Gotta show some Ks!Originally Posted by jpx7
Gotta show some Ks!
Garmel (06-22-2017)
Yeah, "dominant" isn't how I'd describe him so far. Lots of room for improvement. But he can obviously get better.
You brought up Tate and Jay, him responding to that is not a straw man. Tate was rated above Benintendi and Tucker, but Jay was not. That draft, much like most however was really divided into tiers. You had a definite top 3 with Swanson, Bregman, and Rodgers, then the next group of Tate, Fulmer, Cameron, Tucker, Benintendi, and Jay were all a bunch of 55 grade guys mixed in together. Just like there was a top 5 this year, and then a drop off, BPA is usually groups, not single players except for a some years. The drafting the last couple years doesn't justify anything, the biggest loss from draft position isn't the players you get, it's the loss of draft pool money that limits your options and flexibility for signing other players. Now I agree that deliberate tanking like 76ers NBA style is not something I'd want to see, but on the flip side bringing up Dansby and having Snitker manage the pitchers last year like every game was game 7 of the playoffs caused us to drop from 2nd to 5th and lose 1.5 mil in pool money, and there is zero need for that. There is a middle ground between tanking and trying to win games as hard as you can in losing seasons in order to "finish strong".
I think it worked out fine... I love we got wright and waters
And we could have gotten another 1.5 mil player or three 500k ones on top of those two, just because we got two good players doesn't mean it's not tremendously better to get 4-5, that's just freaking common sense. Is that one win in 2016 better than another top 100 prospect?
Maybe not, but snit earned a job. Think it was worth it to him? I have no problem with trying to win every game no matter what... guess that's just the competitiveness in me.
I don't want a manager in-game managing to lose games. The players playing want to win. I'm not upset everything didn't end up absolutely ideal, because it all worked out great.
Thanks for that. I appreciate the time and going through it.
I feel like a lot of the Pro Newk stuff is based on the outcomes. We all need to look more to the substance and not just he outcomes.
3 Ks in 6 innings in the national league (where you are almost guaranteed 1 K for the pitcher if not 2) is not TOR stuff. It just isn't. Even if he throws two consecutive no hitters. Again, I haven't watched him so I'm not trying to say he's Chuck James. No hot take. But I'm concerned by the box score and the two pitches. But maybe a successful year sets him up to spend all off season working on the change and then he comes back on another level.
jpx7 (06-22-2017)
I mean...it was his 3rd start. I definitely want to see more Ks as well. But after the 2nd, he was getting a lot of early-AB swings and pop-ups/grounders. He had back-to-back 7-pitch innings. You're not going to get many Ks if guys are swinging early in the count and making outs. I want more Ks but it's hardly something to be concerned about at this point.
His FIP (3.57) and xFIP (4.33) more accurately reflect how he has actually pitched. Like a #4...which is what a 2 pitch guy with fringe command is.
He can work on the change. He can work on better command in the zone. He has shown he has the tools and is doing just fine 3 starts into his MLB career. That wouldn't change if his ERA really was 4+ right now.
If he makes those improvements he can be a TOR. If he doesn't he's a "stuff" #4 everyone continues to dream on...like Folty currently is.
jpx7 (06-22-2017)
Yeah, blowing out our relievers arms long term because our manager can't manage a bullpen will be great for us. Snitker was a horrible hire. Meanwhile Colorado is doing fantastic with Black.
jpx7 (06-22-2017), WaitingFor2017 (06-22-2017)
While I agree with your outlook based on the version of Newk we have seen thus far, I don't think we have seen a true representation of what Newk is yet (for better or worse).
I have no doubts the strikeouts will be coming soon. At the very least, he should strikeout more than Folty. I also have no doubts the walks will be coming soon too.
My goals is that the Braves have a long run of being serious contenders/divisional champs. I don't have much interest in being the Marlins.
Give yourself enough chances at it and you ought to win the big one eventually.
Which is somewhat ironic as I would characterize many of the pitchers of the Wren era as "non-stuff" #1-2's.
The first few games for a new callup are not usually the best predictor, but if you had to choose a guy with talent who struggles in his first few games versus a guy with talent who does well in his first few games, which are you going to choose?
He certainly hasn't been prefect, but he has been effective, and like any new guy getting his first taste of MLB hitters, I expect we have not yet seen his best work. I am expecting that he will continue to get better with experience.
I'm not clear on why you brought up Chuck James but it was an interesting and impressive allusion.
I'd suggest that if Newcomb throws two no hitters this year without striking out 9 per IP, that I'd not be too worried about whether he was TOR or not. The world is so strikeout obsessed at the moment and I don't see where it is doing anything positive for pitchers or the game, but I guess that's where we are.
If he'd struggled, he'd be back in AAA with, based on how things have gone lately, somewhat shaken confidence. I think its better for him to have done well and at least have that to work on.
It's tough to know what Newcomb's marching orders are at this point. It's very possible they've asked him to concentrate on his primary two pitches to start out because they are his best pitches. I'm not sure where he command lags when he walks guys, but perhaps it is with the secondary offerings? They very well may be trying to get him to showcase his best pitches to give him confidence while he works on the others. Not too unusual to ask someone young and nervous to keep it simple.
An out is an out. I don't care if he gets em to ground out or strikeout as long as he's effective.
I think we've gotten smart enough to understand why Ks are important.
Pitchers can't typically control what happens when a ball goes in play... so a K results in either a HR or a .320 BA
Same. But the same goes, as well: winning games in 2017 is immaterial to that, and losing games may marginally improve their 2018 draft outcomes (and thus long-term contention window). Likewise, I don't think it's in the best interest of a "long run" for the front-office to pursue a course at the trade-deadline that attempts to make the team look more competitive in 2017, for their sparkly new suburban park; nor for the brass, this offseason, to make moves designed to "compete" in 2018, just because of the "quick rebuild" promises they made initially. They tore it down, for better or worse; it takes some patience to build it back up right, and halfway through is not the time to get anxious and abandon the program.
"For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote