Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

New Hampshire trailed 5-0 after seven innings and they had only one hit in the game. But they exploded for seven runs in the eighth and won. The win masked a rough start by Zach Stewart. The Lugnuts racked up 16 hits to support Chad Jenkins on their way to a win. Las Vegas and Dunedin were losers Friday.

Las Vegas 0 Tacoma 7

Lance Broadway gave up four runs in the first two innings as he allowed seven baserunners in the first two. Broadway pitched into the fifth and gave up five runs. Jesse Carlson and Merkin Valdez also gave up a run each.

The 51's only had three hits, Chris Aguila had two of them. Aguila is batting .361.

New Hampshire 7 Binghamton 5

New Hampshire had only one hit, a Darin Mastroianni single through seven innings. Trailing 5-0 David Cooper singled and Shawn Bowman walked to lead off the eighth. Binghamton's starter was pulled and the bullpen threw gas on the fire. Adam Loewen singled in run number one then three straight walks led to two more runs. Manny Mayorson doubled in two runs to tie the game, Eric Thames hit a sac fly to out the Fisher Cats ahead and a wild pitch gave New Hampshire an insurance run.

With the lead New Hampshire turned to Trystan Magnuson to pitch a perfect eighth and Danny Farquhar to pitch a perfect ninth.

Fisher Cat starter Zach Stewart had trouble with his control in this game and it cost him. In the first inning he gave up a lead off home run followed by a couple of doubles. In the second he walked two hitters and then a triple scored both and then a single allowed the third run to score. After two innings the Cats were trailing 5-0.

The Fisher Cats had five hits, four of them in that eighth inning.

Lakeland 5 Dunedin 2

Lakeland scored a run in the first off Joel Carreno. In the bottom of the first Tyler Pastornicky walked, stole second and scored on an Al Quintana double. Lakeland scored another run in the top of the third to make it 2-1 and two in the fourth and it was 4-1. Dunedin got one back in the fourth when Yan Gomes singled in Sean Shoffit. Lakeland added one more run and Dunedin were unable to mount a comeback. In total Dunedin only had four hits. Carreno gave up all five runs and took the loss.

Lansing 9 Fort Wayne 4

Ryan Schimpf, who had four hits on Thursday, added two more hits on Friday. Schimpf led off the game with a double and later scored on a Mark Sobolewski sac fly. Schimpf singled again in the third to load the bases but the Lugnuts were unable to score. Lansing got four runs in the third inning. Brad Glenn, Sean Ochinko, AJ Jimenez, Balbino Fuenmayor and Chris Hopkins all had hits leading to four runs and a 5-0 lead.

Fort Wayne got two runs back off Chad Jenkins with a home run in the fourth. But Lansing got those back in the fifth, Jimenez singled, Fuenmayor doubled him home, and Hopkins singled to score Balbino. Lansing tacked on single runs in the sixth and seventh and Fort Mayne got two consolation runs in the ninth.

Jenkins pitched seven innings and gave up the two runs on four hits and three walks.

The Luggies had 16 hits. Hopkins had four, Balbino and Ochinko three each, Jimenez and Schimpf two each.

Three Stars

3rd star - Manny Mayorson
2nd star - Chad Jenkins
1st star - Chris Hopkins

Posted by Gerry on Saturday, May 08 2010 @ 09:39 AM EDT.

Back From The Dead | 10 comments | Create New Account

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

China fan - Saturday, May 08 2010 @ 11:00 AM EDT (#214797) #

Zach Stewart lasted only 3 innings yesterday. Of his 5 starts this season, 3 have been terrible. Opponents are belting .286 against him. He has to turn it around soon, or it could be the end of the experiment of making him a starter. He is the same age as Brett Cecil, a year older than Drabek, barely a year younger than Zep and Mills, and he is struggling at the AA level. He did have 7 good games as a starter in AA last season, so his decline this season is a bit of a mystery. If he doesn't make some improvements soon, it won't be fair to mention him in the same category as Drabek and Mills (the next wave of starting-rotation prospects). His other rivals are Zep and Litsch (only a year or two older than him) who will soon be rehabbing at New Hampshire or Las Vegas and will leapfrog ahead of Stewart in the depth chart. We may have to rethink our assumption that Stewart is a contender for the 2011 rotation. The bullpen in 2012 might be a more realistic prediction.

TamRa - Saturday, May 08 2010 @ 02:07 PM EDT (#214798) #

When they started him at AA, I kind of shelved the idea that Stewart was a contender for the 2011 rotation anyway - too many other names ahead of him.

Given that he skipped a start or two because of - reportedly - a need for side work on his mechanics, i'm assuming his continued problems arise from not having that adjustment smoothed out yet.

We don't NEED him to be ready to pitch in the majors next April so I'm fine with waiting on him so long as we get reports which explain the situation.

Unless someone is traded, or hurt, we'd be be sorting through as many as 11 candidates (Marcum, Romero, Morrow, Cecil, Zep, McGowan, Litsch, Eveland, Richmond, Mills and potentially Drabek) so the readiness of Stewart is not high on my list of concerns.

