2024 Pitchers and Players of the Month

I don’t have a problem with a pitcher with a higher ERA winning the award as it isn’t the best ERA award. Mathews pitched 12 more innings so his results mean more while he also had a really good ERA still as well. I typically judge pitching prospects based off K%, BB%, and K-BB%. Once you get to the higher levels, HR % start to mean more, although this isn’t who will be a better prospect and more who had a good month. I still like the %s as an input as they show who is really dominating.

Mathews had a 31.8% K rate with a 8.0% BB + HBP % = K-BB% of 23.8%
Ramirez had a 25.0% K rate with a 4.2% BB + HBP % = K-BB% of 20.8%

I may be wrong, but it seems to me like the Cardinals generally try to avoid giving the award to DSL players unless it’s just a slam dunk decision. I’m ok with that. You have 20 year olds sometimes pitching or hitting against 16 year olds in an environment where defense is bad and pitch control can be wild. I don’t fault TCN approach with going strictly by best stats either. Just a different method. I agreed with Brian and also thought the Cardinals would pick Graceffo. But I think there’s another trend going on there where they seem a little less likely to pick guys who have been there and done that in past seasons (e.g. Baker last month).

Fangraphs does have the K% and BB% on their pages. However, it isn’t filterable by month. To get per month rates, I have to convert IP to BF and add on hits, walks, HBP. This isn’t perfect as it doesn’t account for GIDP or CS though.

https://www.fangraphs.com/players/quinn-mathews/sa3023407/stats?position=P#advanced

Stay with me on this, it comes together.

My idea of how to go about developing starting pitchers is founded upon the notion that you have to first establish that success as a starter is a possible outcome. Time will tell if that outcome is achieved, but you have to first find out if it is even possible. IMO the Cardinals have made a grave mistake in not doing that, with Hence being an especially egregious example. He was in his 4th year in the system, 3rd pitching due to 2020, before he ever even went 5 innings, and had only done that on three occasions before he was advanced to AA. Once he was finally pushed toward 100 pitches and 6 IP he broke down physically. He may come back and pitch this year, but it will be well into next year, his 6th in the system, before we next have a chance to find out if he can physically handle it. In other words, we still do not know if success is a possible outcome. Goodness.

The issue with measuring DSL and rookie level guys on one hand, and upper level guys on the other, all with the same yardstick, has been touched upon above and discussed before. But this excersize that Brian goes through every month is what I use to identify lower level pitching prospects, that I otherwise would be unaware of, who are establishing that success as a starter is a possible outcome. This Keiverson Ramirez seems to be checking that box. I don’t know about pitch count, but he is going 5 IP every time out, as an 18 year old his second year in the system. We will have to see what happens next year in the US, but success is a possible outcome.

Quinn Mathews is another who has checked that box. Last year, his first in the system, he worked up to 80-90 pitches and was going 5 IP every time. This year he pushed up to 90-100 and has worked his efficiency up to where he gets 6 IP out of that. So far, so good.

I mention those two guys to deflect the lame excuse that some guys come into the system younger, as teenagers, and others come after several years in a college program. This is an example of each, and both are doing it right. I hope the Cardinals development system is coming to its senses and will quit with bubble wrapping and slow walking some of these guys. Separate out the tea cups early. And bear in mind, if you choose to load your prospect list with guys as to whom success may not even be a possibility, what you are doing is setting up tin soldiers in a sandbox and pretending like you’ve got a real army.

Bling – while Tink is definitely someone the Cardinals handled differently, I don’t think he represents the norm. For example, I remember listening to a single A game where they were complaining that their pitchers are never eligible for any league titles because there are usually only 5-6 pitchers every year that are qualified based on innings and 4 of those are always Cardinals. In other words, the Cardinals are known for having their pitchers throw longer than anyone else – at least at the low levels. You can see this represented when you go back and look at league leaders in ERA on MiLB.com. Typically only a few qualify and most are Cardinals. Hence and Hjerpe have been notable exceptions of late but those are the only two.

The problem above seems simple enough – look at WHIP in the context of ERA, K/9, BB/9 & K/BB.

It’s rare that there are major distortions between WHIP and ERA, but it can happen.

WHIP has a variable. The Walks and IP are locked in as “knowns”, but WHIP can’t tell the difference between a grand slam and a single (Hits). ERA can, so I expect a natural “distortion”.