Perhaps the most pejorative term in scouting parlance is “Quad-A.” It’s a term loosely applied to player who can dominate in the Pacific Coast League or the International League, but just doesn’t possess the skills to thrive at the highest level of competition.

Coming into the 2008 season, Rangers outfielder Nelson Cruz appeared to fit the label to a T. The 6-3, 230 pounder (who also toiled in the Mets and Athletics farm systems) was acquired along with Carlos Lee as part of a 2006 deadline deal with the Brewers that shipped Francisco Cordero, Kevin Mench, Laynce Nix and Julian Cordero to Milwaukee. Cruz creamed the ball at AAA, but he fell flat on his face in two stints with the Rangers in 2006 and 2007:

2006

AAA (Brewers): .302/.373/.528, 10.2 BB%, 27 K%, .226 ISO in 371 AB
Rangers: .223/.261/.385, 5.1 BB%, 24.6 K%, .162 ISO in 130 AB

2007

AAA (Rangers): .352/.426/.698, 11.5 BB%, 21 K%, .346 ISO in 162 AB
Rangers: .235/.287/.384, 6.4 BB%, 28.3 K%, .150 ISO in 307 AB

Cruz looked like the classic high-power, low-contact slugger that could bash in the PCL but couldn’t cut it in the majors. At 26 and with two failed opportunities to establish himself, Cruz looked destined to ride the AAA bus circuit for years to come.

In 2008, Cruz decided to turn into Oklahoma’s answer to Barry Bonds, hitting a scorching .342/.426/.695 in 383 AB at AAA, with a 12.8 BB% and a 22.7 K%. But, unlike the previous years, Cruz continued to murder the ball upon his recall to Texas. In 115 AB, he batted .330/.421/.609, belting 7 home runs. He drew walks at a healthy clip (12.9 BB%) while striking out in about one quarter of his at-bats (24.3%). So, has Cruz broken out?

No. Sure, Cruz’s AAA line was legitimately impressive, but we’re talking about a 28 year-old whose skill set remains the same as it was entering the year: impressive power, but just decent plate patience and lofty strikeout rates. His small-sample mashing might engender lofty expectations, but it’s important to keep the big picture in mind. Cruz had a .388 average on balls in play, a very high number that will regress. Also, the chances of a guy striking out so often hitting .330 are essentially zero.

In 557 career major league at-bats (roughly a year’s worth of playing time), Cruz is a .251/.312/.431 hitter, with 7.8% walk rate and a 26.4% K rate. For 2009, Marcel projects a .258/.324/.435 line. Expecting something along those lines seems reasonable. However, that’s a level of production that you probably want to shoot higher than for your lineup. Cruz has his uses on a major league roster as a power bat, but keep in mind that he’s a 28 year-old minor league slugger, not a hot young prospect. Don’t be fooled by that small sample size.

Amid considerably less fanfare than some other recent Japanese stars coming stateside, Dodgers right-hander Hiroki Kuroda delivered just what was expected of him in 2008. Inked to a three-year, $35.3 million contract last offseason, the longtime Hiroshima Toyo Carp ace translated his excellent control and groundball tendencies to the big leagues rather seamlessly.

Prior to the 2008 season, Baseball Prospectus’ PECOTA system churned Kuroda’s Japanese numbers and spit out the following projection: a 4.12 ERA, 5.1 K/9 and 2.3 BB/9. The 33 year-old slightly surpassed that forecast, posting a 3.73 ERA, 5.69 K/9 and 2.06 BB/9. In addition to limiting the walks, Kuroda was a worm-killer, generating grounders at a 51.3% clip (11th-highest among starting pitchers).

His 7.6 Home Run/Flyball rate (HR/FB%) was pretty low and figures to regress (HR FB% tends to hover around 11-12% for starters), so the 0.64 HR/9 figure will likely increase in 2009. Using Expected Fielding Independent ERA (XFIP) from the Hardball Times, we can adjust for Kuroda’s home run luck on flyballs. XFIP uses strikeouts walks and an average HR/FB% (thus eliminating fluky home run performances) to find what a pitcher’s ERA “should” have been, given his controllable skills. Kuroda’s XFIP was 4.02: still pretty solid.

Kuroda came to the Dodgers with the reputation of possessing a deep repertoire. He showcased it in 2008, featuring a 92 MPH fastball (thrown 59.3% of the time), 83.7 MPH slider (26.3%) and an 87.2 MPH splitter (12.2%). The 6-1, 210 pounder also sprinkled in a very light serving of 88.6 MPH cutters (2%) and 78.2 MPH curveballs (0.2%). Kuroda is not an overpowering pitcher. Instead of blowing hitters away, he tries to bait them into making weak contact, beating the ball into the dirt. He had plenty of success in that regard, as batters swung at pitches outside of the strike zone 30.6% of the time versus Kuroda. That tied for the 10th-highest mark in the majors, with Javier Vazquez. While he held his own versus lefties (.260/.306/.399), Kuroda stifled right-handers to the tune of .246/.292/.319.

While Kuroda’s debut was certainly a success, there was one odd aspect of his season worth discussing. One would ordinarily expect that a veteran pitcher with Kuroda’s sort of skill set (low walks, groundball tendencies) would be pretty consistent. However, that was not the case. Baseball Prospectus keeps track of a stat called “FLAKE“, which measures the standard deviation of per-start performance for pitchers. In other words, it measures how consistent a pitcher is from start to start; a lower FLAKE number means that the pitcher is consistent, while a higher FLAKE number indicates that the pitcher is all over the place in terms of the quality of his starts. Kuroda had a FLAKE of .281, third-highest among all starters throwing at least 150 innings. Only Mark Buehrle and Matt Garza had more variance in the quality of their starts. It’s difficult to say whether or not this portends to anything in 2009, but it is worth keeping in mind that Kuroda tossed some gems and some stinkers this past season. His overall numbers scream “consistent”, but his performance might vary more than most.

Kuroda looks like a solid bet to post similar overall numbers in 2009. Marcel projects him to post a 3.94 Fielding Independent ERA, punching out slightly more batters (6.04 K/9) while also issuing a few more free passes (2.55 BB/9). If Kuroda can continue to get batters to chase his diverse arsenal out of the zone, he should be worthy of a middle-round draft pick.

Heading into the 2004 amateur entry draft, Florida State star Stephen Drew was considered to be the top talent available. A lefty-hitting shortstop with power and enough leather to stick at a premium position, Baseball America labeled Drew a “five-tool player.” However, Scott Boras-induced bonus demands caused Drew to slip a bit on draft day, before the Arizona Diamondbacks anted up at pick #15 and delivered a considerable bounty. Though negotiations were contentious, the D-Backs eventually got their man for a cool $4 million, which tied Jered Weaver (also a Boras client who slipped to the Angels at pick #12) for the highest bonus among 2004 draftees.

It didn’t take long for J.D. and Tim’s little brother to make it to the big leagues, as Stephen reached Arizona during the second half of the 2006 season. A college-trained hitter with a high pedigree, Drew predictably beat up on lower level pitching, but posted solid-if-unspectacular numbers in the hitter-friendly confines of the Pacific Coast League. The 6-1, 195 pounder was highly impressive in his first major league stint, however, posting a .316/.357/.517 line in 226 PA. His plate discipline was pretty rough (6.3 BB%, 23.9 K%), but Drew posted a .201 Isolated Power (ISO) number and a healthy 23.8 line drive rate (LD%). His .396 Batting Average on Balls in Play (BABIP) was still extremely high, as his line drive rate suggested that his BABIP should have come in around .358. All things considered, a 23 year-old player at an up-the-middle position raking right from the get-go is pretty rare.

However, instead of building upon his early-career success, Drew crawled to a .238/.313/.370 line in 2007, with a -1.12 WPA/LI. That figure put Drew in the company of a sordid group at his position, including on-base ciphers Omar Vizquel, Tony Pena Jr. and Juan Uribe. Some of his regression can be chalked up to bad luck, as his sky-high BABIP sank to a lowly .271. However, Drew’s LD% also dipped, down to 16.5%. His expected BABIP was .285, so if we adjust for some bad bounces, Drew’s line “improves” to .252/.327/.384. That still represented a troubling drop in production, particularly in the power department (Drew’s ISO slipped nearly 70 points, down to .133). If you want to look for a silver lining, Drew’s walk rate climbed to 10% and he struck out only 18.4% of the time.

In 2008, Drew essentially replicated his 2006 season, showcasing an aggressive approach that led to 21 home runs and 11 triples (fun fact: according to the 2009 Bill James Handbook, Chase Field increased triples production 76 percent more than the average park from 2006-2008). Drew’s walk rate was identical to his ’06 mark (6.3%), but he lowered his K rate again (17.8%), posted a career-high .211 ISO and hit line drives at a 22.6% clip. His WPA/LI climbed to 0.83, ranking 6th among all shortstops.

In his three years in the big leagues, Drew has produced two stellar campaigns where he took aggressive hacks and experienced a high degree of success. In 2007, when he actively took more pitches, his line drive rate and power fell by a considerable margin. During his solid 2006 and 2008 seasons, Drew had an O-Swing%’s of 30.6% and 28.2%, respectively. Drew’s O-Swing% fell to 21.8% during his more passive 2007 season, but he failed to sting the ball. It seems as though Drew is at his best when he’s looking to swing early in the count, looking for a pitch to drive into Chase Field’s spacious outfield gaps. He has also become more proficient in making contact with pitches thrown out of the strike zone, and has increased his overall Contact% each year:

Drew’s O-Contact% and Contact%, 2006-2008:

2006: 51.2 O-Contact%, 74.3 Contact%
2007: 57.5 O-Contact%, 82 Contact%
2008: 61.8 O-Contact%, 82.6 Contact%

Conventional wisdom says that hitters are best off utilizing a patient approach at the plate, and for many players, that sort of style works wonders. However, in Drew’s case, a “grip-it-and-rip-it” philosophy just may be more effective than a “take-and-rake” design.

Cincinnati Reds right-hander Johnny Cueto created quite a stir last spring. Signed out of the Dominican Republic in 2004 for just $3,500, Cueto tore through the minors in short order before making a lasting first impression in the majors, punching out 18 batters in his first two starts. The 5-10, 185 pounder alternated between dominant and flammable the rest of the year, showcasing plenty of talent while also making apparent his need for a more refined approach.

