Derrick Goold’s 10@10 is up and there’s a quote in there that’s worthy of being called out:
The Cardinals … well, the 2009 draft — at least Day 1 of it — puts the emphasis on two things: Their ability to sign Miller and their ability to develop obvious and (in the case of the next two picks) preceived latent talent. The onus will be on the coaches, not just the scouts. And that should have been part of the discussion all along. VP/Farm Director Jeff Luhnow said as much late Tuesday night at Busch Stadium.
“I feel like this was the year we could take some younger kids and some higher risks,” Luhnow said. “And let our system and our own people do what they do best — which is to take raw material that has a really high upside and turn it into a finished product.”
This was exactly my comment and concern with regards to the Miller pick. It’s a great live arm but he’s still a raw player in two regards: 1) the development of a changeup and 2) inconsistent command. We can debate the importance of a changeup (if his curveball is as good as reported, that can be an effective weapon against LH batters), but these are two areas that I would argue the development system has largely failed in the past.
Shelby Miller is a different kind of talent but guys like Adam Ottavino, Chris Lambert, Mark McCormick, etc. were take for their live fastballs and the belief that they could be coached from pitcher to thrower. There command issues never subsided and their secondary pitches never materialized as reliable offerings. We can place some of the blame on the pitchers but if the failing is systematic then you have to question the development process as well. And when was the last time you heard them teach a pitcher a changeup? I can’t think of one. (Anthony Reyes already had his in college.)
Without digressing too much, it doesn’t help the development system if there’s a different message being preached from different members of the orgaization. I’m not asking for a regimented creed in player development but there’s reason to think that the persistent schisms between Luhnow’s “crowd” and Jocketty “remenants” or TLR and DD are detrimental to developing players. Very few, if any, individuals have enough knowledge of the inner workings to speak to whether that’s truly an issue . . . but the conversation would be incomplete without mentioning it in passing.
So the guantlet is thrown and the challenge is issued. If these kids get signed, it’s on the player development program to produce the next core player for the Cardinals rather than someone who gets released from AA.
Entries (RSS)
Well, I agree that there is a “black box” feeling to the scouting and development components of the farm. Clearly, there is a failure in either (a) identification of talent and/or (b) development of talent. I’m inclined to believe that the system as a whole is getting better, but for whatever reason is still incapable of bringing starting pitchers fully along.
I think you can look at this one way, and, for argument’s sake, assume the coaching is at least as good as any other farm system. If that’s true then our scouts are incompetent. On the other hand, you could say our scouting is tops. If that’s true, then our coaches aren’t getting it done. So we simply don’t have enough information to know for sure. But one thing’s for sure: Drafting pitchers with poor mechanics, regardless of their current aptitude, is never worth it in the long run.
Excellent points. It’s high time these kinds of questions were raised about the general lack of satisfactory development of Cardinal pitchers. Since Luhnow is now in charge of both scouting and development, these important questions should be raised with him by those in a position to do so.
Here is a nice story about Shelby Miller’s draft night: http://www.reporternews.com/news/2009/jun/09/baseballdraft/
I disagree. There’s no track record to use as a baseline here.
Outside of Herron, who wasn’t a velo guy, there really aren’t many high upside HS pitchers taken in the early rounds.
It’s unfair to use Ottavino as a baseline, as there is a big difference between taking a college arm with control problems vs. a HS arm with control problems (problems, which, I might add, improved over the course of this season). Ottavino was a draft pick mistake, not a development mistake.
Shelby Miller may never see the majors, but he’s a HS arm. To “throw down the gauntlet” is nonsensical. You could put him in the Red Sox system or any number of others with good development track records, and there’s a good chance he’s going to fail, because he’s a HS pitcher. There’s also a good chance that he turns out to be Chad Billingsley.
They took a risk on a guy who could be a true impact player and I’m glad they did, even if it doesn’t pan out as hoped.
Chris–
Your points are well-taken, but there certainly IS a problem somewhere in the farm system if it’s only produced two bonafide No. 1s in, what, 15 years? Where the problem precisely lies is the real question.
RedC, I think one of the reasons is draft philosophy. If you focus on pitchers with #3 ceilings in the early rounds, it’s no wonder you aren’t developing any aces.
Miller’s the first HS P drafted in the first by the Cards since 1991. Ankiel was the last HS pitcher drafted with this much upside and his issues weren’t development-related. Our development system did great with him, even if that is ancient history by now.
I know the Cards don’t get all of the credit in Wainwright’s case either, but I think he has to be mentioned as a 1st round HS arm who was somewhat developed by the Cards.
Johan Santana learned his change-up in the minor leagues. I know the guy who taught him how to throw it.
So it’s at least theoretically possible.
To say the changeup is a must have is false. Carp rarely uses that pitch if I’m correct. He goes 2 seam, cutter, curve. Waino is similar. However, he mixes the change in more often. If Shelby Miller ends up being one of those 2, I’d be ok with that…
I don’t know if I agree with the “Cards can’t mold top tier starters” mantra. If you truly believe in TINSTAAPP, then Cardinal-produced pitchers of the last decade could just be an aberration and luck of the draw.
Not saying it will happen, but if the Cards develop 3 great-to-awesome pitchers in the next five years, we’d forget all about the last decade. Point is, I think it’s much flukier than we can really say.