Jump to content

Who will be the #17 and #18 prospects?


Tony-OH

Who will be the #17 and #18 prospects?  

45 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will be the #17 and #18 prospects?

    • Bannon and McKenna
    • Hall and Stowers
    • Pop and Sedlock
    • Leonardo Rodriguez and Tate
      0
    • Stauffer and Fenter

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

I based my note entirely unfamiliarity, and awareness, neither of which I have in great measure regarding these guys, but Sedlock has been disappointing and Pop is out for TJ surgery so I didn’t vote for them. But I’ve heard of Rylan and Bannon. Their guitar work is amazing and the lyrics are fresh and interesting.

so I went with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went with Hall and Stowers, but I could have just as easily picked Pop and Sedlock. Pretty sure it isn't the other three choices. Tate's stock is way down, Stauffer doesn't seem like anything special and Bannon and McKenna don't have much upside.

Didn't pick Pop and Sedlock because I think Pop was about here in the rankings last year and he had TJS. Also while Sedlock is showing signs of life, he probably has 7/8th inning guy ceiling

Edited by ChosenOne21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

The top player left on that list, for me, is Hall. Stowers has tools to work with. So they're my pick. 

We're pretty far down this list and still not picking from scrubs. 

You and I can put out our own lists then. Because I'm right here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, weams said:

You and I can put out our own lists then. Because I'm right here. 

I'm kind of surprised Stauffer and Fenter are getting no love, tbh. Fenter's old for his level, but both had really nice years. I guess it's just too early since they're probably not going to end up ML starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I'm kind of surprised Stauffer and Fenter are getting no love, tbh. Fenter's old for his level, but both had really nice years. I guess it's just too early since they're probably not going to end up ML starters.

I'd assume as much. I don't think it will be too long though. For the first time through this I saw one thing in the future that makes it tough to say to much for a couple picks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went Hall and Stowers, though Tony’s comments on Hall in the Hernaiz thread show me that he’s not that high on Hall.   
 

All in all, I’m pleased to see ten plausible names here.   The bottom part of our top 30 is quite strong compared to just about any year I can remember.   

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I went Hall and Stowers, though Tony’s comments on Hall in the Hernaiz thread show me that he’s not that high on Hall.   
 

All in all, I’m pleased to see ten plausible names here.   The bottom part of our top 30 is quite strong compared to just about any year I can remember.   

Yes. Agreed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Greg Pappas said:

I went Hall and Stowers, but was on the verge of selecting Stauffer/Fenter. I'm high on Stauffer and thought he'd be a strong candidate for this range. 

I don't know a thing about these next two. I just know someone listed as a choice does not make this cut. 

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

    • The same thing was happening was MacDonald was the DC and when Wink was the DC, that makes me put most of the blame on Harbaugh 
    • 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.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...