steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Jul 31, 2013 14:24:13 GMT -5
Per Speier, Owens is being promoted to AA. EXCELLENT news!! Richly deserved. With a full month in AA Henry may be ready for the BIG show earlier. He may be ready in 2015!
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 9, 2013 10:10:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Aug 13, 2013 8:01:36 GMT -5
Thought it was about time for a thread on the Sox's fastest-rising prospect at the moment.
People around here know me as an inveterate pessimist, and I admit normally I can appear to be that way sometimes. But not in the case of Owens. A recent article in Projo talked about a breakthrough on his curveball due to a grip change. It seems to me that, if he's indeed found himself a workable or better 3rd pitch, and his arm slot and arm speed is indistinguishable among the 3, other than any stamina and command issues he has all that he needs to force his way into the discussion, at the major league level even, in the very near future.
He won't go anywhere other than Portland this year of course because of his innings limit. But I have to believe that he will be in major league camp next spring and the organization will be keeping a VERY careful eye on his progress. And if the Sox happen to run into injury issues in the rotation next spring, who knows what might happen? Chances are he needs more seasoning -- but it does happen from time to time that a young pitcher "finds it" and simply forces his way onto the roster, or grabs the brass ring if circumstances present it to him.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 13, 2013 8:38:58 GMT -5
Merged threads.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Aug 13, 2013 8:53:14 GMT -5
Next year will be fun, not that this year isn't. The Sox are in prime position with 6 veteran arms and a wealth of young guys ready to contribute. Don't have to rush any of them next year, but all should get some major league seasoning so when they are needed in 2015 they are ready. Dempster, Lester and Peavy will be in the final years of their deals so in 2015 we'll need two starters to complete the rotation with Lackey, Buchholz and Doubront. Look at the stable to choose from:
Workman Webster Ruby Ranaudo Owens Barnes
I'm fairly certain Britton is 100% a bullpen arm considering his options are limited (1 left) and that's very valuable with a bullpen arm. Plus, the other starters available and his low salary and left arm in he pen is useful.
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Aug 13, 2013 13:22:09 GMT -5
Thanks jmei -- don't know what I was thinking. I didn't see the thread, but I recall having read a few of the posts, so why I started another thread ...... just my Medicare mind, I guess. To me, the key is Owens' curveball. If he truly has discovered something, as the recent article seems to imply, that is a huge game-changer for him, IMO. All the time we hear about pitchers discovering or refining a pitch and it throws them into an entirely different level of capability.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Aug 13, 2013 13:38:03 GMT -5
I know Mellen tweeted (yesterday, I think) he thought his ceiling was a solid #3. That's shocking to me. I can see his projection being a #3, but I would think his ceiling is a #2. I'd be curious to hear from some of the scouts who have seen him in Portland with his newly refined curveball. 18h Chris Mellen Chris MellenSee the ceiling as a solid no.3 SP. RT @lovegolfbigtime: (Henry) Owens ceiling? 1 or 2?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 13, 2013 14:10:11 GMT -5
The thing that impresses me the most about Owens is how fast he has improved. The kid has gotten to be a more complete pitcher so quickly that I can't think of a similar case in recent years. If he continues to learn and improve at this pace, he could be really special in a couple of years.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Aug 13, 2013 14:51:38 GMT -5
I know Mellen tweeted (yesterday, I think) he thought his ceiling was a solid #3. That's shocking to me. I can see his projection being a #3, but I would think his ceiling is a #2. I'd be curious to hear from some of the scouts who have seen him in Portland with his newly refined curveball. 18h Chris Mellen Chris MellenSee the ceiling as a solid no.3 SP. RT @lovegolfbigtime: (Henry) Owens ceiling? 1 or 2? I think Mellen had just seen him live, as well.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Aug 13, 2013 15:00:12 GMT -5
I'd be curious from him, then, why his ceiling wouldn't be a #2. Seems odd to limit his ceiling - not his realistic projection - to a #2. If his ceiling is a number #3 and he's the 4th best prospect and top pitching prospect, the future mound presence would be questionable, barring a trade. Maybe I am just getting all screwed up with the scouting terminology of a #3 starter. I realize not every team will have a true #1 in scouting speak. But it still seems Hank's ceiling should be higher than a #3.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2013 15:20:29 GMT -5
A potential two would be someone like Kevin Gausman. Lots of differences but mainly Gausman has a better fastball than Owens does.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Aug 13, 2013 15:30:06 GMT -5
Maybe it's the scout speak, then. I thought Gausman had a #1 ceiling. Although I'll admit I'm not as up on non Red Sox prospects. But wasn't Gausman a top 10-15 player in all of MiLB?
