Notice: Trying to get property 'display_name' of non-object in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/wordpress-seo/src/generators/schema/article.php on line 52
keyboard_arrow_uptop

Baseball Prospectus's mechanical mavens Doug Thorburn and Ryan Parker turn to the AL Central as they continue their examination of select Top 10 prospects featured in the BP Top 10s (also see their breakdown of AL East, NL East, NL Central, and NL West).

Francellis Montas, RHP, Chicago White Sox
Rankings Summary (White Sox Top 10):
Current Organizational Rank: 5th
Overall Future Potential: 6; late-innings reliever (upper-tier closer)
Realistic Role: 5; late-innings reliever (setup)

Francellis Montas had a late start to the season as he recovered from a knee injury, and he busted the meniscus on the other knee later in the season to take a chunk out of his summer. The knee issues combine with weight fluctuations to fan the flames of speculation that his future is in the bullpen rather than the starting rotation, a move that would allow the team to limit his exposure. Montas has been used almost exclusively as a starter in his minor-league career, but his triple-digit velocity and hard slider should be effective weapons at the back-end of ball games, with whispers that his interesting delivery could expedite a banishment to the bullpen.

Report Card

Balance

40

Momentum

45

Torque

70

Posture

35

Repetition

45

Overall

C

The report card of Montas certainly reflects the type of delivery that profiles better in the bullpen, with big power and a lack of stability. His balance suffers with a lean toward first base throughout the motion, beginning the drift as he reaches maximum leg lift and progressively exaggerating the tilt through the rest of his delivery. The veer reaches its extreme at release point, with excessive spine-tilt that artificially raises his arm slot and earns him a posture grade in the 30 to 35 range on most of his pitches, occasionally spiking a 40.

The stability was especially rough in his first several starts, though he made some modest improvements before the second knee injury took him off the mound. The report card reflects this pre-injury time period but his late-season start for Double-A Birmingham had a much different look to it, in which he eased off the gas pedal a bit and showcased a more stable delivery. Perhaps he was just easing back from injury, because the delivery that was on display in the Arizona Fall League had re-injected a dose of over-the-top when compared to his Double-A debut.

The key to his approach is power, and Montas generates elite torque to support his top-end velocity. He gets some extra twist with the upper half, but his hip-shoulder separation is largely driven by heavy hip rotation paired with a delayed trigger. However, the right-hander fails to utilize power in the form of momentum, with a below-average pace to the plate that drops him under the mean for three of the four baseline grades on the report card. The slow speed during his stride phase might have been related to the injuries that Montas had endured, but the “stay back” approach of shifting his weight is advocated by White Sox pitching coach Don Cooper and could be a lasting feature of his delivery.

Montas posted a strong walk rate of 7.0 percent last season, but his mechanical repetition is not as honed as that rate would suggest. His slow delivery and timing-sensitive torque open the window for an inconsistent release point, and his mechanics were volatile from game to game in 2014. The individual subjects give the impression of a D-grade delivery, but Montas has B-level upside combined with the physical ailments that could have dented his motion last season, and the C-grade on his report card reflects some of the built-in upside as well as the volatility that lines his profile.

Miguel Almonte, RHP, Kansas City Royals

The Royals have a cadre of young arms in the minor-league pipeline, allowing the organization to be patient with the development of players like Miguel Almonte, who is steadily climbing the minor-league ladder one rung at a time. He will be tested this season in Double-A, but he has the peripheral stats and the mechanical baselines to encourage optimism that he can have a smooth transition to the next level.

Report Card

Balance

50

Momentum

65

Torque

55

Posture

50

Repetition

55

Overall

B-

The outstanding feature of Almonte's delivery is an aggressive drop-n-drive after max leg lift that impacts his grades for both balance and momentum. The drop is an obvious knock to his vertical balance but the stability is otherwise pretty sound, maintaining a head position that stays centered for much of the delivery and netting an average grade. He invokes some spine-tilt between foot strike and release point, finishing with average posture that will spike a 55. Almonte falls off to the glove side during his follow-through (sometimes violently), giving the impression of great instability, but his functional balance is relatively solid.

The “drive” influence on Almonte's delivery is apparent. His first gear of momentum is not especially impressive, but he revs the throttle after max lift and invokes a massive gear change, charging toward the plate to add power to his stride. His speed down the slope was inconsistent from game to game last season, drifting from a 55 grade to a 65, but the slower motion frequently led to over-rotation. He lined up the gears most consistently when he brought full speed, resulting in the 65 grade for momentum on the report card as a reflection of his most functional pace to the plate.

