ImageImageImageImage

What happens if things go right?

Lando12
Freshman
Posts: 62
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

What happens if things go right? 

Post#1 » by Lando12 » Sat Apr 17, 2010 4:39 am

The back to back complete games have left me with a question: What if Huff and Talbot stick? The rotation would get crowded in a hurry. Does a guy like Rondon get stuffed in the pen? Does he get dealt? Do we ship off a guy like Talbot before he turns into a pumpkin? Do we trade the excess depth for major league help? Are prospect for prospect trades feasible?

This got hinted at in the Laffey thread, and I think it deserves further discussion. What to do if the depth doesn't sort itself out? It's a fun question to answer because it assumes a whole lot went right.

My guess is that we would see the bullpen get stocked with a level of talent that we just haven't seen in Cleveland. After that, I would imagine any leftovers get stocked in AAA for depth until roster concerns force them off of the island.

I would like to see prospect for prospect trades. Challenge trades are fun, and I think there are very real opportunities to get value. There are always "Pitching and defense are 75% of baseball" types out there.
The lines are drawn, the orders are in, the Dance Commander's ready to sin. Radio message from HQ: Dance Commander, we love you
DavidMcGr
Freshman
Posts: 51
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#2 » by DavidMcGr » Sat Apr 17, 2010 8:33 pm

I don't think it's a realistic situation. Players are going to get hurt. Our rotation has number innings they can pitch. Rondon, Carrasco and more are all going ot get chances in the big league rotation. If something crazy like our BOR options working out to be more then that's one of those good problems to have. We'll either have insane depth, an insane bullpen or trade for areas of more relative need (or a combination of two/three).

I think that down line we may see some great talents pushed into pen when it may not be the best choice though. With guys like Putnam, White, Knapp, Hagadone and more coming up there likely will be limited rotation spots.
http://sabrtribe.blogspot.com - Someday I'll have more time and write something with substance again.
Lando12
Freshman
Posts: 62
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#3 » by Lando12 » Sun Apr 18, 2010 5:20 am

I would agree that such a rosy outcome isn't likely, but I'm a bit curious as to what the organization would do. I don't think it takes everyone to stick, but I don't think that finding 5 from Masterson, Carmona, Huff, Talbot, Rondon, Carrasco, and Gomez is that unlikely. I think that this could be a very real problem for Hagadone, Putnam, and White (and to a lesser extent, Berger and Barnes).

I would also agree that the most likely solution would be to dump a bunch of guys in the pen that don't really belong in there. Putnam has spent some time in the pen, and both Hagadone and White have had bullpen scuttle surrounding them. Ultimately, I think the failures of bullpens past will haunt the team. I think fixing the pen once and for all will be too tempting. But who knows, maybe Antonetti would provide some distance from that. I wouldn't like it, as there is plenty of potential pen talent floating around in the organization and it is an inefficient use of resources. Doing this sort of thing with some of the second and third tier guys in the system is one thing, but I really don't want to see someone like Hagadone shoehorned into the pen.

One potential release from the logjam is that Carmona's options would start to look really expensive if quality depth was available. And I don't think guys like Knapp would really be affected. By the time he would likely be ready, arbitration will start to make the Talbots of the world expendable. I think.

I think the overarching point is that the system has a truckload of pitching. Maybe too much. There aren't too many elite talents, but the B prospect herd could stand to be thinned. I do not feel that way about the hitting in the system. I'm probably bringing this up a full year too soon, but I would like to see some of that excess pitching turned into hitting prospects.

Ultimately I'm jealous of some of the things Tampa has been able to do. When the Indians' most recent rebuild ended, the entire farm system had been emptied onto the ML roster. Tampa maintained a strong system. I want to have a few bullets in the chamber offensively after Chisenhall. That's also why I really hope that starting pitching isn't a forgone conclusion in the upcoming draft.
The lines are drawn, the orders are in, the Dance Commander's ready to sin. Radio message from HQ: Dance Commander, we love you
DavidMcGr
Freshman
Posts: 51
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#4 » by DavidMcGr » Sun Apr 18, 2010 3:24 pm

I think the most likely thing is moving players. If we have high-end prospects who are ML ready then we can move them for proven starters who can produce now, or at least swap them for equally high potential prospects in position of more relative need. However I think the more likely players to moved in this scenario are the less upside players who are producing (Talbot etc...).

I think this brings up a good point though as I've been worried about these scenarios arising due to giving playing time to non-long term marginal upgrades for the past year. This is why I want to move Peralta, why I don't want to sign Branyan or a non-FOR starter and why I want to give our young players as much playing time as possible this season (ie: before we are truly trying to contend).
http://sabrtribe.blogspot.com - Someday I'll have more time and write something with substance again.
FordPrefect
Ballboy
Posts: 43
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#5 » by FordPrefect » Sun Apr 18, 2010 10:12 pm

There's still a lot of downside floating around: Carmona could start walking people again at the drop of a hat. Carrasco apparently has emotional issues. Talbot and Huff have mediocre pedigrees. Rondon is apparently a one pitch pitcher. Masterson has split issues (Dave's interpretation of them noted). White and Hagadone might ultimately be relievers. De la Cruz's velocity is reportedly way down. (granted, that's only one report I saw). Knapp's shoulder speaks for itself.

Some of that stuff is going to go right, but some won't. The pessimist in me sees all that and wants a lot more SP prospects.

The Indians need to draft better, and SP (and impact hitters, not lead off types) should be at the top of the list.
Lando12
Freshman
Posts: 62
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#6 » by Lando12 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:32 am

DavidMcGr wrote:I think the most likely thing is moving players. If we have high-end prospects who are ML ready then we can move them for proven starters who can produce now, or at least swap them for equally high potential prospects in position of more relative need. However I think the more likely players to moved in this scenario are the less upside players who are producing (Talbot etc...).


I hope that is what will happen, but I just don't know. I really think that they are going to carry those bullpen scars with them. But here's hoping.

DavidMcGr wrote:I think this brings up a good point though as I've been worried about these scenarios arising due to giving playing time to non-long term marginal upgrades for the past year. This is why I want to move Peralta, why I don't want to sign Branyan or a non-FOR starter and why I want to give our young players as much playing time as possible this season (ie: before we are truly trying to contend).


There are two issues at play here. One is the money. As far as what an upgrade is worth this year, I'm not sure. I've been playing that by ear. I don't like Peralta's contract and I don't mind Branyan's. That isn't rooted in a firm set of principles, so I can certainly understand disagreement about it.

The other issue is the idea of playing youngsters as much as possible. I think that depends on the organization's view of individual players. Marte is not the heir apparent at 3B. I think he should be playing so that he can build value before Chisenhall arrives. Chisenhall shows up as Marte is getting into arbitration and the whole thing works out nicely. Keeping Peralta means that the Indians lose an opportunity to build value. I don't think you disagree with too much of that.

If Brantley was keeping LF warm for Weglarz, then he should play every day. Allow him to hit a little bit and then deal him to a team that needs a CF like Crisp. That may be the best thing to do with Brantley. I like him as a prospect, but I like Weglarz more and Brantley probably should be a CF, at least in terms of maximizing individual value. The problem is, I don't think the Indians view Brantley like that. They seem to love the guy and have long term plans for him. If they intend to keep him until FA, I don't have a problem with managing his service clock. Would I have gone out and signed Branyan if I was in charge? Probably not. I wouldn't hold Brantley in such high regard (though I do like him as a prospect) if I was in charge. I think the organization view of Brantley, which I admit is reading tea leaves, changes the situation.
The lines are drawn, the orders are in, the Dance Commander's ready to sin. Radio message from HQ: Dance Commander, we love you
Lando12
Freshman
Posts: 62
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#7 » by Lando12 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:46 am

FordPrefect wrote:There's still a lot of downside floating around: Carmona could start walking people again at the drop of a hat. Carrasco apparently has emotional issues. Talbot and Huff have mediocre pedigrees. Rondon is apparently a one pitch pitcher. Masterson has split issues (Dave's interpretation of them noted). White and Hagadone might ultimately be relievers. De la Cruz's velocity is reportedly way down. (granted, that's only one report I saw). Knapp's shoulder speaks for itself.

Some of that stuff is going to go right, but some won't. The pessimist in me sees all that and wants a lot more SP prospects.


I took a slightly closer look at Masterson, and frankly the guy doesn't get enough credit. He's made 27 starts at the ML level. He's pitched 154.2 IP with a 129/77 K/BB and 17 HR allowed. He has a 4.19 ERA over those starts. For a guy that just started his age 25 season, that's pretty good. A few too many walks, but honestly not that bad. He doesn't have problems going through the lineup for a 3rd time or anything like that. We really should like him more. Even the troublesome platoon splits are built on an 89 point difference in BABIP. I know he's a bit goofy with the 3/4 thing, but that BABIP gap is just too large to take seriously.

As for the overall point, I am a year early on this. I don't think guys like Knapp are a problem, as there is plenty of time before they arrive. There is a logjam above him. Things may go wrong as you describe, but I don't think the organization can keep the Bergers and Barneses of the world waiting before we find out. It takes a while to judge SP, and I don't think we can hold onto guys for a few years before making up our minds. At some point, we need to pick five and give it a shot. That point isn't right now, but I do think it is coming. There just isn't a good way to sort through 10 guys at once.

FordPrefect wrote:The Indians need to draft better, and SP (and impact hitters, not lead off types) should be at the top of the list.


I should amend what I said. If a SP is the best player on the board, by all means, take him. I've just seen a lot of talk about how the Indians need to go pitching at that spot. The organization isn't weak there. I think you hit the nail on the head with the impact hitter comment. The 1B/DH/OF glut cleared up in a hurry. There is Weglarz and maybe Greenwell at those spots. I have serious reservations about pretty much everyone else.
The lines are drawn, the orders are in, the Dance Commander's ready to sin. Radio message from HQ: Dance Commander, we love you
DavidMcGr
Freshman
Posts: 51
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#8 » by DavidMcGr » Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:39 am

Lando12 wrote:
DavidMcGr wrote:I think this brings up a good point though as I've been worried about these scenarios arising due to giving playing time to non-long term marginal upgrades for the past year. This is why I want to move Peralta, why I don't want to sign Branyan or a non-FOR starter and why I want to give our young players as much playing time as possible this season (ie: before we are truly trying to contend).


There are two issues at play here. One is the money. As far as what an upgrade is worth this year, I'm not sure. I've been playing that by ear. I don't like Peralta's contract and I don't mind Branyan's. That isn't rooted in a firm set of principles, so I can certainly understand disagreement about it.

The other issue is the idea of playing youngsters as much as possible. I think that depends on the organization's view of individual players. Marte is not the heir apparent at 3B. I think he should be playing so that he can build value before Chisenhall arrives. Chisenhall shows up as Marte is getting into arbitration and the whole thing works out nicely. Keeping Peralta means that the Indians lose an opportunity to build value. I don't think you disagree with too much of that.

If Brantley was keeping LF warm for Weglarz, then he should play every day. Allow him to hit a little bit and then deal him to a team that needs a CF like Crisp. That may be the best thing to do with Brantley. I like him as a prospect, but I like Weglarz more and Brantley probably should be a CF, at least in terms of maximizing individual value. The problem is, I don't think the Indians view Brantley like that. They seem to love the guy and have long term plans for him. If they intend to keep him until FA, I don't have a problem with managing his service clock. Would I have gone out and signed Branyan if I was in charge? Probably not. I wouldn't hold Brantley in such high regard (though I do like him as a prospect) if I was in charge. I think the organization view of Brantley, which I admit is reading tea leaves, changes the situation.


Well the point with Marte is exactly what you brought up with Talbot, Huff, Laffey etc... Hey may not be on our long-term projected depth chart but if given the chance to produce he just very well may do so (exactly what Huff and company just may be doing). On that exact topic I also think there is great value in seeing if Marte can produce now as we will almost certainly need a 3B to at least start 2011 and I'd much rather Marte league minimum than a marginal upgrade (if that) for millions.

I also think the Crisp comparison to Brantley is spot on. I've also thought of him as a plus 4th OFier for us in the future but I think opting for Crowe or someone like Kearns makes a lot more sense if we can get a nice package from a team looking for a young CFier.
http://sabrtribe.blogspot.com - Someday I'll have more time and write something with substance again.
FordPrefect
Ballboy
Posts: 43
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#9 » by FordPrefect » Mon Apr 19, 2010 3:55 am

Lando12 wrote:
FordPrefect wrote:There's still a lot of downside floating around: Carmona could start walking people again at the drop of a hat. Carrasco apparently has emotional issues. Talbot and Huff have mediocre pedigrees. Rondon is apparently a one pitch pitcher. Masterson has split issues (Dave's interpretation of them noted). White and Hagadone might ultimately be relievers. De la Cruz's velocity is reportedly way down. (granted, that's only one report I saw). Knapp's shoulder speaks for itself.

Some of that stuff is going to go right, but some won't. The pessimist in me sees all that and wants a lot more SP prospects.


I took a slightly closer look at Masterson, and frankly the guy doesn't get enough credit. He's made 27 starts at the ML level. He's pitched 154.2 IP with a 129/77 K/BB and 17 HR allowed. He has a 4.19 ERA over those starts. For a guy that just started his age 25 season, that's pretty good. A few too many walks, but honestly not that bad. He doesn't have problems going through the lineup for a 3rd time or anything like that. We really should like him more. Even the troublesome platoon splits are built on an 89 point difference in BABIP. I know he's a bit goofy with the 3/4 thing, but that BABIP gap is just too large to take seriously.

As for the overall point, I am a year early on this. I don't think guys like Knapp are a problem, as there is plenty of time before they arrive. There is a logjam above him. Things may go wrong as you describe, but I don't think the organization can keep the Bergers and Barneses of the world waiting before we find out. It takes a while to judge SP, and I don't think we can hold onto guys for a few years before making up our minds. At some point, we need to pick five and give it a shot. That point isn't right now, but I do think it is coming. There just isn't a good way to sort through 10 guys at once.


Well i think they should be very decisive about moving guys to the pen once they get to the AA/AAA level (see if they have success in AA first, but if it's middling, just move them).

Reasons why:

1) You can move them back later. It's not ideal, but it's possible.

2) You're realistically not going to need more than 8 guys per year. Might there be once in a while where you need 10? Sure, but it doesn't matter in that situation is 10 is Tomo Ohka or Yohan Pino. It'd be nice to have a Pino for that ... but if you don't, well, no sweat. Like you say, you can't sort through 10 guys that often. If it happens once in a blue moon and you only have 8 guys to sort through, oh well.

3) Relievers fail. Look at Sipp and Perez. Lewis last year. There's a concept that you plug someone in at a position, and only deal with them when they hit free agency or are needed elsewhere, but relievers are volatile. It's far more conducive to winning to have a bunch of relievers you can call up midseason than a bunch of 5th starter types. You need a couple 5th starter types, not 2 levels worth of them.

I didn't mention the Bergers or the Jeanmar Gomez's of the world because I think there's a significant chance neither start a game in the majors. They're fring prospects.

Of course, another problem with the Indians is that they draft for control and not for stuff, so that fringe prospects often have no chance of succeeding if moved to the pen. Think Sowers and Frank Herrman to a lesser extent.

I think the Indians needed for a long time to rethink what they drafted. They've known for two or three years that Sowers was a failure, and are just adapting to that now. I think the person to blame has to be Shapiro. He's way too invested in players as people. I don't mean to come off as callous, nor do I want a callous GM, just some leadership that can judge talent and personality separately.

That's my biggest concern: what are the chances Antonetti, Grant, and Acta are going to make better choices than Shapiro, Mirabelli, and Wedge did? I think things have to get better, but I'm not sure how much better. The love affair with Brantley as a long term solution is baffling. Crisp is a far better comparison. Peralta is still around, and a lot of things are being done conventionally (for better and for worse).

OTOH, Grant's drafts are a notch up, Valbuena is playing everyday. And I think Acta is showing a great deal of patience with young players, which is helpful - a benefit Marte has never once received in the majors.

So we'll see.
Lando12
Freshman
Posts: 62
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#10 » by Lando12 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:31 pm

FordPrefect wrote:You're realistically not going to need more than 8 guys per year. Might there be once in a while where you need 10? Sure, but it doesn't matter in that situation is 10 is Tomo Ohka or Yohan Pino. It'd be nice to have a Pino for that ... but if you don't, well, no sweat. Like you say, you can't sort through 10 guys that often. If it happens once in a blue moon and you only have 8 guys to sort through, oh well.


My point is that even if you give 8 guys starts in a year, you aren't doing much to sort through the mess. A half dozen starts don't tell us much. I'm talking about a legitimate, long term chance along the lines of what Huff is getting now.

FordPrefect wrote:I didn't mention the Bergers or the Jeanmar Gomez's of the world because I think there's a significant chance neither start a game in the majors. They're fring prospects.


The odds on pitching are never high, but there is not much separating Gomez from Jair Jurrjens at the same age. You are correct in that I shouldn't spend too much time worrying about potential BOR starters, but I think you sell these guys a bit short.

Now that I have those little squabbles out of the way, let's get to the heart of the matter.

FordPrefect wrote:Well i think they should be very decisive about moving guys to the pen once they get to the AA/AAA level (see if they have success in AA first, but if it's middling, just move them).


I agree with this on principle, and I agree with your reasoning as to why. This was what the Cardinals did with Jess Todd and what I suspect the Indians are going to do with Connor Graham. The only thing that makes me question this as a way out of a depth logjam is the sheer amount of depth the Indians have.

Todd, Judy, Lee, Bryson, Frias, Price, and a host of others are already in the pen. I'm never confident in reliever prospects, but I just find it hard to believe that the Indians would need more than a few starters turned relievers. Teams normally don't have more than a few laying around, so I think your idea works most of the time. I just can't see it solving this particular problem.

There are organizations out there that would kill to have a Barnes and Berger in the system. This time last year, the Indians were one such organization. I think that trades represent a better opportunity for value. I realize I'm dragging your point to an extreme (no one wants to convert everybody to the pen), but I really want to make the point that the Indians system is not conventional. I don't think conventional solutions are going to do all of the job.

I also worry that the bullpen is becoming this organization's white whale. Look at the Rondon experiment last year. They were going to stuff a pitching starved organization's best starting prospect in the pen and yank him out of AA (if it worked). It's using overkill to cover up organizational failures. Let's say you are hunting and you are a bad shot. That doesn't mean bringing hand grenades is a good idea. Sooner or later, the Indians are going to need to solve their bullpen issues rather than throwing so much value at the pen that no one notices the problem.
The lines are drawn, the orders are in, the Dance Commander's ready to sin. Radio message from HQ: Dance Commander, we love you
FordPrefect
Ballboy
Posts: 43
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#11 » by FordPrefect » Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:42 am

I've always been partial to the idea that relievers are not prospects. I think they generally should be used like matches - burn quickly, but when they go out, go on to the next one.

I also don't know that there's a "way" to solve bullpen issues. The Rays - the Rays! - traded for Soriano and are paying him ten million. Say what you want about the Yankees and Red Sox in recent years, but they've had incredible turnover in the pen. There's been zero insight into bullpen construction (putting usage aside) in recent years.

I don't think it's just the Indians' white whale. It's everyone's. No one knows what the hell they are doing.

I also don't know that Barnes and Berger are -that- valuable. They're good depth guys. It's not that they're special, it's that Cleveland has 12 guys like that where others have 2-5. How do you sort through them? You use the best, or the most you can and trade the rest. Unfortunately, the Indians have been terrible at targeting veterans. (Again, compare to the Rays).

I'm all for unconventional solutions, but I don't see any blueprints to follow here.
User avatar
Furrski
Sophomore
Posts: 172
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 18, 2009

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#12 » by Furrski » Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:04 pm

I think that for years our 'blueprint' has been to find low-level, high-upside players and roll the dice. I think that is what you have to do in our situation. You cant afford to be wrong on a free agent pitcher. If you are wrong on a guy you aquire who is in high A ball, and he doesn't advance as planned, you cut him loose or use him as depth. Indians fans can argue to death about who is a better prospect, or if we don't have an 'ace' coming. The reality is, we've stockpiled some good young pitching and we have to see who will have the combination of skill and luck to continue to impress.

Out of, say, Hagadone, Knapp, Rondon, Gomez, Pino, De La Cruz, and White, if half of them grow to become solid major league pitchers, we will take it. Some will not perform, some will get hurt. All we can do is wait and see.
DavidMcGr
Freshman
Posts: 51
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#13 » by DavidMcGr » Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:50 pm

Furrski wrote:I think that for years our 'blueprint' has been to find low-level, high-upside players and roll the dice. I think that is what you have to do in our situation. You cant afford to be wrong on a free agent pitcher. If you are wrong on a guy you aquire who is in high A ball, and he doesn't advance as planned, you cut him loose or use him as depth. Indians fans can argue to death about who is a better prospect, or if we don't have an 'ace' coming. The reality is, we've stockpiled some good young pitching and we have to see who will have the combination of skill and luck to continue to impress.

Out of, say, Hagadone, Knapp, Rondon, Gomez, Pino, De La Cruz, and White, if half of them grow to become solid major league pitchers, we will take it. Some will not perform, some will get hurt. All we can do is wait and see.


We have being the opposite of that for years. We have been drafting safe lower potential college players almost exclusively. Thankfully that has changed, but it is a very recent change.
http://sabrtribe.blogspot.com - Someday I'll have more time and write something with substance again.
User avatar
Furrski
Sophomore
Posts: 172
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 18, 2009

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#14 » by Furrski » Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:20 pm

DavidMcGr wrote:
Furrski wrote:I think that for years our 'blueprint' has been to find low-level, high-upside players and roll the dice. I think that is what you have to do in our situation. You cant afford to be wrong on a free agent pitcher. If you are wrong on a guy you aquire who is in high A ball, and he doesn't advance as planned, you cut him loose or use him as depth. Indians fans can argue to death about who is a better prospect, or if we don't have an 'ace' coming. The reality is, we've stockpiled some good young pitching and we have to see who will have the combination of skill and luck to continue to impress.

Out of, say, Hagadone, Knapp, Rondon, Gomez, Pino, De La Cruz, and White, if half of them grow to become solid major league pitchers, we will take it. Some will not perform, some will get hurt. All we can do is wait and see.


We have being the opposite of that for years. We have been drafting safe lower potential college players almost exclusively. Thankfully that has changed, but it is a very recent change.


