Talent and Experience

[Stotle]

I think this is one piece of a series of complicated reasons why Matusz had a poor year, but it shouldn't be made out to be the main reason. Also, while obviously you don't want to screw up a pitcher just so he can hold baserunners better, the truth is, Matusz is quite bad at holding them. In 2010, despite our "all world defensive catcher," 17 of 20 runners stole successfully on Matusz. For his career, 34 of 41 have stolen successfully. He should be able to do better than that, and I'd expect the coaches to work with him on it.

There are so many ways for a pitcher to improve on holding runners that don't involve significantly altering mechanics (if that's what they did). Especially for lefties!

[Sports Guy]

I think this is one piece of a series of complicated reasons why Matusz had a poor year, but it shouldn't be made out to be the main reason. Also, while obviously you don't want to screw up a pitcher just so he can hold baserunners better, the truth is, Matusz is quite bad at holding them. In 2010, despite our "all world defensive catcher," 17 of 20 runners stole successfully on Matusz. For his career, 34 of 41 have stolen successfully. He should be able to do better than that, and I'd expect the coaches to work with him on it.

Fine..do better...But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter that much.

Concentrate on avoiding getting the hitters to reach base...You don't do that by screwing up their mechanics.

Even remotely justifying that is incredibly poor.

[DrungoHazewood]

An extra year or two of AAA ball won't hurt someone who is really talented.

If you're really talented you barely spend any time in AAA, except in a few unique cases. I bet if you looked at HOFers from the past 30 years the average player spent half a year in AAA.

[Stotle]

If you're really talented you barely spend any time in AAA, except in a few unique cases. I bet if you looked at HOFers from the past 30 years the average player spent half a year in AAA.

There are varying opinions on this though, right? I mean, developmentally speaking? Some orgs have recently been pushing more Triple-A time as one aspect of succesfully developing players. Tampa is probably the most well known org, is this regard.

[LookinUp]

I'm actually disappointed in Frobby in this thread for the dumbest possible reason having nothing to do with his actual responses. I was sure he would do one of his useful Frobby mini-studies pointing out that three years before 1997, Cal, Alomar et al had already demonstrated incredible talent well-beyond the player mix on this current team.

In a nutshell, I'm sure MrOrange was right when he said the upshot of this team is that we have neither the talent nor the experience. The good news is that we do have some talent that should grow with more experience. The bad news is that this team will need to be supplemented at some point with a real talent, infusion, and it's highly questionable whether we have the ability to add that talent right now.

[DrungoHazewood]

There are varying opinions on this though, right? I mean, developmentally speaking? Some orgs have recently been pushing more Triple-A time as one aspect of succesfully developing players. Tampa is probably the most well known org, is this regard.

I'm sure there are varying opinions on this, but even the Rays have their top talent rocket through the system. Longoria had 31 AAA games, and even that was 100% driven by service time and salary concerns. He would have had zero otherwise. If not for service time David Price would have had 18 AAA innings, and as it was he has 52.

[33rdst]

If you're really talented you barely spend any time in AAA, except in a few unique cases. I bet if you looked at HOFers from the past 30 years the average player spent half a year in AAA.

"HOF spend less then a half a season in AAA." Pretty high bar you set there. How about just regular old, three, four and five pitchers like ours. They probably need a little more time then Clemens et al.Don't you think?

[Stotle]

I'm sure there are varying opinions on this, but even the Rays have their top talent rocket through the system. Longoria had 31 AAA games, and even that was 100% driven by service time and salary concerns. He would have had zero otherwise. If not for service time David Price would have had 18 AAA innings, and as it was he has 52.

I'm not arguing that the truly elite (top 10 in all of baseball) type prospects tend to shoot past Triple-A regardless of org (unless your name is Dominic Brown or Jesus Montero), but the vast majority of "prospects" don't fall into that category.

Triple-A:

Desmond Jennigns -- 230 games

Jeremy Hellickson -- 30 starts

Wade Davis -- 37 starts

Reid Brignac -- 193 games

BJ Upton -- 245 games

Matt Moore -- 9 starts (obviously an elite kid)

Matt Joyce -- (51 games with the Toledo, then an additional 136 games with Durham)

Jeff Niemmann -- 49 starts

Alexander Torres -- 27 starts (may start back in Durham this year)

Alex Cobb -- 12 starts (may start back in Durham this year)

JP Howell -- 31 starts

Jake McGee -- 35 appearances (1 GS), total 50.2 IP (may start back in Durham this year)

Obviously, there's the classic story of Delmon Young (though part of his delay was due to his suspension after throwing his bat) -- 138 games

[Fan4Life]

"HOF spend less then a half a season in AAA." Pretty high bar you set there. How about just regular old, three, four and five pitchers like ours. They probably need a little more time then Clemens et al.Don't you think?

I don't think he disagrees with this... he was only pointing out to the poster (SG?) who said bringing on other starters only blocked our young starters from getting the experience they need. that if they are that good, nobody blocks them.

[Stotle]

I don't think he disagrees with this... he was only pointing out to the poster (SG?) who said bringing on other starters only blocked our young starters from getting the experience they need. that if they are that good, nobody blocks them.

The point is that there is a big gap between "not good enough to beat out a run-of-the-mill back-ender" and "hall of fame/top ten prospect in all of baseball".

[DrungoHazewood]

"HOF spend less then a half a season in AAA." Pretty high bar you set there. How about just regular old, three, four and five pitchers like ours. They probably need a little more time then Clemens et al.Don't you think?

That was just an obvious population to look at. But the point was time spent in AAA is inversely proportional to talent, at least at a group level. There will be exceptions for various reasons.

[Dipper9]

If that is your conclusion - its yours. My point is that though talent is a very important element, players often improve from 25 to 27 or 28. To compare this team to the 1997 team without mentioning that experience may make them better ignores an important factor. Especially in the case of the pitching staff. Britton, Arrieta, Matusz and others certainly will benefit from experience. We certainly hope that Jones learns to hit lefties and lay off the low outside pitch. If he does he will be a better hitter in the future. Wieters may not only hit lefties for a 1100 OPS but also hit righties much better. This kind of thought is true for most developing players as they mature.

I am not saying the more talent is not important. I just want to point out the experience is too.

If a player sucks, the more experience he gets isn't gonna automatically make him better. I give you DCab, Gibbons, and most of the other Orioles developed players from the past 14 years. Brady is absolutely right...Talent is the key. The only guy on this team who would have started in 97 is Wieters.

[Frobby]

I'm actually disappointed in Frobby in this thread for the dumbest possible reason having nothing to do with his actual responses. I was sure he would do one of his useful Frobby mini-studies pointing out that three years before 1997, Cal, Alomar et al had already demonstrated incredible talent well-beyond the player mix on this current team.

Is a study really necessary for this one?

Cal - 90 WAR

Mussina - 75 WAR

Palmeiro - 66 WAR

Alomar - 64 WAR

I'd venture a guess that all the players on the 25-man Opening Day roster for 2012 combined won't accumulate 295 WAR in their careers, and I haven't even mentioned

Key 46 WAR

Baines 37 WAR

Surhoff 34 WAR

E. Davis 34 WAR

Brady 31 WAR

Erickson 22 WAR

Bordick 17 WAR

[Dipper9]

Is a study really necessary for this one?

Cal - 90 WAR

Alomar - 64 WAR

Mussina - 75 WAR

Palmeiro - 66 WAR

I'd venture a guess that all the players on the 25-man Opening Day roster for 2012 combined won't accumulate 295 WAR in their careers.

Not to stray off topic, but we often debate whether Moose has the numbers to make the HOF. One would think a 75 WAR would get the job done, eh?

[DrungoHazewood]

The only guy on this team who would have started in 97 is Wieters.

But he was 11 years old!

Actually, you wouldn't take Markakis over Hammonds? Or Reimold or Reynolds over Berroa? If the '97 team had Guthrie as their 5th starter instead of Krivda/Boskie/etc. they might have won 105 games. Or Cal... Cal starts because he's Cal, but in 1997 he wasn't nearly as good as Reynolds' career hitting mark, maybe not even close enough to make up for the glove.