best rookie pitching crop since..?

[uwisfan]

with all the frustration over the crappy pitcher signings the past few years, its refreshing to start to see the first wave of pitching hit the organization (FINALLY!)

 

When was the last time we've had a rookie class like this? This is an exciting group to have make their debuts:

- Mark Rogers

- Brandon Kintzler

- Jeremy Jeffress

- Mike McClendon

- John Axford (actually played a bit last year, but its his rookie year)

- Zach Braddock

[wibadgers23]

This is extremely exciting. The best part is that they are all cheap and Brewers' property for years to come. I'm excited for the second wave of pitchers to come next year as well (Rivas, Scarpetta, Peralta, Heckathorn, etc.).

[jimmyjeromehardy7]

Without doing alot of research I gonna go with FOREVER as the answer to the title question. Hopefully we are done signing over the hill pitching and have learned you can actually pitch rookies in MLB games.

[Invader3K]

The first post in the thread doesn't make any sense. I thought Melvin had done absolutely nothing to acquire any power pitching whatsoever...

 

Anyway, yes, it is quite refreshing and I don't remember a group of guys like this. You'd probably have to go back to the early '90s at the earliest.

[Never Outhustled]

 

first post in the thread doesn't make any sense. I thought Melvin had done absolutely nothing to acquire any power pitching whatsoever...

 

Melvin runs the draft now too? No wonder he's so awful in free agency, he's just spread too thin.

 

I will give Melvin credit for the 2 Indy League pick-ups. They'll both be very important to this team going forward. Thats a more efficient way to stock a bullpen than signing over the hill FA relievers to multi-year deals.

 

 

Awesome to see 2 HS 1st round draft pick pitchers blowing heat past MLB hitters. Now hopefully the Brewers can put that stigma to bed. This team has 6 of its own 1st round draft picks in its team. How many teams can say that? Jack Z just did a wonderful job biulding this organization.

[Invader3K]

Well, you can't give all of the credit to Jack Zdurencik and none to Doug Melvin. People have been pining for "impact pitching" around here and it's finally arrived, just maybe a year or two later than people had hoped for (perhaps somewhat unreasonably).

[Never Outhustled]

When was the last time we've had a rookie class like this?

Wegman Bosio, Plesac and Nieves all came up together, and were rookies in 1986. Dang that's a long time. No wonder we suck. Was there 1 more rook with them I'm forgetting? Either way, this class could be better.

[derflotr]

Hate to be the grinch, but I won't get excited until one of these guys establishes himself as a starter. Rogers is the closest but he has major control issues. Jeffress hasn't started at all this year and has had even more problems with command as a starter in the minors. I watch games now just to see these guys, which is great, but as far as having a huge impact on the team? Doesn't seem realistic at this point.

 

 

I like how the Brewers have 100000 potential bullpen arms for next season, but it won't matter until they get better starting pitching.

[igor67]

Exciting yes, but the critique about none of them being established as starters yet is huge. Obviously Jeffress and Rogers can turn that around in a hurry, but Parra was supposed to help that situation too. To that end those two should be getting regular starts. Let's see if they can force a rotation shot to start the year.

[Fatter than Joey]

I know when I was a kid -- Moose Haas and Lary Sorensen came up at the same time in 1977 and anchored the rotation. Sorensen had a big 1978 while Haas was hurt. -- But the difference was that Haas and Sorensen combined for 55 starts in 1977 not a handful of games in Sept.

 

Certainly though, there is more reason for optimism for a couple of seasons down the road.

[RockCoCougars]

When was the last time we've had a rookie class like this?

Wegman Bosio, Plesac and Nieves all came up together, and were rookies in 1986. Dang that's a long time. No wonder we suck. Was there 1 more rook with them I'm forgetting? Either way, this class could be better.

I believe that both Mike Birkbeck and Mark Ciardi were in the rotation in the beginning of '87, though neither lasted long there. I don't believe that Tim Leary was a rookie, but he got a lot of hype in '86 as well. Plesac was a starter in the minors, and I think that he was supposed to be the #5 out of spring training in '86, but I don't think he ever got any starts before he ended up sharing closer duties with Mark Clear.

 

Nieves got hurt, and Wegman and Bosio each took a few years after hitting MLB to develop. That said, I don't think that the current crop of young pitching can touch those guys- though I'll be happy if I'm wrong.

[MJLiverock]

Hate to be the grinch, but I won't get excited until one of these guys establishes himself as a starter. Rogers is the closest but he has major control issues. Jeffress hasn't started at all this year and has had even more problems with command as a starter in the minors. I watch games now just to see these guys, which is great, but as far as having a huge impact on the team? Doesn't seem realistic at this point.

I like how the Brewers have 100000 potential bullpen arms for next season, but it won't matter until they get better starting pitching.

Exactly. They may be exciting compared to the previous Brewer history but it is still a long way from declaring the pitching woes solved. Only two of those listed may be starters, and one them has been in the bullpen all year and we are hoping they pull him back to the rotation in the minors next year. Rogers and Jeffress have potential but they also have plenty of question marks as well.

 

The only immediate benefit I see is that it should keep Melvin from blowing $5MM-$12MM on signing aged middle relievers and "potential closers".

 

The rotation is still 2 above average starters away from being considered good.

 

 

[JohnBriggs12]

I know when I was a kid -- Moose Haas and Lary Sorensen came up at the same time in 1977 and anchored the rotation. Sorensen had a big 1978 while Haas was hurt. -- But the difference was that Haas and Sorensen combined for 55 starts in 1977 not a handful of games in Sept.

 

Certainly though, there is more reason for optimism for a couple of seasons down the road.

Perhaps the best prospect of that 1977 crop that also included Sam Hinds and Gary Beare was Barry Cort. But he got hurt very early on that year and never made it back to the big leagues.

[Fatter than Joey]

Perhaps the best prospect of that 1977 crop that also included Sam Hinds and Gary Beare was Barry Cort. But he got hurt very early on that year and never made it back to the big leagues.

 

I remember all those guys.... Sam Hinds sticks out the most for me -- they were all out of baseball relatively soon after 1977 -- Barry Cort was Canadian, that's about all I recall about him. He was probably the first Canadian to play for the Brewers. The only other one I recall from that era would be Reggie Cleveland, but he was after Cort.

[Patrick425]

Axford and Braddock have done a good job this year and it's hard not to like what they have shown so far in their young MLB career. However, Like derflotr and MJLiverock have pointed out, where is the starting pitching? Can Rodgers stay healthy? Can Jeffress show some more control? Even if the answer is yes to both of those questions, the Brewers need some top of the rotation help. I don't see that coming from any of these guys.

[uwisfan]

Ive been saying for the last couple of years that they need to bite the bullet and spend the money on that #1 starter, even ahead of Gallardo, pushing the #5 starter off the list, allowing Gallardo to be a great #2, and getting you dependable innings to rest the pen. I was disappointed in the Suppan signing for that reason as its just another guy in the rotation. Spending half the big money on an average pitcher doesnt make much sense to me. Right now, we have to accept the company line that top pitchers just wont come to Milwaukee given equal pay, but adding a single great pitcher would cover a lot of problems for this team.

[CheezWizHed]

Can Rodgers stay healthy? Can Jeffress show some more control? Even if the answer is yes to both of those questions, the Brewers need some top of the rotation help.

 

I would say that if the answer is yes to both of those questions, they would help the top of the rotation. Both of those players have the potential to be #1 SPs. They still have a ways to go to fulfill that, but those two questions are the biggest hurdles those two have to overcome to maximizing their potential.

 

At worst (again assuming "yes" to those two Qs), they end up being #2-3 type SPs.

[Patrick425]

CheezWizHed[/b]]Can Rodgers stay healthy? Can Jeffress show some more control? Even if the answer is yes to both of those questions, the Brewers need some top of the rotation help.

 

I would say that if the answer is yes to both of those questions, they would help the top of the rotation. Both of those players have the potential to be #1 SPs. They still have a ways to go to fulfill that, but those two questions are the biggest hurdles those two have to overcome to maximizing their potential.

 

At worst (again assuming "yes" to those two Qs), they end up being #2-3 type SPs.

That's seems a bit optimistic. Neither of these guys were on Baseball America's top 100 list at the beginning of the season. Neither of them made the mid-season top 25. I realize that those lists are not the "gospel" and a player can still have a successful career without ever being on one of those lists, but I think if these guys were on any other team, we would not think as highly of them.

 

 

[thebruce44]

Patrick425[/b]]

CheezWizHed[/b]]Can Rodgers stay healthy? Can Jeffress show some more control? Even if the answer is yes to both of those questions, the Brewers need some top of the rotation help.

 

I would say that if the answer is yes to both of those questions, they would help the top of the rotation. Both of those players have the potential to be #1 SPs. They still have a ways to go to fulfill that, but those two questions are the biggest hurdles those two have to overcome to maximizing their potential.

