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 telluricrook on Jul 21, 2016 16:16:59 GMT -5
FWIW, my comments about 105 were in the following context: 1) it was a single pitch. You know how when you're driving you assume the officer's radar gun is give or take a few mph? Why are we suddenly falling all over ourselves over a single pitch? 2) We already knew he sat in the high 90s. 3) We'd already heard he hit 103 once previously (wasn't nearly as publicized). I have the same thoughts about that single pitch, but again, I'm not sure what new this is telling us. It's fun. It changes literally nothing about Kopech for me in that I think highly of him and I think no higher of him now. I look forward to seeing him on Sunday. Let me ask you this. Do you think higher of him after these last three starts? Or do you have to see his next start in person?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 21, 2016 22:02:33 GMT -5
FWIW, my comments about 105 were in the following context: 1) it was a single pitch. You know how when you're driving you assume the officer's radar gun is give or take a few mph? Why are we suddenly falling all over ourselves over a single pitch? 2) We already knew he sat in the high 90s. 3) We'd already heard he hit 103 once previously (wasn't nearly as publicized). I have the same thoughts about that single pitch, but again, I'm not sure what new this is telling us. It's fun. It changes literally nothing about Kopech for me in that I think highly of him and I think no higher of him now. I look forward to seeing him on Sunday. Bring a radar gun with you. An accurate one. Well, I usually just sit so that I'm able to see the charting pitchers' gun. But maybe that's not enough with Salem, eh?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 21, 2016 22:06:24 GMT -5
FWIW, my comments about 105 were in the following context: 1) it was a single pitch. You know how when you're driving you assume the officer's radar gun is give or take a few mph? Why are we suddenly falling all over ourselves over a single pitch? 2) We already knew he sat in the high 90s. 3) We'd already heard he hit 103 once previously (wasn't nearly as publicized). I have the same thoughts about that single pitch, but again, I'm not sure what new this is telling us. It's fun. It changes literally nothing about Kopech for me in that I think highly of him and I think no higher of him now. I look forward to seeing him on Sunday. Let me ask you this. Do you think higher of him after these last three starts? Or do you have to see his next start in person? Meh? Strikeout percentage is up but so is the walk rate. He's continued to clean up his mechanics but we knew that because we all read Ian's reports from Instructs. As discussed above, I'll be looking for development with the change (although I don't consider myself qualified to put grades on such things or anything), and the command/control profile.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 22, 2016 0:09:33 GMT -5
This is really about the secondary stuff. We know he throws heat, as Chris says we've known that for a while. His development - as a starter - is linked almost exclusively to a third pitch. There are very few good starters who don't have a pitch mix richer than two plus offerings. While he could eventually be an exceptional asset in the bullpen, starter is where the money is, both for him and for the team. Let's see where he goes with the changeup, if it's that third pitch, of if he needs to look elsewhere. It's the right thing to do to have him concentrate on curve and change, since they provide the most contrast to the FB. However, the cutter is probably easier to learn than either, and if one of the two secondaries stalls at a bit below average, more of a show-me pitch, you'd have him learn a cutter before you decided his future was in the pen. Is it possible to succeed as an MLB starter without a changeup? I thought I'd find the best pitcher who essentially had no offspeed pitch, just FB and breaking balls, just to establish the upper limit. This guy's having a solid year. Another possibility if the changeup stalls is the splitter, which is essentially a changeup thrown with a different grip.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Jul 22, 2016 1:39:36 GMT -5
I would think a factor in his walk rate is that some guys don't even want to swing. They look at that stuff and just hope instead. There have been some instances where guys with stuff like this make the majors some years after starting in A ball, to make playoff appearances as relievers haven't there? Considering his profile and all the injuries it's not completely out of the question this year. The example of Hansen was similar and didn't St. Louis have some relievers a few years ago who were fast tracked through their system to contribute in the playoffs? When they were playing the Sox.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jul 22, 2016 4:55:17 GMT -5
Since we're SSS anyways, let's make it SSSer. Take out the first inning and 1/3 after over a month layoff between Lowell and Salem and you take off 3 walks.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 23, 2016 7:50:29 GMT -5
Since we're SSS anyways, let's make it SSSer. Take out the first inning and 1/3 after over a month layoff between Lowell and Salem and you take off 3 walks. Indeed, he walked 3 of his first 6 hitters (including the first two) versus 4 of the subsequent 49. That would happen maybe once in 1000 times in a random simulation.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 24, 2016 5:23:49 GMT -5
Since we're SSS anyways, let's make it SSSer. Take out the first inning and 1/3 after over a month layoff between Lowell and Salem and you take off 3 walks. Indeed, he walked 3 of his first 6 hitters (including the first two) versus 4 of the subsequent 49. That would happen maybe once in 1000 times in a random simulation. He ended up walking 3 of the next 6 batters after this post. That fact should indicate that looking at the cherry pitched sets its silly. But even if it didn't, people can think about it more generally before yesterday's start to realize the mistake. Prior to this year, he walked 40 of 350 batters, or just under 1out of every 8. Assume that is his true walk rate until you learn otherwise. He has a stretch where he was walking 1 of 12 batters over 49 batters faced. Sounds like he turned a corner! But then he walks 3 of the next 6 (in real life he did this first) and His walk rate is the expected 1 out of 8... There really is a 0.1% chance of that story being true? You assume what you story you like then test for randomness rather than assume the null and test for consistency. It's been pointed out for at least 15 years.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 24, 2016 9:21:25 GMT -5
Indeed, he walked 3 of his first 6 hitters (including the first two) versus 4 of the subsequent 49. That would happen maybe once in 1000 times in a random simulation. He ended up walking 3 of the next 6 batters after this post. That fact should indicate that looking at the cherry pitched sets its silly. But even if it didn't, people can think about it more generally before yesterday's start to realize the mistake. Prior to this year, he walked 40 of 350 batters, or just under 1out of every 8. Assume that is his true walk rate until you learn otherwise. He has a stretch where he was walking 1 of 12 batters over 49 batters faced. Sounds like he turned a corner! But then he walks 3 of the next 6 (in real life he did this first) and His walk rate is the expected 1 out of 8... There really is a 0.1% chance of that story being true? You assume what you story you like then test for randomness rather than assume the null and test for consistency. It's been pointed out for at least 15 years. I usually don't opine on the meaning of the probabilities. Unless I make an argument for their reality*, they're for information only. I always find them interesting. And they are not in fact random, because players are not random number generators. Now, we usually don't know the cause. And even if we did, the cause would probably not be predictive. But I always like to start by assessing the unlikeliness of what we've seen. If it is very unlikely, it opens up the possibility of being meaningful, which then warrants further attention. And sometimes it identifies a problem that can be fixed. The easy alternative explanation in this case is that he has start-of-game command problems, which might be improved by a better warmup routine. That's something a good pitching coach would notice even without any analysis. That's what we should be looking at going forward. *When I have gone to bat for the reality of cherry-picked stats, the track record is very good. Huge arguments at SoSH before 2003 that Mueller would hugely outperform his projection, in 2003 that Ortiz was for real, before 2004 that Damon would outperform his projection after three down years, before the 2004 post-season that Lowe was capable of pitching hugely better than his season numbers ... Here's one more I haven't mentioned recently. In 2009 Ortiz was hitting .188 / .281 / .288 on June 5. He then hit .285 / .364 / .616 in his next 173 PA. At that point precisely, July 31, the PED report story broke. He went 5 for his next 44, with a 2B and 5 BB. It brought his season numbers back down to .218 / .305 / .399. Ortiz talked about losing sleep at a press conference. It was during this stretch that SI / BP called for his release. On 8/14 he broke the slump with a 2/3, 2B, HR, 2 BB game. Within a day or two I was involved in a huge debate at SoSH, where I argued that what he did before June 6, and what he did in the 10 games after the PED story broke, had no predictive value at all, and that he was going to come much much closer to a 980 OPS (as in June 6 to July 31) going forward than to the 704 OPS he had for the whole season after the slump-buster. Cherry-picking at its best or worst, depending on your POV. I don't recall more than a few SoSHers taking my side. What did he actually hit after the slump-buster? .283 / .385 / .592. The reason I use this methodology is because it works far more often than not. The only really big argument I can recall where it failed was for Nomar in 2004, where I predicted a big comeback based on his huge home-road splits in 2003. But of course he hurt his wrist in ST that year, so it's more of an incomplete. I can recall making milder arguments about Troy O'Leary and Frank Castillo comebacks, and more recently, I found Doubront upside that never materialized ... I'm certainly prone to overdoing it because I'm an optimist, and my track record for mild arguments is probably closer to 50-50. But when I really go to bat is when I see a big divide and know of a clear cause. That track record is very, very good. Again, going backwards in time rather than forward, my big three cherry-picking arguments this winter were for Wright, Porcello, and Kelly. That looks like two huge hits and one huge miss, but the Kelly argument (which I was less adamant about to begin with) identified his altering his pitch-mix as the reason for the breakout, and he f-ing went back to the old pitch mix this year. If I'd known that was the plan, I would have been moderately pessimistic about him this year.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 24, 2016 10:16:38 GMT -5
Cherry-picked anecdotes to back up cherry-picked stats-- love it.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Jul 24, 2016 14:56:01 GMT -5
I predicted a blue car was going to drive by my house yesterday and 5 minutes later it happened, therefore I was right!
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Jul 24, 2016 16:18:38 GMT -5
It's just story-selling (to be kind), and mountebankery (to be frank), and oh so tiresome and . . . boring
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 27, 2016 11:29:42 GMT -5
As I talked about on the podcast (sorry, just don't have the time to write these days... maybe someday), Kopech really labored on Saturday. Threw almost all fastballs too, so it wasn't a matter of working on the secondaries.
I'll be honest that I came away thinking future closer rather than future #2 or #3, but of course, caveat being that it was a single start and the heat/humidity (yes he's from Texas, but it was humid as hell Saturday) may have factored into his struggles a bit.
|
|
fenwayfaithful
Rookie
A prospect is fun to watch, but trading him for a sure thing in the Majors is never a losing deal.
Posts: 114
|
Post by fenwayfaithful on Jul 28, 2016 1:15:00 GMT -5
This kid has a lot of hype right now. If we can get a team to fall for it i would jump all over it. The velocity of a fastball doesn't make you great just ask Daniel Bard. This kid has maturity issues and control issues. Yes he's young and if we are willing to wait it out so be it but if i was running the ship and i could get a proven MLB reliever or package him for a starter i would. We really need to do what it takes because to watch this lineup score the way we have and get swept and lose games is disturbing. Pitching always wins games so I'm not saying package him for any type of position player but better yet a Wade Davis. yes we can wait for Kimbrel but i think with Koji out we need 1 more dominant reliable guy. I really want to see Cubs/Red Sox. There pitching against our hitting. Lester, Rizzo all of it would be fun. They keep making moves we need to counter.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 28, 2016 8:09:52 GMT -5
This kid has a lot of hype right now. If we can get a team to fall for it i would jump all over it. The velocity of a fastball doesn't make you great just ask Daniel Bard. This kid has maturity issues and control issues. Yes he's young and if we are willing to wait it out so be it but if i was running the ship and i could get a proven MLB reliever or package him for a starter i would. We really need to do what it takes because to watch this lineup score the way we have and get swept and lose games is disturbing. Pitching always wins games so I'm not saying package him for any type of position player but better yet a Wade Davis. yes we can wait for Kimbrel but i think with Koji out we need 1 more dominant reliable guy. I really want to see Cubs/Red Sox. There pitching against our hitting. Lester, Rizzo all of it would be fun. They keep making moves we need to counter. The Sox are not competing with the Cubs. Why do they need to get rid of one of the only two strong pitching prospects they have for a closer who'll be back shortly and cost them four prospects already? At some point, you have to stop spending your prospects on a closer, and this is coming from a guy who was ok with the Kimbrel deal.
|
|
fenwayfaithful
Rookie
A prospect is fun to watch, but trading him for a sure thing in the Majors is never a losing deal.
