Jump to content

Wieters and Rutschman


Just Regular

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, OrioleDog said:

For me it's about enjoying the novelty of the #1 pick.  Even the years we got Machado, Bundy, etc, there wasn't the opportunity to speculate so freely as anybody might not have been there.  I'm not clamoring for Rutschman as much as observing he's the early favorite.  I hope he or someone else goes supernova so we can approach the Nationals luckiness in the Strasburg Harper years.

The same podcast last weekend suggested 2-10 is a mixed bag right now, and the one specific they discussed from that group was Daniel Espino, who has an interesting crouch in his delivery.  

Even with expert speculation the draft order for mlb is always intensely different after another season.  Rutschman without the 2018 College season... no chance he’s considered 1-1 “lock” with his 2017 sample size only. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheOtherRipken said:

Even with expert speculation the draft order for mlb is always intensely different after another season.  Rutschman without the 2018 College season... no chance he’s considered 1-1 “lock” with his 2017 sample size only. 

Of course.

Injury risk alone would preclude that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jammer7 said:

Easy...as do I have much to do. Which was why I missed by one pick. And that post was not directed to you, if you look again. Easy....

I, too, will take you at your word that you preferred MadBum or Heyward at the time.

But I don’t think you judge the no. 5 pick by determining if he turned out to be one of the top 5 players in his draft class.    That standard would almost never be met, because there’s always several surprise players who perform very well who are drafted lower.   I think it’s much more fair to compare Wieters to the other guys drafted at no. 5.     And when you do that, he’s had the 9th best outcome of 54 guys (so far; it’s too soon to know if some of the very recent picks might eclipse him in a few years).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Number5 said:

We can always count on you, Bob, for a witty remark.  ?

Or being "a tool" fer sure!  On message boards, can trolling be considered a "tool"?  Wit definitely is, right?  Asking for @Can of Corn well not him 'cause he knows all.

 

But back to Wieters and Ruschman, can Cody Roberts be converted to P?  Asking for @Luke-OH .  And in an unrelated subject, can Nickie Horvath ever be a Rickard?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, weams said:

Is he even four tool?

 

6 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Seems to be but the hit tool is the important one.

Not sure if y’all are serious but he has it all.

Mayo: Had Witt been in the 2018 class, many thought he would be at or near the top of the first round. He'll get his chance a year from now. The Texas high schooler has five-tool potential with the ability to stay at shortstop long-term. One evaluator put at least a 60 (on the 20-to-80 scale) on all of his tools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Il BuonO said:

 

Not sure if y’all are serious but he has it all.

Mayo: Had Witt been in the 2018 class, many thought he would be at or near the top of the first round. He'll get his chance a year from now. The Texas high schooler has five-tool potential with the ability to stay at shortstop long-term. One evaluator put at least a 60 (on the 20-to-80 scale) on all of his tools.

Other evaluators have a future 40 on the hit. The other 4 tools are pretty well agreed on to be plus.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Il BuonO said:

 

Not sure if y’all are serious but he has it all.

Mayo: Had Witt been in the 2018 class, many thought he would be at or near the top of the first round. He'll get his chance a year from now. The Texas high schooler has five-tool potential with the ability to stay at shortstop long-term. One evaluator put at least a 60 (on the 20-to-80 scale) on all of his tools.

Also 2018 Witt wouldn't be old for his draft class. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Posts

    • From my understanding of the data the impetus for pulling pitchers early is not (usually) due to pitcher fatigue or pitcher injury risk, but rather because they're not as good the 3rd/4th time thru the lineup.  But I think I'd rather have our starters go from good to mediocre the 3rd time thru the lineup, versus trusting the crappy members of our bullpen with the ball.  Granted Akin had a bad game today and he had been pretty good, but we also tried to have Cionel get thru 2 innings and he gives up a leadoff triple.
    • Yeah, I'd like to see Hyde push the starters a bit more too. But if we see it, I think it'll be a pretty gradual ramp as the season goes on.  Seems like 90 pitches is the new 100, and unless the standings situation gets dire they're going to keep managing like the most important bullets are the ones saved for October. 
    • Holmes had a blown save and the Angels beat the Yankees, maybe he's available.
    • Hyde needs to adjust his bullpen usage IMO.  We don't have the shutdown options we had last year and he's managing like we do.  We have good starters, push them a little bit and try to squeeze extra innings out of them while getting someone warm if they run into trouble.   Grayson could have gone an extra inning and maybe we wouldn't have given up 4 in the last few innings to put the game out of reach.  I understand that there will be occasions where you invite criticism that you're leaving your starters out to dry, but most of our bullpen options have been really unreliable and I think if you stick to the guns that got you there knowing what our bullpen is like you just live with it if it doesn't work out.  It's not like we're pushing our starters to 120 pitches.
    • Yankees lose one to the last place Angels thanks to a Rizzo error, Holmes blown save, and offense that failed to get another baserunner after taking a lead in the 5th inning.  I think I've heard around here that real championship contenders don't do these sort of things, so hopefully this knocks them out of the running. 
    • First thing is first, the Negro Leagues had a lot of great talent and it’s a crime they never got to play in the MLB. That’s a given.    Second, the math doesn’t math here in regard to Gibson, unless I am missing something: Baseball reference has his career lasting for 14 total seasons spanning from 1930-1946.  There’s no ‘31 or ‘32 seasons for him and no ‘41 season.  His listed career stats are the .373 batting average, .718 SLG, 166 homers, 135 doubles   How do they come up with a .718 SLG on 166 homers and 135 doubles across 14 seasons?
    • I fear we are perennially going to want  just a little bit more from Grayson—and then it will all click for a few years in his 30’s for some other team.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...