Thanks much for these observations, especially the change in approach to IFA hitters. Bat speed combined with the ability to see the ball, and the reflexes to initiate and guide the bat toward that moving, spinning object at exactly the right moment, is all that it takes. Is bat speed the answer? No, but it's a damn good start - and it must be combined with the ability to "see" the ball all the way to impact.
Maybe i'm looking for intent in patterns that's not really there, but the approach to hitters Wilbur mentions in the FanGraphs writeup feels a bit like Cherington's rebuild trades?
Bunch of extremely young hitters up with upside in hopes a few pan out?
It looks to me like they changed their approach to scouting and selecting Latin American prospects 2-3 years ago, which culminated in the new Latin scouting director last year.
It was very much needed. The Pirates right now are suffering terribly from going 0 for a decade in international amateur free agency. They really need some of these guys to pan out. They cannot afford to go 0 for 2 decades.
I philosophically lean toward the cle/bos idea here, sort of the hitter corollary to drafting pitchers with control and then develop velo.
But I also think the industry generally sucks at knowing which 14-18 yo kids actually are gonna hit to begin with, so I'm not necessarily opposed to the Pirates dreaming on athletes when they're that young.
Strike zone judgment and contact against in zone fastballs (quality speed, high 80's into the 90's) are the best indicators for the younguns' in my opinion.
And then it's still a crap shoot, but helps to identify players like Green who struggles with the swing and miss.
I think they used the reasoning that he didn't pull the ball and hit the ball the other way. I think he'll continue shortening his swing. How fast he moves depends on how he adjusts to offspeed in my view.
The kid is more advanced than what the scouts thought last year at the draft. He sure is an exciting prospect.
hell, even college bats drafted in the top half of the first round over the last decade have been a mine field. Joey Bart at 1.2 way back in 2018 counts as a relative success, and that's saying something.
My general bias would be toward raw athletes with speed, strength, and so forth and then let the chips fall where they may, with some caveats.
For hitters, eyesight is so important. How to predict how someone's eyesight will develop during adolescence? Do their parents have good eyesight? Some of this is just genetic. These are some of the things that I would take into account when scouting. Finding some way to acquire hard biometric data on reaction times, hand-eye synchronization, and so forth would be a top priority of mine if I were scouting young hitters. Now pitchers... that is a whole different matter.
I wanted to point out, it’s not simply a question of brute strength. There’s an athleticism/body control component to it as well. There’s been studies done on this which show that upper body strength, controlling that strength and quick-twitch muscles in the hands and wrists is what makes the difference. From what I’ve read, it’s not as simple as just having a guy bulk up, and if it was, you wouldn’t have the roughly 15-20 MPH range in bat speeds.
I think that it is more targeting athletes with physical attributes: size, strength, and so forth. A "tools" over "ability" approach to scouting and projecting.
Agreed. Way back when I still played the game, I was a TTO hitter a la Dave Kingman - but nowhere close to that good. Every swing was as hard as I could. And I did try slowing my swing to make more contact, but I just ended up whiffing by being behind everything.
I never said it couldn’t be improved. But you aren’t taking Luis Arraez at 63 MPH and turning him into Oneil Cruz at 78 MPH. There’s limitations. And according to Driveline you’re only getting about 1.2 MPH in EV per 1 MPH faster you swing the bat anyways. So even as good as Triolo’s improvement has been this spring he’s only hitting the ball a little bit harder.
That’s not what the phrasing “not exactly” means. That implies severe limitations, not impossibility. As AB stated above, there is a physical element there that some guys just aren’t going to have.
Thanks much for these observations, especially the change in approach to IFA hitters. Bat speed combined with the ability to see the ball, and the reflexes to initiate and guide the bat toward that moving, spinning object at exactly the right moment, is all that it takes. Is bat speed the answer? No, but it's a damn good start - and it must be combined with the ability to "see" the ball all the way to impact.
Griffin has piqued my interest too 😀
and still a lot of work could be done to shorten the swing. super, super stoked.
Maybe i'm looking for intent in patterns that's not really there, but the approach to hitters Wilbur mentions in the FanGraphs writeup feels a bit like Cherington's rebuild trades?
Bunch of extremely young hitters up with upside in hopes a few pan out?
It looks to me like they changed their approach to scouting and selecting Latin American prospects 2-3 years ago, which culminated in the new Latin scouting director last year.
It was very much needed. The Pirates right now are suffering terribly from going 0 for a decade in international amateur free agency. They really need some of these guys to pan out. They cannot afford to go 0 for 2 decades.
amen.
I am Groot.
Agree with all of that, plus learned some new things such as Wilkin Ramos.
Love this feature guys.
So what do we think of the bat speed approach that was referenced here? Seems intriguing to me, as it’s not exactly a teachable skill.
Isn't that opposite of the conclusion Boston has made?
Opposite Cleveland's approach as well, and it seems different from how the Pirates approach college bats and the draft in general.
i find myself conflicted on this one.
I philosophically lean toward the cle/bos idea here, sort of the hitter corollary to drafting pitchers with control and then develop velo.
But I also think the industry generally sucks at knowing which 14-18 yo kids actually are gonna hit to begin with, so I'm not necessarily opposed to the Pirates dreaming on athletes when they're that young.
Strike zone judgment and contact against in zone fastballs (quality speed, high 80's into the 90's) are the best indicators for the younguns' in my opinion.
And then it's still a crap shoot, but helps to identify players like Green who struggles with the swing and miss.
And that's where i don't understand the specific skepticism over Griffin. he supposedly ran high contact rates on the showcase circuit?
I think they used the reasoning that he didn't pull the ball and hit the ball the other way. I think he'll continue shortening his swing. How fast he moves depends on how he adjusts to offspeed in my view.
The kid is more advanced than what the scouts thought last year at the draft. He sure is an exciting prospect.
Reaction time versus a high velocity fastball has become the defining characteristic between make and break in today's game.
Good bat speed gives you all the more margin for error there.
hell, even college bats drafted in the top half of the first round over the last decade have been a mine field. Joey Bart at 1.2 way back in 2018 counts as a relative success, and that's saying something.
My general bias would be toward raw athletes with speed, strength, and so forth and then let the chips fall where they may, with some caveats.
For hitters, eyesight is so important. How to predict how someone's eyesight will develop during adolescence? Do their parents have good eyesight? Some of this is just genetic. These are some of the things that I would take into account when scouting. Finding some way to acquire hard biometric data on reaction times, hand-eye synchronization, and so forth would be a top priority of mine if I were scouting young hitters. Now pitchers... that is a whole different matter.
Eyesight is essential, even eye dominance for hitters. And pitchers aren't like Ricky Vaughn, glasses don't necessarily change control issues lol.
How do NHL teams test reaction times on goalies? They do. Can this translate to baseball hitters?
That’s what the article implies.
I'm struggling to see why the bat speed of a teenager couldn't generally be improved, but maybe i'm missing something.
Power usually develops later, so unless bat speed has nothing to do with that development, it's a little hard to see why not.
I wanted to point out, it’s not simply a question of brute strength. There’s an athleticism/body control component to it as well. There’s been studies done on this which show that upper body strength, controlling that strength and quick-twitch muscles in the hands and wrists is what makes the difference. From what I’ve read, it’s not as simple as just having a guy bulk up, and if it was, you wouldn’t have the roughly 15-20 MPH range in bat speeds.
I think that it is more targeting athletes with physical attributes: size, strength, and so forth. A "tools" over "ability" approach to scouting and projecting.
The physical element is kind of what my initial comment was getting at.
very much agree.
Agreed. Way back when I still played the game, I was a TTO hitter a la Dave Kingman - but nowhere close to that good. Every swing was as hard as I could. And I did try slowing my swing to make more contact, but I just ended up whiffing by being behind everything.
I never said it couldn’t be improved. But you aren’t taking Luis Arraez at 63 MPH and turning him into Oneil Cruz at 78 MPH. There’s limitations. And according to Driveline you’re only getting about 1.2 MPH in EV per 1 MPH faster you swing the bat anyways. So even as good as Triolo’s improvement has been this spring he’s only hitting the ball a little bit harder.
You literally said it's not a teachable skill jesus christ.
That’s not what the phrasing “not exactly” means. That implies severe limitations, not impossibility. As AB stated above, there is a physical element there that some guys just aren’t going to have.