SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 26, 2014 12:46:36 GMT -5
When the Sox drafted Cody Kukuk, both the college coaches I know had scouted him and told me, independently of each other, that he had the raw stuff to be a #2 starter or better. The question - as it is with a lot of these guys - was control. FWIW I saw him pitch last night in Salem. He was hitting the mitt where the catcher held it, had batters swinging at air, and their knees shaking on his breaking pitch. The FB had some significant giddy-up and movement. I don't trust stadium guns but the velo was real and he pounded the zone pretty much all night. Had a low effort heater and seemed to be able to hop it up a few times without losing control. He also had the body that looks like could handle 220 innings once he builds up to it. All this and he's a lefty.
Of all the pitchers I've seen live in our system over the last couple or so - which has been quite a few - he's one of the very few (Webster being the other guy - who I've lops confidence in until he can prove it at the MLB level under the bright lights and sustain it), who could be something more than a #3.
Kukuk still has a ways to go but - and it's a significant but - if he can maintain that kind of command, he seemed to have the stuff that would play at the highest levels. Or put more bluntly, if he could show he has that kind of command of those 3 pitches every night (FB, change and a breaking pitch that looked like slider from where we were sitting behind the plate), that stuff would play in Pawtucket right now.
I'm no scout, so take all that for what it's worth, but IMHO they may have found a genuine diamond in the rough here.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jul 26, 2014 12:49:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jul 26, 2014 12:54:21 GMT -5
Thanks for the scouting report Guidas. You should have a good crop of guys to look at next year. Rough year on the prospect front this year. Margot, Rijo, Stank and prob Travis. Maybe, even Devers could be playing in your neck of the woods next year.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,438
|
Post by nomar on Jul 26, 2014 13:03:23 GMT -5
I think Kukuk will at least be a good reliever (hello Andrew Miller). Always have loved his potential. Good to see him pounding the zone, but I'll be more convinced when he does it more a few months straight.
Travis is hardly even a prospect. Lack of walks and power from a corner infielder.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 13,395
|
Post by cdj on Jul 26, 2014 13:20:48 GMT -5
I think Kukuk will at least be a good reliever (hello Andrew Miller). Always have loved his potential. Good to see him pounding the zone, but I'll be more convinced when he does it more a few months straight. Travis is hardly even a prospect. Lack of walks and power from a corner infielder.He's a 2nd rounder with 130 at bats in which he hasn't looked bad. I wouldn't quite go there yet. He is still absolutely a prospect. How about we give him more than a month and a half before we go saying this... As for Kukuk, he was my favorite pick in the draft year. Gotta love projectable lefties with a nice fastball! Hopefully his newly discovered control is a permanent thing, that would sure be something.
|
|
|
Cody Kukuk
Jul 26, 2014 13:28:51 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by larrycook on Jul 26, 2014 13:28:51 GMT -5
Interesting that ball and Kukuk have both started to figure this out a bit. I wonder if the sox have brought in someone to work with the lefties.
|
|
|
Post by redsox4242 on Jul 26, 2014 13:31:15 GMT -5
Interesting that ball and Kukuk have both started to figure this out a bit. I wonder if the sox have brought in someone to work with the lefties. Isn't Pedro working with the pitchers?
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 26, 2014 13:33:29 GMT -5
Interesting that ball and Kukuk have both started to figure this out a bit. I wonder if the sox have brought in someone to work with the lefties. That's why it's called minor league development.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,882
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 26, 2014 14:04:17 GMT -5
Kukuk reportedly made a huge breakthrough in ST with his command, and had a 3-start stretch in Greenville where he walked 4 and fanned 20 in 13 IP (.074 BB rate). His overall BB rate at Greenville was .126, a big improvement on his .169 the previous year.
Then he got promoted and seemed to lose whatever he might have found, and then some. He had a .208 BB rate in his first 10 Salem starts -- and an 8.33 ERA.
His first three starts in July, he cut his BB rate back to .135, fanned 15 in 12 IP, and had a 1.50 ERA and 579 OPS allowed.
His last two starts, .050 BB rate, 0.82 ERA, .409 OPS allowed.
Overall in July, .098 BB rate, .326 K rate, 1.17, 503.
