Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

Another update from John Neary, with some good news about some highly touted prospects at Triple-A Syracuse. The pitching lines aren't quite as good lower in the minors, though. Thanks, John!

Syracuse 3-3 at Buffalo 0-4

Josh Phelps had staked Syracuse to a 3-0 lead after three innings before the rain caused a suspension of play on Tuesday night. When the game resumed on Wednesday, Cliff Politte pitched like the Cliff Politte of old, striking out one in a perfect fourth; however, Doug Linton and Scott Cassidy also pitched like the Doug Linton and Scott Cassidy of old, giving up four runs on six hits (two home runs) and two walks in two innings. Syracuse bounced back to win the nightcap 3-0 behind some strong pitching from Jason Arnold (5.1 IP, 2 H, 0 R, 2 BB, 6 K) and Brian Bowles (1.2 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 0 BB, 0 K). Arnold's line for the year in Syracuse is now 80.2 IP, 84 H, 31 BB, 64 K, 9 HR; those long balls worry me a bit. Combining the batting lines over the two games, Phelps went 3 for 5 with the three-run blast and a walk and Gabe Gross went 3 for 6 with a double and two walks. Kevin Cash went 1 for 3 in the first game, and Dave Berg was hitless in two trips in the second game.

New Haven 8 at Altoona 9

With many of these minor-league teams, one doesn't care about wins or losses as much as the way in which games are won or lost. If Sandy Nin is starting for Charleston, a 1-0 loss is much better than a 10-9 win: none of the hitters on that team is anything resembling a hot prospect, so you're really only interested in the pitching line. Similarly, when Chris Baker starts for New Haven, I'm OK with a 9-8 loss. Russ Adams went 0 for 4 with a walk; he's been cool for the past little while and is down to .282/.342/.359 in 142 AA at-bats. Alexis Rios went 2 for 5, John-Ford Griffin went 0 for 4 with a walk, and Guillermo Quiroz went 2 for 5 with two solo home runs. Jordan DeJong was the only prospect to toe the rubber; the best thing that can be said about his 0.2 IP, 3 H, 2 R, 2 ER outing (blowing an 8-7 lead) is that he didn't walk a man -- so far in AA he has walked 12 in 12.2 innings.

Dunedin 8 at Clearwater 5

Bob File pitched a perfect first inning in his second rehab appearance. Chad Pleiness relieved him and struggled through six innings, allowing four earned runs on nine hits (including a home run) and one walk while striking out three. He's been giving up a lot of hits recently; I guess his $H really was too good to be true. A bunch of guys hit well; I'll cite Jason Waugh's 2 for 4 with a double and a walk as a representative for the group. Waugh is up to .287/.356/.427 in 143 Dunedin at-bats, which isn't great, but it's the best on the team.

Auburn 6 at Staten Island 5

Chad Mulholland worked four scoreless innings, fanning three and allowing two hits and a walk. Jamie Vermilyea recorded 5 K's in 3.1 relief innings, but gave up three runs on five hits and a walk; he didn't help his cause by making an error. Davis Romero and Bubbie Buzachero coughed up two more runs in the ninth. Aaron Hill went 1 for 4 with a walk, and "V. Chiavarllt" walked once and provided the big blow, a three-run double in the seventh that put the Doubledays ahead 5-1.

Pulaski 8 at Burlington 2

Joey Reiman hit two doubles and a sacrifice fly in five plate appearances; he's at .345/.430/.512 on the year and has a ridiculous 12 doubles in 84 at-bats, but has also struck out 24 times. Catcher Robinzon Diaz doubled and walked in four trips. In 76 at-bats, he's hitting .408/.439/.592 with 9 doubles; last year in Medicine Hat, he hit .297/.344/.345. He doesn't turn 20 until September 19, so he is mildly interesting.

Posted by Jordan on Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 12:24 PM EDT.

