Jump to content

Adley is in an otherworldly slump right now


interloper

Recommended Posts

Just now, OnlyOneOriole said:

So if a player like a Cal gets drafted and plays his entire career with the Os, should we only grade that pick on his first contract?  I wouldn't. 

I think a player who is drafted, extended, and plays well for his career with a team should be graded higher than a player who is drafted, plays well, but signs with another team once his first contract is up. 

I mean I understand what you are saying now, but every situation is different.  It seems 'nitpicky' to me. 

Anyone could have signed Cal when team control was over.

I think it's the only way it makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Anyone could have signed Cal when team control was over.

I think it's the only way it makes sense.

The controlling team does have a big advantage in negotiations - unless your agent is someone like Scott Boras

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the question about Adley as 1:1 is not so much relevant to "average 1:1" as it is to the other consensus candidate that year, Witt. And that is where, aside from HOF credentials at the position, it's still a valid position (as I imagine some argued in Elias's draft room) to compare relative long-term value (okay, CoC, at least 6-7 years) of top shelf SS vs. top-shelf catcher/DH. Just as there are valid arguments for/against drafting first-round pitchers.

Edited by now
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I think the track record of moving mid-career catchers somewhere else to preserve their health is not good. Piazza tried to move to first, that didn't work. Bench tried to go to third, that flopped. Yogi moved to the outfield to make space for Elston Howard, and I guess that was kind of okay for a year or two.

Yes, sometimes you succeed with young guys who aren't really good catchers anyway and have a skill set that supports other positions (Dale Murphy, Carlos Delgado, Craig Biggio). But that's not Rutschman.

I would much rather keep doing what they're doing and have him get 2/3rds or 3/4ths of his time behind the plate and DH the rest.

Oh I agree for  right now.  I am talking when SB is ready to move up to the parent club. Maybe in 2026.  Let him, the younger guy with less wear and tear on his body, take over catching full time.  Most teams don't have that kind of luxury to have 2 very good catchers. It's a unique situation.  Of course that all assumes that SB will keep progressing.  If he doesn't and he turns into James McCann?  Then that plan flies out the window.

Edited by OnlyOneOriole
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Anyone could have signed Cal when team control was over.

I think it's the only way it makes sense.

After the years of team control you're paying some approximation of market value for the player, or whomever replaces him. So on average there's no marginal value there. All the value is during the discount years.

You have to judge drafts by years under team control prior to free agency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, now said:

I think the question about Adley as 1:1 is not so much relevant to "average 1:1" as it is to the other consensus candidate that year, Witt. And that is where, aside from HOF credentials at the position, it's still a valid position (as I imagine some argued in Elias's draft room) to compare relative long-term value (okay, CoC, at least 6-7 years) of top shelf SS vs. top-shelf catcher/DH.

If you're going to do that, then almost every draft pick can be second-guessed. In 2010 do you think the Nats and their fans are gnashing teeth and wringing hands about that draft because Bryce Harper is a few wins behind Manny and Sale? (Well, of course they are, because they're sports fans, and naturally bitter).

In 2005 Justin Upton was a great 1/1, had a 32 win career, probably top quartile of all time. But he was also the 6th-most valuable player taken that round. Does that mean he was a failed pick, or some part of the D'backs decision making was flawed? Of course not. They did a very, very good job with the information at their disposal and got a very, very good player out of it.

I just don't see the point in rehashing hypotheticals years later. Oh, woe is us, why didn't we get Bobby Witt, Jr, all we ended up with is a plausible HOF catcher. Let's hammer home the point that our management could have done better, because nobody is ever happy.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Adley usually bats righty when he DH’s, which is his stronger side.

I was wondering if maybe just batting from his stronger side full time might be beneficial.  Was it Mullins (??) who did that a few years ago and it seemed to work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, OnlyOneOriole said:

That's a pretty crazy stat.  I would have guessed at least 10-15 min. 

The draft only started in 1965. There were no 1/1 picks for the first 93 years of organized baseball history. Hall of Fame selections typically happen at least 25-30 years after someone is drafted. Sometimes much later. So it's more-or-less impossible for any 1/1 to have gone to Cooperstown prior to about 1990.

Edited by DrungoHazewood
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • I have a feeling that Irvin will do better in another organization than he did with us.  It seemed like the O’s were trying to make him into something he wasn’t, chasing higher velo, etc.   Also, I don’t think Brandon Hyde really believed in him.  We’ll see next year.  
    • Who thought the run D would struggle? Why would anyone think that?
    • Royals lose, now 3 games back of us in the loss column.  Twins lose, now 5 games back of us in the loss column. 
    • Oh it’s definitely harder but I think teams are de-emphasizing it. Again, not saying they shouldn’t but I believe it has gone too far.
    • I think there are a lot of pitchers who made progress this year and may help the major league team some day, but there don’t appear to be a lot of high ceiling guys who could be TOR or even MOR pitchers.   Saying that, sometimes pitchers surprise you.  Nobody gave John Means a second thought until he showed up in the majors and was effective.     
    • No, Arizona was 84-78 for the entire season which is 6 games above 500 and played in the World Series.  Texas was 15-13 in September and won the World Series.  They didn’t play much better.  I have never nor I don’t think many people here think everything is fine and dandy.  In two weeks this same group of players with some added additions from injuries could play better.  They could play closer to the team which played in April and May.  
    • Has it gotten devalued, or just harder to do?   I would far prefer a .260-.280 average BA to today’s .244.   I do think that one reason BAs are lower is that batters are emphasizing swinging for power.  But the bigger reason is, pitchers have just gotten bettter.  They throw harder, with more spin, and have a wider array of pitches than ever before.  It’s harder and harder to make solid contact, so if you do, be sure to hit it hard.    By the way, I have a simple way to raise batting averages by 10+ points: bring in the robo-umps and eliminate the 12% of called strikes that are actually balls.  Yes, the 4% of called strikes that are actually balls also will go away, but the net advantage to the hitters will be significant.  And the beauty is, you’re not changing the rules of the game or the strike zone.   You’re improving enforcement of the actual strike zone.  Do it!  
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...