BaseBallstotheWall

As some of you may know, in addition to watching video from Prospect Tube, the two places I’m mostly likely to consult for scouting information are Project Prospect and Baseball Prospectus. Oddly enough, it would be difficult to find more conflicting philosophies, with a very general statement suggesting that Project Prospect favors floor and Baseball Prospectus favors shooting for the moon. That said, if you wanted to determine what either site prefers, well…I gave you the link for a reason.

The point of contention for me arises from evaluating pitchers versus hitters. I was struck particularly by some information I read this morning from Adam Foster in his chat here, which is essentially that “all pitchers have a low floor.” I think this shines a light on a very good point: upside, in my evaluation, is far more important as it pertains to pitchers than to hitters. A pitcher who is just good at some things (throwing strikes, getting rounders, missing bats, having a strong history of health) is literally just another guy. Hitters are another story: they have value if they’re just a good defender, if they’re just good at drawing walks and reaching base, or if they just have plus power, you can generally find a fit for them. I’m not focusing tremendously on platoon play because if you read this site you know my preference for right-handed pitchers and left-handed hitters, but I don’t think that is really a unique enough trait to weight in this exercise.

I disagree with the notion that hitters are more valuable than pitchers for almost exactly the same reason that the folks over at Project Prospect seem to be ranking hitters over pitchers, and that’s because the pitchers who can potentially do “everything” have so much more value to me than hitters who can do “everything,” largely because of scarcity. If you draft or rank a 5-tool prospect in the low minors and he winds up not developing the plate discipline necessary to capitalize on massive raw power and elite fielding skills, he still has raw power and fielding skills to potentially making him a positive asset. The reward, however, is that all 5-tools develop and he turns into an elite asset. By contrast, you can find any old pitcher to throw strikes and sport an ERA around 5, and there is a rash abundance of them. There are very few pitchers who can miss bats, control the strikezone and win games, and those are the most important assets in baseball.

If I’m being unclear, let’s take some an opportunity to illustrate my point. Ryan Sweeney, drafted in the second round of the 2003 draft, was drafted as a legitimate 5-tool center-field prospect. He was expected to develop power while playing plus defense, hitting for high average and having strong speed. The power simply has not come, however, and while he’s only 25, it seems pretty unlikely at this point that it’s going to come. It appears that his defensive ability also plays up far better in a corner (he’s played nearly 50% more in RF than CF in his time with the Athletics) and his UZR has been stronger in RF (though should be noted that it’s also VERY good in CF). That means, despite the power, we still have a 4 win player with plus strike-zone control and elite defense. So why shouldn’t we rank him as highly as a pitcher with a similar skillset? Because it’s FAR, FAR more rare that a pitcher can have this level of development, and so believing in one means seeing them with more value.

Perhaps this is a turn from conventional wisdom, but I’m a strong believer in drafting and ranking assets that are more difficult to accumulate. For pitchers, if their strikeout rate declines, their walk rate rises, or their command or stuff worsen, they’re really not unlike every other #4 or #5 starter. They don’t have the uniqueness of elite defense, strong contact skills, massive power, etc. They’re just like everyone else. So you might say, why favor the riskier bet?

It’s simple. The difference between a flawed pitcher and an elite pitcher is so much greater than a flawed 5-tool prospect and a complete 5-tool player. I’d want to hedge my bets.

No matter which prospect list you look at, Desmond Jennings is a virtually unanimous choice inside the Top 10. Indeed, in Project Prospect’s very interesting Digital Prospect Guide, the only official Top 10 publication currently out there, Jennings is on it (as Adam has noted, he is actually 2nd on Project Prospect’s top 10 list). So why is he not in my top 10? Well, let’s take a look at the statistics first:

Desmond Jennings
2009 OBP LD% BABIP BB% K% IsoP SB
AA .393 17% .347 14% 11% .170 37
AAA .419 16% .354 11% 11.8% .166 15

From a statistical perspective, it’s hard to have much of a beef with Desmond’s numbers. He generally walks more than he strikes out, he’s had a luck neutral performance, as his stolen bases should illustrate, he has a respectable Isolated Power for someone who bases much of his all-around game around speed, and he looks like a quintessential lead-off hitter. It should be clear by that LD% that he is not, by any means, a slap hitter.

