Derek Holland

by pedrophile on Feb 9, 2026 10:54 PM EST Comment 41 comments

After watching him a few times and reading all the reports on him I had mixed feelings. After watching him a lot more I have a totally different opinion.

Fastball

92-94 does go as low as 89 and does touch 96. But sits 92-94.
Solid location. Occasional lapses of command.
Some games had no control, but usually attacked the zone.
Would attack inside on RH hitters
Typically down in the zone but would go up in the zone
I've read his pitch has lots of life. It's not flat. But not much life. That's cool though, for his velocity and location it's more than plenty.

Curveball

More of a slurve pitch now
Occasionally has true curve break
Very new pitch to him. I think it had been shelved for more than a year. Maddux brought it back in 2nd or 3rd game in MLB.
While he can have trouble locating it for strikes it's hard to hit.
Struggled when hitters laid off of it. Since they laid off the low or inside breaking ball he countered by hanging some high in the zone that got clobbered.
Has a curve velocity but I think release point is his difficulty. Once he gets that under control he will get better control. My question is: with a consistent release point what type of curve will he have. If it's to be a slurve then he will have struggles against patient teams. If it's a consistent curve break then it's projected as a much better pitch.

Slider

I heard how great it was. Wow. I'm not sure what they watched. Or did I just see something different?
85 mph slider with very little movement
Worked fine when he backdoored it to RH hitters. Almost acts like a tailing fastball. Except it doesn't break late. And it doesn't have velocity. But it can steal some strikes when used properly. I wouldn't shelve it, just use it about 3-4 times a game to steal a strike on 0-0 counts.

Change

The announcers mentioned this was his best pitch.
Personally I didn't see one pitch that was clearly a change.
I saw many that were the velocity of either the change or the slider or the curve
The slider had little movement and didn't look like a slider, so I could understand some mistaking it for a change. And it was 85 which is well within the range of what his change would be.
The curve confused because it was a slurve. But it shouldn't be confused with the change. It was 15+ mph less than the fastball.

Outlook

I really like his fastball
I didn't like him nearly as much until I found out his curve had been shelved. It had it's warts. But I'm very impressed with it considering it was shelved and then just brought back.
Without a real change against patient good hitting RH teams he will get lit up. Fortunately there are not many teams that do this.
If his curve improves he could be looking at an upside of a solid #2 pitcher. Yeah, if the curve is totally dominant or the change becomes a weapon he could be more. But potential for #1 is so much more rare than people are willing to admit.

4 recs | Comment 41 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

his stuff was a lot less impressive that it was billed to be

looks like a future #3 because he can throw strikes with a pretty good fastball. which is pretty good. just doesn’t look like a TOR starter to me.

baseball rules.

by doublestix on Feb 10, 2026 12:25 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

don't underestimate

the improvement on his curve. I wouldn’t bet the farm on him. I really don’t know how far his curve will improve. But it improved a ton in season which is impressive. But what will he do with his change?

Yeah, he is billed up to have wicked slider, change, etc. When they don’t exist at all. But I love how he has great velocity without overthrowing and improves a lot in season. So the hype is silly. But I like his ability to learn. Just totally uncertain on how much more he will learn?

After all with a horrible change he better get a huge curve and dominant fastball.

by pedrophile on Feb 10, 2026 12:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Cahill was too, though...

Both these guys suffered from having to figure it out as they went along… they both got throw into the fire.

Holland only has 30 minor league innings above A ball and Cahill only has 37.

I really think they’re both going to be excellent pitchers and attribute much of what problems they had to having very little chance to learn pitchability in the high minors. Young pitchers in over their head tend to stick with their fastballs and not trust their secondary stuff.

by alskor on Feb 10, 2026 12:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for this pedrophile

Holland was one of the guys I wanted more info on. What pitch does he get most of his strikeouts on?

www.oriolesprospects.com | twitter @orioleprospects | OriolesProspects Forum

by ravensfan3 on Feb 10, 2026 12:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

his curve

It looked terrible but is improving a ton.

by pedrophile on Feb 10, 2026 12:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

How terrible could it be if he's getting strikeouts on it?

I’m far from being an expert, but Fangraphs suggests that his curve is in fact his most effective pitch (though it’s also his least used one). I realize this could just be small sample size or something like that, but is it possible this is a case of an un-pretty but effective pitch?

TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems

by OldProspects on Feb 11, 2026 6:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

that it looked bad in his early usage of it. He hadn’t used it in years so it’s to be expected. It got better as the season went on. Mostly of a sweeping action but some hard downward curves in there as well.

by pedrophile on Feb 11, 2026 8:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

One of the reasons I don't like it when Fangraphs' pitch values are used this way...

is that there’s a lot of factors beyond “how GOOD is this pitch” that determine its year-to-year value. This isn’t a comment on Holland’s curve, because I’ve never seen it, but even more important than the pitch’s movement is how it relates to his other pitches. Does he have the same release point as the fastball/slider/change? What is the change in speed? How long does it look the same as other pitches coming out of his hand?

With Fangraphs’ pitch values, the pitches are too conflated to look at them individually. If Holland loses speed on his fastball, then all of a sudden his change could look worse, even if it was the exact same pitch. If he loses his fastball command, then the curve will lose effectiveness.

Every time I see someone quoting pitch values to say “this pitch is really good!”, it makes me cringe a little. It’s not nearly that simple.

by PissedMick on Feb 14, 2026 10:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hudson vs. Holland

In my 24-team DMB Sim League, I was deciding between Derek Holland and Daniel Hudson. I watched all of Hudson’s starts for the Chisox and watched quite a few of Holland. He was very inconsistent and got hit hard quite a few times. I just didn’t see the greatness that others kept talking about. Granted, he’s young, but he got absolutely crushed (not that that’s the end all).

I went with Hudson as he was strong vs. Ls and I wasn’t buying the hype on Holland. But what do I know?

by The Colonel on Feb 10, 2026 1:14 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I faced the same choice and went with Holland

But am not entirely convinced I made the right decision.

by Dingbat Charlie on Feb 10, 2026 3:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Holland's peripherals were not amazing, but he was horribly unlucky last season

He was at least the second-best pitcher in that rotation last year, and maybe even the best.

Pitch F/x classified over 10% of his pitches as changeups, so I can’t figure out what on earth you were watching there. I hope it wasn’t just TV camera angles, which (especially for LHP) are often horribly distorting of pitch movement.

Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."

by PaulThomas on Feb 10, 2026 2:26 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

+1

Holland had a pretty decent year, but was betrayed by his bullpen and an abnormal HR/FB rate (among other things). Feldman was better last year, but I’d take Holland over him in a heartbeat for the future (that’s not really saying much though).

Good command with the fastball, and a developing slider that already is pretty decent…

He seems to be underappreciated a bit now, perhaps even by his own team. It sounds like he’s going to have to battle for the #5 spot in the rotation, and he’s probably the 2nd best starter they have.

by PleasedtoNietzsche on Feb 10, 2026 3:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The team is in win now mode

As good as Holland peripherals suggest he should be he wasn’t able to translate that to run prevention last year and expecting him to have a huge improvement this year would be unwise. Long term he looks like he will be a very good starter but the rangers have guys who can give them just as good if not better actual numbers than Holland will next year. he will get plenty of time and lots of spot starts with Harden and McCarthy in the rotation. But I think it is smart for the Rangers to keep him in OKC to start the season.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Feb 10, 2026 4:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That doesnt make a lot of sense...

The major reason his performance didn’t translate to run prevention is because of luck. Specifically, poor luck on balls in play falling in for hits and poor luck on balls hit in the air going out for home runs. Both of those events occurred at a higher than expected rate. There is actually every reason to think Holland will improve and put up much better surface numbers in 2010. With some improved pitchability and more comfort with his secondary pitches he could put up some very impressive numbers.

Harden can certainly best Holland’s production if healthy. There is pretty much no reason to think McCarthy can at this point and not much case to be made for mediocre options like Tommy Hunter or Matt Harrison. I do like Scott Feldman and feel a good portion of his improvement is real… but he’s somewhat underwhelming. While I do think there’s a case to be made for starting Holland in Oklahoma City, I dont think its at all the case you’re making. Holland is really the best bet in that rotation after Harden for a GFIN mode team. If you’re big on Feldman I suppose Holland might be the third best option - but the next guy would be a very distant fourth.

