LookinUp

Yeah, I'm more referring to ceiling. As I said in my last post, I'm a big believer in player development. I see a great ceiling in everyone. I see things through orange colored glasses. Tony's more reasonable with his ceiling projections. Let's all hope that Elias' player development apparatus makes Tony re-think ceiling. That would be awesome.

Right. I'm personally a big believer in player development after watching some kids for a few years. I see kids who are off and need a new approach, or to upgrade physicality, and then really take off. I see other kids that are really successful and don't really have to work for it. Those kids have a lot to gain through harder work/smarter work. For a guy like Willems, I have to wonder if he'd fit into that latter group where his results kind of came easy. If so, it argues (to me) that he could be the type to really explode. That's just conjecture though, but a worthy example of how really any guy could theoretically come out of nowhere, get exposed to better data, coaching, physical growth, etc., and really exceed what's currently perceived as his ceiling.

I do love where Westburg, Ortiz and Henderson are in relation to another. Kind of mirrors their prospect status.

I'd argue that Tony's ceiling grades are conservative in general, but appropriately so. Most of these guys aren't going to be Jamie Moyer or John Means and exceed what would look like a realistic ceiling. On the other hand, some will, and that means Tony would be wrong. But he can only do what he can do. Chances are that some young guy in this org right now will exceed the ceiling that Tony estimates. Chances are that 95% won't even get there, much less exceed the ceiling.

In fairness, you didn't think Mayo was Mayo before last year. That's why we have to be patient. My guess is this kid is in the process of working hard on his fitness and agility. Add to that a very strong arm and prodigious power and his simplified profile isn't massively different than Mayo's. With that said, I know you were highly impressed by Mayo and that's not likely to happen very often, much less with this guy. Still, they drafted him for the exit velocity and (I assume) strong arm. Those are tools that if nurtured will result in this kid rising up boards once he gets a full season under his belt.

All of these young and/or inexperienced guys can go anywhere. Projections are based on old scouting reports, small sample size and videos. At least with a guy like Haskin, Knight, Watson et al there's more to go on. The real young ones could be diamonds or lumps of coal.

Getting other good starting pitchers does not mean we're giving up on in-house guys. There's plenty of innings to go around and we're not close to filling them with what we have now.

I like both of these picks. The projections are conservative, and I think that’s appropriate. Really nice upside with both guys. Let’s hope they develop.

I don't know much about this kid beyond what Tony has written, but I think the important thing - especially in the 20's - is the profile. This kid has a chance to be a legit cog in this organization. He also has a chance to not progress beyond AA. I get that, but the goal to me is to stockpile a lot of guys like this through your drafts because some will have years like Stowers and maybe turn into better. This guy has a chance to be good. You like that with your #21 prospect.

Funny. When I read it I definitely through of Tanner Scott. You just have to hope an arm like this can control it enough. If so, he can be effective.

Well, if I just wanted them for veteranocity, I'd pay a lot less for some old guy. I was referring to guys who would slot in at 1-2 in our rotation with Means, Rodriguez and someone else as 3-5. I'm talking about guys who would, along with a lineup of Mullins, Hays, Mountcastle, Mancini, Rutschman, Stowers and late this year or early next year infield reinforcements, make us exciting and somewhat competitive. I'm talking about on field talent, some leadership AND the O's version of Jayson Werth as it relates to signaling the fans that now is the time. I'm just walking through my pipe dream. I do think it's a more reasonable scenario (though still unlikely) when you're sure that two of your infielders are ML ready to be real contributors in addition to everything else, so this offseason doesn't exactly add up. I get that.

Sure there are. First, neither is as valuable as GRod, but Meyer is damn valuable and that's hard to give up. Absent throw ins, I could see a 1:1 type deal for him and Mullins and that's if the Marlins really love Mullins. Now you figure out what it takes to get another guy for 3 years. That's a lot, I think.

