Jump to content

State of the System: Starting Pitching - Grade A


ScGO's

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Fair enough.  But I'm still not excited about Lowther and Baumann.  I feel like they're guys we're supposed to be excited about since we've drafted them and they've put up some interesting numbers but both appear to have some flaws.

Definitely, all prospects are flawed and no pitching prospect can be counted on.

I would be very pleased to get a 3, a 4, a 5, and a late inning reliever (Castro or Givens quality) out of the Akin, Kremer, Baumann, Zimmermann, Wells, Bradish, and Smith crowd. A lot of quantity and reasonable quality. 

If we can get a #2 out of Hall and Rodriguez, I would be pleased. Tough to ever expect even 50 percent of pitching prospects to pan out. Obviously I hope they both become top of the rotation starters, but you can't rely on it.

I would have been pleased to get a reasonable 6th inning reliever out of David Hess.

Of course, occasionally a John Means comes along and blows your expectations out of the water, but that is much more rare than the other way around.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MurphDogg said:

Definitely, all prospects are flawed and no pitching prospect can be counted on.

I would be very pleased to get a 3, a 4, a 5, and a late inning reliever (Castro or Givens quality) out of the Akin, Kremer, Baumann, Zimmermann, Wells, Bradish, and Smith crowd. A lot of quantity and reasonable quality. 

If we can get a #2 out of Hall and Rodriguez, I would be pleased. Tough to ever expect even 50 percent of pitching prospects to pan out. Obviously I hope they both become top of the rotation starters, but you can't rely on it.

I would have been pleased to get a reasonable 6th inning reliever out of David Hess.

Of course, occasionally a John Means comes along and blows your expectations out of the water, but that is much more rare than the other way around.

Agreed with all points.  And reasonable expectations, too.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, the current major league rotation is a C+ depending on Means ceiling and the future outlook of Akin and Kremer.

I believe the minor league situation is an A.  I am not sure how many organizations have 2 SP candidates in the top 100, but by law of averages I doubt it is much more than 10.  There are a LOT of names with reasonable chances of becoming 3-5 SPs in the organization.  Baumann may be the next biggest name and we heard nice things about Bradish and we still have Lowther, Wells and Smith leading the wave after Akin/Kremer.  And a bunch of names below that.

I would have to strongly disagree about any renaissance with pitching philosophies.  Our current FO has spent very little of the past few drafts on pitching.  Almost all of the names in the opening post were provided by the prior regime.  I think this is mostly by design as Elias will draft hitters.  Going forward, I expect our pitching inventory to be stocked by international signs, trades for minor leaguers in other organizations (such as the Bradish and Smith deals) and lastly - like Houston - trade for TOR, cost controlled SPs mostly using the hitting inventory.  I expect high $ investments in pitchers in the draft and internationally will be a lesser occurrence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

B-/C+. It’s Hall and Rodriguez and a lot of back of rotation/swingman types behind them. It just is what it is. Our depth has greatly improved. 

We’ve gone position player heavy in Elias’ first two drafts. Almost entirely position players in the first 10 rounds.
 

We’ve acquired a lot of NCAA arms that were drafted in rounds 10-30 of recent drafts. I think the hopes are is that those guys will be the role players/depth on a mlb pitching staff, not the rotation pieces. 
 

I still see Elias playing it safe in the next draft and going position player heavy again. It’s the safest and quickest way to build a system. Then we will eventually buy the rotation arms with prospects or cash.  
 

I think Elias’ goal is fill spots #3-#5 in the rotation and our entire bullpen, then buy top flight rotation/bullpen arms as needed, once we are “contending”. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the depth here and feel like there is more depth in the system at SP than we've seen since I've been following the minors. The major league rotation in 2021 will still leave something to be desired. Kremer and Akin still need to prove themselves after a nice showing (save that one start) in a SSS in 2020. Means looks like a dependable mid-rotation arm if not a bit more. I don't have high hopes for Lopez--and am ready to move on from Cobb--but they're placeholders at the moment.

