Double A manager on Tillman

[Lucky Jim]

I think this is the point in the conversation where we agree to disagree - partly because... I have no clue what you're talking about anymore. It's been a long day, and I'm not sure that was the best use of our time.

That's fine. I wasn't up in arms or anything. It didn't appear to me that you ever understood what I was saying. Which is strange, because it was pretty simple:

Roch is a journalist. Whether he is on the radio, writing a column, on television, or blogging. Roch's access is derived from the fact that he's a journalist, and he's treated as such. One reason folks feel it is safe to give him access is because he has standards of professionalism and performance he has to toe - in other words, folks don't feel they're going to get taken advantage of by shoddy work (like asserting that someone was thinking something they never stated) because Roch is accountable.

"Bloggers" of the amateur variety are not accountable - it's one of the main talking points in media/journalism studies about the rise of eclectronic media. And it's one of the reason few bloggers will ever get real access to original sources.

The fact that Roch is writing a blog doesn't make him a "blogger" rather than a journalist. It makes him a journalist with an added venue/outlet - a convenient one. But it doesn't lower the standards by which he should comport himself. I can guarantee he'd tell you the same thing.

You seem to think that a journalist's standards of professionalism change depending on where he's broadcasting/writing. I think that paid media folks have a set standard of professionalism that precludes asserting that someone's "thinking" something they never said.

That's where we can agree to disagree.

[PapaRick]

That's where we can agree to disagree.

AMEN

Tony, thanks for the set of standards on where prospects fit in the rotation discussion.

Ruzious - LOOK Haley's Comet!

PSST - Lucky Jim - you are right.

[Ruzious]

That's fine. I wasn't up in arms or anything. It didn't appear to me that you ever understood what I was saying. Which is strange, because it was pretty simple:

Roch is a journalist. Whether he is on the radio, writing a column, on television, or blogging. Roch's access is derived from the fact that he's a journalist, and he's treated as such. One reason folks feel it is safe to give him access is because he has standards of professionalism and performance he has to toe - in other words, folks don't feel they're going to get taken advantage of by shoddy work (like asserting that someone was thinking something they never stated) because Roch is accountable.

"Bloggers" of the amateur variety are not accountable - it's one of the main talking points in media/journalism studies about the rise of eclectronic media. And it's one of the reason few bloggers will ever get real access to original sources.

The fact that Roch is writing a blog doesn't make him a "blogger" rather than a journalist. It makes him a journalist with an added venue/outlet - a convenient one. But it doesn't lower the standards by which he should comport himself. I can guarantee he'd tell you the same thing.

You seem to think that a journalist's standards of professionalism change depending on where he's broadcasting/writing. I think that paid media folks have a set standard of professionalism that precludes asserting that someone's "thinking" something they never said.

That's where we can agree to disagree.

That comment really wasn't necessary and is not appreciated. I understood your position. It was your duck comment that didn't make sense to me - at the end of a 15 hour work day.

[TJ Wrangler]

Well let's take a look at these guys. Loewen, Penn and Riley were curtailed by injuries. Cabrera had always been wild and although he had top of the rotation stuff when he came out of the minors, he certainly did not have top of the rotation control.

Liz is similar to Cabrera but he actually has three pitches and I'm still not ready to give up on him as a starter. He just might need more time although his delivery suggests he'll end up in the bullpen.

Olson, he's always been a back of the rotation guy at best with a much better chance of being solid left-handed "Arthur Rhodes-type" reliever. His absolute upside was a third starter so I'm not sure who believed he was a top of the rotation guy.

One of the reasons I was for the Matusz pick was becasue the system did not have a number one guy. Matusz may still not be a number guy, but he's a good bet to be solid two, but he's got the best upside of any pitcher in the system.

Arrieta (command issues), Tillman (velocity and some command issues), Spoone (injury concerns/command issues) all have top of the rotation stuff but none can be profiled as a number one because of too many underlying issues.

Number one Ace pitchers are very, very hard to find and/or develop.

However, a future rotation of Guthie, Matusz, Tillman, Arrieta, and Spoone/Patton would be pretty darn good one day. Unfortunately, the chances of all of those pitchers making it are slim.

Thankfully, we have depth in guys like Hernandez, Bergesen, Berken, Albers, Erbe, and Britton. That's a lot of pitchers with starting possibility even if none profile right now as number one pitchers.

BTW, I didn't even get to some of our new guys like Bobby Bundy, Oliver Drake and Rich Zagone and guys who had off years like Beato and Bascom.

That's a lot of depth in my opinion.

This has to be one of the best posts I've ever read on this forum. I agree with every word here. Thanks a lot, Tony. This was a pleasure to read. Major rep to you.

[stef]

http://masnsports.com/2008/09/revisiting-komminsks-evaluatio.html

"I noticed that Double-A Bowie manager Brad Komminsk caused a bit of a stir, here and on orioleshangout.com's minor league message board, when he appeared to hang a "No. 3" starter tag on Chris Tillman during a recent interview. ...

(I'll stay away from the orioleshangout debate over whether I'm a "journalist" because I have a blog. Twenty-one years as a reporter at The Sun, the last 12 working the Orioles beat in various capacities, provide all the assurances that I need. I don't work out of my parents' basement, and I'm usually wearing pants. Props to Lucky Jim, and a few others, for understanding the difference. But like I said, I'm staying away from it. Really. I'm moving on. This is me...moving on)."

[Lucky Jim]

That comment really wasn't necessary and is not appreciated. I understood your position. It was your duck comment that didn't make sense to me - at the end of a 15 hour work day.

