Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Most Dangerous Division in Sports

Garrett Olson, Prospect

Watching Garrett Olson go to work, I think a lot of us have, at some point or another, wondered just what it was that made Olson such an interesting prospect back when he was with the Orioles. So today I thought I'd take a break from Chone Figgins trade speculation to reflect on an old Olson write-up from Baseball America, just as I did with Jason Vargas and Jose Lopez.

What follows is the Olson bit from 2007, following a very strong 2006 during which Olson whiffed 162 and walked 50 over 165.2 innings between high-A and AA. He did that as a 22-year-old southpaw, and wound up #6 in the ranking of the Orioles' top ten prospects.

Background: If you're looking for the safest bet in this system to pitch in the big leagues, Olson is it. He jumped to high Class A in his pro debut in 2005, then made it to Double-A halfway through his first full season. The Orioles said the quality of his pitches improved at Bowie, as he seemed to pitch to the level of his competition.

Strengths: Olson has a well-rounded package of pitches, works efficiently and has a desire to learn and improve unmatched by anyone in the organization. He threw his fastball at 88-91 mph early in the season but worked at 89-93 later, complementing it with a hard breaking ball. His changeup has improved significantly, though he still needs to command it better.

Weaknesses: The Orioles say Olson was too fine with his pitches early in 2006, though he got more confident with his pitches and was more willing to pitch to contact later. Some scouts doubt the quality of his stuff and say he'll end up as a lefty reliever.

The Future: There are those in the organization who would like Olson to get a shot at the Baltimore rotation in spring training, though he'll likely open the season at Triple-A Norfolk. Assuming his changeup continues to come along, he has the stuff and work ethic to pitch in the middle of a rotation.

It's worth adding that, in a companion piece by BA that graded the top tools in the system, Olson came away with the best curveball, the best changeup, and the best control.

I'll tell you one thing - Olson made his way to the bigs all right, just as they predicted. He just turned 27 last October, and he's made 99 appearances in the Major Leagues, throwing 283 innings. To show for those 283 innings, he has a 6.20 ERA. 310 different pitchers have thrown at least 200 Major League innings since Olson arrived in 2007. Olson's ERA ranks second-worst. His xFIP ranks second-worst. His regular FIP ranks fourth-worst. Given that so many of his innings have come out of the bullpen, it's worth considering that, over the past four years, Garrett Olson may have been the worst regular pitcher in baseball.

Now, I'm not going to run down a list of specific traits that BA identified, as I did with Vargas and Lopez. Rather, I want to focus on two general ideas. First of all, I think you can see present Olson in that scouting report, with little progress having been made. His fastball spends most of its time between 88-91mph. His curve is all right but his changeup is inconsistent, and he does frequently nibble as if he's afraid of allowing contact. While Olson's career to date has been disappointing, it was by no means an unlikely outcome given his skillset at the time. Without the fastball he apparently flashed in Bowie, he's a guy for whom success can only come by making the most out of kind of a little. Those scouts who doubted the quality of his stuff seem to have been right on, as Olson is now a lefty reliever.

And secondly, one wonders what impact the system context may have had on Olson's hype. Olson was a decent pitcher in a thin organization. Among the Orioles' top ten prospects in 2007, Olson - believe it or not - may be the biggest success story. It's either him or Nolan Reimold. The system graduated a handful of guys the year before, which allowed Olson to stand out. Yeah, they said he had the best curve. Yeah, they said he had the best changeup, and the best control. But compared to who? The arms ahead of Olson on the top ten list were an 18-year-old in A-ball, a 19-year-old in A-ball, and a fastball-first righty with little command. There weren't a lot of intriguing arms in the system, and most of the ones that were threw good fastballs. So Olson wasn't being compared against a deep pool of peers.

Garrett Olson was an effective pitcher in the minors, even up through AAA. He's been a disaster in the bigs, at least out of the rotation. It's a letdown that he's been as bad as he has, but this sort of thing happens to a number of finesse arms who rely on their secondary stuff. Unless your offspeed pitches are truly exceptional, it's hard to survive without a fastball, as Olson has found out.

There's no doubt in my mind that Olson was one of the better pitching prospects for the Orioles going into 2007. And there's little doubt in my mind that his ranking was somewhat misleading, considering the team's relatively mediocre crop of pitching prospects. Given his skillset back then, even moderate big league success was a possibility, but by no means a given, or even all that likely. He needed to get better, and not everyone does.

Comment 20 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I have read here before that AAA numbers transfer well to the MLB as far as guessing how a player will perform.

I’m curious to know if there is any kind of trend exists when players do well in 3A but become a bust when they make the move to the MLB level.

I assume that these situations are the exception to the rule, but I wonder if there is a cause of this that could be found in the numbers. My guess is no, but usually I am wrong.