I guess I think of a #2 as Lester in his best years. Isn't that a potential ceiling for Owens? I really don't know. I do know that we need a #2 pitcher or two to emerge from Webster/Owens/Barnes/Ranaudo (and I highly doubt it's going to be Ranaudo).
(Sorry, mods - and everyone else, if I am leading us down the #1/#2/#3 starter rabbit hole again. Feel free to redirect this if necessary).
|
|
|
Post by Ian Cundall on Aug 13, 2013 15:36:20 GMT -5
You guys are in luck. I saw Owens last week in Portland and have written him up for tomorrow's Scouting Scratch column.
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Aug 13, 2013 15:44:55 GMT -5
I would not give a huge amount of attention to the fact that Owens is 4th ranked prospect, and top pitcher, with 5 other pitchers below him in the top 10. All are grade 6, with a ceiling of 7. per Prospect Scouting Scale, grade 6 for pitchers could be either a #2 or #3 starter, so since our pitching prospects are cited with a projection of #3 starter, that must mean they are on low end 6? Presumably a #1 starter could be a grade 7 or 8? so there may some inconsistency in the definition and the verbal projection?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2013 15:49:10 GMT -5
Yes and that's where you would rank a #2 who was in AAA. Yes this is sort of the rabbit hole again but I think of the #1s as one of the top four or five pitchers in the game year after year (Felix, Kershaw etc.). A #2 are the other really good pitchers who just aren't in the elite class.
Gausman's good, but you don't hear him talked about in the way Kershaw was for example.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Aug 13, 2013 16:42:17 GMT -5
You may be right, Moonstone. I guess I was thinking there would be more than 4-5 #1 starters in MLB - maybe 15-20?
To get away from the sinking further down this rabbit hole, because I did think that was useless thread (or piece of a thread), I guess I would ask if Hank's ceiling is of a guy who could anchor a rotation, although not be one of the top 15 or so starters in the game? Kind of like a Lester circa 2009/2010 (I think I have those years right - it was just off the top of my head)?
Anyway, thanks for the heads up Ian - even if you are teasing us for the next 12-18 hours. I am VERY curious about his most recent scouting report and how he profiles now. He obviously needs some work on his command and control, and hopefully that will come. It is harder for taller pitchers, supposedly.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Aug 13, 2013 17:34:39 GMT -5
You guys are in luck. I saw Owens last week in Portland and have written him up for tomorrow's Scouting Scratch column. You must have braved the all-day rain and the 2 hour delay to kick-off. I was going to go on the basis of Owens' pitching but it sure didn't look good. The Portland Press Herald reported the following day that his fastball was at 90 but that it was his off-speed pitches (curve & change) that seemed most impressive and principally got the Ks. Hopefully he can gain some giddy-up as he is still quite lean.
|
|
|
Post by ikonos on Aug 13, 2013 18:48:21 GMT -5
You guys are in luck. I saw Owens last week in Portland and have written him up for tomorrow's Scouting Scratch column. Ian, Owens had two games at AA with his performance in the first game being really good and the second game being good. As a scout, how does the game in which you saw him (if you saw him in the first game but not the second game or vice versa) impact your opinion/narrative? Is it possible to add your thoughts on that or information you gathered from talking to other scouts who saw both games etc?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2013 19:31:09 GMT -5
Not for a good team. Lester at his peak threw harder and had that plus plus cutter. If you throw in the lower 90s you need really good command to anchor a good team's rotation. Hard to do that when you are 6'6"
|
|
|
Post by Ian Cundall on Aug 14, 2013 0:02:08 GMT -5
Ian, Owens had two games at AA with his performance in the first game being really good and the second game being good. As a scout, how does the game in which you saw him (if you saw him in the first game but not the second game or vice versa) impact your opinion/narrative? Is it possible to add your thoughts on that or information you gathered from talking to other scouts who saw both games etc? Good question. It only impacts it in regards to how the player looks scouting wise. What their stat line is at the end of the day has no impact. Catching someone on a "good day" or "bad day" is also why I like to see guys multiple times before saying anything definitive. A one game snapshot doesn't usually tell the whole story. To answer the second part, when I write someone up it is primarily based on what I saw, but if in my discussions with trusted sources, they have seen a player differently, I will try to make a note of that. Also, when you hear something that you didn't see or was different than what you saw, it sticks in the back of your mind and is something to look for the next time you see the player. This is again why it is important to see a player multiple times. Owens is a good example of this. As has been mentioned before in this thread, his velocity was down in his most recent start. I haven't talked to anyone who saw his first start, but I have talked throughout the season with people who saw him in Salem and some of them have seen him with much better velocity, while others have seen him like I did. As a result, I wrote him up a certain way based on what I saw, but noted that if he shows that better fastball etc. more consistently then he could be more.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Aug 14, 2013 9:27:32 GMT -5
Ian - So if he can get to the point where he consistently sits 92-94 with his FB and improves its command and refines the command of his plus secondary pitches, he's still only a ceiling of a mid-rotation starter? I am not saying I think he'll be a true #1, but it seems someone like Owens would have a ceiling of a #2. If not, just curious what he's missing that holds his ceiling back?
Just trying to get a handle on this guy as one of the top pitching prospects. The Sox really need one of these guys (Owens, Barnes, Webster) to develop into a solid #2 at least. Otherwise, they may be stuck paying huge $$ for a FA, probably paying for him past his prime, too.
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Aug 14, 2013 10:25:16 GMT -5
You're questioning semantics here . There are very few true #1's in all of baseball and only a handful of #2's .your trying to mash a round peg into a square hole by getting a hard and fast factual answer on a theoretical projection. The difference between a #2 and a #3 will change from year to year and from player to player and even from team to team. The biggest issue with Owens is command, if he masters command he'll be a better than average major league starter. He doesn't have the velocity or command right now to have a ceiling of a top 20 pitcher in the sport. BUT just because he's not elite doesn't mean he can't still be really really good.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Aug 14, 2013 11:32:15 GMT -5
You guys are in luck. I saw Owens last week in Portland and have written him up for tomorrow's Scouting Scratch column. How can you call it a Scouting Scratch without even talking about his defense?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 14, 2013 11:33:57 GMT -5
Very well done scouting scratch by Ian Cundall on Owens today. He certainly is one of the most interesting prospects to come along in a while. If his fastball continues to be hittable, I wonder if he shouldn't try to develop a cutter?
|
|
|
Post by ibsmith85 on Aug 14, 2013 11:42:00 GMT -5
Very well done scouting scratch by Ian Cundall on Owens today. He certainly is one of the most interesting prospects to come along in a while. If his fastball continues to be hittable, I wonder if he shouldn't try to develop a cutter?I was thinking the same thing, a cutter or slider could put Hank over the top, even if its just an average pitch, just one extra thing for the batters to be conscious of. But then again, I always feel like adding a new pitch is easier than I'm sure it is. (It only takes 200 attribute points for me to add a pitch in MLB The Show, it cant be that hard)
|
|