TPC in Retrospect: Tommy Hanson 2009 Projection

Back in January I put together a post projecting Tommy Hanson's stats for 2009. At the time, it was hard to say how much the Braves would use Hanson, but ZiPS had him pegged for a total of 19 innings, a 5.21 ERA, and a 1-1 record. My projection wasn't perfect, but I think it was a bit better than the ZiPS projection.

To come up with my projection, I didn't simply grab some figures out of a hat. I compiled a list of comparables for Hanson and averaged out their performances during their major league season at the age of 23. At first glance, the compilation technique might not seem extremely accurate, but I think if we look a bit beyond the surface, we'll see that it is actually a very viable and mostly accurate approach.

Here's my projected line for Hanson coming into 2009:
7.9 K/9
4.1 BB/9
1.42 WHIP
4.56 ERA
.500 Win Percentage

Actual 2009 stats to date:
7.49 K/9
3.51 BB/9
1.25 WHIP
3.07 ERA
9-3 record, or .750 Win Percentage

The K/9 projection was relatively spot on, and the BB/9 projection wasn't too far off, but it would seem that my WHIP, ERA, and win percentage projections were completely obliterated. However, I would like to throw out another stat that Hanson has posted this year that will help make sense of the chaos:

Tommy Hanson 2009 tRA: 4.37

For those of you not familiar with tRA, here's the explanation given by fangraphs.com:

tRA involves assigning run and out values to all events under a pitcher’s control and coming up with an expected number of runs allowed and outs generated in a defense and park neutral environment. tRA is on a R/9 scale and does not involve any regression of the rates.

In essence, tRA gives us an idea of what a pitcher's true ERA should be given their overall performance throughout the season minus good luck and timely fielding.

Apparently, Hanson has had quite a bit of luck this season, and for whatever reason, his ERA is substantially lower than his tRA. This also helps explain why his WHIP and winning percentages seem to be so much better than my projections. Somewhere among all of his starts, there were a certain number of events that kept men off base and runners from crossing the plate while Hanson was on the mound, and his surface level stats depict a pitcher that is much different from his true production.

With that in mind, I feel like my projection of a 4.56 ERA is not far from Hanson's tRA of 4.37, and I think if we repeated the 2009 season 100 times in a vacuum, my projection would be remarkably accurate. Unfortunately, we don't live in a vacuum, and each season is only played once, and half of my projection has taken a sharp beating. I guess Tommy Hanson's good luck is by default my bad luck in this situation.



...Read more

2009 N.L. Rookie of the Year Update -- Pitchers in Contention

Prior to the start of the 2009 season, I made some speculations about who might be in the running for the N.L. Rookie of the Year Award. It's still a bit early to declare an obvious winner, but there are a few interesting candidates that were no where to be found on any preseason list.

For my original 2009 N.L. ROY list, I included guys like Cameron Maybin, Colby Rasmus, Kenshin Kawakami, Tommy Hanson, and Dexter Fowler. Here's the basic projection I wrote up in my preseason post:

"...if I had to narrow down the field (for position players), I'd include Maybin, Fowler, and (Gaby) Sanchez. Overall though, I think this year's position players provide a relatively weak field of candidates, which opens up the opportunity for a pitcher to win the award.

"...I really can't single out any one player that I feel is going to stand out this year, and it might come down to who gets more playing time and doesn't screw up a whole bunch. To narrow it down, Kenshin Kawakami has the best shot at R.O.Y. simply because he has a secure starting role with major league team."

Well, we're over two thirds through the season, and it looks like Kenshin Kawakami is pretty much out of the race. With a 5-9 record and a 4.13 ERA, Kawakami can't possibly keep up with teammate Tommy Hanson, who has a 7-2 record, and a 3.05 ERA. Besides Hanson, Randy Wells and J.A. Happ have both added their names to the debate, each posting WHIPs of 1.20 or less, and ERAs of 3.01 or better.

Since Hideo Nomo won Rookie of the Year in 1995 with 13 wins, the fewest number of wins by any ROY pitcher was 12, when Scott Williamson finished with a 12-7 record and also had 19 saves and posted an ERA of just 2.41 in 1999. The average WHIP and ERA since Nomo has been 1.21 and 3.09 respectively.

There aren't any great rookie closers to add to the list, so for now it looks like Wells, Happ, and Hanson will be the only rookie pitchers making their cases over the next 50 games. At this point, I'm not sure if any of them has a distinct advantage, as each of them pitches for teams involved in a playoff battle with the offensive support and defensive capacity to keep them in line for at least 3 or 4 more wins. At least one of these guys is going to win 5 or 6 more games, and it's very possible that all 3 of them will still be in contention for Rookie of the Year at the end of the season.

Later this week, I'll break down the position players still in the running for N.L. R.O.Y. and then make some predictions about who will win it in the end.

...Read more

Quick Hits: Tommy Hanson

Yesterday, Tommy Hanson took it to the Red Sox despite fighting off the flu, and pitching in temperatures that reached well beyond anyone's comfort zone. He's now got a record of 4-0, with an ERA of 2.48. He hasn't allowed a run in his last 3 starts, and looks to be dominating every team he faces.

It would seem that Hanson -- at the ripe old age of 22 -- is well on his way to establishing himself as one of the Brave's premier starters, and perhaps one of the best in the league. But let me throw out a few numbers at you and let's see what really lies below the surface.

Hanson's current K/BB ratio is 1.06, his groundball rate of 31%, he has a WHIP of 1.41, and a home run rate of 5%. His FIP (Fielding Independent Pitching, which measures the number of runs a pitcher is likely to allow in 9 innings given his other stats) is 5.10. National League pitchers with similar stats include Ian Snell, who was recently demoted to AAA after posting an ERA of 5.36, Micah Owings, Jeff Karstens, John Maine, and Shairon Martis. Not exactly a who's who list of ace pitchers.

So, if Hanson's peripheral stats put him in such poor company, why the 4-0 record and stellar ERA? The missing link here is probably the fact that opposing hitters have posted a BABIP of just .239 against Hanson this year at the major league level. That means, that for every ball put into play against Hanson, only 23% of them are finding a gap in the defense.

It's possible that hitters are having a difficult time making solid contact with Hanson's pitches, and the .239 BABIP will prove to be the deciding factor in his future dominance. But if we consider that Hanson has posted a BABIP generally between .260 and .290 in the minors, it is only appropriate to assume that pitching in the majors will result in a BABIP of at least .260 or more. As an example, take Tim Lincecum, perhaps the most dominant young pitcher in the nation. Throughout the minors, Lincecum held batters to a BABIP between .220 and .250, 40 points below Hanson's minor league record. Since reaching the majors, Lincecum has allowed a BABIP between .296 and .336, essentially 60 to 90 points above Hanson's current pace.

If we measure Hanson's BABIP success against other Brave's pitchers, the picture doesn't get much better. Jair Jurrjens has a BABIP of .298 for the year, Javier Vazquez currently sits at .305, and Derek Lowe has a BABIP of .309 despite posting a ground ball rate of 54%.

The most likely explanation for Hanson's current success is probably a bit of luck, limited exposure to opposing hitters, and a small sample size. Given enough time (say 6 to 8 more weeks), there's about a 80-90% chance that Hanson's BABIP reverts back to somewhere around .300, and his ERA drifts upwards of 4.00. It's not absolutely set in stone, but the evidence suggests that Hanson isn't as good as he looks, and sooner or later the results will prove to be less than stellar. As a Brave's fan, I hope he keeps it up, but as a realistic stats fan, I don't see it happening. If I were Frank Wren, I'd sell high and trade Hanson for a big time bat (Adrian Gonzalez would look great in a Brave's uni).

2009 N.L. Rookie of the Year Projections and Speculation

(Update Aug. 16, 2009: For a more up-to-date analysis of the 2009 Rookie of the Year contenders, check out my recent posts detailing the N.L. pitchers and position players still in contention)

I covered most of the candidates for the A.L. Rookie of the Year a while back, and now it's time to take a look at the N.L. candidates. I might be missing some eligible players, so if you think I should add anyone, just let me know.

When we looked at the A.L. candidates, I came up with the following chart of hitters that have won the award since 1990.

