303 replies to this topic

[Crazy Puppy]

Yes, Beckett had a lower BB rate in AA, that is true. But he did it in a smaller amount of innings. And since he had such great stuff, he could just attack the batters and they couldn't hit it anyways.

Hughes doesn't have great stuff? He can't attack hitters? At 20 years old, with 230 minor league innings, he's a real "pitcher" that knows how to get hitters out with guile rather than stuff? Please elaborate on why Beckett's "great stuff" hurts the comparison to Hughes.

Beckett in anyway does not have pinpoint command.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, we know that now. Beckett's command in the major leagues, specifically in 2006, was has been inconsistent. That's pretty much the point. His command in the big leagues has been spotty, yet in AA, his BB rate was lower and K rate was higher than Hughes.

He's simply an example of a terrific pitching prospect -- one of the best in decades -- whose minor league dominance hasn't yet translated into major league greatness. You can kick and scream all you want about why Hughes will be different, but it's not the lock some people are suggesting.

[Jack Sox]

Hughes doesn't have great stuff? He can't attack hitters? At 20 years old, with 230 minor league innings, he's a real "pitcher" that knows how to get hitters out with guile rather than stuff? Please elaborate on why Beckett's "great stuff" hurts the comparison to Hughes.
Yes, we know that now. Beckett's command in the major leagues, specifically in 2006, was has been inconsistent. That's pretty much the point. His command in the big leagues has been spotty, yet in AA, his BB rate was lower and K rate was higher than Hughes.

He's simply an example of a terrific pitching prospect -- one of the best in decades -- whose minor league dominance hasn't yet translated into major league greatness. You can kick and scream all you want about why Hughes will be different, but it's not the lock some people are suggesting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Crazy Puppy pretty much nailed this. Until Hughes dominates major league hitters, he's just another great pitching prospect that has great potential. By the way, I'd be willing to bet he'll have a career much more similar to Josh Beckett and Mike Mussina than Roger Clemens and Pedro Martinez.

Edited by Jack Sox, 16 January 2007 - 09:06 PM.

[Wingack]

Keep grasping for straws, Cmaff. You're not here for intelligent discussion, you're here to stir up shit. You will be gone soon enough.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

ND I don't think you are a troll over there.

[Jack Sox]

ND I don't think you are a troll over there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No one there does.

[Wingack]

Just to be clear, I get pissed when anyone compares prospects to great ML players without qualifying their statements. And, usually, when Sox prospects are overly lauded here, someone steps in and reminds people that they are just prospects. That's all I'm trying to do.

Have I said anything negative about Hughes? No. All I've suggested is that we shouldn't be inducting him into the inner circle of the HoF yet. I do think he projects as a future ace and will likely be one of the top 10 pitchers in baseball in a few years. I also think it is possible that he performs at a historically great level. I don't think that is likely merely because I don't think that is likely for any pitching prospect and there is a lot of evidence to back that up, Edwin Jackson being not a bad example of it. It is possible that Hughes ends up merely average or flames out. I think we all need to remember these possibilities when talking about prospects.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah you are right. It is fun to make comps though. Especially for players that some haven't gotten seen to play. It allows them to have a better idea at who a player plays like.

[BoSox Rule]

maybe ryanm

[Wingack]

No one there does.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know. That is why Cmaff shouldn't have said taht.

[Mike in CT]

So if Hughes is possibly the next Clemens/Pedro... what does that make Matsuzaka?

[PooNani]

http://www.thebaseba...ck-Ankiel.shtml

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nice point, this actually is a point toward Hughes. I mean, if Hughes doesn't develop a mental disease, I pray he puts up the numbers Ankiel did in his rookie year. He was sick (though his control was mediocre in AA and thus in the majors, but he could survive on pure stuff he was that good)

Edited by PooNani, 16 January 2007 - 09:16 PM.

[Crazy Puppy]

Beckett and Bailey are flamethrowers with plus-plus curves but (as Red Sox fans learned this year), when Beckett's curve isnt being spotted, he has to rely on his fastball command which is average at best. Bailey actually has a developing changeup which may be an average pitch eventually (unlike Beckett). Hughes on the other hand has excellent command of his fastball and commands his curveball very well whether its to bury it in the dirt or spot it for a strike. His changeup has excellent fade but the command of that pitch is an important thing for Hughes to master as he continues to mature as a pitcher, as he made great leaps from his start in A ball in 05.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's all reasonable, but again I think you are using a lot of information about Beckett that's based on his major league career. At the time he dominated AA at age 21, he was considered a great pitching prospect, very much on the level that Hughes is on now, even if they are different types of pitchers in many ways. Beckett was BA's No. 1 prospect -- among pitchers and hitters -- entering the 2002 season. I'm not saying they are the same pitcher, just that Beckett is a reasonable exhibit as to why some of the hyperbole about Hughes should be tempered.

