What are the Royals Doing with Aaron Crow?
by Freneau on Mar 28, 2011 12:53 PM EDT
in Kansas City Royals Minor Leagues
Email
PrintYesterday was a big day for non-usual-suspects breaking Royals news. First, Dave Gershman revealed that Tim Collins had made the Opening Day roster. Around the same time, reports began to hit Twitter that Aaron Crow had also made the O.D.R., also as a reliever. I'm not sure who can claim this one, but basically, it wasn't Dutton. Tanner Knowland has been out front in breaking the story. The Collins move was somewhat expected, and as a prospect that has been considered a reliever only for a few years now, not controversial. The Crow decision is, however. Crow, heading into his age 24 season, has been a starter almost exclusively throughout his baseball life.
So assuming that the Royals do send Crow to the bullpen, just what are they doing?
- This is a short term move: There's a theory that this is only a short stint in the bullpen for Crow. A chance for him to get some seasoning and work with the Major League staff for... two weeks... a month? Who knows? I'm sure that, logically speaking, you'd want to have your best teachers at the Major League level. That being said, if he's being promoted to work with McClure, what exactly does that say about the minor league instruction? Moreover, isn't there a simpler way, logistically, to do this? While a short-term stint in the bullpen wouldn't be the end of the world, at the very least, it would be quite odd. For better or worse, today's pitchers are creatures of extreme routine. This isn't merely because they are all over-paid wimps who aren't tough, but because the industry has collectively embraced routine to a huge degree. The "getting him work with McClure" ethos is actually part and parcel of that same larger pitch counts/throwdays/etc mindset. Only, you know, a weird scenario that will totally throw off his program for half a season.
For all we know, the answer could still be none of the above. The situation is still in flux, and there's been little on-record from the official sources one way or the other. I hope that the additional news reveals a coherent plan, because this looks like a mistake. Yes, the "bring him along as a reliever" theory is back en vogue. How many times has it been executed properly? Swingmen, long men, and Sunday starters don't exist anymore. Crow throwing 13 pitches to four batters every other day isn't going to ease him into starting. I don't want to hear about Brian Duensing just yet either. 13 fluky starts with a low BABIP and no strikeouts in a pitcher's park doesn't tell us much. Tick tock.
54 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What are the Royals doing with Aaron Crow?
Limiting his potential, and thus his value to the team.
But then again, a good setup man is really, really important, valuable and hard to find.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Mar 28, 2011 12:59 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Question, Scott:
Doesn’t seem to be what they’re doing – but would you be OK if he had SOS’s role and when he did pitch, it was for 10-20 batters at a time? (In other words, a true long reliever?)
I would be OK with that – but only because the Royals are likely to need a long reliever on a regular basis, so his work could be somewhat regular. This would be not unlike how managers often break in rookie hitters (or used to, anway) – by limiting ABs against tough lefties for a lefty hitter, for example.
Additional benefit – this would limit his innings, and thus limit injury risk.
I guess I’m willing to wait and hear something definitive from Moore/Yost on exactly what they are doing with Crow before deciding on this issue. Now, whether he has actually merits a big league roster is another argument. Clearly, this is another case where the Royals are relying on scouting and virtually ignoring minor league stats when making a decision.
"We're gonna win with pitching and defense" General Manager Dayton Moore, circa winter 2009
"Where did all these Indians come from?" General George Armstrong Custer, circa summer 1876
That wouldn’t be as bad as using him as a short reliever, but it still would be much worse for his development as a starter than actually starting in the minors. He wouldn’t go to even a third pitch until the second time through the lineup. And he’d face many fewer batters multiple times in the MLB bullpen than in a MiLB rotation. Any way you slice it, this retards his development as a SP
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Mar 28, 2011 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Less boring
Is not necessarily pointless. The AA season doesn’t start until April 7-9 (not looking it up) and it looks like Dwyer, Lamb, and Smith are getting the first three starts. At two weeks, Crow would miss one start at most. But he gets a couple of weeks in the show for “inspiration” or whatever, and the org. gets to show the fans more of the shiny new toys. Holland or Wood may have made more sense, but Crow is certainly more interesting. For the minimal impact a short stint should have on the rest of the year, more interesting is good enough.
It's all ball bearings these days!
by CentralChamps20?? on Mar 28, 2011 2:53 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
iPhone commenting
Can’t see the whole screen, so messed this reply up. It goes to Will’s comment below tha t a short stint would be pointless, not to NY’s comment above. Sorry.
It's all ball bearings these days!
by CentralChamps20?? on Mar 28, 2011 2:56 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I think
Given the Royals “rotation” there is going to be plenty of multi-inning middle relief work to go around.
by BlueEyes_Austin on Mar 28, 2011 1:00 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Why can't we put him in the bullpen now and work with him
and after he adds another pitch or two, extend his innings and still use him as a starter down the road?
Chiefs
Royals
Blues
Tigers
How do you "add another pitch or two" in the bullpen?
It seems like most people don’t get that relievers usually throw just their best two pitches. And with Crow adapting to MLB, he’s going to rely on his best two pitches probably even more than the average reliever. He’s not going to chance throwing a subpar third or fourth pitch and give up a bunch of hits and walks.
So how do you develop “another pitch or two” when you’re not throwing them in games. You can’t improve pitches by not throwing them in games.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Mar 28, 2011 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Brandon Morrow was a two-pitch pitcher for Seattle
and now he’s a starter. I’m not saying the Royals plan on moving him back, but it doesn’t end the possibility of him starting. It’d be nice to hears something about their intentions.
Morrow threw three pitches for Seattle
15% of his pitches were a change or a splitter, both of which can be a weapon against left-handed hitters.
Morrow also has some history of arm problems and is starting the year on the DL.
Morrow was a bad example to choose from
He was used as both a starter and reliever during his time with the Mariners, so, I’m not sure if the change/splitter would have shown up in his relief work. Also, he had an unusual (for a pro athlete) health situation where he said he preferred relieving as he felt it was more suitable for treating his diabetic condition.
Plus
I do not think anyone in baseball thinks the Mariners handled Morrow correctly.
Possible...?
That ‘This is a short term move’ is just until Mazzaro comes up and takes the #5 spot?
That’s still a possibility, right? That’s my hope.
I think he could spend some time on the roster...
not pitch at all, and them mazaaro comes up
so worst case scenario its just a pointless move
I guess the point would be
that they don’t have to drop someone else from the 40 man roster to add someone like Louis Coleman for two weeks. Of course, they could have just had Mazarro on the team for those two weeks too, but I guess they want him to continue pitching regularly in extended spring training until a start comes available in KC.
This is the kind of thing that might make a difference in a few years, so I guess it’s good that they are thinking about it now.
Has something to do with Ke&sha
I just can’t connect the dots yet.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Another thought
40 man roster implications may be driving this decision (right or wrong), don’t they? I mean, Louis Coleman, who has FAR outperformed Crow in the minors, is of comparable age, and by all estimations is destined only for a relief career anyway, is seen as only “on the bubble” for making the team. That simply doesn’t jive with the thought that Crow is being picked to “help us win now”. If that was their concern, wouldn’t Coleman have already made the team over Crow, and easily?
Difference is Crow is already on 40 man, and Coleman is not. GMDM values his organization depth (even if it’s crappy depth), and seems to error on the side of keeping a guy off the 40 man over making a move in that area, if all things are even close to being equal.
"We're gonna win with pitching and defense" General Manager Dayton Moore, circa winter 2009
"Where did all these Indians come from?" General George Armstrong Custer, circa summer 1876
Working on ineffective secondary pitches is just not very feasible out of a major league bullpen
There are two big considerations here. First, Crow would be pitching considerably less innings working as a reliever. As a starter, he would be throwing 80+ pitches every five days against live competition, plus some extra work on his throw days. As a reliever, he would be throwing 20 to maybe 40 pitches every few days. In other words, Crow would likely throw at least twice as many pitches a week as a starter than as a reliever, giving him considerably more chances to work on his secondary pitches.
