Often times we hear things thrown around like “he has a 50 arm” or he has “80 speed”. But what do those things mean exactly? Hopefully, I can explain what they are meant to tell us and provide some examples as well.
The Scale
The scouting scale is from 20-80. I still haven’t quite figured out why, but have heard others speculate that when it first started that they decided 50 would be average (which assumes they likely wanted to use 0-100). It is speculated that someone then said they should use the scientific scale of three standard deviations above and below average. So if 50 were average, then three grades in each direction would be the normal distribution.
So, for those of you non-math guys, to make it easier, let’s look at it in a much easier way. Essentially, the talent is distributed like that of a bellcurve, with the peak of the curve being average. In a normal bell-curve, here is how it breaks down from a percentage standpoint:
| Scouting Grade | Term | % of players with this skill (MLB) |
| 20 | Poor | 0.2% |
| 30 | Well Below-Average | 2.1% |
| 40 | Below-Average | 13.6% |
| 50 | Average | 68.2% |
| 60 | Plus | 13.6% |
| 70 | Plus-Plus | 2.1% |
| 80 | Top End | 0.2% |
Now, when we look at the chart above, 68.2% is an awful lot of players. That is why more teams use the half-grade as well. That makes 45-50 worth about 34.1% and 50-55 another 34.1%. Basically though, most players fall into the average range. When it comes to Major Leaguers only, there is roughly only 1 or 2 players that would fall into the 20 or 80 range if we go with the pure mathematical breakdown listed above, though if we truly wanted to get into the numbers there could be a few more depending on just how varied the numbers were.
Real Life Application
While scouts have a general rule of thumb of what each tools breaks down to (IE: 90 MPH is average for a fastball, 40 HR is plus-plus power), but those things aren’t always based in reality as the talent level does change over time. So, what I am going to do is break down the different tools based on available statistics and put the above rates on them to show what each tool would grade out as and provide an example of it.
The tools for position players are as follows: Hitting, power, speed, defense and throwing arm. I will look at these first.
Hit Tool - Measures the ability to hit for average.
Power – Measures the power, typically home run power of a player.
Speed – Measures the speed of a player.
Defense – It measures the defensive ability, reflective of position. A guy who is say a 50 level shortstop would probably receive a better grade at second base.
Arm – Measures the arm strength, not reflective of position.
Now that we explained what each one is supposed to reflect, let’s put it to use.
What I was planning on doing was taken care of yesterday afternoon by Mark Smith at Fangraphs, who apparently thinks just like I do. He looked at batting average and came up with these numbers:
| Hit Tool | AVG | Player |
| 80 | .336 | Miguel Cabrera |
| 70 | .313 | Josh Hamilton |
| 60 | .290 | Martin Prado |
| 50 | .267 | Rafael Furcal |
| 40 | .244 | Vernon Wells |
| 30 | .221 | Brendan Ryan |
| 20 | .199 | - |
That looks right to me. Miguel Cabrera had the highest average in the game during the 2010-2012 stretch by a large stretch over Joey Votto who came in with a .321 average and second place on the list. Votto would be a “75″ hit tool player according to the true breakdown.
Getting away from what Mark had, I want to look at power a little differently than he did. He looked at IsoP, which is a good start, but I personally would rather look at home runs. A guys speed can lead to a higher IsoP than his true power would lead you to believe versus a slow guy. While I would take it a step further, and do something like HR/(AB-K) then adjust for park factors, pure home runs per 600 at bats sounds good (some guys get more chances to swing away because of where they bat in the lineup, so I am normalizing).
| Grade | HR | Player |
| 20 | 0-3 | Ben Revere |
| 30 | 4-10 | Brett Garnder |
| 40 | 11-18 | Brandon Phillips |
| 50 | 19-27 | BJ Upton |
| 60 | 28-36 | Jay Bruce |
| 70 | 37-45 | Giancarlo Stanton |
| 80 | 46+ | Jose Bautista |
For the most part that looks right. Those numbers vary a little bit from what scouts actually use (for the most part). They use something that is similar to this: 80 (39+), 70 (32-38), 60 (25-32), 50 (17-25), 40 (11-17), 30 (5-11) and 20(0-5). It is similar until we get to the 60 and up range.
Speed can’t really be shown with a stat. Steals don’t represent speed. Some guys are just good or bad base runners. Speed is usually rated by a hitters time to first base. They are timed from the point of contact until they reach first base (non-rounding first base event). Here is the scale (bunts do not count):
| Grade | LHH | RHH |
| 20 | 4.4 | 4.5 |
| 30 | 4.3 | 4.4 |
| 40 | 4.2 | 4.3 |
| 50 | 4.1 | 4.2 |
| 60 | 4.0 | 4.1 |
| 70 | 3.9 | 4.0 |
| 80 | 3.8 | 3.9 |
I don’t have examples for each range here.
