Musings From The Scou Ting Dynasty
by Nico on Nov 29, 2009 9:53 AM PST
Email
Print
Alas no, this post is not about Angel Villanova. Or Lincecum. Or Loaiza. Goodness gracious, does anyone play baseball and still obey the law? You know you jaywalk, Mark Ellis. Admit it -- just admit it! I'd make a terrific district attorney.
Are you currently in the process of trying to avoid thanksgiving leftovers? The best way is to quit cold turkey. That's not funny on so many levels.
Don't jump! OK do, and we can talk about scouting, not "metrics" and not "eyeballing," but that third way...Intrigued? Well, jump anyway and let's talk...
When deciding whether an A's player is going to be any good, I use a third method besides examining the numbers and checking what my eyes tell me: I listen to what the A's say and do about him.
For example, I have been bearish about Ryan Sweeney's ability to develop power (and by "bearish" I mean I can't bear to look at his HR totals), because the minor league track record says he never has hit for power and my eyes see an all-fields swing that can't hit HRs the other way. Yet the A's clearly seem to believe Sweeney will develop power and it's not just "happy talk" spin. They have said, consistently, they believe in Sweeney's ability to develop power, they dealt Carlos Gonzalez, and they are building their next contender with Sweeney at the core.
This affects my opinion. If the A's truly believe Sweeney will develop power, and are putting their money where their mouth is, that's the opinion of people who have access to more information than I do, people who see him more, people who know more about scouting than I do, people who have more riding on the accuracy of their beliefs than I have on mine.
Now of course it could be that the A's have no such belief about Sweeney -- that he's who they have so they're talking him up, or that they think he can be an excellent corner OFer without hitting for power. Who knows? My point isn't about Sweeney in particular. It's about all situations where I can use the A's opinion to help form my own.
The A's think Wallace might be able to stick at 3B. The A's felt it made sense to put Cahill into the rotation in 2009. At draft time, the A's thought more highly of Weeks than of Wallace. The A's feel Souza is worth protecting on the 40-man roster. The A's think Rajai Davis can hit well enough to start in CF. Rather than ever just "disagree," I always try, first, to ask myself, "Why?" Because there's often an answer that involves more complex insight, or more information, than I have or have access to.
Should "the A's believe..." be a "top 3" consideration when forming your own scouting opinion? I weigh it pretty highly. But then I'm in the position of knowing I'm rarely the smartest person in the room. Right, Poochini? Cindi?
33 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Interesting question
I generally consider past performance and independent scouting opinion before “team belief” but I could see it sitting in there at third. I definitely believe that the decision makers with the team have a greater amount of information and experience than me which means it’s not an unreasonable appeal to authority. But it’s worth remembering that the A’s are invested in the perception of their prospects. It’s in their best interest to have other teams think as highly of A’s prospects as possible.
The A's don't seem very invested in the perception of
Travis Buck or Gregorio Petit.
Anyway, we’re talking about the organization’s actions, not their words. When they choose to protect Justin Souza against the Rule 5 draft, that has nothing to do with selling him to the fans or other GMs who might trade for him.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
Well obviously perception is not their only motive
I was trying to make the point that team’s public statements and even actions are driven by more than just open and honest evaluation of the specific player.
of all of the examples you gave
one has actually performed at a high enough level in the majors over an extended time to warrant the “belief” — that’s of course, Rajai Davis,
I’m curious as to how Wallace has performed defensively at 3B in the minors. But really, if he shows he can rake offensively in the majors he doesn’t need to be a defensive whiz at 3b, just not terrible.
I was listening to the Baseball America podcast last night
they were talking about some 3B prospect who had body type worries, and were discussing whether he should be moved to 1B, and so forth. This is going to be a bit handwavey, as I was still hungover yesterday, so I recall neither player, nor team.
Anyway. The long and the short of it was, if you move a player to 1B, he’s going to play down – in both physical mobility and defensive production – to that position. If you keep him at 3B for as long as possible, you’re asking more of him, and if a player has ambitions and the drive to improve (and you’d hope he does?), then there’s more of a chance that he works on his fitness, footwork, body shape and mobility, etc, etc, because, when it comes down to it, no-one likes to fail.
Some of us get used to it, obviously, but that’s besides the point.
Anyway, the long and the short of it; the A’s might not actually believe that much in Wallace’ actually ability to hold down third, either now or in the long term, but they want to push him to succeed.
Essentially, this is their Pascal’s Wager, and probably should be taken with a certain degree of wishful thinking.
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does
Whoa, Pascal's wager??
You really think a lot of his upside then.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
hey, from your lips on Angels' wings
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does
Pascal's Wager is a logical fallacy
Just sayin’.
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
I'm aware of this; that layer is included in my describing the A's handling of Wallace
this was just a small part of my point, though.
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does
Anything that relies on a equation
that includes infinity on one side is fallacious.
My friend the statistics professor likes to question the “no cost” side of the equation by pointing out the tiny chance that God does exist but He hates believers and therefore will send everyone but atheists to Hell.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
A large amount of statistical analysis relies on infinity being on one side of the equation, in a manner of speaking
But yes. You are right, Pascal’s Wager is a flawed argument, ignoring as it does certain outcomes. Well, are the A’s not doing the same?
This part really wasn’t what my point was mostly about, to be honest
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does
I don't disagree with your first sentence.
And I still maintain my own first sentence. Complete the syllogism.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
What statistical analysis relies on infinity being on one side of the equation?
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
I like Sweeney, but...
…I don’t hold out much hope he’ll ever be a serious HR threat. A few times a year he get ahold of a ball and just CRUSHES it it the stratosphere, but not often enough to justify the optimism.
Every hitter likes fastballs, just like everybody likes ice cream. But you don't like it when someone's stuffing it into you by the gallon. That's what it feels like when Nolan Ryan's thrown balls by you. ~Reggie Jackson
Ryan Sweeney
He is just 24 years old right now. His doubles increased from 18 in 2008 to 31 in 2009 and his slugging percentage increased from .383 to .407, so I think he can get it done as the years progress. We have to be patient. I don’t expect someone at that age to just bang out 20 home runs like that. Only unbelievably special players like Hanley Ramirez can do that. With the way that Sweeney plays defense, handling both center and right field well with a pretty good arm, he should stick around.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Nov 29, 2009 1:47 PM PST up reply actions
He also increased his home run total from 5 to *GASP* 6 in 09!
but he also had 100 more at bats….
But in all seriousness, I’ve become more of a believer in Sweeney’s ability to develop power. He’s probably never going to hit twenty home runs, but I see no reason why he can’t slug .450 a year at his peak.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Nov 29, 2009 2:27 PM PST up reply actions
I'm really keen on the doubles.
If he can keep it up with the doubles I’m far more inclined to overlook the lack of HR power. HR’s would be nice, sure, but there’s a big difference between a singles hitter and a doubles hitter, and I’d be perfectly happy if he establishes himself as a good doubles hitter.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
on the subject of Ryan-o
according to the Hardball Times, he’s a rather good baserunner
Which does rather add credence to the ‘he doesn’t look like he runs quickly but he covers ground rapidly’ idea.
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does
What's interesting to me
is the angels on the list. Desmond DeChone ranks high, but many of the Angels and ex angels are in the neutral territoy. More evidence that their “style” is not as effective as CW says. (Announcers CW not mine)
Plenty of guys have power outbursts (and by power, I mean HR total) when they're not supposed to
See: Mauer, Joe
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Oh, I don't doubt he'll continue to develop into a fine player...
…and I favor keeping him (barring someone better coming along), but I don’t see the HR potential happening.
Every hitter likes fastballs, just like everybody likes ice cream. But you don't like it when someone's stuffing it into you by the gallon. That's what it feels like when Nolan Ryan's thrown balls by you. ~Reggie Jackson
Thats just like A's fans to.......
complain about one of the best 2 hitters in the lineup, simply because he doesn’t hit for much power IN OAKLAND, yet!
Forgetting that Oakland is CAVERNOUS to say the least, the A’s don’t have power anywhere in the lineup outside of Jack Cust. I’ll make all the Sweeney dislikers a deal, solve our hitting problems/power problems at the other 6 positions (excluding DH w/ Cust, Zukes at C, and Sweeney in RF), and then we can complain about Sweeney.
However, while he is one of the best 2-3 guys in the lineup (+ Zukes and maybe Raj), I say we have plenty of bigger problems to deal with. Add the fact that he plays phenomenal defense, and I say we DEFINITELY have bigger problems as an organization than RF.