After signing for .001 percent of what 2004 first-round pick Homer Bailey received, Cueto got his professional career started for the rookie-level GCL Reds in 2005. In 43 innings, Cueto posted solid peripherals (7.95 K/9, 1.67 BB/9), but his ERA was an inflated 5.02 thanks to an unusually high hit rate (10.26/9). Impressed with his work, the Reds had Cueto make one start for Sarasota of the High-A Florida State League, where he would strike out six and walk two in six frames. The Dominican was still largely unknown at this point, as the 2006 Baseball America Prospect Handbook did not rank Cueto as one of Cincinnati’s top 30 prospects and did not include him in the team’s depth chart.

In 2006, Cueto would go a long way toward making himself known to the scouting community, dominating between stops at Low-A Dayton (Midwest League) and Sarasota. In 76.1 frames at Dayton, Cueto would whiff an impressive 9.67 batters per nine innings, while allowing just 1.77 BB/9. His Nintendo-level 5.47 K/BB ratio translated to a 2.65 Fielding Independent ERA (FIP ERA). Feeling that Low-A hitters were no match for his low-90’s heat and power slider, Cincinnati promoted Cueto to Sarasota for the second half of the season. His strikeout rate declined somewhat (8.9 K/9) and he walked more batters (3.36 BB/9), but those are still dominant numbers for a 20 year-old in advanced A-Ball, and translated to a solid 3.90 FIP ERA in 61.2 IP. Upon reaching Sarasota, Cueto began generating far more flyballs than he previously had in his career. His GB% was 54% at Dayton, but fell to 39% at Sarasota. Cueto’s flyball-centric approach would continue in the coming years, but we’ll discuss that in more depth later on.

Following the season, BA took note of Cueto’s performance in a big way, as he surged from unranked to rating as the 4th-best prospect in the Reds system. While cautioning that “Cueto’s size doesn’t lend itself to durability”, BA praised his “free and easy three-quarters delivery” that pumped fastballs reaching 96 MPH.

Cueto’s 2007 campaign would make his breakout 2006 season look downright tame by comparison, as he sprinted though three different leagues and terrorized batters at every stop. Cueto opened the season back at Sarasota, where he posted rates of 8.27 K/9 and 2.41 BB/9. His 3.43 K/BB ratio bested his 2.65 showing at High-A in 2006, and translated to a tidy 2.86 FIP ERA in 78.1 IP. Upon being bumped up to AA Chattanooga of the Southern League, Cueto would go bonkers. In 61 frames, he posted a 2.89 FIP ERA and punched out a stunning 11.36 batters per nine innings, issuing just 1.62 BB/9. Cueto’s home run rate climbed from an extremely low 0.34/9 at Sarasota to a more reasonable 0.89/9 at AA, but his 7.00 K/BB ratio made him look like the Southern League’s version of Pedro Martinez. Promoted yet again, Cueto would throw 22 innings for AAA Louisville of the International League. In his first and only taste of the IL, Cueto posted a 21/2 K/BB ratio and a 3.02 FIP ERA.

Now firmly entrenched on prospect lists everywhere, Cueto once again ranked as Cincinnati’s 4th-best farm product following the 2007 season. BA also rated him as the 34th-best overall prospect in the minors, commending Cueto for pitching “like a 10-year major league veteran, not a fresh-faced 21 year-old.” Noting his work with former Reds star Mario Soto, BA commented that Cueto’s changeup had come a long way under the tutelage of the three-time all-star. In addition, Cueto also featured a “93-94 MPH fastball that touches 96” and a “tight 83-88 MPH slider.”

Following his eye-opening, three-affiliate tour-de-force, Cueto impressed Cincinnati brass enough to win himself a rotation spot in the big leagues this past season. The 22 year-old showed the ability to miss plenty of bats, striking out 8.17 hitters per nine frames. However, his control came and went (3.52 BB/9), and he had serious trouble with the long ball, surrendering 1.5 HR/9. Cueto’s K rate was the 14th-best among all major league starters, but his home run rate was the 5th-worst in the game. Only Brandon Backe, teammate Aaron Harang, Paul Byrd and Jeff Suppan were burned by the big fly more often than Cueto.

Cueto has established himself as an extreme flyball pitcher, having generated groundballs just 38.6% of the time in Cincinnati. Unfortunately, his home ball ballpark severely punishes such tendencies. Courtesy of the 2009 Bill James Handbook, we find that Great American Ballpark had a HR Park factor of 128 between 2006 and 2008. GABP increased home run production 28% over the past three years. Suffice it to say, that does not bode well for a guy who puts the ball in the air so often.

Johnny Cueto remains an extremely talented young pitcher. His 93 MPH fastball and mid-80’s power slider can be nearly impossible to hit at times, as evidenced by his minuscule 76.9 Contact% (9th-best in baseball, sandwiched between Cole Hamels and Johan Santana). However, he may want to utilize his changeup more often in 2009, as he threw his slider over 32% of the time (the 5th-highest rate in the big leagues) while using the change just 6.7%. When he threw it, Cueto’s change was a nasty looking pitch, with horizontal movement that was identical to his fastball and a whopping 7 inches of vertical drop compared to his heater.

Cueto has the tools necessary to establish himself as one of the best starters in the big leagues. However, fantasy owners might need to experience some of his growing pains first, as he learns to use his full repertoire and limit the long-ball damage.

For years now, the Houston Astros rotation has seemingly consisted of ace right-hander Roy Oswalt and a bushel of reclamation projects. Sure, Andy Pettitte and Roger Clemens passed through the neighborhood, but their presence was short-lived. For the most part, Houston has filled out spots two through five with forgettable names such as Brian Moehler, Chris Sampson, Brandon Backe, Woody Williams and Shawn Chacon. I mean, the club gave four starts to Runelvys Hernandez (nearly a win below average in only 19.1 innings), for goodness sakes. Oswalt (3.80 Fielding Independent ERA in 2008) is still going strong, but believe it or not, he was probably Houston’s second-best starter this past season. Lefty Wandy Rodriguez took a major step forward in 2008, pitching brilliantly in between two DL stints for groin and oblique injuries.

A few years back, Rodriguez looked like another Astros pitcher who could be thrown into the pile labeled “not Roy Oswalt.” Signed out of the Dominican Republic in 1999, Rodriguez compiled solid minor league numbers (3.72 ERA, 7.21 K/9, 3.07 BB/9), but his high-80’s heat and big-breaking curve were often launched into orbit during his first few seasons in the big leagues. Rodriguez posted a -2.25 WPA/LI in 2005 and “improved” to -2.00 in 2006. He struck out about six batters and walked near four per nine innings, uninspiring peripherals that led to a FIP ERA in the neighborhood of five. Wandy seemed to establish himself as a guy who would be about a half run better than a replacement-level starter, and at 28, he didn’t figure to improve all that much in the coming years.

However, instead of posting Moehler-ish numbers again in 2007, Rodriguez improved across the board. His strikeout rate jumped to 7.78 per nine innings, and he issued 3.05 BB/9, a slight drop from his minor league walk rate. In addition to sharpening his controllable skills, Rodriguez fared a little better in the capricious departments of the stat sheet. His BABIP dropped from an unlucky .325 in 2006 to .305 in ’07, and his 10.1 HR/FB% was much lower than his 11.9% mark in 2006 and whopping 14.8% figure in 2005. Wandy’s K/BB rate jumped from 1.56 in ’06 to 2.55 in ’07, and his FIP ERA lowered to 4.18.

Rodriguez did deal with a couple of medical issues in 2008, but when he took the mound, he was nothing short of excellent. His K rate climbed yet again, all the way up to 8.58 per nine innings. Wandy also showed slightly better control, with 2.88 BB/9. His FIP ERA was cut to 3.62, besting Oswalt. To give you an idea of where Rodriguez placed among his fellow starters, here are his ranks in several important categories (minimum 130 IP):

K/9: 13th
K/BB: 24th
FIP ERA: 24th

In the 25 starts that he made, Rodriguez pitched like one of the best 30 starters in the game. In other words, he pitched like an ace.

So, how has Rodriguez gone from back-of-the-rotation fodder to one of the more productive starters in the NL? The answer appears to lie in his curveball, a mid-70’s breaker with a ton of movement. Rodriguez has increased his usage of the curve from 21.4% of his total pitches in 2006 to 29.9% in 2008, and for good reason. By looking at Wandy’s pitch F/X data from Josh Kalk’s blog, we see that his curve has a dastardly combination of horizontal movement (5.65 inches) and vertical drop (7.41 inches). The pitch essentially drops in the zone as much as a 12-to-6 curveball, while also breaking away from a lefty (in to a righty) more than most sliders do.

By looking at Rodriguez’s pitch data from Stat Corner, it also becomes apparent that hitters are finding Wandy’s pitches more difficult to handle. Each year in the big leagues, Rodriguez has lowered his percentage of balls thrown and increased his percentage of swinging strikes:

2005: 38.4 Ball%, 7 Swinging Strike%
2006: 37.7 Ball%, 7.7 Swinging Strike%
2007: 37.2 Ball%, 8.1 Swinging Strike%
2008: 35.5 Ball%, 8.7 Swinging Strike%

Rodriguez’s Contact% has also decreased each year, from 83.4% in 2005 down to 79.9% in 2008. If there’s a negative to point out here, it’s that Wandy has increasingly become more of a flyball-oriented hurler, not always the best idea in a park where right-handers hit some cheap home runs (according to the 2009 Bill James Handbook, Minute Maid Park increased righty home runs by 15% between 2006-2008).

Will Rodriguez continue to post such impressive numbers in the future? Marcel has Rodriguez retaining most of the gains that he has made over the past two seasons, forecasting a 4.08 FIP ERA with 7.83 K/9 and 3.27 BB/9. Given his increased usage of his plus curveball, more swings and misses from batters and fewer free passes being issued, Wandy could be a magical selection once the top-tier pitchers have been snatched up.

When All-Star catcher Victor Martinez went down due to injury, the Cleveland Indians figured to suffer a significant loss of production behind the plate. Instead, a former trade throw-in stepped to the fore and bashed 21 home runs, third-most among all backstops. Kelly Shoppach, a long-time Red Sox prospect picked up in the Andy Marte/Coco Crisp deal in January of 2006, made the most of his first opportunity at substantial major league playing time. While Marte continued to play his way into oblivion (-1.81 WPA/LI), Shoppach emerged as an important cog in Cleveland’s offense.

The former Baylor star batted .261/.348/.517, good for a 1.24 WPA/LI that ranked 7th among catchers. Shoppach’s .256 Isolated Power (ISO) topped his position by a healthy margin, besting Colorado’s Chris Ianetta by 16 points, and ranked 14th among all hitters with at least 400 PA.

While Shoppach has clearly proven that he possesses as much power as any player behind the dish, there are several reasons to expect a downturn in his performance, should he again see significant playing time in Cleveland or elsewhere.

Shoppach whiffs. A lot. In fact, only Three True Outcomes hero Jack Cust went down via strike three more often than Shoppach, who tied D-Backs third baseman Mark Reynolds with an ignoble 37.8 K%. As one would expect from such a high strikeout rate, Shoppach has significant issues making contact. His 64% contact rate ranked ahead of only Reynolds among all batters with at least 400 PA. Shoppach made contact with just 73.4% of pitches swung at within the strike zone, 3rd-worst among hitters (you guessed it, Reynolds and Cust rank 1st and 2nd). It’s not as though he’s a hacking mess at the plate (Shoppach drew walks at a 9.3% clip in 2008 and his O-Swing% was an average 25.6%), but chances are, he’ll either hit the ball across state lines or miss it entirely.

With a player like Shoppach who strike out so frequently, the ball is being put in play less often than it would be for a hitter with a more average contact rate. As such, hitters with high K rates are more prone to fluctuation in their Batting Average on Balls in Play (BABIP). Fewer opportunities for the ball to be put in play means a higher degree of variability, due to the smaller sample size.

Given Shoppach’s 18.6 Line Drive rate (LD%), we would expect his BABIP to come in around .306 (expected BABIP is LD% + .120, so .186 + .120 = .306). Shoppach’s actual BABIP? .359. That number is likely to tumble considerably in 2009. Players who strike out nearly 40% of the time just don’t hit .261 for any sustained length of time.

There’s no doubt that Kelly Shoppach can mash with the best of them behind the plate. However, his colossal K rate makes him a target for plenty of regression this upcoming season. If we adjust for his line drive rate and subtract those extra 53 points of average (the difference between his .359 BABIP and his .306 expected BABIP), Shoppach’s batting line is pared down to .208/.295/.464. The 28 year-old is a valuable player when he hits .260, but that’s just not going to continue. Barring huge gains in the contact department, Shoppach could be appealing to Pedro Cerrano’s shrine on a regular basis, deploring the existence of those darned curveballs.

In a season rife with unexpected twists and turns, Ryan Dempster’s transformation from sufficient reliever to rotation stalwart might have been the biggest surprise. Prior to 2008, Dempster had not made more than twenty starts since his last season in Cincinnati (2003), and the results were disastrous back then: A 6.54 ERA, 134 hits and 14 home runs surrendered in 115.2 innings pitched. Dempster’s lowest Fielding Independent ERA (FIP ERA) as a starter was 4.35, all the way back in 2000 as a member of the Florida Marlins. And, to top it all off, Dempster had posted a FIP ERA over four as a reliever for the Cubs over the 2006 and 2007 seasons combined, and failed to crack a 2/1 K/BB ratio in any of his four seasons in the Chicago bullpen between 2004 and 2007.

Despite the laundry list of reasons as to why “Dempster the starter” seemed like a dubious proposition, the Cubs went ahead with the plan, and were rewarded with one of the better pitching performances in the National League. In 206.2 innings, Dempster struck out 8.14 batters per nine innings, and kept his walks at an adequate level (3.31 BB/9), something he has struggled to do in the past (career BB/9 of 4.47). Dempster’s 2.46 K/BB ratio was the highest of his career, and was actually only the second time that he has surpassed that 2/1 mark (2000 being the other year).

However, his 2.96 ERA overstates his case by about a half a run, as Dempster’s FIP ERA was 3.41. That dichotomy is the product of a low home run/flyball rate (HR/FB%) of 7.7%. HR/FB rates tend to stabilize around 11-12% for pitchers, so expect that number to regress going forward. As that HR/FB rate ticks up, so will Dempster’s 0.61 HR/9.

Using Expected Fielding Independent ERA (XFIP) from The Hardball Times, we can get a more accurate read on Dempster’s performance. XFIP is perhaps the best way to gauge of a pitcher’s controllable skills, as it uses strikeouts, walks and an average HR/FB rate to calculate ERA. By doing so, XFIP eliminates lucky or unlucky performances on flyballs. So, Dempster’s auspicious HR/FB rate is regressed, giving us a better indication of his actual performance. If we adjust for the home run luck, Dempster’s XFIP ERA comes in at 3.94. That figure ranked 11th among NL starters.

Is Dempster’s 2008 showing a sign of things to come, or just an aberrant, blip-on-the-radar season? As we have seen, Dempster’s performance was quite good, but not sub-three ERA good. But can Dempster be expected to keep an ERA in the high three’s to low four’s during the course of his new four-year, $52 million contract?

Ordinarily, one would have every reason to be highly skeptical of a 31 year-old with a mild track record of success, a pitcher who last performed well in the rotation at the advent of the new millennium. However, Dempster does have some things working for him on a scouting level, as his repertoire played differently in the starting five than it did out of the bullpen.

Using Josh Kalk’s pitch F/X blog, we can compare Dempster’s stuff out of the ‘pen in 2007 to what he threw as a starter in 2008.

(X is horizontal movement. A negative X number means that the pitch is moving in toward a right-handed hitter, while a positive X means that the pitch is moving away from a righty hitter (in to a lefty). Z is vertical movement- the lower the Z number, the more the pitch “drops” in the strike zone.)

2007

Fastball: -7.21 X, 8.15 Z
Slider: 0.16 X, 0.81 Z
Changeup: -7.13 X, 5.71 Z

Dempster’s fastball had a good deal of tailing movement in on right-handers (-7.21 X), but his slider and changeup weren’t especially reliable. His slider did not register much horizontal break away from righties. His changeup did a nice job of mirroring his fastball in terms of horizontal movement, but the difference in vertical movement between the two pitches was just 2.44 inches. That’s not a whole lot, especially considering that his fastball (92 MPH) and change (83.1) had less than a 9 MPH dichotomy in velocity.

2008

Fastball: -6.72 X, 8.26 Z
Slider: 1.23 X, 0.08 Z
Changeup: -6.95 X, 3.75 Z

Dempster’s fastball registered similar horizontal and vertical break, but the quality of his secondary pitches increased. Dempster’s slider broke over an inch more away from righties this past season, while also showing a little more dropping action in the zone. Dempster’s changeup continued to mirror his heater in terms of horizontal movement, but the difference in vertical break between the two pitches improved. Dempster’s change dropped in the zone 4.51 inches more than his fastball did, almost doubling the difference from 2007. When commentators talk about a pitcher “pulling the string” on a changeup, this is what they are referring to. With similar horizontal break but a pronounced drop in vertical movement, hitters gear up for the fastball, get the changeup, and swing over top of the pitch.

Will Dempster’s improved secondary stuff allow him to keep most of the gains that he made during the 2008 season? The Marcel projection system seems to think so, forecasting Dempster for a 3.70 ERA, 7.77 K/9 and 3.58 BB/9 in 2009. It’s important to keep in mind that Dempster outperformed his peripherals this past season, and we would expect some regression in his ERA even if he repeated his strikeout and walk levels. If Dempster keeps his walk rate in check and continues to display a nasty slider/changeup combo, he could meet Marcel’s projection.

Outfielder Jeremy Hermida was the object of scouting and sabermetric admiration as his climbed up the Florida Marlins’ farm system. With a silky-smooth left-handed swing and tremendous plate discipline, Hermida frequently adorned top prospect lists from Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus. In fact, BA ranked the 6-3, 210 pounder as the 4th-best prospect in the minors in 2006, with BP valuing him as the 2nd-best talent down on the farm. His .284/.398/.436 career minor league line left something to be desired in the power department, but Hermida appeared to answer those questions with a monster .293/.457/.518 showing at AA Carolina in 2005.

Fresh off of smoking the Southern League, Hermida would have a scalding cup of coffee with the Marlins to end the ’05 season, batting .293/.383/.634 in 47 PA. Baseball Prospectus 2006 was smitten, writing that “if he stops he is he’s going to be a fine player, but if he develops along the normal curve he could be Bondsian.” Talk about high praise.

Despite the hype, 2006 would actually turn out to be something of a lost season for Hermida. He battled a hip flexor injury and never seemed fully healthy, batting just .251/.332/.368 in 348 PA. Hermida drew walks at a 9.7% clip, but without power (.117 Isolated Power) and with a rather high strikeout rate (22.8 K%). Still, he was just 22 years of age, and figured to improve significantly once he was healed up.

Hermida’s 2007 campaign went far more smoothly, as he hit a robust .296/.369/.501. His ISO jumped all the way up to .205, and he retained a solid walk rate, drawing a free pass 9.9% of the time. However, Hermida’s K rate did climb to 24.5%, and his .356 BABIP was pretty high. Given Hermida’s line drive rate (20.7%), we would have expected his BABIP to come in around .327 (the formula for expected BABIP is LD% + .120; .207 + .120= .327). If we take that into account, his line “should” have been about .267/.340/.472. That took some of the air out of Hermida’s season, but that still served as a significant improvement over the previous year’s work.

As a 24 year old in 2008, Hermida figured to build upon his ’07 showing, perhaps making good on the promise that his former top prospect status entailed. Instead, he took a step backward. Hermida wasn’t terrible, mind you, but his .249/.323/.406 line was roundly mediocre. The drop in his batting average was expected (when you whiff that often, you’re not going to hit .300 for an extended period of time), but his walk rate dipped to 8.7% and his ISO fell down to .157, basically splitting the difference between his punchless 2006 and powerful 2007. His already-high strikeout rate climbed to 27.5% as well.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of Hermida’s down year was the continued erosion of his once-pristine strike-zone judgment. Noted for his take-and-rake style in the minors, Hermida has progressively become more liberal in terms of chasing bad balls out of the strike zone:

Hermida’s Outside Swing Percentage (O-Swing%), 2006-2008

2006: 19%
2007: 22.2%
2008: 27.8%

In addition to chasing more pitches out of the zone, Hermida also swung at fewer strikes this past season. His Z-Swing% dipped from 64.2% in 2007 to 59.6% in 2008. As he is getting older, Hermida is swinging at more balls and taking more strikes. That’s an inauspicious combination.

