Weekend takeaways: Munetaka Murakami flashing elite power as closer chaos and pitching concerns mount

Would Mason Miller be a first-round pick if we re-drafted today?

I think it would be an overreaction, but in 15-team leagues with an overall component – your NFBC high-stakes leagues, let's say – I do think he'd be in the conversation. Would you take him over the big three starting pitchers? They've all had varying warts crop up in the early going, though I remain unconcerned about Tarik Skubal and Paul Skenes, especially – Garrett Crochet should be fine, but he's struggled enough with his four-seamer in particular running back to Spring Training that if you wanted to drop him a half-tier from the other two, I wouldn't argue too much with you.

I think the primary reason I'd be opposed to pushing Miller quite that high is because I just don't actually think Smith, Munoz, and Diaz are going to struggle moving forward. They've all had their hiccups, but in the small samples we're dealing with here, even one or two bad outings can lead to an ERA that starts with a 6.00 or worse. But we're also dealing with small enough samples that they effectively tell you nothing about these pitchers' skill sets. I don't see any real reason to think any of them will struggle as much as they have moving forward.

And, while Miller has been absurdly dominant since getting to the Padres, he'll probably allow some runs at some point. He probably won't keep striking out more than two-thirds of opposing hitters. He's an elite strikeout pitcher, of course, but his current mark is 27% higher than his career-best. The highest strikeout rate in MLB history for a reliever in a season was Aroldis Chapman's 52.5% rate in 2014. Even eclipsing that would be a monumental achievement for Miller and would also represent a nearly 20% point drop from his current mark. There will be some regression, though he's obviously the best closer in baseball at this point.

What if Munetaka Murakami is just … good?

The knock on Munetaka Murakami this offseason was that he couldn't handle MLB heat. On Friday, he homered off a 98.2 mph fastball from Luis Severino and parked it 431 feet over the batter's eye in dead center. But Murakami has already shown he can handle MLB heat, having posted a .502 wOBA and .539 xwOBA against fastballs to date.

So, of course, the criticism shifted. Okay, he can hit fastballs, the critics might say, but look at his numbers against non-fastballs: 50% whiff rate vs. both breaking and offspeed pitches! And then on Sunday, he crushed a slider off Jeffrey Springs 425 feet to right field. Yeah, it was a center-cut cement mixer. A terrible pitch. Yeah. That'll happen, and maybe it means nothing. But a breaking ball off a lefty when your loudest critics are saying you can't hit breaking balls or lefties?

I dunno, I think it's notable. I don't think it means Murakami is a superstar, or that he'll sustain his current pace. His flaws are real, and swing and miss is just going to be a big part of his game. But the power here is truly special, and he deserves to get the chance to build on his strengths and improve on his flaws. And those who wrote him off as hopelessly overmatched might have been premature in their declarations.

Cole Ragans just keeps on struggling

It was seven runs in 4.1 innings Sunday, but the runs might not even be the most worrisome part of the line for Ragans. He walked eight. Eight. One start after he walked four, and giving him three starts in five tries with at least four walks; he only did that four times total between 2024 and 2025.

I think it's pretty clear something isn't right with Ragans. The question is what that something is. Is it related to last year's shoulder injury? That would be really scary. Is it related to the thumb injury he suffered earlier in April when he took a comebacker off his hand? That would be concerning, certainly, but significantly less so than if it were related to the shoulder, at least.

But it's something. Maybe it's something a mechanical tweak can fix, but Ragans hasn't really looked right since the spring. His velocity was actually up a bit during his time in the Cactus League, but since the start of the regular season, he's been down about a tick, maybe a bit more Sunday, relative to last season. The shape on the fastball hasn't changed a ton, but he does appear to be cutting his four-seamer a bit more than last year, a sign that something's wrong, either mechanically or with the grip.

I'm not an expert on pitching mechanics, but the Royals presumably have access to some of those. I'm sure they'll be working with Ragans between starts to try to identify what's gone wrong and how to fix it, and as long as he's healthy, I do have faith he'll figure it out. But I'm not 100% certain he is healthy, and I'm definitely not certain they'll fix this in time for his next start.

I'm not dropping Ragans, obviously, and it seems like this is just about the worst possible time to consider trading him, too. But I'm not opposed to sitting him this week, even against a whiff-happy Angels team. He might fix everything and go out and dominate them, but given how ugly things have been so far this season, I lean toward letting him prove he's right before I trust him again.

Eury Perez finally lived up to the hype

Of course, the problem with sitting unquestionably talented but slumping pitchers is, you do run the risk of missing a gem, and I'm sure at least some of you did with Perez's start Sunday against the Brewers. After all, he entered the start with a 5.40 ERA and 1.55 WHIP and hadn't had a start where he threw more than five innings in his first start of the season, and was coming off a start with just two strikeouts in four innings.

But that's the thing about pitchers: In a lot of ways, they are all random number generators. For some pitchers, the range of numbers they might produce in any given start is slimmer, but for a guy like Perez, it's inherently wide. We know the stuff is incredible – only Cristopher Sanchez had a higher Stuff+ rating entering Sunday among starters, per FanGraphs.com. But Perez has struggled mightily with his command, leading to both too many walks and too many just uncompetitive at bats.

And then that just stopped. Facing a Brewers team that entered the game 10th in the majors in wOBA, along with the 12th-lowest strikeout rate and highest walk rate, Perez put together by far the best start of his season, striking out seven over six innings with just one walk and one unearned run.

What changed? He threw his fastball more than normal, which honestly isn't the fix I would have suggested for Perez, given how much he's struggled to command that pitch this season. But he threw it in the zone 66% of the time, generated nine whiffs, and had a strong 36% CSW rate with the pitch. There wasn't really much of a sign that a start like this was coming, except for the fact that we know this kind of start is always possible from a pitcher as talented as Perez. That's always the risk when you sit someone like Perez (or Ragans, or Garrett Crochet, for that matter).

I just don't think it's happening for Shane McClanahan

I want to be wrong about this one, but I just don't see it here. McClanahan managed to claw back some of his lost velocity Sunday against the Pirates, but it didn't really make a big difference – according to PitcherList's PLV metric, his stuff earned just a C grade in this one despite the tick up in velocity.

McClanahan does still rate out pretty well by the stuff metrics out there. Per Fangraphs' flavor of Stuff+, he's at a 103 mark for the season, which is above average. But it's a significant decline from his pre-injury 113 mark, and it has come along with significant declines in command and control. Even if he gets some of the command back, is it likely to get all the way back to where it was before? And if the stuff isn't back … what exactly are we chasing here? Top-30 upside? Top 40? That could still be a useful pitcher, but not someone who needs to be rostered in all leagues when he has a 5.00 ERA.

I do think I'd try to hang on to McClanahan just to see if he can start to take some steps forward. I am, personally, rooting for him and would be thrilled to be proved wrong. But if we got these results and saw these pitches from someone who wasn't named Shane McClanahan, would we be saying you have to keep him rostered? After two lost seasons due to serious arm injuries, are we sure he's Shane McClanahan anymore, anyway*?*