Kyle Crick, RHP. DOB: 11/30/1992. 6'4", 220 lbs.
2012 Low A: 7-6, 2.51, 111.1 IP, 5.42 BB/9, 10.35 K/9
2013 High A: 3-1, 2.87, 68.2 IP, 5.11 BB/9, 13.79 K/9
2014 AA: 6-7, 3.79, 90.1 IP, 6.08 BB/9, 11.06 K/9
Kyle Crick was drafted in the supplemental first round in 2011 out of HS in Oklahoma. I believe he only started pitching in his junior or senior year. He's a big kid who throws hard. He bears a striking resemblance to Matt Cain although he is slightly taller and leaner. Crick pitched just 7 innings over 7 appearances the summer after the draft. His first full season was spent in Augusta in 2012 where he dominated, albeit with a generous walk rate. He moved up to San Jose in 2013 where he again dominated, but missed 6 weeks early in the season with a strained oblique. His AA season in 2014 was a bit more of a struggle as his BB/9 crept up above 6 and he was moved to the bullpen for the AA playoffs. Despite is struggles with command, there were some positives. He ERA was solid if not dominating. He also had the highest K/9 of any pitcher with at least 90 IP across all AA leagues and was a full 1 K/9 above the second place guy.
I saw him pitch in the game where he strained his oblique. He pitched just 2 innings of that game but looked good. I saw him again in the Cal League playoffs where he looked good for 3 innings but then ran into trouble in the 4'th and was not able to get out of the inning. What I saw in that game was very similar to what we used to see from Matt Cain early in his career where batters couldn't hit the fastball but he also didn't completely miss bats with it either. Batters kept fouling the FB back and he didn't have enough secondary stuff to make them pay for sitting on the FB. The pitch count ballooned, he got frustrated and the command got more shaky as the inning went on.
Crick has the elite fastball that sits 95-96 and touches 98. His changeup goes 90-91 MPH which probably needs more separation in velocity from the FB. He's got a good breaking ball, but without enough command to make it a put away pitch. Based on my relatively small observation sample size, my hypothesis is that Crick is not wild with the FB so much as he just does not have a wipeout secondary pitch that he can consistently go to if hitters are fouling off the FB. He then starts trying to overthrow the FB and everything comes unraveled. Of course, the K rates would tend to refute that idea, but the FB is really very good and the secondary stuff is good enough to get K's some of the time, but maybe not consistently.
It is very hard to find comps of pitchers who have both K and BB rates as high as Cricky although there are plenty of examples of pitchers with BB/9's in the upper 4's who went on to MLB success. Felix Hernandez had a BB/9 of 4.91 in AAA. Matt Cain was at 4.19 in AA and 4.50 in AAA. Robert Stephenson who is considered a top prospect in the Reds system had a BB/9 of 4.87 with a K/9 of 9.22 and an ERA of 4.74 at the same age in AA last year. So, while the control/command issue is one that needs to improve, I don't think it is quite the daunting problem that it has been made out to be in some circles.
Crick may just need more time to refine his secondary stuff. He was one of the younger players in AA last year at age 21 so age is not an issue yet. He could repeat AA and still be relatively young for the level. If he fails to make progress with the current secondary pitches, he may need to try using a cutter as his breaking pitch and maybe a splitter instead of the changeup. He still has a very high ceiling with plenty of time to figure it out.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Happy Boxing Day! Also 10th anniversary of the Sunda Trench Tsunami.
ReplyDeleteNice to have blogs like yours to counter the tragedies of daily life that we all face.
Maddy, Cain, Beede, Peavy, Crick...sounds like a good rotation for summer 2016!
NWGiantsFan
DtF!!!
I'll take that in my 2016 stocking!
DeleteMerry Christmas, Dr. B! I agree that the Giants should give Crick every chance to make it as a starter instead of writing him off as a reliever as more and more prospect "experts" are starting to do. Your observations of Crick are quite reminiscent of a young Cain: unhittable stuff but not refined enough to put hitters away without a number of long at bats and eventually early exits due to high pitch counts. We all know how Cain battled through his growing pains, due in large part to his excellent make up. So hopefully Crick also has similar make up and work ethic. And I agree witg NWGF that the Giants have the makings of a power rotation... we just have to be patient.
