Hard Fastballs, Soft opposition

Well a lot of pitchers who rely primarily on their FB end up as RP. I’m not saying that is what will happen to them but it’s been shown over and over (without giving specific examples) that you need more than just 1 pitch to be successful against advanced hitting. It’s definitely possible that Bumgarner/Feliz could develop breaking pitches and CUs and turn into the aces so many on baseball forums seem to think they are already destine to become but until they do I’d have a hard time saying I think Bumgarner or Feliz will be more successful or say that I’d rather have them on my team than pitchers who are more pitchers than throwers.

Has sat in the mid 90’s this year, not sure that qualifies as soft. Also I’m not sure about MadBum but Feliz has been using plenty of offspeed stuff lately in AA.

Getting back to your topic though I think its more a case by case bases. Depends on how good the fastball and how good the offspeed pitches.

“I don’t understand why an A ball hitter is supposed to be decimated by a terrific fastball, but not by a terrific curveball.”

Correct. In fact, I’d venture that the opposite is true – a huge separator between low level hitters and higher level hitters is that lower level hitters get weeded out quickly by even mediocre breaking balls. However, there is a significant change as you move up in levels – at higher levels, quality fastballs play up much better than quality breaking balls. Sometimes you have a 2006-2007 Rich Hill, a guy whose breaking ball is so good that it plays up at any level. But usually not.

It may seem counter-intuitive to think this way, but if you’re looking for such a case in development, Troy Patton comes to mind as a guy who had a lot of success in the lower minors as a power curve guy and then changed his approach to succeed at higher levels, although obviously injuries have taken their toll on him and it remains to be seen how if at all he will perform in the majors.

As for guys similar to Feliz, I can think of . . .well, a ton. You’ll find at least one guy pretty much every year who’s similar to him and maybe more. Homer Bailey was a guy I thought of right away. The 20 year old Bailey was an even better prospect than the 20 year old Feliz, mostly a fastball guy with potential for good secondary pitches. But obviously you can see how that’s gone.

Bumgarner? I can’t think of any good comps for him off the top of my head. Power lefties with sterling command at his age are far and few between. Scott Kazmir was a similarly dominant teenager with great command for his age, but he was doing it with a 70 slider and didn’t have the control that Bumgarner appears to have (although it should be noted that much of this may be owed to the aforementioned 70 slider). Most power lefties struggle with command in their youth, so it’s pretty spectacular to see a kid who actually can count that among his strengths.

This is probably why Bumgarner attracts as much attention as he does. The present stuff, the projection, the command from the left side, it’s not only a great package, but it’s a very unique package that has the potential to be something special. Once you’ve seen a few cycles of prospects go through the development pipeline . . .I don’t want to say that things aren’t exciting any more (although considering the similar cycle of posters on minorleagueball.com I may be on to something here), but you start to see how the vast majority of prospects fit into a fairly comfortable range of projection outcomes. Bumgarner is a guy who might just not fit.

Madbum could turn out like ankiel, who also had nice command, great fastball at lower levels. Although he was dominant in high A by the end of his 18 year old season.

Not making a direct comp, just saying you never know where these guys are gonna end up.

If we’re talking lower levels of the minors, give me the guy with the plus fastball, with command of it, and an ability to sustain it deep into games. You can always teach a changeup or breaking pitch.

Of course, it’s a matter of degree as well. If the difference in the fastballs isn’t that great, then yes you certainly might prefer the guy with the better repertoire. But if there is a really significant difference in ceiling, I would tend to bet on the guy with a greater chance of beign an ace. Part of this is that pitching prospects seem to be inherently risky anyway, so I think you might as well aim high. A true top of rotation SP is such a valuable commodity, you have to give yourself a chance to develop one.

And, the fastball is the most important pitch. Most MLB pitchers are pitching off the fastball, throwing mostly fastballs. I’d rather have a guy with a plus plus fastball and average secondary pitches, than an average fastball, and two plus complimentary pitches.

I will never understand why the critism against Bumgarner is that he is only getting people out with his fastball. I would venture to guess that if anything the one pitch that should be the easiest to hit for even a non-prospect is the fastball, especially if there is no off-speed offerings to upset the timing of the batter.

I would also go out on a limb and say that of all the pitches a pitcher can have in his repetoire the a great fastball is the most likely to play at the higher levels. (Especially from the left side, which is something that cannot be overstated) Take Lincecum for example, everybody was drooling over his curve early in his career but he probably uses that the least now and relys heavily on the FB and CU.

The thing is that you cant teach the FB, but you can learn off-speed stuff. Bumgarner may never develop his slider and change into plus pitches but I dont think he has to in order to succeed at higher levels. Everything is built off the fastball and if you have a great one adding even average off-speed stuff to them will make a pitcher tough to hit.

I think we keep forgetting that most pitchers dont have plus potential with all their pitches, most have one or maybe two plus pitches and servicable secondary stuff. And if I was choosing pitching prospects I would put those with plus fastballs above those with plus off-speed stuff.

Look, why do you have to be so darn argumentive? Can’t you just drink the kool-aid like the rest of us?

Ok seriously, you want to know why I would rank Bumgarner above someone with an already established 3 pitch repetoire? Simply put, I think that when Bumgarner develops his secondary stuff he will be a more desirable commodity.

I get the fact that projecting Bumgarner to learn breaking balls on the fly is a slippery slope that has led the hype train to a lot of messy wrecks. But what Bumgarner has done this year while throwing his FB 75% of the time is something that you cant ignore. I have yet to hear a response as to why Bumgarner despite having only a FB outperformed pitchers who have great fastballs and secondary pitches as well.

that Bumgarner would most likely not be able to survive with only a MLB caliber fastball but we can not say that for sure because we dont know exactly how good his fastball is. For all we know his fastball could be the perfect mix of velocity, location, deception, and movement that makes it a truly unique pitch. Now I wont go so far as to say that he will able to be a #1 starter with only one ++pitch or even a starter at all but I could see him having a pretty nice career as a closer. If that were the case I would still consider him a pretty nice prospect, maybe not top 5 or 10 but still anyone especially pitchers that carve out a legitimate MLB career have to be considered a success.