TT: It's time to bring up Colton Cowser

[Bemorewins]

15 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Trumbo was worth like 1 WAR per year. His 47 homer season was a major outlier and even then he put up only 2 WAR! My prediction would be Stowers will have less power, higher OBP, and better defense (only because of Trumbo's very low bar). 

All of this is sensible and reasonable to me.

To be honest, I never really cared for players wtih Trumbo's profile who are so one-dimensional. 

As far as Stowers goes, I'm just not really sure that he has a longterm place on the O's. There are more talented players/better prospects behind him who fit a similar type of player in Cowser and Kjerstad and the guys in front of him have outperformed him (except Varva). 

IMO he's really wasting up a spot for a more talented prospect OR a more proven player to occupy.

[Sports Guy]

13 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

I did a quick Google search and couldn't find what he was on the scouting scale. Off of memory, his tremendous power potential was always recognized in the game when he was a young player. I can't recall anybody outside of Orioles fans really discussing Stowers similarly. I could be wrong and just missed it. 

I think Trumbo's issue(s) is that he literally brought NOTHING else to the table. He was the pure example of a one-dimensional player.

As far as, top 100 lists being meaningless. I couldn't disagree with you any more. It gives you a feel for how the game/scouting consensus regards/values players potential. Many of these lists are pretty objective and they all are evaluating the same players. If NOBODY sees a player in a certain light/potential, I think it's prudent to take note of that. It doesn't mean that guys can't exceed expectations or underperform for that matter. But I think they can at least give you some decent clues/tools in terms of who the player is and what they can realistically become.

The consensus was he was an upper echelon prospect in an elite system and in other systems, he’s probably top 5.

Plenty of guys have been excellent t that weren’t top 100 prospects and plenty of top 100 prospects fail.

 

[Bemorewins]

9 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The consensus was he was an upper echelon prospect in an elite system and in other systems, he’s probably top 5.

Plenty of guys have been excellent t that weren’t top 100 prospects and plenty of top 100 prospects fail.

 

Understood. It sounds like you are entrenched in your belief in Stowers' talents/ability/potential.

I just think that Cowser is a more talented player/better prospect. AND that Hays and Santander are much better MLB players in the present.

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The consensus was he was an upper echelon prospect in an elite system and in other systems, he’s probably top 5.

Plenty of guys have been excellent t that weren’t top 100 prospects and plenty of top 100 prospects fail.

 

What’s the conversation we really should be having right now?

Stowers wasn’t a top 100 prospect, but he was a good prospect.  Most of the same people who were calling for his demotion recently, were clamoring for his promotion last summer and critiquing his lack of playing time when he was promoted.  So what’s changed?   It wasn’t that he performed poorly in 2022.  He did decently enough in his opportunities then.  And I don’t think anyone’s judging him based on the few sporadic at bats he had at the beginning of this year. 

So really, it boils down to the fact that he’s absolutely sucked offensively in this most recent call-up.   Is it a huge sample size?  No.  Does it mean he can never be a good major league player?  No.   But does it mean he’s unlikely to help us right now?  Yes, I’m afraid it does.  He needs to go to Norfolk, get his rhythm back, and wait for his next chance.  Simple as that.  

 

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

Understood. It sounds like you are entrenched in your belief in Stowers' talents/ability/potential.

I just think that Cowser is a more talented player/better prospect. AND that Hays and Santander are much better MLB players in the present.

You seem to be completely blowing what I’m saying out of proportion but maybe in reading your tone wrong.

 

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What’s the conversation we really should be having right now?

Stowers wasn’t a top 100 prospect, but he was a good prospect.  Most of the same people who were calling for his demotion recently, were clamoring for his promotion last summer and critiquing his lack of playing time when he was promoted.  So what’s changed?   It wasn’t that he performed poorly in 2022.  He did decently enough in his opportunities then.  And I don’t think anyone’s judging him based on the few sporadic at bats he had at the beginning of this year. 

