Here is an article I dug while on the topic of Wacha v Nola. http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/41964/how-18-teams-passed-on-michael-wacha Nobody projected Wacha a a future ace out of college. In fact, Wacha was projected as a quick to the majors #3 and received comps to Leake. It wasn't until sometime after the 2012 draft that he added a few ticks to his low 90s fastball, making his already plus change up that much more effective. I cannot find anyone who said Wacha had a plus-plus change coming out of college. He simply got better. Why can't Nola also get better? If it is true and he could be a #3 right now it sounds kind of crazy to say that is his ceiling...unless he lacks any coach-ability and has completely maxed his physical ability as a 20 year old. Doubtful. Yes, with a few more inches of height Wacha looks the part of a true #1 more than Nola. Maybe Wacha had a better change coming out of college but Nola has superior command, as good or better fast ball, better curve and a solid change himself. Arguments about arm angle lack merit. The fact is whether a pitcher throws sidearm, 3/4 or right over the top the motion is unnatural and can lead to sever injury. No study shows one method or the other is worse or better for the arm and if such study did exist it would be inherently flawed as no control could exist for such experiment. Take a moment to watch Nola clips and marvel at how much movement his pitches generate and how well he controls where they go. He more than passes the eye test. And, yes, his college stats are better than Wimmers. SEC>>>>>>Big Ten