Predicting Pitching Prospects for Your Card Collection...

I got into prospecting...looking for promising Minor Leaguers on Major League rookie cards...around 1998. I initially hoped (as every kid did, I'm sure) that simply getting a bunch of rookies would pay off, but what changed that was 1999 Topps Traded. That was my first set where I bothered to put research into the prospects. I remember being at first excited, then disappointed, and then excited again when the one-per-box rookie autograph turned out to be Carlos Pena. But, as a wannabe pitcher (a combination of chronic illness and arm problems around the start of high school prevented me from going anywhere), I've always been fascinated with pitching prospects. And the one from 1999 Topps Traded that fascinated me the most was David Walling, the first round pick of the 1999 draft for the New York Yankees.

Well, the first thing you should know here is that I'm a fan of the New York Mets and the Detroit Tigers. I actually don't like the Yankees at all. But David Walling, at least according to the back of his baseball card and all the gaudy stats that had been printed about him in the New York papers, was "can't-miss." And he started out well in pro ball, blowing away 82 hitters in 80 innings with the 1999 Staten Island Yankees. He only walked 18 and gave up just 76 hits. In 2000, he started the season with the Tampa Yankees, going 7-2 in 59 innings, giving up 48 hits, walked 12, and struck out 48. His ERA was a sparkling 1.98. His WHIP was a microscopic 1.02. And then something went wrong.

In mid 2000, the Yankees felt that Walling deserved a promotion to AA Norwich. They were right. He'd deserved it. And in 85 innings there, he walked 26 and struck out 70. But he also gave up 101 hits and 50 earned runs in 85 innings. His ERA and WHIP shot up and his stock plummeted. Time and again, he would do terribly despite posting above average K/9 and BB/9 ratios. In 2003, at age 24, David Walling was out of baseball.

Arm problems, perhaps? Maybe he was pitching through an injury? Inability to repeat his mechanics? None of the above. David Walling suffered from a strange mental block where he'd get irrationally nervous with runners on base. So why am I posting about a prospect that frankly should have made it where no one could have predicted his downfall? Simple; I don't pretend to be some kind of guru who claims to be the be all and end all of predicting how well a pitching prospect might do. Even if a guy's arm action and timing are fine (like Walling's), there are other ways for him to fail. I'm just here to help with the guys I believe to have obvious problems.

Let's look at another pitching prospect that fascinated me in that 1999 Topps Traded set. His name was Ryan Mills, and his baseball card explained that his father, ex-MLB pitcher Dick Mills, was a pitching coach. One of those guys that sells videos and says you add 6-12 mph to your fastball. Oh, this guy ought to be good, I thought, being a naive 12-year-old kid. I was wrong.

Ryan Mills got his pitching elbow WAY up high; higher than shoulder level and up across his back in a position alternately called the "M" or the "Inverted W." This puts a TON of stress on the elbow and shoulder and can throw a pitcher's timing off. While he could pretty much throw bullets, he wasn't going to last. And yes, before you ask, I consider ideal pitching mechanics to be close to those advocated by guys like Kyle Boddy (webmaster of drivelinemechanics.com), Chris O'Leary (webmaster of chrisoleary.com), and Rick Peterson (former A's and Mets pitching coach...so before someone says "Dr. Mike Marshall," I merely advocate good arm timing and not getting your elbow way above shoulder level, not inventing a new motion or refusing to budge on anything). Anyway, back to Ryan Mills...

Ryan Mills broke down before most pitchers with his type of mechanics, though. It seems likely he was overthrowing, too; in his second year of pro ball (1999...he only pitched in 2 games in 1998), Mills K'ed 70 in 95 innings. Not terrible. But he walked 87, gave up 121 hits, and surrendered 94 earned runs. An 8.91 ERA and a 2.19 WHIP. Ugh. However, he did get better from the standpoint of effectiveness. In 2000, despite posting a dismal 3-13 W/L record (I'm not fond of W/L records), he pitched 152 innings, gave up 148 hits, and K'ed 131. But he still walked 98 and had a 1.62 WHIP. His ERA stood at 4.74. By the time he found a semblance of control in 2001, he blew his arm out.

The Twins, who'd drafted Mills, converted him into a reliever in 2003 (after struggling again with his control in a starting role in 2002). He did okay that year, but once again blew his arm out in 2004. At the age of 27, he was out of baseball. Before someone says I'm about to deem all pitchers with mechanics similar to Mills to be automatic busts, however, I'm not. I do believe they're at significantly higher risk and guys like that have a lesser chance at sustained success, but I don't believe they'll automatically go up in smoke. Look at Don Drysdale. Or Jake Peavy. Or Bert Blyleven. Or John Smoltz. I don't particularly like any of those guys' mechanics, but hey, it worked for them.

Bottom line, I'm here to HELP. Not preach about how a guy will be a complete failure because his arm action stinks or his timing is awful or he throws too many sliders or whatever. Do I believe a guy like Tyson Ross or Tim Melville has as much of a chance to succeed as a guy like Brian Matsuz or Lance Lynn? No. I don't. But could the former succeed above and beyond the latter? Yes, and therein lies my premise. I would avoid spending that much money on cards of the former. The latter, however, who have "safer" mechanics; I would be willing to a bit more because there's more chance to succeed in the long term.

As for pictures of my autographs and cards, I'm still working on figuring those out. Give me some time, I'm getting used to blogger.com. ;)