On Trading Alderson
It seems that many people around here want to trade Alderson. And there are a ton of legitimate reasons for wanting to do so (including injury risk, which is always a concern). But among them is not the idea that he's a back of the rotation starter at best (AT BEST I TELL YOU!).
When we drafted Alderson, he was seen as a potential #2 starter. So far, he has dominated high A ball as a 19 year old, posting the league's lowest ERA and FIP. He has been promoted to AA as a 20 year old and is currently one of the youngest players in the league. He's posted a B/9 of under 2, a K/BB ratio of almost 3.5, and a WHIP of under 1.2. His BABIP is normal (.293) and his GO/FO ratio isn't incredibly skewed either (0.99). The only concern is his K/9 rate of 6.09. There is nothing to indicate that he isn't performing exactly like he should be.
So why don't people think he'll be a solid #2? Probably because of the quote from a scout in a Baseball Prospectus article which basically said, "yeah, I don't get the hype - he's a sure fire major leaguer, but probably a back-of-the-rotation guy." This is a sentiment with which I completely agree. If Tim Alderson never improves or changes one little bit, he's a #4 or #5 starter.
But he's 20 years old and has a lot of room for improvement. He already has plus-plus control (very few walks) and plus command (average to low hit rates) as well as a plus curve ball. He has a fringe-average fastball and change-up, which are both hindering him from developing further. His change is relatively new, as is the case with almost all high school pitchers who never have to throw it. It seems like he'll develop it to the point where it's at LEAST an average major league pitch.
His fastball, on the other hand, seems to lack movement and velocity, despite throwing a 2-seemer (someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm almost positive he mostly throws the 2-seemer). Will either of those two things change? My inclination is to say yes (thus, my opinion of him as a #2 starter). He's 6'6" and from the time we drafted him, scouts seemed to think that he'll add velocity. Adding 2-3 MPH will give him an average FB. Adding 4-5 MPH will give him a plus FB. Will that translate into a better K/9? Dunno. But I'm also inclined to think that he'll have the opportunity during the offseason to experiment with new grips to add sink to his FB, resulting in higher GB% in the future (something key to watch in his development). He also will probably work on something new like a cutter this year or next to throw into his arsenol.
There are lots of reasons to want to trade Alderson, many of which I agree with - but declining value and unliklihood of being a very good major league pitcher is not one of them.
Would love to hear your thoughts.
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
2 recs |
158 comments
Comments
This.
Assuming Bumgarner, Lincecum and Cain are still with us, he’s 4th best. He projects as a 2/3 in most rotations.
"Don't trust anyone under the age of 30" - Brian Sabean
by Smotheredinhugs on Jul 14, 2009 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But has he thrown a no-hitter?
5th at best imho.
by i wish we were good on Jul 14, 2009 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s likely Alderson will be a pitcher who can help a major-league team, but it’s unlikely he’ll be a star. He just doesn’t have the fastball a pitcher needs to become the sort of guy you’re eager to start in a playoff series. Stranger things have happened, though.
I think the whole “#2 starter” (or #4 starter, or whatever) nomenclature isn’t very helpful. The categories are too broad, too imprecise.
by Evan on Jul 14, 2009 8:14 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
He just doesn’t have the fastball a pitcher needs to become the sort of guy you’re eager to start in a playoff series
Wait a sec. I seem to remember a couple guys named Maddux and Glavine who never threw harder than 90-91. They seemed to do OK. Even Barry Zito, lest we forget, had a great run never throwing harder than 90.
If Alderson has great breaking stuff and pinpoint control with the fastball, he can be a very good ML starter.
Disfrute Los Gigantes every day at www.leftymalo.com
by leftymalo on Jul 14, 2009 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s why I said “stranger things have happened.” There haven’t been a whole lot of Madduxes and Glavines, you know. And at this point, he’s not even throwing 90-91 often.
by Evan on Jul 14, 2009 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are tons of #4 starters around the majors who don’t throw harder than 92 (just to throw out another random number). You need 4 post-season starters to win a World Series. Paul Byrd has thrown a lot of post-season innings. So have Zito and Brad Radke. Every year journeymen make important post-season starts. I seem to remember some guy from the Mets…shit that was depressing. It’s just the way it works. No, I wouldn’t be excited if Zito was our Game 7 starter in the World Series. But you need four starters in the post-season and there has never been a team with four Tim Lincecums.
Joe Martinez: My fingers are crossed and my palms are together for you.
When it's all said and done, America will be remembered for three things: The Bill of Rights, jazz, and baseball.
by cornball on Jul 14, 2009 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In his prime, Maddux was consistently 91-92 with incredible movement, perfect control, a ++ changeup, + cut fastball/slider, and and above average curveball. And he was give an extra 3 inches off the black by most umpires. When the league was polled about the best pitches in the league, he scored in the top five for best fastball, slider, curve, change, and splitter. He didn’t even throw a splitter, but his changeup had so much movement that many hitters thought it was. Glavine was lefthanded, giving him more leeway in the mph dept.
I would have a lot more hope for Alderson it he missed a lot of bats or got a lot of grounders. Right now, unless he gains some mph, I really doubt that he will be more than a 4-5 starter who needs a HR unfriendly park to succeed. I could also see him being a very good setup guy or marginal "closer:
by irwin on Jul 14, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. His incredible K-BB ratio is already declining as he moves up the chain, and he’s just in AA ball. Wait until he gets to the majors. He can’t blow a fastball past a major league hitter, and he’s going to have to corner pitch.
Proud new dad of Edgardo errr Edgar Renteria!!!
by rxmeister on Jul 14, 2009 8:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait a minute
Can’t you say the exact same thing about Bumgardner’s strikeout ratio?
by FireBrianSabean on Jul 14, 2009 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course, but Bumgarner started out with much better stats in that department. 10.4 k’s per 9 compared to 7.7 per 9 last year for them, though Alderson was a level higher. 7.81 K/BB for Bumgarner, 3.65 for Alderson last year.
by Missing Barry on Jul 14, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree completely. I don’t think he’ll be on the same level as Cain, Lincecum and Bumgarner, but not every pitcher needs to be.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.
by jponry on Jul 14, 2009 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the whole "#2 starter" (or #4 starter, or whatever) nomenclature isn’t very helpful. The categories are too broad, too imprecise.
I generally think of it as quintile breakdowns of starting pitchers – i.e. #1 starter = top 20% of starting pitchers; #2 starter = second 20%, etc.
Still the loving, adoptive father of Hector Sanchez. And who doesn't love switch-hitting catchers with power and patience?
by tedfordfan on Jul 14, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's of passing use for #1's, #2, and maybe #3
But 4 and 5 “starters” as a category really don’t exist. Most teams have a revolving door in their 5th spot and, to a lesser extent, their 4th spot (and even the 3rd spot in some cases). Also, in my experience, most fans seem to expect an ERA under 5.00 from their back of the rotation starters, which simply doesn’t reflect reality.
I also probably formulate it a bit differently, looking at the top 30 pitchers as #1, 31-60 as #2’s, etc. It tends to only work through #3, though, as usually only ~90 pitchers actually through enough innings to qualify for the ERA title each season.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
by Bhaakon on Jul 14, 2009 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’s fine. He’s no Linc or Cain, but if this guy were in the Orioles or Royals org, people would be going nuts about him.
Merkin Valdez? Manuel Mateo? A rose by any other name...
by rotorueter on Jul 14, 2009 8:14 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Orioles might be a bad team to use here since they have a bunch of pitchers people are going nuts over like Tillman, Matusz, Arrieta etc.
by Hobbes2d on Jul 14, 2009 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just substitute the Nats for the Orioles and the argument holds. Tim is a very good prospect who just happens to have a lower ceiling than Bumgarner.
Joe Martinez: My fingers are crossed and my palms are together for you.
When it's all said and done, America will be remembered for three things: The Bill of Rights, jazz, and baseball.
by cornball on Jul 14, 2009 7:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually I don’t understand this statement at all. Do prospects on bad teams get some kind of kind of handicap bump from prospect watchers because of it? I’ve certainly never seen anything that suggests this is true. In fact, quite the opposite, players in dreadful systems are sometimes downgraded in people’s minds because of their surroundings. A case in point is Jason Castro. Because Houston’s drafts have been so disastrous, and because people considered it overdraft he frequently doesn’t get the credit he deserves for being one of the best catching prospects in the game.
I think the opposite is true. If it weren’t for the Giants rep with finding pitchers, and the tandem connection of being selected and moving up with Bumgarner, I’m not sure how elite Alderson would be considered in another organization.
Ultimately, though I seriously doubt that when people create prospects lists, they take the system much into account at all (except in places like here, where the particular system is all that really matters to us). If a player’s got a lower ceiling, he’s a considered a lesser prospect.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
by Roger on Jul 15, 2009 5:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Most likely path is probably league average. Absolute ceiling is good but not great (I guess that would #2 starter).
Adoptive parent of Noah Lowry.
:-(
by Cookyman on Jul 14, 2009 8:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I would absolutley be happy if he came up and posted league ave numbers. Thats more than what 75% of prospects do
Minor White > Ansel Adams
by say hey nation on Jul 14, 2009 8:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
In this rotation
Alderson > Zito
the end
by SoFa King Mike on Jul 14, 2009 8:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Then again Ryan Sadowski > Zito.
Judgment Day is coming
comics | art | Nattowear
by Natto on Jul 14, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
HHE D0eSN'T KnOW HoW TO WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stupid is as Ruben Rivera does...
by bkrhater on Jul 14, 2009 8:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Bad Poll
This poll is missing an option…. ACE.. And that’s why I didn’t vote. The kid is twenty years old, in his second full season of pro ball, and his numbers are solid. He has so much potential! It’s not like we’re talking about 26y.o. Sadowski. Have some optimism people.
Only when I am eliminated by MIke Krukow will my life's work be complete
by NateisGreat on Jul 14, 2009 9:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I thought about that, but had to jump off the computer this morning.
Still the loving, adoptive father of Hector Sanchez. And who doesn't love switch-hitting catchers with power and patience?
by tedfordfan on Jul 14, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't do it! You have your whole life in front of you!
Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit... Maybe.
by Mayor of 311 on Jul 14, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't jump out of desperation or despair
/kicks Xanthan
Still the loving, adoptive father of Hector Sanchez. And who doesn't love switch-hitting catchers with power and patience?
by tedfordfan on Jul 14, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
so you live in a one story house obviously.
Ted, hang on, there will be giants games on Friday
cheering for Adam Witter, who will hit bigleague dingers some day.
Still yelling "Go, Antoan"
by foothillsfan on Jul 15, 2009 8:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It seems that many people around here want to trade Alderson.
I think you’re misreading comments here. I don’t think many people want to trade him. At the same time, people want to improve the team by adding offense and you (usually) have to give up quality to get quality. I think Alderson’s name comes up because he’s a highly rated prospect, but not necessarily a guy you’d call “untouchable”, like Posey and Bumgarner.
If we didn’t have MadBum, people might be a lot more reluctant to give up Alderson. I’ve been saying that as long as your minor league system can project advancing a new starter to the major league team’s rotation each season and provide an emergancy starter if needed, anything more is depth from which you can help the team elsewhere. With Pucetas, Sosa, Bumgarner and Wheeler in the pipeline and Sadowski emergence as a capable spot starter, Alderson is probably someone you consider moving if it helps the team.
My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman
by Goofus on Jul 14, 2009 9:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
+ Mayor
Exactly right about that block-quoted sentence. Untrue.
Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit... Maybe.
by Mayor of 311 on Jul 14, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
re
I would also add that, at least for me, Alderson seems to be the most overvalued prospect in the system. So, if and only if, you are going to trade someone, he would be it.
by irwin on Jul 14, 2009 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Overvalued? Compared to whom?
by SoFa King Mike on Jul 14, 2009 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What?
That’s insane. You could say the same thing about Villalona. Or Noonan.
by FireBrianSabean on Jul 14, 2009 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t want to trade Alderson. It would take something very good in return to get me to budge. Can’t think of someone I’d want the Giants to acquire that would require trading Alderson (or any of the other top prospects)
Supporting San Francisco Dugout since 2005 and Manny Burriss since 2006, and bringing you all your California League needs since 2009.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Jul 14, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That half-full glass might be Kool-Aid
Nothing in your argument regarding Alderson’s potential avenues for improvement is impossible by any means, but I think you’re doing a lot of wishcasting and kind of subverting the whole reason for scouting. You could take any 20-year old prospect and say that he’d be awesome if he added more fastball, but at some point you have to go on what you know — what is an objective fact. Alderson has a certain set of skills. It’s possible that some of them can get better, but as of right now, he’s succeeding mainly because he’s getting the most from his abilities. He’s not the prototypical “man, if he could only harness his stuff” high-upside guy; rather, he’s someone who is already getting by with great command, an advanced (for his age) notion of how to set up hitters, and what is generally regarded as fringy stuff. Where is this improvement going to come from?
You mention Maddux and Glavine, but I kind of wish there could be a rule against using Maddux or Randy Johnson or Pedro (or maybe even Lincecum, going forward) as comps. These pitchers are anti-archetypes — they are guys who succeeded in completely anomalous ways, and as such they don’t really offer much insight into other players.
I’ll leave it at this: Maddux and Glavine were both brilliant pitchers (from the standpoint of pitching intellectually) who understood movement and were consistently able to outthink hitters. (The likes of Glavine, I might add, may never be seen again; the league has made a conscious effort to de-subjectify the strike zone, and Glavine was always the kind of guy who could size up an ump’s particular tendencies and take full advantage from start to start.) Alderson has shown that he’s more advanced from a mental approach standpoint than a lot of the competition he’s faced so far, but I don’t really think that has much bearing on how he’ll be vis-a-vis major league hitting. Of course it’s possible that he is that much smarter or that his breaking ball is 2002 Zito-esque — but this flies in the face of everything we’ve heard about him from a scouting standpoint and feels like pure hope, without any concrete reason for the optimism.
Naturally, I hope I’m wrong. But the reasons for TimA’s success thus far are going to be harder and harder for him to repeat as he climbs the levels — much more so than a guy who succeeds on his stuff. I consider myself reasonably optimistic in thinking that he can be a middle-of-the-rotation guy, but I think the chances of him being one of the two best pitchers on a major-league team are highly unlikely, at least given everything we know about him to this point.
