Lyles vs Moore vs Montgomery
by Dewey Finn on Dec 23, 2009 9:04 PM EST
Email
PrintJordan Lyles (Born 1990) - 3.24 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, 144.2 IP, 167 K, 38 BB, 1.02 G/F (LOW A)
Matthew Moore (Born 1989) - 3.15 ERA, 1.27 WHIP, 123 IP, 176 K, 70 BB, 1.34 G/F (LOW A)
Mike Montgomery (Born 1989) - 2.21 ERA, 1.05 WHIP, 110 IP, 98 K, 36 BB, 1.26 G/F (A-/A+)
Who do you believe has the highest upside?
Who do you believe is most likely to reach their upside?
I am having a hard time trying to decide how I should rank them. Initially I liked Lyles most because of his strong strikeout totals and excellent command, but lately I have been reading some things that suggest that right now he is just overpowering young raw hitters with his fastball. I can't remember where I got this, but I was under the impression that he had an above average curveball that has shown flashes of a plus pitch and a decent changeup. My second choice would have been Moore. His strikeout rate is just ridiculous. Apparently he has a low 90s fastball and a plus curveball that is almost unhittable. Does he have a 3rd pitch though? Do some view him as a future reliever? This leaves Montgomery 3rd. However, as organizational reports and rankings are coming out from various sources, I am beginning to think that Montgomery should be ahead of Lyles and Montgomery.
What are your thoughts?
25 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Highest upside
Matt Moore
more than likely to reach potential
probably Montgomery….
I'd rather have Nick Punto playing 3B and Felipe Lopez playing 2B
than Punto playing 2B and Kouzy, Crede, DeRosa or Glaus playing 3B.
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Dec 23, 2009 9:07 PM EST reply actions
Definitely +1
SHS, Dewey, you guys want in for the draft thing I’m doing?
I’m personally inviting you both.
Hey guys, I run a music blog. alternative, powerpop, punk, electronica, screamo, etc etc, check it out. http://muzikdizcovery.blogspot.com/ artist interviews and many other stuff. free cookies! (not really, but still) :D
Go Chatroom
http://epicminorfandraft.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=login
Hey guys, I run a music blog. alternative, powerpop, punk, electronica, screamo, etc etc, check it out. http://muzikdizcovery.blogspot.com/ artist interviews and many other stuff. free cookies! (not really, but still) :D
by cwhitman412 on Dec 23, 2009 10:13 PM EST up reply actions
Agree, but
I agree with this. However I have Lyles at #2 in both categories, and he was also my vote. Enough has been said about numbers and stuff below, and I can see both sides of the argument. While I consider both sides, I happen to lean toward the numbers in this particular case.
I voted for Moore
I really like this kid. The first thing that gets thrown out there is his walk rate, but I’m not as concerned with it as most, or as I might be with other prospects. Almost half his walks came in 35 innings to start the year. I know, you can’t just throw out bad months, whatever. Moore didn’t have control issues in his stint in Rookie Ball in 2008, and he didn’t have issues from June on this year. The walks look like a blip on the radar screen to me honestly. He racks up the K’s, induces grounders fairly well, and doesn’t get hit hard. Now, stepping up to High A in 2010 could prove all of this wrong, but at this point I don’t see much to not like about Matt Moore. He’d be in my top 30 I’m sure, maybe even sneaking into the top 20. His ceiling is a good bit higher than the other two I think.
Montgomery would be second here for me, probably in the 40-60 range. I like this kid alot, looks like a good bet to be a #3 starter(at least as good bets below AA go anyway) with probably a ceiling of a #2.
Lyles would be third out of this group for me, probably in the 60-80 range maybe. The numbers look nice but like you mention Dewey there are reports that he dominated Low A hitters with a good fastball but little else. The Cal League might be a tough test for him next year, but a good year there could move him up the list quickly.
RIP Nick Adenhart
ya...
Lancaster would be quite the test for Lyles. I wonder if the Astros would consider starting him in AA next and skipping the launching pad that is Lancaster.
i just LOL every time I see Lyles get discounted like this.
its like, the guy posted such insane stats, in full-season ball, at the age of 18 for the entire year, and nah… there’s something wrong with him.
do you guys maybe think he’ll make adjustments when he has to?
I am almost more impressed that he did what he did with supposedly one pitch. i mean shit, if he can put up those numbers with 1 pitch, while playing against guys 3-4 years older than him… imagine what he’ll be able to do when he has a couple more pitches…
in case you guys all forgot, he turned 19 in october…. how high would guys like Matzek and J Turner be ranked if they had put those numbers up in Low-A this year instead of pitching in high-school…? [not saying Lyles has equal stuff to Matzek, because if he did he’d have been in my top 5].
I honestly don’t see how one can rank Lyles lower than 40th… and anything beyond is ridiculous.
this is like bizarro-world to my Homer Bailey arguments the past few years… where I was arguing that Homer was just working on stuff and didn’t care so much about his stats… while Lyles has the stats and supposedly non-stuff… this is weird to me
hmm?
