LookinUp

Can't argue with this guy's production. That said, I'd ding him more on velocity than his production would suggest. I just feel like he'll have to be great just to be good, and I really question whether he'll stick. He wouldn't be in my personal top 25 most likely, but I do understand why he's here.

Just voting the way Frobby tells me to at this point, but I do love that 4 of these guys are somehow not in the top 20, and that there's several other interesting guys even beyond the 6 listed in this poll. Depth is becoming deep depth.

Not sure if this was posted elsewhere, but I didn’t see it. Was two weeks before this thread.

It was 2nd division starter or utility guy, right? And with a 50 ceiling. That's a ML player who, best case, is a good starter on a good team or likely is still a guy with some value to a ML team. Especially if he can hold his own in the outfield. My take here is that: 1) Tony's understandably being conservative in general on this list because he hasn't seen a lot of these guys for a full year. 2) He's going by what he's heard. 3) There are guys lower on this list that are a bit farther away but who have higher potential. 4) Vavra, based on Tony and rankings from other sites with some credibility, has some potential to be a real contributor to the ML team within 2 years. I actually think Tony's grade is pretty accurate based on the feedback, but whether he should be ranked over Baumler, Mayo, Rom, Smith, Hall, Wells, Bradish, Stowers, Hernaiz, Haskin and others is up for debate and, ultimately, not really important. Heck, at least one site has him at 7. They must think he's decent. All those guys have risk and they all have had a big layoff from baseball, or at least from being seen. Vavra got put here because he's closer, he has produced on the field, and thus has somewhat lower risk, is my guess.

Yeah, I'm not knocking the kid's athleticism - I trust that it's top notch - but Grienke is exceptional. That's really all I'm saying. It's kind of like saying he hits like Bonds, only with better power. Well, maybe that's extreme, but it illustrates the point I think.

Agreed. I do get the feeling that Elias' targeting of players is with a little more specific projection/opinion of what we can do for the player in mind than our org has had in the past. I'm sure we've always thought we can "help" an acquired player get to the next level, but this development team probably has a little better plan for doing so and thus a better shot at actually accomplishing that than our previous regimes over, say, the last 40-50 years.

After watching his videos, I guess I understand what the source who said he's a more athletic Greinke might have meant. Comping him to Grienke is a comp about how he spins the ball and changes speeds. The more athletic part - which I personally laughed at because Grienke is one of if not the best athlete off the mound I've ever seen - likely refers more to Baumler's physicality. This dude is well built already, and I'm guessing (though not sure) that the video is only from after his Junior season of high school.

Top 5 or off the list. I totally get it. Love the potential though. Let's hope he's a home run.

Also in fairness, it's a bat dependent position and his swing apparently really changed when he left the org. How can anyone project that?

So it makes sense to go with Wells here. I am a little surprised not to see Smith or anyone from the Bundy trade yet. I just really think it's an unknown this year. To SG's point, MUCH more depth than in year's past.

I have no idea. Lol.

I'm not sure if the full-time out of school story is true, but they do play a ton of baseball down there. It's a 12-month season with little competition from basketball, football, and even soccer in a lot of those countries. All of their athletes play baseball, they play it often and they get very good starting at a young age.

Double plays is where the poor arm comes in. This is an interesting part of the list every year because it's where Tony has to mix in 40-45 FV guys with really young guys with huge risk. I'm sure there's a system, but I definitely don't have one. Lol. As for Vavra and even Diaz, it's worth noting that there's some upside there as the ceiling is a 50 FV guy. Having a few guys in the upper minors with a 50 FV is a good thing. They won't all pan out, but if one or two of these types of guys pans out to that 50 FV then you have a real asset on your hands. The same is true with pitchers, where we have a lot of guys who kind of fit a Vavra-like profile. Means was one of them, and look what happened. There's value here for sure.

Me neither. It's very logical, but I'm not sure it's absolute. Would Servideo also be over them for example? Of course, I don't have the bonuses in front of me and he may have gotten less. [Edit: I see he did get less than both Mayo and Baumler, so that would argue they'll have a greater chance of ending up ahead of him.]

