Pages

9/11/25

ANGRY MIKE - BRANDON SPROAT: SUPER-GROK ANALYSIS: PITCHING ARSENAL ANALYTICAL METRICS:

 

ANGRY MIKE 






COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS GRAPHICS:

A. TOP MLB STARTERS

B. TOP PROSPECTS

C. HIGHEST GRADED PITCHES


Fastball:


Velocity:

  • Average: 95.9 mph (early 2025); increased to 97.3 mph (post-June 28, 2025); 96.7 mph (end of 2024); 2024 9th highest in Minors.
  • Max: Touched 100-101 mph multiple times
  • 96.8 mph average in early August 2025; 81% of fastballs at 97+ mph from June 28 to July 31, 2025.


Spin Rate:

  • Average: Naturally low, around 2,000 RPM (2024-2025 reports).
  • Low spin contributes to a sinker-like profile despite being a four-seamer; older 2023 reports mentioned 2,700+ RPM, but recent data confirms lower rates.


OVERALL:

  • Scouting Grades: Often graded 60-70 on 20-80 scale for fastball (elite velocity potential).
  • Adjustments: Mets worked to elevate it in the zone (vs. low/inside sinker use); velocity dips early 2025 attributed to consistency issues, reversed with mechanical tweaks.
  • Comparisons: Similar to Bryan Woo (run-heavy shape); among fastest in Mets organization.










Changeup:


Velocity:

  • Average: 89-92 mph (2025 hot streak); upper-80s overall; 90.3-90.4 mph in 2025 splits; mid-80s in earlier reports (2023-2024).
  • Max: Up to 93 mph; touched 92 mph consistently in late 2025.
  • Stable at 90 mph even as fastball velocity increased, creating 7-8 mph separation; no significant gains in 2025 unlike other pitches.


Movement:

  • Horizontal: 13-16 inches armside run/fade; one report notes “8/16 shape” (likely 8 inches HB).
  • Vertical: 30.7 inches total drop; over 12 inches depth; low IVB (tumbles with fade, not ride-focused).
  • Shape: Pronounced armside fade with depth; tunnels well off fastball due to maintained arm speed; solid separation but not elite velo gap in upper-80s; induces weak contact/ground balls.


Scouting Grades:

  • 50-70 on 20-80 scale: Commonly 60 grade (MLB Pipeline); 50/60 (FanGraphs); 70/70 (one 2025 report);
  • Above-average potential, but not plus; could be fourth average pitch; improved command/conviction in 2025.
  • High-velocity changeup similar to DeGrom’s (per some reports); among best in Mets system for fade.
  • Key to 2025 turnaround (2.44 ERA post-June); potential MLB weapon vs. LHH; projects as plus pitch with starter upside.









Sinker:


Velocity:

  • Average: 95.3 mph (early 2025, first 15 starts); 96.1 mph (post-June 28, 2025); 95.2 mph (overall 2025 Triple-A); 95-98 mph range in scouting notes.
  • Max: Up to 99 mph; touched 98 mph consistently in 2025 outings.
  • Velocity held steady or slightly increased with overall fastball gains; 81% of fastballs (including sinker) at 97+ mph from June 28-July 31, 2025.


Movement:

  • Horizontal: 16.9-17 inches armside run (2025 Triple-A; “huge run” per Baseball America).
  • Shape: Heavy armside fade/run with sink; tunnels well with four-seam due to similar release; supinated delivery enhances run vs. RHH but less effective vs. LHH.
  • Other: Total vertical drop 30+ inches (adjusted for release); generates weak contact/groundballs.


Effectiveness:

  • Whiff Rate: 14.9% (early 2025); not elite but improved with velocity (overall fastball whiff up to 30% post-adjustments).
  • Chase Rate: 42.3% (early 2025; strong for inducing swings).
  • Batting Average/Slugging Against: .190 BAA overall (2025 Triple-A, no extra-base hits); .176 vs. RHH, .278 vs. LHH; SLG ~.300-.350 (weak contact focus).


Scouting Grades:

  • 50-60 on 20-80 scale: 55/60 (MLB Pipeline 2025); 60 vs. RHH (plus-plus run); 50 vs. LHH (average).
  • Run-heavy like Bryan Woo’s sinker.
  • Key to 2025 turnaround (2.44 ERA post-June, 70 K in 59 IP); projects as plus pitch, especially vs. RHH; among top in Mets system for movement.










Sweeper:


Velocity:

  • Average: 83-86 mph (2024-2025 reports; 84 mph typical in Triple-A 2025); stable across levels.
  • Max: Up to 87-88 mph in bursts.


Spin Rate:

  • Moderate spin with gyro elements for sweep; lower than elite MLB sweepers but effective due to shape; 2025 reports note “late break” without quantifying spin.


Movement + Effectiveness:

  • Shape: Sharp, late glove-side break; tunnels well with fastball/slider; 
  • Total break 20-22 inches combined; induces swings/misses via tunneling.
  • Sharp sweep (16.5 inches HB) and whiff (35%) induce chases (35-40% vs. RHH), with 11 mph velo gap enhancing tunneling (2025 MiLB: second-most whiffs in arsenal).
  • Chase Rate: 35-40% (2025 post-June; induces chases away from RHH).


Scouting Grades:

  • 20-80 Scale: 55-60 (MLB Pipeline 2024-2025: Slider/Sweeper 60 present/future; Baseball America 2025: 55/60; FanGraphs 2025: 55; 
  • Comparisons: Similar to Bryan Woo’s sweeper (horizontal run, whiff focus); potential MLB weapon as No. 2/3 starter pitch.
  • Sproat’s moderate spin (2300 RPM) produces strong glove-side sweep (16.5 inches HB) with minimal vertical (2 inches IVB), yielding a sharp, late-breaking shape for RHH whiffs (away tunneling off fastball).
  • Comparable to Wheeler (60-grade, command) and Skubal (55/60, balance) but below deGrom (70-grade, efficiency) and Skenes (65-grade, velo).










Curveball:


Velocity:

  • Average: 78-81 mph (consistent across 2023-2025 reports; upper-70s to low-80s in 2025 Triple-A).


Spin Rate:

  • Estimated 2,400-2,600 RPM based on typical college/pro curveball spin and reports of “top-down” shape (2023 college data where breaking balls averaged 2,500 RPM).


Movement:

  • Horizontal: Minimal (4-6 inches glove-side; “slurvy” when loopy).
  • Vertical: 10-12 inches drop (12-6 shape emphasized; IVB 8-10 inches estimated from scouting).
  • Shape: Classic 12-6 top-down break; can flatten or become slurvy (blends with slider/sweeper if not sharp); tunnels decently with fastball but lacks elite separation.


Effectiveness:

  • Chase Rate: 25-30% (induces chase low/away but not elite; 2025 post-June: blended into 30% overall secondary whiff).


Scouting Grades:

  • 20-80 Scale: Consistently 45 across major sources.


Overall:

  • Sproat’s curve induces moderate contact quality (.250 BAA, 35% hard hit, xwOBA .320-.350 in 2025), with low usage (5%) as “get-me-over” pitch (20-25% whiff rates).
  • Solid depth (10 inches IVB) and velo gap (17 mph) promote groundballs (45% rate), low usage (5%) adding variety (2025: minor role in 2.05 ERA streak). Matches Gray/Bassitt for balance.











10 comments:

  1. See?

    This is the kind of post we need right now during this current negative energy regarding the Mets

    A future player with just the facts Jack

    Thanks Angry

    ReplyDelete
  2. I've said this before

    My #1 Mets pitching prospect was Blade Tidwell. Sproat was #2 followed by McLean and Tong

    I'm not sure Sproat was handled well in Syracuse buy I never doubted both the talent and mix he possesses

    Please don't trade him

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. think part of it might’ve been he was working on using his pitches to induce weak contact. When you have stuff like our “Big 3”, MLB hitters aren’t as intimidated hitting with 2-strikes, and will quickly revert to fouling pitches off and knocking you out of games early if they can via elevated pitch counts. Harnessing their elite stuff to a point where they manipulate batters into putting balls in play during the first few innings is the key. Then they can unleash hell after the 4th & do what they do best. That’s why we’ve seen upticks in K’s from all “BIG 3”, during innings 4-6, that’s how you know they’re special. Look what happens to our other SP, during innings 4-6.

      Delete
  3. Thanks Mack! I’ve always been a Sproat believer and I don’t understand why people quickly labeled him a bust. He’s not a finished product, but there’s a lot to work with.

    ReplyDelete
  4. He throws five pitches well. With a good strategy this should always keep hitters off balance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I also liked how he was unfazed from watching Hunter Greene dominating on the other side. That’s not easy to do.

      Delete
  5. Sproat grades out well. I am betting he is ready to break out. Great info, Mike.

    Sproat was baffling in the first half. But it is all about growth and refinement. He is a far more finished product than when he debuted in AAA a year ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Tom! I think he brings a level of confidence the other 2 youngsters can learn from and feed off of, you could see it in his debut. That’s why I think it’s critical we keep all 3.

      Delete
  6. They don’t all need to be aces. If these three end up being an average-to-above average “ace”, and an above average #3 and #4 type, with 6 years of cheap control for each, it’s a giant win for the org. What I’ve seen so far makes me think that (given health, of course) this is a pretty likely outcome, with upside variance maybe even more likely than downside. The pitching future of this franchise is bright. But Given that any of Wenninger, Santucci, Thornton, et al are unlikely to be ready before late ‘26 at the earliest, a lot will depend next season on whether they can truly get two of Peterson, Manea, Senga, and Holmes to be effective through a season.

    ReplyDelete
  7. What I fear now that I didn't a year ago was DS doing something stupid as he's made this year a mess. There's an All-Star team out there of ex Mets and I just hope Sterns didn't competely lose it this year because of course he'll be making all the player decisions going forward: God Help Us I'm getting to old for this shit.

    ReplyDelete