For now.
On another note, I'm really really ready to see Zep rehabbing if for no other reason than to give us a break from the incompetence of Lance Broadway.

uglyone - Saturday, May 08 2010 @ 02:12 PM EDT (#214799) #

Personally, I've had Stewart pencilled in as a reliever for a little while now.

Romero
Marcum
Cecil
Morrow
Rzepczynski
Litsch
Drabek
Jenkins

already too many starters. and I'm sure more will be drafted this year.

time to groom Stewart for the closer's role.

Matthew E - Saturday, May 08 2010 @ 02:46 PM EDT (#214802) #

Well, you know the saying: There's no such thing as a pitching prospect. It's true, but there is such a thing as a group of pitching prospects. If you're relying on one guy to develop, you're almost certainly going to be disappointed; if you're relying on a large group of promising guys to produce a small group of major league pitchers, you've got a much better chance. That's what the Jays are doing, and it seems to be working so far. I don't really care which guys end up in the Jays' rotation in subsequent years, as long as whoever does rise to the top does well.

Ryan Day - Saturday, May 08 2010 @ 02:59 PM EDT (#214804) #

It's early to give up on Stewart. He's had one bad month and two years of dominance; give him a couple months, at the very least.

When Ricky Romero was 23, many people viewed him as a disastrously bad draft pick who'd be lucky to make it as a fifth starter. Heck, when Roy Halladay was 23, plenty of people were saying his career was over.

Pitchers are unpredictable. They take time.

greenfrog - Saturday, May 08 2010 @ 04:37 PM EDT (#214805) #

Thames made the "in the team photo" section of Baseball America's Prospect Hot Sheet for the first week of May. Here's the relevant snippet: "Blue Jays LF Eric Thames has had problems staying healthy, but when's he'd on the field, he has produced. Thames, 23, hit .385/.533.,923 with four home runs this week for Double-A New Hampshire and is now hitting .313/.388/.586 with seven homers in 26 games."

China fan - Sunday, May 09 2010 @ 02:32 PM EDT (#214812) #

Ryan Day, just to clarify: I'm not giving up on Zach Stewart. Not at all. I just said that he needs to turn it around soon. You said that he deserves a couple of months, which sounds like "soon" to me, so I think we actually agree. And I totally agree with you about the unpredictability of pitchers.

However, since you mentioned Ricky Romero, it's instructive to compare Stewart and Romero at the same age. At the age of 23, Stewart is making his first starts as a starting pitcher at AA, and he is struggling. Romero, at the same age, was already in his third year of starting at the AA level, and was about to be promoted to AAA. In the same season he posted 7 successful starts at the AAA level (which would seem to be a very unlikely scenario for Stewart at his current pace).

You said that Romero was widely perceived as a failure. Yet he had a better record at age 23 than Zach Stewart, who is not perceived as a bust. I guess that's my point: the perception of Stewart today shouldn't be so much better than the perception of Romero at the same age.

Spifficus - Sunday, May 09 2010 @ 02:47 PM EDT (#214813) #

Romero had a AA era of 4.96 in 277 innings (and peripherals to match), without much sign of improvement from year 1 to year 3. Stewart doesn't have that long of a period of meh on his record. What he has is 2 months of awesomeness and 1 month of off. Given how much more pro and amateur experience Romero had at that age, and his supposed level of polish, they're really not good comparables at all.

China fan - Sunday, May 09 2010 @ 04:15 PM EDT (#214814) #

Well, it wasn't me who initiated the comparison of Stewart and Romero. I only took a closer look at the comparison that was already being made. But, if I understand you correctly, it seems that you're defending the conventional wisdom in 2008 that Romero was a bust and the conventional wisdom in 2010 that Stewart (same age as Romero in 2008) deserves the hype of being one of the top five prospects on the team. You seem to be saying that the statistics justified all of the criticism that was heaped on Romero in 2007-08 and all the praise that was heaped on Stewart in 2009-10. But that's where I disagree -- a closer look at the statistics shows that Stewart was thriving at lower levels, while Romero had already made it to higher levels by age 23 and was adjusting to higher levels.

Spifficus - Sunday, May 09 2010 @ 05:08 PM EDT (#214815) #

I'm saying that because of their levels of experience (both amateur and pro, upper minors innings, starter vs reliever) that, aside from Ryan's yaneverknow comparison, they're really bad to compare against eachother. Having said that, Romero had 3 years to whittle away at his prospect status with meh performances. His prospect status was dwindling for a reason - For someone that was supposed to be polished and near-ready at the time of the draft, 3 years of no improvement at AA is not good. To that point, he wasn't making adjustments, or at least any adjustment he was making weren't the right ones. It was only his last handful of starts that he showed even a hint of possible progress at all. Prospect status wise, he earned his doom and gloom prognostications. That he overcame it is a testament to the work he has done since with his control.

Stewart has had, what, 3 bad starts (and only 4 bad starts total in his 19 start career). 3 years... 3 starts... Yeah. I think I'm defending those pieces of conventional wisdom (except 'bust' sounds too absolute and final. 'Long Shot' or 'Lottery Ticket' is probably better). I find that age comps are made too often without weighing in experience enough, and my thought is that's what you're doing here.

Back From The Dead | 10 comments | Create New Account

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