#40 Chris Heston, RHP. 6'4", 185 lbs. BD: 4/10/1988.
High A: 12-4, 3.16, 151.0 IP, 40 BB, 131 K, GO/AO= 2.20.
Chris Heston was drafted out of college at East Carolina in the 12'th round in 2009. He signed right away and started out in the AZL showing a strong groundball tendency along with solid K and BB ratios. He has maintained the K and BB ratios as he progressed to low A then to high A ball, but progressively increased his GO/AO from 1.80 to 1.90 to 2.20 while dropping his ERA from 4.11 to 3.75 to 3.16. He got even more GB dominant over his last 10 starts for San Jose with a GO/AO= 2.40 while going 5-0 with an ERA of 1.78.
From his numbers, we can easily deduce that his primary pitch is a two seam sinking fastball. I don't really have any additional scouting reports. I found a couple of interviews, one on YouTube with a site call Giants Persona and one with Joe Ritzo on milb.com. Chris pretty much confirmed that his strategy is to pound the strike zone with his sinking fastball and then try for strikeouts with a breaking ball if he gets two strikes on the hitter.
GO/AO can be used as a rough substitute for GB%. I use a GO/AO>2.0 as a measure of groundball dominance. The problem comes in pitchers trying to maintain that dominance at higher levels where hitters are able to elevate pitches down in the zone and can also force pitchers to elevate their pitches. I looked up the MLB SP leaders for GO/AO and found only 4 with GO/AO>2.0: Charlie Morton, Derek Lowe, Jake Westbrook, and Jhoulys Chacin. First of all, none of them are really dominant pitchers. Secondly, I believe the reason there are so few that fall into this category is that it's so darn hard to consistently force MLB hitters to hit ground balls. So, I don't necessarily view a high GO/AO as a strong positive unless it goes with other signs of dominance. Chris Heston's K and BB numbers are good, but not necesarily dominant.
I expect Heston to put up more good numbers in AA as the EL favors his type of pitching. The big challenge will be when he hits AAA where sinkers don't sink and breaking balls don't break and power pitchers tend to do much better.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What was Brandon Webb's GO/AO rate?
ReplyDeleteFor his career it was 3.22. He has begun a throwing program after his 2nd rotator cuff surgery in 3 years. I'd have to say its a no-go on a minor league invite for Webb.
Deletemlb.com had Webb's career GO/AO= 3.15, but yeah that's close enough. A GO/AO>3 is extremely rare and is truly dominant GB pitching. Gotta wonder if whatever he did to achieve that put an extra strain on the shoulder or something.
DeleteWebb to me is not comparable for anyone. When he came up, he was barely even an after thought among a stronger crop of Baby Backs, I do not recall him being mentioned even once in the ore season run down for that season of their top prospects. Heis the classic no skill need to prove himself at every level who breaks out and prove dominant in the majors.
DeleteDrB - where'd you get the GO/AO sortable stats? I can't seem to find em. Monkeying around on fangraphs you can get GB/FB ratios but I didn't see the GO/AO. Maybe I just missed it. Cleveland getting Lowe tilts the balance of GB power from Atlanta for sure, as long as Carmona's visa status gets worked out.
ReplyDeleteSorting for low to high HR/FB ratios is a fun one. Matthew Thomas Cain leads the majors with a 3.7% rate. Next? Doc H with 5.1. Charlie Morton shows up with a 5.8%. MadBum has a 6.2%, Timmy 8.0 and VSG 8.2. Not gonna go searching for BPBZ's though. The Giants pitchers are awesome at keeping the ball in the park.
Apparently Raggs didn't know about PitchFx but was interested in it. He was asked about it by one of the bloggers, I think Crazy Crabbers. I'm not completely convinced, I think it might be more sandbagging like what went on with Dave Cameron's article. But, the Giants definitely have a method for pitching to guys, they build a book that they keep internally. Same with defensive positioning. Just because it doesn't josh with a stats system or advanced computer analysis doesn't mean it isn't effective. This might be a classic "we play the game" and let the stats sort themselves out.
Julian of GN definitely asked some interesting questions though. He interviewed Wotus about defensive positioning. The answer wasn't exactly what stats oriented people want to hear I don't think. Neither was Raggs. Sometimes I think Giants interwebz fans are very frustrated by the Giants old school mentality. They really want their team to be at the forefront of statistical analysis and are met with seed spitting resistance. Even with things they do well, such as pitching and defense, fans want to see more. Brian Sabean should work the computer more? This is going to be the missing link that really ties the team together?
I take Sabean's comments about Belt as a huge positive, Bochy's too. Instead of raving about him and then putting him into an impossible situation like last year with expectations of being the next Posey, they are taking it slower. He is positioned to be the 1B of the future. He has every chance to make the club. They need to see it from him, he'll have to prove out.
I like this much more than last year, where WS champagne eyes got em greedy and then injury necessity made for a mish mash. The Braintrust knows what they have in Belt. They also know they screwed the pooch last year. They put Huff on notice and they will give Belt the shot. I see a lot of sarcastic comments about Bochy benching Belt if he has 2 bad games, and playing Huff for half the year no matter what. We'll see how it plays out, but I don't think its going down that way. Belt will need to prove out sooner than later, he won't get 90 days. I doubt Huff gets 90 days to stink up the joint either though. Unlike popular sentiment, Sabean learns from mistakes, maybe a bit slow on the uptake, but he got rid of deadweight vets, he has threatened to again, and he's downplaying Belt while also giving him some nice support long term. Also, he hasn't clogged up the OF with more 3/4 types, leaving just enough backup there to have overlaps for injury/suckiness replacement.
Now can pitchers and catchers report already?
I got the GO/AO sortable stats from mlb.com. Fangraphs uses the sabermetrically more accurate GB%, but someone did as study published on Fangraphs awhile back that showed a good correlation between GO/AO and GB% and GB/FB, so I go ahead and use because it's what they have on mlb.com's stat pages and for some reason it's easier for me to visualize a ration than a %.
DeleteSomething Wotus said leads me to believe that the Giants employ people to monitor FieldFx, plot the results and then feed the summary and plots to the coaches, so the coaches may not be fully aware of where it comes from. Could be the same with Rags and PitchFx?
I don't think the Giants specifically coach their pitchers to not give up HR's. I think they acquire guys who throw heat and teach them to go for the corners of the K zone and to not give in to hitters. The residue of that philosophy is they don't give up many dingers.
My understanding from the Neukom era was that the Giants were involved in advanced defensive metrics of their own. Sabean, however is old school in that he does not believe that there is anything to be gained from telling the other teams the source of your competitive advantage, which is the way most companies today operate. He probably was not happy about Neukom sharing some of their secret sauce with the public that way.
DeleteSo I was not surprised when it was announced that FieldFX was being test run at AT&T I figured that they were eager to see what type of analysis that they can do with that data before other teams.
And it would not surprise me if their data analysts feeds the results to Rags and Wotus, execs do not always need to know how the hamburger is made, as long as it is useful. That is my experience from producing and distributing data analysis. They just want the bottom line, whether it be market forecasts, market share, positioning fielders, or how to pitch to a certain batter.
I would not be efficient for coaches to be spending their time pouring over Fx data. The coaches have too many other reponsibilities that would suffer if they had to take time to do the primary research themselves. I admit it might not be plausible for the coaches to have no idea how the data is produced or where it comes from. I agree Sabes is definitely a guy who doesn't like to give away company secrets. I wonder if that's part of the reason he's had a low turnover in his coaching/front office personnel? He doesn't want the info going out to other teams? He may not let any single person in on the big picture even within his own group. It sure seems like Ned Colletti only learned one aspect of the operation: Sign veterans!
DeleteThis is exactly right. The Coaches have a ton of things to do, they don't have the time to crunch numbers as well. Nice Special Agent Ned crack.
DeleteExactly, that is the main point, they have other things to worry about, so it is more efficient for coaches to focus on other things while the data experts handle the number crunching.
DeleteI assume the coaches have knowledge of the basic principles involved with the data and analysis, else they probably would not be comfortable using the results. Frankly, it does not surprise me that Raggs does not know what PitchFX is, as you two aptly noted, he has more important things he is responsible for, and my impression from the Neukom proud papa discussion of the Giants statistical analysis is that they do a lot of advanced analysis, which probably includes a combination of PitchFX analysis as well as other analysis from other data sources.
Execs eyes would glass over if the data analyst discusssed all the various sources of information that she used to compile her recommendations. Again, they don't really care where the hamburger comes from, as long as it is something tasty. The coaches will trust that Sabean and gang are properly overseeing the stats operations from a baseball perspective, and nothing sells analysis than prior success, as well.
Talking about this made me think of an analogy. There was a great SNL skit where Phil Hartman played Reagan as a dumb before cameras yoke, while a fast-moving, fast-acting man of action when the cameras and public goes away. I think that is Sabean, to a degree.
DeleteLike any good business exec, you do not want to give away your secrets to the competition in an interview. You want to keep your advantages to yourself, else it is no longer an advantage. Sabean always walks that fine line and usually err on the side of caution, than exposure/sharing.
However, this being a very public business, the fan base clamors for more information and for signs that the team is using the latest and greatest in methodology and tools, because they like having a huge advantage over the other teams. And Sabean, by going with an old school persona, perhaps to keep his fellow GM's guard down, does not feed into the needs of the fanbase, instead hoping that his success earns him a level of trust (hence his "I'm not an idiot" comment).
The problem, as I see it, is that he does not have charisma, like Billy Beane. Those type of people usually can wrap the public around their pinkie and get them following and happy. Else, I would think that there would be more complaining about Beane's lousy trades over the years that killed any chance of being competitive today, really, had they kept Ethier and CarGon, they would not have had to trade off all those pitchers this off-season, they would have been competitive enough to get into the playoffs, I think.
Sabean also does not suffer fools lightly, and thus his very public blowups in public for all to see. Those blowups does not make friendly with the fanbase either, and worsen his image with the fanbase by inserting foot into mouth.
But if I had a choice in what type of GM I would like in charge, I would chose "ability to discern talent" over "charisma" anyday, and live with his public faux pas as a small price to pay for beating the other team. Too many Giants fans confuse "needing to fill a spot on the roster" with "lack of ability to tell talent". Sometimes you have to kiss the frog and hope that he turns into a prince, because there is no better alternative. There are a lot of reasons and factors other than being able to discern talent that goes into a lot of the moves a GM has to make in his job.
Where talent recognition is pretty much unaffected by other factors is how well the GM keeps his top talent instead of trading it away. That is where Sabean really shines, and I know readers here mostly understand this, but I'm just really frustrated that the majority of Giants fans do not get this.
But at least I'm at the point now that I don't chase my tail anymore at other Giants sites trying to explain. I'm confident that Sabean will show them via the Giants success during the 2010 decade, and the people who called me "sick" (and other nasty terms) and removed my URL off their websites will be forced to eat crow because they would have spent a good portion of the Giants golden era complaining instead of enjoying it. I've enjoyed the past 4-5 seasons and look forward to enjoying many more (though I'll feel better about that once Cain is signed to an extension).
I agree with a lot of what you just threw down, great points. Sabean actually called himself a dinosaur in that Urban chat. I think it might come down to what people want to hear sometimes. If a listener/watcher/reader is looking for signs that Sabey Sabes is an insensitive jerk or hard headed or old school, etc, they will find it quickly. For example, and this is a minor thing, Julian of GN has posted on MCC that he is very bothered that Sabean doesn't use a computer. Well, first off, there are many CEOs who don't get near computers, rely on their assistants for email advice, can't find anybodys numbers, etc. Its a style, and its a minor thing. To expect a traditional guy (and at the beginning of the interview on video (BASG) you see Bochy asking questions about Blogs with obvious ignorance and pride of ignorance) to be some new age metro with a ipad is just silly. They are dyed in the wool bezball guys. Move on to the next chapter.
DeleteYou've got into the fact that Coletti leaving might have created a weird little vibe that led to Barr, etc. I am always amazed at how long these guys have been together, the absolutely infinitismal turnover. I think that is the biggest sign that Sabean deep down is a good guy, no matter his brush ups or gruffness. To me, its all about this - can we please forgive a guy a few mistakes and move on. He shouldn't have to answer for Vlad, AJ/Nathan or even Zito/Rowand for the rest of his career.
I am sticking around MCC, I have found a happy medium where I like some comments, value some opinions and like getting mine challenged. I know its different for you OGC. I do think overall the vision you and DrB outline is going to prove out. I throw a bit more on the cynical side, but overall this is just too good a team that's been laid down to be anything but hopeful. And yes, I'd feel better once Cain is signed as well.
I always wonder what part of the Giant's low HR numbers come from the pitchers and what part comes from the park. San Diego, I assume, also has low HR numbers, while Cinci and Philly will have high numbers, all a function of the different sized home ballparks.
ReplyDeleteJust curious, Doc, but why do you rate Heston lower than Fitzgerald? Doesn't Heston really outperform the league, ERA wise?
The Giants skill at preventing HR's is not park dependent. Their HR/FB ratios are the same to even better on the road as at home.
DeleteI regard Fitz and Heston as having similar ceilings even thought they are not similar types of pitchers. Fitz is closer to the majors, so I ranked him just a tad higher.
Again, please don't get too caught up in the exact order here. It might have been different if I had finalized it on another day. The most important part of the exercise is to get better acquainted with the talent the Giants have in the minors.
Yes, there were a number of good articles on Fangraphs discussing this, not sure how to find them, started with Cain, then they examined the Giants pitching staff. The conclusion was that something the Giants were doing we're allowing them to keep their HR given up lower than usual.
DeleteI like DrB's comment analysis in those articles a bunch more than Cameron's. I still can't believe a stats guru resorts to Kool-aid and magic dust arguments and refuses to look at road splits for the G's pitchers. It's so bizarre I can't even be offended, I'm just baffled.
DeleteYeah, weird, right? Cameron, one would think would err on the side of analysis, but DrB threw out all that great stuff and still could not convince some of the crowd there.
DeleteHeck, there were articles BY FANGRAPH authors that analyzed this phenomenon and still people were not on board with this. Just very puzzling, but I experienced that with my draft study, the sabernerds didn't understand how skewed it is that most draft picks do not turn out anything close to a good baseball player, and thus there are strategies where punting the draft pick makes sense.
But they just focused on that point and couldn't wrap their minds around it, so they posted my article and took turns taking potshots at me instead of inviting me over and having a scholarly discussion about the merits (or fallacies, there might have been something I missed or did wrong, you never truly know when you are blind to something) of my study.
And BP then posted their draft study within a year of that without acknowledging that I had done a prior recent study, and they did the beginning stats 101 error of focusing on the average WAR per draft pick, the problems of that analysis would take one of my long, large posts to explain why that was a stupid thing to do.
Which site posted your article? Which article is this? I really like the draft study of yours that I read, even if I disagree about the actual players that resulted in the picks punted in the specific case of the Giants. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you were talking about doing a new study now that so much more data crunching is available.
DeleteEven quick perusals of BR and draft year by round will show you quickly how much of a crapshoot it really is. And for every hit each team has just as many busts. There are some franchises who seem to bust more often, but the hits are all hard won and spread out. I think the Cardinals have the best current record on farm system players reaching the majors. Even a team like the Rays with a lot of early picks has their share of busts.
I saw Heston start twice in 2011 for San Jose. In the first game his fastball was 83-89, sitting in the upper part of that range for much of the game. He threw his fastball just as hard as the game went on. He got a lot of swings and misses and really had many of the other team's hitters reeling after pitches, as was easily apparent from the replays on the scoreboard. The next outing, which I believe was a playoff game, was not as impressive for Heston, though Tommy Joseph hit two home runs and also cranked a pair of double.
ReplyDelete