 

At worst (again assuming "yes" to those two Qs), they end up being #2-3 type SPs.

That's seems a bit optimistic. Neither of these guys were on Baseball America's top 100 list at the beginning of the season. Neither of them made the mid-season top 25. I realize that those lists are not the "gospel" and a player can still have a successful career without ever being on one of those lists, but I think if these guys were on any other team, we would not think as highly of them.

 

Them not being on BA's top 100 list is pretty circumstancial at this point (and for the record Jeffress was actually on it even with the suspention at #100). You can bet they will be on there this offseason. And before Mark got hurt, he was #44 in 2006. I would guess he jumps up into the top 30. Jeffress we hopefully will see in the top 50. If they stay healthy they will move up quick as they become more well known in the upper levels.

 

[CheezWizHed]

Optimistic? Saying that two guys that throw in the upper 90s have #1 potential is too optimistic? Especially with the caveat of their biggest weakness removed (Jeffress' control and Roger's health). And by saying "potential", I'm just pointing out the high-end, not that they are guaranteed.

 

BTW, Jeffress is listed at #100 for 2009. Rogers was at #44 for 2006 (same link). Injury was the only reason Rogers dropped off.

 

Also, remember that Ben Sheets (BA #5 for 2001) took 4 years at MLB ball before he pitched like a #1 SP. I'm not saying that Rogers and Jeffress will max out at #1 next year...

[GAME05]

i'm still at the optimistic stage.

 

the pessimist side of me says "sure, once we get an awesome group of pitchers established, at that point we'll have zero offense." but i'm not a pessimist, so i won't say that.

[Patrick425]

I would guess he jumps up into the top 30. Jeffress we hopefully will see in the top 50. If they stay healthy they will move up quick as they become more well known in the upper levels.

If either of them make the list next year, I don't see how Rogers would be ahead of Jeffress. I would guess that Jeffress would be in the top 75 at best. I don't see how or why Rogers would crack the top 100. He had a decent year...nothing great.

 

If the Brewers had pitching prospects that were the equivilent to Fielder and Weeks before they got to the majors, I could possibly get more excited. Guys like Strasburg, Lincecum, Bumgarner, etc....but Jeffress and Rogers?...meh.

 

[GAME05]

Lincecum making the leap from great prospect to best in the NL is as unpredictable as Jeffress or Rogers doing the same thing. no "prospect status" ranking is going to predict that.

[JohnBriggs12]

Perhaps the best prospect of that 1977 crop that also included Sam Hinds and Gary Beare was Barry Cort. But he got hurt very early on that year and never made it back to the big leagues.

 

I remember all those guys.... Sam Hinds sticks out the most for me -- they were all out of baseball relatively soon after 1977 -- Barry Cort was Canadian, that's about all I recall about him. He was probably the first Canadian to play for the Brewers. The only other one I recall from that era would be Reggie Cleveland, but he was after Cort.

Reggie Cleveland? All I remember from his time is his getting hammered by the Red Sox as the Brewers fell out of the race in 79.. He was not a Brewer product by the way. He was a journeyman starter that was in his 30's by the time the Brewers got him. He was sort of a Jeff Suppan of his time.

 

I didn't see Cort pitch but I remember great excitement after he made 2 outstanding starts early on that year. When he went down it was very discouraging to the Brewer fan base at the time.

[Patrick425]

GAME05[/b]]Lincecum making the leap from great prospect to best in the NL is as unpredictable as Jeffress or Rogers doing the same thing. no "prospect status" ranking is going to predict that.

Lincecum was a top ranked prospect from the beginning (like Weeks and Fielder). Fresh out of the draft, he was ranked 11. While it may have been hard to predict that he would win back to back Cy Youngs, it's wasn't that much of a stretch to say he would be a #1 or #2 pitcher with a decent chance of being one of the best in the league. Not all "top prospects" make it big (see Homer Bailey - at least so far). However, it's easier to get excited about guys ranked in the top 10 or 20, than a pitcher that was once ranked 44th and has since been beset by injuries and another pitcher who has a tendency to be wild and just broke into the top 100 at #100 (not to mention his suspension issues). To say that either of these pitchers will be #2 or #3 pitchers "at worse" seems fairly optimistic.

 

edit: by the way, my original post talked about the top 100 prior to this year. Neither pitcher (Rogers or Jeffress) made that list. To be listed #100 one year and not listed the next, is not the direction you want to go (whatever the reason).