In the Minors | 36 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

_Spicol - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 12:57 PM EDT (#96508) #

Arnold's line for the year in Syracuse is now 80.2 IP, 84 H, 31 BB, 64 K, 9 HR; those long balls worry me a bit.

Does 6 HR in 74.2 IP worry you? Because save for one game where he gave up 3 dingers, those would be his stats....Arnold has been pretty much average against the HR this season. I know we can't just throw out games at will, but including it without explanation isn't the correct perspective either. A full season will diminish the impact of a outlying game like that.

"Just like how we shouldn't gloat when Darnell Coles hits 3 in a game and expect more of that going forward, we shouldn't worry when Jason Arnold gives up 3 in a game. I think most baseball fans have the tendency to downplay really great games and at the same time, feel that really bad games are somehow less freakish."

- Taken from the first chapter of the book I just started writing today, "The Psychology of Fandom: A Peek Into the Mind of a Sports Spaz", spaz being a general term and not directed at John. ;)

_John Neary - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 01:18 PM EDT (#96509) #

Spicol: I agree that 9 HR in 80.2 IP isn't especially high. However, it's higher than any of the other good prospects in low-A or above.


Pitcher          IP    HR  9HR/IP
Jason Arnold    116    11  0.85
David Bush      115.2   9  0.70
Dustin McGowan  111     2  0.16
Vince Perkins    94.2   1  0.10
Brandon League  103.1   1  0.09

Last year, Arnold gave up 5 HR in 155.1 IP in A/AA ball, equating to 0.29 HR per 9 innings pitched.

Now, it's entirely possible that most pitchers' home run rates rise when they get to the high minors. I don't have the tools to do a study of that question very quickly. In the absence of such a study, however, I would say that it's a modestly discouraging sign that (1) Arnold's home run rate is up from last year and (2) it's higher than the home run rates of the Jays' other good pitching prospects. I admit that the statistical significance of these results may be low.

As for the argument that a 3-HR game is less of a bad sign than three 1-HR games, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I concur that 3 HR/0 HR/0 HR is going to win you more games than 1 HR/1 HR/1 HR -- this is one of the big effects measured by Michael Wolverton's stats -- but I'm not convinvced that it makes a difference in terms of how we should project Arnold's home run rate.

And I have no problem with the moniker "Sports Spaz" ;)

_nelly - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 01:39 PM EDT (#96510) #

this may not account for the entire difference... arnold did not have the benefit of pitching in the FSL this year.

robertdudek - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 01:48 PM EDT (#96511) #

As pitchers advance they face more hitters that can hit homeruns (the hitters are not only better, but also older). There aren't many 21-year-olds that can hit a lot of homeruns but there are quite a number of 24-year-olds that can.

_John Neary - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 01:54 PM EDT (#96512) #

Nelly: Yes, I shouldn't have left that out. The park and league factors will of course play a role. I don't think there's anything conclusive here, but I think the increase in raw home run rate is mildly worrisome particularly when combined with the decrease in raw K/BB rate.

_John Neary - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 01:57 PM EDT (#96513) #

Robert: Do you have numbers on that? Nothing fancy, just raw home run rates from, say, the Sally, FS, Eastern, and International leagues?

Pistol - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 02:14 PM EDT (#96514) #

I'm with John on this one. I think his HR rate is a little worrisome, and I don't think you should discount it if there's several in one game.

Of course Doc has given up 21 HRs in 168 innings (wow, 168 innings already) and he seems to be doing OK. It helps when your K/BB ratio is over 6.5.

_John Neary - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 02:22 PM EDT (#96515) #

HR rates, 2003:


League HR/AB
IL     0.022
EL     0.021
FSL    0.013
Sally  0.017

Sorry for mixing stats (9HR/IP earlier, now HR/AB) -- I'm in a bit of a rush.

