While it’s true that Strasburg’s various road appearances produced sellout crowds, the kid lost three of his first five games. He’s living proof that reaching triple digits on the radar gun may impress the media but does not necessarily intimidate the opposition

The article in general warns us that Strasburg may not win 300 games (he likely won’t) and that he has not yet earned his place amongst baseball’s best (certainly arguable).

Personally, I do not think that we need to wait for Strasburg’s career to be over before we can enjoy it. This is a guy who, after all of the aforementioned hype throughout his college and minor league career, responded by delivering a 14 strikeout, no walk game in front of a sellout crowd in Washington — and on baseball’s center stage. 

It’s not just that Strasburg is off to a great start, with his 2.45 ERA over his first six starts. It is how he’s doing it – 53 strikeouts, 10 walks, and 2 home runs in 37 innings. A 98-99 mile per hour fastball, 96 MPH two-seamer, an excellent curveball, and a 90+ MPH changeup.

Some of Schlossberg’s points are valid. Sure, we shouldn’t anoint Strasburg a 300 (or 200) game winner during his first season. But winning 300 games is so rare that it shouldn’t be a prerequisite to achieving greatness. And it’s fine to say that Strasburg hasn’t earned an all-star spot yet, or that he hasn’t proven he’s the best pitcher in the game.

But Strasburg is certainly not a product of hype. He has been hyped, unlike any pitcher in recent times, because of what he’s done on the baseball field, and because of the attributes he has that allow him to throw a baseball the way he does. As baseball fans, we don’t need the media to explain Strasburg’s greatness. We can see it every time he takes the mound, and we want to celebrate it while it’s happening, not when it’s all said and done.

Anyway, here’s his pitch movement graph, with horizontal movement on the x-axis, vertical movement on the y-axis, and from the catcher’s perspective:

If you remember, in Strasburg’s first start the gameday classifications were not picking up his two-seamer, classifying all fastballs as the four-seam variety. I am guessing that after Strasburg’s start, someone went in and “trained” the algorithm to pick up his two-seamer, since it is clear that he throws one. As you can see, his two-seamer generally moves more down and in on righties than his four-seamer.

It is also a couple MPH slower:

While Strasburg is interesting enough to watch on the field, check out his early off-field contributions, in the form of increased attendance and ratings. Strasburg’s marquee value may be as high as anyone is baseball right now.

His line: 7 IP, 4 hits, 2 R, 1 HR, 0 BB, 14 K

Unreal. His lone blemish was a changeup to Delywn Young that caught a little too much of the plate, allowing Young to yank it into the right field stands. For most of the game, however, Strasburg toyed with the Pirates’ hitters, blowing 98 mile an hour fastballs by them, dropping unhittable curveballs, and occasionally resorting to his 90+ MPH change.

Watching Strasburg’s performance, I couldn’t help but think that he has the most dominating stuff I have seen since, I don’t know, Pedro Martinez. Sure, I’m probably caught up in the hype. There are plenty of great pitchers in the game today, and one start against the Pirates doesn’t make you the best in the game.

The highest drama came after the 6th, when Strasburg was at 80 pitches and the Nats, behind home runs by Adam Dunn and Josh Willingham, took a two run lead. There was much speculation from the broadcast booth that the Nationals phenom would be taken out. However, not only did Strasburg come up for the seventh, he struck out the side and left to an electric ovation.

You knew it was coming – let’s take a look at some PITCHf/x data on his debut.

That is simply Strasburg’s pitches, in order, accompanied by MPH. He did not lose much on the fastball as the game went on. Here’s his movement chart (from the catcher’s perspective):

Horizontal movement is on the X-axis and vertical movement is on the Y-axis, and the data points are color coded by pitch type. You can see that his pitches cluster into three pretty distinct groups; the fastball in the upper left, the change up just below it, and the curve in the lower right.

I think if we studied his pitches more closely, we’d find two fastballs and perhaps a variation of the curve (a true, knee buckling curve and more of a sharp breaking slider/curve). For now, though, the chart gives us a good indication of his pitch movement.

Using the data from Brooks Baseball, here’s his pitched usage breakdown (with average and max speed):

According to PITCHf/x, Strasburg hit 100.1 and 99.9, both in the second inning. He hit 99 or faster five times and at least 98 a remarkable 28 times. It is completely accurate to say this guys *sits* in the upper-90s. At least he did on Tuesday night. I can’t wait until the next time he takes the mound.

I think we’ve posted after every Strasburg start so far, so I figured I may as well keep that going. Against UNLV, he faced 28 batters: 14 ks, 1 bb, 6 hits, 2 runs. SDSU won 4-3. UNLV is currently ranked 133rd in the nation by Boyd’s World; last year they were at 115.

So far, Strasburg has 59 strikeouts and 107 batters faced, a 55% k rate.

Stephen Strasburg started again today against the cross-town rivals, University of San Diego, beating the Toreros 5-3 on the back of another gem by Stephen Strasburg. His line today was:

8 IP, 5 H, 2  R, 2 ER, 18 K, 1 BB, 1 HR allowed, 1 2B.

Yeah, that brings his 2009 line up to:

20.1 IP, 13 H, 5 R, 4 ER, 45 K, 4 BB, 1 HR allowed,  3 2B, 0 3B.

I’m not making these things up. He really is striking out 60.8% (45 K’s)of the batters he faces (74) while walking just 5.5% — which is actually UP from his 4.4% BB rate of last year.

But, his mechanics should be under some scrutiny as they’re very Mark Prior-like. Read more after the jump…

There’s an article that prompted me to post something I’ve been meaning to post. Over at the Mariner’s blog, Bleeding Blue and Teal, they touched on some problems with Strasburg’s delivery — mainly the Inverted W or the inverted V or the M or the L or the XYZ … whatever you want to call it. This isn’t just their speculating, the site Driveline Mechanics — one I respect and read as frequently as they update — has had two separate posts on his elbow getting above the shoulder line as he cocks back to throw.

Basically, when a pitcher is loading and the hips turn to throw the ball towards home plate, most people, lIke Chris O’Leary, believe that the pitching arm (Strasburg’s right arm in this case) should be vertical with the ball facing towards the 3rd base bag (1st base, if it’s a south paw on the mound). Failure to do this forces the arm to whip around his body in a violent motion trying to catch up to the rest of him. This puts unnecessary strain and pressure on his shoulder and elbow and this is the main problem of the Inverted/Extroverted Alphabet Letter Here that most pitching mechanics experts identify as a big injury risk. Guys like John Smoltz, AJ Burnett, Jeremy Bonderman, Anthony Reyes, and the guy that Stephen Strasburg’s often said to be the most dominant pitcher since this guy’s days: Mark Prior. The BB&T article linked above has a couple of pictures documenting what Strasburg does and also shows the other names in question that have all had arm problems due to this mechanic.

This leads to an intriguing question: Mark Prior was the jewel of the 2001 MLB Rule 4 draft. We all know how his career’s panned out, but does that make Strasburg still a lock for the No. 1 spot considering the flaws he’s got in his mechanics? Is there apprehension? At what spot in the draft do you throw that aside and draft him?

If he’s there for the Padres, I think it’s a no-brainer to take him. I think that even with these mechanics he should go No. 1 overall to the Washington Nationals. Going back to Mark Prior, he gave the Chicago Cubs 613.1 innings of 132 ERA+ baseball between 2002-2005, before he finally broke down. And, don’t forget that until the Cubs then-short stop Alex Gonzalez went all Roger-Dorn on the Cubs and let an inning-ending (at least, I believe it was) double play ball go through him AFTER the whole Bartman incident, they were a few innings from the World Series. 613 innings of 132 ERA+ baseball is a lot.

In 2001, the Cubs gave Mark Prior at $4 million signing bonus — largest still in their history. Add in 10% inflation, and, I believe, that $4 mil becomes $~7.2 million (if I didn’t do that quick math wrong). How do we judge how much Mark Prior actually gave in those four years from 2002-05? Well, Fangraphs is great and has done that for us, with Win Values data that goes back to 2002. They also have those Win Values translated into dollars.

In 2002, Prior’s on-field performance netted 2.8 Wins Above Replacement (WAR) which was worth $7.2 million. If you use the oft-noted $4.4 million +$400K formula for turning WAR into $$, now-a-days that’d be worth $12.72 million. Interesting.

2003 saw his first full season in the bigs and throw 211.1 innings that were worth 7.6 WAR. Back then, it was worth $21.2 million. Converted to today’s rates, that’s about $32 million worth of value.

2004 was injury shortened for Prior after 118 innings. Still, he managed 2.7 WAR good for $8.3 million in value then, $12.28 million today.

