SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Recent Posts
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 24, 2014 14:23:12 GMT -5
Yea given the athleticism Bogaerts has, I don't get why you would waste him at a position like 1B. I kinda see 1B as the place you put the best hitter you have who can't play another position competently, not somewhere you'd put a good athlete with a plus arm
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 24, 2014 14:19:45 GMT -5
I don't like the idea, but I guess it's worth considering. I personally am not ready to throw in the towel on the season. We're not at the halfway point yet, the division's weak and the wild card race is weaker. That said, if we don't do anything to improve or show signs of improvement pretty soon, and Xander continues to slump, it would definitely be worth considering. Boras clients don't sign extensions before they hit the open market, so that extra year of service time becomes more valuable to us than I would normally consider it. I'm hoping Xander hires his brother to rep him though, so maybe we should preserve the relationship just in case. I'm of the opinion that from a development perspective, they should let him hit his way out of it, and ownership has the money to afford an extension when the time comes, assuming Boras doesn't get unreasonable and Xander hasn't switched representation
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 24, 2014 13:49:15 GMT -5
Why would we send RDLR and Workman to the pen over Doubront and/or Peavy? Doubront has proven he's nothing more than a 5th starter at best for now, and I don't see a much higher ceiling for him, given his inconsistencies. Send him to the pen. At the very least one of de la Rosa and Workman should stay in the rotation, and I would love to deal Peavy if possible to get them both in there. I think, especially if we eat some of his salary, Peavy could be quite attractive to an NL club looking for a solid back of the rotation guy, although I can't imagine we'd get too much for him at this stage.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 24, 2014 13:39:21 GMT -5
Yea but bradley actually started to struggle as he rose above salem. Look at his numbers by level: .359/.480/.526 at salem, then .271/.373/.437 at Portland, and .275/.374/.469 at Pawtucket while riding the shuttle up and down. Mookie has raked at every level from Greenville up over the past year. I'd caution you from thinking that Betts' .321/.402/.457, 144 wRC+ (92 PAs) line at Pawtucket this year is meaningfully different than Bradley's .275/.374/.469, 137 wRC+ at AAA (374 PAs) last year. Mookie has certainly hit significantly worse in Pawtucket than he did in Portland this year (.355/.443/.551, 174 wRC+), with a slightly lower walk rate (13.8% -> 12%), a much higher strikeout rate (7.9% -> 14.1%), and much less power (.196 ISO -> .136 ISO). He's still hit well enough, but it's clear that Mookie has been challenged at AAA more than he has at lower levels and could use some additional development time. That's fair, but I also think Mookie is better equipped to deal with the jump. Bradley's minor league success seems to have been mostly a product of his approach, and you can see it in that slash line- he walked a ton, but his average was way down from the lower minors. In the majors, pitchers with better control have consistently gotten ahead in the count, and he hasn't been able adjust. Not that Mookie doesn't appear to have solid plate discipline, but I think his more aggressive approach and quicker bat lend themselves much more to major league success in the short run. And I'd guess that a drop off in production is pretty normal between AA and AAA, and that Mookie has handled the adjustment better than most, although I can't claim to have any numbers to back that up. Under normal circumstances, I'd be happy to let him play out the season in AAA and give him a taste of the bigs in September, but at this stage, with no real viable trade options available without selling the farm, I say give him a shot while we have even an outside chance at turning things around. And I'd add that plenty of young guys struggle with their 1st exposure to the bigs and come back next year much better (Jeter, A-Rod, Manny, and those are just great players that I know off the top of my head), so I think if the talent's real, it really shouldn't mess with his development too much
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 24, 2014 13:26:51 GMT -5
I think if they call Mookie up this year they are foolish. The Red Sox have had three prospects, Bogarts, Middlebrooks, and Bradley that they have pushed into the majors without two full seasons in the high minors. All three have struggled and we are talking about dumping two of them. Where does it end? If Mookie comes up and has a bad month are we going to talk about dumping him too? "We" aren't talking about dumping them. At least I'm not. Also, Middlebrooks doesn't fit that at all. He raked in 75 games his rookie season and has been bad since, but there's very little evidence that more time in the high minors would've helped, given his performance that year. And I personally think a lot of his underperformance since can be attributed to injuries/lack of at bats. Bogaerts is slumping now, but that could be/is most likely a result of small sample size, and regardless he doesn't fall into the same category as Bradley, who's the only guy who actually hasn't performed well at some point after being called up. We probably don't win the series without bogaerts last year, and he was hitting around .285 with a 10ish% walk rate and decent power like a week ago, I don't call that struggling at all. I'm also not saying mookie betts is going to come up and play at an MVP level the rest of the year and we'll make the playoffs. I'm saying that, given the performance so far, and the fact that we really seem to be missing that classic leadoff hitter at the top of the order and anyone good in the outfield, I would like to see him get a chance to help the team this year, while we actually do have a chance at being competitive. We're 6 games under .500 in a pretty weak division, and I for one think the jays are going to get smacked by regression, cause I don't see how buerhle (among others) maintains his numbers. The sox have yet to be truly healthy this year as well. So, try mookie, and if it works, great. If not, he's 21, we can let him finish out the season in AAA if he struggles, I can't imagine that would be earth shattering for him. I'm not going to be calling him a bust if he struggles for 2 weeks in the bigs this year, and frankly anyone who does/would is a fool.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 24, 2014 10:53:02 GMT -5
Yea but bradley actually started to struggle as he rose above salem. Look at his numbers by level: .359/.480/.526 at salem, then .271/.373/.437 at Portland, and .275/.374/.469 at Pawtucket while riding the shuttle up and down. Mookie has raked at every level from Greenville up over the past year. And obviously I'm not suggesting that Mookie alone gets them back in the race, but given his versatility and this team's lack of a true leadoff hitter/stolen base threat/average offensive outfielder, I think he'd help a lot, and maybe allow us to focus on upgrading elsewhere, if possible. Also, I really think the lack of a good leadoff hitter has hurt both Pedroia and Ortiz's production. Beyond that, Bradley has below average power, but I'd say Mookie's much closer to average, and he has a plus hit tool, which bradley didn't really. He had about 60 extra base hits last year in 550 PAs, including 15 homers. I don't see any reason why that kind of power couldn't show up in the majors, especially in a hitters park. Mookie is clearly an outstanding quick twitch athlete, while Bradley (at least from all the scouting reports) seems to be an average athlete with outstanding instincts and approach. I think for someone you're throwing into the fire a little bit, the top notch athlete is a much better bet to succeed, because the guy who relies more on approach will probably need more time to adjust. I'm hoping that's true for Bradley's sake anyway. Regardless, in the long term, apart from the service time aspect, which for us should be less of a concern cause the Sox have the money to keep him around, I don't see too much downside to giving him a shot soon and seeing if he can stick. Don't put pressure on him, let him know he's obviously a big part of the organization's plan for the long run, and if he doesn't perform, let him develop in Pawtucket. But for now, we need to shake things up a little bit before it's too late in the season for anything to matter, so I'd like to see him in the big leagues as soon as possible, just to see if he can make an impact. A brief tryout with our outfield the way it is shouldn't make or break his career no matter how he does
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 24, 2014 8:54:40 GMT -5
I'd like to see him get some reps in RF since it looks like Victorino had a set back. Doubt he'll be playing RF at all, if he didn't have the arm to stick on the left side of the infield, he definitely doesn't have the arm for right at Fenway. I think it's more likely Bradley sees some more time in right with Mookie in CF should he get the call. On another note, how long can we really wait? I don't think it's necessary for him to finish the year in AAA personally, although it might not be a bad idea. I think the best idea (for the 2014 team at least) would be giving him a look now, while we still have a chance to turn things around. Obviously that won't be totally dependent on Mookie, but I think at this stage it really needs to be looked at. As good as Brock Holt has been, I think shuffling around the lineup and seeing if Mookie could spark something as the lead off hitter would be interesting. We haven't had a guy who can steal bases in the lineup all year really, and I'm wondering if maybe that has more value than one would think, just as another thing a pitcher has to worry about. I might just be looking for excuses for Pedroia's numbers being down across the board that doesn't involve him being on the downside of his career way earlier than I would have hoped though
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 19, 2014 16:05:58 GMT -5
This might be enough to trump Boston's offer, although Minnesota would have to be comfortable giving Thompson a max extension in a few months. Klay is both a better present player and has more upside than someone like Sullinger. I don't think he gets a max extension, or even comes all that close. He can shoot and play defense, but he's a ball stopper, not a great athlete, and not great at creating his own shot. Probably someone who would thrive with rubio, and I could potentially see the TWolves taking a thompson, barnes, lee and a 1st offer, which probably allows them to contend for one of the lower seeds in the west next year and for a few years afterwards, but I still think it's very up in the air, cause the celtics can offer a package with way more upside, just from the picks. I don't think thompson or barnes will ever be more than borderline all stars at the very best for a few seasons, and that would be pretty optimistic in Barnes' case. Sullinger has a few areas it's not hard to imagine him making improvements in (jump shot, conditioning, defense, passing) while for thompson, I think he's much closer to having maxed out his natural talent. Also worth noting that sully put up a better PER than thompson this year, and his per 40 minute numbers are extremely good, he only played about 28 mpg this year.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 19, 2014 14:16:23 GMT -5
I actually thought the same thing about the embiid injury, but then again, I just saw Chad ford say that Bennett's finally in shape, so maybe they don't want another tweener forward, especially given the fact that bennett is likely going to be a better shooter than Thad young, especially from deep. Still, given that gilbert wants to win now, it might make sense to drop down a couple spots, get a quality player in return, and then pick up parker or wiggins, or maybe even exum, who might be more interesting to them than we might imagine, given that kyrie is a score-first pg, and they've had some issues moving the ball around. Exum and waiters would be a killer sub backcourt, and exam and kyrie is pretty attractive on the surface too
On the Love front, I think, given that the "win now" options for Minny give them almost no chance to actually win now, given the strength and depth of the West, they go with our offer at present. I'm also curious if we can put protections on the 1st rounders we got from Brooklyn- depending on the leverage we have/the other offers rumored to be on the table for the wolves, I'd like to put like a top-2 protection on the future Nets pick, or see if we could just send them the better pick between ours and Brooklyn's in 2016, or whenever it is we have the right to swap picks. Overall, I think some combo of olynyk, sully, 3 picks, and maybe a sign-and-trade of bradley gets it done. Probably 2 of those 3 players and some cap filler thrown in if necessary. But by the sound of it, the warriors won't budge on klay thompson, they'd be selling low on Barnes at this stage, and lee's not particularly impressive, the nuggets pieces could make them contend for the 8 seed out west, but without much chance of getting it, and chicago's offering some solid players, but taj gibson probably just about at his ceiling, butler will probably never be an all star, and how much are you going to get out of 16 and 19? If it were me, I'd take sully, 6, 17, and the clips 1st next year over that deal, never mind if we throw in the brooklyn pick. And, per Bill simmons and some others, the bulls are all in on melo right now and I don't think they have the cap space to do both, although amnestying boozer and shipping off some contracts might change the picture a little, I'm not too familiar with their payroll situation
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 19, 2014 13:55:54 GMT -5
I don't think it's a requirement than any acquisition have a lower WAR than JBJ....? To be fair, with Kemp that's cause he's played the majority of his games in cf, which would probably not be the case for us. Or rather, I'd only be interested in Kemp if a huge chunk of his salary was eaten by the Dodgers and he played center on nothing more than an emergency basis. But .276/.3337/.467 at the right price with our outfield? He'd be an upgrade somewhere
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 19, 2014 9:28:39 GMT -5
I'm kindof assuming this won't be victorino's last DL trip this year though...
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 19, 2014 1:16:01 GMT -5
Middlebrooks' problem is that he is a guess hitter; he does not recognize pitches coming out of a pitcher's hand and cannot track trajectory and break anywhere as well as someone like Mookie Betts. That's related to physical attributes (visual acuity, fast-twitch reflexes) that don't improve much as a hitter gets older. Yes, an improved approach (i.e., getting better at guessing when pitchers are going to throw him fastballs, sitting on certain pitches in certain situations) will help him hit slightly better, but I tend to think that he'll always be a guess hitter who racks up high strikeout and low walk rates because he just doesn't have the physical skills to have above-average pitch recognition. Even if you think he has some untapped potential, though, he should still not be playing in left field ahead of far better options. As has been so helpfully demonstrated by the Grady Sizemore odyssey this year, the goal of the major league team is first and foremost to win games, not give away at bats in the hope that a player somehow reaches the 99th percentile of his projection. Middlebrooks is a far, far worse hitter versus righties (a career .228/.273/.427, 85 wRC+ hitter versus RHP in 499 PAs) than, say, Daniel Nava (career 125 wRC+ vs. RHP), who he'd be taking plate appearances from. Yea i was really thinking a moderate improvement in learning to lay off some of those off speed pitches in the dirt that he seems to chase more than anyone else on the team, maybe get his walk rate the lower end of that 8-10% range. And I was thinking more of a situation where nava would be in right, middlebrooks in left, and holt in center, whenever bradley needs a day off/if that becomes more the norm, which is certainly possible. I guess I should have clarified what I hope for at this stage out of Middlebrooks: a .250/.310/.450 slash line, with his solid 3b defense, which isn't conservative I guess, but I wouldn't think of it as a "99th percentile" outcome. If that's what we think he can be, it's worth getting him a few extra at bats, given the lack of demonstrably better options. I forgot carp's coming back though, which makes this all kind of redundant
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 18, 2014 11:00:15 GMT -5
In a year where it's still undecided if we have a reasonable chance at making the playoffs, not all trades have to have a significant impact on the current year. An example, which would involve a third team is Lester and PawSox prospect depth for Samardja. For Lester and the Shark, they project to be somewhat comparable for 2014 but the advantage of the trade to the Sox is that Samardja has an additional year of control. The prospects received for Lester and the PawSox depth would go to the Cubs. Lester would go to a team with a strong playoff shot. As of yet, neither the Cubs nor the Red Sox have yet to come to agreement with their pitcher and both are likely to make an attempt before the trade deadline. The Cubs will be looking for pitching. The same could be said of Sale except that the White Sox would likely be looking for position players and Price but he's in our division. Given their respective track records, I think I'd rather have lester. Especially cause he has a track record of showing up in big games, and as you say, it's undecided whether or not we can compete this year. I'd be interested in what looking into Sale though, even though the cost might be a little prohibitive
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 18, 2014 10:31:48 GMT -5
So we're going on a sample size of one? ADD: Especially given the questions surrounding Bradley in ST it would have been criminal not to sign a guy like Sizemore to back him up. Um, it was criminal that they didn't sign a much better player than Sizemore to backup both JBJ and Victorino. That was the point. They backed up two guys with a good amount of risk with a 3rd guy who hasn't been a good major league player in 6 years. Holt is saving (the OF) somewhat, but I doubt that was the plan. Betts might be the rest of it. But we shouldn't be in this position. Yea hindsight's 20/20, but where was this line of thinking when sizemore was raking in ST? Or when they announced the signing? I'm not saying you might not have been thinking that, but given bradley's minor league track record, and the presence of carp, nava, and gomes, along with brentz at AAA, I personally thought we were reasonably well insured, and OF depth was not really a big problem in most peoples' eyes until nava couldn't hit in april, victorino went down AGAIN (admittedly that was obviously happening at some point), bradley couldn't reach the mendoza line, and Farrell decided to roll with sizemore and gomes for 2 months. Also, it's worth pointing out that we're not really far out of the division lead at this stage, especially given the health problems, and if holt's even 75% for real, when/if everyone's healthy again, this team will at the very least be over .500 and probably make some noise in the playoff race before the year's over. I'd favor dealing one of our excess starters, doubront or peavy, and some of our redundant depth options (carp) for someone who can hit lefties and play cf. Much as I love mookie, I think we should give him time. He's obviously had a different path than JBJ, but I think he may have been pushed a little fast/felt the weight of expectations, and that can't have made things easy on him. And he came out of a top college program, was a couple years older than mookie, and had a reputation as having outstanding make up. Although if mookie is hitting .330 in Pawtucket in a month and not too much has changed, then I'd have no problem with throwing him into the mix and seeing how it plays out
