Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
- Tim
- Consider him admonished
- Posts: 8350
- Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
- Location: The South
Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
He’s Grichuk 2.0 and got no future in StL. Ride this wave a week and deal him to Baltimore or Florida? I got hot [expletive] for Justin Bour
- Medwick's_Ghost
- I'm a jerker by nature....
- Posts: 906
- Joined: October 10 13, 12:08 pm
Re: Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
I don't know if this is tongue and cheek or what. What I DO know is that 'roids no more Ozuna will be back looking like hell in the 4 hole next game.Tim wrote:He’s Grichuk 2.0 and got no future in StL. Ride this wave a week and deal him to Baltimore or Florida? I got hot [expletive] for Justin Bour
50-50 whether O'Neill is benched.
- Tim
- Consider him admonished
- Posts: 8350
- Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
- Location: The South
Re: Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
Not tongue in cheek at all
Addendum: I am all in on Randy Arozarena and Adolis Garcia seems to be a promising prospect.
Bader hasn't disappointed and we aren't shipping Fowler anywhere anytime soon. Seems like trading ONeill would be the prudent move.
Addendum: I am all in on Randy Arozarena and Adolis Garcia seems to be a promising prospect.
Bader hasn't disappointed and we aren't shipping Fowler anywhere anytime soon. Seems like trading ONeill would be the prudent move.
- Medwick's_Ghost
- I'm a jerker by nature....
- Posts: 906
- Joined: October 10 13, 12:08 pm
Re: Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
Can't agree. You gotta give the kid some time to see if he's the next Mickey Mantle...same with Bader. We know what Fowler is: a bust. (but of course he will continue to play)Tim wrote:Not tongue in cheek at all
Addendum: I am all in on Randy Arozarena and Adolis Garcia seems to be a promising prospect.
Bader hasn't disappointed and we aren't shipping Fowler anywhere anytime soon. Seems like trading ONeill would be the prudent move.
-
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 17324
- Joined: June 16 07, 2:12 pm
Re: Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
I can answer this now, he's not.Medwick's_Ghost wrote:Can't agree. You gotta give the kid some time to see if he's the next Mickey Mantle...same with Bader. We know what Fowler is: a bust. (but of course he will continue to play)Tim wrote:Not tongue in cheek at all
Addendum: I am all in on Randy Arozarena and Adolis Garcia seems to be a promising prospect.
Bader hasn't disappointed and we aren't shipping Fowler anywhere anytime soon. Seems like trading ONeill would be the prudent move.
- Momo
- Veteran Player
- Posts: 560
- Joined: December 7 17, 11:58 pm
Re: Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
A) The Grichuk comp isn't great.
In regards to the comp, I get why it makes sense at a surface level.
But I also don't think it necessarily makes sense to throw him under the bus simply because of the similarities. Just because Grichuk couldn't be productive with his hitting profile doesn't necessarily mean O'Neill can't.
I still question how sustainable the changes were that DeJong made (shame that now we have to wait to see them), but if a guy like that who also has similarities to Grichuk's profile can develop some plate discipline, there's no reason Tyler can't do the same as well.
And I think it's important to note that O'Neill has already started improving his profile. I'm not sure if that's something he started pursuing on his own, or if it was a Mark Budaska decision (and God only knows if Mabry will [expletive] it up). But after he was traded to the Cardinals, he closed off his stance, and began to load his hands lower, closer to chest level instead of up around his ears.
That resulted in a much more consistent swing angle, and also helped to cut his infield-flyball rate in half, which was super important because before his swing was pretty vulnerable to being busted with poor contact from late swings. And not only was the swing visually more consistent, it actually resulted in a clear upswing in even more power. He lost a little OBP in the transition (.328 for Tacoma vs .304 for Memphis), but he gained a considerable power surge (.479 for Tacoma vs .548). In the end, in 2017 he hit 19 homers in 349 ABs for Tacoma, and 12 homers for Memphis in only 146 ABs.
And this year, he hit 13 dingers for Memphis in only 113 ABs. Some of that is clearly unsustainable since he had a .708 SLG, but some it is also clearly improvement.
B) Wanting to trade what is arguably our third best prospect is also goofy.
Building on the above, I'm not too keen to throw out a player who's showing signs of adjusting and becoming better. Especially when our OF depth at the MLB level isn't quite as impressive as we thought with Ozuna and Fowler underperforming hard.
C) Bour is a [expletive] return for a top prospect like O'Neill.
