No Reds, but Hamilton and Stephenson are listed in the 5 who just missed. Seems reasonable I guess.
No mention of whether Cingrani was eligible or considered.
Printable View
No Reds, but Hamilton and Stephenson are listed in the 5 who just missed. Seems reasonable I guess.
No mention of whether Cingrani was eligible or considered.
Will you link us up please? Thanks. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Benihana
I don't see why he wouldn't be eligible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benihana
I just looked up that writer's top 100 list before spring training. Hamilton was at 30 and Stephenson at 48. So the Reds are looking up.
He had Corcino at 72 and Cingrani at 98 on that February list.
What else does Cingrani have to do?
I know, develope a 2ndary pitch...:D
http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story...t-baseball-mlb
Don't understand Law's logic.
He had Wacha off of his top 100 list this spring, but moved him up to 24 because he developed a secondary pitch. Cingrani was higher in the spring list, and not only did he develop a secondary pitch, he was up in the majors for a month and had success. Yet he didn't move up as much as Wacha. Cingrani also was more dominant in the minors this season as well.
Really makes no sense.
Wacha developed a secondary pitch or he developed his breaking ball? Wacha already had an outstanding change up, so if Law said he developed a breaking ball, that is a huge difference in his arsenal.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
Cingrani certainly changed his secondary breaking ball from a slider to a curve, but his entire lack of confidence in throwing it at the Major League level along with his change up, certainly isn't going to help him beat the reputation that is still out there among some scouts that he is just a reliever.
I just don't see how a 3.27 ERA, 41 K's 9 BB's in 35 big league innings doesn't trump a guy who hasn't even pitched in the majors yet. Cingrani had no problem throwing his new pitch in the minors, and we have no idea what Wacha will do in the majors, so it makes no sense to push Wacha ahead of Cingrani at this point. If Wacha shows he can have success in the bigs with his curveball, then I would understand, but at this point it is highly illogical. It literally is putting projection ahead of actual production.Quote:
Originally Posted by dougdirt
Kyle Gibson and Wacha are two "low upside" arms I wanted to steer clear of in the 2009 and 2011 drafts, respectively. While they are now getting some accolades, I for one am happy that we have Leake and Stephenson/Cingrani instead of those two.
Wacha was always supposed to be quick path to the majors. The question is how good he can be once he actually gets there. 5.8 K/9 in AAA doesn't scream top-of-the-rotation stuff.
The problem is that while Cingrani was very productive in his stint in the major leagues, he did nothing to disprove the notion that he is a one-pitch pitcher who may end up being a high leverage RP rather than a top of the rotation SP. I don't know enough about Wacha to comment about whether or not he belongs on the list, but from what I've seen from Cingrani I don't think he belongs there.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
Thought he was the second coming of Bob Gibson:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Benihana
It may be that Cingrani is ineligible for Law's updated list. He took Profar and Gausman off the list as they had made their debut. But he left Rendon on. The only 1 of 25 who made the list but has debuted. Probably an oversight to have Rendon on the list; and Cingrani was not eligible for it. I asked Keith to comment.
I think Cingrani should be a very highly rated prospect. Cingrani achieved a 124 ERA+ in the majors at a point in his career when his secondary pitches aren't fully formed. He's a 23 year old pitcher who is still a prospect and -- even without the secondary stuff -- was very effective at the big league level and missed many bats.Quote:
Originally Posted by nmculbreth
I think it's fair to project that such a prospect can develop at least decent (if not average) secondary pitches to go along with a deceptive motion and a very effective fastball.
As far as I could see, Cingrani's main problem wasn't his lack of secondary pitches, it was a lack of know how or perhaps command. I recall that he let guys like Soriano and Braun homer off him when these were their teams' main RHH threats. Tony should have been more careful with them, he should have had a better plan for them.
Or maybe it was a lack of command which, again, can be worked on.
Putting in context Cingrani's relative inexperience in pro ball, his performance was quite remarkable IMO and I think he deserves to be a very highly rated prospect. I don't know about top 25, I don't know all these other guys, but very highly rated.
The thing is that Wacha has done nothing to prove anything one way or the other, and Cingrani was ranked higher than Wacha at the beginning of the season.Quote:
Originally Posted by nmculbreth
Lets put it another way.
If Cingrani had not been called up, he would have continued to dominate in the minors, using his secondary pitches, which were a huge improvement over last year, and which were getting minor league hitters out.
That is all that Wacha has done, dominate in the minors with his new pitch. Until Wacha pitches in the majors and gets major league hitters out with his new curveball, he has done nothing to dispel the notion that he was a two pitch pitcher.
It simply is illogical, and typical Keith Law, to move Wacha up so much and not Cingrani, when they have done exactly the same thing in the minors, while Cingrani has also had success in the majors.
Well, a few points.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
First, prospect rankings aren't about what you have done, they are about what people believe you will be able to do, over a long period of time, at the Major League level. So what Cingrani did in the Majors doesn't really matter much if it didn't change an outlook on what someone previously believed about a guy.
Secondly, and I think this is very important: The Reds, someone with them, simply doesn't trust Cingrani's secondary pitches enough against Major Leaguers and that speaks volumes. He threw to three different catchers over a span of 5 weeks. With all three of them he threw 80% or more fastballs. Someone was telling these catchers not to call much for the change or curve. The team that knows him better than anyone else, who has seen every pitch he has thrown as a pro, doesn't trust his secondary stuff at all right now against Major Leaguers. Evaluators are taking note of that and it speaks loudly.
Thirdly, projection is more important than production with prospects. The biggest reason is, that to remain a prospect, you can't actually have much time in the Majors (50ip, 130 at bats or 45 days on a non-September active roster). So production can be hiding a whole lot of your game that in the long run may very well be exploited.
Thanks. All good points.Quote:
Originally Posted by dougdirt
I think Cingrani might have been ineligible since I read Profar was taken off because of his call up. Not sure though.
But my point is that Wacha hasn't done anything more to change people's minds about his projection either. Both Cingrani and Wacha have shown that they have developed a new pitch in which they have full confidence using to dominate minor league hitters. Cingrani has actually been more dominant at the minor league level.
So ignore Cingrani's MLB stint. He still should be ahead of Wacha, since he was ahead of him at the beginning of the season when neither one had shown a new pitch.
I don't really get Doug's point about the Reds not trusting Cingrani's secondary stuff.
Every team obviously feels that their top prospects aren't ready. All of them are in the minor leagues. Each has something to work on or they would be ready for the bigs.
I don't see why Cingrani is penalized because he has certain pitches to work on. That's what being a prospect is.
In Cingrani's case he is age 23 at AAA, now with big league experience. It's not like a 26 year old without secondary pitches. He has years to grow. Meanwhile he struck out 11.2 per nine inning in the majors with what he has.
On the other point, I agree that projection is the issue, I don't expect Cingrani to be rated simply by virtue of his major league numbers. But just like someone else's minor league outings are relevant, Cingrani's major league outings are relevant. They are data points. They exist. And they should indicate a strong potential for this pitcher to be effective in the major leagues, if he stays healthy and develops.
I'm not a fan of prospects lists, I think they too often focus on name recognition and short term results. But as a Reds fan I'm much more excited about Cingrani having seen him pitch in the bigs. Over the next couple of years, Reds fans have good reason to expect Cingrani to be contributing meaningfully in the big leagues.
I don't think that is true. From everything that I've read the big concern about Wacha coming into the draft was the lack of secondary stuff, if he is now throwing an above-average breaking ball I think you could argue that his long term projection has changed dramatically.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
You can say the exact same thing about Cingrani. Scouts were concerned because he lacked a strong secondary pitch. Now he has developed one and is dominating AAA hitters with it. So his long term projection should change as well. And he was listed ahead of Wacha coming into this season.Quote:
Originally Posted by nmculbreth
Wacha has not shown that he new pitch can get MLB hitters out either, only minor league hitters, just like Cingrani. It's illogical that one would move up on the list more than the other. Their stories are almost identical.
Not if someone believes Wacha's secondary stuff works at the MLB level and doesn't believe the same for Cingrani's.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
But they had no reason to believe that. Wacha hadn't pitched In the majors yet. No one had no idea how his secondary stuff or his primary stuff, or any of his stuff would work in the majors.Quote:
Originally Posted by dougdirt
And guess what, in his first start, Wacha threw three curveballs, total. Clearly, he doesn't have enough confidence in his new pitch to use it get MLB hitters out. Or maybe he was so successful without it, that he and his team thought it silly to use it often yet.
And that is why the whole "Cingrani doesn't trust his secondary stuff" argument is bunk. We really have no idea why Cingrani didn't use his secondly stuff more often in the majors. It could be because he was so successful pitching without it, he and the Reds didn't what to expose the league to it too early. Or maybe they didn't want to put too mush pressure on a young arm, when they didn't need to?
Again, completely illogical to have Wacha pass Cingrani at this point, if you had Cingrani ahead of Wacha to start the season. They really have had the same season so far.
It is called scouting. If they saw something that led them to believe it, they are going to believe it even if it hasn't been proven in the Majors yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
Cingrani may or may not trust his secondary stuff, but you can bet your bottom dollar that it is either him or it is someone important in the organization because you simply don't just bring up a starter and have him throw 85% fastballs to three different catchers unless that specific plan is put in place because someone doesn't trust it.
Look, I am not saying I would have Wacha ahead of Cingrani or Cingrani ahead of Wacha. I am simply saying that you can easily make an argument that by watching the two pitch you could jump a guy ahead of the other because of the stuff you saw and how you feel it is going to translate.
First I think I gave a few very good reason why they would ask Cingrani to throw 85% fastballs besides them not having faith in it. It's simply false that the Reds not having faith in Cingrani's secondary stuff is the only logical explanation of why that was what he threw.Quote:
Originally Posted by dougdirt
Shelby Miller has thrown his change up 19 times so far this season. You would have to argue that the Cardinals do not have faith in his change up at the major league level. I would argue that it possibly could be that he's been successful without it, they see no need to include it at this point.
Second, in terms of scouting, I haven't seen Wacha's curve in the minors yet, only the few times in the majors so far, but I cant imagine it looks better than Cingrani's new off speed looked in the minors. And that's my main point. Both developed outstanding off speed pitches that dominated minor league hitters.
They specifically came out and told him to go down and work on it. Someone doesn't trust it. Their words and actions speak very loudly about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690