Jump to content
weams

MLB Pipeline: Austin Martin

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Number5 said:

So, if I understand you correctly, there is absolutely nothing that this player could possibly have done to make you think he's a worthy choice here.  He has performed at a tremendous level wherever he's been for several years, but it must be all smoke and mirrors, coupled with pure luck over a particular small sample size.  Sorry, but you haven't shown me any reason whatsoever to agree with you that he isn't the player he seems to be.  You asserted that his home park in college was the sole reason for his numbers, yet his performance away from that environment shouldn't be considered either, because the Cape Cod League's season doesn't last 749 games.  You are certainly welcome to your feeling that something tells you that Gonzales isn't for real, but your feeling alone doesn't convince me to agree with you.

I am trusting Elias here.  I'd be happy with any of Tork, Martin, Lacy, or Gonzales.  I don't see any valid reason to eliminate Gonzales from that discussion.  It comes down to what the Orioles' baseball people think, which is OK by me.

No, you don't understand me correctly.  Or I don't think so.  All I'm saying is that Gonzales, by virtue of playing in a completely loopy environment, gives us less information to go on.  So he's inherently more risky.  Some of that risk is mitigated by the combination of scouting reports and college summer ball.  But not as much as a bunch of games played in a place where there are five runs scored a game instead of 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Orioles1954 said:

I haven't followed this thread but what happened to Emerson Hancock?

I'm sure the Orioles have done their due diligence on Hancock.  I think he's almost sure to go in the top 10.  As Corn said, it seems like he dropped just a bit in the eyes of many after a good, but not great, start to the college season, especially his K rate.  I wouldn't storm the warehouse with pitch forks and torches if the Orioles took him at #2, but I like the other 4 guys better, based on what limited information I've seen.

Share this post


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

In wildcard's universe Bob Milacki was inducted into the Hall of Fame during the 1988-89 offseason.

How would you know anything about my universe.  You live in your own.

Share this post


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

No, you don't understand me correctly.  Or I don't think so.  All I'm saying is that Gonzales, by virtue of playing in a completely loopy environment, gives us less information to go on.  So he's inherently more risky.  Some of that risk is mitigated by the combination of scouting reports and college summer ball.  But not as much as a bunch of games played in a place where there are five runs scored a game instead of 10.

So there is something he could have possibly done that would have enabled you to consider him as a viable pick?  It sure doesn't sound like it.  Hey, I'm fine with you having the opinion that the Orioles should never, ever select a player whose home park was a hitters park.  I wouldn't share your opinion, but I certainly wouldn't begrudge you for holding it.  it's just that you aren't giving me any real reason to not consider this player, as I'm not predisposed to eliminate any player based solely on geography.  It would be entirely different, to my way of thinking, if there were any evidence whatsoever that he couldn't hit in a less hitter-friendly environment.  But there isn't.  When faced with those conditions, he's performed.  The guy has unquestionably stood out from all of the other players playing in the exact same environment, in my view, whether that be in New Mexico or Massachusetts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Sounded like an insult to me.

Oh come on.  Your thing is to advocate for sweeping decisions to be made on 18 at bats.  After like 20 years we can kid you about it.  I'm sure you can come up with some kind of thing about random players from 1878 to make fun of me.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Number5 said:

I'm sure the Orioles have done their due diligence on Hancock.  I think he's almost sure to go in the top 10.  As Corn said, it seems like he dropped just a bit in the eyes of many after a good, but not great, start to the college season, especially his K rate.  I wouldn't storm the warehouse with pitch forks and torches if the Orioles took him at #2, but I like the other 4 guys better, based on what limited information I've seen.

I'd expect some slot savings if he is the pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Number5 said:

So there is something he could have possibly done that would have enabled you to consider him as a viable pick?  It sure doesn't sound like it.  Hey, I'm fine with you having the opinion that the Orioles should never, ever select a player whose home park was a hitters park.  I wouldn't share your opinion, but I certainly wouldn't begrudge you for holding it.  it's just that you aren't giving me any real reason to not consider this player, as I'm not predisposed to eliminate any player based solely on geography.  It would be entirely different, to my way of thinking, if there were any evidence whatsoever that he couldn't hit in a less hitter-friendly environment.  But there isn't.  When faced with those conditions, he's performed.  The guy has unquestionably stood out from all of the other players playing in the exact same environment, in my view, whether that be in New Mexico or Massachusetts.

There a difference between a viable pick and a less risky pick.  If the Orioles are that comfortable with Gonzales despite having less solid information to go on, then pick him.  You can be the best player in the world and still be a 1998 Colorado Rockie.  But if you're trading for that guy you are taking on a lot of risk that he's not really the best guy, he just has gaudy Mile High numbers.

When you say "..that the Orioles should never, ever select a player whose home park was a hitters park" you're underselling the case here.  Colorado is a hitter's park.  Fenway is a hitter's park.  Gonzales' hitting environment is twice that of the Rockies.  It's way, way, way beyond any environment that has ever existed in MLB history.  That inherently adds risk to the equation.

This is like an NFL team drafting someone who has only played Arena Football. It's plausible he could be really good, but it's very hard to tell because the context is so out of whack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Oh come on.  Your thing is to advocate for sweeping decisions to be made on 18 at bats.  After like 20 years we can kid you about it.  I'm sure you can come up with some kind of thing about random players from 1878 to make fun of me.

No, 1978 is your thing.  I think I'll leave that to you.   Just when you kid don't make it an insult.

Share this post


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

There a difference between a viable pick and a less risky pick.  If the Orioles are that comfortable with Gonzales despite having less solid information to go on, then pick him.  You can be the best player in the world and still be a 1998 Colorado Rockie.  But if you're trading for that guy you are taking on a lot of risk that he's not really the best guy, he just has gaudy Mile High numbers.

When you say "..that the Orioles should never, ever select a player whose home park was a hitters park" you're underselling the case here.  Colorado is a hitter's park.  Fenway is a hitter's park.  Gonzales' hitting environment is twice that of the Rockies.  It's way, way, way beyond any environment that has ever existed in MLB history.  That inherently adds risk to the equation.

This is like an NFL team drafting someone who has only played Arena Football. It's plausible he could be really good, but it's very hard to tell because the context is so out of whack.

The single biggest difference between hitting for the Colorado Rockies and NMSU is the pitching you are facing.  As with every college and high school player ever entering a draft, Gonzales has not been facing major league players.  The numbers he put up, though, were not solely because he was playing in a small park in New Mexico.  At least, there isn't any evidence to support such a claim.  Hitting home runs is not his sole skill.  The smaller dimensions actually detract from doubles and triples, yet he excels in those areas, as well.  Even hit an inside-the-park grand slam.  He makes contact and hits the ball hard all over the ballpark, and runs well.  College career: 89 walks and 79 strikeouts (plus 18 HBP).  Coupled with his high batting average, the guy gets on base.  That is not a park thing.  The altitude is 1300 feet lower than Denver, by the way.  I'm not the one saying "..that the Orioles should never, ever select a player whose home park was a hitters park" …  and if you aren't saying that, what, exactly, are you saying?  The sole argument you have mounted in all of these posts amounts to exactly that, as far as I can see.

I can see that I am somehow being unsuccessful in convincing you that your argument is based solely on geography and it is for certain that you aren't convincing me otherwise.  We will obviously remain in disagreement here.  Hey, I'd be real happy with Tork, Martin, or Lacy, as I said earlier.  I also would have no problem with Elias should he make Gonzales our choice at #2, especially if that can somehow help us have some extra money to sign a guy like Nick Bitsko at  #30.  You clearly think that would be a bad move.  I get that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Number5 said:

 You clearly think that would be a bad move.  I get that.

No I don't.  I don't know if he would be a good or a poor pick because the information is unclear. 

What I'm saying that the error bars in Gonzales' performance are greater than those accompanying Martin or Torkelson because of the obscuring effects of an environment where teams score 10 runs a game.  If the Orioles' projections for Gonzales are good enough that the uncertainty is less relevant, than great, draft him.  But the uncertainty is still there, it doesn't go away.  Of course the offensive environment has a huge impact on his numbers, I don't see why that's even a point of discussion.  But maybe that fact is less important than the scouting reports and other information.

Also, New Mexico State's park isn't small.  It's 345-385-400.  Dimensions aren't everything.  It's altitude, wind and other effects.  Coors has perhaps the largest outfield in MLB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wildcard said:

No, 1978 is your thing.  I think I'll leave that to you.   Just when you kid don't make it an insult.

Just my two cents, but I didn't think it was an insult either, just respectful playfulness to a well known poster with well known posting traits. 

As for thread, the reading has been great and I think I am leaning mostly to Martin as my preferred choice (or Torkelson if he falls to #2).  Just will be great to see anything baseball related, looking forward to the draft, even truncated as it is.  

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

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • It is widely expected that DJ Stewart will be activated for the Injured List today.  What does you bring and how can he help? He brings experience.  In DJ's pro career he has played  527 games in the outfield corners.   Ryan Mountcastle has played 55  games in the outfield in the minors and the majors.   DJ's  outfield experience has not alway been perfect.  He is known for some spectacular misplays.   But he has average speed,  average range and an average left fielder's arm.   HIs overall outfield defensive game should be a improvement over Mountcastle and should move Ryan to DH more often than not if Brandon Hyde takes advantage for the assets he is given. Stewart offensive game is a low average with power and the ability to work a walk that has netted him a 224/334/433/768 split in 301 major league plate appearances.   His left-handed bat should be additive to the O's lineup.    How long will you stay may depend on how he does and whether Austin Hays hamstring heals fast or lingers.   If Stewart does well he will give the Hyde a reason to go from 14 pitchers to 13 when Hays returns.    Injuries have been a problem for Stewart but over the last 3 years he has played in 77% of his teams game.  That is about the same as Santander. Much better than Hays 59% or Diaz 64% but not close to Mullins 93%. Good Luck DJ.  I hope you are at the top of your game because the O's could use that player.    
    • Personally I find it more constructive and rewarding to riff on the idea of a developmental system and service time manipulation for announcers than I do wildly speculating about what the guy who says names out loud could have possibly done to get himself escorted out of the gates.
    • My supposition is he did something the team found unacceptable very recently.   I’m sure they didn’t like the timing at all.  
    • Let’s look at the six main culprits so far: 1.   Ryan Mountcastle, 11 K’s in 30 PA (36.7%).  21.4% last year. 2.  Trey Mancini, 11 K’s in 31 PA (35.5%).  21.1% in 2019. 3.   Rio Ruiz, 10 K’s in 25 PA (40%). 22.5% last year. 4.  Freddy Galvis, 10 K’s in 29 PA (34.5%).   18.9% last year,. 5.  Pedro Severino, 9 K’s in 23 PA (39.1%).    22.5% last year. 6.  Anthony Santander, 9 K’s in 27 PA (33.3%).   15.2% last year. I’m fairly sure all those are coming down substantially.   The one that worries me most is Mancini, for obvious reasons.    
    • Back on topic here: Valaika and Urias are Titanic deck chairs. I expect Jahmai Jones and Rylan Bannon to be fighting for time at 2B this summer. 
    • If you stick to reportage of your field, Twitter is a useful medium to market one's social media profile and increase followers while well providing knowledge to fans. Using Twitter is a smart outlet to engage when used judiciously. Looks like dude kept pissing off his bosses again and again, for years at a time. He apparently knew he was on thin ice but seemingly kept pushing against his warnings. Looks like his firing was probably of his own volition. Was he only using his "celebrity" to promote Orioles feel-good stories? Obviously "No," even though that would be the expectation of an employee of his level. Was he using his Orioles connection to promote Guinness beer without the corporation paying proper advertising fees? Doubtful! That would be a big violation. Plus, Guinness would happily pay for that promotion, I guarantee it. Or did he want to parlay his Orioles name recognition and resultant "followers" to preach personal opinions that his employer decided they had no desire to possibly experience the backlash from? "Who knew" there might be repercussions? Everyone, including the poster. I get that we all enjoy spouting off -- that's part of what motivates some people to join forums. But Twitter is a soapbox for a lot of people who think they are far more important than what they really are. For various reasons, they share  extemporaneous reactions to the day's events, sometimes not well reflected upon. Bottom line,  it's common that if you use your company's identity as your basis of platform, you will be expected to follow a minimum standard of expectation -- and it doesn't matter one bit what exactly he said now., last year, or three years ago or however many times he tweeted something the organization was rebuffed by. Sad truth: Wagner is an employee at will who displeased his employer. You don't have to like or respect reactions to your social media posts. But you have to navigate it if you want to keep your job. We all have to maneuver our employers' work environments. If we can't, we know the expected outcome. Yeah, you "lose freedom" -  in a way: sometimes when you agree to take big-income,  high-profile jobs, then playing within the employer's parameters is how we agree to act if you want to bank coin. btw: Philip: Online anonymity is something more involved than calling one's self "Joe Shitbotnik," or whatever you said.
    • "As an employee" being the operative word here. So they have control over what he says in his personal life? I guess social media is to blame for personal becoming public. Who knew going public could mean losing freedom?
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...