Also similar to the above, if you're insistent on trading what is easily one of your top prospects, I'd want a lot better than Bour. I don't want to trade a 22 year old possible stud OF for a 29 year old 1B. Sounds like a real raw deal. I would still probably be against it, but I could at least see an argument for trading O'Neill as the centerpiece for a top guy like Machado.
In regards to the comp, I get why it makes sense at a surface level.
But I also don't think it necessarily makes sense to throw him under the bus simply because of the similarities. Just because Grichuk couldn't be productive with his hitting profile doesn't necessarily mean O'Neill can't.
I still question how sustainable the changes were that DeJong made (shame that now we have to wait to see them), but if a guy like that who also has similarities to Grichuk's profile can develop some plate discipline, there's no reason Tyler can't do the same as well.
And I think it's important to note that O'Neill has already started improving his profile. I'm not sure if that's something he started pursuing on his own, or if it was a Mark Budaska decision (and God only knows if Mabry will [expletive] it up). But after he was traded to the Cardinals, he closed off his stance, and began to load his hands lower, closer to chest level instead of up around his ears.
That resulted in a much more consistent swing angle, and also helped to cut his infield-flyball rate in half, which was super important because before his swing was pretty vulnerable to being busted with poor contact from late swings. And not only was the swing visually more consistent, it actually resulted in a clear upswing in even more power. He lost a little OBP in the transition (.328 for Tacoma vs .304 for Memphis), but he gained a considerable power surge (.479 for Tacoma vs .548). In the end, in 2017 he hit 19 homers in 349 ABs for Tacoma, and 12 homers for Memphis in only 146 ABs.
And this year, he hit 13 dingers for Memphis in only 113 ABs. Some of that is clearly unsustainable since he had a .708 SLG, but some it is also clearly improvement.
B) Wanting to trade what is arguably our third best prospect is also goofy.
Building on the above, I'm not too keen to throw out a player who's showing signs of adjusting and becoming better. Especially when our OF depth at the MLB level isn't quite as impressive as we thought with Ozuna and Fowler underperforming hard.
C) Bour is a [expletive] return for a top prospect like O'Neill.
Also similar to the above, if you're insistent on trading what is easily one of your top prospects, I'd want a lot better than Bour. I don't want to trade a 22 year old possible stud OF for a 29 year old 1B. Sounds like a real raw deal. I would still probably be against it, but I could at least see an argument for trading O'Neill as the centerpiece for a top guy like Machado.
- cardsfansince82
- is shooing asian children away from his fridge.
- Posts: 27873
- Joined: May 17 06, 10:23 pm
- Location: at the gettin' place
Re: Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
A team that can't hit shouldn't be in any rush to trade the guy that's hitting.
- Momo
- Veteran Player
- Posts: 560
- Joined: December 7 17, 11:58 pm
Re: Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
I don't understand this either honestly.Tim wrote:Not tongue in cheek at all
Addendum: I am all in on Randy Arozarena and Adolis Garcia seems to be a promising prospect.
Bader hasn't disappointed and we aren't shipping Fowler anywhere anytime soon. Seems like trading ONeill would be the prudent move.
What's so much better about either of these guys such that you'd be "all in" but want to ship out Tyler?
Garcia in particular is stinking it up in AAA.
As for the Fowler issue, no we're probably not shipping him out. But at this time last year, no one thought we'd be moving Leake and Mo managed to get rid of him. It's not likely, but I also don't think it's impossible if he continues hitting like this through the ASB.
- Medwick's_Ghost
- I'm a jerker by nature....
- Posts: 906
- Joined: October 10 13, 12:08 pm
Re: Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
You are most likely right but O'neill was tearing up AAA this year like Mantle. He was on a clip to hit 50 HRs for god's sake! (and still is) He strikes out but so did the Mick. Comparing him to Grichuk by the OP is wrong. Nobody strikes out like The Gritch.Magneto2.0 wrote:I can answer this now, he's not.Medwick's_Ghost wrote:Can't agree. You gotta give the kid some time to see if he's the next Mickey Mantle...same with Bader. We know what Fowler is: a bust. (but of course he will continue to play)Tim wrote:Not tongue in cheek at all
Addendum: I am all in on Randy Arozarena and Adolis Garcia seems to be a promising prospect.
Bader hasn't disappointed and we aren't shipping Fowler anywhere anytime soon. Seems like trading ONeill would be the prudent move.
- Jocephus
- 99% conan clips
- Posts: 63642
- Joined: April 18 06, 5:14 pm
Re: Let’s be frank. We gotta trade O’Neill right?
you can be frank, i'd like to stay as joe