I guarantee you that some of the stuff being said about Hughes now was being said about Beckett five years ago.

[PooNani]

That's all reasonable, but again I think you are using a lot of information about Beckett that's based on his major league career. At the time he dominated AA at age 21, he was considered a great pitching prospect, very much on the level that Hughes is on now, even if they are different types of pitchers in many ways. Beckett was BA's No. 1 prospect -- among pitchers and hitters -- entering the 2002 season. I'm not saying they are the same pitcher, just that Beckett is a reasonable exhibit as to why some of the hyperbole about Hughes should be tempered.

I guarantee you that some of the stuff being said about Hughes now was being said about Beckett five years ago.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you have a BA subscription? Mine ran out this past season, but they still have their prospect stuff archived, and I was pretty conscious of the minors when Beckett was coming up and he definitely didnt have a reputation for great command of his pitches or a plus changeup. No reason for us to have a discussion based on assumptions & guarantees when the information is there for the taking

Edited by PooNani, 16 January 2007 - 09:15 PM.

[Caspir]

Nice point, this actually is a point toward Hughes. I mean, if Hughes doesn't develop a mental disease, I pray he puts up the numbers Ankiel did in his rookie year. He was sick

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cmaff asked if there were any other pitchers who fit his criteria, and epraz added Rick Ankiel.

Keep grasping for straws, Cmaff. You're not here for intelligent discussion, you're here to stir up shit. You will be gone soon enough.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Glad I'm not the only one that sees it.

Edit- I see you edited the original content of your post PooNani. Good save.

Edited by Caspir, 16 January 2007 - 09:17 PM.

[PooNani]

Maybe you should learn to read. Cmaff asked if there were any other pitchers who fit his criteria, and epraz added Rick Ankiel.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He quoted my post where i asked for pitchers who fit the criteria, and i'm saying thats a good selection.

edit: It wasn't really a save, at first i interpreted it as a sarcastic post since Ankiel fell apart, but i changed my mind about the tone thereafter

edited for happier tone

Edited by PooNani, 16 January 2007 - 09:26 PM.

[epraz]

Maybe you should read. He quoted my post where i asked for pitchers who fit the criteria, and i'm saying thats a good selection.

edit: It wasn't really a save, at first i interpretted it as a sarcastic post since Ankiel fell apart, but i changed my mind about the tone thereafter

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

for the record, my link was meant to be tone-less.

[JakeRae]

Hughes doesn't have great stuff? He can't attack hitters? At 20 years old, with 230 minor league innings, he's a real "pitcher" that knows how to get hitters out with guile rather than stuff? Please elaborate on why Beckett's "great stuff" hurts the comparison to Hughes.
Yes, we know that now. Beckett's command in the major leagues, specifically in 2006, was has been inconsistent. That's pretty much the point. His command in the big leagues has been spotty, yet in AA, his BB rate was lower and K rate was higher than Hughes.

He's simply an example of a terrific pitching prospect -- one of the best in decades -- whose minor league dominance hasn't yet translated into major league greatness. You can kick and scream all you want about why Hughes will be different, but it's not the lock some people are suggesting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for saying everything I wanted to say much better than I could ever have said it.

Yeah you are right. It is fun to make comps though. Especially for players that some haven't gotten seen to play. It allows them to have a better idea at who a player plays like.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nothing wrong with comps. Just with equating. Saying a player has a Clemen's like fastball or has Schilling-like control or has a similar repetoire to Greg Maddux are all useful and essential parts of getting a handle on what a young player can do. Saying someone has the upside to be Clemens in his prime is along the same lines. I just objected to the certainty with which these comparisons were being made, as if Hughes already has established that he will follow a similar career path to Clemens.

On another note: PooNani, can you explain the difference between command and control to me. It seems to me that control refers to a pitcher's overall ability to command his pitches. One is statistical whereas the other is scouting based. But, you can't have control without command, or vice versa and therefore using them interchangeably, although technically inaccurate, causes no great loss of meaning.

Also, I am actually really interested in hearing the impressions/observations of people who have seen Hughes pitch. That's why I got really frustrated when I started reading this thread and saw a bunch of posts that didn't help me get a more meaningful handle on Hughes. I'm afraid I may have added to that by responding to them, and have learned that sometimes it is best to just ignore those posts, but it seems we've gotten back on track a little, so hopefully we can move forward with actually discussing Hughes. What makes his AA BB/9 so special that an identical rate in another player is not comparable? What makes those who like Hughes certain that his rate stats won't fall significantly as he faces harder competition.

