Are the Pirates Making a Mistake with Cole?
In the run-up to tonight’s MLB draft, the Pirates have been linked to a host of various players at different times, but this weekend the chatter all began to point toward Pittsburgh selecting UCLA right-hander Gerrit Cole. This morning, Jonathan Mayo reported that the decision had been made, and Cole would indeed be the first player taken in the draft. The Pirates are choosing Cole over Rice third baseman Anthony Rendon, fellow teammate and RHP Trevor Bauer (who has frequently out-pitched Cole this year, especially of late), Virginia southpaw Danny Hultzen, and high school standout outfielder Bubba Starling.
In terms of stuff, no one can compete with Cole in this draft, and few pitchers in Major League Baseball can match up either. He’s routinely been clocked in the upper-90s, touching 100 at times, and comfortably sits in the 94-98 range. Velocity is not a question for Cole, but what made him so exciting earlier in the spring was that his changeup was drawing rave reviews. He’d always had the power fastball/slider combination, but adding a nasty changeup gave him three plus pitches that he could throw strikes with, and given his size and velocity, he’s essentially a scout’s dream.
But the results just haven’t matched the stuff this year. Among the four pitchers who have started for UCLA this year, Cole has the highest ERA, the most home runs allowed, and the highest opponents batting average. Now, these aren’t exactly the kinds of numbers you see quoted on FanGraphs all that much, but the reality is that we can’t simply look at Cole’s relatively high BABIP and pronounce it a fluke, as there could be pitcher control over batting average on balls in play at the college level. We know that there’s not much difference in the Major Leagues, but that could easily be due to selection bias – pitchers who don’t have a Major League level of limiting hits on balls in play don’t make it to the show to begin with (or don’t last long if they do). It’s possible that BABIP could have some predictive usefulness at the college level – there hasn’t been any conclusive research published on that yet.
Of course, it could also just be some bad luck. A guy with Cole’s stuff shouldn’t be hittable, and we are taking about a sample of just over 100 innings, after all. Given that college statistics aren’t great predictors of professional success anyway, the Pirates could make a pretty strong case that the numbers that really matter are the grades the scouts put on his pitches, and those are all unmatched by any other pitcher in this draft. But perhaps the real question is should the Pirates be drafting a pitcher #1 overall to begin with?
Here are the pitchers who have been taken #1 overall since the draft was born: Stephen Strasburg, David Price, Luke Hochevar, Bryan Bullington, Matt Anderson, Kris Benson, Paul Wilson, Brien Taylor, Ben McDonald, Andy Benes, Tim Belcher, Mike Moore, Floyd Bannister, and David Clyde. That’s 14 pitchers, and the best one of the group is probably Benes, who threw about 2,500 innings of slightly-above-average baseball. That’s not a good history, obviously, though Price has the talent to set a new standard and Strasburg may still make strong comeback once he gets healthy.
But we can’t just look at those 14 guys. After all, there are pitchers taken after the first pick who have done extremely well, and they were available to select with the #1 pick. So, let’s look at pitchers taken in the top five, and, to be fair to Cole, let’s limit our scope to college pitchers – high school arms come with their own set of unique risks that don’t apply to this particular situation.
Looking at picks two through five gives us success stories like Justin Verlander, Jack McDowell, Kevin Brown, Jon Matlack, Greg Swindell, and Alex Fernandez. Brown won’t get into Cooperstown, but you could make a strong case that he should, and McDowell was one of the game’s better pitchers during the first half of the 1990s. Like Fernandez, the White Sox got good value from him before their rights to his services expired, and the fact that he broke down early doesn’t change the fact that they got a strong return on their investment.
But those success stories pale in comparison to what you see when you look at what college hitters taken in the same range have produced. Even if you just limit yourself to college third baseman (to find a comparable pool of players for Anthony Rendon), you see Matt Williams, Mark Teixeira, Troy Glaus, Evan Longoria, Ryan Zimmerman, and Ryan Braun. That position alone has produced more value from top five draft picks than pitchers have, and that’s not even accounting for the dramatic difference in quantity of players taken at each position – 13 college third baseman versus 59 college pitchers.
Sure, you can point to guys like Alex Gordon and Pedro Alvarez as examples of why premium position players may not live up to the hype, but the reality is that they are the exception rather than the rule, and with pitchers it’s exactly the opposite; a highly drafted pitcher who doesn’t bust is the exception.
That’s not to say that no teams should ever draft pitchers, or that you should always take a hitter at the top of the draft. Hard and fast rules are hardly ever a good idea to live by, and every situation is indeed different. But when there’s a premium college position player available, you should be completely convinced that the potential reward is dramatically higher with the pitcher, because there’s a huge risk difference that needs to be offset. Most people would agree that the gap between the upside with Strasburg and Dustin Ackley made the Strasburg pick sensible, and his pre-injury performance certainly backed up that claim. That’s a case where you can’t fault the team for taking the pitcher.
But Gerrit Cole is simply not Stephen Strasburg. His stuff is good, but his performances haven’t lived up to the stuff, and it’s not even a consensus that Cole is the best pitching prospect on his own team. He’s a good arm, certainly, and he could have a nice career, but I think history suggests that the Pirates may be making a mistake here. Even with questions about his shoulder and his own perceived disappointing season, Rendon is still far more likely to produce as a big leaguer than Cole, or any of the other arms the Pirates could have chosen.
Good college bats are, by far, the safest bet in any Major League draft. There’s a good college bat on the board, and Pittsburgh should probably take him instead of Gerrit Cole.
1
Not that this invalidates the whole take-a-batter-dummy point, but didn’t Verlander have an even worse junior season?
Verlander had the same knock on him as Cole…great stuff, but nobody could figure out why he wasn’t dominating college hitters the way he should. And as a further knock, he played for Old Dominion, not exactly a school that sees lots of top tier talent like UCLA does.
Verlander also had insane wildness at OD. I don’t know about Cole, but Verlander had 20 wild pitches and 16 HBP in 106 innings during his last season at OD, on top of a 3.7 BB/9 (not terrible, but also doesn’t include the 16 hit batsmen).
Why not a different approach: This is really easy, TRADE DOWN. Get the 2, 3 or 4 pick and a couple of 2s and or 3s for your #1. This is all a risk and you can get more bang for your buc(k).
Trading picks is not allowed.
Baseball draft, not football.
This is a very sensible argument. As a Mariners fan, I hope that the Pirates completely ignore your sensible argument and allow Anthony Rendon to drop into our laps.
Rendon, Ryan, Ackley, Smoak looks good to me too. Thank you Bucs and Go M’s!
Just like our 2004 Lopez/Yuni ‘dreams’, projecting these young players best-case scenario is usually doomed to tears.
So we played against Smoak when he was at State. My friend who pitched against him thinks he’s one of the primary reasons they changed the bats. While he had holes in his swing, if you missed it, you were looking at the hardest hit ball you probably had ever seen in your life. He hit what looked like a 500 footer against that poor guy one year.
And that Rendon’s medical reports don’t scare Jack Z into taking someone else instead . . .
(Not that I wouldn’t like Francisco Lindor, whom I hope would be their second choice, but I’d rather have a healthy Rendon.)
Rendon is damaged goods. Enjoy!
As a pirate fan, this is a disappointing day. Rendon is going to be a all star at third base for years to come
The same thing was said about Pedro Alvarez.
And Alvarez is far from being a bust. Less than a third of a season’s worth of bad at-bats does not necessarily portend a mediocre career.
Wait a minute… when did anyone say Alvarez would be an all-star 3B? I remember the collective talk being about a 35HR-bat with serious defensive limitations… did I miss the one guy that said he’d be even competent at the hot corner?
MEDAFAO, you’re correct. Most scouts thought Pedro would eventually have to move to 1B, but it was also widely believed his bat would play there. Given Alvarez’s performance last year, I see no reason to start classifying him as a bust simply due to a poor start to this year.
I don’t classify Alvarez as a bust, only illustrating that the expectations for all high 1st round picks is astronomical.
I agree with the essence of this article, and I’m afraid the talent difference between Cole and Rendon (assuming there is any) is not nearly enough to offset the increased risk the Pirates will be assuming. Let’s also hope that Cole’s price tag is not so prohibitive that it prevents the Pirates from going over slot on a number of players in later rounds, as they have done in recent years.
The problem is that some of those other guys have huge question marks. I don’t think Bauer threw fewer than 140 pitches in any of his starts this year (slight sarcasm). Rendon still has the best plate discipline in the NCAA, but his power had a huge decline and he has some injury questions. Starling and Hultzen have different questions, but they haven’t previously been seen as a similar level prospect.
Also, those last two college pitchers to go #1 have looked pretty darned good. Just sayin’.
It seems like MLB draft experts should follow more of a fantasy baseball draft strategy. Take hitters early, they’re more reliable
The overall point is strong, and I would add that the examples of failure given (Alvarez, Gordon) are not all that bad. Alex Gordon has struggled, but this year, is probably either the best or second best hitter on the Royals. Alvarez still has a long way to go…
agreed on alvarez. 1.1 WAR as a rookie in less than a full season’s worth of at bats is a bit early to be making judgements on a player’s career.
Yeah, seems a little premature (or downright misleading in the cause of propping up the argument) to be touting those guys as the risk of taking a hitter rather than a pitcher.
Personally, it just seems like common sense to go for the players who aren’t virtually guaranteed to have reconstructive surgery at some point. Hitters can flame out just as bad pitchers, but it seems less likely to be because they can’t adjust to post TJ arm strength or labrum rehab gone wrong.
Is signability a factor? Maybe pirates can’t make a signing bonus demand for other people.
Rendon is performing a bit worse this year than he did last year.
I don’t think signability is the issue. Cole is a Boras client and will cost plenty. This isn’t a Moskos/Wieters situation. I think the Pirates made what they believe to be the best decision, regardless of price.
:facepalm:
If you had paid attention at all the last 3 years, you’d know that the Pirates have spent more than any other team on the draft since Neal Huntington became the GM (2008-2010 drafts), including a lot of over-slot bonuses to late round draftees.
In addition, from the player’s standpoint, why wouldn’t you sign if you were drafted first overall? Even without impending CBA changes, why would anyone risk an injury by waiting another year? You can’t improve on being the first overall draft pick.
But which guy has “the good face”? It all comes down to that, really.
Cole looks better in jeans.
It’s always possible that there have been a few phone calls from various agents asking the Pirates now to draft their clients. These sort of things happen when teams have a LOOONG tradition of loosing.
Sorry “NOT to draft their clients”… wish we could edit posts…
Cole may have the Grienke problem where he just never pitches to his true talent because he allows too many line drives and sports an inflated BABIP. Or he could be like Verlander and figure it out – what worries me is that while you can argue that ODU’s coaches couldn’t ‘fix’ Verlander, UCLA should have much better coaching. Possibly better than the Pirates ;)
Still, if you can get 5-6 years of 2008-2010 type Grienke with this pick, it’s a win for the Pirates.
Other than Vandy and UNC college coaching staffs aren’t that great, and certainly pale in comparison to any minor/major league developmental program.
UNC has more pro scouts at their games than any other team I’ve seen (mostly Southern Cal universities). The’re also the only team I’ve seen with a pitchfx guy (this is something that may have changed over the past five years or so). They scout their own guys pretty thoroughly.
Anybody’s who’s ever work with UCLA pitching guru John Savage knows that guy is one of the best in the nation, hands down.
This really isn’t a good year to have the top pick, and I feel like if there was a sure fire college hitter available with the first pick, Pittsburgh would take them. However, Rendon has serious injury concerns and I just think there is no way he can be taken with the first pick. Hultzen and Bauer have performed better than Cole, but Cole is the most projectable, so hopefully the organization will coach him up and he’ll dominate the system and become a fixture in the rotation for many years. I would be ecstatic to have a Justin Verlander type pitcher on my team.
I’m disappointed that the Pirates aren’t taking Rendon. He’s the best mix of safety and upside in the draft, and he’s going to have an Adrian Beltre-like career. Cole could be Verlander or Johnson, but he could also bust. Rendon won’t bust.
Dave, where would you rank Cole and Rendon on your top 100 prospects?
i would agree, but you aren’t allowing any leeway for what the medicals are saying…
Cole probably has some sort of mechanic problem or tips off his pitches. Since his control is fine (few walks) and only command is a problem, the Pirates probably figure they can help him correct his issues rather easily. You don’t find his velocity, 3 pitch combo, and control very often. I think its a good pick.
I think if they can fix Morton, they shouldn’t have much trouble with Cole.
I agree. Cole hasn’t suffered any drop in velocity, and adding some deception to his delivery shouldn’t be a problem for a ML organization.
The concern with Cole, at least as far as I’m concerned, is that his career turns for the worst the second he grabs for his right elbow. Rendon may have a checkered injury past, but Cole has a cloudier future.
Since when has Pittsburgh instructional coach anyone up? Batista leaves and goes off. The Pirates AA and AAA stars of the future are ALL going the wrong way.
Seems to me the coaching has a regression factor involved and not the other way around
Wasn’t that the knock against Taillon last year? He was getting hit hard by high-schoolers, even though they shouldn’t be able to touch his stuff. Well, he is pitching pretty well this year in full season ball.
I would think that a mechanical adjustment and/or a better plan on the mound would be enough to fix at least some of Cole’s problems with allowing too much contact.
Taillon’s stuff hasn’t translated into missing a lot of bats in full season ball so far either. The only really great aspect of his performance so far is the low walk rate. Other than that, his numbers are pretty modest, though he’s still young and has time to improve.
“But those success stories pale in comparison to what you see when you look at what college hitters taken in the same range have produced. Even if you just limit yourself to college third baseman (to find a comparable pool of players for Anthony Rendon), you see Matt Williams, Mark Teixeira, Troy Glaus, Evan Longoria, Ryan Zimmerman, and Ryan Braun.”
While true, it seems to be a logical fallacy to me to assume that since those college hitters worked out, that hitters should be weighted more heavily than pitchers. Maybe it should change the balances slightly, but it would seem to be quite easy to take this too far and end up taking hitters who don’t have the same ceiling or have greater risk because ‘hitters are better bets than pitchers’
Everything is about balancing risk and reward. No one is suggesting that the Pirates should take a low ceiling cornet outfielder, and there are situations where taking a pitcher is probably the right call; a truly phenomenal pitcher is available, a weak crop of college bats, etc… However, this doesn’t really look like one of those situations. There’s a good college bat on the board, and the Pirates are passing on him for a good-but-not-crazy-awesome pitcher. That’s probably a bad idea.
Yeah, I guess I’m just saying that, while informative in the sense that perhaps the balance should tilt from where it is now, I think it’s hard to draw strong conclusions say based on often conflicting scouting information going into the draft, the general wash out rate for pitching (and hitting) prospects and the small sample size used here.
In other words, how can you (or any fan/non-scout) be confident enough in the projected abilities/performance of Rendon and Cole to say that taking Cole is mistake? You note the lack of advanced stat work in the college world; so much of this is really going to depend on what the scouts say that it’s hard for me to criticize the Pirates too much.
(Then you get into the differences in team situation that affect these decisions; risk-tolerance, economics, time table for competing…)
Basically, here’s what I’m saying.
1. History is clear – there is a massive gap in risk associated with spending a high draft pick on a pitcher versus a hitter.
2. In order to justify higher risk selection, need to counter-balance it with added reward (or lower cost, but that’s not a factor here).
3. Given what we know about Cole and Rendon, it is hard to make a case that there is a substantial gap in potential reward.
No one knows how these players are going to turn out. It’s possible that Rendon sucks and Cole is an ace. But, given what we do know, the Pirates either need to be really convinced that Rendon’s shoulder is a huge problem or else they’re assuming a large amount of risk without the necessary benefit to offset it.
I’m not sure I agree with this argument at all. Scouting a pitcher is always a questionable science, but if you have a kid with this ‘stuff’ you almost throw away results. That might sound ridiculous, but do you want to be the GM who said ‘this kid who throws 100MPH wasn’t putting up the right stats in college, so I went another way’. If there was another talent that blew you away, I could see it, but I have not heard one convincing argument not to shoot for the moon and go with a potential ACE pitcher.
Has he lost speed on his fastball? Command of his slider? Is he trying to throw the change too often and it’s not working? This is scouting and if the Pirates see the necessary corrections can be made, this dude could be sick. The Pirates ‘scouting’doesn’t exactly inspire confidence, but still…
The Pirates fans should be salivating at a potential Taillon/Cole 1-2 punch at the front of that staff!
For what it’s worth, I think Rendon should be the pick ***UNLESS*** his medicals reveal a chronic or degenerative condition. That said, though, it’s hard to argue against an SP with the best two pitches in the draft (++FB and + to ++ changeup), right?
Look at the number one picks you have listed, only straburg, price, hochevar and Burlington have been taken in the last 10 years…
Burlington busted and hochevar may never be more than a 3/4 starter, but straburg and price sure may be studs
I think its reasonable to view that the scouting and handling of pitcher is a galaxy away now from where it was 10 years ago.
as a Pirates fan…I want Bauer…he’s goofy, quirky…just unique enough that it might payoff…yeah, he runs his mouth…so what? might be nice to have some lip on this pirates staff…we’ve got some decent prospects in Allie, Tallion, Lincoln, etc. so maybe a gamble is in order? I like Cole, but he’s got mechanic flaws all over the place…Bauer’s never been unsure of himself. I don’t want a fireballer that loses his mechanics every 5 months…Bauer is a hard worker and a innings hog…take the nut job!
Cole has mechanical flaws??? have you ever even SEEN bauer pitch??? holy jeebus, batman!
Actually, I know anecdotally that pitcher risk > hitter risk. Can we see some statistics? Did we go back and research the issue and compare profiles and success rates/failure rates (with definitions of both) over time? I would certainly like to see the actual numbers, with some basis of comparison (for example, comparing Cole to Strasburg would be unfair, regardless if taken #1).
I had been very pro Rendon leading up to this draft for several months now. Having been burned several times through the years by highly drafted pitchers, not to mention missing out on some big bats in the process, it was an easy arguement to make. Rendon had been projected as an Longoria type; excellent contact, avg-above avg power and speed and decent enough in the field. But honestly, this shoulder is scaring the bejebus out of me. Fluke or not, it doesn’t seem to be healing properly, not even enough to field his position. And the decision not to release medical data makes NO sense. If it were clean he would certainly go first overall, but now it just seems like they are hiding something.
Bullington was a stupid signability pick so don’t count him as a #1 bust. Wasn’t Hochevar a similar situation?
I’d include anything in the top 3-5 range depending on the year. Usually the talent is close enough that a case can be made for several guys, much like this year. I guess the point that most fans and professioanl draft guys are making is between best hitter vs best pitcher. I think what really steers me towards a guy like Cole is the worry over Rendon’s shoulder and for that matter any future injury, as he’s suffered a major one two straight years. The non release of medical history is enough of a redflag for me to pass if there is someone close enough in projectable talent.
One possible point here — part of the reasons pitchers are so risky is that they’re very likely to get hurt. But Rendon is already hurt, so Rendon may not be more risky than a pitcher. Given that the next two position players on the board are a multisport tools guy and a not-completely-overwhelming high school shortstop, I’m OK with going for a pitcher; don’t want a Tim Beckham or a Donovan Tate either.
This is really easy, TRADE DOWN. Get the 2, 3 or 4 pick and a couple of 2s and or 3s for your #1. This is all a risk and you can get more bang for your buc(k).
@Dave
You can’t trade picks in the draft.
Other than that, it’s a great idea.
Prior and Jered Weaver are two recent consensus #1 guys out of college who did fairly well in terms of ROI.
For the sake of baseball in Pittsburgh becoming profitable again, let’s hope the Pirates get lucky.
Pirates are now in the black, thankyouverymuch. they will, again, be one of the biggest spenders in this draft, for the 4th year in a row.
“But those success stories pale in comparison to what you see when you look at what college hitters taken in the same range have produced. Even if you just limit yourself to college third baseman (to find a comparable pool of players for Anthony Rendon), you see Matt Williams, Mark Teixeira, Troy Glaus, Evan Longoria, Ryan Zimmerman, and Ryan Braun.”
Dave I love your work but this statement is utterly meaningless. Verlander went #2 in 2004 because of signability. In that draft, prep SS Matt Bush went #1 to San Diego because he was cheap and a local product. Same thing in 2006. Kershaw, Greg Reynolds, Andrew Miller, Timmy and Scherzer were all much bigger prospects than Hochevar, but the cash strapped Royals took the guy they could afford. In 2002, Pittsburgh drafted Bryan Bullingon for the same reason. In fact, it weas widely acknowledged that Bullington wasn’t even a consensus top 15 prospect much less worthy of being the #1 overall pick.
Signability. It’s why Rick Porcello dropped to pick #27. Same for Joba at #41 in 2006. Or Kazmir going #15 in 2002. That’s why assigning risk levels based on where guys went in prior drafts is pointless. The offensive players drafted in the top 5 draft positions have been better than the pitchers drafted in same spot because many of those pitchers would never have gone that high if not for the money concerns. If Boston or the Yankees had the #1 pick in 2002, 2004, or 2006, I can say with 10000% certainty that guys like Bullington, Hochevar and Bush would not have gone #1.
Cole, as a Boras client figures to demand a big contract and I think Pittsburgh fans should be jacked up at the prospects of their team actually being prepared to pony up that kind of cash for a top of the rotation arm. Sure, there is a greater chance that Cole will suffer a major arm injury that might K.O his carrer than Rendon suffering an equally catastrophic injury. But the Bucs in taking Cole aren’t taking the “2004 Hochevar” of the 2011 draft”, they are taking the “2004 Lincecum” of the 2011 draft (If that makes any sense lol).
Putting the pitcher vs. position player debate at #1 aside (which is a really good one brought up here), I think they’re targeting the wrong UCLA pitcher. Bauer’s numbers are better than Weaver, Prior, Leake, Strasburg, and Price — and look how good those guys have been.
It’s a stretch to say Bauer’s numbers are better than Strasburg’s. Bauer’s ERA is very slightly lower this year than Strasburg’s junior season (1.25 vs. 1.32), but Strasburg had an otherworldly strikeout rate, and a better walk rate as well. Strasburg also maintained that performance over 2 seasons.
Bauer has been impressive as far as carrying a heavy workload, though, averaging an incredible 8.54 innings per start this year.
I don’t like taking pitchers early, and I like power pitchers even less. A power pitcher is good because of a god given ability to throw hard. An injury, a mental problem, etc diminishes that and he’s normal. I’d rather take a kid with “good” stuff who is coachable and smart. Teach him another pitch and he’ll be more effective for more years.
i know youre saying not to pick a power arm early in the draft. thats fine. but the power arms that are currently in the MLB were all drafted or signed at one point or another.
other than the signing bonus, whats the difference in being a 1st pick than a 14th pick if the results are still the same?
This is true, but the success/failure rate of power arms to smart arms seems to be pretty big. Every year “o this kid throw 97″ what happens when his 97 turns into 94 and he can’t just blow it past a guys on 3-1?
Power arms rarely have real poise (by that I mean they get out of situations based on natural ability, not skill), or know how to pitch.
I just think that scouts and everyone loses their load watching a 19 year old throw 100 MPH and doesn’t even think that he’s not going to do that forever and when that ability ceases to exist he’s pretty much worthless.
Not only that, but successful power arms in the majors know how to pitch. They don’t just blow it by guys. Josh Johnson isn’t good because he throws hard, he’s good because he’s smart, he locates, AND he has good stuff. So, yea, if a guy throws hard AND knows how to pitch, then take him. Those guys are rare, why learn how to pitch when you can strikeout 13 batters a game in high school (7 inning games) on straight gas?
I completely understand your point, but in the majors, pure power arms don’t last. Even in the minors they don’t last. Pitchers who know how to pitch stay around forever.
Antonio, that is what Jack Z has done for Seattle and I think it is a wiser approach