People hate the management team and think they lie all the time. Even when they are proven wrong, they still don't believe them.
People called for Polanco and Huntington said he wasn't ready. Polanco had a hot start, but died down big time.
People want management to learn from their mistakes, but not their own. Glasnow was not ready last year. I really doubt he will be on the major league team to start the season. Management did not lie to us.
Who is the #2 prospect for 2017?
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
OrlandoMerced
Who is the #2 prospect for 2017?
I remember that point when they called Glasnow up. I just looked at the Pirates game log. They had a terrible June and went from 29-21 to 34-39, then had their record back to 44-41 for Glasnow's start. If were ready, his addition to the rotation could have been huge.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams ... ores.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams ... ores.shtml
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Who is the #2 prospect for 2017?
Hopefully he's learned a valuable life lesson from the whole "no really, you NEED to work on your third pitch" situation.
Who is the #2 prospect for 2017?
One reason for thinking they were lying was the off season acquisition of Vogelsong. If Vogy, by not doing more in the off season it looked like the Buds believed Tailbone and Glasgow could save the day.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Who is the #2 prospect for 2017?
032524332535460 wrote: One reason for thinking they were lying was the off season acquisition of Vogelsong. If Vogy, by not doing more in the off season it looked like the Buds believed Tailbone and Glasgow could save the day.
Now that I agree with. We (and probably they) were just taking it for granted that they'd both be up and mowing down batters by the time super two came along. That's a cautionary tale as well. When you think you have an okay pitching staff you probably should just go ahead and get another one anyhow, because something always goes wrong.
Now that I agree with. We (and probably they) were just taking it for granted that they'd both be up and mowing down batters by the time super two came along. That's a cautionary tale as well. When you think you have an okay pitching staff you probably should just go ahead and get another one anyhow, because something always goes wrong.
-
OrlandoMerced
Who is the #2 prospect for 2017?
There were definitely banking on one of Taillon/Glasnow being ready. And they were right about Taillon. They also thought that Niese would be a good #3 behind Cole and Liriano and that Locke could give them innings as a back end guy.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Who is the #2 prospect for 2017?
547273647262110 wrote: One reason for thinking they were lying was the off season acquisition of Vogelsong. If Vogy, by not doing more in the off season it looked like the Buds believed Tailbone and Glasgow could save the day.
I disagree.
Ryan Vogelsong had a better 2015 than Charlie Morton. Vogelsong had a better record, better ERA, more strike outs. he had more walks and gave a up a little more HRs, but overall Vogelsong had a better year. Vogelsong should have started in the rotation over Juan Nicasio in my opinion.
Only Taillon was expected to be up. Not Taillon and Glasnow.
I disagree.
Ryan Vogelsong had a better 2015 than Charlie Morton. Vogelsong had a better record, better ERA, more strike outs. he had more walks and gave a up a little more HRs, but overall Vogelsong had a better year. Vogelsong should have started in the rotation over Juan Nicasio in my opinion.
Only Taillon was expected to be up. Not Taillon and Glasnow.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Who is the #2 prospect for 2017?
444F474B4E4F541117605941484F4F0E434F200 wrote: One reason for thinking they were lying was the off season acquisition of Vogelsong. If Vogy, by not doing more in the off season it looked like the Buds believed Tailbone and Glasgow could save the day.
I disagree.
Ryan Vogelsong had a better 2015 than Charlie Morton. Vogelsong had a better record, better ERA, more strike outs. he had more walks and gave a up a little more HRs, but overall Vogelsong had a better year. Vogelsong should have started in the rotation over Juan Nicasio in my opinion.
Only Taillon was expected to be up. Not Taillon and Glasnow.
Maybe, but that's why you get redundant in your pitching options. Most of the AAA "depth" wasn't really ready to step up and fill in. There seemed to be a lack of pitching going into the season and the issues that came just accentuated that even more. Now maybe that extra guy would have struggled/gotten hurt as well, but hedging your bets is always good. Just one more rotation piece could have made a world of difference last year.
Also, declaring that a guy is "better than Charlie Morton" probably is not going to win over too many converts, haha.
I was okay with trying out the Juan Nicasio Project but when you're depending on an experiment like that for middle rotation at season's start you might be in trouble.
I disagree.
Ryan Vogelsong had a better 2015 than Charlie Morton. Vogelsong had a better record, better ERA, more strike outs. he had more walks and gave a up a little more HRs, but overall Vogelsong had a better year. Vogelsong should have started in the rotation over Juan Nicasio in my opinion.
Only Taillon was expected to be up. Not Taillon and Glasnow.
Maybe, but that's why you get redundant in your pitching options. Most of the AAA "depth" wasn't really ready to step up and fill in. There seemed to be a lack of pitching going into the season and the issues that came just accentuated that even more. Now maybe that extra guy would have struggled/gotten hurt as well, but hedging your bets is always good. Just one more rotation piece could have made a world of difference last year.
Also, declaring that a guy is "better than Charlie Morton" probably is not going to win over too many converts, haha.