It is really neat to do that travel, but it's crazy how much some people pay for this stuff. Even the coaches get paid at a lot of these places. I get the approach (why let your kid be subject to the whims of a stupid player parent coach?), but the travel/tournament costs alone add up big time. My kid would have to be damn near like Bryce Harper for me to go that route.

Frobby's logic is good, as always. I think of Mayo and Baumler as the cream of our class, even above Westburg. That's my own bias based on what I've read, I guess. At this point, accounting for draft slot/bonus is a logical way to do this. Add in that Vavra is much higher rated in other places, is more known for his bat and that he may have some upside on the positional value side, and it argues that he/Haskin is the choice.

If you don't mind me asking, why would you want Hall over them? I like Hall, but the upside seems pretty replaceable to me.

On Iglesias, is there any hurry to exercise the option? I'd figure you usually wait on that stuff until you have to act just in case something else comes up.

Unless they're trying to pull off a massive trade. Just playing devil's advocate. There are several possibilities, but you're right that there's unfortunately a big chance that our owners are mandating massive cost cutting because of Covid.

Yeah, you hear the horror stories. We see it too. There are a lot of sub-Team USA organizations that are not like that though. Some put way too much coin into it, IMO. On the other hand, speaking from my perspective only, you're not doing this because you're investing in your future pro. You're doing it because most people (kids and parents) are having a blast now. That's the thing. For every crazy kid caught up in one of those national for-profit kid mills, there are dozens still in highly competitive sports and having a blast. Many of those won't play in college, or under scholarship, for many reasons, but a lot actually will. If you do the math in MD for example, there are many more high schools than there are really good travel programs. The competition will actually diffuse a little bit. As a total aside, my daughter went up to PA to play field hockey last year. I think it was the WC team. They're nationally ranked. Just about every girl on that team will get a scholarship to some school for field hockey. I'd bet money on it unless they just shut down college sports in a big way.

To be clear, I agree with the above post, but... If the O's have scouts/metrics on this guy, and if those scouts/metrics project much better results than Drungo's back of the envelope projections, and if ownership really does support Elias' rebuild plan, then I could see Elias thinking now is a decent time to go after this player. Basically 1 year earlier than ideal, IMO. I get the argument that it's early in the rebuild. I'm not sure I agree with anyone who says we shouldn't because have other guys in the system, just because those guys seem pretty far away, which means their risks are still high. So I also don't think it'll happen, but I actually think there is a small chance it does.

Mayo is ahead of Baumler in Tony's poll. I'd be surprised if Haskin is above them, but what do I know?

I played pretty moderate level sports growing up and even then know several guys who got D-1 scholarships, and they weren't professional athlete types of players. That's different than going pro, but certainly still worth some $ in saved tuition. My kid is on a top rated travel team. He's good. Probably better than I was for sure. Playing against the best competition helps his whole team take major steps forward relative to their peers. They just keep getting better and better and leaving other kids behind. I'd say his odds are decent to at least have a chance at a scholarship to a D-1 school, even if that's UMBC and not Clemson. Add in good grades and it helps your chances even more.

The thing about youth sports that could make it worth it is the college scholarships. There are a ton available across many sports. They may not go pro, but getting a 50% or full ride to college is worth a lot of money too. My daughter was a gymnast. Not D-1 caliber, so no pressure on us there, but for the girls that are that caliber, there actually is some pressure to stick with a sport that can be really grueling.

The draft reports on Mayo, and recent fluff piece from instructionals, make it seem like he has huge upside. Who would I rather have in my org? That guy. He could be similar to Gunnar Henderson, though without the SS potential. I was thinking Vavra in here, and Baumler looks like he has potential too, but I didn't want to keep Mayo out so I only had one choice there. I very much doubt McKenna is in the top 20. I know there is value in a legit 4th OF (defensively), but I don't believe in his bat at all. He's more of a 5th OF, IMO, and I'd rather have a ton of guys over him, including everyone else in this poll.