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.
Here's Another Homer Bobby Bombs: the Bobby Dalbec thread
|
Post by adamoraz on Sept 6, 2016 17:07:03 GMT -5
Definitely, great video and scouting info. A lot to be excited about here. I love watching him smash that home run to right field.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 6, 2016 18:24:08 GMT -5
Interesting that anyone could watch Dalbec a few times and confidently state that his ceiling is a .250-.260 hitter. A scouting report is a snapshot in time. Hey, maybe we see him next year and there's drastic improvement in the hit tool or something. That said, it's generally a rule of thumb in scouting that you don't project a tool to improve by more than a grade, and if you do, there needs to be a really good reason why. If you turned in a scouting report saying that a guy had a below-average hit tool right now, but that by the time he reached the majors he projected to be above-average, if you didn't have a good reason you'd be let go during the offseason. I'm not exaggerating, I don't think. If you want to get scouting reports that hedge that every player seen could be anything from a JAG to a future hall-of-famer, you're at the wrong website. When we see a guy, we're going to tell you what we saw. Also don't get the nitpicking of that one point from a report that projects the player as follows: "With the potential for two well above-average tools and two fringe-average-to-average tools, Dalbec has the ceiling of a first division, major league contributor who could slot in at the number five or six spot in a big league lineup." That's a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Sept 6, 2016 22:40:38 GMT -5
Telson nice breakdown of some of the neurological factors in hitting. I tend to more heavily weight the genetic factors than the environmental ones personally, but as you well know in that age old debate it's quite tricky. I recall Jeff Burroughs, for whom the Redsox nearly traded early in his career. As an infant a physician noted the remarkable coordination and stated he was going to probably become a professional athlete, most likely a baseball player. No doubt there is constant refinement and adjustment at all levels afterward. If I myself had worked like crazy, I doubt I would have had a shot at even a minor league career. Pitching, I feel is more of a skill weighting mechanics more heavily than natural ability. Thanks. I kind of always come back to thinking of it like running. It's a simple thing, and just about everyone can do it, but there's a lot that goes into it that we never think about. How fast your nerves can fire (and reset themselves), how efficiently and rapidly your brain can relax muscles when opposing muscles flex, even intrinsic ability to tolerate pain, or utilize oxygen, or pump blood... Genetics kind of defines a person's "range," while work ethic and skill development determine where they end up on that range. But hitting is interesting to me because the athletic talents that go into it are so difficult to assess in everyday life. I don't think anyone would argue that Michael Jordan was not a good athlete, or that he lacked hand-eye coordination...but hitting a baseball was pretty damn tough for him. Of course, he did surprisingly well for a guy with basically very little experience, so maybe a lifetime of practice would've made a huge difference. But baseball often reminds me much more of playing an instrument...repetition and the development of "feel" are crucial, and it takes a lot of both to finally recognize whether or not a player's "range" includes MLB-caliber play. It's part of the beauty of baseball. There's artistry (often from unlikely sources...John Kruk? Matt Stairs? Pedro?) required for success that, in the other major sports, largely is obscured by raw athleticism.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Sept 7, 2016 11:14:59 GMT -5
Something I've long thought about, and your post better articulated it than anywhere I've seen! Consider Kevin Youkilis, not an "athlete" yet with the hand eye to become a fine player. The analogy of playing an instrument is excellent. I've long played the guitar and noticed that there are certain players who progressed so much quicker and became fine lead guitarists.. A rare one even internalized the instrument so that he could play anything he heard instantly. The fine motor skills required in baseball also enable people of closer to average size to excel, as opposed the other major sports.
|
|
|
Post by azblue on Sept 7, 2016 11:21:53 GMT -5
Interesting that anyone could watch Dalbec a few times and confidently state that his ceiling is a .250-.260 hitter. A scouting report is a snapshot in time. Hey, maybe we see him next year and there's drastic improvement in the hit tool or something. That said, it's generally a rule of thumb in scouting that you don't project a tool to improve by more than a grade, and if you do, there needs to be a really good reason why. If you turned in a scouting report saying that a guy had a below-average hit tool right now, but that by the time he reached the majors he projected to be above-average, if you didn't have a good reason you'd be let go during the offseason. I'm not exaggerating, I don't think. If you want to get scouting reports that hedge that every player seen could be anything from a JAG to a future hall-of-famer, you're at the wrong website. When we see a guy, we're going to tell you what we saw. Also don't get the nitpicking of that one point from a report that projects the player as follows: "With the potential for two well above-average tools and two fringe-average-to-average tools, Dalbec has the ceiling of a first division, major league contributor who could slot in at the number five or six spot in a big league lineup." That's a good thing. The opinion in the scouting report was: "...it is not out of the realm of possibility that he could develop into a fringe-average hitter, capable of hitting in the .250 to .260 range, although it is more likely that his hit tool will play just below that." Any reader would understand this as an assessment of the high end of potential development. I grant that there was a disclaimer of sorts in the article about all scouting reports being "snapshots" but the wording above contains no qualifiers except that Dalbec could well be worse than the .250 to .260 projection.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 7, 2016 11:30:19 GMT -5
Yup. That's actually average. MLB hitters are hitting .256 this year. Fringe-average may not be the term there.
Do you not think that statement squares with something from my post? He doesn't project to have an average hit tool right now. He might develop one. We're not going to project him for a multi-grade improvement.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Sept 7, 2016 12:03:33 GMT -5
I don't have any issue with predicting a "likely" ceiling, based on current data. Scouting is about probabilities. There are always (many) exceptions to scouting predictions, because the bucket of "not a 45 hitter" is a lot bigger than "45 hitter," for example. But the idea is that it's a fair estimation of his upper-end performance, based on some "reasonable" idea of "ceiling" (90th percentile outcome seems fairly common). If you consider that most 4th-rounders never see MLB (probably 80%, I'm sure the data are out there somewhere), then that prediction of a .250-.260 hitter at the top end is pretty fair. Maybe his 1% ceiling is .300/.350/.550 with 30 HR, but that's sort of useless as an idea of his quality as a prospect. That's more or less the absolute ceiling of near-superstar, which could be said of almost any player, all at relatively low probability.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Sept 7, 2016 13:53:02 GMT -5
Eight of the 23 Red Sox 4th round draft picks from 1993 on have played in the majors but only one really has had a career, Jonathan Papelbon. The most recent 4th round pick to appear in the majors - and now is with the team - is Noe Ramirez from the 2011 draft. Four of the five 4th round picks since 2011 still are in the system and still have a chance of making the majors - Dalbec, Methany, McAvoy and Buttrey. Other 4th round picks to appear in the majors were Cecchini, Hazelbaker, Hottovy, Chris Smith, Angel Santos and John Barnes.
|
|
|
Post by adamoraz on Sept 8, 2016 18:13:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Feb 15, 2017 19:41:51 GMT -5
Of all our prospects I think I'm most excited to see what Dalbec is able to do this year. What do you guys expect and/or hope to see from him?
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Feb 16, 2017 5:50:36 GMT -5
Of all our prospects I think I'm most excited to see what Dalbec is able to do this year. What do you guys expect and/or hope to see from him? I just hope he doesn't turn into Michael Chavis, who looks like a bust at this point. That's not a knock on the Sox. Can't win on every draft pick.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Feb 16, 2017 7:28:20 GMT -5
Of all our prospects I think I'm most excited to see what Dalbec is able to do this year. What do you guys expect and/or hope to see from him? I just hope he doesn't turn into Michael Chavis, who looks like a bust at this point. That's not a knock on the Sox. Can't win on every draft pick. I think that dalbec has potential. I think the passion we show for our prospects gets the best of us . I think that Dalbec will be the next golden boy. He beat up pitching at Lowell. Give the guy a chance and see how he does at high A. Not saying he is a bust, but not saying he is a star either. He came out of the draft with some worts on him , same as dustin p. Give him a chance to develop. and play some. Would be nice if he is a dustin type and not a chavis type.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Feb 16, 2017 7:53:20 GMT -5
Dalbec strikes out a lot with power, like Chavis. I'm rooting for him but he has a long way to go. He will be in Greenville this year.
There was no warts around Pedrioa when he was drafted. The only warts around him was the other GM's who underestimated his ability. He was the best position prospect to be drafted at that time since Nomar. Theo was surprised Pedrioa was even sitting there when they drafted him.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Feb 16, 2017 8:07:05 GMT -5
Dalbec strikes out a lot with power, like Chavis. I'm rooting for him but he has a long way to go. He will be in Greenville this year. There was no warts around Pedrioa when he was drafted. The only warts around him was the other GM's who underestimated his ability. He was the best position prospect to be drafted at that time since Nomar. Theo was surprised Pedrioa was even sitting there when they drafted him. I agree on the other gm's underestimating him. I think the statements were he was too small, lacked range at ss. And he would not hit enough/ with power to be anything but a backup infielder. There would much better choices on the board at the time. This site is heavy on metrics. But it is always interesting to me what someone sees beyond metrics and how to project a player 3 or4 years down the road.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 1, 2017 12:25:24 GMT -5
Great job on Dalbec's new scouting report (Ian I assume), particularly the swing mechanics portion.
Man, I hate vernacular policing but "sail" not "sale".
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 1, 2017 12:49:55 GMT -5
Man, I hate vernacular policing but "sail" not "sale". Aw dammit. Thanks for the heads up.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 1, 2017 12:51:04 GMT -5
Man, I hate vernacular policing but "sail" not "sale". Aw dammit. Thanks for the heads up. It's better than the people who say "Sails".
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Mar 1, 2017 17:49:10 GMT -5
I know this is a huge comparison, but would Chris Davis be a fair comp if he were to reach his ceiling? Massive power, below average hit tool and speed. Then again, I'm not a scout (for good reason,) so I'm probably way off on thinking this.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Mar 1, 2017 18:12:28 GMT -5
I know this is a huge comparison, but would Chris Davis be a fair comp if he were to reach his ceiling? Massive power, below average hit tool and speed. Then again, I'm not a scout (for good reason,) so I'm probably way off on thinking this. He could be what we hoped Will Middlebrooks would be.
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Mar 1, 2017 19:19:09 GMT -5
I know this is a huge comparison, but would Chris Davis be a fair comp if he were to reach his ceiling? Massive power, below average hit tool and speed. Then again, I'm not a scout (for good reason,) so I'm probably way off on thinking this. He could be what we hoped Will Middlebrooks would be. That's a really good comparison, I hadn't even thought of Middlebrooks. God I loved him in 2012, it's a shame he couldn't sustain it.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 1, 2017 19:47:23 GMT -5
If you go back through the threads about Middlebrooks, you'll see there was a lot of excitement but also a lot of serious skepticism. He had terrible selectivity and some serious holes in his swing. That and his swing-at-anything approach, which he seemingly never attempted to modify, wrecked his career.
We don't want to wish that on Dalbec. I read a story on him with a lot of quotes about his approach and it's radically different than the former's. As he moves up, what to watch for is simple: can he stay away from the pitcher's pitch, and can he turn counts in his favor. If he can do that, he'll be light years away from the Middlebrooks comp.
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Mar 1, 2017 21:00:57 GMT -5
If you go back through the threads about Middlebrooks, you'll see there was a lot of excitement but also a lot of serious skepticism. He had terrible selectivity and some serious holes in his swing. That and his swing-at-anything approach, which he seemingly never attempted to modify, wrecked his career. We don't want to wish that on Dalbec. I read a story on him with a lot of quotes about his approach and it's radically different than the former's. As he moves up, what to watch for is simple: can he stay away from the pitcher's pitch, and can he turn counts in his favor. If he can do that, he'll be light years away from the Middlebrooks comp. I read recently that he believes not pitching anymore will help improve the rest of his game. That certainly makes a lot of sense, and he said he did so well at Lowell because he no longer had the stress of taking the mound. Yes, I read that on your guys new scouting report on him, which was excellent, by the way. you guys really are the best. But all things considered, if everything clicks for him, I think he could be one of the steals of last year's draft.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Nov 13, 2017 12:15:57 GMT -5
Anything new on this power prospect? I'm hoping he'll be in Portland this coming season. Anyone seen him? Could he be the power hitter the club needs in a year from now?
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Nov 13, 2017 13:21:08 GMT -5
Saw him 3 times this summer when working is way back. Even in the GCL he had trouble making contact and struck out at a lousy rate. Dalbec really looks the part, and is actually one of my favorites, but he needs a big turn around this year, IMO. 18 and 19 year olds were throwing the ball past him and mediocre breaking balls were stumping him. I really doubt he will see AA this year, but we can hope.
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 618
|
Post by alnipper on Nov 13, 2017 14:11:11 GMT -5
I like him better as a pitcher. He really hasn't improved his pitch recognition since college.
|
|
|