Defense is another thing that you can’t put a real number on, at least not yet. I think that one day it will be possible with the new system MLBAM is using with the Field F/X system. But things such as range and glove go into this, as well as pitch framing and agility with catchers.
Finally there is the arm. It is another thing that you can’t put a real number on. Using assists doesn’t do us much because guys with known strong arms won’t be run on as much. Not all opportunities are created equally either. A guy like Ichiro, in his prime, would have been an example of an 80 arm. David Eckstein was probably a 20 arm.
Now with pitchers, things are more simple. Each pitch they throw is graded on the 20-80 scale, as well as control and command. Control is the ability to throw strikes. Command is the ability to locate within the strikezone.
Every pitcher has a fastball, even a knuckleballer like R.A. Dickey has a fastball that he will use from time to time. Fastball velocity is generally used when ranking a fastball, though there will also be notes on the movement and deception of the pitch. However in terms of pure velocity, here is how the actual stats from 2010-2012 played out (note that I broke it down for guys with less than 50% of their appearances as starters and more than 50%) and be sure to note that they are the average velocities and that plenty of guys can reach several MPH higher than what they average:
| Starter | Reliever | |||
| Grade | Velo | Example | Velo | Example |
| 20 | 0-84 | Livan Hernandez | 85-87.5 | Clay Hensley |
| 30 | 85-87 | Jeff Suppan | 87.5-90 | Sam LeCure |
| 40 | 88-90 | Mike Leake | 90-92.5 | Matt Belisle |
| 50 | 91-92 | CJ Wilson | 92.5-95 | Logan Ondrusek |
| 60 | 92-93 | Johnny Cueto | 95-97.5 | Jonathan Broxton |
| 70 | 94-96 | Matt Moore | 97.5-100 | Aroldis Chapman |
| 80 | 97+ | Michael Pineda | 100+ | - |
Now obviously, Aroldis Chapman and several others can throw 100+, even with relative frequency, but he led all of baseball in that time with an average velocity of 98.1 MPH. The chart above is for the full three standard deviations above average, so no one qualified as an “80″. But obviously, guys can get there on any given night. Also, be sure to note that left handers generally get a MPH taken off of what the average is for a right handed pitcher to achieve the same grade.
With other pitches plenty of things go into what grades the pitch. Breaking balls are velocity, bite, depth, arm action to sell the pitch. Change ups are arm action, separation from the fastball (in velocity) and movement. Of course, being able to throw that pitch where you want it can make it play up from the raw grade that a pitch could be given too.
Control is not incredibly tough to put a number on now that we have Pitch F/X data that we can use. For this, I simply used “zone percentage” which is the amount of time that a pitcher throws a pitch inside of the strikezone.
| Grade | Zone % | Example |
| 20 | 37.0% | Livan Hernandez |
| 30 | 39.9% | Mariano Rivera |
| 40 | 42.8% | Mike Leake |
| 50 | 45.7% | Homer Bailey |
| 60 | 48.6% | Clayton Kershaw |
| 70 | 51.5% | Chris Perez |
| 80 | 54.4% | Cliff Lee |
I will be honest and say that Mariano Rivera being listed there is downright shocking given that his walk rate is among the league best of 1.5 per 9 innings in that time. But, the guy simply doesn’t throw that many pitches in the zone apparently. Where as another guy with an incredibly low walk rate, Cliff Lee (1.2 walks per 9 innings) pounds the strikezone better than any pitcher in the league.
Command is tough to put a number on because we would need to chart every game a pitcher has because we need to know the location of the pitch and the location where the catcher called for the pitch to be at. We don’t have access to anything like that. Plus, like control, a pitcher can have good control/command of one pitch and not so much of another. So this could vary for each pitch, though an overall grade will still be given and is likely tied to the fastball control/command since most pitchers throw that pitch at least 60% of the time.
Statistical “Scouting Scale” by pitch
For this, I thought it would be good to look at the Pitch Values from Fangraphs (which are based on the actual results of each pitch) to share who got the results from each pitch that fall into the different scouting ranges. I am using the value per 100 pitches thrown (of that specific pitch). A player also had to throw at least 5% of that pitch to be eligible. If there was a Red in the range of the grade, I tried to place them as the example.
| Fastball | 2 Seam | Cutter | Sinker | |
| Grade | Example | Example | Example | Example |
| 20 | Jake Westbrook | Danny Duffy | Chris Tillman | Guillermo Motz |
| 30 | Zach Britton | Brad Bergeson | Alfredo Simon | Jamie Moyer |
| 40 | Sam LeCure | Wandy Rodriguez | Jeff Suppan | CC Sabathia |
| 50 | Zack Greinke | Mat Latos | Daisuke Matsuzaka | Jon Lester |
| 60 | Johnny Cueto | Justin Verlander | Jason Motte | Mitchell Boggs |
| 70 | Aroldis Chapman | Jeremy Affeldt | Anthony Bass | Drew Storen |
| 80 | - | Kameron Loe | - | Logan Ondrusek |
| Slider | Curve | Change Up | ||
| Grade | Example | Example | Example | |
| 20 | Alex White | Hector Noesi | Fernando Rodriguez | |
| 30 | Ian Kennedy | J.A. Happ | Rich Harden | |
| 40 | Jonathan Broxton | Homer Bailey | Sam LeCure | |
| 50 | Johnny Cueto | Yovani Gallardo | Rick Porcello | |
| 60 | Mat Latos | Felix Hernandez | Cole Hamels | |
| 70 | Aroldis Chapman | Sam LeCure | Kameron Loe | |
| 80 | - | Jesse Crain | - | |
Hopefully after all of that, I didn’t confuse anyone more than they were coming into the article. If you have any questions, comments or well, anything, leave it in the comments and we can all talk about it.
I think scouts (and definitely fans) will throw out an 80 on a guy who impresses them way too often. The scale itself is scientific whereas I think it gets used in baseball more to relate how impressed they were with the prospect/player in more of a first feeling level.
You know Duke I think from an amateur scouting standpoint they are a little more reluctant to give that 80 because that guy is going to be so scrutinized by cross checkers and others that they don’t want to put their professional reputations on the line, thus damaging their professional standing. I think they like to er on the low side.
Fans will for sure. I think if we go with the pure scientific reasoning with the 0.2%, or about 2 players in the Majors at a given time, then yeah, 80′s are handed out too often. With that said, there were 100 prospects listed on the BA Top 100. There were three 80′s handed out for non-speed, which is easier to get an 80 since it is more time based. Two guys got an 80 for the fastball and Miguel Sano got an 80 for his power. That was it. If we broke down these guys on the scouting scale, they would all be 70′s and part of the top 2% of all minor leaguers.
Do you think mez will be the back up catcher this year ?
Unfortunately yes.
The whole Mez thing drives me crazy! Hannigan is a wonderful defensive catcher, but Mez should be catching 4 out of 7 days a week. Mez is by no means a weakness behind the plate and his bat would be better than Hannigan by far if he had regular at bats. Dusty certainly has his favorites and once you are, you are good for life.
This really Drives me crazy. Hannigan outperformed Mesaraco so badly last year that it would be absurd to limit his playing time.
I understand that Mes is one of our prospects, but so is Hannigan. Ryan was developed by us, plays elite defense, gets on base better than anyone on the team NOT named Joey Votto, draws more walks then strike-outs, and has one of the most team-friendly contracts in all of baseball.
And yet, he gets so much criticism here. Mesaraco is not the second coming of Johnny Bench. I wish he was. But even if Mes would play better with more regular playing time, he was substandard last year both offensively and defensively. Dioner Navarro, who hadn’t hit in years, outperformed him with the same playing time.
It really boggles the mind.
Doug, I think it would be good to clarify that the % of players with this skill is % of MLB players with the skill. While there may be a more or less normal distribution of a given skill across MLB, the distribution of that skill across all of baseball (or the entire population) is decidedly not normal — or at least not centered at the same mean.
For instance, Brendan Ryan is among the worst hitters in major league baseball — and is in the top .1% of hitters in the United States. And even if you’re only looking at professional baseball, a guy with 40s across the board would still be an above average minor legauer.
I added it to the initial breakdown of the percentages in the top chart. I probably should have mentioned that the breakdown was for Major Leaguers only, not inclusive of minor leaguers or there would be a whole lot more weight at the bottom of the scale.
I find it funny that Hamilton’s times are almost a half second faster than 80
Nah. Those don’t count bunts. I should go back and specify. Still, being 1 or 2 tenths of a second faster than “80″ in insane. I have seen a few other guys do that too.
Ok, that makes sense that it excludes bunts.
He’s definitely a 90. Once in a generation speed.
MLB rates dusty No 3 and said he handles young players very well i think he handled Mez like a little leagure last year YOUR OPINION ? l
First off, I don’t believe that there is a single person out there who is truly able to accurately rate how good/bad all 30 managers are. No one knows all of the things that every single one of them have to deal with on a weekly basis when it comes to players personal lives, attitudes, small injuries we never hear about, changes made from coaches on the staff, the advanced scouting staff that helps/hurts them compared to other teams and probably 25 more things I didn’t even mention.
Secondly, I am clearly not a fan of how Mesoraco was handled last year. I could get into it a lot more in detail, but I feel like you start this conversation at least twice a week and well, you know my opinion on it already.
They are the Cincinnat Reds not the Cincinnati Mesoracos, That being said from what Mez put on the field when he got the opportunity, which is what rookies trying to break into a line-up have to do, they would not have had the second best record in the league had he played more while Hanigan sat. So Dusty , the manager of the Reds, handled in properly.
Newsflash to Reds catchers, call for the slider every once in a while when Chapman is pitching.
Doug, why’d you use zone % to represent control? I could understand using it for command of a particular pitch. Zone % doesn’t tell the whole story because guys like Mo can locate effectively outside the zone as well. Zone % and walk rate don’t correlate all that well. Looked it up, because Chris Perez being a 70 seemed wrong. Of all pitchers with 40+ innings since Perez has been in the league there are 508 guys with better BB/9.
Control is generally the ability to throw strikes. So I looked at guys ability to throw the baseball inside of the strikezone. I could have used something like BB%, though I think that can also be misleading as guys with great stuff can have less control and still not walk as many guys because they can fool guys enough into chasing outside of the zone (like a Mo Rivera apparently).
Are you sure? I thought control was ability to avoid walks and command ability to throw a pitch for a strike. I googled it and this article from baseball prospectus seems to agree:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7171
Control is the ability to throw strikes. Command is being able to locate the pitch exactly where you want it.
“Kevin Goldstein has offered other definitions of command and control, with control representing the ability to avoid walks, and command defined as locating pitches within the zone, and hitting specific targets. I think that Kevin’s definitions are outstanding, and like the NPA versions, they describe two unique aspects of pitch execution. Ideally, we can use Kevin’s definitions in conjunction with the NPA’s to better describe the ability to locate a baseball.”
Do you know of anywhere else that clarifies the terms. They always seem to be used ambiguously by most people.
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2011/9/2/2400473/another-scouting-primer-how-to-scout-pitchers
Let’s be sure to note that Kevin, myself or the NPA guys aren’t professional scouts. While we may all talk to them, we aren’t them.
With that said, I have always been told that control is the ability to throw the ball in the zone and that command is the ability to locate it where you want it. Kevin’s definition is awfully similar to that, it just uses different wording.
Now I’m just further confused, of course this has always been a baseball semantics head scratcher for me. I like your and Kevin’s definition but, according to wording his version of control = your definition of command and vice versa; cause Chris Perez and Mariano would be inversely rated on control according to his definition of ability to avoid walks.
I don’t like Gershman’s definition because throwing in the zone doesn’t exactly equate to throwing strikes and outside to balls. Mariano throws outside the zone much more than Perez, but also has a much higher swing % outside the zone. If Mo wanted to consistently throw inside the zone I’d say with confidence he could do it with more accuracy than Perez.
I think Dunn in his prime had 80 power. I saw the 600 ft blast, just ridiculous…
There was never a 600 foot HR. The one that went into the river was estimated at 535. And yes, Dunn would be an 80 power guy, probably even today. As I noted in the article, I would have liked to have done HR per say, 400 Balls in play, since power isn’t reflective of how often you make contact, and it most certainly would put a guy like Dunn at or near the top. For example, Dunn, in his career has 41.67 home runs per 400 balls in play. Jose Bautista, for the 2010-2012 years has averaged 44.1. So he may still not be quite there for his career, but let’s just look at 2004-2010. Dunn TOPS Bautista with a 44.2.
Balls In Play data is valuable for certain things, but less so for power data. If you just look at how often a guy puts one over the fence when he does make contact, you risk overlooking how hard he might struggle to make that contact. Jose Bautista may not be a threat to win a batting title, but he misses the ball a lot less than Adam Dunn did even in the Donkey’s heyday.
I think Batting Average by itself is over-rated, but Dunn’s case is unique. His 40 Home Runs a year (and his 100+ BBs) came at the cost of too many strikeouts (which I could live with) and too few hits of any other kind. After peaking in 2005 with 151 Hits Dunn began racking 122-138 hits for the remainder of his time in Cincy.
As a scouting tool, I think its okay to use Balls in Play data because most players won’t hit these outliers. But when individual players do (like Dunn and Joey Bats) it becomes a distraction.
Excellent work, Doug!
I was surprised as you were Doug by how low Rivera’s Zone Percentage was. I have to think (and I’m not a Yankee hater) that players know he’s going to get the call more often than not and simply swung at anything he threw.
A stat like that reinforces my feeling that if the technology ever comes available to really, accurately call balls and strikes electronically, baseball needs to do it. Because somehow I just don’t think that Rivera’s cutter fools guys that much more than Doc Halladay’s.