Using the averages at the bottom of the chart, we'll look to see which N.L. R.O.Y. candidates match up the best and narrow down the field. We'll also do the same thing using the following chart of pitchers that have won the award since 1990.

I think it should be noted that the odds of a pitcher winning the rookie of the year are very low. It's not impossible, but it looks like it only happens when the rookie position players are unusually below average. It's also worth pointing out that of the 8 pitchers that have won the award since 1990, two were Japanese pitchers with considerable experience at the professional level, and 3 of the above pitchers spent considerable time coming out of the bullpen. That means that a starting pitcher coming straight from the minors has roughly a 10% chance of winning rookie of the year any given year. Pretty tough odds.

Ok, so now we can make up a list of hitters and pitchers that are likely to meet the requirements for rookie of the year in the National League this year and come up with some basic projections to see what kind of shot they have at winning the award. (The following projections are based off of a combination of the projections given by Bill James, CHONES, Marcel, Oliver, Zips, and my own projections.)


There isn't really a standout among the group. I think Gamel might have the best shot, but everyone else in the group is completely capable of having a solid year and posting R.O.Y. worthy stats. I think McCutchen and Rasmus will probably come up short, and Gamel may not get enough playing time, so if I had to narrow down the field, I'd include Maybin, Fowler, and Sanchez. Overall though, I think this year's position players provide a relatively weak field of candidates, which opens up the opportunity for a pitcher to win the award.

So, let's take a quick look at the rookie N.L. pitchers.

Not really much going on there either. There are a few other N.L. players that have been mentioned as candidates for the R.O.Y. award (including John Mayberry Jr. and Jordan Zimmerman), but I think we've covered the names that are mentioned most often.

So, who's it gonna' be? I really can't single out any one player that I feel is going to stand out this year, and it might come down to who gets more playing time and doesn't screw up a whole bunch. To narrow it down, Kenshin Kawakami has the best shot at R.O.Y. simply because he has a secure starting role with major league team.

The N.L. field is wide open this year as far as the rookie of the year award is concerned. There are no clear cut stand-outs, and it's very likely that a player currently under the radar could spring to the forefront and win it. Be on the lookout for older players getting their shot at a major league roster spot due to injury or trades, especially power hitting corner outfielders or corner infielders. Also, look out for talented relief pitchers, especially closers, that could come in and save 25 or more games for a team in a division race.

If anyone can think of a player that has not been mentioned, be sure to let me know, and we'll throw him in the mix. I'm sure there are plenty of sleepers out there that no one is even considering right now. We'll check back in a few months and see how things look.

Edit: Pablo Sandoval is NOT eligible for Rookie of the Year (145 at-bats in 2008). Thanks for the heads up on that one Jim.

...Read more

TPC 2009 Top 10 Power Pitchers

Everybody loves a good strikeout performance, and these guys can do it with the best of them. Whether it's a 3 digit fastball or a ridiculous curve, batters just don't seem to be able to keep up.

Before we get started, I want to clarify that this list is not meant to reflect the minor league players with the most strikeouts in 2008, or the pitchers that I think will have the most strikeouts in 2009. This list is a ranking of the players that I feel have displayed a capacity to become average to great major league strikeout pitchers. The factors considered included stats, scouting reports, age, competition level, and comparable players.

(*As with my power and contact hitters list, this list excludes all players that either have not played in the minors, or have sample sizes that are too small for analytical comparisons. If you would like, you can consider Stephen Strasburg the #1b pick considering his recent performances and elite scouting reports.)

Ok, now for the good stuff.

1. Neftali Feliz -- Big time stuff, with decent control to boot. At just 20 years old, Feliz can top out at a cool 100 mph with his fastball, and he struck out 33% of the batters he faced at A ball in 2008.

2. Madison Bumgarner -- For a while, Bumgarner was a pure fastball pitcher, but has since developed some decent secondary offerings. At just 18 years old, his fastball had been clocked at 95 mph, and with a 6'4", 215 lbs frame there's reason to believe he could add a bit more velocity in the coming years. Finished out A ball by striking out 42% of the batters he faced over his last 32 innings.

3. Tommy Hanson -- Though his fastball was in the low 90's as recently as last April, Hanson has been in the high 90's range for the past several months, and has been throwing a nasty slider as well. Past stats aren't great, but perhaps the best is yet to come.

4. Christian Friedrich -- Friedrich had a great professional debut in '08, striking out over 12 batters per 9 innings pitched. His fastball usually stays around the 89-92 range, but he also throws a very good curve ball that misses a lot of bats. At just 20 years old,

5. Dellin Betances -- At 6'9", Betances can be a very intimidating guy. Toss in a 98 mph fastball (although it usually doesn't break 95 in games), and a promising knuckle curve, and it looks like the Yankees might need to make room for Betances in another couple of years.

6. Gio Gonzalez -- Although his stint in the majors didn't go so well (7.68 ERA, 1.68 WHIP in 34 innings), Gonazalez still struck out a batter an inning. He's got the stuff to be a major league pitcher, and at just 23 years old he still has plenty of time to develop.

7. Jeremy Jeffress -- Depending on the radar gun, Jeffress has been clocked as high as 102 mph, and while control remains an issue (both on and off the mound), he's got tons of talent and youth on his side. At 20 years old, Jeffress struck out 30% of the batters he faced at A+ ball, and has a career K/9 or 10.4.

8. Chris Tillman -- While control remains an issue for Tillman, he put in some very nice performances at AA last year as a 20 year old, averaging 10.2 strikeout per 9 innings. Tillman tops out around 94 mph, and mixes in a curveball and change-up to keep batters guessing.

9. Trevor Cahill -- Cahill shares several qualities with Tillman, managing to dominant at times, and lose control at others. He usually works in the low 90's, mixing in several other pitches, including a knuckle curve at times, as well as a change up and slider.

10. Will Inman -- Inman had great stats at A ball in 2006 and 2007, but doesn't quite yet have the pure stuff to blow hitters away on a regular basis at higher levels. Average fastball, decent curve, lots of time to work on both, and a future career in the pitcher friendly confines of San Diego.


Almost made the list:

Jake McGee (Tommy John victim) -- likely would have made the top 5
Cole Rohrbough (ankle surgery) -- should be good to go in '09
Nick Barnese -- good stuff, but needs to perform above short season A ball
Michael Bowden -- control has steadily improved, but strikeouts have steadily dropped
Brett Anderson -- AA stats were impressive, but previous stats suggest an emphasis on control rather than strikeouts
Henry Rodriguez -- has struggled with consistency
Brad Holt -- also needs to prove himself against advanced hitters
Jeremy Hellickson -- great stuff, just missed the list
Brett Cecil -- great overall pitcher, not dominant strikeout guy (yet)
...Read more

TPC 2009 Top Pitching Prospects Leftovers: Tommy Hanson

As with all rankings lists, the 2009 TPC top pitching list couldn't include everyone, so I would like to take some time to explain why certain pitchers didn't make the list. For starters, we'll look at Tommy Hanson, the #5 rated prospect in the nation according to Baseball America.

Hanson was considered a very solid prospect heading into 2008, and with a 3.03 ERA at AA in 98 innings in 2008, it looked like he might be ready to make a few starts for the Braves in 2009. Once winter ball rolled around, Hanson headed out to Arizona, where he garnered a lot of attention and the leagues MVP award after striking out 49 batters and allowing just 2 earned runs in 29 innings. Following the conclusion of winter ball, Hanson's stock began to rapidly climb, as several publications gave him the #1 spot among the Braves' prospects, and he was ultimately given the #5 overall spot by Baseball America. As a life long Braves fan, I was excited that so many people believed in Hanson, but there were several reasons why I couldn't fully accept the hype. In fact, after considerable research, I concluded while Hanson had above average talent, the hype had gotten way out of hand, and in scientific terms, a positive feedback system had been created, building hype off of hype. To give everyone a better idea of what led me to this conclusion, I'd like to take some time to discuss a few basic models of analysis that I use.

Last July I wrote a post highlighting some of the comparable pitchers for Hanson, and discussed why I felt the hype was beginning to get out of line with reality. While Hanson's numbers at AA last year looked impressive, once I started comparing them to other pitchers his age, they seemed above average, but not superb.

I ordered the following list of AA stats by fielding independent pitching (FIP), which according to Firstinning.com "considers all things that fielders cannot influence: strikeouts, walks, and home runs. Most pitchers' ability to influence balls in play is relatively weak, so FIP or DIPS are more useful estimates of pitcher's ability than ERA." The official formula for FIP is ((HR*13 + (BB + HBP) *3 - SO * 2) / IP ) + (3.0 to 3.5). The last bit of the equation is league-specific factor that compensates for variations in league talent on a year to year basis.

FIP isn't a fail proof way of judging a pitcher's performance level, but it's fairly accurate, and is especially useful in analyzing minor league pitchers since the varying levels of defensive skill in the minors can wreak havoc on other stats like ERA and WHIP. If I'm looking for a quick summary of a pitcher's performance, I'll usually look at FIP first.

Anyways, according to FIP, Hanson's individual performance level at AA was below a lot of other talented pitchers, many of which pitched at AA at a younger age than Hanson. While several of the pitchers are very talented and were worthy of a top 10 ranking in the minors, others like Sean Gallagher and Wade Davis were generally considered to be in the top 15 or top 20 at best. With an FIP of 3.68, Hanson didn't even beat out Gio Gonzalez, who was ranked as the 97th best prospect in 2009 by Baseball America.

While FIP is a useful stat, it doesn't always tell the whole story. Sometimes I prefer to look strictly at only the stats that a pitcher can directly control, such as strikeouts, walks, and groundball rates (these 3 stats also happen to be the most important indicators of a pitcher's success at the major league level). So, if we take another look at the above list of players and base an analysis strictly off of those 3 stats, where would Hanson fit in? We can immediately put Hughes, Chamberlain, and Gonzalez ahead of Hanson since they did better than him in every category. Once you take age into consideration, Bailey, Billingsley, and Gallardo all performed as well as or better than Hanson at a younger age, so they get ranked ahead of him as well. Brett Cecil had essentially the same strikeout rate, much better control, and a far superior groundball rate, so he too gets ranked ahead of Hanson. That leaves us with just Bowden, Gallagher, and Davis. I can't really argue that any of those 3 are necessarily better than Hanson, but he didn't exceed any of their numbers by a considerable margin, so I also can't make a decent argument to rank him ahead of any of them.

So, if Hanson doesn't look so hot after considering comparable pitchers, FIP, and strictly pitcher controlled factors, statistically speaking there isn't much of a case for him as a current top 10 (or even top 20) talent. The only reason we might be able to justify putting a pitcher with his numbers in the top 20 is if we do so based off of scouting reports. In Hanson's case, scouts rave about his current and future capacity, and that's certainly a good indicator, but the current hype is generally based off of Hanson's performances against high A or AA level hitters, and we've already determined that for his age, Hanson hasn't exactly posted the most superior stats. We also have to keep in mind that scouting reports are very much open to interpretation, and can be written with a personal slant or bias. Scouting reports are also generally based off of a very small sample size, and usually only express data in qualitative terms with very little numerical data to support whatever a scout is assuming about a player's performance. When it comes to a concise scientific analysis of any subject, quantitative data is always preferred over qualitative, and personally, I tend to give statistical data more weight than scouting reports when it comes to minor league prospects.  There is no way to accurately and appropriately compensate for all of the variable factors involved in the writing and interpreting of scouting reports. Afterall, other than radar gun readings and some stop watch timings, scouting reports are basically someone's opinion about a certain player, and provide very few hard facts.  In most professional circles, theories based off of individual qualitative perception is generally considered bad science.  If we accepted as fact everything we think we see without proper analysis, we would all believe that magicians really can fly, and an infinite number of white rabbits can be pulled from a top hat. 