[bombdiggz]

I must say I have to take anything baseball related that cmaff says with a grain of salt as big as Philip Hughes' left nut after seeing cmaff's ERA calculations. Poo Nani, you were right he did embarass himself. Anyone who needs a lugh check out page 10 of the BOS/NYY rotation page.

Now back to Phillip Hughes, he is clearly a stud prospect and I expect him to be a stud MLer. However, that doesn't always translate as people have pointed out with the Beckett ml stats and Prior comparisons. The transition to the bigs isn't easy and there could always be an injury. But Phillip Hughes is arguably the best prospect in baseball and has a great chance to have an awesome ML career.

Edit: That is very well said indeed Crazy Puppy

Edited by bombdiggz, 16 January 2007 - 09:33 PM.

[PooNani]

On another note: PooNani, can you explain the difference between command and control to me. It seems to me that control refers to a pitcher's overall ability to command his pitches. One is statistical whereas the other is scouting based. But, you can't have control without command, or vice versa and therefore using them interchangeably, although technically inaccurate, causes no great loss of meaning.

Well control is usually referred to the ability to not allow free passes (as often as possible), while command is the ability to put the ball where you want it within the strikezone. You can maintain low walk rates without having great command by blowing it by hitters when in good hitters counts (but this doesnt work if your offspeed stuff isn't working, or the competition is excellent). Randy Johnson in 2006 still had good control of his fastball, and didnt issue many free passes. However, he couldnt command his fastball very well within the strikezone, nor could he command his slider out of the stretch whatsoever. Beckett is a control over command type of guy, pretty similar to Bailey and that may be the way they like to be. Bailey has the rep of this country boy flamethrower attitude who just wants to challenge hitters and blow them away. Hughes from my experience of watching him, has the mentality of a Maddux (more of a pitcher than a thrower), but still has good velocity along with those plus offspeed pitches. I obviously wont go so far to predict a Maddux career because theres so many things that need to go right for any prospect to sustain a long HOF career, but Hughes has the tools to at least be successful in the short term.

Edited by PooNani, 16 January 2007 - 09:35 PM.

[ngruz25]

Beckett does not have pinpoint command in the way Hughes does. He never did. He never will.

Could you please grow up? I mean, come on. You came in here and attacked me. I didn't say anything to you. I am having a civilized conversation here.

Please grow up and get the hell out of here if you have nothing to say about Hughes. Me and other people here are trying to have an intelligent conversation here and you are watering it down.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't mean to make this into a personal attack or anything, but this sort of stuff doesn't fly here at SoSH. We pride substantive posts, and yours was not. Making baseless and unsupportable claims does not further intellectual conversation.

That said, carry on.

[Mike in CT]

Just for context, if Hughes is possibly Clemens/Pedro, what does that make Matsuzaka?

[PooNani]

A couple videos:

Phil Hughes vs Binghamton Mets
http://www.youtube.com/v/w4hIfXx8n-Q

Tyler Clippard (finesse fastball 89-91 but with 2 plus offspeed pitches, flyball tendencies)
http://www.youtube.com/v/5PPtvgUVZsQ

Humberto Sanchez, picked up in the Sheffield deal
http://www.youtube.com/v/oopqybAcj9k

6'9 (and growing) Dellin Betances a year prior to the draft (his mechanics have since been overhauled)
http://www.youtube.com/v/vW4RY33ReRE

Edited by PooNani, 16 January 2007 - 09:45 PM.

[cmaff05]

Don't mean to make this into a personal attack or anything, but this sort of stuff doesn't fly here at SoSH. We pride substantive posts, and yours was not. Making baseless and unsupportable claims does not further intellectual conversation.

That said, carry on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, you mean like this one?

This isn't NYYFans where you trolled forever until you were finally booted out. Your shelf life will be much shorter here if you act the same way, CMAff.

What I was saying is that Beckett doesn't have the same command in the zone that Hughes does. He never did, even during the 2003 playoffs.

