« 12 Games Into The Season - Where Are The Bats? | Main | Girardi Goofed Not Having Fresh Arm Face Manny »
April 13, 2008
Pascarelli: Hughes To Be Future Ace
Via Peter Pascarelli of ESPN.com -
In Hughes, the Yankees have someone who they believe is destined to be an ace-caliber pitching star. Only Arizona's Justin Upton (by two months) is younger than Hughes in the major leagues this season. But Hughes' ability is far beyond his years.
And in his brief major league tenure, Hughes has already earned the respect of his veteran Yankees teammates. "He's going to be an ace down the road when he gets comfortable and pitches more at this level," said Yankees outfielder Johnny Damon.
What makes Hughes such an enticing prospect is not just his considerable physical ability, but his feel for pitching, which is so advanced for someone so inexperienced.
"When he's putting his fastball in the spots he wants, he can handle any lineup," said first-year Yankees pitching coach Dave Eiland, who has overseen Hughes throughout his meteoric rise through the New York farm system. "He has a very good curve ball -- a legit outpitch -- and both his change and slider have kept improving.
"He also has a poise and presence that you don't see in many young players. He can be as good as anyone."
Via the Complete Baseball Encyclopedia, career leaders in Runs Saved Above Average (RSAA) since 1973 by pitchers 21 or younger with at least 10 big league starts:
RSAA RSAA IP GS 1 Dwight Gooden 99 744.2 99 2 Dave Rozema 51 427.2 56 3 Bret Saberhagen 42 393 50 4 Fernando Valenzuela 40 495 62 5 Mark Fidrych 38 250.1 29 6 Frank Tanana 36 552.1 72 7 Dennis Eckersley 25 386 54 T8 Felix Hernandez 20 465.2 73 T8 Britt Burns 20 250.2 34 T8 Jose Rosado 20 106.2 16 T8 Rick Ankiel 20 232 41 12 Mike Witt 19 308.2 47 T13 Ismael Valdes 18 226 28 T13 Bob Welch 18 111.1 13 T15 Storm Davis 16 301 37 T15 Matt Cain 16 237 38 T15 David Palmer 16 132.1 12 18 Kerry Wood 15 166.2 26 T19 Terry Forster 14 172.2 12 T19 Jerome Williams 14 131 21 T21 Dontrelle Willis 12 160.2 27 T21 Dennis Blair 12 309.1 49 T23 Gil Meche 10 171.1 30 T23 John Candelaria 10 120.2 18 T23 Yovani Gallardo 10 110.1 17 T26 Mark Prior 9 116.2 19 T26 Bill Gullickson 9 142 19 T26 John Henry Johnson 9 186 30 T29 Chad Billingsley 8 90 16 T29 Don Robinson 8 228.1 32 T29 Dan Petry 8 262.2 40 T29 Floyd Youmans 8 77 12 T29 Jamey Wright 8 91.1 15 T29 Steve Trout 8 177.1 21 35 C.C. Sabathia 7 390.1 66 T36 Scott Kazmir 6 219.1 39 T36 Jeff Russell 6 68.1 10 T36 Rick Jones 6 104 14 T36 Edwin Nunez 6 140 10 T40 Juan Cruz 5 142 17 T40 Bud Smith 5 84.2 14 T42 Brandon Lyon 4 63 11 T42 Alan Wirth 4 81.1 14 T44 Brandon McCarthy 3 67 10 T44 Brad Havens 3 78 12 T44 Mark Lemongello 3 244 34 T47 Roger Clemens 2 133.1 20 T47 Dave Stieb 2 129.1 18 T47 Jerry Garvin 2 244.2 34 T47 Phil Hughes 2 72.2 13 T47 Miguel Asencio 2 123.1 21 T47 Jon Garland 2 186.2 29 T53 Steve Avery 1 309.1 55 T53 Wilson Alvarez 1 56.1 10 T53 Jaret Wright 1 90.1 16 T56 Dan Larson 0 92.1 13 T56 Andy Benes 0 66.2 10 T56 Bill Pulsipher 0 126.2 17 T56 Pete Redfern 0 118 23 T60 Sid Fernandez -1 96 16 T60 Mike Jones -1 80.1 12 T60 Tom Carroll -1 78 13 T60 Tom Gordon -1 178.2 18 T60 Ramon Martinez -1 134.1 21 T65 Rich Harden -2 74.2 13 T65 Mark Gubicza -2 189 29 T65 John Mitchell -2 121.2 20 T68 Steve Baker -3 63.1 10 T68 Jim Abbott -3 181.1 29 T70 Brett Myers -4 72 12 T70 Tommy Boggs -4 117.2 19 T70 Dennys Reyes -4 114.1 15 T73 Kyle Davies -5 87.2 14 T73 Chris George -5 74 13 T73 Rich Dotson -5 222.1 37 T73 Carlos Zambrano -5 116 17 T77 Jeff D'Amico -6 221.2 40 T77 Joel Davis -6 176.2 30 T79 Jim Clancy -7 76.2 13 T79 Pat Mahomes -7 69.2 13 T79 Lary Sorensen -7 142.1 20 T79 Gene Nelson -7 162 26 T79 Alex Fernandez -7 279.1 45 T79 Nick Neugebauer -7 61.1 14 T79 Sean Burnett -7 71.2 13 T86 Mike Norris -8 112.2 22 T86 Larry Demery -8 95 15 T86 Mario Soto -8 78.2 11 T86 Jake Peavy -8 97.2 17 90 Scott Scudder -9 100.1 17 T91 Pete Falcone -10 190 32 T91 Kevin Kobel -10 177.2 25 T91 Larry Christenson -10 229 36 T94 Ramon Garcia -11 78.1 15 T94 Gary Serum -11 207 23 T94 Moose Haas -11 213.2 34 T97 Edwin Jackson -12 75.1 14 T97 Todd Van Poppel -12 88.2 17 T97 Roger Erickson -12 265.2 37 T97 Bruce Robbins -12 97.2 14
As you can see from the list, there have been about 60 pitchers, since 1973, who pitched well in the majors at the same age, or younger, that Hughes is now, up until that stage. And, there have been at least another 40 pitchers, same age, etc., who didn't pitch all that well.
Of these 100 pitchers combined, some went on to have nice careers, a few became Hall of Famers, and many (or most?) of them flamed out due to injury and/or ineffectiveness.
Based on this, I would suggest this is the way one should look at Phil Hughes future/potential: There's a 5% chance he'll be a Hall of Famer, there's about a 25% chance that he'll go on to have a fine major league career, and there's about a 70% chance that his career, albeit due to injury or lack of performance, will be a disappointment.
Just being young, advanced, poised, polished and in the big leagues doesn't make you a lock to be a future ace.
Posted by Steve Lombardi at April 13, 2008 08:49 AM
Comments
One more time: life comes with risks...wait for it...for everyone. We get it.
Posted by: Rich ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.waswatching.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 13, 2008 09:56 AM
I saw the headline, and then the article, and I'm thinking, "Wow, Steve has written his FIRST EVER POSITIVE HUGHES POST! He's totally trying to create good vibes as Hughes pitches an important game at Fenway tonight in front of the entire world on ESPN."
But then I read on... and no. It's yet another meaningless "more than likely Hughes will not be that good -- the RSAA stats are stacked against him. Prepare for his quick withering and death."
It's funny that these posts are never about Joba or your boyfriend Ian, who are both basically held in the same regard, but always Phil. Hmm, probably just a mere coincidence.
RSAA isn't the only way to measure potential success. But while Phil has a 70% chance of bombing, you, on the other hand, have a 100% chance of continuing to be a stultifyingly negative person. Get over your hate of Phil and save your web site.
Posted by: baileywalk at April 13, 2008 01:16 PM
Can you stop using RSAA for your analysis? It gives ZERO credit for playing time, counts average performances as zero when they ware worth much much more than that, and it doesn't account for defense. The third is difficult to account for and debatable, but it would reveal a whole lot more if you used something like VORP, Pitching runs created (although not old enough to compare historically), or even Win Shares. If Hughes pitched the exact same way for 10 times the innings, he'd move into the top 10. When looked at like that, what is this showing us? NOTHING.
Posted by: dan at April 13, 2008 07:42 PM
Alright, I want to propose a nickname for Phillip Hughes.
Phillip Hughes = “The White Shadow”
I was at a bar the night of Hughes’ first career big league start.
I got the bartenders attention and asked him “is the yanks game on YES? the new kid Hughes is pitching.”
The bartender said something quickly and all I heard was him say “….White Shadow”. I thought he was calling Hughes the White Shadow, like that was his nickname. It sounded right for some reason, had a nice ring to it. So I just nodded. For the next couple weeks, maybe even longer, I was under the impression that was his nickname. Finally, of course, one night watching on YES I put two and two together.
I think this would be a great nickname because it sort of represents the YES network era, and a lot of Yankees fans nationwide would get the reference because everyone has turned on YES looking for a game and been disappointed to find “The White Shadow”.
However, this nickname would be unbelievably incredible if Hughes had pitched a perfect game, and the game was missed by millions of fans because “The White Shadow” .was on. I’ll be crossing my fingers, maybe it’ll still happen.
Posted by: nate at April 14, 2008 06:51 AM
"Can you stop using RSAA for your analysis? It gives ZERO credit for playing time,"
-----------------
Wrong.
Playing time is a vital part of RSAA.
Posted by: Lee Sinins at April 14, 2008 12:31 PM
counts average performances as zero when they ware worth much much more than that
-------------
Wrong again.
Average performance is not worth anything about average.
That's what average means.
0 RSAA means the pitcher was average. It means he neither saved a run better than average nor cost his team a run compared to average.
In theory, we could call an average performance 10 RSAA. But, then it's not run saved against average, it's runs saved against 10 runs worse than average. And who cares what someone's RSA10WTA is.
Posted by: Lee Sinins at April 14, 2008 12:35 PM
If Hughes pitched the exact same way for 10 times the innings, he'd move into the top 10.
--------------------
What are you talking about?
Posted by: Lee Sinins at April 14, 2008 12:37 PM
Based on this, I would suggest this is the way one should look at Phil Hughes future/potential: There's a 5% chance he'll be a Hall of Famer, there's about a 25% chance that he'll go on to have a fine major league career, and there's about a 70% chance that his career, albeit due to injury or lack of performance, will be a disappointment.
---------------
And there is a 100% chance that, no matter how many times people watch alleged great prospects fail, they will never learn anything and will be as loudmouthed touting the next one.
Posted by: Lee Sinins at April 14, 2008 12:40 PM
Average performance is not worth anything about average.
------------------
I meant average performance is not worthy anything above average.
Posted by: Lee Sinins at April 14, 2008 12:40 PM