|
Post by bentossaurus on Jul 17, 2013 0:37:02 GMT -5
I believe its most likely any shift for Cecchini off of 3rd would be to LF. Now for those who are considering him at 1st it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibilities. Most importantly though isn't his bat but whether he can provide a level of defense at the position to make it work. Otherwise the argument for if he has enough power depends on what you are willing to accept. If the power doesn't grow significantly are you willing to have some version between a Joe Maeur / Kevin Youkilis / John Olerud / Joey Votto type first baseman. Not to say he will necessarily reach any of these lofty heights but this may be more the style of first baseman you end up with.Willing?!? Where do I sign for that? Other than chicks digging the long ball I can't find any problem with this kind of player. In fact I covet it.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Jul 17, 2013 0:43:15 GMT -5
If by "LT" you mean lefthanded thrower, you'll be disappointed that Garin throws righty. Long term? Yes, LT is what use for long term. Thanks tho. Not sure has been a lefty throwing 3b in.. Wow.. I brought up a catcher from decades back, but don't remember a 3b before.
|
|
|
Post by bjb406 on Jul 17, 2013 2:14:55 GMT -5
Guys he isn't going to be in the majors any time soon. A lot is going to happen before he makes then. They aren't going to make him change positions because he might be blocked a year from now. Who knows what the situation will be a year from now. Drew will almost certainly be gone, Iglesias will come back to earth, and maybe WMB will still be struggling. e could end up in a situation where we are more comfortable with Iglesias as a utility man with Bogaerts and SS and poor production from 3b. By the time he needs to play we will probably have an opening at DH anyway, and if we moved anyone it would probably be WMB or Bogaerts. That's not to mention the trades that could happen before this becomes an issue. I don't think there is much reason to worry about his position.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 17, 2013 7:46:07 GMT -5
Guys he isn't going to be in the majors any time soon. A lot is going to happen before he makes then. They aren't going to make him change positions because he might be blocked a year from now. Who knows what the situation will be a year from now. Drew will almost certainly be gone, Iglesias will come back to earth, and maybe WMB will still be struggling. e could end up in a situation where we are more comfortable with Iglesias as a utility man with Bogaerts and SS and poor production from 3b. By the time he needs to play we will probably have an opening at DH anyway, and if we moved anyone it would probably be WMB or Bogaerts. That's not to mention the trades that could happen before this becomes an issue. I don't think there is much reason to worry about his position. What do you mean by anytime soon? At his pace, he's less than a year away. 2014 to me s soon. Not imminent but soon. I agree there is no reason to worry about a position change. Dd you guys read Speirs article about the " logjam" on th left side of the infield? GC had unbelievable quotes in it. Talked about not worrying about it, it doesn't matter. Guys will do what needs to be done to win. How they had 7 SS on team USA and guys just moved around, himself playing left field. He's got the right attitude and has experience with this situation. Just keep raking and he'll be in the lineup sometime next year. What position, doesn't matter.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 17, 2013 7:46:23 GMT -5
I believe its most likely any shift for Cecchini off of 3rd would be to LF. Now for those who are considering him at 1st it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibilities. Most importantly though isn't his bat but whether he can provide a level of defense at the position to make it work. Otherwise the argument for if he has enough power depends on what you are willing to accept. If the power doesn't grow significantly are you willing to have some version between a Joe Maeur / Kevin Youkilis / John Olerud / Joey Votto type first baseman. Not to say he will necessarily reach any of these lofty heights but this may be more the style of first baseman you end up with. I like to think of it as a Casey Kotchman or James Loney-type first baseman. Keeps the expectations in check.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jul 17, 2013 8:26:49 GMT -5
I like to think of it as a Casey Kotchman or James Loney-type first baseman. Keeps the expectations in check. Gross, jmei. Gross.
|
|
|
Post by honkbal on Jul 17, 2013 9:48:53 GMT -5
I like to think of it as a Casey Kotchman or James Loney-type first baseman. Keeps the expectations in check. Gross, jmei. Gross. Seriously. Please keep all comps to borderline-HOF players, especially when discussing a player's floor.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 17, 2013 11:01:22 GMT -5
Cecchini's first 94 plate appearances at Double-A are shockingly similar to Bradley's first 96 there last season. It's an interesting comparison, because Bradley is one year and one day older than Cecchini, so their age-22 seasons are equivalent.
Cecchini: .346/.457/.513; 7 2B, 0 3B, 2 HR, 16 BB, 19 K Bradley: .341/.427/.451; 7 2B, 1 3B, 0 HR, 11 BB, 19 K
Bradley walked a little bit less, and the lack of homers suppressed his slugging percentage, but both carried a very high BABIP and Bradley had the advantage of being much, much more advanced defensively than Cecchini is at this stage (and at a position with less organizational depth). Much like Bradley wasn't quite ready to start 2013 in the majors but now is probably ready or close to it, Cecchini is probably about a year away.
