Official Offseason Thread

Super said:
so question, why would FG rate Anderson as highly as they do, and rate his curve as a 50/55, if they are getting reports that his curve has position player type RPM? i’d think they themselves would have to be highly skeptical of that data because they’re basically ignoring it?
Click to expand...

I know...it doesn’t make sense.

All I wanted for Christmas was statcast data on a handful of Anderson’s curves. I didn’t get it.
 
Super said:
my dude is an absolute glutton for punishment. you almost have to respect it
Click to expand...

I have mad respect for it. I have respect for anyone who has such an unrelenting commitment to... whatever it is that he does. Clv is like the Andy Kaufman of this board. He could literally have an entire crowd of people telling him to stop, and he just keeps chugging along.
 
Would the Twins still be interested in moving Rosario if they're serious about trying to outbid the Gnats for Donaldson? They could probably get by with mixing and matching (or playing Gonzalez full time) in LF until Kirilloff or Rooker are ready around midseason (with Larnach not far behind), especially if they were able to add Donadson and slide Sano over to 1B. Rosario isn't a perfect fit since he's LH, but he wouldn't be awful. Could move Dansby back up behind Ozzie and put Acuna between Freddie and Rosario and sign Holt to platoon with Camargo.
 
Last edited:
clvclv said:
A "competently run organization" gives Patrick Corbin 6 years and $140 million???

My how someone's tune has changed.
Click to expand...

Aaaaand derp.

Corbin’s contract is heavily backloaded, meaning the present value is much less than $140M.

The Nats support a payroll of nearly $200M.

They just won a WS, and I’ve been told flags fly forever and justify anything.

So no tune has changed. Teams with that level of payroll can afford to give a TOR arm that kind of money into his mid-30s and deal with overpaying him at the end of the deal.

Once again your stupidity gets in the way of your pathetic “gotcha” attempt. It’s like a broken record of derrrp.
 
Last edited:
On Nats/Braves. You can get away with using 3-4 BP guys in the playoffs, but in the regular season, you cant. I think Braves are better suited for 162 over the Nats, but obviously in a playoff series, Nats are better built because of their SP.

Braves have a better bullpen, lineup as of now isnt a big difference, obviously our rotation is worse. But Braves have options to replace guys in the rotation, Nats really dont have the depth if a couple of their SP's go down.
 
clvclv said:
A "competently run organization" gives Patrick Corbin 6 years and $140 million???

My how someone's tune has changed.
Click to expand...

The Nationals have been one of the best teams in baseball for the better part of a decade, and they just won a World Series. So, yeah, I’d say they’re pretty competently run.
 
Enscheff said:
Twins have supposedly made a 4 year offer to JD, spectated to be around 4/90. Any team willing to go 3/75 should be willing to also go 4/90, so we will see if AA goes there.
Click to expand...

I’d offer 3/90 or 4/100 and say these are are our best offers and see what happens.
 
I'd like to add some things as it pertains to Anderson’s curveball. Let me start by saying I am a college pitching coach and have been using this type of data on my guys as well.

Encheff is absolutely correct in what he’s saying. If indeed his spin rate is ~1700 RPM then that is equivalent to a average high school CB or well below average college pitcher in terms of this pitch. When my guys first step on campus and we get them on Rapsodo (fiming software used for video analysis) I expect to see a round 2000 RPM at the very least. The other thing to note is a pitchers true spin vs. total spin which equals his spin efficiency and that’s data we don’t currently have on Ian. For instance, our #2 starter (has best CB on staff) has a 2626 RPM total spin and 2265 true spin which equals ~86% spin efficiency, which is really good.

What I am saying is that if in fact that number of 1700 is correct, he would need to be in the 95% of spin efficiency for this pitch to work. With all of this being said, there are two things I’d want everyone to consider. 1.) Anderson’s CH is a plus pitch and typically for young guys is the hardest pitch to master. The organization (every org has a different philosophy) could have said let’s get this pitch to plus status then turn the attention to your CB/SL after we get this pitch to where it becomes your primary secondary pitch. Guess what I’m trying to say is most pitching coaches can improve a breaking ball (see next point) but the CH is harder to develop, so Braves could have had Anderson put most effort on CH and will now turn attention to CB . 2.) There are some new studies that show guys that struggle with a breaking ball are starting to throw a cutter. By throwing a cutter and learning what different pressure points do to the baseball as it pertains to your release point it can vastly improve spin efficiency which in turn can/will improve your breaking ball.

I’m not a know-it-all by any means and wanted to chime in on this topic as I love all the data available to use now. Not trying to step on anyone’s toes but I hope this helped a little. In the end, Encheff is right and if this is truly what Anderson has for a BB then to me it’s nothing more than a “show me pitch) but I defiantly wouldn’t give up on him because if he can refine that pitch (usually the easiest to get big jump of improvement) he has top of the rotation potential.
 
Enscheff said:
The Nats are probably better than the Braves, just like they were last year. Based on predictive stats they were a true talent 95-96 win team that got a bit unlucky to only win 93.

Meanwhile, based on the same predictive stats the Braves were a true talent 89-92 win team that got quite a bit lucky to win 97 games. Most of that luck came in the form of a completely unsustainable 28-17 record in 1 run games.

The Braves are definitely a top tier contender that can win it all, but the Nats are almost certainly better. They should be better...they are a competent organization with a much larger payroll.
Click to expand...

I'd pick just one nit here... the Nats seem to have near-perennial BP probs, and that will cause you to unperform the team predictive stats (and vice versa). I still think they're better than us, but think it worth mentioning the BPs will close some of that gap.
 
