Monday, January 14, 2013

DrB's 2013 Giants Top 50 Prospects #27: Bryce Bandilla

Bryce Bandilla, LHP.  DOB:  1/17/1990.  6'4", 235 lbs., B-L, T-L.

Rookie AZL:  0-0, 1.93, 14 IP, 2 BB, 20 K's.

Low A:          2-4, 3.05, 44.1 IP, 28 BB, 48 K's.

Bryce Bandilla is another big, burly, hard-throwing LHP who the Giants drafted out of Arizona in the 4'th round in 2011.  He was a reliever in college, but he made 13 starts out of 15 appearances in his pro debut season in 2012 and pitched effectively against a relatively low level of competition.  The rap on him in college was his control and he again sported a high walk rate which he made up for with a high K rate and low BAA.    It should be noted that 6 of the 18 ER he allowed all season occurred in one start on August 2.  He missed some time to injury in mid-season and was shut down after with about 3 weeks left in the season after August 9.  The midseason injury was reportedly an elbow problem.  The season ending injury was an ankle problem suffered when he fell down some stairs.

His BA pre-draft scouting report has him sitting at 92-95 with the FB and touching 97.  That is complemented by an above-average changeup and a slurvy breaking ball that seems to be still in developmental stages.  He has effort to his delivery and tends to fly open and sail the FB which is where his control problems stem from.

I think he'll probably end up as a reliever, but I love that he's starting now as the starting experience will hold him in good stead when and if he returns to the bullpen.  I'm not sure where we'll see him in 2013.  San Jose is mighty crowded, but Bandilla needs to move up and be challenged.  His assignment will be one of the more interesting stories when minor league rosters are posted.

22 comments:

  1. I liked how you put Osich and Bandilla back to back. They could both skyrocket if they start. The Giants have a logjam of heavy artillery arms. Could Bandilla handle a bump to Richmond? With the dozen or so relievers lined up, the SJ rotation overflowing, it does get interesting.

    The injury risk has to be a major factor though. If a player can't take the field, its pretty much the worse thing happening. We've had a big taste of that in the past couple years with the big club. There are some guys who just can't stay healthy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Got Steven Okert next to make it a threepack.

      Delete
  2. Bandilla wouldn't be able to make the jump all the way to Richmond. That would be a much more aggressive assignment than the Giants would probably want to make. I would say either SJ Bullpen or Augusta rotation until a spot opens up in the SJ rotation. My guess is that he comes out of the SJ bullpen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do think there is going to be a surprise assignment to Richmond or two. It's been awhile since the Giants put a pitcher there for their first full season, but they have done it before. The one that stands out in my mind is Kevin Correia.

      I could see them sending either Chris Stratton or Clayton Blackburn there. It's gonna be interesting.

      Delete
    2. Crick, Blackburn, Stratton, Agosta, Mejia, Escobar... Bandilla. The Giants have a ton of interesting high upside talent, jammed up in the low minors. I don't think they would jump him to the Richmond rotation either, but maybe the pen. Somebody has to move somewhere. And here is where looking at the Giants system I think its much better than given credit for. There is no A-list guy (although Crick could be there very soon), there is a lot of big arms. And that's another reason the system doesn't get hype, everybody wants to get hopped up on bats. Some prospect hounds spend way too much time drooling over other systems and then running down the Gigantes. The overall depth of talent is so superior to the mid 2000s version its hilarious and great.

      Delete
    3. Yeah I could see Stratton or Blackburn in Richmond. Blackburn seemed to handle himself well at SJ last season. He could be a bit overwhelmed but he could probably adjust quickly.

      Delete
    4. I agree about the depth thing, Shankbone. OK, we can debate ranking order, but I say a system that can put 2 lefties with mid- upper 90's heaters back-to-back-to-back in the mid-20's has some depth to it, even if they profile as relievers. I mean, just look at the price of LOOGYs these days!

      Delete
    5. Exactly DrB, you hit the nail on the head there, reliable LOOGY's are hard to find, hence why they get so much money, especially with the Giants. Being able to crank them out helps keep the bullpen going well, plus I've seemed to notice that teams are willing to give up some useful players in exchange for relievers, I think the Padres picked up a SS for a couple of good relievers, if I remember right.

      Delete
  3. If the Giants have been grooming Bandilla to resume a starting role, after his last year in college, when he relieved, why the pen in SJ? They have had him starting in the rookie league and in the Sally; he needs to develop a third pitch (eventually a fourth) as a starter; he needs to develop the stamina of a starter, and both to gain much more control and to pitch his way out of problems that he has brought upon himself by walking so many batters. What necessary training would be gained by putting him in the bullpen? It would seem to me that the more likely assignment would be back in the Augusta rotation, and then, if he deserves promotion, the SJ rotation, once one of our top-notch prospects there is promoted or traded.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not familiar with the number of available starting spots and the number of worthy candidates at all the different levels to say if that is at play in determining whehter a player, Bandilla for example, should start or be fasttracked as a reliever in order not to block someone else, and at which level.

      It would be nice to have that covered, though, in any such discussion.

      Delete
    2. The only reason to put him in the SJ bullpen instead of the Augusta rotation is to get him facing higher level hitters, and it would get his arm loose before starting. I wouldn't be shocked to see him in the SJ bullpen and wait for someone to be bumped.

      Delete
  4. I remember reading the Augusta announcer tweet that Bandilla hit 100mph a few times in one of his starts this year. He responded via tweeting that he thought the gun was a little hot, but that his arm felt good.

    His ceiling would be a Jeremy Affeldt type reliever that could go multiple innings from the left side. I hope he gets a chance to pick Jeremy's brain a bit during spring training.

    -Clint

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would argue that his ceiling is higher than that. He could look a lot more like Derek Holland. The Giants likely see a higher ceiling than that in him too if they are putting him in a starting role.

      Delete
    2. I have not read anything specific for Bandilla, but the Giants have placed relievers in starting roles before to get him extra innings so that he get more work in order to learn how to pitch better. Runzler for example. And they have converted college relievers into starters as well, like Russ Ortiz.

      Given that control is his big issue, perhaps they made some mechanical adjustments prior to the season that they wanted him to work on, and putting him in a starter's role would give him the reps to make it muscle memory.

      Still, with that type of velocity, even while starting, when pitchers normally dial it down in order to last more innings, it would behoove the Giants to see if he can pull off starting before writing him off as a reliever. Plus, if he can develop additional pitches to go with his fastball, that would make him that much better a reliever (as DrB noted), should they eventually go that route.

      Delete
    3. Yeah, it's always great to have a lefty that can throw that hard. I would love to see him be given a chance to start. If he can control his pitches, he could be a really good pitching prospect.

      Delete
  5. Boras gets the Nats to pony up for Soriano, 2 year and an option! Yankees stocking up huge on picks for 2013 draft. Giants holding at #26. I estimated the picks, we're looking at #26 (2012 slot money: 1.7MM), #63 (2012 slot money: 818K), #101 (2012 slot money: 472K) for our top 3.

    Also, the IFA rules change slightly, instead of a standard amount, it will be a sliding scale based on winning percentage, from 1.8MM to 4.9MM. The Giants will slot in around 2.2-2.4MM. Pool money can be traded, so they could gain more, or trade off if they wished.

    Hank Schulman tweeted that the Giants haven't given up on Timmy, and part of the equation with FA budgets was keeping moneys in reserve for him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hank also noted that the Giants have not given up on a multi-year contract with Pence at some point, but that they are working on a one-year deal for now, in hopes of beating the deadline Friday.

      I would note that picks in the supplemental round is not as valuable as it was before for the Yankees when very good prospects regularly fell back due to signability issues. Though it would be interesting if a Top 10 guy falls to them, to see if they are willing to blow a future draft pick by going way over slot, to sign the guy.

      Did Bud ever announce any formula for adjusting slot money year to year? It was the same 2009-2011, but I think it went up to more reasonable/recent levels with the 2012 draft, as I recall the first pick being in the $6M range slot. Oh, I was way off, they slotted it at $7.2M. The 26th pick was 23.61% of the first pick, looks like they like to round to nearest $25K. 11.37% for 63rd pick (starting to round to nearest hundredth). 6.554% for 101st pick.

      This website raises to $10.8M due to revenues jump: http://metsmerizedonline.com/2012/10/2013-first-year-player-draft-order-and-bonus-pool-money.html

      Got to leave, do the math...

      Delete
    2. What I get from that Mets website: Alderson & Co screwed up, not signing their 3rd rounder. They do get the pick again, but the pool is reduced from approx. 670K to 185K. Apparently this is done when a player would accept slot money, which means the Mets had bad intel on his price or they were doing it deliberately. Now THAT might be worth a freakout, but nobody would know during a draft thread... In fact, the Mets signed the least number of players they drafted in MLB.

      Another mistake I made in evaluating the draft - late rounders... rounds 31-40 more than half of the draftees are unsigned. In rounds 1-10 there were 8 unsigned players. Appel, Stankiewicz, Alec Rash, Kyle Twomey, Brandon Thomas, Colin Poche, Nick Halamandaris and L.J. Mazzilli. Teams made sure they didn't get dinged with the penalty. 11-30 there are 4-8 guys a round who don't sign, and then the floodgates open up to 15 or so a round at the end.

      Giants only had one guy say no thanks before round 30 - Ryan Tella. He's going to be a top 100 college guy this year, should get inside the 6th round this year, so that is understandable.

      For the Yanks next year, the 3 picks combine for about 4MM and change. They could sign one big guy who falls and then do the pre-arranged senior college guy route. I bet they spread it out though - they've had some good drafting of OFs lately.

      Delete
    3. Ah, forgot that teams could play it that way, makes a lot of sense to build up some picks, of course, assuming someone worth that much money falls their way. Any team play it that way last season? I don't recall any successes other than Astro's and maybe the Pirates.

      Delete
    4. Astro's got Correa at below slot (4.8MM signed, 7.2MM slot), that allowed them to grab McCullers for 2.5MM at the 41 spot, and then Rio Ruiz at the 129 (4th round) for 1.85MM (360K slot). They drafted Hunter Virant in the 11th round as a hedge to not getting Ruiz to sign. This coming year the Astro's have a massive 15MM war chest between the draft and being high man on the IFA side as well.

      Pirates taking Appel without talking to Boras was a huge mistake. They lose a year of development, and a giant hole in their draft with the entire slot counting against them.

      The Cards had a great draft, getting Carson Kelly and Max Foody, both considered tough signs. They played it pretty straight but did sign their 7-10 picks for underslot to raise funds. It helps when you have 9MM in slot money to play with of course, as well as six picks in the top 100.

      Delete
  6. Shankbone:

    I hope you kept that list of unsigned players. It'll be very interesting over the next several years to see how many improved their draft status. That should be the basis in the future as to whether more HS/JC kids sign.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its free on BA as of right now. http://www.baseballamerica.com/draftdb/2012unsigned.php Don't know if they'll put it behind the paywall after a year...

      100K. Take it or go pay something like it at college (not that many full ride b-ball scholarships these days). That seems to be the gist. I think a good proportion of HS kids aren't strong enough or mature enough for pro-ball, so college helps. And some great players have sprung out of college, just with the Gints alone.

      Delete