How does Westburg get playing time vs RHP?

[Malike]

2 hours ago, forphase1 said:

Sure, but Ortiz is a better defender.  Just how that washes out between the two of them is debatable of course.  Westburg is certainly a more complete hitter at this time, more power, though their .OPS this year is almost identical at AAA.

Westburg has a better power profile but he's not graded very highly on his hit tool. He is a guy who will strike out 150+ times a season. I think Ortiz profiles a bit better with the hit tool. We're about to find out in any case. 

In my opinion, I think the FO didn't feel like the team would be this good and the kids would have been brought up to see what they can do and now that the team is exceeding anyone's expectations, they are forced to trickle them in and see how it plays out. I'd personally try to trade Mateo, Frazier, Urias for some pitching help and bring the young guys up, W/L record be damned this season.

[Bemorewins]

1 minute ago, Malike said:

Westburg has a better power profile but he's not graded very highly on his hit tool. He is a guy who will strike out 150+ times a season. I think Ortiz profiles a bit better with the hit tool. We're about to find out in any case. 

In my opinion, I think the FO didn't feel like the team would be this good and the kids would have been brought up to see what they can do and now that the team is exceeding anyone's expectations, they are forced to trickle them in and see how it plays out. I'd personally try to trade Mateo, Frazier, Urias for some pitching help and bring the young guys up, W/L record be damned this season.

Who's going to give us "pitching help" for Mateo, Frazier, or Urias? Like what team(s) do you think would value them? And what kind of pitcher could we get back for any or all 3? I honestly don't know if you could get a bag of baseballs for Frazier and/or Mateo.

[tntoriole]

7 minutes ago, AnythingO's said:

I agree with all of what you say but I believe they give Hyde the option of where and how to play the less obvious choices. I am incapable of believing playing Vavra over Stowers in RF was a ME-SigBot analytical based decision. Likewise for McCann at DH, or O'Hearn in RF or Stowers in LF or Ortiz getting little PT. I believe those decision were made by Hyde and that's why I think ME is sending a strong message about the Westburg promotion. JW will play. Just my strong opinion, worth what you paid for it. lol

As has been said elsewhere.. i don’t think MEs decisions are all totally Sigbot analytical .. he uses things like .. yes we paid this guy 8 million so he is going to play quite a bit and uses veteranosity as well with McCann, etc . I think he is much less concerned about delaying specific player promotions to big league club than we are and believes in his minor league developmental staff providing an advantage for success when they get the call. 
I also think Stowers was a case of him not really impressing ME much and so him going into limbo there. 

[Jammer7]

4 hours ago, deward said:

I would correct to say that Elias showed a lot of patience with Gunnar. I don't think Hyde gets to make those kind of decisions for players that mean that much to the org. Everything we've seen this morning suggests that Westburg's ultimate playing time isn't really up to Hyde either, other than perhaps the details of what position on a given night and what spot in the lineup. 

None of us know exactly where that line is. I keep reading that on this board, but there is zero evidence that it is the case.

I believe there is input from the front office, maybe even who is a priority play and so on. From what I have read and heard, Hyde makes the lineups, and takes into account the input from the front office. Sig, Eve, Elias and Hyde have all said this in interviews in the past year or less. Obviously, Brandon Hyde has bosses and does what he is told. But I do believe he has great discretion in the lineups and pitching change decisions, in general. 

[Sydnor]

3 hours ago, Bemorewins said:

34 and 67 are NOT close in my opinion. Nor is #76 close to #46. But to each their own, I guess?

