Jump to content

What if Lowther is ready?

wildcard

By wildcard
in Orioles Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

Can_of_corn Hangout Grand Counsel

Can_of_corn

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I disagree..people talk all the time about NEEDING to see DOMINANCE to bring up players.  That’s just absurd unless their definition of dominance is actually not the definition of dominance.

 

You can be a useful piece on the ML team without having put up dominant numbers in the minors.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Frobby
Frobby

How do you know?

SteveA
SteveA

Because we need to have thread after thread where we wonder what if someone is ready but they don't bring him up at the exact moment  he is ready.  (How does that work, is there a little popup thermom

Can_of_corn
Can_of_corn

I'm sure it is absolutely existential that the O's control Lowther's age 31 season.

NCRaven Hangout Grand Counsel

NCRaven

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I disagree..people talk all the time about NEEDING to see DOMINANCE to bring up players.  That’s just absurd unless their definition of dominance is actually not the definition of dominance.

 

I agree with you that people use the term in a loose way.  I disagree that they expect six or seven straight no-hitters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ofan239 AAA

ofan239

Posted
Posted

Start Lowther at triple A . I want Os management to do this right unlike the Calvary. If he’s dominating there then bring him up but I am not about rushing prospects anymore if we are banking on these guys . Same with Rustchman. I wouldn’t be upset if he DOES NOT make his debut this year .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, ofan239 said:

Start Lowther at triple A . I want Os management to do this right unlike the Calvary. If he’s dominating there then bring him up but I am not about rushing prospects anymore if we are banking on these guys . Same with Rustchman. I wouldn’t be upset if he DOES NOT make his debut this year .

We didn’t rush anyone before.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I disagree..people talk all the time about NEEDING to see DOMINANCE to bring up players.  That’s just absurd unless their definition of dominance is actually not the definition of dominance.

 

Here’s my rough definition of dominant:

- ERA under 3.00 or more than a run lower than league average, whichever is lower.

- K/9 at least 20% above league average. 

- H/IP of 0.9 or less (8.1 H/9)

- K/BB of 3.0 or higher

A pitcher can do a lot less than that and still be very deserving of promotion, but that’s what I’d call dominant.  

It’s a tough standard.   Zac Lowther was EL pitcher of the year and yet met only one of those four criteria (6.2 H/9).    He came close on ERA (2.55 was 0.98 below league average).    His K/9 and K/BB did not meet the standard.   

Only eight major league pitchers met my standard last year: Bieber, Bauer, Darvish, Lamet, DeGrom, Maeda, Cole and Carrasco.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Here’s my rough definition of dominant:

- ERA under 3.00 or more than a run lower than league average, whichever is lower.

- K/9 at least 20% above league average. 

- H/IP of 0.9 or less (8.1 H/9)

- K/BB of 3.0 or higher

A pitcher can do a lot less than that and still be very deserving of promotion, but that’s what I’d call dominant.  

It’s a tough standard.   Zac Lowther was EL pitcher of the year and yet met only one of those four criteria (6.2 H/9).    He came close on ERA (2.55 was 0.98 below league average).    His K/9 and K/BB did not meet the standard.   

Only eight major league pitchers met my standard last year: Bieber, Bauer, Darvish, Lamet, DeGrom, Maeda, Cole and Carrasco.   

That all seems reasonable to me..and it’s also why it’s crazy to say a player must dominate to get a promotion.  My guess is if that was the criteria, we would rarely see promotions and players would never get out of the minors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

That all seems reasonable to me..and it’s also why it’s crazy to say a player must dominate to get a promotion.  My guess is if that was the criteria, we would rarely see promotions and players would never get out of the minors.

It’s just one of those expressions people toss out a bit carelessly.  I don’t think anyone would suggest that promotions be limited to those who meet my definition.   But the converse probably is true: if a pitcher has had 10+ starts and is meeting those criteria, you have to question why he’s not getting promoted.  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'd say Gausman was rushed.  I don't know if it did any lasting damage to him but I do think they should have let him get some more time in the minors to work on his craft.

I don’t think he was rushed.  He was an advanced college arm.  His 2014 season, the year after he was initially called up and his first relatively full season in the majors saw him have a 3.57 ERA.  His ERA was 4.25 the next year but his K rate and BB rates was improved.

