Jump to content
Sir_Loin

Kjerstad comes in at #99 on BA Top 100

Recommended Posts

 

O's fans are gonna grow to love Kjerstad.  He's a high character kid with a high ceiling as a baseball player.  As an Arkansan and of course a big Razorback fan, I have watched him play many times in college.  He has that "it" factor that is so rare. BTW, he is much more solid defensively than some are giving him credit for.  Give this kid a chance please before passing judgement.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Honestly, if BA’s assessment is right that Martin is the no. 16 prospect in the minors,  I don’t think passing him over to save money for later rounds was a good move.   

Fangraphs has Martin at no. 52.    The move becomes much more defensible if that’s your assessment.    
 

His 99 ranking and Martin's 16 rankings are completely based on their draft ratings. There is no way BA admits to any suggestion that they were wrong. They will continue to rank Martin higher unless he (Martin) is a bust. That's always been their standard operating procedure.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MCO'sFan said:

His 99 ranking and Martin's 16 rankings are completely based on their draft ratings. There is no way BA admits to any suggestion that they were wrong. They will continue to rank Martin higher unless he (Martin) is a bust. That's always been their standard operating procedure.

What else would you use to rank them?  Draft order?

Are you suggesting they bump up Kjerstad simply because of where the O's picked him?

Share this post


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

What else would you use to rank them?  Draft order?

Are you suggesting they bump up Kjerstad simply because of where the O's picked him?

Why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rudyrooster said:

Why not?

For starters because they are probably going to pay him like he was picked 6th.

Also why should they have such little faith in their own work that they make changes based solely over what one team thought?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rudyrooster said:

Why not?

I guess we want to be like the college football rating systems, where a guy will be rates a 3* player but then he gets an offer from one of the big name programs and they change him to a 4* on that basis.  And then everyone says look at how many  4* players the big name program gets!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MCO'sFan said:

His 99 ranking and Martin's 16 rankings are completely based on their draft ratings. There is no way BA admits to any suggestion that they were wrong. They will continue to rank Martin higher unless he (Martin) is a bust. That's always been their standard operating procedure.

 

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

What else would you use to rank them?  Draft order?

Are you suggesting they bump up Kjerstad simply because of where the O's picked him?

Given that they haven’t played a professional game yet, there’s no reason for BA to change their pre-draft opinion as to the order of the draft prospects.    The only new information here is how high Martin ranks compared to players who’ve already spent time in the minors.   

I don’t put particular weight on BA compared to other sources.    But obviously they are extremely high on Martin.    
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 25 Nuggets said:

Something I noticed is that Kjerstad is the highest rated switch-hitting prospect in the draft, and the only one that made the Fangraphs' numbers ranking / has an AV of 50 or better.

Adley Rutschman?  Switch hitter.

Imagine if those two pan out, having them back-to-back in the lineup.

Ken Singleton, Eddie Murray? For some reason thought Kjerstad was lefty swinger.

Edited by Ridgway22
clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ridgway22 said:

Ken Singleton, Eddie Murray? For some reason thought Kjerstad was lefty swinger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ridgway22 said:

Ken Singleton, Eddie Murray? For some reason thought Kjerstad was lefty swinger.

Fangraphs made a mistake with that, as Kjerstad is not a switch hitter.  He’s a LH hitter.  I don’t think their high ranking of him is based on him being a switch hitter, because he’s not.  I think it was just a typo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

What else would you use to rank them?  Draft order?

Are you suggesting they bump up Kjerstad simply because of where the O's picked him?

I guess I am suggesting a few things. First, BA is extremely slow to admit that the had a prospect/draftee rated too high or too low. Second, I am suggesting that it is a farce to have Martin ranked 16th when three teams passed on him after Torkelson was taken (not just the O's). Signability has not been an issue with Martin so, it is safe to say that there seems to be at least somewhat of a consensus that he was not the second best prospect in the draft. But mostly, I really dislike BA's self-bias' it rivals only ESPN. BA shoves prospects down our throats until they are complete busts. They are slow (if ever) to recognize they were wrong. ESPN hypes whatever they are broadcasting to the point where I stopped watching it several years ago. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Frobby said:

 

Given that they haven’t played a professional game yet, there’s no reason for BA to change their pre-draft opinion as to the order of the draft prospects.    The only new information here is how high Martin ranks compared to players who’ve already spent time in the minors.   

I don’t put particular weight on BA compared to other sources.    But obviously they are extremely high on Martin.    
 

I couldn't agree more. You said much more succinctly that I did. I think they are stubbornly high on Martin. It made them look somewhat bad when three teams passed him over after Torkelson was taken. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

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

    • So, to be clear, you think every player in the system should be brought up to the major league team?  As others have said, it is easy now, in hindsight, to say that Elias should have seen that Yaz was going to be a star in the three weeks of spring training he had to look at him, after an uninspiring minor league career under the previous regime, but that just seems to be an unreasonable assessment of Elias, IMO.
    • You can’t blame Elias for not seeing it coming though. 
    • I don’t think he should have had much of a chance. I wish we were smart enough to see it coming. That’s whT I’m disappointed in and what I don’t want to happen in the future.
    • Yaz played the instrument for years and wasn’t good.  He deserved nothing and didn’t earn anything.
    • Yeah, I don't consider returning a Rule 5 guy to be a fail.  In fact, it is the most likely result, league-wide.  I really consider taking Rule 5 shots at guys to be a matter of nothing ventured, nothing gained.  Also, IMO, picking up stop gap players and have them turn out to be exactly that isn't really a fail, either.  Sure, I'd like to see us strike gold on one of these guys, but I can't say that I expect it to happen.  I'm more interested in seeing how guys we acquire like Vavra and Smith turn out.
    • So? The guys we brought up for a chance, every guy brought up for a chance, as opposed to bringing up “because he is ready,” is by definition being given an opportunity that he doesn’t necessarily deserve. We risk nothing by bringing him up. I’m a musician, and I can’t judge a piece without paying it once. Maybe not all the way through, but gotta sit down and play it. Now, it might be by a terrible or unknown composer, and some would say,”it’s by Danzi, it sucks.” Well, so? Maybe it does suck. Danzi was a mediocre composer. But maybe it doesn’t suck. Maybe it’s worthwhile, as recital filler, or as a rare gem from a mediocrity. But if I play it, I’ll know. As another surprisingly similar example, the widow of a local cellist gave me some of her late husband’s music, including an untouched piece he bought 50+ years ago. So rare there’s only one lonely YouTube audio, and the music is long out of print and the publisher is itself long out of business. I played it and said, “this is an incredible piece.” And it is. So this piece is Yaz. The previous owner never bothered to play it, and I did, and I get the benefit. If he’d played lit, maybe he’d have hated it, maybe not. But he never gave it a chance.
    • Well let’s remember that a lot of parts of that system that are good were here before Elias got here.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...