Southcack77
Well-known member
You're in "Braves should have traded Freddie Freeman" territory with your Anderson takes at this point.
Ian Anderson's stuff
- Thread starter Enscheff
- Start date
You're in "Braves should have traded Freddie Freeman" territory with your Anderson takes at this point.
striker42
Well-known member
How so? If Anderson's curve isn't a major league offering then he's a two pitch pitcher. Two pitch pitchers struggle to stick in rotations. This is not a controversial position.
If Anderson's curve is the major league offering he showed against the Sox, he has three major league pitches and projects well as a number 3 starter. I'm not seeing what the issue is with saying him showing a better curve in his second outing is important to his potential.
Anderson's curve wasn't good against the Yankees. He showed a much better curve against the Sox. I don't see the issue is saying that's a big thing for him.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
You called?
Southcack77
Well-known member
I don't think I've ever read an evaluation of Ian Anderson that suggested he was a bullpen risk.
Nor did he look like one in either of his MLB starts.
You're the only person saying this.
This isn't new for you with Ian Anderson.
striker42
Well-known member
There weren't a ton of writeups about Ian Anderson's stuff or potential as he made his way through the minors. All we had were a few blurbs about the spin rate of his curve and how his change became his second best pitch.
You're also not actually addressing my points.
His results in his first two starts were stellar, I'll agree. However, it's not uncommon for a young pitcher to experience initial success until the book gets out on them. So I was much more intent on what I was seeing.
In his first start he displayed good command, a fastball with good rise, a change with good sink, the apparent ability for both to come out of his hand identically, and a curve that didn't look major league quality.
So an analysis of this showed he had an excellent two pitch combo in his fastball and change. They worked extremely well together and he executed them tremendously well. But he didn't display a good third pitch. If this was the real Anderson (and any analysis of him was always prefaced with that qualification), then there was significant bullpen risk. As Enscheff pointed out, he got great vertical movement but little horizontal movement making pitches like two seamers, sliders, and cutters not great options for a third pitch. It was really up to whether that curve was going to be better than we saw.
If the curve remained a poor pitch then Anderson's future was likely in the pen or as an "opener" or whatever you want to call it who pitches 3-4 innings. It is incredibly difficult to be a successful major league starter with only two major league quality pitches.
So then came the Red Sox start. He displayed a much better curve in that one (which makes me think he was overthrowing in his debut). If that's his normal curve then he has 3 pitches of major league quality and the pen risk diminishes significantly.
So, is there anything wrong with this statement: If is curve isn't major league quality then there's significant bullpen risk, if his curve is major league quality then he's got a very high likelihood of being a solid starter provided he stays healthy?
Because that's pretty much all I'm saying. As long as his curve stays major league quality, he looks like a solid #3. If it's bad, his future is murkier. For the record, I think the curve he displayed against the Sox is more likely the true curve.
This certainly isn't a controversial position typically.
However, you are the only person that has suggested Anderson as a reliever prior to seeing him throw a pitch - and that includes the most numerically inclined posters. Even Enscheff reserved judgement until he could get his eyes on the data AND the player.
Wright is a four or five pitch Pitcher - how's that working out?
striker42
Well-known member
Two things surprised me about Anderson. First, his control. I don't see how this guy posed a BB/9 over 4 in his time in the minors. It's still something that has me a little concerned about a regression. But so far he's shown a great ability to not only find the zone, but hit his spots.
The second thing that surprised me is his knowledge of how to use his arsenal. A lot of pitchers see their stuff erode before they ever figure out how to actually pitch with it. That Anderson knows how to mix use his pitches so well is surprising and a makes him way more likely to fulfill his potential.
Those are also the two things that Wright can't do for some reason. It doesn't matter how many pitches you throw or how good they are when you can't locate them and have no idea how to use them.
I honestly thought Anderson's command was why he was a big pen risk coming up. It's hard to walk over 4 per 9 in the majors and stick in a rotation. It can be done but it's difficult. Anderson's command so far has put those concerns to rest. After his first start, his curve concerned me. A two pitch pitcher is usually a reliever.
But if the guy we saw pitch against the Sox is the real deal, Anderson will be a rotation stalwart for a while provided he stays healthy.
Southcack77
Well-known member
Ian Anderson has a passable major league curve. We've seen it.
You seem to be debating whether it's a plus pitch. That's up for debate, I guess, depending on how he commands it. Regardless, it's a major league pitch.
If Anderson's CU really had a 1700 RPM spin rate, then there is no way it could have been a usable MLB pitch. At that point he would have had a very hard time being a 2 pitch SP...guys like Archer who make it work are incredibly rare.
However, nobody really believed that spin rate, and it was reasonable to assume he had an MLB-quality CU. So we knew he was a guy with an above average FA, an above average or better CH, and at least a below average CU (but a MLB CU nonetheless). That arsenal is a SP, and unless the control/execution is Wright or Touki or Newk bad, should be able to perform in that role. Of course, nobody knows how the command will hold up once he's made it around the league once, but that's always the case with any young pitcher not named Mike Soroka.
BP arms are typically guys with a hammer pitch, and/or control issues that they need to mask with platoon advantages and being able to pitch at a higher effort level. Think Minter. Or Gohara.