This is an interesting case of actually preferring ceiling to floor a bit, as I’m not a huge believer in Jennings developing 25-30 HR power as he gets a bit older, though I think a lot of people might. If he doesn’t, I question how much better he is than players like Tyson Gillies and Michael Brantley, who clearly will not develop any power (unlike Jennings, who might), but I’ve felt it necessary to include that caveat in my ranking. I also don’t think he is near the natural hitter of Dustin Ackley, who may also play 2B.

Jennings is a gold-glove caliber CF if healthy, though I am understandably concerned with his long list of injury history. This was Jennings first healthy year, well, ever. He may very well break down. I will admit that it is likely that Jennings is a much safer bet to have a good, solid career than Michael Stanton, Domonic Brown and Martin Perez, who are the three people I can see sliding behind Jennings to move him into the top 10, but I think their chances for upside are so much better than Jennings that I’m trying to be aggressive with their rankings. I think if Jennings had a clean bill of health, I may run a different course and put him as high as ninth, but I think it’s a mistake to ignore it considering how close these folks are.

Jennings has an easy swing and his bat spends a lot of time in the zone, so it’s not impossible to see some power coming along. As you’ll see here, there is no doubt that Jennings is capable of generating power but he hasn’t, yet, at least at the level of Stanton. You’re putting a lot of pressure on his other tools if he cannot do that. I’m taking a “show me” approach with that power, and perhaps I’m unfairly hurting him because he becomes similar to other minimal power CF types than some of the other prospects around him. It’s worth noting that his .170 IsoP is far more than what Gillies and Brantley have ever done, so there is certainly a difference. How much difference will it ultimately be, though?

In light of the fairly glaring omissions I believe I had from my first effort at the top 100, I’d like to offer a revised version, one that, you know, actually includes one of the better prospects in baseball (Neftali Feliz) and also one that includes Aroldis Chapman.

1. Jason Heyward
2. Stephen Strasburg
3. Brian Matusz
4. Neftali Feliz
5. Buster Posey
6. Carlos Santana
7. Justin Smoak
8. Michael Stanton
9. Jesus Montero
10. Martin Perez
11. Domonic Brown
12. Dustin Ackley
13. Desmond Jennings
14. Pedro Alvarez
15. Kyle Drabek
16. Logan Morrison
17. Madison Bumgarner
18. Matt Moore
19. Michael Taylor
20. Christian Friedrich
21. Brett Wallace
22. Jeremy Hellickson
23. Ryan Westmoreland
24. Aroldis Chapman
25. Chris Carter
26. Mike Montgomery
27. Aaron Hicks
28. Chris Withrow
29. Casey Kelly
30. Wade Davis
31. Alcides Escobar
32. Simon Castro
33. Tanner Scheppers
34. Josh Bell
35. Jarrod Parker
36. Devaris Strange-Gordon
37. Tim Beckham
38. Casey Crosby
39. Yonder Alonso
40. Daniel Hudson
41. Matt Dominguez
42. Mike Moustakas
43. Lonnie Chisenhall
44. Fernando Martinez
45. Eric Hosmer
46. Jacob Turner
47. Jenrry Mejia
48. Josh Reddick
49. Brett Lawrie
50. Starlin Castro
51. Julio Teheran
52. Michel Ynoa
53. Jaff Decker
54. Nick Weglarz
55. Hector Rondon
56. Freddie Freeman
57. Jhoulys Chacin
58. Thomas Neal
59. Arodys Vizcaino
60. Zach Britton
61. Jake Arrieta
62. Jordan Lyles
63. Hank Conger
64. Derek Norris
65. Scott Elbert
66. Todd Frazier
67. Aaron Crow
68. Trevor Reckling
69. Zach Stewart
70. Donavan Tate
71. Carlos Carrasco
72. Ethan Martin
73. Joshua Vitters
74. Reid Brignac
75. Hak-Ju Lee
76. Tyler Matzek
77. Ryan Kalish
78. Jon Niese
79. Michael Saunders
80. Jay Jackson
81. Tim Melville
82. Brad Lincoln
83. Alexander Colome
84. Fabio Martinez-Mesa
85. Phillippe Aumont
86. Mike Leake
87. Mike Trout
88. Mat Gamel
89. Ike Davis
90. Tyler Flowers
91. Alex Avila
92. Josa Tabata
93. Tony Sanchez
94. Brett Jackson
95. Travis D’Arnaud
96. Danny Duffy
97. Jemile Weeks
98. Wil Myers
99. Randall Delgado
100. Jurickson Profar

Say “Hello!” to a hopefully new series at BBTTW. While I found top 10 prospects a little problematic for a number of reasons (the rankings take more than time allows, the research was excessive and the definition was a little bit difficult and overdone), I feel like highlighting five players I’m interested in for a variety of reasons might be worth mentioning.

3B Kevin Ahrens – DOB 4/26/89, Bats Both, Projected Level: Hi-A
I briefly delved into Ahrens in my last post but he’s a guy who I think could really emerge for a few reasons. For one, he was a first rounder in 2007 and a justified one, so he had the talent to be selected there. For his age and experience level, he’s very solid in walk and strikeout levels (9 and 18%, respectively), not to mention he was unlucky last year with a .263 BABIP. Even adjusted his line was not anything to write home (a really poor 13% LD Rate was largely the culprit) but his swing looks like it is there. In a still pretty thin system, it’s probably a mistake to sleep on his potential. It helps that he’s more than capable of fielding his position.

SS Justin Jackson – DOB 12/11/88, Bats Right, Projected Level: Hi-A
Jackson was a supplemental first round selection in 2007, and largely gets grouped with Ahrens and John Tolisano as busts from the 2007 draft, though it’s a bit early to write him off. Jackson epitomizes toolsyness, and he’s easily the most toolsy player in the limited Jays system. He has what it takes to field SS, he has good speed, he’s got a strong arm and he has the makings of a good hitter. The problem? Jackson can’t make contact. His strikeout rate for the last two years has been nearly 30%, so he’s a much bigger concern for me from Ahrens, though I think the potential return is actually greater, considering his position. Despite the strikeout rate, Jackson still reached based 32% of the time based largely on his very solid 13% walk rate. His Isolated Power was well under .100, but I’m willing to wait a little longer on someone who has shown the ability to walk. I might argue that he needs to be a bit more aggressive if he’s going to make enough contact to be useful.

CA J.P. Arencibia – DOB 1/5/86, Bats Right, Projected Level: AAA
Arencibia isn’t quite ready for the majors but he’s closer than his 2009 line would appear, and he’s gone from over to underrated in the prospect community nearly overnight. He was never a five-star prospect, but it didn’t stop Kevin Goldstein from rating him as such after 2008. That said, he has tremendous raw power in general, nevermind for a C. He also has a strong arm and is developing his defensive game. What he lacks in spades is on-base ability. He walked in just 2.5% of his plate appearances in 2008 at AA. On the bright side, he walked 5.2% of his plate appearances in 2009, which is a significant upgrade. Still lower than I’d like but it shows he’s working and that it is an organizational focus. His average and OBP looked poor last year (.236 and .284, respectively) but it was compounded by an unusually low .269 BABIP. Normalization make his numbers look solid, and he still posted an IsoP of over .200. I think he stands a very strong likelihood of being average or above with that power alone, and if his other skills continue to develop I think he could really emerge has a nice value player.

LHP Henderson Alvarez – DOB 4/18/90, Throws Left, Projected Level: Hi-A
Alvarez might just be the most interesting prospect in the Blue Jays system. He has a marginal fastball which will perpetually hold back his upside, but he has two strong secondary offerings and he’s left-handed. He’s also fantastically young for his level (he’ll be 20 at the start of the 2010 season in Hi-A, no small feat) and he has a track record of success which is rare to say on someone his age. He avoids walks (3.7%) and he gets grounders (53% GB) while effectively performing at a luck neutral level. Unfortunately, Alvarez doesn’t have elite potential because he lacks a dominant fastball and an out pitch. He struck out just 17.3% of the batters he faced last season, and his previous year numbers match up with this as well. He should move fast, however, with his combination of pitchability and command. Keep him in mind as a potential back-end top 100 prospect for a few years, but like a lot of the pitchers the Jays have developed, he should have some success slotting into the back of the rotation. You never know if he’ll pick up some velocity as he fills out, either.

1B David Cooper – DOB 2/12/87 Bats Left Projected Level: AAA
Cooper, selected in the first round in the 2008 draft, was a boring selection. He was a 1B without elite power but the Jays, like myself, greatly valued his approach and floor and expected him to move fast. Indeed, Cooper’s potential is as an above-average defensive first baseman who makes solid contact, takes a walk and can hit for extra bases (at an average but not above-average level adjusted for position). It’s hard to say exactly what went wrong for Cooper, however. He walked 11% of his plate appearances, fanned 17%, posted a normal LD% and BABIP and yet hit just .258 with an IsoP of .131. Both numbers are causes for concerns for me: his minor league data in 2008 was generated by virtue of a very, very high BABIP (never below .362) and even then his power wasn’t very strong. There’s no room in baseball for a .392 SLG% at 1B, and as much as I like his approach, he either needs to be over .300 or hitting for more power. There are nothing in his statistics that explain the low average, so there is cause for concern, but lets give him another year before we call him a bust.

