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.
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 8, 2019 23:35:13 GMT -5
It's hard not to be excited about it, but I'm trying to not be excited about it. I'm more excited about the 4MPH velocity bump late in the season and the addition of a slider than I am about the 12 K's. That said, WOW. Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by boydhurstlovechild on Sept 8, 2019 23:40:00 GMT -5
Why try not to be excited? That's no way to live. Listen, I think I hear what you're saying. Maybe if Bryan Mata had done it I might feel that way? But some fairly obscure kid who had been demoted from full season ball? Of course it's probably a nutty anomaly, but what if it ain't? Nothing in life is meaningless.
|
|
|
Post by boydhurstlovechild on Sept 8, 2019 23:45:28 GMT -5
Haha, I wrote those posts and was all into it and literally just looked to the left and saw that we had a general manager change. Probably quite a bit more signifigant situation than a performance in the New York Penn League.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Sept 8, 2019 23:55:32 GMT -5
Him doing something awesome in the NYPL doesn't necessarily mean he's a prospect, but him possibly not being a prospect doesn't mean you shouldn't enjoy the hell out of him whupping the NYPL.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 9, 2019 8:57:07 GMT -5
I'll repeat, but YPA added a slider that basically gave him another 40-45 pitch, but complemented his repertoire well.
Not to rain on the parade here but I want to differentiate this from, say, Mata adding a slider/cutter that might become a plus MLB out pitch.
To add something positive, we like him and he'll probably be ranked in our final top 60, but if you aren't into, say, Jhonathan Diaz, YPA won't be your guy either.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 9, 2019 11:09:35 GMT -5
Seems like a bit of a straw man. For one thing, Diaz is ranked 38th and I don't believe anyone has implied that he's Mata. You are also ignoring the velocity uptick for a 21 year old.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 9, 2019 15:29:24 GMT -5
What velocity uptick? For the one game last week you mean?
Not saying anyone has said he's Mata. Just getting in front of the "new slider" narrative before it gets misconstrued. It's a good pitch and helps him a lot. I kind of like him. We’ll see where he goes from here.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 9, 2019 21:11:22 GMT -5
What velocity uptick? For the one game last week you mean? Not saying anyone has said he's Mata. Just getting in front of the "new slider" narrative before it gets misconstrued. It's a good pitch and helps him a lot. I kind of like him. We’ll see where he goes from here. Yes, one game at the end of the season with a 4MPH difference over previous reports is a velocity uptick for a 21 year old.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 9, 2019 23:10:49 GMT -5
Oh, I see I think. Not sure where you're getting 4 MPH from because when I saw him during the regular season he was 88-89 or 90, T92. In the start he was 90-92, T93. So like, 2-3 mph up. I mean, it's certainly not insignificant, but I'd expect him to be amped up in a playoff situation like that too. It's not such a difference that it changes my view of him.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 9, 2019 23:23:12 GMT -5
Oh, I see I think. Not sure where you're getting 4 MPH from because when I saw him during the regular season he was 88-89 or 90, T92. In the start he was 90-92, T93. So like, 2-3 mph up. I mean, it's certainly not insignificant, but I'd expect him to be amped up in a playoff situation like that too. It's not such a difference that it changes my view of him. I was thinking lower when the season began but, based on looks and the bio, that velocity has been increasing as the season wore on. His control hasn't suffered during that increase, 5.14 K/BB and a 11.22 K/9 is pretty decent for a 21 year old. He's not there yet but he seems like a better prospect than Jhonathan Diaz. I had said elsewhere that I thought in the 40's was applicable. Still think that but I haven't seen him live.
|
|
|
Post by bdub on Oct 8, 2019 23:23:21 GMT -5
I'm a little confused here, is this Who we think will be good? ala a propsect? or who actually produced? I'm getting a little salty in my old age, so when i see Mata for example i see lots of potential, great arm, lots of upside, but a so so year in AA at best. 5+ era would never get anyone else mentioned, ever. So each time i see a report on 2019 and Mata is mentioned, i keep thinking are they asking for who will be good, surely you can't put him before guys who gave up 2 less runs a game, but you do.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 9, 2019 5:46:32 GMT -5
I'm a little confused here, is this Who we think will be good? ala a propsect? or who actually produced? I'm getting a little salty in my old age, so when i see Mata for example i see lots of potential, great arm, lots of upside, but a so so year in AA at best. 5+ era would never get anyone else mentioned, ever. So each time i see a report on 2019 and Mata is mentioned, i keep thinking are they asking for who will be good, surely you can't put him before guys who gave up 2 less runs a game, but you do. While they are learning their craft, prospects are evaluated more on tools in their toolbox over actual results. If results were the main criteria, Daniel McGrath would likely be our top prospect. That being said, exactly which 20 year old AA pitcher put up better numbers than Mata ?
|
|
|
Post by bdub on Oct 9, 2019 9:28:37 GMT -5
I think Mata tops the charts for 20 year olds, and certainly has the "tools". But he didn't have McGrath's performance. Spin it anyway you want, whats wrong with minor league baseball is to much talk about what might be and zero about what actually is.
this is why every time a review of 2019 performances comes out i feel like the Sox scouts are trying to re-convince us they made a good choice in drafting or signing xyz player. I don't know McGrath from a hill of beans, i saw him throw online a couple of times, he performed better than every other pitcher in the organization, period. The numbers don't lie.
|
|
|
Post by bdub on Oct 9, 2019 9:31:20 GMT -5
maybe it's it just an opinion but the A's and Rays seem to be less focused on prospects and more on winners. Both of their rosters are loaded with guys other organizations gave up on.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 9, 2019 10:20:52 GMT -5
I think Mata tops the charts for 20 year olds, and certainly has the "tools". But he didn't have McGrath's performance. Spin it anyway you want, whats wrong with minor league baseball is to much talk about what might be and zero about what actually is. this is why every time a review of 2019 performances comes out i feel like the Sox scouts are trying to re-convince us they made a good choice in drafting or signing xyz player. I don't know McGrath from a hill of beans, i saw him throw online a couple of times, he performed better than every other pitcher in the organization, period. The numbers don't lie.
You're totally missing context. It's one thing for a 25 year old with fringy stuff to beat up AA batters on his 3rd try at that level than a 20 year old with great stuff just learning AA ball. If you're correct then Trevor Kelley should be a sensational reliever based on his AAA numbers. Have fun watching Trevor Kelley this year in Boston?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 9, 2019 11:06:50 GMT -5
maybe it's it just an opinion but the A's and Rays seem to be less focused on prospects and more on winners. Both of their rosters are loaded with guys other organizations gave up on. I think they are more focused on prospects because they can't afford top free agents. Heck maybe not just prospects but production vs cost vs team control. I'd also point out they get extra picks in the draft and for losing free agents that we don't get, making it easier for them to have more prospects. What do you mean by "Winners"? Not a term a hear used in Baseball because it's such an extreme team sport, one player can't make you a winner like a LeBron or Brady can. Just look at Trout the games best player. Those teams are filled with guys that came from crappy teams. Those two clubs have very limited payrolls. Which forces them to get very creative. DD went after the best available, they go after the best values. People on this board aren't ready to hand anything to Chavis, they don't think he's good enough. Those teams would love a player like him. The GMs basically act like DD, but with a very limited payroll. They have to make tons of trades and take risks because they have no other choice. Sometimes it works out and some times it doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by bdub on Oct 9, 2019 11:07:26 GMT -5
I'm not down on the guy who figures it out on the "3rd try", he figured it out and got guys out. As for Trevor Kelley, are you saying I should take a guy with an era around 4.5 over a guy with one at 1.79? I don't care if they throw 99mph or they throw 89mph, I care that they get guys out. And if it takes a while to perfect their craft so be it.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Oct 9, 2019 11:24:15 GMT -5
I'm not down on the guy who figures it out on the "3rd try", he figured it out and got guys out. As for Trevor Kelley, are you saying I should take a guy with an era around 4.5 over a guy with one at 1.79? I don't care if they throw 99mph or they throw 89mph, I care that they get guys out. And if it takes a while to perfect their craft so be it. Sometimes...yes. Sometimes...absolutely yes. Numbers are important, I'm a stats guy myself but they absolutely need to be interpreted in the context of what we get from traditional scouting + modern advancements in stats/technology (e.g., TrackMan data). As for Mata, you point out the unimpressive ERA. There are plenty of other (and more predictive) statistics that give optimism though. Consider that his xFIP in AA was 3.27, basically indistinguishable from his 3.23 xFIP in High-A. Why the difference in ERA but no difference in xFIP? Well, the biggest thing was a 15.0% HR/FB rate...something which will obviously affect actual outcomes and ERA, but gets regressed to average levels when calculating xFIP. For a guy who never had a previous HR/FB rate above 5.3%, I'm comfortable with regressing that statistic and relying on the xFIP stat. On top of his career high HR/FB rate, he had a career high BABIP against (.340) and a career low LOB% (67.9%). These are other stats that I think may be more fluky than not (the BABIP isn't necessarily supported by a crazy LD%) and will make ERAs look bad. Looking at the stats that I do care about more, his K% in AA was very impressive (25.2%, up from 24.1% in High-A), and his BB% was manageable at 10.3%...certainly better than his 2018 season. His GB% was a still very impressive 52.1%, albeit substantially lower than the 65.9% he put up in High-A. All said...when you take a more comprehensive look past ERA, there are plenty of stats to support the optimism behind Mata and his ranking as the #2 prospect in the system. When you consider his age and level, the stats are even more impressive.
