Jump to content

Who will be the #7 and #8 prospects?


Tony-OH

Who will be the #7 and #8 prospects?  

61 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will be the #7 and #8 prospects?

    • Baumann and Lowther
    • Baumann and Harvey
    • Henderson and Baumann
    • Henderson and Kremer
    • Kremer and Harvey

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

This one was tricky but I ultimately went with Henderson and Baumann even if I prefer them in the other order. I'm pretty sure Tony and Luke are somewhat down on Kremer and I find it hard to believe they have Harvey this high. Sure, he was great as a reliever this year but the command needs to improve and he once again ended the year injured even if it was a relatively minor one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at 7-10 together was a bit of a brain-teaser, but here was my logic.   
 

1.   You’ve got 6 guys for 4 spaces, so 2 guys have to be eliminated.   I think Akin is currently at the bottom of the totem pole for these pitchers, and it’s premature to put Henderson in the top 10 even though he could end up a really top prospect.   So, removing Henderson and Akin eliminates 2 options from the 7-8 list and 3 options from the 9-10 list.   
 

2.   Once you do that, Baumann-Lowther is impossible for 7-8 because the two options for 9-10 contain either Baumann or Lowther.   Likewise Kremer-Harvey is impossible for 6-7 because the two choices for 9-10 each contain Kremer or Harvey.   That leaves Baumann-Harvey as the only option 7-8.    I think Baumann has the edge over the other options at 7 anyway, based on comments from Tony and Luke throughout the year, so I went with that one.

3.   That leaves only Lowther-Kremer at 9-10.   
 

All pretty logical so long as you think Henderson and Akin are the odd men out.   If Henderson is in, it could be Henderson-Baumann and then Lowther-Kremer.   
 

Wow, this is pretty fun.   Lots of great choices in these slots.   

  • Upvote 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Looking at 7-10 together was a bit of a brain-teaser, but here was my logic.   
 

1.   You’ve got 6 guys for 4 spaces, so 2 guys have to be eliminated.   I think Akin is currently at the bottom of the totem pole for these pitchers, and it’s premature to put Henderson in the top 10 even though he could end up a really top prospect.   So, removing Henderson and Akin eliminates 2 options from the 7-8 list and 3 options from the 9-10 list.   
 

2.   Once you do that, Baumann-Lowther is impossible for 7-8 because the two options for 9-10 contain either Baumann or Lowther.   Likewise Kremer-Harvey is impossible for 6-7 because the two choices for 9-10 each contain Kremer or Harvey.   That leaves Baumann-Harvey as the only option 7-8.    I think Baumann has the edge over the other options at 7 anyway, based on comments from Tony and Luke throughout the year, so I went with that one.

3.   That leaves only Lowther-Kremer at 9-10.   
 

All pretty logical so long as you think Henderson and Akin are the odd men out.   If Henderson is in, it could be Henderson-Baumann and then Lowther-Kremer.   
 

Wow, this is pretty fun.   Lots of great choices in these slots.   

Love the work, but I don't think you can throw Henderson out.

And Henderson-Baumann and then Lowther-Kremer were my picks, before looking at both polls.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DirtyBird said:

Love the work, but I don't think you can throw Henderson out.

And Henderson-Baumann and then Lowther-Kremer were my picks, before looking at both polls.

 

It’s just really hard for me to compare a 1st round supplemental pick who’s only played in the GCL with guys who’ve played in upper levels of the minors with some success, as all the others have done.    I’ll certainly acknowledge he might turn out better than any of them, but I’m hesitant to rank him there now.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Frobby said:

It’s just really hard for me to compare a 1st round supplemental pick who’s only played in the GCL with guys who’ve played in upper levels of the minors with some success, as all the others have done.    I’ll certainly acknowledge he might turn out better than any of them, but I’m hesitant to rank him there now.    

Yeah, I understand that rationale when making a list. But, if you stuck to that way of thinking, you would have Mountcastle ahead of Adley. It's definitely a subjective balance of upside vs performance in these lists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Looking at 7-10 together was a bit of a brain-teaser, but here was my logic.   
 

1.   You’ve got 6 guys for 4 spaces, so 2 guys have to be eliminated.   I think Akin is currently at the bottom of the totem pole for these pitchers, and it’s premature to put Henderson in the top 10 even though he could end up a really top prospect.   So, removing Henderson and Akin eliminates 2 options from the 7-8 list and 3 options from the 9-10 list.   
 