Oh, and I am specifically talking about pitchers making the move rather than position players

by d0nkey on Jan 28, 2011 2:55 PM PST reply actions  

I think it has more to do

with the kind of pitcher a player is. It seems common that soft tossing lefties with mediocre stuff do fairly well in AAA because their stuff is good enough to fool lesser hitters but not quite good enough to sneak by in the majors. Reading the scouting report, it seems like Olson is very similar to Vargas stuff-wise but Vargas has an elite quality pitch whereas Olson has to nibble because none of his pitches can really get a good hitter out. This causes him to fail where a guy like Vargas becomes a reliable starter. I could be wrong though.

by Robby The Kid on Jan 28, 2011 3:11 PM PST via mobile up reply actions  

I don't know if studies bear this out

but I’ve long believed that finesse guys who get by on secondary stuff face a big hurdle between AAA and the Majors, because the difference between a AAA hitter and a Major League hitter is often the ability to hit more than a fastball.

Just as another example, RRS as a starter in AAA: 5.9 K/9, 1.8 BB/9
And RRS as a starter in the Major Leagues: 4.4 K/9, 3.2 BB/9

by Jeff Sullivan on Jan 28, 2011 3:37 PM PST up reply actions  

This makes sense and I guess this would be true for a lot of finesse pitchers

Shouldn’t this ‘trend’ (if it truly exists across the board) tell the coaches and scouts that these types of guys should be left at the AAA level until they can develop a good secondary pitch?

Like RRS for example, if the signs pointed to him inflating his K/9 and BB/9 because he doesn’t have secondary stuff, why would they take the risk? Or was there more upside with guys like RRS that I was unaware of?

by d0nkey on Jan 28, 2011 3:47 PM PST up reply actions  

These guys usually have pretty good curves or changeups or both

They just infrequently have great ones. To cut it in the Majors as more of a finesse guy, you either need at least one really great offspeed pitch, or you need awesome command.

by Jeff Sullivan on Jan 28, 2011 3:55 PM PST up reply actions  

I think you do see it in a lot of scouting reports, and it seems like Major League teams promote big fastball guys sooner.

Jay has been saying something similar for years, such as his opinion on guys like Tom Oldham and Ryan Feierabend. At some point though, if a guy has been having success in the minors, a team is going give him a shot to see if he can get it done.

by nathaniel dawson on Jan 28, 2011 3:58 PM PST up reply actions  

So it is more of a charity call-up?

I don’t want to focus on the results-based analysis using RRS as an example, but if the great offspeed pitch isn’t there, nor is awesome command, why even give the guy a chance? Are there players that actually work out that fit a profile like RRS?

I suppose now that I think about it, if you have an injury or something and just need a 5th starter fill-in, there wouldn’t be much downside to giving a guy a shot. Is this how RRS got his call-up? I don’t remember

by d0nkey on Jan 28, 2011 4:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Because you never know if they're going to fail

Some guys make it work. It’s hard to know until you throw them to the wolves.

by Jeff Sullivan on Jan 28, 2011 5:13 PM PST up reply actions  

They don't know they're going to fail

I’m sure that you could find many pitchers that were of a similar type that did find success in the big leagues. Has anybody ever described Mark Buehrle as having great stuff? (I just know someone’s going to pull out a scouting report from the 90’s that says that Buehrle’s got a blazing fastball). It’s just that for every one that did, you’ll find many that didn’t. And it would be a fairly daunting task to try to research something like this. Exactly what parameters would you use for “stuff”, how do you determine success rate, do you account for injuries? What kind of control group do you compare that with?

It’s probably more that these are baseball people that have seen godzillions of pitchers come and go throughout the years, and have come to learn through their experience that those finesse type pitchers have a rougher go of it in the majors. Not that none of them can make it, it’s just easier if you’ve got good velocity.

But if a pitcher has had continued success through the minors with what scouts would describe as so-so stuff, then it can be worth it for a team to find out if that success can translate to the majors. With pretty much every team in the majors in constant need of another good starter or two, there’s going to be somebody that’s willing to give him a shot. Maybe he’ll be one of the rare ones that can make it even without velocity or a knockout pitch.

by nathaniel dawson on Jan 28, 2011 5:29 PM PST up reply actions  

succinct

marked by compact precise expression without wasted words

by nathaniel dawson on Jan 28, 2011 6:07 PM PST up reply actions  

It could be interesting to see some opposite versions of this post

For example, maybe mediocre scouting reports of young players who became stars. Although it is probably harder to find scouting reports of young players who are not top prospects. One example would be a scouting report of Albert Pujols before he was drafted. He obviously wasn’t very highly thought of since he was drafted in the 13th round

by niceguysfinishlast on Jan 28, 2011 8:45 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

By reading a game thread of your own volition you agree to accept all liability for any and all damage done to your delicate sensibilities.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Starlin Castro's fit with Seattle
Kawasaki80_small
Lists! So many lists!
M_s_hat_copy_small
OT -- May 22nd In Memoriam
Ichiro_small
Why do managers and media members hate walks?
Wbc_029_small
Friday Morning Music Thread
Small
Dustin Ackley BP swing vs game swing
Beastquakerwallpaper_small
More on the Struggles of Smoak
Randy2_for_sbn_small
Albert Pujols 2012: Three Retrospectives
Small
On Batting Orders
Niehaus_small
More on Dustin Ackley and the strikezone

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Sexy People

Wbc_029_small Jeff Sullivan

Small Matthew

Claw_small JY