Proposal: O's spend 40m in FA

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, OrangeTurtle said:

Jim Callis weighs in:

https://www.masnsports.com/steve-melewski/2021/03/callis-compares-wieters-with-rutschman-and-more.html

"For one, Matt Wieters has had a good career for a No. 1 overall prospect, and two, no knock on Wieters, but I think Adley Rutschman is a better defensive player and a better hitter than Matt Wieters.” Callis said. “I think the power and arm strength is similar. But as good as Matt Wieters has been, Adley Rutschman is better.

“He’s got the best catching tools that I’ve seen in a prospect in 30 years of covering this stuff. He has better all-around tools than Joe Mauer, who is more athletic, but didn’t have anywhere close to Rutschman’s power coming out of the draft. And he had more impact with his bat and he’s more polished defensively than Buster Posey was.”

There may be some hindsight and recency bias at play there, but interesting nonetheless.

Ok, Callis is on record.  With Sports Guy.

AR is going to be the second best catcher in the history of the game.

I'll take the under.

The odds are heavily in my favor.

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, Pickles said:

You're a giant ass.  You really are.

Your expectations are stupid and unreasonable.  But of course, they are the product of a stupid and unreasonable mind.

Trying to reason with a stupid and unreasonable person was my own fault.  I should know better than to engage with you.

You are not here to learn anything.  You're not here to share anything.  You're not here to contemplate anything.

You're here to tell us your thoughts, and anyone who disagrees, gets insulted.

 

I didn't insult you at all.  You are the one arguing.  I do not see Wieters on the same level of Adley.  I was vocal about Wieters, on this site, from the moment I saw him.  

I said he should be a MOO hitter..you disagreed.

I cited guys that could do it...you essentially poo poo'ed it.

You act like every catcher breaks down and none of them can be great hitters.  I agree with you but the history of the game is full of C who have overcome that and been great hitters.  My expectation is that Adley will be one of them.

You disagree for whatever reason...your reasoning seems to be that you are going with the odds.  That's fine but you are the one pushing the argument and making a big deal about it.  

And no, your experiences in LL or HS or whatever aren't relevant.  You trying to tell me that catching hurts is irrelevant.  We all know that but there are exceptions to the rule.  There is a reason that there was only a few guys in the world who can do this... because their skill and talent level far exceeds anything you or anyone else can even dream of.  So no, I don't find your life experiences to be relevant to the conversation.  You choose to either want to ignore that. (which is stupid, ignorant and unreasonable, to use your wording) or you just don't feel Adley is that good.  I happen to disagree.

I think he is a MOO bat, perennial AS guy who catches 120-135 games for the first 3-5 years of his career, with obviously year 1 being the year that he may not be at that level quite yet (as with any young player).

[OrangeTurtle]

1 minute ago, Pickles said:

Ok, Callis is on record.  With Sports Guy.

AR is going to be the second best catcher in the history of the game.

I'll take the under.

The odds are heavily in my favor.

I have no dog in the fight, honestly. That was just the first player-to-player prospect comparison that popped up from a credible source.

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

I didn't insult you at all.  You are the one arguing.  I do not see Wieters on the same level of Adley.  I was vocal about Wieters, on this site, from the moment I saw him.  

I said he should be a MOO hitter..you disagreed.

I cited guys that could do it...you essentially poo poo'ed it.

You act like every catcher breaks down and none of them can be great hitters.  I agree with you but the history of the game is full of C who have overcome that and been great hitters.  My expectation is that Adley will be one of them.

You disagree for whatever reason...your reasoning seems to be that you are going with the odds.  That's fine but you are the one pushing the argument and making a big deal about it.  

And no, your experiences in LL or HS or whatever aren't relevant.  You trying to tell me that catching hurts is irrelevant.  We all know that but there are exceptions to the rule.  There is a reason that there was only a few guys in the world who can do this... because their skill and talent level far exceeds anything you or anyone else can even dream of.  So now, I don't find your life experiences to be relevant to the conversation.  You choose to either want to ignore that. (which is stupid, ignorant and unreasonable, to use your wording) or you just don't feel Adley is that good.  I happen to disagree.

