Stubbs isn't a prospect. And he was debated plenty with stats. And projection. And a nice mixture of both.Originally Posted by membengal
Stubbs isn't a prospect. And he was debated plenty with stats. And projection. And a nice mixture of both.
"Scouts" is a nebulous word. Most of them don't watch specific prospects every few days or even months. Neither do the so-called experts, such as Cooper, Law, Sickels, et al.
They simply recycle the same tired lines or scouting reports from early career/ draft analysis, then change as it becomes obvious they need to change. (And then only when it's patently obvious.)
A quick example from three years ago involves Billy Hamilton and his supposedly weak arm. About half the scouts in baseball, according to various experts, thought his best position was 2B because of his weak arm. (That particular meme is still in existence even now, btw.) When told he could chuck it up to 90 mph off the mound and told by managers, coaches, and scouts that actually saw Hamilton play that his arm wasn't weak (but was inaccurate), only a few of them changed their "analysis".
Examples abound. Votto was doubted because he supposedly had a "slow bat". When I saw him in Dayton, Sarasota, then again in Chattanooga, I couldn't believe their consensus. I shouldn't have. Votto has one of the quickest bats in baseball. But the meme was put out there by one guy with lines to fill and quickly picked up by the others.
Prospect guys are all the same, really. They get some interesting information from teams, but, overall, what they write is pretty much filler you can almost always disregard. In order to balance out an article and appear like an unbiased observer/ expert, you have to find something bad about a guy.
Cingrani's been a stud. But, because they didn't call it immediately, so-called experts insist he's a reliever. (I'm guessing that started on draft day, btw. Some draftnik looked at his numbers, assumed he struggled with his secondary offerings, and made a comment. Others picked it up. It became the meme.)
Fact is, Dude's got three pitches. Two of those pitches are above average. The third is a work in progress. Since he's in the minor leagues, he still has time to work on that third pitch.
Even if it doesn't progress beyond what it is now, he's likely going to be able to start in the major leagues at a league average level. Those two pitches will carry him that far because they're so effective-- as seen in his professional career-long dominance. His numbers-- at close to age-appropriate levels-- are arguably the best the minor leagues have seen since he first started in Billings.
If he doesn't improve his slider, he'll still be okay, as his slider is already... serviceable. He can throw it. It breaks at a decent level, and hitting is among the hardest things to do in professional baseball.
He was. Hence, my reference. And your slavish defense of him when he never EVER produced, at any level, befitting a prospect. But he sure looks good in a swimsuit, I guess.
I remember that differently.
I remember you using line drive percentage a couple times. I remember, the rest of the argument was entirely scout-driven "analysis". That the ball jumped off his bat. That he had power he hadn't shown. That his swing was quick and that he would learn the strike zone.
I remember arguing that Heisey was at least his equal quite vociferously. And using numbers. Tons of them.
We made the bet then over who would be the better major league hitter.
I'm still feeling pretty good about my pick.
I think you should try to find a way to go shadow the work of some of the people who do the prospect work (Sickels, Law, any of the BA guys) if you think they aren't out there talking with numerous scouts every day.
As for Cingrani, his slider can be decent at times. Of course there are other times in is a straight low 80's fastball because it doesn't break at all. And then there is the change up, which is supposedly a good pitch, but he uses like his 3rd pitch a few times a game because he simply doesn't trust it for whatever reason.
I am pretty sure I would have brought up Stubbs good walk rate in the minors as well as his power potential that was just waiting to come out despite his low home run totals in the minors.
Produced at what level? He was an elite level defensive center fielder with a minor league OPS of .762. Sure, the guy wasn't Jay Bruce at the plate, but he never needed to be.
And for the record, I am done talking about Stubbs here. Start a new thread on how to properly evaluate a prospect if you want to.
What makes you think I haven't?
I was one of those guys (in basketball). I talked to a ton of those guys in football and in baseball.
Southern League
Tony Cingrani, Pensacola
(1-0, 0.00 ERA, 1 G, 1 GS, 8 IP, 3 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 HR, 0 HBP, 1 BB, 15 K)
After utterly dominating the California League in the first two months of the season -- 5-1, 1.11 ERA, 71 strikeouts and 13 walks in 56 2/3 innings -- Cingrani faced some resistance in Double-A. The lefty's ERA was 5.40 after he surrendered three home runs to the Mobile BayBears in his third outing with the Blue Wahoos. Two starts later, Cingrani service has been restored to its optimum level, with the 22-year-old Rice product fanning 15 batters over eight scoreless innings Wednesday in his finest outing as a pro. Despite all the strikeouts -- he now ranks third in the Minors with 109 in 86 innings this season -- Cingrani needed just 100 pitches to get through the eight three-hit frames.
Whoever wrote that is wrong. He had an ERA of 5.40 in ONE game. At the end of that game his ERA was 2.55. His ERA was never above 2.95 at the end of any game.
I think imho Serrano may be creeping up close to your list...Have you seen his stats in the last month and a half? Or even his stats in his 5 starts...
I like Serrano. But he is a for sure reliever. Could be a 7th inning MLB guy with his FB/SL combo. Relievers that aren't closers aren't going to be ranked that high though.
got it, it was my first post, thanks for the quick response...
Doug, this is just a silly thing to say.
Parker won two batting titles and an MVP.
He got derailed by a drug problem, but he was an awesome hitter, and very consistent
Bruce is a nice player, but he's not a dominating hitter (at least not yet).
Bruce is never going to win a batting title. He'll probably never win an MVP either.. I like Bruce a lot, he's a good player, but I don't think he'll ever get to Parker's level.
Saying that Cozart would kill 80's pitching is also a bit of an exaggeration.
Cozart is a nice player, but I'm not sure he could play SS on turf. (Saying I don't know, maybe he could).. Since Cozart is a bit OBP challenged in this era, he probably would have the same OBP struggles in the 80's
[Phil ] Castellini celebrated the team's farm system and noted the team had promising prospects who would one day be great Reds -- and then joke then they'd be ex-Reds, saying "of course we're going to lose them". #SellTheTeamBob
Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!
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