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.
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,931
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 25, 2020 2:05:41 GMT -5
The whole point of acquiring Pivetta was that he was a thrower who had never been taught anything about pitching.
When we got him, it was clear to me that he literally had less than zero idea how to pitch; his approach was backwards. I wrote: Well, I was right about the latter. The Sox worked with him for less than a month and he's already turned into a pitcher.
I'd slow down with the chest-thumping there, EV. Pivetta has pitched one game against a crap team and needed 96 pitches to get through five innings. We saw some nice things, but this is a guy with an ERA-plus of 79 and WHIP of 1.43 over 93 games. In general, I think Gammons and some posters on here are exhibiting serious irrational exhuberance over the showing of some of the players on the ML team and at the alt. site. I'm not talking about the results, which if predictive would make him a CY favorite. I'm talking about the approach, which was radically different. He may not even succeed much with the new approach, but what I actually said, and all that I said -- that he has already transformed himself from a thrower into a pitcher -- is absolutely and very evidently true.
He could never succeed with the old approach, which wasn't an approach at all. He has a real chance to succeed with this one.
He threw more balls and walked more guys than in his good year with the Phillies. And he gave up dramatically less hard contact. This is exactly the combination you get when you pitch more to the edges of the zone. It's really simple. And pitching more to the edges of the zone is a change in approach, and very close to the change in approach I thought we'd see -- to be willing to walk more guys by trying to get hitters to chase his breaking stuff out of the zone more. I didn't think he was capable of painting the edges as he did! And it may well be that on days where he can't do that with his FB but has good command of the breaking stuff, getting guys to chase is the plan B. IOW, an "effectively wild" version of himself.
Now, he also struck out more guys. I'm agnostic about whether that's sustainable. It may have been largely the opposition ineptitude. When Clay Buchholz made a similar transition, he actually struck out fewer guys.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 25, 2020 4:10:52 GMT -5
I'd slow down with the chest-thumping there, EV. Pivetta has pitched one game against a crap team and needed 96 pitches to get through five innings. We saw some nice things, but this is a guy with an ERA-plus of 79 and WHIP of 1.43 over 93 games. In general, I think Gammons and some posters on here are exhibiting serious irrational exhuberance over the showing of some of the players on the ML team and at the alt. site. I'm not talking about the results, which if predictive would make him a CY favorite. I'm talking about the approach, which was radically different. He may not even succeed much with the new approach, but what I actually said, and all that I said -- that he has already transformed himself from a thrower into a pitcher -- is absolutely and very evidently true.
He could never succeed with the old approach, which wasn't an approach at all. He has a real chance to succeed with this one. He threw more balls and walked more guys than in his good year with the Phillies. And he gave up dramatically less hard contact. This is exactly the combination you get when you pitch more to the edges of the zone. It's really simple. And pitching more to the edges of the zone is a change in approach, and very close to the change in approach I thought we'd see -- to be willing to walk more guys by trying to get hitters to chase his breaking stuff out of the zone more. I didn't think he was capable of painting the edges as he did! And it may well be that on days where he can't do that with his FB but has good command of the breaking stuff, getting guys to chase is the plan B. IOW, an "effectively wild" version of himself.
Now, he also struck out more guys. I'm agnostic about whether that's sustainable. It may have been largely the opposition ineptitude. When Clay Buchholz made a similar transition, he actually struck out fewer guys. I would have to see a chart of the game to believe that he was painting corners, it's not what it looked like to me nor does it make sense on his season chart when half of his pitches came in that game. baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/nick-pivetta-601713?stats=statcast-r-pitching-mlb. In analogy, I saw more Beckett than Schilling.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 25, 2020 5:35:15 GMT -5
The whole point of acquiring Pivetta was that he was a thrower who had never been taught anything about pitching.
When we got him, it was clear to me that he literally had less than zero idea how to pitch; his approach was backwards. I wrote: Well, I was right about the latter. The Sox worked with him for less than a month and he's already turned into a pitcher.
I'd slow down with the chest-thumping there, EV. Pivetta has pitched one game against a crap team and needed 96 pitches to get through five innings. We saw some nice things, but this is a guy with an ERA-plus of 79 and WHIP of 1.43 over 93 games. In general, I think Gammons and some posters on here are exhibiting serious irrational exhuberance over the showing of some of the players on the ML team and at the alt. site. Just to be clear here, the bulk of Gammons statements were attributed to Red Sox executives or in the case of Seabold, a rival executive. The earlier comments on Duran, Casas and Groome were attributed to internal Red Sox personnel and the Mata commentary was pretty much just quoting Paul Abbott. Talk to them.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 25, 2020 8:19:24 GMT -5
I'm not talking about the results, which if predictive would make him a CY favorite. I'm talking about the approach, which was radically different. He may not even succeed much with the new approach, but what I actually said, and all that I said -- that he has already transformed himself from a thrower into a pitcher -- is absolutely and very evidently true.
He could never succeed with the old approach, which wasn't an approach at all. He has a real chance to succeed with this one. He threw more balls and walked more guys than in his good year with the Phillies. And he gave up dramatically less hard contact. This is exactly the combination you get when you pitch more to the edges of the zone. It's really simple. And pitching more to the edges of the zone is a change in approach, and very close to the change in approach I thought we'd see -- to be willing to walk more guys by trying to get hitters to chase his breaking stuff out of the zone more. I didn't think he was capable of painting the edges as he did! And it may well be that on days where he can't do that with his FB but has good command of the breaking stuff, getting guys to chase is the plan B. IOW, an "effectively wild" version of himself.
Now, he also struck out more guys. I'm agnostic about whether that's sustainable. It may have been largely the opposition ineptitude. When Clay Buchholz made a similar transition, he actually struck out fewer guys. I would have to see a chart of the game to believe that he was painting corners, it's not what it looked like to me nor does it make sense on his season chart when half of his pitches came in that game. baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/nick-pivetta-601713?stats=statcast-r-pitching-mlb. In analogy, I saw more Beckett than Schilling. Your description and what I remember were different enough for me to go back and re-watch his performance. No way was he painting edges. A good portion of the strike/pitches ratio was driven by missed out of the strike zone swings on his excellent curves and sliders. Most of the swings on fastballs were either too high or right down the middle. His fastball rarely found CVaz' target and I'd describe his performance as effectively wild. Here's to hoping that he learns to be a pitcher because his stuff is clearly exceptional.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Sept 25, 2020 10:27:11 GMT -5
Another hit for Nick Yorke, this time off of Caleb Simpson. Last sim game going on right now in Pawtucket. Seabold also pitching.
ADD: another one. Yorke now 2/3 today after a ground ball single up the middle off Seth Blair. He'll probably finish sim city with a 7/9 stat line. Small sample, but obviously very impressive for an 18 year old. Got two more ABs actually, got HBP by Blair but I didn't see what happened in his last AB.
Seabold has not looked sharp. Had his first inning rolled over and just gave up a HR to CJ Chatham in the third.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Sept 25, 2020 11:21:39 GMT -5
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Yorke struck out in his last PA.....the last PA ever for a Red Sox affiliate at McCoy stadium. I suppose Yorke will have to settle for a 7/10 line.
|
|
soxin8
Veteran
Posts: 614
Member is Online
|
Post by soxin8 on Sept 25, 2020 11:36:52 GMT -5
Okay, I'll relent. But out of curiosity, where (roughly speaking) would Rocker/Leiter rank in the system if the Sox drafted them tomorrow? Where would they rank nationally? I would think higher than #5 and in the 100-200 range, respectively. Either would be the top prospect in the system and a top 50 prospect. To be clear, I'm not agreeing with Gammons at all! Sorry if I gave that impression. I do think the point is overly aggressive. I just don't think it's "Edgar Martinez is a future all-star closer" crazy, which is probably the point I was trying to make. Again, sorry for the confusion. I agree that the point is wrong. Just trying to explain what I take him as trying to say and point out that Song is still a huge question mark with an incredibly wide range of incomes for a guy who looked so good in Lowell. How does Leiter's scouting reports compare to Groome's when he was drafted? Has Groome fallen or Leiter that much better?
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Sept 25, 2020 12:11:54 GMT -5
Yorke's two hits:
|
|
|
Post by costpet on Sept 25, 2020 14:07:30 GMT -5
I wonder if they're thinking of Duran replacing JBJ as soon as next year?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 25, 2020 14:23:30 GMT -5
Either would be the top prospect in the system and a top 50 prospect. To be clear, I'm not agreeing with Gammons at all! Sorry if I gave that impression. I do think the point is overly aggressive. I just don't think it's "Edgar Martinez is a future all-star closer" crazy, which is probably the point I was trying to make. Again, sorry for the confusion. I agree that the point is wrong. Just trying to explain what I take him as trying to say and point out that Song is still a huge question mark with an incredibly wide range of incomes for a guy who looked so good in Lowell. How does Leiter's scouting reports compare to Groome's when he was drafted? Has Groome fallen or Leiter that much better? Groome has thrown 66 professional innings since being drafted. Yes, his stock has unquestionably fallen significantly since. I can't even say I've familiarized myself with Leiter's scouting report. I really just don't even have the bandwidth to care until the spring - it's hard enough filling my brain with information necessary to differentiate between Angel De Jesus Maita and Jesus Angel Maita. My point was more that a player taken 3rd or so in the draft is very likely to be the system's top prospect (unless we've got a regular minor league season and, say, Casas is mashing in Double-A).
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,931
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 25, 2020 14:44:18 GMT -5
Your description and what I remember were different enough for me to go back and re-watch his performance. No way was he painting edges. A good portion of the strike/pitches ratio was driven by missed out of the strike zone swings on his excellent curves and sliders. Most of the swings on fastballs were either too high or right down the middle. His fastball rarely found CVaz' target and I'd describe his performance as effectively wild. Here's to hoping that he learns to be a pitcher because his stuff is clearly exceptional. But what you've done here, if your perceptions are unbiased, is make my argument for a changed approach better. I expected his new approach to be risking (and accepting) more walks by throwing lots more chase pitches, and you're saying that's exactly what he did!
I would regard his swings and misses on high FB as the same strategy.
But did you watch the game you expected, or the game that Statcast saw?
Let' see ... he threw 49 FB:
4 down the middle (middle third horizontally and vertically)
8 others in strike zone, not at edges ("Heart")
19 edges of zone ("Shadow") 14 Chase 4 "Waste" (really a misfire)
That's 8, 16, 39, 28, 8 percent.
What did he do on 2018 with the Phillies?
10, 22, 45, 19, 4.
So Heart down 25%, Chase up 47%. Very small sample, but it's what I predicted.
The four FB down the middle:
Austin Hays in the first on a 3-1 pitch, fouled, then walked. Ryan Mountcastle in the first on an 0-2 pitch after two sliders. 94.5 mph fly ball out. Ramon Urias in the 5th on a 2-2 pitch, a hard hit (99.5) line drive single. Cedric Mullins in the 5th on a 3-1 count. Took it for a strike, then walked.
So two of these were to the first 3 batters of the game, and 2 were in his last inning of work. That's 2 in his first 7 fastballs, 2 in his last 7, and 0 in the 35 in between. And you'd expect him to be nervous at the start and tiring at the end.
In 2018 he threw 728 FB in the second through 4th innings and 78 were down the middle. Edit: he gave up 21 balls in play on those, with a .595 wOBA
Throwing 0 in 31 in those innings, as he did in his debut, is p = .064, or a 1 in 16 chance. But it's what we expected.
Let's do his slider. I'm not expecting a significant difference, because the "pitching" would be the count that he throws it on, but I'm curious.
5, 18, 37, 27, 13 Philly '18 12, 8, 31, 31, 19 Sox debut
No real evidence of a changed approach here.
That's just 3 sliders down the middle. But that's where the pitch ends up. One was taken for a strike (Mullins), one was fouled (Alberto), and one (Severino) produced a 92.4 mph, 207' fly ball out.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Sept 25, 2020 14:46:46 GMT -5
The two clips that I've seen, showing three solid hits, were all to right field. With the large caveats of (1) an 18 year old against seasoned minors pitchers, and (2) small sample size, has anyone seen a solid contact pull?
|
|
kevfc89
Veteran
Posts: 5,281
Member is Online
|
Post by kevfc89 on Sept 25, 2020 17:58:35 GMT -5
The two clips that I've seen, showing three solid hits, were all to right field. With the large caveats of (1) an 18 year old against seasoned minors pitchers, and (2) small sample size, has anyone seen a solid contact pull?
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 25, 2020 19:29:44 GMT -5
Your description and what I remember were different enough for me to go back and re-watch his performance. No way was he painting edges. A good portion of the strike/pitches ratio was driven by missed out of the strike zone swings on his excellent curves and sliders. Most of the swings on fastballs were either too high or right down the middle. His fastball rarely found CVaz' target and I'd describe his performance as effectively wild. Here's to hoping that he learns to be a pitcher because his stuff is clearly exceptional. But what you've done here, if your perceptions are unbiased, is make my argument for a changed approach better. I expected his new approach to be risking (and accepting) more walks by throwing lots more chase pitches, and you're saying that's exactly what he did! I would regard his swings and misses on high FB as the same strategy. But did you watch the game you expected, or the game that Statcast saw?
Let' see ... he threw 49 FB: 4 down the middle (middle third horizontally and vertically)
8 others in strike zone, not at edges ("Heart")
19 edges of zone ("Shadow") 14 Chase 4 "Waste" (really a misfire) That's 8, 16, 39, 28, 8 percent. What did he do on 2018 with the Phillies? 10, 22, 45, 19, 4. So Heart down 25%, Chase up 47%. Very small sample, but it's what I predicted. The four FB down the middle:
Austin Hays in the first on a 3-1 pitch, fouled, then walked. Ryan Mountcastle in the first on an 0-2 pitch after two sliders. 94.5 mph fly ball out. Ramon Urias in the 5th on a 2-2 pitch, a hard hit (99.5) line drive single. Cedric Mullins in the 5th on a 3-1 count. Took it for a strike, then walked.