Extra Tidbit: Having done a fair amount of research on OF Jake Marisnick, I can tell you that he has more potential and upside than anyone on this list. In a draft where the Jays failed to sign James Paxton, Jake Eliopoulos and Jake Barrett, Marisnick is the face of this draft, along with RHP Chad Jenkins. Marisnick is a legit five-tool athlete with good power potential and a strong understanding of baseball, though I have read that his swing may need to be overhauled. He’s drawing Rocco Baldelli comps which is concerning considering Baldelli’s unwillingness to walk, but the upside is certainly there. He’s in a system that should preach the need to understand the strikezone (see the developments with Ahrens and Jackson for evidence of that) and he has more natural toolsiness than at least Ahrens and possibly Jackson, too. I don’t expect much from next year but he’s a player to watch a few years from now.

Having read a number of interesting baseball books (Moneyball, The Book, The Book on the Book), I feel it necessary to discuss the value of an out as it pertains to evaluating minor league prospects. All of these books discuss and weigh the various parts of the game that cost an offense outs, including strictly managerial tendencies like sacrifice bunts and intentional walks.

Let’s take a look at the virtually universally accepted runs per outcome chart, this one taken directly from The Book (Tango, Lichtman and Dolphin, page 28).

Home Run 1.397
Triple 1.070
Double .776
Error .508
Single .475
Interference .392
HBP .352
Non-Intentional Walk .323
Passed Ball .269
Wild Pitch .266
Balk .264
Intentional Walk .179
Stolen Base .175
Defensive Indifference .120
Bunt .042
Sac Bunt -.096
Pickoff -.281
Out -.299
Strikeout -.301
Caught Stealing -.467

Now, this graph is a tad bit superfluous for the information I want to illustrate, but you’ll see quite plainly that an out is worth essentially -.3 runs. Every time a batter makes an out they are costing a team that many runs, with caveats for some specific outs made (strikeouts, caught stealing, pickoff, etc.). You’ll see the lack of value in the sac bunt, intentional walk and caught stealing in this metric, as well, which is a good thing to realize for you folks advocating small ball. There are a number of interesting books on this topic that I would suggest taking a look at if this topic interests you in any way.

I think you can use this information to determine exactly what you want in a prospect, and the single most paramount of those things should be the ability to avoid an out, with the second most important being to create an out. This should be fairly obvious, but I think often times folks are shooting for the upper end of this spectrum (power) and ignoring the more attainable part of the spectrum (outs gained and outs lost). I like to consider power in a prospect a bonus and in fact, often look at prospects in the lower minors who are already doing well at avoiding and creating outs, hoping that their power will come but realizing that if it doesn’t, they are good enough at avoiding and creating outs that they still should have value to my organization.

I essentially bring this up because I’ve been reviewing a recent acquisition of my own, Toronto 3B Kevin Ahrens. As a former first round pick, Ahrens has done nothing terribly impressive to avoid a bust label after two and a half years in the minor leagues. But what I see is someone that manages the strikezone well (9% BB Rate, 18% K Rate) and can handle his position very well (good reports on defense, former SS in high school). He’s also primed to take advantage of platoon rates (I’ll have an upcoming article on this and my preference for left-handers) as a switch hitter, as well. His IsoP is below .100 but he’s also just 20 in Hi-A, so he has time. The LD% is low, also, and may ultimately be his undoing (13%) but I think there’s a lot more going for him than a cursory statistical analysis will tell you.

In the end, it’s all about preference. If you want to shoot for the moon you can ignore the ability to create and avoid outs and hope for the homerun, but if you get a homerun hitter who costs you outs in the field and at the plate (not walking, not putting the ball in play, etc.), you’re likely losing out to someone who can efficiently avoid and create outs while still having the upside to gain the other attributes you want so badly in the first player.

Below you’ll find my second ever podcast, with information on Tanner Scheppers, Scott Elbert, Kyle Allen, Chris Dwyer and Carl “Allan” Webster, as well as some TERRIBLY interesting information on my fantasy league. Enjoy!

BBTTW Podcast 2!

While Zeke Spruill gets all the attention in Atlanta as the hot high-schooler from the 2008 draft, it was Brett DeVall (and, well, Tyler Stovall) who were more highly regarded coming out of school, and who were chosen earlier in the draft. So why isn’t DeVall getting any attention?

Well, for one, DeVall got shutdown about midway through his first pro season with an injury that took a long time to get clarification on. There was a lot of speculation that DeVall was likely headed towards Tommy John Surgery, though it appears now that DeVall may have just had bone spurs in his elbow and that he may not be out all of 2010. We’ll see how that ultimately comes to fruition but right now I’m leaning towards non-TJ since his dad posted that it doesn’t look like he’ll need Tommy John. The other thing that doesn’t excite folks about DeVall is that his primary offering is not a devastating fastball but rather a devastating curveball (his fastball and other pitches are largely regarded as average with potential for a tick-above average). That repertoire isn’t exactly sexy, and coupled with the injury situation he’s not really grabbing a lot of attention.

Let’s take a look at his line in Lo-A (important to note that it is a big adjustment for a high-school draftee to debut in full-season ball, so any kind of success is particularly impressive given the mix of players he’ll face): 53.3 IP, 50 H, 14 BB, 41 K, 45% GB, 3.58 FIP, .298 BABIP. None of these numbers are particularly remarkable, slighting perhaps the 14 BB (6.3% BB rate) though he’ll have to have good control since he won’t miss bats at an elite level at the upper levels, in my estimation. The strikeout rate is not strong but I think you have to lend some cushion to the fact that he was dealing with an arm injury, perhaps for most of his 2009 campaign, and that may have effected his ability to throw all his pitches exactly as he would have liked. Despite the low average on balls in play, DeVall still allowed nearly as many hits as innings pitched. His tendencies are trending in the flyball direction though it’s too soon to tell and he is at way too low of a level to really trust the data.

Scouts like his pitchability and definitely think he’s a strong candidate to be useful in some capacity at the major league level, though no one is truly enamored with his ceiling (I think this is a somewhat foolish notion since it’s hard to really project development that much going forward). That said, his body doesn’t exactly allow you to dream on potential growth like it does for Spruill, so adding 2-3 MPH in velocity is unlikely. He’s kind of, well, short and chunky. By all scouting reports I can find, he has good mechanics, though the only video I’ve seen is him talking at the end of an instructional video for a camp that his family owns and runs.

In the end, DeVall is interesting but unremarkable. There are a lot of prospects like DeVall in a draft though few have the combination of stuff (at least average and probably a tick above) and advancement that DeVall has. His evaluation largely depends on his injury situation but I think he’ll move quickly whenever he does pitch.

Scott Elbert — LHP, Los Angeles Dodgers DOB 8/13/85
2009 Performance:
AA: 62.1 IP, 59 H, 30 BB, 87 K, .370 BABIP, 40% GB, 3.04 FIP
AAA: 33.2 IP, 34 H, 14 BB, 38 K, .356 BABIP, 59% GB, 3.42 FIP
MLB: 19.2 IP, 19 H, 7 BB, 21 K, .300 BABIP, 47% GB, 4.64 FIP

As I mentioned I would do, I wanted to update you on each of my 21 or so draft picks in my draft for my sim dynasty league. I was slated to have a late pick in the second round, but as a result of my draft board evaporating (Chad Jenkins going was basically my last straw) I agreed to ship my 43rd overall pick, along with 2008 third rounder Dennis Raben, for LHP Scott Elbert. I actually entertained an opportunity to acquire Elbert for #19 overall earlier in the draft, but wound up finding the opportunity to move up for Tanner Scheppers more intriguing.

Elbert is a difficult prospect to judge. He’s had no shortage of injuries and he’s with a team that is very comfortable using their top prospects in relief (see Chad Billingsley for awhile and James McDonald currently) so his value is certainly tied to whether or not he has the opportunity to grab the fifth starter slot going into 2010. Even if he does, it doesn’t mean much, since James McDonald broke camp as the starter last year and quickly lost his spot after four starts.