Posts: 114
|
Post by fenwayfaithful on Jul 28, 2016 14:22:03 GMT -5
This kid has a lot of hype right now. If we can get a team to fall for it i would jump all over it. The velocity of a fastball doesn't make you great just ask Daniel Bard. This kid has maturity issues and control issues. Yes he's young and if we are willing to wait it out so be it but if i was running the ship and i could get a proven MLB reliever or package him for a starter i would. We really need to do what it takes because to watch this lineup score the way we have and get swept and lose games is disturbing. Pitching always wins games so I'm not saying package him for any type of position player but better yet a Wade Davis. yes we can wait for Kimbrel but i think with Koji out we need 1 more dominant reliable guy. I really want to see Cubs/Red Sox. There pitching against our hitting. Lester, Rizzo all of it would be fun. They keep making moves we need to counter. The Sox are not competing with the Cubs. Why do they need to get rid of one of the only two strong pitching prospects they have for a closer who'll be back shortly and cost them four prospects already? At some point, you have to stop spending your prospects on a closer, and this is coming from a guy who was ok with the Kimbrel deal. You do realize were another dominant RP away from a GREAT team. Wade Davis/Kimbrel in the back end with Ziegler/Taz/Ross/Barnes. That would be a stacked pen along with an above avg starting staff and the best offense in baseball. you pass that up because you have someone who throws fast? i wouldn't. We are pretty good as it sits but Wade Davis would really put us on another level.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 28, 2016 14:31:15 GMT -5
The Sox are not competing with the Cubs. Why do they need to get rid of one of the only two strong pitching prospects they have for a closer who'll be back shortly and cost them four prospects already? At some point, you have to stop spending your prospects on a closer, and this is coming from a guy who was ok with the Kimbrel deal. Y ou do realize were another dominant RP away from a GREAT team. Wade Davis/Kimbrel in the back end with Ziegler/Taz/Ross/Barnes. That would be a stacked pen along with an above avg starting staff and the best offense in baseball. you pass that up because you have someone who throws fast? i wouldn't. We are pretty good as it sits but Wade Davis would really put us on another level. Funny, when the Sox got the ace they needed and the closer they needed that's what we heard, too. At some point you can't keep spending your resources on a closer position. That said, that doesn't mean that I don't think the Sox can't stand an upgrade in the bullpen. I just wouldn't overspend at this point in talent to do so. Besides, small sample size here, but Kimbrel isn't that lights out when he isn't in a closing situation, so your idea to move him to the 8th inning might not work out so good. It's going to take more than Kopech to get Davis. Either Ian Kennedy comes stapled to Davis or the Sox have to provide a good deal more than Kopech to get Davis. THe Sox need a good reliever. They don't necessarily have to snag a closer.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 28, 2016 15:22:32 GMT -5
Wade Davis is trending down in a scary way. Would not touch any trade for him. His K/9 has dropped from 13.6 to 8.6 from 2014 to 2016. His walks are up and velocity is down.