So really, it boils down to the fact that he’s absolutely sucked offensively in this most recent call-up.   Is it a huge sample size?  No.  Does it mean he can never be a good major league player?  No.   But does it mean he’s unlikely to help us right now?  Yes, I’m afraid it does.  He needs to go to Norfolk, get his rhythm back, and wait for his next chance.  Simple as that.  

 

Thanks for telling me what conversation we should be having now.  

[Bemorewins]

7 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You seem to be completely blowing what I’m saying out of proportion but maybe in reading your tone wrong.

 

It's very possible that there is a miscommunication between us. It seems to me that you like Stowers more than the scouting consensus, which is fair and fine by me. We all have a right to assess things the way we assess them and express our opinions on this board. I'm cool with all of that.

I just seem to value and put more stock into top 100 lists than you do, which is just my opinion as well.

I'm fine with us not always agreeing on this board and I learn from different people's perspectives and opinions (like yours). 

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

It's very possible that there is a miscommunication between us. It seems to me that you like Stowers more than the scouting consensus, which is fair and fine by me. We all have a right to assess things the way we assess them and express our opinions on this board. I'm cool with all of that.

I just seem to value and put more stock into top 100 lists than you do, which is just my opinion as well.

I'm fine with us not always agreeing on this board and I learn from different people's perspectives and opinions (like yours). 

You don’t even know how the scouting community likes him!  All you are complaining about is that he isn’t on top 100 lists.

Have you provided any actual scouting evidence other than that?

All I’m saying is that he has been a highly ranked prospect in the best system in baseball and he has tremendous power upside, which is largely inarguable considering his power and exit velo numbers  the minors.

Those are just 2 pieces of factual info.

[Bemorewins]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

You don’t even know how the scouting community likes him!  All you are complaining about is that he isn’t on top 100 lists.

Have you provided any actual scouting evidence other than that?

All I’m saying is that he has been a highly ranked prospect in the best system in baseball and he has tremendous power upside, which is largely inarguable considering his power and exit velo numbers  the minors.

Those are just 2 pieces of factual info.

You sound like an attorney from the lingo that you frequently use like "evidence" and how you chose to engage debates. If that is the case, I am ill-equipped to win an argument with you...lol

I will say that I am definitely not complaining about anything. I just put more stock (probably way more) into top 100 lists than you do. I also put stock into prospect podcast and listen a lot to MLB network radio especially the Front Office show and the Minors and Majors show that they have on the weekends. And I can't really say that I have heard his name in heavy rotation in any of those spaces.

You are absolutely correct in that he was higher rated in our system. But if he was in say AA or AAA now where would he rank? In your opinion is he a better prospect than ANY of our current top 9 guys who are all pretty much consensus top 100 guys?

[HandsomeQuack]

Re: Top 100 lists, once you get outside the top 50, the margins become pretty thin. I forget who I saw say this, but there isn't a ton of difference in value between being ranked 50 and being ranked 150. Just looking at some Orioles, Coby Mayo was 36 on FGs, 69 on Baseball Prospectus, and unranked on the other major lists. Kjerstad was 80 on MLB's list and unranked everywhere else. Are those guys "Top 100" prospects? Heck, Cowser was ranked around 40 by most publications but completely left off by Keith Law and FGs.

The lists are nice barometers for the level of buzz around some guys (and most importantly, nice content for us fans to consume and argue about before the regular season kicks off), but outside of the guys that are universally regarded as blue chip prospects, I wouldn't take them too seriously.

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

You sound like an attorney from the lingo that you frequently use like "evidence" and how you chose to engage debates. If that is the case, I am ill-equipped to win an argument with you...lol

I will say that I am definitely not complaining about anything. I just put more stock (probably way more) into top 100 lists than you do. I also put stock into prospect podcast and listen a lot to MLB network radio especially the Front Office show and the Minors and Majors show that they have on the weekends. And I can't really say that I have heard his name in heavy rotation in any of those spaces.

You are absolutely correct in that he was higher rated in our system. But if he was in say AA or AAA now where would he rank? In your opinion is he a better prospect than ANY of our current top 9 guys who are all pretty much consensus top 100 guys?

