Here are scouting reports on Crowe and Yean from the Tribune:
Wil Crowe
Scouting report: A 2017 second-round pick out of South Carolina, the 26-year-old Crowe was ranked the Nationals’ No. 3 prospect by MLB.com and No. 10 by Baseball America and projects as a back-of-the-rotation starter. The 6-foot-2, 228-pounder throws a four-seam fastball and an above-average changeup. Started three games last season, going 0-2 and allowing 11 earned runs on 14 hits with eight walks and eight strikeouts. In 2018, Crowe was 11-0 with a 2.69 ERA at High-A Potomac and was named the Nationals’ co-minor league pitcher of the year. In 2019, he pitched 1491⁄3 innings across Class Double-A and Triple-A, going 7-10 with a 4.70 ERA.
Ben Cherington: “I think he’s certainly at a point in his career where he can be a factor in 2021 and have an opportunity to earn more opportunity over time. He’s got the pitches and the know-how and the physical characteristics and the history that suggests he can be a starting pitcher in the major leagues, and we still see some improvement opportunities for him, and looking forward to getting him in our system and working with him.”
Eddy Yean
Scouting report: The 19-year-old Yean signed for $100,000 out of the Dominican Republic in 2017, and was ranked the Nationals’ No. 6 prospect by MLB.com and No. 8 by Baseball America. The 6-foot-1 Yean, who has bulked up from 180 pounds to a muscular 230, has a fastball that touches 97 mph and a slider with potential. Compiled a 3-5 record with a 4.70 ERA with 75 strikeouts in 90 innings over 20 starts across all levels in 2019. Didn’t pitch last summer after the minor league season was canceled but was called “impressive” in the Instructional League this fall by Baseball America.
Ben Cherington: “Big, physical kid from the DR who kind of came on the scene in 2019 in short season, and his stuff started popping. He’s got a really good fastball, mid-90s velocity, but just a lot of life. One of those fastballs that just moves a lot. Shows potential of a really good slider, change-up is developing. He’s a strong, physical kid who we think has a chance to be durable. All the reports we did in terms of the background work were really positive, so looking forward to getting to know him.”
https://triblive.com/sports/pirates-tra ... -pitchers/
Josh Bell to Nats
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
Josh Bell to Nats
Bob,
Makng post-season play isn't what it used to be with the advent of the second wild card. That's by design. Commissioner Selig knew what he was doing.
Every year, around 25 teams have a chance to make it. Five don't. We're one of the five now.
The 25 tend to get some separation around August.
As far as the rest does, there tends to be a difference between teams that bow out early, and the champions. It's a long season, and brutal post season.
I've thought of competitive as- the teams that have a realistic chance to get into the League Championship Series. Those are maybe 15 or so teams; being competitive for the world championship.
Makng post-season play isn't what it used to be with the advent of the second wild card. That's by design. Commissioner Selig knew what he was doing.
Every year, around 25 teams have a chance to make it. Five don't. We're one of the five now.
The 25 tend to get some separation around August.
As far as the rest does, there tends to be a difference between teams that bow out early, and the champions. It's a long season, and brutal post season.
I've thought of competitive as- the teams that have a realistic chance to get into the League Championship Series. Those are maybe 15 or so teams; being competitive for the world championship.
-
Bobster21
Josh Bell to Nats
0F3A2D2D261F2D2D26212D480 wrote: Bob,
Makng post-season play isn't what it used to be with the advent of the second wild card. That's by design. Commissioner Selig knew what he was doing.
Every year, around 25 teams have a chance to make it. Five don't. We're one of the five now.
The 25 tend to get some separation around August.
As far as the rest does, there tends to be a difference between teams that bow out early, and the champions. It's a long season, and brutal post season.
I've thought of competitive as- the teams that have a realistic chance to get into the League Championship Series. Those are maybe 10 to 12 teams; being competitive for the world championship.
As I said, "To me, being competitive means being a legit contender for post season play with a perceived chance to win."
That would exclude a team that barely wins a weak division (maybe just around .500) and is just going to be fodder for whoever they meet in the playoff. It would also exclude an unimpressive team that gets the last WC spot by default because the rules require that somebody had to qualify. But there are good WC teams. When the Bucs had the 2nd best record in MLB with 98 wins in 2015, they were a WC team because of the tough division they were in with the Cards winning 100 and the Cubs winning 97.
OTOH, I did not consider the 2016 team competitive even though they went into September just 2.5 games off the 2nd WC spot. On Sept 2, they were barely over .500 at 67-65. The Nats, Cubs, Dodgers and Giants all had strong teams and there were 2 other teams still ahead of them just for the 2nd WC spot. So I agree with you that the WC system lets a lot of teams be "in the hunt" because of the math but many of those teams don't have a realistic chance. To me, it's just a case of MLB lowering the bar to let fans of noncompetitive teams think they are competitive.
