Indians Swindle Rays
Castrovince reports the Indians have picked up LHP RJ Swindle on waivers from Tampa Bay, who claimed him on waivers from Milwaukee. He's been optioned to Columbus. Another arms collection move.
over 2 years ago
woodsmeister
172 comments
2 recs |
Email
PrintComments
AC’s comment about the 40-man going to 34 got me wondering about salaries. Do we pay a guy on the 40 but not the 25 his MLB salary, his minor league salary or something in between? That is, is there a direct monetary benefit to keeping players off the 40?
Guys signed to a major league contract get their major league salary no matter where they are. Guys on the 40-man who are pre-arb signed split contracts. They get paid pro-rata according to whether they are in the bigs (25-man roster) or in the minors (40-man roster).
For example: Zach Jackson’s major league salary is 403,800 and his minor league split is 102,200.
So simplifying for my dense self, as long as they’re off the 25 we save a little money. If that $300k difference is average, leaving 6 guys off the 40 for a month saves us… $300k. ($300k / 6 months * 6 players)
I’m not sure what you’re asking. You mention leaving a guy off the 25 and leaving six guys off the 40.
If you’re referring to taking a guy off the 40, that’s a whole different story all together. Like Barfield? I guess he’ll just make his minor league split here-on out. But for a guy who’s not even on the 40, there’s no split contract. To begin next year, he’ll sign a minor league deal, which likely will have a provision about how much he can make at the major league level. Or it’s just league minimum.
If you’re referring to taking guys off the 25-man roster, well sure, you save some money by keeping them in AAA rather than in Cleveland. But it’s negligible if you’re dealing with all pre-arb guys. You might send down Rafael Perez($436K majors, 244K minors) and call up Jess Todd ($400K minimum), but you’re only saving the pro-rata portion of the difference between 436 and 400K, but you still have to pay Perez 244K pro-rata in AAA. And Jess Todd is probably making 65K in AAA, so you’re actually losing money by having Todd up and Perez down.
He’s 25 yrs old, but his numbers don’t look that bad. For a freebie, not bad. Brew Crew did a write up on him. Looks to be another soft-tossing lefty. Hmm…..
I just wanted to believe.
A curveball clocked on the 50s?
Paul Byrd has the number of this great dentist if you’re interested kid.
As General Manager of this team, I demand to know when I'm getting a start.
by bigbrabbs on Aug 12, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Holy crap. Here are his pitch data from fangraphs:
FB 82.6 (38.4%), SL 72.5 (46.3%), CB 54.1 (8.7%), CH 72.8 (6.6%)
In non-independent minor league ball, he has 267 Ks and 38 BB. ERA under 2. He can’t get major leaguers out, but he’s great in the low minors.
Let’s be fair – his AAA numbers (82 innings) are actually pretty good. 10.1 K/9, 2.2 BB/9, 7.1 H/9, 0.2 HR/9. We don’t have many guys with numbers that good. As for what he can do against major league hitters, I’m not sure his career 11 innings really tell us the answer.
Haha…he has an 82.6 mph FB
nice
"sometimes the internet is hard for me." - ClemsonGirl
by world dictator on Aug 12, 2009 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Can’t say he doesn’t have separation with his pitches….almost 30mph from FB to CB. Jeremy Sowers would cut someone to have that.
I really really want to see this guy pitch in Cleveland this year.
"sometimes the internet is hard for me." - ClemsonGirl
by world dictator on Aug 12, 2009 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
So do I. Not because I have any confidence he’ll be successful, but I just want to see a 54 mph major league (?) curveball. I kind of want to see, at least once, Swindle pass the ball off to Kerry Wood – that’d be a change of pace.
by APV on Aug 12, 2009 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I want to see how he’s getting so many strikeouts with that repertoire. Betancourt command? Swing-and-miss changeup? I’m going to check and see if I can find any reliable swing%.
Steel Nick
his major league experience won’t give you any reliable numbers. I don’t know if there is minor league pitch-FX/swing data available. I’d love to know where, if there is.