Numbers were great, no complaints. And nobody says Lyles has only one pitch . . .he gets praise for making advancements with both curveball and changeup. Neither projects as more than average, but that’s fine as lots of guys don’t even have that kind of repertoire depth.
So . . .good numbers in A ball, 89-91 MPH fastball, average breaking ball, average changeup. That’s worthy of solid consideration, right? Also: show me guys 35-45 on your list, so I have an idea of what exactly you’re saying when you say that you can’t say how one can rank Lyles lower than 40th. Otherwise, you come off as sounding really arbitrary . . .like, what can I expect out of “the No. 40 prospect” that I shouldn’t out of the “No. 60 prospect”? Does this change on a person-to-person basis, or a year-to-year basis?
i'm saying,
Lyles seems to be getting discounted a lot lately… put his stats on the name of Casey Kelly, and people would be flipping their shit… [and i used Kelly because he’s another guy who supposedly lacks #1 stuff, and i wouldn’t argue that, just using as an example].
and I’m not sure what yr looking for on the arbitrary numbers thing… I’ll say that Lyles is borderline A- to me… that better? if not an A-, he is at/near the top of the B+ pile.
how many are going to rank Kelly ahead of Lyles? Lyles’ stats we way more impressive, at a year younger, and ok Kelly was switching positions and is a LHP, but I bet Lyles gets ranked below CK on 90% of year-end lists… [again not trying to pick on Kelly, just using him as an example since both guys have similar “not ace” stuff]
kelly vs lyles
Kelly is actually a RHP.
Lyles did have the better numbers. But scouting-wise people do like Kelly more. Both his curveball and his changeup grade as plus pitches, while Lyles does not have a single pitch that grades as plus. That’s probably the biggest difference between the two . . .command-wise they seem pretty close, maybe an edge to Kelly.
The grade works better for me, thanks. I’d say Kelly is a B+ and Lyles a solid B. Kelly looks much more like a potential frontline starter to me . . .has everything except fastball velocity and should see a small increase. Lyles looks like a solid innings eater type, with a chance to break along the Jeremy Hellickson line of development (continued improvement in secondary pitches, command holds up at higher levels).
damn, yeah, forgot he's rhp
i guess i’m not trying to argue with you… maybe my argument is more of a question for the scouts… i want to know how he put up these numbers without a single pitch that grades as plus…
Control and deception
Control and deception are big parts of success in the minors. I am not saying that Lyles does not have a plus pitch, but many pitchers have success in the minors because of their ability to command ‘average’ pitches. When these guys get to the majors they aren’t so lucky and tend to get lit up.
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift
by King Billy Royal on Dec 24, 2009 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
Disagree?
I mean, I see what you are saying but I dsiagree with the deception part. Deception is a big part of many pitcher major league sucess also. Its a huge and underrated aprt of evaluating how good a guys fastball really is.
I have nothing to add on Jordy Lyles though. Seem like with all the differing views on the guy we’ll need to send a scout out with a video camera to see him pitch. I love the banter here, I really do but sometimes I feel like Id get more from seeing 1 inning from a decent camera angle of a pitcher than all the talk here.
Merry Christmas all!
Lyles Supporters
I hope some of you can provide some insight into his stuff, what he needs to work on, etc.
Thanks!
I know him pretty well
We grew up playing ball together or against each other from tee ball…His fastball is a plus pitch and was out of high school, it absolutely explodes out of his hand even though he sits 91-93 or so, but it is super deceptive. His curveball is just average right now, but anybody who thinks it doesn’t have a chance to be a plus pitch is crazy. It is loopy from time to time now, but he was 18 for most of the year and only started throwing it his junior year. His change-up is also at least average right now, and BA rated it the best in the Astros system, so it can’t be too shabby. His command is and always has been amazing
I’d say Monty’s slightly ahead of him for now because he has about the same command and his stuff is a little more polished. I’d put Moore behind him, but Moore’s stuff is the best of the three at this point, while his command is far behind which leaves him at a close third. The gap between the 3 really isn’t big at all
I'll go Montgomery
He might not have Moore’s ceiling (I find this a tad debatable) but for some reason, I think he’s safer.
Btw, I imagine your Lyles impression might’ve come from Adam Foster’s comments over at PP.
they also
think Kevin Mulvey is a better prospect than Chris Withrow…so take it with a grain of salt
I'll say this...
I think most of PP’s rankings are heavily weighted by floors, which I personally don’t agree with. For example, putting Jon Niese ahead of guys like Jenrry Mejia, Casey Crosby, Matt Moore, and Casey Kelly doesn’t sit too well in my head.
That's the terrible flaw in trying to base your prospect rankings on an approach defined mostly by numbers
It inherently favors high floor types in the upper minors. Youre guaranteed to miss the boat on a number of great impact talents.
PP's rankings now are far more influenced by scouting than in the past
If I remember correctly, Adam stated that his high ranking of Mulvey was at least in part from viewing the effectiveness on his breaking pitches.
They definitely are
and I applaud that. BUT I think theyve fallen into the trap of drawing conclusions from seeing just a game or two.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