But let's say the scouting reports are right, and that they are just as accurate as any statistical data we have at our disposal. From what I've read, Hanson began throwing a slider halfway through the summer, and if you check his stats for July and August, his K% jumped up by about 10%, while his ERA dropped from about 4.00 to below 2.00. I've also read numerous accounts that this spring Hanson has looked very impressive, hitting the high 90's with his fastball, and throwing a slider that compares well to that of John Smoltz. If all of that is 100% accurate, and Hanson is in fact pitching at a level that would allow him at the age of 22 to strike out 30-35% of hitters at AA ball while maintaining the same walk rate and groundball rate, would we be justified in moving him into the top 20 or top 10? The short and honest answer is no. Once you consider his age, those stats still would not be considerably better than the 20 and 21 year olds we looked at above. The same can be said for the scouting reports on Hanson. Once they are interpreted in the appropriate context (age, competition level, comparable players), there are just too many other pitchers the same age or younger who have garnered similar or better reports.

There's just no way to justify naming Hanson one of the top 20 pitchers in the minors based solely off of current statistical and scouting data. We could argue that while he may not be top 20 material at this moment, there might be a chance that we could give him a top 20 spot based off of what we assume he'll do in the future, or in other words, what we believe his ceiling of potential to be. Afterall, if we knew for a fact that Hanson would be a future ace in a year or two, couldn't his current level of performance be overlooked? But here's where we run into a problem. The only resources we have for projecting future performance are stats and scouting reports, both of which can be viewed as data concerning a player's current talent level, or as data concerning a player's future potential. As we've already discussed, the statistical data suggests that Hanson is currently on track to be a good, but not great starter. If we judge him by his comparable players, he could be a solid #2 or #3 starter in a few years, and by his late 20's he could be considered a #1 starter if things go well for him. But after the age of 30, it's very hard to predict what a player will do, as evidenced by the vast array of both stars and average players that have seen their careers take a completely different path once they got past their 20's (see Andruw Jones, Dale Murphy, Jamie Moyer, Sandy Koufax, John Smoltz, etc.). While we'd like to say that Hanson will only get better as he ages, the majority of players see their performance levels decline as they get older, and only a handful are able to continue to play without sustaining some kind of drop off, and even fewer will actually see their performance levels improve. The appropriate thing to do in Hanson's case is to either apply the general trend (his production will decrease from his late 20's to his early to mid-30's), or not speculate about it at all.

So, once again, the statistical data doesn't help Hanson, even if we use it to project his future success. And while some scouts may project him as a future ace, it's really just speculation. Watching a player pitch and calling him a #1 starter doesn't actually make him a #1 starter. He might be given the #1 spot, but unless his performances justify keeping him in that spot, he'll get bumped. And just like we discuessed before, past statistical data doesn't support any type of theory that projects Hanson as a pitcher with #1 starter results anytime soon. If we assume he will actually be a #1 starter in the near future, that assumption will be based solely off of the personal opinion of the so-called expert scouts that have seen him pitch. I don't know about anyone else, but after watching recent events (the economic collapse), my faith in the "experts" is only as strong as the logical and well supported data they provide for their projections, and so far I have not seen any superior scouting reports published on Hanson that were accompanied by a rational and convincing statistical analysis.

Well, this post has gone on much longer than I anticipated, but what I'm really trying to say is that statistically speaking, Hanson is not currently a top 20 pitcher. In statistical terms, he also does not qualify as an elite pitcher when considering his future performance levels. As for scouting reports, current reports are promising, but when taken in context, do not justify a top 20 ranking. The only reason we have to put Hanson in the top 20 is because there are people in major league circles who believe he has the stuff to be a future ace. While it sounds good in theory, it is a very poorly supported assumption, and can be considered personal opinion at best, and speculation at worst. In more critical terms, the only thing suggesting that Hanson will be a future ace is hype, and while hype may sometimes be justified, in this case the only thing supporting the hype is the actual hype itself.

TPC 2009 Projection: Tommy Hanson

The following projection is based off of the assumption that the Braves will call up Tommy Hanson sometime in 2009. I'm not going to try and guess exactly when they'll call him up, but barring injury or some kind of horrible start in AAA, he should be called up sometime before the All-Star break.

Before we come up with a rough projection, let's first identify some pitchers that have posted similar minor league numbers to Hanson (each pitcher was 21 during their time at AA; all stats are overall minor league averages).

