Did Danny Duffy's Rookie Season Accomplish Anything?
by Freneau on Sep 13, 2011 12:12 PM EDT
in Kansas City Royals News
Email
PrintRoyal pitching prospect Danny Duffy is nearing the end of his 2011 Rookie campaign, and I'm wandering if much was really accomplished by it. Sure, there are all the soft factors, of which we can pick our explanatory cliche ("he got his feet wet" "he took his lumps" "he learned the ropes" etc) but those are really really hard to evaluate. I think they'd be hard to evaluate even if I was Danny Duffy myself, simply because so much of how we make sense of emotional and mental experiences is frankly irrational and tied to after the fact circumstances anyway. Oh, having [BLANK] happen when it did helped me deal with [BLANK] the next month because I was prepared. Yea... whatever.
Beyond the mental mumbo jumbo, we'd really need to look into the specifics such as mechanics, release point, learning how to read scouting reports, and work on individual pitches. There might be something there, but we definitely didn't see the results at the macro level in 2011.
Duffy has a 71 ERA+ and a FIP- of 117 (which means 17% below average). He's simply not been very effective in 2011. The strikeout rate (7.43 per 9) has been ok, but he's walked too many (4.36 BB/9) and been hurt badly by the home run (1.28 HR/9). As has been discussed quite a bit, he labors through innings, missing a below average number of at bats and mixing in too many balls.
While there have been various attempts to celebrate a Duffy turning point this season, there doesn't truly appear to have been one. In his last seven starts (37 IP) he's posted a 6.69 ERA, thanks mostly to allowing a zillion hits. I don't think he's a 6.00 ERA pitcher (hardly anyone is, or is allowed to be) but nevertheless, there's just no sense that we're building to some happy 2011 ending. You are welcome to stroll through the game log on your own if you'd like.
The good news is that Duffy is just 22, so he has plenty of room to improve.If you liked Duffy in April, feel free to like him in October. He's got that label that we all find so magical, he's young and he'll be young, well, until he isn't. Despite the increased interest in prospects from mainstream fans, there has been less recognition of the central fact that pitchers and hitters develop differently. A pitcher struggling at 22 is much more worrisome than a hitter doing so (hey everyone in Baltimore's system, glad to see ya!).
As we head to 2012 however, all I really see this season as is filled innings, killed time, and another reminder that pitching prospects are extremely unpredictable.
61 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
But didn't he have a hot wife?
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
It burned a year of team control
On a losing season.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 12:22 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
It's hard for me to get too worked up about this
I don’t see how we’re ever supposed to have winning seasons if we don’t call up the prospects and see what we have. If we wait for winning seasons start burning years of team control, we’ll be waiting forever.
I’m not saying every call up was too early and maybe even Duffy’s call up was ok. But it seems like you are saying that no time is too soon. I say start calling up a bunch of top prospects when a) the team is getting closer to decent, and/or when the prospect is so clearly ready and been in AAA for so long that not promoting him could seeiously hurt his development. Instead, Moore very aggresively promoted prospects to an awful team after little time in AA or AAA.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 1:38 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Obviously, we shouldn't rush prospects to a losing team
The post that I was responding to said nothing about rushing prospects, and I think the philosophy of not using up prospects’ years of control on losing seasons is misguided. I’m not sure how this becomes “no time is too soon.” Alchemy?
Duffy was pitching very well at AAA. This is not a Sal Perez situation or even a Moustakas situation. Obviously, he wasn’t to the point that “not promoting him could seriously hurt his development.” That’s an incredibly high bar; for a pitcher, it might be an impossible bar. By that standard, he should not have been called up. Indeed, none of our rookies should have been called up by that standard.
Your other standard is “the team is getting closer to decent.” And this gets back to my original point. The team can’t get closer to decent without calling up the prospects. You’re setting up a catch 22. We can’t know how close to decent we are until we see what we have in Moose, Hosmer, Duffy, and the rest. The veterans on this team performed about as well as they could possibly have been expected to perform. Francoeur, Melky, and Gordon had near-career-best seasons. Francis and Chen pitched as well as could be expected. Hoch may have made a step up to the next level. Butler was solid as ever. (Soria was the one disappointment). All that’s missing is the young guys. We need to know what we have in them in order to know how close to decent we are.
by KSinDC on Sep 13, 2011 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
I’m not sure how this becomes "no time is too soon." Alchemy?
I didn’t mean with regard to when the prospect was MLB-ready. I meant with regard to whether it was a good time for the team. I contend that the team’s situation is a relevant concern to when a prospect is called up to the majors. It appears that you are arguing that all that matters is 1) if the prospect is MLB-ready, and 2) if the prospect is blocked. As long as he’s ready and there is an opening for him where he can get sufficient playing time, then call him up. I think you also have to consider the team’s situation.
If a team is early in a rebuilding process, then you can call up top prospects, pretty much whenever they are ready. I can quibble a little with the exact timing of the promotions of Gordon (because no AAA time) and Butler (little AAA time and still just 21), but I don’t think they were promoted much earlier than they should have been. I don’t contend that top prospects should be kept in the minors for as many years as it takes for the team to get close to decent. Similarly, if the team is contending or close to contending, their potential value to the MLB team outweighs service time issues. But, IMO, the Royals are in a fairly small middle group that is considerably later in a rebuilding process, but not yet very close to contention. For them, I think it makes waiting another year a good idea for most top prospects.
But I hope I haven’t led you to think my position on promoting top prospects is more absolutist than it really is. I don’t think that the Royals should have kept every top prospect in the minors this year. I was on record before the season started that I’d be fine with the Royals promoting Moustakas and one (or maybe more than one) top SP prospect if and when they proved they were MLB-ready this year (erring on the conservative side, rather than the aggressive side). That way they can see if the team has some key pieces in place that make the team close to decent and then they can promote many more in 2012. And at the same time, they haven’t wasted a year of service time on a lost season for many top prospects.
Moore promoted this raft of prospects and here we are, still not on the verge of contention. The Royals still aren’t close and very likely won’t be contending next year. I don’t see how the Royals have benefited from Moore’s very aggressive promotions to the majors this year.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I understand better now where you're coming from
We agree more than we disagree.
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Here's to you, Mckinney
You’re slowly convincing me. I’m torn though. This season was infinitely more fun to follow because of all the young talent, Duffy included. And maybe subsequent waves of youthful talent (Cuthbert, Lamb, Billo (?), Starling) will be handled differently but generally I’d prefer to err on the side of waiting longer than promoting quickly. Mostly because as Will’s saying, we can’t quantify what players gain by playing in the majors before the team sees any marginal gain, we can quantify what the team loses in the out years of team control. If nothing else the extra season of control makes the player a more valuable trade commodity. I’d have liked to seen Moose, Perez and Gio stay in the minors. Hosmer I don’t have a problem with. Duffy I can’t get worked up about. In the end, Scott’s probably right that my short term interest as a fan is contra to my long term interest. I do think that reasonable minds can disagree but small market clubs are generally better off waiting.
by billexgordler on Sep 13, 2011 3:44 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I do think that reasonable minds can disagree
I certainly agree with this, and often these are difficult calls. I haven’t explicitly recognized this enough in my comments on this issue.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
There's sort of an irony in the whole situation (which is why Super Two maybe be gone with the new CBA)
the more “ready” and helpful a prospect is at the beginning of the MLB season, the more incentive the team has to keep him down until after they think Super Two Day has passed. Hosmer was far and away the consensus “most ready” Royals prospect even before the season, and that’s been borne out in the majors among the call ups. But that also means that (hypothetically) if Super Two or something like it stays, it costs the Royals far more money down the road, thus making it a much harder decision than to call up, say, Duffy.
Not sure what the Royals should have done, but Hosmer by himself has made the season much more fun. In a weird, way, he’s made the other rookies more fun, maybe because he adds to the “aura of hope.” Just speculating on my own psychological state. Nothing against Greg Holland (quietly an awesome year, by far the best Royals bullpen performance this season, despite not dating Ke$ha), I think if it wasn’t for Hosmer, I’d be pretty down on the Royals rookies, actually.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 13, 2011 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Greg Holland is so awesome
he is dating Madonna (1986 model)
by killed time, do you mean Duffy, or us?
"Shot by my own men."
He didn't get injured...
Vladimir: Well? Shall we go?
Estragon: Yes, let’s go.
[they do not move]
by Loose Seal on Sep 13, 2011 12:30 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
I read somewhere they just found a lost Beckett play...
…it was just 70 blank sheets of paper. Beckett scholars are suggesting that it may have actually been a short story or commentary, however.
The greatest moment of my childhood was when [insert name] did [insert insane thing].
by 2motley4thetitle on Sep 13, 2011 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions
The k/9 is encouraging
But he did about what I expect Monty would have done in the bigs had they brought him up. When you factor in Duffy’s “comeback” to baseball, the callup wasn’t necessary at the time or in hindsight. If it was motivated by a fleeting notion that the Royals were contenders in early May, it may end up being a big miscalculation on Dayton’s part.