Here is an explanation of why the gap between 34 and 67 isn’t as significant as you’re making it out to be.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2023-top-100-prospects/

And now, a few important things to keep in mind as you’re perusing the Top 100. You’ll note that prospects are ranked by number but also lie within tiers demarcated by their Future Value grades. The FV grade is more important than the ordinal ranking. For example, the gap between Padres shortstop Jackson Merrill (No. 10) and Yankees shortstop Oswald Peraza (No. 40) is 30 spots, and there’s a substantial difference in talent between them. The gap between Peraza and Guardians pitcher Tanner Bibee (No. 70), meanwhile, is also 30 numerical places, but the difference in talent is relatively small. You may have also noticed that there are more than 100 prospects in the table below, and more than 100 scouting summaries. That’s because we have also included the 50 FV prospects whose ranking fell outside the 100, an acknowledgement both that the choice to rank exactly 100 prospects (as opposed to 110 or 210 or some other number entirely) is an arbitrary one and that there isn’t a ton of daylight between the prospects who appear in that part of the list.

[Bemorewins]

2 minutes ago, Sydnor said:

Here is an explanation of why the gap between 34 and 67 isn’t as significant as you’re making it out to be.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2023-top-100-prospects/

And now, a few important things to keep in mind as you’re perusing the Top 100. You’ll note that prospects are ranked by number but also lie within tiers demarcated by their Future Value grades. The FV grade is more important than the ordinal ranking. For example, the gap between Padres shortstop Jackson Merrill (No. 10) and Yankees shortstop Oswald Peraza (No. 40) is 30 spots, and there’s a substantial difference in talent between them. The gap between Peraza and Guardians pitcher Tanner Bibee (No. 70), meanwhile, is also 30 numerical places, but the difference in talent is relatively small. You may have also noticed that there are more than 100 prospects in the table below, and more than 100 scouting summaries. That’s because we have also included the 50 FV prospects whose ranking fell outside the 100, an acknowledgement both that the choice to rank exactly 100 prospects (as opposed to 110 or 210 or some other number entirely) is an arbitrary one and that there isn’t a ton of daylight between the prospects who appear in that part of the list.

Here's the thing, let's say you are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT and Ortiz and Westburg are almost neck and neck as prospects, it is obviously that the Orioles like Westburg's tools/profile better than they like Ortiz's. I have accepted that and am fine with that, just as much as I would have been fine with it if it was in reverse.

I am not one of these guys/fans who falls in love with certain prospects or have preferences regarding this one vs that one. I simply don't care. What I care about is the success of the Baltimore Orioles and their pursuit of chasing championships. I trust that they have evaluated these players through the best criteria at their disposal and make decisions accordingly.

I'll be honest with you, if the Orioles had or ultimately decide to trade both at the deadline, I'm fine with that as well.

[Sydnor]

2 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

Here's the thing, let's say you are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT and Ortiz and Westburg are almost neck and neck as prospects, it is obviously that the Orioles like Westburg's tools/profile better than they like Ortiz's. I have accepted that and am fine with that, just as much as I would have been fine with it if it was in reverse.

I am not one of these guys/fans who falls in love with certain prospects or have preferences regarding this one vs that one. I simply don't care. What I care about is the success of the Baltimore Orioles and their pursuit of chasing championships. I trust that they have evaluated these players through the best criteria at their disposal and make decisions accordingly.

I'll be honest with you, if the Orioles had or ultimately decide to trade both at the deadline, I'm fine with that as well.

All of that is fine, but that’s not what you said in the post that I responded to. You said 34 and 67 were not close in your opinion. I was simply providing you with information regarding prospect evaluations. 

I agree with you that the organization seems to value Westburg more highly. However, the organization, like all organizations, will not be infallible in evaluating players. Evan Phillips and Yaz are two examples of players that they whiffed on.

[FlipTheBird]

1 hour ago, Sydnor said:

All of that is fine, but that’s not what you said in the post that I responded to. You said 34 and 67 were not close in your opinion. I was simply providing you with information regarding prospect evaluations. 

I agree with you that the organization seems to value Westburg more highly. However, the organization, like all organizations, will not be infallible in evaluating players. Evan Phillips and Yaz are two examples of players that they whiffed on.

Just because a guy leaves and finds some modicum of success doesn't mean the Orioles "whiffed" on them. There's an incredible history of players across baseball history who didn't find themselves until their second, third, or even fourth stop. And the Orioles gave Yaz tons of time - and he's far from a player that would have changed *any* part of the last 5 years.

Some of the young players that the O's wind up trading the next few seasons will probably go on to have productive careers. That is not a failure on the team's part - it's the cost of doing business.

[Sydnor]

1 hour ago, FlipTheBird said:

Just because a guy leaves and finds some modicum of success doesn't mean the Orioles "whiffed" on them. There's an incredible history of players across baseball history who didn't find themselves until their second, third, or even fourth stop. And the Orioles gave Yaz tons of time - and he's far from a player that would have changed *any* part of the last 5 years.

Some of the young players that the O's wind up trading the next few seasons will probably go on to have productive careers. That is not a failure on the team's part - it's the cost of doing business.

They acquired nothing for either Yaz or Phillips. Phillips is a key cog in the Dodgers bullpen and has been worth 3.0 fWAR/4.3 rWAR since joining the Dodgers. Yaz has been worth 10.6 fWAR/11.4 rWAR since he was acquired for Tyler Herb. That’s more than a modicum of success.

Phillips would be under team control through 2027. He seems better than players like Akin, Gillespie, etc. I didn’t say Phillips would have changed anything in the last 5 years, but I’d love to have him the pen right now.

I also did not say Yaz would have changed anything in the past 5 years. But, he has been accumulated more WAR than either Hays or Santander. In fact, he’s 60th in fWAR among position players from 2019 to the present. Seems like he might have value in a trade for more than Tyler Herb.

The organization did not give Yaz an opportunity to play in the majors. He was in the organization for approximately 5 years. Those were Duquette years. Elias traded him during spring training in his first year with the organization.

I don’t know if you read what I wrote, but I said that the organization, like all organizations, will not be infallible in evaluating players. I don’t expect them to be perfect. But in discussing Ortiz v. Westburg, if the organization thinks that Westburg is better, it’s possible that they’re wrong, and we can think differently.

Some players that they trade will have productive careers, the trick is to keep the players that will be the most productive. In a sense trading or waiving the most productive players is a failure. I’ve heard Elias discuss how giving up on JD Martinez was a failure by the Astros front office.

[deward]

4 hours ago, Jammer7 said:

None of us know exactly where that line is. I keep reading that on this board, but there is zero evidence that it is the case.

I believe there is input from the front office, maybe even who is a priority play and so on. From what I have read and heard, Hyde makes the lineups, and takes into account the input from the front office. Sig, Eve, Elias and Hyde have all said this in interviews in the past year or less. Obviously, Brandon Hyde has bosses and does what he is told. But I do believe he has great discretion in the lineups and pitching change decisions, in general. 

Sure, Hyde is determining batting orders, pitching changes, when to rest guys, and other day to day stuff. I'd be shocked if he has the latitude to unilaterally decide to, say, bury Gunnar Henderson on the bench when he's struggling. I can't envision a scenario where Elias decides it's time to promote Jordan Westburg and Hyde says, "great, I'll work him into one game a week. Maybe." Hyde has input, and I'm sure his opinions are taken into account, but Elias isn't constructing a roster and just hoping that Hyde plays along.

[Jammer7]

1 hour ago, deward said:

Sure, Hyde is determining batting orders, pitching changes, when to rest guys, and other day to day stuff. I'd be shocked if he has the latitude to unilaterally decide to, say, bury Gunnar Henderson on the bench when he's struggling. I can't envision a scenario where Elias decides it's time to promote Jordan Westburg and Hyde says, "great, I'll work him into one game a week. Maybe." Hyde has input, and I'm sure his opinions are taken into account, but Elias isn't constructing a roster and just hoping that Hyde plays along.

I agree. I doubt any modern day manager would have that kind of latitude. Those are conversations they have before a move is made, for sure. There is a lot of things taken into consideration, like data, scouting reports, match ups and so on.

I would love to be a fly on the wall in some of those conversations. 

[25 Nuggets]

8 hours ago, Malike said:

Westburg has a better power profile but he's not graded very highly on his hit tool. He is a guy who will strike out 150+ times a season. I think Ortiz profiles a bit better with the hit tool. We're about to find out in any case. 

In my opinion, I think the FO didn't feel like the team would be this good and the kids would have been brought up to see what they can do and now that the team is exceeding anyone's expectations, they are forced to trickle them in and see how it plays out. I'd personally try to trade Mateo, Frazier, Urias for some pitching help and bring the young guys up, W/L record be damned this season.

1B O'Hearn / Santander

2B Frazier (50%) / Westburg

SS Henderson (Mateo DR/PR)

3B Urias (Frazier PH, Henderson DR)

If they don't move anybody, that's the infield usage I would like to see.  If Cowser is called up, McKenna goes down.  Ortiz gets more time in AAA.

[Low Country Bird]

21 hours ago, Bemorewins said:

I respect your opinion and right to have one. But the consensus of the scouting community/ talent evaluators don't see things as you do. In most prospect rankings, they are not particularly closely rated as players. 

Isn't Ortiz a top 100 prospect?  Keith Law likes Ortiz just as much, if not more, than Westburg.  And this just isn't true as most other publications have them pretty close.  Tony has Westburg one spot over Ortiz.  My point was if Westburg is getting all that attention and playing every day, Ortiz should have gotten the same.  

[Tony-OH]

20 hours ago, NCRaven said:

The only prospect evaluation that matters is Elias's.  And, it's been pretty clear to me that he seems to rate Westburg higher than Ortiz.  First, Ortiz has gotten little to no run during his time with the Orioles.  And, second, they elected to have Westburg continue to play every day, including a significant amount of games at shortstop, while Ortiz sat on a bench.  They treated Ortiz like an up and down guy and Westburg like a real prospect.  We'll see...

It's really hard for anyone to argue with this. Elias showed his hand a bit by bringing Ortiz up to ride the pine. Now he will say all the right things about Ortiz, but actions speak louder than words. The real question may be does the rest of baseball think higher of Ortiz than Elias? 

Personally I think he can be a very good everyday major league shortstop and a GG caliber second baseman. I would have played him over Mateo and Frazier, but's hard to get into Elias' head.

Afterall, he started Westburg only six games at 2B while giving him most of his time at SS and 3B in AAA this year then starts him at 2B in his major league debut? It seems like the development side is not always on the same page with how the players will be used at the major league level. 

Westburg should start tonight against the lefty, so the real key is whether or not he starts on Wednesday against the righty. 

As others have said, Ortiz is a similar prospect level and was treated as an up down guy bench piece for most of his major league time this year. It remains to be seen how Elias plans to use Westburg against righties. 

Most of us are hopeful he gets the Adley/Gunnar treatment and not the Stowers/Ortiz treatment. I'm done trying to guess along, but Elias is way too unpredictable with his usage of rookies. 

And before anyone gets too upset with me for saying that, I'm not bashing Elias. I'm just pointing out a fact. The team is winning and at the end of the day, a GM gets graded on wins and losses at this point so right now he's getting an A. 

 

[Frobby]

20 hours ago, Bemorewins said:

You may have a little blind spot for Ortiz (which is understandable) if you think the gap between 34 and 67 isn't sizeable. That's over 30 spots! And in other list like the mlb.com top 100 ranking it's similarly as wide with Westburg coming in at #46 and Ortiz at #76. 

Depending on where on the list it is, 30 spots is not necesssrily that big.  The grades are more important - is the player a 50, a 55, etc.  For example, on Fangraphs’ preseason list, everyone from 42 to 118 was rated a 50.   By the way, they ranked Ortiz 67th and Westburg was unranked.   So, I’d say the majority consensus ranked Westburg higher than Ortiz, but it wasn’t unanimous.  To me, they are reasonably close.   Let’s face it, the consensus on these things isn’t always right, either.