His AAA numbers are pretty impressive
.985 WHIP, 2.7 BB/9, 8.5 SO/9
Even a decent SO/9 rate in the majors 10.8…but boy does he give up a crap ton of hits
"sometimes the internet is hard for me." - ClemsonGirl
by world dictator on Aug 12, 2009 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Swindle was DFA’d by the Brewers, claimed by the Rays on August 7, then DFA’d by the Rays on August 8. Since 2004, he’s been from the Red Sox to the Northern League to the Rays to the Northern League again to the Yankees to the Phillies to the Atlantic League to the Phillies again to the Brewers to the Rays again to the Indians.
Thanks. Now edited.
"It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?" - Inspector Clouseau
by woodsmeister on Aug 12, 2009 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
How did he end up playing i the Northern League following his rookie season in the Red Sox organization (2004 – Lowell Spinners)? He put up fantastic numbers that season…why’d he end up out of MLB the next season?
but why would the Red Sox decide after just a single season (one in which he put up a 56:4 K:BB ratio!) that they didn’t have room for him in the oganization…even at the low-A level? Any info anyone could provide would be greatly appreciated.
No idea, but maybe they didn’t see a future for a guy whose best pitch is a 55 MPH curveball. He did play for Canada in the Olympics, so he can hang out with Weglarz! and speak Canadian.
doesn’t explain why the Red Sox let him go…
by cleveland teamer on Aug 12, 2009 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
So his PP wasn’t big enough?
"sometimes the internet is hard for me." - ClemsonGirl
by world dictator on Aug 12, 2009 10:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Just because there’s no where else to put it:
The Rays claimed John Meloan. Looks like we passed on him this time around.
RJ: My delivery is a little unorthodox. I start almost off the rubber on the far left side and throw a low three-quarters arm motion so it is tough to pick up and makes my fastball look a bit harder and gets on people quicker.
TGP: Does your success as a reliever depend on coming into a game after someone throwing at much faster speeds?
RJ: No, it doesnt really matter who throws in front of me, hard or fast. I am just a lot different from anything anyone else before me will throw.
That is for sure
This helps:
TGP: Let’s move on to your career as a professional. You were drafted in the fourteenth round by the Red Sox in 2004. You had a 1.94 ERA in 51 innings for their low-A ball team, which seems pretty good to me. But then you were released. What happened?
RJ: The Red Sox released me because I had a herniated disc in my back the next spring and they didnt think I could perform anymore with the problem, so they decided to let me go rather than get the problem fixed. It was definately a blow I was not expecting.
Swindle is only 25 and formerly of the Red Sox, Yankees, and Phillies organizations. Last season Swindle dominated Triple-A left-handed bats like none other, and had a 14:1 strkeout-to-walk ratio against them. Swindle’s previous three seasons give credence that he really is top LOOGY material: 15.53 K/9, 1.41 BB/9, and despite facing 183 lefty batters, he’s yet to give a homerun up to one.
Which explains why, in his first big-league appearance, the Phillies brought him in to face three right-handed batters, beginning with David Wright. Who promptly homered.
When the Rays signed him … I read some posts over at the Bay.
Apparently, both Philly and Milwaukee used him as a long man type … and he got rocked by the righties.
However, looking at his limited big league splits … he wasn’t fooling the lefties either.
by FallsTribeFan on Aug 12, 2009 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I love seeing someone who is a legitimate junkballer at least coming close to a shot at the big leagues. I’ll definitely be cheering for this dude to make it to the surface for us.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
The slower the curveball the longer the downward force acts on the ball. Ergo, the slow curve ball breaks more than a faster one. That’s the physics part. Now tracking and hitting it are different matters.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Same thing.
F=MA
The change in flight or dx=1/2AXtXt
The F – force acting on the ball – equals the mass times acceleration. As t – the time of flight – increases the relative change in the flight path changes by the square of the time. So the change in flight path of a 50 mph curve ball would be four times that of a 100 mph curve ball. In other words a 50 mph curve would break 4 inches for every 1 inch of break in a similarly spinning 100 mph curve.
