Jump to content

Who is the Orioles 2021 #8 prospect?


Tony-OH

Who is the Orioles 2021 #8 prospect?  

76 members have voted

  1. 1. Who is the Orioles 2021 #8 prospect?

    • Samuel Basallo - C
      0
    • Kyle Bradish - RHP
    • Heston Kjerstad - OF
    • Connor Norby - 2B
    • Jordan Westburg - SS/3B

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I’m not worried about the organizational fodder.  I’m talking about the ML Players that are blocking some of these guys…players like Mancini and Santander, for example.

Mancini will be gone either this off season or next. Santander can’t even get his OBP over .300 and is prone to injury so the further he gets into arbitration the more likely it is he is DFA. I don’t think Santander is on this team come 2023. Add to the mix that Hays has injury problems and Mullins needs to show he is actually good and it wasn’t an outlier year…there is plenty of opportunity to go around.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tony-OH said:

For me, the top 9 were pretty legit to rank. From 10 on there's a lot of things to consider and really I could start group these guys into groups of things I like and things that concern me. 

Having 8 to 9 legitimate prospects who could be average to impact major leaguers with a whole host of guys still with some upside to become that is pretty darn good.

Agreed on the top 9 - not going to say who 8 and 9 are, but I think it's clear.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

Agreed on the top 9 - not going to say who 8 and 9 are, but I think it's clear.  

I don't think there is going to be much debate on 8 and 9 other than the order between the two. I think #10 will get a wide variety of votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I don't think there is going to be much debate on 8 and 9 other than the order between the two. I think #10 will get a wide variety of votes.

Seems Tony's considering Kjerstad here. I can't argue it. I have zero clue where I'd put him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tony-OH said:

I don't think there is going to be much debate on 8 and 9 other than the order between the two. I think #10 will get a wide variety of votes.

Right, everyone should get 9 right when the time comes.  10 is where you can start playing all kinds of games on us.  Looking forward to it.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I am interested in is whether we have enough surplus, and that surplus is valuable enough to start making trades for the present instead of for the future. Santander Has flaws, but he has virtues as well, maybe packaging him with one of our extra but good prospects might bring something worthwhile back?

Mainly, I just want to start making acquisitions for the present, so we can when 85 games next year instead of 65.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Philip said:

What I am interested in is whether we have enough surplus, and that surplus is valuable enough to start making trades for the present instead of for the future. Santander Has flaws, but he has virtues as well, maybe packaging him with one of our extra but good prospects might bring something worthwhile back?

Mainly, I just want to start making acquisitions for the present, so we can when 85 games next year instead of 65.

I guess it depends what you mean by worthwhile. A reliever that's good but expensive? Probably not in our range, but Santander might get that back.

An impact starter. Add Santander to one of our 3-9 prospects and you might get it done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I guess it depends what you mean by worthwhile. A reliever that's good but expensive? Probably not in our range, but Santander might get that back.

An impact starter. Add Santander to one of our 3-9 prospects and you might get it done. 

Depending on the starter and the controllability, I would certainly entertain dealing Henderson and Santander (as an example) for an "impact starter". That said, the starter would need to be young and controllable. You do that and start dreaming on rotation that could be 4 deep before supplementing it (including Means, Rodriguez and Hall--with others providing depth like Baumann, Bradish, etc.) by 2023. Add a solid mid-rotation free agent to the list this year or next and you have a formidable rotation with some depth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NCRaven said:

Went with the infielder again in this spot.

Next years group will be just as interesting after we add a 1:1 and this year’s draft class gets their first full season.

Not to mention hopefully Kjerstad will have a chance to show what he’s got in real games and could move up this list real fast. 

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

    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...