Big Mike, I can accept that Javier Vazquez is not an ace, but, I also can be fascinated about why he hasn’t become one. I don’t just analyze concrete realities, but, try to imagine how players or teams might change or improve. It’s a lot more interesting that way.
In the case of Vazquez, he’s been oozing with enough talent through the years that he’s left many more observers than one Peter Ajemian to wonder why he couldn’t dazzle hitters even more often.
In fact, as I was writing the blog and had chosen to label Vazquez “an enigma,” I looked up an article on him in The Hardball Times, to check on his pitching repertoire. The article was headlined,” The enigma that is Javier Vazquez” I felt reinforcement when I read that others had wondered why his talent hadn’t taken him further. It’s not that I was complaining he had not met some “standard;” but, rather, “How can a guy with so much rich talent NOT become more of a star pitcher?”
To tell you the truth, these are the kind of topics that make me love baseball. The details. How did CC Sabathia make an adjustment on one of his pitches last summer so that it helped make him much more effective?
How did Red Sox closer Keith Foulke, with only two pitches, use a little “tic” in his motion — hesitating a split second before he uncorked the ball – keep hitters off balance enough to excell in 2004 and help the Sox go all the way? Foulke’s fastball was average. His changeup was good, but, many – including myself – believe that that tiny hesitation move was the KEY to his success
How could Derek Lowe have a fairly mediocre 2004 season, and then pitch three consecutive fantastic games in the 2004 playoffs for the Red Sox? He’s a good “adrenalin” pitcher, but, why was he good at that and other pitchers choke under pressure?
I’ve always been more fascinated by the cases involving when pitchers or other athletes HAVE the talent and seem poised to keep rising up, but, just can’t do it, often for psychological reasons or quirky things. Remember Jose Contreras, the star pitcher from Cuba who the Yanks and Sox wildy competed for? When he got to the Yanks, he was SO UP and DOWN – often within the same game! He’d pitch brilliantly for three or four innings and record eight strikouts, and, then he’d walk a couple of guys in the next inning and start to unravel — very badly – and he’ d be out of the game.
Now, Big Mike, maybe you don’t care about a pitcher like that — and you’d say: “That’s baseball….He did the best he could….He was just erratic..”
What makes a pitcher or a player get to the next level? Those more complex, intangibles are often interesting. Take Joba Chamberlain on the Yanks. I can’t stand him, but I think he’s very talented. Yet, it’s unclear, even after a couple years, if this guy is going to use his potential or perhaps be distracted and squander it.
It’s details that often make a real difference in what happens to a pitcher. He might get a new pitching coach and start to thrive by incorporating a new pitch or two. He might just need more reassurance.
I can use Clay Buccholz on the Red Sox as another example. He’s got loads of talent – a killer changeup, excellent curve, and good fastball. He pitched a no-hitter during his first call-up during the 2007 season. Then, in 2008, Buchholz joined the rotation, and, after he lost a few games, he became very inconsistent and had a lousy season. He, clearly, had lost his confidence.
Some fans were ready to give up on him before 2009, but, he, when he got called up that time, he performed much better and, now he’s slated to be in the 2010 rotation. No one – still – knows if he’ll become a star pitcher or a more average pitcher like Javier Vazquez, but, it’s fun and fascinating to see how it comes out. What might help him improve or be stymied?
It’s the gray that’s often more interesting than the black and white, Big Mike.
