Jump to content

2021 15th round pick (437): Keagan Gillies - RHP - (Senior) Tulane

lovetoaster
 Share

Recommended Posts

bobmc Hangout Grand Counsel

bobmc

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

That's a big MFer.

Eu9wz5FXAAAlfpH.jpg

I'm assuming that's him in the picture.  Anyway, looks like he throws hard.

Grad student?  Anyone out there draft eligible for their PHD?  Get 'em, Elias!

 

Here's all 6' 8" of Keagan.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tony-OH Hangout Grand Counsel

Tony-OH

Posted
Posted
Just now, Sports Guy said:

Bad mechanics?  

His arm drags badly behind his plant foot which screams elbow concerns at some point, but still, nice arm for the 15th round. Why not? No a ton of K's either for this kind of velocity consistency must be an issue. He highlight film is impressive though.

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

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

His arm drags badly behind his plant foot which screams elbow concerns at some point, but still, nice arm for the 15th round. Why not? No a ton of K's either for this kind of velocity consistency must be an issue. He highlight film is impressive though.

Certainly something to work with.  Maybe all the tech the Os have can help him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Can_of_corn Hangout Grand Counsel

Can_of_corn

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Thats a big hammer curve, 12-6.  Here's hoping this guy can help soon.

I like that he's big, too.  IMO, someone who's 6'8" isn't afraid of much.  I think it's a psychological thing, this guy probably won't be nibbling around the plate.  We see that with Tyler Wells, he's not afraid.  

Mark Hendrickson was 6'9".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LookinUp Hangout Grand Counsel

LookinUp

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

That and his mechanical issues and command are why he was still available in the 15th round. Worth a flier though with an arm like that.

Not sure if this above is inside information or just your logical conclusion. 

As for my speculation, along the lines of what I just now typed in another thread, I think these seniors still have eligibility left and thus still have leverage. It's possible that a guy like this actually has a big number and that's why he fell.

Again, I'm not even certain I'm right, but it seems possible that one or more of our "senior sign" guys are actually akin to previous year's high value juniors. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tony-OH Hangout Grand Counsel

Tony-OH

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

Not sure if this above is inside information or just your logical conclusion. 

As for my speculation, along the lines of what I just now typed in another thread, I think these seniors still have eligibility left and thus still have leverage. It's possible that a guy like this actually has a big number and that's why he fell.

Again, I'm not even certain I'm right, but it seems possible that one or more of our "senior sign" guys are actually akin to previous year's high value juniors. 

But I think you are missing the fact that they are not getting younger. Every year over 21 hurts their value although this year that's being overlooked a bit because of the missed COVID year. Can they go back, sure. But at 23 or 24 years old for some, what kind of leverage would they have then? Zero.

At that point it's a matter of whether they want to give pro ball a try or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LookinUp Hangout Grand Counsel

LookinUp

Posted
Posted
Just now, Tony-OH said:

But I think you are missing the fact that they are not getting younger. Every year over 21 hurts their value although this year that's being overlooked a bit because of the missed COVID year. Can they go back, sure. But at 23 or 24 years old for some, what kind of leverage would they have then? Zero.

At that point it's a matter of whether they want to give pro ball a try or not.

I completely agree. As leverage goes, it probably aligns somewhere like this.

Most to Least 

High School Senior
Draft Eligible Soph.
Draft Eligible Jr. (has another year)
Covid Draft Eligible Senior (has another year, but is older)
Draft Eligible Sr. (out of amateur options)

This year's "seniors" are second from the bottom, so they have more leverage than the pure seniors but are certainly discounted by age.
 

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

    • Sydnor
      Anthony Santander 2024

      By Sydnor · Posted

      But that is not what you said. You said he’s a bad fielder, just not quite Trumbo-tier. Thus, you were stating he is close to as bad a fielder as Trumbo was, which is not correct. Generally speaking, no player makes up the loss of offensive value with defensive value as the age. It is usually one of the first things to go. I was not making any sort of argument that he was going to make up declining offense with defense, just pointing out that you made a preposterous statement.
    • 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. 

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...