He just needs to sustain this and not lose it again -- or cut the out-of-whack stretches to a lot fewer than 10 or 11 starts.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 26, 2014 14:18:20 GMT -5
Kukuk reportedly made a huge breakthrough in ST with his command, and had a 3-start stretch in Greenville where he walked 4 and fanned 20 in 13 IP (.074 BB rate). His overall BB rate at Greenville was .126, a big improvement on his .169 the previous year. Then he got promoted and seemed to lose whatever he might have found, and then some. He had a .208 BB rate in his first 10 Salem starts -- and an 8.33 ERA. His first three starts in July, he cut his BB rate back to .135, fanned 15 in 12 IP, and had a 1.50 ERA and 579 OPS allowed. His last two starts, .050 BB rate, 0.82 ERA, .409 OPS allowed. Overall in July, .098 BB rate, .326 K rate, 1.17, 503. He just needs to sustain this and not lose it again -- or cut the out-of-whack stretches to a lot fewer than 10 or 11 starts. Thanks for the broader perspective. I don't put much stock into A-ball hitters but there were some ugly swings and more than a couple guys talking to themselves walking back to the bench last night.
|
|
|
Cody Kukuk
Jul 26, 2014 19:33:40 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by larrycook on Jul 26, 2014 19:33:40 GMT -5
I wish it was that easy. But the fact is, there are so many moving parts. It is going to be a process, but I am thinking ball and kukuk are starting to make progress. There will be ups and downs, but I am hopeful the ups will outnumber the downs.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 27, 2014 8:08:34 GMT -5
Honestly, I'd want to see prolonged stretches of good control before getting excited about Kukuk. If he can't have prolonged control in the minors, he won't make it in the majors.
He might be a good piece in a trade where you let another team gamble on him if you don't think he'll ever have command or control.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jul 27, 2014 12:02:03 GMT -5
Does everything need to evolve to trade? Seems like the Sox do a great job of, you know, developing players with talent. Isn't that what the minors are there for ?
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Jul 28, 2014 10:55:31 GMT -5
Great to even see Kukuk flashing control (always thought he had the arsenal.) He will need to solidify those gains for me to be a believer. He will obviously need to continue to gain control and show command before I'll rate him very highly. I still have him in less regard than after his impressive no-walk ST this past winter.
|
|
|
Cody Kukuk
Jul 28, 2014 20:53:10 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by larrycook on Jul 28, 2014 20:53:10 GMT -5
Kukuk is going to need to start stringing together quality starts before I start to get excited about him as a viable starter.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jul 28, 2014 21:26:13 GMT -5
I posted this in the gamethread 3 days ago but applicable here. Lot's of details on his turnaround:
Cody Kukuk proved he was ready for a promotion this April when he dominated the South Atlantic League. The Red Sox, impressed by their fourth-ranked left-handed pitching prospect, moved him up to Salem a month later.
Then he endured one of the worst months of his baseball career.
"It was a little tough, but it was nice having Walk [pitching coach Kevin Walker] and our manager sticking by me," Kukuk said. "They told me, 'You're going to get through this. You're a step away from dominating.' It's nice having them in my ear, and I have great teammates that pick you up when you struggle."
The Red Sox's No. 16 prospect has turned things around, with Friday's gem the latest example. He recorded a career-high 10 strikeouts while allowing two hits over six innings Friday night as Class A Advanced Salem blanked Myrtle Beach, 6-0.
"It's very satisfying," Kukuk said, "when you're starting to pitch well and everything comes together."
Kukuk (4-6) allowed only three baserunners, with Edwin Garcia singling and Royce Bolinger drawing a two-out walk in the first. The early threat didn't faze him, though.
"My first inning has been where I've struggled, it's where I've given up a run in my last two starts, so I went into it thinking, 'Stick at it, don't show your frustration, keep plowing away.' And that helped a lot," he said. "Just keep attacking and don't veer from the plan, that's the biggest part right now."
The 21-year-old left-hander struck out the side in the second and worked around Luis Mendez's leadoff single in the third before retiring the final 12 batters he faced. Nate Reed pitched the seventh and eighth before Matty Ott struck out two in the ninth to seal Salem's 10th shutout.
"It felt great. Right from the beginning, [catcher] Carson Blair and I were on the same page," Kukuk said. "I was able to establish the fastball inside, we did that and it opened everything up with the changeup and slider. I think we both had them guessing all game, so it's always good when you and your catcher are on the same page. It's been a lot of hard work."
Kukuk ran up his strikeout total in his final inning when he fanned Chris Garcia, Edwin Garcia and Rangers No. 3 prospect Nick Williams to strike out the side for the second time. The 10 punchouts bested his previous high of nine, which he posted twice last year for Class A Greenville.Sorry about cut n paste in full, couldn't see any way to trim it without interrupting the story flow. www.milb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20140725&content_id=86296228&fext=.jsp&vkey=news_milb. . . Kukuk is going to need to start stringing together quality starts before I start to get excited about him as a viable starter. I'm guessing that's a heartbreaking view to the hordes of fans that think he's ready for the Boston rotation now.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jul 29, 2014 8:01:07 GMT -5
What I'd love to know, is whether he's fixed something in particular. Did he have mechanical flaw that led to his stretch bad starts? What's different the last 2-3 outings?
