Yeah he has not hit much (or well) right handed - and he has not made a ton of contact ... but Farrell has shown some ability to bring these guys in without overwhelming them.
Yeah he has not hit much (or well) right handed - and he has not made a ton of contact ... but Farrell has shown some ability to bring these guys in without overwhelming them.
I see....Originally Posted by mvp 78
.691 in AA
.797 in A+
That's better than Shaw recently and when he was in the minors.
Not great, but maybe "good enough".
No last offseason was not the time to do it, because you don't change a top prospects decision based on what the team needs might be in 1-3 years. You make those decisions when a guy is MLB ready.
struck out in nearly half of his trips to the plate on that side.
So, you're fine with throwing these guys out there at the ML level with just 10 games at their new position?
Something might need to change. Either we might have to move their positions earlier, or we keep them on the farm longer. We might be playing with fire. We're lucky we didn't get burned.
Wow.
So much drama over one prospect coming up.
It's a fucking game.
"Hating the Yankees like it's a religion since 94'" RIP Mike.
"It's also a simple and indisputable fact that WAR isn't the be-all end-all in valuations, especially in real life. Wanna know why? Because an ace in run-prevention for 120 innings means more often than not, a sub-standard pitcher covering for the rest of the IP that pitcher fails to provide. You can't see value in a vacuum when a player does not provide full-time production."
17 out of 77 PAs in A+ is not half, but he did in AA (19/43)
Total: 36/120 or 30% .
There was more "drama" when the called up Beni "out of desperation" we were told.
I was only looking at AA ... and 30% is extremely high. Now scouts and people smarter than me can suss out whether that is approach (see Napoli, Dunn) or flat not hitting certain kinds of pitches.
This does not temper my excitement at the promotion - baseball is fun, and this is fun. I am grateful for things like Bogaerts joining the lineup in 2013, Benintendi this year, Clay throwing a no-no out of nowhere in 2007 ... makes the dog days pass easier.
Yes
I'm a thousand times more ok with it than saying "hey player xyz might not be able to play position w in 2 years so we should move him here now because that might be a hole in a year or two"
No team in baseball operates that way. If 1/2 the teams out there conducted business like that I'd say you have a point but the fact that all 30 teams do not should tell us something right there.
Because that's exactly what happened. Otherwise, they would not have pulled their trousers down for Beltran. But then again, common sense need not apply.
We miss you Mike.
lol
"Hating the Yankees like it's a religion since 94'" RIP Mike.
"It's also a simple and indisputable fact that WAR isn't the be-all end-all in valuations, especially in real life. Wanna know why? Because an ace in run-prevention for 120 innings means more often than not, a sub-standard pitcher covering for the rest of the IP that pitcher fails to provide. You can't see value in a vacuum when a player does not provide full-time production."
When have I come even close to saying that's what we should do?
You guys are continually misrepresenting what I said and believe.
I did call for Bogey's position change to 3B, and I wasn't the only one. I read what scouts were saying, and I fell for it. i was wrong and admitted it often. What I felt about Bogey was not something systemic in my beliefs on prospect protocol. I had mentioned that even if Bogey was not going to be converted to 3B, it wouldn't hurt to give him some reps at 3B "just in case". It all ended up working out fine in 2013, and Bogey has turned into a fine SS.
Moncada's case is completely different. There were reports he wasn't advancing at 2B and others that said he was doing great there. His bat clearly looked like he was on a fast track to ML readiness. All I said was we should THINK ABOUT starting to GIVE HIM SOME REPS at 3B SOONER RATHER THAN LATER, and you'd have thunk I invented a whole new system. I never said move him to 3B now, but many acted as though I did.
I was shouted at that I didn't "undertsand protocol" and when the Sox started giving him reps at 3B 2 weeks after I posted my suggestion, user still said I was wrong.
Teams seldom speed up timetables due to quicker-than-expected adjustments by unique players or out of desperation due to an injury or sudden struggle from a ML player, but it's not some fantasy.
Moncada was looking so awesome at the plate (and I don't fear the K like some do) that I felt an adjustment might be called for.
User and others said you don't change a player's level and position within the same season. That was the protocol and that's what works. Putting too much on a kid's plate is not what teams do.
Apparently the Sox either put too much on his plate or they are acting out of desperation and taking a gamble, or protocol is not etched in stone for every player (or a combination of the 3). Someone tell me, if I'm missing a fourth option.
.
I'm a thousand times more ok with it than saying "hey player xyz might not be able to play position within 2 years so we should move him here now because that might be a hole in a year or two"
I am too. I don't know who was saying move Moncada to 3B two years ago.
No this was based on the fact that earlier in the year most would not have penciled him into being brought up this early. The Sox are being overly aggressive as DD has a reputation of doing.
Our position was, if the team thought he was ready or close to ready it makes sense to move them and give them a little bit of time at a new position. There is a stark difference between that and developing a guy at a new position.
And that is not the same thing as "giving him a few innings over at another position because he might move there one day" that is something else organizations just don't ever do with a guy unless they feel his ultimate role is a utility profile.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote