Turn Off Ads?
Page 12 of 20 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 297

Thread: Cingrani...

  1. #166
    Viva la Rolen kaldaniels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,853

    Re: Cingrani...

    Not trying to be argumentative, but the controversial pitch from this year looks like one that Big Leaguers would crush if they were sitting on it. It totally locked up the hitter, but he is a minor leaguer who wasn't looking for the breaking ball.

    The "nice looking slider" from 2012 looks pretty nasty.

    The "loopy slider" seems to tail away, no?

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #167
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Bedford, KY
    Posts
    8,992

    Re: Cingrani...

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Yeah, in my opinion it is different. It is slower, has more sweep and more break than any single one he threw last year in the 800 some odd pitches I saw him throw.
    We talked about it last year. I mentioned it last year in the thread where we (you and I) discussed Cingrani's potential. I mentioned his loopy slider then. Others also mentioned it, IIRC. (Though perhaps not.)

    I don't know what game it was. I don't even know what thread it was.

    I do know that we've already had this conversation, though.

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    It is more consistent.
    This is an empty statement.

    Many posters on this site insisted that Cingrani was likely to improve the consistency on his off speed offerings as he matured. (Like almost all minor league pitchers.)

    Of course it's improved. Almost all good pitchers improve their off-speed offering over the course of their minor league careers. That's what the minor leagues are for, after all.

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    You can argue it hasn't changed at all, but bring something to the table.
    I did. I have you scouting reports that described a "loopy" slider from the beginning of his time as a possible draftee. I gave you Cingrani's own comments about his slider. I gave you comments from, IIRC, one of his pitching coaches. I can't give you video, but that's about all that's left, doug.

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    You saw it this good last year. Where did you see it? Pensacola home games are on Milb.tv. We can go back and watch them. I watched them all. I watched all of the road games he pitches on Milb.tv too. I never saw this pitch. The scouting reports from BA, BP and Sickels don't talk about this pitch. If you can recall when you saw it, I would love to go back and watch it.
    Again, dunno. I believe I told you in the thread where we discussed Cingrani's potential. If not, I don't have that information handy. I do know that I saw it on video, so there you go. It has to be out there somewhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    I don't recall it at all. Neither do any of the big three scouting places.
    There's a shock. Each of them parrot the other. (Though I do think Sickels often is able to ignore some of the typical noise.) And remarkably few writers actually see any games, doug. You know that. It's all phone calls and taking information from one site and expanding on it a bit.

    For example, I hope you remember the bit about Hamilton's "weak arm," as you were the one, IIRC, that finally put that puppy to rest. It was a throwaway line that snowballed into insistences by many-- including some on this board-- who questioned whether the kids could throw at all. Writers simply had to find something to balance out their articles to keep from sounding like fanboys.

    Cingrani's in the same boat, but it's even more pronounced because he had no pedigree, aside from a Division I spot at Rice. A third round isn't supposed to put up arcade numbers across three levels. Especially because wasn't on anyone's list. Not as a sleeper. Not as a solid prospect.

    So they had to give reasons why.

    Yeah, great fastball, they said. Great command. But he needs to work on his secondary pitches.

    Well, of course he does. Almost all minor league prospects need that particular work.

    Then it becomes a problem that could expose him as a helium prospect as he progresses. Then it becomes an almost sure thing.

    Never mind the production. Never mind his K totals. Never mind the hit totals. Never mind that he dominates leagues that aren't supposed to be dominated by any pitcher, let alone one with only one pitch. (Because, by that point, he only had the fastball. His changeup went from plus to good to acceptable to questionable to fringy.)

    Cingrani's always had a slider. It's not always been consistent. It's getting better. It's still, IMO, a show-me pitch. And, again, IMO, that may be all he needs to be a starter in the majors.
    "You can learn little from victory. You can learn everything from defeat."
    -- Christy Matthewson
    "Show me a good loser and I'll show you an idiot."
    -- Leo Durocher

  4. #168
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,071

    Re: Cingrani...

    The top one, from 2013, was 75 MPH. The bottom one, no velocity on.

    Still, two different pitches. The bottom pitch has no horizontal movement to it. It goes straight to the zone and breaks downward. The top pitch comes across the zone and breaks downward. The middle pitch is a pure slider. Goes straight, drops off.

  5. #169
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Bedford, KY
    Posts
    8,992

    Re: Cingrani...

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    The top one, from 2013, was 75 MPH. The bottom one, no velocity on.

    Still, two different pitches. The bottom pitch has no horizontal movement to it. It goes straight to the zone and breaks downward. The top pitch comes across the zone and breaks downward. The middle pitch is a pure slider. Goes straight, drops off.
    The different camera angles may be affecting perception here.

    Both pitches are slow and "loopy". Similar release points. Similar hand placement. One breaks a bit more. Maybe.
    "You can learn little from victory. You can learn everything from defeat."
    -- Christy Matthewson
    "Show me a good loser and I'll show you an idiot."
    -- Leo Durocher

  6. #170
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,071

    Re: Cingrani...

    Quote Originally Posted by kaldaniels View Post
    Not trying to be argumentative, but the controversial pitch from this year looks like one that Big Leaguers would crush if they were sitting on it. It totally locked up the hitter, but he is a minor leaguer who wasn't looking for the breaking ball.

    The "nice looking slider" from 2012 looks pretty nasty.

    The "loopy slider" seems to tail away, no?
    Big Leaguers will crush most any pitch if they can sit on it. That is why it is important to throw more than one pitch. When Cingrani can throw 91 and mix in a nice change up too, you can't just sit breaking ball or you have no chance on the other two.

    The 2012 nice slider was indeed nice. Unfortunately, there weren't many like that and a lot that looked like 81 MPH straight fastballs.

  7. #171
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,071

    Re: Cingrani...

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    The different camera angles may be affecting perception here.

    Both pitches are slow and "loopy". Similar release points. Similar hand placement. One breaks a bit more. Maybe.
    The one from this year has the hitter turning away because he thinks he is about to get hit with it. The catcher catches it over the middle of the plate. That isn't the camera angle.

  8. #172
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,071

    Re: Cingrani...

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    We talked about it last year. I mentioned it last year in the thread where we (you and I) discussed Cingrani's potential. I mentioned his loopy slider then. Others also mentioned it, IIRC. (Though perhaps not.)
    I went back and looked at the video. I even provided it. The loopy slider from last year has a one plane break. The one this year breaks on both planes. Different pitch.

    I did. I have you scouting reports that described a "loopy" slider from the beginning of his time as a possible draftee. I gave you Cingrani's own comments about his slider. I gave you comments from, IIRC, one of his pitching coaches. I can't give you video, but that's about all that's left, doug.
    And I showed you where after his first start this year, his current pitching coach called it a curveball, not a slider. Tony after that game did call it a slider. Hence, all of the confusion.


    There's a shock. Each of them parrot the other. (Though I do think Sickels often is able to ignore some of the typical noise.) And remarkably few writers actually see any games, doug. You know that. It's all phone calls and taking information from one site and expanding on it a bit.
    I know that BA guys don't scout their own stuff. I know KG didn't. I know that Jason Parks does. I know that the scouts the previous guys talk to, do. I know that John Sickels does. All agreed that his slider he was throwing last year pretty much sucked.

    For example, I hope you remember the bit about Hamilton's "weak arm," as you were the one, IIRC, that finally put that puppy to rest. It was a throwaway line that snowballed into insistences by many-- including some on this board-- who questioned whether the kids could throw at all. Writers simply had to find something to balance out their articles to keep from sounding like fanboys.
    It wasn't really a throw away though. Hamilton did have a weak arm most nights. It wasn't because he had a truly weak arm, it was because his mechanics sucked and didn't often throw it right to show off his actual arm strength. For someone who saw him one or two series, they may never had a chance to see his strong arm in action because he didn't use it much because of the mechanics going on for 95% of the throws he made. Likewise, with Cingrani, he would flash a good slider now and then, but most of them sucked. They were flat without bite. A flat slider is just a slow fastball without movement. People saw those bad ones 50% of the time, some poor ones another 40% and a good one or real good one 10% of the time. Top it off with that he only threw 10 a game and you could see him twice in a season and only see one real nice looking slider. That is why it is good to make the phone calls and to see a guy as much as possible.

    Cingrani's in the same boat, but it's even more pronounced because he had no pedigree, aside from a Division I spot at Rice. A third round isn't supposed to put up arcade numbers across three levels. Especially because wasn't on anyone's list. Not as a sleeper. Not as a solid prospect.
    Actually, there were several people who upon being drafted, called Cingrani a sleeper. More so as a reliever, but it wasn't like he was a 25th rounder. The guy was taken in the Top 100 of the entire draft for a reason.

    His changeup went from plus to good to acceptable to questionable to fringy.)
    Where did this happen?

    Cingrani's always had a slider. It's not always been consistent. It's getting better. It's still, IMO, a show-me pitch. And, again, IMO, that may be all he needs to be a starter in the majors.
    Yeah, he has always had a slider. But most of the time it was a terrible pitch and it had been that way for a while.

    Even as a show me pitch, which you may be right that it is all he needs with the FB/CH being that good, it is actually a show me pitch at this point. The slider he threw most of the time last year wasn't. It was a BP fastball. Straight as an arrow and 80 MPH at the belt because it wouldn't bite.

  9. #173
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,070

    Re: Cingrani...

    But no amount of numbers should give anyone confidence about developing a pitch.
    It was simply that his fastball is so dominant that all he needed was improvement with the secondary stuff -- whether that was sharpening what he had or expanding the repertoire, didn't matter. It was reasonable to think he could -- he's young and had always relied so heavily on the fastball that all it would take would be some "time on task" with good coaching. That's how development in pro ball is supposed to work -- learning happens.
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  10. #174
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,071

    Re: Cingrani...

    Quote Originally Posted by lollipopcurve View Post
    It was simply that his fastball is so dominant that all he needed was improvement with the secondary stuff -- whether that was sharpening what he had or expanding the repertoire, didn't matter. It was reasonable to think he could -- he's young and had always relied so heavily on the fastball that all it would take would be some "time on task" with good coaching. That's how development in pro ball is supposed to work -- learning happens.
    That is how it is supposed to work, but not how it always does. Cingrani had been through JUCO, College and three professional coaches coming into this season and still hadn't really shown much improvement in his breaking ball. I am happy to see that he is being rather consistent with it, but I am completely understanding as to why people didn't expect it to improve at that point.

  11. #175
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    757

    Re: Cingrani...

    Doug,

    You mentioned the new curve ball and how hitters think they are going to get hit with it and start to move out of the way...

    Does this give us an indication that he is really really deceptive in his delivery and batters just don't pick him up at all?

  12. #176
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,071

    Re: Cingrani...

    No. Plenty of guys throw a curveball that starts at the shoulder of the hitter then drops across over the plate to a same handed hitter.

  13. #177
    Member redsfandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,533

    Re: Cingrani...

    Quote Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling View Post
    From RotoWorld via the Enquirer:

    Reds manager Dusty Baker said Wednesday that the club considered calling up prospect left-hander Tony Cingrani to replace Sean Marshall (shoulder) in the bullpen.

    The club didn't want to impede Cingrani's progress as a starting pitcher, so they ultimately settled on Logan Ondrusek as Marshall's replacement on the roster. "He’s our first call-up if one of our starters goes down," Baker said. "He still has to work on his breaking ball. We kicked around Cingrani. It’s just that we didn’t want to impede his progress as a starter. If anything happens to one of my starters, we don’t have a whole of quality backup." Cingrani, 23, owns a 21/2 K/BB ratio in 12 1/3 scoreless innings through his first two starts with Triple-A Louisville this season.

    He was considered for the bullpen. Still needs to work on the breaking ball.
    I'm not crazy about Dusty saying Cingrani would be the first pitcher called up to fill in for a starting pitcher. I really hope that Walt isn't on the same page.
    "Now that's a real shame when folks be throwin' away a perfectly good white boy like that."

  14. #178
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,554

    Re: Cingrani...

    Quote Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey View Post

    Also, glad you are not a GM since you would take the guy that, by your own measures, has a better chance at "flaming out into oblivion."
    So, if Prospect A had a 10 % chance of flame out, and a 90% chance of being a #1 starter, you'd chose Prospect B who has a 5% chance of flame out, and a 95% chance of being an average pitcher?

    Because that is what you said, the "flame out " projection is all that you'd base your choice on.

    It's not unusual that the higher upside prospect is also the higher risk to achieve that level.

    GM's generally prefer the prospect with the higher upside (especially when that upside is #1 starter potential), as middle of the road players are much easier to obtain.

  15. #179
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    9,781

    Re: Cingrani...

    Quote Originally Posted by redsfandan View Post
    I'm not crazy about Dusty saying Cingrani would be the first pitcher called up to fill in for a starting pitcher. I really hope that Walt isn't on the same page.
    Why?
    Go BLUE!!!

  16. #180
    Party like it's 1990 Blitz Dorsey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    4,716

    Re: Cingrani...

    Yeah, why would anyone not be on board with Dusty saying that? Cingrani sure as hell better be the next man up if one of the Reds' starters goes down. Who would you rather see out there? Galarraga?

    Cingrani is not only the best choice but the obvious one. I'm glad Dusty said it so it's already on the record.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25