I don't get the sense that Tony's as high on them as some others are. It would be really interesting to see where they might fit in a list 2-3 years ago versus now. There's still Rhodes, Trimble, Haskin, Willems, Bautista, Young, Craig, Deson, Williams, Hernaiz, Mundy, Servideo and at least a couple of DSL guys that are worth keeping an eye on. I'm not saying most of these guys will pan out, but several at least have a chance. I mean, who knows what Trendon Craig will turn into? But he was picked over slot, came with some hype and got invited to instructionals. That's interesting at least.

Just to rehash, I've talked about Grienke and Scherzer, not exactly the next Matt Harvey. I also said it's not happening. Just an approach I'd personally take if I were the O's. This is all academic. Not realistic at all. We aren't signing the type of veteran SP I'd want us to.

No. I agree with your perspective on this one. This is really the way we would have to look at it. I think we're underselling what we'd be getting back and that means to actually make a trade like this our offer would have to go higher. And that higher offer would likely have to include guys like above.

In fairness, I might be Willems' biggest fan. lol There's also a lot of guys in that 10-25 range that are more significant than the two I picked. What if 1 was Basallo and the other Bradish, for example? Or Rom? I'm not necessarily talking about fit because I haven't looked at who the Marlins would want, but if they wanted our two highest upside international guys, I'd argue that's substantial.

Part of the why is your answer...we have a whole lot of flotsam and jetsam. If you bring in two really good players, they're not blocking anyone. They're most likely letting those other guys settle into where they actually fit. I'm also not sure I'd use the word ethereal, but maybe I need to look it up. I think there's a lot to learn from experience and this org has very little of it in the coaching or the players. I like what SF did this year. Not our model, for sure, but there's something to be said for having baseball lifers who know how to have ABs against great pitching, and know how to pitch to today's awesome hitters, right next to you on the bench or in the dugout. Either way, it's an academic discussion at best. I don't own the team. The Angelos family does. They'll likely just wait another year before investing in FA talent.

Mullins, Santander + 2 guys in our 10-25 range for both of those SP. So Mullins, Santander, Vavra, Willems, for example.

I remember thinking this guy could be the best of the bunch. So disappointing that he never recovered from injury. He had a short, but electric, stretch IIRC.

I never know how to predict how these things will unfold. The only predictable part is the posturing before deadlines. That's why they set the deadlines, because nobody moves until then. It's hard for me to believe they'd lock up in the aftermath of Covid, but it's also not so hard for me to believe that they don't think April/May are that profitable so it'd be ok.

Yeah, I just don't think he'll be valued as a 4+ WAR player, last year notwithstanding. Still, you go get really good arms when you can. We have a lot of guys that we could put in a deal for two arms like this. I'd happily start with Mullins and consider adding from there.

I like this guy some. Feels like he could come up and be an impact bench type of player. Maybe more valuable in the NL for that reason. I knew that his defense wasn't his strength, but wasn't aware of his L/R split issues and historical injury issues. Those knock him down a tier for me. Seems like he carries a lot of risk of reaching his potential. I'm really curious to see what you say about a bunch of guys from the last draft (or 2) and a couple more international guys. I honestly can't believe how many guys I still really look forward to reading about at this point.

I feel like we'd have to add to that trade and probably significantly. Santander just isn't that valuable. I'd do it in a heartbeat though.

Really sorry this kid got injured because he was playing very well. He's higher on my personal list than Tony has him here. I feel like if we were an org that didn't have Henderson, Westburg and Mayo ticketed as the future infield, Ortiz would be penciled in as a future SS or starting 2B. Obviously the bat has to pan out, but it was starting to this year. Don't get me wrong, I'd definitely put him behind the other three, but I'd have started to consider him as high as #10 on our list. That's just me.

If you were to spend a lot of money on a FA, generally speaking, would you be more comfortable signing a starting pitcher or an outfielder? I ask because it'd be the latter for me and I think spending needs to be considered something that's happening for sure in the next 2-3 years. Given that, I'm trading guys like Mullins at peak value for arms and buying replacement position players on the FA market, to the extent we don't have them in-house.