ReplyDeleteI didn't follow Cricky in 2014 as much as in 2013 but I would think his production was significantly impaired by Jeff Arnold's injury and not able to adjust before frustration kicked in ... you could see the same thing with Timmy when Sanchez went down, he just didn't seem comfortable yet with Susac and threw like crap before being relegated to reliever/non-releiver
ReplyDeleteboth/others need to find their strong catchers and get up to speed before their stats drop-off
I do think Jeff Arnold's injury might have had a negative ripple effect on the young pitchers in Richmond last year. Good point!
DeleteThe first postseason game in 2010, when we went to Atlanta and Timmy had a great game - that was Posey catching, wasn't it?
DeleteI think in 2011, Timmy started to decline.
Was it due to not having Molina? He had a great game at Atlanta, as mentioned above, with Posey catching.
Hard to argue with the kind of stuff Crick has, but what's going on upstairs? There are reports of issues between the Richmond coaching staff amidst threats to demote to San Jose if he couldn't pull it together. Well, I guess he did get the bullpen demotion. One wonders what goes on between the ears. I imagine if he can stay in the strike zone longer and cut those walks down from 6 and closer to 4, we'll also see more balls in play and fewer K's. I'm thinking he needs to get over the AA hurdle and learn to work with coaches there before taking on the PCL.
ReplyDeleteAs for Beede, how much different is he than Crick with respect to command of his stuff? It sure would have been nice to see him dominating the collegiates and giving the impression of a fiery competitor, but if he did have it all together, he would have been a top 5 pick.
At least the Giants will have two premier stuff arms in the pipeline, even though one of them is losing his grip.
I actually think Crick is very strong mentally, and I think that is what will lead him to having a successful career in the majors, as opposed to a guy like J. Sanchez. Sanchez had the stuff, but I felt like he was his own enemy. I think Crick will overcome his mechanics, maybe not without his knocks, but I've seen nothing to suggest he has any makeup issues. Not sure where you heard those reports!
DeleteYeah Ryan, I'm not sure I agree with your characterization of the situation. The Giants were concerned about too big of an innings jump due to the time missed in 2013. That likely figured into them not wanting him to start in the postseason. I would be cautious about using the word demotion here.
DeleteAs for Beede, he has the big fastball, but the development of his secondary pitches, particularly the changeup, is way ahead of Crick's, which is why I put him at #1 and Crick at #3.
I don't know where you get off with the phrase "losing his grip" or who you were referring to with it. I actually thought about hitting the button on the comment because of it. Almost nothing drives me crazier than people just throwing out bombs like that with nothing to back it up.
I won't argue that Crick might benefit from starting 2015 back in AA, but not for the reasons you give. He is probably not going to fast track the way Cain and Bumgarner did at the same stage, but he's still young and has lots of time to polish up his game.
I've read around and it's not a unfair statement, even if not well received or supported. An occasional knock I've read about Crick, here-and-there on the Internet, is that he ends up 'losing it' which often times leads to 'big innings.' Essentially the theories tend to fall into two categories. One is that his secondary offerings are weak, that once batters start sitting on his fastball and he starts making mistakes because he has no secondary 'plus pitch.'
DeleteA second one, I'll copy down below, is one I think is more likely, that is, once he starts to struggle with command, he starts to fall apart and it becomes a toxic feedback loop. This is from his A-Ball days.
... When Crick is commanding his pitches, he’s ready to throw his next pitch right after receiving the pitch from the catcher. You can observe this for yourself in the video attached below. When he fails to command a pitch, he stands in front of the mound mad at himself, sneaking peaks towards the batter’s box till finally taking the mound again for his sign. It’s even worse when he fails to command several pitches in a row. He will walk around the mound, grab the rosin bag and slowly make his way back to the mound. The quick worker I observed most of the game becomes a slug trying to aim his pitches. In the fourth, he exhibited this behavior, walking the leadoff hitter on five pitches. The coaching staff allowed him some wiggle room to regain his composure; and, for a minute, he regained it, striking out the next batter; however, after throwing ball one to the Braves next hitter, Crick got back in his sluggish routine again. After he walked the batter, his struggles prompted a mound visit. After the mound visit, the fast tempo Kyle Crick returned, at least till he gave up a leadoff single in the 5th inning.
And, FWIW, the guy who wrote this really likes Crick and thinks he's go a huge amount of potential. Especially for a guy who, at the time of that writing, had JUST TWO YEARS of pitching experience. But he also sees that things get into Crick's head. And when that happens, things can get bad.
The aforementioned video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2dJciEceiI
I recall Crick losing it rather quick in the playoff game, that Doc mentioned above, in San Bernardino.
DeleteI also think that if the problem is mental toughness, it may be improved with age and maturity.
DeleteAnd as Doc offered a couple of reasons for his high walk rates, it's a good first step, since to fix something, we must locate the cause or causes.
Yeah, I don't know how much stock to put on random internet observations. I mean everybody is entitled to their opinions, including me, but I would not regard them with authority.
DeleteAlso the sequence of events described in the link Moses provides, really isn't different than what you can see most any time in any MLB game. Lots of pitchers slow way down when they get runners on base and there are lots of visits by the pitching coach to the mound for bad body language. What did Roger Craig call it? Don't get your dauber down? I see nothing in that report to suggest that Crick was resisting instruction or that the coaches were frustrated with him.
DeleteA couple of years ago, I saw Andy Skeels have an extended conversation on the dugout steps with Andrew Susac after a funny looking play on the field. It would have been easy to infer that Skeels was dressing him down about something, but I really think he was just teaching, which is what is supposed to be happening in the minor leagues. Look where Susac is now!
There are lots of visits to the mound just to break the rhythm of the game or establish a tempo. "Struggles" is in the eye of the beholder.
Deleteagree with covechatter and DrB and have seen Cricky throw great stuff, I just think he needs to find/stay in his zone with or without JeffA which needs more work in 2015. I think the relationship between pitcher and catcher is vital and speaks to JeffA's ability to call a game. He needs to refind his guy to play catch with or get past it because it'll be Buster or Susac when he gets his cup of coffee
ReplyDeleteI forget Crick is so young.
ReplyDeleteAs for being #3, and Beede being #1, I think Mella is 1, Crick is 2 and Beede is 3 when it comes to our three top pitching prospects. This is not because I think you're 'wrong' or 'ignorant' or any such silly things. I just have a slightly different weighting to the various criteria::
1. I don't go by pure talent projections alone. If I did, I'd got Crick, Beede Mella. To me a player not only needs talent ,but also needs to show he's harnessing his talent.
2. Mella and Beede are #2 rotation pitchers though Beede might have enough upside to be a lower-tier ace.
3. Crick is an Ace pitching prospect through-and-through.
4. Crick and Beede both have some substantial control problems with their secondary pitches and Beede actually lost his curveball in his Junior year. So while Crick is not so good with his secondary, the loss of a pitch is an every scarier/bigger red flag for me. Both may end up as relievers if they can't fix these issues.
5. Mella has more control his plus-pitch breaking stuff and has a good (95MPH) fastball.
I think Mella has shown enough control that he has a reasonable chance of coming up this year (40-man) and that 2016 is going to be his year to enter the rotation or be traded.
One other thing -- Susac is not a prospect in my book. He's MLB. If he goes to the minors, it'll be for an injury rehab or to work on game-calling while Sanchez backs-up Posey. And I don't see it happening for two reasons. First, he's just a lot better than Sanchez. Second, Posey has yet to start more than 121 games (averaging 115) in a full season as an MLB catcher which means someone else is going to get 40 to 50 starts as Posey gets rest and 1B time.
Excited to have a prospect like Mella in the low minors but he is still in the low minors and had a shoulder scare last year. Long way to go. Beede's stuff is just as good and way more advanced.
DeleteHello Dr. B. Long time since I have commented. Do you see any chance any of your top 5 rated OFs (Williamson, Edie, Carbonell, Horan, Cabrera ) make the 25 and see significant playing time in '15?
ReplyDeleteFttts
Most likely not.
DeleteSpeaking of Crick, thoughts on trading him for Ben Zobrist??
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong, Crick still has a lot of value and I'm sure scouts on other teams can see his potential as well.
I would hope they would not trade Crick for Zobrist who is starting the decline phase of his career, IMO.
DeleteWe're not trading Crick for Zobrist.Probably someone like Blach.