Plus, doesnt McCarthy have an option remaining…? Thought Evan Grant (ugh) reported that… and there was some discrepancy, but not sure what the outcome was…

by alskor on Feb 10, 2026 5:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

McCarthy

Yes he does but he falls into the category of having to pass through revocable waivers to utilize it.

As for Holland. He had 1 start in AAA last year before being called up. He had brief flashes of brilliance. I am very high on his future. However I don’t put as much of his failure on “luck” as much as he was leaving stuff way too much over the plate and ML hitters were clobbering the hell out of it.

I imagine if he were in the ML rotation all year he would end up with a ERA between 5.00 and 5.15. I think guys like McCarthy and Hunter will best that by a considerable amount. (note: I am a huge McCarthy fan which may be clouding my judgement somewhat) To me Holland is clearly the first in line for a callup when the inevitable injury or poor performance comes up.

Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.

by bigsteve on Feb 10, 2026 8:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If the team wants to win now, they better go with Holland

I don’t think he failed last year really at all. The team may have failed during his starts, but to say he failed individually is just not true. You might not attribute his “failure” to luck, but then you’d be suggesting that his true talent elicits a .321 BABIP against and a 14.9 HR/FB %, both of which would be truly historic numbers over the course of pitcher’s career.

ERA doesn’t tell you all that much about how a guy has pitched or will pitch, which is what we are talking about, so projecting it is irrelevant. If you think McCarthy and Hunter will be considerably better than Holland objectively, then I think you’re sorely mistaken.

by PleasedtoNietzsche on Feb 10, 2026 11:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No

The team expects to win the division in 2010. Talent wise Holland is better than BMac and Hunter, but it is results that matter. Holland had a 5.10 FIP last year which was mainly due to his HR rate.

Do you expect them to put him in the rotaion to start the year and hope he improves on last year’s numbers? Or should they go the pitchers that have proven themselve to be better ML pitchers?

Vladimir Guererro - 2010 AL MVP

by RangerMad on Feb 20, 2026 3:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hunter and McCarthy haven't proven anything of the like

Where do you get the idea that McCarthy/Hunter have “proven themselves to be better ML pitchers”? W/L record? ERA? I honestly have no idea what you’re talking about.

Holland’s FIP WAS due to the HR rate; when you normalize for that (xFIP), he was better than both Hunter/McCarthy. Holland induced more groundballs than both of them, had a significantly better K/bb ratio, and got screwed by lady luck.

Results matter, but you’re looking at the wrong results if you have come to the conclusion that McCarthy/Hunter have “proven” to be better. And the predictive factors clearly point to Holland being even better in the future.

I don’t know what the Rangers will do, but I don’t think any good argument could be made that they would be better off this year going with Hunter, or god forbid, Brandon McCarthy, over Derek Holland.

by PleasedtoNietzsche on Feb 20, 2026 7:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Hunter and McCarthy have proven they arent as good pitchers or as good bets for performance in 2010 as Holland, if anything.

by alskor on Feb 20, 2026 10:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Holland

I don’t think either of those players will be better than Holland.

The real question is would the Rangers be better served with Holland spending some time in AAA refining his secondary stuff.

IMO for a #5 starter the first month not only isn’t that important but it can throw the player out of sync. So it might be best for him in AAA the first month so that when he does come up he is much more effective.

The wildcard is that Maddux seems to be having a very good effect on Holland and I wouldn’t want to disrupt that.

by pedrophile on Feb 21, 2026 2:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

please dont confuse him with other ranger fans.....

by slash on Feb 16, 2026 8:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

True

bigsteve really has a hard time getting around the luck/fluky performance issue.

Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.

by t ball on Feb 16, 2026 10:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

changeup

He throws one pitch that is around 83-85 that could either be his change or his slider. It just doesn’t do much other than a little tailing action.

So when I was saying I didn’t see any changeups → what I really meant was I didn’t see any pitches that I could specifically say were changes. They might have been. They might have been a meh slider as well.

Some of those pitches you could tell were sliders though.

by pedrophile on Feb 10, 2026 7:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sliders don't "tail"

That’s pretty much physically impossible. They move down and away from the pitcher’s throwing hand relative to a fastball. Changeups move down and closer to the pitcher’s throwing hand.

by PaulThomas on Feb 10, 2026 2:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

just poor terminology on my part. Another poster described it best as a hanging slider.

by pedrophile on Feb 10, 2026 5:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

man, you're confusing his pitches, how in the hell have you not come to that assumption already????

you’re probably confusing his “new” curve that started to look good with his slider, and what you call his slider is his change up, I know he does have a curve, but he doesnt throw it often at all, considering I’ve seen every damn start the kid has made, I could tell what was being thrown, I’m not sure how to explain it to you because I dont know what the hell pitch you saw in what game… to be honest man, im not suprised you dont what the hell he’s throwing because you havent seen him pitch that much, just as your neftali feliz post obviously meant you havent seen all his starts and are very cynical in nature and I am familiar with your posts over the years on here, so im not basing that off of two fanposts, and also i prolly shoudv’e said your fanposts are usually negative with a cynical outlook, instead of you persnally…BTW im not saying feliz is the second coming or anything, i didnt really state any opinion on the players beside your skills as a “scout”

by slash on Feb 16, 2026 8:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i do realize the word hell, is in that post way too often....probably makes me look like i was mad, when i wasn't

by slash on Feb 16, 2026 8:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

disagree

I did see his new curve and liked how much he improved it.

I was very high on Feliz so I’m not sure how you get the negative. I see him right now as a dominant closer whose stuff won’t stand up as a starter (at least not above average). With progression he might improve to being a quality starter or even an ace. How is that negative?

But I don’t assume progression. I will let the readers assume or guess on how he will get better or not.

I think most people following prospects are far far too optimistic. Unreasonably so. If you take a look at BA top 10 prospects each year you will see how many fail.

further - it doesn’t really matter if I mixed up his slider and change. They both look like a hanging slider and suck at the moment.

He is young and talented and might improve a ton. I’m just writing what I see right now.

by pedrophile on Feb 16, 2026 3:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

My friends and I always love how announcers praise every lefty’s curveball. You think they would know by now that the camera angle may have something to do with it.

"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 Feb 10, 2026 9:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Holland had shelved the curve in JuCo

"I was going to say, 'You’re gay for Elvis.' But then I realized that I, too, am gay for Elvis." ~Adam J. Morris.

by Kinslerhomer on Feb 10, 2026 9:56 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

and he only go as low as 89 at home

where the pitch F/x gun is effed up. Always 1.5/2 MPH slow.

"I was going to say, 'You’re gay for Elvis.' But then I realized that I, too, am gay for Elvis." ~Adam J. Morris.

by Kinslerhomer on Feb 10, 2026 10:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It did seem weird

because it wasn’t like it was a cut fastball and he wasn’t tired.

That’s pretty impressive to have it shelved in JuCo and then bring it back on his 2nd or 3rd MLB start. I would like to see how it progresses this year.

What do you think they will do with his change?

by pedrophile on Feb 10, 2026 11:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He's supposedly been working on it a lot this offseason

But it was horrible last year, looking like a hanging slider most of the time, tailing into RH instead of away.

"I was going to say, 'You’re gay for Elvis.' But then I realized that I, too, am gay for Elvis." ~Adam J. Morris.

by Kinslerhomer on Feb 10, 2026 12:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Also, alskor dug up some velo data fron Holland last year

click

"I was going to say, 'You’re gay for Elvis.' But then I realized that I, too, am gay for Elvis." ~Adam J. Morris.

by Kinslerhomer on Feb 10, 2026 12:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

His velocity is higher...

The gun in Texas is notoriously slow. Pitchers all show up ~2mph lower there (hat tip to kinslerhomer)

If you look at his velocity chart his average fastball is closer to 93-95 in road starts.

This was discussed here: https://www.minorleagueball.com/2010/1/5/1235902/al-starting-pitching-sophomores#

I had made this chart (blue is away, green is home).

He did lose some steam at the end of the season, but that’s not unexpected.

Here’s the PitchFX from his last start of the season (away): http://brooksbaseball.net/pfx/index.php?month=9&day=30&year=2009&game=gid_2009_09_30_texmlb_anamlb_1%2F&pitchSel=502706.xml&prevGame=gid_2009_09_30_texmlb_anamlb_1%2F&prevDate=930

avg fastball of 93.24

I see he already mentioned it here, but I’ll leave this up for any who are skeptical.

by alskor on Feb 10, 2026 12:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs