Looks like this is how the rotation shakes out

[SilverRocket]

1 hour ago, Flash- bd said:

Oh I think it definitely matters and think there's a lot of data to back that up. But I think there's a lot of posters who are better equipped than I am to explain why. 

The reasons I can think of that would make a difference are:

1) Deception in the delivery, which doesn't show up in pitch data. But I don't think Grayson is really reliant on some unusual delivery where that would be a huge factor.

2) Mental game, where the pitcher maybe nibbles or has inconsistent mechanics or otherwise changes how he throws when he's feeling more pressure. Do you think that's the case here? I thought Grayson was pretty well-regarded for how he approaches his game.

Or is it some other factor?

[Pickles]

9 minutes ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

I'm not sure I agree. Just off the top of my head I can point to both Gunnar and Ortiz as likely as talented as Holiday. And then you have the current reigning Fielding Bible award winner. I think your analogy is a bit flawed.

Holliday was a 1:1 draft pick.  Ortiz isn't even in the same category, nor is Mateo, as much as I love him.

Gunnar was an excellent prospect, global #1, but even he doesn't have Holliday's talent, or he wouldn't have lasted to the second round of the draft.

That's not to say Holliday will develop as well, or have a better career, but he is certainly the most talented SS in the system.

So I repeat: Should he be in the majors?

[Aristotelian]

2 minutes ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

I'm not sure I agree. Just off the top of my head I can point to both Gunnar and Ortiz as likely as talented as Holiday. And then you have the current reigning Fielding Bible award winner. I think your analogy is a bit flawed.

Ortiz is as talented as a 1-1 pick? Who is our #3 prospect? That doesn't make much sense. Agreed on Gunnar although most seem to consider him more of a 3B than a SS. The analogy does suggest that at least some amount of development is good, and there is a judgment call as to when a prospect is ready to compete.

We should keep in mind that when Gunnar was promoted he was the youngest player in MLB at the time, so at least in that case it does not appear the Orioles are especially slow when it comes to promoting talented prospects.

[Pickles]

15 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Ortiz is as talented as a 1-1 pick? Who is our #3 prospect? That doesn't make much sense. Agreed on Gunnar although most seem to consider him more of a 3B than a SS. The analogy does suggest that at least some amount of development is good, and there is a judgment call as to when a prospect is ready to compete.

We should keep in mind that when Gunnar was promoted he was the youngest player in MLB at the time, so at least in that case it does not appear the Orioles are especially slow when it comes to promoting talented prospects.

My "point" was simply talent isn't everything.

If your argument is that Rodriguez should be up because he's the most "talented" while ignoring that he hasn't been able to consistently throw his breaking balls for strikes since he as injured almost 10 months ago, it's not a good argument.

[Sports Guy]

This is the type of thing that we don’t know about unless it’s reported. So, before we jump to conclusions on GRod’s “struggles” (or anyone else’s), we need to remember that ST results don’t always mean anything.

[Aristotelian]

1 hour ago, Pickles said:

My "point" was simply talent isn't everything.

If your argument is that Rodriguez should be up because he's the most "talented" while ignoring that he hasn't been able to consistently throw his breaking balls for strikes since he as injured almost 10 months ago, it's not a good argument.

That is definitely not my argument and I agree that Rodriguez has not looked like an MLB pitcher at any point this spring. I will be fine with whichever decision the organization makes for his opening day assignment. I personally would hold him back to build up his innings and sharpness, with the extra service time a bonus.

[Can_of_corn]

15 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

That is definitely not my argument and I agree that Rodriguez has not looked like an MLB pitcher at any point this spring.

I hate hyperbole.

https://www.thebaltimorebanner.com/sports/orioles-mlb/orioles-grayson-rodriguez-first-spring-training-start-K6KOPZ7BWFFFRNLBF2AXQRJEAI/

 

If you pitch five innings and four of them are clean did you not look like a MLB pitcher those four innings?

Edited March 26, 2023 by Can_of_corn

[Pickles]

13 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

That is definitely not my argument and I agree that Rodriguez has not looked like an MLB pitcher at any point this spring. I will be fine with whichever decision the organization makes for his opening day assignment. I personally would hold him back to build up his innings and sharpness, with the extra service time a bonus.

I didn't mean you personally; I meant the royal you.

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, Pickles said:

 

Gunnar was an excellent prospect, global #1, but even he doesn't have Holliday's talent, or he wouldn't have lasted to the second round of the draft.

Not sure I agree with the logic here.  Not all talent manifests itself at the same time.  Scouts don’t have perfect insight into who has the most talent.   They make educated guesses.   Sometimes they turn out to be wrong.  

[Aristotelian]

5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I hate hyperbole.

https://www.thebaltimorebanner.com/sports/orioles-mlb/orioles-grayson-rodriguez-first-spring-training-start-K6KOPZ7BWFFFRNLBF2AXQRJEAI/

 

If you pitch five innings and four of them are clean did you not look like a MLB pitcher those four innings?

Fine, he hasn't looked like a MLB pitcher since March 2. You got me bro!

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Frobby said:

Not sure I agree with the logic here.  Not all talent manifests itself at the same time.  Scouts don’t have perfect insight into who has the most talent.   They make educated guesses.   Sometimes they turn out to be wrong.  

I think that if the draft were redone Gunnar would go much, much higher.  I'm thinking top four.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Aristotelian said:

Fine, he hasn't looked like a MLB pitcher since March 2. You got me bro!

I'm not your bro, chum.

[Aristotelian]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm not your bro, chum.

Buddy?

[Lurker]

5 hours ago, SilverRocket said:

The reasons I can think of that would make a difference are:

1) Deception in the delivery, which doesn't show up in pitch data. But I don't think Grayson is really reliant on some unusual delivery where that would be a huge factor.

2) Mental game, where the pitcher maybe nibbles or has inconsistent mechanics or otherwise changes how he throws when he's feeling more pressure. Do you think that's the case here? I thought Grayson was pretty well-regarded for how he approaches his game.

Or is it some other factor?

Another interesting factor is the risk/reward of drafting players from high school as opposed to players from the college ranks.

There is only about a 14% chance that any first round high school drafted pitcher makes it to the major leagues, and less than 8% chance that they will play 3 or more years. 
 

For first round college drafted pitchers, those same numbers are 22% and 15%.

Both Hall and Rodriguez were high school picks.

Gibson, Kremer, Bradish, Irvin, and Wells were all drafted from college.

https://sabr.org/journal/article/the-chances-of-a-drafted-baseball-player-making-the-major-leagues-a-quantitative-study/

[Pickles]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Not sure I agree with the logic here.  Not all talent manifests itself at the same time.  Scouts don’t have perfect insight into who has the most talent.   They make educated guesses.   Sometimes they turn out to be wrong.  

I like Andy MacPhail's phrase for it: "A snapshot in time."  

He said that regarding system rankings but it of course applies to individual prospects as well.

It would devolve into subjective opinion, but I still contend Holliday should be considered the most "talented" as his absolute upside at SS is hightest in the system.  IMO.