2005 was his last valuable season of his career. He threw 166.2 innings picking up 3 WAR, good for $10.2 million back then. Now, that would be $13.6 worth of value today.

All told, from 2002-2005, Prior accumulated 16.1 Wins Above Replacement, totalling an aggregate value of $47.1 million. 16. 1 WAR in this offseason, is worthy of $71.24 million.

The Cubs initial investment was just $4 million. Prior flew through the minor leagues — like many elite college pitchers do — thus giving his peak years of his terrible mechanics to the Cubs and, in turn, giving them nearly 12-to-1 on their investment back then — close to 18-to-1 now-a-days.

Obviously no one is exactly alike, but we can be cautious when talking about Strasburg. Maybe he never breaks down and has a Hall of Fame career. Maybe he has a Mark Prior like career. Either way, even if you get just the 116.2 innings from Prior’s rookie year in 2002, you get your investment back immediately and anything after that is gravy.

So, should Stephen Strasburg be taken first overall this June? Absolutely. No questions asked.

ey, listen, I know there’s been A TON on Stephen Strasburg all over the internet, and recently here at Friar Forecast. That said, this was just way to good to not mention, even if there’s barely a chance that he’ll fall to the Padres at No. 3 overall.

Stephen Strasburg struck out 16 batters last night. No, I’m not kidding and I didn’t create him in a video game. His second start of the year nearly doubled his strikeout total from his first start. So, we can safely assume something in the neighborhood of 27 strikeouts in start 3 for him.

Now, he was pitching against the Nevada Wolf Pack, but still. 16 K’s is remarkable.

His final line in the game:
6.2 IP, 5 H, 2 R, 2 ER, 1 BB, 16 K, 26 Batters Faced.

His line through two games:

2-0, 12.1 IP, 8 H, 3 R, 2 ER, 3 BB, 27 K, 1 HBP, 49 Batters Faced. Yes, he is striking out 55.1% percent of the batters he faces, while walking just 6.1%.

Fun fact: the rest of the San Diego State pitching staff has 21 K’s and 8 BB’s on the season.

H/T: Beyond the Box Score

Utah was ranked 82 last year in D1 by Boyd’s World, so they weren’t exactly pushovers. The game was played in SDSU’s park, which has a PF of 113, though it doesn’t matter much when balls don’t get put into play.

Anyway, this kid is pretty good. You may have heard, but he’s expected –he’s almost a lock — to go number one in the ‘09 draft, and the Padres pick at #3.

Regardless of where he’s drafted and how he performs in pro ball, I’m interested in following this guy’s final college season.

With the talk of Stephen Strasburg’s starts in 2008, as well as how his opening start of the 2009 campaign, and some of the work I did breaking down the Padres 2008 draft (albeit, with tweaks I’ve made to my system since writing those, the numbers have changed a bit)  being bandied about ’round here, I’m coming by with some more college statistics-related things.

First up, Myron and I penned an article for Rich Lederer’s fantastic Baseball Analysts website. It basically is an outline of adjusting college offensive numbers to the best that I know how at this point (suggestions are aboslutely welcome).

Some good work has been done recently over at Project Prospect:

-Top 30 pitching prospects.
-Top 50 pitchers under the age of 25.
-Some article comparing the Mets 18th overall draft pick, Ike Davis, and the Mariners’ 66th overall draft pick, Dennis Raben. I bring it up because this cool guy is also writing this linkage post.

But the one that made me most excited: Lincoln Hamilton’s 2009 Draft “Big Board.” This is definitely subject to change, as all ‘big boards’ are, throughout the college season. I plan on manually entering in the numbers of college hitters (and pitchers, though I’m FAR less comfortable divulging that info at the moment since there are so many things that goes into evaluating pitchers) starting in early-to-mid March and tracking it every couple of weeks — I can bring some updates here. There’s also a thread on Lincoln’s article over there. If you’re not a member of those forums, and like studying prospects, I really would urge you to join. The articles are great, but that forum is civil, well-run, and is built on the accessability of the writers, and depth of knowledge of all the people that post there. A ton of great discussion that isn’t always prompted by the site’s founders. Even if you just want to lurk and read the discussion going on, there’s a ton of links, valuable information, and nice breakdowns by guys who do actually have scouting backrounds and/or current jobs as part-time area scouts. Great stuff.

Also, Project Prospect has started rolling out their annual Team Top 5′s (plus 3-5 honorable mentions), which will then lead to their Top 200 Prospect List. I will be doing the Padres top 5 over there.

