Over the last few weeks there have been a series of debates about whether pitchers like Neftali Feliz and Madison Bumgarner are stronger than pitchers like Jhoulys Chacin and Derek Holland. Most people seem to think that Feliz and Bumgarner are stronger prospects, but the question of just how much stronger they are has been fought bitterly. 

A number of people have tried to argue that Feliz and Bumgarner's success at lower levels should be downgraded because they rely primarily on their fastballs. They say that considering you can't rely strictly on a terrific fastball at the higher levels, therefore they will face more difficulties than Holland and Chacin who have better secondary stuff. 

Intuitively, this seems sensible but I'm wondering if it's true. Considering none of these pitchers (with the arguable exception of Holland) have had consistent, outstanding success at AA or higher levels, it seems like they all have to improve a lot. Those people seem to be arguing that a pitcher with a good fastball and a decent breaking ball in the low minors is more likely to become a good major league pitcher than one with a terrific fastball and an uncertain breaking ball. 

I have a problem with this argument on a number of counts. First, if Holland's and Chacin's secondary stuff were as strong as some seem to believe, then it should show up in their stats. They should have blown A ball hitters away at the same rates that Feliz and Bumgarner do; I don't understand why an A ball hitter is supposed to be decimated by a terrific fastball, but not by a terrific curveball. Second, pitchers with as good fastballs as Bumgarner and Feliz might be able to get away without an excellent breaking pitch even in the majors; certainly they'll need a good or even a decent breaking ball, but their secondary stuff probably doesn't have to be as strong as Chacin's or Holland's would. 

I'm wondering what other people think; are there any pitchers like Feliz and Bumgarner in the past? Did their secondary stuff develop or did they flail in the higher levels?

After I did this for the 1998 Draft, somebody wondered if maybe that year was unusual, and suggested that the 1997 one was considered to be significantly stronger. After having done the 1997 one too, I can say with some certainty I will never do another one. As it happens, the '98 draft was significantly stronger than the '97, both with greater star talent and more depth, though 23 teams managed to find a player of some value (in contrast to 20 in 1998). Very few teams managed to find even one player who would be a star, and with the exception of the Blue Jays who managed to steal not only Vernon Wells, but Michael Young in the 5th round, and Orlando Hudson in the 43rd nobody got 2. The theme of this is clear: it's very, very difficult to get real major leaguers from the draft because prospects and prospecting is so uncertain.

Blue Jays: Michael Young (5), Vernon Wells (1:5), Orlando Hudson (43), Mark Hendrickson (20)

Astros: Lance Berkman (1:16). Tim Redding (20)

A's: Tim Hudson (6)

Pirates: Mike Gonzalez (30)

Phillies: Derrick Turnbow (5), Randy Wolf (2) Johnny Estrada (17)

Rockies: Aaron Cook (2), Chone Figgins (4)

Angels: Troy Glaus (1:3) Scot Shields (38), Matt Wise (6)

Cardinals: Rick Ankiel (2), Adam Kennedy (1:20)

Diamondbacks: Jack Cust (1:30), Alex Cintron (36)

Reds: Scott Williamson (9)

Cubs: Jon Garland (1:10) Scott Downs (3)

Twins: Michael Cuddyer (1:9), Matt LeCroy (1:50), J.C. Romero (21)

Orioles: Jerry Hairston (11), Jayson Werth (1:22)

Atlanta Braves: Horacio Ramirez (5), Danny Wright (46)

Mariners: Joel Piniero (12)

Giants: Scott Linabrink (2)

Devil Rays: Toby Hall (9)

Royals: Jeremy Affeldt (3)

Red Sox: David Eckstein (19), Travis Harper (3)

Pirates: John Grabow (3)

Mets: Jason Phillips (24)

Rangers: Mike Lamb (7)

Marlins: Ross Gload (13)

Kneejerk predictions about this year's draft might be more fun, but perspective can be interesting too. I looked at the 1998 draft and tried to get a sense of which teams gained the most, or lost the most, from their picks.

That draft was most memorable for the J.D. Drew drama, who would finally sign with the Cardinals after rejecting the Phillies in the previous year. Despite the hub-hub, what's most startling is how difficult it is for a team to get anybody who impacts their major league team from the draft. I tried to list all of the players who were signed who would either start or be a significant pitcher for at least 2 or more years at the major league level. Even with considering such players like Joe Beimel as significant (4.38 ERA over 443 major league IP over 8 major league seasons), a total of 10 teams still got absolutely no significant player over the entire draft.

Even in a draft that included such talents as J.D. Drew and Pat Burrell, it is even harder for them to get a star after the 1st round. It is nearly impossible for a team to not only find a major league player in a late round, but then to sign him. The Chicago White Sox get double credit for not only finding and securing any major leaguer in the 38th round, but Mark Buehrle. To give a sense of how difficult this is, the next future major leaguer to have any impact who was signed by the team who drafted were Mike Koplove and Tim Spooneybarger, who both provided two solid years of relief after having been drafted by the Diamondbacks and Braves respectively in the 29th round. (In Spooneybarger's defense, he might have had an even greater impact had he not needed Tommy John's surgery at a pretty young age)

The teams are listed in the order of what I think were the best drafts. The players are listed in order of what I think were the best picks. The numbers in parenthesies refer to which round they were chosen. If they were in the 1st round, they get two numbers to denote with which pick.

A's: Mark Mulder (1:2) Eric Byrnes (8), Gerald Laird (2)

Reds: Adam Dunn (2), B.J. Ryan (17) Austin Kearns (1:7)

White Sox: Mark Buehrle (38) Josh Fogg (3), Aaron Rowand (1:35), Kip Wells (1:16)

Rockies: Matt Holliday (7), Juan Pierre (13)

Cardinals: J.D. Drew (1:5) Jack Wilson (9)

Indians: C.C. Sabathia (1:20)

Phillies: Pat Burrell (1:1), Nick Punto (21) Geoff Geary (15), Jason Michaels (4)

Astros: Brad Lidge (1:17) John Buck (7)

Rangers: Carlos Pena (1:10)

Brewers: Bill Hall (6)

The Cubs got Corey Patterson (1:3), Eric Hinske (17), Ohman (8)

The Devil Rays got Aubrey Huff (5), Brandon Backe (18), Joe Kennedy (8)

Red Sox: Mike Maroth (3), Adam Everett (1:12)

Tigers: Brandon Inge (2), Jeff Weaver (1:14)

Blue Jays: Felipe Lopez (1:8), Jay Gibbons (14)

Expos: Brad Wilkerson (1:33)

Dodgers: David Ross (7), Scott Proctor (5)

Braves: Tim Spooneybarger (29)

Diamondbacks: Mike Kopolove (29)

Pirates: Joe Beimel (18).

Kevin Slowey, with his only good stuff and terrific control in Minnesota, seemed like an easy comparison for former Twins pitcher Brad Radke. His minor league numbers, however, were a cut above Radke's, and now he seems to be putting together some very unusual lines that are probably still better than the predecessor.

Continue reading this post »

My brother and I are in the same fantasy baseball league, and we occasionally send each other overly long comments about baseball and fantasy baseball. I think this recent e-mail might be of some interest to other people:

I think the As are onto something quite interesting in regards to pitching. It's of some use to our league but also for general interest.

Continue reading this post »

Cowgill, a 22 year old drafted in the 5th round, has been absolutely battering A- ball. In 64 atbats, he has 11 home runs. His BB:K is a respectable 9:16, and he's managed to put up an 1190 OPS (not that hard when you have an ISOP of .547 - no, that isn't a typo) despite batting only .266 (startlingly enough, his BABIP is .162).

Does anybody know anything more about him? Could he be a good majorleaguer?

Though he doesn't have terrific stuff, he always managed to get results, striking out nearly a person per inning in A+ and AA last year at age 23 while walking only 36 people over a total of 149 IP. In his first ten or so starts in AAA this year, he got demolished, however, suggesting that the scouts' doubts were valid. Recently, however, Leblanc has pitched terrifically. In his last 5 starts, he has struck out 39 people in 29 innings, walking 10 (including 9 strikeouts and only 1 walk and 1ER in 7 innings today). He still has a 6.15 ERA on the year, but do you think he'll be brought up to the majors soon? What sort of pitcher do you think he'll be?

Like maybe others here, I started following baseball when people like Bill James were only beginning to be influential, and before the days of some these more modern statistics. This meant that when I looked at players like Ted Williams or Joe Dimaggio, the two best players of the 1940s, I was normally looking at their triple crown stats. Recently, I re-looked at some of these older players paying particular attention to what we now know are the more important statistics, including walks and strikeouts and homers. Here is what I found for those two people. I also calculated some BABIPs for fun.

Joe Dimaggio looks even better - one of the only players in history to hit almost as many homers as strikeouts (361 to 369) over his career, despite having an extremely high batting average (.325 over his career), one wonders why it was lower than other players'. We don't have line drive percentage data for these players (or at least I don't) but his BABIP over his career was .304. In his best year, 1939, at age 24, he batted .381/.446/.671 (OPS+ 184), it was partially because his BABIP rose to .354 (though hitting 30 homers and striking out only 20 times in 462 at bats didn't hurt)

Ted Williams needed a bit more luck to get his .400 batting average. At age 22 in 1941, he batted .406/.551/.735 (OPS+ of 235!!!). His numbers were relatively similar to Dimaggio's, with 37 homers and only 27 strikeouts in 456 at bats (though he added 147 walks to Dimaggio's 52), but he managed the extra 25 batting average points by having a BABIP of .378. Over his career, in 7706 ABs he had a disturbing 2021 walks while striking out only 709 times (just under 3-1). His .329 career BABIP helped him get a .344 career batting average

I noticed in another diary that about 5 or 6 people mentioned that they were or had been in grad school. Though considering both the recent phenomena of people very well educated in the academic sense entering the top tiers of baseball general management, and the longer tradition of very educated people delving into thinking about sports, and particularly baseball (David Halbertsam, Gay Talese, etc, all wrote major books on the sport), I probably shouldn't have been surprised, but I was anyway.

And considering I'm now about to apply for grad school (in history), I was even more curious. So how many people here are actually in, or were in grad school? Which fields are you in? And, considering the previous discussion about the poverty of being a grad student (and the decisions I myself am going to have to make), are you still happy you went?