So, just what sort of player is Jeremy Hermida? Is he the Brian Giles clone that his minor league dossier suggests, or is he going to continue to disappoint? Baseball Prospectus 2008 offered an interesting (and insidious) possible career path for Hermida. Per PECOTA, Hermida’s most comparable player is Ben Grieve. For those of you who don’t remember, Grieve was a another big, left-handed batter who received plenty of prospect love for his patient approach. However, Grieve’s career quickly faded to black after he won the 1998 AL Rookie of the Year Award, as prohibitively high strikeout rates and mid-range power got the best of him. There are a number of similarities between Hermida and Grieve:

Jeremy Hermida

HT: 6-3 WT: 210
Career Minor League Line: .284/.398/.436, 18.5 BB%, 22K%, .152 ISO
Major League Line: .267/.342/.436, 9.5 BB%, 25.4 K%, .170 ISO

Ben Grieve

HT: 6-4 WT: 230
Career Minor League Line: .302/.407/.484, 16.9BB%, 19.8K%, .182 ISO
Major League Line: .269/.367/.442, 12.7 BB%, 24.4K%, .173 ISO

I know that it’s probably a little unfair to compare Hermida (25 in January) and his major league line thus far to Grieve’s entire line of work in the big leagues, but Grieve’s career was essentially over by the time he was 26.

None of this is to say that Hermida’s career is doomed; this is just one possible path for his development. Still, there are a lot of striking similarities between the two players, and the Marcel projection system does not foresee much of any improvement, forecasting a mild .271/.348/.440 line for 2009. Fantasy owners will want to use caution regarding Hermida, lest they suffer a Griev(e)ous fate as another top prospect falls short of expectations.

The 2008 Toronto Blue Jays just might have been the strongest fourth-place team in major league history. Toiling in the brutally competitive AL East, Toronto compiled a +104 run differential due to the club’s outstanding run prevention. While strong defense deserves some of the credit (the Jays ranked 3rd in the majors in Defensive Efficiency), the Blue Jays starters were plenty effective, compiling a league-best 3.72 ERA as a staff. However, that group will look drastically different in 2009, with Shaun Marcum falling victim to Tommy John Surgery, Dustin McGowan recovering from a shoulder operation and A.J. Burnett likely headed greener pastures courtesy of a lavish free agent payday.

One of the guys who will be back (along with that Halladay fellow) is right-hander Jesse Litsch. A 24th-round draft pick out of South Florida Community College in 2004, Litsch quickly ascended to the majors following a minor league career that showcased polish, if not power (3.41 ERA, 7.71 K/9, 1.58 BB/9).

Reaching Toronto at the age of 22 in 2007, Litsch made 20 starts for the Jays. In 111 innings pitched, Litsch posted a 3.81 ERA. However, that number overstated his performance. Litsch’s Fielding Independent ERA (FIP ERA) was a more tame 5.14. He displayed relatively good command (2.92 BB/9) and kept the ball on the ground (48.1 GB%), but Litsch just didn’t miss any bats, with only 4.05 K/9. That strikeout rate was the 11th-lowest among starters throwing at least 100 innings. A quick look at the other names near the bottom of the whiff list (including Steve Trachsel and Livan Hernandez) shows that it doesn’t pay to garner so few swings and misses.

In 2008, Litsch would once again outperform his peripherals, compiling a 3.58 ERA in 176 innings. The 6-1, 175 pounder benefitted from a combination of good luck and stellar defensive play behind him, posting a below-average .285 BABIP. While Litsch was fortunate to post such a low ERA, his rates did improve. His abhorrent strikeout rate crept up to 5.06 per nine innings (still quite low, but it’s something) and he issued just 1.99 BB/9. With the slightly improved K rate, sharp command and more work for his infield D (48.5 GB%), Litsch’s FIP ERA was a legitimately useful 4.29.

What makes Litsch so interesting is his “kitchen sink” approach to pitching. You name a pitch, and odds are, he throws it. Litsch used a traditional fastball less than any other pitcher in baseball this past season, save for knuckleballer Tim Wakefield. Litsch’s 89.9 MPH heater was utilized just 23.9% of the time, and that was actually up from his 18.9% fastball usage in 2007. His bread-and-butter offering is an 86 MPH cutter, used 43.4% of the time. Litsch also feeds batters a steady serving of 82 MPH sliders (11.4%), 77 MPH curves (11.9%) and 81 MPH changeups (9.4%). None of those pitches are dominating, but facing a pitcher with such a diversified repertoire has to be challenging.

Batters appeared to find Litsch’s stuff a little harder to hit in 2008. His Outside Swing Percentage (O-Swing%) climbed from a below-average 19.6% in ’07 to 25.5% in 2008. That bodes well for his long-term prospects. As Eric Seidman discovered, there is a statistically significant relationship between O-Swing% and BB/9, WHIP, ERA, and FIP ERA.

Both the Bill James and Marcel projection systems see some regression coming to Litsch’s ERA in 2009, with James predicting a 4.06 mark and Marcel forecasting a 3.87 showing. Both systems have Litsch’s projected FIP ERA at 4.43.

