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 vermontsox1 on Dec 8, 2021 14:15:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Dec 8, 2021 14:25:28 GMT -5
In the second round, the Red Sox select RHP Brian Keller from the Yankees.
|
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 8, 2021 14:26:16 GMT -5
Longenhagen had Lambright as a sleeper in the Royals' system as of May 3: "Lambright and Kaufman are lefties with relief potential. Lambright was up to 95 in 2019..."
You figure they had eyes on him during the whole Benintendi PTBNL saga.
|
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 8, 2021 14:27:11 GMT -5
In the AA portion, the Red Sox select RHP Brian Keller from the Yankees. Instant star. How awesome would that be, two years running? |
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 8, 2021 14:29:04 GMT -5
In the second round, the Red Sox select RHP Brian Keller from the Yankees. Obligatory Yankee. Guy had control until he came back from him injury. He got good results but his control went ka-blooey. The lefty they got from the Royals never really had any control to begin with. Tons of whiffs. Tons of walks. |
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Dec 8, 2021 14:35:47 GMT -5
And that's that. No Red Sox selected.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 8, 2021 14:37:02 GMT -5
Longenhagen had Lambright as a sleeper in the Royals' system as of May 3: "Lambright and Kaufman are lefties with relief potential. Lambright was up to 95 in 2019..."
You figure they had eyes on him during the whole Benintendi PTBNL saga.
He hasn't pitched in 2 years I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by evanstonredsox on Dec 8, 2021 14:41:34 GMT -5
Keller's 2021 season against the WooSox:
13.0 IP 5 H 0 ER 6 BB 19 K
Might've helped his case
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,777 
|
Post by cdj on Dec 8, 2021 16:41:50 GMT -5
Love constantly trolling the Yankees
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 8, 2021 16:47:42 GMT -5
Longenhagen had Lambright as a sleeper in the Royals' system as of May 3: "Lambright and Kaufman are lefties with relief potential. Lambright was up to 95 in 2019..." You figure they had eyes on him during the whole Benintendi PTBNL saga.
I'm stealing this. Will credit. Lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Dec 8, 2021 17:02:22 GMT -5
LHP Austin Lambright from the Royals in the first round and RHP Brian Keller from the MFYs in the second round.
Can never have enough arms. Ort worked out okay last year. Would love for Keller, especially, to follow suit.
More guys to add to the SP60!
EDIT: Guess I didn't see that these two were already being discussed is this thread when I started the new thread. My bad!
|
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Dec 9, 2021 20:17:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Dec 10, 2021 17:55:46 GMT -5
Is there anyone besides me who is annoyed that pitch spin is expressed as rpm? This would be the number of revolutions the ball would experience if it was in flight for a minute. But there has never been a baseball that was in flight for a full minute (not especially a thrown baseball), unless it was dropped from an airplane or hot-air balloon more than 8360' in the air (based on a baseball's terminal velocity being about 95 mph). It's safe to say that no thrown baseball has ever spun close to 2800 times.
I would propose rps (revs per second) but even then a pitch takes a lot less than a second to reach home plate. That said, Lambright's benders would have upwards of 47 rps. To me, it actually makes it easier to conceptualize. Given that a high-80s pitch (probably like Lambright's breaking pitches) takes about half a second to reach the batter, if you know that it had 48 rps, you can calculate in your head that it spun about 24 times.
What does it mean? As far as I can tell, spin efficiency and controlling the axis of the spin are a lot more important than the actual raw spin numbers but it would just be nice if the numbers being used had some sort of meaning in reality. Indeed, if you really want to figure out what a baseball is doing from the time it leaves the pitcher's hand until it reaches the catcher's mitt (with any luck, after a swinging strike), you're going to have to convert the rpm data into # of revs in 60' 6" anyway (really somewhere closer to 55', based on the pitcher's release point, but you get the idea).
I just wish the people who invented the machines had thought about what is really happening when they decided how to present their machines' data. It would make it easier for fans to understand what it really means.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Dec 10, 2021 18:14:10 GMT -5
Is there anyone besides me who is annoyed that pitch spin is expressed as rpm? This would be the number of revolutions the ball would experience if it was in flight for a minute. But there has never been a baseball that was in flight for a full minute (not especially a thrown baseball), unless it was dropped from an airplane or hot-air balloon more than 8360' in the air (based on a baseball's terminal velocity being about 95 mph). It's safe to say that no thrown baseball has ever spun close to 2800 times.
I would propose rps (revs per second) but even then a pitch takes a lot less than a second to reach home plate. That said, Lambright's benders would have upwards of 47 rps. To me, it actually makes it easier to conceptualize. Given that a high-80s pitch (probably like Lambright's breaking pitches) takes about half a second to reach the batter, if you know that it had 48 rps, you can calculate in your head that it spun about 24 times.
What does it mean? As far as I can tell, spin efficiency and controlling the axis of the spin are a lot more important than the actual raw spin numbers but it would just be nice if the numbers being used had some sort of meaning in reality. Indeed, if you really want to figure out what a baseball is doing from the time it leaves the pitcher's hand until it reaches the catcher's mitt (with any luck, after a swinging strike), you're going to have to convert the rpm data into # of revs in 60' 6" anyway (really somewhere closer to 55', based on the pitcher's release point, but you get the idea).
I just wish the people who invented the machines had thought about what is really happening when they decided how to present their machines' data. It would make it easier for fans to understand what it really means.
Do you also think that they should change how pitch speed is measured? Or if you don't drive your car for a full hour, do you not measure your speed in mph? Just seems like weird logic for no real benefit. It's just a standard of measurement. Maybe when they were first beginning to track how rpm's affected pitch movement the actual number of revolutions mattered but now it's just something they use to handicap pitch rotation quality. People don't really quote rpm numbers to get into the mechanics but as a point of reference. It's just like if you watched a pitcher who throws 91 and a pitcher that throws 99 and used those numbers to make a point about their velocity, you'd say a pitcher who throws a 2300 rpm curve has a worse curve than a pitcher who throws 3000 rpm, or throw whatever arbitrary qualifiers you want in there. Again, I'm just not sure what the point of the complaint is. |
|
|
|
Post by soxinsf on Dec 10, 2021 18:36:18 GMT -5
Good Bad Sox has this exactly right. No one measures rotation rate by measures other than RPM. And while rotations per pitch would give one accurate measure, it is no more meaningful than RPM. What we are talking about here is a way to compare rotation rate from one pitcher to another.
And, it is a truism that a great breaking ball is not wholly determined by spin rate. Variables like location, velocity, variation from other pitches, etc play major roles in the effectiveness of any pitch as does the ability of the pitcher to consistently repeat the pitch in its best form.
|
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Dec 10, 2021 19:53:58 GMT -5
Is there anyone besides me who is annoyed that pitch spin is expressed as rpm? This would be the number of revolutions the ball would experience if it was in flight for a minute. But there has never been a baseball that was in flight for a full minute (not especially a thrown baseball), unless it was dropped from an airplane or hot-air balloon more than 8360' in the air (based on a baseball's terminal velocity being about 95 mph). It's safe to say that no thrown baseball has ever spun close to 2800 times.
I would propose rps (revs per second) but even then a pitch takes a lot less than a second to reach home plate. That said, Lambright's benders would have upwards of 47 rps. To me, it actually makes it easier to conceptualize. Given that a high-80s pitch (probably like Lambright's breaking pitches) takes about half a second to reach the batter, if you know that it had 48 rps, you can calculate in your head that it spun about 24 times.
What does it mean? As far as I can tell, spin efficiency and controlling the axis of the spin are a lot more important than the actual raw spin numbers but it would just be nice if the numbers being used had some sort of meaning in reality. Indeed, if you really want to figure out what a baseball is doing from the time it leaves the pitcher's hand until it reaches the catcher's mitt (with any luck, after a swinging strike), you're going to have to convert the rpm data into # of revs in 60' 6" anyway (really somewhere closer to 55', based on the pitcher's release point, but you get the idea).
I just wish the people who invented the machines had thought about what is really happening when they decided how to present their machines' data. It would make it easier for fans to understand what it really means.
Do you also think that they should change how pitch speed is measured? Or if you don't drive your car for a full hour, do you not measure your speed in mph? Just seems like weird logic for no real benefit. It's just a standard of measurement. Maybe when they were first beginning to track how rpm's affected pitch movement the actual number of revolutions mattered but now it's just something they use to handicap pitch rotation quality. People don't really quote rpm numbers to get into the mechanics but as a point of reference. It's just like if you watched a pitcher who throws 91 and a pitcher that throws 99 and used those numbers to make a point about their velocity, you'd say a pitcher who throws a 2300 rpm curve has a worse curve than a pitcher who throws 3000 rpm, or throw whatever arbitrary qualifiers you want in there. Again, I'm just not sure what the point of the complaint is. My point is that if they expressed the spin rate as rps instead of rpm, then any fan could almost immediately approximate how much a pitch really spun, based on the fact that most pitches take a little less than half a second to get to the plate. Spin as rpm is a purely arbitrary concept. It's a number and nothing else, completely untethered from reality.
Your analogy of driving, say, 60 mph, is exactly what I'm talking about. If you only drive half an hour, it's 30 miles (or if you have 30 miles to go, you know it's half an hour). Using rpm for pitch spin is like having your speedometer tell you your speed in miles per day. No one drives for 24 hours straight, so it would be a pretty useless number. Sure, you could say "Well, before I was driving 1440 miles per day and now only 1200 miles per day, so I guess I'm going slower than before." But I have no idea how long it's going to take me to get to Worcester.
As for pitch velocity being expressed in mph, everyone can relate to that because we all know that a 95 mph heater is coming at you like a really fast car. But who the heck knows what rpm are? The most familiar example is your car's engine but no one has actually watched the inside of their car's engine turning or can tell the difference between 2000 and 3000 rpm.
And we use rpm for pitch spin as a complete accident because when machines started measuring it, that's the unit they were set on. If that's a good enough reason to use a unit, we're lucky that Henry Ford happened to use mph instead of mpd.
|
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Dec 10, 2021 20:07:10 GMT -5
I think per second would be better just because a two digit number is enough, I don't need the four digits.
|
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 10, 2021 20:13:44 GMT -5
I think per second would be better just because a two digit number is enough, I don't need the four digits. If they could convert it to a 5-star system like my Thai restaurant, it might be even simpler. Spin rate? Very hot. What about that guy? Mild. |
|
|
|
Post by soxfaninnj on Jan 31, 2022 13:13:18 GMT -5
After reading about Germans velocity sitting in the mid 90s I would be really surprised if he doesn’t get selected. He fits the profile of guys who selected to a tee.
|
|
badfishnbc
Veteran
Doing you all a favor and leaving through the gate in right field since 2012.
Posts: 492
|
Post by badfishnbc on Feb 1, 2022 9:16:02 GMT -5
After reading about Germans velocity sitting in the mid 90s I would be really surprised if he doesn’t get selected. He fits the profile of guys who selected to a tee. I think it's a fair point, but with spring training possibly delayed and therefore potentially shortened, it's less time for a team to evaluate whether a player can hack it with the big club right now. I think the potential for any Rule 5 draftee sticking sinks drastically in the current environment, and at the very least improves the likelihood that the pick is offered back to their original team. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 1, 2022 9:26:17 GMT -5
Interesting thoughts and great point that the lockout/shortened ST could definitely have an impact on how Rule 5 goes. I could see it going a few ways. Your hypo makes a lot of sense. I could also see, in the sprint of getting ready for the season, a team taking a flyer on a Rule 5 guy as it tries to fill its roster out, not knowing how things are going to shake out with remaining free agents. I think that'd mean more picks, with more guys being offered back.
For what it's worth, in the era of widely available minor league pitch data, seeing the guy in person - particularly pitchers - is probably less important than it used to be. Teams are preparing for the Rule 5 draft right now by crunching all of that data - you almost wonder if the increased waiting game will make some of those options seem even more attractive.
|
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 1, 2022 9:32:15 GMT -5
Also possible that the season is shortened enough that taking and keeping a Rule 5 player makes sense, sort of like how the Sox kept Arauz on the roster for the entirety of a shortened 60 game season.
Not saying that I expect the season to be only 60 games long, but at this point nothing would surprise me.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 1, 2022 9:34:47 GMT -5
Also possible that the season is shortened enough that taking and keeping a Rule 5 player makes sense, sort of like how the Sox kept Arauz on the roster for the entirety of a shortened 60 game season. Not saying that I expect the season to be only 60 games long, but at this point nothing would surprise me. Even that cuts both ways. Flukier results happen in smaller samples so you could see more teams go for it (and put a higher premium on roster spots) with a shorter season. |
|
|
|
Post by basbal24 on Feb 1, 2022 17:55:04 GMT -5
If no agreement possible in the next 3 to 4 weeks -will they cancel MLB rule 5 this year ?
|
|
badfishnbc
Veteran
Doing you all a favor and leaving through the gate in right field since 2012.
Posts: 492
|
Post by badfishnbc on Feb 18, 2022 12:09:34 GMT -5
After reading about Germans velocity sitting in the mid 90s I would be really surprised if he doesn’t get selected. He fits the profile of guys who selected to a tee. German Rule 5 watch, day 72: I am troubled by information appearing on Twitter regarding a potential move to the bullpen. I can only pray that none of Ian Cundall's 5,423 followers are MLB scouts. |
|
|
