Jump to content
RVAOsFan

Ryan Mountcastle 2019

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yea, it's an expression.  One that I am sure you are aware of.  Like calling someone a generational talent.  Trout is a generational talent, he isn't the only one that gets called that.

Is there a point?  Are you saying that very good, above average, and special are interchangeable.   You obviously used the word special for a reason.  Or maybe not.  Maybe you just like to use misleading expressions?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Is there a point?  Are you saying that very good, above average, and special are interchangeable.   You obviously used the word special for a reason.  Or maybe not.  Maybe you just like to use misleading expressions?  

The reason I used it was that it was the term I remember evaluators using.  Are you holding me at fault because their definition of the term is different from your own?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

The reason I used it was that it was the term I remember evaluators using.  Are you holding me at fault because their definition of the term is different from your own?

No, I'm holding you at fault for suggesting all of the evaluators (everyone in the know) said his bat was "special".  I doubt that very very much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Huh.  I thought the very nature of the word "special" is something that wouldn't be spread around liberally. BTW, I only responded to COC who said "everyone in the know thinks Mountcastle has a special bat".

But you were the one who inserted that word into the Mountcastle discussion, about 4 weeks ago:

You did make it clear that “special” was something better than “good,” while forecasting a .750 OPS for Mountcastle.   I think we’d all agree that’s not “special.”

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading Fangraphs, 2080 baseball, MLB, Baseball America, trying to find all (or even one) evaluator who called Mountcastle's bat special.  So far, no luck.  Maybe the Hangout evaluators called his bat special?  I don't believe so .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Frobby said:

But you were the one who inserted that word into the Mountcastle discussion, about 4 weeks ago:

You did make it clear that “special” was something better than “good,” while forecasting a .750 OPS for Mountcastle.   I think we’d all agree that’s not “special.”

Frobby, you are special.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Frobby said:

That’s what my mommy always said.   

Maybe she only meant above average.  I'm not clear on how your mom used the word special.  For your sake, I hope she used it judiciously and not liberally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Maybe she only meant above average.  I'm not clear on how your mom used the word special.  For your sake, I hope she used it judiciously and not liberally.

I think she was just explaining the short yellow bus that picked me up for school at my house.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ReclaimTheCrown said:

Sooo....what’s everyone think of Mountcastle’s low walk rate?

It’s special. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

It’s special. 

I can get on board with that.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ReclaimTheCrown said:

Sooo....what’s everyone think of Mountcastle’s low walk rate?

Can't walk out of Norfolk.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't figure out why he's not in left every day at Norfolk. Doesn't that position make the most sense with Mancini around, not to mention Nunez and Davis...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







  • Posts

    • You can believe what you want. I do think that it is more than an arms length relationship. I've been around some of the reporters indeed some who have moved on and I never heard too much about Roch sugar coating things. I have seen that with some folks associated with MASN though. Real journalism requires at least an attempt at integrity.  Obviously as someone who has been covering one team so so very long there is a lean towards the polyannic.  If you are looking for the big expose to expose the horrors of all things Angelosian, he's not your guy. Pick Ken or Nester for that crap. Billionaires are not great people. We get it.  Back to the player subject here.   
    • I've never agreed being slow about promoting/keeping guys down that are already on the 40 man. You are burning option years w/o knowing how much work they need to do to adjust to the majors. You end up putting yourself in a out of options crapshoot a few years down the line with talented, but unfinished players. We know why they do it, but in a pure trying to build the best team I don't find it optimal in any way. It's a business thing, not building a better team thing.  backlogging non 40 man players into the rule 5 pool will happen regardless in a re-build. Though slow playing doesn't really help either. (It can disguise players and keep them from being picked if they are still in A ball)
    • Absolutely.  Even if they just guarantee you a one-year deal at $1M you might as well take it.  You just have to be willing to adapt to the Japanese culture, baseball and otherwise.  Not everyone does. Matt Stairs was in professional baseball for 20+ years, his time in Japan was 60 games of a .712 OPS when he was 27.  
    • And you know this how? I’m just trying to get clarification. I cannot recall a time when he was overly critical about the organization or a move that they made.   It’s just common sense that you don’t bite the hand that feeds you. That conflict moved needle from writing what he wants IMO  
    • I heard the clips on the radio this morning. I’m fine with the process and it seems like the deal progressed fairly quick. I would have been interested in the question of why quantity over quality. Obviously they didn’t play the whole show so maybe it was asked.    I don’t mind the deal as much as some here. But I would have preferred a player less with a more prestigious main player. But it’s mainly stating a preference for conversation as I really think it was a decent trade.
    • I think this would be a good signing. I think it's important to see what we've got (pitching wise) and the best way to do that is to back them up with above-average defenders behind him.  If we're not concerned about winning, let's try it.
    • Have no idea about the other player. Just know about Iglesias . Roch writes what he wants. He's as independent as Connolly or Trezza.  You write bad stuff too much, you lose access. The way of the world. 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...