Lone Star Ball: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Steve McNair Found Shot to Death


Arms Race - Oakland vs Texas

Many thanks to tball for the inspiration that led to today's fanpost.  This isn't the complete comparison of the A's and Rangers farm systems that tball suggested to Jamey, but it was a fun dataset to try to get my arms around.

A lot has been made of the recent accumulation and development of pitching prospects by the A's and Rangers.  To get a sense of how the A's and Rangers stockpiles of young pitching prospects compare, I gathered the 2008 stats for the Top20 or so pitchers under the age of 27 for both teams and categorized them as follows:  AAA/ML, A+/AA, A-/A, and Rookie.  Categorizing the pitchers made it easier to rank the pitchers from both teams since it eliminated the "ceiling vs probability of reaching ceiling" issue that makes stack-ranking younger and older prospects together so difficult.  Given that I know more about the Rangers prospects, the analysis was undoubtedly biased in the Rangers favor; for that reason I would highly recommend that you spend a few minutes with the stats below and draw your own conclusions.  The column entitled "Level" provides the level(s) that I used to compile the data that is shown.  "BAA" is Batting Average Against, LD% is the percentage of balls in play that are line drives, and FIP is a stat that combines the rates of home runs, walks, and strikeouts to estimate ERA.  In theory, the stat eliminates the influence of defense though its elimination of balls in play tends to under-estimate the performance of groundball pitchers.  The FIP used for the table below featured a park effect calculation to minimize the potential effect of a home-field advantage or disadvantage though the normalizer does not account for differences between leagues.   


AAA/ML
                   Age/Hand Level  IP    ERA   BAA   WHIP  BB,K,HR/9IP LD%  FIP
Smith           24/LHP    ML   160   4.23   247   1.37     4.2,5.6,1.0
Eveland       24/LHP    ML   139   4.21   260   1.47     4.4,6.1,0.5  
Gallagher   22/RHP    ML     93   5.23   274   1.59     4.7,8.0,1.0
Gonzalez     22/LHP   AAA   126  4.24   237   1.33     4.4,9.1,0.9     16      4.40
Braden        25/LHP   AAA     54   2.36   256   1.15     1.8,9.0,1.3     21      4.20
Meyer          27/RHP   AAA   126  4.48   251    1.33     3.7,7.8,0.8     15      4.28

vs

McCarthy   25/RHP      ML     16    2.25  228   1.13     2.8,5.1,1.1 
Feldman    25/RHP     ML    133   5.05  278   1.44     3.6,4.4,1.3
Harrison     22/LHP    AAA     88   3.43   271   1.33     2.9,5.7,0.6     13      4.13
Hurley         22/RHP    AAA     87   4.83   279   1.40     3.1,7.7,1.8     18      5.42
Hunter        22/RHP  A/AAA  166   3.41   270   1.23    1.8,5.7,1.0      16     4.42
Nippert       27/RHP    AAA     64   3.98   275   1.28     2.3,6.1,1.3      18     4.89

There are no stars among either team's ML-ready pitchers, but there are a lot of solid pitchers who can fill out a rotation and bullpen. Oakland's ML-ready pitchers are almost universally left-handed and league average.  Eveland and Smith have proven to be effective despite relatively high walk rates.  Gallagher is producing about as well as could be expected for a 22 yo pitching his first season in the major leagues.  Gonzalez generates a lot of K's with a plus curveball but his average fastball and change-up have made his transition to the big leagues difficult (7.18 ERA, 1.78 WHIP in 26.1 IP).  McCarthy's injury this year makes it difficult to compare his stats to the other pitchers, but as recently as 1.5 years ago he was considered to have perhaps the highest ceiling of any player on either team's list.  Feldman's age and peripherals peg him as being essentially equivalent to Smith and Eveland.  Harrison and Hurley have both shown that they can pitch at the big league level, though they are currently below average with mid 5 ERAs and ~1.5 WHIPs. During the next few years, it is likely that Hurley, Harrison, Hunter, Gallagher and Gonzalez will be performing at similar levels in the big leagues.  Nippert was thrown in as the sixth Ranger, though Gabbard or Mathis would have fit in just as well.  Given McCarthy's questionable health, the AAA/ML category falls on the A's side of the ledger.   

A+/AA
                    Age/Hand   Level      IP    ERA    BAA   WHIP    BB,K,HR/9IP    LD%   FIP
Cahill           20/RHP     A+/AA   128   2.61    185    1.01        3.5,9.5,0.4       10      3.26
Anderson    20/LHP      A+/AA   108   3.69    242    1.15        2.3,9.8,0.7       13      3.51
Simmons    21/RHP        AA      137   3.51    279    1.32        2.1,7.9,0.8       23      3.53
Mazarro        21/RHP   AA/AAA   173   2.74    249    1.15        2.3,6.5,0.3       21      3.30
Rodriguez    21/RHP       AA        43    5.20    298    2.23        9.3,9.1,0.2       21      4.80

vs

Feliz             20/RHP     A/AA     129    2.69     204   1.10        3.6,10.7,0.1    18     2.59
Holland       21/LHP      A/AA    154     2.27     210   0.99        2.4,9.4,0.2      15     2.63
Kiker            20/LHP        A+      124    4.73     292   1.42        2.7,8.0,1.0      12     4.55
Poveda       20/RHP        A+        94    4.47     241   1.31        3.8,9.3,1.0        8      4.58
Hyatt            24/RHP    A+/AA     143   3.58     239   1.23        3.0,7.1,0.8      13     4.18

The Top2 pitching prospects for both systems finished their seasons in AA.  The following question has been asked of national prospect experts, "Would you rather have Cahill and Anderson or Feliz and Holland?"  To date, the answer has been Cahill and Anderson, but Holland's amazing finish might be changing the minds of those who are in the know.  The remaining prospects in the A+/AA category are also very interesting.  Simmons has outstanding control but gives up a few more hits than you would like and doesn't strike out enough players to be considered a top-of-the-rotation pitcher.  Mazzaro pitched great in AA (1.90 ERA, 1.10 WHIP) but has struggled in his first 33.2 innings in AAA (6.15 ERA, 1.72 WHIP).  Henry Rodriguez has an upper-90's fastball that he struggles to control.  He struck out 147 batters in 117 innings, but also issued 84 walks.  His transition from A+ to AA has not been pleasant (3.96 vs 7.46 ERA).  Kiker and Poveda both had good, though somewhat disappointing seasons in the Cal League.  Both pitchers use three pitches to produce almost 1K/IP.  Though Poveda posted a slightly higher walk rate this year than in the past (3.83/9IP), both pitchers are considered to have good control.  With the exception of the ERAs, which are difficult to compare between the Cal and Texas leagues, Kiker's and Poveda's numbers compare favorably to those of Simmons and perhaps slightly above Mazzaro due to Mazzaro's low k-rate. The fifth pitcher on the Rangers list posted outstanding numbers in stops at A+ and AA (and a spot start in AAA), though his age and lack of outstanding stuff leave him with lower upside than Rodriguez and tips the scale for the A+/AA pitchers in Oakland's favor.        

A-/A
                   Age/Hand   Level      IP      ERA    BAA    WHIP    BB,K,HR/9IP    LD%    FIP
Santos         22/RHP    A('07)  122      2.65                0.90          11K/9IP
Hernandez  21/LHP      A-/A      76      2.04    222     1.03        1.7,7.9,0.1      14       2.73
Ross            21/RHP       A         17      4.66    206     1.06        2.7,7.4,0.5      10       3.53
Italiano        22/RHP      A/A+    103     3.81    223     1.40        5.3,9.7,0.7      17       4.36

vs

Main            19/RHP        A          46     2.58    228     1.10        2.7,9.8,0.8       17       3.34
Beavan        19/RHP       A        125     2.37    233     1.01        1.4,5.3,0.9       14       4.19
Boscan        18/RHP      A-         71     3.12     251     1.10        1.4,8.9,0.4       15       3.04
Ramirez       19/RHP     A-          45     2.66    163     1.20         5.8,10.4,0.8     15      4.78
Perez            17/RHP     A-          65     3.65    276     1.47         3.9,7.4,0.3       19      4.06
Gomez         20/RHP      A           90     2.97    235     1.08         2.0,7.0,0.8       16      3.80
Murphy         21/LHP    A-/A         48     2.83                1.00         3.4,9.6,1.0
Pimental     18/RHP      A-          65     3.31                 1.21        4.3,7.4,0.6

The biggest disparity between the A's and Rangers minor league systems occurs at the low A levels.  Fautino de los Santos put up very good numbers in the Appy and SAL leagues last year (2.65 ERA, 10+K/9IP, 0.90 WHIP) but he has missed all but the first month of this season due to an arm injury.  Carlos Hernandez is a 21 yo LHP who posted very nice numbers in 75 innings of work in the NWL and MWL, however he is not included on any list of A's prospects that I've seen.  As a 2nd round pick in the 2008 draft, Tyson Ross has not pitched enough to know how he will transition to professional ball.  22 yo Craig Italiano opened the year with some of the best stats in the minor leagues as he repeated the Midwest League after an uninspiring 2007.  His early season 1.16 ERA, 10+K/9IP, and 1.11 WHIP is now looking like a mirage as he has put up a 9.90 ERA and 2.33 WHIP in 30 Cal League innings.  In contrast to the A's, the Rangers low A minor league rotations are absolutely stacked.  No fewer than 5 pitchers are prjected to be mid-rotation or higher starters when they reach the big leagues.  Main, Ramirez, and Perez are all considered to have top-of-the-rotation stuff and posted numbers that support that contention.  Boscan combined high k and groundball rates with a low walk rate to dominate the NWL as an 18 yo.  Beavan and Gomez were among the MWL's most productive pitchers despite rather pedestrian k-rates.  Throw in Tim Murphy and Carlos Pimental and it is hard to imagine this wave of pitchers failing to produce fewer than 3 major league starters.  This category is an absolute slam dunk in favor of the Rangers.

Rookie
Inoa

vs

Font, Weiland, O'Campo, Ross

This is where my lack of knowledge of the A's farm teams and recent signees makes it difficult for me to compare the two systems.  A review of the A's rookie league team failed to reveal even a single pitcher with a compelling stat line.  Micheal Inoa is being touted as the next Felix Hernandez, but beyond that it appears that the A's low minor league cupboard appears to be bare.  In contrast, Weiland and O'Campo were among the AZL league's leading pitchers, Robbie Ross is touted to have three solid pitches, and Font is at least in the same neighborhood as Inoa in terms of potential.  As with the previous category, the collection of Rookie-level pitching talent clearly favors the Rangers.

Overall - Oakland might have a slight advantage at the upper levels, but the depth of high ceiling arms at the lower levels provides Texas with a clear advantage in the AL West Arms Race.

 

 

 

 

23 recs | Comment 127 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Agreed, nice work

though I feel compelled to make a few points on Oakland’s behalf.

First, the list understandably omits a few top A’s prospects. The following 5 guys all certainly figure into the A’s top dozen or so pitchers, and I would have Leon and Hunter as the A’s top two single A guys:

Arnold Leon – 19 year old who split 08 between A+ and the Mexican league due to a quirky contract w his old team. Pitched well in relief w good peripherals, very young for his league. Could be a mid rotation starter or a dominant reliever.

Brett Hunter – 21 year old picked in the 7th round this June after arm problems at Pepperdine. Once protected as a top 15 pick, slipped due to injury, but pitched well w Team USA this summer and signed a 7th round record $1.1M deal. At his best he’s mid to high 90s and a potential front of the rotation starter. Currently pitching in relief in low A.

Andrew Carignan – Former UNC closer spent his first full year between A+/AA at 21/22, posting ludicrous K rates (~12/9) and even more ludicrous BB rates (6/9) along the way. Could be a top quality closer if he ever harnesses the stuff.

Sam Demel – Former UTEP closer put up similar numbers to Carignan but spent the whole season in A+. Big time heat. Pegged as a sleeper coming into the year and did not disapoint.

Jared Lansford – Carney’s son had a bounce back season after missing all last year to injury. Averaged about a K per IP between A+ and AA. Did some closing. Could return to starting next year. Former second rounder is still just 21.

The second point I’d like to make is that AA/AA/MLB arms are worth a lot more that A+/A/A- arms. A lot can go wrong between A ball and the majors. See Fautino De Los Santos or Craig Italiano for Oakland examples. These guys dominated A ball, but injuries and/or ineffectiveness have dimmed their prospect stars considerably. Considering the omitted pitchers discussed above, I don’t think that the Rangers advantage at the lower levels is enough to make up for their lesser depth at the top.

That said, I look forward to watching all the guys discussed in your post prove themselves on the field in the coming years. I only wish they could come a little sooner for the A’s. ;)

by NRC on Sep 4, 2008 5:46 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

A's/Rangers Discussion

NRC: Thanks for the input. It is truly an honor to have you here for a discussion of A’s prospects. Hopefully, you and others from Athletics Nation will stop by to help educate me and others at LSB about the A’s farm system.

Like the A’s, the Rangers have a number of interesting relief prospects (Madrigal, Beau Jones, Garr, Laughter, Castillo to name a few), but I chose to restrict my analysis to starters to avoid problems with comparing stats from pitchers who go one or two innings per appearance to the starters who have to pace themselves and get through a line-up a couple of times. I had meant to mention that in the FanPost but it slipped my mind.

by spurdynasty on Sep 4, 2008 7:23 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yes tie goes to the upper level talent

I wish the rangers would have pulled the trigger on hunter, 4-7, but most seem to think he projects as a reliever. That is not a bad thing as he could emerge as a great closer…..

by Goyogringo on Sep 4, 2008 9:22 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Hunter

Texas probably didn’t because Jon Daniels kept listening to Firebat say over and over that his shoulder was blown out and never will pitch again. :)

by JBImaknee on Sep 5, 2008 12:19 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

JD, if you're reading for this,

Dustin Ackley is better than Grant Green. Draft him next year

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 2:42 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Great post for...

…those of us new to the MiLB scene. Thanks for the research!

"The path you choose, you also choose its destination..."

by pro82 on Sep 4, 2008 3:24 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Man...

you are made of win, spurdynasty.

by ghostofErikThompson on Sep 4, 2008 3:33 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Sounds like you need your own blog

good work

I'm undefeated in fights. Have I been in any? No. Thats because people know my f'ing status. Don't mess with the elite. - Miles

by Dirk Diggler on Sep 4, 2008 3:33 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Poveda's LD%

is eye opening. he could come on strong next season and join the ranks of Feliz and Holland in the eyes of many. You have to like the way he finished the season. I will be very anxious to see how Poveda and Kiker perform in Frisco next year.

Also, is there any way Holland gets a AAA assignment out of spring training?

by clark on Sep 4, 2008 3:42 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I would add that the game logging in the minor leagues may not be quite as consistent as the majors

So it’s not always certain as to what is a line drive and what is a fly ball. Be careful with those numbers

by Telegraph on Sep 4, 2008 3:50 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

This is really, really important

I don’t know offhand what Texas’s A+ team is, but I know from experience that line drives are comically underreported in the California League. I’m talking, guys with 10% “line drive rates” posting .340 BABIPs. I know the defenses in the minors are worse, but they’re not THAT bad.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 5, 2008 1:57 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Poveda 2009

Like many of the LSB/Newberg Report community, I’ve been ecstatic about the progress of Feliz and Holland, Beavan and Main, Boscan and NeRa. But the guy that I am most excited about for 2009 is Poveda. For the past two months, I’ve religiously tracked Omar’s starts and he’s seemingly gotten stronger every fifth day. He’s obviously gained confidence in his curve and become a legitimate three-pitch pitcher. During the second half of the year, I am certain that Poveda has induced more swing-and-misses than any other pitcher in the system. If he arrives at spring training healthy and fit and is able to maintain that through the year, I expect him to be a part of any discussion of the Rangers top pitching prospects by this time next year.

by spurdynasty on Sep 4, 2008 4:56 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Hmm...

I wonder if the rangers should protect him from the rule 5 just in case ….

by Goyogringo on Sep 4, 2008 9:25 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Thats a tough one

I think thats part of the reason he hasn’t been promoted yet. Its hard for teams to rationalize taking a player who hasn’t played in AA in the rule 5 draft. Although his last couple months in Bakersfield have been really good. I could see a team like KC or someone who is fully rebuilding taking a flyer on him. Keep him in the majors for April and then have him come down with the mysterious arm problem that keeps him on the DL the rest of the year.

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 Sep 4, 2008 9:32 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Poveda and the 40-man roster

I think that Poveda’s finish almost guarantees that a team will select him if he is exposed in the Rule 5 draft and stash him as you suggest BigSteve. And that would be a real tragedy both to the Rangers future pitching and to Poveda’s development path.

by spurdynasty on Sep 5, 2008 6:18 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Poveda

I’d much rather use a 40-man spot on him than Mayberry.

--Brian

by BCanfield on Sep 5, 2008 3:43 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Why

Mayberry could actually help us out next year. Poveda wouldn’t be ready for at the very least another year probably a year and a half to two years.

With the amount of crap that has been said around here regarding Borbon taking up a 40 man spot this year I can only imagine if we had Poveda on it as well.

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 Sep 5, 2008 7:22 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

JMJ

How can an almost 25 year-old RF that can’t hit help us, next year or in the future? He is not a prospect and never has been. Byrd, Boggs, and Cruz are much better options for next season than Mayberry.

I’d much rather have a starting pitcher that is striking out more than a batter an inning in A+.

--Brian

by BCanfield on Sep 5, 2008 8:25 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Injuries

If a guy goes down for 2-4 weeks Mayberry could come up and even if he only played sparingly he could help out. Im not saying hes going to come up and put up Chris davis numbers but he could come up if we needed him. Whereas if a pitcher goes down for 2-4 weeks next year Poveda cannot help us out.

Personally I would protect Poveda but I can see why they may not and understand if they don’t. We need to get ready to start losing some decent players to rule 5 because with the amount of talent we have coming up over the next few years its bound to happen. I don’t want to lose him but if it happens I can understand why it does

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 Sep 5, 2008 9:44 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Poveda on the 40 over Mayberry

Abso-freaking-lutely.

"So he tore it up in AA. Yippee. ...Max Ramirez be damned." - bigsteve

by tricer on Sep 5, 2008 8:58 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

do you believe

that Poveda would be more likely to stick on a 40 than Mayberry?

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 9:36 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

i would like to know as well....

"I don’t know of a single thing Obama’s done except talk and write." - Newt Gingrich

by knockoutking on Sep 5, 2008 12:16 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't think you make those decisions with that thought process

Say you are in the room with the braintrust and there is only room on the 40 for one of Poveda and Mayberry.

Now, you can approach the decision by trying to decide which of the 2 players would be more likely to stick on another team’s ML roster and thus be lost. Using this process, you would keep Mayberry.

Or, you can approach the decision by trying to make an evaluation on which of the 2 players is going to be more valuable, in the long run, to the Rangers. Using this process, you would keep Poveda.

I’d rather make these type of decisions based on talent and ML projection. I believe that Poveda is more talented and will eventually be a more valuable contributor at the ML level, so I’d keep him and not lose a single wink of sleep over Mayberry posting a 750ish OPS from a corner OF spot in another uniform.

I’d rather keep the most talented player, and in this case it’s easily Poveda IMO.

"So he tore it up in AA. Yippee. ...Max Ramirez be damned." - bigsteve

by tricer on Sep 5, 2008 2:31 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Wow

I can just hear the uproar now if we left a former 1st round draft pick who could play in the majors the upcoming season unprotected so we could protect a guy who won’t sniff the major leagues for 18 months at the very minimum most likely 2 years until he even breaks through to the bigs. It would be epic.

While Poveda is the better prospect there are more factors than just who the better player is. The rule 5 means the player has to stay on the active roster all year. A 25 year old with a decent seaosn in AAA and can play multiple positions is much much easier to keep on the active roster than a pitcher who has 1 start in AA and spent two years in Low A ball and a year and a half in High A.

This season when we were having to make roster decisions due to injuries people were up in arms over giving Borbon a ML contract and taking up a spot on the 40 man roster. Borbon is arguable a year and a half ahead of Poveda in development. Adding Poveda would create many many situations where we risk losing good young players all so a guy who had a good half of a season can hopefully continue on his development path and help out in a couple years. Thats not smart baseball

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 Sep 5, 2008 2:44 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

In all honesty

I don’t think it will come down to that, but I think the backlash will be even greater if a pitcher gets selected and he goes all Joaquin Soria on us.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 2:45 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Joakim Soria

shit, people should have easier to spell names.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 2:46 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Poveda

Like I said I personally would protect Poveda but if the Rangers do leave him unprotected and he gets picked up I won’t be pissed. There will be more tough decisions like this down the line with the amount of talent we have coming down the pipeline. Especially if we start promoting guys 1 and 2 years before they must be protected. Neftali Feliz, Justin Smoak, and Andrew Laughter all look like they will be candidates for 40 man inclusion a full year at least before they are required to be added. Next year alone we will have to add Elvis, Beau Jones, Manny Pina, Whittleman, and Holland. All together thats 8 players we may add to the 40 man roster between April 2009 and November 2009. While right now we have room at the bottom of the 40 to trim players like Loe and Littleton and Murray and the likes. But soon we are going to be getting into territory where we may have to decide on keeping a good player who has established themselves in the majors and we know what they can do or a young player who we hope turns out to be something good.

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 Sep 5, 2008 2:59 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Steve, you are a nice guy

but I find that I rarely agree with anything that you say.

Mayberry could play in the majors next year, but he would/will suck. And he’s blocked by several players that are a lot better than him. And he’s never been any good as a professional. Poveda is a talented pitcher that has developed rather nicely and looks like he may be poised for a breakout. There is a huge premium on talented pitchers throughout baseball, and especially in this organization. To me, it is absolutely a no brainer which one I’d keep.

Having said that, I agree w/ Firebat below that the likely scenario is that both are protected.

"So he tore it up in AA. Yippee. ...Max Ramirez be damned." - bigsteve

by tricer on Sep 5, 2008 2:59 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Mayberry

It would be surprising if he’s unprotected. Leaving aside the pedigree his numbers are David Murphy’s as a minor leaguer. Like, really the same.

I have to think teams hate cutting ties on number one picks something fierce, even if this one has The Taint.

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Sep 5, 2008 10:30 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

David Murphy

without the glove.

But he’s “raw”. So give him “time to develop”. By 33 he should be an excellent bench bat.

"Oh well, McCain is pretty communist anyway,... we can be 70% communist with McCain,"-Sharky

"I just hope enough dumb oversexed over self-esteemed American public educated female liberals (yeah, you know the type) vote for a woman because she has a vagina, to swing some things."- Sharky.

"JD is a great GM if you ignore the giving away pitching and handing out horrible contract stuff."-Tricer

by DJCahill on Sep 6, 2008 5:39 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

if you don't protect Mayberry

he’ll almost certainly be picked and could easily stick on a team like KC. Mayberry would be one of the first two or three guys taken.

The best solution to the logjam is to trade away some of the 40 man talent in either a many for few deal or for non-40 guys. Ideally we’ll see Laird dealt before the rosters need to be set. When do guys need to be protected by?

by JBImaknee on Sep 5, 2008 12:24 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

LD%

is really a largely pitcher independent stat. It is really controlled by the batter more than it is controlled by pitchers. I don’t think you can credit pitchers for having a low LD% other than perhaps credit them with luck.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 4, 2008 5:18 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't believe this is true

Given a large enough sample size, pitchers do have control over their LD, just as they do over flyball and groundball. In general for really good pitchers, their year-to-year LD are always lower than average, unless they have a ridiculously high GB. Frequently, when you see pitchers have a really bad year, their LD of that year is also very high. I tend to think LD% as how hittable a pitcher’s “stuff” is, and how often he makes mistake pitches.

The problem though is that under the current system of classification, it’s hard to know what “kind” of line drive it would be. An average line drive hit by Josh Hamilton would obviously be different than an average line drive hit by, say, Juan Pierre. In addition, it’s hard to know when a ball put in play stops becoming a line drive but rather a fly ball. I think the impending hit_f/x system would solve this problem when it comes out.

by Telegraph on Sep 4, 2008 5:58 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Last 3 years

Johan Santana
2006 – 19.8
2007 – 18.4
2008 – 21.5

Brandon Webb
2006 – 17.3.
2007 – 18.1
2008 – 15.5

Roy Halladay
2006 – 20.6
2007 – 17.9
2008 – 19.9

I think the more useful comparison would be LD% vs. the league average of hitters, but LD% itself fluctuates quite a bit (relatively speaking, of course)

by FirebatM3 on Sep 4, 2008 6:18 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That would certainly be useful; I am not sure how much LD% of hitters change from year to year

With the exception of Halladay, the other two pitchers have lower LD% than average, and so does a large fraction of other good pitchers. Moreover, even for a given pitcher, in seasons that he is really brilliant, the LD% tends to be lower than his other seasons (for the most part), and vice versa. LD% will obviously not give you the whole story about a pitcher, but it is one of the components that should be considered. It’s not something like BABIP, and there does not seem to be any correlation between LD% and BABIP (i.e. BABIP doesn’t necessarily go down because of a decrease in LD%). My theory is that since LD are usually the hardest hit balls, the reduction in LD might be compensated by harder hit fly balls or ground balls. Anything that gets hit harder will have more chance of ending up as a hit, so the loss in LD is translated to a certain degree to harder hit pitches of the other type, which explains the relative invariance of LD to BABIP. Unfortunately, I don’t have a database to back this up, it would be nice if someone can find this out (if not already).

The second part is that LD% by itself is misleading. Certain pitching styles lends to high LD% than others. Someone like Kason Gabbard should have low LD% because he doesn’t throw anything in the zone. However, if Gabbard gave up more line drives with his pitching style, then he would obviously be a horrendous pitcher.

Also, Baseball Info solutions and MLB seem to have a different understanding of what is a “line drive”, which is not an easy thing to categorize to begin with. All this will cause a lot of inherent noise in the data, so it’s hard to conclude anything very precisely. All I would say is that in general (all others things being equal), low LD% is better when considered with all sorts of other statistics, but it’s not something to be used on its own.

by Telegraph on Sep 4, 2008 6:53 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Definately true

There’s a proven correlation between pitcher LD% and BABIP as long as the increase/decrease is around 4% or more, I think. Everything else tends to be yearly fluctuation.

But what I was trying to say is that 1 year of low LD% doesn’t necessarily mean that the pitcher was exceptional or really ready to break out (in Poveda’s case), in fact, if you look at the Bakersfield blaze hitters numbers, you’ll see why the LD% for Poveda was so low. That league some how depresses LD% (or the scorer doesn’t score them correctly).

Julio Borbon went from a 9% LD% to a 18%
Jose Vallejo went from a 10% to a 22%
Chad Tracy went from a 14% to a 18%

Similarly, Clinton guys who goes to Bak get their LD% dropped

Ian Gac went from 22% to 14%
Renny Osuna went from 19% to 13%

I am just trying to say that 1) LD% is a bad indicator of ability or breakout performance, especially if 2) those LD% comes from the Cal league.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 4, 2008 11:48 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Poveda's LD% history

Clark: Thanks for pointing out Poveda’s LD rate. I just went back to Poveda’s prior season’s and discovered that he’s consistently produced lower than average LD rates (see below). As you suggest, that is a great harbinger of future success:

2005: 7.3 LD% in 55 IP
2006: 16.0 LD% in 138.2 IP
2007: 11.1 LD% in 158.1 IP
2008: 8.4 LD% in 94.1 IP
Career: 11.7 LD% in 446.1 IP

by spurdynasty on Sep 4, 2008 8:17 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think NeilRam

Is going to be the Derek Holland breakout player next year

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXWLfIgc0nA

by mchang4 on Sep 4, 2008 3:48 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Great job again

If you do decide to make another one, maybe you could compare some of the position prospects between Texas and Oakland. I’m pretty sure that would easily fall in the Ranger’s favor…

"Well, the Dallas Mavericks got beat by the New Orleans Hornets last night ending their season. Word is that someone on the team is dating Jessica Simpson." - Jay Leno

LSB facebook group ---->>> http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=33345329288

by hinduplaya on Sep 4, 2008 3:55 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Rangers vs A's Systems

I’ll leave the position player comparison to Adam or tball or Jamey or you, hindu. Like you, I would be shocked if the Rangers system failed to come out on top.

Before I began comparing the stats compiled by the A’s and Rangers pitching prospects, I fully expected the A’s to come out on top. Tracking some of national prospect discussions had led me to believe that the A’s would have the top-rated farm system after this year and that the Rangers would be competing with the Rays for second place. After this exercise, I will be surprised and disappointed if a knowledgable and impartial analysis by Baseball America fails to determine that the Rangers farm system is superior to the A’s system.

by spurdynasty on Sep 4, 2008 5:18 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You think BA's analysis is impartial?

I’m not going to go off on a conspiratorial rant about them hating Moneyball or something (although some of their writers do…), but BA has certain institutional biases which make its rankings anything but “impartial.” In particular, they consistently overrate extremely young players, and underrate older players at the higher levels.

Given that particular bias, it actually wouldn’t surprise me if they rank the Rangers first, but they’d be making the same mistake that (IMO) you do in looking at very young pitchers and seeing upside instead of probability.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 5, 2008 2:18 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

All of that is true, but

the sheer number of high ceiling arms in the Rangers’ system means there is a good possibility that the level of talent in the upper minors remains strong or gets stronger in the next 2-3 years. Even with attrition it looks like there is a lot of talent there.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 5, 2008 7:22 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

How?

by their own statistical analysis, Holland and Feliz have been the superior pitchers to Cahill and Anderson this year, and I would probably say the top 3 of the Rangers position prospects (Ramirez, Andrus and Smoak) would rate above the A’s best position prospect. Just because they don’t conform with your opinion, doesn’t make the analysis biased or invalid.

There are a lot of good pitchers in the Rangers system, and their success is reflected in both traditional and non-traditional stats, as spursdynasty was kind enough to list. Why don’t you go about proving that your prospects are actually better rather than fall back on truisms and claims of institutional bias?

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 9:35 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I really have no idea what you're talking about here

with respect to the pitchers, so you’re going to have to rephrase that somehow. I’d say Cahill and Feliz are about the same, Cahill with many more ground balls, Feliz with more strikeouts. Anderson’s missed some time but has been significantly better than Holland when he’s been active.

I’m not going to try to rank the position prospects, because there’s no way I can do an objective job of it without going to way more work than I want to right now, but I have to say that I cannot fathom the state of mind that would rank Andrus over Carter or Cardenas.

Look, my point here is specifically not that BA hates the A’s. I expect them to rank Inoa in the top 100 prospects. I think that’s completely ludicrous; I’m not sure I’d put him in the top 200 right now given his total lack of pro track record and undeveloped physique.

It happens that the Rangers have more very-low-level players for BA to overrate, but I think that’s a combination of coincidence and the A’s generally taking a lot of college draft picks who spend very little, if any, time down there.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 5, 2008 7:09 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Andrus vs Cardenas

Andrus started the season in AA at the age of 19. He turned 20 at the end of August.
Cardenas started the season as a 20 yo playing 2nd base in High A. He was promoted to AA in August and will turn 21 in October.
Advantage – Andrus

Andrus is a take-charge SS. Scouts say he plays gold glove caliber defense.
Cardenas started the year at 2nd base and transitioned to SS when he was traded to Oakland. Scouts say he has an average glove at 2nd base.
Advantage – Andrus

As a 19 yo in AA, Andrus hit 295/350/367/717 and 313/364/400/764.
As a 19 yo in Low A, Cardenas hit 295/354/417/770.
August 2008 is the only time that Andrus and Cardenas have shared a league. While it is a small sample (~100 ABs each), Cardenas hit 297/392/326/718 and Andrus hit 303/351/393/744.
Advantage – Cardenas?

by spurdynasty on Sep 5, 2008 7:56 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You're cherrypicking badly here

Cardenas’s career OPS is almost 100 points higher than Andrus’s.

If that difference holds up in MLB, Andrus would have to be 20 runs better with the glove to be as good a player.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 6, 2008 12:40 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That tends to happen

considering Andrus began playing pro-ball at the age of 16.

The difference between the two offensively is SLG%, and that tends to be the last skill to blossom for young players. While Cardenas will hit for more power, probably, than Andrus, I don’t think either is going to be a 20+ HR guy. That said, Andrus has the clear advantage in terms of baserunning, speed and defense, and considering he can stick at a premium defensive position while Cardenas probably cannot and that Andrus is 1 year younger than Cardenas despite playing at a higher level than him, is it really so surprising that some believe Andrus is a better prospect?

by FirebatM3 on Sep 6, 2008 12:58 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Cherrypicking?

I don’t see what could be deemed cherrypicking from the first two categories. I left out base-running which is clearly in Andrus’s favor. In that sense, perhaps I am cherrypicking in Cardenas’ favor.

I assume you must be talking about the batting lines that I used. I had initially planned to simply compare the hitting numbers from Cardenas and Andrus for this year, but was concerned that the differences in age and league (Cardenas played mostly in High A despite being a year older) was unfair. Furthermore, I noticed that Cardenas’ numbers this year and last are essentially the same (295/354/417/770 in 2007 vs 296/364/399/763 in 2008). I restricted the analysis to the two players at the same age to get a sense of how their SLG numbers might ultimately compare. The numbers certainly suggest that Cardenas will hit for more power, but that appears to be his only advantage over Andrus.

In terms of cherrypicking, I would suggest that comparing the career OPS numbers of a 16/17/18/19 yo to those of a 18/19/20 yo is a great way to slant the truth.

by spurdynasty on Sep 6, 2008 6:53 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

thanks for coming over

It’s nice for us Ranger-philes to gain a little perspective.

I disagree that Anderson has been significantly better than Holland. Their k rates and bb rates are pretty similar, while Anderson has generated more groundballs and Holland has been harder to hit. Hard for me to see how you could say that either has been “significantly” better than the other this season.

"So he tore it up in AA. Yippee. ...Max Ramirez be damned." - bigsteve

by tricer on Sep 5, 2008 8:22 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Ditto

Seems the A’s pair and the TX pair are quite close, at least based on performance. The only area I see Anderson being ahead of Holland in is national awareness.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 5, 2008 10:56 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

"Harder to hit" is not a skill

or at the very least it’s not a skill that can be measured using minor league stats.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 6, 2008 12:41 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

sometimes

it’s easy just to go back to scouting basics. A 95 mph fastball tends to be harder to hit than a 91 mph fastball. A lot of us are still waiting for an explanation of how Anderson is far superior to Derek Holland.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 6, 2008 1:00 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

+1

I think he’s running out of ammo — little that he had.

"The question of how we came to be is a philosophical one." - 4HIM

by Chase Irwin on Sep 6, 2008 2:56 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

No, dude

Not in the sense you’re using the term. A better fastball produces more swinging strikes and thus more strikeouts. It can produce more grounders or more popups. It does not cause more of your fly balls to remain in the park. It does not cause more of your grounders to be fielded rather than finding holes. The effects of the better fastball are already captured in a pitcher’s K rate and GB rate.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 6, 2008 3:22 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

He didn't say those things

All he said was “harder to hit” he didn’t claim it automatically kept the ball in the park or make the defenders’ job easier. Everything you say supports his point. Harder to hit = produces more popups and/or grounders and swinging strikes.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 6, 2008 9:20 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

OK

Anderson produces more grounders and swinging strikes. (Holland did produce more popups.)

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 6, 2008 10:37 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

swing strike %

where can you find that info about the minors?

by FirebatM3 on Sep 6, 2008 11:01 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

"Very low level"

First, I strongly disagree with the idea that young players performing well at one level is somehow more likely to flame out than young players at another level. Pitchers, especially, tend to burn out due to injuries, and as long as a young pitcher is within an injury nexus, chances are they are as likely to be injured as another pitcher at a lower level. I don’t think you can simply write off a very good young player at A, especially one that has excellent peripherals and lacks any indicator stats that screams “fluke”.

Aside from that, what I’m saying is that if the Rangers are chosen as the better farm system, it won’t be just because of the players at “very low levels”, it will be because you can legitimately argue that the combination of better position prospects at all levels and similar-level pitchers make the Rangers a better farm system, period. Regardless, it matters very little what the ultimate rankings are, to comment on the state of a farm system that you, quite frankly, have no more than a functional knowledge of is quite presumptuous.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 8:41 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You'd better tell John Sickels to shut his site down then

There are an awful lot of “presumptuous” comments being made over there.

Get off your high horse. Being gratuitously insulting to non-Rangers fans to make them go away and not sully your mind with their heretical ideas does this site no credit at all.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 6, 2008 12:44 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Relax...

He’s just partial to a lot of our guys just like A’s fans are with their players. We don’t want to hear that Feliz and Holland aren’t going to be great ML pitchers. We have to hold out hope because the pitching has been so bad here for so long and we finally have a good farm system.

Felix and Holland have to be the saviors of this pitching staff. We don’t want to hear otherwise, and until they struggle we will continue to believe they will be. Both have been very dominant this year, that point can’t really be argued.

Believe me I don’t think the A’s are going to struggle in a couple years to bring up good ML pitching as well. It will be fun to see how it plays out, as long as the Rangers win of course.

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates

by slc ranger on Sep 6, 2008 12:59 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

don't be an apologist dude

if I got to Athletics nation and said Vince Mazzaro is obviously inferior to Michael main, I’d expect to get smacked down pretty quickly, especially since 1) it’s not true and 2) I had no idea who Mazzaro was until I searched him on first inning about 15 seconds ago.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 6, 2008 1:23 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I know...

just trying to be nice. I agree with you in saying Anderson isn’t far superior to Holland. Just gave him the benefit of that doubt that he’s partial to A’s players is all.

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates

by slc ranger on Sep 6, 2008 1:28 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Sickle's site is a minor league blog

and people can make comments as they wish, but if they make an incorrect comment, like I believe you have done, they’ll be called out on it. I don’t pretend I know a lot about the lower levels of the A’s farm system, so I don’t tend to comment on it, and while I know a bit about their best players, I am sure you know more about their development, skill-set, et all of those players than any of us. So rather than give your two cents on a farm system that you have only a functional knowledge of, why not just stick to discussing the A’s and how their strengths that SD cover.

And frankly, when your first post begins with “I hate to tell ya’ll”, I’m much less inclined to treat you with kid’s gloves. We know about the flameout rate of pitchers, but greater depth has greater impact, and I’m still waiting for an explanation from you about how being at a higher level lowers flame out rates or helps pitchers escape their injury nexus.

And gratuitous insults would have involved me telling you to go eat a cock and die in a fire, if you took offense to the tone of my post, you should probably grow a thicker skin.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 6, 2008 1:11 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I was about to say.

You haven’t even told him to get cancer in the center of his asshole yet.

by LiamP on Sep 6, 2008 1:15 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't think I ever told anyone do that

but I believe I did tell seven to drown himself in an elephant’s anus.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 6, 2008 1:21 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I know you didn't.

But I figured with the rate of frequency at which Steal Home posts, it had to be coming sooner or later.

by LiamP on Sep 6, 2008 1:55 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Being at a higher level does not help you escape injuries

It does reduce the risk of flameouts. If a guy can get it done in AAA, it means a lot more than if he’s doing it in short season ball because the difficulty level is much closer to MLB difficulty level. Guys at lower levels have to improve much, much more to even maintain the numbers they’ve shown in the minors.

This is kind of obvious, but check out the MLE FIPs for the low-level guys. Main, for instance, has an MLE FIP of 5.23. He has a lot of ground to cover to be a decent MLB pitcher, and many players never cover that ground. (Many others do, of course.)

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 6, 2008 3:18 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

MLE

aren’t those largely based off of league factors, which are inherently weighted against lower level leagues?

My contention is that the majority of the flameouts occur because of injuries, especially when you’re talking about well-regarded prospects. I think BP had injuries as the cause of something like 75% of pitching prospect burnout, so if injuries aren’t anymore likely for two guys in different levels, I think you’re underselling the importance of lower level depth quite a bit.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 6, 2008 11:06 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I really didn't see anything

insulting in his post. Did I miss something?

"...my balls are really like a veiny flesh color" blueballlefty on Jun 4, 2008 7:44 PM EDT
"you gonna lose your horse. seriously." FX2
"If you ain't got no money, ain't nobody calls you honey," Bo Diddley

by Rodney on Sep 6, 2008 1:17 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Evidently.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 6, 2008 3:08 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You're funny!

"...my balls are really like a veiny flesh color" blueballlefty on Jun 4, 2008 7:44 PM EDT
"you gonna lose your horse. seriously." FX2
"If you ain't got no money, ain't nobody calls you honey," Bo Diddley

by Rodney on Sep 6, 2008 3:33 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

C'mon

don’t insult the poor guy. He’s sensitive

I'm undefeated in fights. Have I been in any? No. Thats because people know my f'ing status. Don't mess with the elite. - Miles

by Dirk Diggler on Sep 6, 2008 5:44 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

now THAT'S a diary...

well done Sir…if I could triple rec I would..so you’ll have to settle for one :)

"California is the most liberal state in the union. No joke that place is probably going to slide into the ocean one of these days. California is a wasteland run by liberals"

-Sharky- what a nice guy huh? I guess he doesn't watch any TV shows or movies.. If California goes so goes the entertainment industry. What a nut job!!

by LAMuscleFag on Sep 4, 2008 3:55 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Believe it or not...

…I’m working with the folks at AN on a multi-part piece, examining who has the best young talent in the organization, top to bottom…

Given how long it takes me to respond to things, I’ll probably have it up sometime in 2011…

by Adam J. Morris on Sep 4, 2008 4:19 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

x

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXWLfIgc0nA

by mchang4 on Sep 4, 2008 4:21 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

This picture is going up on the wall next to my bed

I want it to be the last thing I see before I go to sleep and the first thing I see when I get up in the morning.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Sep 4, 2008 4:59 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I agree

Someone needs to get ahold of the young’n and ganster him up a bit. The dude’s a soldier. I wanna see less of a Marlo Stanfield vibe and more of a Snoop Pearson vibe. As in I wanna see him looking like he does not give one single lone solitary f*****.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Sep 5, 2008 3:28 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

says Kevin Millar?

"So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know... "

by Walter Sobchak on Sep 5, 2008 11:58 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Heh... +1

That’ll go right next to my Miranda Lambert poster.

A Lonestar in California

We need to hire Chuck Norris to kick the ass of any Ranger fan caught booing one of our young pitchers at the RBiA.

by lonestarJon on Sep 5, 2008 6:27 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Miranda Lambert?

We’ve gotta get you some hotter pinup girl dreams, Baseball Jesus.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Sep 5, 2008 3:40 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I get that a lot

But I’m good, thanks. Truthfully, “the girl next door” types are my favorites.

A Lonestar in California

We need to hire Chuck Norris to kick the ass of any Ranger fan caught booing one of our young pitchers at the RBiA.

by lonestarJon on Sep 5, 2008 7:11 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

heh

I’d call her more of a “girl who got beaten repeatedly in the face by a door” type, but whatever floats your tug boat, good sir.

You should give her a call, dude.

I bet you could get on that if you tried.

The 40 Trumps All!!!

by thedirkatron on Sep 6, 2008 12:50 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Its worth pointing out

that at the low-A level, the Rangers prospects are putting up better number than the A’s prospects and on average they are three years younger.

by NorCalRangersFan on Sep 4, 2008 10:48 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

you mean there is an advantage to high school guys?

Drafting high school guys is awesome when they actually pan out. That 2007 draft is looking very special right now…

by JBImaknee on Sep 5, 2008 12:30 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Great post...

There are a couple of other guys I’m hoping someone somewhere will give some more information on, although they haven’t yet pitched professionally in the Rangers’ organization: Tae-Kyong Ahn and Edwin (Vicente) Escobar.

It's not my website, but you should visit Andy Seiler's First-Rate http://texasrangersanalyst.blogspot.com/

by YourNameHere on Sep 4, 2008 11:59 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Alright, here's the deal

While the analysis of the players is largely correct, the ultimate evaluation isn’t. Low-A pitchers are, I hate to tell ya, a dime a dozen. Show me six good rookie-ball prospects and I’d expect one, maybe two of them to make it to the majors.

This is kinda true for position players too, but it’s REALLY true for pitching prospects. With position players, you figure that a few are good enough and a bunch can beat up on the lower levels but end up being AAAA or worse when they get to the high levels. This is true for pitchers too, but a. many of them will have career-altering injuries, b. many of those injuries end up damaging players’ chances permanently even if they return to play, and c. those injuries are disproportionately suffered by guys aged 19-21. So, you’re not discounting the low-level guys enough.

This next part may sound snooty, but… the respective track records of the teams have to weigh in here too. It may be partly to do with the ballparks, it may have to do with the instruction, it may just be a Beaneian knack, but the A’s have a much better history of generating good pitchers out of raw material than the Rangers do.

I trust them to take a raw youngster like Leon, or even Inoa (although Inoa is so damned young that the odds are stacked hugely against him anyway— which isn’t to say I disapprove of the signing) and figure out what works best for him to get to the majors, be it adding a pitch, altering his mechanics, or (the extreme case, aka Brad Ziegler) changing his arm slot completely. To be sure, this works better for bullpen guys, which is one reason why Oakland constantly (ok, except 2004) has a good and cheap ‘pen. Sorry to rain on the parade here, but I really don’t see that out of the Rangers.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 5, 2008 2:14 AM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

A's/Rangers Discussion

Paul: Thanks for stopping by and providing your thoughts. It’s great to balance this discussion with the perspective of an A’s fan. I hope that you will continue to stop by and contribute.

To your first point, I agree whole-heartedly that attrition reduces the impact (and value) of pitchers at the lower levels. To that end, the relative contribution of the lower-level pitching in a comparison of two farm systems should be less than that of the upper level pitching. It is my opinion that the differences between the A’s and Rangers farm systems among pitchers who will start next year in AA or higher is relatively small. Obviously I am biased due to my familiarity with the Rangers system, but given a choice, I would take the Rangers upper minors over the A’s given my expectations for Holland, Feliz, Poveda, Harrison, Hurley, Hunter, and Kiker. In my opinion, everyone one of those pitchers have stuff that is at least equivalent to a few recent Rangers prospects (Danks, Galaragga, Young, Feldman) who have succeeded in the major leagues, albeit at varying levels.

Assuming that the A’s/Rangers upper levels are indeed similarly stocked with talented pitchers, then the final analysis has to be affected by the talent present at the lower levels. And from the Midwest league on down, the comparison is insanely one-sided. As noted, attrition will take a few but the Cahills and Andersons and Feliz’s and Hollands and Hudsons and Harens of the world almost universally get their starts in A-ball.