Sorry, I'm more talking about trades- we typically target the low level high ceiling guys we scout from other teams. You are correct, we had been drafting guys with certain baseball skill sets, and now its been said we will focus more on athletic ability.
DavidMcGr
Freshman
Posts: 51
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#15 » by DavidMcGr » Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:52 pm

Oh, I see what you're saying but I don't necessarily agree with it. I think we've done a good job of identifying under valued players and then, somewhat luckily, having them work out but I wouldn't call them toolsy or high upside players. Most of them were already in AA/AAA and either underwhelming (Cabrera, Choo) or universal studs (Marte, Escobar). I think it's ironic that the players who were commonly thought of as C prospects turned into real producers while the A level ones faltered, but that'll happen under small sample sizes. I think we're always looking for undervalued talent but we're clearly digging a bit deeper as we have just recently starting targeting guys who are clearly high potential yet still in A ball (Knapp and Hagadone).
http://sabrtribe.blogspot.com - Someday I'll have more time and write something with substance again.
Lando12
Freshman
Posts: 62
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#16 » by Lando12 » Wed Apr 21, 2010 5:00 am

Furrski wrote:You are correct, we had been drafting guys with certain baseball skill sets, and now its been said we will focus more on athletic ability.


I'm just hoping for more high school talent. I don't think you can draft successfully over the long term while ignoring such a large portion of the available talent. The focus on college players also leaves the system with a few problems. Lake County rarely has much talent. I don't know if I like stuffing all of our players into the top few levels of the system and force early roster decisions. Having the occasional Greenwell in the works gives a bit more flexibility.
The lines are drawn, the orders are in, the Dance Commander's ready to sin. Radio message from HQ: Dance Commander, we love you
User avatar
Furrski
Sophomore
Posts: 172
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 18, 2009

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#17 » by Furrski » Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:49 am

Signability also is a factor in their decision- it's easier for a high schooler to say "eh... No thanks, I'll go to college for a year and see if I can get drafted higher." Drafting out of college gives us the upper hand.
User avatar
Furrski
Sophomore
Posts: 172
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 18, 2009

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#18 » by Furrski » Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:55 am

DavidMcGr wrote:Oh, I see what you're saying but I don't necessarily agree with it. I think we've done a good job of identifying under valued players and then, somewhat luckily, having them work out but I wouldn't call them toolsy or high upside players. Most of them were already in AA/AAA and either underwhelming (Cabrera, Choo) or universal studs (Marte, Escobar). I think it's ironic that the players who were commonly thought of as C prospects turned into real producers while the A level ones faltered, but that'll happen under small sample sizes. I think we're always looking for undervalued talent but we're clearly digging a bit deeper as we have just recently starting targeting guys who are clearly high potential yet still in A ball (Knapp and Hagadone).


Shapiro has been quoted as saying his is his philosophy. Low level high ceiling, he calls it. I dont have time right now to dig for examples, but Grady was in A ball, right? I think B Phillips was low level. Recently Carlos Santana was in A ball. I do consider AA low, too, though technically we'd have to see how much time they spent there.

Luck is definitely the biggest factor, because they have so far to go, but they were targeted for a reason.
Lando12
Freshman
Posts: 62
And1: 0
Joined: Apr 08, 2010

Re: What happens if things go right? 

Post#19 » by Lando12 » Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:09 pm

Furrski wrote:Luck is definitely the biggest factor, because they have so far to go, but they were targeted for a reason.


I think if you look at BB/K numbers, the reason why certain guys get targeted becomes clear. Santana had control of the strike zone throughout his minor league career, even when he wasn't hitting. The same held true for Cabrera when he was age appropriate for his level. Grady's BB/K numbers were the only impressive part of his performance at the time of trade. It even holds true for some under the radar higher level guys like Marson, Brantley, and Valbuena. As I recall, Chisenhall's BB/K numbers were downright cartoonish (against admittedly poor competition) when he was drafted. It holds true for Kipnis as well.

Given their track record in the trade department, I would guess that they are on to something.
The lines are drawn, the orders are in, the Dance Commander's ready to sin. Radio message from HQ: Dance Commander, we love you

Return to Cleveland Indians