IMO, these rankings have been revolving around potential, mostly. And if people want to weigh the grades towards potential, that's fine but it usually doesn't take into account that the potential might not pan out. Adley is a great prospect and if you're going to bet on someone, you should bet on him but there's still a chance he could not be the all-world catcher that we're hoping for. And the B is because of Adley, not because I'm enthralled with what we currently have.
Severino and Sisco are decent (not great) hitting catchers. After his red hot start to 2020, Severino came back down to earth pretty quickly, his OPS+ didn't crack 100. I love Sisco's plate discipline, his separation between his batting average and on base percentage is pretty absurd but I'm not sure if hell ever hit above .250. If he did, his on base percentage could end up over .400. His OPS+ this year was 105.
Both of these guys have average defense, at best.
I'm not sure if SG's claim of having the best catching situation in the sport is accurate as I'm not up to date on what other franchise situations look like. But when you have a top 5 prospect at catcher, you can probably be in the conversation, so I'll go along and agree with him. But again, if you're going to give out grades for untapped potential, you also need to take into account that these guys might not work out.
I feel like it is really tough to evaluate the future of a bullpen just because of the unknowns. Who really knows what flawed starter will be thrown to the bullpen and be a stud....I don’t think anyone saw Zach Britton coming. I guess the good news is that when you have the depth the Os are growing, it gives a decent indication that there can be impact arms in the pen.
I understand the OP grade of an A, but I would imagine that grade takes into account what our organization was as much as what it currently is. If you compare it to our history, I would agree with the A grade. But comparing to other organizations, I would think a B is probably more realistic. I say this having done zero research to support this comment. Either way, I am happy with the state of the pitching, and think next year will be a big one to see what we actually have.
This is a pretty simplistic way of looking at Brocail's body of work - albeit unusual from our best poster.
I do not have the time to go into more detail, but I will put out a few thoughts that may have led to a change in our pitching coach - in the absence of looking at a detailed pitcher by pitcher analysis from last year to this year.
- I believe our defense was supposed to be better in 2020 than 2019 - something that could have impacted pitcher results.
- the removal of Dylan Bundy (2019 ERA 4.79, ERA+ 98) and the addition of Alex Cobb (2020 ERA 4.30, ERA+ 106)
- speaking of Mr. Bundy, his improvement in results in 2020 with another organization based on a change in pitch mix (as well as opponents) is not a good reflection on our pitching coach - especially if it were determined that the pitch mix change was something that should have been implemented last year based on available data. Not sure of the results of other pitchers who left the organization.
- also not sure of the improvement of someone like Tanner Scott from 2019 (ERA 4.78, ERA+99) to 2020 (ERA 1.31, ERA+351!) - what role did Brocail have in the improvement or perhaps in Scott's mediocre numbers last year.
My guess is that our GM has made a numbers based decision on Brocail - just as it was pointed out here how bad Flores was in 2020.