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,882
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 29, 2014 22:31:35 GMT -5
What I'd love to know, is whether he's fixed something in particular. Did he have mechanical flaw that led to his stretch bad starts? What's different the last 2-3 outings? If you have a specific mechanical flaw, e.g., overstriding, that's fairly easy to spot and usually corrected in less than a long stretch of starts. It's when a pitcher has trouble repeating his delivery that you see this kind of variation. You can think of that in terms of a whole bunch of different mechanical flaws that take turns alternating at random. That kind of problem, I think, usually needs to be adressed at a deeper level than mechanics; it's usually much more of a mental thing.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 30, 2014 18:05:31 GMT -5
^ This.
That theory jibes with the fact that his control was reportedly great in Spring Training. For whatever reason, that faded and quick. Now he's on a roll.
That was the book on him even when Kukuk was drafted. Great potential but the mechanics were going to need a lot of ironing out because he had an awful time repeating them.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 30, 2014 18:12:39 GMT -5
What I'd love to know, is whether he's fixed something in particular. Did he have mechanical flaw that led to his stretch bad starts? What's different the last 2-3 outings? If you have a specific mechanical flaw, e.g., overstriding, that's fairly easy to spot and usually corrected in less than a long stretch of starts. It's when a pitcher has trouble repeating his delivery that you see this kind of variation. You can think of that in terms of a whole bunch of different mechanical flaws that take turns alternating at random. That kind of problem, I think, usually needs to be adressed at a deeper level than mechanics; it's usually much more of a mental thing. Don't let jmei see this, Eric. He'll say it's the most insane BS EVER, especially if you ascribe it to Webster. You too, Chris. You've been warned.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,882
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 31, 2014 1:49:37 GMT -5
If you have a specific mechanical flaw, e.g., overstriding, that's fairly easy to spot and usually corrected in less than a long stretch of starts. It's when a pitcher has trouble repeating his delivery that you see this kind of variation. You can think of that in terms of a whole bunch of different mechanical flaws that take turns alternating at random. That kind of problem, I think, usually needs to be adressed at a deeper level than mechanics; it's usually much more of a mental thing. Don't let jmei see this, Eric. He'll say it's the most insane BS EVER, especially if you ascribe it to Webster. You too, Chris. You've been warned. It's actually pretty straightforward neuroscience. Thinking consciously about a pitching motion or hitting mechanics impairs the output from unconscious motor memory ("muscle memory"). You have to get the brain out of the way. Inconsistent mechanics means a combination of two things: no complete optimum muscle memory has been laid down, and/or and the brain is not getting out of the way. A pitcher learning his optimum mechanics is learning multiple checkpoints or elements of his delivery: proper positions of hands, length of stride, arm angle, rotation of hips, and so on. It's a complex muscle memory to lay down. The way that works is this, I think (and it's very interesting neuroscientifically): the brain doesn't know whether the execution of a pitch was correct, and hence worth remembering, until the pitch has been executed. (This is unusual, because usually the brain knows that an important learning experience is happening before the information that needs to be remembered arrives, or at least during.) In this case, as the pitch hits the catcher's mitt squarely, the brain gets a jolt of dopamine, the chemical of desire -- it's saying "we want to do that again" (this is why dopamine is often also often described as the chemical of reward, but the point of giving the reward is to train the brain into desiring it again, and dopamine levels increase upon the mere perception of anything desirable.) The size of that dopamine jolt is essentially stored with the memory of the pitch execution. Dopamine hence serves as the marker of any memory's importance. When we sleep, all the memories of pitch execution are consolidated or erased depending on their dopamine-level tag. You can see all the ways this process can get complicated or go wrong. You can have a great outing or side session go to waste as a learning experience if you don't sleep well afterwards. You might throw a great pitch where two checkpoints / elements were off but canceled each other out, and so you're going to "learn" each of those mistakes to a degree. And of course the whole process of learning the correct mechanics involves conscious awareness of one or more elements, and then trying to not think about them and just do them. Why do guys going well get out of whack? The quality of output or playback from muscle memory is tremendously variable. Some days it's great, other days it's noisy and your execution is innately sloppy. A pitcher has to learn to ignore those bad days, so that he doesn't start to question and hence think about his mechanics subsequently. Furthermore (although I haven't worked out how this happens), it seems to me that a bad outing, if not dealt with properly at the emotional level, can serve essentially as an unlearning experience, adding bad information to the muscle memory. Certainly we know that there are guys who have lost their good mechanics permanently, and that certainly implies that a good muscle memory can be overwritten with a bad one. It seems that this tendency to have the optimum-mechanics muscle memory overwritten is what plagues Buchholz, and what ended Steve Blass's career, to give an extreme example. Someone in sports psychology who parsed the neuroscience of unlearning proper mechanics, and hence understood the do's and dont's of mentally processing bad outings, would have a very useful set of advice to give to pitchers.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Jul 31, 2014 2:14:41 GMT -5
i hope to fuckin god he is real....otherwise were gonna have a hard time finding a #1 starter since everyone wants to trade Lester because he give back prospects...and everyone can say I told you so.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 31, 2014 6:50:04 GMT -5
Don't let jmei see this, Eric. He'll say it's the most insane BS EVER, especially if you ascribe it to Webster. You too, Chris. You've been warned. It's actually pretty straightforward neuroscience. Thinking consciously about a pitching motion or hitting mechanics impairs the output from unconscious motor memory ("muscle memory"). You have to get the brain out of the way. Inconsistent mechanics means a combination of two things: no complete optimum muscle memory has been laid down, and/or and the brain is not getting out of the way. A pitcher learning his optimum mechanics is learning multiple checkpoints or elements of his delivery: proper positions of hands, length of stride, arm angle, rotation of hips, and so on. It's a complex muscle memory to lay down. The way that works is this, I think (and it's very interesting neuroscientifically): the brain doesn't know whether the execution of a pitch was correct, and hence worth remembering, until the pitch has been executed. (This is unusual, because usually the brain knows that an important learning experience is happening before the information that needs to be remembered arrives, or at least during.) In this case, as the pitch hits the catcher's mitt squarely, the brain gets a jolt of dopamine, the chemical of desire -- it's saying "we want to do that again" (this is why dopamine is often also often described as the chemical of reward, but the point of giving the reward is to train the brain into desiring it again, and dopamine levels increase upon the mere perception of anything desirable.) The size of that dopamine jolt is essentially stored with the memory of the pitch execution. Dopamine hence serves as the marker of any memory's importance. When we sleep, all the memories of pitch execution are consolidated or erased depending on their dopamine-level tag. You can see all the ways this process can get complicated or go wrong. You can have a great outing or side session go to waste as a learning experience if you don't sleep well afterwards. You might throw a great pitch where two checkpoints / elements were off but canceled each other out, and so you're going to "learn" each of those mistakes to a degree. And of course the whole process of learning the correct mechanics involves conscious awareness of one or more elements, and then trying to not think about them and just do them. Why do guys going well get out of whack? The quality of output or playback from muscle memory is tremendously variable. Some days it's great, other days it's noisy and your execution is innately sloppy. A pitcher has to learn to ignore those bad days, so that he doesn't start to question and hence think about his mechanics subsequently. Furthermore (although I haven't worked out how this happens), it seems to me that a bad outing, if not dealt with properly at the emotional level, can serve essentially as an unlearning experience, adding bad information to the muscle memory. Certainly we know that there are guys who have lost their good mechanics permanently, and that certainly implies that a good muscle memory can be overwritten with a bad one. It seems that this tendency to have the optimum-mechanics muscle memory overwritten is what plagues Buchholz, and what ended Steve Blass's career, to give an extreme example. Someone in sports psychology who parsed the neuroscience of unlearning proper mechanics, and hence understood the do's and dont's of mentally processing bad outings, would have a very useful set of advice to give to pitchers. I completely agree and have spent a lot of time over the years studying this and talking to a variety of experts in the field. When I said last week that Webster's problems were mental because he can repeat his delivery and then suddenly he can't, jmei jumped all over me. I explained I didn't mean he had mental illness, that pitching was a learned skill and that he had learned it well enough to execute strikes to the mitt sometimes - but then he loses the zone. This essentially meant with high probability he was mentally unable to focus well enough at repeated periods in the game to access the body control/muscle memory to perform a task he had performed successfully moments (or pitches) before. At that point I was accused of insanely talking out my butt with "pop psychology." So you've been warned.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 31, 2014 8:02:33 GMT -5
Inconsistent mechanics means a combination of two things: no complete optimum muscle memory has been laid down, and/or and the brain is not getting out of the way. For a young pitcher with little history of consistency and little evidence of the latter, we should presume the former is the more accurate explanation. Laying down the intricate and complex muscle memory necessary to have great command is extremely difficult. We'll see how well Kukuk develops it. And yes, I do think it is asinine to jump to the conclusion, on the basis of no specific evidence, that a pitcher who struggles with inconsistent command does so because he is "mentally unable to focus." But that's a matter for another thread.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 31, 2014 8:06:03 GMT -5
Agreed that Kukuk - and many young pitchers - simply cannot repeat their delivery, but I'm not sure I see the distinction being made here, though I assume that is just b/c it is above my pay grade, as the saying now goes.
If I think to myself "first I put this foot in front of the other foot..." instead of simply doing so b/c my muscles have been trained to do so without the intermediary of consciousness, which bucket does that fit into?
|
|
|