|
Post by dirtywater on Dec 10, 2015 11:40:56 GMT -5
This is just sad. At a minimum, Cecchini should have been shipped out last offseason when we blocked him with Panda and Hanley. His stock had dropped, but not this much.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 10, 2015 11:47:41 GMT -5
Still think it's weird that they DFAed him ahead of Coyle.
|
|
|
Post by humanbeingbean on Dec 10, 2015 11:51:55 GMT -5
It seems like the Brewers are a decent team for him, though. I hope he has a decent spring and earns a shot at breaking with the team, but even if he doesn't, there's always been so much talk about and respect for his game knowledge... maybe he'll get into coaching/managing. This is a sad story. Hope he finds his success.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater on Dec 10, 2015 11:54:26 GMT -5
Still think it's weird that they DFAed him ahead of Coyle. It's close, but I understand a little. Cecchini had one elite tool and he completely lost it. Coyle still has some usable tools but injuries last year?
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Dec 10, 2015 11:56:19 GMT -5
Still think it's weird that they DFAed him ahead of Coyle. They probably think they had done all they could to fix him and are giving him one more shot to figure it out somewhere else.
|
|
|
Post by mjammz on Dec 10, 2015 12:02:30 GMT -5
This is a perfect example of what can happen when a team holds onto a prospect to long and doesn't capitalize on their value.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 10, 2015 12:07:07 GMT -5
Dombrowski has mentioned his affinity for players with a varied skillset. How Rusney and JBJ help the team when their bats aren't playing.
Cecchini is atrocious defensively, and it seems as if his development has stalled in this system. Happens to a lot of guys who have high OBP's but no power once they get to the higher levels and pitchers aren't afraid of being taken out of the park.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 10, 2015 12:21:14 GMT -5
This is a perfect example of what can happen when a team holds onto a prospect to long and doesn't capitalize on their value. This is a perfect example of 20-20 hindsight. You might think a guy is at the peak of his value and then throw him into a Adrian Gonzalez trade like Rizzo. I'll take letting Cecchini bust as long as they don't trade Mookie at what they might have thought the "peak" of his value was in 2013.
|
|
|
Post by humanbeingbean on Dec 10, 2015 12:26:48 GMT -5
This is a perfect example of what can happen when a team holds onto a prospect to long and doesn't capitalize on their value. I hate this argument. Should we have traded Bogaerts, Swihart, Vazquez, Betts, etc when their values were highest? Should we trade Moncada or Espinoza right now? Some prospects pan out, and others don't. Cecchini practically fell off the face of the earth. Nobody could've predicted his hit tool would completely evaporate, as other posters have pointed out. We can't trade every prospect.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Dec 10, 2015 12:31:15 GMT -5
This is a perfect example of what can happen when a team holds onto a prospect to long and doesn't capitalize on their value. What are Betts and Bogaerts examples of?
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Dec 10, 2015 13:13:30 GMT -5
I'm not trying to pile on here, but I think Cecchini was the type of prospect to hold onto because he was seen as a high floor type. I always think it makes sense to hold onto high floor guys until they get to the point where they are viewed as a starting option from the day they get traded.
The odds of Cecchini busting were very slim. He wasn't very risky at all. But he busted. That's the heartbreak of baseball prospecting in a nutshell.
Still, he provided this forum with a lot of excitement and hope in his heyday. He was one of my personal favorite guys to follow in recent memory. Sad ending, but still a fun ride with Cecchini in our system.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater on Dec 10, 2015 13:40:29 GMT -5
This is a perfect example of what can happen when a team holds onto a prospect to long and doesn't capitalize on their value. This is a perfect example of 20-20 hindsight. You might think a guy is at the peak of his value and then throw him into a Adrian Gonzalez trade like Rizzo. I'll take letting Cecchini bust as long as they don't trade Mookie at what they might have thought the "peak" of his value was in 2013. I do agree with you on this point. But once we signed Panda and Hanley there was literally no point on holding on to him. Marrero and Holt leapfrogged his value to the ML club at that point. I realize he was no longer a headliner type of guy, but could have easily packaged him with a couple pieces in a deal for a starting pitcher, for example.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 10, 2015 14:19:52 GMT -5
It's not as if other teams weren't aware of Cecchini's flaws. You wouldn't have gotten much at all for him a year ago and he did provide some depth for a couple years. They held onto him to see if he could rebound. He didn't, but oh well. I personally would have traded him after 2013 when his power disappeared at AA, but I think most teams would have hesitated at giving up what they might have wanted at that point, precisely because they saw the same thing I did.
Not sure why anyone would think that the Red Sox are the only team that knew anything about Cecchini and that maybe they could trick some team into giving up more than he's worth. There is selling high and selling low, but all parties involved know exactly what the questions or lack of questions are about any prospect. The exception could be stuff in the clubhouse or work ethic that isn't seen on the field, but I don't think that applies for Cecchini.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 10, 2015 14:24:17 GMT -5
I do agree with you on this point. But once we signed Panda and Hanley there was literally no point on holding on to him. Marrero and Holt leapfrogged his value to the ML club at that point. I realize he was no longer a headliner type of guy, but could have easily packaged him with a couple pieces in a deal for a starting pitcher, for example. There was plenty of reason to think he would play better at Pawtucket in 2015 than he did in 2014, increasing his trade value. Heck, one year ago it wasn't crazy at all to think that Cecchini would have much more value than Holt by midseason '15. That obviously didn't happen. But considering that he barely saw time at third base in the minors this year, the signing of Sandoval clearly isn't what blocked him - his play is what blocked him. EDIT: If Cecchini had hit well in Pawtucket and didn't get traded he'd have gotten a very long look at first base in August and September.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 10, 2015 14:26:31 GMT -5
Still think it's weird that they DFAed him ahead of Coyle. It's close, but I understand a little. Cecchini had one elite tool and he completely lost it. Coyle still has some usable tools but injuries last year? For me it was Brentz or Coyle. If you can't stay healthy you have no value to the team.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 10, 2015 14:48:06 GMT -5
It's not as if other teams weren't aware of Cecchini's flaws. You wouldn't have gotten much at all for him a year ago and he did provide some depth for a couple years. They held onto him to see if he could rebound. He didn't, but oh well. I personally would have traded him after 2013 when his power disappeared at AA, but I think most teams would have hesitated at giving up what they might have wanted at that point, precisely because they saw the same thing I did. Not sure why anyone would think that the Red Sox are the only team that knew anything about Cecchini and that maybe they could trick some team into giving up more than he's worth. There is selling high and selling low, but all parties involved know exactly what the questions or lack of questions are about any prospect. The exception could be stuff in the clubhouse or work ethic that isn't seen on the field, but I don't think that applies for Cecchini. For one his power didn't disappear, he never had any. If you wanted to trade him after 2013 you could have got a ton of value for him. The thing is why would they want to trade him? He was always looked at as a very good contact hitter with great on base skills that would develop 10-15 HR power down the road. It never happened, but that was the scouting report.
Have to know which team you work for as a scout? What did you see in 2013 that would predicted what he has become? Let's be real his lack of power is not the issue. He stopped hitting its that simple and nothing in 2013 or before predicted that. If he hit .260-.270 with his good on base skills and a .370 slugging % he would still be a Red Sox. It's the fact he hit .213 last year that has lead to him being traded.
I have to know if teams know everything about prospects how come there are so many bad trades down the road? You seem to be overlooking that fact that almost all prospect still need to develop. Some do and some don't.
The Orioles had a lot more information on Rodriguez and still traded him for Miller. If you got them to be honest they would tell you they never thought in a million years he would progress like he has. If they know what they know now they would never had made that trade. Just because another team might know a players flaws doesn't mean they don't think they can develop him and fix those flaws.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 10, 2015 14:58:24 GMT -5
I'm not trying to pile on here, but I think Cecchini was the type of prospect to hold onto because he was seen as a high floor type. I always think it makes sense to hold onto high floor guys until they get to the point where they are viewed as a starting option from the day they get traded. The odds of Cecchini busting were very slim. He wasn't very risky at all. But he busted. That's the heartbreak of baseball prospecting in a nutshell. Still, he provided this forum with a lot of excitement and hope in his heyday. He was one of my personal favorite guys to follow in recent memory. Sad ending, but still a fun ride with Cecchini in our system. I don't consider a guy with zero applicable defensive profile to be a high floor guy.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 10, 2015 15:21:42 GMT -5
It's not as if other teams weren't aware of Cecchini's flaws. You wouldn't have gotten much at all for him a year ago and he did provide some depth for a couple years. They held onto him to see if he could rebound. He didn't, but oh well. I personally would have traded him after 2013 when his power disappeared at AA, but I think most teams would have hesitated at giving up what they might have wanted at that point, precisely because they saw the same thing I did. Not sure why anyone would think that the Red Sox are the only team that knew anything about Cecchini and that maybe they could trick some team into giving up more than he's worth. There is selling high and selling low, but all parties involved know exactly what the questions or lack of questions are about any prospect. The exception could be stuff in the clubhouse or work ethic that isn't seen on the field, but I don't think that applies for Cecchini. For one his power didn't disappear, he never had any. If you wanted to trade him after 2013 you could have got a ton of value for him. The thing is why would they want to trade him? He was always looked at as a very good contact hitter with great on base skills that would develop 10-15 HR power down the road. It never happened, but that was the scouting report.
Have to know which team you work for as a scout? What did you see in 2013 that would predicted what he has become? Let's be real his lack of power is not the issue. He stopped hitting its that simple and nothing in 2013 or before predicted that. If he hit .260-.270 with his good on base skills and a .370 slugging % he would still be a Red Sox. It's the fact he hit .213 last year that has lead to him being traded.
I have to know if teams know everything about prospects how come there are so many bad trades down the road? You seem to be overlooking that fact that almost all prospect still need to develop. Some do and some don't.
The Orioles had a lot more information on Rodriguez and still traded him for Miller. If you got them to be honest they would tell you they never thought in a million years he would progress like he has. If they know what they know now they would never had made that trade. Just because another team might know a players flaws doesn't mean they don't think they can develop him and fix those flaws.
I'm on a crappy tablet right now so I can't do all of the numbers for you, but I did have heated debates either here or on Overthemonster about him at the end of 2013 regarding his power. At that point it was a concern. His ISO dropped from .196 to .108. His power at Salem was perfectly acceptable, but it just didn't carry as he moved up. I didn't expect his ISO to stay that high, but didn't it expect it to drop by half either. His K-rate jumped as well. That was the beginning of my pretty huge doubts on him, because a guy with a ~.100 ISO is not going to be able to walk as much as he did without an elite contact rate which was also going away. He was walking because he was looking for walks and pitchers at lower levels don't have enough control. Add that to his lack of defense.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 10, 2015 18:07:47 GMT -5
For one his power didn't disappear, he never had any. If you wanted to trade him after 2013 you could have got a ton of value for him. The thing is why would they want to trade him? He was always looked at as a very good contact hitter with great on base skills that would develop 10-15 HR power down the road. It never happened, but that was the scouting report.
Have to know which team you work for as a scout? What did you see in 2013 that would predicted what he has become? Let's be real his lack of power is not the issue. He stopped hitting its that simple and nothing in 2013 or before predicted that. If he hit .260-.270 with his good on base skills and a .370 slugging % he would still be a Red Sox. It's the fact he hit .213 last year that has lead to him being traded.
I have to know if teams know everything about prospects how come there are so many bad trades down the road? You seem to be overlooking that fact that almost all prospect still need to develop. Some do and some don't.
The Orioles had a lot more information on Rodriguez and still traded him for Miller. If you got them to be honest they would tell you they never thought in a million years he would progress like he has. If they know what they know now they would never had made that trade. Just because another team might know a players flaws doesn't mean they don't think they can develop him and fix those flaws.
I'm on a crappy tablet right now so I can't do all of the numbers for you, but I did have heated debates either here or on Overthemonster about him at the end of 2013 regarding his power. At that point it was a concern. His ISO dropped from .196 to .108. His power at Salem was perfectly acceptable, but it just didn't carry as he moved up. I didn't expect his ISO to stay that high, but didn't it expect it to drop by half either. His K-rate jumped as well. That was the beginning of my pretty huge doubts on him, because a guy with a ~.100 ISO is not going to be able to walk as much as he did without an elite contact rate which was also going away. He was walking because he was looking for walks and pitchers at lower levels don't have enough control. Add that to his lack of defense. So you base a power dip on 214 AB's, while what just ignoring the 455 AB's at Greenville? Let me say this one last time, Cecchini has never had any power, besides a fluke 214 AB's. If you said that my doubts were his D or that he won't be able to hit better pitching then yes you can claim to have known what was going to happen to Cecchini. But you keep saying his lack of power was the red flag that made you know he was going to flame out and that's just not true.
