball and subsequent bad throw to first base to complete the strikeout, Timmy would have polished off the playoff team in just 84 pitches over the seven innings.  That would have been only a dozen pitches per inning, and I wonder if the Giants would have brought him out for the eighth.  

In the three starts I saw Timmy make, he averaged 15.2 pitches per inning.  If the catcher had held the third strike in question or at least not misfired with what was a rather easy throw to first base, Timmy would have averaged 14.6 pitches per inning in those games.  

Given that he was striking out batters at a rate of more than 15 per nine innings, that was pretty efficient pitching.

by sharksrog on Dec 1, 2006 4:28 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pitching Schedule
Yes, he started about every 4'th game in college, but in college they usually play 3 weekend games and one or two midweek games.  

Tim's last college appearance was, indeed on May 31.  If his first start was on Feb 10, that's a 16 week season.  He made 17 starts and 5 relief appearances in those 16 weeks.  Hmm.....looks like about 1 start/week to me.  That's an impressive workload for a college pitcher, especially with how deep he generally went into game, but it's a far cry from 120 pitches every 5 days for 30 starts that a frontline starter would get in the majors.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 1, 2006 9:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Let me just say...
John, I completely agree with you on Lincecum's A. There is only a handful of pitchers right now that I would consider an A prospect and he definitely deserves his based on talent and performance.

Thank you,
Yoda

by yoda1 on Nov 29, 2006 1:57 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I can't speak for John
regarding his grading of Lincecum, but based on his comments for Sanchez, Sanders, and EME, he is basing his grade on those players being healthy.

We can conclude that John is giving Linc an A based on ability and/or potential.  To automatically give a player a significantly lower grade, as Havok suggests, because of shortcomings (pun intended) which he has never even exhibited yet is not in the spirit of this exercise, in my opinion.

Linc will probably spend his entire career having to prove his detractors wrong, and if that serves as motivation to make himself the best player he can be, then more power to him.

by baseballjunkie on Nov 29, 2006 3:45 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Havok's list
M Hampton 5'10 195 90 mph fastball
B Colon 5'11 250 97-98 mph (not a small frame)
W Rodriquez 5'11 160 92 mph fastball
C Gaudin 5'11 165 94 mph fastball
G Chacin 5'11 195 92 mph fastball
P Martinez 5'11 180 96 mph fastball
C Hensley 5'11 190 92 mph fastball
I Snell 5'11 190 96 mph fastball
G Perkins 5'10 195 94 mph fastball

and

Pedro
Hampton
Oswalt
Kazmir
Chacin
Fossum
Hudson
Gordon
Wagner
Rivera
Street

I'll bet a fair amount of money that the list performs better than league average over their careers. Does that prove that smaller pitchers tend to be better? No. Maybe what it proves is that there's a real bad bias towards short pitchers in the MLB and those that made thru the Milb tend to be very good and plays at a level above league average. But that's just me guessing. Anyway, it's foolish to bet on ANY pitcher becoming a front-line starter after his first half season as a pro because there's way too many things stacked against him. Pitchers in nature are high risks, no matter the size.

The fact of the matter is that Lincecum has never even complained about any soreness at all in his pitching career. Much less a major injury. And it's foolish to look over that fact and think he'll get hurt simply because of his size. Will he get hurt? Probably, it's a rarity when pitchers DON'T get hurt sometimes in their career for a significant amount of time. But that's not because he's small. It's because it's only natural. And I've read from at least 3 sources that the respectful authors loves Lincecum's delivery. Is it strange? Yes! But it could also be revolutionary. I'll take their word that the delivery is extremely efficient while not putting much stress on the arm.

Also, if there is a weird player every 10 years that does everything different with amazing result. I like the chance that it will be Lincecum's decade coming up.

by playingwithfire on Dec 1, 2006 12:12 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

forgot to mention
about the last paragraph, I wouldn't bet my savings on it. But it's all just very very good gut feelings.

by playingwithfire on Dec 1, 2006 12:13 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

2007
It will be exciting to see how Timmy Lincecum develops in 2007.  Now that I've been appointed Timmy's "mom" here on this board, I feel it is important to keep everyone up to speed on the latest developments.

Last night Giants manager Bruce Bochy was interviewed on the Giants flagship station's "Hot Stove League" show.  One of the two interviewers was Giants radio announcer Dave Flemming.

When the subject of Timmy came up, Bochy indicated that how fast a player could advance through a system was determined by many things including stuff and makeup.  He said that some players were even able to jump to the majors a year after or even right out of college.  He then went on to say that Timmy is above-average in all those factors.  He said it all in a very low-key fashion, but it appeared to me that Timmy will actually get a chance during spring training to pitch his way onto the Giants staff.  

In my mind, the two factors that could augur against a strong enough spring from Timmy to turn the Giants plans around would be that his waterfall curve is unlikely to break as much in the desert as it would in, say, the heavy air of San Francisco.  Second, Brian Sabean is DEATH on control from a young pitcher.  And control hasn't been Timmy's forte to date.

In Timmy's last professional outing, he walked only one batter -- and that one after a dropped third strike prevented his seventh of pitching from being completed after 84 pitches.  But I believe 2006 was the first college season in which Timmy got his walks below even five per nine innings.  As a professional he's done better (more in the low three's per nine innings), but control is probably an even bigger issue for Timmy than his having command of only two pitches at this point.  

Timmy's fastball and curve (which he throws about two-thirds and one-third of the time, respectively) are both plus-plus pitches, so he may need little if anything more.  If Timmy could ever learn to control his changeup, slider and knuckleball (Yes, he even has a knuckler!), he would be darn near unhittable.

Heck, he's pretty darn hard to hit as it is.  His penultimate pro outing last season was a five-inning one-hitter (73 pitches) in which the lone hit was an infield scratch that would very likely have been turned into an out by Omar Vizquel, and the loudest-hit ball off his pitches was a looping liner by a righthanded hitter that found its way into the right field stands about 50 feet short of the wall.  

In fairness though I should mention that his final (87th) pitch the first time I saw him was a high, inside fastball (94 mph if I remember correctly) that went out a lot faster than it came in.  It came in a minor-league game, but it truly was a major-league homer.  

Timmy has enough on his fastball to blow it by guys high, but he'll likely give up a lot fewer homers if he keeps it down.

I guess the two factors that have me most excited about Timmy are his extremely high strikeout rates both as a collegian and as a pro.  

Timmy had something like 42 more strikeouts than any other NCAA pitcher last season -- just missing the 200 mark at 199 -- and I don't believe any professional pitcher came especially close to striking out as many batters per nine innings as Timmy did at  short-season Salem-Keizer and High A San Jose.

And just as important is Timmy's history of no arm problems and that his own dad was clocked at 88 mph -- at the age of 55!  Timmy Lincecum could conceivably be Livan Hernandez in another 33 years.

What he is today is a non-sanforized righthanded version of Randy Johnson.  With the build of Roy Oswalt.  With a pitching motion that has been compared to Kevin Brown.  With the push off the pitching rubber of Nolan Ryan.  And what has been described as the fastest arm speed ever.

Is it any wonder Will Caroll of Sports Illustrated and Baseball Prospectus said that considering ability and injury likelihood, if he had the opportunity to start a franchise with just one pitcher, his choice for the next ten years would be one Timothy LeRoy Lincecum?

by sharksrog on Dec 1, 2006 3:36 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

oh, man.
is his middle name really leroy?

by wily mo on Dec 6, 2006 1:38 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Minor League Ball: Where the Future of Baseball is Discussed
Start posting on Minor League Ball »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Top-10 Prospects of the Last 20 years: Hitters
Pose_small
SHS 'spect list continued....101-201
Hu_080227mag_uptonscover_small
daveh's top 111 prospects for 2010

Recent FanPosts

Small
last year's rookies, kickoff
Small
How about a package of Maine and Castillo for Zambrano?
Small
BA PHI TOP 10
Img587561916661595
Top 15 high school MLB draft prospects
Small
BP BAL Top 15
N16115505_31581383_8646_small
Rising Stars Chat
Small
Dexter Fowler and UZR
Small
Teahen to the White Sox....
Planetterror_small
Stephen Strasburg is out of the AFL Rising Stars Game

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Carew_small John Sickels


Site Meter