[PooNani]

To stay on the Hughes path. He pitched at the Futures game, and was knocked around pretty well. I had to cut down the youtube video since there is a size limit, so unfortunately you dont get to see Kottaras hitting the homer to deep center . That being said, you could see he was excited and overthrowing, the single by Gonzalez was a nice pitch pulled through the hole, but the pitches hit by Balentien and Kottaras were letter high fastballs that were drilled (IIRC), and although he calmed down against Tabata, Tabata is godly ;

Pitch 1 - Called Strike
Pitch 2 - Called Strike
Pitch 3 - Swinging Strike (Blocked)

Joel Guzman strikes out swinging. 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pitch 1 - Foul
Pitch 2 - Ball
Pitch 3 - Foul
Pitch 4 - Ball
Pitch 5 - In play, no out recorded

Carlos Gonzalez singles on a ground ball to right fielder Hunter Pence. 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pitch 1 - In play, run-scoring play

Wladimir Balentien doubles (1) on a fly ball to center fielder Cameron Maybin.    Carlos Gonzalez scores. 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pitch 1 - Ball
Pitch 2 - In play, run-scoring play

George Kottaras homers (1) on a fly ball to right center field.    Wladimir Balentien scores. 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pitch 1 - Called Strike
Pitch 2 - Swinging Strike
Pitch 3 - Foul
Pitch 4 - In play, out(s) recorded

Chin Lung Hu grounds out, second baseman Howie Kendrick to first baseman Joseph Koshansky. 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pitch 1 - Called Strike
Pitch 2 - Called Strike
Pitch 3 - Ball
Pitch 4 - Foul
Pitch 5 - Foul
Pitch 6 - Foul
Pitch 7 - Blocked Ball in Dirt
Pitch 8 - In play, no out recorded

Jose Tabata singles on a sharp line drive to center fielder Cameron Maybin. 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pitch 1 - Called Strike
Pitch 2 - Pickoff Attempt 1B
Pitch 3 - Ball
Pitch 4 - Swinging Strike
Pitch 5 - Swinging Strike

Anderson Gomes strikes out swinging. 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tell me what MLB hitter Tabata resembles

Edited by PooNani, 16 January 2007 - 09:56 PM.

[bombdiggz]

Man Hughes does have one sweet delivery and the movement on those pitches are sick. You tube has some pretty sweet matsuzaka (mouth watering for some) pitching clips. They are a must watch if anyone hasn't seen them before.

[Grubbery]

Oh, you mean like this one?

What I was saying is that Beckett doesn't have the same command in the zone that Hughes does. He never did, even during the 2003 playoffs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Based on what criteria? You're making an imperical statement, but have provided absolutely nothing. It looks foolish especially when comparable BB stats at this point in their minor league careers completely undermines your comment.

[PooNani]

/\/\/\/\
Read the post I made on this subject earlier in the thread. It's not all about BBs. Hopefully someone with a BA subscription can dig up Beckett's 01/02 scouting report to confirm what I recall from the time.

Just for context, if Hughes is possibly Clemens/Pedro, what does that make Matsuzaka?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Asian Walter Johnson

Hell if I know. The sample of Japanese pitchers coming over is too small, and I've seen Hughes pitch several times against American hitters while my exposure to Matsuzaka is varying scouting reports and youtube videos. Given his combination of control and power stuff i'd say he'll be a very good pitcher in the US as long as he stays healthy.

Edited by PooNani, 16 January 2007 - 10:01 PM.

[Lucen]

well you should get rid fot that soft spot cause he aint die hard red sox fan. he was just a person who grew up watching da sox and who liked them.

I have heard that he has never went to sox games. and now he doesnt care about them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

According to the commentators in this video, you're wrong. Hughes did go to Fenway for games.

[PooNani]

I believe Phil was born in Rhode Island (or his Dad's family is from there), but he grew up in Southern California. Foothill HS in Santa Ana

[Me and rey]

Just for context, if Hughes is possibly Clemens/Pedro, what does that make Matsuzaka?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The pitcher Matsuzaka would be if he does have the arsenal of pitches we have heard about Would be someone similar to Juan Marichal. Take note i said SIMILAR as i said Hughes Could be similar to Seaver. We are talking about HOF pitchers here. What i am referring is The type of pitcher i would expect to see as far as style is concerned.

[SouthernBoSox]

To stay on the Hughes path. He pitched at the Futures game, and was knocked around pretty well. I had to cut down the youtube video since there is a size limit, so unfortunately you dont get to see Kottaras hitting the homer to deep center . That being said, you could see he was excited and overthrowing, the single by Gonzalez was a nice pitch pulled through the hole, but the pitches hit by Balentien and Kottaras were letter high fastballs that were drilled (IIRC), and although he calmed down against Tabata, Tabata is godly ;


Tell me what MLB hitter Tabata resembles

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I guess he looks similar to Manny, at least thats the popular comparison. Swing looks more like Nomar's to me.

[Hello]

By the way, I'd be willing to bet he'll have a career much more similar to Josh Beckett and Mike Mussina than Roger Clemens and Pedro Martinez.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If Hughes has a similar career to Mike Mussina, I would be estatic.

Also, I saw someone on page 1, make a reference to Homer Bailey and rating him as a better prospect than Hughes.

Earlier today, I came across a Hughes vs. Bailey article.

The numbers are ridiculous. Over the course of his minor league career, Bailey is averaging 10.27 K/9 with a very low 1.25 WHIP. As if these are not reasons enough to be impressed, just look and see what Bailey became in 2006, pitching against the highest level of competition he had been opposed to. Bailey made 13 starts at High-A Saratoga, putting up an ERA of 3.31 while posting a 79 to 22 strikeout to walk rate with a WHIP right at 1.00.

Considering the competition faced at Double-A, Bailey was actually more impressive at Chattanooga. In these 13 starts, Bailey performed with a similar amount of control (77:28 K to BB) with an impressive 1.15 WHIP. He also managed a 7-1 record with an ERA well south of two (1.59).

All of these facts make the decision so easy for me: Philip Hughes.

Hughes, a 6-foot-5, 220-pound native of Santa Ana, Calif., has separated himself from Homer Bailey. While his repertoire on the hill is not that of Bailey’s, Hughes has no problem showing off something that Bailey does not have: impeccable control.

Last season, Bailey posted the greatest control numbers of his career with WHIP numbers of 1.00 and 1.15 at High-A and Double-A respectively. If Hughes had put up similar statistics, it would have been the worst year of his minor league career.

Hughes has never posted a WHIP over 0.91, which came in 21 starts last year at Double-A Trenton against tough competition in the Eastern League. Over the course of the 237.1 innings pitched in his minor league career, Hughes has done it all: 21-7 record, 2.13 ERA, amazing 269:54 K to BB clip, and of course, the microscopic WHIP of 0.86.

[No Guru No Method]

well you should get rid fot that soft spot cause he aint die hard red sox fan. he was just a person who grew up watching da sox and who liked them.

I have heard that he has never went to sox games. and now he doesnt care about them.

We can let Mr Hughes clear this issue up himsel (Courtesy Baseball America)

On growing up a Red Sox fan: My dad is from the New England area and my grandma used to live in Rhode Island. I always used to go there every summer and go to Red Sox games and stuff, so it’s kind of how it happened. (Fenway Park) is probably the nicest stadium with probably the most history. I have never pitched at Fenway, but that would be really cool to do someday.

On his favorite Red Sox: Well, I always liked the guys (they) never really kept around all that long. So I always kind of liked them when they went through. My first favorite player was Mo Vaughn and then he left. I liked Nomar after that, then he left, but I really just liked Red Sox players, not any individual guys.
----

Google is good.

Edited by No Guru No Method, 16 January 2007 - 10:39 PM.

[GoWhalers]

As far as I'm concerned Phillip Hughes is the real deal and he's going to be a great pitcher for years and years barring any sort of cataclysmic injury. He really has shown no weakness in the minors and if all goes as it should he's going to be downright scary at the major league level.

As much as it pains me to say it, he's going to be good. Real good.

[Sam Ray Not]

Not to belabor the point, but the only Hughes-hype anyone seems to have had a problem with was Southern BoSox's confident assertion that, barring injury, he WILL be as good as Clemens/Pedro. Not "can" or "might," WILL. Yes, that is ridiculous. Most of the Hughes defenses herein are attacks on straw men. We all think he's a fantastic prospect -- and I'm more convinced than ever after watching that YouTube footage.

Still, notwithstanding the tortured parsing of "command" and "control," I remain unconvinced that he's a better prospect than Beckett was in AA (great find, Crazy Puppy). Outside of Beckett's superior ERA, K/9, and K/BB, what indicators do people need? Is K/BB not a good enough measure of command and control? Seems to me the main difference between the two pitchers is that Beckett was toiling in relative obscurity while Hughes is doing so under the watchful gaze of a rabid fanbase jealous to add the one missing jewel -- a bona fide homegrown ace -- to its already obscenely shiny crown.

Wake me when we can begin talking about Hughes with Pedro and Roger as one of the five or six greatest pitchers who ever lived.

Edited by Sam Ray Not, 17 January 2007 - 07:41 AM.

[Worst Trade Evah]

The big thing is health. IF he stays healthy, then I pretty much agree with SouthernBoSox -- Hughes is going to be really great. That's a bigger IF than people are acknowledging. Beckett is a great comp -- and Beckett did not stay healthy. He made what? 9 trips to the DL in his first 4 years in the majors? He still has good stuff, but during a critical development period at the beginning of his MLB career, Beckett got set back. Same with Prior and most of the others.

IF he stays healthy, then Hughes will be great. I don't have any problem saying that, because that IF is pretty huge.

