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.
Hiring better pitching coaches
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on May 22, 2017 10:17:24 GMT -5
It seems like every year there is a new restriction on organizations who have extra resources financially. Whether we are talking about the cap on MLB rosters or how much a team is allowed to spend on draftees or international kids, the rules are all about keeping a competitive balance. Now, to some degree, I agree that we need a check and balance, but when you root for a team and an organization like the Red Sox...let's face it...it can be frustrating. I admit it, I want the Sox to sign every good prospect out there, but that is not possible. The excellent article today www.overthemonster.com/2017/5/22/15672392/red-sox-starting-pitching-depth-johnson-owens-velazquez by Max Marcovitch is well worth reading, and is on target. We can't seem to develop our own pitching and it is hurting us currently and the future big time. It is difficult to always have to "BUY" pitching. We seem to have a decent handle on developing positional players, but not so much hurlers. It is enough for a fan to "hurl" themselves when a huge share of our roster cap is designated for David Price, Rick Porcello, and Chris Sale. It hurts our ability to add players down the stretch every year. Read the article and see what our history, on developing pitchers, looks like over the last 12 years. So let me go back to my reason for starting this thread. Few organizations have our resources, why not go after the TOP pitching coaches in baseball and put them in places they can make major differences. Isn't it amazing that particular organizations just consistently develop pitchers? Why is that? What are they doing that is so different? Why can't we copy some of this? In my opinion there are, at least, 4 outstanding pitching coaches at the major league level. They are Ray Searage (Pirates), Jim Hickey (Rays), Derek Lilliquist (Cards), and Dave Righetti (Giants). I'm sure I'm missing someone. Now the major league team position is one thing, and I would advocate throwing some money at these guys, but there are some outstanding work being done in these organizations in the minors. For example: Stan Kyles --- AAA Pirates. But since I live in Ray's country, here are 2 names that you may have not heard of, though you probably recognize the first...Kyle Snyder (3 yrs in Durham - AAA) and R.C. Lichtenstein - for 12 years as a Ray's pitching coach in the minors and currently in AA at Montgomery. I'm sure the guys we have in Pawtucket, Portland, etc. are very knowledgeable, but the results never seem to change. One last thing, find out WHO the tops scouts are in DR, Mexico, VZ, Cuba, Korea, Taiwan, Japan, and, yes, in the USA...and offer them a hefty raise also. We can't spend excess dollars on draftees and free agents, then lets find the best people out there and double their salary! |
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on May 22, 2017 12:57:11 GMT -5
This is an interesting subject.
I agree that the Sox appear to have a systematic difficulty addressing pitching, and spend titanic sums of $$$ to run away from it rather than fix it.
I also think most of this board shares that opinion, hence the collective erection when Brian Bannister "fixed" Rich Hill.
Realistically, I'd surmise the organizational excellence of Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, etc. in this area runs far deeper than pitching coaches. Thinking that having Ray Searage will make your pitchers better is overly simplistic.
We all know that the Red Sox need to find a way to turn their financial muscle into better pitching development, the Red Sox know too, and the million dollar question is how.
My one thought is that I often wonder if the Sox organizationally focus too much on the strikeout. Seems like Boston farmhands and trade/FA targets are usually better throwers than pitchers.
I get that it's a Fenway-driven consideration but it's frustrating watching Boston pitchers run out of bullets in the middle of the 4th because they've been getting to 3-2 against every hitter.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on May 22, 2017 13:24:38 GMT -5
Certainly hiring just a pitching coach will not solve this problem, but someone seems to have a "system" in those organizations that seems to work. Living in the Tampa area, it astounds me when watching the Ray's broadcasts that a new prospect has somehow emerged in Durham every year. They have two potential studs again this year. They have the opposite problem we have. They can't seem to develop any offensive fire-power.
It just seems, every kid they bring up has a good change-up, throws strikes, and finally contributes in some way. Maybe they have a "mold"! lol
I'm sure Dave and his staff, and Ben's in the past, looked at their models and took something a way, but we just seem to be running in place.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 22, 2017 13:26:15 GMT -5
Changed thread title to reflect what was being discussed (I legitimately thought you'd been hacked and it was spam, Steve)
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcgillstatue on May 22, 2017 16:32:54 GMT -5
Looking at the top echelons at the minor league level:
Ralph Treuel, minor league pitching coordinator, has been in the system since 1996 and has been in this role since 2006. (He spent most of that year as the MLB Sox' interim bullpen coach when Dave Wallace needed emergency hip replacement surgery and Al Nipper moved from the bullpen to acting pitching coach.) He also briefly was the Red Sox' MLB pitching coach under Joe Kerrigan in September 2001. Treuel's actually in his second stint as the Red Sox' MiLPC, as he served in that role under Dan Duquette in the late 1990s. Prior to 1996, he was the Tigers' MLB pitching coach in the last year of the Sparky Anderson era.
Goose Gregson, Latin American pitching coordinator, has been in the system since 2002 and in this particular role since 2007. He's also helped out with the GCL Red Sox. Was acting pitching coach during 2003, when Tony Cloninger was diagnosed with bladder cancer and before Wallace came over from the Dodgers.
Bob Kipper, Pawtucket pitching coach, joined the Red Sox in 1999 and has coached at all levels of the minors, with the PawSox since 2015. He's also had two stints as MLB bullpen coach, including all of 2002 under Grady Little and August-September 2015 under interim manager Torey Lovullo.
Kevin Walker, Portland, joined the organization in 2011 and is in his third year with the Sea Dogs.
At Class A, Short Season and Rookie levels:
Paul Abbott, Salem, has a similar history to Walker's, coming to the Red Sox system in 2011 and now in his third season with Salem.
Walter Miranda, Greenville, is another veteran of the Red Sox system, first joining it in 1999. He's been with the Drive since 2015 and has never coached above the Class A level.
Lance Carter, Lowell, is in his third season with the Spinners and his third in the organization.
Dick Such, GCL Red Sox, is a former longtime MLB pitching coach (Rangers, Twins) who has been with the Red Sox since 2009.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2017 18:39:26 GMT -5
What Boston can't do is a top down assessment. That does not work for those people who hired organizational help would also be responsible for hiring inept coaches and staff.
You can't ask the current players for they would be fearful of retribution even those who have been traded - its a small world in baseball.
And hiring one or two coaches from another club also wouldn't work for those "type" of coaches may only work well in that environment - players drafted, field dimensions, club payroll, etc....
What the Red Sox could do is hire an outside consulting firm. Have them conduct a blind interview with former Red Sox farm hands who are out of baseball. Ask questions regarding - communication style, development, training, off season, expectation of the organization. Additionally, ask questions regarding the consistency of the developmental message? Are you hearing the same message from every coach at every level or are you hearing different messages.
Ask about playing in the Red Sox system? How did that make you feel? Did you feel part of a family/team or just a piece of meat. Was there open communication or did they say "just do your job and don't ask!" Did a player truly know where they stood in the organization? How much of what you heard was to build your confidence or redirect you in a direction they felt was best, but may not have been what's best for you?
What did you feel was your chances moving up in a big market team with deep pockets? What did you think worked well, but wasn't done enough. What positives methods really made a difference in your development?
Compile this data and present to top management and have them ask, do today's coaches skills line up with these challenges. If so, what is our strategy to turn this around? Who do we need to fire, and hire and reorganize!
For its clearly not working and hasn't for a long time.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on May 22, 2017 19:17:37 GMT -5
What Boston can't do is a top down assessment. That does not work for those people who hired organizational help would also be responsible for hiring inept coaches and staff. You can't ask the current players for they would be fearful of retribution even those who have been traded - its a small world in baseball. And hiring one or two coaches from another club also wouldn't work for those "type" of coaches may only work well in that environment - players drafted, field dimensions, club payroll, etc.... What the Red Sox could do is hire an outside consulting firm. Have them conduct a blind interview with former Red Sox farm hands who are out of baseball. Ask questions regarding - communication style, development, training, off season, expectation of the organization. Additionally, ask questions regarding the consistency of the developmental message? Are you hearing the same message from every coach at every level or are you hearing different messages. Ask about playing in the Red Sox system? How did that make you feel? Did you feel part of a family/team or just a piece of meat. Was there open communication or did they say "just do your job and don't ask!" Did a player truly know where they stood in the organization? How much of what you heard was to build your confidence or redirect you in a direction they felt was best, but may not have been what's best for you? What did you feel was your chances moving up in a big market team with deep pockets? What did you think worked well, but wasn't done enough. What positives methods really made a difference in your development? Compile this data and present to top management and have them ask, do today's coaches skills line up with these challenges. If so, what is our strategy to turn this around? Who do we need to fire, and hire and reorganize! For its clearly not working and hasn't for a long time. I like the idea! Just because many of these coaches have been in our system for a long time, means little if we don't get results. It is time for results and maybe less loyalty. |
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on May 23, 2017 5:22:35 GMT -5
Steve you may have hit on the Sox Achilles heel. How many years have we wondered the same thing out loud or subconsciously? I questioned whether we scout and draft poorly or just don't teach effectively....or all of the above.
I recall a Sox pitching prospect who was traded and after joining his new team, saying that pitchers were never taught anything in the Sox organization. They were left on their own to figure things out. The assumption was that if they had the talent, they would make it. If not, well go pump gas. Old School. Admittedly that was pre-Epstein but our results speak.
The Rays are a good reference. Every year they seem to add someone from the minors who can do the job. And they are not necessarily hard throwers. They can pitch. How do they do it...and with their micro resources? Maybe necessity was their "mother of invention"...i.e. get the best teachers. The cost is much less than trying to buy player stock.
In prior times coaches were "lifers" and not necessarily particularly knowledgeable or able to effectively convey knowledge or technique. I hope that we have graduated. I was excited about Bannister as one being of the desired ilk but even if so, he is one guy. Pedro appeared not only supremely blessed but also the consummate student...a pitching version of Ted Williams. And, like Ted, he loves imparting his wisdom. I guess he does some work with the Sox but, if interested, could be a great coaching candidate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 24, 2017 8:42:10 GMT -5
sarasoxer, a couple questions:
1) Did this prospect who was traded become anything, or did he wash out? And fwiw, pre-Epstein is kind of irrelevant here, no? The lack of developing pitching only goes back to whenever you consider Lester and Papelbon "developed."
2) Many of the guys the Rays get credit for producing have come from trades. It's just that nobody thinks of them that way because they trade for minor leaguers. As an organization they really stopped drafting and developing their own talent a long time ago, but nobody noticed because of the young guys they were getting when they traded their vets. If we're going to give the Rays credit for, say, Chris Archer, then we'll need to do the same with the Red Sox and Eduardo Rodriguez. Right now Cobb is their only starter they've drafted/signed and developed themselves, with Colome, Alvarado, and Stanek the only ones in the bullpen. For the hitters, it's just Longoria, Beckham, and Kiermaier. The Red Sox current roster has much more truly homegrown talent (Barnes, Scott, Taylor, Vazquez, Pedroia, Bogaerts, Benintendi, Bradley, Betts, Marrero, Travis).
And one comment - there's no way the Red Sox "don't teach anything" to their players. That's insane. I know you're only passing along an anecdote someone else said, but... I'm guessing there's a bit of sour grapes in there from a guy sick of being in "Fort Misery."
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on May 24, 2017 9:37:46 GMT -5
It is true Chris that the Rays have traded for these prospects, but they do seem to target pitchers well, and know when to discard others. I actually believe we should get credit for turning Eduardo into what he is today. Probably the only reason the Orioles when along with moving Rodriquez for Andrew Miller was they became a little unsure of him with the poor year he was having at that time. I'm not sure they were doing much for his development. Rick Peterson, IMO, is one of the most over-rated pitching coaches in baseball. If I remember, we changed his reliance on primarily his fastball. I think a team should get credit for "finishing off" a prospect.
The Rays, and their organization, just seem to do it better. Every time I saw Hellicison pitch, it amazed me how he was able to get thru a line-up 3 times with a 90 mile per hour fastball and an above average change. Cobb doesn't have outstanding stuff. Archer was not the primary focus in that Cubs trade. Matt Moore was solid for awhile, but they knew that guys almost ready in Durham to replace him. I'm pretty sure Jose Deleon will be a good one soon, because they will polish his ruff areas.
I do have great hopes for Brian Bannister. I just would like to see the pitching coaches we have had for so long in the minors be held responsible. Maybe it starts at the top with our GM, but I would like to see there be a big emphasis on this weakness.
By the way....I was hacked....by the Russians.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 24, 2017 9:41:32 GMT -5
Chris, you left out Snell, but that's just nitpicking. Hopefully Owens can someday be just as mediocre.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 24, 2017 9:50:06 GMT -5
Well there was also that David Price guy that the Rays developed too but he was the number one overall pick and he would of developed in any system.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 24, 2017 10:19:51 GMT -5
Would have. Or would've, if you like. You're killing me man. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 24, 2017 10:54:54 GMT -5
It is true Chris that the Rays have traded for these prospects, but they do seem to target pitchers well, and know when to discard others. I actually believe we should get credit for turning Eduardo into what he is today. Probably the only reason the Orioles when along with moving Rodriquez for Andrew Miller was they became a little unsure of him with the poor year he was having at that time. I'm not sure they were doing much for his development. Rick Peterson, IMO, is one of the most over-rated pitching coaches in baseball. If I remember, we changed his reliance on primarily his fastball. I think a team should get credit for "finishing off" a prospect. The Rays, and their organization, just seem to do it better. Every time I saw Hellicison pitch, it amazed me how he was able to get thru a line-up 3 times with a 90 mile per hour fastball and an above average change. Cobb doesn't have outstanding stuff. Archer was not the primary focus in that Cubs trade. Matt Moore was solid for awhile, but they knew that guys almost ready in Durham to replace him. I'm pretty sure Jose Deleon will be a good one soon, because they will polish his ruff areas. I do have great hopes for Brian Bannister. I just would like to see the pitching coaches we have had for so long in the minors be held responsible. Maybe it starts at the top with our GM, but I would like to see there be a big emphasis on this weakness. By the way....I was hacked....by the Russians. If we're going to give the Rays credit for developing pitchers, shouldn't we then hammer them similarly for failing to develop position players other than Longoria and, I guess, Kiermaier? Their lack of offense absolutely killed them during their window in which they were competitive. As for "holding the coaches responsible," you're assuming that they had the players to work with in the first place. To me, it's difficult to know that from our perspective, and the telltale sign would be something like the Orioles situation alluded to above - if you have guys who're struggling, then they go elsewhere and blossom. The Red Sox have had top 100 guys, sure, but if it were the coaching, I'd think you'd have seen the likes of Ranaudo, Webster, Doubront, Britton, Bowden, and even, say, Kelly, Stolmy Pimentel, Hagadone, Craig Hansen, etc. leave and blossom. Instead, when these disappointing arms leave, if anything, they get worse. Please, someone correct me if I'm forgetting someone, but have they had a single pitching prospect who was, say, top 10 in the system but then never really amounted to much, leave a disappointment and improve? Chris, you left out Snell, but that's just nitpicking. Hopefully Owens can someday be just as mediocre. Left out Snell because he's in the minors right now, although I think you were being snarky here and not actually disagreeing? |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 24, 2017 11:06:51 GMT -5
Eh, you could make the argument that bad coaching ruins a guy for life. I do agree with the broader point that trying to figure out what is scouting and what is coaching is really hard to do from afar, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 24, 2017 11:20:04 GMT -5
Yeah, and don't get me wrong - I'm not saying it's not something that should be evaluated. They've had enough guys that it's something to look at. But they've also not had top flight arms to begin with since, say, Kelly. Since then it's been guys like Ranaudo, Webster, Barnes, and Owens.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 24, 2017 12:17:29 GMT -5
Chris, you left out Snell, but that's just nitpicking. Hopefully Owens can someday be just as mediocre. Left out Snell because he's in the minors right now, although I think you were being snarky here and not actually disagreeing? I didn't realize Snell was sent down. He was pretty ok last year. |
|
|
|
Post by thursty on May 24, 2017 13:04:46 GMT -5
Miguel Gonzalez, Alex Wilson, Frankie Montas (tbd)
That's stretching "blossoming" quite a bit, but 2 of the 3 have provided some MLB value, and Montas is still a talent
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 24, 2017 13:24:33 GMT -5
I think the bigger problem has been getting those guys into our system. You went from Lester, Paplebon, Sanchez to Espinoza, Kopech, and Groome. There wasn't much in between. Our coaches sure did a good job on Erod and Wright. It's hard for coaches to develop studs if there aren't studs in the system. One thing I will say, is our coaching seemed to mess up Owens more than it helped him. In 2015 he was a solid 4/5th starter. He had walk issues, but they made it worse trying to fix the issue. Now it's so bad he's not even a backend starter.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 24, 2017 13:58:06 GMT -5
One thing I will say, is our coaching seemed to mess up Owens more than it helped him. In 2015 he was a solid 4/5th starter. He had walk issues, but they made it worse trying to fix the issue. Now it's so bad he's not even a backend starter. I strongly disagree with this take. Owens was raw and had a terrible delivery without any reasonable follow-through at all when they drafted him as a project in 2011. In 2012 he was working on his landing and incorporating his legs into his delivery, and struggling some in the South Atlantic League. Then in 2013 he went on a three-year run of steady improvement, stemming largely from the fact they'd gotten some consistency in his lower half. The reason for Owens' struggles once he hit the majors was that he never could keep his fastball down and he didn't throw hard enough to make up for it. I can't think of a single successful non-knuckleball starting pitcher who lacked both velocity and fastball command in my baseball-watching life. He was getting guys out with his change and curve in the minors, because minor leaguers are in the minors because they can't handle good changeups and curves. Once he reached the majors and was facing hitters with good pitch recognition, they were able to lay off his change and curve, sit the fastball, and crush it. Owens is a pretty good case for someone the Red Sox coaching staff has gotten pretty close to the most out of, in fact. In a lot of systems he'd have burnt out sooner. I'd say they got a measure of success out of Ranaudo too, though I'm less confident in that. Ranaudo was a mess his junior year at LSU, too. He was very talented, so they thought they could piece those tools back together and we'd see that dude from his sophomore year and on the Cape again. We never really saw that dominant pitcher, but he had a lot of success coming up through the system. ----- As for an example of someone the Red Sox coaching strategy hurt, I'd use Pat Light. He's a pitcher who had plus velocity on his fastball and a good secondary pitch. His fastball command was (and is) poor, but he was starting with a two pitch mix and enough velocity to give a margin of error. They had him shelve that splitter to make him work on his other pitches, but without his best pitch he was working too often with men on base. And in my experience seeing him, confidence (or poise, if you prefer that term) was a real issue with Light. So you had this pitcher who was prone to confidence issues losing his best pitch and having to constantly pitch out of jams. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 24, 2017 14:38:25 GMT -5
One thing I will say, is our coaching seemed to mess up Owens more than it helped him. In 2015 he was a solid 4/5th starter. He had walk issues, but they made it worse trying to fix the issue. Now it's so bad he's not even a backend starter. I strongly disagree with this take. Owens was raw and had a terrible delivery without any reasonable follow-through at all when they drafted him as a project in 2011. In 2012 he was working on his landing and incorporating his legs into his delivery, and struggling some in the South Atlantic League. Then in 2013 he went on a three-year run of steady improvement, stemming largely from the fact they'd gotten some consistency in his lower half. The reason for Owens' struggles once he hit the majors was that he never could keep his fastball down and he didn't throw hard enough to make up for it. I can't think of a single successful non-knuckleball starting pitcher who lacked both velocity and fastball command in my baseball-watching life. He was getting guys out with his change and curve in the minors, because minor leaguers are in the minors because they can't handle good changeups and curves. Once he reached the majors and was facing hitters with good pitch recognition, they were able to lay off his change and curve, sit the fastball, and crush it. Owens is a pretty good case for someone the Red Sox coaching staff has gotten pretty close to the most out of, in fact. In a lot of systems he'd have burnt out sooner. I'd say they got a measure of success out of Ranaudo too, though I'm less confident in that. Ranaudo was a mess his junior year at LSU, too. He was very talented, so they thought they could piece those tools back together and we'd see that dude from his sophomore year and on the Cape again. We never really saw that dominant pitcher, but he had a lot of success coming up through the system. ----- As for an example of someone the Red Sox coaching strategy hurt, I'd use Pat Light. He's a pitcher who had plus velocity on his fastball and a good secondary pitch. His fastball command was (and is) poor, but he was starting with a two pitch mix and enough velocity to give a margin of error. They had him shelve that splitter to make him work on his other pitches, but without his best pitch he was working too often with men on base. And in my experience seeing him, confidence (or poise, if you prefer that term) was a real issue with Light. So you had this pitcher who was prone to confidence issues losing his best pitch and having to constantly pitch out of jams. I'm sorry but it's not like you think it was. He was just fine at AA, AAA and majors in 2014 and 2015. His huge BB spike was in 2016 after they changed hid delivery again. I would buy what you said but he was just fine against more advanced hitters in 2014 and 2015. Are you really trying to argue he wasn't? |
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 24, 2017 14:40:30 GMT -5
Would have. Or would've, if you like. You're killing me man. I mean, not all of us here are editors or writers for a professional living. I know I'm not a master at the English language. I was also typing with 20 hours with no sleep. My bad. |
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 24, 2017 15:06:26 GMT -5
I'm sorry but it's not like you think it was. He was just fine at AA, AAA and majors in 2014 and 2015. His huge BB spike was in 2016 after they changed hid delivery again. I would buy what you said but he was just fine against more advanced hitters in 2014 and 2015. Are you really trying to argue he wasn't? That's really not what I said at all... Owens improved a lot from 2011 to 2014. The improvements are clear statistically and they were obvious if you watched him. Owens worked tirelessly, and the staff worked tirelessly with him, during that time, getting the lower body and his landing spot consistent. I'm not sure what your theory is with Owens, but the implication seems to be that he got to where he was on natural talent and his career was going fine through 2015 and then went backwards when the staff decided to mess with him. That just isn't how it went down. His delivery has been a work in progress from the moment they drafted him. The problem that Owens faced when he reached the majors is that his fastball is too hittable, and that hitters can recognize secondaries so they were able to lay on it. That's the reason they've been working on his delivery - without improved fastball command, there just isn't going to be major league success. Rebuilding a delivery is tough and it's leading to more walks. But here's the issue - his approach that was successful before he reached the majors wasn't going to work in the majors. This isn't a situation where if left alone, Owens would've been a just fine back-end starter. He got killed with his old delivery. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 24, 2017 15:11:06 GMT -5
I'm sorry but it's not like you think it was. He was just fine at AA, AAA and majors in 2014 and 2015. His huge BB spike was in 2016 after they changed hid delivery again. I would buy what you said but he was just fine against more advanced hitters in 2014 and 2015. Are you really trying to argue he wasn't? That's really not what I said at all... Owens improved a lot from 2011 to 2014. The improvements are clear statistically and they were obvious if you watched him. Owens worked tirelessly, and the staff worked tirelessly with him, during that time, getting the lower body and his landing spot consistent. I'm not sure what your theory is with Owens, but the implication seems to be that he got to where he was on natural talent and his career was going fine through 2015 and then went backwards when the staff decided to mess with him. That just isn't how it went down. His delivery has been a work in progress from the moment they drafted him. The problem that Owens faced when he reached the majors is that his fastball is too hittable, and that hitters can recognize secondaries so they were able to lay on it. That's the reason they've been working on his delivery - without improved fastball command, there just isn't going to be major league success. Rebuilding a delivery is tough and it's leading to more walks. But here's the issue - his approach that was successful before he reached the majors wasn't going to work in the majors. This isn't a situation where if left alone, Owens would've been a just fine back-end starter. He got killed with his old delivery. Maybe they should have realized that a long time ago? I don't know. He's one of the strangest pitching prospects I've seen. Because of how elite his changeup was (is?), I wonder if he could have used it like a fastball and throw his fastball as a secondary like Steven Wright does. That would require throwing it for strikes of course. I wouldn't use Owens as the basis of any argument though, for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 24, 2017 15:18:13 GMT -5
Miguel Gonzalez, Alex Wilson, Frankie Montas (tbd) That's stretching "blossoming" quite a bit, but 2 of the 3 have provided some MLB value, and Montas is still a talent Gonzalez was in the Angels system for 3 years, was picked in R5 and missed two full seasons due to injury, then spent two years with the Red Sox before going to Baltimore as a free agent. I'm not sure he was even in this system long enough for them to take credit or blame for him either way. Alex Wilson was on a development path to what he is now when he was traded, no? Our report for him at the time of the trade says "Projects as a middle releiver at the major-league level, with the ceiling of a 7th-8th inning setup man in peak seasons." He's basically topping out that projection that was on him. As for Montas, take a look at what he was doing in Greenville when they traded him - he had helium and was starting the climb into what he became. Again, projection we had said he could be a late-inning, high-leverage reliever but was so far off he was hard to project. www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=owensI'm sorry but it's not like you think it was. He was just fine at AA, AAA and majors in 2014 and 2015. His huge BB spike was in 2016 after they changed hid delivery again. I would buy what you said but he was just fine against more advanced hitters in 2014 and 2015. Are you really trying to argue he wasn't? I think you're taking too positive a view of his 2015 numbers in particular. The walks went up in 2016, yes. That's irrefutable. But his walk rate was never good. It's not like it went from good to bad. It went from bad to worse. However, 2015 was his lowest strikeout rate of his career and at the major league level he gave up 7 home runs in 63 innings. He was also allowing too many hits generally. I can't quite remember what the mechanical adjustments were in 2016. Do you have any links on that? |
|
|
