LookinUp

I think he show boated that grounder to first and Hyde said something. That’s my guess.

Luke already sort of addressed your point... I doubt the O's promote him to the majors if they doubt his health. On talent alone, an even less effective Akin probably still has a place on expanded rosters in September.

Thanks Tony/Luke. Really helps me understand what to expect from Akin in terms of what's possible.

Just curious, in scouting, do you guard against a recency bias or otherwise try to account for it? I ask because it seems like you're saying his early 2019 stuff was higher caliber and you're projecting based on his more current stuff. I'm genuinely asking how to weigh these factors. As a fan, I want to believe that his April stuff is the real guy moving forward, and he's just going through something like a dead arm period now. As an evaluator, I have no idea what I'd think, lol.

Agree. I suspect this is pretty consistently true across the system, though I imagine there are variations in an individual's development plan.

It's a very refreshing article, IMO. Part of it is our organization has the benefit of time. There's no more aggressive approach to prospects that would turn this year's team into a winner, so take your time with these guys and work with them on what's important in the minors. I do like that they're willing to take lumps in terms of wins and losses, or ERA, or WHIP, in the minors. They know that they're essentially asking him to change his approach so he can hopefully have more success moving forward. It's hard to change what has worked for you over the last however many years.

This is about minor league pitching development, but I think it's great reading on the Orioles Talk board. Mods, feel free to move if you'd like. I highly recommend the full article, which is here: https://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/bs-sp-orioles-minors-keegan-akin-20190807-bgg54gmvqbgi7e5ku63da4scr4-story.html

And they may have a pressing need in the middle of a pennant race. Really apples and oranges how a team in year 1/2 of a rebuild should develop talent, IMO.

That OBP jumps off the page.

The crazy part to me is it seems like his fastball and change both took steps down in quality from when he was drafted. I was under the impression that change up was a game changer. It turned out to be a game changer, but not in the way we had hoped.

We didn't realize at the time that it was 2 salary dumps, not one.

I think this season is all about implementing our systems and coaching processes throughout the organization. The results are encouraging because performance is up across the organization. Over time, with better players and a talent pipeline that includes international players, this should result in consistent winning.

I basically agree with wildbill. Houston has been able to make those trades because they have a very deep farm system. At the same time, if you can settle on most of your position players, it's easier to trade away prospects. It's harder to trade pitching because you go through so many. It's almost impossible to have too much pitching in any system.

Wow. 30-13 is only good for 2nd place for Bowie? That's crazy. Their winning % is slightly better than Delmarva's crazy successful first half (.697 v .695).

If his OPS is .780 in August and September, he’s our SS of the future. That’s a big leap from 40 PAs though. Of course, he’ll have no chance if his B.A.C. Is .16%, lol.

You could even argue he’s the most likely. There’s little doubt his bat would play right now.

I'd wager the answer is yes, but not with the same amount of information.

I don't think they cut him until spring training next year. After game 162 this year, they're not really paying him until game #1 next year. Might as well give ownership the carrot that we're giving him every chance to succeed.

I think we have to think beyond stage 1 to realize just how this approach helps with player development. All they said was we scout other teams better. What's next? 1. They're much better informed about how to see hitter tendencies and attack weaknesses. 2. They pitch much more to the available strengths (e.g., away from hitter strengths). 3. To the extent weaknesses of hitters don't align with strengths of pitchers, they need to know that and work on how to attack those weaknesses. I really think what comes across as a throwaway line about better scouting is key to better preparing our pitchers to face all types of hitters. It's so much smarter than an "aim for the corners" philosophy.

So it was worth pointing out that not putting them on our 40 man does not mean we're cutting them or that they are put on waivers.

Nice find!

Maybe the thread has changed topics, but it seems to me like you're moving the goal posts. The thread title talks about next year's 40 man roster. We can expose many guys to the Rule V draft and still have their control next year without keeping them on the 40 man roster. I don't think the topic is at all about guys clearing waivers, as you're now saying it is. Like I said, maybe the thread took another turn in the last page or two, but that's not what the title says.

Not putting a guy on the 40 man roster doesn't mean 1) we'll lose them or 2) that we're giving up on them. All it means is we're willing to risk losing them* because someone else became available that we'd rather have. It would be a great sign to have to not promote 10 of our guys. That means we've identified 10 other guys that Elias would rather have. *and to be clear, the risk of losing most of them is the risk that another team is willing to stash them on their own ML roster for a full season.

Would be a major pleasant surprise for me. I don't think I loved the pick at the time. It would be awesome if he's a nugget.