I have hope that he will get better but mostly I’m just hoping he stays healthy.
by thelaundry on Sep 13, 2011 12:40 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
I think if monty pitched in the majors this year, he would have walked at least 6 batters per 9 ip.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 12:59 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Monty would have walked more
But the result would be similar – two young power LHs who have a decent K rate but walk too many and get hit hard. Monty was pitching pretty well in the spring but the Royals decided he wasn’t ready, to their credit. Duffy pitched pretty well for a month in AAA (in his first full season since returning to pro ball) and decided he was ready. Why were they prudent with Monty and just the opposite with Duffy?
by thelaundry on Sep 13, 2011 1:52 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I don't know what the Royals' thought process was
One possible factor: Although Duffy had his “pause” last season, he was way better in his limited AA innings in 2010 than Montgomery in addition to being superior at AAA this season.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 13, 2011 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
He has much better stuff than gobble. I expect better results.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 1:00 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Gobble back in the day had pretty good stuff
Chris George perhaps is a better comp though
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Gobble was a top 50 prospect in baseball
If my memory is right (which it probably isn’t).
Edgar knows best.
Yeah, he was seen as a pretty good prospect after a good season in high-A (2001)
And then he was less than impressive and dealt with injury in 2002 and dropped out of the top 100. I don’t think he was ever seen as a high-ceiling prospect. I think at best he was projected as a mid-rotation guy. The same was true of Duffy until his velocity jumped in 2010 (while maintaining his control). That’s what made prospect analysts look differently at him.
The Chris George comparison is a decent one, except that George’s reputation and prospect rankings were always based almost solely on tools. He really wasn’t very impressive in the minors in terms of actual performance. His K/9 were usually in the 6-7 range and his BB/9 were usually in the 3-4 range. Meh.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Perhaps a different way to look at it
I’m not sure what Duffy accomplished himself, and his his walks are more discouraging than his strikeouts are encouraging. But one might be able to make an argument that from a team perspective, they got a look at him against major league hitters, have an idea of what he might do, what he needs to work on, what his future role might be (“can we see him being in the middle of the rotation?”).
While I care about service time issues generallyl, I don’t worry about it as much with pitchers, at least not most of them. Duffy’s got some potential, but he isn’t one of those few pitchers whose service time I"d be worried about burning.
Just throwing it out there.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 13, 2011 12:59 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Is he not a player whose service time u worry about because u dont think he’s very good?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 1:03 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
whoa, Mobile Scott!
I couldn’t figure out if someone had hacked your account from the "u"s.
I have no idea how good Duffy will be. I’m feelig pretty positive today, and I think he could be a middle of the rotation guy, maybe more.
It’s just that with pitchers, you’re probably going to get their best years pretty early. So unless this is a guy like David Price or another Lincecum or whatever, I’m not that worried. I don’t mean that as a put-down on Duffy to say he’s not a Price/Lincecum/(Matt Moore?) type prospect. It’s just a different kind of situation.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Sep 13, 2011 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed on pitcher devt years. Thats why I didnt make much of a stink about his call up.
I hate “typing” on this thing.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 1:40 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
With only a few exceptions, I'd bet...
…that most first-year pitchers seasons can be viewed as a waste. I’m with Matt in that both the team and Duffy himself got to see the league in a “Duffy context.” Now all parties can work from a common experience in terms of advice, improvement, strengths, weaknesses, etc. In sum, you’re going to lose a year of service time in the first year with 95 percent of new ML pitchers. – TL
"Sir,--It has been wittily remarked that there are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third and most aggravated is statistics." *The National Observer* (June 13, 1891): p. 93-94.
Some interesting things about Duffy's 2011
HR/FB%, by month
14.3 %
14.7 %
13.8 %
7.9 %
6.3 %
IFFB% by month
7.1 %
5.9 %
24.1 %
15.8 %
18.8 %
Despite the SSS, you could hypothesize some progress or “settling in” from those numbers, but the biggest worry – BB% – didn’t really improve throughout the season:
14.9 %
11.0 %
8.3 %
10.1 %
12.2 %
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Sep 13, 2011 1:21 PM EDT reply actions
I am confused
For years, disgruntled fans have been calling for DM to give the young players a chance. Yet this year DM has clearly done that and people are still being somewhat critical of Duffy getting so much time in KC. I don’t understand the reasoning. What should have been done differently? If DM had demoted Duffy and replaced him with a mediocre veteran this place would’ve exploded and people here would’ve come up with fifty things that would be accomplished by Duffy gaining MLb experience.
Killing time until time kills me
by EspeciallyK on Sep 13, 2011 1:46 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Duffy, Hosmer, Moose, and Perez weren’t 25 year olds with nothing left to prove in the minors. They are each VERY young and called up as soon as they looked good for a month or two in AAA (or less).
I guess what I’m saying is that there is something in between ignoring prospects and rushing them.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 2:05 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
We would like DM to do the Geroge Costanza trick from Seinfeld
and do the opposite of what he thinks he should do.
Or maybe he is already doing that and is trolling us all.
If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there is a man on base. — Dave Barry
by ChangingSpeeds on Sep 13, 2011 9:33 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm too lazy to look one up, but does anyone have a pitching chart for Duffy?
I watched a lot of games this summer. And the behind the plate umpires have been pretty awful as a whole. But it would appear that the young players are getting a much worse strikezone than the established players. Duffy has a peanut sized strikezone and Hosmer has a zone the size of the grand canyon. I’m sure its been this way for years, but when will they consider using the Pitch f/x? I hate to take away the human element, but it has been really bad this year.
by royal_in_cincinnati on Sep 13, 2011 1:50 PM EDT reply actions
Experience
"Stay Classy Kansas City"
by Mas Cervezas on Sep 13, 2011 2:00 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
He needs to throw strikes for he will end up like Kyle Davies
All potential, no results.
- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …
Maybe somebody with access to pitch charts could prove/disprove this,
but it seemed to me as if his curve (obviously his out pitch) was peaking in accuracy around late June or July. He was missing badly with it in his first few starts, but seemed to have more success with it later – which he didn’t seem to sustain.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room!
by KeepItCopacetic on Sep 13, 2011 2:47 PM EDT reply actions
Sure, Duffy didn't have a good season...
…But the comparisons with Greinke are fascinating.
Duffy Age 22: ERA: 5.64 FIP: 4.82 xFIP: 4.52 K/9: 7.43
Greinke, Age 21: ERA: 5.80 FIP: 4.49 xFIP: 4.66 K/9: 5.61
We all know how Greinke turned out.
those numbers arent even really that close and they were completely different types of pitchers
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Sep 13, 2011 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions
not to mention that greinke had had major league success previously
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Sep 13, 2011 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions
If it means Duffy wins the Cy Young in 2015
And gets a gushing SI cover story by Posnanski, then I’m on board.
by thelaundry on Sep 13, 2011 3:32 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I'm not sure why you said that...
Those numbers seem pretty darn close to me. So you mean that a .16 difference in ERA and a .13 difference in xFIP is far apart?
While Duffy has a bigger FIP, his K/9 is also significantly higher than Greinke’s season. Also, Greinke posted a 4.70 FIP his first year which I wouldn’t really call “success”.
Greinke was pitching in more of a hitters era.
AL ERA 2005: 4.35
AL ERA 2011: 4.05
By FIP, Greinke was nearly league average. Duffy is almost a half run over league average.
Plus if you cite K rate, you should cite BB rate too
Greinke
age 20: 1.6 BB/9, 3.85 K/BB
age 21: 2.6 BB/9, 2.15 K/BB
Duffy
age 21: 4.4 BB/9, 1.71 K/BB
by Gopherballs on Sep 13, 2011 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
In addition
Greinke made comments later on that he was bored, wasn’t trying very hard, and hoped if he pitched bad enough that the Royals would cut him.
I doubt that’s the case with Duffy.
Unless I'm wrong...
Correct me if I'm wrong
But I always thought that K’s were more important than strikeouts—control can be corrected, but not everyone can miss bats (exhibit a: 2011 Jeff Francis)
thats probably true when projecting a pitchers ceiling or future worth...
you cant just assume duffy’s control will actually improve though. id definitely rather have a young pitcher who’s very good at K’ing people and below average at walking people than vice versa.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Sep 14, 2011 12:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Certainly I'm not claiming that Duffy will be even remotely close to as good as Greinke
However, I think that there is a definite possibility of improvement—possibly significant. The fact that his K rate is pretty good is encouraging.
yeah...he definitely can and probably will improve...
i just didnt see the comparison there at all…their stats, styles of pitching and experience levels were all pretty different
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Sep 14, 2011 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions
No, the value of the strikeout is virtually the same as the value of a walk
Greinke is a poor comp for Duffy because of the huge difference in BB rate and, most importantly, K/BB ratio. It is extremely difficult for a pitcher to be good unless he strikes out at least twice as many batters as he walks, regardless of whether he strikes out a bunch or only a few. While no great shakes, Jeff Francis has pitched significantly better than Duffy this year even though Francis has a lower strikeout rate. Rather, he makes up for it by never walking anyone, giving him a respectable ratio of 2.4 Ks for every 1 BB.
What made Greinke great was that he kept the low walk rate that he showed in his first two seasons but then significantly increased his K rate.
by Gopherballs on Sep 14, 2011 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Why are BBs more heavily weighted than Ks in the FIP ratio?
Does that not reflect their actual values?
While there have been various attempts to celebrate a Duffy turning point this season, there doesn’t truly appear to have been one.
This is a good example why trying to draw conclusions from a small sample sets is usually a waste of time. If a larger sample size is available, it should be used.
+1
And given the variance in stats that all players have, it is easy to find “turning points” if you are looking for them. Short-term trends are exceptionally unreliable and/or not particularly meaningful.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Sep 13, 2011 5:20 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
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
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- 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
