2019 BA Top 100

Deester11 said:
I'll take the minority view. Paches swing is not long. It has been conducive to line drives and has been since he signed. Last year they adjusted the plane of his swing leading to loft without a lot of loss for line drives. I think Waters and Pache could be switched with who you like depending on the day you see them. I've seen the worst of both. Waters has a better hitting trajectory at this point, but I don't think Pache's far from realizing his hitting ability. We will see...
Click to expand...

agree very good problem to have!
 
here are some comments from Sietzer on Pache from spring training last season on his swing so maybe he has shortened up the swing and thats great to hear!

“When he got here (to spring training) he was long (in his swing), he was sweepy, the hand speed wasn’t there. And man, I’m telling you, this kid is working and making great adjustments, and it’s coming. So I hope that (general manager) Alex (Anthopoulos) lets him stay here for a while so I can keep my hands on him every morning and just see where this ends up when he has to go back (to minor league camp).”
 
Champman33 said:
here are some comments from Sietzer on Pache from spring training last season on his swing so maybe he has shortened up the swing and thats great to hear!

“When he got here (to spring training) he was long (in his swing), he was sweepy, the hand speed wasn’t there. And man, I’m telling you, this kid is working and making great adjustments, and it’s coming. So I hope that (general manager) Alex (Anthopoulos) lets him stay here for a while so I can keep my hands on him every morning and just see where this ends up when he has to go back (to minor league camp).”
Click to expand...
I remember those quotes and asked a scout from Pittsburgh about that. In Pache, from Rome up, his swing was inconsistent. Think about when a pitcher gets out of whack mechanically....they lose the strike zone. In any game where Pache was "on" I'd dispute a long swing and his path to the ball was shorter and direct. The thing I love about Seitzers quote is "adjustments.". To me, this is the year we can see what more improvement looks like. I find it awesome that Switzer loves his Pache toy.
 
Deester11 said:
I remember those quotes and asked a scout from Pittsburgh about that. In Pache, from Rome up, his swing was inconsistent. Think about when a pitcher gets out of whack mechanically....they lose the strike zone. In any game where Pache was "on" I'd dispute a long swing and his path to the ball was shorter and direct. The thing I love about Seitzers quote is "adjustments.". To me, this is the year we can see what more improvement looks like. I find it awesome that Switzer loves his Pache toy.
Click to expand...

im all on board for that cause if he can just have a MLB avg bat hes going to be a very very good player!
 
Deester11 said:
I remember those quotes and asked a scout from Pittsburgh about that. In Pache, from Rome up, his swing was inconsistent. Think about when a pitcher gets out of whack mechanically....they lose the strike zone. In any game where Pache was "on" I'd dispute a long swing and his path to the ball was shorter and direct. The thing I love about Seitzers quote is "adjustments.". To me, this is the year we can see what more improvement looks like. I find it awesome that Switzer loves his Pache toy.
Click to expand...

Watched him in a five-game series last August. He was virtually hitless for the first four games and had a big fifth game. An inconsistent swing, and a long, slow swing was occasionally obvious to me. But I thought he did adjust. If he is stubborn about it, he will not make it IMHO.
 
rico43 said:
Watched him in a five-game series last August. He was virtually hitless for the first four games and had a big fifth game. An inconsistent swing, and a long, slow swing was occasionally obvious to me. But I thought he did adjust. If he is stubborn about it, he will not make it IMHO.
Click to expand...

That's the point. He's far from coachable. He is typically at the park early and soaks up instruction. Like I said...inconsistent. If he approaches batting like he does in the outfield....he'll be ok.
 
Super said:
donaldson may be the best bat on the market. no one as proven was coming for much cheaper.
Click to expand...

Brantley, McCutchen, Grandal, and Pollock all came much cheaper - albeit with longer commitments (other than Grandal).

Again, I'm in the believer group - and am just fine with not blocking Riley with a long-term deal (at either position) - I'm just incredibly frustrated with the Donaldson deal if AA is indeed done with significant adds this winter. Leaving Camargo at 3B until Riley is ready (or for good) would've given you the flexibility to sign BOTH Pollock and Marwin with the same $$$ you spent on Donaldson - a huge upgrade over Markakis, injury insurance for Pollock, and massive bench upgrades once Riley comes up.

The Donaldson signing simply doesn't make sense by itself - even if he gives you 130 healthy games, he's not good enough on his own to make this team a legitimate contender. Is that group "as proven" as Josh? Probably a tough question considering the health risks attached to him, but I just don't understand jumping out there and going after one of the best players on the market - health concerns and all - if you're not going to do ANYTHING else to improve the team.
 
