Jump to content

State of the System: Corner Infield - Grade B+


ScGO's

Recommended Posts

Corner Infield

 

Current Roster: At the MLB level, 1B is packed with quality options with Trey Mancini, Ryan Mountcastle, Renato Nunez, and even Pat Valaika.  Mancini's health is obviously a question mark. 3rd base on the other hand hasn’t been as steady. Rio Ruiz shows flashes and perhaps gets the first shot out the gate in 2021 again, but he’s not the long term solution.  Valaika and Hanser Alberto can provide innings there as well if Ruiz struggles again.  Chris Davis may unfortunately be in the fold for another season.

 

Future Outlook: The trade for Tyler Nevin helped our corner depth a bit. Rylan Bannon could provide a 3B option as well.  If Trey is truly healthy, Nunez may become expendable, but with only 2 years left until becoming a free agent himself, Mancini may not be around for our next playoff season, so 1B could be Mountcastle’s by the end of next year.  The future at 3B could be a bright one with Gunnar Henderson and then Coby Mayo approaching. Toby Welk remains intriguing in the low minors too. With 3rd base, Elias has done a good job addressing a position needing depth at the minor league level.

 

Players of Note: Andrew Daschbach, JC Encarnacion, Dilson Herrera, Seamus Curran, Patrick Dorian, Ryan Ripken

 

System Grade: B+

 

The corner situation is bright, but the mix of depth and potential differs a bit between the two as 1B has solid MLB ready options but not a ton of minor league depth, while 3rd base isn’t very strong on the parent club, but has very promising prospects in the low minors with Henderson and Mayo.  By 2023, Henderson and Mountcastle could be a legitimate duo on the corners.  It will be interesting to see how the O’s handle 1B on the big league club with Mancini’s health and free agency looming, Nunez’ arbitration and inconsistencies being considered, and of course having Davis on the roster doesn’t help the system at all.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

C. Mountcastle is a stud but 3B is a black hole. Mancini doesn't count because in the best case scenario he is gone in a couple months (good couple of months, traded at deadline). After that, prospects are all question marks. Is Gunnar no longer considered SS? 

I don't believe he sticks.  Look at his body type and watch some films of him taking grounders.  He has a great arm and solid glove, but he will get bigger and there will be more athletic options at SS. I think he could be a stellar 3rd baseman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ScGO's said:

I don't believe he sticks.  Look at his body type and watch some films of him taking grounders.  He has a great arm and solid glove, but he will get bigger and there will be more athletic options at SS. I think he could be a stellar 3rd baseman.

I think it’s fair to say he won’t stick at SS but I also don’t think you can put him at third for the purposes of your exercise quite yet either.

My bigger issue is that you have Mountcastle and Mancini listed here.  Neither can play third and both can’t play first.  One has to be at DH or in LF.

In other words, I think by adding both of them plus Henderson, you are “cheating”. (For lack of a better word)

I like the potential of Mayo but he is obviously years away and we just don’t know anything yet.

I can see where you come up with your grade by including everyone but I think it’s a bit of a stretch at the moment.

I think even with the inclusion of all of these guys, I wouldn’t be as generous as a B+ but I think a B would be fair.

I do wonder though...when you are doing this, how much consideration are you giving for how far away a player is?  Or do you just strictly do it on talent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

C-C+

At first you have a guy attempting a comeback from cancer with a year left under team control in Mancini.  Mountcastle could go there, but currently he's an outfielder. In '19 Tyler Nevin hit .251 with a .744 OPS in AA.  He's more of a 1B than a 3B, so he'll have to hit more than that.  Nunez is a DH.  Valaika a utility player.

At third we have Rio Ruiz, who is 26 and has a .667 career MLB OPS.  Gunnar Henderson just turned 19 and hasn't played above rookie ball.  Bannon might not be a third baseman, and his best hitting numbers in the minors are in rather extreme hitter's parks.

Mayo hasn't appeared in a pro game yet, and Welk is 23 and hasn't been above low-A.  The rest of the players of note look like org guys.  The presence of Ryan Ripken indicates the depth here is pretty shallow, he's 27 and barely gotten to AA.

C/C+.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Mountcastle and Mancini will both spend some time at 1B next season.  1B was Mancini position in the minors and from what I have seen he is average defensively there.   I like what I have seen from Mountcastle at first.  Soft hards, good on balls in the dirt and pretty mobile there.   He looks like a SS playing 1B to me.   I like him better defensively at 1B than LF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, ScGO's said:

I don't believe he sticks.  Look at his body type and watch some films of him taking grounders.  He has a great arm and solid glove, but he will get bigger and there will be more athletic options at SS. I think he could be a stellar 3rd baseman.

The issue with this assessment is projecting growth out 3-4 years in the future, after a position switch that we don't know how he'll handle.  It's premature to call him a stellar third baseman when all he has on his resume is high school/rookie ball shortstop.

Right now he's something like a 25 current/55 potential.  He might be great, but a lot of guys might be great if everything works out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

 

At first you have a guy attempting a comeback from cancer with a year left under team control in Mancini.  Mountcastle could go there, but currently he's an outfielder. In '19 Tyler Nevin hit .251 with a .744 OPS in AA.  He's more of a 1B than a 3B, so he'll have to hit more than that.  Nunez is a DH.  Valaika a utility player.

At third we have Rio Ruiz, who is 26 and has a .667 career MLB OPS.  Gunnar Henderson just turned 19 and hasn't played above rookie ball.  Bannon might not be a third baseman, and his best hitting numbers in the minors are in rather extreme hitter's parks.

Mayo hasn't appeared in a pro game yet, and Welk is 23 and hasn't been above low-A.  The rest of the players of note look like org guys.  The presence of Ryan Ripken indicates the depth here is pretty shallow, he's 27 and barely gotten to AA.

C/C+.

Mancini has two years until he is eligible for FA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When discussing the state is the system, I think it’s best to divide it into tears, the present, the short term future, and the far future, or 21, 22 and 23-24.

The near future shows us with a plethora of first base/DH types, and not much else. A couple of years out, things look a lot better, but I’ve said this before, I think Mike is going to be really scrounging around for middle infield help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

 

At first you have a guy attempting a comeback from cancer with a year left under team control in Mancini.  Mountcastle could go there, but currently he's an outfielder. In '19 Tyler Nevin hit .251 with a .744 OPS in AA.  He's more of a 1B than a 3B, so he'll have to hit more than that.  Nunez is a DH.  Valaika a utility player.

At third we have Rio Ruiz, who is 26 and has a .667 career MLB OPS.  Gunnar Henderson just turned 19 and hasn't played above rookie ball.  Bannon might not be a third baseman, and his best hitting numbers in the minors are in rather extreme hitter's parks.

Mayo hasn't appeared in a pro game yet, and Welk is 23 and hasn't been above low-A.  The rest of the players of note look like org guys.  The presence of Ryan Ripken indicates the depth here is pretty shallow, he's 27 and barely gotten to AA.

C/C+.

I included him because his presence in the organization at 27 tells me they will do what they can to push him up for a cup of coffee at some point for the fan fare.

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...