Just my 2 cents……
"I mean, come on, man. I'm a vet. Don't talk to me like that. If they do, I'll just smile." Nnamdi Asomugha
Beane seems far from convinced Wallace can stick at 3B. Here's the quote from his
interview with Sickels:
JOHN SICKELS
The other big bat in Triple-A is Brett Wallace. Can he stick at third base?
BILLY BEANE:
Well we don’t know for sure yet, but we won’t take him off third base until he proves he can’t handle it. His bat has come very quickly, he was just a year out of college and hit well in Triple-A. The bat looks special to us. Sometimes with guys like that, the glove gets panned by scouts just because the bat has come so quickly and they are looking for something to criticize. Also, I think Brett’s defense gets panned unfairly because of the way his body looks.
JOHN SICKELS:
It looks to me like he has a strong arm and decent hands, but his range is limited.
BILLY BEANE:
Maybe, but third base is a big hole in our system, and if he can make it there it would fit very nicely into the plan. The other factor is that Brett believes he can play third base, he’s committed to it, and it is foolish not to let him try. So we’re keeping him there until he proves otherwise.
I’d still rather have Beltre or Figgins than Wallace at 3B. In fact I’d breathe easier if they in Beltre and a defense first SS, and move Wallace to 1B or DH.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
Beltre is one of my least favorite players ever.
It is my perception that he roided up for the final year of his contract, put up a deceptive season, and then after he signed his name on the dotted line, quit juicing and went “ha ha, I tricked you!”
I think Shoeless Joe Jackson has more honor than Adrian Beltre.
"Flea Markets aren't just for blind dates anymore!"- The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Dec 2, 2009 3:13 PM PST up reply actions
Cahill is the one where the organization opinion has had the biggest impact on my view.
By the numbers, he was terrible last year — his 5.47 tRA* was 103rd of 119 starting pitchers listed at StatCorner. By my eyeballs, he looked nowhere near ready on most days — great movement on the sinker, but no command; a potentially plus knuckle-curve that he didn’t seem to have confidence in.
But the A’s didn’t send him down, they didn’t send him to the pen, and they didn’t shut him down at the end of the year. This makes me think that they believe that he’ll be fine, and can make the necessary adjustments at the major league level.
He did improve in the second half, cutting his HR from 18 to 9, upping his K/BB from 1.15 to 1.39 and lowering his ERA 4.67 to 4.59 despite his BABIP rising from .259 to .292.
If they keep him in the rotation to start 2010, I’m going to have a lot more optimism about him than if they demote him for Eveland or somebody like that.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
So you saw the knuckle curve?
I literally only remember one, and on was 10 feet in front of the plate when it landed.
I know that he threw a few at the beginning of the season, but I can’t remember what they looked like for the life of me…
Did it actually look good?
God, if he could actually throw a good breaking pitch, then I would believe in his potential.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Nov 29, 2009 6:24 PM PST up reply actions
I saw several pitches that looked like knuckle-curves,
but ultimately the breaking pitch Cahill seemed most able to throw well was the slider. His changeup came along nicely throughout the season, so he is now poised to enter 2010 with a good changeup and pretty good slider — it’s all about “fastball command” for him.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Ya I should say I saw pitches that I thought were supposed to be knuckle curves
but he abandoned it pretty early.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 29, 2009 7:06 PM PST up reply actions
The other encouraging thing about Cahill is that his GB rate rose significantly while his
LD rate dropped at the last six weeks or so of the season
:
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
I seem to remember reading somewhere
that sinker ball type pitchers can improve during the season, as they get more tired. IIRC, this is due to them getting less wrist snap in the delivery, meaning that the lift generated by a fastball (a normal fastball will seem to rise, due to the spin) is less; hence, the ball sinks more, it comes more off the end of the bat, and hence more ground balls are generated.
I might be talking out of my hat, of course.
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does
This was covered in Ball Four
and also my theory on why Kirk Saarloos absolutely sucked when he wasn’t a starter.
Sinkerballers need to throw a LOT to keep their arms tired and get more sink on their pitches.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
LD rate for pitchers is pretty much random
It’s the primary reason why extracting information from pitchers’ BABIP is like trying to tape a shredded document back together.
His GB rate did go up, but the decline in LD rate is almost certainly a meaningless coincidence.
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
![](<a href="http://s516.photobucket.com/albums/u323/NicoPemantle/?action=view¤t=grouchomarxjpeg.jpg" target="_blank"><img src=){kind=link}