+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    27,527

    Manny Machado #2 Prospect

    http://www.orioleshangout.com/articl...ado-2-prospect

    Machado is probably 1a, but someone had to be #2.


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Somewhere in the LA area
    Posts
    2,963
    I went with Machado at #1, though I see the argument for both.

    It seems that scouts almost universally prefer the devil they don't know, which puts Machado at a disadvantage compared to Bundy. In as much as it's possible to do so, do you take this into account when comparing the two?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    5,188
    Quote Originally Posted by Hallas View Post
    I went with Machado at #1, though I see the argument for both.

    It seems that scouts seem to universally prefer the devil they don't know, which puts Machado at a disadvantage compared to Bundy. In as much as it's possible to do so, do you take this into account when comparing the two?
    This point was brought up in the Schoop thread (I believe by Drungo) but there is something to be said for the fact that every year a prospect has that is human makes it slightly less likely that he's a God. Yes, Machado made it to A+ in his first full season with no real setbacks, but he also didn't hit .400 with 50 HRs. You may consider his floor a tick higher, but his ceiling is probably a bit lower than it was on draft day. So, I think there is something to the idea of leaning toward the devil you don't know when you're mostly basing a pick off projection and upside.

    However, strictly looking at draft-time profiles, I would have taken Bundy over Machado and I know more than a few "real scouts" who would have also.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lanham, MD
    Posts
    9,657
    Quote Originally Posted by RVAbird View Post
    This point was brought up in the Schoop thread (I believe by Drungo) but there is something to be said for the fact that every year a prospect has that is human makes it slightly less likely that he's a God. Yes, Machado made it to A+ in his first full season with no real setbacks, but he also didn't hit .400 with 50 HRs. You may consider his floor a tick higher, but his ceiling is probably a bit lower than it was on draft day. So, I think there is something to the idea of leaning toward the devil you don't know when you're mostly basing a pick off projection and upside.

    However, strictly looking at draft-time profiles, I would have taken Bundy over Machado and I know more than a few "real scouts" who would have also.
    I would have too. I really like them both, but I'd have gone Bundy. A fun conversation a couple weeks ago some friends and I were debating if you were choosing in one Super Year, how would you draft going Strasburg, Harper, Taillon, Bundy, and Machado.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    5,188
    Quote Originally Posted by allstar1579 View Post
    I would have too. I really like them both, but I'd have gone Bundy. A fun conversation a couple weeks ago some friends and I were debating if you were choosing in one Super Year, how would you draft going Strasburg, Harper, Taillon, Bundy, and Machado.
    That's how I'd like them [he said in his best dog-show-judge voice].

  6. #6
    Lucky Jim's Avatar
    Lucky Jim is offline Plus Member since 12/06 Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY.
    Posts
    18,038
    Quote Originally Posted by Hallas View Post
    I went with Machado at #1, though I see the argument for both.

    It seems that scouts almost universally prefer the devil they don't know, which puts Machado at a disadvantage compared to Bundy. In as much as it's possible to do so, do you take this into account when comparing the two?
    I still see Machado as Top-10 in MiLB by most analysts (he was No. 14 going to this year by BA, and there's no way his stock drops). I don't think that Bundy will be Top-10. I tend to lean this way; preferring the full season of performance which, while mixed, showed no real holes and should alleviate some doubts (about future power, and a bit about his ability to stick at SS for at least a while).

    It seems to me that if Bundy comes in next year and struggles a bit with pitching every fifth day, and sits at 93-95 (like some respect) he'll probably drop a bit.

    Particularly this year, it looks like we're favoring those guys who we don't have any negative evidence regarding, but whose positive evidence is somewhat more speculative. I'm big-time pro-Bundy, but without any evidence translating HS performance to professional, I'm sticking with the professional performance of Machado.

    And - to be clear - I'm not challenging the rankings at all. We all weigh things differently. For me, I'll take the Baby Birds in the hand (Machado, B. Bundy - top-10 for me even w/ inconsistent command and still-unrefined secondaries) over those Baby Birds still in the bush (Delmonico, Esposito, D. Bundy as No. 1).

    I think we all agree, however, that next year is a huge year for this farm system.

  7. #7
    Lucky Jim's Avatar
    Lucky Jim is offline Plus Member since 12/06 Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY.
    Posts
    18,038
    Quote Originally Posted by RVAbird View Post
    You may consider his floor a tick higher, but his ceiling is probably a bit lower than it was on draft day. So, I think there is something to the idea of leaning toward the devil you don't know when you're mostly basing a pick off projection and upside.
    I have to admit, I fundamentally disagree with this. His ceiling isn't lower: his ceiling is exactly the same. We simply have more information.

    To play devil's advocate (but hopefully not in an off-putting way): isn't it possible that when we prioritize scout-speculation about upside at the expense of real information, what we're valuing is the speculation itself, not the prospect? In a sense we're valuing the very incompleteness of our own information. I struggle with that.

    But concede that you, Stotle, Tony, Allstar and others probably do not.

    Edited to switch floor for ceiling. Largely because I'm a maroon.
    Last edited by Lucky Jim; 11-10-2011 at 10:38 PM.

  8. #8
    Frobby is offline Hangout Blogger Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Bethesda MD
    Posts
    65,264
    I would have voted the other way, but we all know we're splitting hairs, so who really cares? The write-up was drool-worthy. I bet if Manny hadn't dislocated his kneecap, his stats would have been much more impressive. I can't wait to see what he does next year and I'm going to make it a point of getting out to Frederick or Bowie to get a look.

  9. #9
    Lucky Jim's Avatar
    Lucky Jim is offline Plus Member since 12/06 Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY.
    Posts
    18,038
    Quote Originally Posted by Frobby View Post
    I would have voted the other way, but we all know we're splitting hairs, so who really cares? The write-up was drool-worthy. I bet if Manny hadn't dislocated his kneecap, his stats would have been much more impressive. I can't wait to see what he does next year and I'm going to make it a point of getting out to Frederick or Bowie to get a look.
    Hey now, if we can't split hairs here, where can we split them?!?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    cecil county, md
    Posts
    8,205
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucky Jim View Post
    I still see Machado as Top-10 in MiLB by most analysts (he was No. 14 going to this year by BA, and there's no way his stock drops). I don't think that Bundy will be Top-10. I tend to lean this way; preferring the full season of performance which, while mixed, showed no real holes and should alleviate some doubts (about future power, and a bit about his ability to stick at SS for at least a while).

    It seems to me that if Bundy comes in next year and struggles a bit with pitching every fifth day, and sits at 93-95 (like some respect) he'll probably drop a bit.

    Particularly this year, it looks like we're favoring those guys who we don't have any negative evidence regarding, but whose positive evidence is somewhat more speculative. I'm big-time pro-Bundy, but without any evidence translating HS performance to professional, I'm sticking with the professional performance of Machado.

    And - to be clear - I'm not challenging the rankings at all. We all weigh things differently. For me, I'll take the Baby Birds in the hand (Machado, B. Bundy - top-10 for me even w/ inconsistent command and still-unrefined secondaries) over those Baby Birds still in the bush (Delmonico, Esposito, D. Bundy as No. 1).


    I think we all agree, however, that next year is a huge year for this farm system.
    I agree with this.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    5,188
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucky Jim View Post
    I have to admit, I fundamentally disagree with this. His ceiling isn't lower: his ceiling is exactly the same. We simply have more information.

    To play devil's advocate (but hopefully not in an off-putting way): isn't it possible that when we prioritize scout-speculation about upside at the expense of real information, what we're valuing is the speculation itself, not the prospect? In a sense we're valuing the very incompleteness of our own information. I struggle with that.

    But concede that you, Stotle, Tony, Allstar and others probably do not.

    Edited to switch floor for ceiling. Largely because I'm a maroon.
    Yes. Absolutely possible. I think it's discrediting to think that any of us don't struggle with that. It boils down to confidence in your initial valuation.

    This is a really good discussion and I want to reply to your post in detail, but I'm cooking food and celebrating the end of 48 hours of work in 4 days, so it will have to wait a little bit until I have free time and am 100% sober (well, no guarantees on that last part).

  12. #12
    Lucky Jim's Avatar
    Lucky Jim is offline Plus Member since 12/06 Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY.
    Posts
    18,038
    Quote Originally Posted by RVAbird View Post
    Yes. Absolutely possible. I think it's discrediting to think that any of us don't struggle with that. It boils down to confidence in your initial valuation.

    This is a really good discussion and I want to reply to your post in detail, but I'm cooking food and celebrating the end of 48 hours of work in 4 days, so it will have to wait a little bit until I have free time and am 100% sober (well, no guarantees on that last part).
    I honestly didn't mean to sound like you guys don't consider it. I just meant that I think I struggle with it more. Truly, I think the fact that I'm not a scout, and have no scouting experience, makes me discount scouting input (perhaps) more than I should and definitely more than you guys.

  13. #13
    Sports Guy's Avatar
    Sports Guy is offline Plus Member Since 3/04 Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    107,457
    I agree with this...as I said, if Manny was a slam dunk candidate to stay at SS, I would have had him over Bundy but that doesn't appear to be the case.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lanham, MD
    Posts
    9,657
    Quote Originally Posted by RVAbird View Post
    That's how I'd like them [he said in his best dog-show-judge voice].
    No coincidence I listed them in that order

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lanham, MD
    Posts
    9,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucky Jim View Post
    I honestly didn't mean to sound like you guys don't consider it. I just meant that I think I struggle with it more. Truly, I think the fact that I'm not a scout, and have no scouting experience, makes me discount scouting input (perhaps) more than I should and definitely more than you guys.
    It's something I struggle with quite a bit. I tend to sit on the fence and not make real authoritative assessments the first time or two I see a guy. Something that Nick was always trying to help me work on. When I just get one look at a guy I tend to overthink it, when I get multiple views I get much more confident. I guess it's just always a doubt in the back of my mind, is this really what I'm seeing or is this an off day/good day for him?

    That being said, I can't wait for this season to get a couple good looks at Manny/Schoop in Bowie. Doing it on staff or not, I still plan on getting a couple looks at them this season, and I'd love to maybe have a beer and talk baseball with anyone who wants to come watch them with me.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

OriolesHangout.com is an unofficial site and not associated with the Baltimore Orioles and part of Hangout Ventures LLC. Copyright ©2013 | Privacy Policy | Advertise with us