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 mgoetze on Apr 16, 2016 14:52:09 GMT -5
That is an interesting windup. I note that he also does a little mini-windup even with men on base. Might be interesting to check his splits (bases empty vs. men on) once he has produced a full season's worth of stats. |
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Apr 16, 2016 14:52:38 GMT -5
Sounds like a slop thrower. |
|
larrycook
Veteran
Posts: 2,471
Member is Online
|
Post by larrycook on Apr 16, 2016 15:02:24 GMT -5
Any chance he grows into his body a bit more and gets another tick or two on his fastball?
|
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 16, 2016 15:08:06 GMT -5
Any chance he grows into his body a bit more and gets another tick or two on his fastball? He's young so yeah he's gonna put on some weight, but he's not a guy with a whole lot of physical projection left. |
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 17, 2016 3:49:01 GMT -5
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,405 
|
Post by ianrs on Apr 17, 2016 12:46:35 GMT -5
Some pretty impressive movement and deception on that fastball. Nice to get higher quality video and scouting on international prospects as they move into US-level minors ball. If he keeps it up, Raudes should easily push into the top 20 in the system.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Apr 17, 2016 16:55:56 GMT -5
Sounds like a slop thrower. You mean like Koji?? |
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 17, 2016 21:10:05 GMT -5
Sounds like a slop thrower. You mean like Koji?? Yeah, even if eventually only works around 90, if his command/control are plus-plus, and that curve continues to develop, he's got a shot to be a very solid or better pitcher. |
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Apr 18, 2016 8:50:35 GMT -5
Any chance he grows into his body a bit more and gets another tick or two on his fastball? That wouldn't be a surprise at all. I've also heard it said that low-effort guys tend to add velocity more often than high-effort guys. While Raudes isn't as low-effort as Espinoza, his delivery strikes me as balanced and mechanically sound. |
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 18, 2016 9:42:49 GMT -5
Any chance he grows into his body a bit more and gets another tick or two on his fastball? That wouldn't be a surprise at all. I've also heard it said that low-effort guys tend to add velocity more often than high-effort guys. While Raudes isn't as low-effort as Espinoza, his delivery strikes me as balanced and mechanically sound. I've heard that too. It also bears remembering that at 18, he's not even close to done growing. FB velocity historically peaks in the early to mid-20s if I recall correctly. |
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Apr 18, 2016 10:05:00 GMT -5
I believe it's at 22-23 but that's just the typical trajectory. There are outliers.
|
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 18, 2016 10:35:25 GMT -5
I believe it's at 22-23 but that's just the typical trajectory. There are outliers. I remember seeing a pretty exhaustive historical analysis that had the peak as you said, 22-24, then a noticeable drop at 25-26 (which was interpreted as "learning to pitch," i.e. use command and deception and a pitch mix over pure velocity, then a plateau with very mild decline until the early 30s, with a pretty precipitous drop after 32-33. Of course, you're right in that it's a summation, and there's a LOT more noise when you look at individuals. But Raudes strikes me as a kid with a very reasonable chance to add meaningful velocity, even if he ends up with only an average FB. I love the CB and command. Given what a feel pitch the curve is, and how far away he is, I can see him having plenty of eventual success with plus-plus command and a plus-plus CB, even if the rest of his stuff is just average. |
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,405
|
Post by ianrs on Apr 18, 2016 11:54:22 GMT -5
I believe it's at 22-23 but that's just the typical trajectory. There are outliers. I remember seeing a pretty exhaustive historical analysis that had the peak as you said, 22-24, then a noticeable drop at 25-26 (which was interpreted as "learning to pitch," i.e. use command and deception and a pitch mix over pure velocity, then a plateau with very mild decline until the early 30s, with a pretty precipitous drop after 32-33. Of course, you're right in that it's a summation, and there's a LOT more noise when you look at individuals. But Raudes strikes me as a kid with a very reasonable chance to add meaningful velocity, even if he ends up with only an average FB. I love the CB and command. Given what a feel pitch the curve is, and how far away he is, I can see him having plenty of eventual success with plus-plus command and a plus-plus CB, even if the rest of his stuff is just average.  Here's a figure from a 2012 Fangraphs article showing that velocity remains relatively stable around a peak into the 25-26 year old range, then a consistent dropoff after that. However, there's no data here for pre-21, which I would be interested in. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 18, 2016 12:01:14 GMT -5
For the most part, there's only been reliable historical velocity data for MLB pitchers (and not the minor leagues), and there are so few pre-age-21 pitchers who have made the majors that you're not going to get particularly useful data for that cohort.
ADD: even the set of age 21 to 24 or so pitchers is not the most reliable data set. There's a big selection bias-- only really good pitchers make the majors at that young of an age, and their velocity aging curves may not be typical.