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 18, 2014 10:17:38 GMT -5
If Middlebrooks' bat isn't good enough to stick at 3B, why would you think it's good enough to stick in LF? Isn't it a little premature to make that statement? He's 25 with less than 750 major league PA's and has hit 34 homers. I think this is something that people probably mention all the time, but given the premium on legit RH power (see the Trumbo trade) there's no way we should be conceding that at this point. I do agree at this stage that he make much more sense as a 3b against lefties, but I also think he really needs more reps, cause his problem is his approach, so why not put him in left sometimes too? Can't imagine he'd be much worse than Gomes against righties, even though I admit that with Farell's tendencies, that's probably not who he replaces. But in the long run, if he can lay off enough bad pitches to get to a BB% in the 8-10% range (not unimaginable) I think he becomes an extremely valuable player, because if you get him 600 PA's he'll probably hit 25 bombs, and that's with solid d at 3b
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 17, 2014 16:04:43 GMT -5
I have down four by my count who did it between 2008 and 2013. They would be the Braves, Rays, Reds and Cards. The A's were next and would have made it had I included Cespedes. So that certainly seems like an achievable goal. I tried to double-check this. My own subjective thoughts below: Braves 2008: ?? (Gregor Blanco?) 2009: Hanson, Prado 2010: Heyward, Venters 2011: Kimbrel, Beachy, Freeman 2012: Simmons, Medlen, Minor 2013: Teheran, Chris Johnson?, Evan Gattis? 2014: Alex Wood? Rays 2008: Longoria 2009: Price, Zobrist 2010: ?? (Jaso? Joyce?) 2011: Jennings, Hellickson? Niemann? 2012: Moore, Cobb, McGee 2013: Myers, Archer 2014: Odorizzi? Nitpicking a little I guess, but Joyce played 92 big league games with the Tigers before he got to the Rays, and Chris Johnson played parts of 3 seasons for the Astros, and it's a little bit of a stretch to call him a quality starter anyway, given that most of his value last year was a by-product of a .394 BABIP that seems unsustainable, at least on the surface
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 17, 2014 15:49:11 GMT -5
Just a quick addition to that: Coyle's not going to keep that .443 BABIP as he moves up, but his power has been consistent since turning pro, and if he puts up a league average BABIP while retaining most of his power, is a line like .270/.330/.450 an unreasonable idea? Maybe that's on the high side, but at this stage, I'd think that's probably better than what we could really expect from Cecchini
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 17, 2014 15:43:30 GMT -5
Cecchini is not hitting for much of an average at AAA, shows little power, and has an increased strike out rate- twice as many ks as bb. Pawtucket has seen a lot of down offensive performances so far this season, while Portland has seen something of the reverse. Sometimes that just happens, but it does make you wonder. At this stage I'm a little pessimistic on Cecchini ever actually developing power. It's not just that he never really started hitting homers: he's stopped even getting extra base hits, his ISO at this stage is 0.66, which is pathetic for a corner infielder or outfielder, especially if they project to be average at best with the glove. To my understanding, Pawtucket is a much friendlier environment for a hitter than Portland, at least early in the season when it tops out at 50 degrees in Portland basically, so that's another mark in Coyle's favor. Even assuming that his average/BABIP come back to earth, he's already matched Cecchini's hr output from last season across both levels, and that's in half a season in which he's missed some time already. I think at this stage, it might not be time to give up on Cecchini, but Coyle has significantly more upside to me, primarily because the skills he's lacking, plate discipline being the most important one, can be taught/learned much more easily than you can teach someone to hit the ball out of the ballpark. And after looking at Cecchini's numbers while writing all this, I just got less optimistic on him: his triple slash is .263/.344/.329, with a .338 BABIP, and his walk rate is down 7% from last year, with the k% up something like 5-6%. I still hope he's a lefty youkilis, but the reality might well be more like a lefty alex hassan
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 17, 2014 9:36:54 GMT -5
I'm skeptical of any prospect's numbers in Albuquerque. It's more of a time to extend Lester than trade him. This team without Lester and Lackey would be scary bad next year. This year's team with Lester and Lackey is scary bad! Maybe if Cherrington shakes things up, and gives some Pawtucket starters some games this year, he will have a better handle on what we need next year. A 2015 rotation of Lackey Buchholz (if healthy) Workman De La Rosa Webster can win some games for us if the offense improves. Yea I guess that rotation would be good with our offense from last season maybe. But as it is, we're much better off extending lester. I don't think this years team is done yet, and I definitely don't think the answer to our problems is dealing our best pitcher for an outfield prospect, no matter how good he is. If we were to deal lester, I'd want more than just pederson, or some comparable prospect, and ideally i'd want someone established. We're 32-38 in what looks like a pretty weak division, especially if the jays don't add some pitching. We're not even at the halfway point; I think people should pump the breaks on the tanking/trade lester talk, and I think it's pretty clear that dealing lester, unless its for something a little more than a single highly rated prospect makes us worse this year and next year at least, if not for longer. Lester should have about 3 prime seasons left in him, and I'd like him to pitch them for us
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 17, 2014 8:56:38 GMT -5
I pretty much called the OF situation this year in the offseason. We didn't address it because Ben wouldn't part with Carp. And Sizemore pushing first JBJ and second Nava to the minors instead of reshaping the OF completely is basically the major reason why we are where we are. We should not have relied on JBJ 100% without a real backup plan. We should not have relied on Victorino to remain healthy without a real backup plan. And here we are. The plan was Sizemore, Nava, Gomes and Carp, while giving up on the best of the 4 earliest. Obviously that was the only big trade, you're talking about trading "depth" guys. It's not like they're going to bring back much return, that's why they're bench players. Personally, I thought before the season that having sizemore and victorino around would let them ease bradley in, along with carp gomes and nava around to play the corners when necessary. Given the way sizemore played in spring training, it wasn't unreasonable. Carp and sizemore have given us nothing, nava wasn't hitting half his weight in april, and victorino has played like 8 games all year, so the outfield has been terrible so far, but only victorino's injuries were easily foreseeable, and even then, the sox appeared to have the depth to deal with that. Also, what are you talking about with sizemore forcing JBJ to the minors? Pretty sure he's spent all year on the major league team
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 12, 2014 8:43:04 GMT -5
The Sox might do well to extend Pierczinski for one more year to mentor Vasquez. What's he gonna teach him, how to GIDP? If any mentoring is needed I'd prefer David Ross. Sign him as a catching coach if he doesn't want to play anymore. They also still have Varitek signed on as a special assistant to the GM. Can't imagine anyone being more helpful in the transition than tek, and that's probably what he's still around for, cause we've heard plenty about Pedro, who has the same job title, going around the minors mentoring the pitchers
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 10, 2014 10:37:15 GMT -5
I've heard he's not going to stick defensively as a middle infielder in the bigs though, which makes this more interesting. I thought mookie would be higher ranked, but at least keith law has pederson and him 21 and 22 in his updated top 25, so they actually match up pretty well. pederson gives us immediate outfield help, mookie gives them either a cost controlled 2b or OF for the future. Still, if we were going to deal him, i'd rather we packaged him for someone like stanton than doing a prospect-for-prospect swap
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 9, 2014 0:00:50 GMT -5
I think we probably would be able to find a better return for lester than pederson if they decide to shop him, especially since he's been throwing well most of the year. even so, i'd much rather have lester re-signed than traded. I don't know how easy he'd be to replace
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 5, 2014 15:31:03 GMT -5
Jmei there is a an sp report from 2013 that refers to his delivery at times being all arm. There are videos of that too. Obviously the more you use your arm and not the rest of your body to create velocity. Wasn't doing that the other day though it remains to be seen if he can do that over a long period of time. It's reasonable to surmize that the inconsistency in his command and his past durability problems are caused by the same thing. An inconsistent delivery. Jimed if you want to change 220 innings to staying in the rotation all year that's fine. But I think you are quibbling. So far he's maxed out at 110 or so and subsequently got hurt. Darn you say anything negative about a prospect on here you get slammed. I think it's reasonable to be concerned about the durability of a pitcher who needed major surgery without a ton of work. Well it's a bit of a premature statement to say he's injury prone cause he had tommy john and the sox and dodgers were cautious through the recovery process. He threw 110 innings once, had tommy john and has been working back since then. As far as I know, he hasn't been hurt since, definitely not in a meaningful way. And look at the number of pitchers who have tommy john now: it's being talked about as an epidemic, especially for pitchers who throw in the mid-to-high 90s. Nobody has it twice though, cause it's not really a recurring problem. If you'd questioned his command/control long-term, you probably would've gotten less of a negative response, because that's always been his primary issue as I understood it
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jun 5, 2014 15:22:57 GMT -5
Maybe an easier exercise... guys i think can be all-star, or maybe let's say for the semantics police out there, "above average at the position" players: - Betts - Owens - Swihart - Vazquez - Margot - Devers Honorable mentions: Brian Johnson, maybe Trey Ball? I think if you're talking about absolute ceilings, that's just about right, although I don't think vazquez really belongs on there. Ball is kind of an unknown quantity at this stage, which means that you can pretty much dream on his ceiling, but he just might never get past AA. I also think it's always possible that one of Barnes, Ranaudo or webster could develop into that- webster's stuff gives him a really high ceiling, he's just one of those guys who probably won't ever get too close to it. We can always dream though
|
|
|