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 9:21 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
“You mention Maddux and Glavine, but I kind of wish there could be a rule against using Maddux or Randy Johnson or Pedro (or maybe even Lincecum, going forward) as comps. These pitchers are anti-archetypes — they are guys who succeeded in completely anomalous ways, and as such they don’t really offer much insight into other players”
I tend to agree with you on Maddux and Glavine [as aces without blazing heat] and Johnson [as a guy who learned control]. but I disagree about Lincecum and Pedro. I think they provide an excellent example of why you shouldn’t downgrade a guy too much because he isn’t 6’4" They had/have the stuff to dominate and have shown no sign of being injury prone. Simply because they stand 5’9" doesn’t mean that they are relievers.
by irwin on Jul 14, 2009 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But their success as players is certainly “unusual” and therefore a bad comparison for projecting a future player. If you build your team on the hopes that your players are the unusual exception, you’ll almost always end up disappointed. I think your point about height is a different argument. :)
by Missing Barry on Jul 14, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, there’s a reason teams dislike starters under six-feet and catchers over six-five. How many starters under six-feet are in the Hall of Fame? One. Who’s the only catcher at six-five to play longer than Joe Mauer? Sandy Alomar, Jr. Yeah, there are exceptions (Pedro, Tim, Joe Mauer), but they are exceptionally rare and succeed because of equally rare talent.
Joe Martinez: My fingers are crossed and my palms are together for you.
When it's all said and done, America will be remembered for three things: The Bill of Rights, jazz, and baseball.
by cornball on Jul 14, 2009 7:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plenty of other examples besides Maddux and Glavine
Off the top of my head I come up with Brandon Webb, Gaylord Perry, Jamie Moyer, Trevor Hoffman, Orel Hersheiser, Jim Barr, and Rick Rueschel. There are plenty of other exampes in the past 40 years of highly-successful pitchers that only threw a FB in the 86-91 MPH range. And the game hasn’t changed that much – there will be plenty of more pitchers like them in the years to come.
Unless you throw a heater at 99+, a successful MLB FB is not determined by pure velocity. Much more important to its success are traits like movement, late movement, location, deception, and variety (how its mixed with your other pitches). The history of the league is littered with guys that could throw mid-90s FBs, but didn’t know how to pitch. Just look at Matt Cain this year – he’s actually throwing his FB on average about 2-3 MPH slower than previously, but he’s been fabulously successful because he’s locating it better, getting more movement out of it, and mixing in his change and curve more effectively.
Alderson obviously knows how to pitch – not just throw – as his results the past 2 years bear out. I don’t understand why some people write him off after a stretch of 2 or 3 mediocre performances. That’s what he’s supposed to be doing now in the Minors. Experimenting with, and developing, different pitches and styles to see what works best. That’s why you keep young pitchers in the Minors – because they can develop and experiment there without the fear of failure. With a pitcher like Alderson we need to focus on stats like BB/9, ERA, and # of pitches/9; not Ks or K/BB, because trying for a high number of Ks won’t be conducive to his success. He wants batters to put the ball in play and to have low pitch counts. You’ll know he’s learning his lessons as long as he remains accurate (low BB/9) and efficient. There’s no readily-available stat that shows how many pitches he throws, but you’ll know he’s being efficient as long as he pitches deep into games (since the Giants have their Minor League pitchers on pitch counts).
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 14, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dunno how good of an example Gaylord Perry is.
Randy Winn is in time out until his OBP gets back over .330.
by oldjacket on Jul 14, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the game has changed quite a bit. I’m not sure how one would go about proving something like this, since there aren’t really enough data out there; but purely anecdotally, it sure seems that average fastball velocity has increased even in the twenty years I’ve been a fan of baseball. Plus I think that the change in umpiring I mentioned in my initial comment is an extremely significant alteration in the game that has not been adequately interrogated. Add to this the general uptick in offensive production, particularly from the mid-90s to the mid-00s (in other words, when Maddux was at his best), and then finish off with the fact that Maddux is demonstrably better than any of the pitchers you name, and I think my point re: Maddux is pretty sound. Please note that I didn’t mention Glavine as a nonuseful comp.
As for Lincecum and Pedro - maybe. It’s too early to tell with Lincecum, but I do believe that the way he achieves his success (mechanics, mostly) makes him somewhat unsuitable as a comparison. I’m more comfortable with a guy like Oswalt as a comparison for the vertically challenged. Pedro’s career trajectory was/is (if the Phillies rumors are true) pretty much unique: guy gets cast off because the perception is that he’s too fragile, goes on a run in his mid to late-twenties that is arguably the greatest stretch a pitcher has ever experienced (when factoring in the prevailing offensive environment of the time), and then essentially craters in his early- to mid-thirties, completely devoid of the stuff that had made him successful.
With those latter two, it wasn’t just their size that I was looking at. Again, I think it’s a little premature to compare anyone to Lincecum, rather than the other way around — a little over two full seasons in the bigs is nowhere near enough time to establish a track record. But with Pedro, it was not just his size and arsenal I was thinking of, but moreso the fact that he was so far beyond any other player in the game. It’s unlikely, for example, that you would use Babe Ruth or Ted Williams or Barry Bonds as a comparison, simply because there really aren’t many who can get into that conversation.
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry, I’m still a newbie and unfamiliar with the technology. None of that slashed-out stuff was meant to be slashed out, but I don’t know how to fix it. I’m an idiot.
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that guys like Pedro and Timmeh are outliers – they can/could both bring the heat, but also both have/had devastating change-ups to keep the poor hitters off-balance.
I totally disagree with you that the game has changed so much, and umpiring has changed so much, that pitchers that rely on location, command, and guile wouldn’t succeed now at the same rate they did in the past. Maddux and Glavine were quite successful as late as 3 years ago – and the reason they declined was due to age, not the effectiveness of their pitching style. All you have to do is look at how successful Moyer was just last year. Just look at his stellar stats pitching in an extreme hitter’s park in 2008 at the age of 45. Besides that, guys like Brandon Webb, Derek Lowe, and our own Noah Lowry have been highly successful as late as last year (not Lowry due to injury). To further prove my point, I ask you this, if a young Maddux, Hersheiser, or Rueschel were to come into the league today are you telling me that they wouldn’t be as successful as they were before?
I do agree with your assertion that the average FB velocity has increased recently, but I don’t agree with your reasoning why. It’s my assertion that this is a product of the herd mentality of modern-day GMs, scouts, and the various team’s Minor League Development Divisions. Due to the development of the internet, specialized TV sports channels, and the player super-agents there is much less of a chance for a command and control pitcher to be given the time to develope their craft in the Minors. Information is deseminated around the country so quickly today that if a pitching prospect has 1 bad outing the fans go nuts and the team fires their GM. In the draft and in the Minors, all anybody wants is a 6’2", or taller, 200 lb., or heavier, flame-thrower that can throw a FB > 95 MPH and K a million batters a game. This is mostly group-think, and it goes in cycles, just like speed & D vs. power does with hitters. Someday soon a smart GM will see an opportunity and start to stockpile command and control pitchers – realizing that they’re cheap, less likely to blow out their arms, and plentiful because nobody else wants them. As soon as that team is successful then others will run to copy them and the pendulum will swing back a bit.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 14, 2009 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fla-Giant
Excellent points up above about Alderson, as regards pitch movement, location, and variety; as well as pointing out the purpose of being in the minors in the first place. Well said.
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005. And winner of the 2012 NL Fireman of the Year Award!
by Lyle on Jul 14, 2009 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
re
1.) Webb gets lots of groundballs and strikeouts, Alderson does niether. Webb also pitched in great hitters parks in the minors
2.) Hershiser threw 92-93 with wicked sink before his arm blew up, after that he was a very ordinary 4-5 starter.
3.) I really have no clue about Perry’s velocity. But yeah, the spitball
4.) Moyer is lefthanded and Hoffman is a reliever. Hoffman, when dominant, threw 95+
5.) I new saw Jim Barr pitch. I remember Reuschel getting a lot of groundball, but I think that data wasn’t recorded.
Strikeouts, groundballs and walks + good velocity. This is what you look for in good to great pitchers – Alderson only has one of those right now. That is reason for a healthy dose of doubt in his ability to sustain a low ERA when he moves up that ladder.
Nobody is saying that velocity is the be-all, end all of pitching prospects. But it sure helps.
by irwin on Jul 14, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Webb & Alderson have two completely different pitching styles and cannot really be compared.
by SoFa King Mike on Jul 14, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, okay. Thanks for clearing that up.
by SoFa King Mike on Jul 14, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. Webb didn’t get a lot of groundballs or Ks his first 1.5 years in the Minors. He had to learn how to throw that sinker. Besides that, I brought him up not as an example of what Alderson could be like, but as an example of a highly-successful pitcher that doesn’t rely on heat.
2. Hershiser was not all about sink, he was more about movement, a la Greg Maddux, he also had a good curve (like Alderson).
3. Perry started with a low- to mid-90s, but became successful when he backed off and threw in the 88-90 range. He rarely threw a spitter – he used the threat of it and the natural movement of his FB to mess with the hitter’s minds.
4. Hoffman never threw 95+ during his salad days as a great reliever. He was low 90s with movement, but mostly he located and got people out with the change. And, he’s still dominating this year, check out his stats. Moyer being LH is a disqualification? I could see that being true if he were a mid-90’s FB/slider power pitcher, but since he’s a junker his left-handedness doesn’t DQ him.
5. Rueschel threw mainly high 80s, but every once in a while he would wing it in about 92. The thing about him was that he could throw much faster, but when he did he lost his movement and became very hittable. The other thing about him, like Mariano Rivera, is that he basically only threw that one pitch – a fastball that he could move in many directions (but mainly downward). Jim Barr threw low-90s, but he had awesome command of his location – both in and out, and up and down. He had many stretches where he would go 20-40 innings without walking a batter.
Of course, Alderson is not at any of these guys’ level, but if you compare him to how successful these others were in the minors at the tender age of 20, he doesn’t look bad. Alderson still has to improve, but if he can just develope a repeatably effective off-speed pitch I believe that he’ll be very successful in the Majors throwing a 90 MPH FB, because of his ++ control.
Low walks, ERA, and BAA, as well as the ablility to pitch deep into a game – that’s what you look for in good to great pitchers. Good velocity is not that important – movement is much more valuable at the MLB level. Almost all MLB hitters will feast on a straight FB between 92-96 MPH. Velocity is just the current rage among evaluators because it’s so easy to see and measure, all you need is a handy jug gun. Even fans can easily look at the screen, read the print-out and say, “Wow, he threw that won 96!” Let me ask you this. Radar guns weren’t readily available until the late 70s, so talent evaluators had no way of knowing how fast somebody threw except by comparison with others. However, everybody could see movement, command, and control with their naked eye. So, since they have velocity info at the tips of their fingers, why aren’t the talent evaluators doing so much better at finding and defining a talented pitcher now than they were in the 40s, 50s, and 60s? The failure rate is no better now than it was before.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 14, 2009 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Again, well said.
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005. And winner of the 2012 NL Fireman of the Year Award!
by Lyle on Jul 14, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree about Hoffman. He had a cannon of an arm before it wore out. Pretty sure he hit 95 regularly and I’ll bet Robby Thompson’s jaw agrees.
My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman
by Goofus on Jul 14, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair though Goofus when Hoffman plunked Thompson it was at the very start of his career when he was still throwing mid 90s gas.
by Hobbes2d on Jul 14, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not trying to make velocity a big bugaboo. I completely agree that it’s a sexy figure that can very easily be mistaken for something that will guarantee results. The nine runs the Giants recently hung on Felipe Paulino (who hit 100 on the FOX gun during his two innings of work) are certainly proof that plain ol’ country hardball isn’t going to impress even a mediocre lineup.
But if a pitcher is in the 88-91 range and not throwing some serious sink, the statistical likelihood that he is going to be a star player — a #1 or #2 starter, one of the best pitchers on a given team — just isn’t that high. I would never argue that it can’t be done; but it’s less likely, at least judging by the pitchers that are currently successful starters in the majors.
I’m not taking issue with Alderson’s qualifications as a major-league pitcher. I think he’s one of the safer bets in the minors, to be perfectly honest. I’m simply responding to the notion that we should suddenly begin thinking of him as potentially far better than scouts have consistently led us to believe. Until I see how his stuff plays out at the major-league level, I don’t see any overwhelming evidence for why I should alter my perceptions of his capabilities.
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That merits a rec in my book.
That’s it! Katie bar the door for this 79 win team is star crossed! And I am loving it.
by daveinexile on Jul 16, 2009 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
“Plenty of other examples besides Maddux and Glavine”
Of course there are a lot of examples. What you have to look at is their success rates. For every example there are 99 guys that failed. Guys with fringy fastball’s like Alderson only become ace’s like 1% of the time (I have no actual idea what the % is, but my point is it’s extremely low). It’s much better to evaluate him on realistic expectations he’s likely to follow, which excludes him from being an ace.
by Missing Barry on Jul 14, 2009 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Goes both ways
It’s also true that for every guy with a mid-90s or greater heater that became an ace, there are 99 guys that failed. Besides which there is a much higher incidence of arm injuries for those types of pitchers. To get back to my point, I in no way believe that Alderson should be expected to be an “ace” of our staff in the future. Not because of his 88-90 MPH FB, but because it’s stupid to expect any 20 year old AA pitcher to be an ace. The percentages of that happening are even worse than 1%. By the same token, it’s not smart to write off a 20 year old pitcher with Alderson’s early success as already a disappointment. The main thing to ask in order to decide his potential are things like:
1. Can he locate and control a variety of pitches?
2. Can he change speeds well and adjust to hitters throughout the game?
3. Is he efficient and often able to pitch deep into games with a limited pitch count?
4. Is he consistent?
5. Does he pick up new things quickly?
6. Is he more worried about protecting his stats than he is about doing the work to develope himself as a good MLB pitcher?
When you look at that list I think that Alderson comes out looking quite good right now.
To focus on a small sample of games where he had fewer Ks or gave up a lot of runs and hits at this point in his career is not smart. For all we know he could have been working on using a new grip, throwing an inordinate amount of a particular pitch for development purposes, or doing something else out of the ordinary in order to try and better himself. Even if that’s not the case, even the best pitchers (yes even The Freak) go through slumps now and then.
I think that it’s fair to expect that Alderson currently has an above average chance of being a good MLB pitcher (projecting somebody as #1-#5 is kind of silly because it’s been shown time and again to be such an inexact science)
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 14, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m going to go out on a limb and throw out my opinion that guys with better “stuff” succeed at higher rates than guys with Alderson’s stuff. Strikeouts matter, and they matter a lot, and so far, based on what scouts have observed, he doesn’t seem to have the type of stuff that will get a high amount of swings and misses. This lowers the expectations on him, and will most likely prevent him from being an ace (I use that more as a projection, of course you’re right it’s foolish to say anyone in AA will or won’t be an ace).
That said, you’ve pointed out a lot of good qualities he has – things that will likely make him a solid pitcher. I just see the odds of him becoming more than that are lower than other similar prospects because of his lack of swing and miss stuff.
by Missing Barry on Jul 14, 2009 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. We weren’t discussing “stuff”, we were discussing velocity (specifically of his FB).
2. I don’t believe (but I don’t have any stats to back it up with) that the success rate of high velocity pitchers is that much different than those that throw 88-90 MPH. Sure, a larger number of pitching stars in the Majors now are of the high velocity type. However, the pool that they start from is much larger than the pool of medium velocity pitchers, so the rate of success remains fairly similar (ie. 20 successes out of 100 is the same rate as 2 out of 10). I think that the minors (especially in AA and AAA) are populated with many more high velocity (92 MPH and higher) starting pitchers than mid-velocity.
3. Scouts have opined many different predictions about Alderson at differrent times in the past 2 years. It’s not reliable to pay much heed to just 1 being anonymously quoted at any given time, because you have no idea what that scout was saying about the same prospect in the past – the scout quoted might have been one that always panned his future viability. Now if you could follow a specific scout, or group of scouts, and chart how their analysis changes over time then that would be useful info.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 14, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. I am discussing “stuff,” for the very simple reason that I agree with you that basic velocity is largely useless as a guideline of pitcher success.
2. It’s possible and indeed almost certain that, in all of organized baseball, the number of high-velocity or otherwise high-stuff guys dwarfs the number of pitchers who thrive on control and command (it’s really just a matter of how high that proportion is). It’s also possible that a majority of control/command guys get naturally selected out of the pool before they even reach professional or collegiate baseball. Either way, your assertion essentially seems to boil down to the fact that group-think has led the entirety of organized baseball to prefer one over the other, when in reality the less-preferred group is just as viable, if not more so. That might be the case, but without taking on the entire collective wisdom of those employed in professional baseball (which, I realize, it’s quite so sacrosanct as it may think itself), the simple fact is that teams prefer a certain type of pitcher, and that those types of pitchers are given greater opportunities to thrive.
3. I’m not just basing my arguments on that one anonymous quote reported by Kevin Goldstein, nor have I even made mention of it that I can recall: rather, I’ve been relying on my own impression of the general consensus amongst all the reports I’ve seen on Alderson. Since scouting reports, at least as they are disseminated to the public, are not always associated with specific scouts, and since following a specific scout would be nearly impossible without some credentials with the team, I don’t think I can honor your request for useful info; but if it would be helpful, I will try to compile some sort of sample dossier on what I’ve read about TimA. I’m honestly surprised, though, that saying Alderson is generally considered by scouts as a middle or back of the rotation guy is a big surprise. It’s not MY opinion necessarily — I’ve never seen him pitch, and I wouldn’t presume to know more than a seasoned baseball scout anyway. But it’s certainly what I’ve taken away from just about everything I’ve ever read about him and his projected upside.
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
make that “ISN’T quite as sacrosanct as it thinks itself”…sheesh!
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
His #2 point is just wrong
Most right-handed pitchers in AA and AAA throw with Alderson velocity (but not Alderson command). Those guys tend to make up the bulk of the organization players who float around the minors for 5 or 6 years without ever doing anything significant. Generally speaking, if you throw 95 MPH, you have to have really horrific command to not at least get a big-league tryout as a bullpen arm.
Every year, there are literally dozens of college righties with 89-91 fastballs and decent command who get picked in rounds 3-10 of the draft. Once in a while, one of them becomes good enough to reach the majors. Most of the time, they stall out in AA or AAA. The bulk of the actual pitchers (not pitching PROSPECTS, but total number of players) are, by MLB standards, soft-tossers.
W/r/t Alderson himself, I’m actually a fan of that kind of pitcher, but he’s not any kind of guaranteed stud. I’d say a reasonable upside comparison is James Shields, but the expectation is that he’ll be more like a Nick Blackburn type, or Joe Blanton. It’s a good idea to produce lots of cost-controlled #4 starters because it allows you to spend money on other positions, but they aren’t going to make or break your team.
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
by PaulThomas on Jul 14, 2009 5:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I almost threw a note about stuff vs. velocity in there, but didn’t. Oh well. You made points earlier about movement and such and they were valid, I just think the point applies whether you’re talking about stuff or velocity since nobody has ever raved about Alderson’s fastball in general. Rick Parker (Lewis) Can’t Lose said it best earlier with his “I’m not taking issue with Alderson’s qualifications as a major-league pitcher.” (The whole comment, not just that line).
by Missing Barry on Jul 14, 2009 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Many (not just you) missing my basic point
I never made the Glavine/Maddox comp – that was another poster. I think that’s absurd as both had generational-type control. You can never project command/control.
But given his body type and the fact that scouts have since high school consistently said that they expect him to gain velocity on his FB, I just wonder if people aren’t selling the kid short. He’s 20 in AA and projects to improve just based on physical maturity.
I agree that the comments about the new grip/cutter magic are pie in the sky, but I just don’t understand why people are viewing him as a pitcher who isn’t likely to change/improve in the coming years.
Still the loving, adoptive father of Hector Sanchez. And who doesn't love switch-hitting catchers with power and patience?
by tedfordfan on Jul 14, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oy Glavine! I seem to have let the herd out of the stables here. Two separate issues to address:
1) I wasn’t trying to compare Alderson to Maddux. I was merely saying that Maddux shouldn’t realistically be used as a template for comparison to anyone, simply because he’s too much of an outlier. Personally, I find the notion of player comparison on a micro level to be a little silly. To me, it’s far more useful on a macro level: “Player X is a 32-year old hulking slugger with limited athleticism, and previous players of that build and skill-set have exhibited a strong tendency to decline rapidly in their early or mid thirties” is far more useful to me than “Player X has had a remarkably similar career trajectory to Player Y, so we can approximate the next four years of Player X’s future by looking at what Player Y did at a similar age.”
2) (and more pertinent to the original post) In terms of top-of-the-rotation material (what we can call #1 or #2 starters, for lack of a better word), there is more often than not something exceptional about a given pitcher’s stuff. Comparing Alderson’s raw stuff to this group leaves him looking up at an awful lot of guys currently toeing the rubber in the majors. And I include extraordinary GF/FB rates in the stuff category — to me, Brandon Webb and Derek Lowe are just as nasty as Carlos Zambrano or Roy Oswalt or whomever else you want to name. Now I’m not by any means suggesting that Alderson can’t be extraordinarily successful with the tools he has at his disposal. But I am saying that he has an uphill battle with his current arsenal, and that speculating about what he might develop further down the road is, at least to me, too speculative and too arbitrary to be instructive. For all I know, Merkin Valdez could come up with an insane screwball next year. Barry Zito could reinvent himself as a knuckleballer. Anything is possible, and it’s particularly possible with a 20-year old kid a year and a half removed from high school and already demonstrating an advanced knowledge of pitching; but it’s not something to bank on, or to build into his ceiling or projections before it happens. Those sorts of prognostications, at least in my opinion, need to be based on what’s there already, and what has been shown in the track record of the player. You can get a little loose when projecting velocity, I suppose, just as scouts sometimes do when they project power for a hitter; but velocity does not equal greater success, and there are just as many pitchers who find greater success by decreasing their velocity as there are those who get better when their arms get stronger. So I choose to trust the scouting consensus when it comes to Alderson, and secretly hope that he’s the sort who can’t properly be appreciated or quantified by scouts.
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was well said. Would you then be an Alderson Agnostic? Are you excited only about Posey and Bumgarner? What do you think of Thomas Neal?
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005. And winner of the 2012 NL Fireman of the Year Award!
by Lyle on Jul 15, 2009 6:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you, Lyle. As a matter of fact, I live in a cave on the Mediterranean coast and lead a group of other Alderson Agnostics in study and meditation! Perhaps I should add that to my signature :)
Actually — I’m excited about Alderson already, to a certain degree. I am impressed by the numbers he’s put up, and impressed that scouts seem fairly unanimous in thinking that he’s a bona fide major leaguer. Taking into account his age and relative inexperience in pro ball, even just the notion of him being so widely considered major league talent is pretty special. I was never trying to argue that I didn’t like him as a prospect — just that I didn’t think there was just cause to elevate expectations for him already, based on what we know. I would say I’m a little more excited about Posey and Bumgarner, but I don’t mean that as any slight on TimA — I’m thrilled to have them all in the system. At any rate: I agree with several posters above that Alderson would probably be the guy I would shop if the right deal were on the table, because I believe his absolute upside is less than the other four. I’m not eager to move him, though.
And as for Thomas Neal — I don’t feel qualified to offer much beyond general optimism at this point. He’s been tearing the cover off the ball, but I haven’t yet read too much about him in scouting circles (though he did make a mid-year all-star team for…Baseball America, I think?) and I’d like to see him perform against higher-level pitching before I really start throwing salsa up in the air. I’m extremely intrigued, and very hopeful.
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 15, 2009 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Other THREE. It’s early.
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 15, 2009 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think
you can really tell this. Plus, you didn’t have a box for “injured”. TANSTAAPP.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Jul 14, 2009 9:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
There aint no such thing as a pitching prospect?
Everybody loves money
by fwoty oz on Jul 14, 2009 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Angry Neo-Statistics Types Always Abhor Potential
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005. And winner of the 2012 NL Fireman of the Year Award!
by Lyle on Jul 15, 2009 6:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not exactly desperate to trade Alderson, but I think of the “Big Four”, he’s the one I’d be most willing to give up. I think he could definitely be an average major league starting pitcher for at least the six years the Giants (or whoever) control him, but I do think anything beyond that will require him to gain velocity on his fastball.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.
by jponry on Jul 14, 2009 9:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I’d rather deal Villalona. Alderson doesn’t have a ton of upside, but his floor is pretty high.
There’s a better than 50% chance Villalona is Joel Guzman part 2.
by microwave donut on Jul 14, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But the other side of that equation is SHINY!
"The BB's are out. The BB's are being arseholes to me." - Brian Wilson.
by hairball on Jul 14, 2009 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am beginning to agree with you, microwave donut. (I don’t believe I’ve ever typed those words in that exact order before). If someone must go, let it be Villalona, powerful though he may be.
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005. And winner of the 2012 NL Fireman of the Year Award!
by Lyle on Jul 14, 2009 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even as his adoptive parent
I wouldn’t be broken up if he’s dealt. I love his potentila but there is a LOT that can go wrong with a long road to travel until he gets to the bigs…
"Catcher are base running. Hitters are offense."
Only [hella] games left until the end of Zito's [no, make that Rowand's] contract.
Adoptive father of "Poncho" Villalona: This Angel don't fly. Nothing about him is light.
by thehavenot on Jul 14, 2009 8:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is what I was getting at.
I’m not exactly desperate to trade Alderson, but I think of the "Big Four", he’s the one I’d be most willing to give up.
Still the loving, adoptive father of Hector Sanchez. And who doesn't love switch-hitting catchers with power and patience?
by tedfordfan on Jul 14, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
DON’T DO IT
Judgment Day is coming
comics | art | Nattowear
by Natto on Jul 14, 2009 10:04 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I see him as a James Shields type pitcher.. Mid 3 ERA, good, but not great K rate, real good walk rate.. Low WHIP innings eater.. Decent #2 starter, great #3
Brandon Crawford: Your SF Giants 2011 Opening Day starting SS!
by Azmanz on Jul 14, 2009 10:15 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I’d take James Shields in a heartbeat, but I’m not sure I’m quite as sold. Hope you’re right!
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least we have his cousin.
Judgment Day is coming
comics | art | Nattowear
by Natto on Jul 14, 2009 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mid 3 ERA is #1 starter terrain
Everybody loves money
by fwoty oz on Jul 14, 2009 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
High 2/low 3 is #1 in my book..
Low to mid 3 is a #2 and mid to high 3 is a #3. Low to mid 4 is #4 and anything else is 5.
Brandon Crawford: Your SF Giants 2011 Opening Day starting SS!
by Azmanz on Jul 14, 2009 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
pretty high standards, 3.50 is a top 20 pitcher pretty much every year.
Beckett, Sabathia, Haren, Hamels and Felix Hernandez all have career ERA’s north of 3.50 and I wouldn’t hesitate to call any of them #1 starters (well maybe Hamels this year).
by microwave donut on Jul 14, 2009 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A Zach Wheeler signing
Might make a Tim Alderson more palatable. Especially for hitting that is not a rental.
by jctGamer on Jul 14, 2009 10:24 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I believe you meant to have the word "trade" after Alderson?
"The BB's are out. The BB's are being arseholes to me." - Brian Wilson.
by hairball on Jul 14, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope to make a Tim Alderson someday.
by SoFa King Mike on Jul 14, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I enjoy eating Tim Alderson. It is delicious.
by jctGamer on Jul 14, 2009 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You had me going for a second
I read the “A Zach Wheeler signing” and for about 2 seconds thought that you were breaking the mews that Wheeler had been signed! LOL.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 14, 2009 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry lol
Players that will sign for over slot rarely do so until literally hours before the deadline.
by jctGamer on Jul 14, 2009 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I don’t think that he’ll get much above slot. I read somehing recently that stated something like > 90% of all 1st round signings this year haven’t been above slot. I believe that Wheeler will eventually sign for around slot, but not until close to the deadline. What’s going on right now is that his agent his probably advising him to wait it out and see if the Giants will blink first.
FYI, the 2 picks immediately ahead of Wheeler have already signed for basically slot (Tony Sanchez with the Pirates for $2.5M and Matt Hobgood with the O’s for $2.422M), so they’ve set a pretty good precedent for Wheeler. I think that it’s safe to assume that he’ll sign for about $2.3 – 2.4M, since he really wants to start pro ball, and has only a committment to a minor regional college as leverage. Even if he were to go to college and pitch lights out for 2 years, he’s not likely to make much more than this as a bonus, and that’s a big IF.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 14, 2009 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe pre draft rumor is
Wheeler was looking for ~4M, and the Orioles passed on him to draft Hobgood because he was willing to sign at slot.
Giants will pay the premium for Wheeler because 4M is still much better than Matzek’s crazy 7-10M demand.
by jctGamer on Jul 14, 2009 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He can “look” for all he wants, but he doesn’t have much leverage to ask for $4M in this einvironment. He might get above slot, but I doubt he gets more than $3M. It’s not like he was a consensus higher than #5 pick that fell to the Giants in a surprise – he was never rated higher than the #5 best player available.
He wants to pitch badly, and $2.4 – 3M is a fortune to a guy like him. He’d have to wait 2 more years before he could re-enter the draft, and all that time he’d have to worry about injuries and the ordinary vagaries of performance drift. Now if he had a strong love for a major university baseball program and a desire to get a degree then the Giants would probably go higher.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 14, 2009 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jim Callis just said in his chat transcript today that he believes Wheeler will sign for significantly over slot.
by jctGamer on Jul 15, 2009 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Andrew (Florham Park, NJ)
Any words on the Zack Wheeler negotiations? He shouldn’t be a tough sign should he?