Despite the between-start inconsistency, the right-hander often repeated his delivery quite well within the confines of a single game. Almonte has a lot of upside remaining before he hits mechanical ceiling, and his ability to iron out the timing elements will likely guide his path to the majors. One potential obstacle in 2015 will be the implementation of a pitch clock in the minor leagues, as Almonte takes a lot of extra time between pitches whether in the windup or the stretch, and he will have to adjust his rhythm in order to be in line with the new rules.

Byron Buxton, OF, Minnesota Twins
Rankings Summary (Twins Top 10):
Current Organizational Rank: 1st
Overall Future Potential: 8; elite major leaguer
Realistic Role: High 6; first-division/occasional all star

Byron Buxton is going to impact the game both at the plate and while patrolling center field. When Buxton was drafted, he was considered a toolsy prospect whose game (and swing) needed to be cleaned up. In just a few short years, his swing has evolved into the baseball crushing machine that has scouts drooling. Even Raimel Tapia would be envious of Buxton’s hit tool.

What allows that hit tool to shine is his smooth and easy swing. Buxton’s swing hits all the mechanical checkpoints, but if there is something that isn’t ideal in his swing, it’s two small moves in his lower body. After his front foot lands, there is a very small bit of forward drift in his swing. This could just be a benign idiosyncrasy in his swing, and the available footage seems to agree. As his foot lands, his upper body moves forward just a bit before launching, but he keeps his hands and arms in a strong position.

The other issue is Buxton’s back knee moves forward a bit too soon in the swing. Elite hitters will steepen the angle of their back leg without the knee coming forward. This never really happens with Buxton. His knee moves early, but the big muscles in his leg are not driving it forward. Watch how his knee comes forward and down early, but then sort of slides up as he gets into contact:


https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/CarelessPieringGhostshrimp

It’s not a terrible pattern, but everything else is so textbook in Buxton’s swing even the tiniest flaws get noticed. Overall his swing is awesome and his ability to stay balanced is worth drooling over. The Twins prospect can adjust to changes in elevation with the best with even the way he takes pitches being noteworthy.

The star aspect in his swing is his bat-speed, it’s flat-out special. The speed in and of itself is eye-popping, but what really stands out is how it’s created. Buxton doesn’t have a bat waggle like Clint Frazier and Javier Baez or crazy torque like Bryce Harper and Joey Gallo. Buxton creates bat-speed because everything in his swing is timed so precisely and the transition between movements is flawless.

Look how slow and controlled he starts and then, BOOM! Bat-speed! The truly amazing things is that it was easy for him to create this bat-speed. Think of Yordanno Ventura and how he creates velocity with ease. That’s the same type of athletic gift that Buxton possesses. Twins fans are in for a treat when Buxton gets to the show.

Clint Frazier, OF, Cleveland Indians
Rankings Summary (Indians Top 10):
Current Organizational Rank: 3rd
Overall Future Potential: High 6; first-division player/occasional all star
Realistic Role: High 5; solid-average regular

Clint Frazier has very quick hands. Also, the sky is blue. Obvious statements aside, Frazier’s swing has always been an interesting study. After shooting up draft boards in 2013 and showing solid numbers in his professional debut, his 2014 stat line almost felt like a letdown. Minor-league stats can be deceiving, as 2014 was probably the best year for Frazier in terms of his development as a hitter.

Here’s some footage of Frazier in high school and in the AZL. The thing that jumps out mechanically is that “flick” of the bat right before he launches it through the zone. It’s small enough not to get in the way of the rest of his sequence, and it primes his hands to do some serious damage. Beyond the move itself, it should be noted when he cocks the bat:


https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/KindheartedIberianemeraldLizard

He strides out onto a very pointed front foot with is front heel noticeably elevated off the ground. When he starts to bring his heel to the ground is when he cocks his bat. It doesn’t matter if he keeps his foot on the ground or takes a small secondary tap, his timing pattern is set to his upper half when his toe gets pointed and he cocks his wrists when his heel drops.

He lost that timing in 2014, going with a leg kick and in the process, losing both cues (the pointed toe and heel drop) that were critical to his swing. He adjusted back to his old timing pattern halfway through the season and his numbers improved. With a whole season to work within his established pattern, his 2015 should look much better. A hitter Frazier could pattern himself after would be Anthony Rendon. Rendon has a similar front toe/heel movement, all while keeping his movements fluid.

The front side of his lower half isn’t exactly textbook, but that could be as much about him searching for a stride as anything else. At times he can lock out that front leg a bit too early, but it’s not a swing-ruining move and can be fixed with time.

Once he finds his timing Frazier will rake. His overall swing is solid. His quick hands are the dominant feature, but it’s not as if his swing is reliant on them. He’s not just slapping at the ball with his hands. The lower half works very well, although it can be hard to tell with his stride and abrupt cessation to his swing (it’s nothing to worry about, just not a typical elongated follow through). His backside works especially well as his hips carry forward while his back knee stays strong. He saves that energy for when he needs it at the point of contact.

Steven Moya, OF, Detroit Tigers

Steven Moya is a long drink of water, standing every inch of his listed 6-foot-6. While the power in his swing is certainly attractive, there have been concerns that his large frame could lead to a long swing. Here’s the swing in action:

While Frazier and Buxton had very sound mechanical profiles, Moya’s is all over the map. I like Moya’s balance and fluidity, which is even more impressive when his long-limbed frame is considered. Moya gets some solid bat speed and, unsurprisingly, he gets good extension after contact. If Moya’s swing is a house, the foundation is solid, but the building itself could use some remodeling.

Starting from the ground up, I like the initial move in his stride. He gets his hips moving forward with a bit of coil to start, but the last bit of his stride leaves something to be desired. Watch the last quarter of his stride. His front foot just kind of reaches and this impacts the rest of his lower body. As he reaches, his hip changes elevation just a bit, meaning he either has to burn time readjusting his hips later in the swing or will have to launch from a bad slot. Compare his stride to a young Miguel Cabrera:

Sticking with the Cabrera comparison, look how the upper body on each player moves totally different. Moya drops his back elbow and then begins to turn his upper body while Cabrera turns his front shoulder and drops his back elbow at pretty much the same time. This may seem trivial, but Cabrera is using his big muscles in his upper body to get his hands where he wants. In contrast, Moya doesn’t tap into these same muscles and his hands take on more of a burden.

At contact the differences are stark. Moya extends to the ball and Cabrera is extending through the ball. Moya’s path to the ball is longer and his timing has to be precise.

Tigers fans may need to exercise some patience with Moya. His swing has the foundation, but needs work. If it clicks, Moya has to potential to do some serious damage. Cabrera is a great model for Moya (and any other young hitter, for that matter) and he will have the chance to pick his brain as a teammate. Here’s hoping Moya tightens up his swing, because with his natural tools and solid foundation, the Tigers could have yet another quality bat.

Thank you for reading

This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.

Subscribe now
You need to be logged in to comment. Login or Subscribe
BCermak
1/20
Thanks for this, guys. I always find these breakdowns incredibly fascinating!
danrnelson
1/20
Never thought I'd see a Yordano/Buxton comp. of any kind. I'm currently stuck at my computer in a puddle of drool.
jwbbslo
1/20
That sit to pitch/drop & drive style seems be a teaching focus for the Royals.Collins,Hochevar,Holland,& Crow all approach 100 degrees of flexion in their rear leg.Seems like many of the top relievers(Uhehara,Rosenthal,Chapman,Holland & Janssen)+ many guys who get a high % of swings & misses all vertically load to pitch.Maybe more deception because there is less downhill plane than hitters are used to seeing?
JW
tombores99
1/20
You raise some interesting points, JW, It could be a teaching point in KC, but I don't know for sure. Drop-n-drive is pretty common.

I was curious about how you are measuring flexion in the back leg, as none of the Royals that you mentioned break 90 degrees in my book. I also have to ask if the high% of swing-n-miss that you have noticed among the guys that vertically load happen to be with relievers - where sacrificing stability in the name of power is relatively common.

I'm also not sure about the idea of less downhill plane = deception, esp when Holland is one of the examples. The guy has a blatant over-the-top release point, achieving a league average RP height despite the blatant drop-n-drive and his only standing 5'10".

