It's always possible - but I don't think a statistically-driven front office is ever going to bet on the outliers. The Astros will just lose out on those kinds of players.
That's like a starting pitcher that doesn't get a lot of K's, but still maintains a good ERA. But none of it matters unless he can do it in the majors.
If he continues to walk a lot his ERA will not stay low, I can guarantee you that. But so far in Miami he has kept his walks down, if that continues he can be a solid pitcher.
See, I would think the advanced analytics would be able to simply look past the numbers... and take into account the special considerations. Otherwise, they're just going to be making the same mistakes based on stats that all other teams do at some point or another (including the Astros of yesteryear).
Or maybe he's just a 24 year old who has pitched less than a full season of big league ball... I know some players are what they are in the minors... but some also improve once they're in the majors as well.
No it isnt. There is a long history of players that hit over 300 with +doubles that do well. There is not a long history of starting pitchers that have a high walk rate and a low strikeout rate doing well. I am not saying Cosart is not going to be a good pitcher, as I have said numerous times, he has a very good arm... what I am saying is that if he becomes very good, it will correspond with his control improving. I expect his control to improve, the question is how much. I brought Moran up because he was the centerpiece in the deal the Astros got. He was not hitting well in Jupiter (who does). However, after being promoted to AA, he has hit well overall. Maybe this is the rare trade that benefits both teams.
The "special consideration" you're talking about is luck/hope/fluke - Cosart turning out to be a freak. You can't measure it or predict it and you're just hoping for the best. The Astros will almost always bet on the guy who they project out to be good rather than the one that they hope will defy their projections. No system is perfect, but the data suggests that method will be right more often than not. Sure - and that's what the advanced analytics specifically look for. They look to identify areas of improvement and areas of weakness that are not obvious in the results of young players that don't have a lot of MLB data to look at.
Eh... you guys have all pretty much trashed him far worse than what his actual numbers/performance is. I don't think its out of the question for a guy to be able to maintain a low ERA despite not getting K's. He does need better control... but he's certainly shown enough flashes to show that its not "impossible" for that to get better. Also, the Marlins were willing to give up quite a bit to get him... now whether or not they were just being "duped" (or duping the Astros) remains to be seen, but some of you act as if Cosart has no chance of sustaining a quality MLB career as a starting pitcher (when just 6 months ago, he was a vital part of this rebuild).
Again... lets wait till he does it in the majors before he's anointed. Not saying he won't be able to do it, but I'll be cautiously optimistic till he does. I'm also not going to write him off if he fails in his first stint or two (like Santana has), because young players/hitters need time to develop. Again, I said low era, low K rate... yes, there are no pitchers that have a high walk rate that can sustain success. Probably.... but then again, I'd still take the young starter who's had success in the big leagues now over the future 3B (but that's just me). I just get annoyed with some of the comments towards Jarred... you'd think he was the biggest fluke pitcher on earth with the way he's been discussed since the trade happened (as he continues to pump out quality starts... and its mimicking the nice run he had earlier this season).
Please provide a list of 5 pitchers over the last 40 years that have had long term success with a 1:1.3 K to BB rate. I doubt you find any, Keith Law hasn't. Can his control get better? Absolutely it can, and the question is HOW much better is it likely to get. Of course the same applies for a number of pitchers with golden arms but poor control. Some figure it out (Ryan, Schilling, Johnson) and many others don't (Willis, Clyde, Williams). Most of those that did figure it out though, had gaudy K stats. Cosart has a chance to have it all click. I am happy overall with the deal they got for him but would gladly take him back and think he has a decent shot to still be in the big leagues in 5 years. He is a good prospect.
I agree with you. I am not annointing Moran as anything other than the fact that his bat has improved since moving from Jupiter. There were concerns (me included) that he was just not that good. Yes, I agree with you there are some (not many, but enough) pitchers that have low strikeout rates and low era's... although the margin for error is small. Cossart has the arm to be one of those pitchers, I just do not assume he will get his control to that level. It is possible, but not certain. I normally take a #2 starter over an above average starting third baseman as well. However, there was more to the trade really, we don't know what Moran or Cossart end up being. It is very possible that in 10 years we look back and neither one is anything special. I don't think there is any doubt that luck has played some part in Cossart's success thus far. However, his arm is too good, and his style prevents lots of homers... that has to be taken into consideration.
Agreed. No pitcher will ever succeed long term with those peripherals. He will need to improve. The question is also is he incapable of improving. The way some speak about him, Cosart is who he is and is unlikely to ever get better (despite the repeated periods of success he's had over the last year+) Agreed.
For me Cosart is a huge mystery . When he came up last year I thought he had excellent potential , but as this year went on I found myself souring on him a bit . Oddly my assessment has very little to do with his peripheral stats, bb and k rate . Simply put cosart is not the same pitcher that he was last year , the one with the 1.95 ERA . Yes , he was somewhat lucky last year , but at the same time he DID get those results albeit in a small sample size . To me this year with the constant changes to his windup and trying to pitch differently the astros effectively gave up on Cosarts ability to sustain last seasons work. According to Fangraphs his fastball and cutter velocity this year are down a full mph. This was obviously done to try and improve his command and make his peripherals fall into line better. But when you take his stuff into context I think it was worth a shot to tell him just aim for the middle of the plate and throw hard. He has a cutter that is disguised so well and his fastballs generate such high levels of ground balls I think he could have been almost as effective as last season with only minor tweaks. The reports from his last game with the marlins apparently he was throwing 95/6 which is a tick or two above where he sat as an astro this year . I normally am in favor of location above velocity for a pitching prospect but Cosarts ground ball profile and cutter were worth giving an extended look . I feel like the astros see what everyone else sees and figures with his peripherals and lack of improvement in control cosart is what he is . But let the guy who threw last year pitch an entire season and I bet his actual performance significantly outperforms his peripherals . I think if his approach turns more to a pitch to contact and throw it harder (obviously mixing cutters and fastballs) he can be a player whose stuff will allow him to drastically exceed expectations. With regards to the actual deal , I hate seeing Cosart not get that kind of opportunity with the Astros , but I think it is clear he was not going to get it here. Hopefully this trade works well for the Astros and Moran can win a starting job during spring training . I don't know even if cosart blossoms in Miami or elsewhere that means he would have blossomed here , but at the same time I think the Astros need to think a little more outside the box in the terms that every player is unique and you can use stats to help then but they shouldn't be defined by them .
I do find Cosart an interesting pitcher. With his arm and breaking ball, I would expect better peripherals (mostly Ks). With his peripherals, I would expect worse performance. That said, Cosart is going to be a little better than I expected going into the year. He looks to be a guy that is going to be streaky. When he gives up HRs, he is going to give up a lot of runs. He doesn't give up a lot of HRs so he's going to have spurts when he doesn't give up a HR for a while. That said, low K and high BB rates are not a recipe for great success. While I expect he'll improve over time, I'm not expecting him to be more than a BoR guy. Maybe a No. 3 guy. I think at least one of Tropeano, Folty, Hader, Kyle Smith, Appel, Peacock (hey it could happen, though not likely), and Woj can replace Cosart's production or at least come close in the near future once they adapt to MLB.
The post you were responding to was MadMax's argument that he might just be a freak - that's, by definition, saying that he will not pitch to the projections. If that's the case - if you're hoping he'll be a freak - you're relying on luck/flukiness/etc. If there are advanced stats that show he might be great, then it's not being a freak - it's just developing based on the projections. No one has has said it's impossible for him to get better - we're saying he's shown *zero* signs of it for any extended period over the entirety of his minor and major league careers. That can be said for a lot of players, good and bad, like Carter or Keuchel. The Astros were willing to stick with those players because they, apparently, saw something worth sticking with. They either didn't see that with Cosart or ... Or you could just as easily say the Astros valued Cosart really highly and were willing to give up quite a bit to get Moran because they like him that much.
Moran may be a future stud but right now he strlkes me more as a white version of James Loney playing third base.
This pretty much exemplifies my point... as you're relying on his minor league career (where he started as a high schooler) and his major league career (all of 34 starts) to try to define your position. Its entirely presumptuous on your part to exclaim there are "zero" signs of him getting "better"... and if he is or isn't, its still way too early to exclaim "he is who he is." And honestly, his 12 start stretch from 4/23 - 6/26 exceeds anything that any other Astros starting pitcher has done (other than Keuchel) this year (in terms of prolonged consistency). http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=cosarja01&t=p&year=2014&share=0.16#15-26-sumitching_gamelogs He had an atrocious July... which in part could have swayed their minds in the trade... and now he's having a tremendous August. If he closes out the year strong, we're talking about a stretch of ~20 or so starts that were very good... and one awful month, and that awful start against Oakland at the beginning of the year. Definitely something that can be built on... definitely not somebody who is showing "zero" signs of getting it (in his 2nd year).
Unfortunately I don't think defense is his calling card. I think he will give us a better approach at the plate and higher OBP than Domingo but will lesser defense and power. Lets hope the power continues to develop but watching him hit his swing strikes me as more line drive.
Every other pitcher that he's being compared to uses the same data sets, though - their minor league stats and their limited major league ones. That's the only data there is, and I'm using the totality of it. There ARE *zero* signs of him getting better. That doesn't mean he might not get better at some point. It just means he hasn't shown anything to suggest it. We always talk about the concept of buying low, selling high. Part of the Astros' job is to identify "sell high" targets - figuring out what players are likely valued about what they project their future to be, and then to move those players at their high value. Maybe the Astros will be wrong - but it shouldn't be surprising if they trade someone that's doing well. They *should* be trading every player that does well that they don't think can sustain it. They clearly think Keuchel can sustain his success, so they keep him. There are lots of reasons to think Cosart can't sustain his success, so if they find a team willing to take a chance that he can, that makes the perfect trade partner and explains why the Astros got such a large return in exchange. We'll see if they are right or not. During that stretch, his peripherals *still* sucked. In May, despite a 2.76 ERA, he has an atrocious WHIP of 1.47. He hasn't had any extended period of time where he has reduced his WHIP, cut his walks, or increased his K's. He's done it for a month here and there (June) but he hasn't ever sustained it. You keep relying on ERA - but I'm pretty sure the Astros would be looking for improvement in his peripherals because those are better predictors of future success. Thus the argument that he's shown no signs of progress. Again, no one said he can't - just that he hasn't.
