Who are the #19 and #20 Prospects?

[HowAboutThat]

1 hour ago, RZNJ said:

I've never heard of David Williams but I've heard of Mason Williams who, I believe was drafted by the Yankees in the 1st round years back, was regarded as a top ten prospect,  and actually had decent numbers in a SSS with the Reds at the ML level.  If, two years ago, you asked 100 scouts who had more upside at the ML level, it is doubtful that a high percentage would have picked Yaz.  Are you going to be demanding that Mason McCoy gets a chance?  Should Richie Martin get another chance?  He's still younger than Yaz was 2 years ago.  Rylan Bannon.   Which guys deserve 100-300-500 AB's before we include them in some minor deal?

https://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/player.php?p=washida01
 

I remembered the name wrong. Year too, but the point remains valid. He should have had a chance. The very fact they didn’t give him a single MLB AB and he went on to not just success but stardom( at least for now) reinforces that he should have had a chance. He might have failed massively, then gone on to success with the Giants, but at least he would have had a chance.

And yes of course Richie Martin should be up again, Bannon too. 

[Moose Milligan]

10 hours ago, RZNJ said:

 It would be interesting to hear from Yaz what changes he did make.   That would be interesting.   

 

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/mike-yastrzemskis-breakout-is-mostly-real/

 

Quote

As Andrew Baggarly and Grant Brisbee wrote when discussing Yastrzemski’s breakout, he did it in large part by feasting on two-strike counts more than most hitters did. More than half of his home runs (11 of 21) came on two-strike counts. This year, it’s seven of eight. As Baggarly and Brisbee noted, Yaz is no longer as worried about striking out.

That does not mean adhering to the longstanding and now somewhat outdated advice that hitting coaches always preached about a two-strike approach. Yastrzemski used to choke up, spread out, shorten his swing, expand the zone.

“But I don’t anymore,” he said. “Because the whole idea of hitting is to try to get off your best swing as many times as you possibly can and hope you run into one at any of those points. That mentality stays the same. I’m still trying to get my best swing off even when the guy’s trying to strike me out.”

Yastrzemski credited the Giants’ hitting group of Donnie Ecker, Justin Viele, and Dustin Lind for continually reminding him that there’s no shame in striking out, especially if you’ve taken your optimal swing and made a good swing decision.

Quote

In the eyes of ZiPS, the 2019 season was enough to turn Yastrzemski from a role player to a legitimate stopgap starter for a few seasons. In about six weeks of 2020, he’s done enough to re-write the headline once again. No, ZiPS doesn’t see future MVP contention being likely, but what he’s done is at least enough to change the expectation to that of an above-average player, one can make an All-Star Game in his better seasons (and certainly would have if we had one this year). He’s unlikely to maintain his current .360 BABIP, but he doesn’t really need to; his plate discipline has improved, he can play defense, hit some doubles and homers, and has hit .359 against the shift. The fact that he’s already 30 counts against him in terms of long-term evaluation — players like the seemingly ageless Nelson Cruz are the exception rather than the rule — but he’s a key part of San Francisco’s lineup and likely will remain so for at least a few years.

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/giants/how-giants-mike-yastrzemski-has-turned-star-year-after-close-call

Quote

Farhan Zaidi spent much of his first Winter Meetings with the Giants sidestepping questions about how much he may be able to spend on a free agent like Bryce Harper, or what he might do with veterans like Madison Bumgarner and Will Smith. But one night, in his suite at the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in Las Vegas, Zaidi was asked how the Giants could find their own Max Muncy or Chris Taylor. 

Zaidi smiled as he talked of two of his greatest hits as the Dodgers' general manager. He said the first step for the Giants was obvious.

“We have to, as an organization, have a mindset of giving guys opportunities,” Zaidi said back then. “The Chris Taylor and Max Muncy success stories weren’t just about their acquisition, but it was also about giving them the chance at the big league level and giving them some runway.”

Quote

But the coaching staff was thrilled that night because of the deeper meaning of those swings. New hitting coach Donnie Ecker said the staff preaches that hitters should find "multiple solutions" at the plate, and he saw that in that game. Yastrzemski got a changeup down and in from Chris Paddack -- who has one of the game's best -- and pulled it down the line for his first homer. The walk-off was on a 93-mph fastball up and in from Matt Strahm, a tall lefty who stands as far to the first base side of the rubber as he can, giving lefties the impression that he's throwing from behind them. Yastrzemski put that one in the water, too. 

