Dan Klein for Teagarden?

[BaltimoreTerp]

I have nothing to add to this thread except...

We're like an angsty shark. When we stop *****ing, we die.

..."The Angsty Sharks" would be a great name for a band.

[eb45]

That's because the pool of "pure relief prospects" who are actually prospects is almost always small, particularly at low levels. Most of the people who will actually be relievers in MLB are probably starting right now.

I would venture to say that the heuristic approach of acknowledging that a sub-AA pure relief prospect isn't a big loss may [only may] be more accurate than what you've done above. Sometimes distance allows us to see things more clearly.

I agree that most minor league relievers are not prospects, when you consider that "minor league reliever" is generally a synonym for "ineffective starter," and if the Orioles had traded someone who actually fit that mold, like a Sean Gleason or Tim Bascom, it would not have been a loss. However, when you're dealing with individuals (like we are right now), heuristic approaches are not the best way to go.

Henry, in my opinion, is the rare sub-AA reliever who is actually a prospect, because 1. he has multiple effective pitches, 2. he's not a failed starter (i.e. he could start if not for concerns about his arm), 3. he keeps the walks down.

And then there's the part where he'll be 22 this season and I think trading him for a backup catcher is pretty foolish.

[erb8472]

I'm guessing Texas would want a little bit more included in this deal.

[Sports Guy]

I agree that most minor league relievers are not prospects, when you consider that "minor league reliever" is generally a synonym for "ineffective starter," and if the Orioles had traded someone who actually fit that mold, like a Sean Gleason or Tim Bascom, it would not have been a loss. However, when you're dealing with individuals (like we are right now), heuristic approaches are not the best way to go.

Henry, in my opinion, is the rare sub-AA reliever who is actually a prospect, because 1. he has multiple effective pitches, 2. he's not a failed starter (i.e. he could start if not for concerns about his arm), 3. he keeps the walks down.

And then there's the part where he'll be 22 this season and I think trading him for a backup catcher is pretty foolish.

Exactly right...Who cares if he wasn't a failed starter? That means he is going to be less effective as a reliever?

[flashjordnk]

Henry, in my opinion, is the rare sub-AA reliever who is actually a prospect, because ... 2. he's not a failed starter (i.e. he could start if not for concerns about his arm)

So just because we predicted he couldn't crack it as a starter so we never put him there in the first place makes him more valuable? Or are you saying that a guy like Tim Bascom has zero value as a reliever and could only give us value as a starter? I'm just not sure that I 100% buy that just because we bypassed him for a starter in the first place, it gives him any extra value.

I do agree, he's got multiple pitches and he does keep his walks down. But I'm guessing you could find pitchers floating around at any age that don't have a ton of value that are similar. But I'm not necessarily sold that thinking that is correct.

[Lucky Jim]

I agree that most minor league relievers are not prospects, when you consider that "minor league reliever" is generally a synonym for "ineffective starter," and if the Orioles had traded someone who actually fit that mold, like a Sean Gleason or Tim Bascom, it would not have been a loss. However, when you're dealing with individuals (like we are right now), heuristic approaches are not the best way to go.

Henry, in my opinion, is the rare sub-AA reliever who is actually a prospect, because 1. he has multiple effective pitches, 2. he's not a failed starter (i.e. he could start if not for concerns about his arm), 3. he keeps the walks down.

And then there's the part where he'll be 22 this season and I think trading him for a backup catcher is pretty foolish.

I think he's a real prospect, too. The point I made was re: the error in treating him like a rare prospect by studying him in context of the farm system. Which is what you did. He's in rare company but not in a way that elevates his value.

[eb45]

Exactly right...Who cares if he wasn't a failed starter? That means he is going to be less effective as a reliever?

Well, depending on the reasons, yes. If someone fails as a starter in the low minors, it could (and in most cases does) mean they won't have the stuff or command to succeed at higher levels, and they're moved to the bullpen so that they can try and succeed with limited command or arsenal. The thing with Henry is that that isn't the case: he blew out his arm in 2008, got surgery and pitched sparingly in Juco. In 2010 he had some injury issues with scar tissue from the surgery, and in 2011 the Orioles decided not to make him a starter despite the fact that he could have succeeded there. He was also considered (by some) to have first round upside in 2009.

The parallels to Klein are actually pretty striking, only Henry's arsenal was never as deep as Klein's, and he would have taken a lot more development as a starter.

[Sports Guy]

I think he's a real prospect, too. The point I made was re: the error in treating him like a rare prospect by studying him in context of the farm system. Which is what you did. He's in rare company but not in a way that elevates his value.

But what he isn't, at least IMO, is a run of the mill, dime a dozen bp arm like the ones Eb45 mentioned.

[Lucky Jim]

But what he isn't, at least IMO, is a run of the mill, dime a dozen bp arm like the ones Eb45 mentioned.

Did anyone other than EB say he was?

[Sports Guy]

Did anyone other than EB say he was?

People have referred to Henry in that way.

[andrewrickli]

No, we could find a capable back up catcher elsewhere without giving up a guy that has potential and was drafted very high (and who COULD be a starter).

Randy Henry, is easily replaceable....

[DrungoHazewood]

Exactly right...Who cares if he wasn't a failed starter? That means he is going to be less effective as a reliever?

No, it's that pitchers who aren't suited to start in the low minors are less likely to be good enough to pitch at all in the majors. It's kind of like a player who's already shifted down from short to second to third by the time he hits Frederick, and has a narrower window for success at higher levels.

[eb45]

Did anyone other than EB say he was?

I didn't say anything like that, but it seems to be the impression, and while I wouldn't say he's rare, he's certainly more valuable than a Gleason type, and has a significantly greater chance of making it to the majors than someone older or with worse stats. That was the point I was trying to make.

Also, Henry was the ninth-youngest pitcher in the Carolina League, for what that's worth.

Compare him to someone like Trey Haley, another 21 year old reliever with a decent draft pedigree. Which would you rather have, and why?

[eb45]

No, we could find a capable back up catcher elsewhere without giving up a guy that has potential and was drafted very high (and who COULD be a starter).

Randy Henry, is easily replaceable....

I thought you forgot a "not" in the last line until I remembered what thread this was and that you were talking about Klein. Because everything you said about Klein is applicable to Henry as well.

[flashjordnk]

I didn't say anything like that, but it seems to be the impression, and while I wouldn't say he's rare, he's certainly more valuable than a Gleason type, and has a significantly greater chance of making it to the majors than someone older or with worse stats. That was the point I was trying to make.

Also, Henry was the ninth-youngest pitcher in the Carolina League, for what that's worth.

Compare him to someone like Trey Haley, another 21 year old reliever with a decent draft pedigree. Which would you rather have, and why?

You do realize Haley is a failed starter though right? As in they thought his stuff was good enough to play there.

I guess if you don't have any questions about a team drafting a guy in the 4th round as purely a reliever option, that's OK. But honestly isn't that like giving a prospect extra credit because a team did something stupid?

This was SG's response to Henry in the initial draft thread:

Seems like a lot of better talent out there before this guy.

Maybe they feel he would have been rated a lot higher if not for the elbow injury?

This was Frobby's comment with an agreement later in the thread from Stotle:

Yeah, I'd agree. This sounds like a high risk, high reward kind of pick. It seems a bit early to be taking a flier, but Jordan has seen the kid and we haven't.

So if there weren't any plans to move this guy back to starter, I guess it is comparable to a Klein if he didn't start comparison. Why wasn't this guy ever considered good enough to move back to starter?