Now, where they did mess up is how they kept jerking him around, yo yo’ing him up and down, etc...I would have been fine to leave him down all of 2013 and he did need to refine his secondary pitches but I think there is a difference between needing more work and rushing.

To me, rushing would have been putting DL Hall in the majors in 2019. 
 

I am just not sure I believe in the concept of rushing a highly drafted college player.  They should be ready quickly if they were a top pick.

HS players are different, especially pitchers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

He was a sophomore draftee that had fewer than 100 innings in the minors before his first promotion and had no clear third pitch.  That would have been fine if he was a reliever,

That’s fine but as you like to say, you can develop in the majors too.

He was trusted with over 110 innings in 2014, with a team that was arguably the best in baseball.  I think he was fine.

Again, I wouldn’t have had an issue with him staying down all of 2013 and I honestly would have preferred that over the jerking him around that they did but I still wouldn’t define that as rushing him.  

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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • Hallas
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Hallas · Posted

      At least relative to the rest of the league Santander has an interesting profile because he is comfortably above-average at making contact; his whiff rates are much better than Trumbo's so he's not really as much of a TTO player as you would think.  This gives him hope that he will age a little bit better than someone like Trumbo.  Though he's still got a good shot of being out of the league in 3 years.
    • forphase1
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By forphase1 · Posted

      It's not the money, it's the years.  I wouldn't mind signing him for a year or two, even at what I'd consider to be stupid money.  But what I DON'T agree with is signing him for any more than 2-3 years as I don't think he's going to age well.  And I expect him to get more than 3 years from someone, so I'm a hard pass.  Can we afford him?  Money wise, sure.  But I don't want to see us stuck with him 4-5 years down the road when his skillset has greatly diminished, but he's still playing every day because we owe him a lot of money and a lot of loyalty.  Let some other club take that risk, get the QO pick and move on.  
    • DrinkinWithFermi
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By DrinkinWithFermi · Posted

      Santander does exactly ONE thing very well: Hit HRs He doesn't hit for average, he doesn't get on base, he's a very slow runner, and he is a very poor defender. If he stops hitting HRs so often, his value completely evaporates and his contract basically becomes dead money, and the Orioles cannot afford to eat large amounts of dead money like the Dodgers, Mets, and Yankees of the world. I am simply using Trumbo, whose basic tool kit is very similar to Santander's, as a fairly recent, Orioles-related cautionary tale. Trumbo had his big walk year with the Orioles at age 30 and instead of doing the smart, obvious thing and taking the free draft pick, we gave him a big money extension that everyone except the FO knew was probably going to end poorly. Baseball Savant has Santander in the 22nd percentile in terms of overall fielding value. However you want to slice it, he isn't going to make up any lost value from declining offense with his defense. If his ability to slug goes south, the whole contract goes with it, because he has no other tools to make up for that with.
    • Sydnor
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Sydnor · Posted

      Santander is -2 OAA this year. He’s averagish to below average. There but there are much worse defensive right fielders such as Adolis Garcia and Castellanos -9, Lane Thomas and Renfroe -8, and Soto -4. Acuna and Tatis are also -2 OAA.  In 2016, Mark Trumbo was -15 OAA. They’re not even in the same universe.
    • e16bball
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By e16bball · Posted

      Anthony Santander (age 27-29): .245 / .317 / .477 / .794    124 OPS+   9.0 rWAR Mark Trumbo (age 27-29): .244 / .299 / .443 / .742   105 OPS+  2.6 rWAR Is it really very meaningful that Trumbo was the better player when they were significantly younger? 29-year-old Santander is a better player by miles than Trumbo at the same age, and he has been for years. I think that’s what matters most to how you’d project them over the next few years.
    • Grt 2BA FL Gator
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Grt 2BA FL Gator · Posted

      I love Tony and I honestly think we are gonna miss his veteran leadership as much as anything. I’m very happy we have him for this year. But I do think he’d be a bad long term investment. 
    • Moose Milligan
      Ohtani

      By Moose Milligan · Posted

      He’s the best player in history. No one can convince me otherwise.  I didn’t say he has the most records or the most counting stats or the most MVPs. That’s not what I said.  He’s just the best player in baseball history. 

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...