A
couple of weeks ago 40-man rosters were finalised and the Jays left
several players off their 40-man roster, and these players all become
minor league free agents. One of the most surprising moves was the
fact the Jays left Corey Thurman, Rule V pickup from the Kansas City
Royals in 2002, off their 40-man roster. Thurman didn't develop like
the Blue Jays would have liked him to this year, but I'm not sure
I agree with him being left off the 40-man roster entirely. Thurman
spent 2002 in the majors and 2003 in AAA, with 6 MLB appearances.
Here are his numbers for the past 2 seasons.
|
Year
|
Level
|
IP
|
H
|
HR
|
BB
|
K
|
ERA
|
K/9
|
BB/9
|
HR/9
|
|
2002
|
MLB
|
68
|
65
|
11
|
45
|
56
|
4.37
|
7.4
|
6.0
|
1.5
|
|
2003
|
AAA
|
86
|
90
|
8
|
26
|
72
|
4.27
|
7.5
|
2.7
|
0.8
|
|
2003
|
MLB
|
15
|
21
|
3
|
9
|
11
|
6.46
|
6.6
|
5.4
|
1.8
|
Now,
those splits, aside from the walks, seem pretty reasonable, and this
year at Syracuse Thurman really cut down his walk rate, and it'll
be interesting to see if that is a real improvement or if that is
simply a mirage. The knock against Corey has always been that he lacks
a good third pitch. His fastball is probably about average, and he
has a very good changeup that he's not afraid to use, but his curveball
was below-average, and I guess the Jays management has come to the
conclusion that he's not progressing in developing that pitch, so
therefore they decided it was worth it to protect others instead of
Thurman. Thurman wasn't claimed when he was removed from the 40-man
roster, so there is a chance that no team will take a chance on him,
or maybe the Jays can resign him, however it's more likely that they
are waiting until his is a minor league free agent to sign him, to
avoid using a 40-man roster spot on him.
|
Player
|
K/9
|
BB/9
|
HR/9
|
|
A
|
4.4
|
3.9
|
1.8
|
|
B
|
4.3
|
2.3
|
1.4
|
|
C
|
5.1
|
3.3
|
1.2
|
None
of those splits are noticeably better than Thurman's, and I think
you'll agree. They all give up comparably the same number of homeruns
and while they walk fewer batters, than Thurman in 2002 they also
strike out less batters. Their K/BB ratio is slightly better probably,
but the interesting thing to consider is Thurman's BB/9 rate in AAA
this year. If Thurman did improve his control noticeably, I think
he could probably put up better numbers in the majors than the three
examples we have seen here. I'm a bit surprised the Jays didn't decide
to find out, but I guess the front office brass thought that the improved
numbers didn't accurately reflect an actual improvement on Corey's
part, or they would have protected him. In case you are wondering
"A" is Pete Walker and "B" is Mark Hendrickson, and both are their
stats from the past year. Walker battled a leg injury for a long period of time, and only racked up
55 innings, so I also calculated stats for his 139 innings in 2002,
which I labelled "C". I like the Lilly traded even more now that I
think about, I quite like the signings of Hentgen,
Myers and Catalanotto, but I don't agree with leaving Thurman off the
roster at the expense of Pete Walker. I suppose Mark Hendrickson gets
bonus points for being tall and left-handed, and he has better control
than Walker, but his splits
were not great either. Nothing against Walker, and he's not a bad
long man in the pen, but give me the choice between a 34 year-old
Pete Walker or a 25 year-old Corey Thurman, and I'd take Thurman every
time.
On
a side note it will be sad not to see Thurman around the ballpark
anymore. He was a great guy and he always had a smile on his face.
He's a great autograph signer, one of the best I've ever encountered
and he'll sign for ages most of the time; until the line has literally
finished. On the days when he's throwing, he'll still try to sign
if people ask him to, and you know with Thurman that if he gives you
an excuse, it's legitimate. He is one of the most friendly, approachable
ballplayers I've ever met, and I really hope he winds up back in
Toronto soon. Obviously
not at the expense of winning, but you know what I mean.
On
a related note, Brian Bowles, another pitcher the Jays left off their
40-man roster, joined the ex-Blue Jays merry-go-round in Milwaukee,
joining Pasqual "Sticky Fingers" Coco (man,
I rooted for that guy because of his name so much, I have at least
20 Coco rookie cards around my house), Doug Davis and rule V pick
Matt Ford under Gord Ash's watchful eye.