I didn't mean that as a slight, and I apologize. We really were looking at this from a different perspective, i.e., you were defining the job by the medium and I was defining the standards of the medium by Roch's job.

It's a fundamental difference. Apologies if my tone was disrespectful or unnecessarily sharp.

With RShack around, I don't have anyone to bicker with, and it's left a void in my life.

[Lucky Jim]

http://masnsports.com/2008/09/revisiting-komminsks-evaluatio.html

"I noticed that Double-A Bowie manager Brad Komminsk caused a bit of a stir, here and on orioleshangout.com's minor league message board, when he appeared to hang a "No. 3" starter tag on Chris Tillman during a recent interview. ...

(I'll stay away from the orioleshangout debate over whether I'm a "journalist" because I have a blog. Twenty-one years as a reporter at The Sun, the last 12 working the Orioles beat in various capacities, provide all the assurances that I need. I don't work out of my parents' basement, and I'm usually wearing pants. Props to Lucky Jim, and a few others, for understanding the difference. But like I said, I'm staying away from it. Really. I'm moving on. This is me...moving on)."

Like he's objective.

[allstar1579]

2008 is a new time, and there are new outlets for media. Newspapers are shifting more towards the internet than print, blogs are being published for journalists because people respect and value their opinions and want to hear more, and message boards are getting headlines when it comes to debate and research.

Calling someone a "blogger" is kind of discrediting them in the media area, a "blogger" is someone that writes to entertain or amuse, themselves or others. A Journalist...well we all know what those are. The two are not mutually exclusive you know. A journalist can have a blog, and throw some inside info around, or some extra tidbits here and there, or just do some journalistic reporting through it. Just because it is a blog, doesn't mean that it has to be stereotyped into what we think a blog has to be. Just look at this site, it is a message board, a place to toss around opinions with other like minded people, but that doesn't mean we don't have some journalists here. Guys like Tony, BowieMike, Avencil, Scottie, they get press passes, they write great pieces on players, reports on games, inside info and conversations with players. Just because they also post on here and chime in with their opinions doesn't make them less of a journalist, so why does Roch have to be less of one because he has a blog?

[stef]

So, how 'bout that Tillman fella?

Might be a pretty good pitcher some day, ya' reckon?

[Lucky Jim]

So, how 'bout that Tillman fella?

Might be a pretty good pitcher some day, ya' reckon?

I'd really like to see him sitting at 93-94. Which I don't think is impossible (as he's a young 20.)

But I'm a fan.

[Ruzious]

I didn't mean that as a slight, and I apologize. We really were looking at this from a different perspective, i.e., you were defining the job by the medium and I was defining the standards of the medium by Roch's job.

It's a fundamental difference. Apologies if my tone was disrespectful or unnecessarily sharp.

With RShack around, I don't have anyone to bicker with, and it's left a void in my life.

Eh, just me being oversensitive. Lol at the RShack comment. I have no desire to fill his shoes. :laughlol:

[Lucky Jim]

I didn't mean that as a slight, and I apologize. We really were looking at this from a different perspective, i.e., you were defining the job by the medium and I was defining the standards of the medium by Roch's job.

It's a fundamental difference. Apologies if my tone was disrespectful or unnecessarily sharp.

With RShack around, I don't have anyone to bicker with, and it's left a void in my life.

I mean WITHOUT RShack around. See - I've gone inventing surrogates just to take his place in my OH universe.

Jeez. I need help.

[Ruzious]

2008 is a new time, and there are new outlets for media. Newspapers are shifting more towards the internet than print, blogs are being published for journalists because people respect and value their opinions and want to hear more, and message boards are getting headlines when it comes to debate and research.

Calling someone a "blogger" is kind of discrediting them in the media area, a "blogger" is someone that writes to entertain or amuse, themselves or others. A Journalist...well we all know what those are. The two are not mutually exclusive you know. A journalist can have a blog, and throw some inside info around, or some extra tidbits here and there, or just do some journalistic reporting through it. Just because it is a blog, doesn't mean that it has to be stereotyped into what we think a blog has to be. Just look at this site, it is a message board, a place to toss around opinions with other like minded people, but that doesn't mean we don't have some journalists here. Guys like Tony, BowieMike, Avencil, Scottie, they get press passes, they write great pieces on players, reports on games, inside info and conversations with players. Just because they also post on here and chime in with their opinions doesn't make them less of a journalist, so why does Roch have to be less of one because he has a blog?

Nobody said that, nobody said Roch isn't a journalist, and no writer has been discredited in any way.

[Baltimoron]

A top of the rotation guy is a guy who can command at least three pitches, two of which should be plus, can be counted for at least seven innings in 80% of his starts, and preferably misses bats when he needs to.

I'm pretty sure that no MLB pitcher with any meaningful amount of starts has achieved this threshold this year, nor for some time. Its not attained by multiple top starters each year.

The top 20 or so performing starters in a given year may get you a Quality Start (6 innings, 3 or less runs) at or a little better than 2/3rds of the time, but pitchers don't go deep. link. That's sorta the gold standard today.

[Frobby]

I'm pretty sure that no MLB pitcher with any meaningful amount of starts has achieved this threshold this year, nor for some time. Its not attained by multiple top starters each year.

The top 20 or so performing starters in a given year may get you a Quality Start (6 innings, 3 or less runs) at or a little better than 2/3rds of the time, but pitchers don't go deep. link. That's sorta the gold standard today.

Even Roy Halladay, who is probably the king of going deep into games, has gone 7+ only 21 out of 29 starts (72%). So 80% is clearly too high a threshold.