PDA

View Full Version : Buster Olney's comments on 1530 ESPN



Vottomatic
12-12-2012, 11:59 PM
Olney was on Mo's show this afternoon. Here are some of his comments. Keep in mind, this is from memory, so they won't be exact quotes.

In regard to Choo playing CF:
Olney said nearly all the experts he spoke with don't see Choo being able to play CF and fully expect the Reds to make a change during Spring Training and move Bruce to CF.

In regard to acquiring Choo to bat leadoff:
Olney thought it was a great move offensively. Thinks Choo is perfect for many reasons - good OBP, lefty that balances out the lineup, has some pop and base stealing ability, has hit well in GABP for his career.

In regard to Gregorius and what the experts think:
Olney said the majority of experts see Gregorius as a good glove, no-hit major league shortstop that most likely ends up a utility guy. He also added that most GM's and experts are shaking their heads at the D-Backs acquiring Gregorius.

In regard to Stubbs:
Olney said the Indians are excited about Stubbs and think he will improve offensively. To which Olney said the rest of the league's GM's and experts are shaking their heads wondering what the Indians are thinking???

WVRedsFan
12-13-2012, 01:14 AM
Olney was on Mo's show this afternoon. Here are some of his comments. Keep in mind, this is from memory, so they won't be exact quotes.

In regard to Choo playing CF:
Olney said nearly all the experts he spoke with don't see Choo being able to play CF and fully expect the Reds to make a change during Spring Training and move Bruce to CF.

In regard to acquiring Choo to bat leadoff:
Olney thought it was a great move offensively. Thinks Choo is perfect for many reasons - good OBP, lefty that balances out the lineup, has some pop and base stealing ability, has hit well in GABP for his career.

In regard to Gregorius and what the experts think:
Olney said the majority of experts see Gregorius as a good glove, no-hit major league shortstop that most likely ends up a utility guy. He also added that most GM's and experts are shaking their heads at the D-Backs acquiring Gregorius.

In regard to Stubbs:
Olney said the Indians are excited about Stubbs and think he will improve offensively. To which Olney said the rest of the league's GM's and experts are shaking their heads wondering what the Indians are thinking???I'm certainly no expert, and don't pretend to be, but Buster and I agree. DiDi is going to be a no hit, great glove shortstop. Drew is going to be a +/- .240 player with speed and little OBP, and Choo is a real MLB player. If its only for one year, so be it. Next year should be a blast. I've learned after 50 years of fandom that there is only this year because next year may never come. We gave up potential for performance. I like that.

icehole3
12-13-2012, 04:08 AM
I'll give DiDi a chance before just saying he's a no hit SS, Stubbs I am one of his biggest supporters on this board. My take is his problems are all mental and if the Indians can get through that hard head of his and get him to attempt 20-30 bunts next season he can show enough progress next year to begin to turn his career around, the kid needs to try to bunt at least once or twice a week, thats it. Can the Indians fine him for not attempting to bunt the ball? :)

Wonderful Monds
12-13-2012, 04:46 AM
I'll give DiDi a chance before just saying he's a no hit SS, Stubbs I am one of his biggest supporters on this board. My take is his problems are all mental and if the Indians can get through that hard head of his and get him to attempt 20-30 bunts next season he can show enough progress next year to begin to turn his career around, the kid needs to try to bunt at least once or twice a week, thats it. Can the Indians fine him for not attempting to bunt the ball? :)

Bunts never were and never will be even remotely close to what Drew Stubbs' problem is.

DGullett35
12-13-2012, 06:36 AM
Francona may get Stubbs on track who knows but they've went through at least 3 hitting coaches in the past 2 years so maybe this wont be the right place for him either. I wish him the best. hes probably going to like playing in Cleveland though. They only get like 10K fans in the stadium so the boos shouldnt be as loud as in Cincy.

lollipopcurve
12-13-2012, 07:06 AM
if the Indians can get through that hard head of his and get him to attempt 20-30 bunts next season he can show enough progress next year to begin to turn his career around, the kid needs to try to bunt at least once or twice a week, thats it.