|
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 18, 2016 15:45:45 GMT -5
For the most part, there's only been reliable historical velocity data for MLB pitchers (and not the minor leagues), and there are so few pre-age-21 pitchers who have made the majors that you're not going to get particularly useful data for that cohort. ADD: even the set of age 21 to 24 or so pitchers is not the most reliable data set. There's a big selection bias-- only really good pitchers make the majors at that young of an age, and their velocity aging curves may not be typical. Agreed, from 21-23, pitchers are relatively age-advanced if they're in MLB. And there's a clear industry bias towards velocity. There's also likely to be substantial attrition for guys with plus velocity but fringe or worse control. The short answer, though, is that it's probably reasonable to hope that he adds a little giddyup until he's done (for the most part) growing. Interesting side question: it seems likely that some teams would track their minor leaguers velocity-wise. Once there's more minor league pitch f/X, I'm sure it'll become widespread. So what do *those* data show (since selection bias based on "success", i.e. promotion, can be dramatically reduced)? |
|
|
|
Post by brnichols19873 on May 2, 2016 17:59:55 GMT -5
Just as an update on Raudes, wanted to add a tidbit I unconvered a while back but havent pointed out as of yet...in a September 2015 article from a Nicuarguan paper he offered the following quote, exposing that his full arsenal of pitches last season consisted of 5 picthes while he threw 6 total pitches before being signed. "I had an advantage in that I have five pitches of good quality. My fastball, I have curve, sinker, slider and change. I can throw you call the fork but [they will] not let me.”
If the report from Norris is accurate (and we have no reason to doubt) he is now focusing on just three offerings, fb, cb, and change. With this in mind, it seems plausible to assume he could rapidly improve these three offerings as the season progresses as he no longer must attempt to refrine the other 2 to three offerings. Further, it puts his current success in an even better light as he has dominated to this point despite not being able to focus heavily on a limited number of offerings as a US prospect of comparable age would be...
|
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on May 2, 2016 18:53:19 GMT -5
Interesting. I guess there's too much risk of injury with the forkball... or too much risk that Farrell will run you out there almost every night if you can throw one? Could certainly make for a unique and deadly repertoire if he could add that back in later, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on May 2, 2016 19:03:03 GMT -5
How different is a forkball from a changeup?
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,700
|
Post by nomar on May 2, 2016 20:26:43 GMT -5
How different is a forkball from a changeup? "Fastball" is to "Changeup" as "Splitter" is to "Forkball". So it's an off speed pitch that you'd like to have the same arm speed and drop of a splitter. I've never really heard of TJ being linked to forkballs more than they are with splitters. Although some people are anti-splitter because the grip puts some strain on your fingers. The Sox may have just seen that as his worst offering and told him not to bother with throwing it. |
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 2, 2016 22:48:33 GMT -5
How different is a forkball from a changeup? Kevin Appier used to throw one. And Jose Contreras had a great one, when it was on...some video here (132 km/hr= 80 mph). Like Nomar said, basically a split-finger change. |
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on May 3, 2016 7:13:33 GMT -5
Right, I thought it was a split finger change. I guess I'm really wondering how they're different in movement and relative speed. Is there any real sense in throwing both?
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on May 3, 2016 16:47:40 GMT -5
Right, I thought it was a split finger change. I guess I'm really wondering how they're different in movement and relative speed. Is there any real sense in throwing both? There used to be pitch called a forkball that functioned as a type of change. The palmball was another. Like any changeup, the break depended on the grip. Bruce Sutter introduced a version with the fingers split rather less, that he threw a good deal harder, and it got named "split-finger fastball." But it was still a bit of a changeup. I'm guessing it was 4 to 5 mph slower than his FB. Subsequently the pitch became popular, but very few people who throw it can get the small velocity separation Sutter got. Koji's is 8 mph slower, and of course it's terrific. Taz is 6.2. Buchholz was also 8 mph when he used it in 2014. So it's basically a somewhat harder than usual change, and it tends to have a bit more drop and less armside run than a circle change like Pedro's. Hence it's usually called just a "splitter." Given that Raudes was speaking in Spanish, I think it's much likelier that the pitch he abandoned was a splitter rather than a true forkball. |
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on May 3, 2016 17:15:38 GMT -5
Elroy Face had what was described as a forkball and Ray Culp had a "palmball" that was a fantastic pitch for him as his velocity dropped. I assumed that the palmball is placed back in the palm so that the wrist and fingers do not impart velocity. I don't know how the forkball differs from the splitter, if any.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on May 3, 2016 18:14:04 GMT -5
Elroy Face had what was described as a forkball and Ray Culp had a "palmball" that was a fantastic pitch for him as his velocity dropped. I assumed that the palmball is placed back in the palm so that the wrist and fingers do not impart velocity. I don't know how the forkball differs from the splitter, if any. Bob Stanley had a great palmball, too. In the forkball, the fingers are actually on the sides of the ball, at 9 and 3 on the clock. You need very big hands. In the splitter, the fingers are more at 10 and 2. That's all of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 4, 2016 11:25:01 GMT -5
Elroy Face had what was described as a forkball and Ray Culp had a "palmball" that was a fantastic pitch for him as his velocity dropped. I assumed that the palmball is placed back in the palm so that the wrist and fingers do not impart velocity. I don't know how the forkball differs from the splitter, if any. Bob Stanley had a great palmball, too. In the forkball, the fingers are actually on the sides of the ball, at 9 and 3 on the clock. You need very big hands. In the splitter, the fingers are more at 10 and 2. That's all of it. I believe that the key difference is that the splitter tumbles forward (as opposed to the fastball, which spins "backwards), creating downward movement. The forkball, again as I understand it, has little-to-no spin, not unlike a knuckleball. Not sure if it's supposed to have the same unpredictable movement or not, as logic indicates it would. Appropos of nothing, I know this because used to mess around with a pitch we called the "Spork" when I played Babe Ruth over the summer and occasionally had to pitch. We called it that because sometimes it tumbled forward and sometimes it didn't spin. Splitter+forkball = KFC dining utensil. |
|
|
