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 ematz1423 on Jul 11, 2024 9:28:39 GMT -5
I could semi understand the thought of just drafting the closest to the majors guys you can for the Angels when they had Trout and Ohtani and were trying whatever they could to build around them as quickly as possible to try and keep Ohtani but at this point, it really doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jul 11, 2024 10:25:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Jul 11, 2024 11:09:54 GMT -5
Would love this if it were to happen. Not going to re-post my whole board again for the sake of time, it only a couple changes: 1. Adding Kurtz to the list of fallers I’d dream on. 2. Moving Griffin to the top of my list of high schoolers. I think the toolset is something the system doesn’t have and he represents what I like about Honeycutt just in high school form. With all that said, it feels like it’d be pretty hard to mess this pick up. With the tier of college bats in that range being as wide as it is, I’d be fine with just about anyone, depending on the bonus they get. I still don’t love Seaver King, but even that one wouldn’t be too tough to understand. |
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 11, 2024 11:21:58 GMT -5
The pitchers line is a little confusing because he ranks Brody Brecht higher than Yesavge and #13 overall. |
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 11, 2024 11:22:03 GMT -5
I agree with this 100% but you could also start with a #12 pick and develop him into an ace. Big picture, it's kind of stunning how quickly (<9 months) Boston has become a model of pitching development. |
|
|
|
Post by oldfaithful2019 on Jul 11, 2024 11:39:52 GMT -5
I agree with this 100% but you could also start with a #12 pick and develop him into an ace. Big picture, it's kind of stunning how quickly (<9 months) Boston has become a model of pitching development. Yeah, i get the Jack Leiter affect concern and realize that the Paul Skenes are very rare, but I see no problem with Yesevage, Brecht or even Hagen Smith if he were to drop at # 12. If one of them is the BAP on the Sox board at 12, then lets see if we can develop another Ace !! |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 11, 2024 11:51:02 GMT -5
I agree with this 100% but you could also start with a #12 pick and develop him into an ace. Big picture, it's kind of stunning how quickly (<9 months) Boston has become a model of pitching development.This might be true of their reputation, but development successes with Houck, Crawford, Bello, and Whitlock all came prior to the last 9 months, and the only really notable development jump within the last 9 months that I can see is Perales. |
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Jul 11, 2024 13:18:53 GMT -5
The pitchers line is a little confusing because he ranks Brody Brecht higher than Yesavge and #13 overall. Its also a little weird bc here he says “if you’re good at pitching dev you don’t have to use first round resources on one.” Compare that to the write up for Brecht, mocked to the Os at 22 (as an aside—dear god please don’t let that happen): Here begins the three- or four-team cluster of clubs that are really, really good at developing pitchers. Brecht has monster stuff and a huge frame; he’s basically the pitching version of Caglianone in this class. If any of the Orioles, Braves, Dodgers, or Yankees get their hands on him, they might turn him into a monster. |
|
|
|
Post by oleary25 on Jul 11, 2024 13:20:30 GMT -5
Cade ObberMueller Iowa LHP. He’s a guy who stood out to me. I’m paraphrasing what’s on mlb draft website. He’s ranked 214 on mlb draft players. He has a low 90’s fastball tops out at 96 apparently has a lot of sink and run. His slider sweeps and has a lot of movement Low 80’s. They grade his slider as a 60. Change up low 80’s with sink. Overall he has poor control. Which leads them to believe he be a relief pitcher. Also his height is 5’11 160 lbs which is another reason they are projecting him as a reliever. However if he can put on some size he and can refine his control he maybe a good starter. He could be very effective Walker Janek # 24 prospect in an interview said he was the hardest pitcher he faced all year. His mechanics remind me of a Miniature Rich Hill. Even he is a reliever from what I’ve seen from the side arm action seems effective and hitters will have a hard time making hard contact.