Jim Callis
(2:36 PM)
I think he’s going to sign for significantly over slot, so we’ll probably have to wait until Aug. 17 to see him become a Giant. He’ll sign, though. I still think all 32 first-rounders will wind up signing, with the two biggest risks not to sign being Kyle Gibson (if he’s not healthy) and Tyler Matzek.
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/27426/mlb-with-jim-callis
Basically what I wrote before ;p
by jctGamer on Jul 15, 2009 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for that
That was a bit of information I hadn’t seen. It certainly makes me less certain about my stance. I wonder what Callis would describe as significantly over slot?
Would it be $1M, $1-2M, or even more? Certainly he shouldn’t expect to come close to the $6M that Posey got at #5 last year.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 15, 2009 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
excellent post
it really seems to me that people around here have overreacted to that Baseball Prospectus quote from a nameless scout. Personally, I didn’t even find the quote to be negative, here is the exact quote:
“It’s not an insult at all, he’s a for-sure, big-league starting pitcher for me,” said one scout who saw him recently, “but it’s strictly back of the rotation for me,” he added, while explaining that Alderson’s backwards style of pitching is not one that is usually conducive to major league success. “That plus breaking ball is his calling card, and he’s a guy with plus-plus control and average command, but he can’t pitch off his fringy fastball, and you don’t really see many changeups out of him.”
by FluLikeSymptoms on Jul 14, 2009 11:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I never read that quote until now.
Judgment Day is coming
comics | art | Nattowear
by Natto on Jul 14, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trade Alderson posts were pretty frequent prior to that quote though.
by SeeingStars on Jul 14, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
but it seems to me (and I could be over-reading this a bit) that before this most of the trade Alderson talk was among the “trade Alderson for Uggla and we’ll win the World Series!!!!11” crowd, and lately it’s a little more mainstream.
by FluLikeSymptoms on Jul 14, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Since I seem to be on one side of a polar discussion up above, let me just say: I’m not looking to trade Alderson. I appreciate the relative security he provides. I wouldn’t hang up if someone asked about him; but a pitching prospect who is consistently regarded as a surefire major leaguer is not exactly a common commodity.
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would be fine with trading Alderson in the right deal, I just think this notion that he has lost value recently is incorrect.
by FluLikeSymptoms on Jul 14, 2009 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
can someone explain the difference between command and control
Minor White > Ansel Adams
by say hey nation on Jul 14, 2009 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
control = ability to throw strikes
command = ability to throw good strikes
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.
by jponry on Jul 14, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
whhhaaaattttt????
/head explodes
Minor White > Ansel Adams
by say hey nation on Jul 14, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like, control is whether or not a pitcher is able to throw it in the strike zone (reflected in walks.)
Command means the ability of a pitcher to not just hit the strike zone, but hit the corners (or around the corners) or throw it at the letters rather than just throwing it right down the middle.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.
by jponry on Jul 14, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see
Minor White > Ansel Adams
by say hey nation on Jul 14, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I"ve always hated the command/control dichotomy. Why should throwing the ball in the strike zone but in a hittable spot be considered “good control” but not “good command”? You either throw the ball where you want, or you don’t. Call it command, call it control, call it very good aim.
And get off my lawn, too.
Disfrute Los Gigantes every day at www.leftymalo.com
by leftymalo on Jul 14, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t necessarily disagree with you, I’m just explaining what the scouts mean when they say it.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.
by jponry on Jul 14, 2009 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve always understood command to also include the ability to add and subtract velocity and the ability to tweak movement. In this vein, Maddux had the greatest command of all time to go with his unbelievable control.
Joe Martinez: My fingers are crossed and my palms are together for you.
When it's all said and done, America will be remembered for three things: The Bill of Rights, jazz, and baseball.
by cornball on Jul 14, 2009 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have never understood that either. A guy has an excellent ability to throw the ball in the strike zone, but he can’t locate it where he wants within in the zone? Come one
by FluLikeSymptoms on Jul 14, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t like it, however I now understand it
Minor White > Ansel Adams
by say hey nation on Jul 14, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
thanks jponry
Minor White > Ansel Adams
by say hey nation on Jul 14, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with everyone agreeing with lefty. Can we do something about this? With three of us, it’s an organization. With fifty, they may think it’s a movement!
by Evan on Jul 14, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seperating strikes from good pitches makes some sense, but I think it would be interesting to find out if there really are guys that can be good at one but not good at the other. It wouldn’t seem to make a lot of sense for a guy to have one without the other.
by Missing Barry on Jul 14, 2009 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think thats the whole idea of why this type of scouting sucks
Minor White > Ansel Adams
by say hey nation on Jul 14, 2009 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well my real point is: “it would be interesting to find out if there really are guys that can be good at one but not good at the other”
We can debate whether it makes sense forever, but until we see some evidence, I don’t think we can say it does or does not suck.
by Missing Barry on Jul 14, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Now pitching...
…Carlos Silva
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Low blow dude. Low blow.
That’s it! Katie bar the door for this 79 win team is star crossed! And I am loving it.
by daveinexile on Jul 16, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get where you’re coming from but I do think there’s a big difference between being able to keep the ball in the strike zone and throw strikes and being able to do exactly what you want to the ball and it getting it to go where you want basically at all times. Because the best pitchers are able to move the ball to different quadrants of the K-Zone at will and those pitchers don’t always have to be IN the strike zone, just around the plate. But that moving around keeps hitters off balance. If you try to do that but can’t obviously you won’t be as effective.
by Hobbes2d on Jul 14, 2009 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"That plus breaking ball is his calling card, and he’s a guy with plus-plus control and average command, but he can’t pitch off his fringy fastball, and you don’t really see many changeups out of him."
You can learn the changeup.
See:
Lincecum, Timothy Leroy
MadBum should follow suit, as well.
by SoFa King Mike on Jul 14, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
See:
Giants development process. Really, we’re like a changeup factory.
"The BB's are out. The BB's are being arseholes to me." - Brian Wilson.
by hairball on Jul 14, 2009 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
- Sanchez should to use it more often with his slurve.
- MadBum changeup with his slider/fast ball = ZOMG DEVASTATOR
- Lowry had a great changeup. Poor Noah. =(
by SoFa King Mike on Jul 14, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You CAN...but you may not
See, this is why individual examples of players as comparisons don’t do it for me. Sure, Lincecum learned an unreal changeup pretty much entirely after getting to the bigs. Don’t you think Brian Wilson or Merkin Valdez would’ve started throwing good ones by now if they had the aptitude? It’s possible to learn anything, but I’m not sure we should suddenly start banking on our pitchers to put that together (no matter how much Righetti has made it his stock and trade). I HOPE TimA learns a great changeup — but I can’t plan on it.
(Also — the most successful changeups Righetti has helped to develop have been those of Lincecum and Schmidt, two guys with power arms. I’ve yet to see him teach anyone a Hoffman-esque changeup, and I do think there’s a difference between the Hoffman / Santana changeup, which can drop as much as 10-12 mph off a fastball, and the Schmidt/Lincecum change, which sacrifices some velocity differential for ridiculous movement down and away from lefties.)
"I'm not sure what the hell charisma is, but I have the feeling it's Willie Mays." --Ted Kluszewski
by Rick Parker (Lewis) Can't Lose on Jul 14, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, even Pedro Feliz had a great changeup. Oh, wait…. nevermind.
