Jump to content

Baseball Prospectus Top 101: Bundy #4, Gausman #13, Schoop #80


skanar

Recommended Posts

Shrug. 43 spots (37-80) isn't all that great, all things considered. Castellanos' numbers are dinged-up some due to a terrible August that included a very low BABIP (like, close to .200 I think). He tired some, was a little unlucky, etc. Not excusing numbers, but adding some further context.

I think he's referring to the gap in the rankings of other publications. BP seems to have the smallest gap between the two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Shrug. 43 spots (37-80) isn't all that great, all things considered. Castellanos' numbers are dinged-up some due to a terrible August that included a very low BABIP (like, close to .200 I think). He tired some, was a little unlucky, etc. Not excusing numbers, but adding some further context.

Couple thoughts:

Wasn't Schoop dinged up to start last season? Schoops numbers improved over the course of the year especially in the BB/K numbers between April - June v July - Aug.

Isn't the K rate for Castellanos a bit of a red flag? He is striking out in one in every three or so PAs.

Can you sync the "superior pitch recognition" skills of Castellanos with his high K rate? Not used to seeing this kind of description associated with this kind of K rate.

Does the AFL performance of Schoop v Castellanos carry ANY weight? They were facing the same pitchers from the same lineup.

I do trust the scouts' opinions first, really, truly, I do. Always have, but the raw stats at comparative ages and levels comfortably favor Schoop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple thoughts:

Wasn't Schoop dinged up to start last season? Schoops numbers improved over the course of the year especially in the BB/K numbers between April - June v July - Aug.

Isn't the K rate for Castellanos a bit of a red flag? He is striking out in one in every three or so PAs.

Can you sync the "superior pitch recognition" skills of Castellanos with his high K rate? Not used to seeing this kind of description associated with this kind of K rate.

Does the AFL performance of Schoop v Castellanos carry ANY weight? They were facing the same pitchers from the same lineup.

I do trust the scouts' opinions first, really, truly, I do. Always have, but the raw stats at comparative ages and levels comfortably favor Schoop.

The numbers I have seen show the following Krates at Double-A:

vs LHP: 74 PA, 9.5% (Schoop ~15%)

vs RHP: 263 PA, 25.9% (Schoop ~20%)

Total 2012:

vs LHP: 143 PA, ~14% (Schoop ~15%)

vs RHP: 437 PA, ~22% (Schoop ~20%)

By month:

June:93 PA, ~18%

July: 112 PA, ~22%

August: 132 PA, ~25%

So there is some concern, but as I said you also had someone who ran into a little bad luck and was probably pressing a little too hard as the season wore on.

Re: AFL stats, it's just an incredibly small sample size. I think if you speak to folks who watched both play, the consensus would be that Castellanos hits the ball harder more consistently. Much of that is due to his ability to pick out which pitches to attack. Pitch recognition is a separate skill from overall approach (though it plays into your ability to formulate an overall approach). Finally, we have more data than just Double-A, and all of that data (scouting and statistical) points to Castellanos excelling, offensively.

I do think some prospecting media folks missed the boat on the strides Schoop was making throughout the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand scouts say Castellanos hits the ball consistently harder, but during the time both were in AA from June 1 or early June until the end of the season, covering approx 320-350 PAs or so for each, Schoop had more xbh - not that this is the definition of hitting the ball harder. In the AFL, Schoop had 6 xbhs with 16 BBs in approx 80 PAs, while Castellanos had 7 xbh and approx 30 Ks in 110 PAs.

Also, while others more familiar will have to comment on the hitting/pitching favors in the parks involved, Castellanos has a rather extreme home/road split in AA with a road OPS of .585 with 8 BBs and 51 Ks. He made up for this with a strong home OPS. Schoop's road OPS in AA for the season was .650. Schoop's K rate improved steadily each month from 1:3 to near 1:2 to nearly 1:1 in August.

It is clear that Castellanos was undone by a horrible August - not sure of his team's home/road splits in that month.

