Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Most baseball fans like to look at minor league pitching stats and dream about what a player might become. We look at the teenager who blows away A ball hitters and wonder if he might be the next Dwight Gooden. At the same time, we haven't seen most of these pitchers pitch regularly (if at all) and we must rely on scouts for anecdotal information. The one thing we do have is a confusing tangle of numbers. But what, if anything, do they indicate about a pitcher's likelihood of making it in the majors?

The following performance ratings are based on the pitcher's performance relative to minor league level and age, and are adjusted for league and for whether the pitcher was a starter or a reliever in the minors. Major league stats are NOT included in the evaluation.

About 70% of the core performance rating (before adjustments) is comprised of strikeout and walk rates per opportunity. The rest of the core rating is comprised of homeruns allowed rates and hits allowed per ball in play. The method takes a "wait-and-see" approach with pitchers in the lower minors - it recognizes that these pitchers face two sets of hurdles before reaching the majors: (a) the need to polish their arsenal to get more experienced hitters out; and (b) avoiding injuries. It's very difficult for a college pitcher pitching in low-A ball to compile a high rating. Most college pitchers' ratings improve in their first full year.

The informal letter grading system used by John Sickels and others roughly corresponds to the following rating scale (which I will call "prospect rating" for lack of a better term):

105 plus : A+
95-105 : A
90 -95 : A-
85-90 : B+
75-85 : B
72-75 : B-
69-72 : C+
63-69 : C
60-63 : C-

In the following chart, pitchers 26 and older as of July 1, 2003 and pitchers with less than 200 Batters Faced in 2003 are excluded.

Blue Jays minor league pitchers:

Pitcher  .............. PA  Rating  Letter Grade
Dustin McGowan ..... 637 92.0 A-
David Bush ......... 643 89.2 B+
Corey Thurman ...... 373 86.3 B+
Jason Arnold ........ 659 83.4 B
Vinny Chulk ......... 524 81.9 B
Jamie Vermilyea ..... 205 80.0 B
Vince Perkins ........ 519 78.6 B
Jesse Harper ........ 531 76.5 B
Joshua Banks ........ 264 76.0 B
Gustavo Chacin ...... 314 75.9 B
Dave Gassner ......... 608 75.9 B
Josh Towers .......... 545 73.5 B-
Brandon League ....... 573 73.4 B-
Cameron Reimers ...... 684 73.1 B-
Derrick Nunley ....... 246 73.0 B-
Chris Baker .......... 660 72.1 B-

Here is the Top 10 list from 2002: F Rosario 85.8, D McGowan 81.4, M Smith 80,6, S Valdez 78.7, V Chulk 78.4, C Mowday 78.2, P Coco 77.2, B Bowles 77.0, M Ford 76.5, D Markwell 76.2. The rating system thinks the pitching depth in the system was about the same in 2003 as in 2002, but regards the quality of top prospects as higher in 2003.

Of course, not all pitchers of the same age have the same potential, even if the actual performace is similar. For example, Adam Peterson doesn't make this list, and the method views him as a C prospect because of his age. He's most likely a solid B or B+ prospect - if we look only at his performance in double A, the method does peg him as a B prospect.

For those preparing for keeper league roto or sim leagues, the top 20 rated minor league pitchers in 2003 (200 BF or more, AL/NL stats excluded) might be of interest. Note that the fewer PA in the sample, the less reliable the rating is.

Pitcher ...... Organisation   Rating   PA
Harden, Rich ....... OAK ... 115.7 396
Soriano, Rafael .... SEA ... 113.2 241
Tsao, Chin-hui ..... COL ... 111.8 446
Jackson, Edwin ..... LAD ... 111.2 619
Perez, Oliver ...... SDP ... 110.5 200
Balfour, Grant ..... MIN ... 108.6 276
Cotts, Neal ........ CWS ... 106.1 440
Crain, Jesse ........ MIN ... 105.9 326
Hamels, Cole ....... PHI ... 103.5 383
Bevis, P.J. ......... NYM ... 103.3 334
Jenks, Bobby ....... ANA ... 102.6 363
Zumaya, Joel ....... DET ... 102.0 376
Blackley, Travis ... SEA ... 101.9 658
Miller, Greg ....... LAD ... 101.6 581
Cabrera, Fernando . CLE ... 100.8 456
Tankersley, Dennis . SDP ... 100.3 660
Vogelsong, Ryan .... PIT ... 100.0 643
Munoz, Arnaldo ..... CWS .... 99.8 238
Riley, Matt ........ BAL .... 99.5 597
Madson, Ryan ....... PHI .... 99.0 694

The best minor league pitching prospects are ... | 46 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Craig B - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 11:03 AM EST (#79615) #
Robert, this is great work.