2.   Once you do that, Baumann-Lowther is impossible for 7-8 because the two options for 9-10 contain either Baumann or Lowther.   Likewise Kremer-Harvey is impossible for 6-7 because the two choices for 9-10 each contain Kremer or Harvey.   That leaves Baumann-Harvey as the only option 7-8.    I think Baumann has the edge over the other options at 7 anyway, based on comments from Tony and Luke throughout the year, so I went with that one.

3.   That leaves only Lowther-Kremer at 9-10.   
 

All pretty logical so long as you think Henderson and Akin are the odd men out.   If Henderson is in, it could be Henderson-Baumann and then Lowther-Kremer.   
 

Wow, this is pretty fun.   Lots of great choices in these slots.   

Yes, in addition to the actual ranking results, it’s fascinating to pull out your old statistical process of elimination chart, And make the most logical choices based on the available options. I actually don’t remember my vote, but I think I went with Baumann and Harvey. Which means I guess that Kremer is further down, poop.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, isn’t it pretty premature to put Henderson so high? Yes, he was a second round draft choice which means he was, what, 34? Something like that, but he’s a high school kid and he’s proven nothing. Yes, skyhigh potential, but still the other guys probably deserve to be higher for now don’t they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pickles said:

I think Henderson is the first upside guy the OH staff loves.  And I think they like Baumann more than Lowther or Kremer.  I don't really think Harvey has any place this high on the list.

I am relieved they finally made the move to send Harvey to the bullpen It does crater his "prospect status" because we can't dream he'll develop into a TOR starter, but the possibility of having a young, inexpensive, high-leverage power arm at the back of the bullpen is good enough for me. 

I went Henderson-Baumann because using Tony's "Who would you rather have in the system" rule, Henderson is a high upside power bat with the ability to play the left side of the infield and the only other option that included Henderson was Kremer who I'd rate below Baumann because he doesn't have the same upside. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Pickles said:

I think Henderson is the first upside guy the OH staff loves.  And I think they like Baumann more than Lowther or Kremer.  I don't really think Harvey has any place this high on the list.

I have no idea what Tony and Luke will pick, but there's at least a chance they still keep Harvey very high. I know Luke wasn't sold on his move to the bullpen being permanent. If it isn't, he's still a very high upside starter, even though his 2019 performance didn't warrant it (which was his first consistent work in years). 

Also, I know Luke mentioned his scoring criteria in another thread, but comparing a guy like Harvey to a guy like Gunnar and rank ordering their prospect status is slightly less easy than putting an elephant on the moon. I hate to be the fun sucker, but the order here really doesn't matter very much. I just love that we're tossing around the names of several guys who have legit claims to being high level prospects or near term contributors even going past #10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, WalkWithElias said:

I am relieved they finally made the move to send Harvey to the bullpen It does crater his "prospect status" because we can't dream he'll develop into a TOR starter, but the possibility of having a young, inexpensive, high-leverage power arm at the back of the bullpen is good enough for me. 

I went Henderson-Baumann because using Tony's "Who would you rather have in the system" rule, Henderson is a high upside power bat with the ability to play the left side of the infield and the only other option that included Henderson was Kremer who I'd rate below Baumann because he doesn't have the same upside. 

That's largely how I felt about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, LookinUp said:

I have no idea what Tony and Luke will pick, but there's at least a chance they still keep Harvey very high. I know Luke wasn't sold on his move to the bullpen being permanent. If it isn't, he's still a very high upside starter, even though his 2019 performance didn't warrant it (which was his first consistent work in years). 

Also, I know Luke mentioned his scoring criteria in another thread, but comparing a guy like Harvey to a guy like Gunnar and rank ordering their prospect status is slightly less easy than putting an elephant on the moon. I hate to be the fun sucker, but the order here really doesn't matter very much. I just love that we're tossing around the names of several guys who have legit claims to being high level prospects or near term contributors even going past #10.

Here's my reasoning that this is too high for here:

I think his days as a SP are over.  He got BAD results last year starting.  Go look at the numbers.  He was the worst of the AA starters by far.  Between not getting results, and the arduous process of building him up to the point he could throw 180 innings a year, imo it's safe to say he won't start anymore.

So he's a BP guy.  Ok, fine.  He can still have a future here, and help.  However, on a "Who would you rather have?" kind of evaluation, anybody who has MOR upside is more valuable.  Unless you think Harvey goes full Britton in the pen.

So if you want to rank him over Akin?  Sure, I get it.

But over Baumann, in particular, I don't see it.

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

    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...