O's Agree To Terms w/Davies

[csgordos]

Is it reasonable though, to assume that a high school aged player has not yet reached his full physical maturity and may develop more over the next several years? I find it interesting that many of the reports about Bundy seem to indicate that he's at or near his physical peak due to his training methods and work ethic while other high school players seem to still have room for physical development.

Taking an educated guess about this issue: I would venture that many athletes (especially >10 years ago) didn't know anything about proper training in highschool. The idea was/is that when put in a professional organization and placed on a better diet and workout regimine that the athlete could make gains in regards to speed (running or throwing), power, endurance, etc. With the spread of the internet and high school athletic training (and the big money that comes from college scholarships) it is possible that there is little that can be added at the professional organizations that the athlete doesn't already get prior to being drafted. Now even the pros go to Arizona, CA, and FLA for specialized training during the offseason. The male athlete peaks at around age 27-28 so there is always room for growth. But, my guess on the difference between the idea that Player A vs. Player B making future gains would involve scenarios such as I layed out above with one athlete coming from a "poor" area in regards to training education vs. somebody who has had all the tools available from an early age. Stotle may be able to answer this question more directly than myself.

[Stotle]

Taking an educated guess about this issue: I would venture that many athletes (especially >10 years ago) didn't know anything about proper training in highschool. The idea was/is that when put in a professional organization and placed on a better diet and workout regimine that the athlete could make gains in regards to speed (running or throwing), power, endurance, etc. With the spread of the internet and high school athletic training (and the big money that comes from college scholarships) it is possible that there is little that can be added at the professional organizations that the athlete doesn't already get prior to being drafted. Now even the pros go to Arizona, CA, and FLA for specialized training during the offseason. The male athlete peaks at around age 27-28 so there is always room for growth. But, my guess on the difference between the idea that Player A vs. Player B making future gains would involve scenarios such as I layed out above with one athlete coming from a "poor" area in regards to training education vs. somebody who has had all the tools available from an early age. Stotle may be able to answer this question more directly than myself.

It's as simple as "there are some situations where projectability could reasonably add velo, and some situations where it is unlikely to." There are a multitude of factors that go into that calculation, some of which are readily observable and some of which require the evaluator to make an educated guess. Maybe Tony knows what Baltimore's evaluation is for Davies, and whether they consider increased velocity to be a factor in his OFP. I don't have any access to the scout who made the signing, or to Mr. Jordan.

[jgdomino]

Looking at it objectively I agree! As I state dpreviouosly, "time will tell".

Watch out Stotle!! jgdomino might start questioning your opinion because you don't agree with him!! LOL

Its not bashing an opinion. It is bashing a frame of mind. To say that a 17 year old kid is this or that is asinine. Do the odds say he turns out to be nothing more than an organizational pitcher and we spent 575k on that filler. YES. But why bash the organization for taking a chance on a kid, when there are nine million other threads on this board about how the Orioles don't take chances on kids. Just because it is not who or whom others want them to take a chance on is irrelevant. My comment was mainly to point out the over reaction to an insignificant event that has no negative effect on the organization or Joe Jordan's future.

[NCRaven]

Its not bashing an opinion. It is bashing a frame of mind. To say that a 17 year old kid is this or that is asinine. Do the odds say he turns out to be nothing more than an organizational pitcher and we spent 575k on that filler. YES. But why bash the organization for taking a chance on a kid, when there are nine million other threads on this board about how the Orioles don't take chances on kids. Just because it is not who or whom others want them to take a chance on is irrelevant. My comment was mainly to point out the over reaction to an insignificant event that has no negative effect on the organization or Joe Jordan's future.

To "say that a 17 year old kid is this or that" is exactly what scouts are paid to do. You don't draft a 17 year based on what he is today, but what you think he'll be when he's 22 years old and ready (hopefully) to compete for a major league roster spot.

[jgdomino]

To "say that a 17 year old kid is this or that" is exactly what scouts are paid to do. You don't draft a 17 year based on what he is today, but what you think he'll be when he's 22 years old and ready (hopefully) to compete for a major league roster spot.[/quote

Big difference between a scout (who obviously thinks he will add some velocity in this scenario to warrant that bonus) and message board posters. Our job is to take what we are given with a grain of salt and Judge the results. the last 14 years = poor but at least drafting and development wise with an upward tick.

[Can_of_corn]

Also signed to a 2012 contract.

From Steve Melewski via twitter.

[Stotle]

Big difference between a scout (who obviously thinks he will add some velocity in this scenario to warrant that bonus) and message board posters. Our job is to take what we are given with a grain of salt and Judge the results. the last 14 years = poor but at least drafting and development wise with an upward tick.

Would be true if "scout opinion" was one sided. Lots of scouts don't see much potential for uptick in velo. Time will tell, of course.

[Tony-OH]

Would be true if "scout opinion" was one sided. Lots of scouts don't see much potential for uptick in velo. Time will tell, of course.

Yep. Apparently the Orioles saw something here and when I talk with Joe in the next few days I'll find out what they saw. My guess is they think he can become an excellent pitch ability guy, not a guy they think is going to end up with outstanding velocity. I'm sure they expect some uptick in velocity, but whatever they saw it was enough for them to commit late 2nd round money against. I do remember Joe telling me they liked him a lot right after they drafted him along with Reyes, but he didn't think he was going to get Reyes (and he didn't).

[Tony-OH]

I talked to Joe last night about Davies and especially the comment that he threw 84-86 MPH. He laughed and said "I'm not good enough to give that kind of money to a kid throwing 84-86." Jordan said he and his scouts have seen him up to 92-93 and he's already a pitchability guy with three pitches. He's not going to be a guy with a huge fastball most likely, but they obviously feel he's got enough velocity to be a major league starter and certainly has the command and offspeed pitches. Time will tell of course, but I thought it was interesting that the Orioles have him at a much higher velocity than some other readings we've read about.

[bobmc]

I talked to Joe last night about Davies and especially the comment that he threw 84-86 MPH. He laughed and said "I'm not good enough to give that kind of money to a kid throwing 84-86." Jordan said he and his scouts have seen him up to 92-93 and he's already a pitchability guy with three pitches. He's not going to be a guy with a huge fastball most likely, but they obviously feel he's got enough velocity to be a major league starter and certainly has the command and offspeed pitches. Time will tell of course, but I though it was interesting that the Orioles have him at a much higher velocity than some other readings we've read about.

Thanks Tony for all of the updates recently! Any word on how the fall instructionals will go - there or in Sota? Will Zach be going to 'sota to "hook up" with Jason, Nicky and Dylan. What sort of things do they do at first - just orientation? Is there a formal schedule for these guys or do they just blend in with the GCL guys? Anything you have is appreciated!

[Tony-OH]

Thanks Tony for all of the updates recently! Any word on how the fall instructionals will go - there or in Sota? Will Zach be going to 'sota to "hook up" with Jason, Nicky and Dylan. What sort of things do they do at first - just orientation? Is there a formal schedule for these guys or do they just blend in with the GCL guys? Anything you have is appreciated!

I'll see what I can find out Bob.

[Murray#1]

I talked to Joe last night about Davies and especially the comment that he threw 84-86 MPH. He laughed and said "I'm not good enough to give that kind of money to a kid throwing 84-86." Jordan said he and his scouts have seen him up to 92-93 and he's already a pitchability guy with three pitches. He's not going to be a guy with a huge fastball most likely, but they obviously feel he's got enough velocity to be a major league starter and certainly has the command and offspeed pitches. Time will tell of course, but I though it was interesting that the Orioles have him at a much higher velocity than some other readings we've read about.

I obviously have no real knowledge on this subject, but when I read that I couldn't help but think of Hobgood. I hope our guys are right this time.

[Stotle]

Time will tell of course, but I though it was interesting that the Orioles have him at a much higher velocity than some other readings we've read about.

I had him as high as 90 but only in a one inning appearance.

[Tony-OH]

I had him as high as 90 but only in a one inning appearance.

Joe said he needs to get physically stronger and they think he will. Perhaps that's why they think he'll be able to hold his "up to" range a bit more in the future. Tell you what though. There's nothing wrong with starting off with a pitchability guy, especially if you thik in the end he can end up with a an average MLB fastball.

Considering the Orioles didn't draft a ton of these kinds of guys, I'm glad they got him into the system. Joe didn't say it outright, but I still think they didn't draft a few more of these guys because they though Bundy was going cost more then he ended up costing.

[Stotle]

Joe said he needs to get physically stronger and they think he will. Perhaps that's why they think he'll be able to hold his "up to" range a bit more in the future. Tell you what though. There's nothing wrong with starting off with a pitchability guy, especially if you thik in the end he can end up with a an average MLB fastball.

Considering the Orioles didn't draft a ton of these kinds of guys, I'm glad they got him into the system. Joe didn't say it outright, but I still think they didn't draft a few more of these guys because they though Bundy was going cost more then he ended up costing.

I have no issue with Davies as a player. The bonus is higher than I'd personally recommend for a kid I'm writing up for my org, but that's just personal preference (and the fact my org has a "big body, big velo" focus). I also agree that it's good for Baltimore to bring in a strikethrower -- that hasn't historically been the strength of the system, if memory serves.

I think your last sentence sounds right on, and is something that could hopefully be addressed with the new CBA if we can get the signing deadline moved up 4-6 weeks.