keyboard_arrow_uptop

Tanner Houck, RHP, University of Missouri
Seen in a 8 IP start on 4/6. Large frame; lean, proportioned body; athletic; could add weight to frame and maintain flexibility and overall athleticism. Pitches from a full wind-up; long arm action; plus arm speed; low-three-quarters slot; has crossfire in delivery with some effort, but repeats delivery well. Fastball 91-93 (t94); plus run/sink; very heavy pitch; had a lot of GBs this outing; liked going under hands of RHH; future average command and control. Slider 78-82; early break with quality depth and action; shape could get slurvy at times; located well to RHH; struggled to backdoor to LHH but had right idea; future plus offering. CH 84-86; can show arm speed on it with late fade/sink; needs to pick better counts to throw it; threw 3-1 to LHH who crushed over scoreboard; future average offering. Threw a couple CT at 88; not sure if intended; not enough to get a grade on. 1.20-1.33. Efficient outing; 78 pitches through 6; finished with 100 through 8. Pitched at higher velocity spring and summer 2016; still working well with diminished velocity though. See as a middle of the rotation starter.

Freddy Tarnok, RHP, Riverview HS (Brandon, FL)
Seen in a 5 IP start on 5/2. Looks larger than listed height/weight; closer to 6-foot-5; has plus projection remaining; could fill out upper half easily. Pitches from the stretch only; pump and go delivery; low-effort; clean, compact arm action; above-average arm speed; three-quarters slot. FB 88-96; mixes in 2S FB from time to time; 1st IP 93-95 (t96); had lots of swing/miss in the zone; 4th/5th IP 88-91; worried about arm strength; arm action looked consistent from inning to inning; just lacks arm strength; mild run; lacked command. CB 78-80 (t81); shows hard, downer action; just had inconsistent feel for it; lacked strike-throwing ability at times; shows promise with velocity and ease of delivery to potentially be an average offering. CH 83; he has it, but it is what you expect. Had lots of swing/miss with FB early in game; once velo went down hitters started to time it up better. Worried about pop-up status; arm strength; and consistency of breaking ball. See as a bullpen reliever with possible closing opportunities. Committed to University of Tampa (D2) as a two-way player.

Phoenix Sanders, RHP, University of South Florida
Seen in a 7 IP start on 3/17; and a 6 IP start on 4/28. Broad shoulders; built lower half; could add a tick in pro ball out of the bullpen but lacks projection. Pitches from a full windup; compact arm action with average arm speed; three-quarters slot; tends to finish upright and can leave pitches up. FB 88-90 (t92); mild two-seam run in the lower half of the zone; throws quality strikes to both sides of the plate but can be too hittable at times. CB 75-78; more a change of pace pitch but can throw for strikes; has depth and action but lacks sharpness. SL 80-82; can get SL happy at times and pitch backwards off it; can manipulate shape; has tilt and action but isn't always a swing/miss offering; uses to both sides. CH 80-82; has feel and can drop for strikes but lacks movement; more change of pace. .94-1.07 SS; extremely quick to the plate. Strike-thrower; senior sign type of guy; like mentality but lacks a swing/miss offering; and can be hittable in the zone; see as a quality org arm.

Brooks Wilson, RHP, Stetson University (DeLand, FL)
Seen in a 5 IP start on 4/26. Large frame with a muscular, athletic build; physical projection remaining; broad shouldered; caveman look. Pitches from a full windup; small; compact arm action with average arm speed; primarily three-quarters slot; but also goes to side arm/low-three-quarters. FB 89-91; some 2S action; will pitch up to finish; did a good job throwing strikes and could throw to both sides of the plate. CB 76-78 (t79); quality depth with some bite; can manipulate shape and action; uses in all slots; future average offering. CH/SF? 80-82; looked to have split action but was told is just a normal changeup; has feel for offering and is fine using to LHH; more change of pace pitch then offering to use as a starter. 1.36-1.44 to the plate. Worked efficiently; 75 pitches through 5 IP; uses a variety of slots and speeds to mess with hitters comfort levels. See as a bullpen option with FB/CB combination.

Tony Dibrell, RHP, Kennesaw State University (GA)
Seen in a 9 IP start on 4/7. ideal pitcher’s body; lacks remaining projection; already very muscular and could lose flexibility if he adds more muscle. Pitches from a full windup; compact arm action with a soft stab but has a full arm circle; average arm speed. Three-quarters slot. FB 89-92 (t93); mild run in the lower half of the zone; above-average control; maintained velocity late into game; potential above-average offering. CB 74-75 (t78); 11/5 shape; had a tendency to get slurvy but is still a future average offering with quality depth and action; used against both and was preferred finish pitch. SL 80-83; lacked consistent shape; slurvy; had some tilt but was not sharp; only v. RHH. CH 80-83; has feel for offering with late fade/run; can throw for strikes; used as a finish against LHH as well. 1.22-1.27 to the plate. Polished collegiate arm; pitch counts got high but wanted to stay in game; 93 pitches through 6; finished with 145 after 9. Throws strikes and has an average overall arsenal; see as a back end of the rotation pitcher.

You need to be logged in to comment. Login or Subscribe
dgalloway15fish
5/05
HS arm throwing 96 lacks arm strength?
TheArtfulDodger
5/05
You'll note that after the first inning he faded considerably from 96, which I believe is what Steve is referring to. The ability to hold his velocity.
BobcatBaseball
5/06
He touched 96, not pitched at 96 which is a big difference. Yes he was 93-95 in his first inning but his velocity faded from each prior inning. This suggests a lack of arm strength to consistently hold his initial velocity.
theduke11
5/05
145 pitches in one start? That's crazy