wounded mullet
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2009
- Messages
- 13,951
- Likes
- 11
You missed the part where I said "necessarily." If you had as much control as Sanchez, you may be considered having "good stuff."
no, that's entirely the point. His stats show that he obviously doesn't have great control on the majority of nights. He's an average MLB pitcher at best who was on it for one night.
No one is saying he is the next coming of Sandy Koufax or anything. My point is that someone can have great "stuff," as far as a mid-90's fastball, good break on a curve, a biting slider, etc., and not have the control of Greg Maddux. Good stuff does't equal control 100% of the time. In your example, you could be considered having good stuff if you could throw strikes. In my case, when I pitched, I threw an 82 mph fastball and a changeup, and could put the ball wherever I wanted. I had great control, but not "good stuff."
No. If your strikes are being hit solidly and you are missing the strike zone as often as he is you do not have good stuff just because you have good movement. It's a combination of the two.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
"Good stuff is usually defined by what action his pitches take. Some examples of good stuff are late movement on the fastball or life; sharpness on the breaking pitch; and deception on the change up to name a few. If you can find a kid with stuff, and a chance of command, you have yourself a possible prospect."
--Rob Smith
Pitching Coach, Creighton University
To be a successful pitcher in this league, I agree with you that you need to have a combination of both stuff and location. But it is possible to have good stuff and need work with control.
oh i see what you did there, you edited the quote to make it favorable in your argument. Thats groundbreaking stuff.