Coby Mayo 2023

[PsychoBird68]

5 hours ago, baltfan said:

Better command of the strike zone forces pitchers into unfavorable counts.  In the minors, a lot of pitchers are forced to throw fastballs or other pitches that are designed to just be strikes in an effort not to walk the batter.  Major league pitchers, on the other hand, have better command so they don't fall behind as often and when they do they are much less likely to throw a cookie.  So, what I am saying is that it is great that they are teaching a good approach in the minors, but it will work better there then it does in the majors.  Doesn't mean it doesn't work in the majors, just not as well.  So they get less cookies and less walks. 

Moreover, the Orioles learn in the minors to try to only swing at strikes you can do damage on.  In the minors, that is a lot more balls than in the majors.  It still can be a good strategy in the majors, but you have to adjust what you think is a pitch you can do damage on.  If you wait for the ball down the middle, you are going to strikeout a lot of the time.

You saw this with Gunnar when he first came up.  He was looking for only pitches he could do damage on.  As a result, he often found himself behind in the count.  Yes, he was walking a fair amount but he wasn't hitting and was striking out a ton.  He adjusted his approach to become more aggressive, which ended up turning his season around.  

 

Facing better pitchers with a bigger strike zone is what changes it's not the approach and some can adjust to better pitchers and some never do.....It would be easier if they had the same strike zone and rules in MLB 

Edited September 3, 2023 by PsychoBird68

[baltfan]

26 minutes ago, PsychoBird68 said:

Facing better pitchers with a bigger strike zone is what changes it's not the approach and some can adjust to better pitchers and some never do.....It would be easier if they had the same strike zone and rules in MLB 

So how do explain the large differences between the success of Orioles’ hitters in the minors vs majors? For example, takes a look at the Reds’ young core and you will see they are much closer to their minors’ stats than similar Orioles. 

[PsychoBird68]

22 minutes ago, baltfan said:

So how do explain the large differences between the success of Orioles’ hitters in the minors vs majors? For example, takes a look at the Reds’ young core and you will see they are much closer to their minors’ stats than similar Orioles. 

Making the jump from AAA to MLB is all about adjusting to better pitchers, sure you can cherry pick players that make the jump look easy but most don't and most never carry a OPS near what they had in the minors 

[baltfan]

1 hour ago, PsychoBird68 said:

Making the jump from AAA to MLB is all about adjusting to better pitchers, sure you can cherry pick players that make the jump look easy but most don't and most never carry a OPS near what they had in the minors 

Show me another team with rookies that underperform as much as the Orioles when they first come up?

[PsychoBird68]

14 minutes ago, baltfan said:

Show me another team with rookies that underperform as much as the Orioles when they first come up?

Every team that didn't have a player vying for a rookie of the year award the last two years....

[PsychoBird68]

24 minutes ago, baltfan said:

What a cop out.  I gave you an example where the deltas aren’t as big.  Give me one where they are similar to the Orioles.  If you just want to look at #1 prospects, Carroll has performed closer to his minors numbers than Gunnar. 

Yes a cop out is a lot easier....lol....Just look at rookie stats and you'll see that it isn't team based but talent based......But there are a lot of teams not having good luck with their rookies...like STL....However the players with a good approach and talent will make the adjustment to big league pitching

Edited September 3, 2023 by PsychoBird68

[TheWall]

2 hours ago, baltfan said:

Show me another team with rookies that underperform as much as the Orioles when they first come up?

This is such an absurd post. Adley came up and was immediately a 5+ WAR player last year. Gunnar is a 5+ WAR player this year at 22. Westburg has been fine as a rookie. Grayson struggled at the start of the year, but has righted the ship after working on things and looks really strong in the second half. 

Who are you talking about on the Reds? Matt McClain has been awesome, but beyond that it isn't anything crazy. Elly is ridiculously exciting, but he's been worth 1 WAR -- the same as Westburg in nearly twice as many games. 

[CallMeBrooksie]

3 hours ago, baltfan said:

Show me another team with rookies that underperform as much as the Orioles when they first come up?

Show me another team with more production from first and second year players than the O's this year. You're so far out of your depth on this.

Adley's debut last year was wildly successful (and has carried into this year). Gunnar is the runaway favorite for AL ROY and Grayson is having a very successful rookie season to any objective observer.

Westburg has also had a really nice rookie campaign thus far.

You're basically just whining about Colton Cowser, I guess?

[baltfan]

1 minute ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

Show me another team with more production from first and second year players than the O's this year. You're so far out of your depth on this.

Adley's debut last year was wildly successful (and has carried into this year). Gunnar is the runaway favorite for AL ROY and Grayson is having a very successful rookie season to any objective observer.

Westburg has also had a really nice rookie campaign thus far.

You're basically just whining about Colton Cowser, I guess?

This is so silly.  You are pointing to literally the last two #1 prospects in all of baseball.  Moreover, I never said the Orioles teaching or approach in the minors is the wrong one, it’s the correct one.  But Adley struggled when he first came up and so did Gunnar.  For both their approach needed to adjusted, especially for Gunnar.  Still the command of the zone they are teaching is fantastic and better in the long run.  All I was saying and still say is that waiting for bad pitches to do damage works better in the minors versus the majors.  And it isn’t just Cowser that struggled.  Stowers struggled. Ortiz didn’t do much.  But that’s all ok.  I am saying there is a logical explanation and  the team should be patient.  I only wish they had had Mountcastle from the beginning in the minors.

Finally, I am not whining about anything it’s just an observation.  I never said the approach would make it so these guys won’t succeed.  It will say, however, that not everyone has the tools of Gunnar or Adley and will be able to adjust.  There are likely to be some guys that thrive in the minors for the Orioles that are profiting off of pitchers getting behind that won’t be able to do that at the major league level.  Of course, some guys in the minors with awful control of the strike zone will also do much better in the minors than the majors.  
 

[CallMeBrooksie]

3 minutes ago, baltfan said:

This is so silly.  You are pointing to literally the last two #1 prospects in all of baseball.  Moreover, I never said the Orioles teaching or approach in the minors is the wrong one, it’s the correct one.  But Adley struggled when he first came up and so did Gunnar.  For both their approach needed to adjusted, especially for Gunnar.  Still the command of the zone they are teaching is fantastic and better in the long run.  All I was saying and still say is that waiting for bad pitches to do damage works better in the minors versus the majors.  And it isn’t just Cowser that struggled.  Stowers struggled. Ortiz didn’t do much.  But that’s all ok.  I am saying there is a logical explanation and  the team should be patient.  I only wish they had had Mountcastle from the beginning in the minors.

Finally, I am not whining about anything it’s just an observation.  I never said the approach would make it so these guys won’t succeed.  It will say, however, that not everyone has the tools of Gunnar or Adley and will be able to adjust.  There are likely to be some guys that thrive in the minors for the Orioles that are profiting off of pitchers getting behind that won’t be able to do that at the major league level.  Of course, some guys in the minors with awful control of the strike zone will also do much better in the minors than the majors.  
 

No, what's silly is stating that Adley and Gunnar both struggled in their first year. Neither of them did... They both had crazy good seasons, as a matter of fact.

To say otherwise means looking at a laughably small sample size within an otherwise massively impressive season and using that sample to say that they struggled to adjust. Bobby Witt Jr. struggled to adjust... Not Gunnar and definitely not Adley.

Speaking of small sample sizes ... Ortiz and Stowers? Come on... There's nothing meaningful at all you can conclude from the collective sip of coffee that those two experienced.

Serious question... Did you just start watching MLB baseball in the past few years?

[TheWall]

35 minutes ago, baltfan said:

This is so silly.  You are pointing to literally the last two #1 prospects in all of baseball.  Moreover, I never said the Orioles teaching or approach in the minors is the wrong one, it’s the correct one.  But Adley struggled when he first came up and so did Gunnar.  For both their approach needed to adjusted, especially for Gunnar.  Still the command of the zone they are teaching is fantastic and better in the long run.  All I was saying and still say is that waiting for bad pitches to do damage works better in the minors versus the majors.  And it isn’t just Cowser that struggled.  Stowers struggled. Ortiz didn’t do much.  But that’s all ok.  I am saying there is a logical explanation and  the team should be patient.  I only wish they had had Mountcastle from the beginning in the minors.

Finally, I am not whining about anything it’s just an observation.  I never said the approach would make it so these guys won’t succeed.  It will say, however, that not everyone has the tools of Gunnar or Adley and will be able to adjust.  There are likely to be some guys that thrive in the minors for the Orioles that are profiting off of pitchers getting behind that won’t be able to do that at the major league level.  Of course, some guys in the minors with awful control of the strike zone will also do much better in the minors than the majors.  
 

