Cingrani is our best pitching prospect IMO

[dougdirt]

I'll chalk that up to your youth and never having seen those pitchers pitch.

And I strongly disagree with that statement.

Which pitchers?

Guys who barely threw 90 MPH? Yeah, some guys threw a lot harder. But 80% of the league topped out below 92 MPH.

Every generation has better players than the one before it.

[The Rage]

Next year will be the big year for Cingrani. Those AAA guys should give a good indication if his secondary stuff is up to snuff.

Cingrani sits solidly in the low 90's and can dial it up to the mid-90's going by his fx. Not bad at all. Will he be better or worse than Travis Wood?

[fearofpopvol1]

Next year will be the big year for Cingrani. Those AAA guys should give a good indication if his secondary stuff is up to snuff.

Cingrani sits solidly in the low 90's and can dial it up to the mid-90's going by his fx. Not bad at all. Will he be better or worse than Travis Wood?

He certainly doesn't have that cutter or changeup that Wood has. I do think Cingrani's fastball is way better than Wood's though.

[RedlegJake]

So hitters today aren't better than hitters in 1980? Is that really what you guys are trying to argue?

Guys being bigger, faster and stronger at the plate and guys having more pitches and being able to throw them harder today yet offense is better today than it was then doesn't support that guys today are better hitters than then? Not to mention that guys today are also generally better fielders because they are faster and have much better scouting reports.

Mem, I must be missing the point you were trying to make with my two quotes. I said guys weren't good hitters then. And that we could send a below average hitter today (Cozart) to 1980 and he could be a very good hitter. What was the point you were trying to make there?

Please. Add me to the list of disagreers. Go back to 1960 or 1950 yes. But not 1980. That's not far enough back. Jay Bruce would not outhit Dave Parker if you sent him back to 1984. Probably have more homers but not by much and Parker would outhit him in every other category. It's just not enough time Doug. You need 3 or 4 generations to make that a true statement. Players do get bigger, faster and stronger and athletically just overall better but it doesn't occur in a single generation.

[dougdirt]

Please. Add me to the list of disagreers. Go back to 1960 or 1950 yes. But not 1980. That's not far enough back. Jay Bruce would not outhit Dave Parker if you sent him back to 1984. Probably have more homers but not by much and Parker would outhit him in every other category. It's just not enough time Doug. You need 3 or 4 generations to make that a true statement. Players do get bigger, faster and stronger and athletically just overall better but it doesn't occur in a single generation.

Yes, it does happen in a generation (sans one generation using drugs and the other one not). Check out Olympic records. Aside from the long jump, each new record is being broken by the next generation of guys. Every generation.

[RedsfaninMT]

Yes, it does happen in a generation (sans one generation using drugs and the other one not). Check out Olympic records. Aside from the long jump, each new record is being broken by the next generation of guys. Every generation.

Hey Doug, phone call you from Michael Johnson regarding his 43.18 400 Meter time from 1999.

[dougdirt]

Hey Doug, phone call you from Michael Johnson regarding his 43.18 400 Meter time from 1999.

Oh man, you got me. 13 years ago is still pretty close to 'this generation'.

Yes, there are some outliers to things, but more than half of the athletic records were set in the last 5-10 years. It is because we are better athletes now than we were even 10 years ago.

[RedsfaninMT]

Oh man, you got me. 13 years ago is still pretty close to 'this generation'.

Yes, there are some outliers to things, but more than half of the athletic records were set in the last 5-10 years. It is because we are better athletes now than we were even 10 years ago.

Agreed. BUT (!) Johnson broke Butch Reynolds record from 1988. Nobody has touched either of their times since. And that's certainly a generation (24 years).

[lollipopcurve]

Jay Bruce would not outhit Dave Parker if you sent him back to 1984. Probably have more homers but not by much and Parker would outhit him in every other category. It's just not enough time Doug. You need 3 or 4 generations to make that a true statement. Players do get bigger, faster and stronger and athletically just overall better but it doesn't occur in a single generation.

Agreed 100%. And I feel confident in saying that Dave Parker was a better hitter than Jay Bruce is now. Bruce has plenty of time to improve, but for now there's no doubt in my mind that at his peak the Cobra could do a lot more at the plate. Parker was the type of hitter that I think Bruce would like to be -- used his hands without sacrificing much power and sprayed the ball around, amassing EBHs across the board -- doubles, triples, homers.

[dougdirt]

Jay Bruce has as many home runs today as Dave Parker had in all of 1980. He also has more walks. I bet Bruce would out hit Parker in 1980.

[RedlegJake]

Yes, it does happen in a generation (sans one generation using drugs and the other one not). Check out Olympic records. Aside from the long jump, each new record is being broken by the next generation of guys. Every generation.

Across the entire spectrum of baseball I would agree. But take any single player and move him back a single generation, like Cozart, to 1980 and NO he doesn't make any appreciable gain in his game. Take him back to 1950 and yes, he becomes a stud player. And we are not talking track and field here. We are talking baseball. Talk about apples and oranges. T&F is pure athletic talent - speed and power period. Baseball also involves a very difficult skillset that transcends generations. Learning to recognize a curve coming out of a pitcher's hand doesn't get much easier in 2012 than it was in 1982.

[Vottomatic]

My ex-wife still has the her high school record in the Butterfly from back in the early 80's, and she went to a school in Indiana that had 2,000 kids and still does today.

How's that for every generation getting better?

[Vottomatic]

Across the entire spectrum of baseball I would agree. But take any single player and move him back a single generation, like Cozart, to 1980 and NO he doesn't make any appreciable gain in his game. Take him back to 1950 and yes, he becomes a stud player. And we are not talking track and field here. We are talking baseball. Talk about apples and oranges. T&F is pure athletic talent - speed and power period. Baseball also involves a very difficult skillset that transcends generations. Learning to recognize a curve coming out of a pitcher's hand doesn't get much easier in 2012 than it was in 1982.

I agree.

Doug chalks everything up to better fitness and strength.

Brains and baseball smarts make up for alot.

It's like with basketball, no one will ever convince me that Lebron or Kobe are better than Jordan. Saw it with my own eyes. Jordan went 1 on 5 nearly every night and still got it done. Best there ever was. And today's b-ball players are more "fit" and "stronger". Hehehe.

Nope.

[rgslone]

Jay Bruce has as many home runs today as Dave Parker had in all of 1980. He also has more walks. I bet Bruce would out hit Parker in 1980.

Doug, I don't want to jump to a conclusion that you didn't say - so I'll just ask: Are you saying that Bruce is already a better player than Parker? If so, I can't agree with that, certainly not as of today in regard to hitting. I would suggest comparing Parker's age 24 stats (1975 - his 1st full year) with Bruce's last year (2011 - his 3rd full year). Moreover, in his prime I remember Parker being one of the most feared hitters in baseball and a tough out. I think currently Bruce is feared, but he's not a particularly tough out.

[dougdirt]

Doug, I don't want to jump to a conclusion that you didn't say - so I'll just ask: Are you saying that Bruce is already a better player than Parker? If so, I can't agree with that, certainly not as of today in regard to hitting. I would suggest comparing Parker's age 24 stats (1975 - his 1st full year) with Bruce's last year (2011 - his 3rd full year). Moreover, in his prime I remember Parker being one of the most feared hitters in baseball and a tough out. I think currently Bruce is feared, but he's not a particularly tough out.

Not saying that at all. Parker had better seasons than Bruce has had thus far. I still think if we had a 'go back' machine Bruce would be able to out perform him though. Sorry,pitchers simply weren't nearly as good then. Bruce would be able to feast on a whole slew of 90 MPH fastballs.