What to make of Matt Hobgood's season?

[Stotle]

When we drafted this kid a head of guys like Matzek and Green. I think Hobgood has the build of Bartolo Colon. Hobgood seems like a good kid, but I liked Matzek a lot more than Hobgood. If the Orioles draft another pitcher in the first round next year I sure hope they get the best player available. No offense to Brian Matusz who I think could be really good, that beautiful swinging Texas minor league first baseman would have been my pick. I would have rather had a Smoak/Matzek combo than a Matusz/Hobgood combo. I would go as far as saying that a good number of teams would prefer the first option to the second.

To be fair, about 11 teams disagreed with you on each count (Smoak and Matzek) on draft day.

[Fairfax Bird]

When we drafted this kid a head of guys like Matzek and Green. I think Hobgood has the build of Bartolo Colon. Hobgood seems like a good kid, but I liked Matzek a lot more than Hobgood. If the Orioles draft another pitcher in the first round next year I sure hope they get the best player available. No offense to Brian Matusz who I think could be really good, that beautiful swinging Texas minor league first baseman would have been my pick. I would have rather had a Smoak/Matzek combo than a Matusz/Hobgood combo. I would go as far as saying that a good number of teams would prefer the first option to the second.

He also has the build of Curt Shilling ... by the way a Bartolo Colon career is not something to cry over. He was great for several years for the Indians and then was traded for a boatload of prospects.

[crawdad]

It will take awhile to see if you are right or wrong. This season Matusz had a better showing in the major leagues than Smoak did in AAA. While Smoak is tearing it up for team USA, he didn't show a lot of power this year in the minors. 21 doubles and 12 homers in 386 AB's. There was a noticeable slippage at AAA from AA. Of course, many of the same posters who have given up on Snyder (same age) as an answer at 1B, continue to tout that we should have drafted Smoak.

I think Jordan went out on a limb on Hobgood. But I don't think it's a long limb. IMO, this draft wasn't a very good one. I was never high on Grant Green and it will surprise me if he becomes a quality ML SS. As for Hobgood over the more publicized HS pitchers like Miller, Turner, Wheeler, and Matzek, we'll have to wait and see.

Smoak will be fine, but yeah Team USA stats mean nothing. The competition is horrible.

[crawdad]

Opinion? Impact middle of the order hitter? Nick Johnson type? Casey Kotchman type?

Smoak . . . I see above average 1B. Kind of a Justin Morneau type. Above average bat, competent if not slightly above average at first. Nothing exceptional, but good. Should be a 3-4 WAR player over a 5-10 year period.

[Stotle]

I saw his (Smoak's) first two ABs against Cuba today and he was not controlling the strikezone at all. Decent, not great, off-speed and breaking stuff ate him up -- 2 SO. Looks like he's collected a hit. USA up 7-4 for those not watching (championship game -- it's on MLB Network).

Luke May is turning into a solid little catching prospect (Dodgers). Started out as a SS, moved to OF, now behind the plate and looking solid. I wonder if the Pirates don't shift Alvarez to RF -- I guess LaRoche could move to 2B?

[QBsILLEST1]

I saw his (Smoak's) first two ABs against Cuba today and he was not controlling the strikezone at all. Decent, not great, off-speed and breaking stuff ate him up -- 2 SO. Looks like he's collected a hit. USA up 7-4 for those not watching (championship game -- it's on MLB Network).

Luke May is turning into a solid little catching prospect (Dodgers). Started out as a SS, moved to OF, now behind the plate and looking solid. I wonder if the Pirates don't shift Alvarez to RF -- I guess LaRoche could move to 2B?

Since we were on the discussion the other day having to do with Hobgood having a ceiling of a #2 at this point. What are we looking at with Matusz? My opinion would be he can be a #1 if his command gets just a bit better. He seems to have the stuff and though he doesnt throw 98 MPH, he has the pitchability and plus command at this point to make up for it.....If his command stays where it is which Id still consider plus, I still see him as a #2...

Are my ceiling/projections too high?

[Stotle]

Since we were on the discussion the other day having to do with Hobgood having a ceiling of a #2 at this point. What are we looking at with Matusz? My opinion would be he can be a #1 if his command gets just a bit better. He seems to have the stuff and though he doesnt throw 98 MPH, he has the pitchability and plus command at this point to make up for it.....If his command stays where it is which Id still consider plus, I still see him as a #2...

Are my ceiling/projections too high?

My own opinion is that generally your ceiling/projections are too high, but it seems to be directly related to the fact that the media sources that cover these prospects/amateur draft eligibles tend to be lacking in the transparency department. It isn't clear who is giving the info, and there is no historical context. Often times, we see "scouts say" or "one scout likened Player X to". More context is needed to get a clear picture on a player. Who is the "one scout"? Is he someone who has accurately profiled a similar MLer? I know I'd give more weight to a statement like "One scout with a solid track record in identifying future pitchers likened Player X to Cole Hamels".

When I don't see any context at all, I take the statement with a bucket of salt. The scout is really under no pressure because his/her name isn't tied to the appraisal at all. Further, he loses nothing if he's wrong -- why would he care if Baseball America (for example) didn't ask his opinion on something in the future? BA (again for example) is also under no obligation to really challenge the appraisal because they are under pressure to fill column inches.

When it comes to something like the prospect book, I tend to assume that a good number of coaches/scouts were consulted, so I tend to weigh it a little higher. But the one-off articles covering a particular game or player? Shrug.

As far as Matusz is concerned, seems like a #1/#2 to me, depending on the command of his fastball, overall durability and consistency over the course of a season. If he shows an ability to constantly improve upon his pitchability over the course of his career, he should be a front-end arm and enjoy a lot of success. All, of course, just in my opinion.

[QBsILLEST1]

My own opinion is that generally your ceiling/projections are too high, but it seems to be directly related to the fact that the media sources that cover these prospects/amateur draft eligibles tend to be lacking in the transparency department. It isn't clear who is giving the info, and there is no historical context. Often times, we see "scouts say" or "one scout likened Player X to". More context is needed to get a clear picture on a player. Who is the "one scout"? Is he someone who has accurately profiled a similar MLer? I know I'd give more weight to a statement like "One scout with a solid track record in identifying future pitchers likened Player X to Cole Hamels".

When I don't see any context at all, I take the statement with a bucket of salt. The scout is really under no pressure because his/her name isn't tied to the appraisal at all. Further, he loses nothing if he's wrong -- why would he care if Baseball America (for example) didn't ask his opinion on something in the future? BA (again for example) is also under no obligation to really challenge the appraisal because they are under pressure to fill column inches.

When it comes to something like the prospect book, I tend to assume that a good number of coaches/scouts were consulted, so I tend to weigh it a little higher. But the one-off articles covering a particular game or player? Shrug.

As far as Matusz is concerned, seems like a #1/#2 to me, depending on the command of his fastball, overall durability and consistency over the course of a season. If he shows an ability to constantly improve upon his pitchability over the course of his career, he should be a front-end arm and enjoy a lot of success. All, of course, just in my opinion.

Yes, I tend to be more optimistic with my projections on a lot of stuff, but its usually my wishful thinking overtaking my reality. A lot of times, I am thinking one thing, but wishfully bump it up a notch. Dont really know why. For instance, Ill say I think Jake Arrieta is gonna be a #2, when in actuality hes probably gonna be a middle rotation guy. I will say though if Jake improves his secondaries and command, he can be as good as any of our pitchers...But thats neither here nor there I guess... Just an example....

[Stotle]

Yes, I tend to be more optimistic with my projections on a lot of stuff, but its usually my wishful thinking overtaking my reality. A lot of times, I am thinking one thing, but wishfully bump it up a notch. Dont really know why. For instance, Ill say I think Jake Arrieta is gonna be a #2, when in actuality hes probably gonna be a middle rotation guy. I will say though if Jake improves his secondaries and command, he can be as good as any of our pitchers...But thats neither here nor there I guess... Just an example....

I think it's great to be positive. I was just pointing to some issues with prospect reporting that we all unfortunately have to deal with/keep in mind.

[QBsILLEST1]

I think it's great to be positive. I was just pointing to some issues with prospect reporting that we all unfortunately have to deal with/keep in mind.

Yes, I agree. The only real way to know the truth is to witness it yourself.