Jorge Mateo

[RZNJ]

BTW, he's largely been a failure as a ML player due to his first 123 AB's with the Padres.

[Aristotelian]

I don't really know what it means to live up to Top 100 rating. What is the over/under right now for Colton Cowser average WAR? 

Mateo is at 1.1 WAR over 300 career AB's. Would we take 2.2 WAR annually from Cowser? I think I would. I definitely wouldn't call him a failure if that turned out to be his production level.

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

You say he has a chance to be far more than he has been thus far.   Fine.   Let him keep playing SS and see if that happens.  Simple.

And I haven’t disagreed with that…at least as far as the current situation of this team.

Its like you are trying to argue for the sake of arguing.  Stop trolling and read what I’m saying.  
 

Like I said, the only actual discussion where we may differ is if the Os should be trying to find someone better today.  

[RZNJ]

I don't need to wait until the end of the season to know that, at almost age 27, he has largely been a failure as a MLer and was a subpar MiLer.

 

 I obviously believe he has a chance to be far more than he has been thus far.

 

The same poster made both statements.  Guess who?

 

 

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

The consensus was that he was a top 100 prospect.   The fact that he isn't a ML star doesn't mean that rating was wrong.   Those ratings are based on potential.     Did he belong on those top 100 lists?   Were they wrong to put him in the top 100?

Perhaps yes.  People fall in love with tools while ignoring production all the time.  
 

 

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

And I haven’t disagreed with that…at least as far as the current situation of this team.

Its like you are trying to argue for the sake of arguing.  Stop trolling and read what I’m saying.  
 

Like I said, the only actual discussion where we may differ is if the Os should be trying to find someone better today.  

Why am I going to trade something of value to get something "better" when all I have to do is keep playing Mateo to see if he is something better?

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

I don't need to wait until the end of the season to know that, at almost age 27, he has largely been a failure as a MLer and was a subpar MiLer.

 

 I obviously believe he has a chance to be far more than he has been thus far.

 

The same poster made both statements.  Guess who?

 

 

So?  Both of those things can be true.  I don’t really get your point here other than to be a troll.

[Sports Guy]

Just now, RZNJ said:

Why am I going to trade something of value to get something "better" when all I have to do is keep playing Mateo to see if he is something better?

I don’t know, why are you?

[RZNJ]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Perhaps yes.  People fall in love with tools while ignoring production all the time.  
 

 

You're the guy who loves upside!

[RZNJ]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

So?  Both of those things can be true.  I don’t really get your point here other than to be a troll.

You always resort to calling me names.   You are so weak.   Pitiful.

[Sports Guy]

Just now, RZNJ said:

You're the guy who loves upside!

Yes I do..until the upside is nothing more than just that..upside.  Frobby said he made 3 top 100 lists.  By the third one, I am assuming he was much further down and not producing.  At some point, the upside has to meet the production. 
 

[Sports Guy]

Just now, RZNJ said:

You always resort to calling me names.   You are so weak.   Pitiful.

It’s a fair question to ask.  You are acting like a troll.  I’m trying to have a conversation with you, one of which I’m largely agreeing with you and yet you are trying to pick apart posts and act like they can’t be true.

Thats very troll like.

So I will go back to the question.  WhY can’t both of those statements be true?  Why can’t I think he’s been a failure thus far but also believe he has the ability to be more than that?  And why do you feel the need to point out that I’m saying that, as if it’s a bad thing?

[RZNJ]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Yes I do..until the upside is nothing more than just that..upside.  Frobby said he made 3 top 100 lists.  By the third one, I am assuming he was much further down and not producing.  At some point, the upside has to meet the production. 
 

Dude, you just talk in circles.   

[RZNJ]

In the draft section you argue that drafting Lawlar was the right decision even if he never makes it.     You argued that his ranking would never be wrong because it was correct on draft day.   If he doesn't succeed it was still the right decision.

 

Here you are suggesting the Mateo was overrated on top 100 lists because he hasn't established himself.   Here you are suggesting that the final results invalidate his ranking at the time.

 

I guarantee that you either too dense or too stubborn to see the conflict.

[Sports Guy]

12 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

In the draft section you argue that drafting Lawlar was the right decision even if he never makes it.     You argued that his ranking would never be wrong because it was correct on draft day.   If he doesn't succeed it was still the right decision.

 

Here you are suggesting the Mateo was overrated on top 100 lists because he hasn't established himself.   Here you are suggesting that the final results invalidate his ranking at the time.

 

I guarantee that you either too dense or too stubborn to see the conflict.

Weren't you just the one crying because of name calling?

What I said about Lawlar is that you judge the decision in the moment and not after...similar to a trade.  At that time, he was the clear #1 guy on most boards and certainly was by the time the Os picked.  I don't even believe the Os had Cowser ahead of him.

So yes, when you make that decision and determine that he is the best player, I do not think you make the wrong decision by drafting him even if he turns out to be a failure.  

Where you rank someone in the top 100, after multiple years of failure, is a different discussion.  Mateo has shown that he was an overrated player.  Do you really dispute that? Do you think he has lived up to the lofty rankings and hype he has 4ish years ago?

I mean, if I Were to play devils advocate with what I am saying, I guess I would say that he is at least in the majors and producing, so maybe he's not a failure in terms of looking at it in that way(a lot of the top 100 guys can't even say that)...but he certainly hasn't lived up to his hype or anywhere close it, which is how I am looking at it.