But that's not good enough. A couple years ago, Huntington said the team's goal was to have a chance to win 78-82 games and hope to overachieve. In other words, just hang around the teams with an outside shot at the last WC spot and maybe get lucky. I thought that was a sad goal, hardly inspiring. He was essentially saying the Pirates wanted to take advantage of the low bar the WC system set in order to appear competitive. That's not what I would consider competitive. If you can't look at the other teams in the post season pool and see a realistic chance to advance, then you're only there because you filled a slot that the rules required someone fill and your stay will be brief.
Makng post-season play isn't what it used to be with the advent of the second wild card. That's by design. Commissioner Selig knew what he was doing.
Every year, around 25 teams have a chance to make it. Five don't. We're one of the five now.
The 25 tend to get some separation around August.
As far as the rest does, there tends to be a difference between teams that bow out early, and the champions. It's a long season, and brutal post season.
I've thought of competitive as- the teams that have a realistic chance to get into the League Championship Series. Those are maybe 10 to 12 teams; being competitive for the world championship.
As I said, "To me, being competitive means being a legit contender for post season play with a perceived chance to win."
That would exclude a team that barely wins a weak division (maybe just around .500) and is just going to be fodder for whoever they meet in the playoff. It would also exclude an unimpressive team that gets the last WC spot by default because the rules require that somebody had to qualify. But there are good WC teams. When the Bucs had the 2nd best record in MLB with 98 wins in 2015, they were a WC team because of the tough division they were in with the Cards winning 100 and the Cubs winning 97.
OTOH, I did not consider the 2016 team competitive even though they went into September just 2.5 games off the 2nd WC spot. On Sept 2, they were barely over .500 at 67-65. The Nats, Cubs, Dodgers and Giants all had strong teams and there were 2 other teams still ahead of them just for the 2nd WC spot. So I agree with you that the WC system lets a lot of teams be "in the hunt" because of the math but many of those teams don't have a realistic chance. To me, it's just a case of MLB lowering the bar to let fans of noncompetitive teams think they are competitive.
But that's not good enough. A couple years ago, Huntington said the team's goal was to have a chance to win 78-82 games and hope to overachieve. In other words, just hang around the teams with an outside shot at the last WC spot and maybe get lucky. I thought that was a sad goal, hardly inspiring. He was essentially saying the Pirates wanted to take advantage of the low bar the WC system set in order to appear competitive. That's not what I would consider competitive. If you can't look at the other teams in the post season pool and see a realistic chance to advance, then you're only there because you filled a slot that the rules required someone fill and your stay will be brief.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
Josh Bell to Nats
Sounds like we're in the same ballpark.
Of course, we know that different folks have different perceptions, too.
)))
Of course, we know that different folks have different perceptions, too.
)))Josh Bell to Nats
I can't wait for April. I'm going to have the whole place to myself.
Josh Bell to Nats
48696148636B0C0 wrote: I've gotten lost trying to follow the car analogies and will confine my remarks to baseball.
I think this was a terrible trade. The Pirates could hardly have sold lower on Josh Bell. While I appreciate the "we're not going to compete while Bell is here" line of thinking and agree that he should have been traded, I am dissatisfied with the return.
Wil Crowe is the "close to the majors' mediocrity" we have traded for unsuccessfully in the past. Whereas the DBacks trade seemed to bring back some highly-rated talent, I don't think Yean was enough.
Of course, I don't know what other offers were on the table. But I do know that the organization is bereft of talent at catcher and we seem to have a phobia about acquiring lefty pitchers.
We do have depth at 1B and should get MLB-quality output from the position next season. But I viewed Bell as our best trade chip, and, to be redundant, think we settled for a firesale return.
Hi buddy, we go back to the McClatchy years together and I have always respected your opinions and ability golf and pay off on bets or take your winnings and spend it on your 4 some in the 19th hole. Oh, those were the days when we almost got Jimbo a baseball bat with a driver head on it so he could do more than dub the ball off the tee.
The trade came to great surprise to me as well and I have wondered what other offers BC had on the table.
Concerning your question about getting back a catching prospect, I wonder as well why BC did not go after one even if he is a few yrs away. As for lefty pitchers, what is with BC. Is he just stocking up on young untested players or players like Crowe who seem to require a different system than the Nats to help him refine what he does have in his arsenal to be a back of the rotation guy.
Is BC just stockpiling young prospects no matter the position hoping that he can move some of them at a later date for a prospect whose position is one of need and might be available later?
This move and what might be coming up later in the off-season have me scratching my head.
Please tell your bride that Mrs. Possum and I said Happy Holidays.
Thanks, Possum. We both outkicked our coverage in the marriage department!
I will never forget that OnlyBucs weekend, although I have forgotten how to play a decent round of golf!
Hope that better health allows us all to meet up again!
I'll probably break down and schedule a trip to Pittsburgh because we're so damned tired of NOT traveling, even the AAA-quality Pirates would be a site for sore eyes!
I think this was a terrible trade. The Pirates could hardly have sold lower on Josh Bell. While I appreciate the "we're not going to compete while Bell is here" line of thinking and agree that he should have been traded, I am dissatisfied with the return.