I should also note that in some cases, at least, this may not be intentional. Some pitchers just struggle to maintain balance in the vertical plane when throwing at full intensity. More alarming to me is the heavy back-side drift that starts very early for pitchers like Holland and Collins.
oldbopper
1/21
Since the player with the highest percentage of votes ever for Hall of Fame induction is also the ultimate drop and drive pitcher that I have ever seen, I find this seeming desire to downgrade and dismiss this technique as, even a little bit, inferior somewhat mystifying. I think JW has a valid point of discussion when he mentions that the angle of the downward plane of the pitch is less with drop and drivers and that may be a type of deception. This could be an explanation why, for the past two years, I have been watching Koji Uehara make everybody look foolish and it wasn't with just his splitter, the famous invisiball. The number of swings and misses that he got with his awesome heater, all of a very consistent 89, was equally amazing to watch. I find nitpicking success to be a losing formula. Greg Holland's stuff should, and does, alarm the hitters a lot more than his technique should alarm evaluators. "If it ain't broke don't fix it" should be the mantra in every case where performance exceeds what appears to be flawed technique.
tombores99
1/21
I have to disagree with your first premise here - Tom Seaver was not the ultimate drop-n-drive pitcher. He certainly had some drop, but it wasn't excessive (tho it varied over the course of his career) nor was it a pure post-max-lift drop - he actually started the drop before max lift, getting flex in his posting leg as part of his early generation of momentum.

I would not say that I dismiss the technique, not at all, but by definition it requires an adjustment that interferes with balance. I prefer that a pitcher maintains balance throughout - as Maddux did, and Randy, and Pedro, in addition to all-time greats like Walter Johnson.

Funny thing is that I am not a major proponent of downhill plane - I think that it's fine in a vacuum, but many pitchers sacrifice posture in order to achieve the taller release point, and I disagree with this strategy. I also don't see a connection between flatter pitches and increased deception, but am certainly willing to listen if there is evidence to the contrary. However, most of what is offered here is purely conjecture - for example, Uehara's vertical release point on his fastball has a Z-score of just -0.15, within a hair of league average, so he and Holland are poor examples if the desire is to link deception with lack of downhill plane.

"Nitpicking success" is in the eye of the beholder. Pitchers have many ways of finding success, but strong balance has been a tie that bound nearly all of the great pitchers of our generation. It's also a fundamental component of athleticism. Pitchers can have success without it - especially in the bullpen, where the downsides of inconsistency are minimized; you could also drive a car with your feet if you wanted to, but that doesn't mean that it's an efficient strategy.
tombores99
1/21
I should add some detail, re: Seaver - he had a lot more drop-n-drive later in his career with the Reds and White Sox, but it wasn't so egregious in his many years with the Mets (which were also his peak seasons).

I wrote about it here.
jwbbslo
1/21
Doug
The KC guys are in the 100-110 range(Collins110 Hochevar101 Holland105 Crow110 & ++ starting arm Herrera128)Chapman is 96 & vertical loaders Ryan96 & Clemens 100 later in their careers.Kershaw sits to 99 degrees.

Regarding swings & misses it not only correlates to vertical loading but also to pitching up in the zone.According to Ken Kendrena @ Inside Edge, the swing & miss % on balls up is 11% & only 4% on balls down. Look at the following stats on fastballs up vs. fastballs down.UP .216/.331/.344 DOWN .283/.384/409.Highest exit speeds speeds recorded & most hom e runs are recorded on balls down.

We have created a generation of low ball hitters. They don't adapt well to the ball up,plus umpires are calling the rule book strike zone & call more balls up in the zone strikes.The vertical loaders see to throw more fastballs up that have less downhill plane.That also opens the door for shorter,especially shorter right handed, pitchers to be successful.The elevated fastball overlaps & conceals the breaking ball which creates pitch recognition & timing issues.(Another for of deception) As you know Perry Husband has done a lot of research in that area.

Spin rate also comes into play here. The guys with higher spin rates on their fastballs(Uehara) seem to get by with lesser velo. Certainly his secondary stuff plays into the mix.
JW

tombores99
1/21
Great stuff, JW, and thanks for the reply. I appreciate the data from Inside Edge, and it certainly jives with expectation when it comes to fastballs. I suppose my eyebrows raised at the connection to "deception," but that's admittedly a vague term that can be applied multiple ways. And Perry Husband has definitely done some great work in this area, ie the Barry Zito paradigm.

I did want to ask: when measuring leg flexion, are you looking at the angle created at the knee (straight leg = 180 degrees), or the angle/degrees of coverage (ie how far it flexes)? I was referring to the latter, but if you are using the former (as it sounds) then it would result in a perceived difference of (180-X = Y). I apologize for the confusion if that's the case. I was also using my eyes, which are obviously limited. What programs are you using to calculate leg flexion, and are you measuring in 3 planes? I'm very curious!
jwbbslo
1/21
I use Right View Pro,Dartfish & Bats depending on what I'm looking at. I am measuring the maxim the back leg flexion with 180 degrees being straight.
JW
tombores99
1/21
Gotcha, thanks for the clarification. Semantics got in the way, but it sounds like our eyes were in agreement.