|
Post by joshv02 on Feb 11, 2013 9:04:06 GMT -5
Mike Augliera, the Binghamton kid? He didn't make BA's top 30. Weird "sleeper" pick, no? I get that he led the NCAA in SO:BB ratio, but, uh. Really?
Aside: While I agree that Keith does have a certain sarcastic online persona, in the little interaction I've had with him outside of ESPN he seemed like a super nice guy. For example, when he was still with the Blue Jays (or maybe it was soon after her left?) he emailed people on Primer from time to time to correct people's misunderstanding of the various personnel rules (which, at that point were much less publicized and cataloged than now, thanks in large part to SP.com).
Sure, he doesn't suffer fools lightly - but, you have to see his twitter timeline to understand how many fools come out of the woodworks. (Though, it isn't the persona I'd likely adopt.)
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Feb 11, 2013 9:20:54 GMT -5
To say his rankings don't make sense would imply that you are thinking he's either thoughtless in his rankings or purposely pushing the Sox ranking below the Yankees. I dont like the man, so defending him is maddening to me, but there is little chance I believe he doesn't put thought into things, nor do I think he's dumb. Just because people don't understand his reasoning doesn't make his reasoning wrong nor does it mean he doesn't have any. That study is meaningless with regards to this conversation. It's an historical look at how players ranked in the top 100 have fared. Means nothing to the current players as individuals. It means even less when we are trying to get into Keith Laws head. People should try to open their minds to see where he's coming from rather than argue against someones opinion. It's just an opinion and he's a rather smart guy so it may be wise to at least try to see where he's coming from. No ranking is factual. Keep that in mind. You're making a huge leap here. I was very clear in my first post saying that I find Law's reports to be quite good and I think he does an excellent job. I also went out of my way to say I find him to be an intelligent, thoughtful person so I am clearly not saying he is "thoughtless". I am also not saying that he was purposefully pushing the Red Sox system down in his rankings. Rankings are always imperfect and frankly are done to draw hits more than anything else. I would bet Law would rather focus on the scouting reports then this stuff. My opinion is really quite simple: I think given Law's assessment of the players, the Red Sox system should be higher ranked. I think if you take his valuation of the players then the Red Sox system should be somewhere around the 10-12 mark. Again, that does not mean I think he is thoughtless or intentionally biased as you imply. That couldn't be farther from the truth. There are a million things that need to be considered when doing the rankings and I believe he missed on this particular thing - nothing more, nothing less.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Feb 11, 2013 20:16:07 GMT -5
I just think you were a little strong in stating you don't know how anyone could argue against your view that his ranking is wrong based off his own partial analysis. (by partial, I mean we are only privy to part of it) You've already correctly stated there are a million things that go into the rankings. Considering this and the fact you believe he's smart and thoughtful, wouldn't it make more sense to conclude that there is a piece of his analysis you are missing ? Not anything he's written but stuff he hasn't? It's not like the 4 player write ups and his quick overviews tell the entire story. They are a snip-it of information that people are taking as a full report. He doesn't breakdown every facet of every organization and weight it's importance so you shouldn't be drawing such conclusions off of the information provided. We can agree to disagree but that's the only thing I'm trying to get people to see. Knowing what I know of Law he has good reason for the rankings. Even if I may disagree; it's not wrong.
|
|