As to the Rangers history of failing young pitchers, you are speaking to the choir. I have suffered a lifetime of misery watching talented young pitchers fail to reach their ceilings in the Rangers system. However, one of the most exciting developments in the Rangers system is the recent emphasis on talent evaluation and development. Rick Adair et al appear to be an amazing job of developing the pitchers in the system as witnessed by the numbers that have been posted in the minors the last couple of years. Seemingly for every Rangers pitching prospect that has under-performed expectations, there are two that have exceeded them. The jump from the minors to the majors has been a problem in recent years, but I am encouraged by the changes in the Rangers pitching staff and by the recent “successes” of young major leaguers like Feldman, Harrison, and Hurley.

by spurdynasty on Sep 5, 2008 6:04 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The Rangers' youngest pitchers

What Paul is failing to realize is that most of the best talent in the Rangers’ rookie, SSA and A ball teams is really, really young, but still pitching very well against older competition. Even with attrition, there are a hell of a lot of teenage arms putting up very good numbers against guys 2 or 3 years older on a regular basis. Some of these guys will fall away before reaching AA, but I still expect the system to have a lot of talent at AA/AAA in 2010-2012.

Spur, awesome job again. Are you on vacation or something? Where the hell are you getting all the time to do this? :)

I might go ahead and do position players if I have time. It would be fun to expand this to all of the AL West over the winter.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 5, 2008 7:31 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Thanks for the compliment, tball

That really means a lot coming from a guy with your obvious understanding of teh game and the Rangers organization.

As for the time, I work a fair amount while my wife and kids are sleeping. Instead of putting those hours toward my job or investing this week, I decided to apply them to one of my hobbies. I have a couple of more posts planned and the last one will provide an explanation.

by spurdynasty on Sep 5, 2008 8:40 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

This sounds like a multiple person project

the AL-West wide comparison I mean, if you want/need help, I’d be happy to lend a hand as well.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 9:31 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah, maybe so

I even thought it might be a good idea to invite someone from the other AL West blogs to pitch in and simultaneously post it over there for comments. Or, I could simply make a post over there asking for their lists of top prospects by position and comments and build on that. Either way, it’s a project I’d like to tackle, but I think it would be better in the offseason.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 5, 2008 9:41 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm not "failing to realize" it

I’m perfectly aware of it. I agree that the Rangers have much better SS and Rookie level rotations (and A level, too, unless you throw out Hunter and Ross’s injury records, which would be silly). I do not agree that that amounts to a significant difference in system value.

Let me put it in two different phrasings and show you the difference. One person might say the Rangers have twice as much talent as the A’s at the low levels. Sounds pretty dominant, right?

Another person (me) might say that they expect the Rangers to get about 2 good pitchers out of their low level guys and the A’s to get 1. Well, that’s twice as much, yes. Doesn’t sound so impressive, though.

Now, if you have a different point of view and think that the prospects are twice as likely to succeed, then suddenly the Rangers are getting two extra players (4 to 2) instead of one. It’s really just a question of where you calibrate the success rates of low-minors pitchers. And, I have to be honest, mine is calibrated at the “really really low” setting. I’ve seen way too many epic flameouts.

Two other factors to keep in mind here. First, ARL isn’t an especially big deal for pitchers. I actually would rather see a 20 year old putting up numbers in SS/A than a 17 year old, because of the injury nexus issue. Second, most rookie leagues are very pitcher-friendly because the players aren’t physically equipped to put up decent numbers with wood bats. The reductio ad absurdum example of this is the DSL, where the average OPS is like .650, but it applies to a lesser degree to leagues somewhat higher up the chain.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 5, 2008 7:34 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Epic flameouts

I agree, and Rangers fans have see their share. I don’t agree with spur when he says the Rangers have a “clear advantage”. I’d say the two systems rank very close in pitching, and it’s awfully difficult to come up with an indication strongly favoring either group.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 5, 2008 11:03 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

you're too kind

or at least more kind than I would have been.

Oakland’s pitchers have awesome ERAs and a lot of success because of their ballpark, their defense and whole shit load of luck. Yeah, Greg Smith might end up better than he was thought of in the minors, but I don’t think they’ll be nearly as good if they have two butchers like Cardenas and Patterson in the INF in the future.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 9:30 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Other than Mulder-Hudson-Zito

what exactly have the As produced in house that has been that impressive?

Danny Haren was a product of St. Louis, Eveland and Smith jumped right out of the Diamondbacks organization into the big leagues. Rich Harden was awesome, but always hurt. Seriously, there is no bridge between Harden and Cahill as far as impressive As pitchers go right now, and at this point, it’s pretty ridiculous to say “well, we’ve done it before” when the reason you did it before was 1) really talented pitchers who would succeed regardless 2) a pretty pitching tilted ballpark and 3) a great defense that was fielded in the past several years. Developmental history is perhaps the dumbest argument a person can make for the ultimate success or failure of prospects, that’s like saying just because the As haven’t been able to develop a good hitting prospect, all their guys are ultimately doomed for failure.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 9:29 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Development history

I agree to a certain extent that development history is overrated and that talent ultimately prevails, but aren’t you a little concerned about how we develop our pitchers? I’m mainly referring to certain pitchers losing velocity (McCarthy, Beavan, Kiker, Hurley).

by jcir454 on Sep 5, 2008 10:02 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

see, that's the thing

plenty of pitchers fail because of random bad luck. Dan Meyer failed as a prospect in Oakland, despite a good track record going in, that’s not the product of the “A’s farm system”, but a product of random bad luck injuries. Same with John Rheineicker.

I think part of the Ranger’s poor developmental history is just that they’ve had few real pitching prospects. Melvin and Hart both did a poor job of acquiring depth, I think that’s the only difference between Texas and Oakland developmentally. One had a lot of depth, the other did not.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 11:01 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I often wonder that myself

And if I’m not mistaken, the Mulder/Hudson/Zito triumvirate preceded Beane (definitely preceded the “Moneyball” era).

People always argue that certain organizations can / cannot develop players. Yet I think basic statistics can explain it – out of 30 teams, there will be one team that hits three or four guys in a short timeframe by pure chance. Before you know it, they get a “reputation”, and people stop paying attention to what is actually happening.

by JBImaknee on Sep 5, 2008 12:35 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Zito, Hudson and Mulder

are very much a product of the Alderson-Beane era. Billy Beane deserves full credit for their drafting and development.

But most of that is that they were lucky to avoid injuries.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 2:44 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Feliz and Holland vs. Cahill and Anderson

To me, the stats above favor Feliz and Holland, at least in terms of performance this season. Very similar stats in many areas with a slight edge for the TX boys in FIP and HR per 9. I want to add one more stat to the comparison: GB vs. FB rates.

Feliz 1.19 (1.64 A, 0.73 AA)
Holland 1.20 (1.30 A, 0.93 A+, 1.20 AA)
Cahill 2.43 (2.19 A+, 3.06 AA)
Anderson 1.92 (1.78 A+, 2.40 AA)

Here is one measure where Oakland’s duo outshines the TX pair, though all look even better when this measure is added. I have dreams of seeing these four face off in about 2011 in the playoffs if one team is the Wild Card.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 5, 2008 9:51 AM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Feliz and Holland won't post HR numbers like the ones they've put up this year if they put up similar FB rates in the majors

That much is fairly clear. Pitchers (at the big league level) have limited control over whether their flyballs go for home runs or not. Holland’s HR/FB ratio is 2.3. Feliz’s is 3.1. Cahill is at 6.7, Anderson at 10.1.

Over the last three calendar years the lowest rate for a starter is Matt Cain, at 6.2. Only four players have HR/FB rates less than 8 over that span— Cain, Joe Blanton (you can make a good argument that both of those guys’ success in this category has to do with their ballparks), Cliff Lee and Chien-Ming Wang. MLB median is 10.4%.