Hopefully Cecchini terrorizes sub-replacement-level pitching in spring training next year creating a media firestorm to keep him with the team in order to keep the comparison apt.
|
|
|
Post by njsox on Jul 17, 2013 12:05:52 GMT -5
I believe its most likely any shift for Cecchini off of 3rd would be to LF. Now for those who are considering him at 1st it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibilities. Most importantly though isn't his bat but whether he can provide a level of defense at the position to make it work. Otherwise the argument for if he has enough power depends on what you are willing to accept. If the power doesn't grow significantly are you willing to have some version between a Joe Maeur / Kevin Youkilis / John Olerud / Joey Votto type first baseman. Not to say he will necessarily reach any of these lofty heights but this may be more the style of first baseman you end up with. I like to think of it as a Casey Kotchman or James Loney-type first baseman. Keeps the expectations in check. Great comparison with Kotchman, I was thinking the same. Kotchman was one hell of a minor leaguer, more highly regarded than Cecchini. I have been a big fan of Cecchini and expect huge things from him, but it's good to throw out a Kotchman comparison to put everything in perspective. We are talking about the unpredictability of baseball prospects after all.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 17, 2013 13:46:08 GMT -5
Please keep all comps to borderline-HOF players, especially when discussing a player's floor. I want to add something to this comment but it's just too perfect.
|
|
|
Post by bjb406 on Jul 17, 2013 13:54:50 GMT -5
this is why comps are stupid by their very nature.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 17, 2013 13:58:23 GMT -5
I don't think comps are dumb by nature, but I think comps to HOF caliber players on guys who've had a month above A-ball are typically pretty dumb.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jul 17, 2013 14:29:28 GMT -5
This a glass half completely full message board
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jul 17, 2013 15:03:19 GMT -5
This a glass half completely full message board Yeah, when you have a top-50 prospect it's important to focus on projecting him to move to the opposite end of the defensive spectrum and become a mediocre hitter. Hey, if things break wrong he can be a 1-win player! What's the point other than to be a douche? If things break really wrong he'll bust entirely. So what? If he stays at third and if he develops power and if he can maintain his approach at higher levels and if he can stay healthy and productive for 18 seasons he could make the Hall if it hasn't been destroyed by a meteor! If - if - if - there's no sense in it. Sure, it's grotesquely vague to say that if Cecchini doesn't hit a lot of HR he will be not as good as certain famous players who also don't hit a lot of home runs, but really, chill out.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 17, 2013 15:08:18 GMT -5
Hey, if things break wrong he can be a 1-win player! What's the point other than to be a douche? If things break really wrong he'll bust entirely. So what? If he stays at third and if he develops power and if he can maintain his approach at higher levels and if he can stay healthy and productive for 18 seasons he could make the Hall if it hasn't been destroyed by a meteor! If - if - if - there's no sense in it. Alright, well I guess just close the forum down then since all opinions are pointless.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,845
|
Post by nomar on Jul 17, 2013 15:17:41 GMT -5
To be fair Cecchini has hit significantly better for Portland than JBJ did, but JBJ did get banged up in his time there.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jul 17, 2013 15:18:22 GMT -5
This a glass half completely full message board Yeah, when you have a top-50 prospect it's important to focus on projecting him to move to the opposite end of the defensive spectrum and become a mediocre hitter. Hey, if things break wrong he can be a 1-win player! What's the point other than to be a douche? If things break really wrong he'll bust entirely. So what? If he stays at third and if he develops power and if he can maintain his approach at higher levels and if he can stay healthy and productive for 18 seasons he could make the Hall if it hasn't been destroyed by a meteor! If - if - if - there's no sense in it. Sure, it's grotesquely vague to say that if Cecchini doesn't hit a lot of HR he will be not as good as certain famous players who also don't hit a lot of home runs, but really, chill out. I have no idea what that rant was about. Or why I was quoted. I haven't projected him for anything. I have made relatively few comments on the subject. I just think it's kind of funny the way so many want to label the guy as as the second coming after 75 AB's above A ball. I'm actually a big believer in GC and think he'll have a long career for the Sox. I would NOT trade him. But I am cautious nonetheless. And certainly don't feel the need to throw around comps of HOF players.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jul 17, 2013 15:51:01 GMT -5
I have no idea what that rant was about. Or why I was quoted. Read the thread. I quoted you as part of the silly pile-on in a series of posts demanding pessimism. I looked at the last three pages and just about every time someone threw out a big name the comment had a clear caveat such as "I'm not comparing the two..." or "I'm not saying Cecchini will be as good as..." -- sounds like people are hopeful but trying to stay realistic to me. Do you really consider it "glass completely full" to voice optimism about Cecchini becoming a .300 hitter or developing power? Other than that my take on Cecchini is similar to yours.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Jul 17, 2013 15:55:53 GMT -5
Comps are like reincarnation ... just like (as the great philosopher Crash Davis pointed out) no one ever says, "I was Joe Schmo in a past life," no one chooses a random journeyman big leaguer for a comp.
edit to add: to be fair, jmei is the exception to this ... jmei also likely understands that in a past life he was probably an itinerant farm hand.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2013 16:07:19 GMT -5
I agree...comps suck. For fun let's take a look at the scouting reports of Kotchman and Cecchini. Kotchman from John Sickels: sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=1780727You will notice many similarities. Both were considered athletic with sweet swings and strong plate discipline. Both also had a history of health issues. Coincidentally both are the sons of baseball coaches. The main difference seems to be that Cecchini is a touch more athletic. There was never any talk of Kotchman playing any position other than 1B. If Cecchini is able to stay at 3B there will be less pressure on his bat as they say. What this mini exercise highlights for me is two things. #1 The importance of continued health. I don't know this for certain, but it could be that the reason Kotchman never became the player everyone thought he would be, was that a persistent stretch of chronic injuries that continue to this day. The scouting report warns of "his body is "tight" and prone to muscle pulls, hamstring trouble, and a sore back". As we all know Cecchini himself has struggled with health in both his amateur and pro career. He'll have to prove that his body can withstand the rigors of professional baseball, no matter how great his natural talent. #2 The importance of defense. Watching Cecchini's progress on defense will be almost as important as watching his bat. If he can stay at 3B, that obviously makes him more valuable. Even Casey Kotchman might have had a better shot if he could have played 3B or even LF.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jul 17, 2013 16:42:37 GMT -5
I have no idea what that rant was about. Or why I was quoted. Read the thread. I quoted you as part of the silly pile-on in a series of posts demanding pessimism. I looked at the last three pages and just about every time someone threw out a big name the comment had a clear caveat such as "I'm not comparing the two..." or "I'm not saying Cecchini will be as good as..." -- sounds like people are hopeful but trying to stay realistic to me. Do you really consider it "glass completely full" to voice optimism about Cecchini becoming a .300 hitter or developing power? Other than that my take on Cecchini is similar to yours. I think you may have a reading comprehension issue if you think I have been demanding pessimism. I'm actually more optimistic than pessimistic about our prospects in general. But the optimism gets out of hand sometimes. If you're not comparing the players, then why the comp? Maybe that's just my issue with forcing comps. But adding that general comp is copout. You are comparing the players, that's why one mentions the player. I don't see any issue with suggesting GC will develop more power (I think he will) or be a .300 hitter in the majors. But saying the Sox are getting him ready to be in Boston this year and throwing around HOF player comps? The enthusiasm goes overboard at times. There's more development for most of these prospects - that's why they're still prospects.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Jul 17, 2013 17:35:02 GMT -5
I stated that the movement of Cechinni to lead off MAY indicate that they want to accelerate his development a little and that he MAY even see mlb time this year. Not PROBABLY. Not DEFINITELY...ETC. But then, Oh my God, we've got to put the kabosh on that. We don't know who is in trade discussions as we speak. Do you think that just maybe Middlebrooks is being considered as a trade option? We keep hearing that they are interested in Michael Young. What is up with that with all the 3rd base prospects we have? We see a significant change and it's just before the trading deadline. It's not crazy to potentially prepare Cechiini as deep mlb depth before year end. He may be involved in some trade discussions or be impacted by them if someone else like Middlebrooks is involved. These are POSSIBLE scenarios.
Posts get deleted and it's like it never happened. Was that so controversial that we can't even handle that as a discussion?
Elvis Andrus hasn't played a minute of AAA ball EVER yet that seems to have worked out quite well. That may even have been key to their turnaround as a franchise that first year. It is not unimaginable that Cechinni couldn't get a few September call up AB. That he might be strong enough as a hitter to already be able to help out some in a pinch after a rash of injuries or whatever. Or that the org might even consider him an upgrade on the team somewhere, in the OF, at 1st or somewhere else POTENTIALLY, before year end. We have a chance to win this year. We need to have all hands on deck if necessary and be prepared for all contingencies.
He's not Machado or Harper but he hit better than both of them in USA Baseball. If he hadn't been injured so much since that time maybe he would be in the majors right now. An ACL and a wrist injury are both huge injuries. He's healthy now. Maybe he can advance quickly. He's been a baseball rat his entire life. If anyone should advance quickly it might just be the offspring of 2 high school baseball coaches.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jul 17, 2013 19:15:38 GMT -5
Read the thread. I quoted you as part of the silly pile-on in a series of posts demanding pessimism. I think you may have a reading comprehension issue if you think I have been demanding pessimism. I think you may have a reading comprehension issue if you think I was referring to only your post. First off, I'm not. Secondly, because somebody mentions a player in a thread doesn't mean they are suggesting a comp, especially when they say they are not suggesting a comp. And then some posts are just not well-communicated. Consider this one: You agree that the .300 is reasonable, yet you insist the poster using Boggs as a comp because he's mentioned in the post, even while azblue specifically denies it? I think one particular poster did that. And I don't think anyone did that, except maybe for a silly post about Bagwell, and even that had a caveat.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 17, 2013 20:37:39 GMT -5
I stated that the movement of Cechinni to lead off MAY indicate that they want to accelerate his development a little and that he MAY even see mlb time this year. Not PROBABLY. Not DEFINITELY...ETC. But then, Oh my God, we've got to put the kabosh on that.It's so annoying how people want to point things out just because they happen to be completely true.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 17, 2013 21:03:21 GMT -5
Kotchman's body is so tight. I thought i was the only one who noticed this. "Toight like a Tiger"
|
|