Spl51
-
Posts
273 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Spl51
-
-
Every time I watch Leiter, he looks like 1.1 to me over Rocker, but then I consider that he's 6' and mostly sits 89-92 and I get scared. No one seems to be able to get good contact on him even at that speed, obviously his spin metrics and extension must be elite.
-
Just now, Roll Tide said:
It wasn’t speculation... he was generally rated around the tenth slot on most scouting boards. If you think that Kjerstad was the Orioles top rated player at #2, this is just a wasted conversation. I can buy he was drafted so that Elias could overpay guys not to go to college later in the draft. I believe that is what was done! Even if I don’t like the approach.
HAHA I guess this conversation is done because you can't even read. You seem truly obsessed with this decision based on the amount of time and energy you have spent writing about this.
-
15 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:
He likely was..... It was rumored that they would/were drafting below slot early so they could overpay on the High Schoolers later in the draft.
It's crazy how you act like him being underslotted is breaking news. Picture this scenario: Torkelson is tier one on their board, then they have Martin, Gonzales, Lacy, and Kjerstad as virtual ties in the next tier. One or two could be very slightly higher or lower due to organizational need. If one of those players gives a lower price that means you can get extra value later on in the draft. This is not rocket science, it's all about value. You saying he likely was 7 or lower is pure speculation and really doesn't make sense.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:
7th isn’t 2nd! That’s my point so I appreciate your assistance. There were at least 6 better rated prospects including Martin. The only one they couldn’t get is Torkelson
Damn, I guess they should just take whoever averages out to be 2nd over all the public boards. Why even scout the players? I'm sure Kjerstad was 7th on THEIR board like you are saying.
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:
Kjerstad made is way up to the 10th ranked player on most of the scouting boards. Show me just one that had him ranked 2nd. He was definitely a reach at #2
https://www.fangraphs.com/prospects/the-board/2020-mlb-draft/summary?sort=-1,1&type=0&team=
He was 7th on fangraphs, in the same 50 fv tier as everyone in the top 7 but Torkelson.
-
3
-
-
https://www.prospectslive.com/mlb-draft/2020/6/15/prospects-live-in-depth-mlb-draft-grades
QuoteOne little tidbit, I’ve been told by a source close to the Orioles organization that Bryce Jarvis was the arm the Orioles hoped fell to 30, and that they had no interest in Bitsko. Take that for what it’s worth but it’s an interesting tidbit.
Interesting.
-
3
-
-
3 minutes ago, ChuckS said:
Mountcastle over Kjerstad though it's close. I rather have a power bat that is Major League ready than one who has to make his way through the entire minor league system. Kjerstad's arm might give him a leg on Mountcastle defensively. Both project as power hitting corner outfielders so I don't see Kjerstad having that much more upside. Kjerstad as our no. 5 prospect seems about right for now.
Kjerstad has much better plate discipline, better hit tool, better power, and better arm. Agree with you the other comparisons.
-
1
-
-
Man do I really not understand why Keith Law's opinion carries such weight with people.
-
4
-
-
2 hours ago, OrioleDog said:
My toss-up guesses vs. the OH list:
Let's battle - who would you rather have in your system?
Opening lines:
wOBA: Kjerstad v. (4) Mountcastle
SP4: Baumler v. (8) Lowther
3B: Mayo v. (9) Gunnar
2B: Westburg v. (16/17 Hernaiz/Adam Hall)
CF: Haskin v. (19) McKenna
IF5: Servideo v. (21) Bannon
Kjerstad
Lowther for sure has way more of a chance to provide value, but personally I'm an upside guy and I would rather have Baumler. This is who I'd rather have, not a ranking.
Gunnar right now
This one is hard, there really is not enough info for me to pick. Maybe Westburg, but it's close.
Haskin
Servideo
-
1
-
-
https://2080baseball.com/2020/06/21-names-to-know-for-the-2021-mlb-draft/
Rocker and Brady House are my guys right now.
-
Doin' work vs Detmers, hitting bombs to center.
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, atomic said:
Compare him to someone more realistic. Greinke was drafted out of high school number 6 overall. So he is surely a bad comparison. I mean I am not sure why you are arguing this point. I have never heard a guy drafted in the fifth round compared to a Hall of Fame type player who was drafted that high out of high school.
Comps are not based on expected outcomes. How many times must this be said? Comps are used to give you a feel for the type of player they are or could be. Here's how I interpreted that comp:
Baumler is a thin projectable high school pitcher, with precocious command, who has a more athletic delivery and body. That's it.
-
3
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:
You are hilarious. You are so over the top that I can almost see you seething. I like your passion, but it's so misguided at times. Like your hate for the best quarterback and player in football last year. You see what you want to see, but you need to learn to be more open to other opinions and ideas and also realize you may be proven wrong and then accept that.
This is something I've definitely learned a lot as I've gotten older, the internet is really good at amplifying and reinforcing our anger. Recognizing when your brain has basically closed you off to new perspectives is really hard, but it's really easy to see in others when you take a step back.
-
2
-
-
He has really good command already, especially for a high school pitcher, with a ton of projection remaining. Breaking ball was pretty inconsistent, but I need more looks.
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, Number5 said:
Before the draft started MLB network did a segment on Kjerstad. Seems like an impressive young man. He mentioned how his adjustments to his swing had paid off and was excited.
Martin's coach at Vanderbilt was part of MLB network's broadcast team and just as the draft was about to start he was asked what players he thought we should look for in the draft and the first name he said was Kjerstad. When the Orioles drafted Kjerstad, he said it was a great pick and that the Orioles are going to have to replace a lot of windows in the warehouse. I was looking for Martin, Lacy, or Gonzales at #2, and didn't really know much about Kjerstad before the draft, but I've got to say I'm warming to the guy and maybe some of us aren't willing to consider the possibility that the guy might just be a gem.
Interviewed the day before the draft, Elias said he would only go under-slot at #2 if the Orioles had the guy rated as good, or even secretly rated him better, than the players that the various sites had rated at that spot. He went on the say that if that allows us financial leverage later in the draft, so much the better. Well, it looks like that's exactly what they did. I have to admit, I thought "later in the draft" meant pick #30 and/or 39, but now we know he meant much later.
I've got no real issue with the players we selected in rounds 1A, 2, and 3, per se, as they are reasonable picks for when they were taken. My question in those cases wasn't who we took, but rather why we didn't go under-slot there. We found out later, of course, that Elias had a plan in rounds 4 and 5.
Had we grabbed a guy like Kelley at #30 or 39, maybe there would be less vitriol over the pick of Kjerstad. Or maybe even Wilcox in round 3. I'm not sure why we didn't, but Elias and his team seem excited by the kids we got in rounds 4 and 5, so I hope they are right. I was looking at the possibility of Montgomery and Witt in those 2 late rounds, as they were still there and, in fact, went undrafted. My guess is that perhaps those two were just plain unsignable and had decided that they were going to school.
Too soon to make a real judgment, of course, but I'm going to go with a B. Had we gone with Kelley or Wilcox as an over-slot when presented with the opportunities to do so, I'd have been really happy. As it stands, I'm happy, but I'm just not quite as comfortable with the over-slot guys we did get. I hope they change my mind!
Kelley and Wilcox are the opposite of the type of pitchers Elias wants, so I wasn't surprised. Low 3/4 delivery's with little deception, just average breaking balls, and low spin rates, leading them to get hit more than you would expect with their velocities. Bitsko was his target.
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:
Great ...so they drafted 2 RF or a RF and a DH! I'm more excited now .... Rolls Eyes!
Have you watched Kjerstad play defense? He's not a DH by any stretch. Reminds me a lot of Aaron Judge. Huge arm, seriously it's plus plus. He's surprisingly fast, but he's a big guy so his routes look a little awkward. Traditional right field profile in a really good way.
-
2
-
-
I'm whelmed by this draft, but it obviously remains to be seen how this draft will look in 2-3 years. Only thing that kinda sucks is that Bitsko got poached by the Rays.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, dbmillertime said:
How would opinions be on the current draftees if Luke-OH had done evaluations showing the selected players as top on his list? If he had mocked the players that have been selected, would you be more optimistic? Searching for a glimmer of hope....
I see the thinking with these picks. It's pretty much all about analytics, high exit velocities. It's just hard to get excited about it. They don't wow you from a scouting perspective.
-
But like... where is...the money going...?
-
Just now, weams said:
Absolutely. Cedric Mullins, McKenna, probably Stewart...
...Grenier, Akin, Ortiz....
-
Okay I have no problems with the picks, I just don't know what they are saving money for.
-
Let's just say this isn't a traditional scouting draft class. Obviously there's stuff that we don't know about.
-
55 minutes ago, jabba72 said:
Does anyone think that Luke was heavily involved in scouting these two picks? Im willing to give the FO the benefit seeing as they use the most state of the art methods to scouting amateurs. Obviously they think Kjerstad his a very high ceiling. I'd really like to hear from Luke about this.
Luke actually retweeted this tweet yesterday:
-
1
-
-
Watch everything from 2:20 on. Hitting 97. That change is a 60-70, and his breaking ball flashes plus.
-
3
-
O's lose practice game 6-to-4 after rain shortens
in Orioles Talk
Posted
Are people actually deluded enough to think Davis is anything but a complete waste of a roster spot who's going to inevitably be worth negative WAR? I'm not mad about it at this point, since there's no reason to get rid of him yet. I've accepted it.