Jesse Litsch will never be a dominant starter, as his low strikeout rate will often keep him at the caprices of the defense behind him. Luckily, the leather behind Litsch is solid right now. That, coupled with groundball tendencies and strong control, should be enough for the 24 year-old to post another season worthy of fantasy consideration.

While I’m quite sure that we are all familiar with the $137.5 million dollar man in Queens, there is yet another pitcher with the Santana surname who just turned in one of the best seasons of any starter in the game in 2008. Ervin Santana, long noted for his power fastball/slider combo, emerged as one of the more valuable properties in the American League.

Signed out of the Dominican Republic as an undrafted free agent in 2000, Santana made his major league debut in 2005. He would post a 4.43 Fielding Independent ERA (FIP ERA) in 133.2 IP that season, with 6.67 K/9 and 3.16 BB/9. A flyball pitcher (36.6 GB%), he was occasionally bit by the home run bug, with 1.14 HR/9.

Santana’s 2006 line would look largely the same in terms of his peripherals, as he struck out 6.22 batters per nine innings and issued 3.09 BB/9. His FIP ERA lowered slightly, down to 4.29. Though he remained a flyball-oriented hurler (38.4 GB%), Santana had better luck in the home run department. His 0.93 HR/9 was largely the product of a low 7.7 HR/FB%.

After two solid campaigns, Santana seemed primed to build upon his success and establish a new level of performance. Instead, he got his head handed to him: in 150 IP, Santana posted a ghastly 5.76 ERA. Some of that was the product of a very high BABIP (.333) and a low strand rate (67.3 LOB%), and he did manage to up his K rate to 7.56. However, his walk rate increased (3.48 BB/9) and he was crushed by the long ball, surrendering 1.56 HR/9. His HR/FB rate (11.9%) was not especially out of whack; he just gave up a ton of flyballs. Santana’s 35.6 GB% was the 8th-lowest among starters tossing at least 140 innings. With the higher walk rate and the homer-happy style, Santana’s FIP ERA climbed to 5.13.

Over his first three seasons in the big leagues, Santana utilized a four pitch mix: a fastball, slider, curveball and changeup.

Santana’s Pitch Selection, 2005-2007:

(FB=fastball, SL=Slider, CT=Cutter, CB=Curveball, CH=Changeup, SF= Split Finger XX= unidentified. The first number is the % that the pitch was thrown, the number in parentheses is the velocity)

2005: FB 61.7% (93.4), SL 21.7% (81), CB 6.3% (78), CH 10% (84.2), SF 0.3% (86.7)
2006: FB 60.9% (93.1), SL 21% (80.9), CB 8.5% (78.1), CH 9.6% (82.1)
2007: FB 61.9% (92.2), SL 24% (81), CB 8.7% (77.1), CH 5.5% (83.1)

Santana seemed to make an effort to incorporate all four pitches into his arsenal, though his changeup seemed to be waning in favor. He lost nearly a mile an hour off of his fastball in 2007, which would help explain his home run issues. Santana is a guy who likes to challenge hitters up in the zone with his four-seam fastball. One MPH might not seem like much, but it could mean all the difference in the world to a hitter’s reaction time.

In 2008, Santana returned with a simpler pitching approach. He basically scrapped the curve and used his change even less, instead choosing to rely upon his nasty slider:

Santana’s Pitch Selection, 2008:

FB 61.4% (94.4), SL 33.9% (83.9), CB 0.8% (78.1), CH 3.9% (85.8)

Santana’s fastball velocity bounced back to a career-high 94.4 MPH, and he increased his slider usage by about 10 percent. With improved heat and a harder, oft-utilized slider (the slider nearly gained 3 MPH), Santana drastically improved his performance this past season. He upped his WPA/LI from -1.85 to 3.08, almost a five-win swing. Santana’s strikeout rate jumped to 8.79 and he walked just 1.93 batters per nine innings. His HR/FB% was low at 8.9%, so his 0.95 HR/9 figures to creep up somewhat, but his FIP ERA was an outstanding 3.30. That figure ranked 5th among all American League starters. He also managed to correct his cartoonish home/road splits, though it’s debatable how much of that was just statistical “noise” from 2005-2007. Angel Stadium suppresses home run production, but no pitcher should have that wide of a split between home and road performance. Given Santana’s talent, there’s no reason to expect any wide split going forward.

There are plenty of other positive indicators as well. Santana got ahead of hitters much more consistently in 2008, upping his First-Pitch Strike Percentage (F-Strike%) from 59.9% in 2007 to 66.7% in ’08. Among all major league starters, only the incredibly precise Mike Mussina (67.6%) got ahead of batters with more frequency. Hitters also went fishing outside of the strike zone far more often this past season. Santana’s O-Swing% increased from 26.3% in 2007 to 31.7% in 2008. Only Jake Peavy and CC Sabathia garnered more undisciplined swings from batters. Santana’s Contact% also dipped by a solid margin, from 83.3% in ’07 to 77.1% in ’08. That 2008 figure ranked 11th among all starters, just slightly behind that other Santana guy.

Just about every performance indicator for Ervin Santana is trending up. Unleashing mid-90’s heat and a hellacious mid-80’s slider, Santana has increased his strikeouts, slashed his walk rate, is getting ahead of hitters and is becoming increasingly harder to hit. What’s not to like? 2008 was no outlier: Santana is here to stay as one of the best starters in the game.