Spencer Arrighetti had just thrown a pair of impressive innings when I talked to him following a spring training start in Lakeland, Florida at the end of February. I admittedly didn’t know a ton about the 24-year-old at the time. I was aware that the Houston Astros had named him their 2023 Minor League Pitcher of the Year, and that he’d been taken in the sixth round of the 2021 draft out of the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, but that was mostly it. The only other thing I knew about Arrighetti — this from my perch in the press box — is that he throws a sweeper.

What I learned about the 6-foot-1, 205-pound righty from our postgame conversation is that he is anything but old school with how he approaches his craft. Analytics is Arrighetti’s second language, and when it comes to talking pitching, they are pretty much his first language. Now on the doorstep of the big leagues — he tossed 4 1/3 scoreless innings with the Triple-A Sugar Land Space Cowboys this past Friday — Arrighetti is a bona fide pitching nerd.

———

David Laurila: Are you into pitching analytics?

Spencer Arrighetti: “Absolutely. I was taught the data by the Astros, and they obviously know their stuff really well. I love the model that we have. I’ve definitely fallen in love with that aspect, so while the game itself is still more important, I fully acknowledge that we have the ability to train analytically now. We can use data to get better.”

Laurila: What have you learned about yourself since coming to pro ball?

Arrighetti: “I’d summarize it by saying that vertical approach angle is kind of indicative of how a pitch will perform. Fastballs are especially vertical-approach-angle dependent on where you should throw them. I’ve learned about that. I’ve also made an effort to improve vertical approach on my fastball, as well as improve spin axis and spin rates on my other pitches.

“There is also the usage data. I’ve found a really good way to utilize my pitch mix efficiently and effectively. Obviously, we’re always trying to fine tune that — the more you climb the ladder, the more it matters — and at this stage it’s especially important for me to have a concept of what’s going to be good against big league hitters.”

Laurila: Can a pitcher meaningfully improve approach angle, or is more a matter of optimizing what you have?

Arrighetti: “It’s a nice mix of both. You get special athletes who do special things, and there are certain things about a guy you won’t want to change, like his delivery. At the same time, you can absolutely chase it. I think I had a pretty decent vertical approach in college, and after being made aware of it, I made more of an effort to get behind and under the ball.

“We look at hop, and it matters a lot, but I don’t have good hop. My four-seam performs like it has hop, but it actually doesn’t have it. I throw it from… I like to call it ‘throwing it from the basement’ as opposed to throwing from above your head. That’s where you find the vertical approach that is more down to up. So, I think that you can make an effort to refine it. Obviously, you’re not going to take a guy that throws 100 [mph] with a steep vertical approach and tell him, ‘Hey, let’s try to flatten it out a little bit.’ You’re going to tell him, ‘Hey, throw 100. You’re fine.”

Laurila: Hand positioning at release plays into what you’re looking to do…

Arrighetti: “Absolutely. Edgertronic is pretty popular within the data room. You can see exactly where the ball is coming out of your hand, which gives you an idea of the timing of it. You adjust your wrist position based on that; you find that point on the ball where you want to be letting it go.”

Laurila: Have you altered any of your grips as a result?

Arrighetti: “I don’t throw a single pitch the same way that I threw it in college; I actually don’t throw many pitches the same way that I threw them in Low-A. We’ve been really good about finding grips and cues that complement my arm and the way I want to throw the ball. Because of that, I’ve been able to develop an arsenal that I’m really confident in. So yeah, I’ve made a lot of drastic changes — even this offseason. I made a big adjustment with my changeup grip. Grips are great until they’re not, and cues are also great until they’re not. When it’s time to adjust, you adjust. Sometimes the adjustment is big, and that’s OK.”

Laurila: Are any of your grips unique?

Arrighetti: “I would say that they are iterations of other pitches that guys throw really well. In general, the more that analytics have come along, the more we have a good idea of which grip will do what to the ball, and from what slot, horizontal approach, and vertical approach. So, not necessarily unique, but tailored to me.”

Laurila: Do you chase certain movement profiles?

Arrighetti: “Absolutely. I think everybody does.”

Laurila: Some guys claim they don’t…

Arrighetti: “The guys that claim they don’t are most likely guys who don’t love the data. Which is fine. There are big crowds of both. There are guys who think it has no place, and there are guys who think it rules everything. For the most part, I think guys generally fall somewhere in the middle. Personally, I’m probably right in the middle, even with my reverence for the work done in research and development.

“Data is a great tool if you’re open to using it. For the guys that don’t need it, that’s awesome. If you naturally have great shapes, that’s awesome. But I’ve found it very useful to use TrackMan and Edgertronic to fine tune the pitches I’m throwing. Everybody wants more hop on their fastball. Everybody wants more sweep on their sweeper. Everybody wants to throw really nasty stuff. So yeah, I would say I’ve been chasing movement profiles for a little while.”

Laurila: You threw some good sweepers today. Is that your best pitch?

Arrighetti: “I would say it’s my most confident pitch with a right-handed hitter in the box. And there is more to it than how much it moves. The point in space where the ball starts to move matters, as does having the ability to disguise your pitches. But while those things are important, for me, when it’s bigger it’s better. I typically look mostly at the actual amount of movement. Velocity as well, because I’m pretty good at spinning the ball. When I throw at a high spin rate, at high velo, I’m going to get big movement. That’s usually what I’m looking for.”

Laurila: What are the metrics on your sweeper?

Arrighetti: ““I get anywhere from 16 to 26 inches of sweep. I’ve actually gotten reps at 28, and while TrackMan is a little faulty sometimes with its setup, I like to believe that I’m capable of making it move that much. Today it was probably around 18 to 20. You also have to be able to adjust your lines with how much it’s moving. If I’m trying to throw it at a righty’s hip, I want 16, 18, 20. If I’m trying to throw it behind them, bigger than that. It will be closer to 78-79 [mph] when it’s big, and usually 80-82 when it’s smaller.”

Laurila: How do you go about adding or subtracting movement?

Arrighetti: “It’s very intent and leverage-based for me. If I find good leverage with the middle finger, which to me is… I don’t know if you’ve watched Matt Brash throw his, but he’s got one of the best sweepers in baseball. He tries to leverage the ball in his hand with a slight bias towards the side. I’ve found that doing that has helped me a lot. If I can find a seam, have that leverage, and feel the leverage at release, it’s going to be really good.”

Laurila: Do you feel that you comp to Brash?

Arrighetti: “No. If I were to comp myself on that pitch, I’m probably closer to Joe Ryan’s. In terms of sweepers that I love to watch and would like to model mine after, a guy in our org who does really great is Cristian Javier. His is the invisiball sometimes. It’s moving 20 inches with a little bit of induced vertical break at about 80 [mph].”

Laurila: How has your repertoire (four-seamer, sweeper, cutter, curveball, changeup) evolved since you signed?

Arrighetti: “I threw a pretty average four-seam, a really slow loopy curveball, a pretty fringe changeup, and a rifle slider. Really, the only one that’s similar now would be the rifle-spin pitch I throw, which I like to call a cutter.

“My changeup grip has probably changed the most. When I was in college it was a pretty standard circle that didn’t really complement the way I throw. I’m not very good at pronating, so I’ve shifted to more of a low-spin split changeup. I’ve seen a lot of progress with that, because I can keep the supinated wrist and pull through the ball a little bit harder from the top. I don’t really have to worry about turning it over much.”

Laurila: You mentioned spinning the ball well. Is that primarily with your breaking stuff?

Arrighetti: “I spin the fastball well, too. I’ve been up to 2,400 rpm, which is good post-sticky stuff crackdown. When guys were using stick, the really good ones were 2,800, 2,900, 3,000, which is unbelievable. I can spin a breaking ball 3,000, but I’ve never come close with a four-seam. My arm action is pretty whippy, which is usually good for spin rates.”

Laurila: Which of your breaking balls gets the most spin?