I was okay with trying out the Juan Nicasio Project but when you're depending on an experiment like that for middle rotation at season's start you might be in trouble.
Who is the #2 prospect for 2017?
685A56564270535A57525D5A3B0 wrote: Hopefully he's learned a valuable life lesson from the whole "no really, you NEED to work on your third pitch" situation.
Not sure I completely agree with this. I do think he could be even more effective and dominant with a good changeup.
His issues when he hit the majors last year were more about a lack of velocity and FB command. At times, he flashed the goods. At times, he flashed that up 90s FB and the curveball was always impressive. It hasn't been talked about much, but his velocity was down for a big part of his MLB time. That hasn't been the case in the minors.
I think the obvious explanation is nerves/adreneline. Glasnow does have a long history of struggling with an "adjustment period" when making a level jump. He has struggled at every level jump for a bit and then figures it out. Then he flat out dominates. Even with occasional suspect command. This is his pattern. It's too bad people are ready to dump him so easily. In reality, there is no reason to think that he can't (and won't) follow the same pattern in the majors. If his velocity goes back up to the upper 90s with movement and he keeps up his plus curveball, he will have great success in the majors, even with the spotty command. If he can figure out the command thing and maybe throw a few changeups...well, he's got Cy Young stuff.
Pick off move. I'd be shocked if he comes back and that is still a significant problem. It may never be a strength, but I bet it won't hold him back.
Not sure I completely agree with this. I do think he could be even more effective and dominant with a good changeup.
His issues when he hit the majors last year were more about a lack of velocity and FB command. At times, he flashed the goods. At times, he flashed that up 90s FB and the curveball was always impressive. It hasn't been talked about much, but his velocity was down for a big part of his MLB time. That hasn't been the case in the minors.
I think the obvious explanation is nerves/adreneline. Glasnow does have a long history of struggling with an "adjustment period" when making a level jump. He has struggled at every level jump for a bit and then figures it out. Then he flat out dominates. Even with occasional suspect command. This is his pattern. It's too bad people are ready to dump him so easily. In reality, there is no reason to think that he can't (and won't) follow the same pattern in the majors. If his velocity goes back up to the upper 90s with movement and he keeps up his plus curveball, he will have great success in the majors, even with the spotty command. If he can figure out the command thing and maybe throw a few changeups...well, he's got Cy Young stuff.
Pick off move. I'd be shocked if he comes back and that is still a significant problem. It may never be a strength, but I bet it won't hold him back.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Who is the #2 prospect for 2017?
675559594D7F5C55585D5255340 wrote: One reason for thinking they were lying was the off season acquisition of Vogelsong. If Vogy, by not doing more in the off season it looked like the Buds believed Tailbone and Glasgow could save the day.
I disagree.
Ryan Vogelsong had a better 2015 than Charlie Morton. Vogelsong had a better record, better ERA, more strike outs. he had more walks and gave a up a little more HRs, but overall Vogelsong had a better year. Vogelsong should have started in the rotation over Juan Nicasio in my opinion.
Only Taillon was expected to be up. Not Taillon and Glasnow.
Maybe, but that's why you get redundant in your pitching options. Most of the AAA "depth" wasn't really ready to step up and fill in. There seemed to be a lack of pitching going into the season and the issues that came just accentuated that even more. Now maybe that extra guy would have struggled/gotten hurt as well, but hedging your bets is always good. Just one more rotation piece could have made a world of difference last year.
Also, declaring that a guy is "better than Charlie Morton" probably is not going to win over too many converts, haha.
I was okay with trying out the Juan Nicasio Project but when you're depending on an experiment like that for middle rotation at season's start you might be in trouble.
The rotation failed more because of Cole, Liriano and Niese. Morton was good enough for years, why I compared him to Vogelsong. I don't know why Vogelsong wasn't put in the rotation sooner. I understand the Nicasio experiment, but it went on too long.
I disagree.
Ryan Vogelsong had a better 2015 than Charlie Morton. Vogelsong had a better record, better ERA, more strike outs. he had more walks and gave a up a little more HRs, but overall Vogelsong had a better year. Vogelsong should have started in the rotation over Juan Nicasio in my opinion.
Only Taillon was expected to be up. Not Taillon and Glasnow.
Maybe, but that's why you get redundant in your pitching options. Most of the AAA "depth" wasn't really ready to step up and fill in. There seemed to be a lack of pitching going into the season and the issues that came just accentuated that even more. Now maybe that extra guy would have struggled/gotten hurt as well, but hedging your bets is always good. Just one more rotation piece could have made a world of difference last year.
Also, declaring that a guy is "better than Charlie Morton" probably is not going to win over too many converts, haha.
I was okay with trying out the Juan Nicasio Project but when you're depending on an experiment like that for middle rotation at season's start you might be in trouble.
The rotation failed more because of Cole, Liriano and Niese. Morton was good enough for years, why I compared him to Vogelsong. I don't know why Vogelsong wasn't put in the rotation sooner. I understand the Nicasio experiment, but it went on too long.