What are you even talking about? Some guys from the minors will fail? You do realize how often Top 100 ranked prospects fail, right? 

Stowers struggled, but he's never been a highly touted prospect. Ortiz struggled, but he basically got 0 opportunities. 

You still haven't elaborated on all these prospects from the Reds that are performing better than the Orioles prospects. Why is Elly -- former top 5 prospect -- performing worse than Westburg? 

[baltfan]

3 hours ago, CallMeBrooksie said:

No, what's silly is stating that Adley and Gunnar both struggled in their first year. Neither of them did... They both had crazy good seasons, as a matter of fact.

To say otherwise means looking at a laughably small sample size within an otherwise massively impressive season and using that sample to say that they struggled to adjust. Bobby Witt Jr. struggled to adjust... Not Gunnar and definitely not Adley.

Speaking of small sample sizes ... Ortiz and Stowers? Come on... There's nothing meaningful at all you can conclude from the collective sip of coffee that those two experienced.

Serious question... Did you just start watching MLB baseball in the past few years?

They both struggled at first. Adley sturggled his first two months. Gunnar struggled his first two months this year and in particular made very big changes and started swinging at first pitches much more often.  So, you  write off these off  as just normal struggles that guys have all of the time.   And you could be correct that this was just the struggles that many have. But with Gunnar, in particular, he changed his approach and became much more aggressive early in the count.  In other words, he changed his approach from the minors.  Adley’s adjustment was more subtle.  In particular, he stopped letting the ball travel so deep and stopped getting beat by fastballs as much.  Again, though, this is so stupid.  I am not arguing the approach they teach is wrong.   I think it is the right developmental approach.  I am just saying it could cause them to struggle a bit more at first.  For guys like Adley or Gunnar, that will not matter because they will continue to get chances. For others like Cowser, Stowers, or Ortiz though, no matter how bad they look it means you have to give them some time to adjust.  
 

[baltfan]

3 hours ago, TheWall said:

What are you even talking about? Some guys from the minors will fail? You do realize how often Top 100 ranked prospects fail, right? 

Stowers struggled, but he's never been a highly touted prospect. Ortiz struggled, but he basically got 0 opportunities. 

You still haven't elaborated on all these prospects from the Reds that are performing better than the Orioles prospects. Why is Elly -- former top 5 prospect -- performing worse than Westburg? 

Steer and McLain.  Both were barely in the top 100 of MLBPipeline.  Both have been better than expected.  Cowser was also a top 100 prospect and you neglect to discuss Cowser who clearly struggled in part due to his approach and figuring out how to make it work at the ML level.  Again thoug, I am saying this explains why they initially struggle.  I am not saying that they will always struggle or that they shouldn’t be developed this way. I agree with the way that the Orioles teach and am saying it means that we need to be more patient because it can work better in the minors versus the majors, so there will need to be adjustments.  

[PsychoBird68]

7 minutes ago, baltfan said:

Steer and McLain.  Both were barely in the top 100 of MLBPipeline.  Both have been better than expected.  Cowser was also a top 100 prospect and you neglect to discuss Cowser who clearly struggled in part due to his approach and figuring out how to make it work at the ML level.  Again thoug, I am saying this explains why they initially struggle.  I am not saying that they will always struggle or that they shouldn’t be developed this way. I agree with the way that the Orioles teach and am saying it means that we need to be more patient because it can work better in the minors versus the majors, so there will need to be adjustments.  

All teams from travel ball to MLB teach the same approach...Control the strike zone and swing at balls in the strike zone....Like I said most players need some time to adjust to major league pitchers and the bigger strike zone.....some of the best prospects in baseball never make that adjustment because they don't have the patients to stay with the approach that got them there or they aren't talented enough   

[baltfan]

3 hours ago, PsychoBird68 said:

All teams from travel ball to MLB teach the same approach...Control the strike zone and swing at balls in the strike zone....Like I said most players need some time to adjust to major league pitchers and the bigger strike zone.....some of the best prospects in baseball never make that adjustment because they don't have the patients to stay with the approach that got them there or they aren't talented enough   

If you really think that what the Orioles are doing is equivalent to what they are doing in travel ball, you really are giving the Orioles short shrift. And what is your basis for saying that the major league strike zone is so much larger than the minor league strike zone?