Jump to content

Who will be #26-#30 prospects?


weams

Who are threOrioles Hangout #26 through # Prospects  

38 members have voted

  1. 1. Who are threOrioles Hangout #26 through # Prospects

    • Cumberland, Tate, Welk, Grenier, Neustrom
    • Welk, Muckenhirn, Sedlock, Cumberland, Prado
    • Tate, Sedlock, McLarty, Welk, Cumberland
    • Craport, Sparks, Bishop, Cumberland, Sedlock
      0
    • McLarty, Sedlock, Cumberland, Tate, Welk

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 11/20/19 at 05:00

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

He just missed on mine as well. 4th outfielder comp without a lot of pro stats to back it up one way or the other. Long swing without the power of Stowers but similar swing problems. 

Five home runs and nine doubles for Watson in 116 pro at bats isn't too shabby.  Stowers had only six home runs in 204 at bats.

Both players seem to have contact issues, so I figured Watson's elite speed and CF defensive capabilities might put him ahead of Stowers or at least not far behind given that they were drafted within ten picks of each other. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ChuckS said:

Five home runs and nine doubles for Watson in 116 pro at bats isn't too shabby.  Stowers had only six home runs in 204 at bats.

Both players seem to have contact issues, so I figured Watson's elite speed and CF defensive capabilities might put him ahead of Stowers or at least not far behind given that they were drafted within ten picks of each other. 

I like them both! I am willing to be patient. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChuckS said:

Five home runs and nine doubles for Watson in 116 pro at bats isn't too shabby.  Stowers had only six home runs in 204 at bats.

Both players seem to have contact issues, so I figured Watson's elite speed and CF defensive capabilities might put him ahead of Stowers or at least not far behind given that they were drafted within ten picks of each other. 

Watson could end up better than Stowers, but we liked the tools a bit better overall with Stowers overall. Both have a lot of work to do on their swings but I won't argue too much of one over the other because I got a preliminary look at both. We'll see what adjustments they make this offseason and next spring and have a better feeling next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChuckS said:

Five home runs and nine doubles for Watson in 116 pro at bats isn't too shabby.  Stowers had only six home runs in 204 at bats.

Both players seem to have contact issues, so I figured Watson's elite speed and CF defensive capabilities might put him ahead of Stowers or at least not far behind given that they were drafted within ten picks of each other. 

It's future 60 raw vs future 50 raw. Watson admittedly looked better the little bit I saw from him in his debut. But most of my context on Watson is from college, where I saw 60+ ABs. Long swing and a slasher type game that doesn't play as well in pro ball. He did put the ball in the air a lot more in his brief debut. That'll be something to watch going forward, if it's a real profile change, that would help. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like where the system has come, but this is where you really see the lack of international signings. For a team that’s had 3 years picking in the top half of the draft, 3 comp balance picks, and a firesale, we should have more “ceiling” at the bottom of this list. 

Great job by Tony and Luke for giving it to us straight and not hyping our favorite “underrated” prospects too much. 

Top 30’s are great and all, and I’m surely not asking the guys to do more, but the deep systems have a lot of “Prado” types knocking on the top 30 door. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I like where the system has come, but this is where you really see the lack of international signings. For a team that’s had 3 years picking in the top half of the draft, 3 comp balance picks, and a firesale, we should have more “ceiling” at the bottom of this list. 

Great job by Tony and Luke for giving it to us straight and not hyping our favorite “underrated” prospects too much. 

Top 30’s are great and all, and I’m surely not asking the guys to do more, but the deep systems have a lot of “Prado” types knocking on the top 30 door. 

Thanks!

I am kind of agnostic on the DSL guys in the sense I don't know enough about them yet to really compare them to the others in the system. There are a few DSL guys that may deserve inclusion on talent, but without eyes or contacts there, it's wait and see for me. I try and know my limitations. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Initial thoughts were Who the heck is McLarty?  I did some research. 20 year old. 2019 JC drafted. 20 IP in Aberdeen. 

Somebody’s really been getting their money’s worth out of milb tv. ?  

I appreciate it. 

The main thing to know about McLarty was he was the first pitcher we drafted in 2019 (though in the 8th round).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Initial thoughts were Who the heck is McLarty?  I did some research. 20 year old. 2019 JC drafted. 20 IP in Aberdeen. 

Somebody’s really been getting their money’s worth out of milb tv. ?  

I appreciate it. 

DI college and I watched him pitch in college some as well on ESPN+

That’s all I’ll say for now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got another one right!

On 11/19/2019 at 11:33 AM, Frobby said:

Tough call.    The only one I’m sure is wrong is no. 4.     No way Craport, Sparks or Bishop are in the top 30 this year.   The others are all plausible.    I chose no. 3 because it has both Tate and Sedlock, who’ve each been listed a ton up to now.    5 is identical to 3 but in a different order; I more or less flipped a coin between those choices.  

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...