Of these 5 comparable pitchers, I think Johnny Cueto matches up the best with Hanson.  Cueto's walk rate was a bit higher, but his ground ball rate was also a bit higher, so it all kind of evens out.  I threw Jesse Foppert up there (the once rising phenom in the Giants organization) simply because his minor league numbers were somewhat similar to Hanson and Foppert actually pitched in the majors for almost a whole season before undergoing Tommy John surgery.  Unfortunately, I can't find a GB% for Foppert from before his injury, but if we assume that at worst he posted a 40% GB%, then he can provide us with a decent comp for Hanson.

Anyways, the first thing that strikes me when I look at Hanson's comparables is that he seems to be benefiting from some good luck or pitcher friendly situations.   His WHIP of 1.10 and ERA of 2.74 are similar to Jake Peavy's, but his K/9, BB/9, and GB% suggest that his actual performance is considerably inferior to Peavy.  With that in mind, it comes at no surprise that almost a third of Hanson's minor league innings came at Myrtle Beach, where hitters tend to struggle.  But that aside, we should keep in mind that the quality of minor league defenses can vary greatly, so WHIP and ERA are often out of the control of individual pitchers.  

The few stats that a pitcher can control in the minors include strike out rates, walk rates, and ground ball rates.  So, before we look at some possible major league stats for Hanson in '09, let's move forward with a rough ranking system that has Hanson matched up with Cueto and Jon Lester, while coming in somewhere below Jake Peavy and Jesse Foppert, and somewhere just above Scott Olsen.

Below are the major league stats for each of the above pitchers at the age of 22 years old:

          

If we dispose of the outliers in each category, we come up with a K/9 of about 7.9, a BB/9 of 4.1, a WHIP of 1.42, and an ERA of 4.56.  I'm pretty comfortable with those numbers for Hanson, and had he posted them in 2008, he would have fit in somewhere between Jair Jurrjens and Mike Hampton, and would probably have maintained a .500 win percentage for the Braves.  Not bad, but not great.

TPC 2009 Projection for Tommy Hanson:  7.9 K/9, 4.1 BB/9, 1.42 WHIP, 4.56 ERA, .500 win percentage

...Read more

Tommy Hanson vs. Derek Holland vs. Neftali Feliz

"Hanson probably has the best stuff of anybody in the organization right now--even at the big league level. If there is one kid in the whole organization who is untouchable in a trade--that was one of the hang-ups in the Peavy deal--it would be this kid. He's as good as advertised. He's going to have a chance to make this club out of spring training. If we don't make a trade for a No. 1 starter, I'd say it's a pretty good bet the kid could be on the opening day roster. He's not going to be starting Game 1, but you'll probably see him the first week of the season."

-Chipper Jones

I know how much some of you all like Tommy Hanson, and as a Braves fan I really hope he turns out to be a great one, but just in case you've bought into the Tommy Hanson hype, here's a bit of perspective for you.

Raise your hand if you can name the 5 prospects the Braves gave up in 2007 for Mark Teixeira. If you said Matt Harrison, Elvis Andrus, Jarrod Saltalamacchia (I spelled that without looking), Beau Jones, and Neftali Feliz, then give yourself a pat on the back, because you were correct my friend. Prior to that trade, most avid Braves fans knew who Salty was, they also knew a few things about Elvis Andrus, and a few had even heard of Matt Harrison. But there weren't many fans out there who knew much about Beau Jones, and there might have been a handful of fans who recognized Neftali Feliz's name.

Fast forward about 18 months, and suddenly the Braves find themselves with very few options going into the 2009 season, piecing together an aging pitching staff and hoping that Jeff Francoeur and Chipper Jones can collectively put together 500 solid at bats. Meanwhile, the Rangers have a very healthy and powerful offense, and are quietly putting together a respectable group of pitching prospects.

Neftali Feliz, who before 2008 was probably considered basic filler in the Teixeira trade, is heading the Rangers' young pitching stars, putting up some of the best pitching stats of any Rangers prospect in recent history. While most Braves fans are completely hooked on Tommy Hanson, they'll soon find out that the Braves actually sent their best pitching prospect to Texas. To illustrate my point, here's a side-by-side comparison of Hanson and Feliz, along with Derek Holland, a very capable, yet overlooked Rangers pitching prospect.