So two of these were to the first 3 batters of the game, and 2 were in his last inning of work. That's 2 in his first 7 fastballs, 2 in his last 7, and 0 in the 35 in between. And you'd expect him to be nervous at the start and tiring at the end. In 2018 he threw 728 FB in the second through 4th innings and 78 were down the middle. Edit: he gave up 21 balls in play on those, with a .595 wOBA
Throwing 0 in 31 in those innings, as he did in his debut, is p = .064, or a 1 in 16 chance. But it's what we expected.
Let's do his slider. I'm not expecting a significant difference, because the "pitching" would be the count that he throws it on, but I'm curious.
5, 18, 37, 27, 13 Philly '18 12, 8, 31, 31, 19 Sox debut No real evidence of a changed approach here.
That's just 3 sliders down the middle. But that's where the pitch ends up. One was taken for a strike (Mullins), one was fouled (Alberto), and one (Severino) produced a 92.4 mph, 207' fly ball out.
I think we have a semantics difference with the expressions pitcher & thrower when used together. An improved thrower is still a thrower. Like I said, more like Beckett than Schilling.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 26, 2020 1:19:08 GMT -5
I watched the final sim game, some notes:
Youke got 5 ABs total, The last inning he was hit by a pitch then in the final AB at McCoy, he struck out being fooled badly by consecutive sliders from Blair. He ended up getting on base 8 times in 11 plate appearances. Defensively, he's there for the bat.
LOL, Bruce Crabbe with a nice pick to start a double play.
Chatham with a HR to left off Seabold. year long results seem to look like he's trading bat for power.
Announcers unanimously gave the MVP to Duran. They didn't come up with a Cy Young instead mentioned a lot of people that could have won it.
Seabold was rusty and it showed but I think there's more giddyup on his fastball than earlier. No radars were given.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 26, 2020 4:12:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 26, 2020 4:14:02 GMT -5
Announcers also said some prospects who will be going to the Fall Instructs will remain at McCoy until that happens.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 26, 2020 11:59:39 GMT -5
Announcers also said some prospects who will be going to the Fall Instructs will remain at McCoy until that happens. Seabold and Duran flew home, so that would seem to exclude them then.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 26, 2020 12:14:38 GMT -5
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,054
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Sept 26, 2020 17:22:11 GMT -5
I watched the final sim game, some notes: Youke got 5 ABs total, The last inning he was hit by a pitch then in the final AB at McCoy, he struck out being fooled badly by consecutive sliders from Blair. He ended up getting on base 8 times in 11 plate appearances. Defensively, he's there for the bat. LOL, Bruce Crabbe with a nice pick to start a double play. Chatham with a HR to left off Seabold. year long results seem to look like he's trading bat for power. Announcers unanimously gave the MVP to Duran. They didn't come up with a Cy Young instead mentioned a lot of people that could have won it. Seabold was rusty and it showed but I think there's more giddyup on his fastball than earlier. No radars were given. Yorke seems a lot like a less polished Hiura (which makes sense given he’s a HS kid)
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 26, 2020 22:58:14 GMT -5
I watched the final sim game, some notes: Youke got 5 ABs total, The last inning he was hit by a pitch then in the final AB at McCoy, he struck out being fooled badly by consecutive sliders from Blair. He ended up getting on base 8 times in 11 plate appearances. Defensively, he's there for the bat. LOL, Bruce Crabbe with a nice pick to start a double play. Chatham with a HR to left off Seabold. year long results seem to look like he's trading bat for power. Announcers unanimously gave the MVP to Duran. They didn't come up with a Cy Young instead mentioned a lot of people that could have won it. Seabold was rusty and it showed but I think there's more giddyup on his fastball than earlier. No radars were given. Yorke seems a lot like a less polished Hiura (which makes sense given he’s a HS kid) You can't make these calls based on a few games with only a few chances. What I would expect is no chance at SS, below average range and footwork at 2B but makeup reports say he won't be a defensive hole either. If I were to be placing a bet, I'd bet on league average left field. The best defensive infielder at the site was clearly Downs and best defensive outfielder, clearly Duran.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Sept 29, 2020 11:24:42 GMT -5
|
|
soxin8
Veteran
Posts: 614
Member is Online
|
Post by soxin8 on Oct 3, 2020 16:09:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 3, 2020 17:23:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 5, 2020 9:09:17 GMT -5
|
|
|