A lot of this has to do with league and park effects. It’s probably best, if you really want to be rigorous, to assume a generic HR/FB rate (eg, 10.4%) and then regress all prospects’ numbers to that rate. It’s not going to be perfectly accurate, because pitchers do have slightly different long-run HR/FB rates, but I suspect it will give you more predictive value than unregressed numbers.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 5, 2008 7:52 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

OK

I’m not sure if I forgot to put in percentage signs or the post somehow ate them. All the numbers in line two are percentages, not ratios… 10.1 home runs per fly ball would be quite a feat.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 5, 2008 7:53 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Ok, fine

but I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, other than all 4 pitchers can expect to give up more HRs at the major league level given a neutral park. That seems pretty obvious. The fact remains that right now Feliz and Holland have better numbers than Anderson and Cahill on that specific measure, and they ranked very high in that stat in their respective leagues. And, of course, I didn’t say that makes them better all by itself.

As I said above, I see these 2 pairs as being awfully close right now, with Holland being the shocker. I’d like to hear why you think Anderson has been “significantly better” than Holland. I’m not sure there is any pitcher in the minors that has been “significantly” better over the whole season than any of these four we’re discussing.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 5, 2008 11:13 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Prospect smackdown style:

Both pitchers started in 2007, so we don’t have the problem of “lining up” their seasons. In 2007, Anderson was much better. Holland had a 4:1 K:BB ratio, walked just under 3 per 9 innings, and struck out just under 12… but it was in short-season, and specifically the NW league. Anderson struck out just over 9 per 9 innings, walked only about 1.7, and had a K:BB ratio of about 5.5:1. Most of that was the pitcher-friendly MW league, but about 1/3 was in the very unfriendly Cal league. Also, Anderson’s ground-ball ratio was more than twice as high (1.5 to 0.7).

This season it’s been closer, but Anderson has still been the better of the two. Holland has struck out 157 in 150 innings, for a K/9 of a hair over 9, and walked 40, for a walk rate of about 2.5 per 9 innings. His K/BB is again about 4:1. Anderson whiffed 120 in 105 innings, for a K/9 of about 10, and walked 27, for a walk rate of 2.2 per 9 innings. His K/BB this year is about 4.5:1. Both guys have been better on ground balls this year, but the differential has been maintained (Anderson at 1.9, Holland at 1.2).

Additionally, Anderson has pitched more at higher levels. Even this year, most of Holland’s pitching was in the low-A Midwest League, while Anderson pitched in the Cal and Texas leagues (and the Olympics, although he wasn’t great there and the stats don’t show up on his minors page).

So stats-wise, pretty much every stat (other than runs allowed… but Anderson’s performance was badly damaged by two starts where he had a thumb injury and couldn’t grip the baseball) is showing mild to moderate advantages for Anderson except ground balls, where he has been much better. Holland has the better fastball speed, but Anderson has much better offspeed pitches, so that’s kind of a wash.

It’s not a blowout but I’d call it a significant difference in performance.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 6, 2008 3:05 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You left out age

which works in Anderson’s favor by a year and a half. To me, when the stats are that close among that many markers I still wouldn’t use as strong a word as significantly better, just being semantic about that. I’d agree that the higher ground ball rates make Anderson a tic more attractive, and he’s pitched more at higher levels, but to play devil’s advocate Holland advanced through 3 levels and his performance got better at each stop, even while graduating from a pitcher’s league to two hitter-friendly ones.

I hope we’re still having this argument in a few years, and in a playoff or meaningful September game context.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 6, 2008 9:27 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm a law student

I specialize in parsing phrases…

I’d call it “better enough to make me think that the difference isn’t caused solely by luck.” My prose tends toward the florid side, so I’d use a stronger adverb if I thought the two were not comparable…

(You’ll notice I didn’t view the age as an advantage, for the same reason that I referred to above w/r/t the really young guys. If anything, the ages of the two are a slight tick in Holland’s favor because he’s a bit less likely to suffer a major injury. Anderson might be a little more projectable, though.)

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 6, 2008 10:45 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I wouldn't call

using significant to describe pretty miniscule differences in performance parsing words, I’d probably call it hyperbole.

As an aside, why are we using statistics per 9, while I don’t agree /w the folks at LL on a lot of stuff, I agree that /PA is probably a better evaluative measurements. The difference between Holland and Anderson’s K and BB% are about 2% on K, and less, I think, in the case of BB. Anderson does have a pretty significant advantage on GB/FB, though.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 6, 2008 11:31 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Agree on rates

I prefer to use percentages of PAs for K rates and BB rates.

To Paul above, projectability was exactly what I was getting at.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 6, 2008 11:51 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Agree on rates

I prefer to use percentages of PAs for K rates and BB rates.

To Paul above, projectability was exactly what I was getting at.

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 6, 2008 11:52 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Double posts have been an increasing problem lately

I can sympathize, as I’ve made that errant second click more than a few times myself, but now it seems like it’s happening on a regular basis to people it doesn’t normally happen to, like t ball.

A Lonestar in California

We need to hire Chuck Norris to kick the ass of any Ranger fan caught booing one of our young pitchers at the RBiA.

by lonestarJon on Sep 7, 2008 5:26 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

What's really odd

is that did not show up that way on my computer when I posted it last night. Now it is…

O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere.

by t ball on Sep 7, 2008 7:22 AM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

curious

why are we using major league average of HR/FB to evaluate minor league pitchers. While it is true a major league pitcher does not have extensive control over their AB/HR and the major league average is 10.4, a quick examination of the top prospects of the last few years shows that the majority of them (Hughes, Porcello, Scherzer, Buchholz, Liriano et all) have a HR/FB well below 10. Is it just the relatively small amount of time these guys spend in the minors that depresses these rates or is it because guys with overpowering arsenals, something that I don’t believe either Cahill or Anderson can claim.

by FirebatM3 on Sep 5, 2008 8:53 PM CDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

very interesting comparison

between how both team are rebuilding their teams through farm system development.

rangers seemed to have stocked alot of their pitching talent off a couple great trades and the 07 draft. i see lots of upside but a bit further away

to be honest, i dont know muh of the depth guys beyond he top 10-15 prospects so i wont attempt it.

more info about A’s, just their opinion but BA/BP called their depth in milb pitching the deepest in baseball

its a bit top heavy with cahill/anderson, tons of #3 mid rotation types, and a huge haul of relievers. personally i have my doubts all of them will work out and some will be used in trades to fill offensive needs, i actually think rangers/A’s would match up well in a trade. Especially if Rangers are looking for more mlb ready arms to bridge that gap till their high upside guys are ready. And rangers have depth in hitters. Would aan interdivision trade happen, a couple were the pena/ramos deal, then the minor deal of rheinecker and others for Dominguez

into the original post it would not surprise me if all those A’s lefties currently are gone by next season other than gio…meyer/eveland are out of options, smith/braden are you typical back rotation guys with very little margin of error.

simmons/mazzaro are your typical mlb ready strike throwers, kind of in the mold of how baker/slowey/blackburn etc are doing in Minn

A’s potentially have more relievers than needed street/ziegler/devine/blevins/casilla/brown/ blevins etc then maybe ready by late 09 or so carignan/demel/hrod/bailey/lansford etc

its interesting to see the different philosophy between rangers/A’s. A’s went on a HS pick frenzy couple yrs ago…the only results are cahill/mazzaro…up until this yr lansford/italiano battled injuries and regained some prospect status as relievers

by Asfan4ever723 on Sep 5, 2008 11:34 PM CDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Texas Rangers.
Start posting about the Rangers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Giants fan from McCovey Chronicles will campaign for Kinsler
477845_small
July 1st, 2009: A Texas Rangers Memory
Wmplayer_2009-05-18_23-29-11-64_small
David Brown/Spurdynasty on Fastball Velocity and Pitching Performance
Martin_perez__8_small
July 2 Thread
Small
Julio Borbon called up

Recent FanPosts

Small
Nippert being called up
Small
Greetings from Philadelphia - let's make a deal!
Small
Int'l signings
Small
Minors - 7/5
Small
Help with video feed.
Small
Minors 7/4
340x_small
Baserunning: Why have we lost runs due to this?
Small
What moves need to be made.............
Small
Ranger's Snag Sardinas

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini

SPONSORS


Managers

Th_buckykatt_small Adam J. Morris

Official Partner of Yahoo! Sports