Two Guy's we should think about

[NoVaO]

I generally stop posting when it's clear nobody's mind is ever going to be changed, and/or when there's nothing new to be said. Seems to me we've reached both of those points here.

I still think I'm right about all of this, if for no other reason than because I can look at all of these players objectively, and you guys can't. I'm looking at both the good and the bad.

You're looking at just the bad on Huber, and just the good on Olson/Liz. Nowhere is it mentioned that Liz has some serious command issues, features only 2 pitches, and will likely be used as a reliever *IF* he makes the bigs. Nowhere is it mentioned that Olson is considered a low-ceiling back-of-the-rotation guy that's neither overpowering with velocity nor dazzling with stuff.

I found it pretty interesting that the just-out BA ratings and analysis shows neither guy in the O's rotation in 2010. That tends to confirm my read on these guys. They're not all that.

Now could I be overvaluing Huber? Perhaps. It's difficult to guess at how much his stock has fallen, but it was very high coming into 2006.

But you guys are definitely not providing an honest, accurate assessment of Liz or Olson.

As others have said, exactly how are people overvaluing Liz and Olson? Why is Huber more valuable than Liz and Olson? Huber will be repeating AAA this year after a disappointing showing. Olson will be getting his first taste of AAA next year after doing very well in AA. Liz's upside has been talked about a lot, but so has his problems. But I don't see why Huber has more value than either Liz or Olson. Remember, entering last year, he was only #84 on BA's list, so he wasn't that hyped.

I also found a couple things on Kouzmanoff and Huber:

From a Callis chat recently:

Mark (Bangor, PA): I hear Kouzmanoff has been tearing it up in the AFL. Do you think that means he'll be competing for the 3B with Marte in the spring?

Jim Callis: The Indians have to give Kouzmanoff a look, don't they? He wasn't a high draft pick, but he just keeps hitting.

His AFL #'s: .409/.490/.682/1.172 with just 4 K's in 43 ABs

Dayton Moore (KC): Thanks for my Draft Report Card Jim... What am I doing with Justin Huber?

Jim Callis: Seems like he might get squeezed out in Kansas City. The Royals should give him a shot, but I don't think Huber is a big part of their future, more of a .280/20 HR guy, and that's not special at 1B or DH.

Again, he looks like a Craig Wilson type. I think he'll hit for a lower average than .280 though.

[NoVaO]

Bigbird reported that it could be close to happening.

BTW, we are using decently researched arguments to support our points and Dave has to comeback with how we are homers. What's the sense in arguing about this stuff if he's gonna resort to that stuff? I think we've supported our contention that Liz/Olson would certainly be enough to bring Huber back and instead of acknowledging some good points that we've made, we just get called homers. Next time we should just concede from the beginning that Dave is the only one objective enough to state opinions about Oriole prospects.

Agreed...he can't use the homer excuse everytime we discuss prospects. I don't think there is anything left for us to say.

[davearm]

Maybe because they think they will get dealt. Maybe because they think Liz and/or may be a big time closer..In fact, i believe BA rated Liz as the 5th best closer prospect in baseball.

And that is still enough to trade for Huber.

I think you are overlooking that the Royals are loaded at first, that they need pitching desperately and that pitching is a bigger commodity than positional talent.

When looking at the big picture, the only reason the Royals don't make this trade is because well, they are the Royals.

I think if I hear this bs one more time I'll pull the last few hairs out of my head.

JUST BECAUSE A GUY IS BLOCKED DOESN'T MEAN HIS TEAM IS DYING TO GIVE HIM AWAY TO THE FIRST TEAM THAT'LL TAKE HIM.

Bargain shopping like this is going to get you a whole lot of nothing.

ONCE AGAIN, look at the Kouzmanoff trade. Barfield's a darn good return for a guy that was blocked in the Indians' system. That's full price.

[davearm]

Agreed...he can't use the homer excuse everytime we discuss prospects. I don't think there is anything left for us to say.

I use the "homer excuse" when you overvalue O's prospects.

[davearm]

Two pitch pitcher? Sure you want to stick with that description?

Well sounds like he's got a fastball, a curveball he can't command, and a changeup he can't command.

Is that one pitch or three?

Look the guys obviously got a live arm, and if he can work through the rawness and the control issues, then he'll be a good young bullpen arm with setup or closer upside. That is still a big "IF".

Maybe I'm jaded because this guy sounds exactly like our Roberto Novoa, who had basically the exact same scouting report a few years back when we got him (and some other prospects) for Kyle Farnsworth. Same big heater, same control issues. The results of that combination are not pretty, believe me. (See also: Julio, Jorge.)

As Callis mentioned, Huber's got a Craig Wilson profile.

I'd take a young Craig Wilson over a young Roberto Novoa or Jorge Julio anytime.

I'd be interested to see what the folks at "Royals Hangout" would say to Huber for Liz/Olson. Doubt they'd be too thrilled.

[Leitch]

What say you if Liz is ranked in the top 100 ahead of Huber on most of the 2007 lists?

Obviously the lists are overvaluing Orioles prospects

[srh523]

LOL great argument but really going nowhere fast. So what would the Royals chatboard have to say about this trade?

[Sports Guy]

Where was Rich Hill on the list coming into this year?

[Sports Guy]

I think if I hear this bs one more time I'll pull the last few hairs out of my head.

JUST BECAUSE A GUY IS BLOCKED DOESN'T MEAN HIS TEAM IS DYING TO GIVE HIM AWAY TO THE FIRST TEAM THAT'LL TAKE HIM.

Bargain shopping like this is going to get you a whole lot of nothing.

ONCE AGAIN, look at the Kouzmanoff trade. Barfield's a darn good return for a guy that was blocked in the Indians' system. That's full price.

If a player is blocked and it is obvious they need to move him, his value does go down.

[davearm]

You've got a wonderful way of twisting things Dave. You've got Liz compared to Novoa who's nothing special and already have Liz's upside as setup or closer. I would agree that his likely destination is bullpen but he obviously has potential as a starter. He also obviously, has potential for 3 ML pitches. Are they there yet? Nope, but BA sees the potential for 3 solid pitches. You've got Huber's upside as Craig Wilson and Liz's upside as Jorge Julio. Find me the guy who said Huber's upside was Wilson and then find me someone who says Liz's upside is Jorge Julio. You keep ignoring the snippets from Sickels and BA which descbribe Liz's upside as "special" and "a lot of upside". That doesn't sound like an upside of Jorge Julio or Novoa. You can pick and choose and twist and bend but you have been shown with the evidence (BA & Sickels) you yourself have used, to be wrong. Leave it to you to always find a Cub's analogy. I would be interested to hear what knowledgeable Royal fans would have to say about Liz/Olson/Huber. I'm certainly tired of hearing what you have to say about it.

BTW Dave, a big part of your argument is the pre-season rankings from 2006. What say you if Liz is ranked in the top 100 ahead of Huber on most of the 2007 lists?

I see those snippets. I also see the terms "raw" and "command issues", and I see from his stat sheet that he walks guys at a frightening rate.

But I am curious, did anyone use phrases like "special" and "a lot of upside" to describe Julio when he was the same age as Liz is now?

Recall that was the year the O's handed him their closer job as a rookie, and he responded with 25 saves, a sparkling ERA, and a handful of ROY votes.

What happened next was that his control went south to the tune of ~5 BB/9(the same neighborhood Liz lives in already, incidentally), and hitters learned to sit on his fastball, and cream it. The rest is (sad) history.

Could Liz turn out better than this? Sure. Or he could be worse.

The point is, if you can't recognize the similarities, both good and bad, then you've simply lost your ability to look at the situation rationally. Which is what (IMO) is giving rise to the orange-glasses phenomenon that's going on here... you're trumpeting to the accolades, and sweeping the red flags under the rug. I'm not joining in.

[Sports Guy]

I see those snippets. I also see the terms "raw" and "command issues", and I see from his stat sheet that he walks guys at a frightening rate.

But I am curious, did anyone use phrases like "special" and "a lot of upside" to describe Julio when he was the same age as Liz is now?

Recall that was the year the O's handed him their closer job as a rookie, and he responded with 25 saves, a sparkling ERA, and a handful of ROY votes.

What happened next was that his control went south to the tune of ~5 BB/9(the same neighborhood Liz lives in already, incidentally), and hitters learned to sit on his fastball, and cream it. The rest is (sad) history.

Could Liz turn out better than this? Sure. Or he could be worse.

The point is, if you can't recognize the similarities, both good and bad, then you've simply lost your ability to look at the situation rationally. Which is what (IMO) is giving rise to the orange-glasses phenomenon that's going on here... you're trumpeting to the accolades, and sweeping the red flags under the rug. I'm not joining in.

And where are your glowing scouting reports on Huber throughout the year?

Seems to me, all you are doing is hearing a name, seeing a ranking from LAST YEAR and formulating an opinion with no real intelligence behind it.

It seems you are also ignoring the fact that the Royals farm system is pitching week and they are strong in the areas that Huber plays.

Strength for a weakness. No doubt that Liz/Olson for Huber is fair.

[Sports Guy]

BTW Dave, i am still waiting for what you think it would take to get Huber...Do you think a team is giving up a top 20 pitching prospect for him?

[davearm]

And where are your glowing scouting reports on Huber throughout the year?

Seems to me, all you are doing is hearing a name, seeing a ranking from LAST YEAR and formulating an opinion with no real intelligence behind it.

It seems you are also ignoring the fact that the Royals farm system is pitching week and they are strong in the areas that Huber plays.

Strength for a weakness. No doubt that Liz/Olson for Huber is fair.

They'd probably ask for Loewen, but settle for Penn.

No matter how many times you say it's fair, I don't think they'd be interested in Liz/Olson for Huber.

[davearm]

BTW Dave, i am still waiting for what you think it would take to get Huber...Do you think a team is giving up a top 20 pitching prospect for him?

They'd probably ask for Loewen, but settle for Penn.

[Sports Guy]

They'd probably ask for Loewen, but settle for Penn.

No matter how many times you say it's fair, I don't think they'd be interested in Liz/Olson for Huber.

LOL...Dave stick the NL.

If that is the type of player they want for Huber, they will just lose him as a 6 year minor league FA or have him getting 150 ab's a year in the AL.

BTW, Liz and Olson appeared on BA's top 20 list in TWO DIFFERENT leagues...Huber didn't make his.

Very little doubt in my mind that Olson and Liz have a higher prospect status right now.