Discussion about this post

User's avatar
SlightlyOff's avatar

Hey, for once, I feel like I can actually contribute something of value in the comments! I’ve been a Gaucho for the past four years, so I’ve seen a good deal of McGreevy. Amateur scouting report on him:

Pros: No burying the lede, the command is plus-plus at it’s best and still above-average even on Mike’s worst days. Most games, he basically lives in the shadow/chase zone, and he’s the poster child for how to “attack” hitters without “going right after them”. He pounds the zone relentlessly, but unlike a lot of guys who get that said about them, he does that and still manages not to leave a lot of fat pitches in the nitro zone. It’s the kind of control that means we probably shouldn’t really pay attention to his minor league stats until he’s at AA or higher, because I think he could carve the lower levels never throwing anything but a fastball.

And the velo bump is legit, in my opinion. I know a guy’s size and physicality is nowhere near everything that goes into determining how hard he throws. But trust me from standing next to McGreevy, his frame is about as starter prototypical as it gets and there’s power in it. I’m a swarthy 6’0”, 230ish pounds who’s never skipped leg day and is a proud member of the Thunder Thighs club, and Mike’s lower half puts me to shame. I don’t think he’ll be a fireballer by any means, but he should have no problem sitting at 93 and reaching back for more in the bigs, maybe a little more if he can shorten his arm stroke in the back a bit without impacting his feel.

The other big thing Mike’s got going for him is that he has at least 3 distinct pitches with different movement profiles. His fastball gets good sink and has that late, really aesthetically pleasing hard arm side snap you see on running two-seamers. His slider plays well off the sinker at 82-85, and when he stays on top of the pitch it’s got good vertical depth. His curveball does too, at around 76-78, but it also sometimes gets that signature hump that lets you identify it early. And his change is pretty much exactly average-looking, though it gets decent results because it’s always where it needs to be. Which takes me to……

Cons: Other than his sinker, nothing McGreevy throws really snaps or dives like a plus pitch. His slider is the best of his secondaries and that has some good bite on its best attempts. But all of Mike’s offspeed stuff can tend to get a little….slurvy’s not the right word, since he maintains their movement profiles well, but the movement itself on his secondaries isn’t the nastiest or sharpest. I definitely think he’d benefit from a pitch lab breaking down his stuff at a micro level and tinkering to see if they can’t find a better grip or wrist posture or what have you. That leads me into my biggest concern- the fastball shape. McGreevy throws a two-seamer, and his regular arm action would seem to suggest that’s what is best suited for him. Even with more velo, it’s not likely to miss a bunch of bats, and that has the potential to be a problem when his other pitches are all still a little undercooked. However, something I’ve noticed is that McGreevy tends to throw his curveball from a higher arm slot, which is what makes it look a little like a 12-6 (I don’t think it actually is, but it’s fairly close.) While that currently makes his curve a little too easy to identify, it also makes me think he could throw a decent four-seam fastball from that slot as well. I don’t think Mike has great raw spin (I’ve never seen a Trackman reading), but I think he gets good spin efficiency from that higher slot because his curveball still has good downward plane. And I think his command is so good, he could pitch up in the zone effectively anyway because he can aim in on the hands or above and away and not worry about leaking back into the heart of the zone. So I do wonder if any progressive pitching orgs are looking at him and wondering if a few mechanical changes couldn’t coax more swing and miss out of his repertoire.

Overall, I am of course extremely biased when it comes to Mike McGreevy and I think there’s an efficient, innings eating #3 starter peak in there. But I still have to qualify my endorsement of him with the caveat that I think what kind of pitching dev staff gets a hold of him will be the single biggest factor in how bright his prospect star shines. I think if he just develops as is, he turns into a 4/5 starter who will get to his production through volume of innings and soft contact. But if he follows his fellow alumnus the Biebs and adds some new wrinkles, I think he’ll ascend to a new level of pitcher. And I think I now trust the Giants enough to wholeheartedly endorse the pick if he’s it.

Expand full comment
Lyle's avatar

I’d prefer Bednar/Madden/Ford, I think. I fully expect to be disappointed.😊

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts