Around the League - 2021 Szn

jpx7 said:
And yes: that means a mid-season trade of Scherzer and Turner to the Braves for a package that most outside observers deem "light".
Click to expand...

Look, if those observers can't appreciate how tough it is to give up both William Contreras AND Victor Vodnik, that's really on them.
 
is Kieboom kind of being written off already? i know he’s been rough but i wouldn’t call him a bust.

i’m not sure i’d cement Robles as a bust either but he’s probably not any kind of star.
 
Pache reminds me more of Michael A Taylor. Dude was supposed to be the next big deal in CF "if he could learn how to hit".

I suspect that's the floor for Pache, with guys like Pillar and Ender as the reasonable upside.
 
Super said:
is Kieboom kind of being written off already? i know he’s been rough but i wouldn’t call him a bust.

i’m not sure i’d cement Robles as a bust either but he’s probably not any kind of star.
Click to expand...

Not written off. Both of those guys were top prospects within all of baseball and the reports said they had star potential. Based on how things have played out, it seems unlikely either will reach those heights.
 
I'm very bearish on guys that have all the tools but the hit tool. It's the toughest one to learn, develop, and maintain. And it's the one that makes the most impact. As it stands now, Pache is not really an MLB prospect, other than maybe as a fifth outfielder/pinch runner. This guy hasn't shown he can hit, at all. Of course, it could be that one day he will hit. But I really question the judgment of our front office since you didn't need a masters in statistics to assess the probability of Pache not being able to hit.

I guess I'd say the same thing about Kieboom and M.A. Taylor and to a lesser extent Robles. And yes, I do think Kieboom is a bust. They've been waiting on him for years.
 
Super said:
is Kieboom kind of being written off already? i know he’s been rough but i wouldn’t call him a bust.

i’m not sure i’d cement Robles as a bust either but he’s probably not any kind of star.
Click to expand...

I always felt like Kieboom was a bit of a tweener - not good enough defensively to stick at SS (or in CF), and not enough power to profile as a typical corner guy (IF or OF). Think Markakis on the dirt. Hard to come up with good comps for guys like that, but I always thought he had a Jeff Blauser feel - Jeff could hit enough to fake it at SS early in games, but you always liked to have a defensive whiz around to replace him in tight situations and he was never your first choice as a PH since he wasn't going to change a game with one swing very often.
 
clvclv said:
I always felt like Kieboom was a bit of a tweener - not good enough defensively to stick at SS (or in CF), and not enough power to profile as a typical corner guy (IF or OF). Think Markakis on the dirt. Hard to come up with good comps for guys like that, but I always thought he had a Jeff Blauser feel - Jeff could hit enough to fake it at SS early in games, but you always liked to have a defensive whiz around to replace him in tight situations and he was never your first choice as a PH since he wasn't going to change a game with one swing very often.
Click to expand...

David Freese
 
Carp said:
David Freese
Click to expand...

Hadn't actually looked at Kieboom side-by-side with anybody - really just shooting from the hip - but Freese seems to fit that mold as well. Felt like he had a little more power than Kieboom/Blauser, but probably not a whole lot more - he certainly wasn't a "banger" by any stretch either.
 
clvclv said:
I always felt like Kieboom was a bit of a tweener - not good enough defensively to stick at SS (or in CF), and not enough power to profile as a typical corner guy (IF or OF). Think Markakis on the dirt. Hard to come up with good comps for guys like that, but I always thought he had a Jeff Blauser feel - Jeff could hit enough to fake it at SS early in games, but you always liked to have a defensive whiz around to replace him in tight situations and he was never your first choice as a PH since he wasn't going to change a game with one swing very often.
Click to expand...

Contract year Blauser was the only good Blauser.
 
Southcack77 said:
Contract year Blauser was the only good Blauser.
Click to expand...

And we have yet to see any "good Kieboom" - not sure what your point is. I simply pointed out the fact that Kieboom seems like one of those guys that doesn't really fit at any particular position. Blauser didn't really fit anywhere either even when he was "good".
 
Super said:
is Kieboom kind of being written off already? i know he’s been rough but i wouldn’t call him a bust.

i’m not sure i’d cement Robles as a bust either but he’s probably not any kind of star.
Click to expand...

It's too early to say Kieboom is a bust. The only point of my comment was that if we're disappointed with Riley, the Nationals are likely at least as disappointed with Kieboom.

That said, I don't know how clvclv came up with a Markakis comparison. If Kieboom reaches Markakis 30 WAR career, my guess is the Nationals won't be disappointed.
 
50PoundHead said:
It's too early to say Kieboom is a bust. The only point of my comment was that if we're disappointed with Riley, the Nationals are likely at least as disappointed with Kieboom.

That said, I don't know how clvclv came up with a Markakis comparison. If Kieboom reaches Markakis 30 WAR career, my guess is the Nationals won't be disappointed.
Click to expand...

Very small sample size because Kieboom has had less than 200 PA's at the major league level, but he really hasn't shown any signs that he even belongs. Riley at least has shown flashes and shown improvements. Also Kieboom will be 24 later this year so it's not like he's super young still. Both are a disappointment no doubt, and I really don't have high hopes for either.
 
NYCBrave said:
Very small sample size because Kieboom has had less than 200 PA's at the major league level, but he really hasn't shown any signs that he even belongs. Riley at least has shown flashes and shown improvements. Also Kieboom will be 24 later this year so it's not like he's super young still. Both are a disappointment no doubt, and I really don't have high hopes for either.
Click to expand...

Good point on Kieboom's age. I guess one of the points I was trying to make is Braves' fans saw Markakis sinking slowly in the West. Markakis had two > 2 WAR seasons (2.5 at age 22 and 4.2 at age 23) before he turned 24 and Kieboom isn't even getting regular ABs at the same age.
 
clvclv said:
And we have yet to see any "good Kieboom" - not sure what your point is. I simply pointed out the fact that Kieboom seems like one of those guys that doesn't really fit at any particular position. Blauser didn't really fit anywhere either even when he was "good".
Click to expand...

My point is that Blauser sucked except in contract years.
 
50PoundHead said:
Good point on Kieboom's age. I guess one of the points I was trying to make is Braves' fans saw Markakis sinking slowly in the West. Markakis had two > 2 WAR seasons (2.5 at age 22 and 4.2 at age 23) before he turned 24 and Kieboom isn't even getting regular ABs at the same age.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that failing to dominate at 23 is much of a black mark.

I have very little Kieboom stock, myself, but it's a little early.
 
Southcack77 said:
I'm not sure that failing to dominate at 23 is much of a black mark.

I have very little Kieboom stock, myself, but it's a little early.
Click to expand...

Check back at my posts. I'm not the one burying Kieboom. I just thought clvclv's Markakis comparison was really off-base and wanted to point that out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top