|
|
|
Post by bdub on Oct 9, 2019 11:43:15 GMT -5
good stuff thx. I'm not down on Mata potentially being the number one guy someday in the rotation. I guess my struggle is everyone else gets marginalized, and yet they produced this year. Yes some had to take multiple years and routes to figure it out, but they did. It's a little like the Twins starter the other night against the Yankee's, he drove for UBer last year. I respect that, I respect that he stayed at it, figured stuff out. what i don't respect is coddling prospects. Giving them the benefit of the doubt when we give no one else the same courtesy. Baseball is a brutal game, we should honor and not marginalize those who overcome past failures.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 9, 2019 11:54:57 GMT -5
I have my eyes on Kutter Crawford. He certainly didn't have the year we hoped for, yet still struck out a ton of guys. Like we are do for a guy like him to develop an Ok third pitch and become a back end starter.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 9, 2019 12:19:35 GMT -5
I worry about Crawford's delivery as a starter, but I agree with the K rates and I'm relatively bullish on his FB/Cutter combo playing up in shorter stints. It looked to me when I saw him that he kinda telegraphed his curve, but that's easy for me to say when I'm not in the batter's box. Tangentially-related, Crawford's ranking is a good indication of the new depth in the system this year. Five 2019 draftees are ahead of him, plus Ward after his breakout. I think being ranked #24 right now is a much stronger endorsement than what it was a year ago.
As far as someone down the rankings I'm excited about, everything in Guedez's write-up and stat line screams that he's the sort who could move relatively quickly for his age. I don't see him starting the year with Greenville (largely for innings reasons) but I could see him getting assigned there if/when Murphy or Zeferjahn ends up getting the bump to Salem.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 9, 2019 12:36:40 GMT -5
good stuff thx. I'm not down on Mata potentially being the number one guy someday in the rotation. I guess my struggle is everyone else gets marginalized, and yet they produced this year. Yes some had to take multiple years and routes to figure it out, but they did. It's a little like the Twins starter the other night against the Yankee's, he drove for UBer last year. I respect that, I respect that he stayed at it, figured stuff out. what i don't respect is coddling prospects. Giving them the benefit of the doubt when we give no one else the same courtesy. Baseball is a brutal game, we should honor and not marginalize those who overcome past failures. I'd be quite surprised if that was the case. I would think he's more of a mid-rotation starter than a potential ace. I think he has a good shot at snagging a rotation spot in 2021 or at the latest 2022, but I don't see top-of-the-rotation starter in Mata. Of course, being a mid-level rotation starter would be a huge development step for the team that hasn't developed a rotation mainstay since Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz. I think the highest ceilings as starters in the system belong to Jay Groome and Noah Song. As far as the fringy prospects, I think we all have appreciation for what they go through to progress as high as they do. It is a brutal game and when those guys who are not heralded step in and help out a club, it's appreciated. You can't build a major league club on guys like that, but it's nice to be able to have guys like that come in and step in when an injury arises or fill a roster spot better than you'd imagine.
|
|
|
Post by bdub on Oct 9, 2019 12:47:01 GMT -5
I agree with you, I guess how this all started is I just feel potential and ceiling are one thing, a very important thing. but actual success is another. and so as we measure 2019 lets not kid ourselves and mix the two. 2019 should have two reports on pitching.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 9, 2019 12:53:04 GMT -5
I agree with you, I guess how this all started is I just feel potential and ceiling are one thing, a very important thing. but actual success is another. and so as we measure 2019 lets not kid ourselves and mix the two. 2019 should have two reports on pitching. Actual success is way down the list of importance. A pitching prospect has to work on things they are not good at instead of getting everyone out with an advanced fastball like he could get away with at lower levels. He may be working on pitching to contact when the poor minor league defense doesn't help him out like it would in the majors. Some guy like McGrath could be the Cy Young of all the minor leagues, but he's still not going to get many people out at the majors because his stuff isn't nearly good enough. Some guy like Henry Owens can get everyone to chase his changeup in the minors, but in the majors it's never going to happen and he'll never get anyone out with his poor fastball and bad command of it. And that's what happened with him. That's why scouted ceilings are far more important than just looking at box scores.
|
|
|
Post by Addam603 on Oct 9, 2019 13:14:54 GMT -5
I agree with you, I guess how this all started is I just feel potential and ceiling are one thing, a very important thing. but actual success is another. and so as we measure 2019 lets not kid ourselves and mix the two. 2019 should have two reports on pitching. Actual success is way down the list of importance. A pitching prospect has to work on things they are not good at instead of getting everyone out with an advanced fastball like he could get away with at lower levels. He may be working on pitching to contact when the poor minor league defense doesn't help him out like it would in the majors. Some guy like McGrath could be the Cy Young of all the minor leagues, but he's still not going to get many people out at the majors because his stuff isn't nearly good enough. Some guy like Henry Owens can get everyone to chase his changeup in the minors, but in the majors it's never going to happen and he'll never get anyone out with his poor fastball and bad command of it. And that's what happened with him. That's why scouted ceilings are far more important than just looking at box scores. This reminds me of Brayan Bello in the first half of the season. I remember reports where he was working almost exclusively on a single pitch during starts and was getting hammered. So the results and the box score said he sucked, which obviously isn’t accurate. You can’t completely discount either one. Potential/scouting and actual results need to be considered hand in hand.
|
|
|