Quote

"I kind of got fascinated with his story," Ecker said. "I studied him and you kind of saw the ingredients that got him up to San Francisco, but now once you're around him, I think you just double-click into who he is and we're not surprised to see him performing the way he's performing."

Quote

Some of those ingredients, Ecker said, are thoughtfulness, intelligence, maintenance of his body, and a seriousness about his career and getting better. The last one has added another important tool for Yastrzemski this season. 

Yastrzemski is swinging at 13 percent fewer pitches this season. After swinging at 29 percent of the pitches he saw outside of the zone last year, Yastrzemski is down to 18 percent. Above everything else, the new hitting coaches want the Giants to focus on making good swing decisions, and Yastrzemski is doing that early on. 

 

"It's more of a mental thing, trying to game plan against pitchers, and our hitting staff has been unbelievable with that. They're coming up with plans to help us stay locked in and figure out what we should be swinging at, what we need to be taking," Yastrzemski said. 

It seems like fairly simple solutions.

It's funny, people throw their hands up and go "Oh well, it's an outlier, it's an extreme case, it doesn't happen that often," but it happened.  A 47 win team couldn't be bothered to give him a shot.  And on top of that, they couldn't coach him up, they couldn't tell him what adjustments to make.

For people who claim to be obsessed with getting the right people in place from top to bottom in the organization and who are obsessed with getting AAAA players and thinking "maybe we can do something with THIS guy..." it's odd that we're so dismissive of Yaz because...the likelihood of that happening again?  Or the likelihood of that happening in the first place?  

It's weird, it's like people want to shape their arguments around circumstance so they can be viewed as being "right" instead of being consistent with their critiques.  It doesn't bother any of you that we didn't have the coaching and instruction in our minor leagues where someone could look at Yaz and go "Hey, he might be older than a typical prospect but there are some tools here we can work with..."  It doesn't bother any of you that the Giants philosophy is to give players some runway in the majors but we couldn't do it after a 47 win season?  

But I don't even know why I'm arguing or debating these points, it's obvious Yaz wasn't going to do it here, even if given a shot... just like Arrieta wasn't going to do it here, just like Justin Turner wasn't going to do it here because Orioles.

[Sports Guy]

Still waiting on a reason why Yaz SHOULD have had a chance.

To me, using the word should implies that he earned it.  It implies that he proved to the organization that he was a MLer and they overlooked him and didn’t give him that chance.

Is that what people believe?

[Frobby]

27 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Still waiting on a reason why Yaz SHOULD have had a chance.

To me, using the word should implies that he earned it.  It implies that he proved to the organization that he was a MLer and they overlooked him and didn’t give him that chance.

Is that what people believe?

I think the issue here isn’t whether Yaz should have gotten a major league shot based on his MiL performance, but whether the Orioles’ development team hindered his performance by trying to force him into a box regarding his approach at the plate.   That’s what Yaz has said.    I can’t really blame Elias’ crew for failing to pick that up in the few weeks they had to look at Yaz before he was traded.    It’s on the old regime if Yaz was poorly coached.  

[Jammer7]

21 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think the issue here isn’t whether Yaz should have gotten a major league shot based on his MiL performance, but whether the Orioles’ development team hindered his performance by trying to force him into a box regarding his approach at the plate.   That’s what Yaz has said.    I can’t really blame Elias’ crew for failing to pick that up in the few weeks they had to look at Yaz before he was traded.    It’s on the old regime if Yaz was poorly coached.  

I think it is this, and several unfortunate injuries along his development. I remember DD was high on him at one point, but this kind of thing happens in every organization. Different coaches, different opinions, different training methods, whatever it is, it just clicks differently in different players. We have had success stories in Baltimore with guys that just needed a change of scenery too. Melvin Mora, Chris Davis, and several more come to mind. 
 

I remember being a little disappointed when he was traded, but I remember thinking we had several guys ahead of him. I remember liking what I had seen in him, but thought he had a ceiling as a 4th OF. 

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I think the issue here isn’t whether Yaz should have gotten a major league shot based on his MiL performance, but whether the Orioles’ development team hindered his performance by trying to force him into a box regarding his approach at the plate.   That’s what Yaz has said.    I can’t really blame Elias’ crew for failing to pick that up in the few weeks they had to look at Yaz before he was traded.    It’s on the old regime if Yaz was poorly coached.  

That's fine.  Its proven that the organization was a disaster before Elias (its not a lot better now because we are still owned by the same family but they are better nonetheless).

But Phillip is using the words "he should have been given a chance".  I see zero evidence that they SHOULD have done anything besides what they actually did.  I also think there needs to be some accountability on the part of Yaz himself.  Maybe the Os wanted him to do things differently but he had plenty of time to show them what he could do and he failed.

[Frobby]

44 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

That's fine.  Its proven that the organization was a disaster before Elias (its not a lot better now because we are still owned by the same family but they are better nonetheless).

But Phillip is using the words "he should have been given a chance".  I see zero evidence that they SHOULD have done anything besides what they actually did.  I also think there needs to be some accountability on the part of Yaz himself.  Maybe the Os wanted him to do things differently but he had plenty of time to show them what he could do and he failed.

I agree with you there.    I don’t see any reason why you give a chance to someone who hasn’t really shown anything much in 6-7 years in your organization.   He did get a spring training invite last in 2019 under Elias, which is more than he ever got under Duquette.   Put up a .599 OPS in 18 at bats.   Can’t really blame Elias here.  

[HowAboutThat]

He deserved a chance because we had 40 wins, so why not?

[Tony-OH]

6 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

 

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/mike-yastrzemskis-breakout-is-mostly-real/

 

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/giants/how-giants-mike-yastrzemski-has-turned-star-year-after-close-call

It seems like fairly simple solutions.

It's funny, people throw their hands up and go "Oh well, it's an outlier, it's an extreme case, it doesn't happen that often," but it happened.  A 47 win team couldn't be bothered to give him a shot.  And on top of that, they couldn't coach him up, they couldn't tell him what adjustments to make.

For people who claim to be obsessed with getting the right people in place from top to bottom in the organization and who are obsessed with getting AAAA players and thinking "maybe we can do something with THIS guy..." it's odd that we're so dismissive of Yaz because...the likelihood of that happening again?  Or the likelihood of that happening in the first place?  

It's weird, it's like people want to shape their arguments around circumstance so they can be viewed as being "right" instead of being consistent with their critiques.  It doesn't bother any of you that we didn't have the coaching and instruction in our minor leagues where someone could look at Yaz and go "Hey, he might be older than a typical prospect but there are some tools here we can work with..."  It doesn't bother any of you that the Giants philosophy is to give players some runway in the majors but we couldn't do it after a 47 win season?  

But I don't even know why I'm arguing or debating these points, it's obvious Yaz wasn't going to do it here, even if given a shot... just like Arrieta wasn't going to do it here, just like Justin Turner wasn't going to do it here because Orioles.

Great post.

It really is amazing how quickly some want to dismiss this and not understand that something went wrong here. The Orioles failed to develop Yaz and gave up him  for nothing, yet a team like the Giants were able to coach him up and he turned into an impact player. 

Yaz has mentioned coaching and swing changes they made with him. No one is saying that the Orioles are now awful with development, but with all the technology they have brought in, they failed to realize what Yaz COULD become. 

That's my only concern here. As you mentioned, this was a 47 win team that had opportunities and at bats to give in the outfield, yet they gave Yaz away and kept a player like DSJ. Regardless of whether some people want to call this a one off or not, what can not be argued is this WAS a failure by the Elias regime. 

Meanwhile, let's look at the hitters he's brought in for looks off waivers, international signing money or Rule 5:
Richie Martin - Utility upside? Can he hit major league pitching? Defense at SS was below par
Drew Jackson - Fail, returned defense was below par
Rio Ruiz: below average stop gap, defense is avg to slightly below average
Hanser Alberto : Stop gap, defense is below par
Jack Reinheimer: Fail, defense was below par
Dwight Smith Jr..- Below average stop gap, awful defensively
Pedro Severino: Stop gap/backup catcher on good team
Keon Broxton: His only Orioles career highlight was hitting a bomb of a home run on the first pitch he saw, fail afterwards
Jose Rondon: Huh, why? AAAA guy at best. Fail
Richard Urena: Huh? 
Pat Valaika: Bat first - Utility guy who was well below average defensively almost everywhere he played.
Ramon Urias: jury is out. Stick might be ok but defensive is questionable
Andrew Velazquez: Utility guy, can't hit and SS defense is questionable due to lack of arm strength

See any consistency here? It's been two years, but it's certainly time to start questioning the process in which Elias evaluates the players he acquires off waivers. His pitching acquisitions have not yielded much fruit either and while many of the players he's acquired in trades have not played because of COVID, none seem like potential impact prospects. Add in a lack of overall success in signing good minor league free agents who have helped or look like any kind of potential future piece, and he really has not found much success bringing in stop gap guys. 

Now I know some people are going to look at this and say I'm bashing Elias, I'm not. I'm just saying the results have not been good, yet one of the guys he let go for nothing has flourished. 

Maybe it was all just a case of a guy needing new voices or scenery, but the thing that can't be denied is we haven't any players come over into this organization and even turn into a potential everyday guy, and forget about an impact guy.

Hopefully his drafting, development of current talent, and international scouting will prove to be on point. The early results look good in these departments, but of course the development is hard to judge with no minor league season this year. 

I still think Elias is doing a lot of good things, but his Yaz whiff and the players he tried instead are not points in his favor for judging nearly ready talent.






 

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

He deserved a chance because we had 40 wins, so why not?

Because you other players you thought would be able to come out who have actually done things that deserves a try out.

He had accomplished nothing.

[Sports Guy]

I still don’t get how Elias whiffed on Yaz when he really never saw him play and could look at his age and MiL stats and see nothing but a mediocre, career minor leaguer.

[Frobby]

Tony, I think your points about the players Elias has brought in off waivers not producing much Is stronger than the point about Yaz. It’s not like they had a lot of time to evaluate Yaz.    Basically, a few weeks in the spring when he showed very little, to go with his mediocre track record.    

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

Tony, I think your points about the players Elias has brought in off waivers not producing much Is stronger than the point about Yaz. It’s not like they had a lot of time to evaluate Yaz.    Basically, a few weeks in the spring when he showed very little, to go with his mediocre track record.    

I mean I guess but guys are on waivers for a reason..they aren’t good.  You take a shot and see if you can catch lightning in a bottle but for the most part, all you hope for is someone to take up at bats while you wait for younger players to develop.

I would never really expect a guy to be claimed off of waivers and turn out to be good.  I wouldn’t expect a rule 5 guy to be anything more than a mediocre role player.

Sometimes you get lucky and they become more than that but usually, they are as likely to be DFa’ed as they are to make a minimal contribution.

I think complaining about the lack of productivity from these types of guys is a relative waste of time.

 Where I think you do complain is that Elias hasn’t gotten better players.  That’s my complaint.  You have some resources to get better players, go get them.  

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, birdwatcher55 said:

Interesting analysis. Not sure I agree on all points but from my perspective I look at the Elias-Sig regime as a definite 5 year project and as I have stated before I don't start grading until after 2021 and possibly 2022 as one full season and 60 games is no legitimate yardstick. Not having minor league baseball is a definite setback but the fact our Farm System is graded #8 is big plus and the FO deserves some credit here. In summary, rebuilding a 47 win team is going to be a major task and it's going to take several years to turn the corner. I think we all need patience and lots of it realistically.

Well let’s remember that a lot of parts of that system that are good were here before Elias got here.

[HowAboutThat]

19 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Because you other players you thought would be able to come out who have actually done things that deserves a try out.

He had accomplished nothing.

So? The guys we brought up for a chance, every guy brought up for a chance, as opposed to bringing up “because he is ready,” is by definition being given an opportunity that he doesn’t necessarily deserve. We risk nothing by bringing him up.

I’m a musician, and I can’t judge a piece without paying it once. Maybe not all the way through, but gotta sit down and play it. Now, it might be by a terrible or unknown composer, and some would say,”it’s by Danzi, it sucks.” Well, so? Maybe it does suck. Danzi was a mediocre composer. But maybe it doesn’t suck. Maybe it’s worthwhile, as recital filler, or as a rare gem from a mediocrity. But if I play it, I’ll know.

As another surprisingly similar example, the widow of a local cellist gave me some of her late husband’s music, including an untouched piece he bought 50+ years ago. So rare there’s only one lonely YouTube audio, and the music is long out of print and the publisher is itself long out of business. I played it and said, “this is an incredible piece.” And it is. So this piece is Yaz. The previous owner never bothered to play it, and I did, and I get the benefit. If he’d played lit, maybe he’d have hated it, maybe not. But he never gave it a chance.