Jump to content

Gunnar Henderson signs


Luke-OH

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, maybenxtyr said:

I tried to stay up on the threads about the draft picks...is he legit? I hope so, and I'm glad he chose Baltimore over college.

 

On another note, I have probably got t-shirts older than him!

That’s the point of this thread, he’s going to sign. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

That’s the point of this thread, he’s going to sign. 

I was more asking about his talent level. I jumped over to his draft thread and got caught up. Hopefully I'll see him in Salisbury later this season, or next. He sounds like a good talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bird watcher said:

I’m having a hard time seeing how this is anything but an obvious choice assuming he is going to get north of 3mil or even 2mil.  If he wants to play professional baseball then he gets his start early with a better/potentially faster path to the majors. If he wants an education to hedge against failure in professional baseball then he has millions already in the bank to own his own home and pay for college with no loans necessary and still have millions left over.  

Why would anyone go to college under those circumstances?

In the history of the draft only 6 players picked at 42 have put up 1 WAR.  I think having fun in college while getting an education is the smart move. Auburn us a good college.  Odds are he blows his money and doesn't make the big leagues.

  • Downvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

I dunno if you're considering that as a dig at Manny of some sorts but I think Manny has 300 million reasons not to care what goes on in Baltimore.

This is a good point.  I think any team that has the 42nd pick should just not select anyone.  What's the point if that player is only going to put up 1 WAR?  Ditch the pick, use the money elsewhere, I say.  

 

Where did you get that from my post? I think for rye teams interest Gunnar should sign. For the kid I think he should go to college.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, maybenxtyr said:

I was more asking about his talent level. I jumped over to his draft thread and got caught up. Hopefully I'll see him in Salisbury later this season, or next. He sounds like a good talent.

Sorry, I misread your post as I hope he signs.

Talent level, he’s what you want from a HS prospect, the chance to stick at SS or be a good defensive 3B if he grows out of it. And the chance for an impact bat if things go right. He already has more raw power than any SS prospect in the system and is an above average runnner. He doesn’t have the gaudy toolset of Bobby Witt or C.J. Abrams, but there is still significant ceiling to go along with your standard HS player risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bird watcher said:

I’m having a hard time seeing how this is anything but an obvious choice assuming he is going to get north of 3mil or even 2mil.  If he wants to play professional baseball then he gets his start early with a better/potentially faster path to the majors. If he wants an education to hedge against failure in professional baseball then he has millions already in the bank to own his own home and pay for college with no loans necessary and still have millions left over.  

Why would anyone go to college under those circumstances?

College sports are like a religion to some people, and apparently he’d get to play with his brother. I can see someone valuing such things seemingly irrationally highly. Me I’d take the money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Well you brought up that only 6 players picked at 42 have produced 1 WAR.  That's what you said, right?

Have put up at least 1 WAR.  So 6 out of 50 or so players have been worthwhile signs.  It is a long shot that he contributes at the major league level but that is why they give you 40 draft picks and international slots.  Sign 60+ players and hope 2 or 3 turn out.  For the high school player college is the better option.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, makoman said:

College sports are like a religion to some people, and apparently he’d get to play with his brother. I can see someone valuing such things seemingly irrationally highly. Me I’d take the money. 

If you play well in college the money will still be there.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, atomic said:

Have put up at least 1 WAR.  So 6 out of 50 or so players have been worthwhile signs.  It is a long shot that he contributes at the major league level but that is why they give you 40 draft picks and international slots.  Sign 60+ players and hope 2 or 3 turn out.  For the high school player college is the better option.  

Ok.

So therefore, the odds are stacked against Gunnar.  I'm saying if any team has the 42nd pick, they should just not use it.  Why would you?  It's a 12% chance it'll work out.  Chris Davis has a better batting average.  Be smart, use that money elsewhere.   We shouldn't sign this kid, 12% chance he works out.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Ok.

So therefore, the odds are stacked against Gunnar.  I'm saying if any team has the 42nd pick, they should just not use it.  Why would you?  It's a 12% chance it'll work out.  Chris Davis has a better batting average.  Be smart, use that money elsewhere.   We shouldn't sign this kid, 12% chance he works out.

 

I am sure someone on here can give you the cost benefit analysis.  12 percent chance you pay $2 million and you get $60 million in value. You still come out a head if you make enough of these picks.