Arrighetti: “My curveball, which is more seam efficient than my sweeper. My sweeper is actually very not seam efficient. I’m trying to basically throw a two-seam the other way, if you will. Seam-shifted wake is a hot topic right now. It’s kind of hard to explain, but essentially, I don’t need spin efficiency or spin rate on the slider — but it helps it makes the ball appear white, which is useful.”

Laurila: Any final thoughts?

Arrighetti: “I’ve heard some guys throw around the term fake hop. That’s what we like to call induced vertical break hop. We kind of touched on this earlier. Looking at the TrackMan, my four-seam doesn’t have a lot of hop, but you have to look at the release height and the angle you’re throwing from. For a long time, I didn’t think my four-seam was anything special, and the Astros have made it really clear to me that it’s going to be a great weapon at the upper levels. That’s held true so far. Sometimes the data is a little tricky. You have to look at other numbers that maybe don’t jump off the page.”

Below is an analysis of the prospects in the farm system of the Cleveland Guardians. Scouting reports were compiled with information provided by industry sources as well as my own observations. This is the fourth year we’re delineating between two anticipated relief roles, the abbreviations for which you’ll see in the “position” column below: MIRP for multi-inning relief pitchers, and SIRP for single-inning relief pitchers. The ETAs listed generally correspond to the year a player has to be added to the 40-man roster to avoid being made eligible for the Rule 5 draft. Manual adjustments are made where they seem appropriate, but we use that as a rule of thumb.

A quick overview of what FV (Future Value) means can be found here. A much deeper overview can be found here.

All of the ranked prospects below also appear on The Board, a resource the site offers featuring sortable scouting information for every organization. It has more details (and updated TrackMan data from various sources) than this article and integrates every team’s list so readers can compare prospects across farm systems. It can be found here. Read the rest of this entry »

As I continue to meticulously make my way through the prospect lists (Cleveland and Cincinnati are next), I’ve pushed all the scouting reports for rookies who are currently on American League active rosters live to The Board. These reports often include updated notes from this spring. Those players are:

• Colton Cowser, LF, Baltimore Orioles
• Nolan Schanuel, 1B, Los Angeles Angels
• Emerson Hancock, SP, Seattle Mariners
• Justin Foscue, 1B/2B, Texas Rangers
• Justin Slaten, SIRP, Boston Red Sox
• Nick Loftin, 2B, Kansas City Royals
• Darell Hernaiz, SS, Oakland Athletics
• Joe Boyle, SP, Oakland Athletics
• Wilyer Abreu, RF, Boston Red Sox
• Austin Martin, LF, Minnesota Twins
• Jacob Latz, MIRP, Texas Rangers
• Matt Sauer, SIRP, Kansas City Royals
• Austin Shenton, 1B, Tampa Bay Rays
• Guillermo Zuñiga, SIRP, Los Angeles Angels
• Kody Funderburk, SIRP, Minnesota Twins
• Mitch Spence, MIRP, Oakland Athletics
• Kyle McCann, C, Oakland Athletics

Read the rest of this entry »

Welcome back for another installment of FanGraphs’ Visual Scouting Primer! For previous editions, or an introduction explaining the concept of this ongoing series, you can click here, here, and here, but in an effort to tamp down my word count, I’m diving right into it this time. Read the rest of this entry »

Earlier this week, in the second installment of this ongoing series, I started picking apart the language used to describe baseball swings. But given how many elements make up a player’s swing, and therefore how much terminology exists to describe the subtle (and not so subtle) differences between them, I could only fit so much into that post before I had to cut myself off.

I’m skipping the preamble this time, so if you’re not quite sure what you’ve stumbled into with this primer, you can catch up with the first and second editions of this series, and meet me back here when you’re ready. I will, however, reiterate that the point of this is not to identify “good” or “bad” elements of baseball mechanics, but rather to define these terms as descriptive tools, as opposed to value-based judgements. And just like in my last post, I’m focusing on big leaguers for this one, thanks to the availability of side views of their swings, which are featured in MLB broadcasts, but missing from most MiLB game feeds.

Now, as promised, I’ll pick up exactly where I left off.

Short Swing vs. Long Swing
In Hitting, Part One, I dug into players’ loads, i.e. where a player’s hands come set before he starts his forward motion toward an incoming pitch. When a swing is described as being either “long” or “short” to the ball, that is referring to how quickly and directly a player can get the barrel of his bat to the ball. There’s some debate as to whether the length we’re describing is a measure of time, or of distance, but in either case, a “short” swing is one where a player’s bat moves directly to the ball, while a “long” swing is one where the bat’s path is less direct.

Typically, being short to the ball is favored, in the same way that a pitcher’s repeatable delivery is often more favorable than a violent one (see Pitching, Part One, for more on that). Of course, there are many exceptions to that rule, but generally, being short to the ball is considered a good thing. This is largely due to the fact that the simplicity of a short swing is often seen as more reliable and sustainable, particularly as a player is still developing in the minor leagues. A short swing allows a player to wait longer before deciding whether to swing at a given offering, which can be valuable by way of pitch selection, and for a minor leaguer who hasn’t yet faced advanced pitching, that bodes well for how he’ll fair as opposing pitchers’ velocities increase and their command becomes more precise.

Short swings come in many flavors. Here are some examples:

Short to the Ball, With Power: Yordan Alvarez

Yordan Alvarez’s simple load and short bat path allow him to attack pitches and get the sweet spot of his bat to the ball quickly. He guides the knob of his bat directly to where the pitch is coming at him, and the barrel of his bat quickly follows the same route.

Short to the Ball, Without Power: Steven Kwan

Kwan is short to the ball, but his swing differs from Alvarez’s cut. Whereas the appeal of Alvarez’s being short to the ball allows him to apply his upper body strength to pitches throughout the strike zone, Kwan’s swing is more about simply getting his bat on the ball, even if he’s not trying to send it out of the park. As such, a side-by-side look at their respective swings shows similarly short bat paths, but by the time they’re making contact, their postures are very different, illustrating the difference between a power swing and a contact swing (more on that later).

Sometimes, adding length to a swing is valuable. For example, Fernando Tatis Jr.’s deep load, and Junior Caminero’s bat wrap (both featured in my previous entry), create a longer distance for their bats to travel, but are also contributors to those players’ bat speed and power production.

Long to the Ball: Davis Schneider

In Schneider’s case, his long swing isn’t due to a particularly deep load or a bat wrap. His bat simply takes a longer route to the strike zone from his load to his point of contact.

A side-by-side comparison with Alvarez’s direct bat path makes this easier to see. Switching back to a front view of their respective swings (the camera movement in Schneider’s side view makes for a nauseating side by side), keep an eye on the heads of their respective bats. You’ll first see the swing all the way through, then with a few freeze frames thrown in to illustrate the moments when their bat paths differ the most, with Schneider’s dipping down behind him, rather than making a straight line to the ball.

Thus far, Schneider has used his long swing to optimize his launch angle, despite his middling average exit velocity. Because he raked during his first taste of the majors last year, albeit in just 35 games (141 plate appearances), it is acceptable for him to maintain his current mechanics (weirdos welcome!), but if he encounters timing issues in the future, he may have to adjust to shorten his swing.

Shortening Up: Alec Bohm

Adjusting swing length can make a huge impact on a player’s ability to consistently get to his power in a game. After a headline-making 2020 season, Bohm’s power dipped significantly the following year. This may have been due to his swing becoming too long.

Here’s a look at his swing in 2020:

And here’s what it looked like in 2021:

And to make it even clearer, here’s a side by side, first all the way through, and then with some handy freeze frames:

These camera angles are slightly different, so I can’t overlay these videos to make my point, but you can see that his 2021 swing starts earlier, and begins with his back elbow dipping, and his bat head looping back toward the catcher, whereas in 2020, his hands and bat moved directly to the ball. As of 2023, his power was back, as was his short swing.

Power vs. Contact Swing
As I hinted above, in the Alvarez-Kwan comparison, players will often develop swings that are geared specifically toward either power or contact. The reasons why players do this are relatively self explanatory, and based on body type, speed, positional profile, or countless other attributes that may make a player more valuable if he focuses on either power or contact, rather than both.

Power Swing: Kyle Schwarber

Schwarber generates power with a stable, balanced lower half, with his weight evenly distributed, if not slightly shifted toward his back foot. He uses his strong hands and arms to generate bat speed without sacrificing that stable base. Schwarber’s swing has always been geared for power, though he has simplified it in significant ways since he came up with the Cubs.

Schwarber’s old swing included a much noisier load, an obvious hitch (or trigger), and a more pronounced leg kick. The leg kick, in particular, caused Schwarber to shift his weight during his swing, whereas his current mechanics finish with his weight distributed in more or less the same way as before he starts his swing, allowing for an even stronger and more stable base. In other words, while it’s always been a power swing, the simplifications he’s made over the years have enhanced the power-driven aspects of it.

Contact Swing: Luis Arraez

Arraez is MLB’s current king of contact. Dating back to his debut in 2019, he’s never finished a season with a contact rate below 90%. He’s short to the ball, and adjusts the barrel of his bat to pitches throughout the strike zone. In contrast to Schwarber, Arraez’s lower half is less stable, with his back foot rarely staying planted, and he lets his arms extend as he makes contact with the ball, essentially allowing the weight of the bat, combined with basic physics, to do more of the heavy lifting, when it comes to power generation (or lack thereof).

He doesn’t hike his back elbow up like Schwarber does, and he’s not clubbing the ball with his upper body, so when he makes contact, he doesn’t focus on activating the muscles in his arms to drive the ball a great distance, opting instead to throw his hands toward the ball, and simply spray line drives to whatever part of the field makes the most sense, based on the pitch’s location. (He led the majors in line drive percentage in 2023.) In slow motion, you can see that the impact of the ball on the bat causes his arms to wobble in a noodly kind of way, which you’ll rarely see from a pure power hitter like Schwarber, whose arms stay bent and flexing as he makes contact.

That’ll do it for this installment, but I’ll be back soon with yet another batch of hitting terminology, and after that we’ll get back to the pitching side of things. Stay tuned!

I saw Dylan Cease’s start on Monday night and wanted to pass along some notes and video of him following his trade to the Padres. I also wanted to share fresh spring notes on the new White Sox prospects acquired yesterday. Let’s start with Cease. Here is my video from his unbroadcast start:

Read the rest of this entry »

When Eric Longenhagen and Tess Taruskin blurbed Ben Brown in last month’s Names To Know: 100 More Relevant Prospects feature, they noted his “monster mid-90s fastball/breaking ball combo.” Power is the defining characteristic of Brown’s arsenal. The 24-year-old righty ranks among the top pitching prospects in the Chicago Cubs organization, and following an impressive in spring training, he is expected to make his big league debut in the forthcoming campaign.

Brown began coming into his own in 2022 — the year he was acquired by the Cubs from the Philadelphia Phillies in exchange for David Robertson — and he made further strides last year. Across 92.2 innings between Double-A Tennessee and Triple-A Iowa, the 6-foot-6 righty logged a 12.6 strikeout rate while holding opposing hitters to a .215 batting average. His command faltered at times — a health-related speed bump was a contributing factor — but the power remained a constant.

Brown discussed his repertoire and approach at the Cubs’ spring training facility in Mesa, Arizona last week.

———

David Laurila: You consider yourself a pitching nerd. How did that come about?

Ben Brown: “I’ve been one my entire life. I was coached really well growing up, but I also loved to watch YouTube videos of guys throwing. Roy Halladay. Josh Beckett. I was a big Red Sox fan, so I watched Beckett, Jon Lester, Daniel Bard, [Jonathan] Papelbon. I picked up a lot from that.

“I also spent some time at Driveline after I had Tommy John surgery [in 2019], and got introduced to that whole community in Seattle. I can be the hardest critic on myself, because I know what looks good, as well as the numbers you aspire for analytically. I feel like I’m pretty well versed on all that. And I’ve definitely had a lot of really good discussions with pitching coordinators and whatnot about analytics since getting traded over to the Cubs.”

Laurila: Have you found yourself chasing certain metrics on any of your pitches? Read the rest of this entry »

Below is an evaluation of the prospects in the Chicago Cubs farm system who readers should consider “imminent big leaguers,” players who might reasonably be expected to play in the majors at some point this year. This includes all prospects on the 40-man roster as well as those who have already established themselves in the upper levels of the minors but aren’t yet rostered. We tend to be more inclusive with pitchers and players at premium defensive positions since their timelines are usually the ones accelerated by injuries and scarcity. Any Top 100 prospects, regardless of their ETA, are also included on this list. Reports, tool grades, and scouting information for all of the prospects below can also be found on The Board.

You may be able to infer that is not a top-to-bottom evaluation of the Cubs farm system. We like to include what’s happening in minor league and extended spring training in our reports as much as possible, since scouting high concentrations of players in Arizona and Florida allows us to incorporate real-time, first-person information into the org lists. However, this approach has led to some situations where outdated analysis (or no analysis at all) was all that existed for players who had already debuted in the majors. Skimming the imminent big leaguers off the top of a farm system in the meantime allows time-sensitive information to make its way onto the site more quickly, better preparing readers for the upcoming season, helping fantasy players as they draft, and building site literature on relevant prospects to facilitate transaction analysis in the event that trades or injuries foist these players into major league roles. There will still be a full Cubs prospect list that includes Fernando Cruz (whose current grade and report you can already access here), Jefferson Rojas (an offseason Pick to Click), Pablo Aliendo and all of the other prospects in the system who aren’t Top 100 guys and also appear to be at least another whole season away. As such, today’s list includes no ordinal rankings. Readers are instead encouraged to focus on the players’ Future Value (FV) grades. Read the rest of this entry »

A few weeks ago, I introduced an ongoing series aimed at clearing up the confusion that sometimes accompanies the scouting-specific language that pops up in our (and others’) scouting reports. While the first installment was an introduction to pitching terminology, this one will be focused on hitting. And while the previous entry was part of Prospect Week, and accordingly featured almost entirely videos of prospects, this one will focus more on current big leaguers.

There are a number of reasons for the departure from prospects for this installment. For one thing, I believe it’s easier to understand these terms when they’re exemplified by players with whom you, the dear reader, are more familiar. Additionally, most of the terms I’ll dig into that are used to describe swings are more easily illustrated using a side view of a player’s swing and, unlike major league broadcasts, minor league broadcasts tend not to include these angles. But even aside from that practicality, I think it’s important to place these terms in a broader context than just prospect evaluation. While some of these terms are sometimes used to describe a possible hinderance to a prospect’s development, I want to emphasize that they aren’t inherently good or bad. Players can excel at the major league level while still embodying these traits, even the ones that, in a vacuum, seem to carry negative connotations.

Just like in the last installment, many of these terms will be familiar to you as baseball-savvy folks, but I hope that the accompanying visuals will serve as a useful supplement to your consumption of scouting reports, both past and present. And because I can’t help myself, I’ve sprinkled a few prospects in throughout the piece for those of you who may be jonesing for more prospect coverage. Read the rest of this entry »

Below is an analysis of the prospects in the farm system of the Milwaukee Brewers. Scouting reports were compiled with information provided by industry sources as well as my own observations. This is the fourth year we’re delineating between two anticipated relief roles, the abbreviations for which you’ll see in the “position” column below: MIRP for multi-inning relief pitchers, and SIRP for single-inning relief pitchers. The ETAs listed generally correspond to the year a player has to be added to the 40-man roster to avoid being made eligible for the Rule 5 draft. Manual adjustments are made where they seem appropriate, but we use that as a rule of thumb.

A quick overview of what FV (Future Value) means can be found here. A much deeper overview can be found here.

All of the ranked prospects below also appear on The Board, a resource the site offers featuring sortable scouting information for every organization. It has more details (and updated TrackMan data from various sources) than this article and integrates every team’s list so readers can compare prospects across farm systems. It can be found here. Read the rest of this entry »