Second, major league games do not present a situation where a pitcher can really throw pitches just to work on them, whereas in the minors, he can throw 75% change ups and there are no real ramifications. Major league pitchers have to be able to get hitters out — even the mop up guys. Even on a rebuilding team, the manager has pressure to play to win, the fans paying $100 to bring their family to the game demand the team plays to win, and the advertisers demand the team plays to win a game so 75% of the eyeballs do not change the channel before the company’s ad plays again. To get hitters out, the pitcher needs to use their best stuff, not work on their fringy change up. The manager also is more likely to use the pitcher mostly against same handed hitters, so the pitcher is not getting the same experience against opposite handed hitters and or the same opportunities to throw a pitch like a change up (which are mostly thrown against opposite handed hitters). In the minors, there is nothing like the same pressure — a minor league manager is not going to get fired if he loses because he followed the baseball operations department’s orders to make Crow throw 25 change ups every game, and he gets to face both lefties and righties. Which is the more likely scenario in which Crow’s change up would improve — throwing it twice a week as a reliever in the majors, or throwing it forty times a week as a starter in the minors?
Brian Duensing? Besides Will pointing out that he is not very good, he pitched five years in the minors making over 100 starts, just like almost all major league starters who “broke in” as a reliever. Crow has spent one year in the minors and has not even made 30 starts, so it is not a comparable situation.
A move to the bullpen for Crow is bad news in that he would be more valuable if he could start. Still, it still might be the right move if the team is convinced that Crow will not develop a change up or other secondary pitch that would allow him to stick as a starter long term.
by Gopherballs on Mar 28, 2011 1:35 PM EDT reply actions 3 recs
I don't get it at all.
I will love to see what the club says is the reasoning for the promotion. Until then, I can’t see any reason behind it.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
following Greinke
Greinke did it, he pitched well enough last spring to make the club,maybe the move works out. We don;t want another Hochevor either.
Even mentioning Greinke and Crow in the same argument is just ludicrous.
Killing time until time kills me
you say that, but you don't give a reason
The whole problem with the world is that fools & fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. ~ Bertrand Russell
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Mar 28, 2011 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Greinke pitched 350 innings in the majors as a starter before he was "broken in" as a reliever
He also had already established both a decent change up and curve.
that's more like it
The whole problem with the world is that fools & fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. ~ Bertrand Russell
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Mar 28, 2011 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions
He was brought up before
But Wainwright was actually pretty good in the minors until AAA, while Crow’s track record is mixed at best.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
He's not getting any younger and they like him as a reliever.
He has failed to develop a change which effectively prevents you from starting. He could go to the minors and keep trying, or they could put him in a situation where they feel he will succeed (and most everyone thinks he has elite closer upside as a reliever).
He can dink around with a change during training sessions but there’s a point at which you have to say enough is enough and convert him to a reliever. Some people thought that would be decided if he failed at NWA again this spring/early summer. I don’t fault them for making a move earlier if they don’t like the odds of him learning to command the change-up.
I’ve also heard they feel like his FB and slider really take a hit when he’s a starter and the electric stuff is why he’s a good prospect in the first place.
continuing to work on his change (or curve) would also help maximize his value as a reliever
Sinker/slider guys tend to get hit hard by opposite handed hitters, so the best high leverage relievers usually still need something decent to throw opposite handed hitters. Crow turning out to be only a ROOGY would be a big disappointment.
Maybe a gritty veteran like Soria can mentor Crow in the ML bullpen
Soria’s awesome, but he doesn’t have telekinetic mentoring powers like “he who shall not be spoken of who-can-mentor-from-any-distance,-great-or-small”
The whole problem with the world is that fools & fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. ~ Bertrand Russell
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Mar 28, 2011 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions
There are things a pitcher can work on from the bullpen...
I don’t see how any of these things are likely to help Crow at this point, but what do I know? Maybe there’s something we don’t know. Or maybe one of you folks who has seen more of him can suggest how any of this might apply (because I’m not seeing it).
We all know that pitchers often throw harder as relievers than they do as starters, since they get to work for shorter stints. Zack added velocity when he went to the ‘pen (I assume you’ll all trash be for comparing them now, but whatever…). Sometimes some of that added velocity sticks when they eventually return to the rotation.
