LookinUp

Luke, I think I learn something new with every one of your posts. There's so much to learn with how this new regime is handling things. It's awesome that you're able to understand what's happening in this organization right now. Here's what I think is a hard question. Do you have any idea if they're focusing on different things at different levels? I'm specifically wondering about the pitching differences between Delmarva and Frederick. I get the general sense that in Delmarva they might be establishing fastballs and changing eye levels, whereas in Frederick (and I assume above) you're seeing more of the work with secondaries.

Is it at all common for guys with the velocity numbers we're seeing to put up these kinds of statistics in the minors? Every now and then we've seen guys pop up with great runs, but this year it seems like a different guy is lighting the world on fire every week. I love it, but I just don't know what to trust anymore, lol. I feel like it has to be smoke and mirrors that will be exposed as they move up, but then I see the guys in AA still doing it and start to wonder.

There are some interesting takes in this thread making the case for McKenna. I'm not sure I buy them all, but I'm not sure I don't either. For example, I'm not sure being better than average when younger than the league is a significant predictor of anything even though I absolutely believe age and performance relative to peers are incredibly important. However, I'd imagine that being in the top quintile, for example, would mean a lot more than being in the top half of a league of players, most of which will never make significant contributions in the majors. So I see that discussion as more of an argument to say he's not a failure as opposed to an argument predicting future success, if that makes sense. Either way, it's clear he's a guy who will have to work to continue to improve as a hitter. That's ok. What I like about him is what even a layman can see. He's got a very athletic build, though small frame, and the natural gift of speed. In other words, I feel like he has some physical traits that most don't have, so he has a chance.

Just curious, how timely are your velocity and/or profile assessments? I had the same question re: a post of yours in the Leo Rodriguez thread. Maybe a better question is how likely are those assessments to have fundamental changes over time? I see some of the numbers guys are putting up seemingly out of nowhere and I just wonder if the cause for the improved results is they've figured out how to add a few ticks of velocity, maybe sharpened secondaries, or whether most of this is just a function of a new pitching coordinator essentially focusing on things like changing eye levels. I honestly don't know what to make of it all. Are the arms in this org suddenly this good or is their instruction just that much better. If it's the latter, that's a real dagger to the old player development regime.

My man. I don’t even know how to respond. I’ll look at this post over the next 12-24 months for real to see what actually happens.

I feel like that’s less than his mid case scenario, which is more like a cup of coffee but never a contributor who really sticks. It is nice for him to have that defensive profile though. That will afford him more opportunities than most get.

1. Great day for these kids. Really life changing in many ways. 2. This is exactly what Elias told us he would do. Hopefully it somewhat quiets the doubters. He’s not lying. Now it’s all about the quality moving forward.

I did a quick twitter search on dylan bundy and saw some posts. Didn't see anything beyond fan speculation.

Chatter? Can you cite it?

I wonder what's possible at this point. Those are extreme numbers.

Yeah, I'm not sure what the issue is. I know he doesn't have an electric arsenal, but I while I know it's a step up from Delmarva to Frederick, the difference for him seems extreme. Hopefully it's dead arm, or he's having to work through an adjustment. Whatever the case, I have a hard time believing he went from totally dominant in A- to middling in A+ because the talent is SOOOO much different. Of course, I could be wrong. No doubt about that.

I imagine Hyde would take the pick of the litter, not the next man up.

Meh. That take is a bit simplistic.

Yup. Or in the 2-3 years prior. I get it.

I understand your conclusion, but if I were completely rebuilding my swing to save myself and my franchise from one of the biggest contractual boondoggles in sports history, I probably wouldn't give a play by play either. Of course, I'd also offer management the opportunity to put me on the DL with an oblique injury while I went about trying to completely re-learn how to hit, and that hasn't happened yet.

Bolded for emphasis. It's not just Elias and Koby saying this.

Does anyone know about when these signings will begin to be announced? (I know tomorrow, but about what time?)

I agree. These taxes seem to really inhibit behavior in many sports, but if I were the owner and there was a talent with a great profile that we could sign if I paid the tax, I'd like to think I'd give the ok to do it.

A buddy of mine saw him yesterday. Said he looked terrible.

Ummm, I think half of the board still hasn't heard of them. Heck, I'm just hearing about Shepard now. I've pointed this out too, but we do play in the AL East. That will be the differentiation, IMO. The Tigers are horrific though, to be sure.

I've gotten to know a member or two of his extended family a very little bit. They're still a little bitter about how things went down from a media perspective. They swear the O's were never really in it. I don't recall if they said we never offered any contract or never offered anything within like $40 million, but my take away was the O's never even really tried so he didn't really have an opportunity to come home whether he wanted to or not.

Our outfield prospects, at any of the 3 spots, are deeply flawed. Mountcastle becomes much more valuable if he can play even an average left field. This is a no brainer move that took too long to make.

I don't think quantity over quality necessarily has to be a bad approach. The trick is getting quality quantity; identifying the right players to target. A lot of the promise of Mike and Sig is that they will be better at getting the right players through the draft, trades, free agency, waivers, and international free agency.

So I went back and looked at the scouting scale. It essentially says a guy with this grade profiles as a bench or up/down guy, both of which are below a utility player. I guess what I don't get is how much projection we need to have to pay this guy $200-$300k. Technically, I get that anything above 0.0 WAR is doing decent from an an 11 round draft pick perspective. However, if I'm the Owner, I don't want to pay that if I don't have some scout or analytic telling me there's a decent chance that, with a few tweaks, he can be a 50-60 player. I mean, is there any chance this guy becomes a Steve Pearce? Are those odds infinitesimal, or are they more like a 5-10% chance of happening? If it's the latter, I understand paying the money.

Between Hall's BB's and Law's comments, it's a bummer reading about two of our top 3 prospects all of the sudden. I guess it's to be expected, at bit. Anyone who isn't an uber prospect will have warts, and they will get called out given all of the attention on these guys. If I were in charge, I'd try to tweak things over time rather than focus on a full breakdown and rebuild of a throwing motion. He has time to work on things.