BrandoFan Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 The Great One: 229ab 25runs 12doubles 1homer 42rbi 24 bb 25 so 3sb 0cs 11gidp .332 .395 .406 Reed: 216 35 18 4 51 40 16 26 6 5 . 343 .441 .491 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 The Great One: 229ab 25runs 12doubles 1homer 42rbi 24 bb 25 so 3sb 0cs 11gidp .332 .395 .406 Reed: 216 35 18 4 51 40 16 26 6 5 . 343 .441 .491 So what's your point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted June 12, 2003 Author Share Posted June 12, 2003 The Great One: 229ab 25runs 12doubles 1homer 42rbi 24 bb 25 so 3sb 0cs 11gidp .332 .395 .406 Reed: 216 35 18 4 51 40 16 26 6 5 . 343 .441 .491 So what's your point? As a Texas Lit major, you should now of all people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 The Great One: 229ab 25runs 12doubles 1homer 42rbi 24 bb 25 so 3sb 0cs 11gidp .332 .395 .406 Reed: 216 35 18 4 51 40 16 26 6 5 . 343 .441 .491 So what's your point? As a Texas Lit major, you should now of all people. This is Joe Mauer and Jeremy Reed were talking about correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Both players are doing very well. But by your numbers in bold it looks like you were trying to make a statement that Reed is much better. That is obviously open to interpretation, but considering Mauer is two years younger, playing at the same level and plays a more difficult position, I don't see much validity in your point. Reed's numbers are quite impressive and Sox fans should be excited about his development. But to have a left-handed hitting catcher that is barely 20 years old and putting up those kind of numbers is very rare. I'd like to have both, but don't ask me to choose which I'd rather have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Mauer is a catching prospect who is tearing the cover off the ball. He's an amazing talent. Him and Jeff Mathis (Angels) are two of the best catching prospects in the game. Reed is really putting up great numbers too, but I'd trade Reed for Mauer anyday of the week and I'm a HUGE Reed fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted June 12, 2003 Author Share Posted June 12, 2003 Mauer is a catching prospect who is tearing the cover off the ball. He's an amazing talent. Him and Jeff Mathis (Angels) are two of the best catching prospects in the game. 1000 OPS is "tearing the cover off the ball", catcher or not. Barely at 800 is merely "very good". One homer from a no-speed 6'4, 215 pound phenom is also very humbling and so are 24 walks half-way through the season of A-ball.. Color me unimpressed. Not until 2007-ish anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MnSoxFan Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Still arguing this point, hmmm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTC2784 Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 1000 OPS is "tearing the cover off the ball", catcher or not. Barely at 800 is merely "very good". One homer from a no-speed 6'4, 215 pound phenom is also very humbling and so are 24 walks half-way through the season of A-ball.. Color me unimpressed. Not until 2007-ish anyway. Like someone said, a lot of high school players develop their "pop" after a couple of years in the minors. Also, a catcher hitting .300 and playing solid D is much harder to find than a CF playing solid D and hitting .300. You just don't find offensive catchers that can play D too often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 1000 OPS is "tearing the cover off the ball", catcher or not. Barely at 800 is merely "very good". One homer from a no-speed 6'4, 215 pound phenom is also very humbling and so are 24 walks half-way through the season of A-ball.. Color me unimpressed. Not until 2007-ish anyway. Good thing you aren't the person he needs to impress. And those that actually work in the game and make a living evaluating guys feel differently than you do. I'm sure he's relieved about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted June 12, 2003 Author Share Posted June 12, 2003 1000 OPS is "tearing the cover off the ball", catcher or not. Barely at 800 is merely "very good". One homer from a no-speed 6'4, 215 pound phenom is also very humbling and so are 24 walks half-way through the season of A-ball.. Color me unimpressed. Not until 2007-ish anyway. Good thing you aren't the person he needs to impress. And those that actually work in the game and make a living evaluating guys feel differently than you do. I'm sure he's relieved about that. Are these the same scouts who completely "missed" 80 % of current all-stars? Cause we all know just how hyped Manny Ramirez, Magglio Ordonzez, Sammy Sosa, Palmero, Piazza, Pujols, Unit, Sheffield, Shilling, Burly, Lois Gonzalez, Padilla, Foulke, Edgar, Borowski, Catalonato, Dye, Hudson, Wunsht, Marte and literally 100s of other quality players were coming up through the system...For every cant miss Mark Prior, there are 10 Sweeneys, Edmondes and Jaime Moyers rising from relative obscurity. Just as most stock brokers/market analysts, most of these pros are on the money maybe 30% of the time. Maybe less. Such is the human nature and unpredicability of player development. Yet you wouldn't know that judging from the sheer arrogance, ego and unadulterated hype emanating from the Learned Ones...I wouldn't worship at their altar quite as much if I were you, tends to cloud one's own ability to evaluate. Lemmingitis is a very serious disease. Reed has been better than Mauer this season. Period. He is only 20? Have you ever considered the fact that maybe some players dominate because they mature earlier than others but also hit their ceiling much sooner? Could that have possibly accounted for Joe having a superior "eye" in High School? There is a very small chance he will be an all-star for Minnesta before 2007 as it is (how many HS prospects do? 3%? 5), so from the Sox major league team standpoint, I am looking strictly at short term: 2003-2004, maybe 2005. After that is another ballgame altogether. He is nothing but a singles hitter in A right now, come back to me when he is "filled out", "grown up" and is ready to hit more than 1 homer and has more than 24 walks. Dismissed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MnSoxFan Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Guess we have our scout eh Rex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Guess we have our scout eh Rex Yep, obviously he knows more than we do and all professional scouts and baseball operations people. If they are only right 30% of the time, then Brando why don't you give it a shot? You'll be right 10, maybe 15% of the time?? If you're lucky, that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted June 12, 2003 Author Share Posted June 12, 2003 Yep, obviously he knows more than we do and all professional scouts and baseball operations people. If they are only right 30% of the time, then Brando why don't you give it a shot? 1. It's not an 'IF'- they definately miss WAY more then they hit, ridiculously so. Truly competent scouts are as rare as really good actors, traders, etc. 30% was very generous. Hyping up 100 kids in hope one of them hits it big (npi) ain't my bag, baby. No glory in it. 2. I admitted Mauer could very well be legit. But as far as 2003-04 time window goes, I am not scared of him as I would have beem of Mark Prior being nabbed by Twinckies 2 years ago. 3. Same principle goes for Reed- he may in fact be overmatched at AA/AAA, but this season he has definately been better. Those 11 GIDPs alone should effectively lower Mauer's Real OPS into mid 700s whereas Reed's speed, including but not limited to SB, elevates his into 1000 zone. So to speak. But whatever, I am sure you know better. How could you not? If they are only right 30% of the time, then Brando why don't you give it a shot? You'll be right 10, maybe 15% of the time?? If you're lucky, that is I'll take Conceited Presumption for 101, Alex. Rex, that whole knee-jerk "why don''t you try it yourself, if you think you're so smart" thing was tired when Bullard said it. You're better than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 1000 OPS is "tearing the cover off the ball", catcher or not. Barely at 800 is merely "very good". One homer from a no-speed 6'4, 215 pound phenom is also very humbling and so are 24 walks half-way through the season of A-ball.. Color me unimpressed. Not until 2007-ish anyway. Like someone said, a lot of high school players develop their "pop" after a couple of years in the minors. Also, a catcher hitting .300 and playing solid D is much harder to find than a CF playing solid D and hitting .300. You just don't find offensive catchers that can play D too often. Mauer's power will develop. I can't think of many high school outfielders that hit for a lot of power right away. Typically its two to three or even four years down the line when they start developing home run power. Basically its as they fill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Yep, obviously he knows more than we do and all professional scouts and baseball operations people. If they are only right 30% of the time, then Brando why don't you give it a shot? 1. It's not an 'IF'- they definately miss WAY more then they hit, ridiculously so. Truly competent scouts are as rare as really good actors, traders, etc. 30% was very generous. Hyping up 100 kids in hope one of them hits it big (npi) ain't my bag, baby. No glory in it. 2. I admitted Mauer could very well be legit. But as far as 2003-04 time window goes, I am not scared of him as I would have beem of Mark Prior being nabbed by Twinckies 2 years ago. 3. Same principle goes for Reed- he may in fact be overmatched at AA/AAA, but this season he has definately been better. Those 11 GIDPs alone should effectively lower Mauer's Real OPS into mid 700s whereas Reed's speed, including but not limited to SB, elevates his into 1000 zone. So to speak. But whatever, I am sure you know better. How could you not? I'll take Conceited Presumption for 101, Alex. Rex, that whole knee-jerk "why don''t you try it yourself, if you think you're so smart" thing was tired when Bullard said it. You're better than that. They miss way more then they hit because of the sheer numbers. When you draft and scout as many guys as you do, there are going to be plenty of guys that don't make it. Basically the only thing they can do is look at the raw tools and find guys that have the potential to turn into good major league players. Its basically a crapshoot. You have to guess what they will develop into, look at what they have and make a guess based on their background and interview the type of work ethic that they will have. Then you do your very best to project where they will be. Also, plenty of guys get drafted soley to fill roster spots. Of course some of those guys end up making it or falling through the cracks. Also remember, a lot of latter round picks can be talented. In regards to the non american born players, its a lot more difficult simply because the resources aren't there to scout all these guys, etc. Plus you have governments that could be against you taking the players as well and it also can cost some money depending on the "hype" of the player. Scouts do know what they are doing, imo. I'm not going to ever say how I could do as a scout. I think there is potential for me to be a front office type person, but until you actually go through it and deal with what they do, its hard to say things. Plus, most of us don't get the opportunity to watch guys play and if we do, only very few of us see them on a conistent basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted June 12, 2003 Author Share Posted June 12, 2003 1000 OPS is "tearing the cover off the ball", catcher or not. Barely at 800 is merely "very good". One homer from a no-speed 6'4, 215 pound phenom is also very humbling and so are 24 walks half-way through the season of A-ball.. Color me unimpressed. Not until 2007-ish anyway. Like someone said, a lot of high school players develop their "pop" after a couple of years in the minors. Also, a catcher hitting .300 and playing solid D is much harder to find than a CF playing solid D and hitting .300. You just don't find offensive catchers that can play D too often. Mauer's power will develop. I can't think of many high school outfielders that hit for a lot of power right away. Typically its two to three or even four years down the line when they start developing home run power. Basically its as they fill. But that's the crux of my point: by the time Mauer develops (I should "IF" because a future HOF player is not as impressive as I thought he'd be in his 3rd ml year, against his peers) to be Pirzinki's superior, we will have a Democrat running this country. Meanwhile, Prior began his dominating ways right away. As a Sox fan I am happy about tha as I am about Reed's performance, which is clearly better right now than Mauer's. Hehe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTC2784 Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 But that's the crux of my point: by the time Mauer develops (I should "IF" because a future HOF player is not as impressive as I thought he'd be in his 3rd ml year, against his peers) to be Pirzinki's superior, we will have a Democrat running this country. Meanwhile, Prior began his dominating ways right away. I thought this was about Mauer vs. Reed. I think everyone agrees that Prior beats the hell out of Mauer.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 But that's the crux of my point: by the time Mauer develops (I should "IF" because a future HOF player is not as impressive as I thought he'd be in his 3rd ml year, against his peers) to be Pirzinki's superior, we will have a Democrat running this country. Meanwhile, Prior began his dominating ways right away. I thought this was about Mauer vs. Reed. I think everyone agrees that Prior beats the hell out of Mauer.... Prior beats the hell out of anyone in the majors. I don't think you could trade one player for him straight up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 1000 OPS is "tearing the cover off the ball", catcher or not. Barely at 800 is merely "very good". One homer from a no-speed 6'4, 215 pound phenom is also very humbling and so are 24 walks half-way through the season of A-ball.. Color me unimpressed. Not until 2007-ish anyway. Like someone said, a lot of high school players develop their "pop" after a couple of years in the minors. Also, a catcher hitting .300 and playing solid D is much harder to find than a CF playing solid D and hitting .300. You just don't find offensive catchers that can play D too often. Mauer's power will develop. I can't think of many high school outfielders that hit for a lot of power right away. Typically its two to three or even four years down the line when they start developing home run power. Basically its as they fill. But that's the crux of my point: by the time Mauer develops (I should "IF" because a future HOF player is not as impressive as I thought he'd be in his 3rd ml year, against his peers) to be Pirzinki's superior, we will have a Democrat running this country. Meanwhile, Prior began his dominating ways right away. As a Sox fan I am happy about tha as I am about Reed's performance, which is clearly better right now than Mauer's. Hehe. Prior was also still in college at the same point Mauer is right now. You have to be able to understand how to differentiate between someone who had three years of Division I experience and someone coming out of high school. If you are trying to compare a half season's stats for two guys at the same level with that big of a difference in experience (not even factoring that the HS kid is from a cold weather state), then you are comparing apples to oranges. If it will make you happy, I will concede that Reed's numbers for this first half of the season are indeed better than Mauer's. One could argue that relative to their position that is not necessarily true, but I will give that to you as well, because of how great Reed's numbers are. So if that was your point, then you win. But I just can't understand trying to compare the two. I still don't get the point in doing so. Both seem to be on track to make an impact in the Major Leagues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 I don't know who is right.... Time will tell. But, I sure enjoyed reading this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 In a way you can say we are both right, depending on the point you are trying to make. I don't agree with Brando's comparison, but the bottom line is that right now, Reed does have better numbers than Mauer and is probably a year closer to the Big Leagues even though they are both at the same level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marsh Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 chisoxfn said: "Basically the only thing they can do is look at the raw tools and find guys that have the potential to turn into good major league players. Its basically a crapshoot. " not trying to pick on you but this statement made me think of the book "Moneyball" which i'm currently in the middle of reading. the book's premise from what i gathered so far was that the above quote and belief system is a part of what allows the A's to be competitive in a small market. "performance scouting" and plate discipline as opposed to "tools" and major league body type are what the book preaches in scouting players. maybe i should have started a seperate topic but is anyone reading or read the book? it's really interesting. one thing that kinda shocked me was that the way they portray billy beane as being highly emotional, b****ing out players, very controlling of everything in the organization from the draft to the batting lineup, and even telling the manager where to stand in the dugout. it really reminded me of kw as far as attitude. unfortunatly that is the only comparison i can make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Moneyball has had Billy Beane backtracking with a lot of baseball executives. It is widely believed that the book overstated his methods because of the author's fascination with Beane. He talks about how Beane calls clubs stupid for drafting HS players, when arguably his best position player was a HS draftee (Chavez), which of course it fails to mention. There were other ommissions of contradictions to their "new approach" as well, but I can't recall them off the top of my head. The book and the media along with it seems to portray Beane as a guy who came up with some "new concept" that no one had ever heard of. That is completely laughable. Perhaps they emphasize certain stats more, but it's not like they re-invented the wheel here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marsh Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 rex, i thought it did a good job in the first few chapters of establishing the origins of, i guess you could call it "sabermetrics". it doesn't really say they (the A's or billy beane)invented the system but were really the first team to really utilize it. have you read it? i do think that they over-emphasize some things but reading it really makes me wonder on whether or not they want to resign tajada or to a lesser extent chavez because of thier lack of plate discipline/#of pitches they see per at bat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.