How much will Chance Sisco influence the 2017 roster?

[Redskins Rick]

Promoting someone to the majors who was very clearly not ready.

Clearly, you had to really go back in the Delorean to find an example.

[Can_of_corn]

Clearly, you had to really go back in the Delorean to find an example.

I wanted to come up with one you would be familiar with.

Actually it was the first one that came to mind and I figured the facts that he 1) Was promoted at 18 2) Did so woeful on offense early 3) Ended up in the HoF 4) Was an Oriole made him a fine choice.

Manny was promoted after half a season of AA and he wasn't dominating.

Schoop was promoted after a nondescript and injury plagued partial season at AAA.

In both cases they were promoted due to need at the ML level more than "earning it" by dint of dominating in the minors.

Manny adapted really well, Schoop less well.

[Number5]

You don't want to explain how you jumped from "both sides of the ball" to "defensively ready"? I'm shocked.

I was responding to your total disregard of defense. Besides, I don't agree with your comments regarding Machado and Schoop offensively either. Machado is basically in the "you've got to be kidding me" category, and Schoop, as a first-year middle infielder, was just fine. Pretending that all major league middle infielders should be at 100 OPS+ from day one is to completely disregard the facts.

You compared Sisco to Machado and Schoop, which is what I responded to. That comparison has no real substance. You also have now made up a definition for the term "rushed" which is clearly devoid of any consideration to the difference in readiness among various players. If you had said that Machado and Schoop were brought up earlier than the normal progression, rather than saying that they were rushed, I probably would not have commented at all, although comparing Sisco to them would still have been quite a reach, given his reported major need for more seasoning at catcher. I know that you will go on with this, so go ahead, if you wish. My interest in the conversation is over.

[Redskins Rick]

I wanted to come up with one you would be familiar with.

Actually it was the first one that came to mind and I figured the facts that he 1) Was promoted at 18 2) Did so woeful on offense early 3) Ended up in the HoF 4) Was an Oriole made him a fine choice.

Manny was promoted after half a season of AA and he wasn't dominating.

Schoop was promoted after a nondescript and injury plagued partial season at AAA.

In both cases they were promoted due to need at the ML level more than "earning it" by dint of dominating in the minors.

Manny adapted really well, Schoop less well.

Again, you and I will have to disagree.

1.6 for just 51 games, is pretty dang good for a young rookie right out of AA ball.

factor in a full season, and what would have been his WAR?

[Can_of_corn]

I was responding to your total disregard of defense. Besides, I don't agree with your comments regarding Machado and Schoop offensively either. Machado is basically in the "you've got to be kidding me" category, and Schoop, as a first-year middle infielder, was just fine. Pretending that all major league middle infielders should be at 100 OPS+ from day one is to completely disregard the facts.

You compared Sisco to Machado and Schoop, which is what I responded to. That comparison has no real substance. You also have now made up a definition for the term "rushed" which is clearly devoid of any consideration to the difference in readiness among various players. If you had said that Machado and Schoop were brought up earlier than the normal progression, rather than saying that they were rushed, I probably would not have commented at all, although comparing Sisco to them would still have been quite a reach, given his reported major need for more seasoning at catcher. I know that you will go on with this, so go ahead, if you wish. My interest in the conversation is over.

Oh please, you said Schoop was ML ready on offense despite putting up a sub 700 OPS the year before and putting up an OPS+ of 65 his rookie year.

I've never denied they played well on defense. You however made a claim on offense that you chose to ignore rather than defend.

[Can_of_corn]

Again, you and I will have to disagree.

1.6 for just 51 games, is pretty dang good for a young rookie right out of AA ball.

factor in a full season, and what would have been his WAR?

You know almost as well as I do that defensive metrics are funky. Schoop did play really well on defense that season. Shame we haven't seen much of that since.

I do think he was pretty clearly over-matched on offense. Unless he ran into one he didn't look good and the numbers support that.

[Tony-OH]

He's also a 30 year old catcher coming off of a historically terrible season. I don't know how much he can be counted on in the future, for anything.

While there is no denying Joseph was terrible at the plate last year, it was the first time in his career where he spent so much time not playing between starts. I think he got off to a bad start, then pressed due to his lack of playing time. During an 8 day stretch in July when he started 7 of 8 games while Wieters was on the DL, he slashed .348/.375/.348/.723.

I believe if he plays regularly and Buck keeps him to about 100-115 games a year he can be a productive hitter for a catcher. Now, if he Orioles can upgrade and keep the costs down, then I'm fine with that, but no way do I consider risk Wieters taking another huge one year contract.

As for Sisco, I think it will all depend on his defense and if he can control the running game. The only caveat is that Buck really wants defense first from his catcher and that will never be Sisco's calling card.

