Jump to content

Matusz or Tillman


adam_jonzin'

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Tillman. I'd be willing to wager he's going to struggle more in the Majors than Matusz. Matusz is more polished-- and from what I know about both-- has more pitches. Tillman has bouts of wildness every now and again.

However, as much as I'm ragging on Tillman right now, he's better than 99% of all the pitchers that have passed through our farm system in the past 10 years. Tillman is either really good or we're really bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just ask the question you want to know people's answer to:

Do you think Matusz or Tillman is the better prospect?

I'm going with Matusz, but that's because I'm a bit conservative and prefer the safer bet over the guy who is a bit more of a risk but probably also has a bit higher upside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well for me its a catch 22. Say that young stuf 1B is Joey Votto. So, you want me to get rid of Tillman and others? I wouldnt want to get rid of Tillman period and then adding someone else to it makes it even harder. But for me, I wouldnt want to trade either Tillman or Matusz, especially as part of a package, which is what it would probably have to be. Now, if it was a top flight SS or 3B, Id consider it with Tillman, not Matusz....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just ask the question you want to know people's answer to:

Do you think Matusz or Tillman is the better prospect?

I'm going with Matusz, but that's because I'm a bit conservative and prefer the safer bet over the guy who is a bit more of a risk but probably also has a bit higher upside.

Just to play devil's advocate, it all depends how you define better prospect, and what your tolerance for risk is. I can imagine that someone could feel that Tillman is the better prospect because of higher upside, but be more willing to trade him because he is riskier.

Personally, I have no appetite for trading either one. None at all. But if I had to trade one, I'd trade Tillman because I think Matusz is more certain to be a 1 or a 2, whereas Tillman could be anywhere from 1 to 3. It's a very close call, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the young stud 1B was Puljos with a 6 year, $50 million extension, I'd send Tillman first.

+1.

It's would be very dumb IMO to trade either of them for a 1B unless that 1B is Albert Pujols or maybe Fielder/Cabrera/Howard.

Pitching. Pitching. Pitching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to play devil's advocate, it all depends how you define better prospect, and what your tolerance for risk is. I can imagine that someone could feel that Tillman is the better prospect because of higher upside, but be more willing to trade him because he is riskier.

Personally, I have no appetite for trading either one. None at all. But if I had to trade one, I'd trade Tillman because I think Matusz is more certain to be a 1 or a 2, whereas Tillman could be anywhere from 1 to 3. It's a very close call, though.

Yeah, basically the question I'm answering is if there is some weird expansion draft and we can only protect one of Matusz or Tillman from being taken in it, which do I protect.

I'll keep Matusz. Love both though, and think they are gonna be a dynamite 1-2 or 2-1 for most of the next decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...