If I may ask, how did you arrive at the formulae that you use? Was it through comparisons of minor league stats to later major league performance? Or was it comparison to later major league appearance, or perseverance? (in other words, does the system test for whether a player will (a) have success in the majors (b) pitch extensively in the majors or (c) appear in the majors?)
Coach - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 11:10 AM EST (#79616) #
This is excellent, Robert. It's no wonder you're such a tough DMB opponent.

I haven't seen many of these guys, but the top two (Harden and Soriano) agree completely with the visual evidence; they were great. Josh Towers, especially relative to Corey Thurman, has a very interesting rating, but he outperformed it by quite a bit in September to raise his profile.

if we look only at his performance in double A, the method does peg him as a B prospect.

Peterson's stock has gone up with his opportunity to advance more quickly as a closer; if the Jays' rotation stays healthy, he could be the first pitcher called up. The ratings for McGowan, Bush and Arnold indicate how much of a leap they need to take in AAA this year before stepping into the Toronto rotation -- or the bullpen.
Mike Green - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 11:11 AM EST (#79617) #
I am curious to know two things: what are the relative weights attached to double A vs. triple A performance (the somewhat high ratings for Thurman and Chulk lead to this), and whether relief and starting pitchers are rated differently (it does not appear so).

I checked on some of the less familiar names at the bottom of the top 20 list. Fernando Cabrera dominated high A competition at age 21 as a starter in 2003, and was promoted to double A. He struggled, and was put in the bullpen where he enjoyed success, before a last start at the end of the season of 5 shutout innings. In the playoffs he pitched in relief. Subjectively, I'd rather have McGowan than Cabrera going into 2004.

Arnaldo Munoz seems to be a fine left-handed relief pitcher. He was effective, but not overpowering, against minor league right-handed hitters. Subjectively, I am quite sure that he will be an effective relief pitcher in the majors, but the scope of his role is really quite uncertain.
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 11:15 AM EST (#79618) #
I haven't tested it against major league success yet. The core rating is based on intuition, personal observation, and Bill James' central tenet - that a pitcher's future value is highly correlated with strikeout rates.

I did test to make sure that the median for each age group was about the same - thus, I am fairly confident that the age function I devised is at least okay.

There are some other things I'd like to include, such as college versus high-school and handedness, but I'd need to have a more extensive database (currently, I have 2002 and 2003).
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 11:18 AM EST (#79619) #
The system evaluates the expected skill level at age 26.
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 11:27 AM EST (#79620) #

The method looks only at minor league numbers, so Towers' performance in Toronto isn't included in these rankings.

Mike Green,

AAA is rated at 68; AA at 61 (MLB = 100). Yes, I adjust for starter/reliever. A starter's rating gets boosted by 5%; a reliever's is downgraded by 5% (that's based on % of games started - a picther with 20 starts and 20 relief appearances has a zero adjustment)
Mike Green - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 11:42 AM EST (#79621) #
Thanks, Robert. I think you're on to something good, but you may need to tinker with the amount of the starter/reliever adjustment.

You could wait to see how the system performs with this years projections. Alternatively, you could check the method against Jay pitching prospects of the past. Dave Till seems to be just itching to do for pitchers what he has done for hitters !
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 11:42 AM EST (#79622) #
The system evaluates the expected skill level at age 26.

Let me clarify - I don't know precisely, but I think 88 represents major league average pitching on this scale. That is, a pitcher with a score of 88 is expected to be a major league average pitcher when he reaches age 26.
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 11:49 AM EST (#79623) #
This is the corresponding list for 2002 ...

Santana, Johan MIN 118.9 212
Foppert, Jesse SFG 117.6 586
Prior, Mark CHC 115.2 220
Rodriguez, Francisco ANA 114.2 334
Stephens, John BAL 107.1 571
Williams, Jerome SFG 107.0 671
Peavy, Jake SDP 104.7 335
Ainsworth, Kurt SFG 104.1 477
Song, Seung MON 104.1 481
Myers, Brett PHI 103.9 509
Lee, Cliff CLE 103.6 588
Saarloos, Kirk HOU 103.1 380
Lewis, Colby TEX 102.8 448
Harden, Rich OAK 102.5 636
Benoit, Joaquin TEX 101.8 432
German, Franklyn OAK 100.8 262
Blackley, Travis SEA 100.8 505
Valverde, Jose ARZ 100.5 214
Rauch, Jon CWS 100.0 451
Hernandez, Buddy ATL 98.9 234
_S.K. - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 11:57 AM EST (#79624) #
This list rekindles my confusion over why Corey Thurman is no longer considered a viable prospect for the Jays. I know he got tattooed a few times this year, but shouldn't you reserve judgement at least until the guy's past prospect age or has accumulated 200 innings or so?
Coach - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 12:03 PM EST (#79625) #
Towers' performance in Toronto isn't included in these rankings.

I get it; just pointing out that his AAA performance wasn't at all predictive of his AL success. The scale seems pretty accurate to me -- Josh had a few 95-like starts down the stretch, now we're hoping he can be an 88 for a full season. Corey Thurman pitched well enough to earn a shot, but instead of improving at the next level the way Towers did, he failed to duplicate his success. Not everyone seizes their opportunities.

Those 115 guys are pretty special, obviously. The 2002 list, which also did a great job of identifying the best arms, seems to roughly bear out the 33% rule: some pitchers go on to expected stardom, some get hurt, some disappoint, and predicting which is which is mostly guesswork.
Mike Green - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 12:10 PM EST (#79626) #
Just a word on Travis Blackley, Clint Nageotte, Josue Matos and the rest of the San Antonio Missions double A staff. The staff struck out 1142 in 1235 IP or about 8.3/9IP. Blackley's 8K per game was team average. The Missions offence struck out over 7 times per game. The Missions' staff was undoubtedly good, but that is definitely a high strikeout context.
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 12:58 PM EST (#79627) #
Mike Green,

The ratings are adjusted for league, so unless you are saying that there is something in San Antonio that's different than the other parks in the Texas league as far as strikeouts go, the context has been adjusted for.

Blackley's raw performance rating was 15% better than the Texas League median - pretty good, but not great. It was Blackey's age - 20.66 for 2003 (quite young for AA) that propels him onto the list.

Dustin McGowan actually pitched better relative to the league in New Haven than he did in Dunedin. His prospect rating for the AA stats alone is 101.0 (324 BF).
_Kristian - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 01:24 PM EST (#79628) #
How close was Greinke too making the top 20?? His stats in A ball were unreal though his strikeout rate dropped after his promotion to Double A?
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 01:36 PM EST (#79629) #
Greinke was 34th. His overall prospect rating was 94.6 (544 BF). At Wilmington (high A) he scored 95.4 (330 BF) and in AA Wichita he scored 93.4 (214 BF).
_Jody - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 01:56 PM EST (#79630) #
Where might one find the rest of this list? If it's posted please include the URL. If it's a document, could you possible email to me? Keep up the great work Mike, love the site.
_Korv - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 02:40 PM EST (#79631) #
Just wanted to echo Jody's comments. I would be very interested to see the rest of the list. Any chance?
Mike Green - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 04:19 PM EST (#79632) #
Thanks Robert, I didn't know the ratings were league adjusted. I will check the Texas League strikeout rate with San Antonio's, and let you know.
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 04:21 PM EST (#79633) #
Jody and Korv ...

Keep this up and I might start to think that the full list might have some economic value ;-)

I don't know if I want to publish a full list - I'm going to be tweaking and testing the system in various ways over the next year. You can be sure that Version 2.0 will be more robust when it comes out.
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 04:32 PM EST (#79634) #

It's in the 2nd paragraph.
_Jonny German - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 04:53 PM EST (#79635) #
Very interesting Robert. Do you have an equivalent evaluation system for hitters?
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 05:00 PM EST (#79636) #

Yup. I'll be posting similar "Top 20 lists" for the hitters in the near future.
Mike Green - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 05:19 PM EST (#79637) #
I don't know whether it is a park effect, or the makeup of the San Antonio team, but they did have the highest number of strikeouts per IP in the Texas League by a significant margin. Home-road stats would help in sorting this out.

I do know from looking at the Jay system that there were an abnormal number of strikeouts in Charleston (by both Alley-Cat pitchers and opponents). They had an early start time there, 6:05 p.m, from April-June so more of the game was played in twi-light, and this may have played a role.

In the particular case of Blackley, I checked his entire record, which is excellent from Rookie ball on up, and I would concur with the system's evaluation of him as a Grade A prospect, bearing in mind his overall record and his youth.
Lucas - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 05:21 PM EST (#79638) #
I just wanna chime and in say that this is really cool. Great work Robert!
Mike Green - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 05:55 PM EST (#79639) #
For Blue Jay fans, the system's evaluations of Vermilyea and Banks are heartening. They're both roughly just a little bit behind where McGowan was last year, and substantially ahead of where Bush was. Subjectively, I concur with the evaluations.

Combined with the return of Rosario and several other positive developments in the lower levels of the minors, I expect that Robert's system will rate the Jays' minor league pitching prospects better at the end of 2004 than at the end of 2003 or 2002.
_Kristian - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 07:13 PM EST (#79640) #
This stuff is great. It was interesting looking at the 2002 list and some of the names on their. It shows the risk reward with prospects from Prior to Rauch etc. It is also interesting to see someone like Jon Stephens on there who in 2002 and before put up awesome minor league numbers but someone who scouts have had doubts on his ability to transform that to major league success. 2 names missing from this years list that suprised me were Greinke and Kazmir.
_Tassle - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 07:49 PM EST (#79641) #
Not sure if you've got it finished yet, but how high does Rios finish overall in your hitter rankings? Obviously Mauer is 1st, but I imagine Rios in AA must have generated some pretty amazing numbers with your system.
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 07:49 PM EST (#79642) #
Grienke and Kazmir were very close to the top 20, but the system likes guys who have succeeded at AA and AAA.

I think John Stephens will be a big league pitcher - if anyone ever gives him the chance. I honestly don't know why the Orioles won't give him at least 150 innings to show what he can do.

The prejudice against guys without a good fastball is very strong.
_Kristian - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 08:21 PM EST (#79643) #
I will go out on a limb and predict Jeremy Reed as the #1 hitter especially after what he did in Double A. .409 Average, with only 19k's vs 29 walks. Even in Single A with a .333 Average and a K/BB ratio of 17 to 41 his numbers are off the charts. I wont be close but here is a top 5 guess:

1. Jeremy Reed
2. Joe Mauer
3. Alex Rios
4. Kevin Youlkis
5. Grady Sizemore
_Ms Fan - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 09:26 PM EST (#79644) #
Just a word on Blackley-- He's really not regarded as a fantastic porospect by the organization or M's fans alike-- he is a soft tosser. He can obviously regularly fool minor leaguers, but his ability to fool major leaguers is in question. He is being viewed as a young Jamie Moyer (who had 20 or 21 wins this year, I forget, but that is a tough comparison for any young kid. It took Moyer quite a while to figure out how to pitch this good. So this system has its flaws as well, but it'd be nice to think of Blackley as a superb prospect. He is being viewed as a # 3 or 4 starter down the line, I believe.
robertdudek - Friday, November 21 2003 @ 09:52 PM EST (#79645) #
No system is perfect. The system won't tell you who's striking hitters out by throwing slop and who is blowing them away. To the system, all strikeouts (in League/Level context) look alike.

That's as it should be. This evaluation method is not intended to take the place of observational evidence - it's meant to compare minor league numbers. It seeks to answer questions such as: is this set of numbers more impressive than that set etc.
Mike Green - Sunday, November 23 2003 @ 10:37 AM EST (#79646) #
Robert, I have two more questions about the system, arising from the Buckley discussion:

-How is age taking into account?
-Is no. of innings at an early age taken into account? (e.g. some kind of discount for IPs over 170 at age 21 or below- I don't know exactly what the age and IPs would be)

Again, this is nice stuff, and I'm very interested in version 2.0.
robertdudek - Sunday, November 23 2003 @ 02:17 PM EST (#79647) #
There's no penalty for high IP counts. A pitcher's expected skill growth rate between ages 18 and 22 is reduced (compared to 22 to 25), because his arm isn't mature and he is likely a greater injury risk.

It's hard to assses the risk on an individual basis - some of those guys throw in winter ball, some don't. The whole relationship between pitches and arm trouble is a tangled mess, anyhow. I think it's better to make blanket adjustments based on age.
_Jack N. - Tuesday, December 16 2003 @ 12:37 AM EST (#79648) #
I disagree with the premise of your list. My criticism of it is that it removes most A-ball pitchers from consideration from the list. Even if they are guys who are just out of high school dominating the league, they will have a rough time making the list. Are you really going to try and tell me Neal Cotts is a better prospect than Scott Kazmir? Anyway, by your evaluation I see one prospect that was in Low-A all year (Joel Zumaya), one that split the year between Low-A and High-A (Cole Hamels) and the only other one who pitcher in A-ball was Greg Miller (who was in AA as an 18-year-old at the end of the year.) I simply don't believe in your method of weighting the leagues. There is no way you can convince me that a lot of pitchers in A-ball wcan't be better than some of the names listed (Grant Balfour?). Looking at some of their stats tells me that they will succeed at higher levels. Can you please give me a more in depth description of how you compiled your list? I would like to know how much each factor was weighted (if you already said it, I missed it.)
Craig B - Tuesday, December 16 2003 @ 09:08 AM EST (#79649) #
Are you really going to try and tell me Neal Cotts is a better prospect than Scott Kazmir?

Yes, he is. Cotts is a better prospect than Kazmir. His arm has stood up to four more years of high-level ball, he has blown away a high-level league (the Southern League). I think Cotts is a better prospect, in that the overall expected return on him is higher.

There is no way you can convince me that a lot of pitchers in A-ball can't be better than some of the names listed (Grant Balfour?)

Jack, it's not a question of whether a player can be better. The are hundreds of A-ball pitchers who could be better than some of the pitchers listed. The question of whether they will be better, or whether they will even make the majors so we can find out, looms much too large for pitchers in low A ball.

It's not just that some pitchers have trouble making the transition from the low-level minors to the high-level minors... there are huge injury risks along the way.

Looking at some of their stats tells me that they will succeed at higher levels.

Only the truly exceptional A-ball pitcher, in my experience, is a lock to succeed even at AA. But you're saying we should see them as likely to succeed in the majors? No way.
Mike Green - Tuesday, December 16 2003 @ 09:50 AM EST (#79650) #
I agree with Craig. The Auburn pitching class of 2002 is a good example. The staff included Peterson, Perkins, League, Maureau, Bush, Hanson and Nin. Only Bush has really emerged from this crowd, but it is not at all certain who, if anybody, will be the best of the lot in the long run.

You could argue that the weight attached to performance at lower levels should perhaps be a little higher. For instance, although Josh Banks has yet to succeed below short-season A ball, his K rates are high enough that I am confident that he is a better prospect than Vinny Chulk say. But, it's a very difficult call and Robert had very good reasons for attaching the weights that he did.
_Jack N. - Tuesday, December 16 2003 @ 09:02 PM EST (#79651) #
Craig B.

Go ask any scout who is better between Kazmir and Cotts and every single one will tell you Kazmir. The overall return is not expected to be higher for Cotts. Kazmir is one of the premium prospects in baseball. He's a hard-throwing lefty with a nasty slider. Cotts is a guy who throws 88-90 mph and has major control problems. He got killed in his starts in Chicago because he just can't throw strikes. I'm not sure that there's much room for improvement in throwing strikes at his age. You can take Neal Cotts and I'll have Scott Kazmir. And we'll see who is right in the future. Kazmir may get injured, but if he stays healthy he will be a stud. Cotts on the otherhand has ceiling no where near Kazmir. It's kind of like this "College vs. High School" Risk argument you hear when the draft rolls around.

This list just favors AAA pitchers so unfairly that I can't agree with it. These days not too many premium prospects are in AAA so I see a lot of marginal guys showing up on his list who project maybe as 5tyh starters. And as the M's fan already pointed out, this list rates someone like Blackley very high when his ceiling is not that high at all. He somebody who throws 85-55 mph. Do you really think that is deserving of the 13th spot on this list? Just because he can soft-toss his way to wins in AA with good control doesn't mean he can succeed in MLB.
_Kristian - Wednesday, December 17 2003 @ 06:53 AM EST (#79652) #
Scott Kazmir is the far better prospect than Neal Cotts. I think if you polled 20 General Managers you would find 19 of them willing to take the chance on the higher upside pitcher who is in low A when you are talking about Kazmir vs Cotts. However, Ryan Anderson was the #1 pitching prospect in the minors for 3 years and now look what happenend. I think this formula shows that a pitcher who has success at a higher level of competition is less of a risk at this point and has a greater chance to have a return on investment. Kazmir can have a major injury before he even reaches Double A but Cotts is already their and doing well. The better statement might be Cotts is less of a risk at this point in time but to say that Cotts has a higher expected return to me is far from the truth.
_S.K. - Wednesday, December 17 2003 @ 07:34 AM EST (#79653) #
Be careful not to mix "expected return" with "possible return". A pitcher closer to the majors would have a higher expected return because he has less chance of getting hurt, as you said. Kazmir certainly has a higher ceiling, but he has a lot of pitches yet to throw before reaching the majors, and no one knows what will happen.
_Kristian - Wednesday, December 17 2003 @ 08:04 AM EST (#79654) #
Why would a pitcher closer to the majors have a less chance of getting hurt? Do you mean that a pitcher closer to the majors has a less chance of getting hurt before reaching the majors? Has there been any statistics to back this up? It would be interesting information.
_S.K. - Wednesday, December 17 2003 @ 08:49 AM EST (#79655) #
A pitcher closer to the majors has less TIME before he gets there, and therefore less chance of getting injured (since you are less likely to get hurt over, say, a 3 month period than you are over a 3 year period).
I'm talking about simple probabilities here, nothing to do with statistics or anything like that.
Craig B - Wednesday, December 17 2003 @ 09:00 AM EST (#79656) #
Oh man, I had a long post ready, then messed it up. Aagh!

Anyway, the long and shotr of it is that there are physiological reasons I don't understand perfectly, why a 24-year-old pitcher is less likely to be hurt badly than a 20-year-old pitcher, but there are other factors as well, such as time to the majors etc.

And not every Kazmir-like pitcher turns into a stud, far from it. Bruce Chen was dominating similar leagues to Kazmir at ages six months apart, all the way to AA even, and has he turned into a stud? There are other examples, but actually few HS pitchers can be compared to Kazmir because few HS pitchers ever have really good seasons early in their careers...
_Keith Warden - Saturday, December 20 2003 @ 03:38 PM EST (#79657) #
I would like to talk to someone in regards to my son Patrick Warden

We live in Barrie, Ontario.

Patrick's birthday January 1, 1986

Height - 6' 3"

Weight - 180 lbs.

Left handed Pitcher

speed clocked at 86 m.p.h.

throws fast ball, change up, fork ball, curve ball

We had a camp held in Hamilton, Ontario 2 years ago. They saw him and said to me that they would talk to us later but have not heard from them.

We would like to go to a camp for a try out if possible.

Thank you for your time

Look forward to hearing from you

Keith Warden
_James Pidutti - Thursday, February 05 2004 @ 04:26 PM EST (#79658) #
Keith, if you get to read this. A 16 year old LHP throwing 86 is a very good sign. Keep going to those camps and good things are bound to happen. I'm from Sudbury, Ontario and when I was 20 I threw 89 from the left side and was signed by the Blue Jays right through those camps. So be patient, 16 is still young and I'm sure your son has a bright future ahead of himself. Write me back if you need advice or have questions.
_James Pidutti - Thursday, February 05 2004 @ 04:28 PM EST (#79659) #
Keith, if you get to read this. A 16 year old LHP throwing 86 is a very good sign. Keep going to those camps and good things are bound to happen to your son. I'm from Sudbury, Ontario and when I was 20 I threw 89 from the left side and was signed by the Blue Jays right through those camps. So be patient, 16 is still young and I'm sure your son has a bright future ahead of himself. Write me back if you need advice or have questions.
_S.K. - Thursday, February 05 2004 @ 05:31 PM EST (#79660) #
If that birthdate is accurate, Patrick is actually 18 now.
The best minor league pitching prospects are ... | 46 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.