Any thoughts on who Buck was referring to RE: Surprise future closer?

[esmd]

So reading Roch this morning, and caught this bit on Tanner Scott:

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2018/07/morning-notes-on-schoop-brach-and-scott.html

"Tanner Scott replaced Brach Sunday with a runner on base and surrendered a two-run homer to Yangervis Solarte to take the loss and raise his ERA to 6.67 with a 1.729 WHIP. He’s struck out 43 batters in 28 1/3 innings.  Scott was celebrating his 24th birthday. Blowing a lead and a save opportunity instead of blowing out his candles.  Showalter isn’t worried about failures chipping away at Scott’s confidence.  “You see him have a tough outing and then he comes out next time and strikes out the side. Then you see him go out and have a tough outing and come back and look a most unhittable,” Showalter said.  “I think we’re OK there. It’s something I do keep an eye out for. Roger (McDowell) and Alan (Mills) are with him a lot. Alan’s good with that. Actually, Zach’s been great with him. A good type of tough love. Not any of the hazing crap that you hear about. But I think Zach sees a lot of himself in him and he seems to have taken a real interest in him. But no, I think because of the way he bounces back ... they’re tough lessons, not only for him but the team.”  Does the ability to recover so easily make Scott closer material? Showalter was ready for the question.  “I like those closers that don’t have to bounce back, OK? Let’s do something to correct it,” he said.  “They come in all shapes and sizes. Zach, seven or eight years ago, nobody in here probably thought he was going to be a premiere closer. I’ve got somebody in the back of my mind who’s on this club right now that I think might be able to do it down the line that would surprise everybody. But it’s a growth. Very seldom is it at 23, 24. It’s usually at 27, 28, 29.  “You take some of baseball’s lessons, make you never assume something with two outs and nobody on. Good closers are ruthless. They want to see how solidly they can slam the door as opposed to leaving an opening here and there. They’re hard to find. I don’t know what the game’s going to do with it down the line, if it’s even going to be someone like that. Hard to win without it.”

Any guesses on who Buck was referring to?  It doesn't seem to be Scott.  My first thought was Givens, but the bit about surprising everybody makes me think it's not him.  Same with Castro, I've seen him mentioned as a potential closer, so not sure that would be a surprise to a lot of people.  I dunno, maybe I'm reading too much into it.  I can't imagine he was referring to Mike Wright.  Maybe Paul Fry?  I don't know much about him at all, and I've only seen him pitch once, over the weekend in Toronto, but he looked like he had some nasty stuff.  Maybe that one is too far out there, I dunno.  What say you?

[esmd]

Staying on Fry for a second, he's had some roller coaster results in the minors, but since he came into the organization, he's been pretty damn good.  The K's/9 and WHIP don't look bad.  With a fresh start next year, the pen might not look so awful with Givens, Castro, Scott, Fry, Bleier (hopefully), O'Day (if healthy), and possibly Wright.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=fry---000pau

 

[Flacco Machado]

I think it will be up to the new manager, next year...

[amdcpus]

Almost positive he's referring to Mike Wright. Especially after that sentence about coming into the role when your 27, 28, 29.

[esmd]

Thank you, Capt. Obvious.  Any thoughts on the actual topic of the thread?

[Greg Pappas]

Perhaps Gausman (27) or Bundy (25).

[esmd]

Just now, amdcpus said:

Almost positive he's referring to Mike Wright. Especially after that sentence about coming into the role when your 27, 28, 29.

He might be.  That just blows my mind though.  Wright seems WAY too high strung to be a closer, IMO.

[esmd]

Just now, Greg Pappas said:

Perhaps Gausman?

Interesting.  I'd kind of discounted him and Bundy, figuring that Buck and the club would view their value higher as starters.  But maybe so.

[Greg Pappas]

4 minutes ago, esmd said:

Interesting.  I'd kind of discounted him and Bundy, figuring that Buck and the club would view their value higher as starters.  But maybe so.

I had updated (edited) my post to include Bundy.  I've discussed Gausman transitioning to a closer before, with my brother.  It's doubtful, but he still hasn't progressed past 'decent' as a starter.  My only concern with Gausman is that he doesn't seem to have that killer instinct... that certain something that some pitchers have.  Of course, I didn't see it in Britton either, but he found it in a big way and became a dominant closer.  Hard to say what could happen.

[TonySoprano]

Chris Tillman? 

Actually, Tillman's a year younger than someone I'd consider, Richard Bleier.  Givens is the obvious choice and fits the 27-29 criteria, but my guess is Buck is talking about a younger guy.   Castro?

[bobmc]

5 minutes ago, TonySoprano said:

Chris Tillman? 

Actually, Tillman's a year younger than someone I'd consider, Richard Bleier.  Givens is the obvious choice and fits the 27-29 criteria, but my guess is Buck is talking about a younger guy.   Castro?

I agree on Castro - nugget.

 

He surely wouldn't be referring to the Rule-5-osity candidate Pedro, would he?  Trevor Hoffman light?  

[wildcard]

Givens......but not in April.

[jtschrei]

Mike Wright. 100 percent

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Givens......but not in April.

Because he won't be ready or because the team won't have any save opportunities that month?

[wildcard]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Because he won't be ready or because the team won't have any save opportunities that month?

Because he can't pitch in the cold.