Last edited:
clvclv said:
Brantley, McCutchen, Grandal, and Pollock all came much cheaper - albeit with longer commitments (other than Grandal).

Again, I'm in the believer group - and am just fine with not blocking Riley with a long-term deal (at either position) - I'm just incredibly frustrated with the Donaldson deal if AA is indeed done with significant adds this winter. Leaving Camargo at 3B until Riley is ready (or for good) would've given you the flexibility to sign BOTH Pollock and Marwin with the same $$$ you spent on Donaldson - a huge upgrade over Markakis, injury insurance for Pollock, and massive bench upgrades once Riley comes up.

The Donaldson signing simply doesn't make sense by itself - even if he gives you 130 healthy games, he's not good enough on his own to make this team a legitimate contender. Is that group "as proven" as Josh? Probably a tough question considering the health risks attached to him, but I just don't understand jumping out there and going after one of the best players on the market - health concerns and all - if you're not going to do ANYTHING else to improve the team.
Click to expand...


I'd much rather have Donaldson than Marwin and Pollock.

I don't even really understand the opposite argument.
 
I know its tedious to repeat, but AA has added 6 wins at the cost of $30M.

Anyone else like to spin a scenario where we add wins at a more efficient rate?
 
nsacpi said:
I know its tedious to repeat, but AA has added 6 wins at the cost of $30M.

Anyone else like to spin a scenario where we add wins at a more efficient rate?
Click to expand...

Let's see Donaldson play more than 20 games before making that statement.

How about "we HOPE AA has added 6 wins at the cost of $30 million".
 
clvclv said:
Let's see Donaldson play more than 20 games before making that statement.

How about "we HOPE AA has added 6 wins at the cost of $30 million".
Click to expand...

Dude, we can say lets see any player play x games. To say there is uncertainty is so trite as to not be worth repeating in every post.

I should say expected wins rather than wins. I think everyone else understood the point.

So I repeat my challenge. Give me a scenario where you can acquire expected wins at a more efficient rate.
 
clvclv said:
Let's see Donaldson play more than 20 games before making that statement.

How about "we HOPE AA has added 6 wins at the cost of $30 million".
Click to expand...



Good Lord, man. Your last post was talking bout signing AJ Pollock. And you want to talk about seeing Donaldson play 20 games first?
 
nsacpi said:
Dude, we can say lets see any player play x games. To say there is uncertainty is so trite as to not be worth repeating in every post.

I should say expected wins rather than wins. I think everyone else understood the point.

So I repeat my challenge. Give me a scenario where you can acquire expected wins at a more efficient rate.
Click to expand...

Who *issed in your Corn Flakes this morning? I've said I'm absolutely fine with the Donaldson signing since it leaves you flexibility when it comes to what to do with Riley. Donaldson hasn't appeared in more than 113 games at the MLB level since 2016. I see little reason to expect him to suddenly go back to being the guy that gives you 150+ starts - since when is it unreasonable to expect a player his age to start slowing down a little?

They don't hand you titles or awards for "expected wins added", sorry. I don't think adding Donaldson, Mac, and Markakis has made this team much better than it was at the end of 2018. I hope I'm wrong, but acting like I'm the only person that's disappointed with what AA has achieved this winter is hilarious. Cite whatever reasons you like - there wasn't as much money available to spend as hoped, he's holding onto prospects too tightly for whatever reasons, the asking prices have legitimately been too high, whatever - adding 6 "expected wins" doesn't make this team a legitimate contender in 2019, regardless of how effectively he added those hoped for wins.
 
clvclv said:
Who *issed in your Corn Flakes this morning? I've said I'm absolutely fine with the Donaldson signing since it leaves you flexibility when it comes to what to do with Riley. Donaldson hasn't appeared in more than 113 games at the MLB level since 2016. I see little reason to expect him to suddenly go back to being the guy that gives you 150+ starts - since when is it unreasonable to expect a player his age to start slowing down a little?

They don't hand you titles or awards for "expected wins added", sorry. I don't think adding Donaldson, Mac, and Markakis has made this team much better than it was at the end of 2018. I hope I'm wrong, but acting like I'm the only person that's disappointed with what AA has achieved this winter is hilarious. Cite whatever reasons you like - there wasn't as much money available to spend as hoped, he's holding onto prospects too tightly for whatever reasons, the asking prices have legitimately been too high, whatever - adding 6 "expected wins" doesn't make this team a legitimate contender in 2019, regardless of how effectively he added those hoped for wins.
Click to expand...

spin me a scenario that adds expected wins at a more efficient rate
 
nsacpi said:
spin me a scenario that adds expected wins at a more efficient rate
Click to expand...

As soon as somebody produces the trophy AA gets for having won that contest, I'll start looking.

Does he get a gold star too???
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top