Pickles

Law of unintended consequences. Adding Puerto Rico to the draft killed baseball in Puerto Rico. It would not be shocking to see an international draft severely cripple baseball in the Caribbean and S America. Not to get political, but replacing what is largely a "capitalistic" system with a "socialistic" one will hamper production.

He didn't hit .300 in the MiLs. What makes you think he'll do it for his ML career?

It was almost obligatory, because all prospect writeups have a weakness or needs to improve category, and for Wieters it was ALWAYS his defense. And as others have recalled, it was mainly about his size preventing him from setting a good target and/or preventing him from having a good pop time to second. Also, about how his size would prevent him from having a long career behind the dish and would necessitate a move to first. Feel free to jog my memory, but nobody predicted him to become a Gold Glove catcher, with an arm as a real asset. Likewise nobody made a criticism of his bat, including what would turn out to be legitimate criticisms: That he lacked elite bat speed, and that was a significantly better hitter from the right side than the left.

Bingo. But guess where they both get their money from- and not just voluntarily? From taxpayers. The absurd salaries for the players are only supported by the absurd amounts of public money dumped into private profit through stadiums, arenas, etc. It's honestly why I get bothered by looking at either side as a victim. They are BOTH objectively OVERPAID.

He was. IIRC, he touched 95 off a mound. Yeah, the criticisms of his defense were not about his arm strenght.

No I understood your point.

But by God! What if he's a philandering dick and his wife divorces him! He might have to sell one of his Porsches! That's a bridge too far!

I guess my point was simply that the labor agreement the players have been operating under is not as wildly unfair as some seem to be suggesting. And again, that's not making any comment upon the current negotiations.

If Tyler Wilson is an example of a guy getting screwed by the labor practices of MLB, let us all be screwed in such a way.

Then don't get divorced. Problem solved.

Surely the players will get those concessions.

This is what you wrote: "But if you play MLB for five years you shouldn't have to be bagging groceries when your 60 to pay off your used car." It's a laughably moronic thing to write and believe. If a guy who makes a few million in his mid 20s playing baseball ends up bagging groceries at the age of 60 to pay for his used car, no amount of money will fix what has obviously been a decade long series of terrible decisions. It's a moronic hypothetical. Sorry.

You can show me a factor that corresponds more closely to winning than revenue? I bet you can't.

Indeed. And in all the words written about him as a prospect- much of it rhapsodic praise about his offensive potential which turned out to be excessive- I can't recall a single evaluator accurately predicting how good defensively Wieters would be.

You literally just suggested a man who makes a few million in his mid 20s, and is given lifetime healthcare, will be forced to bag groceries at aged 60 to pay for his used car under this system. You said it. It's laughable.

Because revenue is directly correlated to winning. It isn't a mystery.

The average ML salary is over 4 million per year. I notice you also take no conisderation of the considerable costs in running a ML franchise. With that taken into the equation, we're getting awful close to what they should expect according to you. I mean the players have a right to try to get more of the pie. And I make no strong comment on the current round of negotiations. But this idea that retired players are being forced to live in boxes and eat cat food after retiring from baseball because of the pernicious greed of the owners is going a little far in this thread.

So you think raising the Competitive Balance Tax and lowering the penalities for exceeding it would make the Orioles MORE competitive with the Yankees?

Lol. Get real dude.

I think the critiques of Wieters' defense were mostly about his size and length, and whether he could be compact enough to set a good target and get a good pop time. And it was almost always what was cited under weakness, as nobody would criticize any aspect of his bat. Admittedly, that would have taken a brave scout considering Wieters' performance in the MiLs. All I can say is reading your reports here is quite exciting. If I were betting I'd take AR for the over of Wieters' career. My inclination to temper my expectations is based not on my evaluation of his talent, but rather simply based on probabilities.

All of this is fair. As is pointed out after this post, for two-three years Wieters was a "franchise" player imo. I think I'll be happy if AR replicates that, with better obp, and is able to maintain it for a longer period of time. One thing I am eager to see is how well AR's defense compares to Wieters'. Nobody- and I think you'll admit he exceeded your expectations- predicted Wieters to be the defensive player he was. In fact, Wieters' defense was the one thing most scouts pointed out as a weakness, almost obligatorily so. He was a legitimate Gold Glover. If Rutschman turns out to be the good defensively with another 10% of offense tacked on (to Wieters' best), I'll be thrilled.

Sure. It's always a "snapshot in time." But going into their ML debut season, they're about equal as prospects. As you probably know, Wieters was considered the best positional prospect of his draft class. Rutshcman was seen as the best overall prospect. I think it is fair to say Rutschman was a better prospect at the draft, but Wieters "slipped" to 5 overall because of Boras/money.

I won't belabor the point but there have been some pretty prominent posters who have declared- without a doubt, cut and dried- that Rutschman was a better prospect than Wieters. I'll confess to being a bit "disappointed" in Wieters' career. And I"ll share the same feeling if Rutschman has a career of similar value. I'd probably take the over. But even with that said, a catcher being a true middle of the order hitter is a rare thing. If he's an 850+ OPS bat, I'll be thrilled- and a bit surprised.

Oh, I don't disagree. My post wasn't meant to be a criticism of Wieters. Many have made the argument that AR is a better prospect than Wieters was. He isn't. I think Tony chimed in and gave a slight nod to AR, based on his power. I'll concede that. But the idea that it's a hands down no comparison, is flat out false. There was a thread from this past summer in which poster after poster basically predicted AR was going to come up and be Johnny Bench immediately. He won't. I think he'll end up as Wieters with better OBP skills. And I'm fine with that. Anybody expecting more than that is, imo, likely to be disappointed, and unscientifically, that seems to be a majority of the board to me.

Depth in a system is critical. Our best players, borderline all-star guys, never appeared on any of these lists. It's likely that we have a player(s) in our system who will have a long and productive career that is completely under the national radar. That said, I'm not sure Keith Law has made a very strong argument that our current system is unusually top heavy.