Speaking of Prospect Lists, a little publication I like to call Baseball America released their top 100 list which means all of the big guns have released their lists. Baseball Prospectus and ESPN (A.K.A. Keith Law) already released their lists and the Sporting News released a top 50 earlier.

The Aztecs kicked off their season last night with a win 6-3 over Bethune Cookman. I decided to listen to the game and chart the pitch selection of one Stephen Strasburg (Elstron was announcing a majority of the pitches and would say either fastball or breaking ball, so I managed to record about 90% of pitch selection).

Strasburg’s line: 5.2 IP, 3 H, 1 R, 0 ER, 2 BB, 11 K, 1 HBP, 1 WP, 103 pitches

He only had two 1,2,3 innings (2nd and 4th).

He threw four different pitches in the start, two of them fastballs (four seamer (mainly) and added a two seamer this year), as well as a slider (more of a cutter) and a breaking ball (curve).  The two seamer sat in the low 90′s (91-94), while the four seamer hit 98 on the gun (generally 94-96, topped out at 98).  The slider had some serious bite, but it seemed like he had a lot of problems locating it and had to rely mainly on the FB.

74% of the pitches he threw in the game were fastballs, and of the 24 batters he faced only four of them were started off with anything other then the fastball.

Of the batters he did throw a first pitch FB to, 80% of them started the count down 0-1 (or were out on the 1st pitch).  In fact, of the few batters that did start 1-0, NONE of them worked the count to 2-0.
7 of his 11 K’s came via the fastball, however three of his last four K’s came via offspeed pitches (curve and slider).

The outfielders could have taken the day off.  Only two outs (the very first out of the game and the last out of the 5th) came via a fly ball, the rest were all grounders.  Of those four grounders, all but one of them were hit to the right side (second out in the second went 6-3).

The result:  Strasburg was clearly the most dominant pitcher in baseball last year, and showed why in this game.  In the first start of the season you do not expect the ace to be perfect, but he was right up there (The run that scored got into scoring position via a PB, but it could have been a WP; that was why it was unearned).  He does need to work on spotting his curve, and could probably throw the two seamer more often because it can result in earlier outs to conserve his pitch count.  Overall, though, Strasburg was dominant, and I would be amazed if he fell to us at #3.  But keep your fingers crossed, anyway.

As you can probably tell, from this post and the last, I’m in college baseball/draft mode. It’s a little early (at least for draft stuff), though the start of the college season, right around the corner, is probably the source of my anxiousness.

Anyway, with the help of the SDSU website and Boyd’s World, I tracked down each of Stephen Strasburg’s 13 starts from last season, and added the park factor for the stadium where the game was pitched and the opposing team’s ISR rank (described here; think RPI, but better). I included the ISR’s to show what caliber of opponents he faced. We really only care about their offense, of course, not total team strength, but this will have to serve as a proxy for offensive prowess. Anyway, here’s the chart. Make of it what you wish:

Look at how he turned it on after the start at Utah. Through then, here are his totals:

33.3 inn, 18 runs, 35 hits, 6 walks, 38 ks
after
64 inn, 8 runs, 26 hits, 10 walks, 96 ks

Remember, of course, the same size here is extremely small — especially when we start slicing and dicing — like half the size of a full MLB pitcher’s season.

What also stands out to me are the park factors. He didn’t pitch in a pitcher’s park all year. The average PF for stadiums he pitched in was 117. If you assumed his road parks were neutral, which is what we often do in the majors, you’d get a PF of like 108. In reality, his road parks, collectively, were actually tougher than his home park. That’s tough luck, but I suppose comes with the territory when you pitch in the hitter-friendly Mountain West Conference.

The average ISR of teams he faced was 73, which seems relatively high, though I admittedly have nothing to compare it against. Five of his 13 starts came against teams rated in the top 40.

With the Padres holding the third pick in the 2009 draft, Strasburg very well may not be available. In case you haven’t been following the hype, Strasburg is as big of a college prospect as we’ve had in a few years, to say the least. In a recent chat, Kevin Goldstein said he’d rank him in the top three on his top 100 list right now. That isn’t his top 100 college prospects; it’s his top 100 minor league baseball prospects.

A lot can happen between now and the draft, like, uh, Strasburg’s junior campaign. It’ll be a fun one to follow, even if the Pads don’t get a chance to take the young right hander.