I think he is a MOO bat, perennial AS guy who catches 120-135 games for the first 3-5 years of his career, with obviously year 1 being the year that he may not be at that level quite yet (as with any young player).

Fair enough.  Moving on.

 

[Pickles]

2 minutes ago, OrangeTurtle said:

I have no dog in the fight, honestly. That was just the first player-to-player prospect comparison that popped up from a credible source.

If you're looking solely at tools as evaluated as MiLers, Adley gets the advantage in glove and speed.  Wieters in power, arm, and hit tool.

My sole point was anyone who is claiming AR is a better prospect than MW was, is wrong.  To say they're similar prospects, I wouldn't argue.  But to claim AR is superior, is just false.

Of course, some, like SG, will add the caveat "to me."  Well, I can't argue that, because that's a subjective opinion.  I question how much of that comes from hindsight.  And I question exactly what it's based on- other than hindsight.

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Fair enough.  Moving on.

 

And btw, there is one thing about this conversation that I feel needs to be said.  When I talk about Adley, I am talking the first 3-5 years of his career.  What guys like Posey and Mauer were and have been able to do is be really good beyond those years.  That is what makes them HOF level guys.  Is what help make Bench a HOF guy.

I am not saying Adley will be at that level long term.  Way too much unknown.  But I definitely expect it in the prime years of his career.

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, Pickles said:

If you're looking solely at tools as evaluated as MiLers, Adley gets the advantage in glove and speed.  Wieters in power, arm, and hit tool.

My sole point was anyone who is claiming AR is a better prospect than MW was, is wrong.  To say they're similar prospects, I wouldn't argue.  But to claim AR is superior, is just false.

Of course, some, like SG, will add the caveat "to me."  Well, I can't argue that, because that's a subjective opinion.  I question how much of that comes from hindsight.  And I question exactly what it's based on- other than hindsight.

With me, zero of it is hindsight because I was not as high on Wieters from the first time I saw him in the majors.

Unlike now, video wasn't really there.  Had I seen the amount of video on Wieters as I have seen on Adley, I would have thought it then too.

Adley is just a much smoother and more fluid athlete.   

[7Mo]

7 minutes ago, Pickles said:

 

Of course, some, like SG, will add the caveat "to me."  Well, I can't argue that, because that's a subjective opinion.  I question how much of that comes from hindsight.  And I question exactly what it's based on- other than hindsight.

Isn't everything you've posted in this thread "to me", the same as what you accuse SG of?

You're not citing anything except your own opinions.

[Sports Guy]

17 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Ok, Callis is on record.  With Sports Guy.

AR is going to be the second best catcher in the history of the game.

I'll take the under.

The odds are heavily in my favor.

LOL.  So, here is one guy, who has been evaluating guys forever (and talked to scouts forever) who actually did a comp of the 2 prospects.  You have said Wieters was better with this and that...and yet someone here, who actually does this and knows more than us and talks to people who knows more than us, comps them, says what I have been saying and you basically laugh it off.

And I am the stupid and unreasonable one?  LOL. You can't make this sh** up.

[7Mo]

57 minutes ago, Pickles said:

I caught for a few years when I was young.  I usually played SS because I was the best athlete on the team, but when I was ten our catcher got hurt, and my dad was coach, so he made me catch.  I liked it.  I was good at it so I stayed there for a couple years until the fields got big and they put me back at SS.

That was 25 years ago.  I can't extend my left thumb fully to this day because I broke it so many times catching- specifically foul tips which go straight down, miss the gloves' webbing, and just push your thumb back.

How many times did you break your left thumb?

[jabba72]

32 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

With me, zero of it is hindsight because I was not as high on Wieters from the first time I saw him in the majors.

Unlike now, video wasn't really there.  Had I seen the amount of video on Wieters as I have seen on Adley, I would have thought it then too.

