Well, actually, what you were responding to was something else... but it was a couple posts back, so I can see how the main point got lost...
The question was how can they say a P has already reached his ceiling about change-ups and sliders when he's still learning how to pitch right? I can understand how they can think that about FB's... but change-ups and sliders?
ps: I never meant to suggest that developing a pitch was easy. But "easy" and "very possible" are not the same thing... as is demonstrated by the fact that it takes most MLB P's some number of *years* to learn enough to be MLB-ready....
Very fair, I didn't read back at all, just read that one part and wanted to chime in.
It's more like they are evaluating future performance based on what is presented right now...if that makes any sense. No one could possibly know a guy could have a lights out slider if he doesn't throw one to be evaluated, but based on what can be seen at that time is what you are getting in these reports. Of course something could change down the road like you said, new grips, new mechanics etc. but basically you should insert the line into every evaluation you read, "without any other changes" this is how this will develop. It's not fair to the evaluators to ding them for not knowing a guy could have a much better pitch if he did a. or b. They are just presenting what they can see, and how things SHOULD improve based on what's being presented.
It's why a lot of guys seem to come out of left field, or move up prospect lists later in development, because like you said, one might change something working with a new coach one day and it makes a MAJOR improvement. Doesn't happen real often though, those guys that do a good job of this, like the 2080 guys, and others out there do a good job of evaluating what they can see, and projecting out.
Yeah I know what you mean, I completely paraphrased.