|
|
|
|
Post by bojacksoxfan on Jul 11, 2024 14:23:39 GMT -5
I agree with this 100% but you could also start with a #12 pick and develop him into an ace. Big picture, it's kind of stunning how quickly (<9 months) Boston has become a model of pitching development.This might be true of their reputation, but development successes with Houck, Crawford, Bello, and Whitlock all came prior to the last 9 months, and the only really notable development jump within the last 9 months that I can see is Perales. You may be the only person who doesn't think 2024 All Star Tanner Houck did any development this year. I would bet Tanner Houck thinks he's developed quite a bit in the last 9 months. |
|
|
|
Post by ogshortstufff on Jul 11, 2024 14:31:33 GMT -5
Tibbs is my least favorite of the guys in the cluster where the Sox pick. You can't draft based on need, but the corner outfield profile worries me especially since he doesn't have eye-popping tools. The contact and power are definitely above average, but is that enough to take a LF (or potentially 1B) at 12? |
|
|
|
Post by wanderingdude on Jul 11, 2024 14:31:38 GMT -5
The pitchers line is a little confusing because he ranks Brody Brecht higher than Yesavge and #13 overall. Its also a little weird bc here he says “if you’re good at pitching dev you don’t have to use first round resources on one.” Compare that to the write up for Brecht, mocked to the Os at 22 (as an aside—dear god please don’t let that happen): Here begins the three- or four-team cluster of clubs that are really, really good at developing pitchers. Brecht has monster stuff and a huge frame; he’s basically the pitching version of Caglianone in this class. If any of the Orioles, Braves, Dodgers, or Yankees get their hands on him, they might turn him into a monster. I’ve developed quite an affinity for the new pitching dev staff to get their hands on a guy as talented as Brecht, and seeing him go to the O’s would kill me. I have no idea if he’ll ever hit close to his ceiling, but it would be so fun to watch how we developed him and would be a huge hit for the system if it worked. |
|
|
|
Post by ogshortstufff on Jul 11, 2024 14:35:30 GMT -5
I agree with this 100% but you could also start with a #12 pick and develop him into an ace. Big picture, it's kind of stunning how quickly (<9 months) Boston has become a model of pitching development. Yeah, i get the Jack Leiter affect concern and realize that the Paul Skenes are very rare, but I see no problem with Yesevage, Brecht or even Hagen Smith if he were to drop at # 12. If one of them is the BAP on the Sox board at 12, then lets see if we can develop another Ace !! If Willard, Bailey, and co. believe the pitching apparatus is in better shape than it was last year, then I would definitely be intrigued by someone like Brecht. Keith Law described him as a high schooler in a college pitcher's body on the BA podcast, so if the dev team think they can mold him he certainly has one of the highest upsides in the class. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 11, 2024 14:36:55 GMT -5
This might be true of their reputation, but development successes with Houck, Crawford, Bello, and Whitlock all came prior to the last 9 months, and the only really notable development jump within the last 9 months that I can see is Perales. You may be the only person who doesn't think 2024 All Star Tanner Houck did any development this year. I would bet Tanner Houck thinks he's developed quite a bit in the last 9 months. Nope, ericmvan too! I commented a number of times last season that Houck was *already* an ace in innings 1-4; the issue, as eric has shown, had been stamina. He had trouble with that, I imagine, in part due to his injury last year, but he worked hard on it over the offseason by all accounts; and this season he's the same pitcher he was last year in innings 1-4 but able to go 7, 8, or 9 innings.
You can even go back to 2021 to see that the potential was already there: as a starter he had a 2.64 FIP and 3.08 xFIP.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,778 
|
Post by cdj on Jul 11, 2024 14:39:23 GMT -5
I think Houck’s biggest issue before this year was the inconsistency with his splitter, this year he’s very confident with it
Anyway I would absolutely have zero issue with a pitcher at 12
|
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jul 11, 2024 14:43:03 GMT -5
You may be the only person who doesn't think 2024 All Star Tanner Houck did any development this year. I would bet Tanner Houck thinks he's developed quite a bit in the last 9 months. Nope, ericmvan too! I commented a number of times last season that Houck was *already* an ace in innings 1-4; the issue, as eric has shown, had been stamina. He had trouble with that, I imagine, in part due to his injury last year, but he worked hard on it over the offseason by all accounts; and this season he's the same pitcher he was last year in innings 1-4 but able to go 7, 8, or 9 innings.
You can even go back to 2021 to see that the potential was already there: as a starter he had a 2.64 FIP and 3.08 xFIP.
When they actually let him start he generally did well, as you point out he'd run into issues the 3rd time through the order in the 4th-5th-6th innings sometimes but his ERA and all the other stuff was still always under 4 as a starter. I've long been on the let Houck start bandwagon. Go figure now that he's a full time SP the results are excellent, I'm not going to claim I thought he'd be an all star but I did always see him as a solid 3/4 SP. It has been frustrating watching them jerk him back and forth from the rotation to the pen the last few years. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 11, 2024 14:47:04 GMT -5
Nope, ericmvan too! I commented a number of times last season that Houck was *already* an ace in innings 1-4; the issue, as eric has shown, had been stamina. He had trouble with that, I imagine, in part due to his injury last year, but he worked hard on it over the offseason by all accounts; and this season he's the same pitcher he was last year in innings 1-4 but able to go 7, 8, or 9 innings.
You can even go back to 2021 to see that the potential was already there: as a starter he had a 2.64 FIP and 3.08 xFIP.
When they actually let him start he generally did well, as you point out he'd run into issues the 3rd time through the order in the 4th-5th-6th innings sometimes but his ERA and all the other stuff was still always under 4 as a starter. I've long been on the let Houck start bandwagon. Go figure now that he's a full time SP the results are excellent, I'm not going to claim I thought he'd be an all star but I did always see him as a solid 3/4 SP. It has been frustrating watching them jerk him back and forth from the rotation to the pen the last few years. But he really did struggle going deep into games as a starter last season, despite their commitment to him in that role.
(Also to clarify: I'll grant that he's taken a step forward this season. My point was just that Houck was a development success story prior to this season, and not an indication of the success of some new development approach or what have you.)
|
|
|
|
Post by bojacksoxfan on Jul 11, 2024 15:04:25 GMT -5
You may be the only person who doesn't think 2024 All Star Tanner Houck did any development this year. I would bet Tanner Houck thinks he's developed quite a bit in the last 9 months. Nope, ericmvan too! I commented a number of times last season that Houck was *already* an ace in innings 1-4; the issue, as eric has shown, had been stamina. He had trouble with that, I imagine, in part due to his injury last year, but he worked hard on it over the offseason by all accounts; and this season he's the same pitcher he was last year in innings 1-4 but able to go 7, 8, or 9 innings.
You can even go back to 2021 to see that the potential was already there: as a starter he had a 2.64 FIP and 3.08 xFIP.
Ah yes, you and EV are the two people who believe rate stats and/or cherry picked endpoints matter more that durability and availability. This is also true of Crawford as well. You have noticed that the Sox this year are receiving a lot fewer horrible innings than in previous. What would it take to get you to realize that fringy starters going 3-4 IP/start developing into starters that can go 6-7 IP/start might actually be contributing to there being fewer horrible pitchers throwing horrible innings? Feels like that's an important missing link to your recent observations about the state of the Sox pitching staff. Getting back to Houck your theory - no development - and EV's theory - just stamina improvement, don't say much of anything about his massive platoon split improvement. This year: vR - 628 OPS vL - 513 OPS 2023: vR - 622 vL - 858 2022: vR - 496 vL - 776 Houck is basically the same guy as always vR and massively better vL. Is one sided platoon improvement more likely to have come from improving his stamina or developing his split finger so that it's a weapon vLHH? Throughout his entire professional life Houck has not been able to consistently get LHH out. This lead to expectations he'd end up a reliever and an inability to go deep into starts. This year he's developed a way to get LHH out and now he's an actual starting pitcher. Whatever "development" he did to become a 3/4 IP starter with ~1 WAR seasons pales in comparison to his more recent development into a starter capable of pitching real starter innings have producing a ~3 WAR half season. |
|
|
|
Post by oleary25 on Jul 11, 2024 15:14:01 GMT -5
I was watching Janek interview. He said he didn’t call his own pitches. Is it a common thing for coaches to call the game for them?
|
|
|
|
Post by oleary25 on Jul 11, 2024 15:25:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 11, 2024 15:26:57 GMT -5
Nope, ericmvan too! I commented a number of times last season that Houck was *already* an ace in innings 1-4; the issue, as eric has shown, had been stamina. He had trouble with that, I imagine, in part due to his injury last year, but he worked hard on it over the offseason by all accounts; and this season he's the same pitcher he was last year in innings 1-4 but able to go 7, 8, or 9 innings.
You can even go back to 2021 to see that the potential was already there: as a starter he had a 2.64 FIP and 3.08 xFIP.
Ah yes, you and EV are the two people who believe rate stats and/or cherry picked endpoints matter more that durability and availability. This is also true of Crawford as well. You have noticed that the Sox this year are receiving a lot fewer horrible innings than in previous. What would it take to get you to realize that fringy starters going 3-4 IP/start developing into starters that can go 6-7 IP/start might actually be contributing to there being fewer horrible pitchers throwing horrible innings? Feels like that's an important missing link to your recent observations about the state of the Sox pitching staff. Getting back to Houck your theory - no development - and EV's theory - just stamina improvement, don't say much of anything about his massive platoon split improvement. This year: vR - 628 OPS vL - 513 OPS 2023: vR - 622 vL - 858 2022: vR - 496 vL - 776 Houck is basically the same guy as always vR and massively better vL. Is one sided platoon improvement more likely to have come from improving his stamina or developing his split finger so that it's a weapon vLHH? Throughout his entire professional life Houck has not been able to consistently get LHH out. This lead to expectations he'd end up a reliever and an inability to go deep into starts. This year he's developed a way to get LHH out and now he's an actual starting pitcher. Whatever "development" he did to become a 3/4 IP starter with ~1 WAR seasons pales in comparison to his more recent development into a starter capable of pitching real starter innings have producing a ~3 WAR half season. His trajectory has been:
2020-21 very good starter (2.7 WAR in 86 IP); 2022 solid MIRP 2023 okay starter (1.2 WAR in 106 IP in a season disrupted by injury) 2024 ace
A "starter with 1 WAR seasons" doesn't really describe what he was at any point. And I go back to the big picture point which I stated above: yes, he's taken a step forward this season but he was already a development success prior to this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jul 11, 2024 15:41:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jul 11, 2024 15:46:20 GMT -5
Just a few short days away from the draft now, as interesting as I find reading about potential draftees who quite frankly I couldn't pick out of a lineup if you gave me infinite clues but it's always great on draft day when that first pick comes in and can do some deep diving on the selection. Won't even fathom a guess as to who they will pick since I know squat about these guys but hopefully it's a good one!
|
|
|
|
Post by wanderingdude on Jul 11, 2024 15:46:57 GMT -5
Ah yes, you and EV are the two people who believe rate stats and/or cherry picked endpoints matter more that durability and availability. This is also true of Crawford as well. You have noticed that the Sox this year are receiving a lot fewer horrible innings than in previous. What would it take to get you to realize that fringy starters going 3-4 IP/start developing into starters that can go 6-7 IP/start might actually be contributing to there being fewer horrible pitchers throwing horrible innings? Feels like that's an important missing link to your recent observations about the state of the Sox pitching staff. Getting back to Houck your theory - no development - and EV's theory - just stamina improvement, don't say much of anything about his massive platoon split improvement. This year: vR - 628 OPS vL - 513 OPS 2023: vR - 622 vL - 858 2022: vR - 496 vL - 776 Houck is basically the same guy as always vR and massively better vL. Is one sided platoon improvement more likely to have come from improving his stamina or developing his split finger so that it's a weapon vLHH? Throughout his entire professional life Houck has not been able to consistently get LHH out. This lead to expectations he'd end up a reliever and an inability to go deep into starts. This year he's developed a way to get LHH out and now he's an actual starting pitcher. Whatever "development" he did to become a 3/4 IP starter with ~1 WAR seasons pales in comparison to his more recent development into a starter capable of pitching real starter innings have producing a ~3 WAR half season. His trajectory has been:
2020-21 very good starter (2.7 WAR in 86 IP); 2022 solid MIRP 2023 okay starter (1.2 WAR in 106 IP in a season disrupted by injury) 2024 ace
A "starter with 1 WAR seasons" doesn't really describe what he was at any point. And I go back to the big picture point which I stated above: yes, he's taken a step forward this season but he was already a development success prior to this year.
It’s hard to quantify how much credit should be given to a player who may have worked on his own or the pitching coach, but at least early in the season he was throwing different variations of both his splitter and slider. Here’s a pretty neat breakdown on how his splitter and slider have changed since last year with some pretty heavy usage + arsenal changes. |
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Jul 11, 2024 15:49:12 GMT -5
Ah yes, you and EV are the two people who believe rate stats and/or cherry picked endpoints matter more that durability and availability. This is also true of Crawford as well. You have noticed that the Sox this year are receiving a lot fewer horrible innings than in previous. What would it take to get you to realize that fringy starters going 3-4 IP/start developing into starters that can go 6-7 IP/start might actually be contributing to there being fewer horrible pitchers throwing horrible innings? Feels like that's an important missing link to your recent observations about the state of the Sox pitching staff. Getting back to Houck your theory - no development - and EV's theory - just stamina improvement, don't say much of anything about his massive platoon split improvement. This year: vR - 628 OPS vL - 513 OPS 2023: vR - 622 vL - 858 2022: vR - 496 vL - 776 Houck is basically the same guy as always vR and massively better vL. Is one sided platoon improvement more likely to have come from improving his stamina or developing his split finger so that it's a weapon vLHH? Throughout his entire professional life Houck has not been able to consistently get LHH out. This lead to expectations he'd end up a reliever and an inability to go deep into starts. This year he's developed a way to get LHH out and now he's an actual starting pitcher. Whatever "development" he did to become a 3/4 IP starter with ~1 WAR seasons pales in comparison to his more recent development into a starter capable of pitching real starter innings have producing a ~3 WAR half season. His trajectory has been:
2020-21 very good starter (2.7 WAR in 86 IP); 2022 solid MIRP 2023 okay starter (1.2 WAR in 106 IP in a season disrupted by injury) 2024 ace
A "starter with 1 WAR seasons" doesn't really describe what he was at any point. And I go back to the big picture point which I stated above: yes, he's taken a step forward this season but he was already a development success prior to this year.
It's hard to take you seriously calling him becoming an ace this season from last as 'a step forward'. Didn't you say that it would be no issue if he started the season in the bullpen, not 4 months ago? That seems like the kind of step forward a giant would take. Even if you assume he would have developed his splitter without any input from the new pitching regime - the reduction in his walk rate by nearly 4% is even harder to assume. I'd much sooner assume the 'development' that he achieved from 2017-2023 regardless of pitching infrastructure just based on his talent alone. EDIT: To make this somewhat draft related - if first round draft choices can't be expected to become bonified MLB players - and I think most agree that's true - at the very least, when they do become bonified MLB players - we should start first with their talent/ability before jumping to development. If a guy picked in the first round requires the exact same amount of development as a guy taken in the 10th round (lightning in a bottle players excepted) then why would teams ever draft pitching at all? I won't disparage who anyone has done working with Tanner since he was drafted. But I'm also not giving them commendations either. I think that's why I'd rather them take a pitcher in the first round this year because I like what the new regime can do with a talented guy like Tanner. |
|
|