Relievers also throw a more limited arsenal of pitches. That’s not always bad (I’ll skip the Greinke comparison this time… but you know I thought about it). Sometimes it is a good idea to focus on your fastball for a while. (Or your slider, or whatever other pitch counts as one of your best). Old-schoolers sometime talk about this as “learning to trust your stuff,” but whatever you call it, the idea isn’t necessarily crazy… I just don’t know if there’s any reason to think Crow would benefit from such an exercise.
Also…. ok, I’m out of ideas. But still, isn’t there any reason to think that Crow might actually benefit from the old “easing in” strategy?
Basically, I’m familiar with the results Mr. Crow has been able to produce, but no real details concerning his development. Is it possible there’s actually a good reason for a bullpen stint, and we’re just not thinking of it?
McClure?
Sorry but I just don’t see Bob McClure being all that as a pitching coach. If he was we’d had the best pitching in the majors several years ago. One year wonder Zack Stinkie doesn’t prove to me that McClure is a pitching GURU. Three times during his tenure as the Royals pitching coach we have had the highest team era in baseball. Pitcher after pitcher can’t find a strike in a bowling alley. The past 3 or 4 managers have been saddled with this dead head and been sent packing because of the teams inability to win. Everybody is on the Crow bandwagon and he wasn’t that impressive in semi pro ball and stunk it up at the AA level last year. Maybe set up man is what he’ll turn out to be best suited for, but with McClueless as the pitching coach he won’t reach his potential until he’s elsewhere.
Good move..
Last year in ST Crow was the best reliever in the pen in terms of stuff and results. His fastball touched 97, he was able to throw his slider and he didn’t have to throw his changeup. His reward for looking awesome after two years of not pitching was AA at the age of 23, and he stunk.
Here’s my scouting report on Crow as a starter; Delivery lacks deception, fastball has good movement but its easy to diagnose coming out of his hand and tops out at 94(as a starter) rides in the low 90’s. Not enough differential between fastball and changeup(mid-eighties) to be useful as an offspeed pitch. Slider has good bore and tilt.. 60 pitch.
Either Crow is going to maximize his delivery as a reliever.. and bump his fastball to plus velocity or he’s not going to hack it as a starter. He needs plus velo to seperate the speed of his fastball from the change and the slider.. Everything sets up off of that.
The guy gave up 10 HR in 60 IP in the CAROLINA LEAGUE.. Despite a great groundball rate which means he wasn’t getting enough juice on his fastball and he didn’t have enough pitches.
This is likely the view of the Royals org...
Agree or disagree but it seems like the Royals have decided that Crow’s ceiling is as a top-flight reliever and that he couldn’t even make it as a 5th starter. I have nowhere near the insight to know whether they’re right or wrong or whether another year in the minors could make a difference. I do know that I’ve been hearing that he might end up as a reliever since he was drafted and last year may have been enough to prove it to the org.
by billexgordler on Mar 28, 2011 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions
If true, the Royals made a really bad draft selection there
Moore has had some great drafts. That appears to have been a very bad pick.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Mar 28, 2011 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions
"Very bad" is overstating it
Or at least premature. Expected WAR for the first six seasons of a #12 overall pick’s career is somewhere between 2.5 and 3. Crow could easily exceed that if he turns in a few good seasons as a closer or even as a setup man. It’s not the ideal outcome, but no one’s picks reach their ceiling every single year.
That's one way to look at it
But in my opinion a small market team like the Royals needs first round draft picks to become big contributors. A postion player can do that. A starting pitcher can do that. A reliever cannot. A reliever’s realistic ceiling is about 2 WAR per season and 1.5 WAR or less is much more likely. The ceiling for SP’s and position players is much higher and average performance form such players is higher.
So if it turns out the Royals drafted a reliever with the #12 overall pick, I think it was a very bad pick for them. If a large market team just ends up getting a decent contributor with a fairly high first round pick, that’s not a problem because they can get league average or better players fairly easily on the FA market. For a small market team like the Royals, getting average or better players is difficult, so drafting players who could reasonably get to that level is all the more important.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Mar 28, 2011 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure, everyone wants their high draft choices to be starters and everyday players, not relievers and platoon guys and utility infielders. But drafting is hard, you can’t expect everyone to reach their ceilings just because you really need them to succeed. That’s not going to happen, some guys are going to make it and some aren’t. So you have to temper your expectations…even most first round picks don’t become MLB regulars.
If Crow ends up being a good relief pitcher, drafting him 12th overall is not a very bad pick. Now, Bryan Bullington, there was a very bad pick.
yeah
its weird being that scott’s the guy here writing all the great pieces to temper the expectations of the prospects and such, yet, if the 12th overall pick isnt anything more than a 2 WAR player, which is a success in his studies, then that player is deemed a failure.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Mar 28, 2011 11:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Success
If Crow is a reliever he will be unlikely to average even 1.5 WAR per season over his cost controlled years (my “success” definition). That is unless he’s a full-time closer in each of those seasons. He’s much more likely to be a 0.5-1.4 WAR player. And the pick looks especially bad if he becomes that reliever less than two years after being drafted.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Mar 29, 2011 8:02 AM EDT up reply actions
You can’t be completely results-oriented when evaluating individual draft picks. Over the long haul, yes, results are all that matter, but you lose perspective when you focus in one how a single pick turned out.
Philosophically, a guy like Crow who has excellent stuff but weak secondary offerings is a better pick for a small market, rebuilding team than a “safer” guy like Mike Leake because he has more upside. The risk that his secondary stuff doesn’t develop and he ends up in the bullpen is something you have to accept in return for his higher ceiling.
Drafting is even more of a crapshoot than that.
Expected WAR for the first six seasons of a #12 overall pick’s career is somewhere between 2.5 and 3.
I’m not going to do the math on this one, but I’m certain you are way high on this. The attrition rate for draft picks is just too high to expect a 2.5-WAR average. By way of simple illustration, here are the ten #12 picks leading up to Crow’s selection in June of 2009:
1999: Brett Myers
2000: Joe Borchard
2001: Mike Jones
2002: Joe Saunders
2003: Lastings Milledge
2004: Jered Weaver
2005: Jay Bruce
2006: Kasey Kiker
2007: Matt Dominguez
2008: Jemile Weeks
I see three out of those ten guys who might fairly be considered 2-WAR-or-better players (Myers, Weaver, Bruce). And Saunders is probably the only other guy up there who is good for at least 1-WAR.
I want better for Aaron Crow, but the reality is that if he makes the ’pen and puts up 1 WAR per season, he will have beaten the odds… at least if you calculate those odds based solely upon draft status.
I don't think he's saying 2.5-3.0 WAR average per season
I think he’s saying a total of 2.5-3.0 WAR over their first six seasons.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Mar 29, 2011 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions
Right
The details are here: http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2009/06/the_draft_and_w.php
It’s in graph form, hence the approximate values.
Ah, that makes a lot more sense.
Sorry Maguro.
Here’s another thought, though…
Based on my 6-year fWAR data, I did come up with a “projected” fWAR formula for BA prospects. That formula was:
2.53 – 0.447 * ln(Prospect Ranking) = Expected Average fWAR over first 6 years
(And, by “first six years,” I mean the year of the BA ranking and the next five years, regardless of service time).
Using that formula, I would expect a #40 prospect (Crow’s ranking in 2010) to produce 0.881 fWAR per season. Or, in absolute terms, about 5.25 fWAR between now and the end of the 2015 season. That’s about 1 WAR per season. I know that’s not what we want, but if he did it, he’d be outperforming the average.
if the 11th pick turns into an elite reliever....
thats a definite success as a draft pick
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Mar 28, 2011 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions
clearly, thats not what you hope for....
but its far from being the failure that you’re making it out to be
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Mar 28, 2011 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm cool with letting Crow pitch as an MLB reliever this year
He should be a long man, throwing two innings or more each outing. That would get him about 100-110 MLB innings pitched (if he goes twice a week), gain him valuable experience, and give us a better look at him.
If he doesn’t succeed, just send him back down to Triple-A for more experience there as a starter, and we try again later in the season or next year. If he succeeds, we have a guy ready to throw, say, 150 innings as a starter in 2012.
"America is a nation without a distinct criminal class, with the possible exception of Congress." --Mark Twain
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
Related FanShots on Royals Review
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