Wil Crowe is the "close to the majors' mediocrity" we have traded for unsuccessfully in the past. Whereas the DBacks trade seemed to bring back some highly-rated talent, I don't think Yean was enough.
Of course, I don't know what other offers were on the table. But I do know that the organization is bereft of talent at catcher and we seem to have a phobia about acquiring lefty pitchers.
We do have depth at 1B and should get MLB-quality output from the position next season. But I viewed Bell as our best trade chip, and, to be redundant, think we settled for a firesale return.
Hi buddy, we go back to the McClatchy years together and I have always respected your opinions and ability golf and pay off on bets or take your winnings and spend it on your 4 some in the 19th hole. Oh, those were the days when we almost got Jimbo a baseball bat with a driver head on it so he could do more than dub the ball off the tee.
The trade came to great surprise to me as well and I have wondered what other offers BC had on the table.
Concerning your question about getting back a catching prospect, I wonder as well why BC did not go after one even if he is a few yrs away. As for lefty pitchers, what is with BC. Is he just stocking up on young untested players or players like Crowe who seem to require a different system than the Nats to help him refine what he does have in his arsenal to be a back of the rotation guy.
Is BC just stockpiling young prospects no matter the position hoping that he can move some of them at a later date for a prospect whose position is one of need and might be available later?
This move and what might be coming up later in the off-season have me scratching my head.
Please tell your bride that Mrs. Possum and I said Happy Holidays.
Thanks, Possum. We both outkicked our coverage in the marriage department!
I will never forget that OnlyBucs weekend, although I have forgotten how to play a decent round of golf!
Hope that better health allows us all to meet up again!
I'll probably break down and schedule a trip to Pittsburgh because we're so damned tired of NOT traveling, even the AAA-quality Pirates would be a site for sore eyes!
Josh Bell to Nats
6F7F7E495F5F533C0 wrote: So now, what is the real time clock Nutting/Cherrington figure on being competitive enough to add some decent pieces instead of Dyson types? Say we deal off Musgrove and Frazier at the beginning of the season. I can see Moran, Kuhl, Brault types moving next even though all three of those don't make money at all that matters. They can't trade Stallings can they, since he might have the best value on our roster if Musgrove and Frazier are gone.
I can't fathom this organization competing in 2023 at all based on the level of talent we are brining in. We might get our dominant starter in the upcoming draft and he could be up in maybe two years. I'm not seeing anything until 2025 and that is if everything goes right. Our stud prospects, absent Hayes, are in lower levels and have two or three years before being up.
I'm already planning to have the first overall pick in 2022 draft too.
Some are suggesting that pick in 2022 is going to be a doozy. The son of former Steelers' TE Eric Green seems to be the front runner. He looks impressive as a 16 year old.
The reality is this team is not going to compete this year. They weren't going to compete with Bell. They weren't going to compete with a couple of FA signings that improved one or two positions. They weren't going to get a WC spot. And if you aren't going to get a WC spot, it is working against your own self interested to be close. If you aren't making the playoffs, the most franchise rewarding thing to do is be in last place and earn the first pick. At this point, the first pick gets you a stud OF'er.
It mystifies me that people think the Pirates are going to go out and sign a couple of FA to make a couple of positions better on a team like this. It doesn't just waste money (which I don't care about). It wastes their chance to actually build a franchise.
I can't fathom this organization competing in 2023 at all based on the level of talent we are brining in. We might get our dominant starter in the upcoming draft and he could be up in maybe two years. I'm not seeing anything until 2025 and that is if everything goes right. Our stud prospects, absent Hayes, are in lower levels and have two or three years before being up.
I'm already planning to have the first overall pick in 2022 draft too.
Some are suggesting that pick in 2022 is going to be a doozy. The son of former Steelers' TE Eric Green seems to be the front runner. He looks impressive as a 16 year old.
The reality is this team is not going to compete this year. They weren't going to compete with Bell. They weren't going to compete with a couple of FA signings that improved one or two positions. They weren't going to get a WC spot. And if you aren't going to get a WC spot, it is working against your own self interested to be close. If you aren't making the playoffs, the most franchise rewarding thing to do is be in last place and earn the first pick. At this point, the first pick gets you a stud OF'er.
It mystifies me that people think the Pirates are going to go out and sign a couple of FA to make a couple of positions better on a team like this. It doesn't just waste money (which I don't care about). It wastes their chance to actually build a franchise.
Josh Bell to Nats
The current projection is 2025 for when we will be competitive. Do you want to raise it to 2030?
-
Bobster21
Josh Bell to Nats
79626F6E676B640A0 wrote: The current projection is 2025 for when we will be competitive. Do you want to raise it to 2030?
I'm confident that if you keep complaining about it, the Pirates will make every effort to become competitive sooner.
I'm confident that if you keep complaining about it, the Pirates will make every effort to become competitive sooner.
Josh Bell to Nats
58434E4F464A452B0 wrote: The current projection is 2025 for when we will be competitive. Do you want to raise it to 2030?
What difference does it make as long as they improve at one position right? ::) ::)
What difference does it make as long as they improve at one position right? ::) ::)