|
|
Post by mackenzie45220 on Jul 27, 2014 10:40:08 GMT -5
I can't help but notice an oddity in his platoon splits.
Pitching against righties (career): 687 PA, .222/.303/.386/.689 slash line, strikes out 25.0% of batters
Pitching against lefties (career): 495 PA, .211/.281/.335/.616 slash line, strikes out 27.7% of batters
The splits have been particularly dramatic this year:
Against righties: .233/.324/.434/.758, strikes out 20.2% of batters
Against lefties: .180/.279/.297/.576, strikes out 27.7% of batters
Obviously, it's strange for a right handed pitcher to be better against left handed hitters than right handed hitters. In particular, righties really hit more home runs against him, having allowed 20 to right handed hitters and 8 to lefties in his career, 10 this year for righties compared to just 2 for lefties. Any reason as to why righties seem to have more success against him?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lark11 on Jul 27, 2014 10:46:02 GMT -5
I'm not sure. Maybe it's small sample size, maybe it's something else. Usually when a pitcher has better success against opposite-side hitters than same-side hitters it's because his changeup is better than his breaking ball, but scouting reports on Stephenson have always pegged his breaking ball as being much more advanced than his changeup.
I've also noticed that Stephenson's fastball has some arm-side run to it. So, maybe he's more comfortable throwing it on the outside corner to lefties and letting it tail away from them than he is throwing it on the outside corner to righties and having it tail a bit back towards them.
Or, maybe it's a small sample size.
Interesting observation though.
|
|
|
|
Post by mackenzie45220 on Jul 27, 2014 11:02:28 GMT -5
I'm not sure. Maybe it's small sample size, maybe it's something else. Usually when a pitcher has better success against opposite-side hitters than same-side hitters it's because his changeup is better than his breaking ball, but scouting reports on Stephenson have always pegged his breaking ball as being much more advanced than his changeup. I've also noticed that Stephenson's fastball has some arm-side run to it. So, maybe he's more comfortable throwing it on the outside corner to lefties and letting it tail away from them than he is throwing it on the outside corner to righties and having it tail a bit back towards them. Or, maybe it's a small sample size. Interesting observation though. Does the fact that he has hit 8 righties but only 1 lefty with pitches indicate he's more comfortable going outside against lefties? |
|
|
|
Post by Lark11 on Jul 27, 2014 11:16:23 GMT -5
I'm not sure. Maybe it's small sample size, maybe it's something else. Usually when a pitcher has better success against opposite-side hitters than same-side hitters it's because his changeup is better than his breaking ball, but scouting reports on Stephenson have always pegged his breaking ball as being much more advanced than his changeup. I've also noticed that Stephenson's fastball has some arm-side run to it. So, maybe he's more comfortable throwing it on the outside corner to lefties and letting it tail away from them than he is throwing it on the outside corner to righties and having it tail a bit back towards them. Or, maybe it's a small sample size. Interesting observation though. Does the fact that he has hit 8 righties but only 1 lefty with pitches indicate he's more comfortable going outside against lefties? Well, he's probably facing more righties than lefties, so he's had more opportunities to hit righties. On the other hand, it might be indicative of Stephenson not being as comfortable or effective pitching inside to righties. It's tough to say. Maybe the tailing action on his fastball (aka into righties) gets away from him when he tries to work inside. Given his fastball velocity, he doesn't need to be that fine to be effective, but maybe he doesn't locate his fastball effectively on the inside corner to righties. Or, maybe the breaking ball slips out of his hand and plunks the righties. Tough to do more than speculate on that, though. |
|
|
|
Post by mackenzie45220 on Aug 2, 2014 21:14:51 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2014 4:55:04 GMT -5
He had another less than stellar start yesterday. I think the guy has tremendous potential but I also think that his meteoric rise through the minors has hit a noticeable bump. Unless he drastically improves in the next three weeks I would think it would be a 50/50 proposition that he starts 2015 in Pensacola and moves to Louisville during the season as opposed to what I have often heard predicted that he would finish this year in Louisville and be with the Reds at some point of 2015.
|
|
|
|
Post by redsfanman on Aug 4, 2014 8:24:52 GMT -5
I think the typical development cycle - A to A+ to AA to AAA to MLB - is sidetracked by the Reds organization's impression that AA Pensacola provides a better learning experience for pitchers than AAA Louisville, facing more top prospects and fewer AAAA hitters... with AA being more about player development, AAA being more about holding guys until there's an opening. Jon Moscot and Mike Lorenzen's success in Pensacola this year (which hasn't led to any promotions) would seem to support that assumption, as would Carlos Contreras' jump directly from Pensacola to the Reds.
Where will Robert Stephenson end the season? Where will he start the next season? I don't think it really matters, as long as he's pitching. He's likely to get a good look in spring training, despite being a real long shot to make the team. Whether he starts 2015 in AA or AAA he's likely to remain near the top of a short list of candidates for a call-up as long as he pitches well. Same goes for Lorenzen, Lively, Holmberg, and Moscot. And Corcino, if he gives up on starting and becomes a reliever.
|
|
|
|
Post by mackenzie45220 on Aug 4, 2014 8:26:38 GMT -5
He had another less than stellar start yesterday. I think the guy has tremendous potential but I also think that his meteoric rise through the minors has hit a noticeable bump. Unless he drastically improves in the next three weeks I would think it would be a 50/50 proposition that he starts 2015 in Pensacola and moves to Louisville during the season as opposed to what I have often heard predicted that he would finish this year in Louisville and be with the Reds at some point of 2015. Yesterday's start was fine. He may have allowed 4 runs, but he only allowed 3 hits. And no, he didn't allow 4 runs because he walked a ton of guys. He walked 2 batters yesterday. Hit another. In the first inning, he walked a guy, he allowed a walk, then homer, then single. Then he pitched 4 consecutive perfect innings. Then hit by pitch, walk, and 2 run double. He didn't pitch that poorly |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2014 16:34:13 GMT -5
He had another less than stellar start yesterday. I think the guy has tremendous potential but I also think that his meteoric rise through the minors has hit a noticeable bump. Unless he drastically improves in the next three weeks I would think it would be a 50/50 proposition that he starts 2015 in Pensacola and moves to Louisville during the season as opposed to what I have often heard predicted that he would finish this year in Louisville and be with the Reds at some point of 2015. Yesterday's start was fine. He may have allowed 4 runs, but he only allowed 3 hits. And no, he didn't allow 4 runs because he walked a ton of guys. He walked 2 batters yesterday. Hit another. In the first inning, he walked a guy, he allowed a walk, then homer, then single. Then he pitched 4 consecutive perfect innings. Then hit by pitch, walk, and 2 run double. He didn't pitch that poorly I didn't say he was pathetic or sucked ass or anything of that nature.... I said he was less than stellar. 4 earned runs allowed in 6 innings pitched would rank as "less than stellar" in just about anybody's book. If that performance is fine to you then okie-dokie. I have a different opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by mackenzie45220 on Aug 4, 2014 22:32:58 GMT -5
Yesterday's start was fine. He may have allowed 4 runs, but he only allowed 3 hits. And no, he didn't allow 4 runs because he walked a ton of guys. He walked 2 batters yesterday. Hit another. In the first inning, he walked a guy, he allowed a walk, then homer, then single. Then he pitched 4 consecutive perfect innings. Then hit by pitch, walk, and 2 run double. He didn't pitch that poorly I didn't say he was pathetic or sucked ass or anything of that nature.... I said he was less than stellar. 4 earned runs allowed in 6 innings pitched would rank as "less than stellar" in just about anybody's book. If that performance is fine to you then okie-dokie. I have a different opinion. 4 runs in 6 innings isn't good. The only point I was making is that it would have been nearly impossible for Stephenson to allow 4 runs and pitch better than he did. He barely let anyone reach base, bad timing/luck led to the runs. Let's say a pitcher started a game by pitching 5 perfect innings. Then, in the 6th, he allowed a single, got a strikeout, a walk, another strikeout, a hit by pitch, and a grand slam. Can you really say he pitched poorly, despite the fact he allowed 4 runs in 6 innings? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2014 4:25:02 GMT -5
I didn't say he was pathetic or sucked ass or anything of that nature.... I said he was less than stellar. 4 earned runs allowed in 6 innings pitched would rank as "less than stellar" in just about anybody's book. If that performance is fine to you then okie-dokie. I have a different opinion. 4 runs in 6 innings isn't good. The only point I was making is that it would have been nearly impossible for Stephenson to allow 4 runs and pitch better than he did. He barely let anyone reach base, bad timing/luck led to the runs. Let's say a pitcher started a game by pitching 5 perfect innings. Then, in the 6th, he allowed a single, got a strikeout, a walk, another strikeout, a hit by pitch, and a grand slam. Can you really say he pitched poorly, despite the fact he allowed 4 runs in 6 innings? I can't believe this is questionable. I didn't say he pitched poorly. I said "less than stellar". For your reference:
World English Dictionary
stellar (ˈstɛlə)
— adj
1. of, relating to, involving, or resembling a star or stars
2. of or relating to star entertainers
3. informal outstanding or immense: companies are registering stellar profits
[C17: from Late Latin stellāris, from Latin stella star] |
|
|
|
Post by floydgator on Aug 21, 2014 8:26:13 GMT -5
The wheels have completely come off the cart for Stephenson. His ERA is up to 4.84 for the season.
|
|
|
|
Post by psuhistory on Aug 21, 2014 8:42:26 GMT -5
4 runs in 6 innings isn't good. The only point I was making is that it would have been nearly impossible for Stephenson to allow 4 runs and pitch better than he did. He barely let anyone reach base, bad timing/luck led to the runs. Let's say a pitcher started a game by pitching 5 perfect innings. Then, in the 6th, he allowed a single, got a strikeout, a walk, another strikeout, a hit by pitch, and a grand slam. Can you really say he pitched poorly, despite the fact he allowed 4 runs in 6 innings? I can't believe this is questionable. I didn't say he pitched poorly. I said "less than stellar". For your reference:
World English Dictionary
stellar (ˈstɛlə)
— adj
1. of, relating to, involving, or resembling a star or stars
2. of or relating to star entertainers
3. informal outstanding or immense: companies are registering stellar profits
[C17: from Late Latin stellāris, from Latin stella star] |
|
|
|
Post by redsfanman on Aug 21, 2014 8:58:16 GMT -5
Robert Stephenson is entering uncharted territory (for him) as far as inning totals, similar to Alfredo Simon. In 2012 Stephenson threw 65 innings in 15 starts, in 2013 114.1 innings in 22 starts, this year he's already up to 124.2 innings and 24 starts, with a couple more to go.
In his last 6 starts he's given up (in order) 5, 3, 4, 5, 1, and 7 earned runs, for a 6.23 ERA over his past 10 starts.
Strangely his batting average allowed (.227) is nearly identical to the past 2 years (.217 and .222) rather than significantly different, despite the increase in ERA (2.99 last year to 4.84). I guess that's just because of all of his walks.
Interesting trivia note, Mike Lorenzen has a much higer BAA (.249) this year than Stephenson, despite having a much lower (3.01) ERA. Not necessarily what you might expect. Although Lorenzen has a WHIP of 1.24 compared to Stephenson's 1.40.
John Fay (or was it CTrent?) recently said on Twitter that a big question that would soon come up was whether Stephenson or Lorenzen get September callups. I think that would be a mistake, both are (or should be) worn out and just need to rest for spring training.
|
|
|
|
Post by floydgator on Aug 21, 2014 13:29:04 GMT -5
I also find it hard to "reward" a guy pitching as badly as Stephenson has over other players. It may not be either/or, but Moscot, Lively, and Adleman have all been significantly better than Stephenson. Add to that, it seems unlikely that calling a guy up who has been awful at AA and is already past a career high for innings (still building, of course, but he'd be hitting the big leagues as you would be expecting him to tire) would actually help his progress.
On a tangentially related note, I'd like to see Marquez Smith get called up. Not b/c he has any future, he doesn't, but the guy has killed high A ball this season and has been good in AAA multiple seasons in the past, but never gotten to the bigs. He's 29. Would be nice for him to say he as a big leaguer.
|
|