Except for his strike out rate, Holland has outpaced Hanson, and has demonstrated the ability to keep the ball in the park while playing in some very hitter friendly leagues. Feliz is on the verge of being a very exciting pitching prospect, and will probably be soon be considered a top 20 or even top 10 prospect.

Just looking at those numbers, there's really no comparison. Feliz is just nasty (obviously his WHIP and ERA could be better, but his age puts him over the top), while Hanson doesn't even top Derek Holland, who has yet to appear on a single major prospect ranking list (although I expect him to crack the top 50 of several lists in the next few months). And once again, the problem with Hanson is easy to identify: his inability to keep the ball on the ground and inside the park.

Am I saying Hanson will never be any good? Not at all. Am I saying he will absolutely never be better than Derek Holland or Neftali Feliz? Once again, no. But what I'm getting at is that at this moment in time, there are better pitching prospects that for whatever reason are not getting the attention they deserve, while Braves fans (and more importantly the Braves front office and players) are all but certain that Hanson is "untouchable."

I'm not discounting scouting reports or insisting that I'm absolutely right about this one, so if you're a Hanson fan, please don't take all of this the wrong way. However, as a life long Braves fan, I hope that Frank Wren and company are able to realize exactly what guys like Hanson are and are not capable of accomplishing over the next few years, and plan accordingly. And for all you Rangers fans, take a moment to appreciate that your team is making some very smart moves as of late, and that the future is looking brighter.

...Read more

Tommy Hanson Pitching Mechanics

As most of you know, I think that Tommy Hanson has been a bit over hyped, and he'll struggle for a few years in the majors before putting it all together. DriveLineMechanics.com has an interesting breakdown of his mechanics. Good arm action, but his finish leaves his release point high in my opinion, which helps explain his low GB% (the dominant and glaring weakness in his game).

Tommy Hanson Thoughts and Comments

I've had a few requests from Braves fans to address my thoughts on Tommy Hanson. I know a lot of people have been impressed with him this year, but I don't think he's all that great. In fact, the Braves don't have a single pitcher in the minors that I think is going to have much of an impact over the next 3 to 5 years.

Anyways, here's Hanson and fellow comparables.

Not a bad list of comparables, but not great either. What really bothers me about Hanson and every other pitcher the Braves have in their farm system is the lack of solid ground ball rates. I don't know if the Braves pitching coaches don't teach their pitchers to induce ground balls, or if the pitchers just don't have the talent to do so. My gut tells me that the pitchers have plenty of talent, they just aren't being taught the importance of ground balls and how to make them happen.

To make my point, here's a brief excerpt from a recent interview Project Prospect conducted with Trevor Cahill:

AL: Simply put, you're a guy that balances out a lot of way to keep people off the bases. High strikeout rates, keeping the ball on the ground, low walk rate -- what's your approach when you take the mound?

TC: Usually it's about getting ground balls. Early contact and ground balls gets you later into games. I got a little obsessed with the strikeout when I was with [High-A] Stockton. I would start throwing to get them to swing and miss instead of getting them to roll over. That kind of prevented me from getting deep into games.

AL: So would you rather pitch deep into the game -- eighth inning, complete game -- or strike 15, 16 guys out?

TC: Well, right now with one inning [in the Futures Game], it's nice to strike out guys. But it helps the team out more if you go eight innings and give up no runs than it does if you go six innings, give up no runs, and get the strikeouts. Strikeouts don't matter for the win.

I always like to keep it in my back pocket. If a guy gets on third base with no outs and you need strike three, it's nice to be able to have it.

If the Braves minor league system was teaching their pitchers the importance and efficiency of ground balls, there would be a lot more guys like Trevor Cahill and Brett Anderson in their system, and fewer Tommy Hansons. It would seem logical that a team that benefited so much from the efforts of Greg Maddux (career GB% around 60%) and Tom Glavine (50%) would try to instill their young pitchers with similar skills. However, at current, their best ground ball starting pitchers are averaging a GB% of 50% or less(compared to 60% or higher in the Oakland A's system), severely limiting their overall effectiveness. As long as the Braves fail to teach this important aspect of the game to their young pitchers, Braves fans are going to continue to see a revolving door of pitching prospects like Chuck James and Kyle Davies. ...Read more