|
|
|
Post by theghostofjoecronin on Jul 28, 2016 15:34:08 GMT -5
This kid has a lot of hype right now. If we can get a team to fall for it i would jump all over it. The velocity of a fastball doesn't make you great just ask Daniel Bard. This kid has maturity issues and control issues. Yes he's young and if we are willing to wait it out so be it but if i was running the ship and i could get a proven MLB reliever or package him for a starter i would. We really need to do what it takes because to watch this lineup score the way we have and get swept and lose games is disturbing. Pitching always wins games so I'm not saying package him for any type of position player but better yet a Wade Davis. yes we can wait for Kimbrel but i think with Koji out we need 1 more dominant reliable guy. I really want to see Cubs/Red Sox. There pitching against our hitting. Lester, Rizzo all of it would be fun. They keep making moves we need to counter. The Sox are not competing with the Cubs. Why do they need to get rid of one of the only two strong pitching prospects they have for a closer who'll be back shortly and cost them four prospects already? At some point, you have to stop spending your prospects on a closer, and this is coming from a guy who was ok with the Kimbrel deal. I think that's why the Sox stocked up on bullpen arms during this years draft. We just haven't been able to develop many relief pitchers over the past several years....because of that we were forced to make a trade for a closer. Hopefully from here on out we can rely more on internal options, which will benefit the team by having a deeper farm system and also saving some money on our payroll by not having to overpay on the FA market.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Jul 28, 2016 15:48:22 GMT -5
The Sox are not competing with the Cubs. Why do they need to get rid of one of the only two strong pitching prospects they have for a closer who'll be back shortly and cost them four prospects already? At some point, you have to stop spending your prospects on a closer, and this is coming from a guy who was ok with the Kimbrel deal. I think that's why the Sox stocked up on bullpen arms during this years draft. We just haven't been able to develop many relief pitchers over the past several years....because of that we were forced to make a trade for a closer. Hopefully from here on out we can rely more on internal options, which will benefit the team by having a deeper farm system and also saving some money on our payroll by not having to overpay on the FA market. Couldn't you say that about any draft? It doesn't seem like any pitchers ever really project to be starters past the first round or two. If they did....they'd be 1st rounders.
|
|
|
Post by theghostofjoecronin on Jul 28, 2016 20:17:42 GMT -5
I think that's why the Sox stocked up on bullpen arms during this years draft. We just haven't been able to develop many relief pitchers over the past several years....because of that we were forced to make a trade for a closer. Hopefully from here on out we can rely more on internal options, which will benefit the team by having a deeper farm system and also saving some money on our payroll by not having to overpay on the FA market. Couldn't you say that about any draft? It doesn't seem like any pitchers ever really project to be starters past the first round or two. If they did....they'd be 1st rounders. Not really, every year when we draft pitchers we draft them to be starting pitchers and if it doesn't work out then we might later convert them to RP. This year's draft the several pitcher's we drafted after Anderson will IMO pitch in relief roles from the get-go...and a few will be fast-tracked (Nogosek, Gorst, Shawaryn-I think he's more suited for relief with only a FB/slider and low 3/4 arm slot).
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Jul 28, 2016 20:18:48 GMT -5
15 walks in 23 High-A innings. That big league call up is imminent.
|
|
|
Post by dnfl333 on Jul 28, 2016 23:18:09 GMT -5
15 walks in 23 High-A innings. That big league call up is imminent. SOS with these pitchers who throw in the high 90's. No control and lack of a secondary pitch. See Kelly and Barnes
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 29, 2016 8:22:30 GMT -5
As I talked about on the podcast (sorry, just don't have the time to write these days... maybe someday), Kopech really labored on Saturday. Threw almost all fastballs too, so it wasn't a matter of working on the secondaries. I'll be honest that I came away thinking future closer rather than future #2 or #3, but of course, caveat being that it was a single start and the heat/humidity (yes he's from Texas, but it was humid as hell Saturday) may have factored into his struggles a bit. What sort of contact was made? I see there were only 2 hits. If he's fooling hitters into swinging when they should take, and getting soft contact, that is one of the few things that correlates well with reducing runs allowed. The hitter is getting the bat on the ball, which avoids the K, but he's just popping it up or hitting it into the ground. This ability to fool hitters also justifies throwing more balls as he nibbles on the edges more. Soft contact tends to strand runners with popups or dribblers. You can call it laboring, but he stretched all the way out to 97 pitches and had gas left in the tank. Get ready for the callup! This guy is Noah 2.0ah.
|
|
|
Post by cto94 on Jul 29, 2016 9:20:50 GMT -5
15 walks in 23 High-A innings. That big league call up is imminent. SOS with these pitchers who throw in the high 90's. No control and lack of a secondary pitch. See Kelly and Barnes Read Kopech's starting profile and watch those guys pitch- they all have secondary pitches. Barnes is in the bullpen cause he doesn't have a good 3rd pitch, Kelly cause he can't command anything. Kopech's 20 years old and in A ball- he's not going to turn into a big league ace overnight, but that doesn't mean he's doomed to be a bullpen arm
|
|
|