Madison Bumgarner vs. Martin Perez w/Poll
by Wilbur Wood on Jun 22, 2010 9:01 AM EDT
Email
Print
Okay this is a bit of a lightning rod.
If this poll were taken on April 1st I would have expected the results to be at least 80/20 in Perez' favor. Now about 12 weeks later. Perez is scuffling somewhat at AA and Bumgarner has re-established his velocity and K rate and some contend that his newly added cutter his become an above average pitch (55-60).
Which player will have the better MLB career and why?
Let the debate begin. I will be monitoring the results for any "unusual" voting patterns, so comments are as important as the raw vote totals.
50 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I am a MadBum supporter...
And while I was happy to see the 11k outing, I’m not convinced yet. I couldn’t find any real reports on his velocity or pitching in general, so we’ll see what he does next time out.
Meanwhile, Perez has struggled, but to this point, I haven’t heard any reports of diminished stuff. So he’s probably just learning how to pitch, so I’m not real worried about it.
Anyway, if MadBum strings together a few more starts with solid K rates, and if his stuff is back, then I’d take MadBum over Perez, but that will be a while.
Poster formerly known as artie
Perez
I just don’t understand all of the MadBum hype.
Nonsensical.
One guy has much better stuff than the other.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
agreed
I’ve been thinking about it a lot, other than fantasy and trades why do we evaluate prospects against on another rather than against their chances to succeed?
Come check out Bullpen Banter!
Follow Bullpen Banter on Twitter
Follow me on Twitter
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
Than why have lists or rankings?
As inherent in a “list” is that #15 prosepct is worth more than #22.
Fat man is no more,
Bursting on through Heaven's Door
Come on in, says Bill
disagree
worth is a very vague term and is in the eye of the beholder (or the organization). The ranking numbers are only comparing players from a given year, but the letter grades stretch across time.
Come check out Bullpen Banter!
Follow Bullpen Banter on Twitter
Follow me on Twitter
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
Perez without a doubt
Young enough struggles can be expected with superior stuff. He will adjust and, when he does, the superior stuff will be even more apparent with the results.
Maybe if the current trends (Bumgarners’ most recent start and Perez season thus far) continued all year, you could post this poll in the off-season and maybe things would change some. I’d probably still vote for Perez though.
I'd go with Perez, too.
Even though his ERA/FIP aren’t great in Double-A, he’s still got a good strikeout rate and he’s inducing groundballs 50% of the time.
The shaky command needs to be refined, but the kid doesn’t turn 20 until next season and he projects to have multiple plus offspeed offerings in addition to his impressive fastball.
I think you’re going to get a fairly common response here: it’s still gotta be Perez, but if these guys look the same in early September as they do now, then you’ll see a lot more people lean towards Bumgarner. The whole youth/stuff advantage for Perez seems to be enough for him right now, it would seem.
I like baseball.
I write for Beyond the Box Score and The Hardball Times Fantasy
aren't great?
Not to pick on you because most have the same attitude, but call a spade a spade.
Perez is absolutely sucking this year. Very high BB’s, lots of runs, very low IP per game, and probably high pitch counts (considering the innings he pitches). There have been some positives and he has a great arm.
But I expect a kid who supposedly has as good an arm as Perez to absolutely dominate with K’d and hits/9 if the walks are really high. After all if the walks are high and innings are low with dominant stuff then hitters have nothing to offer at. This is when you see sick K number and sick hits/9. Not seeing it.
I’m seriously concerned.
From my limited memory wasn’t he a dominant fastball with plus curve at times? Can he throw the curve for strikes? What’s up?
It seems everyone jumps all over every negative mad bum scouting report and Perez gets all the passes in the book and no scouting reports on why he stinks.
No reports have suggested that Perez' stuff is not there
It’s mechanics, execution. If anyone had seen his velo drop or made disparaging remarks about his stuff I’d be concerned. But people I trust who have been to games say the stuff is still there. Some of his starts have been decent with one crappy inning or a few bad at bats. Some have been awful throughout.
It’s just not the same as the Bumgarner situation. Perez still has the same stuff/velo. He has better secondary pitches. He’s a better prospect.
Freude schöner Götterfunken, Tochter aus Elysium, Freude!
stuff
From what I read of his stuff, correct me if I’m wrong, is he has a great fastball 92-96, a promising curveball, and a good changeup.
To me that means he throws very hard and can occasionally spin some real nice curves but consistency is a a problem. But he’s definitely young enough to correct this. And a solid change which is important.
He is quite young for AA. But his stuff IMO isn’t what people think it is. I’m not talking about the scouts. I would imagine scouts give a player like Perez a rating something like:
40 – 60 curve
55 – 65 fastball
45 – 55 change
just a guess. It sounds like his curve shows flashes but isn’t MLB average or even borderline or scouts would mention that. So a 40 baseline. And with the flashes they see and the armspeed he gets a 60 would be projected. He could go higher here, but let’s be somewhat cautious as breaking pitches rarely improve as much as we would like.
The fastball already has plus velocity but his command is poor, so a 55 baseline sounds good. And a 65 top end of somewhat above plus.
The change he has a solid feel. This sounds like high praise for his age but also conceding it’s slightly below MLB level. And I expect it would be above average in the future but not plus.
Anyways that’s just a quick guess of a writeup.
My thing is this: Most people think of Perez stuff as the future projected number. In reality his stuff isn’t that good. Not yet it isn’t. With changes, improvements, refinements, repeatability, etc. it could become dominant. I agree. I like him a lot.
But when people say his stuff is so much better than Bumgarner that’s totally wrong IMO. It’s just confusing reality with projection.
If you were to ask me who has a higher chance of being dominant it’s obviously Perez. But I think Bumgarner has a much higher chance of helping his team. Just way lower chance of a flameout.
That's a great post
In general, you’re right, people tend to think of the future grades. But the reports of Perez have always stressed how advanced his secondary stuff was, and I think that’s why the Rangers moved him up to AA. Here are the preliminary grades Jason Parks gave for Perez in spring training this year (present/future):
FB 60/65 fastball (sits 91-94, top at 96)
CB 60/65
CU 50/60
control graded out at 60 then.
projection: Solid no. 2 starter
Obviously he’s been having a couple of mechanical issues which have greatly affected that control. But his present grades on his stuff were pretty high according to at least one very credible source this spring. Parks should be putting out a full report on Perez soon in his series over at BBTiA, it will be interesting to see how he updates that. I don’t think he’s seen Perez since then so it might not change much.
So I think that until the last few weeks, you could say Perez’ stuff was better than Bumgarner’s right now, not even taking projection into account. And for me the projection is higher, and that’s far more important and the reason I had Perez ranked higher than Bum preseason anyway. I don’t care overmuch about their stat lines from start to start, I’m going on the scouting reports of people like Law, Goldstein, Parks, etc.
Freude schöner Götterfunken, Tochter aus Elysium, Freude!
agreed
both on projection and on scouts gradings. Although I try to ignore most of what Law says. Partially because he is annoying but also just not trusting his judgment. And I totally ignore Goldstein. Parks is one I do respect but I would like to see his writeup.
The reason I downgraded Perez stuff is mostly intuition/guessing.
When a player with stuff like Perez is in the low minors it’s very hard to get a firm grasp of his command since he can throw it anywhere and be successful. But as he moves up the level the command is more important. Control is useless IMO, it’s more a measurement of stats.
Another concern I have is that scouts usually only see a pitcher once or twice. If I read 5 or 6 good scouts that put his command at a 60 then it’s probably accurate.
Also, it’s the chicken or the egg thing. Did his mechanical issues just pop up? Or is he working on something? Or is adjusting to a higher level having some effect?
Last paragraph
I have wondered if the mechanical issues arose when he tried to adjust, could be. I’ll ask Jason when he posts his report, he’s usually pretty quick to answer there. On seeing a pitcher once or twice, I agree. It’s a good way to get a read on the potential of his stuff, and maybe his control, but the command and consistency and mechanical issues might elude occasional viewings. I find those present grades almost impossible to believe, as much as I respect Parks.
Freude schöner Götterfunken, Tochter aus Elysium, Freude!
Agree totally
How could those present grades be true with the results? But then again his stuff probably appeared that good in A ball. I would think at the lower levels you would need many viewings to get a grasp on his command.
Thanks, hopefully we get some more insight into what’s happening with Perez.
I voted a couple hours ago
and it was about 75-25 Perez…I guess all the Bumgarner believers were sleeping really late today. Perez just has better stuff, despite his rough season so far. All in all, I like Perez’ chances to be a very effective major league starting pitcher more than I like Bumgarner’s odds.
Freude schöner Götterfunken, Tochter aus Elysium, Freude!
Yes
Voting went from ~ 80/20 in favor of Perez to approaching 50/50 over the past 2-1/2 hours. Seems fishy, hence why comments are better info
Fat man is no more,
Bursting on through Heaven's Door
Come on in, says Bill
?!?!
So, um, you put the poll up just to torture yourself? That makes sense. I’m going to try and restrain myself but, another post/ excuse to run down Bumgarner isn’t really THAT necessary is it? It sounds like you know EXACTLY who you like best.
I see the initial 80/20 in favor of perez wasn’t “fishy” was it? Not that I care :-)
The Perez 80-20 thing wasn't fishy, neither was the 50-50 mark
The fishy thing is how quickly the balance changed… almost as if someone was stuffing the ballot or something.
I like baseball.
I write for Beyond the Box Score and The Hardball Times Fantasy
by Satchel Price on Jun 22, 2010 6:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Really?
Someone has THAT much invested in arguing Bumgarner’s prospect status?
I think you'd be surprised
by how some people choose to spend their time..
Not saying that someone did that, and frankly I could care less if they did, but let’s not act like it’s a totally ludicrous suggestion.
I like baseball.
I write for Beyond the Box Score and The Hardball Times Fantasy
by Satchel Price on Jun 22, 2010 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions
It seems to always happen with Giants prospects, to tell you the truth.
I’m sure some of it is that they have one of the most internet-connected & prospect-interested fanbases. My money has always been on a few zealous posters, though.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
For instance, on the CPL votes last year
Giants prospects landed at #s 5, 12, 19, 25.
Number 12 was Tim Alderson. This is pretty much why we stopped doing polls and went to a system where you had to put your name next to your vote/comment. We got far, far less “votes” total.
There are a few other groups of fans that seem to fall into this every once in awhile (mine occasionally among them).
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
We didn't stop doing the polls when Alderson landed number 12.
The 2009 prospect list was done purely with the poll method.
"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 Jun 22, 2010 9:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Roughly 30
consecutive votes for Bumgarner at one stretch.
Probably statistically impossible in a vote that is otherwise “even”
Fat man is no more,
Bursting on through Heaven's Door
Come on in, says Bill
ok, yea...
that doesnt seem to be an unbiased vote…
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Jun 22, 2010 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions
I havent voted either way
And wont vote. But the evening out could be because of the time difference on the east coast and CA, where most Giants fans are. It could simply be Giants fans waking up and voting…
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Jun 22, 2010 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe a poor argument but...
Bumgarner should pitch in San Fran which is a decent enough park for pitchers. Ballpark in Arlington can be a house of horrors in the summer and I expect Bumgarner should certainly reap the rewards.
True
But that does not make Bumgarner the better pitcher. It does make him potentially the better fantasy player.
Right
but the question was who’s going to have the better career (not better pitcher). Thus making it worth noting, because, there’s a highly likely scenario that both guys, spend a considerable chunk of their careers, pitching for their current organizations.
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day."
-Frank Sinatra
Yeah.. uh..
shouldn’t the better pitcher have the better career, assuming that neither gets seriously injured? I’m confused.
Why would you consider a pitcher with stats inflated by his run environment to have a better career than a pitcher who didn’t have those benefits, if the latter pitcher was clearly superior with all things neutral?
I like baseball.
I write for Beyond the Box Score and The Hardball Times Fantasy
by Satchel Price on Jun 24, 2010 1:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Perez should fit better in Texas than most pitchers
Because he’s a groundball pitcher. Not to mention that he’s quite capable of missing bats, too. Perez actually profiles nicely for Texas, at least relative to other pitchers.
I like baseball.
I write for Beyond the Box Score and The Hardball Times Fantasy
by Satchel Price on Jun 22, 2010 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
and lefties do better there than righties as well
the park favors left handed hitters more than right, basically neutral for right handed hitters.
Freude schöner Götterfunken, Tochter aus Elysium, Freude!
Perez
I still go with Perez, but I really wish we had more information about what they are doing with his mechanics. I’ll write Scott Lucas and see if he has an opinion. Everything I have read says that he is sill maintaining his velocity, sitting 92-93 and touching 96. I just keep reminding myself that he was a pitcher in Spokane 18 months ago with an era approaching 4. As long as we don’t see reports of his change up and curve suffering, I thin you still have to place your bets with Perez.
I have two starts on file from him...
including his most recent start, which I just compiled an article on (Subscription Required)
The mechanical differences between his June 18th start and one of his starts from early May is the way he breaks his hands. In his last start, he would come to a much more compact position around the waist and really squeeze tight around his core before breaking his hands hard into his arm circle. Before he would break his hands earlier, around chest high.
As for his change and curve suffering, he didn’t throw his change-up much in the two starts I saw. And his curveball was a non-factor in his early May start. It was better in his last start, but still a little inconsistent. What did him in was he could throw his fastball for strikes.
In any case, as long as he’s healthy, there isn’t too much to be concerned about. He’s a teenage pitcher going through growing pains in Double-A.
And yes, I would also take Perez over Bumgarner.
Recent Update " What's Wrong with Martin Perez?
by Alex Eisenberg on Jun 22, 2010 11:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Wilbur this a good ?
I spent 6 hours off/on thinking it over and still havent made up a good argument for one over the other
"The key to winning baseball games is pitching, fundamentals, and three run homers."
Opposite ends of the Spectrum
A) A player with a premo scouting profile who is still young but going through adversity
vs.
B) A player who has fallen to very deep lows, has always had a mixed scouting profile (lack of secondary pitches) but has bounced back and is getting excellent results at AAA and still is young.
Unfair to brand as “Tools” vs “Results” becam MadBum does have a big league FB
Fat man is no more,
Bursting on through Heaven's Door
Come on in, says Bill
and is getting excellent results at AAA
Is he? What about his results really profiles as “excellent?”
82.2 IP
88 Hits
22 Walks
59 Ks
5 HR & 47% GB(give you those)
That isn’t “excellent results” for me. Nor does it portend particularly well in terms of projecting him at the next level given the weaknesses in his game. If we assume (and I think its fair to do so) that he won’t be able to strike out as many MLB hitters as he can AAA hitters… well, it gets pretty dicey. Mid rotation dicey. With the stuff he has (talking specifically lack of secondary stuff here) I don’t know how anyone is comfortable projecting special results from this kid.
If it hadn’t been for the hype of two years ago would he stick out as a prospect? Would his repertoire or results really stick out to anyone? Here we have a kid with good control, a good fastball a developing cutter and a pretty serious lack of offspeed and breaking ball offerings. Does that say “top 10 prospect” or “top 25 prospect” to anyone? It sure doesn’t for me.
Good prospect, nothing special. I think there’s a good case to be made that Perez could be special.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
"of late"
Was implied but not stated in assessment of “results” at AAA by MadBum.
Fat man is no more,
Bursting on through Heaven's Door
Come on in, says Bill
Yeah, he's been better his past three starts
20 IP, 16/3 K/BB, just 1 home run allowed
Still, I wouldn’t classify a 3.81 FIP from a top prospect with a 6.3% HR/FB in Triple-A to be an excellent performance.
Plus, last year in Double-A he put up a 4.53 FIP against RH hitters, along with a 4.02 FIP against RH in Triple-A this year. You’d like to see more swing-and-misses, and the fairly pronounced platoon split doesn’t really help things either.
I’m not exactly bullish on Bumgarner right now, at least relative to his former stock as an elite pitching prospect.
I like baseball.
I write for Beyond the Box Score and The Hardball Times Fantasy
by Satchel Price on Jun 24, 2010 1:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Heard that Bumgarner may start this Saturday...
so we’ll see if he continues to get people out…
I keep waiting for him to turn into the guy he was when he destroyed the SAL league in 2008. His last start was the closest he’s gotten in the last year, so I wonder if it wasn’t a breakthrough game.
But, I’d also begun to accept the fact that he may just be a guy who gets 6-7ks per 9, and maintains a 1 WHIP, which is what he’s done over the time he’s been slumping. And if he can do that, then I’d be ok with that.
Poster formerly known as artie
Well, yeah
But I’d love to see him do that in the majors.
If he’s putting up a ~7 K/9 in Triple-A, I doubt he repeats that figure in the majors with his offspeed stuff.
I like baseball.
I write for Beyond the Box Score and The Hardball Times Fantasy
by Satchel Price on Jun 24, 2010 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm curious about it too...
and I’ll admit that I don’t have first hand opinion about his stuff or how it will work or anything like that.
As a stat hound, he seems to perform pretty consistently from level to level, let’s just exclude 2008 as a high point fluke stat blip, but in 2009 and 2010, his K rates, walk rates, and WHIP has all been about the same as he went from AA to AAA. His WHIP is a little elevated this year, probably due to the first couple of starts, but in his last 10, it’s about where it should be.
Anyway. as he moves up, people keep waiting for him to fail, but he hasn’t yet.
And I admit, I’m rooting for him, but he hasn’t blown up yet, so we’ll see.
Poster formerly known as artie
I agree with Casejud in one respect: Bumgarner is one of the better pitchers on the mental side of things. I give him a lot of credit for figuring out what works and doing it. The mediocre K rate this year is somewhat concerning, but I tend to think that cerebral pitchers do what works until it stops working. In this case, he’s pitching to GB contact and limiting BBs, and it’s working. The question is whether, if he stops being successful with that approach, he has the stuff to get strikeouts (or more GBs, or fewer BBs, or whatever will make him most successful).
I do mark down Bumgarner because of his diminished K rate, simply because we don’t know if he could ever get it back. But I think that prospect discussion often ignores the fact that people tend to keep doing what makes them successful. Perhaps Bumgarner could have a K per IP if he ran into adversity and started pitching away from contact again; we just don’t know.
Or do we?
I agree with lot of what you say, just to tired to make a long post.
Id agree though. It has merit because, when he lost velocitry he cointinuied to get guys out and now that he’s throwing harder again – he K’d 11 the other night. I think he’s got the K pitch in his back pocket again.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Minor League Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
