Is There Something Wrong With the Pirates' Player Development?
by Scranton on Feb 16, 2012 9:33 PM EST
Email
PrintI was reading the Fangraphs prospect chat with Mike Newman this evening and there was a question about Alvarez's struggles compared to what was thought of him at draft time. Newman stated that he had heard some bad things about Pirates' prospects and a change of scenery would do Alvarez good. Newman, to my knowledge, didn't elaborate on what bad things he has heard.
Has anyone heard about any concerns regarding the way the Pirates develop players, particularly hitters? Outside Alvarez and maybe Tony Sanchez, are there examples of players that obviously underperformed the concensus of their potential? I know the pitching development philosophy has been discussed quite a bit here, but I'm not sure the same can be said for position players. Of course, it could be just one dude's incorrect opinion, but does anyone know if there is more to this?
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.
77 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ask me in 5 years.
Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?
http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained
by Kosstic518 on Feb 16, 2012 9:47 PM EST via mobile reply actions 1 recs
I would certainly hope it wouldn't take 10 yrs to judge a FO's developmental ability.
Everything that guy just said is bullshit . . .thank you
I think you have to
10 years would allow you to look at four draft classes with six years experience. That seems about accurate to have the sample size in terms of both players and years to make an accurate assessment.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Feb 17, 2012 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
Sweetleb is right. Tony Sanchez is struggling but the answer is to want him to hit .400 with 30 homeruns. But why stop at 30 when you can have 70. and come to think of it I’d like him to .500. Would you mind passing this along to the Pirates so they can want him to do that?
by rj.reynolds on Feb 16, 2012 10:59 PM EST up reply actions
its kind of a example...
of a player who had talent and could be develope by the pirates, I can’t help your not hip tp satire.
"please buy the team mr. cuban"
No, he didn't.
Why is your/you’re so hard for people? That, and their/they’re/there.
It’s a message board, not an SAT test. But come on, people, knowing the difference between there, they’re, and their is 5th grade english.
by Midnight Moose on Feb 17, 2012 6:50 PM EST up reply actions
It was right as a reply to sweetle b.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 17, 2012 8:21 PM EST up reply actions
It's not that difficult...
I was looking at the wrong “you’re”. lol
I read “you’re a genius.” at the end, completely missing the “if you’re” at the begining, and thought, “No, that’s right”. I should start drinking coffee in the morning, too bad it tastes like dirt.
You need better coffee.
If you’re not a big coffee drinker, and just want a cup in morning to help open your eyes, my advice would be to get one of those one-cup brewers, like a Keurig. More expensive, for sure, but also the best coffee/espresso you can brew, at home.
Keurig has like 250 varieties of coffees, teas, and espressos. You can surely find one that would match your tastes.
by Midnight Moose on Feb 18, 2012 7:18 PM EST up reply actions
Where do you work?
I’m guessing the company’s name starts with a “K,” and end with “eurig.”
.
.
.
Kidding aside, I was skeptical when Mrs. Cocktailsfor2 brought one of those home, but after trying 5 different types of coffee makers (French press, percolator, etc.) over the last 2 years, it’s one that she has actually used for more than 3 weeks without abandoning. And once we found a coffee she really liked (Diedrich’s, IIRC), she actually will drink more than 3 sips of a cup before throwing it out.
As for cost, yes, they are expensive on a cup-for-cup basis, but we also bought one of the refillable pods, and she does like the brand of French Roast I usually get, so there’s that, too.
________________________________
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Feb 19, 2012 8:34 AM EST up reply actions
Architectural services?
I suppose that if we build a really cool-looking deck/patio on the side of Kevin’s house, it would improve his entire outlook in the mornings, and would help to open his eyes, without the benefit of a cup of good coffee.
All the same, it would probably be easier and cheaper for us just to buy him a good coffeemaker, and a couple pounds of decent coffee, wouldn’t you say?
by Midnight Moose on Feb 21, 2012 7:35 PM EST up reply actions
bautista
I heard the pirates wanted him to be a .250 hitter with little power and when he was traded to bluejays ,toronto decided that they wanted him to hit 330 and 40-50 homeruns. The question is why did the pirates not want 40-50 hr and a .330 average.
"please buy the team mr. cuban"
insightful
Everything that guy just said is bullshit . . .thank you
shouldn’t natural selection have picked this guy off by now?
by PuncSpeedChunk on Feb 16, 2012 10:07 PM EST up reply actions 10 recs
Seriously
that doesn’t even remotely make sense.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Feb 17, 2012 10:35 AM EST up reply actions
Interesting
This would be the first I’ve heard about it. I suppose you could name Andrew Lambo as well. But then again, there are multiple examples of guys who did develop well and maybe outplayed their ability. Neil Walker is a guy who seems to have benefits from some coaching. It seems like Alex Presley has turned out alright too. So I wouldn’t say they’re perfect by any means, but there’s examples on both sides of the coin.
The glare of the spotlight is harsh, and the pressure that success breeds immense. We revere our heroes, but expect much. And criticism can come as easily as praise.
Perspectives become reality.
Twitter: @shanecglass
Lambo would be an unfair example. He was stalled when he got here and hasn’t really progressed. I still have high hopes for him this season though.
Fair enough.
Although there are others out there who have failed. It just seems there’s enough of both that saying they’ve failed isn’t really particularly accurate, but isn’t inaccurate either.
The glare of the spotlight is harsh, and the pressure that success breeds immense. We revere our heroes, but expect much. And criticism can come as easily as praise.
Perspectives become reality.
Twitter: @shanecglass
I'm still particularly pleased
with Grossman’s development. No one seems to notice for some reason. Ya he got a million dollars, but I bet you there are way more than 100 players in the minor leagues with close to a million dollar bonus or more and plenty of them aren’t sniffing a top 100 list.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Feb 17, 2012 10:36 AM EST up reply actions
I think people are slow
to really accept Grossman as a prospect because he was SO bad in his first 2+ years (5 games in ‘08) that his play last year doesn’t completely redeem him. Also, if he had 5 fewer walks last year (even if he got singles instead), I think he would have gotten less publicity because at least part of the push for Grossman came from the novelty of the 100R/100BB thing.
Don’t get me wrong, I think he played really well last year and it was great to see him rip up the AFL. It’s quite possible that he truly turned a corner and will be a top prospect going forward. I’m just not surprised that some people are hesitant to jump on his bandwagon.
by KentuckyPirate on Feb 17, 2012 11:10 AM EST up reply actions
yep
he was also repeating a level… when he has another great year, though, more of the doubts will go away…
by BurgherKing on Feb 17, 2012 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
Of course
Completely forgot about Grossman, probably because of the hand injury. He’s another guy for the positive.
The glare of the spotlight is harsh, and the pressure that success breeds immense. We revere our heroes, but expect much. And criticism can come as easily as praise.
Perspectives become reality.
Twitter: @shanecglass
Newman
said he’d heard “interesting things,” not bad things. He couldn’t possibly have been more vague. From the context, it’s not at all clear that the things he’d heard were bad. All that’s clear is that whatever he heard is meaningful enough to inform his opinions and that, in the specific case of Alvarez, what he heard leads him to believe Alvarez would benefit from getting out of the organization.
given that he didnt wish to expound on it
i m guessing he’s heard it once or from one source. I have a decent guess as to who the source might be, esp since Newman “contributed” one or two articles to that person’s website, while it was still up :-)
by BurgherKing on Feb 16, 2012 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
that's a lot of assumptions
I think Newman’s savvy enough not to confuse Jake with a legitimate source.
(Also curious why “contributed” is in scare-quotes there.)
when Jake started his last thing (forgot the name now)
Mike Newman was listed as a contributor. A couple of pieces by him appeared on the site too. I put “contributed” in quotes because I wasn’t sure if it was done with his permission or not, but its entirely plausible that Mike corresponded with Jake enough to believe he may have some legit sources. (Unless you’ve read his stuff and know the extent of fantastic theorizing that Jake does, it’s easy to be taken in early on a small sample)
by BurgherKing on Feb 17, 2012 12:25 AM EST up reply actions
He did say a bit more at the end of the chat, actually
Q: Seriously, why the dislike for the Pirates? You are lower on all of our prospects than other places and now Alvarez needs to leave after 1 bad year preceded by steady progress?
A: I didn’t say he needs to leave. I said a change of scenery may be in the best interest of all parties involved. I hope to be blown away and giddy by Josh Bell this season, but Taillon was not as good as he was touted to be and Rojas Jr. was so raw it was difficult to watch at times. For the record, I hope the Pirates turn it around. Loyal fans deserve it.
Still not sure what he was talking about in the first answer, but he does actually go to games and scout, so I dunno.
This just strikes me
as a comment that answers a question without really saying anything (Newman’s not Schide’s). When a player struggles enough that part of the fanbase turns on him-check-and the team brings in backup plans-check-a “change of scenery” is always suggested to fix it. It doesn’t really say anything to me about the Pirates’ development. I’m surprised to see the complaints about Taillon, though.
by KentuckyPirate on Feb 17, 2012 9:00 AM EST up reply actions
As far as I understand it, Newman is about the only guy who’s seen Taillon’s curve and thought it wasn’t very good. He says his change is very raw, which I think is the consensus, but he seems to be way out there on the curve. See some discussion here.
Newman says he avoids listening to other scouts so he can form his own opinion without preconceptions, which is admirable, but when it’s one vs. many on a particular issue odds are with the many.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 17, 2012 9:26 AM EST up reply actions
Newman is about the only guy who’s seen Taillon’s curve and thought it wasn’t very good.
That by itself pretty much zeroed out his credibility with me.
Occupy MLB! Down with Seligula!
In his defense
he saw it once. If Taillon threw it four times (entirely possible in an entire 3 inning start) he might have seen once good one (instead of great) two decent, and one that Taillon screwed up or something.
He’s definitely wrong but I’m not gonna go so far as to hate on his credibility.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Feb 17, 2012 10:38 AM EST up reply actions
plus
He never said he “thought it wasn’t very good.” He specifically described it as “at least solid average with room for additional growth.” It was clear from the article that he thought it was a good/promising pitch.
Poppycock
Calling it “at least solid average” is by a pretty wide margin the worst description of his curve I’ve seen from any evaluator. It would be kinda like describing Kate Upton as “at least solid average” and then defending yourself by saying that you never called her ugly…
by KentuckyPirate on Feb 17, 2012 11:22 AM EST up reply actions
Yes, in his one viewing of Taillon, he saw a curveball that was worse than the general opinion. So what? Is Taillon not allowed to have a bad day? Or is Newman not allowed to have a unique opinon? Or is no one allowed to have a lower opinion of a Pirate prospect than Pirate fans’ do?
You’re analogy is absolutely accurate. If I expressed the opinion that a certain girl was average or better in the looks department, and then you went around telling people I said she was ugly, I would indeed be forced to defend myself. And you’d be kind of a dick for misrepresenting me.
He's allowed to make his own conclusions
my problem is that I believe he should present them as his observations rather than fact. I really only made the above comment because 1) I wanted to use the word poppycock in a thread and 2) I was hoping somebody would post a Kate Upton picture since I mentioned her in a thread because that always brightens up the blog.
The comment that I actually had a problem with was when Newman said “Taillon was not as good as he was touted to be.” It’s fine for Newman to form his own opinion based on what he saw but as WHYGZS pointed out below, if you have 20 opinions on a guy and 19 say he’s a stud and 1 says he’s a notch below elite (Newman’s description) then that player is still a stud and I think it’s an overstatement to say he’s not as good as he was touted to be.
by KentuckyPirate on Feb 17, 2012 12:56 PM EST up reply actions
I choose door #1
although I do respect the defensive stance in door #2 along with the clenched teeth on lower lip determined look.
But you’d better be careful MD. It has recently been revealed that some posters on this site are a little sensitive to the exploitation of females with positive physical attributes.
I don't think it'll be an issue
with a female who openly markets herself with her positive physical attributes.
yeah
I think I said somewhere else, looking hot is Kate Upton’s job, and she is quite good at it.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 17, 2012 4:08 PM EST up reply actions
He saw Taillon once...
and now “Taillon is not as good as they thought he was”, an opinion that is not shared by any other evaluator I have come across.
He just lost whatever credibility he may have had.
I would say McPherson is about as good an example of player development as you will find anywhere.
www.drstrangeglove.com
by nycbucsfan on Feb 17, 2012 11:17 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
This
is the biggest reason that I think it’s stupid to avoid listenting to other scouts. He saw Taillon pitch in 1 game…for 5 innings…facing 20 batters. I couldn’t find a pitch count but I can’t imagine he threw more than 75 pitches. How much of a sense can you really get for a player’s curveball if you only saw it four times?
by KentuckyPirate on Feb 17, 2012 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
This is what scouts do, guys. They go see a player once or twice and write a report on him. Everyone understands that it’s a small sample, which is why teams have several different scouts see each player on several different occasions and try to develop a consensus from the reports. This is the same thing that a source like BA does: develop consensus out of differing perspectives/opinions.
This is not evidence that Newman is not credible or that he should change his approach. He’s offering valuable, knowledgeable, first-hand accounts, which should not be dismissed. Yeah, we’re all well-informed enough to deduce that he saw Taillon’s curve on a bad day, but we can process all of the information at our disposal and come to that conclusion without disparaging what Newman does/did.
by epoc on Feb 17, 2012 11:23 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
this makes sense
If I may epistemology-geek for a while (and let’s face it, YOU CAN’T STOP ME), there are some convincing arguments that when you’re trying to form an opinion you shouldn’t weigh your opinion much more heavily than the opinions of other equally well-informed people; because the odds are that the consensus opinion of the best-informed people is the right one, even when you’re on the other side. But if everyone did that there would be what’s called an Information cascade — it would be impossible to shift the group opinion, because every new person who comes along would adjust their opinion to the group’s.
So it’s better for us that Newman and othe scouts make up their own mind, so we can say “Nineteen scouts and eyewitnesses thinks Taillon has a Kate Upton curve, one guy thinks it’s solid average, it must be pretty good.” If the scouts didn’t make up their own minds then the rest of us wouldn’t have as good information.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 17, 2012 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
All well and good...
but his comment is the type of statement one would expect to hear made about a failed prospect. It pissed me off because I know he saw him once, yet he is willing to say something that sounds like Taillon’s career is a fait accompli. If he said, “I only saw him once, but I do not agree with most evaluators about Taillon”, I woildn’t have had a problem.
How’s that for an over-agressive rant? :)
www.drstrangeglove.com
by nycbucsfan on Feb 17, 2012 2:03 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I think I’m going to refer to it as a “Kate Upton curve” every time I see it from here on out.
by Superstar25 on Feb 18, 2012 11:59 PM EST up reply actions
I was trying to work “Kate Upton curves” in there somehow but I couldn’t quite pull it off.
(Do we even talk about women having curves anymore? Did we ever? I’m only 41.)