DeleteZobrist is a useful player, no doubt, but trading a top 3 prospect in the organization for him would be too steep a price. Now that we have McGehee, Zobrist would likely take the role of super sub. I think we should groom Duffy for that role and I see him having the potential to be a Zobrist type of player one day. I would be ok with trading for Zobrist, but only if we can part with a lower level, lower ceiling prospect or two.
DeleteI thought that the Giants got McGehee so that they would not have to trade for someone expensive, in terms of prospects, like Zobrist. Zobrist would have been a very good replacement for Sandoval, at a large cost. McGehee is probably a workable placeholder for Sandoval's position until the Giants get a longer term third baseman who will not be Zobrist.
DeleteZobrist would probably play LF if the Giants did trade for him. Personally, I'm really not seeing it happen, but that may be wishful thinking.
DeleteAgree with BJ that Zobrist would be a valuable player since he can play multiple positions and add depth to the roster.. I saw that blurb in Gammons latest article that some GMs think the Giants will trade for Zobrist for a "package of prospects", hopefully a lower level prospect or two since Zobrist is a free agent in 2016. They should be looking to add depth losing Panda, Morse, and the injury histories of Pagan and Belt..
DeleteLG
I agree that Z is declining at nearly 34, but he's declining from four straight years of over 5 fWAR each, with strong offense and defense. Normal Zobrist has been worth peak Sandoval, pretty much. Sandoval will probably go up in Fenway, if he doesn't go up too much in Fenweight, and Zobrist will slide, but still . . .
DeleteBut I should add that I too would hesitate long before giving up a lot for him at this age and as a rental. I also don't know how fragile at 34 he may be.
DeleteZobrist had a slash line of .272/.354/.395 with 10 HR, 10 SB last year. His power numbers have been in steady decline since 2009, his peak season. He generates some impressive, and more than a little controversial, fWAR's for reasons that nobody can quite figure out. It seems to mostly come from a high walk rate and some pretty crazy defensive UZR numbers. Maybe he really is that good of a defender. I haven't seen him play very much so I don't have an eyeball test to compare with his metrics. I would definitely interpret them with caution. Even Fangraphs, the inventors of fWAR, can't seem to figure out how Zobrist does it. They ran an article a couple of months ago hypothesizing that his main value is in playing multiple positions even though fWAR is supposed to correct for positional value and therefore should not measure versatility!
DeleteIn addition to all that, the Giants would be getting just 1 year out of him before he hits free agency.
So yeah, I would not mind having Zobrist for 1 season, but I would not want to see the Giants give up a top prospect or multiple prospects for him.
Zobrist theories are way overboard. Every so often people pick up on some decent player who averages about 20 HR's a year, and has an all star appearance or two in their past, and they start talking about how Sabes should throw 3-4 top prospects. Any talk involving Crick or Susac is bonkers.
DeleteHe'd fill the offensive void left my Morse, and offer depth though.
If I thought Zobrist was likely to hit 20 HR's next year, I'd be all over a trade for even a top prospect like Crick. I mean, flags fly forever, right? Problem is, Zobrist hit 12 HR in 2013 and 10 in 2014. The days of hitting 20 and 27 HR's ain't coming back, and they certainly would not get a boost playing in AT&T Park!
DeleteI think we are all absolutely in accord on Z.
DeleteCrick should be a nice addition to the rotation.He needs to start throwing a curveball.Just to keep hitters honest.I watched him pitch last year in AFL.He looked great.He's still young.I believe Wheller had the same problem in the minors.He just needed some time to mature as a pitcher.I expect the same of Crick.
ReplyDeleteCrick just needs time. Just about every pitcher that is ultra competitive will start to steam when batters are fouling off pitch after pitch. Btw, Crick is a Texan. Blackburn and Okert are the Oklahomans.
ReplyDeleteDidn't read all the comments, so apologies if this was already asked. I think what I like about the overpowering fastball and the wild hair on occasion is that if he can't sort out some of the issues, I feel (maybe wrongly?) that he could easily transition to a reliever. What are your thoughts on his floor being a setup man or even a closer? Not every SP prospect with shiny stats pans out.
ReplyDeleteAndy in San Diego
I hope the Giants do not give up on Crick as a starter too soon.
Delete