With that, let’s take a look at Elbert’s 2009 performance, which we can basically divide into two instances. He was strictly a reliever in the majors, and strictly a starter in the minors. What should stand out at both levels is that his control is not exactly where it should be. His walk rates were 10.9%, 9.5% and 8.4% across three levels, and that’s a little bit higher than you’d like to see. His groundball rate is all over the place, at 40%, 57% and then 49%, so it’s hard to say where he lies tendency wise. What remains constant, however, and what I have the most interest in, is his strikeout rate. He fanned 23.3% out of the bullpen in MLB, and perhaps more impressively, 31 and 25%, respectively, in his minor league stint. While he might be “effectively wild,” it’s clear that Elbert can miss bats at any level.

A few concerns with Elbert, though: if he can’t throw strikes somewhere, he really doesn’t have a fit on a major league roster and his ability to miss bats will be under appreciated. There is also a pronounced difference in his splits v L and v R, as in the majors he posted an .862 OPS against v R and a .698 OPS against v L, and the numbers were similarly skewed in the minors. He’ll have to demonstrate an ability to get righties out in the majors in order to succeed long-term. In general, though, Elbert’s a guy that I like because worst case, he’s probably a really effective LOOGY, and best case, he’s a front of the rotation starter who misses bats and controls the game.

As most of you folks know, I’m in a dynasty league (and have been for the past three or four years) and we’re at our amateur draft phase. I held the nineteenth overall pick and traded up to the fourteenth overall pick to select RHP Tanner Scheppers of Fresno State/Texas. While the draft is not strictly amateurs (Daniel Hudson went third overall and Thomas Neal and Alex Avila were worth considering from the non-2009 draft pool), this particular draft is generally regarded as a poor one. The players that went before Scheppers went in this order, 1-13: Stephen Strasburg, Dustin Ackley, Daniel Hudson, Jacob Turner, Aaron Crow, Grant Green, Donavan Tate, Tyler Matzek, Michael Trout, Mike Leake, Zach Wheeler, Jiovanni Mier and Alex White.

Now, I realize you’re not reading my blog for my draft recap, but I must say that I’m fairly surprised at the placements of Michael Trout (very high initial BABIP, an interesting but not overwhelming set of tools) and Jiovanni Mier (very good defender but I have questions about the bat), so I was expecting Scheppers to be off the board, at the latest, at 12. Once I saw that both Alex White and Tanner Scheppers (both in my top tier behind the Strasburg and Ackley tiers, and ahead of Trout, Wheeler, Mier, Matzek and Tate), I made the decision to move up to fourteen and take whoever would fall between White and Scheppers, though Scheppers was my preference.

It should be noted that in general I’m risk adverse, but this draft was so lacking in upside that I saw Scheppers as the last available potential front-end option, so I jumped at it. I am concerned with the way that he ends his release (you’ll see an excellent article here detailing my very concern) as well as the shoulder injury that caused him to fall to the second round, twice, in the 2008 and 2009 drafts. I will also note that while I don’t believe Scheppers has anything near a maximum effort delivery (in fact, he has relatively clean mechanics beyond the strange rocking motion and the shortening of his follow through, as you’ll see here), I’m not sure he has a starting pitcher’s mentality given the way he seemed to dial it up in the AFL all-star game earlier this offseason.

Scheppers has a dominant fastball, sitting between 97-99 as a reliever and between 92-95 as a starter. He also has legitimate secondary offerings including a lockdown curveball, so I definitely think he could start given health and the right demeanor. I’m certainly drafting him with that hope. With that said, he’s also over 22 and notes that one of his major concerns is with command, so it’s very possible Texas could fast-track him to the bullpen as early as the middle to end of next season. In fact, given how they handled Derek Holland and Neftali Perez, I’d honestly be surprised if he didn’t spend some time, at least, in the bullpen, before getting an opportunity to start.

Scheppers isn’t without a need to refine his efforts, however, as he walked nearly 11% of the batters he faced in his last year at Fresno State. With that said, he also was relatively new to pitching, having pitched a total of 20 innings in high school and just 15 as a freshman at Fresno. We have no minor league data on him since he signed very late, but he was impressive in the AFL and I also really like his experience in the independent leagues, where he was told to have learned how patient professional hitters are. He also mentioned that he was more aware of the benefits of pitching inside in a number of interviews.

I think Scheppers most likely destination is an elite, flamethrowing reliever in the Joba Chamberlain mode, and in fact, he may struggle similarly as a starter for the same reasons Joba has. I think if you watch the video I provided it’ll be easy to see how easy his velocity is, and since you can largely attribute velocity with success, I think this is a great time to bet on the moon with Scheppers. We’ll see how he progresses next year.