Cecchini was known as an elite contact hitter and someone that had elite on base skills at the end of 2013. Now he is no longer an elite contact hitter and thus his on base % has gone in the tank. This is the reason Cecchini was traded and the main reason he is a failed prospect, not his lack of power.
Do you think we trade him if he hit .270 and had an on base % of .350 or better, even if he had very little power? Nope, his overall hitting did him in, not his lack of power!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 10, 2015 18:10:24 GMT -5
His extra base hits have gone from 47 to 33 to 21 in the last three years, but then again I'm not using any exclamation points.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 11, 2015 1:40:55 GMT -5
If the choice was between Coyle and Cecchini, depth would also have to factor in here. We now have Shaw ahead of Cecchini at both position he plays whereas Coyle can man 2B. From a pure depth perspective, it makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Dec 11, 2015 4:40:25 GMT -5
Sorry if I'm a bit late. Been working a lot recently. Does anyone know the details of the exchnage? Not just monetary, but if he wanted a shot somewhere, or if the Brewers actually think he can provide depth in the NL as a lefty with SOME ability to play 3 ish positions.
|
|
|
Post by mannofsteele on Dec 11, 2015 7:24:44 GMT -5
Good luck to you Garin! I hope you have a decent cup of coffee in the majors to be given a shot. Milwaukee is a nice fit for you with lots of holes in their infield to bring your hit tool to the Majors.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 11, 2015 7:52:18 GMT -5
I'm on a crappy tablet right now so I can't do all of the numbers for you, but I did have heated debates either here or on Overthemonster about him at the end of 2013 regarding his power. At that point it was a concern. His ISO dropped from .196 to .108. His power at Salem was perfectly acceptable, but it just didn't carry as he moved up. I didn't expect his ISO to stay that high, but didn't it expect it to drop by half either. His K-rate jumped as well. That was the beginning of my pretty huge doubts on him, because a guy with a ~.100 ISO is not going to be able to walk as much as he did without an elite contact rate which was also going away. He was walking because he was looking for walks and pitchers at lower levels don't have enough control. Add that to his lack of defense. So you base a power dip on 214 AB's, while what just ignoring the 455 AB's at Greenville? Let me say this one last time, Cecchini has never had any power, besides a fluke 214 AB's. If you said that my doubts were his D or that he won't be able to hit better pitching then yes you can claim to have known what was going to happen to Cecchini. But you keep saying his lack of power was the red flag that made you know he was going to flame out and that's just not true.
Cecchini was known as an elite contact hitter and someone that had elite on base skills at the end of 2013. Now he is no longer an elite contact hitter and thus his on base % has gone in the tank. This is the reason Cecchini was traded and the main reason he is a failed prospect, not his lack of power.
Do you think we trade him if he hit .270 and had an on base % of .350 or better, even if he had very little power? Nope, his overall hitting did him in, not his lack of power!!!!!!!!!
The lack of power is why pitchers pitch him differently now than when he was at the height of his hype in Salem (and obviously as you move up the pitchers are better at attacking a hitter's weakness). That's why his hit tool went away. He tried to adjust. That was exactly my concern. I could not find any major league players with his hitting profile. If you want to argue his power in Salem was a fluke, go ahead, you'd be right. But there weren't a lot of people who thought that at the time. I didn't start to think it was a fluke until he got to Portland. Pawtucket confirmed it.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Dec 11, 2015 8:11:13 GMT -5
I'm not trying to pile on here, but I think Cecchini was the type of prospect to hold onto because he was seen as a high floor type. I always think it makes sense to hold onto high floor guys until they get to the point where they are viewed as a starting option from the day they get traded. The odds of Cecchini busting were very slim. He wasn't very risky at all. But he busted. That's the heartbreak of baseball prospecting in a nutshell. Still, he provided this forum with a lot of excitement and hope in his heyday. He was one of my personal favorite guys to follow in recent memory. Sad ending, but still a fun ride with Cecchini in our system. I don't consider a guy with zero applicable defensive profile to be a high floor guy. Back when he was in Greenville he was projected as an average defender at 3B once he cleaned up his footwork. Obviously that was more about projection than results, but at that point the bat looked like it could've been good enough to play anywhere because of his hit tool and plate discipline.
|
|