Kinda simplified this – the fluid dynamics change with linear speed speed of the ball – but you get the idea.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
I freely admit that I’m not great at physics (got a B in an online earth science course, remember?), but does this ignore the fact that a ball thrown harder has tighter/faster rotation? I think your numbers (which are actually mostly letters) are assuming the same effect from spin (and every thing else) just over a longer period of time. Wouldn’t this change if you assumed stronger spin for the harder thrown ball?
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
Ya got me this is the “kinda simplified” part. It’s actually the speed of the ball’s stitches relative to the quiescent air that causes the force – that ‘s the F in the equation. Oh yeah, the “X” here means “multiplied by”. I’m havin’ some issues writing equations here.
Any way, if you assume the same rotational velocity, the Force (F) should be pretty close. But yer right, a faster pitch will have more force, but then it has less time for the force to act on the path. And A – the acceleration – is a second derivivative, meaning the change in path is relative to the square of A.
Wish I could put up an Excel graph for ya. We’ll go over this in detail next time I’m in Cleveland and we’re discussing brush back pitches, the male ethos and the meaning of Life.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Any spinning object traveling through a viscous medium will have a force perpendicular to the line of motion, known as the Magnus Effect. The movement of any pitch will be a product, then of three forces, the magnus force, drag and gravity. The break of a curveball is largely attributable to the Magnus Effect, which also explains why Swindle’s curve breaks horizontally rather than vertically (the spin when it leaves his hand is in the horizontal, not vertical, plane).
The Magnus Effect can be described by this formula:
where CL is the lift coefficient, ρ is the density of the air, A is the cross-section area of the ball and v is the ball’s velocity. The density of the air and the cross-section of the ball will, of course, be constant for any particular game (though not constant between different locations as altitude changes). The lift coefficient is primarily a function of the Spin Factor, calculated as (radius of the ball * angular velocity)/linear velocity.
Thus, you have two variables, velocity and spin. Experiments have demonstrated that the lift coefficient does not depend strongly on velocity for speeds between 50 and 110 MPH. A 75 MPH pitch at 1000 RPM will deflect approximately 16 inches; a 90 MPH pitch at the same RPM will deflect 14 inches. Increasing the RPM to 1800, however, will change the deflection from 16 to 21 inches at 75 MPH. A 50 MPH pitch will deflect less than a 75 MPH one, but the loss in deflection will be minimal (less than an inch). Bottom line – to get more break, add more spin. Now, how Swindle gets that much spin on a pitch that slow is another matter altogether.
for those who are more visually inclined, here is a picture of what Fred is talking about:
by Brick. on Aug 14, 2009 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Looks good, but what’s the definition of w carrot X v carrot? Still can’t do the Greek notation thingy.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
ω represents rotation and ν represents velocity. In this case, (ω x ν) denotes the direction of the force.
Now explain this physically.
My last fluid’s professor lamented how over-emphasized the magnus effect is. We actually had to describe the mechanism of a curve ball for one of our problem sets. I worked on it with another tribe fan, and we got full credit. Go figure.
I’ll offer a different explanation, one that I can describe physically, and one which my engineering professors prefer when talking about curve balls. So here it is: the ball has two kinds of velocity – translational and rotational velocity. All you artniks: think “translating” an image in photoshop. You just move it from one spot to another. So when you drive down the street, you “translate” from one end of the street to another. The translational velocity of the ball is the time it takes to travel the 60 feet 6 inches to home plate plus extra to the catcher’s mitt. Let’s define our coordinate system so this is positive + velocity.
The second velocity term is rotational velocity, which was described above. Think about the velocity vectors on a “stationary” spinning ball: the velocity vector at the top of the ball is pointed forward (which we’ll define as the positive + direction), and the velocity vector at the bottom of the ball is pointed backward (we’ll define this as the negative – direction). Hence spin.
So when you add these two together to get the total velocity of the ball, you can see that the top and bottom of the ball will have different total velocities. The top of the ball will have the total velocity of the translational velocity ( + ) plus the rotational velocity ( + ). The bottom of the ball will have the velocity of the sum of the translational velocity (+) plus the rotational velocity which – remember! – has a negative sign. So the bottom of the ball is moving slower than the top of the ball.
Why does this matter? Because the fluid flow at the bottom of the ball – because of its lower velocity – is laminar. Laminar flow is that clean steady flow you see out of the kitchen faucet when you turn it on part way. The fluid flow at the top of the ball is turbulent – because the top of the ball is going faster. Turbulent flow is that choppy white stuff you see when the faucet is full blast, or when you look at the wash coming out of the back of a powerboat. Turbulent flow is lower pressure flow than laminar, so there is a pressure gradient, resulting in a force in the direction of high to low pressure. This upward force acts in opposition to gravity – but while the ball travels toward home plate, it loses speed. The flow at the top of the ball transitions into laminar flow and the pressure gradient disappears. That means no upward force, which means the ball breaks suddenly.
Turn the ball on its side and the same thing applies: force acting in a direction that eventually disappears during the flight of the ball, making it move suddenly.
It’s good right up to where you make the differentiation of “turbulent” and “laminar” flow. We could do the Reynolds Number thing, but that would net you small differences. The general nature of the flight path argues that both sides would be “turbulent”.
More to the point, this is much like any other object with a fluid flowing at different speeds on different sides – kinda like an airfoil. The side that has a higher relative speed to the object will have less pressure on it – here think of the top of the airfoil/wing than the side with the relative slower speed – the bottom of the airfoil/wing. Hence the force or “lift”.
Then we get back – as always – F=Ma with F being the Magnus – lift – whatever you wanna call it force. M is the mass of the ball and a is the second derivative of space with relation to time or the first derivative of the velocity with respect to time. The longer the “t” the more the ball is “forced” or “lifted” by the Magnus Force.
It’s a lot easier to do if you can draw the pictures.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
False on both counts. The flow on the bottom of the ball is the significant term. I’ve got all my data + notes at school, and I’m back home in the summer so it’s not with me. We looked at high speeds of a ball with a curve ball’s spin in a testing apparatus. It’s pretty remarkable.
RE: air flight. That’s the cook-book explanation of lift that you see on non-rigorous science programs. That is a running joke in the mechanical department here at Northwestern. “Because the wing is curved on top, the air has to travel faster to meet at the other end.” Why does it have to meet at the other end, again? Answer: it doesn’t.
The dominant term resulting in lift on an airfoil, or a cylinder or whatever in fluid flow is circulation. Depending on the direction of flow (or angle of attack) the stagnation points on the air foil can shift up or down, resulting in upward or downward lift. Please please please stop telling your children that airplanes fly because the air moves faster top because the wing is curved. It’s circulation people. Circulation.
That is a running joke in the mechanical department here at Northwestern. "Because the wing is curved on top, the air has to travel faster to meet at the other end." Why does it have to meet at the other end, again? Answer: it doesn’t.
That does sound hilarious.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Let’s get back to basics. This stuff has been well studied elsewhere. Here’s a nice little piece from NASA . Note the graphic, when the cylinder does not spin – no rotation – the lift is – circulation or no – is zero.
BTW, laminar flow with a stitched sphere – like a baseball – is unlikely at any speed above 20 ft/sec. Unless we’re talking about the boundray layer.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Joe, it’s the delta between the relative top and bottom speeds. Ya can’t have one change – like the relative velocity of the ball through the air – without changing the other.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Good website. An important line, found at the bottom:
But in reality, the flow around a spinning baseball is very complex
I’m willing to concede this one to a higher power.
I made the mistake of asking my dad — who works in fluid dynamics at NASA — about this conversation. Now my head is spinning even more than before.
Obviously a better explanation. That’s why you’re the engineer and I’m an attorney who happens to like equations.
I mean, you explained the magnus effect to a T, but my profs argue that magnus effect – while present all the time – doesn’t dominate in every instance. Classic magnus effect example is like a tennis ball going over the net with spin, or a sail boat.
I’ve spun a sailboat enough to get a Magnus Effect.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Aug 17, 2009 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I have this weird animosity toward sidearm pitchers. My least favorite Indian in the 90’s was Steve Reed. I hated Matt Miller, and I don’t trust Joe Smith one bit. The same will go for this guy
Kent Tukulve, Dan Quissenberry, Ted Abernathy, lots of good relief pitchers with a side arm motion.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Girls can be faster than cars? I am clearly not living up to my potential.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Aug 13, 2009 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Wouldn’t a 55 mph curve be an eephus? Or does the eephus have to be thrown overhand?
by fleerdon on Aug 12, 2009 5:49 PM EDT reply actions
Rob Neyer is a big fan of Swindle because of his interesting array of pitches, so he really likes this move for the Indians. His take on the pitcher:
Does the Swindle have any sort of future? Obviously, the prospect mavens don’t believe that he does. It seems that Cleveland’s front office might disagree. I believe that anyone who can post a 1.43 ERA in 82 Triple-A innings — with superb K/BB and HR ratios — has a legitimate shot at being a useful reliever in the majors. No matter how hard he doesn’t throw.
He also adds that if the Indians bring him up to the majors this season then he may be the best reason to watch the team.
He also adds that if the Indians bring him up to the majors this season then he may be the best reason to watch the team.
Clearly he has never seen the guy behind the plate that switches hats every inning.
by Brad D on Aug 13, 2009 2:38 AM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
thought that guy was over the first base dugout, not behind the plate. Not that I would know, I don’t watch all the games. Just thought I heard someone mention that before.
Pretty sure he’s down the 1st base line…you see him over a left handed batter’s shoulder.
by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on Aug 14, 2009 4:04 AM EDT up reply actions
There is no netting there. If he’s not behind the dugout (which I think he is), he’s damn close.
Steel Nick
I’m trying to make everyone happy. He’s over the left shoulder of a left handed batter so he’s behind home plate from the view of someone looking at a left-handed batter. He’s not down the first base line because technically that hasn’t started yet where he’s sitting. He is over the first base dugout so you and talonk are correct. But depending on you look at it anyone who says they are behind home plate could also be considered correct.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
See I love this. A nice quick joke, followed by a crazy detailed discussion of an obscure Indians topic. Seriously, this place is great.
Following links from Luis’ above, I found this article on Indians.com.
“This is the only time in my entire life that I wear a hat,” he says. “I never wear a hat otherwise.”
and
“I can’t go to 81 games,” Tom says. “I’d drive myself crazy. [The players] go to all the games, but [many of them] make a couple million dollars.”
by dgcambridge on Aug 14, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m becoming strangely obsessed with R.J. Swindle. The more I look at it, he’s a LOOGY not being used properly, kind of like our ROOGY not being used properly. This year he’s made five appearances:
4/21 vs Philadelphia: Walked Utley, struck out Howard. Left in to face Werth (RH), Ibanez (LH), Feliz (RH), Coste (RH), Moyer (LH) – gave up another double and a single.
5/22 and 23 vs MIN: True LOOGY. Facing Span, Mauer and Morneau. Two singles, a walk and a solo homer for Span.
His remaining three appearances (WSN, SDP, LAD) he faced 7 LHB, 11 RHB and 4 switch-hitters.
Clearly not acceptable, though better than Raffy P. I wonder how he would fare if he never faced righties.
Now I remember – I have seen this guy. He threw to Jordan Brown in the AAA all-star game this year. He started him off with that huge ultra-slow curve, dropping it in for a strike. You could hear the crowd react, and Brown took a step back after the pitch and nearly started laughing. It was that bizarre. A couple of pitches later he tried the curve again, and Brown waited, reached and swept it up, all arms, for a high fly ball to short center.
Of course we do. Jordan Brown a well-known, consistent quantity, and so you can describe all things relative to Jordan Brown.
We know Jordan Brown, know exactly what he can and can’t do. Garko is also like this. We can define Garko’s ability and range very well. His value is set. I think Sowers also fits this describtion. But I have no idea where Wegz will end up, or Marte, or Peralta, or Huff, or any Perez, and maybe now even Sizemore. But I know JB.
by dgcambridge on Aug 14, 2009 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
