College player update thread 2

[TheRightAnswerInFlushing]

1) On Verlander.

 

He really ought to be the number one pick. Walks schmalks. It's not as if he's walking a batter an inning or something absurd. His control isn't "that bad" now, and it's a safe bet to assume that it will improve to some degree. Control can be learned or, at the very least, improved. You can't teach what he did against Virginia Commonwealth. You can spend all say tutoring a guy, but it's not going ot get him throwing 99mph, as Verlander was against VCU. I was immensely interested in reports from that game because it was a top-drawer pitching matchup, so I read a lot of articles. However, only now did I hear that he hit 99mph "several" times. I had heard that he had hit 97, which, up until now, was the highest I had heard from any credible source, but never before did I hear of "99." There were some reports of 98 in 2003, but they weren't substantiated. When a kid throws "several" pitches at 99 en route to striking out 16 guys, you have to stand up and admire that. It'd still be impressive even if he were one of these dime-a-dozen closer prospects who can throw high-90s for an inning, but when you consider that this guy is out there, throwing high 90s in the later innings, you see why this guy has to be the #1 pick on merit.

 

2)On Niemann.

 

Very disappointing news---especially when it appeared that Niemann was starting to get back on track. In his prior start, reports were that he was consistently between 94 and 95, hitting 96 a few times. That began to make me think that his arm was healthy. As you know, I have expressed much concern about his health in the past. This latest news of an injury-shortened outing wherein he was between 87 and 92 is very disheartening. Obviously, there are fluctuations in velocity from one start to the next, but, simply put, you don't go from throwing 94-96 to throwing 87-92 unless there is something wrong, physically. That's way out of the normal range.

 

3)On Wade Townsend.

 

You know, I really haven't heard anything about this guy in 2004. He seems to be getting lost in the mix between Weaver's statistical dominance and Verlander's mind-boggling radar gun readings. Because I expect both Weaver and Verlander to be gone by the time that the Mets are set to choose, I have been looking for more information on Townsend. I realize that he is having a good statistical year, but I had heard that his velocity was down. Does anyone know more about what he has done in 2004?

[TheRightAnswerInFlushing]

Oh, I forgot something.

 

I want to know about Thomas Diamond, RHP, New Orleans. Reports are few and far between. Anyone have any opinions or info?

[NastyTwig]

www.brewerfan.net/ViewFeaturedAmateurProfile.do?featuredAmateurPlayerId=170&draftId=2

[Anders34]

11,

 

I am not sure what you meant when you said Street had little 'projectability'. I assume you meant that as a starter. In that case, I agree. I think he will make an excellent setup man or closer in the bigs. He has good 'stuff' and his command is excellent. When I said 'stuff' I mean the combination of velocity and movement. His fastball last night hit 91 MPH and has a lot of movement to it. He also works in good off speed pitches and has a closers mentality. I will be shocked if he lasts past pick #20.

 

Flushing

I agree, Niemann is pretty disappointing. The reports from the Rice trio hitting that high of velocity this year comes from the Reckling Park gun when I reported it (which I am now conviced is highly suspect). Last night Niemann never broke 92. Humber (in his few pitches) was right around 90 and topped at 93. Townsend has been flying a bit low on the radar this year. I have not seen him, but I assume his 95 or 96 is actually 93 or 94. From Colby's game summaries, he has been having a few walks but besides that there is not much to harp on so far this year.

 

I haven't heard to much on Diamond so far this year.

[11]

Anders34

 

What I meant is that what you see now is what you'll get later. He's turns 21 this year and is now listed at 6'0 190; he's RHed and throws (quoting you) 91 MPH. Given just those facts, it seems to me that he does not project well to grow bigger, increase velocity, or improve a whole lot because he's been 'coached up' in a great system. In my estimation he does not "project" to get appreciably better. So for those reasons, I don't see the words "big league closer" in his future.

 

I wonder what team is really willing to spend a 1st round pick on a relief pitcher who IMO does not have the power arm to start or close?. Certainly, he has off the chart make up.