He's a poor bunter -- always has been, and likely always will be.

icehole3
12-13-2012, 07:09 AM
Bunts never were and never will be even remotely close to what Drew Stubbs' problem is.

thats my opinion and it cant be changed, you're right and I'm wrong :)

Strikes Out Looking
12-13-2012, 08:01 AM
How in the world did someone get Buster Olney to talk about something besides the Yankees?

MikeS21
12-13-2012, 08:25 AM
Does anyone know if the Indians are still following this model:

http://www.cleveland.com/gameplan/

This article first appeared in 2003. My first thought hearing about this trade is how Drew Stubbs fits into this model. But I'm not sure if they still follow this or not.

chicoruiz
12-13-2012, 09:16 AM
Olney said nearly all the experts he spoke with don't see Choo being able to play CF and fully expect the Reds to make a change during Spring Training and move Bruce to CF.

I keep reading this from various sources and posters, and it makes me feel stupid. If Choo has enough speed to to steal 20+ bases and enough arm to play RF, what is it that would keep him from developing into an adequate CF? I've always heard that it's actually easier in the sense that balls don't slice and hook away from you as much as they do in the corners.

MikeS21
12-13-2012, 09:41 AM
I keep reading this from various sources and posters, and it makes me feel stupid. If Choo has enough speed to to steal 20+ bases and enough arm to play RF, what is it that would keep him from developing into an adequate CF? I've always heard that it's actually easier in the sense that balls don't slice and hook away from you as much as they do in the corners.
Hey, they kept running Deon Sanders out to CF and called him adequate, and he didn't have that great of an arm.

Sea Ray
12-13-2012, 09:50 AM
With all this talk since Choo was acquired, I still haven't heard any comments from him or his agent about his feelings towards CF. Does he think he can do it? Is he on board with it? Did the Reds even ask him? I think silence here is not good from the Reds perspective. Why would they make this trade without consulting the player?

If he can't play CF, then is this still a worthy trade? You can make the case that the answer is no; that he and Ludwick were both acquired to play the same position.

CySeymour
12-13-2012, 09:51 AM
I keep reading this from various sources and posters, and it makes me feel stupid. If Choo has enough speed to to steal 20+ bases and enough arm to play RF, what is it that would keep him from developing into an adequate CF? I've always heard that it's actually easier in the sense that balls don't slice and hook away from you as much as they do in the corners.

Ryan Freel was a good example of why you need more then just good speed to play CF. Choo is not known to take good routes to the ball, same as Freel. Since CF has more ground to cover then the corners, bad routes are a death sentence to a CF defensively. On the flip side, remember Eddie Milner? He didn't have a strong arm, but he was an expert on how to track balls and how to take proper routes.

REDREAD
12-13-2012, 09:52 AM
Stubbs will probably never be a star player, but he's ok as a complimentary player, especially for a team like the Indians who are rebuilding. I can see why they are happy to have him. Nice defensive CF who will give their developing SP a little more margin for error. Stubbs has had flashes of greatness.. there's always the hope that maybe he'll tap into it, and the Indians have time to wait for that. Heck, Stubbs might end up having a better career than Didi, and I like Didi.

top6
12-13-2012, 12:06 PM
I think this was a pretty good trade, but people seem to be hand waiving away the concern about the lack of a true CF in the starting lineup. This could be a huge problem--but I am happy we have Heisey so if things spiral too much out of control he can just start in CF and we can figure out what to do with Ludwick/Choo.

I hope the Reds are also looking for a weak bat/good defense/AAAA-type CF to sign to a minor league deal--if such a player exists.

BCubb2003
12-13-2012, 12:37 PM
It would have been interesting to see Gregorius, Phillips and Stubbs up the middle.

I think Gregoriois might have Phillips-level defense, but we've seen that the lineup needs offense.

_Sir_Charles_
12-13-2012, 12:48 PM
I think this was a pretty good trade, but people seem to be hand waiving away the concern about the lack of a true CF in the starting lineup. This could be a huge problem--but I am happy we have Heisey so if things spiral too much out of control he can just start in CF and we can figure out what to do with Ludwick/Choo.

I hope the Reds are also looking for a weak bat/good defense/AAAA-type CF to sign to a minor league deal--if such a player exists.

Don't we already have that in Ryan LaMarre?

vaticanplum
12-13-2012, 01:34 PM
Can a baseball coach-y type person tell me why "taking bad routes to the ball" is something that can't be corrected and almost eliminated with training? I've never understood this. Always seemed like something that could be fixed with a ton of practice and good coaching. Freel I get, due to his being a (lovable) impetuous jittery blockhead, but that can't be true for everybody. Certainly doesn't strike me as true of Choo (heh).

RedsManRick
12-13-2012, 01:37 PM
Can a baseball coach-y type person tell me why "taking bad routes to the ball" is something that can't be corrected and almost eliminated with training? I've never understood this. Always seemed like something that could be fixed with a ton of practice and good coaching. Freel I get, due to his being a (lovable) impetuous jittery blockhead, but that can't be true for everybody. Certainly doesn't strike me as true of Choo (heh).

I'm no coach, but for me personally, it simply came down to lacking the ability to accurately judge where the ball was going. The bad route was the result of a constant reassessment of the ball's trajectory. Like plate discipline or any other primarily cognitive task, I'm sure it's something that can be improved with coaching and practice, but only to a point.

top6
12-13-2012, 02:00 PM
Don't we already have that in Ryan LaMarre?

Very possible (I really don't know much about the non-top prospects in the minors). I should have said "are looking for or already have." Point being that I want a second option other than Heisey if it becomes obvious that poor outfield defense is killing the team at some point.

NJReds
12-13-2012, 02:10 PM
Very possible (I really don't know much about the non-top prospects in the minors). I should have said "are looking for or already have." Point being that I want a second option other than Heisey if it becomes obvious that poor outfield defense is killing the team at some point.

If the Angels sign Josh Hamilton, I wonder what it would take to get Peter Bourjos? He'd offer speed and defense off the bench. He hit in the minors, but seemed to regress in the majors last year.

The Voice of IH
12-13-2012, 02:34 PM
How in the world did someone get Buster Olney to talk about something besides the Yankees?

I think this is a pretty silly comment. Olney may follow company policy and talk about big markets, but on his blog he is one of the best daily baseball source there is. It's great.

bucksfan2
12-13-2012, 02:36 PM
Can a baseball coach-y type person tell me why "taking bad routes to the ball" is something that can't be corrected and almost eliminated with training? I've never understood this. Always seemed like something that could be fixed with a ton of practice and good coaching. Freel I get, due to his being a (lovable) impetuous jittery blockhead, but that can't be true for everybody. Certainly doesn't strike me as true of Choo (heh).

A lot of its natural. Seeing the ball off the bat and being able to break automatically. Some people have to hesitate for a split second in order to pick up the flight of the ball. Others can pick it up that split second sooner and get a better jump. When chasing a ball in the gap our cutting a ball off before it gets past you, that extra step or half step can make a world of difference.

I remember when Andruw Jones was in his prime. He was able to get such a great jump that he played a very shallow CF. He could go back on a ball and get it but it also enabled him to get to many sinking line drives that normally would end up as hits.

vaticanplum
12-13-2012, 02:38 PM
A lot of its natural. Seeing the ball off the bat and being able to break automatically. Some people have to hesitate for a split second in order to pick up the flight of the ball. Others can pick it up that split second sooner and get a better jump. When chasing a ball in the gap our cutting a ball off before it gets past you, that extra step or half step can make a world of difference.

I remember when Andruw Jones was in his prime. He was able to get such a great jump that he played a very shallow CF. He could go back on a ball and get it but it also enabled him to get to many sinking line drives that normally would end up as hits.

Interesting stuff, thanks (RMR too).

dougdirt
12-13-2012, 02:54 PM
It would have been interesting to see Gregorius, Phillips and Stubbs up the middle.

I think Gregoriois might have Phillips-level defense, but we've seen that the lineup needs offense.

Gregorius is a better defender than Phillips is. Phillips is an outstanding second baseman. Gregorius is an outstanding shortstop. Big difference.

RANDY IN INDY
12-13-2012, 03:52 PM
Is Gregorius a better 2b than Phillips?

dougdirt
12-13-2012, 03:59 PM
Is Gregorius a better 2b than Phillips?

Probably. Better range, more athletic and a stronger arm. Hands may not be quite as sure, but they are pretty darn good. Offensively though.... that is a different story and not one that is even up for debate.

RANDY IN INDY
12-13-2012, 04:08 PM
I would have a hard time agreeing with your notion that Gregorious is a better defender at 2b than Phillips right now.

dougdirt
12-13-2012, 04:11 PM
I would have a hard time agreeing with your notion that Gregorious is a better defender at 2b than Phillips right now.

Based upon what? The scouting reports suggest he probably is. I don't think a scout around would tell you that Phillips has better range or arm than Gregorius does. Does Phillips have better hands? Yeah, he does, but it isn't by a whole lot. Gregorius has a clear advantage in two of the three aspects of defense and only a slight disadvantage in the third.

Sea Ray
12-13-2012, 04:25 PM
Based upon what? The scouting reports suggest he probably is. I don't think a scout around would tell you that Phillips has better range or arm than Gregorius does. Does Phillips have better hands? Yeah, he does, but it isn't by a whole lot. Gregorius has a clear advantage in two of the three aspects of defense and only a slight disadvantage in the third.

How 'bout experience? Who has more experience at 2B? That's gotta be worth something

dougdirt
12-13-2012, 04:29 PM
How 'bout experience? Who has more experience at 2B? That's gotta be worth something

Phillips has more experience, but for just about every shortstop ever, the move to second base was one without issue. At both spots you range to the left and to the right. The throw is shorter.

RANDY IN INDY
12-13-2012, 04:45 PM
Phillips has more experience, but for just about every shortstop ever, the move to second base was one without issue. At both spots you range to the left and to the right. The throw is shorter.

He'd have to show it on the field on a consistent basis for me to make such an extraordinary statement. Tools and potential is one thing. Consistently performing on the field when it counts is a totally different equation. I've seen plenty of "five o'clock" performers over the years.

dougdirt
12-13-2012, 04:49 PM
He'd have to show it on the field on a consistent basis for me to make such an extraordinary statement. Tools and potential is one thing. Consistently performing on the field when it counts is a totally different equation. I've seen plenty of "five o'clock" performers over the years.

.965 fielding percentage on minor league fields with minor league first basemen this past season. At shortstop. That isn't a five o'clock performer.

RANDY IN INDY
12-13-2012, 04:58 PM
And Brandon Phillips consistently does it at the major league level. Gregorius needs to prove it for a while.

Scrap Irony
12-13-2012, 05:03 PM
.965 fielding percentage on minor league fields with minor league first basemen this past season. At shortstop. That isn't a five o'clock performer.

Paul Janish had a lifetime minor league fielding percentage of .971.

Zack Cozart's fielding percentage (minor league only) is .970.

IMO, you're overestimating both the impact of Gregorius' defense and his ability. Is he above average? Okay, sure. Is he a game-changer? I don't know anyone-- aside from you, doug (and, of course, the DBack GM)-- who says so.

Most experts and scouts see his likely major league spot as a poor starter or a decent backup middle infielder. Considering the current Red SS graded out as above average overall his rookie season, I just don't get the hand-wringing over losing the guy.

Is he a good prospect? Okay, sure. Maybe. He has a couple good things going for him-- youth and defense.

But he has some massive holes as well. More holes than Cozart, IMO, who only struggles with obp.

Vottomatic
12-13-2012, 06:15 PM
All I want to know is......is Gregorius a future Cy Young winner? :D ;) :p

Laugh. It's a joke.

dougdirt
12-13-2012, 07:24 PM
IMO, you're overestimating both the impact of Gregorius' defense and his ability. Is he above average? Okay, sure. Is he a game-changer? I don't know anyone-- aside from you, doug (and, of course, the DBack GM)-- who says so.
He is a plus defender. I don't recall a scouting report saying otherwise. If you have seen them, please share.



Most experts and scouts see his likely major league spot as a poor starter or a decent backup middle infielder. Considering the current Red SS graded out as above average overall his rookie season, I just don't get the hand-wringing over losing the guy.
Plenty of guys, since this trade, have said his upside is a "second division starter". Well, that means somewhere in the 7-12 range of all Major League shortstops. I don't have some grand illusions of Gregorius becoming some superstar. I just believe he can be a .700-.740 OPS hitter with gold-glove caliber defense. In todays game, that is really, really valuable. One of my favorite things to talk to scouts about is their terminology. Often times it isn't based in reality. It is based upon what teams want, not what is actually available. They will tell you that so and so is a #2 or #3 pitcher. But by their definitions, that means that only about 15 teams even have the capability of having a #1, #2 and #3 starter (Re: there are maybe a total of 45 guys in all of baseball who are a #1, #2 and #3 combined), where every other pitcher in baseball has #4 and #5s or worse filling out their rotation. It may be what they believe a pitcher should profile as, but it doesn't jive with the reality that is the current talent distribution. It hasn't for a long time. It is like scouting terms have remained the same for player talent as they used to be when there were 16 teams in the entire league.

At the end of the day, it isn't handwringing over losing this guy. Just like it wouldn't have been if they had traded Cozart instead. It is that there is literally no one within 4 years behind whoever they kept who can even play a defensive first shortstop. Jason Donald, Emmanual Burris.... those guys aren't shortstops anymore than Chris Valaika was a shortstop.



Is he a good prospect? Okay, sure. Maybe.
Well, he is good enough that Baseball America was going to rank him higher than both Nick Travieso and Jesse Winker. While I don't entirely agree with that assessment, JJ Cooper didn't come up with that idea out of thin air. Those two guys are first rounders from last year and Jesse Winker went to the Pioneer League and absolutely raked. Apparently plenty enough people convinced Cooper and Baseball America that Gregorius has more value than that.

Wonderful Monds
12-13-2012, 07:37 PM
All I want to know is......is Gregorius a future Cy Young winner? :D ;) :p

Laugh. It's a joke.

No. He is future Derek Jeter.

dougdirt
12-13-2012, 07:50 PM
No. He is future Derek Jeter.

That is pretty much unpossible. Jeter never was any good at playing shortstop.

Scrap Irony
12-13-2012, 08:19 PM
Second division starter means the second half of the league-- 16-30. From Wiki:


First division is a term that has had various meanings, at various times, in the sport of baseball, but originally referred to the rankings within a league. Teams which ranked in the top 50% of a league were said to have finished in the "first division", while the rest were said to be in the "second division".

In other words, many think he's a below average starter-- at his ceiling.

dougdirt
12-13-2012, 08:22 PM
Second division starter means the second half of the league-- 16-30. From Wiki:



In other words, many think he's a below average starter-- at his ceiling.

I am not going to argue with you (or wikipedia) about this. Scout talk generally isn't based in the reality of talent distribution.

I don't know how many scouts you have talked to, but I doubt it is anywhere near "most". Some out there do think he is a future utility player. Some also think he is the guy I suggest he could become. Just like some used to say Johnny Cueto was a reliever, while others said he was a #2 starter. There is an incredible amount of variance on just about every prospect. I feel just fine thinking that Gregorius has the potential to be a .740 OPS bat in the Majors. You (and others) can disagree with that. I am done talking about it.

Scrap Irony
12-13-2012, 08:27 PM
I am not going to argue with you (or wikipedia) about this. Scout talk generally isn't based in the reality of talent distribution.

Wow.

This now reminds me a bit of the Billy Hamilton isn't really an athlete thread.

Sigh.

dougdirt
12-13-2012, 08:35 PM
Wow.

This now reminds me a bit of the Billy Hamilton isn't really an athlete thread.

Sigh.

Which you still don't seem to grasp. I never said he wasn't an athlete. in fact, on multiple occasions I have said he is the best athlete we have in the Reds system. What I said, is that he isn't what I would consider a "super athlete" because he lacks any kind of physical strength. Josh Hamilton. Mike Trout. Ken Griffey Jr. Guys like that are super athletes to me. Guys who can hit the ball a mile. Run past you. Run over you. Throw it by you. Those guys are super athletes. Billy Hamilton isn't in that group. Billy Hamilton is a fine athlete. He just isn't in that class.

camisadelgolf
12-14-2012, 04:23 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics