Yu Darvish & Prospect Rankings
by BenMc5 on Dec 16, 2011 9:49 AM EST
Email
PrintAs we move closer to finding out who won the bidding for Darvish (sounds like Toronto?) I have been thinking a lot about where he fits in among the top prospects in the game. I know this has been discussed some in the community ranking posts but thought it probably deserved a post of its own. When Daisuke came over, he was ranked #1 by Baseball America in their 2007 top 100. Based on many articles I have read, Darvish is a better pitcher than Daisuke was at the same age. Take a read through this excerpt from a great article over at Fangraphs titled "Darvish Is Not Daisuke."
Comparing their performance results in Japan:
"Matsuzaka had a 2.95 ERA in eight seasons in Japan. He never once had an ERA under 2.00. He had an 8.7 K/9. Darvish just completed his fifth-straight season in which he had an ERA under 2.00 and a whip under 1.00. This year was his finest to date: 16-5, 1.48 ERA, 0.84 WHIP, 240 K, 32 BB, 5 HR in 207 IP (stats as of Sept. 27). Overall, Darvish managed a 1.996 ERA in his seven NPB years, with an 8.9 K/9. Demonstrably better."
Regarding Darvish's 5-pitch mix:
"The 25-year-old Darvish throws five pitches that project as above average at the MLB level: a four-seam fastball, a two-seam fastball, a pair of sliders and a 12-6 curveball. He’s also added a cutter into his repertoire this year, and he mixes in occasional changeups and forkballs. Darvish’s out pitches have been his two sliders: a mid-80′s horizontal slider that breaks hard and away from right-handed batters, and a lower-80′s downward-breaking slider. This year he induced whiffs 19.5% of the time he threw his slider — and he threw them about a quarter of the time."
My initial feeling was to slot him in right behind Matt Moore as the #2 pitching prospect and #4 overall prospect. But there really aren't many pitchers with 5 pitches that project as at least above average in the MLB. Even though Daisuke was #1 overall in 2007, I feel like the top 3 of the current year (Harper, Trout, Moore) is much stronger than the top 3 in 2007 (Alex Gordon, Delmon Young, Phillip Hughes). So I'm still undecided as to where I would put him, and wanted to use this forum for the community to provide their opinion and insights.
82 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
#4....
seems about right. Maybe even #3 ahead of Moore.
What about where to slot Cespedes and Soler?
Ahead of Moore?
Why exactly? Moore has better stuff, a cleaner arm action, many less innings, and sucess in the US.
Your last point is a bit silly, isn't it?
You really think Matt Moore deserves more credit for his “sucess” of 63 innings above AAA ball than Darvish does for his 5 years of dominance in Japan?
" This is what people are like now: they've got thier cell phone and they're like "Uh . . . it won't ..." Can you GIVE IT A SECOND? It's going to space! Can you give it a second to get back from space? Is the speed of light to slow for you? " - Louis CK
seeing that the Japanese ball is SMALLER
If you think that success, as a pitcher, in Japan is equivalent to success in the US, I can tell you’ve never tried to throw a slider. Smaller ball = better movement. It takes time to adjust to the bigger ball.
Moore should be ranked ahead of Darvish.
by JoelGuzman'sScout on Dec 17, 2011 3:29 AM EST up reply actions
I thought they moved to a MLB-sized ball this year
Different composition, but same size, and now used league-wide in Japan.
by cookiedabookie on Dec 17, 2011 12:15 PM EST up reply actions
Whether you think...
Moore is better than Darvish or not, I dont see how it can be based on Moore’s performance in the US. Moore has 9.3 MLB IP, only 52.7 IP even at AAA. Most people consider the Japan Leagues to be roughly equivalent to AAA ball (I think it’s a little above) and Darvish has 1268.3 IP in Japan. So Darvish has a much longer track record of success at higher levels and he’s past his injury nexus age whereas Moore isnt.
Right now, I have Moore ahead of Darvish myself. I merely suggested that who’s better is debatable. It will be interesting to see which one BA ranks higher.
How can we even begin to compare AAA to the Japanese leagues though?
While pro ball is preperation for MLB, the Japanese league is just something else. The style of play is reportedly different, and players seem to randomly have sucess between the two.
4 seems right
Darvish is MLB-ready, which puts him ahead of a guy like Miller. I definitely slot Darvish behind the Big 3 though. I’d take Moore over Darvish in a heartbeat if I were a GM.
There is no way I take any non-MLB starter over Matt Moore
I haven’t quite figured out where to slot Darvish. I’m initially thinking among the very bottom of the A-’s (~15). Hopefully I can watch that playoff start over the weekend and come up with a better idea.
Bullpen Banter
MLB Bonus Baby
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
My
problem with this is Moore is not #3
Trout
Moore
Harper
Darvish
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 1:04 PM EST up reply actions
Read my post in the other thread regarding Harper
Harper is a generational prospect. What he just did as an 18 year old was insanely good. Compare what he and Heyward did at the same age in the South Atlantic League. Heyward was 35 points behind in OBP and 71 points behind in slugging, and that was still enough to get him up to #5 per BA. Seriously, you even brought up the “potential strikeout issue” when talking about a guy who struck out in 17.7% of his PA as an 18 year old in AA. That fact alone tells me your holding predraft scouting reports against instead of actually evaluating the season he just had.
I'm not a Harper fan
But the kid is insanely good. He is the best hitting prospect since Arod.
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Dec 16, 2011 1:15 PM EST up reply actions
You
are right man. I’m a fucking retard.
1. Harper
2. Trout
3. Moore
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
There
should be about 10 line breaks between 1. and 2. to accurately show the gap.
1. Harper
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2. Trout
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 1:58 PM EST up reply actions
My issue isn't even as much about the ranking as your ridiculous reasoning for it
You claimed he didn’t hit well enough (despite posting the best wRC+ among hitter with at least 300 PA in the SAL) and that he had possible strikeout problems (despite the 17.7% K rate in AA as an 18 year old).
Did I call you a retard, or say anything personal for that matter?
I just explained why your “questions” about Harper are completely unjustified. You said the guy had possible strikeout problems after he posted a 17.7% K rate in AA as an 18 year old. Please feel free to explain what reasoning there was for that beyond the pre-draft question raised about his contact ability, because I sure can’t see anything.
He
also struck out at a 20% clip in low-A ball, which is an acceptable, but not elite number. That confirmed my pre-draft questions
He then still struck out in AA at an 18% clip, better, close to elite, but not elite. Furthermore, his power disappeared (.140 ISO) so he gave up something to have an improved strikeout rate.
I project closer .260/.340/.510 instead of .300/.380/.570 or so.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 2:17 PM EST up reply actions
Clearly
and not being self-indulgent or dramatic, I could be wrong. I realize that. I’ll just take Trout, who I think will have an offensive impact closer to Harper than most people believe, over Harper because of the aforementioned clause and the huge difference in defensive value.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 2:19 PM EST up reply actions
Huge difference in defensive value?
Not sure I’d go nearly that far. You’re looking at a difference of maybe 10 runs (I don’t think Trout project any better in CF than Harper does in RF) and I know there has been some talk of Harper being able to handle CF.
Well
I think Trout does profile to be a significantly better CF than Harper in RF. Trout has been lauded as a plus-plus defensive CF and I buy into that. Harper has a freakin cannon of an arm, but other than that projects as an above-average RF as he fills out. That’s gonna be closer to 15-20 runs in my book, which is 1.5 – 2 WAR I don’t see Harper making up with the bat.
That’s my persona opinion. It differs from yours. Deal with it and show some class.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 3:11 PM EST up reply actions
Last
sentence. My bad. Please accept my apology. I woke up much earlier than I wanted to today.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 3:20 PM EST up reply actions
No worries
But realize that disagreeing doesn’t equate to not showing class
Harper has a freakin cannon of an arm, but other than that projects as an above-average RF as he fills out
First, that means your at least projecting him as a plus defender in RF if you think he’s above average without considering the arm. I don’t think people realize how much a great arm in RF is worth. Take Francoeur for instance. He’s averaged over 8 runs saved per 150 games with his arm alone. If you combine something like that with above average defense outside the arm, you’re looking at a roughly +10 run defender in RF.
Second, we’re talking about Bryce Harper in his first full year of playing in the OF. The fact that he’s taken to it as naturally as he has is a huge plus. I see absolutely no reason to think that he won’t improve as his reads and routes continue to improve with experience.
Third, why are we projecting Harper to fill out and not Trout? Are we going back to those worries at draft time that Harper was going to end up like Dunn for whatever reason? Sure, he’ll probably lose some range as he ages, but so will Trout. Why are we holding it against one guy and not the other?
I
was referring to Harper as above-average across the board, including the arm.
Even if Trout and Harper are equal in skill at their relative positions, that’s still 1 WAR a year Harper has to make up with this bat. I’m not sure that will happen. I’m unsure enough I’m ranking Trout ahead of Harper.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 3:33 PM EST up reply actions
And I'll admit that while I disagree that is at least understandable
As I said, my issue was always less about the ranking itself than the initial reasoning behind it.
Comparing Ryan Braun to Harper
you have two guys who were forced to change positions and ended up in the OF.
Braun was a third baseman with a below average arm and poor throwing mechanics who has learned over time how to use his feet (which is where throwing comes from) and the proper mechanics for an outfielder.
He is now, at least as LF’ers go, an above average thrower.
Harper is the opposite.
Learning curve aside, in order to be considered a plus defender, Harper’s going to have to learn to tone it down, to sacrifice strength for accuracy.
I remember growing up in a Red Sox house and watching Dwight Evans play alot, and that’s what he had to do. Players ran on him all the time because they knew Evans would rush throws and would rely on his arm to make the play. It was only when he learned to back off and use his feet and improve his accuracy did he gain respect as an outfielder not to run on.
Under pressure, Harper still throws like a catcher, and there are still too many times where showing off the arm is more important to him than holding a runner.
It’s a lot easier as a coach or instruct to work with a kid like Braun, who has room to grow and learn, than a kid like Harper, who has already peaked ability wise and and ask him to back off sometimes.
LOL...you're ridiculous man
So your issue with Harper is that he’s trying to do too much when he’s throwing the ball….when he was 18 and playing his first year in the OF. Its the minor leagues, the whole point is to gain experience. Testing his arm and figuring out when he has to gun it and when he can dial it back for accuracy is exactly what he should be doing right now.
It’s a lot easier as a coach or instruct to work with a kid like Braun, who has room to grow and learn, than a kid like Harper, who has already peaked ability wise and and ask him to back off sometimes.
SMH…You know Harper has peaked ability wise, how?
"It’s a lot easier as a coach or instruct to work with a kid...who has room to grow and learn
Is this why the announcers always say “Sign that kid to a contract!” when they catch a foul ball. (all in good fun)
But seriously, I have a hard time believing that Bryce has already peaked.
by cookiedabookie on Dec 17, 2011 11:57 PM EST up reply actions
Are you possibly overreacting because Alvarez K's so much?
All kidding aside, liking Trout for his speed or defensive value is reason enough to prefer him over Harper.
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
I
think the gap between Trout’s offense value and Harper’s offense value will be smaller than the gap between Trout’s defensive value and Harper’s defensive value.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
Guys with 80 power don't need elite contact rates
20% is more than acceptable for a guy posting an ISO of .236 as an 18 year old in the SAL, especially one that’s walking over 14% of the time. How in the world did that confirm your pre-draft question? If we were talking about a Mike Stanton like 28.3% K rate, than I’d see your point, but we’re not. And that’s not even including the low K rate in AA. His K rate in AA was lower than Trout’s. I assume you also question Trout because of his strikeout problems, right?
And why are you projecting that line? He hit .256 in AA as an 18 year old, but he’s only going to hit .260 in the majors? Based on what exactly? And his BB rate is essentially going to remain static going forward into his prime based on what? If you’re going to break from pretty much everything the scouting community has to say about the guy, I’d like to hear reasoning beyond “he didn’t do that well in AA as an 18 year old.”
I
gave you my reasoning. It’s perfectly acceptable reasoning. I was “concerned” with Harper going into the draft and his performance over two levels did not assuage those fears, period.
I honestly don’t understand what you are failing to see?
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 3:10 PM EST up reply actions
Fine
I threw darts at a dart board.
Anyway, sorry for being such an ahole. You aren’t going to change my mind but I’ve lacked class in answering your legitimate questions and for that I apologize.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 16, 2011 3:19 PM EST up reply actions
Matsuzaka had a 2.95 ERA in eight seasons in Japan. He never once had an ERA under 2.00.
Did you mean 3.95? 1.95?
God has to bruise you before he use you. So you'll be sensitive to his touch.
?
That is from the article and I think it means 2.95 like it says.
"When the going gets tough, the tough get going."
Sorry. I misread it. I thought it said he never had an ERA over 2.00
God has to bruise you before he use you. So you'll be sensitive to his touch.
Am I the only one who won't rank him with the other prospects?
Just like I won’t rank other guys who go straight from an international team to an MLB team. I won’t rank Cespedes either.
A common debate
but seems like most places usually end up deciding to slot these guys in.
"Am I the only one who won't rank him with other prospects"
No.
Darvish isn’t a prospect. He’s a 25 year old man with eight years of “major league” experience.
The quality of play over there isn’t good, but it’s the best they have, and Darvish was the best pitcher there.
He won’t be close to the best pitcher here.
He’s just another overpaid free agent signing.
He is long past whatever the definition is for a prospect.
Proper forum
Darvish and Cespedes will both qualify as rookies once they are in the majors. They both are considered prospects in that they have skills and performance that may or may not translate to the major league level. And for us fantasy geeks, they both (in most leagues) qualify as rookies/minor leaguers, so yeah, I think this is absolutely the proper forum to discuss them and deserve to be ranked among any other more traditional prospects.
The wind is in the buffalo.
I'd probably slot him in behind Trout and Harper
The guy is going to kick some ass in the majors. His stuff is filthy. Hopefully he goes the Jays but whoever gets him should have a top pitcher in their hands.
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Dec 16, 2011 11:12 AM EST reply actions
my gut reaction
can’t question what Darvish has done in NPB, but before I put him ahead of Moore, Teheran, and Miller, I want to see how he reacts to the MLB strike zone and having to pitch outside the zone more (like Daisuke, he may have benefited from a bigger strike zone in Japan.) I’d tentatively have him at 7 overall, behind Harper/Trout/Moore/Teheran/Miller/Profar.
Don't forget that the MLB baseball is bigger as well
Probably won’t matter for a big guy like Darvish, but like you I would like to see him in the US environment first.
Number 1
With NPB being similar to AAA skill wise, it makes for a pretty easy decision. If a random American pitcher just came off a season in which he pitched 200 innings of minor league baseball in 26 starts with 240 K’s, a sub 2 FIP, and 5 above average major league pitches, where would you rank him? Forget the Darvish hasn’t pitched in the United States, look at how successful he has been against the level of competition. Yes, he was 25 but he was also dominating NPB baseball at the age of 20. Darvish is ahead of Moore in my books, and I don’t think it’s all that close.
If you want to say dumb things, you can't get mad when I call you dumb.
I think its close
But I agree that Yu has to be ahead of Moore.
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Dec 16, 2011 1:11 PM EST up reply actions
And do all guys who come from AAA dominate in the majors?
Sure some Japanese guys who come over don’t perform well but a lot of them are good contributors as well.
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Dec 16, 2011 2:02 PM EST up reply actions
Nailed it
If you want to say dumb things, you can't get mad when I call you dumb.
by dudedudedude on Dec 16, 2011 2:07 PM EST up reply actions
What is the stat?
You are making a pretty big claim. Do you think the success rate for AAA players to contribute in the majors is higher then the top Japanese guys coming over? Lots of Japanese players have had very good careers or years in the majors:
Ichiro
Hideki Matsui
Sasaki
Saito
Nomo
Johjima
Okajima
Iwamura
Kuroda
There is definite risk with signing a Japanese player but the risk isn’t any higher then projecting a AAA player’s production in the majors.
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Dec 16, 2011 2:37 PM EST up reply actions
Those are quite a few role players.
My point is this: I don’t know the exact success rate or anything like that, but I think it is fair to say that Japanese players have a very difficult time having similar success to what was expected.
Of course, there are the Ichiro’s who do great. But, overall, the success rate has been very poor.
I, personally, believe that is due to the different styles of play in the different leagues. While pro ball prepares you for MLB, the Japanese league doesn’t.
On top of this, practically all the guys that come over are “top prospects” or guys who would rank among the best MLB prospects. They are expected to succeed, unlike many of thir AAAA counterparts. If a comparison were to be made between all the top 250 prospects who were in AAA and all the equivilent Japanese players to come over, I would suspect that the pro ball players have had far far greater success.
After all, how many of these guys have become legit stars?
I just don't quite buy that AAA & NPB are equivalent
I’m not knocking what Darvish did in Japan, especially considering his age…I just don’t think it’s quite that easy
by PrincetonCubs on Dec 16, 2011 2:00 PM EST up reply actions
It's obviously not a perfect comparison
But it’s the best we have. There are some major differences but there are major difference between different AAA leagues too and we still make comparisons across those leagues.
If you want to say dumb things, you can't get mad when I call you dumb.
by dudedudedude on Dec 16, 2011 2:08 PM EST up reply actions
+1
Good point.
This post is like an episode of Judge Judy calling for a translator before she can declare Darvish a prospect and allow him into the community.
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
Different game there
Different baseball, they don’t pitch every 5th day, smaller stadiums, better D, different style of pitching, etc. I don’t see how we can compare numbers so all we are left with are scouting reports and I will take Moores over Darvish in a big way.
+1
I think it’s an easy decision too. Darvish is good, but I don’t think he has that kind of ceiling.
Bullpen Banter
MLB Bonus Baby
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
A couple good examples
Colby Lewis might be a good example … went to Japan, pitched 2 years, era around 2.85 over that time, came back to majors and put up an era of around 4.00 in 2 years in a really tough park.
Kuroda had similar success (~2.85 era in 3 years prior to coming over) and has a career MLB era of 3.45, but in the NL in a pitchers park. Similar drop to Lewis? Adjusted for park and league I’d say probably.
Dice-K’s last 3 years avg era was around 2.45, career in MLB is 4.25. He has not adjusted well.
Using similar metrics, Nomo went from like 3.30 to 4.25 in MLB. Better on day 1, but again it was the Dodgers (NL, home park) and he had some real deception that worked in his favour early on IMO.
But even if Darvish doesn’t adjust as well, like Dice-K … his avg era in the last 3 years was 1.65. I repeat, 1.65!!!!! He’s been under 1.90 for FIVE straight seasons, his 20-21-22-23-24 year old seasons. That’s impressive no matter how you look at it. I agree it’s tough to compare, but he’s consistently the best player in his league and there are examples of players adjusting well.
Colby is a great example in my mind
Much of his success has been attributed to a new pitch he developed in Japan (cut fastball??) but the bottom line is that Colby became a better pitcher by adapting!
KG’s latest podcast featured a US-born teammate of Yu’s who commented that one of Yu’s pitches in particular may have gotten guys out in Japan but no way was it gonna work over here. Then he mentions Yu’s deep repertoire, how he’s always changing grips and speeds, and confidently predicts Darvish will adapt because he’s such a smart kid.
It really doesn’t matter if you want to consider Darvish a prospect or not, he appears poised to be among the 30 best pitchers in mlb right away.
If I was a GM I would surely take Moore and spend elsewhere but for this post I would place Darvish at #1, just like BA did with Matsuzaka.
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
Darvish 4th
Behind Trout, Harper, and Moore.
assuming he's prospect eligible, he is clearly a Grade A without a doubt
He has over a half decade of success pitching at a high level against excellent competition, and his stuff is excellent. I guess you could nitpick about wear on his arm or how well his game will translate . . .but there is really no reason to think he is any less than an extremely solid bet to be an above-average, if not well above-average, major league pitcher. There really isn’t any good reason to have him any lower than a true A.
I'm no expert, and I'm a little biased,
but based on what I’ve read, Moore has more upside than Darvish. Moore has TOR and top 5 pitcher in all of baseball potential, while I have read Darvish also has ace potential but not as high Moore potential, I read more like top 10 pitcher in all of baseball,which is still very very valuable. Also add in that Moore is younger and a lefty, and I think has to be higher. IMO though, I don’t think Darvish should be ranked with prospects seeing as he is already 25 and has pitched over in the Japanese leagues the past few years.
No matter how much they are hyped, my teams always find a way to disappoint.
by thedudeofdudes on Dec 16, 2011 11:38 PM EST reply actions
He'd be number 3 on my list
1. Harper
2. Moore
3. Darvish
4. Trout
No knock on Trout, but I like Moore better, and if I had to take Darvish or Trout for six years for the Mets, I’d take Darvish by a nose.
In terms of sheer value, a pitcher has to be extremely good to be better than an above average CF.
By ranking Darvish ahead, I assume you expect him to be a top 5 pitcher while Trout is an above average CF then, right?
I have Matt Moore as the best prospect in baseball
He definitely has top 5 SP in baseball upside, and the injury risk is pretty low given how easy his velocity is. There are few pitchers that I’ve seen with that little effort in their delivery.
Bullpen Banter
MLB Bonus Baby
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
Mark Prior
Prior had the most beautiful delivery of any pitcher ever and look at what happened to him.
No he didn't
Prior had some pretty obvious flaws in his mechanics. Don’t buy into the Tom House/ASMI propaganda. They had worked with him for years, of course they wanted to sell his mechanics as perfect.
maniac
aren’t YOU saing that ?
In terms of sheer value, a pitcher has to be extremely good to be better than an above average CF.
Personally, if I were a Met fan, I’d want a CF from New Jersey who is the perfect #3 hitter for that ballpark, but that’s just me.
by JoelGuzman'sScout on Dec 17, 2011 3:37 AM EST up reply actions
Might have won, not won
ESPN’s Buster Olney spoke with a source Monday who suggested that the Rangers might have won exclusive negotiating rights to Japanese righty Yu Darvish.
Many have suspected that the Blue Jays made the highest bid, and the New York Post even crowned Toronto as the winner last week. But Olney spoke to an American League executive Monday afternoon who said the “smart money is on the Rangers.” Darvish, 25, posted a sparkling 1.44 ERA and 276/36 K/BB ratio in 232 innings this past season in Japan. The Nippon-Ham Fighters are expected to make an announcement on his probable landing spot Monday night.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