As noted, the depth with Lowther, Baumann, Zimmermann, Wells, Bradish, Smith, etc. is great. I feel confident that with them (and Means, Akin, Kremer) we have a solid 3-5, plus some depth capable of stepping in for 2022 and beyond. One of those players (maybe Kremer or Means) might be able to step in as the #2, but we are missing a TOR arm. Hall and Rodriguez are great prospects and I'm hopeful they can be the #1 and #2 long-term, but it's possible they don't develop to that point. We may see them take the Zack Britton route. Or the Dylan Bundy route. Or the Hunter Harvey route. Or maybe they do become a top guy for a few years like Arrieta after flaming out here. I know this is a different regime with better analytics and (hopefully) better development, but it's not a guarantee that they'll pan out. 

We have depth to protect us for most of the rotation, but the options at the top are still limited and I'd like to have a couple more TOR options to feel good enough for an A grade. I'm going B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jamalshw said:

I like the depth here and feel like there is more depth in the system at SP than we've seen since I've been following the minors. The major league rotation in 2021 will still leave something to be desired. Kremer and Akin still need to prove themselves after a nice showing (save that one start) in a SSS in 2020. Means looks like a dependable mid-rotation arm if not a bit more. I don't have high hopes for Lopez--and am ready to move on from Cobb--but they're placeholders at the moment.

As noted, the depth with Lowther, Baumann, Zimmermann, Wells, Bradish, Smith, etc. is great. I feel confident that with them (and Means, Akin, Kremer) we have a solid 3-5, plus some depth capable of stepping in for 2022 and beyond. One of those players (maybe Kremer or Means) might be able to step in as the #2, but we are missing a TOR arm. Hall and Rodriguez are great prospects and I'm hopeful they can be the #1 and #2 long-term, but it's possible they don't develop to that point. We may see them take the Zack Britton route. Or the Dylan Bundy route. Or the Hunter Harvey route. Or maybe they do become a top guy for a few years like Arrieta after flaming out here. I know this is a different regime with better analytics and (hopefully) better development, but it's not a guarantee that they'll pan out. 

We have depth to protect us for most of the rotation, but the options at the top are still limited and I'd like to have a couple more TOR options to feel good enough for an A grade. I'm going B.

Maybe like Asa Lacy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

B-/C+. It’s Hall and Rodriguez and a lot of back of rotation/swingman types behind them. It just is what it is. Our depth has greatly improved. 

We’ve gone position player heavy in Elias’ first two drafts. Almost entirely position players in the first 10 rounds.
 

We’ve acquired a lot of NCAA arms that were drafted in rounds 10-30 of recent drafts. I think the hopes are is that those guys will be the role players/depth on a mlb pitching staff, not the rotation pieces. 
 

I still see Elias playing it safe in the next draft and going position player heavy again. It’s the safest and quickest way to build a system. Then we will eventually buy the rotation arms with prospects or cash.  
 

I think Elias’ goal is fill spots #3-#5 in the rotation and our entire bullpen, then buy top flight rotation/bullpen arms as needed, once we are “contending”. 

Elias' next 1st round pick will probably be a true short stop, or at least he will hope to find one there at #5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ScGO's said:

Elias' next 1st round pick will probably be a true short stop, or at least he will hope to find one there at #5.

BPA of course, but I will be disappointed if the Bobby Witt, Jr of 2021 is the demographic of the selection unless it is a too good to be true slam dunk.  I will be curious to see come June/July if MLB makes any effort to promote the combine NFL-style, especially if the College World Series doesn't make it back full bore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd give the situation a solid B. 

Means, Cobb, Akin, and Kremer are 4 ML caliber starters, which is more than we've had since 2016. Lots of reasons to be optimistic about Baumann, Hall, Rodriguez, Smith, etc. in the next few years too. 

But an A is too good for this group. The Reds had Trevor Bauer, Luis Castillo, Sonny Gray, and Tyler Mahle throwing gem after gem this year with some solid pitching prospects in the minors. Are they an A++?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the OP grade of an A, but I would imagine that grade takes into account what our organization was as much as what it currently is. If you compare it to our history, I would agree with the A grade. But comparing to other organizations, I would think a B is probably more realistic. I say this having done zero research to support this comment. Either way, I am happy with the state of the pitching, and think next year will be a big one to see what we actually have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/29/2020 at 8:40 PM, ScGO's said:

I suppose the grade is a measurement of the actual talent, the philosophy in scouting/developing for the position, and the depth.  That's why I believe they deserve the A.

How do the Orioles' pitchers compare to the other 29 organizations?   It's fine to give them an A, I suppose.  But would that mean that 14 other organizations also get A's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, luismatos4prez said:

I'd give the situation a solid B. 

Means, Cobb, Akin, and Kremer are 4 ML caliber starters, which is more than we've had since 2016. Lots of reasons to be optimistic about Baumann, Hall, Rodriguez, Smith, etc. in the next few years too. 

But an A is too good for this group. The Reds had Trevor Bauer, Luis Castillo, Sonny Gray, and Tyler Mahle throwing gem after gem this year with some solid pitching prospects in the minors. Are they an A++?

Kremer is a former 14th round pick who's thrown less than 40 innings above AA, and I don't think he's made any top 100 prospect lists.  Although he has potential he's not an established MLB starter yet.

Akin has 25 MLB innings, had a 4.73 ERA last year in Norfolk, and has less than 400 professional innings on his resume.  He is not an established MLB starter yet. I like his strikeout rate, although he does not throw particularly hard.

The Orioles have a lot more potential and optimism than they do fully- (or even mostly-) formed pitchers.

  • Upvote 1
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

    • Great post.  I like your optimism, and I'll try to believe this team can turn things around just in the nick of time like some classic Hollywood baseball movie.
    • I think Elias has mostly done an excellent job with one exception -- he seems like he treats the bullpen like an afterthought.  I doubt that will happen again this coming offseason. I don't really blame him for the current offensive struggles overall.  Just too many injuries late in the season.  That said I don't understand how we went from dealing Austin Hays, Connor Norby and Ryan McKenna just so we could land the right handed bat of, gulp, Austin Slater.  
    • Man this team has no shot. Right now they may not even make it. 
    • Most of these guys are only playing because of injuries to starters.  But Austin Slater I'm guessing was brought in to replace the traded Austin Hays.  The problem is that Slater has shown little ability to hit lefties this year, after hitting them pretty well up to this season.  This must be why two teams dropped him before the O's picked him up.  I know he was let go much earlier in the season, but is Ryan McKenna actually worse than this guy?  I don't understand how the front office went from releasing McKenna to later trading Hays and Norby -- thinking their right handed bats could adequately be replaced by someone like Slater.  
    • I'm willing to give Elias some rope because of the strict limitations he was under with JA but he better not be so damn conservative again this year and let every serviceable FA out there sign with other teams while he's busy picking up reclamation projects again. Minus Burns of course.  
    • I agree completely that it’s irrelevant whether it worked.  But I don’t agree that bunting is clearly the right decision in either scenario, and I think that decision gets worse if it’s intended to be a straight sacrifice rather than a bunt for a hit. To be clear, the outcome you’re seeking in tonight’s situation, for example — sacrifice the runners over to 2nd/3rd — lowers both your run expectancy for the inning (from 1.44 to 1.39) and your win expectancy for the game (from 38.8% to 37.1%). It increases the likelihood of scoring one run, but it decreases the likelihood of scoring two runs (which you needed to tie) and certainly of scoring three or more runs (which you needed to take the lead).  And that’s if you succeed in getting them to 2nd/3rd. Research indicates that 15-30% of sacrifice bunt attempts fail, so you have to bake in a pretty significant percentage of the time that you’d just be giving up a free out (or even just two free strikes, as on Sunday). The bunt attempt in the 3rd inning on Sunday (which my gut hates more than if they’d done it today) actually is less damaging to the win probability — decreasing it only very slightly from 60.2% to 59.8%. More time left in the game to make up for giving up outs, I guess, and the scoreboard payoff is a bit better (in the sense that at least you’d have a better chance to take the lead).   At the bottom of it, these things mostly come down to gut and pure chance. The percentages are rarely overwhelming in either direction, and so sometimes even a “lower-percentage” play may work better under some circumstances. You would have bunted both times. I wouldn’t have bunted either time. Hyde bunted one time but not the other. I don’t know that anyone is an idiot (or even clearly “wrong”) for their preference. Either approach could have worked. Sadly, none of them actually did.
    • Wasn't Hyde always thought of more or less as a caretaker? I'm on the fence about him coming back. I totally get the injuries and that needs to be taking into consideration but man this collapse some heads have to roll who's I'm  mot sure 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...