Orioles Top 15 Prospects from Scout.com

[srh523]

And yet in this mix Hayden Penn fails to even get a mention! Has his star really fallen that far? I think he will come back and dominate AAA hitters again this year. They need to just let him there for a bit and get his swagger back.

[Frobby]

I'm aware that those ERAs are high (and so don't need the lecture.) But they're averages. I didn't mean that he would pitch like a league-average #4 or #5 (and I'd like to see something other than an "average" of those numbers - teams can fall apart on the back end of a rotation with a patchwork of guys who aren't ML starters, distorting numbers. I think looking at pitchers who pitched 100 innings is low, and distorts your averages. If we look at 150 innings+ I think those numbers likely normalize.)

Rather, I'm looking at how I figure a #4 on a good team is likely to perform: an ERA between 4.50 and 5.00 - which is where I expect Loewen to be.

As for Guthrie, an ERA over 5 would not surprise me in the least. I don't think number #5 starters who are #5s all year (as opposed to call-ups, swingmen, etc.) are quite that high. But Guthrie at a 5.25 or so? Sure. I can see that.

But - as someone as nuanced as you are in your arguments should understand - I didn't say it was likely that they'd perform that way. I said it is more likely they perform that way than that they perform like #1-2. Yes, however, I do think it MORE likely that Guthrie puts up a 5+ ERA than that he pitches to a 3.75 ERA for the year.

Feel free to disagree. But if you want to question my analysis at least do it on the basis of what I actually said.

In Loewen's case, I definitely agree with you. In Guthrie's case I'm not so sure. I don't expect a 3.75 ERA from him, but I don't expect 5.25 either. I've seen third-party projections in the 4.30-4.60 range and that's my best guess as to where he'll be. If I had to pick between 3.75 and 5.25, I'd pick the lower figure, but maybe that's just the optimist in me.

And I did not mean to distort what you were saying. But now you've dialed it back a bit. Before you said it was "far more likely" that Guthrie would pitch like a no. 5.

[JimPalmerJr]

Where is Hayden Penn ?

[orioole28]

And yet in this mix Hayden Penn fails to even get a mention! Has his star really fallen that far? I think he will come back and dominate AAA hitters again this year. They need to just let him there for a bit and get his swagger back.

I believe Penn isn't consider a prospect because he has exceeded the number of innings pitched in the ML.

[srh523]

I believe Penn isn't consider a prospect because he has exceeded the number of innings pitched in the ML.

You are right I was mostly speaking in term of the big club.

[orioole28]

You are right I was mostly speaking in term of the big club.

I believe if Penn has a solid ST, he will be given a good opportunity to make the starting rotation.

[hoosiers]

It's interesting to see they are still high on Snyder, but not that favorable on Rowell. And Beato before Erbe?? Where is Olson?

Olson's not in the to 10.

I think people forget how good Snyder was in short season after he was draft - league top prospect.

I think Rowell may lose a bit of his luster if he has to move to 1B and BA has consistently hinted that there are doubts he can stick at 3B.

[Frobby]

It's interesting to see they are still high on Snyder, but not that favorable on Rowell.

Since they rate Rowell ahead of Snyder, what is the basis for this statement?

[Lucky Jim]

In Loewen's case, I definitely agree with you. In Guthrie's case I'm not so sure. I don't expect a 3.75 ERA from him, but I don't expect 5.25 either. I've seen third-party projections in the 4.30-4.60 range and that's my best guess as to where he'll be. If I had to pick between 3.75 and 5.25, I'd pick the lower figure, but maybe that's just the optimist in me.

And I did not mean to distort what you were saying. But now you've dialed it back a bit. Before you said it was "far more likely" that Guthrie would pitch like a no. 5.

Ah. So - wait - you pervert my comment to say something it doesn't...but somehow that pales in importance to the idea that I'm "dialing it back" because I simply left out a modifier I used before? That's pretty absurd.

First, one isn't related to the other. You changed my comment and then present problematic statistics - essentially in rebuttal to an argument that hadn't been made. You casually glide over that, of course, to make it seem as if I've been disingenuous.

But I haven't. Which is my second point: there was no "dialing" intended - I DO think it far more likely that Guthrie puts up an ERA over 5.00 than an ERA of under 4.00 if he pitches a complete season.

Wait - am I changing my argument because I included "a complete season"? Because I round off to whole numbers? I don't think I am. The point remains the same. And the fact that I left the word "far" out of the second post is irrelevant - it's not as if there's some agreed upon measure of "likely" versus "far more likely." I guess it depends on what you feel is probabilistically significant.

But, just to be safe, I'll make sure I use perfectly parallel construction from here on out. Didn't realize we were so formalist in these parts.

[Edited to note: I'm really just arguing this tongue-in-cheek. Just fooling around. Sorry if it came off as shrill.]

[Gurgi]

Would love to trade Bedard and Roberts and fill out the prospects some more.

[Frobby]

Ah. So - wait - you pervert my comment to say something it doesn't...but somehow that pales in importance to the idea that I'm "dialing it back" because I simply left out a modifier I used before? That's pretty absurd.

First, one isn't related to the other. You changed my comment and then present problematic statistics - essentially in rebuttal to an argument that hadn't been made. You casually glide over that, of course, to make it seem as if I've been disingenuous.

But I haven't. Which is my second point: there was no "dialing" intended - I DO think it far more likely that Guthrie puts up an ERA over 5.00 than an ERA of under 4.00 if he pitches a complete season.

Wait - am I changing my argument because I included "a complete season"? Because I round off to whole numbers? I don't think I am. The point remains the same. And the fact that I left the word "far" out of the second post is irrelevant - it's not as if there's some agreed upon measure of "likely" versus "far more likely." I guess it depends on what you feel is probabilistically significant.

But, just to be safe, I'll make sure I use perfectly parallel construction from here on out. Didn't realize we were so formalist in these parts.

[Edited to note: I'm really just arguing this tongue-in-cheek. Just fooling around. Sorry if it came off as shrill.]

Sorry if I offended you in some way, it wasn't my intention.

[Lucky Jim]

Sorry if I offended you in some way, it wasn't my intention.

Not at all - which is why I added the note at the end. Just airing out the argumentative rhetoric.

[tywright]

Since they rate Rowell ahead of Snyder, what is the basis for this statement?

Most on here rank Rowell ahead of Reimold and at least 4-6 slots ahead of Snyder, correct? However BA ranks Reimold, Rowell, and Snyder 4-5-6, respectively. Thus they are less excited about Rowell as we are.

[Frobby]

Most on here rank Rowell ahead of Reimold and at least 4-6 slots ahead of Snyder, correct? However BA ranks Reimold, Rowell, and Snyder 4-5-6, respectively. Thus they are less excited about Rowell as we are.

Fair enough. I'd be hard pressed to rank Reimold ahead of Rowell personally.

[Lucky Jim]

Most on here rank Rowell ahead of Reimold and at least 4-6 slots ahead of Snyder, correct? However BA ranks Reimold, Rowell, and Snyder 4-5-6, respectively. Thus they are less excited about Rowell as we are.

BA also ranked Snyder ahead of Reimold in the season-end prospect list for the Sally League in October.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/264942.html

I have trouble seeing it, but...