Follow the money - straight to the mound

Arms race started in response to PED's and then really accelerated when the testing reached the point where teams could no longer slug their way to the playoffs. 

 

Offered the opening we see for the smaller markets to compete.  Find enough arms and you can win with average offense with a few real talented position players.  The Giants (although not small market) are the poster child for this approach.  TB, KC, PITT and Nats and others have been on this bandwagon for years.

Take a look at the rosters of any college or pro team.  What percentage of pitchers are on the roster compared to the roster as a whole.  It's around 50%.  That goes right along with the numbers you are quoting.

 

So, to me it seems that kids are getting recruited and drafted in accordance with roster needs, plain and simple.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Being a 2 way player above HS, whether college or Milb is incredibly tough, if a player is going to be at the top echelon for both.

In my view, the "game" transitions who pitches rather than the player.  Sometimes the "game" is the MLB club which drafts the player. Locally we have had a couple of 2 way HS players drafted very high.  Word was the MLB team would let them do both.

That lasted less than one week and pitcher only was the result.

In terms of others above HS, I would propose the game itself ends up as the distinguishing factor in more situations than not.  Hitting in college is not like hitting in A ball. Hitting in A ball is not like hitting in AA ball.  Having an elite type arm provides a back up but the inability to adjust each step of the way and be successful as a hitter  is at least as important in the criterion in my view.  I just don't think many players get the choice to make above HS. Either their coaches or their organization, or their inability to adjust as a hitter makes it for most.

Interesting perspective, infielddad. I'm no data guru, so I can't prove this, but doesn't it seem like today, more young players who can pitch and hit are being pushed or pulled toward pitching than ever before? There's a 2015 stud on JP's summer team from NY - three-hole outstanding hitter, average and power ... excellent 3B - and he brings it 92-95 from the mound.

 

I'm almost certain he'll be drafted to pitch -- and isn't 'the game' potentially losing out on a really good hitter who COULD have more long-term impact with the stick, playing every day? 

 

bballman - you're right of course. But still, those 50% who are pitchers were generally more highly recruited and got higher bonuses. Why? 

 

I looked at 1970-1979 1st round MLB draft. Out of 245 players drafted, 89 were pitchers: 36%. I should know, but did teams carry fewer arms then? 

You do what you have to do to get to the next game, the next season, the next level.

 

Most 2-way players I've known resist the nudge to the mound in HS, college and beyond.  I don't think money has anything to do with it.  They just wanna 'make it' at the next level.

 

Period.

jp, the way I would approach this would be to suggest that no matter how good that HS hitter is, he has a hole or holes.  When he gets to Milb or college, those holes will be found.  He will be forced to adjust or fail.  In Milb, the holes get found earlier and exploited far more frequently and consistently each step of the way, with probably the biggest adjustments occurring  at AA.

While I expect there are variables, it is much easier to project 92-95 out of HS than it is to project the holes in the swing and the ability to adjust at every level through college and Milb.

I'm not for sure that it is follow the money/mound. In our case, it was suggested to 2015 son that he become a PO this past Summer. He was leading his team in hitting at the time. The main issue was injuries as it was related to me. Did not want him getting hit by a pitch, didn't want him twisting an ankle, didn't want someone sliding back into to him at 1B, etc. etc. These suggestions were from people that we trust. It was hard at first but son got to where it kind of liked being a PO.

 

Now he may hit some for his HS team....just don't know yet.

I think the problem with the logic is, probably EVERY pitcher that makes it to the MLB was a 2 way guy in HS.  That generally changes once you get to college.  So, if you look at the numbers from a HS perspective, every pitcher probably could have been looked at as a 2 way guy.  My guess is every position player that is drafted was a pitcher in HS as well.  Those guys who are projected as having the arm to pitch at the next level are drafted as pitchers.  Those who are projected as better hitters are drafted as position players.  Since the rosters call for 50% pitchers, the borderline guys will probably go as pitchers, then things will work themselves out as time goes on.

 

The other factor, I think, is that the pitcher position is also much more fluid at the ML level.  That is, the turnover is higher at the pitcher position.  Between injuries and performance issues, pitching rosters turn over at a higher rate than the rest of the roster.  Therefore, more demand for pitchers.

My 2015 experience mirrored the one described above by RedFish. The school he committed to told him they would give him the opportunity to try to be a two way guy, but I think son has come to the realization that the mound is his future. The same reasons of injuries was given to us. Tough at first but made sense.

luv, I am guessing you already know this about the Giants but there is more to it than average offense and arms.  Because of their approach, and their park, defense is critical.  Playing right field in AT&T has shown how good Hunter Pence really is.  Who would have thought Pablo would be talked about for a Gold Glove but he was terrific in 2014 at 3B while playing nearly every game.  He has very good range and made every play.

Another aspect is the Giants talk about "stretching" their line up. In other words, they want 8 tough outs (9 with Bum), again a factor of the park where HR's are in short supply.  Using this approach, plus 12 really good arms, they shorten the game to 6 innings and look to  be up by one or tied. They have a goal to drive up pitch counts for the opponent, and rely on their bullpen against the opponents pen, a match up they often win. 

On the other hand, in 2014 when the Giants could go Pagan, Posey, Pence, Pablo and Belt 1-5, as they did until Pagan was hurt in mid June, they were with the very best in baseball, without the need for power,  

I believe that when taking a look at a younger player what he can do on the mound at 18 is much easier to project from than what he can do at the plate. It's hard to excell at the upper levels while concentrating on both, so if a kid can throw 90+, I think it's more likely, unless he is a real rare talent with the bat, that he will be led away from the plate to concentrate on pitching. Travis Wood is a good example. growing up, he could throw, but I thought (at least through about age 16) that his best bet to make the upper levels was with his bat. The kid could absolutley rake. Note that he is the answer to a recent MLBtv trivia question (what pitcher has the most home runs over the past 5 years?). However, he was a lefty that could throw 93mph. What advise would any sane advisor give him?

I will tell you that Buster Posey was that "special" kid. He could throw 93 in high school with 4 quality pitches. But, he could flat rake. Everyone told me I was crazy when I said he wouldn't pitch at the next level. I just NEVER personally witnessed anyone that could hit like him. It was fun to watch and you could tell he was always the best player by a long way on the field.

I'm learning here -- and am particularly sold on the logic that strong pitching is more long-term projectable that strong hitting.  

 

That said, has it always been this way? And if so, what accounts for the higher percentage of pitchers getting drafted high today? From about a third in the 70's to more than half now.  

A considerably increased number of the position players don't come through the draft compared to the 60's and 70's. Think international players and especially Latin players.

I think it has probably always been that way, but unt fairly recently, I don't think clubs thought they needed all that many pitching prospects. A couple of good starters, a couple of more who can keep you competitive and a few scrubs (available almost anywhere) in the pen and you were good to go. So you really only needed a few of your pitchers to work out to be succesful. Especially after the 1969 expansion, that started to change.

       
       


Do you know the split of rosters from the 60s and 70s?  Pitching has become much more specialized now. You used to be able to get thru a game with 2 guys. Now, you may use 3,4 or 5 much more frequently. Those guys also used to use a 3 or 4 man rotation as opposed to 5 now. I'm not sure, but maybe the make up of the roster was different then. More position players, fewer pitchers on the roster. Something to look into.

Junior was a 2 way through his 1st year in Juco, cut short by injury, came to the conclusion himself that if he was gonna get drafted, it would be from the mound. As a father I missed watching him play every game, selfish, lol , knew deep down he was right.

A quick spot-check shows that in 1970 and 1971, the Cardinals 40-man roster included 22 and 23 pitchers respectively.

 

Last year they carried 17.

 

Truth is, I can't tell whether this supports my point or not. But to be clear, my point isn't the tongue in cheek headline. It's that potentially great hitters are electing to pitch because baseball values pitching more. There's the pressure we've seen from posters here, and there's more money.

 

Which might explain why offensive production is not keeping pace with improved pitching.

I think that reason may be that at anytime they could call up one of their AAA guys not on the 40 yet.  You don't have to be a golden glove guy but if you can hit you have a job and IMO there are not too many really great hitters out there.

Good responses but I think that JBB hit the nail on the head. Most guys will do what they have to get to where they want to go. And as infielddad brought up the park factors really decide who goes where and why and as bballman, pointed out, pitching is now a specialized position, in the pro game and at the ML level they have a role or learning where they fit in the best. some begin those roles in college.  The problem is that very few know how to use those guys in the proper role.  

 

To be honest, if we had it to do over again I still would definitely encourage son to be a pitcher, more opportunities.

 

IMO, there are so few hitters in ML ball who are really special.  Not in the lower levels, but I kind of understand why so many more pitchers make  the big field before hitters.

 

jp,

Most if not all HS pitchers all played other positions (at one time) and hit the ball well, mine the PO actually made utility player of the year in our county..his senior season. He would have loved to have been a postion guy, I think they all want to, but reality is like JBB stated, a guys got to do what hes got to do to stay in the game.