Archive - player evaluation RSS Feed

Thoughts on losing Simon Castro

January 19, 2012 in Myron Logan, player evaluation, prospects, San Diego Padres, scouting with 1 Comment

When the San Diego Padres acquired Carlos Quentin from the Chicago White Sox, they gave up a couple of pitching prospects in Simon Castro and Pedro Hernandez. We’ve already discussed the trade in general, so now let’s focus more on Castro.

Right hander Simon Castro was signed as an international free agent out of the Dominican Republic back in 2006. He was quite raw, obviously, and didn’t really burst onto the big time prospect scene until after his 2009 campaign at Single-A Fort Wayne.

Castro pitched 140 and a third innings that year, posting a 3.33 ERA, 10.1 K/9, 2.4 BB/9, and .6 HR/9. Those are some pretty solid numbers, especially for a 21-year-old who had yet to really put it all together previously. After the impressive season, Castro ranked as the 57th best prospect in baseball by Baseball America, the #2 Padres prospect by Kevin Goldstein, and the #2 Padres prospect by John Sickels.

Sickels called Castro an “excellent arm with improving command” and Goldstein said that “he will be an above-average major-league starter, with some scouts projecting him as high as a No. 2.”

in 2010, Castro jumped up to Double-A San Antonio and continued to perform. He again pitched 140 innings (10 and a third in Triple-A Portland), with a 3.28 ERA, 7.3 K/9, 2.6 BB/9, and .6 HR/9. The drop in strikeouts was a bit alarming, but overall the 6-5 right hander had a more-than-respectable year in his first taste of Double-A.

The prospectors didn’t waver. Baseball America rated him as the 58th best MLB prospect while Kevin Goldstein and John Sickels both kept him at #2 overall in the Padres system.

Last season Castro started out in Triple-A Tucson and lasted only six starts, posting an ERA over 10 and ugly peripherals. He was sent back down to Double-A San Antonio where he would regain some of his form. His ERA was 4.33, but as we mentioned in the Quentin trade analysis, his peripherals looked largely the same:

Year Inn K/PA BB/PA BABiP FIP
2010 129.7 20.2% 6.8% .271 3.34
2011 89.3 19.5% 4.3% .321 3.80

One could argue pretty easily that he was actually a little better the second time around in Double-A, as his strikeout rate stayed virtually the same and his walk rate dropped quite a bit. His strikeout-to-walk ratio jumped from 2.97 in 2010 to 4.56 in 2011.

Of course, there are some legitimate reasons to be concerned with Castro’s 2011 year. For one, he struggled mightily again in Triple-A, giving him a 9.50 ERA, 1.5 HR/9, and nearly one walk for every strikeout in 36 career innings. It’s a small sample, sure, but it is ugly performance. Further, he repeated Double-A and while his peripherals were a little better, it’s not as if he dominated.

After 2011, though, would you expect him to completely drop off the prospect radar? That’s kind of what happened. Baseball America didn’t list Castro in its Padres top 10, Kevin Goldstein rated him #20 in the system, and John Sickels didn’t even rank him in his top 27.

Now, prospect lists are certainly fluid, and Castro didn’t do much to build on his 2010 campaign. Further, the Padres continued to add minor league talent from the draft and trades, helping push Castro’s freefall – not to mention, other guys establishing themselves.

Still, if you’re trying to look at the whole picture, it’s hard to believe that Castro should have fallen this far based on his ‘11 performance. If he was a top three prospect prior to 2011, there’s no way he’s a top 20-30 prospect after. That’s only my opinion, of course, and the prospect experts certainly study these guys closer than I do and have a lot of scout/front office contacts.

The general point, though, is not about prospect lists. Instead, the concern is over what Castro could still become. We’ve talked a lot recently about the Padres depth in the minor leagues. Castro was kind of a guy who embodied that depth. Formerly a highly-regarded prospect, there he was sitting way down — all but forgotten — on our organization depth chart.

Castro is gone now and while we received Carlos Quentin for him (and Hernandez), at this point it’s not clear that the acquisition was worth the potential cost.

A case for Cord Phelps

January 16, 2012 in Chris Kelly, player evaluation, prospects, San Diego Padres with 5 Comments

There’s been plenty of talk this offseason about moves the San Diego Padres have made. Like them or not, Josh Byrnes has not hesitated to pull the trigger on deals that he thinks are best for the team.

What has also been discussed around the virtual watercooler are the moves Byrnes hasn’t made. The one I’m interested in the most for this piece is the acquisition (or lack thereof) of middle infield starters. After all the deals that have been done, San Diego is still without proven talent at SS or 2B.

Fans and bloggers alike were clamoring for help at these critical positions. The assumption was, since we didn’t acquire any, then such players must: #1 not be out there, or #2 must not be available. In looking at San Diego’s system, it is difficult to believe that ownership wasn’t attempting to upgrade at these positions. However, maybe they feel comfortable with any of Logan Forsythe, Everth Cabrera, Beamer Weems, Jeudy Valdez, Jonathan Galvez, or a healthy Drew Cumberland. One could argue a case for any of them, although most on that list are 1-2 years away.

I did some investigating into potential options that would be viable for San Diego to acquire. Viable was really at the crux of my research. It’s easy to dream for guys like Starlin Castro, Asdrubal Cabrera, etc, but those are pies in the sky. So, on the one hand, there are plenty of talented, young players at those crucial positions; but, not surprisingly, teams aren’t interested in parting with them (takes care of #2 above). The other side of the coin seems to indicate that available talent in that area is limited. Many names that piqued my interest were still 1-2 years away. If the wait is that long, why look outside the organization?

There was one name, though, that struck a chord (apologies): the Cleveland Indians’  Cord Phelps.

Now, if you do the research, Phelps is not an elite prospect by any means, and most scouts would probably project him to be a utility guy. To me, though, I see some opinions wavering as to his future status. Some think he might blossom if given a starting gig. I’m firmly entrenched in that camp.

First, let’s look at his career MiLB slash line over four seasons (I’m not going to consider his MLB numbers since he only has 71 at bats under his belt.):

.288/.376/.434 (.810 OPS)

Obviously, the OBP stands out. Over the past three seasons, he’s had more than 375 AB per season. In 2009 (A+), his OBP was .386. In 2010 (AA/AAA), it was .368. Finally, in 2011 (AAA), it was .376. Those percentages are consistently strong.

Now, let’s look at some advanced stats. Keep in mind, these are his MiLB numbers we’re talking about, and we know that past performance doesn’t always predict future success.

His wOBA over those seasons: .350, .383, .377.  Again, average is typically around .330. Impressive, right? There’s more. His BB% over those three seasons averages out to 10.8. Anything in the double digits in BB% is considered above average. The guy has excellent plate discipline.

Additionally, his K% over those three seasons averages out to 16.2. That percentage might even be slightly elevated, since his K% in Triple-A Columbus last season was 20.5, generally six to seven percentage points higher than his typical performance. Why? Likely because he wanted to prove he had some pop, as he hit a career-best 14 homers that season, nearly double the output of his previous career-best.

Phelps’ track record also has a nice history when it comes to runs created. Here are his wRC+ numbers for those same seasons:

2009 (A+) 115
2010 (AA) 96
2010 (AAA) 141
2011 (AAA) 134

So, in High-A Kinston of the Carolina League, Phelps was 15% better than league average, and during the first half of 2010 in Double-A Akron, he was 4% worse than average. He made significant improvements in this category in Triple-A. For the last half of 2010, he was 41% higher than average and then this past season he was 34% better.

Now, there’s plenty more, but I wanted to focus on his ability to get on base and to create runs. I think we should harken to the old days where your middle infielders are the guys at the top of the lineup who set the stage and score the runs. He seems to be well-suited to the 2-hole, as he hits from both sides of the plate and scouts say his swing stays in the zone for a long time, allowing him to barrel up the ball.

Phelps is also looking for a home. He’s currently on the Indians radar as a utility player. He can play 2B, SS, and 3B. In fact, this fall, they tested him out at 3B during the Arizona Fall League. He’s blocked by a couple of prospects that are in line to inherit his positions. Lonnie Chisenhall is earmarked for  third base, Cabrera has short stop locked down, and Jason Kipnis is slated to be the regular second basemen. I say we make a move to acquire Phelps and make him either our short stop or second basemen. I wouldn’t give up any major prospects for him, but I could see an MLB bench guy plus a young arm in the system. Jesus Guzman makes sense and would fit well in the AL.

Now, defensively, Phelps is not a wizard, but he’s not a butcher, either. Let’s look at his range factors for the seasons above:

RF/G 2B SS
2009 4.72
2010 4.30
2011 4.09 4.08

Those numbers put Phelps right in line or slightly above the players currently in the system that I mentioned earlier, with the exception of Cabrera whose RF/G is generally higher. So it seems as though he’s capable with the glove and has a really nice approach at the plate. That’s why I think he’d be a good fit for the lineup.

I’d love to see him take over at shortstop, but I’m not sure he has what it takes to play the position at the major league level. Peter Friberg makes some interesting points  for Weems as a potential short stop, and Valdez seems to be suited for the position defensively, so maybe Phelps could hold that fort down until the lower level guys establish themselves, then switch to second.

Any takers?

This frown’s not turning upside down

January 9, 2012 in Chris Kelly, player evaluation, San Diego Padres, trades with 21 Comments

The San Diego Padres made an unsurprising move on Friday. They sent first baseman Anthony Rizzo and pitcher Zach Cates to the Chicago Cubs in exchange for pitcher Andrew Cashner and outfielder Kyung-Min Na. Much of the initial reaction to the trade is negative from the Padres’ perspective. Here are my thoughts (obviously).

I’m not going to get knee deep in the numbers, and I’m essentially looking at this trade for the Rizzo and Cashner pieces. Na’s track record leaves nothing to be excited about, and one season does not a prospect make as far as Cates’ status is concerned.

Geoff Young of Ducksnorts tweeted a nice piece by Jason Wojciechowski to help frustrated fans/bloggers to maintain perspective when they can’t get behind deals made by their teams. It was a nice refresher, but I’m still writing, aren’t I?

I know I don’t hold all the keys to the kingdom and am definitely “armchairing” it as I write about these things, but what Wojciechowski didn’t touch upon is the reason I write despite having little to no insider information. It’s the passion I have for my Padres. I’m not trying to turn this into a thesis on blogging, but I did think it worth mentioning that I am well aware of the knowledge I don’t possess, yet I’m compelled to opine anyway.

Okay…back on topic. The deal is done, and I’ve had some time to digest it (along with a God-awful heaping of Taco Bell that may taint my analysis). I’ve read what others think, and I’m trying to see as many angles as possible here. The conclusion I continue to reach, however, is that this has the potential to be a terrible deal for San Diego.

The thing about trades, though, is the time factor. Hence the use of the word “potential”. Only time will tell how this works out. That’s the funny thing about trades from a fan perspective. By the time a trade’s outcome can be measured, we’ve already focused on other, more pertinent issues at hand, so we don’t often stop to truly evaluate a trade at its most appropriate point. Mental note: write an article about this trade on the last day of the World Series. I think that will be the time we’ll be able to really figure out who won.

In fact, Joe Fan is probably already starting to get foggy about the Adrian Gonzalez trade to Boston. As it stands, we just shipped out the centerpiece position player of this deal in Rizzo. Patterson has already found greener pastures. With Kelly’s stock falling a bit and Fuentes not showing overwhelming numbers, it’s becoming clear that Boston got the better end of that deal.

Why does this matter? Because San Diego’s organization has little to no room for error. It’s imperative for both amateur and professional writers to hold the Padres organization accountable by critiquing trades. Baseball is an odd business because the bottom line for clubs is money; however, the way they make money is ultimately traced back and through its fan base. Therefore, is the team in it for its own bottom line or to appease its fan base? Or is one a product of the other? That being said, can we assume a team has its fans’ best interests at heart? How can you even measure that? I’m not sure of any of the answers to those questions.

My apologies. I feel like I keep going off on philosophical tangents, but I can’t help it. I know I should just toss this toga into the hamper and get back to the trade itself.  I suppose it’s a way for me to rationalize the emotional…which may be an effort in futility.

Okay…I promise this time. Back to the trade analysis we go.

I’m going to Nostradamasize here and call this one a dud and will even go so far as to say that it will trump Josh Byrnes’ previous stinker: trading Carlos Quentin to the White Sox. In the future, he’ll be known for trading away Joey Votto 2.0 for a reliever who showed flashes of brilliance but would wind up taking the Aaron Poreda path of all stuff, no location. Then, to top it off, Cashner will get seriously injured and miss significant time. Meanwhile, Rizzo will win the starting gig coming out of Spring Training and will put up the following slash line: .275/.340/.480.

Gulp…that’s a hefty prediction on my part. Now that it’s on the screen, it looks pretty extreme. This would certainly be a worst case scenario for San Diego. While it may be bold, though, it’s not “off the map” bold. This could happen.

Now, this could also happen. Rizzo scuffles as he adjusts to MLB pitching, and finishes out with a line of: .220/.320/.440. He strikes out too much, and doesn’t exhibit the power stroke of a Votto. Meanwhile, Cashner is 100% healthy and remains so, thanks to San Diego’s top-notch training staff. He locks down the 8th inning role, which lifts some of the tremendous pressure on the young, talented bullpen arms. Huston Street is later moved at the deadline for a nice prospect or two, and Cashner, with Black and Balsley’s help, becomes a dominant closer with a propensity for the occasional flameout (as closers do). This scenario is also not “off the map,” but it is extreme in favor of San Diego.

So, that leaves us with the question: which is more likely? Your guess is as good as mine because neither guy is proven. I suppose that’s why it’s been so difficult to keep this article on topic.

Ultimately, my bottom line says that Chicago will benefit from this more than San Diego will. The reason being, we are in a more desperate need of position players with pop, not pitching (I know…you can never have too much pitching). To me, Brynes is looking like he’ll be featured on an upcoming episode of Extreme Couponing. The cameras will follow him as he proudly opens a pantry in the back of the clubhouse that has 50 different bullpen guys in numerical order, sitting on the shelf.

On one hand, you have to watch in awe. But on the other, you’re thinking: at what point is this just plain crazy?

Putting themselves on the map (the sequel)

January 3, 2012 in Chris Kelly, player evaluation, prospects, San Diego Padres with 2 Comments

For my first piece at Friar Forecast, I took a look at a position player (Connor Powers)  in the Padres minor league system that you won’t see on any prospect lists but has a chance to open some eyes. For this time around, I’ll focus on a pitcher: Matt Jackson.

Jackson was drafted at the age of 21 by the Padres in the 31st round of the 2009 draft out of the University of South Alabama. He was a letterman in both football and baseball at Haughton High School in Louisiana. Jackson initially attended LSU, and, as a freshman during the 2007 season, he pitched 32.0 innings, walked eight, and struck out 20. His final record at LSU was 0-0 with a 4.50 ERA.

Jackson subsequently transferred to Chipola JC (Florida) and was dominant, going 10-0 with a 2.61 ERA. Over 72.1 innings, he walked 14 and struck out 55. Following that season, he transferred to USA where he finished 5-4 with a 5.33 ERA. At South Alabama, he pitched 74.1 innings, allowing 81 hits while walking 27. Jackson struck out 64 batters for a K/9 of 7.75.  Overall, his WHIP that season was 1.45.

Those college numbers don’t necessarily jump off the page, but the Padres saw some things they liked in the 6’4″ 190 pounder’s arsenal.

In his first season of professional baseball in 2009, Jackson finished at short season Eugene with a record of 3-7 and a 4.97 ERA. He pitched 58.0 innings, resulting in a WHIP of 1.31 to go along with a 6.8 K/9. In 2010, Jackson split time between Eugene and Low-A Fort Wayne. All totaled that season, he went 4-3 with a 4.98 ERA, a 1.375 WHIP, and a 5.8 K/9.

Thus far, the numbers Jackson put up were very solid but not eye-popping, especially for a 22-year old pitching in a pitcher-friendly league. However, 2011 saw a different Jackson altogether.

In his second stint at Ft. Wayne, Jackson found his niche. Despite being 23 and repeating the level, his numbers bear notice. He finished with a 5-1 record that included a 1.95 ERA in 64.2 IP. You read that correctly: a 1.95 ERA. It gets better. Over those 64 some innings, he allowed 49 hits, walked 12, and struck out 68. Yep…68. That resulted in an impressive K/9 of 9.5. Equally impressive was his WHIP of 0.943. Minuscule is a word that comes to mind.

Let’s look at a tale of two seasons here (data courtesy of Fangraphs.com):

IP K% K/9 BB% BB/9 HR/9 BABIP WHIP
2010 50.0 14.9 5.94 5.4 2.16 0.54 0.331 1.42
2011 64.2 26.5 9.46 4.7 1.67 0.14 0.279 0.94

Granted, Jackson spent several weeks of the 2011 season on the DL, so it’s likely his numbers would have been slightly less stellar. Regardless of age, injury, and experience, though, that’s a pretty dramatic improvement. Those 2011 numbers show absolute dominance.

The real question, of course, is will he be able to maintain this dominance? He’ll likely be moving up to Hi-A Lake Elsinore, and it is notorious for being a hitter-friendly league. Laws of probability would say that he won’t maintain the level he attained this past season, yet to see such a significant change in his performance, it is obvious Jackson has made some adjustments that will work for him in 2012, and I expect to see him performing in the same neighborhood as he did this past season.

If he can maintain at or near an 8.0 K/9 and a WHIP around 1.10, you’ll see him move quickly on up through the system. He’s got the frame, so if he can fill out some more without sacrificing any of his stuff, Jackson could at best be a mid-to-back of the rotation starter, and at worst, he could be a long reliever. He relies on a fastball, sinker, curve, slider, and circle change–a wide array of options, which can create havoc for opposing hitters.

2012 will be a pivotal season for Jackson. Another strong run of stats like he put up in 2011 will quickly earn him a place on the prospect lists which, given the status of San Diego’s system, is really saying something.

Examining Wade LeBlanc’s Change-Up

May 5, 2010 in Daniel Gettinger, pitchf/x, player evaluation, San Diego Padres with 12 Comments

Since replacing injured pitcher Chris Young in the starting rotation, Wade LeBlanc has been lights out for the San Diego Padres.  In 23 innings he has a 1.16 ERA, a 2.15 FIP, and a 3.61 xFIP.  LeBlanc is unlikely to sustain such excellence for the entire season, but based on his performance thus far, there is no reason to think he cannot be a league average pitcher going forward.

LeBlanc’s best pitch is his change-up.  He throws it 25 percent of the time, and according to Fangraphs, it has been 5.73 runs above average per 100 pitches so far in 2010.  LeBlanc throws his change-up at 77 mph, 10 mph slower than his fastball.

Because his change-up is so solid, I wanted to see how it compared to some of the major league’s best change-ups according to pitch f/x.

I sorted by the 2009 leaders in change-up runs above average (total, not per-100), and selected the top three lefties for comparison.  The players with the best lefty change-ups in 2009 were: CC Sabathia, Cole Hamels, and Mark Buehrle.

The following table notes how often each pitcher threw his change-up, as well as some speed statistics:

Pitcher

% Change

Fast Vel.

Change Vel.

Diff.

Wade LeBlanc

25%

87 mph

77 mph

10 mph

CC Sabathia

20%

93 mph

80 mph

13 mph

Cole Hamels

24%

90 mph

81 mph

9 mph

Mark Buehrle

25%

85 mph

79 mph

6 mph

The speed difference between LeBlanc’s fastball and change-up is a bit less than Sabathia, but compares favorably with Hamels and Buehrle.

This table highlights each pitcher’s horizontal and vertical movement on his change-up;

Pitcher

Horizontal Movement

Vertical Movement

Wade LeBlanc

7.8

6.8

CC Sabathia

8.6

7.5

Cole Hamels

7.8

7.4

Mark Buehrle

7.0

3.6

Sabathia gets the most horizontal movement on his change-up, but it stays up a bit more than the others’. Buehrle’s change-up has by far the most sink.  The movement on LeBlanc’s change-up is pretty similar to Hamels’.

Finally, lets take a look at the pitch flight charts.  The charts were created using data from Brooks Baseball, and are pitch flights for each pitcher’s most recent start:

There are slight differences between each of the pitcher’s change-ups, but frankly, they are pretty similar. For LeBlanc, this is a good thing.  His change-up is pretty comparable from a “stuff” perspective to Sabathia, Hamels, and Buehrle, three of the top change-up pitchers in baseball.  LeBlanc is unlikely to ever be as good as those three because there is a lot more to pitching than just having a good change-up, but it is certainly a start.

Page 2 of 9«12345»...Last »