To me, Touki is a BP candidate because of the wipe out CU and questionable control. Wright just has a bunch of good pitches, and he has to be able to execute them to be effective in any way, and if he can't he's just a more talented Lucas Simms who will bounce around between every team that thinks they can "fix" him.
However, nobody really believed that spin rate, and it was reasonable to assume he had an MLB-quality CU. So we knew he was a guy with an above average FA, an above average or better CH, and at least a below average CU (but a MLB CU nonetheless). That arsenal is a SP, and unless the control/execution is Wright or Touki or Newk bad, should be able to perform in that role. Of course, nobody knows how the command will hold up once he's made it around the league once, but that's always the case with any young pitcher not named Mike Soroka.
BP arms are typically guys with a hammer pitch, and/or control issues that they need to mask with platoon advantages and being able to pitch at a higher effort level. Think Minter. Or Gohara.
To me, Touki is a BP candidate because of the wipe out CU and questionable control. Wright just has a bunch of good pitches, and he has to be able to execute them to be effective in any way, and if he can't he's just a more talented Lucas Simms who will bounce around between every team that thinks they can "fix" him.
Last edited:
A guy like Wright isn’t really a good BP candidate because he doesn’t have a single plus or better pitch. His best chance is his control comes around and his 3-4 averageish offerings let him be a back end rotation, swing man type a guy. There’s just nothing there for Wright to throw behind in a count that a hitter can’t cover.
Anderson has at least 2 plus pitches. If he gets that 3rd harnessed to average or better he’s a number 3 easily.
Anderson has at least 2 plus pitches. If he gets that 3rd harnessed to average or better he’s a number 3 easily.
NYCBrave
Well-known member
Still can't help but be discouraged he went from possibly being the best pitcher in that draft, to now having the upside of a number 3 starter.
Anderson’s ceiling is of a solid # 2. The CU becomes a 3rd plus offering and the control is like it has been his 1st 2 games. He’s can be a solid #2. I don’t think he can be an Ace. But to me there’s only 10 or so if those guys anyway. Guys like Cole, deGrom, Scherzer, Stras and so on.
But his most likely outcome is mid rotation workhorse. Which is pretty dam good.
But his most likely outcome is mid rotation workhorse. Which is pretty dam good.
NYCBrave
Well-known member
Sorry, I was referring to Wright in the post I quoted
bravesfanMatt
Steve Harvey'd
Wright still has top of rotation stuff. Just needs a real development staff to guide him. Maybe we can pay the tribe this winter to work with him.
striker42
Well-known member
He needed that curve to meet the threshold of being a pitch he could use and rely on. Passable as you say. It doesn't have to be a great pitch (and it's not), it just has to be a useful pitch. After his start against the Yankees I wasn't sure it was a useful pitch for him. He certainly didn't use it effectively. Against the Sox it was effective and executed with it. I think the latter performance is probably more indicative of what his curve is and his ability to execute with it.
I'm not sure why this is even a debate. He showed a passable curve against the Sox. Paired with his good fastball and change there's general agreement he should be a solid starter provided his control and health hold up. A number 3 starter might not be what you want out of a 3rd overall draft pick but it sure is something we need.
Just heard great interview with Ian on the MLB XM channel - he sounds like he has his head on straight - commenters then discussed his curve being very good and change being “lights out” that he fooled everyone he seemingly threw it to and even when they guessed change, they couldn’t get it. That he changes speed super well, and the org believes in him to be number two for playoffs- that we didn’t do anything at deadline because of him
The VAST majority of "best Pitcher(s) in the draft" turn out to be #3s and #4s - that's absolutely nothing to be embarrassed or disappointed about.
There's a grand total of 60 #1s and #2s on the planet, and the vast majority of them were drafted/signed somewhere between 5-15 years ago. Fans have to adjust their expectations, not the clubs or players. A #1/#2 guy comes along every so often - every organization doesn't draft one every couple of years EVEN if they're drafting in the top 10 every year. If they did, all the teams that have been drafting in the top 10-20 over the last 5 years would have at least one #1 and one #2 already in their system.
TOR arms (with heads to allow them to reach their ceilings) are incredibly rare, and having the organizational people in place to develop them correctly is often more rare. Developing a PITCHER, particularly a top 10 percentile Pitcher is unbelievably hard to do. Think about the current "Aces" - deGrom was a SS, nobody saw him coming. Scherzer was traded twice before he got things figured out. How many years did Cole spend in the Pirates' system before he was traded and somebody else finally unlocked him?
NYCBrave
Well-known member
Which is even more credence to the fact that our philosophy of drafting pitchers first over the past how many years was way off base.
That doesn't change the fact that you're "discouraged" that the "best Pitcher in the draft has the upside of a #3 starter" - there are 30 MLB organizations that are pretty *amn happy when things work out that way.
The Braves have been incredibly lucky to come up with Soroka, Fried, and Anderson, and if any of Newk/Touki/Wright/Wilson/Davidson/De La Cruz/Muller turns into a #3/#4, the rebuild will be a resounding success on the pitching side.
Last edited: