06/02/2004 - Brewers (Hendrickson) at Dodgers (Jackson)

[xisxisxis]

Clancy, he has TWO change-ups........

 

Do you spend much time talking to walls Chris?

 

I saw most of the game and while I was less than impressed with the radar gun readings I do have to agree that the homeplate ump just missed a bunch of calls making it harder for Ben to get ahead in the count without throwing one down the middle. On at least 2 occasions Ben threw a very nice curve on a 2 strike pitch that dropped into the strike zone. Both times I think the Ump just didn't call it a strike because he couldn't believe it dropped that much.

 

 

Living out of market, I got Scully's telecast. As great as Scully was, its time for him to give it up. He seemed little interested in any of the 3 games of this series and more interested in repeating the home towns of Brewer players. He must have mentioned Jenkins playing at USC 15 times during the three games.

 

Being in LA I get a lot more of Scully. I don't think he's as annoying as Sutton and Bozo, because he isn't stupid just repetitive. I literally screamed at the TV the 4th time he mentioned Ben was 6'4" and 190 pounds. I also had a good chuckle when for the billionth time he defined what getting on base means (as if the LA crowd is too stupid to understand) - 'he's also good at getting on base, either by hitting or getting a base on balls'. He's at least insightful once in awhile as long as you can tune out the 10 times he repeats the same thing every game.

[Member]

Do you spend much time talking to walls Chris?

 

Sometimes... sometimes the nice fluffy, padded ones talk back to me.

[DHonks]

On at least 2 occasions Ben threw a very nice curve on a 2 strike pitch that dropped into the strike zone. Both times I think the Ump just didn't call it a strike because he couldn't believe it dropped that much.

 

Someone forgot to give the umps a scouting report. One thing that amazed me was Ben's command with it. He threw it right on the corners. Unfortunately the ump had given up on the pitches already.

Three more things:

-3:1 groundout to flyout ratio.

-most of the hits were seeing-eye singles

-his curve was registering about 74 mph, giving him a very good 15 mph difference between his sinker and his curve. In the Fall League I swear he also threw another offspeed pitch. I think he threw a curve in the low 80s, too, because I remember my friend commenting that for a curveball specialist, his curve wasn't all that impressive. Just then he pulled out the slow big spike-curve and he quickly rescinded his comment. So I think for his first start, Ben just tried to keep it simple with his fastball and main curve.

[mothershipconnection]

The "D" in Podsednik is silent? Well shut my mouth, my apologies to Mr. Scully. Not sure how I could have missed that.

Last year his relatives made the trip over to Houston and talked with Jim Powell and they told him that it's pronounced "Puh-sed-nik". Almost everyone in the media still pronounces it "Pod-sed-nik", so don't fell bad, you wouldn't have heard the correct pronunciation unless you listened to the Brewers broadcast.

[FVBrewerFan]

Quote:

---

I definately would like to see another start. If Luis Martinez got three, Ben should get a couple too.

---

 

Have the Brewers indicated whether or not he'll get another start, or if they plan to have him up for the rest of thes eason for that matter? I see Capuano on the 15 day, and Santos was a short term solution. I see no reason why they wouldn't have Hendrickson start in place of Capuano. When Capuano comes back, move Santos out of the rotation.

 

Finally, I can't accept nervousness as the reason for throwng a fastball at 88 consistently. When a pitcher is too "amped up" they overthrow everything. Now maybe he was thinking location, location, location and that took some speed off his fastball. I guess I can accept that a a possible reason.

[batman]

Tim Hudson is a short right-handed pitcher. He struggles to reach 90mph on the radar gun, and he doesn't have a curveball like Hendrickson's. Somehow, he's managed to be a pretty darned good hurler.

 

This obsession with velocity is odd. It's not like Lil' Ben is an amateur player we're scouting for "ceiling". He's got a lengthy minor league track record, and it is chock full of success at every level (except Rookie Ball, but I think we can forget about that). He's gotten hitters out... and he's gotten them out in "good" ways, by inducing groundballs and by striking them out. If he can do that while throwing 88mph, who cares about his velocity?

 

Sure, Lil' Ben might not be as good as Big Ben. But at this point, who is?

 

~Bill

[pogokat]

its funny to see some of the sabertoothedmathmaticians in here complaining about velocity....

 

come on guys...its all about results...

 

we know ben has got some nasty stuff

 

we know ben has a great track record in the minors (everyone needs to take a breath and look at what he did in high desert)

 

he needs more time...

 

i bet by his fifth start, ben has hit 92 on the gun at least once....

 

sheesh...i even saw tom glaving hit 92 one time...

 

anyway, i think ben will be fine...i'd rather a pitcher have a tension filled first start than light it up and blow away like neugie did...

 

though i will say that i have met the lord, and his name is saenz...

 

he he...not true...but my ability to calmly laugh at clancy's lunacy is eroding

[PrimetimeHater]

The most recent comparison I have read from a writer was Shane Reynolds. Reynolds threw around that same velocity, and I'm guessing the guy was talking about what numbers he thinks Hendrickson could put up....because he did say he reminds him of Reynolds in his prime. So, not quite sure why he said Reynolds, because Reynolds best pitch wasn't his curve. Anyways...just thought I'd bring that up...I know I'd be very pleased if Hendrickson turned out to be like him.

[batman]

The obvious comparison is Daryl Kile, who was a really good pitcher before Coors Field ate him. Lots of groundballs, really good curveball, and a good-but-not-great fastball.

 

That would be great, but is probably a high-end projection. Shane Reynolds was basically a slightly-better-than-average starter, and that seems more like Lil' Ben's low-end. Something in between would be real nice.

 

~Bill

[batman]

Good picture of Lil' Ben:

 

http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/sports/brew/img/jun04/ben602.jpg

 

Care of the AP and JS.

 

~Bill

[xisxisxis]

It's not like Lil' Ben is an amateur player we're scouting for "ceiling". He's got a lengthy minor league track record, and it is chock full of success at every level (except Rookie Ball, but I think we can forget about that). He's gotten hitters out... and he's gotten them out in "good" ways, by inducing groundballs and by striking them out. If he can do that while throwing 88mph, who cares about his velocity?

 

If I had a dime for every player who had success in the minors and NEVER had success in the majors I'd retire tomorrow. Ben has had an ok WHIP, a reasonable/good K/9IP, and an OK K/BB. Nothing in those peripherals screams that he's a can't miss prospect and success against minor leaguers isn't predictive of success against major leaguers. I'm a big supporter of Ben's, but to top out at 89 on your fastball in June is a little concerning. Granted it's one start only, but as with any young prospect there is still a lot that needs to happen for him to be successful at the major league level (IF he is). I'm not gonna change my opinion of him after 1 outing, but I certainly have some concerns.

[batman]

success against minor leaguers isn't predictive of success against major leaguers

 

Do you really feel that way, David? I think it's pretty definitively proven that minor league statistics correlate well with major league statistics. It's the same game and it requires the same skills... sure, the talent level continues to increase as you move up the ladder, but does that make minor league success irrelevant?

 

You're throwing the baby out with the bathwater because some minor league "stars" become major league washouts. Here's what Bill James had to say about the issue in a Slate Interview:

Quote:

---

Q: One of your most important insights is the idea that minor league batting statistics predict major league batting performance as reliably as major league statistics do. There have been certain players?think of 1980s players like Mike Stenhouse, Doug Frobel, Brad Komminsk?who seemed as though they would be terrific hitters but never really made it in the big leagues. Did they not get enough of a shot? Are they outliers? Or is there such a thing as a Four A (too good for Triple A, not good enough for the majors) hitter?

 

A: Well, no, there is no such thing as a Four A hitter. That idea, as I understand it, envisions a "gap" between the majors and Triple A, with some players who fall into the gap. There is no such gap. In fact, there is a very significant overlap between the major leagues and Triple A. Many of the players in Triple A are better than many of the players in the majors.

 

The three examples you cite are three very different cases. Stenhouse never had 180 at bats in a major league season, so one would be hard pressed to argue that he got a full trial.

 

Frobel is a different [instance], in which I think there probably wasn't a real strong case that he was a good hitter to begin with. Frobel hit .251 at Buffalo in '81, hit .261 at Portland?Pacific Coast League?in 1982. We would expect, based on those seasons, that he would hit .200, .210 in the major leagues, with a pretty ghastly strikeout/walk ratio?which is what he did. Then he had the one good year at Hawaii in 1983, looked like a better hitter, and fooled some of us into thinking that he was better than he was. But ... it was one year, 378 at bats, of performance that isn't that impressive. It wasn't enough, in retrospect, to conclude that he was actually a good hitter.

 

[Then] there are some players whose level of skill changes?drops?between two adjacent seasons or between two seasons separated by two or three years, usually because of an injury but sometimes because of some other factor. Frank Thomas is not the same hitter now that he was a few years ago; Tino Martinez isn't; Mo Vaughn isn't.

 

When those "disconnects" happen between major league seasons, we ascribe them to sensible causes?aging, injury, conditioning, motivation, luck, etc. Comparing major league seasons to minor league seasons, occasionally you get the same disconnect. Sometimes a guy simply loses it before he establishes himself in the major leagues. That's what happened to Komminsk, I think?he shot his cannons in the minor leagues.

 

I'm trying to make two general points here. Point 1: When there is a disconnect between a player's major league and minor league records, some people want to ascribe this to some mystical difference between major league baseball and minor league baseball. Unless you can say specifically what that difference is, this is akin to magical thinking?asserting that there is some magical "major league ability," which is distinct from the ability to play baseball. The same sorts of disconnects happen routinely in the middle of major league careers?not often as a percentage, but they happen. Everybody who plays rotisserie baseball knows that some guys you paid big money for because they were good last year will stink this year. It is not necessary or helpful to create some magical "major league ability" to explain those occasional disconnects between major league and minor league seasons.

 

Second point ... the creation of new knowledge or new understanding does not make the people who possess that new knowledge invulnerable to old failings. I can't predict reliably who is going to be successful in the major leagues in 2004, even if we stick with the field of players who have been in the major leagues since 2000. I can't do that, because there are limits to my knowledge, and there are flaws in my implementation of what I know. The principle that minor league hitting stats predict major league hitting stats as well as major league hitting stats predict major league hitting stats can be perfectly true?and yet still not enable me or you to reliably predict who will be successful in the major leagues in 2004, because I still have limits to my knowledge and flaws in the way I try to implement that knowledge.

---

 

slate.msn.com/id/2084193/

 

I'm not saying Lil' Ben will necessarily have success just because he has had success in the minor leagues. But to discount the predictive value of his minor league numbers seems quite foolhardy.

 

~Bill

[mls4]

All I wanted to say is that it's nice to have a 4th Ben on the team finally. Not to mention the 2 Ben-netts as well.

[MikeRizzo]

I watched the game again and Ben pitched better than I first thought.

 

If they made a few plays behind him it would have been different. And I know we did not see his best he will only get better .

 

I say give him a break first time up in front of all those dodger fans and me he did really well .

 

Ben is for real

 

Mike

[biedergb]

Mike -- I know you're Dana Eveland's stepdad, but I came across the name Mike Rizzo in an old Baseball America as a scout for I think the Astros (or some other NL Central team). Wondering if that was you, or a relative, or just another Mike Rizzo entirely.

Just curious,

Greg.

[Never Outhustled]

The Brewers don't need a 5th starter intill the 12th, so I expect Hendrickson to be optioned as we speak. Capuano is eligible to return on the 11th, and he seems recovered already.

[DHonks]

so I expect Hendrickson to be optioned as we speak

 

why, we don't even know if Ben Sheets can go in his next start.

[950opsLHcatcher]

Ben's two-seamer is his better fastball, definitely. He has to be able to hit his spots with the four-seamer to be effective, however. Even though he was only throwing in the mid-80's last night, he is capable of staying around 90, not that it makes that much of a difference.

 

I think what DHonks might have seen as another breaking ball was just a hard change-up. Ben throws at a lot of different speeds, and sometimes it is hard to tell the difference between a flat curve and a hard-breaking change. He is capable of effectively pitching between 70-90 MPH, which is a good thing. As noted, he also usually hits the black of the strike zone, and with his sink, he'll get lots of ground balls. He doesn't strike a whole lot of guys out because he's usually confident enough in the curve that he'll use it earlier in the count and show another pitch (like the sinker) to induce a weak swing.

 

And does anyone else think that if he had a little longer hair, he'd sorta look like Jeff Weaver (sans coke binge look)?

[batman]

And does anyone else think that if he had a little longer hair, he'd sorta look like Jeff Weaver (sans coke binge look)?

 

My brother had never seen Ben before last night, and that's the first thing he said. "That guy looks like Jeff Weaver." I see it a little bit, but I guess the unbiased answer is yes.

 

http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

~Bill

[MikeRizzo]

biedergb

 

The other Mike Rizzo is a scouting Director for the Arizona Diamondbacks ..... No relation although I wish there was, I have never talked to him but it came up a lot when Dana was bieng scouted. I know the local area scout for the D backs as he has some intrest in Danas brother for next years draft so maybe I will meet him.http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/happy.gif

 

Mike:

[biedergb]

Thanks for the reply Mike.

[950opsLHcatcher]

I know the local area scout for the D backs as he has some intrest in Danas brother for next years draft so maybe I will meet him.

 

Yah, but are the Brewers interested in him? We could use another Dana. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[xisxisxis]

I'm not saying Lil' Ben will necessarily have success just because he has had success in the minor leagues. But to discount the predictive value of his minor league numbers seems quite foolhardy.

 

If you say he may not necessarily have success in the majors because he has had success in the minor leagues you are stating that his minor league success is not PREDICTIVE of major league success. There is a difference between a correlation and whether something is predictive (a distinction that even Bill James has confused in that article, IMO). There can be correlations that aren't predictive, but all things that are predictive are correlative. I believe there is a correlation between minor league stats and major league stats for players who make it and stay in the majors at least a few years, but there is little predictive value to minor league stats in determing who will make it in the majors.

[endaround]

So David, you're saying there is an omitted variable bias? That since we only have the numbers of those in MLB and no those who didn't make the correlation is misleading?