I would have him right there with Norby. I am not even sure if I would have Norby in the Top 10 of our system and he’s a top 100 guy. 
 

Im not enamored by Stowers and don’t feel he is some Uber prospect. But he is a good prospect with big time power upside.

He is also overshadowed because of how excellent our system is, so people not talking about him doesn’t mean that much.

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, HandsomeQuack said:

Re: Top 100 lists, once you get outside the top 50, the margins become pretty thin. I forget who I saw say this, but there isn't a ton of difference in value between being ranked 50 and being ranked 150. Just looking at some Orioles, Coby Mayo was 36 on FGs, 69 on Baseball Prospectus, and unranked on the other major lists. Kjerstad was 80 on MLB's list and unranked everywhere else. Are those guys "Top 100" prospects? Heck, Cowser was ranked around 40 by most publications but completely left off by Keith Law and FGs.

The lists are nice barometers for the level of buzz around some guys (and most importantly, nice content for us fans to consume and argue about before the regular season kicks off), but outside of the guys that are universally regarded as blue chip prospects, I wouldn't take them too seriously.

Exactly right.  It’s like the NFL draft this year. Very little difference between the guy who went 25 and the guy who went 65.  The consensus is all over the map.

Every one agrees who the top top guys are and after that, it’s a preference thing.

[Frobby]

1.  Not every good major league player was a top 100 prospect.  

2.  Most top 100 prospects don’t become good major league players.   

3.  An even higher proportion of non-top 100 prospects fail to become good major league players.  

Therefore, the odds of Stowers becoming a good major league player aren’t all that high.  But they’re good enough where he should get the opportunity to show what he can do.   Not necessarily now, and not necessarily with the Orioles.  


 

[Bemorewins]

8 minutes ago, HandsomeQuack said:

Re: Top 100 lists, once you get outside the top 50, the margins become pretty thin. I forget who I saw say this, but there isn't a ton of difference in value between being ranked 50 and being ranked 150. Just looking at some Orioles, Coby Mayo was 36 on FGs, 69 on Baseball Prospectus, and unranked on the other major lists. Kjerstad was 80 on MLB's list and unranked everywhere else. Are those guys "Top 100" prospects? Heck, Cowser was ranked around 40 by most publications but completely left off by Keith Law and FGs.

The lists are nice barometers for the level of buzz around some guys (and most importantly, nice content for us fans to consume and argue about before the regular season kicks off), but outside of the guys that are universally regarded as blue chip prospects, I wouldn't take them too seriously.

That's why I look at a bunch of them to get "a feel" for consensus. Btw, historically speaking, it appears Law has had a biased against the Orioles, so when it comes to things O's related I tend to take his opinion much lighter weighted than others. If Cowser was generally believed by everyone to be inside the top 40 and then lone wolf Law doesn't rate him at all, that tends to mean nothing to me.

But I agree that the lists aren't the end all and be all. 

[Tony-OH]

45 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What’s the conversation we really should be having right now?

Stowers wasn’t a top 100 prospect, but he was a good prospect.  Most of the same people who were calling for his demotion recently, were clamoring for his promotion last summer and critiquing his lack of playing time when he was promoted.  So what’s changed?   It wasn’t that he performed poorly in 2022.  He did decently enough in his opportunities then.  And I don’t think anyone’s judging him based on the few sporadic at bats he had at the beginning of this year. 

So really, it boils down to the fact that he’s absolutely sucked offensively in this most recent call-up.   Is it a huge sample size?  No.  Does it mean he can never be a good major league player?  No.   But does it mean he’s unlikely to help us right now?  Yes, I’m afraid it does.  He needs to go to Norfolk, get his rhythm back, and wait for his next chance.  Simple as that.  

 

Good post. I'm nowhere ready to call Stowers a bust and still think he's going to end up a good big league outfielder for someone, but he absolutely was lost at the plate during this promotion for whatever reason. 

This team is trying to win now so you can't keep a guy in one of those ruts when you have the option to send him back. Hopefully he'll get out of the rut and be back because I don't like seeing Vavra starting in RF.