Are we underestimating Chayce McDermott?

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

So it sounds like McDermott task at Norfolk for the first two months is to lower his walks.

Yea, lower walks and work on command.  He did a good job of lowering his walks per 9 innings from 5.8 to 4.3 when he got to Norfolk.   He really needs fine tuning more than radical adjustments at this point.  

[oriole]

You just can’t be walking guys like he does and expect to make it as a starter. Of course, he did much better in that regard once he got to Norfolk and Im happy to see it…but he’s far from someone you should make any assumptions about at this point. He is a non factor when deciding how to approach the 2024 staff.

[Aristotelian]

So hard to project pitchers based on minors stats. So far he is progressing well and has a lot of upside. His AA/AAA numbers at Age 24 compare favorably, say, to Mike Baumann. Walks could be a problem. Fuji might be a floor comp.

[emmett16]

5.27 career BB/9 scares the crap out of me. I just can’t get too excited.  
 

Povich, who people say has control issues, is 3.84

Hall is 5.2 

He’s a wild card. No pun intended.

Edited January 23 by emmett16

[sportsfan8703]

For this season, he’s somewhere in between the RH version of Vespi to the 3rd/4th RH reliever in the bullpen. Gillaspie and Khreibel gave us 14 IP last year. McDermott likely fills that role at least. 

[CaptainRedbeard]

When considering Povich and McDermott walk rates in AAA, you have to remember they were dealing with the automated strike zone which really inflated the offensive environment across the league.

For reference, Connor Norby had a .290/.359/.483 line and that only came out to a 109 wRC+. 

Norfolk’s pitching staff collectively had a 4.7 BB/9. 

Povich and McDermott certainly need to improve their command to take that next step up to being legitimate MLB SP options but they may not be as far off as you may think based on the walk rates. McDermott’s stretch in AAA in particular was very strong and if that was more resulting from actual improvements rather than small sample size noise he may be ready quickly.  But I don’t think we have enough info to be confident in that yet. 

[nvpacchi]

I'm probably a bigger McDermott-stan than most, but he needs to have every opportunity to start.  30% K rates at all stops along the minors and a 13.9% swinging-strike rate at AAA (17th in IL last year) is serious swing and miss.  Even docking 10% off his K rate from the jump to the majors, a 26-28% K-rate is still plus.

And while the walks and control are an issue, and he may never be more than a 5 and dive guy, there are profiles that have had success, and they've only had success given that they can strike out so many guys.

Guys last year with K rates between 25-30% and BB rate > 10%:

Kodai Senga, Dylan Cease, David Peterson, Charlie Morton

All with mid 3 to low 4 xFIP.  The danger for McDermott becomes if he doesn't strike guys out, then he is Jack Flaherty or Josiah Gray.  I do like him as first or second guy up after Irvin and Wells if we don't secure another pitcher this offseason.

Shameless plug too for some McDermott analysis I did a few months back!

 

Edited January 23 by nvpacchi

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, nvpacchi said:

I'm probably a bigger McDermott-stan than most, but he needs to have every opportunity to start.  30% K rates at all stops along the minors and a 13.9% swinging-strike rate at AAA (17th in IL last year) is serious swing and miss.  Even docking 10% off his K rate from the jump to the majors, a 26-28% K-rate is still plus.

And while the walks and control are an issue, and he may never be more than a 5 and dive guy, there are profiles that have had success, and they've only had success given that they can strike out so many guys.

Guys last year with K rates between 25-30% and BB rate > 10%:

Kodai Senga, Dylan Cease, David Peterson, Charlie Morton

All with mid 3 to low 4 xFIP.  The danger for McDermott becomes if he doesn't strike guys out, then he is Jack Flaherty or Josiah Gray.  I do like him as first or second guy up after Irvin and Wells if we don't secure another pitcher this offseason.

Shameless plug too for some McDermott analysis I did a few months back!

 

I have mentioned this before and I realize it was just one interview but a few months back I caught an interview with him on MLB radio. He has a psych background and was talking about how much that helps him in the mound. 
 

I came away so impressed by him. I wouldn’t trade him. Not saying he’s untouchable but I’m not interested in trading him. If I had to pencil in a rotation for 2025 right now, he would be in it.

[Tony-OH]

9 hours ago, Flash- bd said:

I think he's a really interesting arm and think he gives us pretty good depth behind potential DL Hall / Tyler Wells injuries (or potential poor performance) should we not add a SP and decide to go with the better of those two in ST as the #5 starter and the poorer as a high leverage bullpen guy. 

The more I think about it the more I really just am not sure trading for a SP is the best use of our assets. Really feels to me like an upgrade on one of our OFs or in the bullpen is. DL Hall feels like the one who's being underestimated above all, I know relieving isn't the same as starting, and that it's a SSS, but his 2.3 BB/9 and 4.60 SO/W rate suggests to me he might just offer better upside as a starter than any of the options that are being discussed to trade for. And a healthy Tyler Wells is not a half bad back-up plan, along with McDermott and Irvin as further depth. 

Good Lord. I wanna take the time to regurgitate the 1000 reasons why Hall will not be a successful starter, but I just don't have the time. I'll just assume you disagree with the evidence or haven't read it. But if you want to throw some orange pixie dust and believe, feel free.

No one is underestimating his ability to get big league batters out or his starter's repertoire. Those of us who accept him as a reliever understand it's not only about walk rate when it comes to being a successful starter so pointing to it as empirical evidence for him being the best option is just not well informed in my opinion. 

McDermott is similar in that his age, inconsistency of command from start to start, and amount of pitches it takes him to get outs are all concerns. The one thing McDermott has over Hall is better health record.

[Flash- bd]

40 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Good Lord. I wanna take the time to regurgitate the 1000 reasons why Hall will not be a successful starter, but I just don't have the time. I'll just assume you disagree with the evidence or haven't read it. But if you want to throw some orange pixie dust and believe, feel free.

No one is underestimating his ability to get big league batters out or his starter's repertoire. Those of us who accept him as a reliever understand it's not only about walk rate when it comes to being a successful starter so pointing to it as empirical evidence for him being the best option is just not well informed in my opinion. 

McDermott is similar in that his age, inconsistency of command from start to start, and amount of pitches it takes him to get outs are all concerns. The one thing McDermott has over Hall is better health record.

I know, Tony, I have read your thoughts on Hall. It's not that I disagree with it--hard to disagree with analysis from someone who knows far more about baseball than I do (understatement of the century)--I just have a different view of it, tbh, and feel like not enough credence has been given to how interrupted his development has been as a starter and the room for growth there. Yeah, there's surely a bit of gut feeling / intuition there--orange pixie dust--but hey, it's my (rather useless) opinion and I can't help expressing it!  

I don't offer my opinion too often and mainly just limit myself to asking questions or being rather positive or trying to offer a bit of 'perspective' from my point of view, as I generally defer to people--you first among them--here who have far more baseball knowledge than myself, but what I can say, I just can't help but have a different opinion / feeling on Hall. 

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, Flash- bd said:

I know, Tony, I have read your thoughts on Hall. It's not that I disagree with it--hard to disagree with analysis from someone who knows far more about baseball than I do (understatement of the century)--I just have a different view of it, tbh, and feel like not enough credence has been given to how interrupted his development has been as a starter and the room for growth there. Yeah, there's surely a bit of gut feeling / intuition there--orange pixie dust--but hey, it's my (rather useless) opinion and I can't help expressing it!  

I don't offer my opinion too often and mainly just limit myself to asking questions or being rather positive or trying to offer a bit of 'perspective' from my point of view, as I generally defer to people--you first among them--here who have far more baseball knowledge than myself, but what I can say, I just can't help but have a different opinion / feeling on Hall. 

Don't get me wrong, you an have any opinion you like and all things considered, I hope you are right and I'm wrong. but you mentioned how his development was interrupted, and it was, by injury multiple times. Guys with high pitch counts and haven't pitched a full season as a starter since Low-A ball, who are 25-years old, in an organization that needs him out of the pen, are all great reasons why the Orioles should shelf any ideas of trying to move him back to a starter's role. 

He's got a chance to be a Billy Wagner type closer and hopefully will have a nice long career like Wagner in that role.

[jabba72]

I'd love to know what Elias and Sig think of McDermott, Hall and Povich individually. I guess we'll see that play out in Norfolk. 

[orioles22]

I expected Hall to start, but after last year's struggles I don't expect it. I think it makes more sense go with him as a reliever and hope McDermott and/or Povich can work their way into the rotation eventually.

[Flash- bd]

I think Hall's repertoire, how good he looked with a number of pitches and commanding them to a decent extent (I think the biggest issue here, or critique of my idea, is that I'm probably working off a recency bias / SSS, which is why I totally get why you don't see it my way, but...), and the fact he has had such an interrupted development as a starter (COVID, injuries, lost 2021 to injury, even last season's innings I would really scratch off, as he was without his stuff for the majority of the season due to his injury in spring training), should give us reason to view him as a rather unique case as a 25 year old SP. 

We're talking about a high school pitcher who has 288 IP as a starter under his belt before last season where he was pitching without his real stuff for most of it. Those 288 IP interrupted by a season lost to COVID, and a major injury. Grayson compiled 334 in a period of a year less. So, I think it would be fair to consider Hall somewhere similar to where Grayson was coming into last season, in his development. 

I guess, even if you see it my way in that respect, you could make the argument, can we afford a potential development season (but with less innings, as we agree Hall has less ability to maneuver his way through lineups without using as many pitches) like Grayson's last? I don't know. I take your other points about his already established value to our bullpen, too. 

Probably ultimately comes down to philosophical differences. I tend to want long-term value maximization even at the expense of short-term results. I could be wrong with this philosophical stance--it would probably take a very complicated analysis to parse it all out--but it's the way my mind works. 

[Tony-OH]

6 hours ago, Flash- bd said:

I think Hall's repertoire, how good he looked with a number of pitches and commanding them to a decent extent (I think the biggest issue here, or critique of my idea, is that I'm probably working off a recency bias / SSS, which is why I totally get why you don't see it my way, but...), and the fact he has had such an interrupted development as a starter (COVID, injuries, lost 2021 to injury, even last season's innings I would really scratch off, as he was without his stuff for the majority of the season due to his injury in spring training), should give us reason to view him as a rather unique case as a 25 year old SP. 

We're talking about a high school pitcher who has 288 IP as a starter under his belt before last season where he was pitching without his real stuff for most of it. Those 288 IP interrupted by a season lost to COVID, and a major injury. Grayson compiled 334 in a period of a year less. So, I think it would be fair to consider Hall somewhere similar to where Grayson was coming into last season, in his development. 

I guess, even if you see it my way in that respect, you could make the argument, can we afford a potential development season (but with less innings, as we agree Hall has less ability to maneuver his way through lineups without using as many pitches) like Grayson's last? I don't know. I take your other points about his already established value to our bullpen, too. 

Probably ultimately comes down to philosophical differences. I tend to want long-term value maximization even at the expense of short-term results. I could be wrong with this philosophical stance--it would probably take a very complicated analysis to parse it all out--but it's the way my mind works. 

I don't think is has anything to do with philosophical differences at all. If you are comfortable with a starter that may or may not get you five innings every five days (I know I've done the work before but his ability to get past the 5th in the minors is very, very low and that's against minor league hitters) then he's your guy. If you are comfortable taking a guy and have him become a mediocre starter because of lack of ability to cover innings, vs being an impact left-handed reliever, then he's your guy. 

You said, "We're talking about a high school pitcher who has 288 IP as a starter under his belt before last season where he was pitching without his real stuff for most of it." You do realize that's because he's not been able to stay healthy to compile those innings, right? You know he's a guy who's velocity has dropped off already from where he was in his first two years in the minors, right? You do know he's had back, shoulder, and even a strained forearm at points in his career, right?

Most great closers probably could have been used as a starter and been at least effective enough to be a back of the rotation guy, but they found that their best role was in relief because it maximized what they are good at. 

Hall is very good at inducing weak contact and missing bats, but that leads to high pitches per inning because he's never had great command. In his 11 starts last year at Norfolk he was able to get past the 5th inning one time, and it took him 98 pitches to complete 6 innings. How many more pitches would it take against major league hitters? He had a 5.5 BB/9 in AAA last year at 5.7 BB/9 in his 11 starts. 

Some of you point to his improvement at the major league level when he dropped to 2.3/9 as a reason to be hopeful. Maybe the fact that he never pitched more than two innings of threw more than 27 pitches (not including his one long relief outing early in the year where it took him 75 pitches to get three 3 INNINGS!!) had more to do with that improvement than any sudden better command?

As for McDermott, he has some of the same concerns and we'll need to see how he does in Norfolk this year before making a final call, but he did show more signs last year of potentially being able to stick as a starter.