473 replies to this topic

[Slidemaster]

Of course age is the most important thing with prospects, was just reacting to the statement, which said nothing about age.

Here's one: Mancini had a 691 OPS in high A at age 22. He reached the majors 2 years later. And no, it doesn't matter he was an 8th round pick, draft status is meaningless at this point.

It no longer matters as far as his performance now. It does matter when evaluating the pick. You shouldn't be getting role players with top 5 picks.

[McNulty]

Using stats to evaluate prospects is deeply flawed. What if the Orioles are tweaking his swing and he’s working through it?

Also, do you have any joy in your life? You seem pissed off about everything all the time.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Using stats to evaluate prospects is deeply flawed. What if the Orioles are tweaking his swing and he’s working through it?

Also, do you have any joy in your life? You seem pissed off about everything all the time.

He’s a teacher with a family of COVID deniers and an O’s fan for however long, so all that’s working against him probably.

Agree with your post. I wish we heard more about the development process, but can understand why we don’t. It’d be nice to hear more about what specifically they’re working on and what perhaps the deliverables are in that regard.

[McNulty]

Sub out teacher for veteran and I’m right there with him.

[Slidemaster]

He’s a teacher with a family of COVID deniers and an O’s fan for however long, so all that’s working against him probably.

Agree with your post. I wish we heard more about the development process, but can understand why we don’t. It’d be nice to hear more about what specifically they’re working on and what perhaps the deliverables are in that regard.

Pretty much nailed it.

Things are actually pretty good, all things considered.

I wish the development process was more transparent too. It's awfully disheartening seeing top picks underperformed without context.

[Slidemaster]

Using stats to evaluate prospects is deeply flawed. What if the Orioles are tweaking his swing and he’s working through it?

Also, do you have any joy in your life? You seem pissed off about everything all the time.

I'm actually a pretty positive dude about things that are not sports (the Orioles more than the Ravens). I've seen a handful of winning seasons in my life, never seen a world series, and have basically only known baseball ineptitude with a smattering of success. It's hars to assume that will ever change for the long haul.

[makoman]

It no longer matters as far as his performance now. It does matter when evaluating the pick. You shouldn't be getting role players with top 5 picks.

 

Your expectations are too high. Only 13 #5 picks in over 50 drafts have amassed more than 5 bWAR. It's only 21 for #4 picks. 24 for #3 picks. Finally gets over 50% at #2 with 30 and #1 with 33.

 

And I know we live in a world of immediate hot takes, but it's just dumb to evaluate a baseball pick < 1 year after the draft. Brian Matusz looked like a genius pick his first year. Billy Rowell was very solid. Manny (if looking at stats only) was a little meh. Mountcastle was under .800 OPS in 2015-16. Brian Roberts was another with under .800 OPS in high A at age 22 his first full year, who was in the majors at 23. Stowers was awful in low A his first summer. Hell, some people were worried about Adley in 2019. Player development is rarely linear. You'll have plenty of time to rag on the pick and say I told you so later if it turns out you were right.

[Mackus]

Your expectations are too high. Only 13 #5 picks in over 50 drafts have amassed more than 5 bWAR. It's only 21 for #4 picks. 24 for #3 picks. Finally gets over 50% at #2 with 30 and #1 with 33.

 

Cowser was also a #5 pick in name only.  The numbers go way down for back-end of the top ten through early teens, which is where both Cowser and Kjerstad should have been picked.  Of course the historical draft picks aren't exactly a top-down ranking of annual talent either, so maybe that's already accounted for in the numbers.

 

There is nothing alarming or concerning (or overly exciting, from the other perspective) about Cowser's development thus far.  He's had some slumps which make you take notice, but he's turned those around, alleviating the concern.  Nothing about him has changed since the day he was drafted, IMO.  He's got the same exact profile.

[Slidemaster]

Cowser was also a #5 pick in name only. The numbers go way down for back-end of the top ten through early teens, which is where both Cowser and Kjerstad should have been picked. Of course the historical draft picks aren't exactly a top-down ranking of annual talent either, so maybe that's already accounted for in the numbers.

There is nothing alarming or concerning (or overly exciting, from the other perspective) about Cowser's development thus far. He's had some slumps which make you take notice, but he's turned those around, alleviating the concern. Nothing about him has changed since the day he was drafted, IMO. He's got the same exact profile.

This is exactly what bothers me. Why take guys like him at number 5 with the hope of getting players who are good later? Why not just take the guy you think has the best chance to contribute at that moment?

We've been over it over and over again, but it the strategy feels stupid, like you're picking a lottery ticket to have the chance for more lottery tickets later.

[Mike B]

Cowper in his first AB at Bowie went deep.  

[makoman]

Cowper in his first AB at Bowie went deep.

Against a lefty.

[makoman]

I know it's a stupid sample size but he's really hit the ground running at AA. .360/.568/.680/1.248 240 wRC+ in 8 games. 21.6% K but 21.6% walks. It sure beats the alternative.

[Mike B]

It is nice to see.  The last 2 number ones have been scrutinized for different reasons.  Now Cowser seems to be rolling at AA, and Kjerstad is absolutely screaming to be promoted from Delmarva.  

[Hooded Viper]

Is Cowser a Markakis type, or comparable at all?

[Slidemaster]

Is Cowser a Markakis type, or comparable at all?

From what I've read, better power and more strikeouts. He's not a 3 true outcomes type player though.

[BobPhelan]

Is Cowser a Markakis type, or comparable at all?

Markakis with better plate discipline, more strikeouts, and the ability to play CF (with a weaker arm). Something like that if everything works out.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I doubt he has better plate dicipline as Markakis. Thats more of a nod to Nick than a swipe at Cowser. Seems to have more speed and likely more range with a lesser arm

[Mackus]

I doubt he has better plate dicipline as Markakis. Thats more of a nod to Nick than a swipe at Cowser. Seems to have more speed and likely more range with a lesser arm

Cowser is a college bat at lower levels whereas Nick was a HS guy who moved fast. And walks aren't the entirety of plate discipline. And Cowser has a much smaller sample. But he has walked much more than Nick did in the minors. Nearly 17% in 450 PA compared to 11% in 1200 PA.

[BobPhelan]

I doubt he has better plate dicipline as Markakis. Thats more of a nod to Nick than a swipe at Cowser. Seems to have more speed and likely more range with a lesser arm

Future casting a near best case scenario, definitely not saying it’s gonna happen. But should be a valuable part of our contending run.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Future casting a near best case scenario, definitely not saying it’s gonna happen. But should be a valuable part of our contending run.

I understand but Nick was really good with the dicipline. Very good.