Sergio Romo: striking out professional hitters since 2005. And winner of the 2012 NL Fireman of the Year Award!
by Lyle on Jul 14, 2009 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tim Alderson is just a pitching Pedro Feliz. We all are Pedro Feliz.
by Dan from NM on Jul 15, 2009 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is this just your sneaky way of saying that we are all peter happy? Or did I get the translation wrong and what you’re trying to say is that we all just want happy peters?
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 15, 2009 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They should have Tim teach them both his changeup.
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.
by jponry on Jul 14, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
he’s a guy with plus-plus control and average command
So this means Alderson almost never misses the strike zone, but he doesn’t always hit the corners? Any McCovenites agree or disagree?
Disfrute Los Gigantes every day at www.leftymalo.com
by leftymalo on Jul 14, 2009 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what is stupid about this command/control is the extreme variablity in umpires
Minor White > Ansel Adams
by say hey nation on Jul 14, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would say a pitcher with true command limits the variablity in most umps. There is not a lot a pitcher can do with the extreame idoits umps that makes their called strike zone belt high and size of half a loaf of bread ( just like there is not a lot a bater can do with the old Atlanta Strike zone were the ball is called a strike at the outside edge of the other batters box) but a pitcher with command should be able to adjest well enough to were ever the zone has floated to as long as Blue keeps his calls constant.
That’s it! Katie bar the door for this 79 win team is star crossed! And I am loving it.
by daveinexile on Jul 16, 2009 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My observations:
He’ll miss it at times. But when he does hit them, he can get in a groove. He is particularly more aggressive at this point and starts pounding the strike zone.
by SoFa King Mike on Jul 14, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great Post
Well thought out, with logical reasoning to back your premise. Seems like a #2-3 starter to me. Even if he apparently doesn’t have NO SWINGTHROUGH STUFF!!
by BigDaddyK on Jul 14, 2009 11:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I see him as a 2/3 talent, but slotted 4th or 5th on the Giants because of how much talent he is surrounded by(and Zito).
Chris Dominguez: Bringing dingerz back to The Bay (In a while)
by CB30 on Jul 14, 2009 1:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Let us not forget he is only 20 years old. He was pitching exclusively out of the stretch in high school and is still probably getting comfortable with a windup – when I saw him in Visalia last year, he seemed more comfortable pitching with runners on base out of the stretch. Even with getting comfortable pitching from the windup and facing tougher competition, he is doing well in AA and hopefully will continue to grow and improve. So, I say no trade unless it brings back a significant bat that can remain in our system for a number of years. Otherwise, let us be patient with both Tim II and MadBum while they continue to develop.
by APGiantsFan on Jul 14, 2009 3:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The kid is a solid #2 or a great #3
But he’ll be our 4 behind Freak, Cain, and MadBum.
What’s not to like?
"Snow woulda had it!!!"
Self appointed president, ruler, dictator, czar and potentate of the Free Gerald Society. As of... right now.
by beat_la_25 on Jul 14, 2009 4:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The reason I like Alderson so much is his control. He has consistently posted extremely low BB rates throughout his minor league career (although it is short). If a guy can put the ball where he wants it like Alderson can, he’s going to have a good ML career. Control>pure stuff; look at anyone from Jonathan Sanchez to Randy Johnson. Sanchez has little control, loses his release point and arm angle, and starts giving up the game quickly and easily because he can’t locate despite his amazing fastball and curve. Johnson had a similar career path until he found control after working with Nolan Ryan, and we all know how he turned out.
Personally, Alderson is expendable only because of the quality pitching depth we have in the farm system and in the major leagues. But that does not mean he is going to be a back of the rotation starter. Alderson currently projects as at least a #3 guy in a typical rotation, but since we have very little offense and very little coming through the pipeline on offense there’s a good chance Alderson will be traded to a team like the Orioles or Rangers, who have excellent hitters but no pitching.
by quincy0191 on Jul 14, 2009 10:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
we have good hitting prospects in the minors
Come on, we definitely have some good hitting prospects, although most will not be ready for the majors by 2010.
by bradleybear on Jul 14, 2009 11:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I hate to seem like a killjoy
because it’s obvious some people have a great time with the whole prospect thing rosterbating all over themselves in their dark, lonely studio apartments, but there seems like a an awful lot of regurgitating of BP, BA, et al. The kid is obviously talented but it’s a wee silly to be divining what type of pro pitcher he will be based on internet douche bags’ analysis of other internet douche bags’ opinions of him. Let’s just find out, it will be fun.
by Rorsavelt on Jul 15, 2009 7:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Ok, but what if we do it at a bright sunny sidewalk cafe with Wifi (as I am currently — oh sweet sweet day off, I can see the bizarro spectrum of protesters and curiosity seekers congregating outside the capital building from here and am blissfully detached from it all in my rosterbating joy).
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
by Roger on Jul 15, 2009 7:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't get arrested!
Yeah, don’t get me wrong, I enjoy the thought of future Giants greats coming to save the day, I just get a little put off by the armchair scouting. Somehow it’s more absurd than armchair GM’ing. That’s why Pablo is so extra great, he was just one of many very talented kids who put it all together one day and before any of the know it alls at Baseball Prospectus could tell us how worried they were about his weight or what have you he was out hitting David Wright.
by Rorsavelt on Jul 15, 2009 7:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah well, you’re talking to the wrong armchair scout know-it-all when it comes to Pablito.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
by Roger on Jul 15, 2009 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rorsavelt, I would like to introduce you to the original member of the Pablo Sandoval bandwagon.
Randy Winn is in time out until his OBP gets back over .330.
by oldjacket on Jul 15, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
dark, lonely BASEMENTS
Get it right!
Judgment Day is coming
comics | art | Nattowear
by Natto on Jul 15, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
dark, lonely, MOTHER'S BASEMENTS
GROUGTHINK ALERT
by groug on Jul 15, 2009 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
with hot pockets and Mtn Dew
Supporting San Francisco Dugout since 2005 and Manny Burriss since 2006, and bringing you all your California League needs since 2009.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Jul 15, 2009 4:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t be so biased. There are plenty of people that live in houses and have families that are sad, lonely, and sorry too – just look at all the ones that populate this site.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Jul 15, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Player X reached the majors when he was 20 after a K/9 in the minors of 7.5. The knock him was his K rate, and the part of te scouting report that read:
He throws his fastball in the high 80s most of the time
NAME PLAYER X omg
by Grant on Jul 15, 2009 1:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well I wanted to name him Greg
But his mother insisted on Zack.
Everybody loves money
by fwoty oz on Jul 15, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The fast-rise/less-than-overwhelming-fastball thing also applies to Jerome Williams, but that has a negative outcome, so I’m ignoring it.
by Grant on Jul 15, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually the early scouting reports on Jerome were a low to mid 90s fastball in the first couple of years (when he had a K rate of 9. as a 17 year old in the NWL and 18 year old in the Cal). Somewhere along the way he seemed to have fallen in love with throwing all different speeds and (along with the training issues) he just seems to have lost it. I think something similar happened to Livan, actually.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
by Roger on Jul 15, 2009 7:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alderson
Watching him pitch in the EL, there is NO WAY, I ever see him as a force in the show. Hell, even the scouts are turned off. He is VERY hittable at this level.
by thehondohurricane on Jul 16, 2009 4:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 



