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

    • It's fine, but I would personally prefer having Cowser and Adley taking tons of pitches back-to-back before Gunnar further punishes the opposing starting pitcher with high exit velo barrels. 
    • I was going to say pretty much the same thing about Cowser in my post, but left out my thoughts to keep the post more Gunnar-centric. But I totally agree that Cowser fits the best as this team's leadoff hitter, especially since Holliday doesn't look like he's going to make an impact offensively as early as most of us thought heading into the season.  Going back to last season, I've said Cowser has the best mix of patience, hit tool, power, and speed to be a great leadoff hitter. The strikeouts are most likely always going to be high with him, but he has .380-.400+ OBP makeup, and having someone like that hitting leadoff with Adley and Gunnar hitting directly behind Cowser is going to set things up for an elite offense which is much more dynamic and less one-dimensional than the what we've seen up until this point. Cowser Adley Gunnar Westburg O'Hearn Santander Mountcastle Is an ideal top 7 against RHP for right now, with Kjerstad (replacing Hays) and Mayo (essentially replacing Mateo and bumping Westburg to 2B) making the lineup legitimately scary within the next couple months. Mullins and Hays need to be phased out, with Santander and Mountcastle not far behind if those two continue struggling and not reaching base enough to justify hitting in the middle of the order.
    • A lot of teams (likely driven by analytics) are putting their best overall hitter at 2 (like the Yankees batting Soto 2, and the Dodgers batting Shohei 2) to maximize ABs while guaranteeing that a high-OBP guy is batting in front of him to give him opportunities with men on base.  That's probably what we want.  It seems logical considering how thoroughly debunked small-ball in the first inning has been.  Rutschman at 3 is fine.
    • Realistically I think Adley as the leadoff guy is the best lineup for us but if he has trouble batting leadoff in half the games because he can't get his catcher's gear off fast enough then I get it.   Cowser has continued to be incredibly patient, and if Adley can't be our leadoff guy then Cowser is probably our next best option.  Of course Cowser also hits a lot of bombs, so it'd be interesting if he goes on another heater.   If Cowser gets off the schneid then Cowser leadoff and Gunnar at 2 could be incredibly potent.  I don't think Cowser is actually playing that badly, he's just been running into some bad luck.  And he's starting to wake up a little bit anyway.
    • Agreed, appreciate the stats. Gunnar isn't a leadoff hitter - he's a prototypical #3 hitter or cleanup hitter. Hyde writes poor lineups, and Gunnar hitting leadoff has been one of the consistent problems with the offense this season. Gunnar hitting mostly solo shots is both a consequence and reflection of this offense's flaws - the O's have too many low-OBP hitters in the lineup (hitting in less-than-optimal spots for the most part) and are too reliant on solo homers to generate runs. At least Hyde has started hitting Westburg leadoff against LHP, which is progress, but Hyde is way too stubborn and too slow to make the correct adjustments. He's very similar to Buck Showalter in that respect.  Anyway, I look forward to Hyde waking up and moving Gunnar down to #3/#4 against RHP.  
    • While the return on the Tettleton trade wasn't ideal, 1: I don't think you can really expect a 30 year old catcher to put up a career year and then follow it up with another one, and 2: we had Chris Hoiles who played quite well for us following Tettleton's departure.  If we had forward thinking GMs we probably would split them at C and give them DH/1B/OF games on their non catching days, which is what Detroit did with Tettleton to prolong his career after 1992.  (He was basically the same hitter from 1993-1995 but he stopped catching with regularity so his WAR was much lower.)   The Davis trade was so completely undefensible on every level, not the least of which because we already had a player who was at least as good as Davis was on the team, but he didn't fit the stereotypical batting profile of a 1B.  At least today teams wouldn't be so quick to dismiss a 10 HR first baseman if he's got an OBP of .400.
    • The Glenn Davis trade was so bad it overshadowed another really bad trade in team history. The Orioles traded Mickey Tettleton that same offseason for Jeff Robinson in part because Tettleton had an off year in 1990 with a .223 batting average and a .381 slugging percentage. Except Tettleton drew 116 walks making his OBP .376 and his OPS+ was 116. Jeff Robinson was coming off a 5.96 ERA in 145 innings pitched. I have no idea what the team was thinking with this trade. Robinson did manage to lower his ERA in 1991 to 5.18 his only Orioles season. There's no way this trade is made today in the age of analytics. Tettleton meanwhile put up 171 home runs and an .859 OPS for the remainder of his career. 😬 Just a bad trade that doesn't get talked about enough thanks to Glenn Davis.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...