So you'd expect Arnold's HR rate to not quite double going from the FSL to the IL. The difference between Arnold's expectation and outcome is insignificant -- 1 or 2 HR, probably -- and can be safely ignored. Mea culpa.

robertdudek - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 02:24 PM EDT (#96516) #

Homeruns as a percentage of Plate Appearances

Majors ......... 2002 2001 2000
AMERICAN ....... 2.83 2.86 3.02
NATIONAL ....... 2.61 2.97 2.97

AAA .......... 2002 2001 2000
INTERNATIONAL 2.16 2.31 2.42
PACIFIC COAST 2.48 2.72 2.52

AA ............ 2002 2001 2000
EASTERN ....... 2.04 2.22 1.86
SOUTHERN ...... 1.66 2.07 1.82
TEXAS ......... 1.71 2.04 2.19

A+ ............ 2002 2001 2000
CALIFORNIA ..... 2.02 1.98 1.74
CAROLINA ....... 1.53 1.53 1.57
FLORIDA STATE .. 1.58 1.49 1.50

A/A- ........... 2002 2001 2000
MIDWEST ........ 1.42 1.74 1.54
SOUTH ATLANTIC . 1.53 1.66 1.54
NEW YORK-PENN .. 1.23 1.23 0.96

Craig B - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 02:33 PM EDT (#96517) #

2003 HR rates (per 100 AB):

Appalachaian 1.49
New York-Penn 1.26
Sally 1.67
Florida State 1.34 (notoriously tough hitter's league)
Eastern 2.06
International 2.24

Robert is right, traditionally more home runs are hit higher on the ladder. Altitudes and ballparks will affect this (Florida State is really tough, California League really easy, etc.)

_nelly - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 02:34 PM EDT (#96518) #

john, i was wondering if you had seen any information on vermilyea that would account for the huge increase in his k rate. he didn't average a strikeout per inning at the university of new mexico last season... now he is at 1.77 k's per inning at auburn.

is it a product of the small sample size?
does the UNM yard favor hitters that much?
or, more likely, a combination of factors.

Craig B - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 02:34 PM EDT (#96519) #

OK, I didn't see that.

Craig B - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 02:36 PM EDT (#96520) #

Nelly, a lot of it is altitude. UNM is even tougher on pitchers than Colorado is, and a big part of altitude baseball is that strikeouts are cut way down because of the reduced amount of break on pitches.

Sample size has to be a factor as well.

_Jordan - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 02:38 PM EDT (#96521) #

In addition to Halladay, Jim Palmer and Catfish Hunter strike me as examples of aces who gave up a lot of long balls; the key, of course, is to do so with as few men on base as possible (Palmer never allowed a grand slam, IIRC). Arnold's bad habit, which he shares with virtually every young pitcher, is leaving pitches up in the strike zone, and as Robert says, when you get to AAA and MLB, you'll meet batters who crush those pitches.

It's reasonable to be concerned about the home runs, but unless it's a lingering problem, I wouldn't worry much. The book on Arnold is that his stuff is not overpowering, but he's smart and knows how to pitch. That means, to me at least, that he needs time to adjust to each new level of competition, because he has to figure out what works and what doesn't. It's the silver lining to not having a 98-mph fastball; you need to learn how to let batters get themselves out, because you can't force the issue yourself.

For this reason, I expect Arnold to also struggle initially upon his promotion to the big leagues, and there may well be a lot of second-guessing as to his ability at that point. But give him time, and I think he'll figure out the majors too. Just don't expect instant results when he first arrives; that's not in his repertiore.

Craig B - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 02:43 PM EDT (#96522) #

Robin Roberts gave up tons of home runs, he still holds the NL record I believe.

_John Neary - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 04:13 PM EDT (#96523) #

Nelly, Craig: Sample size is probably a factor, but there's no way Vermilyea's a fluke. (I acknowledge that neither one of you called him a fluke). If his true strikeout rate was one per inning, he would have a 0.0004% chance of accumulating 53 K's in 30.1 IP. Even if his true K rate was 12 per 9 innings, he'd only have a 0.9% chance of having 53 K's at this point in the season. Vermilyea's numbers are so insane that one figures some of it has to be luck, but there's an awful lot left over for skill.

Nelly, I don't have any scouting information on Vermilyea other than what Craig provided.

Regarding Jason Arnold:

                        $H    $HR   $BB   $K
IL, 2003               .341  .021  .079  .181
Jason Arnold, IL, 2003 .354  .026  .091  .188

Arnold has been pretty much an average IL pitcher (without accounting for park factors). His HR, BB, and K rates are all modestly above league average.

I tend to agree with Jordan regarding Arnold. He'll need a bit of time to adjust to AAA, and he'll probably need a bit of time to adjust to the majors. Certainly our expectations must now be a bit lower than they were at the time of his promotion to Syracuse -- hands up everyone who thought he'd be a league-average IL pitcher in his first 80 innings? -- but he's still got a lot to offer.

_John Neary - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 04:21 PM EDT (#96524) #

One more point on Arnold: Dayn Perry has suggested in some recent BP articles that minor-league home run rate may be a stronger predictor of major league success than minor-league K and BB rates. I don't think his findings are anywhere near conclusive, but they're still worth considering.

John

Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 04:26 PM EDT (#96525) #

http://economics.about.com
So you'd expect Arnold's HR rate to not quite double going from the FSL to the IL. The difference between Arnold's expectation and outcome is insignificant -- 1 or 2 HR, probably -- and can be safely ignored.

Are you sure? What's your methodology? :)

Mike

Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 04:32 PM EDT (#96526) #

http://economics.about.com
Arnold's bad habit, which he shares with virtually every young pitcher, is leaving pitches up in the strike zone

When I talked to Arnold, he admitted this was his biggest weakness and he's been dilligently working on keeping the ball down. That's one of the reason I think Arnold is going to succeed: He knows what he has to do to be successful in the major leagues and he seems quite comitted to working on it. Like I said in my piece, he seems quite intelligent (he's quite articulate at least, and the two are generally positively correlated) so I'm sure he'll figure out what he needs to do.

Mike

_Spicol - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 04:58 PM EDT (#96527) #

As for the argument that a 3-HR game is less of a bad sign than three 1-HR games, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree.

That's not my argument. My argument is that that game is an outlier and may have been the flukiest of flukes. It certainly appears to be, given he had only given up 7 HR in 221 IP before this season.

_nelly - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 06:52 PM EDT (#96528) #

since my original post, i noticed vermilyea's k rate was similar to his current rate while pitching in the cape cod league last summer (32k's / 20 innings). seems he likes sea level.

_R Billie - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 08:44 PM EDT (#96529) #

Vermilyea was a steal for the Jays. It's a shame that he seems to prefer relieving though goodness knows, the Jays could use a guy that can go 3-4 innings in the middle of a game. Move him quickly until he hits a wall and hope he's ready for 2005.

_R Billie - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 08:49 PM EDT (#96530) #

As far as Arnold's numbers, yes they're a bit concerning, particularly given his age and experience. He's certainly not rushed...I'm just disappointed that his control appears to be fairly unrefined. It shouldn't take until the age of 24 and AAA level ball to understand you have to keep the ball down to be successful.

K/BB ratio, HR rates, and K rates tend to degrade as a pitcher moves up levels so a slight drop in performance is reasonable between AA and AAA but I think the more experienced hitters in AAA are exposing some holes in Jason's game. It's only 80 innings though and he seems to be improving which is a good sign. But he probably won't be ready for the start of 2004.

Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 10:17 PM EDT (#96531) #

http://economics.about.com
It shouldn't take until the age of 24 and AAA level ball to understand you have to keep the ball down to be successful.

I think he's realized it for years RB and he's probably been working on it for awhile... I'm sure he didn't just have any epiphany a couple months ago about not throwing hanging breaking balls. It's not something you can get really good at overnight. If it were, I'd be playing professional baseball instead of being a superstar economist. :)

Mike

robertdudek - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 10:19 PM EDT (#96532) #

Understanding that you have to keep the ball down is easy; keeping the ball down while throwing strikes is no trivial matter.

Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, July 24 2003 @ 10:33 PM EDT (#96533) #

http://economics.about.com
Understanding that you have to keep the ball down is easy; keeping the ball down while throwing strikes is no trivial matter.

Hahahah.. yeah.. good point. If all pitchers had to do was keep the ball down, the Jays could just sign a bunch of failed cricket bowlers. :)

Mike

_John Neary - Friday, July 25 2003 @ 12:05 AM EDT (#96534) #

Mike: I'm neve again going to be able to make any assertions without an accompanying p value, am I? ;)

Spicol: I still don't quite understand your point; please pardon my obtuseness. I do consider it something of a fluke that Arnold gave up three home runs in one game, but I don't think it is a fluke that he gave up the three home runs. (And to think that I'm having trouble understanding what you say!) The Poisson distribution gives a 32% chance that a pitcher allowing 9 HR in 14 GS will allow at least 3 of them in a single game. That means that it's quite plausible that the 3 HR game was the product of normal variation.

_Brent - Friday, July 25 2003 @ 01:49 AM EDT (#96535) #

John: Forgive my ignorance, but doesn't your Poisson assumption have to include the fact that Poisson variables must be iid? I mean, if I were to use a Poisson process to say, count the number of homeruns allowed during t IP, then shouldn't the number of homeruns allowed be independent? I say this because giving up three homeruns in a game would not be classified as independent. I'm not 100% sure on this however, partly because of my unfamiliarity with the practicality of the Poisson process, and since I'm running on 3 hours sleep.

_Ken - Friday, July 25 2003 @ 06:59 AM EDT (#96536) #

Enough of this poisson distribution, i thought i'd seen the last of that a few years ago. :) damn french mathematician
I'll say one thing though, the probability that nobody continues this thread had a damn high distribution.

anyway enough of Simeon and back to Jason, yeah he has been a bit better lately, but i am still not very encouraged by his performance at AAA, worse than i and i'm sure most of us expected.
However as i recall when JP traded for Arnold one of his biggest assets was said to be his knowledge and intellect when analysing his own pitching. If this is true i'm sure we can have confidence in Arnold improving his performance, pitch savvvvvvvvvvy guys are always more likely to get around tough situations.

On another note, Banks had a bad day at the park yesterday at Auburn giving up something like 6ER in 2.1 innings, ouch.....still thats his only bad outing so far, hope the blister isn't a factor.
Dominic Rich is back and hitting like he never left, going 2-4 yesterday as the Ravens won 1-0, behing Cam Reimers outsanding pitching going 8 innings giving up 7h and 0BB with 6K, ripe for promotion i say.

btw anyone heard anything on Rosario, has he started throwing yet?

P.S. Phelps has been promoted

_John Neary - Friday, July 25 2003 @ 08:10 AM EDT (#96537) #

Brent: Yes, the Poisson distribution does assume that the variables are iid. I don't have any proof that home runs allowed are iid. However:

1. It is my impression that baseball streaks and slumps are more often the product of random chance than is commonly believed.
2. The calculation shows that you can explain the 3-HR game by random chance alone. Identical independently distributed variables will give you a 3-HR game 32% of the time [and I've done some random trials to confirm it without using the Poisson distribution, Mike ;)].

Ken, you spoke too soon!

_Brent - Friday, July 25 2003 @ 09:29 AM EDT (#96538) #

Long live the Dead Thread Distribution!

I wonder if the whole streak/slump situation has been researched at all. It would be surprising if streaks had some predictive quality, although I suspect that you are right John.

Speaking of injured players in the minors, does anyone know anything about last year's 8th round pick Chris Leonard. I read somewhere that he has some fantastic talent, but injuries have always gotten in the way. His stats from his last year at Miami (Ohio) U. are unimpressive at 4.85ERA, 65IP, 75H, 26BB and 61SO, but I heard he has some upside. I believe he is recovering from TJ or something, I don't know.