So Bowden posted a month-by-month prediction article in The Athletic. Some tidbits:
Braves sign JD in January to a 4/112 contract
KB to gnats for Kieboom, and 2 pitchers
Lindor to Reds for Senzell and pitchers
And he’s got us losing to Yanks in 6 in the WS.

Most interesting thing he wrote that didn’t register for me until now, with the new September roster limit (28 instead of 40), pitcher innings limits, and Minor League seasons being over, the availability of pitchers being ready to step in will be severely limited at the end of the season. I don’t see this lasting more than a year. He predicts by 9/2021 the roster will be up to 30.
 
blueagleace1 said:
I'd like to add some things as it pertains to Anderson’s curveball. Let me start by saying I am a college pitching coach and have been using this type of data on my guys as well.

Encheff is absolutely correct in what he’s saying. If indeed his spin rate is ~1700 RPM then that is equivalent to a average high school CB or well below average college pitcher in terms of this pitch. When my guys first step on campus and we get them on Rapsodo (fiming software used for video analysis) I expect to see a round 2000 RPM at the very least. The other thing to note is a pitchers true spin vs. total spin which equals his spin efficiency and that’s data we don’t currently have on Ian. For instance, our #2 starter (has best CB on staff) has a 2626 RPM total spin and 2265 true spin which equals ~86% spin efficiency, which is really good.

What I am saying is that if in fact that number of 1700 is correct, he would need to be in the 95% of spin efficiency for this pitch to work. With all of this being said, there are two things I’d want everyone to consider. 1.) Anderson’s CH is a plus pitch and typically for young guys is the hardest pitch to master. The organization (every org has a different philosophy) could have said let’s get this pitch to plus status then turn the attention to your CB/SL after we get this pitch to where it becomes your primary secondary pitch. Guess what I’m trying to say is most pitching coaches can improve a breaking ball (see next point) but the CH is harder to develop, so Braves could have had Anderson put most effort on CH and will now turn attention to CB . 2.) There are some new studies that show guys that struggle with a breaking ball are starting to throw a cutter. By throwing a cutter and learning what different pressure points do to the baseball as it pertains to your release point it can vastly improve spin efficiency which in turn can/will improve your breaking ball.

I’m not a know-it-all by any means and wanted to chime in on this topic as I love all the data available to use now. Not trying to step on anyone’s toes but I hope this helped a little. In the end, Encheff is right and if this is truly what Anderson has for a BB then to me it’s nothing more than a “show me pitch) but I defiantly wouldn’t give up on him because if he can refine that pitch (usually the easiest to get big jump of improvement) he has top of the rotation potential.
Click to expand...

Thanks for helping to make sense of this.
 
blueagleace1 said:
I'd like to add some things as it pertains to Anderson’s curveball. Let me start by saying I am a college pitching coach and have been using this type of data on my guys as well.

Encheff is absolutely correct in what he’s saying. If indeed his spin rate is ~1700 RPM then that is equivalent to a average high school CB or well below average college pitcher in terms of this pitch. When my guys first step on campus and we get them on Rapsodo (fiming software used for video analysis) I expect to see a round 2000 RPM at the very least. The other thing to note is a pitchers true spin vs. total spin which equals his spin efficiency and that’s data we don’t currently have on Ian. For instance, our #2 starter (has best CB on staff) has a 2626 RPM total spin and 2265 true spin which equals ~86% spin efficiency, which is really good.

What I am saying is that if in fact that number of 1700 is correct, he would need to be in the 95% of spin efficiency for this pitch to work. With all of this being said, there are two things I’d want everyone to consider. 1.) Anderson’s CH is a plus pitch and typically for young guys is the hardest pitch to master. The organization (every org has a different philosophy) could have said let’s get this pitch to plus status then turn the attention to your CB/SL after we get this pitch to where it becomes your primary secondary pitch. Guess what I’m trying to say is most pitching coaches can improve a breaking ball (see next point) but the CH is harder to develop, so Braves could have had Anderson put most effort on CH and will now turn attention to CB . 2.) There are some new studies that show guys that struggle with a breaking ball are starting to throw a cutter. By throwing a cutter and learning what different pressure points do to the baseball as it pertains to your release point it can vastly improve spin efficiency which in turn can/will improve your breaking ball.

I’m not a know-it-all by any means and wanted to chime in on this topic as I love all the data available to use now. Not trying to step on anyone’s toes but I hope this helped a little. In the end, Encheff is right and if this is truly what Anderson has for a BB then to me it’s nothing more than a “show me pitch) but I defiantly wouldn’t give up on him because if he can refine that pitch (usually the easiest to get big jump of improvement) he has top of the rotation potential.
Click to expand...

Thanks for providing this amazing info. Back when I was in college 20+ years ago we didn’t have anything resembling this tech. Our coach was still trying to get us to swing down on the ball, and trying to enforce it with that silly contraption with the padded bars guiding the swing path. It was horrible.

I already posited that Anderson May be able to add a cutter, or somehow figure out how to get nearly 100% spin efficiency, but my question for you is this:

When a kid comes in with a spin rate of 2000 or less, how likely is it he can improve upon it? Have you guys identified drills to “strengthen” whatever is responsible for spin rate? Is it something that improves as kids mature physically, or is it something they can focus on and improve...such as a skill like command or swing path?

I guess the short version: what are the chances a mostly mature pitcher like Anderson can add ~500 RPM?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top