Piliere's Danny Duffy scouting report

by rdf8585 on Nov 18, 2010 6:18 PM EST

FULL REPORT @ http://mlb.fanhouse.com/2010/11/18/full-scouting-report-danny-duffy/

In part, it reads:

"Duffy has a lot of strong attributes but it's the fastball that will set him apart. There have been varying reports on Duffy's velocity since his return, but the buzz about his velocity being up is absolutely true. On Wednesday, Duffy worked at 92-94, never pitching below 91 and reaching 96 mph twice. And throughout the outing he routinely touched 95 mph"

"If you are looking for a comparison, one of the more clear-cut ones out there is Cole Hamels."

"Right now, his overall command of his secondary pitches make him more of a third starter or perhaps a two. But, if he can consistently spot his curveball or changeup, then we suddenly have an ace-type pitcher on our hands."

Pretty positive report overall and looks more and more like Law just saw him on an off night.

Tweet Comment 6 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

i've seen Hamels comps dropped on 3 of KC's LH's now

which is kind of a lazy comparison (tall lefty with strong changeup), but it’s still pretty damn exciting.

R.I.P. cwhitman412, Frederick0220, & Mets2k9
http://twitter.com/doublestix

by doublestix on Nov 18, 2010 7:02 PM EST reply actions

I enjoy reading Piliere

But has he ever provided a scouting report that wasn’t glowing?

Could be that he just reports on guys that stand out to him, but I find it interesting that they’re always so positive.

http://bullpenbanter.com/

by Jeff Reese on Nov 18, 2010 7:48 PM EST reply actions

I think that's part of it

that he just chooses to write up guys he’s enthusiastic about for the most part. He’s also just a very positive person, as is plain in his chats and any time he’s stopped by here.

When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream.

by t ball on Nov 18, 2010 9:26 PM EST up reply actions

eh

I think it’s just a matter of guys that really stand out to him. Those types of pieces tend to attract the best buzz, and let’s face it, it’s easier to write about the guys that you like than the guys that you don’t like.

Also, negative pieces usually result in a bunch of homers labeling you a hack. :) It’s hard not to be honest, but if somebody wrote “scouted Dustin Ackley for a week in the AFL, and I like him as a decent regular but not a star”, how many responses to the tune of “you’ve watched him for just a few days, but the Mariners, who have watched him for a whole season, love him and think he’s a future star” and “OMG CAN’T YOU READ A STATLINE??!?!?!” is that going to get? (not singling Ackley out here, just using him as an example) I have little problem torching a guy if I don’t like what I’m seeing, but I’ll admit that I have no financial stake in my thoughts at the moment – if I did, would it be a different story? I’d like to think not, but it’s something to consider.

by mrkupe on Nov 18, 2010 10:00 PM EST up reply actions