|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 31, 2020 10:18:01 GMT -5
He was really good at Portland, too. He's always been one of the real mysteries to me. I don't know if he tried to be more aggressive at the plate when he went back down in '14, or if he was too consciously trying to hit more homers, or what. He also never really found a defensive home, so I wonder if focusing on trying to learn new positions dragged down his offensive game.
|
|
|
Post by ajs1994 on Jul 31, 2020 11:27:23 GMT -5
I think part of it was Cecchini exposed for his lack of power. The times I saw him, he mostly hit ground balls and line drives. I think as you move up the ladder, pitchers with better command will just attack you with strikes unless you prove you can really do some damage against them. I think that made it much harder for Cecchini to walk at the absurd clip he was in A ball and AA.
The guys I can think of who in the 2010s maintained strong walk rates with ISO's under .150 are 2013/2014 Matt Carpenter, Joe Mauer, 2013-2015 Yelich, David Dejesus. I'm sure there are others, but it seems like a hard profile to succeed with in the majors.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 31, 2020 12:22:12 GMT -5
I hear you. I guess it's rare but there are more cases than that. It was a profile pretty similar to Chase Headley, who was a gap-to-gap guy who had great patience, though with Headley you can certainly make the case that the one 30+ homer season did a lot to make pitchers honest. But there are others, Jason Heyward, Alex Gordon, Pedroia, Brett Gardner, who worked a lot of walks despite not putting up great slugging numbers. The huge difference is that those guys all had to be plus defenders to have that kind of value te remain MLB starters (and Pedroia did it at an up-the-middle position), and it's not at all clear that Cecchini was going to get there. But that doesn't really explain why he just stopped hitting at Triple-A. If Cecchini had ended up like a .280/.340/.370 tweener without a real position and washed out that way I wouldn't have been shocked, and I think that was always what we saw as the realistic downside. It wasn't just surprising that he washed out, it was how.
Anyhow, slight tangent: This is exactly the kind of discussion I was hoping this series would lead to. Thank you for reading and giving your feedback, it's really interesting to go back and revisit these guys after the fact in more detail.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 31, 2020 12:26:16 GMT -5
I seem to distinctly remember him trying to make adjustments to get to more power, and that screwing his swing up generally.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jul 31, 2020 12:46:20 GMT -5
Ranaudo is the guy who fascinates me from that class. Huge body, LSU, one-time great fastball.... and just didn’t pan out. Seemed like besides a loss in velocity, his fastball was straight as could be. He is only 30! In another universe, guy is still one of the Sox top-3 starters.
But it amazing to see the college pitchers who fail but not because of a serious injury. Pitchers may be hard to scout in terms of health and projection, but a 22-year old who already has excellent stuff and doesn’t have a huge injury should be ready to plug right in... but it so often doesn’t work out that way. It is part of the cruel beauty of baseball.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Jul 31, 2020 13:21:31 GMT -5
Not trying to make this about Boras or anything, but it DOES seem to be the big/name guys he represented in drafts who flamed hard doesn't it often times?
Did they have a really decent kid rep'ed/advised by him in the draft in the JH days who worked out?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 31, 2020 13:25:02 GMT -5
Not trying to make this about Boras or anything, but it DOES seem to be the big/name guys he represented in drafts who flamed hard doesn't it often times? Did they have a really decent kid rep'ed/advised by him in the draft in the JH days who worked out? Ellsbury, JBJ (I admittedly haven't confirmed he was their agent at draft time.)
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Jul 31, 2020 13:39:49 GMT -5
Thanks. 2 is good. mention of ranaudo, then thinking of Marrero and couldn't remember a decent guy had me going there and do believe recall JBJ advised by Boras, but not possibly Ells. Think Schilling had some words about the change to the tune of ' selling his soul to the devil " during his rookie year after the switch.
Now that think more about Schill's words, it was along the lines of "he was as pure as snow" before agency switch. It was in The Globe back then.. memory not as good as it once was.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Aug 25, 2020 13:05:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Aug 25, 2020 22:05:30 GMT -5
So we just conveniently forgot to advertise the 2013 write-up, huh? That's the story you're going with, Chris? Personally, I think if there's one thing this site could use, it's some 2013 draft discussion.
|
|
|
Post by sittingstill on Aug 25, 2020 22:35:33 GMT -5
Whatever happened to Cecchini, the kid who raked at A ball, then could do nothing above it? Another guy I was completely wrong about and thought had a very good MLB career ahead of him early on and Sean Coyle.. Remember people here talking about his fiery attitude and comparing him to Pedroia. His profile used to mention that, may still. Sorry to chime in here so late, but Cecchini was on a podcast two years ago that is long but worth the time: kwbradio.libsyn.com/ep-60-garin-cecchiniHe's kind of stunningly candid about what was going on in his head at the end of his Sox career and how he moved on from that. I thought it was a very interesting story of how mental and physical challenges combined can really knock someone off kilter.
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel Fidler on Sept 11, 2020 10:08:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel Fidler on Sept 11, 2020 10:08:16 GMT -5
I was really convinced by Jim's argument that the Sox played it safe in rounds 4-7 even more so than Even DeJong was not a big prospect at the time (I think), but they could have afforded Chance Adams (thank goodness they didn't), Drew Jackson, Willie Calhoun, or Trent Thornton. All of those seem like Red Sox guys.
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel Fidler on Sept 11, 2020 10:08:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel Fidler on Sept 11, 2020 10:09:09 GMT -5
"Wow, there is hardly one still active, let alone in the system" is what came to mind when reading it.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Sept 11, 2020 10:16:37 GMT -5
"Wow, there is hardly one still active, let alone in the system" is what came to mind when reading it. But if Groome makes it as a starter and Dalbec is for real, it is a pretty sweet draft, nonetheless.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 11, 2020 10:18:39 GMT -5
In the edition that comes out today, the summation is basically that the 2016 draft had little depth, but was strong in the first few rounds and led to some pieces moved for key 2018 contributors. That sounds about right.
It's too early to say, but my guess is it'll be either number 1 or 2 on the best Rikard drafts, along with 2018 (gun to my head I'd guess the latter because I love Casas and think Casas/Duran/Ward is more likely to wind up better than Groome/Dalbec, but it could definitely go either way).
When these are done, I'll be interested in seeing people rank these drafts. How do people have them so far?
I'll reveal the list I had once we finish the series.
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel Fidler on Sept 11, 2020 10:20:11 GMT -5
*Spoilers!
But seriously, that has been such a repeating theme for the mid-10s drafts. For all that I (we) love prospects, in many ways it's hard to argue with the results (at a broad level, obviously some of the reliever trades were idiotic).
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Sept 18, 2020 13:43:00 GMT -5
The 2017 draft retrospective coincidentally sandwiched Tanner Houck's debut: The picksRecapAlso, for the sake of easy and lasting access, you can now find these draft retrospective pieces linked to each respective draft under the "Draft History" tab ( 2017 example here)
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 21, 2020 15:56:46 GMT -5
Real life got in the way for a minute, but we are back with 2018. Lot of potential with this class: PicksRecap
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 21, 2020 17:27:44 GMT -5
Brobdingnagian
That's it. That's the post.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 21, 2020 17:30:48 GMT -5
OK, kidding aside, I thought it was a great point James made in the piece today that Decker was 12 entering 2019 and is now 24... but 12 guys have entered the rankings ahead of him through trades and the 2019 and 2020 drafts. That feels about right. I don't think his value has necessarily remained COMPLETELY level (failing to make the Drive last year, while fine and not a terrible thing, wasn't as good as if he'd made it out of camp - although it's better than if he'd made the Drive and been demoted like Brannen), but it hasn't really dropped all that much, and it speaks to the amount of talent that they've infused into the system in the June 2019-August 2020 period (which is when that all happened).
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 21, 2020 18:15:52 GMT -5
Brobdingnagian That's it. That's the post. It's been a Gulliver's Travels sort of year.
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel Fidler on Oct 21, 2020 19:59:21 GMT -5
It certainly has not been a year of Lilliputian proportions.
|
|