I've always had a bit of a soft spot for Brian Bowles. I think it's
because I think he's never really gotten a fair shot to prove himself
in the majors, and partly because I remember reading that in the offseason
he is working on a degree in history at some university in southern
California.
|
Year
|
Level
|
IP
|
H
|
HR
|
BB
|
K
|
ERA
|
K/9
|
BB/9
|
HR/9
|
|
2002
|
AAA
|
59
|
46
|
4
|
32
|
53
|
3.36
|
8.0
|
4.8
|
0.6
|
|
2003
|
AAA
|
47
|
47
|
1
|
21
|
32
|
2.66
|
6.1
|
4
|
0.2
|
|
Career
|
AAA
|
183
|
149
|
8
|
97
|
166
|
2.98
|
8.1
|
4.7
|
0.4
|
|
Career
|
MLB
|
30
|
25
|
1
|
17
|
25
|
3.22
|
7.5
|
5.1
|
0.3
|
After compiling
these stats, I've just realised the site I was using rounded innings
pitched to the nearest whole inning, so those totals may be slightly
off, and that may slightly change the player's real ratios, but it
is hardly noticeable, so I'm choosing not to correct the problem.
The
first thing that stands out here is Bowles' extremely low homerun
allowed ratio. That stat seems to show why Bowles continuously posts
ERAs in the high 2 to low 3 range. It's because, while his other ratios aren't outstanding,
since he rarely allows any bases-clearing home runs, he ends up stranding
many runners on base. That isn't a bad thing at all, and as long as
he can keep it up in the big leagues, he should continue that success.
When you don't allow home runs you force the other team to string
together several hits and/or walks in order to score runs, and you'll
help prevent big innings against your team, as the other team can't
put a few runners on and then knock them home with a 3-run homerun.
Bowles has consistently posted a reasonably low home rate in the minors,
excelling this past year in AAA, and in a limited sample he has kept
this up in the big leagues.
He
seems to struggle a bit with his control, but it's less worrisome
for him as he doesn't allow many homers. The other noticeable thing
about Bowles' numbers is that his K rate has declined the last several
years. His career K rate at Syracuse is 8.1, so
since it has declined the past two years, but has never even reached
his career mark, that means he posted a higher mark (9.5) in 2001,
and the rate has since dropped. That is never a good sign for a pitcher,
however it's worth noting that his BB/9 ratio declined from 5.1 in
2001, to 4.8 in 2002 and then feel to 4 in 2003. It looks like Bowles
worked on his control over the past couple of years in
Syracuse, and as a result of improving that he lost some of his strikeouts.
Bowles
is 27, so he's never going to be anything more than a middle reliever;
however he is very likely in the upper tier of talent available in
the minor league pool. JP had to decide if it was worth using a roster
space on Bowles, or if it was worth searching for similar talent in
the minor league free agency pool where he wouldn't have to use a
40-man spot on them unless they made the team. He obviously chose
the latter, and Bowles went to Milwaukee, which should be a very good situation for him. I think he'll make
the club, or at least will be promoted during the year, and will put
up respectably, slightly below-average numbers in the Brewers pen.
What
annoyed me about the whole Bowles situation was the fact he wasn't
given a fair chance in Toronto. He did well
in Syracuse in 2001, and got 2 innings in the majors that year. He did well in
Syracuse in 2002,
and got 20 innings in the majors, which wasn't bad. However, in 2003,
for the third year in a row he did well in Syracuse, and he got
brief call-ups in May and August. Bowles was called up in September,
and you know how many opportunities he got to pitch? One.
He pitched 1.2 innings against the Yankees on September 8th
in New York, and he
gave up 1 walk, yet he didn't get to pitch again for the rest of the
year, despite the fact the Jays were obviously out of the pennant
race. I don't understand why Tosca kept trotting Lopez and Miller
out there in meaningless situations when both had a ton of appearances
and had basically secured their roles on the team for 2004. I don't
understand why Bowles was continuously passed by as Dan Reichert,
Scott Service and Juan Acevedo racked up 45 innings this year, and
all put up much worse numbers than Bowles did. Again, given the chance
to pitch about 40 innings in the majors it's quite possible Bowles
would have impressed the front office enough to gain a spot over someone
like Pete Walker, but instead pitchers like those mentioned above
and Tanyon Sturtze
racked up pointless innings in July, August and September that could
have been given to Bowles to see how he did against big league pitching.
Neither
move is anything drastic, but I wonder what reasoning JP has for leaving
Thurman and Bowles off the roster, at the expense of a couple of other
pitchers left on the roster. Thurman is more a case of that, as he's
a starter, or at least can be even though he may lack a good third
pitch, so obviously he's more valuable, and both Walker and Hendrickson
can function as starters, so a more direct comparison can be made
there. Relievers are plentiful in minor league free agency, and I
bet JP already has some names of a couple of pitchers he'd like to
select in the rule V draft. Still, it's a shame Bowles never got a
shot in Toronto, and was basically
ignored over the past two years while sitting in the
Syracuse bullpen.
