Re: Oscar Taveras
Posted: August 31 11, 4:24 pm
How are we supposed to determine the one single reason why a prospect makes it or not? How are we supposed to determine whether a prospect fails because he was rushed or because he just didn't have it? After all the scouts who found these players -- and there are a dozen of them every year -- and the teams that drafted them saw the tools, the talent, the potential... Yet, that perceived talent that manifested at the MiLB level was unrealized in the majors. Why? Sometimes these prospects flame out because of injury (Alan Benes). I'll grant you those guys. Sometimes the player's tools that allowed him to dominate the minors simply didn't translate to the majors (Anthony Reyes). I'll give you those guys, too.
That leaves an extremely long list of highly regarded prospects who simply were not capable of translating their amazing talents into success at the MLB level. Some of them were rushed to the majors and never succeeded. Some were brought along slowly and never succeeded. You could try to pin it on any number of possible things, but by and large the reason they didn't succeed is that they were simply not "ready" to tackle the challenge of playing the majors when they got there... they had not mastered the requisite skills and techniques to successfully translate their talents to the major league environment. Maybe it was a mental problem. Maybe it was physical. Maybe it was something else that we can't even measure. Whatever the reason for their lack of readiness, the fact is that they were not ready.
And for the ones who did succeed but weren't rushed, we'll never know if they would have succeeded had they been rushed. Why? Because they weren't rushed and you can't quantify what extra years of development means to a player. The knife cuts both ways.
So, to your question, name one player other than Ankiel who was ruined by bring brought up to early? OK, go through and look at any top 100 list from the last 10 years and you'll see probably 30-50 names on every list from every year who didn't make it and they didn't make it because they were not "ready". Some might never have developed the skills/abilities/mental fortitude/techniqes/whatever that would have made them ready, but that point is moot in this discussion. Others might have if given more time, but weren't given the time they needed. We'll never know precisely because they failed.
And again, as to whether Rasmus would have improved the '08 club, I'll give you the same answer I've been giving you. I don't care. It doesn't matter. Because Rasmus' development -- and he clearly had some developing to do in '08 -- matters more to me than a marginal improvement in our outfield in a rebuilding season. But, to play along, Ankiel was a 3.4 WAR player that season. Ludwick was a 4.5 player. The combo of Skip and Duncan was a 2.4 WAR player. Our two backup OF'ers that year were Barton -- 764 OPS -- and Mather -- 780 OPS. Rasmus wouldn't have cracked that roster nor would he have been an improvement over a single player we gave significant time in the OF to because they all performed pretty well.
That leaves an extremely long list of highly regarded prospects who simply were not capable of translating their amazing talents into success at the MLB level. Some of them were rushed to the majors and never succeeded. Some were brought along slowly and never succeeded. You could try to pin it on any number of possible things, but by and large the reason they didn't succeed is that they were simply not "ready" to tackle the challenge of playing the majors when they got there... they had not mastered the requisite skills and techniques to successfully translate their talents to the major league environment. Maybe it was a mental problem. Maybe it was physical. Maybe it was something else that we can't even measure. Whatever the reason for their lack of readiness, the fact is that they were not ready.
And for the ones who did succeed but weren't rushed, we'll never know if they would have succeeded had they been rushed. Why? Because they weren't rushed and you can't quantify what extra years of development means to a player. The knife cuts both ways.
So, to your question, name one player other than Ankiel who was ruined by bring brought up to early? OK, go through and look at any top 100 list from the last 10 years and you'll see probably 30-50 names on every list from every year who didn't make it and they didn't make it because they were not "ready". Some might never have developed the skills/abilities/mental fortitude/techniqes/whatever that would have made them ready, but that point is moot in this discussion. Others might have if given more time, but weren't given the time they needed. We'll never know precisely because they failed.
And again, as to whether Rasmus would have improved the '08 club, I'll give you the same answer I've been giving you. I don't care. It doesn't matter. Because Rasmus' development -- and he clearly had some developing to do in '08 -- matters more to me than a marginal improvement in our outfield in a rebuilding season. But, to play along, Ankiel was a 3.4 WAR player that season. Ludwick was a 4.5 player. The combo of Skip and Duncan was a 2.4 WAR player. Our two backup OF'ers that year were Barton -- 764 OPS -- and Mather -- 780 OPS. Rasmus wouldn't have cracked that roster nor would he have been an improvement over a single player we gave significant time in the OF to because they all performed pretty well.