It's the Halfway Point of the Season: Who's in Your Top 10?

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by membengal

You put Cingrani 10th. Whatever. Its Stubbs all over again, only in reverse.

You seem to be offended by how I feel about a prospect. Or that I simply make things up about him to justify my rankings. That isn't the case. I have absolutely no reason to love/hate someone. I am a Reds fan. I want them all to be #1 starters and #3 hitters. But they aren't all that. In fact, none of them are likely going to be close to that.

You don't have to like my way of ranking prospects. I feel confident in my rankings at the time I make them. I have seen Tony Cingrani pitch 5 times this season. There is a lot to like. There are also several questions that still need to be answered in regards to him remaining as a starting pitcher regardless of what the numbers say. If you don't like my opinion on it, then to quote you, "whatever".

[membengal]

Not sure how to really respond to it. It looks willful at this point. He's got a guy who has put up the crazy numbers scrap outlined, built at a hitter's paradise in the Cal League, and then continuing up to AA, while having skipped a level, behind a guy who hasn't thrown one pitch as a pro and two hitters making rookie ball debuts. And that's not even taking into consideration having him behind Gregorius, a nice glove no hit SS.

Its laughable.

What scrap highlighted:

And, oh my, what a card it's been. 30 starts, 150 IP, 100 H. 1.44 ERA. 12.1 K/9.

[membengal]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

mem, I'm with you. I think Doug's underrating Cingrani. But I'm sick of seeing people bringing it up repeatedly, especially without bringing up any new points. Doug's not 100% on board the Cingrani wagon. Cool. If that's trolling, what do you call it when a board member follows around another board member from thread to thread just to point out how ridiculous of an opinion someone has? You're one of my favorite posters, but you're not doing anyone any favors with comments that are bordering on sniping.

There, I broke it down. Better?

I will try and ignore it from here on out. But, again, this is the Stubbs thing all over again, in reverse. For years that fight went on, doug vs. the world. I hoped doug would win, but man, Stubbs has been the awful with the bat, just he was all through the minors. It is what it is.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by membengal

Not sure how to really respond to it. It looks willful at this point. He's got a guy who has put up the crazy numbers scrap outlined, built at a hitter's paradise in the Cal League, and then continuing up to AA, while having skipped a level, behind a guy who hasn't thrown one pitch as a pro and two hitters making rookie ball debuts.

Its laughable.

Why aren't you all over New Fever? You didn't even ask him why he had Cingrani behind two hitters making rookie ball debuts and one guy who hasn't thrown one pitch as a pro.

What about The Rage who had him behind that same non professional pitch thrower and one of those hitters making his rookie ball debut?

What about when every publication out there is still quoting scouts who think Cingrani is a reliever? (Note: They also mention some who believe he is a starter). Do they not have a clue at all and are laughable at their profession that Major League teams (multiple ones at that) are paying to evaluate talent?

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by membengal

There, I broke it down. Better?

I will try and ignore it from here on out. But, again, this is the Stubbs thing all over again, in reverse. For years that fight went on, doug vs. the world. I hoped doug would win, but man, Stubbs has been the awful with the bat, just he was all through the minors. It is what it is.

I think you misremember the Stubbs debate. My side was that he would develop the power. He did and he did it rather quickly upon entering the Major Leagues. He isn't the weak slap hitter that a whole bunch of people were claiming he was.

[membengal]

Yes, I think anyone whether it is you or Goldstein or Law or whomever that is pigeon-holing Cingrani as merely a reliever at this point is laughable.

He's got more than just a chance to start. And the results scream there is something there to date.

[membengal]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

I think you misremember the Stubbs debate. My side was that he would develop the power. He did and he did it rather quickly upon entering the Major Leagues. He isn't the weak slap hitter that a whole bunch of people were claiming he was.

The Stubbs debate also revolved around contact and average, and he has been just a disaster on that front, from minors into majors. And it is killing his career. Just like pretty much everyone said it would.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by membengal

The Stubbs debate also revolved around contact and average, and he has been just a disaster on that front, from minors into majors. And it is killing his career. Just like pretty much everyone said it would.

I feel pretty confident you won't find a post by me suggesting Stubbs would have good contact rates or average.

[kaldaniels]

Not being someone who follows the kids in the minors on a daily basis, I must say it's fun to track the stock market-like movement of these guys up and down the rankings. Good posts by all on here. Thanks!

[Scrap Irony]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Because no one doubts that Corcino is a starting pitcher and there is still a whole bunch of people out there who aren't convinced that Cingrani is a for sure starter.

Cingrani, in no way, shape or form has a better off speed pitch than that of Corcino. Cingrani's breaking ball is average when it is at its best and more of a 30-40 pitch. His change up is above-average to plus depending on where you look, but he also doesn't throw it. So it isn't really effective. Corcino on the other hand has an above-average to plus slider that he uses well. Corcino's change up is quite a bit better than Cingrani's slider is. That leaves Corcino with much better offspeed stuff and still with an above-average fastball, though not quite the same kind of fastball as Cingrani.

And again, I really think you aren't giving people enough credit if you think BA/BP/Sickels are talking to guys who have only seen Cingrani pitch one or two times in the last two years.

Fastball – Daniel Corcino has a very live Fastball. He can consistently bring the heat with a fastball that sits at 93-94 mph. But he is capable of a little extra and can light the radar gun at 97 mph. This pitch comes in straight, but does get on the hitters quickly. He can throw this pitch with control, but has a nasty tendency to overthrow this pitch, which can cause him to lose command of the strike zone.

Slider – This pitch is an excellent compliment to his major league ready fastball. The slider has a hard break away from right-handed hitters. With velocity that has good variation from his fastball, the hitters can’t cheat on the fastball. With the big break on this pitch it flashes as a plus major league offering. The greatest problem with this offering is that Corcino often overthrows this pitch. It is actually more effective when he throttles back on this pitch allowing him to throw with more control.

Changeup – This pitch is a below average pitch but can be thrown for strikes. This pitch is not used enough. The problem with this pitch is that Corcino hasn’t had to use it much and certainly hasn’t needed to work on refining it. His other 2 offerings are so dominant, that this pitch has largely gone ignored from a developmental standpoint. However, Corcino will have to learn how to use this pitch effectively at higher levels if he is to continue his rising prospect status.

Two pitches. Just like Cingrani.

Off-speed means anything other than a fastball. Is Corcino's slider better than Cingrani's change-up? I'd say they're about even, maybe a slight edge to Corcino. Fastball velocity is about even. (BA says both pitch in the low 90s, but can "crank it up" to 97/98.), but Cingrani's has more movement and he controls it better. Cingrani's slider v. Corcino's change-- meh.

So, with all else being equal, let's look at three variables-- mechanics, production, and age. Corcino's described as a max-effort kind of guy who often overthrows. Cinani's praised as a pitcher who keeps the ball hidden well with clean arm slot and balance. Corcino has the edge in age-- by a year. Cingrani has performed far better while in AA (and in his career) though it's a much smaller sample size.

At this point, there's really not much difference.

Certainly not eight spots' worth.

Now, you could cite out-of-date reports about worries because of a lack of a third pitch (which... he has... which... is okay... but which needs work... like all minor league pitchers). Or you could grab onto the experts who've seen him pitch... maybe. You might cite his small sample size. (Though poo-poohing that dominance at age-appropriate levels and leagues levelled against pitchers seems... biased.) You might point out his lack of pedigree. (Though that would also ding Corcino, Cueto, and, to a lesser degree, Votto and Dunn.)

Corcino has had a longer track record of decent numbers, true. He's been young for his league as well, absolutely. Last season, his numbers were TOR-like. Ace-worthy. This year, they're not. And Cingrani's continue to be.

[Red Swagger]

1. Hamilton
2. Cingrani
3. Corcino
4. Stephenson
5. Gregorius
6. H Rodriguez
7. Lotzkar
8. Joseph
9. Lutz
10. R Wright

11. Yorman
12. Sulbaran
13. LaMarre
14. Soto
15. Waldrop


I did not include any player that was drafted in 2012

Travieso
Winker
Rahier
Gelalich

[dougdirt]

I disagree with the guy who said Corcino's change up is a below average pitch.

I also hope that he wasn't using a video from April 2011 to determine Corcino's stuff now, but it is the video that he posted in the article. I was at that game and the video is mine, and it was one of his worst games of the year and he was topping out at about 90 MPH that day. I recall being a little disappointed after the game based on what I had heard about him from the season before.

There may have been a point in time where Cingrani was throwing low 90's and touching higher, but I haven't seen him mentioned as topping 92 all season as a starter. Corcino is in that 91-94 range and touches higher. Of course, I also think that even with that, Cingrani has the better fastball because of the movement and ability to pinpoint it.

With Cingrani it still comes down to his secondary stuff. He is 23 years old and I still haven't seen a game from him that showed anything near good and consistent secondary stuff. And according to his own words, I have seen the best game for his secondary stuff in his life. Corcino on the flip side is throwing an above average to plus slider, consistently, every game. That is the difference between the two guys in my rankings right now. One guy is consistently throwing a very good secondary pitch every night he toes the mound and he does it often within that game. One guy doesn't.

[camisadelgolf]

One point that I don't see brought up enough is that it makes a huge difference when hitters get to see pitchers multiple times. Cingrani hasn't spent more than a few months at the same level. Meanwhile, there have been tons of pitchers who have dominated leagues for a while only to practically become non-prospects due to scouting reports getting around and hitters becoming familiar with the pitchers' stuff.

[Scrap Irony]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

One point that I don't see brought up enough is that it makes a huge difference when hitters get to see pitchers multiple times. Cingrani hasn't spent more than a few months at the same level. Meanwhile, there have been tons of pitchers who have dominated leagues for a while only to practically become non-prospects due to scouting reports getting around and hitters becoming familiar with the pitchers' stuff.

While I agree that there have been a few pitchers who have dominated a league or two, then struggled later to find any consistency, I'd argue that Cingrani's dominated every league he's been in as a professional. He was the best pitcher in the Pioneer League-- a hitter's league. He was the best pitcher in Bakersfield-- a hitter's league. He's been among the best pitchers in the Southern League.

Three leagues he's pitched in. Three dominant performances.

His professional ERA has never been above 2.95 in any league he's pitched. His career ERA is under 1.50.

I'd love to see the list of starters with career minor league numbers under 1.50 in three leagues that haven't made an impact as a major leaguer.

I don't think there are very many of those. If any.

Maybe I'm wrong, though. I certainly don't know for certain. But, yeah, I'd love to see that list.

[Scrap Irony]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

I disagree with the guy who said Corcino's change up is a below average pitch.

I also hope that he wasn't using a video from April 2011 to determine Corcino's stuff now, but it is the video that he posted in the article. I was at that game and the video is mine, and it was one of his worst games of the year and he was topping out at about 90 MPH that day. I recall being a little disappointed after the game based on what I had heard about him from the season before.

There are multiple reports about Corcino's max-effort delivery. As to stuff, here's another report. I've only found the two:

Daniel Corcino (RHP)
Numerous sources inside the Reds organization have compared Corcino to current Reds hurler Johnny Cueto. Corcino offers a plus fastball that can touch 95 mph regularly and has good life. His slider and change-up have both improved over the last year and both flash as potential average pitches. If his small stature does not hold him back and he improves his command, Corcino could be a very nice mid-rotation starter.

Too, I find it odd that you'd say the writer is only using the video to make his observations, especially when I basically told you that was what many do, and you claimed they didn't.

Originally Posted by dougdirt

There may have been a point in time where Cingrani was throwing low 90's and touching higher, but I haven't seen him mentioned as topping 92 all season as a starter. Corcino is in that 91-94 range and touches higher. Of course, I also think that even with that, Cingrani has the better fastball because of the movement and ability to pinpoint it.

From a scouting report dated from June 28:

While his plus fastball was already 95mph as a starter, it can touch 99 in relief, and he flashes just enough of a loopy slider and acceptable change to keep hitters more or less honest.

From milb:

He can dominate with his plus fastball and changeup, more than enough to zip to the big leagues as a short reliever. But the Reds will let him start, and if the slider can catch up, he could have a chance in that role. On June 2, he was promoted to Double-A.

Originally Posted by dougdirt

With Cingrani it still comes down to his secondary stuff. He is 23 years old and I still haven't seen a game from him that showed anything near good and consistent secondary stuff. And according to his own words, I have seen the best game for his secondary stuff in his life. Corcino on the flip side is throwing an above average to plus slider, consistently, every game. That is the difference between the two guys in my rankings right now. One guy is consistently throwing a very good secondary pitch every night he toes the mound and he does it often within that game. One guy doesn't.

Isn't a changeup a secondary pitch? Haven't you yourself said Cingani's change is a plus pitch? (And didn't milb in the above quote?)