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 19, 2012 12:20 AM EST up reply actions
tom seaver did but
that commercials prolly before your time.
by karreemofwheat on Feb 19, 2012 8:04 AM EST up reply actions
All well and good..
www.drstrangeglove.com
by nycbucsfan on Feb 17, 2012 1:51 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
plus a pitcher's curve can come and go on occasion
sometimes you have it, sometimes you dont. newman may have seen a day when Taillon’s pitches werent too sharp.
you cant evaluate a player on one viewing.
by white angus on Feb 17, 2012 11:25 AM EST up reply actions
I wanted to make some kind of joke about photo development/player development, maybe along the lines of overexposure. Idk, I’m tired.
by ATribeCalledGreg on Feb 16, 2012 11:02 PM EST reply actions
Come on ATCG
You’re gonna have to bring it harder than that if you are going to be “Xfinity’s Ultimate Sports Social Media Job” winner.
by Wizard of Woz on Feb 17, 2012 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
see my reply to epoc above
when Newman says “interesting things”, I suspect he might have heard from one “Jake”!
i think your right not wanting to burn a bridge.
he fluffed me.
by karreemofwheat on Feb 17, 2012 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
Conclusion should be based on overall, not one player,
therefore since the Pirates haven’t developed many, the answer is yes, development is lacking.
Tom Specht
Vicious cycle ?
one could argue that a perennial losing team has a tougher time attracting top coaching. If you’re a highly regarded coach, you likely have a lot of choices of which team you want to coach for; so do you work for the Red Sox or the Pirates ?
Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
Maybe at the ML level
But MiL coaching spots aren’t really stepping stones to greatness, such that being the pitching coach for the Lowell Spinners puts you on a clear path to Fenway. And since the low minors are really shitty, from a day to day POV, an offer of a promotion, even from the lowly Pirates, would win over most coaches you’d want to grab.
There are organizational loyalties, and that might harm the Pirates – if they’re mostly hiring MiL coaches from the ranks of their crummy alums, they might not be getting quality. But since being a good coach has little to do with being a good player, the Pirates should have a surfeit of promising ex-players to choose from. Brant Brown, come on down!
In the big picture
What I’d say is that there are so many potentially good coaches out there (over 100 MLBers retire/wash out every year, plus all the career MiLers who might be good coaches) that the challenge isn’t getting the best ones to work for you, it’s identifying which ones are the best.
After thiniking about it. . .
I think the development record of this F.O. does not have me concerned at this point. I think they have to get some credit for players like Marte and Grossman as well as McCutchen and Walker. Further, using the example from Newman’s chat, I think Alvarez performance in the minors and his rookie year, while nothing to get giddy about, was well within the margin of error of his consensus. Last year was obviously very troublesome, but I’m not sure that it wasn’t more indicative of Alvarez than the Pirates organization.
Good discussion, it seems this was more one person’s opinion than a general industry-wide perception.
Everything that guy just said is bullshit . . .thank you
After reading both the serious comments and the humor in this thread.....
…..here’s a little more humor (at least for me, it was):
When I first encountered this thread on the FanPosts index page, the title was truncated to “Is There Something Wrong With the Pirates…”
I almost choked on my tea….. as I noticed the large number of replies posted already….. which immediately evoked the thought “No surprise there” along with another another chuckle.
I was NOT disappointed when I clicked on the link, saw the full title, and read the usual energetic discussion (and I liked the images, too).
On the general topic
I think it’s fair, and safe, to say that the Pirates had trouble developing players in the DL era, and probably, to a lesser extent, in the Bonifay era. But, since NH completely overhauled the organizational philosophy behind player development, it’s really, really hard to judge what’s happening. I mean, there’s a basic “are we developing enough MLBers, and are they maxing out their talent” question that can be answered after a certain length of time (I’d say that, given the mixed outcomes, it’s too early to judge; you can identify great success or dismal failure in just 5 years, but we’re at neither extreme right now), but even once we know that, we won’t know whether the credit/blame should be assigned to The Pirate Way or to individual coaches.
All we can do is hope, frankly.
On a micro level
Pedro and Tony have the same problems they had at draft time. Breaking balls and lefties leading to K’s for Pedro (and defense) and breaking balls and advanced pitching for Sanchez. I don’t see that as an indictment against the development system, we just couldn’t, or haven’t, fixed their flaws yet.
Overall, I think the development has been pretty solid throughout the minors.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
