Immodest Support for New Oakland Pitcher Jharel Cotton

Jharel Cotton was omitted from all the notable top-100 lists entering the 2016 season. He was excluded from all those same lists entering the 2015 season, as well. And the 2014 one. And 2013 one. And 2012. And so on. A review of the literature suggests that, since the dawn of the uncreated light, Jharel Cotton’s name has been omitted from top-100 prospect lists.

One sort of document from which Cotton’s name hasn’t been omitted is the author’s weekly attempt to identify and/or monitor compelling fringe prospects, the Fringe Five. Cotton finished atop the haphazardly calculated Fringe Five Scoreboard last year and is currently fourth on this year’s edition of the scoreboard.

Why Cotton has been excluded from the aforementioned top-100 lists isn’t precisely for me to say. Why he’s been included among the Five, however, is because both (a) he’s produced excellent strikeout and walk numbers and (b) his repertoire suggests that his performances are sustainable.

Strikeout and walk rate not only point towards future success but also become reliable in relative small samples. Here’s Cotton’s rank by strikeout- and walk-rate differential (K-BB%) among all minor leaguers who’ve recorded 90 or more innings over the past three years.

Cotton has placed in roughly the 97th percentile by this measure each of the past three seasons, is what the numbers declare. The numbers need little in the way of annotation. One asks a question, the numbers answer it. “How many more batters does Jharel Cotton strike out than walk?” is the question. “Basically more than every other pitcher,” is what the numbers reply figuratively. But not literally. Because numbers possess no agency.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

With regard to the repertoire, there are always two relevant questions. One: does the pitcher in question possess the requisite arm speed to contend with major leaguers? And two: does that pitcher also have some manner of swing-and-miss secondary pitch or pitches? The answer for Cotton, in both cases, is “Yes.”

By all accounts — including the sort facilitated by PITCHf/x cameras — Cotton’s fastball sits at 92-94 mph. The average fastball velocity recorded by all major-league starters this year is 91.8 mph.

Moreover, there’s the presence of the Cotton’s changeup. Lead prospect analyst Eric Longenhagen assigned the pitch a grade of 70 in his report earlier today. The footage present here depicts that changeup at three speeds: real time, slow motion, and nearly slowest motion. “Absolutely slowest motion” has been excluded, because that’s actually just a single image and not footage at all.





Carson Cistulli has published a book of aphorisms called Spirited Ejaculations of a New Enthusiast.

1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JoserMember since 2021
9 years ago

Well, technically footage referred to lengths of film; given that video is entirely electrons these days, which defy spatial measurement altogether, footage doesn’t apply to any of it.

(A professional videographer acquaintance has adopted the term “gibbage”, from GB; though I think that was mostly a joke, it is actually kind of useful when estimating storage requirements)