Adley is just a much smoother and more fluid athlete.   

Yup I remember Wieters first game. Based on the hype I was expecting a Albert Pujols physique and swing and Wieters just didnt have it. 

[Pickles]

34 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

LOL.  So, here is one guy, who has been evaluating guys forever (and talked to scouts forever) who actually did a comp of the 2 prospects.  You have said Wieters was better with this and that...and yet someone here, who actually does this and knows more than us and talks to people who knows more than us, comps them, says what I have been saying and you basically laugh it off.

And I am the stupid and unreasonable one?  LOL. You can't make this sh** up.

You just can't walk away- even when given the opportunity.

One guy lukewarmly agrees with you and you just have to crow about it from the rooftops.  Can't make this up indeed.

I hope Tony chimes in.  He is somebody who can shed some light on this.  He'd be very qualified- although no man- even your dear Callis- is an oracle.

I repeat what I said about them as prospects.

If you're looking solely at tools as evaluated as MiLers, Adley gets the advantage in glove and speed.  Wieters in power, arm, and hit tool.

My sole point was anyone who is claiming AR is a better prospect than MW was, is wrong.  To say they're similar prospects, I wouldn't argue.  But to claim AR is superior, is just false.

I'll let Tony add to that if he wants to.  He's about the only person who could sway me much on that statement.

Now in regards to what that looks like at the ML level, I would agree that MW's ML career was on the low end of the spectrum of probabilities for what it might have looked like.  Nowhere near the lowest, but I would certainly say under the 50th percentile.  

So yeah, it's easy to say AR probably surpasses MW's career- even though they're in the same category prospect wise.  But that doesn't mean he's automatically going to go to the 96% and be Johnny Bench- even with the caveat of "only" for 3-5 years.  And if you want a 130+ OPS with GG C defense for 130 games a night, then yes, you're talking about 6+ WAR and Johnny Bench.

That's extremely rare.  Me and you have seen it with our own eyes twice, without needles being involved.  You have NO idea the physical toll that it takes to catch and produce like that.  You mock me for having a far greater understanding of it, simply because I try to educate you.

I can't tell you what to be disappointed in or not.  But I can tell you what is reasonable.

I make the analogy of investing.  Every investment is a range of probable outcomes.  Expecting, and being disappointed with less that the 90% positive outcome, is unreasonable.

The fact that all of this is based solely on your faith in your own prescience makes it all that much less convincing. 

If you really want to go round and round answer me these two questions:

1) Why didn't you call out Wieter's "slow bat" and "lack of athleticism" when he was hitting .355 at Bowie?  You claim you never saw him in the minors?  I saw dozens and dozens of his highlights on this website alone.  I even believe they live streamed the Bowie playoffs that year on this website.  Surely you saw him play plenty in the MiLs, and you never once said "slow bat?"  Why?

2) Were you or were you not catching vapors 4 months ago about AR's supposed "slow bat" when he struggled a bit out of the gate at Bowie this year?  So how many times exactly have you seen him this year?  How many times did it take for you to sing a different tune? 

 

[Pickles]

44 minutes ago, 7Mo said:

How many times did you break your left thumb?

It was just basically in a state of permanent disfigurement for two summers.

Catching messes your fingers, hands, and wrists up.

Guess what you need to hit?

[Pickles]

27 minutes ago, jabba72 said:

Yup I remember Wieters first game. Based on the hype I was expecting a Albert Pujols physique and swing and Wieters just didnt have it. 

You boys are severely underpaid.  LOL.

[Pickles]

1 hour ago, 7Mo said:

Isn't everything you've posted in this thread "to me", the same as what you accuse SG of?

You're not citing anything except your own opinions.

I'd say no.

I'd say stating that AR and MW were similarly valued prospects is not really an opinion.  It's a fact.

That's a far different thing than stating that AR is clearly a better prospect.  Because that's revisionism.  Because it's based on nothing but hindsight.

And retreating into "to me" when making such a claim is really a dodge from the revisionism.