Where was Folty raised. How does the weather there compare with where Newcomb was raised.Originally Posted by thethe
Where was Folty raised. How does the weather there compare with where Newcomb was raised.
Hotter climate so it helps flexibiltiy of the ligaments. Gooooood analysis
Hotter climate? Folty did not grow up in the sunbelt.
Well some of us are lucky enough to see these guys and will be be wrong just like pro scouts. As frustrating as Newk is, I love watching him pitch. More so than a few of our prospects who most like better. I hate the walks and they are always his undoing. But they didn't knock him around the park.....I'm hopeful..if I had a big three that I've seen more than once : Allard, Newk and Wiegel were tops based on stuff. This year Gohara has blown me away in the one start I saw.
By that notion then all pro scouts are wrong due to all of the hyped prospects that fail. Again, this is not myself or anyone else hating on our prospects. It's just a fact that most pitching prospects, even the top ones, bust. Odds are high Newcomb is one of them. Could be that he doesn't and it's someone like Anderson or Allard. Braves might run unusually high and have more pitches do work at the MLB level. They could also get really unlucky and only have a couple of contributors. Even our FO believes that. From today's AJC.
So what’s the answer? According to Coppolella, it lies in weight of numbers. “The best protection is top-shelf pitching depth,” he said. “We just keep taking pitchers, trading for pitchers, developing pitchers. We spent money for (big-league starting) pitching this year, but we didn’t give up any pitching depth.”
Here he voiced the line that has become the Braves’ boilerplate, generally ascribed to the famed scout Paul Snyder: “He used to say it takes 10 (pitchers) to get two.” In an industry where success hinges on tender arms, the only possible inoculation is volume.
There are still a lot of fly balls for Kemp to not catch this season hero. And he will not continue with an OPS of 1.000+.
But by all means, continue to chirp 1/6 of the way through the bet.
Good gosh, this crap gets old. We get it, we all know what the historical data shows. And we could end up better off or worse off than the historical data tells us should happen. Braves fans will usually tend to be more positive and hope we fall on the 'better off' end. Great. Do we have to rehash this and have us all told we're dumb over and over because we are, after all, fans?
This was a simple thread about excitement over Allard until Enscheff couldn't stand the enjoyment any longer and had to tell us all Allard is as likely to have his head fall off as he is to develop into an ace. Awesome.
Hudson2 (05-05-2017)
See, this is a perfect example of someone not understanding what I wrote.
I am not advocating for any particular pitcher to bust, or for any particular pitcher to be great. I pegged Allard and Soroka as the guys I think will contribute to the MLB level, but the exact names aren't the point.
The point is that 70% of the pitching prospects ranked 50+ over the last 25 years have busted. All of these pitchers were scouted by pro scouts. All of these guys had good stuff. All of them had questions about a 3rd pitch, their size, mechanics, or control. All of these guys moved up and down the lists. All of the questions facing the Braves current pitching prospects were faced by the guys on these lists over the past 25 years.
Therefore, it is silly to think the Braves current prospects rated similarly will have any higher a success rate just because you are a fan of the team.
Yeah...that's not what I said at all. Work on reading comprehension.
I posted my ranking of the pitchers in response to someone else posting their ranking. Several of you got offended that I don't think the Braves will produce a dozen Aces ovwer the next 5 years, and this discussion broke out.
If you don't like it, don't read it.
That is rich.
And yet, it is entirely possible they will have a higher success rate. So just let us idiots dream about it.
interesting to see JC quote Paul Snyder on the 5 to 1 ratio. That's how it tends to work out with pitching prospects. You tend to lose one per level as the move up. 5 in low A become 4 in high A then 3 in AA then 2 in A AS then 1 in the majors...on average
Garmel (05-05-2017)
the braves had Glavine, Smoltz, Avery, mercker, Pete smith, Jason Schmidt, Hanson, wainwright, and others during the period.
I guess what I don't understand about the stats boys is why they are so anxious for the braves prospects to perform exactly at the "historical rate."
A historical rate with a fairly simple methodology with perhaps limited application.
And why the stats boys are so anxious to embrace small sample sizes when they support their arguments but so loath when it doesn't.
Enscheff tried to declare his amateur gm creeds bases on ten games earlier but a sixth of a season is silly now?
I mean it's a message board and no one here is actually qualified to do much so it's good fun, but wait and see would not be the worst move.
Now name all the ones who failed
It's about having realistic expectations about our prospects and what we need to do to be contenders in the future.
I'll chip in with Bubba Nelson, Jung Bong and Macay McBride.
I would add everyone here is free to have whatever expectations they want. None of us is trying to impose our expectations on anyone else. But some of us do think it is relevant to look at the historical record...in particular historical bust rates for pitching prospects. Those not interested in such a discussion don't have to participate.
David Nied, Derek Lilliquist, Bruce Chen, Bret DeVall, Dan Meyer, Jose Capellan.
Bruce Chen had quite a decent career. Not a star. Neid would have remained a stud if it weren't for injuries. Capellan was more hyped by Braves fans than pundits. DeVall was never thought of as a high ceiling guy and was never ranked in any lists if I remember right. Meyer had helium based on one or two decent years. That group couldn't touch the raw talent we have now
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote