SpringfieldFan Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Hey, I didn't see the first Angels game on Monday. However, I heard Santana being described as having "electric" stuff and being lights out in the minors. My question, judging by how you saw Santana look, is: who would you rather have, him or Brandon McCarthy. Which one is has the better upside? SFF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitesoxfan56 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 someone should probley change the title to ervin?? so we dont think your talkin about johan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 I don't think any of us have seen enough of Erwin Santana to make that comparision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Trying to judge guys MLB talent after 1 or 2 games is just insane. Santana had a terrible first game and a great 2nd game. Who knows which one will show up for his whole career. McCarthy had a good first game and a good spring training. Who can say that he won't suddenly hit his own skid that he can't get out of (God I hope not.) Any young pitcher you bring up can have a tremendous upside or a tremendous downside. If my memory serves, back in 2000 if you were to rank the Sox's pitching prospects, you'd have said 1. Kip Wells, 2. Garland, 3. Buehrle, while today I'd say that the ranking order has been totally reversed. Both McCarthy and Santana have some filthy stuff they can throw up there. Let's see how they use it before we try to rank anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 (edited) I realize that it is retarded to rank guys based on one outing, but I'll at least try to answer the guy's question. From what I saw of the two players I'd rather have B-Mac. Santana seemed to be featuring only two pitches: a 94 MPH fastball and a decent slider that he didn't seem to have full control of. He had no real breaking stuff from what I saw, which is a major problem. B-Mac on the other hand had a really nice curveball that he seemed to have solid control of, and he has a changeup that we didn't really see in that start. His fastball didn't quite have as much zip, but that could change as he fills out his frame a bit. Edited May 25, 2005 by ZoomSlowik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpringfieldFan Posted May 25, 2005 Author Share Posted May 25, 2005 QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ May 25, 2005 -> 01:11 PM) I realize that it is retarded to rank guys based on one outing, but I'll at least try to answer the guy's question. From what I saw of the two players I'd rather have B-Mac. Santana seemed to be featuring only two pitches: a 94 MPH fastball and a decent slider that he didn't seem to have full control of. He had no real breaking stuff from what I saw, which is a major problem. B-Mac on the other hand had a really nice curveball that he seemed to have solid control of, and he has a changeup that we didn't really see in that start. His fastball didn't quite have as much zip, but that could change as he fills out his frame a bit. Thanks Zoom. That is about all I was asking. Having not seen Santana, I didn't know if he threw heat, had pinpoint control, nasty offspeed stuff, or some combination. Therefore, I had no general idea how he compared to BMac. SFF (aka "the guy") Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 From what I saw on Monday, I still can't say which one I rather have. McCarthy dominated a piss poor hitting club. Ervin dominated a piss poor hitting club. Based on pure stuff and from what I've heard, I rather have Santana. His fastball is 98, not 94. He has a slider with alot of bite. His changeup is also pretty decent, but I would like to see him develop a sinker or curve, else he's just a closer with nasty stuff and a starter with above average stuff(aka 3rd or 4th starter). I think Santana will become a Vazquez/Burnett type while McCarthy will become a Buehrle/Garland(the good Garland where he attacks hitters and basically tells the opposing team, "here's my pitch, hit it if you can"). Pure stuff - Santana A pitcher who's more ready - McCarthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 When I saw McCarthy throw his curve ball vs the Cubs, all I could see in my mind's eye was Carrie Woods' curve before his elbow went out. It was an incredible pitch to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
False Alarm Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 i can't say anything for certain after watching each of em once. i didn't notice a radar gun on santana. from what i've read, he works mid 90s and BMac's generally at 90-91 (never mind that i saw 93 on one of his fastballs sunday). i thought their breaking stuff was about even (read: very good), and i'm not positive i saw a change from either one (though i know BMac's is excellent). here's the thing: mccarthy's younger, has better control (although santnana's was outstanding monday), and has excellent mechanics and no injury history. santana, on the other hand, played only 8 games last year because of injury. there are plenty of amazing pitching talents who flameout young cuz of injury and arm problems, and i'd say santana's at significant risk of being just another. so, though santana's stuff might be a half tick better than BMac's, i'd take BMac over santana any day cuz of his consistency, control, and health profile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.