As I said, it will be interesting to see Castellanos work to cut down on his Ks and see his other stats surge as he matures and whether Schoop can stay close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stats are not the appropriate measure for Cole at this point. It might be they tell us something eventually, but the body, attitude, arm and pure stuff warrants his placement.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this the exact same position people were taking when Bauer was outpitching him in college? Have his stats been lagging his stuff for the last 4ish years? At what point do they become the appropriate measure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this the exact same position people were taking when Bauer was outpitching him in college? Have his stats been lagging his stuff for the last 4ish years? At what point do they become the appropriate measure?

Is this an honest question? Baseball is a different game at the collegiate and minor league level than it is at the Major League level. No one evaluating these players for MLB organizations care which arms make the best collegiate or minor league starters. This is probably why Cole was drafted higher than Bauer, paid more than Bauer, and ranks higher than Bauer on every reputable prospect list I've seen.

The "4ish years" is silly regardless. Would you like me to tick through the stats with you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this an honest question? Baseball is a different game at the collegiate and minor league level than it is at the Major League level. No one evaluating these players for MLB organizations care which arms make the best collegiate or minor league starters. This is probably why Cole was drafted higher than Bauer, paid more than Bauer, and ranks higher than Bauer on every reputable prospect list I've seen.

The "4ish years" is silly regardless. Would you like me to tick through the stats with you?

Yes, it was a serious question. I am going by memory, but I think I recall hearing the same scouting evaluation as a basis for him being the #1 pick, so it struck me that people are still talking about his stats not matching his stuff. He was the guy I wanted the O's to get, for what it's worth, and I'm not questioning whether his stuff is good enough to be an ace. I'm wondering if we're overlooking a relative lack of location/pitchability/whatever you want to call it because his stuff is so off the charts good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it was a serious question. I am going by memory, but I think I recall hearing the same scouting evaluation as a basis for him being the #1 pick, so it struck me that people are still talking about his stats not matching his stuff. He was the guy I wanted the O's to get, for what it's worth, and I'm not questioning whether his stuff is good enough to be an ace. I'm wondering if we're overlooking a relative lack of location/pitchability/whatever you want to call it because his stuff is so off the charts good.

You heard it last year because Bauer had a great year and Cole's ERA wasn't sparkling (mostly due to a couple of starts). I don't know where you got the "4ish years". Here are Cole's numbers

UCLA

FR - 11.01 SO/9, 1.12 WHIP, 0.37 BB/SO

SO - 11.20 SO/9, 1.17 WHIP, 0.34 BB/SO

JR - 9.37 SO/9, 1.11 WHIP, 0.20 BB/SO

MILB (last year was only year)

A - 9.27 SO/9, 1.10 WHIP, 0.30 BB/SO

AA - 9.15 SO/9, 1.31 WHIP, 0.38 BB/SO

AAA - 10.50 SO/9, 1.17 WHIP, 0.14 BB/SO (only one start)

I don't see how these stats call anything negative into question. I understand why Bauer's were considered so eye popping, but to get swept up in those stats is to ignore how he accrued them (which was largely exploiting undisciplined college hitters with gimmicky stuff).

As for Bundy vs Cole, Cole is a year/level ahead of Bundy and has performed largely on par with Bundy in that respect. It's an uneven comparison since other factors come into play, but:

Bundy (HiA)/Cole (AA)

IP - 57/59

SO/9 - 10.42/11.20

BB/SO - 0.27/0.34

WHIP - 1.16/1.17

This was essentially a toss-up for me, with Cole winning out on stuff like size, angles, track record, durability (track record perspective), and the like.

Again, I'm not sure what in Cole's history implies he's anything but a highly effective and promising arm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. Given those stats, can I now pick a fight with you for saying that "Stats are not the appropriate measure for Cole at this point?"

I mean, those stats do paint a pretty damn good picture too, but I get your point that there's more to the projection than stats alone. Your post misled me, and that makes me sad. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. Given those stats, can I now pick a fight with you for saying that "Stats are not the appropriate measure for Cole at this point?"

I mean, those stats do paint a pretty damn good picture too, but I get your point that there's more to the projection than stats alone. Your post misled me, and that makes me sad. :D

Actually, I'd still argue his stats aren't an accurate measure for how nasty his stuff actually is. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You heard it last year because Bauer had a great year and Cole's ERA wasn't sparkling (mostly due to a couple of starts). I don't know where you got the "4ish years". Here are Cole's numbers

UCLA

FR - 11.01 SO/9, 1.12 WHIP, 0.37 BB/SO

SO - 11.20 SO/9, 1.17 WHIP, 0.34 BB/SO

JR - 9.37 SO/9, 1.11 WHIP, 0.20 BB/SO

MILB (last year was only year)

A - 9.27 SO/9, 1.10 WHIP, 0.30 BB/SO

AA - 9.15 SO/9, 1.31 WHIP, 0.38 BB/SO

AAA - 10.50 SO/9, 1.17 WHIP, 0.14 BB/SO (only one start)

I don't see how these stats call anything negative into question. I understand why Bauer's were considered so eye popping, but to get swept up in those stats is to ignore how he accrued them (which was largely exploiting undisciplined college hitters with gimmicky stuff).

As for Bundy vs Cole, Cole is a year/level ahead of Bundy and has performed largely on par with Bundy in that respect. It's an uneven comparison since other factors come into play, but:

Bundy (HiA)/Cole (AA)

IP - 57/59

SO/9 - 10.42/11.20

BB/SO - 0.27/0.34

WHIP - 1.16/1.17

This was essentially a toss-up for me, with Cole winning out on stuff like size, angles, track record, durability (track record perspective), and the like.

Again, I'm not sure what in Cole's history implies he's anything but a highly effective and promising arm.

Cole's WHIP was 1.30 at AA. You mistakenly listed his AAA WHIP. His K/9 was 9.2 not 11.2. Despite all of this,I can see how one might rate him above Bundy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cole's WHIP was 1.30 at AA. You mistakenly listed his AAA WHIP. His K/9 was 9.2 not 11.2. Despite all of this,I can see how one might rate him above Bundy.

You are correct -- I mistakenly looked at his soph. year stats from UCLA (second in list) instead of the minor league section of spread sheet. Apologies -- that's a bad mistake considering the topic.

Here's Bundy (HiA)/Cole (AA) correct this time

IP - 57/59

SO/9 - 10.42/9.15

BB/SO - 0.27/0.38

WHIP - 1.16/1.31

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • Aram loves the pitch metrics on Povich and McDermott. Was effusive in his spring podcast going through Os top prospects. 
    • Let’s also give the org credit for the O’Hearn pickup.  He was part of last night’s lineup.  For that matter, they picked up Mateo too.  
    • Thank you.  Not sure how easy for someone who may have been doing it for years and someone who’s been talented enough to make it work.   Someone posted a video of Freddie Freeman and Holliday to show similarities but, to me, it just showed how different their lead foot was.  Freeman’s was closed and perfectly in line and parallel to his back foot.  Hollidays foot pointed out and the foot towards 2B position.  I questioned it.  Other guys, who admittedly know more, said it was no problem.  Again, he might be able to become a HOF with those mechanics.  I’ve just never seen a good ML hitter hit that way. From that early January thread “I guess it depends on your definition of “step in the bucket”.  His stride foot definitely doesn’t go straight.  Pretty easy to see where his foot is in relation to the batters box and how much further away it is when it lands.  It doesn’t seem to affect him negatively though.  Interestingly enough, Freeman’s stride foot goes perfectly straight.” Edited January 6 by RZNJ
    • He allowed only one batted ball over 95 MPH, commanding his cutter particularly well in this one. I think the cutter is the most critical pitch for Povich to take the next step. He’s never had issues getting punch outs, he needs to be able to pitch in the zone without relying too much on his fastball. It’s also a key weapon against RHP - if you don’t have a true plus breaking ball or fastball that can overcome the platoon splits (which I don’t think Povich does), you can only make it as a LHP SP through the strength of your cutter and changeup, which are more reverse/neutral splits.  His changeup is probably not good enough to carry him on its own, so it’s the cutter that brings the whole pitch mix together.  
    • Agree he steps in the bucket. In theory should be a relatively easy fix. 
    • His back or shoulder might give out first. Hardly any talented pitcher retires without some sort of serious injury recorded.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...