Here's what happened to Beckett (compiled by Portagee SoxFan)

5/1/02 Josh Beckett: Placed RHP Josh Beckett on the 15-day DL retroactive to April 29 with a blister on the middle finger of his right hand. (Activated 5/14)
6/5/02 Josh Beckett: Placed RHP Josh Beckett on the 15-day disabled list (right middle finger blister). (Couldn't find activation date)
8/24/02 Placed RHP Josh Beckett on the 15-day DL with a blister to his right middle finger. (Activated 9/11)
5/9/03 Placed RHP Josh Beckett on the 15-day disabled list with a right elbow sprain. (Activated 7/1)
5/31/04 Placed RHP Josh Beckett on the 15-day disabled list with a blister to his right middle finger (Activated 6/16)
6/25/04 Josh Beckett: Placed RHP Josh Beckett on the 15-day disabled list, retroactive to June 18, with a pulled muscle in his lower back. (Activated 7/5)
7/6/04 Placed RHP Josh Beckett on the 15-day DL with a skin tear to his right middle finger (Activated 7/30)
6/17/05 Placed RHP Josh Beckett on the 15-day disabled list with a blister to his right middle finger. (Activated 6/30)
7/8/05 Placed RHP Josh Beckett on the 15-day disabled list with a left oblique strain (Activated 7/23)


And here's what happened to Mark Prior:

9/17/02 Cubs reinstate P Mark Prior to active list.
7/21/03 Cubs place RHP Mark Prior on 15-day DL with shoulder soreness.
5/6/04 Transferred RHP Mark Prior from the 15-day to the 60-day disabled list
4/3/05 Placed RHP Mark Prior on the 15-day disabled list with right elbow inflammation, retroactive to March 25.
5/28/05 Placed RHP Mark Prior on the 15-day disabled list with a right non-displaced fracture of the lateral epicondyl (elbow)
3/28/06 Placed RHP Mark Prior (right subscapularis strain) and RHP Kerry Wood (right shoulder arthroscopy) on the 15-day disabled list, retroactive to March 27.
5/26/06 Transferred RHP Mark Prior to the 60-day disabled list.
8/12/06 Placed RHP Mark Prior on the 15-day disabled list right shoulder tendinitis

Run down the list of former big prospects, and it's a similar story. This is why people say TINSTAAPP. It's basically Russian roulette getting him through the injury nexus. The odds are, he'll get hurt, and then it's just a question of how he bounces back.

Liriano and Hernandez were both arguably better prospects than Hughes. Liriano crushed AAA at age 21 (1.72 ERA, 0.88 WHIP, 11 k/9, 2.37 BB/9 etc). Hernandez had a slightly worse year than that in AAA -- at age 19. Liriano just had Tommy John surgery while the relatively healthy guy, Hernandez, had a pretty solid age-20 MLB season, which was still a losing record with a 4.5 ERA on a lousy team.

Edited by Worst Trade Evah, 17 January 2007 - 10:30 AM.

[PooNani]

thats just in the majors, his first season was 2000

http://www.jockbio.c...eckett_bio.html

But that start proved to be his last for nearly two months. When Josh complained of soreness in his right shoulder, the Marlins took no chances. An MRI revealed mild tendonitis, and he was shut down immediately.

Though he tired by season’s end (and served a second stint on the DL),

Over the winter, Josh met with Dr. James Andrews in Birmingham, Alabama to get his shoulder checked out completely. The diagnosis detected a small tear in his labrum, some fraying in his rotator cuff, and biceps tendonitis. The news didn’t cause much concern; after a standard rehab program, he received a clean bill of health.

Edited by PooNani, 17 January 2007 - 10:33 AM.

[GoWhalers]

The Yankees have been especially careful with Hughes, limiting his innings and putting him on strict pitch counts during his starts in the minors. I'm assuming this is because of his past injury problems which seem minor and non-nagging at worst. What do you think the odds are that when he gets the call-up injuries become a real worry for him?

Maybe I'm just being pessimistic (if you can call it that) but I can't see this as being any more of a problem than your typical pitcher coming up from the minors.

[Sam Ray Not]

The big thing is health. IF he stays healthy, then I pretty much agree with SouthernBoSox -- Hughes is going to be really great. That's a bigger IF than people are acknowledging. Beckett is a great comp -- and Beckett did not stay healthy. He made what? 9 trips to the DL in his first 4 years in the majors? He still has good stuff, but during a critical development period at the beginning of his MLB career, Beckett got set back. Same with Prior and most of the others.

IF he stays healthy, then Hughes will be great. I don't have any problem saying that, because that IF is pretty huge.

(snip)

If he's healthy, he'll be great. That's a big if.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Great is one thing, "Roger/Pedro great" quite another. The words "will be Roger/Pedro great" should just never be uttered, about anybody (including, as was pointed out, the young Pedro and Roger).

But I totally agree about the size of the IF. I was trying to think of how many power pitchers haven't had some semi-serious health issue during their careers. Clemens ... Ryan ... and? Good health for pitchers is more the exception than the rule. I'm already worried sick about Papelbon's "minor" shoulder issues. I always think of the grotesque description of the state of Hershiser's shoulder when he was forced to retire ... something about bone stretched out of its socket, and tenderized meat ...

Fans of Hughes, Paps, or any young power pitcher should really be holding their breath till they make it to their 30s unscathed. I know there's no such thing as bad karma, but, just to be safe, I'm not going to be crowing much about Paps as "the next Schilling" till like 2011.

[PooNani]

Still, notwithstanding the tortured parsing of "command" and "control," I remain unconvinced that he's a better prospect than Beckett was in AA (great find, Crazy Puppy). Outside of Beckett's superior ERA, K/9, and K/BB, what indicators do people need? Is K/BB not a good enough measure of command and control? Seems to me the main difference between the two pitchers is that Beckett was toiling in relative obscurity while Hughes is doing so under the watchful gaze of a rabid fanbase jealous to add the one missing jewel -- a bona fide homegrown ace -- to its already obscenely shiny crown.

Again, if you want to choose to ignore that there's a difference between the two and that Hughes and Beckett are very different pitchers at the same stage in their careers, that's perfectly fine. Even if you want to assume that he commanded his fastball as well as Hughes, his dERA was nearly a third of a run lower, mainly because he kept the ball down in the zone and gave up much fewer extra base hits. He was also a year younger than Beckett at the same stage in his career.

And Again, even if you assume that Hughes was the same type of pitcher as Beckett at the same stage in his career, (given what i knew about Beckett in 01, such isnt the case), if Beckett is used as an example of how Hughes could fail....does that mean you're saying Beckett is doomed? I mean, the Sox did give up 4 prospects for him and signed him to a 4 year extension. If this same comparison were made prior to 06, wouldn't you (along with other sox fans) be scared of the idea of the Yankees developing their own Josh Beckett?

I really hope no one thinks Hughes WILL be Clemens or Pedro. Hughes has potential to be something great IF he stays healthy, IF he shows the same determination in the majors, and IF he adapts well when it comes to learning how to attack MLB hitters. All I've established is that his combination of stuff, build/mechanics and statistics put him in very special territory. He's gotta take it from here..

Edited by PooNani, 17 January 2007 - 10:36 AM.

[Sam Ray Not]

And Again, even if you assume that Hughes was the same type of pitcher as Beckett at the same stage in his career, (given what i knew about Beckett in 01, such isnt the case), if Beckett is used as an example of how Hughes could fail....does that mean you're saying Beckett is doomed? I mean, the Sox did give up 4 prospects for him and signed him to a 4 year extension. If this same comparison were made prior to 06, wouldn't you (along with other sox fans) be scared of the idea of the Yankees developing their own Josh Beckett?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Um, no: I'm just saying that King Phillip could end up pretty good, really good, or great; and that Beckett could also end up pretty good, really good, or great (though, granted, greatness in his case is looking like more of a longshot; and I would trade him back for Hanley and Anibal if I could).

And I never said I wasn't a-scared of the Big Bad Hughes. I am.

[Me and rey]

Um, no: I'm just saying that King Phillip could end up pretty good, really good, or great; and that Beckett could also end up pretty good, really good, or great (though, granted, greatness in his case is looking like more of a longshot; and I would trade him back for Hanley and Anibal if I could).

And I never said I wasn't a-scared of the Big Bad Hughes. I am. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In these days of the all powerful radar gun, Beckett seems to be still learning to pitch. We all know he can throw. That is what he does when he gets pissed off. if he learns to forget the velocity readings and become a pitcher, he can be the great pitcher that he is physically capable of being. The challenge for Beckett is to learn to listen to instruction, and forget his "stupid Stubborness. " it would also help to learn to throw a real change up. As far as Hughes is concerned I have never seen him pitch. I am looking forward to seeing him face Ortiz Ramirez and Wells. They don't have hitters like that in AA ball. Ido remember Clemens First year with the Red Sox. IIRC he was shut down with a fore arm strain at some point. Clemens at that time was a totally different pitcher physically and also as far as what he threw.

