LookinUp

I think you have to have pretty great tools to make the jump into the top 100, so the obvious guys are DL Hall (off 1 list), Baumann, Diaz and Henderson. It'll likely be too soon for our newer guys, like Hernaiz (maybe Henderson who has a larger profile) or any of the international guys, to get enough playing time and publicity to jump even if they deserve it. The exception would be if a player really lights up a short season league with 60+ power or tremendous pitching velocity, etc. Stowers will be playing full season ball and theoretically might be an exception if he clicks, though I'm not personally betting on it. His ceiling is probably high enough, but I think he'd have to force his way to AA and still have success there this year to get top 100 consideration. I doubt Rom has the velocity to do it and don't think McKenna will hit enough to do it, though is speed fits the definition of a loud tool. Hanifee is another out of the box guy who could surprise, but again, the write-ups on him from Tony and Luke don't make that look like a high probability jump. Then there's the pretty substantial list of good, but not great, prospects who profile as 45-50 types if things work out. I'm thinking guys like Kremer, Lowther, Adam Hall and Akin who could be decent professionals if things go their way but probably still aren't top 100 guys overall even with great years just because the known tool set doesn't profile with a 50+ ceiling. I'd certainly bet on whoever we take at #2 overall to be a top 100 guy, and it's possible though not likely one more guy makes that list if we target and sign a signability guy. Lastly, you never know if we hit on a high profile international signee on J2. That's also unlikely in terms of being a top 100 ranked player this year.

Agree. Seems like Hall's stuff is electric, but his production didn't match the stuff so he fell. If he produces like we all hope, he should move way up. I guess that's a pretty big if at this point, but I'm still very bullish.

I listened to a podcast with Jack Leggett the other day. He's the former manager for Clemson and now a USA Baseball guy. He seems like a wonderful person. His philosophies are very compelling. About moving runners over, getting the extra bases, situational hitting, bunting, running. All wonderful stuff that is now passe. I felt bad for the guy. He clearly wants to get back into running a program, and he's had a ton of success, but he's not interested in hitters that K a lot, and is only mildly interested in launch angles. It seemed to me that he might not know what he doesn't know. His methods have tremendous value and have achieved tremendous success, but they're not inclusive of how to differentiate value from a statistical perspective, which means that he's probably teaching some guys to hit to the right side to move the runner over instead of letting him hit for power. Well, it seems like he's no longer wanted as a program manager. It's really a sea change from where the game was a decade ago. I felt bad for the guy. I wonder how similar he is to Buck.

Anyone know if a modern SABR type person has written about the best non-hall inductees? That would be an interesting read and would likely resuscitate the case for a few guys like Grich and Whitaker.

And he had the jump throw for balls in the 6 hole. That was fancy.

Interesting use of quotation marks.

If you believe BB reference, yes, his defense was pretty terrible. Jeter won 4 gold gloves. During those seasons, his dWAR was -.3, -1.8, -.7 and 1.1. Over his entire career, he had a -8.3 dWAR. He had only 3 years with a positive dWAR and one where it was 0.0. That means he had 16 seasons with a negative dWAR. For comparison, Omar Vizquel had a career 29.5 dWAR, one season of which was negative. Ripken's career dWAR was 35.7, and he never had a season with a negative dWAR.

It's slow this time of year.

You can't call teams naive if the only real solution to prevent it requires more (e.g., electronic) than has ever been historically done. Remember, we're in place where people are trying to speed up the game. Mound visits by catchers are limited. The idea that you have an extra person in the stands, for example, is completely untenable without electronic support (and the fact that person would eventually be identified and surveiled as well). And catchers already have alternative signals (e.g., hand on knee, fixing helmet). They've been doing that stuff forever from at least the college level up. This is all manageable with people on base, but to have to perpetually use "alternative" coding systems to prevent real-time spying is absurd both practically and from a spirit of the game perspective. It would be like allowing the opposing team to mic up the offensive coordinator in football so they know every play that's coming before it comes. Just because computers allow people to do that, doesn't mean it should be in any way allowable or accepted.

