36 replies to this topic

[BSLChrisStoner]

Regarding Jordan... good discussion on him here:

http://baltimorespor....php?f=17&t=793

[Mackus]

Again no confidence in the new regime? I know Stockstill is still there, but a new GM/Scouting Director.

I think it's fair to take an "I'll believe it when I see it" approach in regards to the Rajisch and any changes made to the development system turning around the struggles of the past.

[You Play to Win the Game]

I think it's fair to take an "I'll believe it when I see it" approach in regards to the Rajisch and any changes made to the development system turning around the struggles of the past.

Nothing wrong with this. I try to check myself a bit with my expectations around Peterson/Rajisch/Duq. It all sounds good and looks good, but we'll have to wait to see the results.

Admittedly, seeing Tillman come up with improved velo and stuff was a big shot in the arm; but at the same time, he's only made three starts. It will be a while until we really know if the Player Development has improved, or if we just tried to improve it.

[JeremyStrain]

Yeah, I agree - I think it's a combinaion of both. I don't think I should have said "Jordan was fine" in my initial post. I was a little more definitively hinting at the PDev being the issue rather than Jordan. I think in fairness, it was most likely both.

It's easy to hedge bets and say we'll never know who was to blame, but there were a lot of draft picks that were questionable at the time, it's not really fair to say if someone else had taken them they would have panned out because a lot of these guys would have gone a round or two later.

There was a reason no one was taking Givens. Avery and Hoes might turn out to be decent picks, but why are they developing and others aren't if it's all the development system's fault? Even then they were probably taken a round early.

Hobgood and Rowell I don't even need to mention, and there was some question on drafting a flyball/strikeout pitcher (Matusz) for Camden Yards. I think he'll be a great pitcher...just not here. That's all JJ.

Sure there is probably SOME joint blame in places, but when our players leave and STILL suck it's not the developments fault.

[ncicere]

I can see Avery being like a Dee Brown. Not a very high average, good defense, excellent speed, but not that much of an everyday contributor. Avery is a fun guy to watch... At most two times a week. He wont develop into an All-Star, but he wont be a terrible guy to have on your roster. As for the trade, I don't think I would trade him just because he is on the Orioles and the O's dont have a variety of players like him.

[You Play to Win the Game]

It's easy to hedge bets and say we'll never know who was to blame, but there were a lot of draft picks that were questionable at the time, it's not really fair to say if someone else had taken them they would have panned out because a lot of these guys would have gone a round or two later.

This isn't what I'm doing though. I am unequivocally stating that both were pretty poor.

[JeremyStrain]

This isn't what I'm doing though. I am unequivocally stating that both were pretty poor.

I just think development gets a bad rap and the blame when things go wrong, but it's pretty hard to screw up a good prospect. Matusz and Tillman didn't get messed up until the ML staff got a hold of them. Wieters still did fine and moved fast. I think guys that were bad picks got exposed as that, and guys that were going to make it, did. Unless they are changing guys mechanics and moving them around for no reason, what is development actually doing to mess these guys up? Why do some make it and some don't? I think it's just poor drafting, which happens to everyone but to the bad teams it happens more often than the good drafting.

[Mackus]

Hobgood and Rowell I don't even need to mention, and there was some question on drafting a flyball/strikeout pitcher (Matusz) for Camden Yards. I think he'll be a great pitcher...just not here. That's all JJ.

Rowell is the one guy that I don't blame on Jordan, or at least, I don't fault him for it. That was just a guy who didn't turn out. That happens. He wasn't a stretch where we took him and there weren't any obvious choices at the time that would have been better (Lincecum is the obvious counter-point, but many folks thought that his arm wouldn't hold up with his motion or that he would just be a reliever).

Hobgood was Mark Smith 2.0 though, except a pitcher and we didn't miss out on the two greatest local talents of the past 10 or so years before taking him.

[You Play to Win the Game]

I just think development gets a bad rap and the blame when things go wrong, but it's pretty hard to screw up a good prospect. Matusz and Tillman didn't get messed up until the ML staff got a hold of them. Wieters still did fine and moved fast. I think guys that were bad picks got exposed as that, and guys that were going to make it, did. Unless they are changing guys mechanics and moving them around for no reason, what is development actually doing to mess these guys up? Why do some make it and some don't? I think it's just poor drafting, which happens to everyone but to the bad teams it happens more often than the good drafting.

Why do you think that Matusz and Tillman didn't get messed up until the ML staff got a hold of them? How do you know that the MiL development folks did what it took to develop their secondary stuff/FB control in the minors, as opposed to just having them over power MiL hitters so their stats looked good, thus creating the mirage that they were ready to be successful in the bigs?

I know you know your stuff, so I'm not trying to be an ass here or anything - just genuinely curious - especially since a lot of people "in the know" have stated how poor the development system has been for years here.

[JeremyStrain]

Rowell is the one guy that I don't blame on Jordan, or at least, I don't fault him for it. That was just a guy who didn't turn out. That happens. He wasn't a stretch where we took him and there weren't any obvious choices at the time that would have been better (Lincecum is the obvious counter-point, but many folks thought that his arm wouldn't hold up with his motion or that he would just be a reliever).

Hobgood was Mark Smith 2.0 though, except a pitcher and we didn't miss out on the two greatest local talents of the past 10 or so years before taking him.

I don't fault him a TON because there was a consensus he was the top HS bat, but talk about his attitude was there at the draft, for him to never change that, I do kinda blame him for. Then again some guys ignore character and make-up and some give it weight, I am the latter.

[You Play to Win the Game]

I don't fault him a TON because there was a consensus he was the top HS bat, but talk about his attitude was there at the draft, for him to never change that, I do kinda blame him for. Then again some guys ignore character and make-up and some give it weight, I am the latter.

Well the irony with that is that that the rationale for Jordan loving Hobgood wo much was because of his character and make up.

[JeremyStrain]

Why do you think that Matusz and Tillman didn't get messed up until the ML staff got a hold of them? How do you know that the MiL development folks did what it took to develop their secondary stuff/FB control in the minors, as opposed to just having them over power MiL hitters so their stats looked good, thus creating the mirage that they were ready to be successful in the bigs?

I know you know your stuff, so I'm not trying to be an ass here or anything - just genuinely curious - especially since a lot of people "in the know" have stated how poor the development system has been for years here.

Because I saw them both in the minors quite a bit, with both of them they actually made them do the opposite and NOT use their best pitches much, instead focusing on control and placement of the FB. It was the ML where they started tinkering with TTTP and changing Tillman's curve (which I don't think was a terrible idea, but he needed to relearn how to pitch with the new one, and after that change in mechanics his FB velo dropped.

If they were just throwing the ball past kids or using their advanced secondaries every other pitch, I'd say you have a point, but I saw them first hand not doing that at all. It was the tinkering that went on in the ML that messed with stuff. Matusz had a great year working with Kranitz, then the next year...splat. That's ML level not miL.

It is a poor system, but the better prospects are going to succeed with or without it. It's the lower level guys that poor development hurts. The 5th and later round picks and non-prospects that go on to do well in other systems that we haven't been developing.

[JeremyStrain]

Well the irony with that is that that the rationale for Jordan loving Hobgood wo much was because of his character and make up.

That IS some great irony. Going from one extreme to the other there, but let's be honest...$$$ was the driving factor there.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Because I saw them both in the minors quite a bit, with both of them they actually made them do the opposite and NOT use their best pitches much, instead focusing on control and placement of the FB. It was the ML where they started tinkering with TTTP and changing Tillman's curve (which I don't think was a terrible idea, but he needed to relearn how to pitch with the new one, and after that change in mechanics his FB velo dropped.

If they were just throwing the ball past kids or using their advanced secondaries every other pitch, I'd say you have a point, but I saw them first hand not doing that at all. It was the tinkering that went on in the ML that messed with stuff. Matusz had a great year working with Kranitz, then the next year...splat. That's ML level not miL.

It is a poor system, but the better prospects are going to succeed with or without it. It's the lower level guys that poor development hurts. The 5th and later round picks and non-prospects that go on to do well in other systems that we haven't been developing.

Fair enough - thanks for the information. That is something I've always wondered about. I agree with you in that poor d systems mainly hurt fringe prospects. I think we've definitely seen that.

[You Play to Win the Game]

That IS some great irony. Going from one extreme to the other there, but let's be honest...$$$ was the driving factor there.

Which still blows my freakin' mind. That a team in the shape we were in would try to go cheap with a top 5 pick.

[JeremyStrain]

Which still blows my freakin' mind. That a team in the shape we were in would try to go cheap with a top 5 pick.

Yeah I mean I get the gist about going overslot later, but seems like all the overslots were bad ideas.

[LanceRinker]

This was a tough choice for me but I'd rather deal Avery to a team that views him as something more than just a 4th OF'er.

The reason I'd do that is because we could either get a low-level prospect in return for him, or we could include him in a larger package to get a much better player in return (a la Headley).

With that extra draft pick we won, not only do we get the opportunity to draft a player who will still be somewhat highly rated but we'd also get extra bonus pool money which is far more valuable than Avery (IMO).