Be nice.Originally Posted by Tom Servo
Be nice.
It's really not crap.
School's out. What did you expect?
Mods having problems today.
Mocking a poster for Cy Young comment and insulting a player with the nick name "thumbs".
After all the gnashing of teeth last year over this trade, once again the internet warriors who complained about it get proven dead wrong. I don't care what he does in the future, we got a big time boost from Rolen that has put us into contention TODAY - not hoping to get an average starter 2 years down the line, if that. Of course I've already ready "oh it doesn't matter, he was still undervalued at the time."
Weird that its basically only fans of teams that think they have the next big thing in the works on these deals, while the rest of the baseball world gives a collective 'meh' to the deal. We won out on this, period, and all the haters were wrong. Enjoy your crow.
Except guys like JJ Cooper at Baseball America or John Sickels, who both openly questioned what the heck the Reds were thinking with the move. Not so much to acquire Rolen, which everyone was on board with, but giving up what they gave up to acquire him.
Those guys make a living off touting prospects. Doesn't mean they're right.Except guys like JJ Cooper at Baseball America or John Sickels, who both openly questioned what the heck the Reds were thinking with the move. Not so much to acquire Rolen, which everyone was on board with, but giving up what they gave up to acquire him.
But probably does mean they know the value of them doesn't it?
No, I don't think so. What they write creates the illusion that they know the value, but what truly establishes the value of the prospect is one of two Ts -- time, which will reveal how good a player the prospect is, or a trade, which shows what kind of talent the prospect can be exchanged for.But probably does mean they know the value of them doesn't it?
I disagree. Trades don't always show the kind of talent the prospects can be exchanged for, only what they were exchanged for in that situation. Surely you don't believe that someone has never been fleeced in a deal before, because according to what you just said, that is the value of the guy at the time, what he was traded for.
It really is. It over simplifies the adage that a pitching prospect is one pitch away from ending his career. Which btw is true for EVERY pitcher. But there isn't one person following baseball that can honestly say Strasburg or Chapman aren't prospects. The biggest difference between the two in terms of value is, and I might be wrong, But I believe the Reds could trade Chapman tomorrow.
And they could get a ransom for him too. And once Strasburg sets foot on a MLB mound next month, the Nats could do the same.
They are prospects. is it a volatile position? sure. Does past success translate? sure and no. But that holds true for all minor leaguers regardless of position.
Now if there were a clever acronym for amateur players regarding sure things, I'd be all over that.
Dubito Ergo Cogito Ergo Sum.
Didn't the Mets trade Kazmir to the Rays for essentially nothing? I'm with doug on this.
Dubito Ergo Cogito Ergo Sum.
Traded for Victor Zambrano.
Sure, there are some prospects who maintain their status all the way through the process of becoming big leaguers to the point they have a lot of success. But the adage does reflect an important reality -- pitching prospects fail/disappoint at a high rate, sometimes precipitously, and it is not as true of position prospects.It really is. It over simplifies the adage that a pitching prospect is one pitch away from ending his career. Which btw is true for EVERY pitcher. But there isn't one person following baseball that can honestly say Strasburg or Chapman aren't prospects. The biggest difference between the two in terms of value is, and I might be wrong, But I believe the Reds could trade Chapman tomorrow.
And they could get a ransom for him too. And once Strasburg sets foot on a MLB mound next month, the Nats could do the same.
They are prospects. is it a volatile position? sure. Does past success translate? sure and no. But that holds true for all minor leaguers regardless of position.
Now if there were a clever acronym for amateur players regarding sure things, I'd be all over that.
Put it this way -- the trade gives you an early-look market value, perhaps in more general terms than the particulars of the trade itself (in other words, Kazmir was worth a seemingly durable, established major league starter). Was it a gross underestimation of Kazmir's worth to want that for him? No. The Mets just did a poor job of selecting the starter they'd get in return.I disagree. Trades don't always show the kind of talent the prospects can be exchanged for, only what they were exchanged for in that situation. Surely you don't believe that someone has never been fleeced in a deal before, because according to what you just said, that is the value of the guy at the time, what he was traded for.
Ultimately, only time will reveal the prospect's true value.
No doubt. Guys like Stewart are the reason TINSTAAPP was created. The Chapmans and Strauburgs may become aces, but those that come out of nowhere generally return shortly thereafter.
Stewart's success last season screamed to be taken with a dose of salt. He'd never pitched with those numbers before-- not in college nor in the minor leagues. Now, he's struggling to find his game again.
Doesn't mean he won't be good. It means he wasn't quite as good-- and certainly not as finished-- as those prospect mavens thought he was.
And that's okay, too. I can remember a couple of them insisted the A's got a steal of a deal when they dealt McGuire to St. Louis. It's the nature of the beast, to look at the next great thing rather than appreciate those that have proven in the past what they can do.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote