Chance Sisco 2020

[interloper]

3 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

@Frobby @interloper You realize that he put up those offensive numbers in his age 22, 23, and 24 seasons?  Everyone thinks they're a whiz at judging Catchers defensively but what really do we know?  All we know is their caught stealing percentage and how many passed balls they have.  Either way, at 24, he's not a finished product.  

Is the ball going to be juiced this year?  If not, I'll take a .729 OPS from a guy that isn't the catcher of the future.  

Yeah no argument. I like what he did last year - he just didn't keep it up. But like I said, it was a huge improvement over his previous ML stint. 

Defensively, the only thing I feel qualified to say is that he doesn't look good trying to throw out runners. When he's missing, he seems to be missing by a lot. I don't know enough to comment about his blocking or framing or pitch calling. I just know he doesn't appear to be a natural throwing the ball. But if he can improve defensively to where that's his main defensive weak point, I'm kind of ok with that. I think those other areas are more important in today's game. Just don't throw the ball into CF. 

[Moose Milligan]

Glad to see that he's trying new things but quite frankly anyone who's catching games for the Orioles these next couple of years is just a placeholder for AR.

[Legend_Of_Joey]

45 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

And Davis gained mass.

Wynns made some adjustments too, according to Eric.

McCoy also seemed to be working on stuff in the video Tony posted.

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Moose Milligan said:

Glad to see that he's trying new things but quite frankly anyone who's catching games for the Orioles these next couple of years is just a placeholder for AR.

"But Moose, maybe Chance can figure out his offensive game and we can trade him!!"

[mdbdotcom]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

Glad to see that he's trying new things but quite frankly anyone who's catching games for the Orioles these next couple of years is just a placeholder for AR.

That's when they'll move him to 3B.

[HowAboutThat]

22 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

He's only 24.  Catchers usually take longer to develop.  I wouldn't give up on him yet.  At the very least I see him as a .700 OPS Catcher.  That's not bad for that position.  

He has shown slight improvement: his walk rate is up and his K rate is down( but still very high) but his catching defense is horrible. If his offense is not bad for the position, his Defense has to be acceptable for the position and it’s not.

[interloper]

Just now, Moose Milligan said:

"But Moose, maybe Chance can figure out his offensive game and we can trade him!!"

Maybe when we release Davis he can be our LH DH!

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, interloper said:

If you ignore everything else (not that you should), you can say the following about Chance: he improved from a .557 OPS in 2018 to a .729 OPS in 2019 in a similarly-sized sample (160 AB to 167 AB). In a vacuum, that's good! 

Now the reason we're kind of down on the guy is because that .729 OPS was buoyed mostly by a scorching hot start when he got called up followed by a pretty dismal remainder of his season. And then you factor in his defense and his former top prospect status and it all kind of adds up to disappointment. 

BUT. He did improve, at least in the technical sense. And this new knowledge about his offseason work is definitely exciting. There's room on most teams for a left-handed slugging catcher - all he has to do is just be sort of average on defense. 

You hit the nail on the head as far as my concerns about his offense go.    Also, even though his OBP was solid, it was very walk-driven and I’d like to see a batting average much better than last year’s.    

[interloper]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

You hit the nail on the head as far as my concerns about his offense go.    Also, even though his OBP was solid, it was very walk-driven and I’d like to see a batting average much better than last year’s.    

Haha usually everyone says the exact opposite. But yeah, he's supposed to have this great bat. Let's see the bat. Although failing that, walking and cranking some bombs isn't the end of the world for a guy who might be a backup catcher. 

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, interloper said:

Haha usually everyone says the exact opposite. But yeah, he's supposed to have this great bat. Let's see the bat. Although failing that, walking and cranking some bombs isn't the end of the world for a guy who might be a backup catcher. 

I'll say the opposite, I don't mind the walks at all.  I'm not sure if ~.100 point separation between batting average and OBP is real for him but if he could get that batting average up to .250 and keep the walk rate the same, that'd be nice.

[Frobby]

15 minutes ago, Philip said:

He has shown slight improvement: his walk rate is up and his K rate is down( but still very high) but his catching defense is horrible. If his offense is not bad for the position, his Defense has to be acceptable for the position and it’s not.

What meets your definition of “acceptable?”     To my way of thinking, unacceptable means I wouldn’t play him at catcher no matter how good his offense was.    I don’t put Sisco in that category.  For me, he’s in the category of “has to hit very well to justify playing him at catcher, because he’s well below average defensively.”   If he was putting up an .800 OPS I’d gladly put up with his subpar defense, though of course I’d like his defense to get better.   

[interloper]

Let's also keep in mind Matt Wieters' best full season as an Oriole was .778 OPS (not counting his injury shortened 2014). He did that with what we mostly thought was above average defense. And he never hit more than 23 homers.

Chance Sisco was never touted as highly as Matt Wieters, so I think expecting a .800 OPS is pretty lofty. I think he could have a season where he surpasses Wieters' home run total, but if he manages to outshine Wieters overall offensively, I'll be impressed. 

[HowAboutThat]

6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What meets your definition of “acceptable?”     To my way of thinking, unacceptable means I wouldn’t play him at catcher no matter how good his offense was.    I don’t put Sisco in that category.  For me, he’s in the category of “has to hit very well to justify playing him at catcher, because he’s well below average defensively.”   If he was putting up an .800 OPS I’d gladly put up with his subpar defense, though of course I’d like his defense to get better.   

I think he is unplayable at catcher, if he doesn’t improve significantly.

No matter how good his offense is, and his offense would have to improve dramatically to even make the question worth considering.

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'll say the opposite, I don't mind the walks at all.  I'm not sure if ~.100 point separation between batting average and OBP is real for him but if he could get that batting average up to .250 and keep the walk rate the same, that'd be nice.

What I’m saying is that if a guy has a .333 OBP (as Sisco did last year), I’d rather have that comprised of a .275 BA (50 hits) and 16 walks + HBP in 198 PA, rather than a .210 BA (35 hits) and 31 walks + HBP in 198 PA.

[Enjoy Terror]

Tale of two halves