_Ken - Friday, July 25 2003 @ 09:48 AM EDT (#96539) #

it's alive, or.............maybe just undead!

yeah, too soon, but i covered myself for that eventuality, even "damn high" probability has the slight chance, looks like john and brent comprise that 0.05 outside the standard deviation (if that's right, its amazing how much i've forgotton, i used to be able to do this stuff, i'm sure thats wrong, i'm talking about standard distribution graphs or something, non?) redundant brains.

yea Leonard is meant to be a bit special, i remember last year people gettin excited about the jays picking him, if he stays healthy he will be a sure fire STEAL by the scouting dept, but the chance he won't is, dare i say it, "damn high".

_Spicol - Friday, July 25 2003 @ 09:52 AM EDT (#96540) #

Spicol: I still don't quite understand your point; please pardon my obtuseness. I do consider it something of a fluke that Arnold gave up three home runs in one game, but I don't think it is a fluke that he gave up the three home runs.

You're not being obtuse at all. But in order to understand better you should stop thinking only like a mathematician and think like a sports psychologist as well. A high level of performance in a sport is extremely difficult to master with consistency. Numbers are great and I think that numerical analysis tells 90% of the story but sometimes, there's other stuff. I'll explain further...

Avoiding a home run requires some amount of skill. It's not a fixed probability, like flipping heads or pulling a jack out of a deck of cards. At some point, there might be a temporary breakdown of that skill due to mental or physical fatigue, a mechanical problem, whatever...a fluke game...a game where the conditions were such to create that outcome but that never happens again or perhaps only 0.001% of the time. I don't think we can use a Poisson Distribution here. These aren't random occurrences. These are occurrences where to some great degree, Arnold's skill at preventing a home run temporarily broke down. Hitting a home run is never, ever random chance. The distribution of when they are hit across 500 plate appearances may be, or may appear to be at least, but break it down to that one pitch and swing and there is nothing random about it.

If Arnold's skill at preventing home runs ever breaks down so consistently that he continues to give up nearly 1 HR every 9 IP then yes, we might get concerned. But it might also be that the conditions that presented themselves on that day to affect Arnold's skill never manifest in the same fashion again. That, dear Sports Spaz, is a fluke game. And maybe that's what Arnold had.

_John Neary - Friday, July 25 2003 @ 12:22 PM EDT (#96541) #

Spicol: I take your point. I'm going to call this one off, as I think we're both taking reasonable positions and neither one of us is likely to budge. Your gut feeling is that Arnold probably had a mental or physical breakdown or something of that nature in that game; mine is that he probably just had a run of bad luck. Neither one of us is going to be able to provide any incontrovertible proof any time soon, so let's just leave it for now and see how Arnold does in the future.

robertdudek - Friday, July 25 2003 @ 12:35 PM EDT (#96542) #

I believe that the hitter is more important in determining whether a PA ends in a homerun than the pitcher. Homerun rates for hitters vary much more than for pitchers. That is why I almost never worry about homeruns allowed by a pitcher until I have a very large sample to deal with and I can be reasonably confident that the homerun hitting abilities of the sample of hitters he's faced has returned to near normal.

_R Billie - Friday, July 25 2003 @ 05:45 PM EDT (#96543) #

It's also true that a hitter is more responsible for an at bat ending in a walk than a pitcher is. Impatient hitters are much less discriminatory towards borderline pitches or even pitches that aren't so borderline. Which is why a pitcher's walk rate tends to degrade as he moves up.

When a pitcher's K/BB ratio and homerun rate degrades as much as Arnold's has between AA and AAA it's a sign that his stuff isn't as good as it appeared against younger, less experienced hitters (which is why Joe Blanton deserves an asterix in Low-A ball). He's more finesse than power and I think he'll figure out how to succeed eventually but my expectations for his major league future as a #2 starter have been downgraded significantly.

In the Minors | 36 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.