[colbyjack]

Anders, thanks as always for your first-hand reports. I certainly hope the cable company around here has the College Sports Network by this time next year.

 

Any thoughts on JP Howell? I saw he pitched 3 innings for the Longhorns & had a pretty impressive line, despite walking 2. I'm guessing he only pitched 3 innings so they could keep him fresh for a weekend start as well.

 

On Verlander.

 

He really ought to be the number one pick. Walks schmalks. It's not as if he's walking a batter an inning or something absurd. His control isn't "that bad" now, and it's a safe bet to assume that it will improve to some degree. Control can be learned or, at the very least, improved. You can't teach what he did against Virginia Commonwealth.

 

Walks schmalks? I don't disagree that control can be teached to a certain degree, but you can't just blow them off as if they're nothing. And how do we know his control isn't "that bad" now? We really don't know how bad he is missing.

 

As for his velocity, we have heard earlier this spring that he was approaching if not reaching triple digits, and was clocked as high as 99 before. I believe Tommy also confirmed this. No doubt about it, that's extremely impressive, and it often gets lost just how awesome his curveball can be. I agree that Weaver isn't necessasrily a lock for the #1 pick.

 

This latest news of an injury-shortened outing wherein he was between 87 and 92 is very disheartening. Obviously, there are fluctuations in velocity from one start to the next, but, simply put, you don't go from throwing 94-96 to throwing 87-92 unless there is something wrong, physically. That's way out of the normal range.

 

An injured groin obviously can mess a lot of things up, but one of my biggest concerns about Niemann is his mechanics given his size. With sloppy mechanics a player can easily losing 5 or more mph to his fastball, not to mention his control. Too many things about Niemann say "stay away" to me, and they've been saying that since before the season even started.

 

On Wade Townsend.

 

You know, I really haven't heard anything about this guy in 2004. He seems to be getting lost in the mix between Weaver's statistical dominance and Verlander's mind-boggling radar gun readings. Because I expect both Weaver and Verlander to be gone by the time that the Mets are set to choose, I have been looking for more information on Townsend. I realize that he is having a good statistical year, but I had heard that his velocity was down.

 

That is interesting. You know, I think the 3 Rice pitchers almost work against one another, because no one seems to be for sure which one is the best pitcher. I had Townsend my #2 player overall behind Weaver to open the season. He has a great fastball and a great curve. Outside of Anders' reports, I haven't heard really anything about what he has been throwing. While the walks are high, his stats are sound, and he's been consistent all year long. Plus, scouts named him the #1 prospect on the Cape last year, ahead of Niemann, whom BA ranked #1.

 

As for Huston Street, I again agree with Anders' assessment, I don't think he'll last past the 20th pick or so. The groin injury may have changed that since he hasn't pitched as much recently, but if he's healthy again, he likely will be pitching deep into the college season given how strong Texas is (currently #1).

 

I think he could be very successful as a closer similar to Trevor Hoffman, who also isn't a flamethrower yet possesses a nasty changeup. Like Hoffman, Street is also quite the athlete, and spent a lot of time at 3B & elsewhere on the infield last year filling in numerous holes as the Longhorns offense (& defense) struggled.

 

However, I have always believed that closers are made, not born. I always find myself stumped when I try to think of a player that had success as a closer that was groomed to be one. That certainly hasn't stopped several teams from taking relief pitchers in the first round of the draft the last couple of years. Despite the Moneyball philosophy that closers are overrated, for some reason the Blue Jays stick out as a team that would be very interested in Street in the first round.

 

Thomas Diamond is another guy that hasn't gotten much pub. I think we'll start seeing more & more info on these players once we hit May & BA really takes off with their draft coverage. His stats are actually really good so far this year (thanks to NastyTwig for pointing out the player profile):

 

2.84 ERA, 10 starts, 66.2 IP, 48 H, 86 K, 22 BB, .197 BAA

 

New Orleans doesn't play in the greatest of conferences, but still those are good numbers. He has given up 6 HRs in that time, which is a lot for a college pitcher, but he does throw gas. He could very well be taken in the top 10, although I'm not so sure he's a top 5 guy at this point in time. You would like both he & Chris Lambert flushing, 2 of the better pure arms available in this year's draft.

[Anders34]

Interesting you mentioned J.P. Howell, Colby. I was flipping between that game and the Brewers debacle from the other night. Howell and Capuano bascially have the same throwing motion and appear to have the same 'stuff'. Fastball that is usually mid to high 80's. Nasty split finger or slider. Decent to good changeup. Capuano seems to be a fairly decently put together guy while J.P. is very slight of build. I wonder if J.P. added some more muscle if he could get more on his fastball. I like J.P. and think he is a good college pitcher. Not so sure how he will project. I would say second round is a likely possibility although I would figure the Brewers might go H.S. pitcher there if they don't in Round 1.

 

As for CSTV, I was very impressed with their coverage. They had a in-game interview with a Rice assistant coach that was later ejected for arguing with the ump. They also had a journalist from the Houston Chronical talking about Rice in general, Niemann, and co. IMHO, they blew FSN college baseball coverage out of the water.

[TheRightAnswerInFlushing]

On Verlander's control

 

The degree by which he is missing is roughly inferable from his walk total, which is not that high. It's not low, but it's not what I would call alarming. His walk total is low enough to let you know that he is throwing a fair number of strikes. Guys who throw that many strikes generally are not missing "consistently" by big margins. If you want to tell me that he has stretches of 10-15 minutes where he can't hit the broad side of a barn, I'll buy it, but, then again, so do a LOT of pitchers Besides, he's a kid. You're talking about a kid, here. If you're going to make draft selections based upon who is the best pitcher RIGHT NOW, you might be making a huge mistake. You have to "project" these players as best you can. When I look at Verlander, I'm thinking about what Verlander will be in 2006, not what he is in 2004. Randy Johnson didn't get any control until after age 30. Clemens always struggled with control, albeit not to the degree that Johnson did.

 

On Street

 

First, I would like to say that I outrightly reject the notion of a "closer prospect." The best closers, for the most part, have been failed starters. Good starters are rare finds, and good closers are a dime a dozen. That's why so many of the great closers began as starters. They tried them as starters, they failed, and then they had them try another role---closing. Particularly, Street just does not have great stuff. He seems like a less-impressive version of Ryan Wagner.

 

Street reminds me a lot of a guy in the Mets' system named Royce Ring. Ring was a #1 pick of the White Sox in, I believe, 2002. Like Ring, Street strikes me as more of a "setup" prospect than a closer prospect, and because I already made my feelings on closer prospects well-known, you can just imagine how I feel about SETUP prospects.

[colbyjack]

The degree by which he is missing is roughly inferable from his walk total, which is not that high. It's not low, but it's not what I would call alarming.

 

Verlander is walking a batter every other inning. That's not alarming? His & Townsend's walk total is far too high IMO.

 

Trust me, I really like Verlander (& Townsend for that matter) and if the Brewers had a chance at the guy I would be thrilled to get him. But you seem to be going out of your way to make excuses for him. Plus, you're the one that warned me about looking at stats for amateur players. If he's walking a batter every other inning now, I think it is just as easy to assume that total will get worse as a pro than it is that it will get better.

 

Good starters are rare finds, and good closers are a dime a dozen.

 

You had me up until this statement. I agree 100% that I don't agree with the idea of drafting a relief pitcher early, and I'm not a big fan of closing prospects as you noted. But good closers are hardly a dime a dozen.

[TheRightAnswerInFlushing]

1) Walking a batter every other inning is not alarming to me, no. Not at all, in fact. If he were walking a batter per inning, I would agree. A batter every 2 innings is just not a big deal at this stage of his career. I mean, Kerry Wood walked 218 guys in 296 minor league innings from ages 18 to 21. It comes out to 6.6 walks per 9 innings. That's FAR worse than what Verlander is doing now, and I think it safe to say that any team in major league baseball would jump at the chance to have Kerry Wood. I'm sure that Kerry Wood's control was bad in high school, too. However, the Cubs were smart enough to look at his raw stuff and say "this kid is a top 5 pick." You can learn control, but you don't learn a 100mph fastball and two dynamite breaking balls.

 

2) Further, Wood's control has improved as a pro. It hasn't become great or even good, but it's much improved over where it was a an 18-21 year old. He has averaged 4.6 walks per 9 innings in his pro career, and even that number is a little spiked by the season after Tommy John surgery. Still, 4.6 walks per 9 innings is a big improvement over 6.6 walks per 9 innings. It's a 30 percent reduction in walks. If Verlander realized a 30% reduction in walks as a pro, he'd go from walking about 4.5 guys per 9 innings to 3.1 guys per 9 innings---a very manageable number. He may even improve further.

Randy Johnson walked 328 guys in 423 innings in the minor leagues between ages 22 and 25. Taht comes out to an average of 7 walks per 9 innings. In 18 seasons in the major leagues, he has averaged 3.6 walks per 9 innings---almost a 50% reduction in walks per 9 innings.

 

Good closers really are a dime a dozen. There are usually 1-3 elite guys followed by a bunch of guys who nobody thinks are very good. Closers are extremely prone to injury and tend not to last very long. People forget all of the once-dominant closers who suddenly disappeared. Very rarely do you see closers that are effective for extended periods of time with the same team. They tend to wander much more than good starters? Why? Because people aren;t going to let go of a starter; they're much harder to replace. Closers tend to have one good year, one bad year, and get passed around the league.

[colbyjack]

Flushing, once again you take the best case scenario. I've stated all along that I like Verlander a lot, and while you brought up Kerry Wood another name that has been tossed out there is Nolan Ryan. I know the Brewers aren't going to be in a position to take Verlander so it really doesn't matter much to me, but again, you can't just blow off his high walk totals. Some pitchers have overcome wildness, but too many others have not. Try coming up with a worst-case scenario for a change http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif .

 

If a closer has one good year that does not necessarily make him good. Do you think a start that has 1-2 good seasons is good? Injuries are part of the game, and is a factor as to whether or not someone is good or not. If someone isn't healthy enough to stay on the field I have a hard time classifying that player as good. Closer are still hardly a dime a dozen.

 

That said, onto the updates for the past week. Sorry for getting these up so late, I was away for the weekend.

 

College player updates for the week of Monday, April 12-Sunday, April 18

 

Jeff Niemann, Tues. vs. Texas:

2 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 3 K, 1 BB

 

As we have already talked about, Niemann was removed early in this game with a groin injury, and his velocity was reportedly down in the 89-92 range.

 

Phillip Humber, Tues. vs. Texas:

.1 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 1 K, 1 BB

 

Again, as we discussed earlier, Humber came in to get the last out of the game.

 

Jered Weaver, Fri. vs. UC Irvine:

9 IP, 4 H, 0 R, 12 K, 0 BB

 

Weaver is now 11-0, and has been simply unbelieveable all year long. I'm going to need to hear a lot better argument than pointing to his lack of true stuff to convince me that he's not worthy of one of the top 2 picks in the draft.

 

Justin Verlander, Fri. vs. Delaware

7 IP, 9 H, 4 R (3 ER), 9 K, 2 BB

 

Nice to see the walks down, but Verlander took the loss in this one.

 

Jeremy Sowers, Fri. vs. Arkansas

6 IP, 4 H, 6 R (4 ER), 5 K, 4 BB

 

Sowers 2nd ugly line this spring, and overall he hasn't been as consistent as what you would like to see.

 

Phillip Humber, Fri. vs. San Jose State

7 IP, 5 H, 2 R (0 ER), 8 K, 1 BB

 

Another good looking outing for Humber.

 

Wade Townsend, Sat. vs. San Jose State

9 IP, 2 H, 0 R, 8 K, 4 BB

 

Townsend took a no-hitter into the 8th in a great effort, although he did walk 4 batters.