[25 Nuggets]

The Orioles looked positioned to sign Castro/Iannetta/Suzuki to 2 or 3 years with Pena backing up, working Cisco in with the veteran.

Like I said elsewhere - give me Castro.

2016

Wieters (30) - 87 OPS+, 88 wRC+, 1.4 oWAR

Castro (29) - 88 OPS+, 88 wRC+, 1.2 oWAR

Iannetta (33) - 75 OPS+, 77 wRC+, 0.9 oWAR

Suzuki (32) - 90 OPS+, 86 wRC+, 1.1 oWAR

Castro is the youngest and also probably the best defensive catcher at this point in their careers. I don't anticipate Iannetta to bounce back at his age and Suzuki has been a half win player for two seasons.

There will be a lot of teams next season with a worse starting catcher than Castro. (or Wieters)

[wildcard]

While there is no denying Joseph was terrible at the plate last year, it was the first time in his career where he spent so much time not playing between starts. I think he got off to a bad start, then pressed due to his lack of playing time. During an 8 day stretch in July when he started 7 of 8 games while Wieters was on the DL, he slashed .348/.375/.348/.723.

I believe if he plays regularly and Buck keeps him to about 100-115 games a year he can be a productive hitter for a catcher. Now, if he Orioles can upgrade and keep the costs down, then I'm fine with that, but no way do I consider risk Wieters taking another huge one year contract.

As for Sisco, I think it will all depend on his defense and if he can control the running game. The only caveat is that Buck really wants defense first from his catcher and that will never be Sisco's calling card.

I 2nd this.

[sportsfan8703]

He has only played 4 games above AA. So really, we don't know, if his bat is MLB ready.

ST should be a good look to see how he will do.

AAA is not necessary for his bat. Skipping AAA is typical of top prospects. I think the bat is ready. He'll get a good two months of working with the coaches in ST to get the glove ready.

MW wasn't known for his pitch calling and pitch framing. We have a vet staff now outside of Bundy. They should be able to call their own games. Also teams in our division don't run that much.

I'm pretty sure we're going to get to see a ton of him in ST. People forget the knock on MW out of college was his defense. He was older then than Sisco is now. People also forget that CJ was a guy playing 1B at 26 in Bowie. Had basically given up C full time. Sisco will be fine, I trust our coaches with the defense.

[thezeroes]

I do think that Chance Sisco is not required to be on the Forty to protect him from the Rule 5 draft so he will get the ST invite and labor at Norfolk until he proves that his glove will play at the MLB Level. I reserve the right to change my opinion IF he is placed on the Forty this winter. His service time clock and his options will hold him back until he proves worthy of the 40 Man Roster spot around September.

[mdbdotcom]

If Sisco starts showing consistent power before becoming a plus defender at catcher, it wouldn't surprise me to see him in right field before too long.

[Frobby]

Like Machado and Schoop?

Buck always said if you can play good defense, they can carry you in the majors while your bat catches up. But Sisco isn't a good defender so I don't think he gets the Schoop/Manny treatment. I see him getting at least a half-season of AAA.

[UpstateNYfan]

While there is no denying Joseph was terrible at the plate last year, it was the first time in his career where he spent so much time not playing between starts. I think he got off to a bad start, then pressed due to his lack of playing time. During an 8 day stretch in July when he started 7 of 8 games while Wieters was on the DL, he slashed .348/.375/.348/.723.

I believe if he plays regularly and Buck keeps him to about 100-115 games a year he can be a productive hitter for a catcher. Now, if he Orioles can upgrade and keep the costs down, then I'm fine with that, but no way do I consider risk Wieters taking another huge one year contract.

As for Sisco, I think it will all depend on his defense and if he can control the running game. The only caveat is that Buck really wants defense first from his catcher and that will never be Sisco's calling card.

Thank you. I noted during the season that this was the first time in his career that Joseph was a role player and not getting regular AB's. For some it is a monumental adjustment. He was written off by most here when he was in the minors. He was a hard worker and got his chance and surprised everyone. I would like to think that last year was an outlier for him, but I think he needs regular AB's to an at least average hitter. If he is kept as a bench player I don't expect anything better. I don't know much about Sisco, but negatives about players in general seem to get more attention than positives. Buck is not one to experiment with the catcher position. If it wasn't for Wieter's injury Joseph probably would never gotten a chance. The O's will likely sign a one year deal with someone and give Sisco a year more growth unless an injury develops at the ML level.

[thezeroes]

As Tony noted and you also expanded on, Caleb Joseph has always been a regular where ever he played. Seldom going for extended periods without playing in a game until this year. He also had the "Groin" injury that did not allow him to get/stay in any type of groove/shape. He missed ALL of June and was used sparingly in August (13 PA's). I am not ready to write him off as the starter, even for Matt Wieters and a four year contract. Save the money