Has a decent bat.

I get your point, but it's likely that they go through a post season reassessment of each team's rankings. My guess is the new list Frobby referenced will reflect that assessment rather than what was likely an end of year update.

I agree with the rest of your post, but disagree with this conclusion. First, there was a written rule against these actions, at least at some point during the process. So everyone who broke the written rule deserves the outrage. Second, while it's naive to think that teams in all sports aren't looking for an edge, it's also fact that these particular activities went far beyond the norm of what was expected or accepted. Real time electronic surveillance is a game changer.

The crazy part is that regardless of all of the talk about his needing time to learn the pitchers, how to better call games, etc., he's still liable to be the best catcher in this organization by a fair amount and that could become pretty clear to the brain trust when they're all in the same place during the spring. It makes me think that he'll be there, but he'll be playing in B games and catching a lot on the back fields.

So you're saying there's a chance? Yes. Part of the "depth" is Akin, Kremer, Lowther, Zimmerman, Wells and likely Baumann (who has the best chance to stick, so may be moved the slowest). Not sure who from that group is a bona fide major leaguer, an opener or an actual worthy starter, but if you told me that by the end of this season, our rotation includes Means, Lowther and Baumann, I wouldn't be shocked or too disappointed.

Well, the other option is to declare that it's all allowable and it's up to the other team to prevent it. I'm personally of the opinion that fewer rules and more transparency is generally a better way to run things. In that case, everyone would have the cheating equipment and would be forced to manage the pitching game in a way that prevents cheating, or even takes advantage of it (make them think one thing is coming at a big spot but go another route). That would likely be followed by electronic pitch calling though, which might have to come from the dug out, which would change the C position forever.

I understand everyone's emotions about going after players, but you need written rules first. It's really not that hard. You can go after people who did things in the past against the written rules to make you feel better, but you pick a huge fight with the union. You really only deter future behavior if you make explicit rules and punishments that go to the players, coaches, etc.

More like a cutter or curve ball, to me. A circle change would be supported more by his middle, ring and pinky fingers.

1. This shouldn't be forgotten. Davis could get cut in spring training or during this season. 2. I really don't see much of a reason that Cobb can't be at least as good as Bundy. It doesn't take that much. 3. The lowest hanging fruit might be MLBs crackdown on sign stealing. We probably have 3 of the worst offenders in our division alone. Not as many obvious tankers this year. We could be a little better and still end up #1.

His meteoric rise has caught my attention over the years. Same with others, from many teams. I did see this, for 2017: Altuve OPS: Home = .834, Away = 1.081 Bregman OPS: Home = .787, Away = .863 Not exactly what you would expect to see if they were using this method a lot. Maybe it was focused on high-leverage games? Lol re: those terrible excuses.

You have to wonder how close-minded Buck is. Seems to me that virtually nobody is as closed-minded as he's being portrayed.

He may have run away from that org just in time to save face.

This whole episode has been eye-opening for me. Now I realize that teams really need to have multiple play books for catchers. Even if the real-time part is no longer an issue, you still have the potential for guys on base to steal signs and relay it to the hitter with the benefit of video replay scouting. And re: the above tweet, it makes a lot of sense that the Yankees would be in on something like this. When you see guys like Urshela, Tauchman, Maybin and Hicks suddenly hitting like they never have before, it raises red flags. I know I jumped to the conclusion that they were peddling something like steroids, but now I think they may have had better information on pitches that are coming. That information might have been perfectly legit, analytics based stuff. I don't know. I just know that I've envied their ability to get guys to way over perform.

Someone here probably knows better than me, but I think (and this is true across sports) that making a distinction without a real difference is the issue. Toronto was going to ask him to do a very similar job, though with more stated authority. That's why the O's would have filed a grievance, etc.

I'd take that bet. It'll be as something like a bench coach first though. Doubt he jumps right into being a Manager again.

Not really.