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Was looking for something about Josh Beckett's command when he was in the minors and ran across this website that discusses a young Mark Prior. Lot of similar statements being made: "Not one person can on the above list can speak of a dominance before 23." "Didn't show nearly the command or the power." "Delivery and mechanics are reportedly so flawless that even though he throws the ball 95mph, there is the thought that it puts virtually no strain on his arm." "Barring injury however, Mark Prior looks to be on track to take his place as one of the all-time great pitchers if not the best ever."

Does have an interesting list of pitchers in MLB before the age of 23.

Based on not much research, Prior seems to me to be a pretty good comp, which is to say that the MFYs should be very glad to have him and he has the potential to anchor a rotation for a decade. Which is about all that one can ask from a prospect.

BTW, this Sickels review of Beckett said that he had excellent control. True, doesn't mention command, but I thought I'd throw it out there.

[PooNani]

nice find

Beckett has the other attributes he needs. His curveball is outstanding, and he throws it for strikes. His changeup is very advanced considering his age and experience level, and he isn't afraid to use it.

Have to wonder if blisters are behind his problems now, because that changeup he was throwing in 06 was more like an Aaron Small fastball

[Me and rey]

nice find
Have to wonder if blisters are behind his problems now, because that changeup he was throwing in 06 was more like an Aaron Small fastball

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The blisters affect the curve. i would guess the change is more likely affected by concerns about the shoulder.

[SouthernBoSox]

The blisters affect the curve. i would guess the change is more likely affected by concerns  about the shoulder.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well . . . no. If shoulder was the concern it would affect all of his pitches. He is just very inconsistent with it. He use to throw it with a different grip and it was pretty good. It was pretty hard 88-89, but it had some sick movement, like Schmidt's change. Now he hardly ever throws it and when he does its flat.

[templeUsox]

Schmidt actually threw a "dry spitter" which is basically done by gripping the ball without touching any seams.

[SouthernBoSox]

Schmidt actually threw a "dry spitter" which is basically done by gripping the ball without touching any seams.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You sure? I've seen slo-mo's where you can clearly see a circle change grip. I've seen interviews with him talking about his change-up.

I have to admit, this is the first time I've heard the term "dry splitter". Maybe it is thrown with a grip similar to a circel change.

[Bronx Bombers]

You sure?  I've seen slo-mo's where you can clearly see a circle change grip.  I've seen interviews with him talking about his change-up.

I have to admit, this is the first time I've heard the term "dry splitter".  Maybe it is thrown with a grip similar to a circel change.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Schmidt's change is supposedly thrown this way, fingers off the seams and sliding down off the ball, except that there's no grease needed. Kewl. (In fact Bill James once opined that these vicious splits and changes made the spitball obsolete… that and all the cameras these days.)

The result is a hellacious 86-mph "dry spitball," and Schmidt throws it high, for a called strike.

http://detectovision.com/?p=823

This is from a Mariners blog and has a breakdown of Schmidts pitches including the "dry" spitter.

[SouthernBoSox]

Schmidt's change is supposedly thrown this way, fingers off the seams and sliding down off the ball, except that there's no grease needed.  Kewl.  (In fact Bill James once opined that these vicious splits and changes made the spitball obsolete… that and all the cameras these days.)

The result is a hellacious 86-mph "dry spitball," and Schmidt throws it high, for a called strike.

http://detectovision.com/?p=823

This is from a Mariners blog and has a breakdown of Schmidts pitches including the "dry" spitter.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good read. Seems like its just in between a change and split.

[croma01]

This isn't NYYFans where you trolled forever until you were finally booted out. Your shelf life will be much shorter here if you act the same way, CMAff.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why am I not surprised to see that NDBoston is as pompous as ever?

Also (diverging from the topic some) the jury is really still out on Beckett. The guy has the ability, stuff, and makeup to be an ace. However, his blister problems coupled with location problems and pitch selection seem to have sidetracked him some. If he could harness his stuff and develop some kind of consistent off speed pitch, he can develop into a legit #1 starter.

Yankee scouts (and other teams' scouts) rave about Hughes' stuff and his command. However, I'm really going to reserve judgement on him until I see him perform on the Major League level. I know he is an excellent prospect that has the ability to develop into a legit staff ace. However, cautionary tales of other flameout phenoms tempers my excitement some. I do like that the Yankees are handling Hughes correctly and not rushing him to the majors while also monitoring his workload.

[singaporesoxfan]

Still, notwithstanding the tortured parsing of "command" and "control," I remain unconvinced that he's a better prospect than Beckett was in AA (great find, Crazy Puppy). Outside of Beckett's superior ERA, K/9, and K/BB, what indicators do people need? Is K/BB not a good enough measure of command and control?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Traditionally, K/BB is the measure of command; BB/9 is the measure of control, as I understand it.