Baseball Prospectus has a piece up on Albert Almora's hot start. They talked with several scouts about what they thought about him at this point. It's worth reading.
Hit:
High Scout: “He’s killing the ball, and it looks sustainable to me. He has great hand-eye coordination, and he has a swing that lets him hit the ball hard the opposite way. I don’t think we’re talking about a batting champ in the future, but I think Almora can hit for average as a big leaguer, I really do.”
Low Scout: “He’s made some mechanical adjustments, I think. He’s shorter to the ball, and he’s making more hard contact. I just am not sold that his approach can work at the highest level. He’s not your prototypical hacker, but he doesn’t work counts, and unless you’re Jose Altuve or someone like that, it doesn’t work that well.”
High Scout grade: 55
Low Scout grade: 45
It's worth pointing out that last season when a lot of fans started to think less of Almora, he was putting together a pretty good season (105 wRC+). It's not a whole lot different in terms of overall value (117 wRC+ so far this year), but he did it very differently. Last year he improved his walk rate so much that I started to think more highly of him. This year it's back down to such low levels it's difficult to imagine it working out long-term for him. Oh well, he's hot right now and having a great season. A low walk rate is somewhat understandable if you're hitting as well as he currently is.
Comments
Contending teams with veteran pitchers seem to require veteran catchers. I’m not even sure how they’re going to work in Contreras let alone Davis.
SKQuote Reply
Stop winning, Pirates.
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
SK,
That’s what people said in 2007. Didn’t 2008 prove something about this? Soto pretty much took over late in 2007. If Hendry and Lou can force the pitchers to deal with a rookie catcher, I would be disappointed if this front office couldn’t. It’s their job to do what’s best for the team.
I have no idea if Davis is a good defensive player though, but Contreras can hit and can play passable defense. I’m not too worried. Contreras is a better defender than Schwarber and this front office rightly didn’t care too much about what the pitching staff thought of pitching to him.
dmick89Quote Reply
Mike Moustakas has an ACL tear.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
That’s horrible news for the Royals. I think, anyway. I don’t know who their backup is.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Rice Cube,
It is terrible news for them. They lost two key players on one play. One of them is probably out for the season.
dmick89Quote Reply
I’m interested to see how Almora’s defense actually grades out. Supposedly it’s pretty elite, but I don’t know how much of that is real, and how much of it is simply Cubs prospect hype.
EdwinQuote Reply
TIL: Dexter Fowler has the same career BABIP as Wade Boggs (and higher than Tony Gwynn).
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
A few points on trading for Miller or a starter or whatever:
The market will dictate an overpay for any sort of pitching, even a totally useless Sonny Gray or Matt Harvey. Rich Hill will cost a mountain of gold for just a rental. The reason they will cost so much is scarcity, which may result in a winner’s curse because of the bidding process. The buying contender will have to pay more than the other potential suitors, inevitably paying more than the value of the asset, particularly when the other suitors may be competitors.
So of course it’s overpaying, just like like the Cubs overpaid for Lester and Heyward in the open market. For this reason, I don’t buy the argument that this front office would never do something because the have never done it before. The team is in a different place than it was before. And because they hit the prospects and trades so well in the past that they don’t have a need or a place for some of the next wave, they have the luxury of spending prospects, something they have only really done trading for Montero.
If the Cubs do trade for any players before the deadline, I hope they overpay for an elite player, and the part of the team that needs an elite player the most is the bullpen. Miller has two-and-a-half years and is in the prime of his career and is the kind of player that can make this bullpen formidable.
This does not preclude also overpaying for a top-of-the-rotation starter, which I am for. The Cubs have the depth to do it, even as their depth has been tried.
ceruleanQuote Reply
Two asterisks:
Harvey and Gray have been awful, and if they continue being awful I doubt they would get traded because neither team would bring down their asking price much.
I actually think that Lester and Heyward have been fair deals thus far, but I wouldn’t be surprised if one or neither of them pan out for any number of reasons.
And an addendum:
While I don’t think it would be wise to go full Jim Hendry on the farm system, I also know it is not wise to hoard—which is to hold onto things beyond their usefulness. The Cubs farm system, if it has been built with replicable skill, can and should be used as a tradeable good.
ceruleanQuote Reply
Also, I don’t buy the argument that a Miller-type is less valuable because he would just be a setup man, which is what he is right now. Remember the good-at-sports Marmol putting out fires? Or maybe Rondon becomes that guys so they can keep his arbitration numbers down. (dying laughing)
ceruleanQuote Reply
The Cubs didn’t overpay for either of them. Both were valued at more than the Cubs eventually paid and both were offered more money to sign elsewhere. The Cubs only signed them because they signed at under market value and chose to take a lesser bid. This front office has not to the best of my knowledge overpaid for a single asset. In fact, I think they have underpaid for almost everything they’ve acquired. Even Ben Zobrist had multiple offers that were higher than he signed for. Dexter Fowler signed for less. This has been a team that has been been built by being cheap. Fortunately, they’ve been able to do that because they’ve convinced players to play along. So I don’t mean that the team has been built by being cheap in a negative way. I mean it in the most positive way.
dmick89Quote Reply
Edwin Jackson. Just remembered that. That was an overpay and the organization has even acknowledged it wasn’t a good decision on their part.
dmick89Quote Reply
I think if the Cubs cared all that much about improving the bullpen, they’d have done it in the offseason when it’s clearly more efficient to do so. As long as Strop and Rondon stay healthy, I don’t see this as an area the Cubs will spend any time looking to address at the deadline.
dmick89Quote Reply
The Cubs winning by so many runs is already doing that. Just keep doing that and Rondon won’t earn as much next year. It’s a brilliant plan and a lot of fun to watch. (dying laughing)
dmick89Quote Reply
False.
berseliusQuote Reply
I agree that those were fair market deals, or maybe better than fair market deals, but that has to do more with the inefficiency of the market than anything. They are not deals that will break the bank, and since all teams are pretty aware of how much money is on the horizon, that continues to push the value of wins upwards. (Those teams like the Yankees and Braves that spent with relative abandon in the nineties did pretty well for themselves and the costs of their signings brought many returns, including fan apathy for the postseason, a luxury I am envious of.)
Prospects too may be this way, especially if one believes that the org is doing an amazing job developing them. If the Cubs build the reputation of having quality assets, deals will get easier, just as it got easier for the stingy teams to open the coffers every once in a while. Until then, use a relative strength to remedy a relative weakness.
ceruleanQuote Reply
Yes and no.
ceruleanQuote Reply
/corrected
SKQuote Reply
dmick89,
I don’t remember people saying that in 2007. In fact, the incumbent was Michael Barrett, who only barely had credibility as a veteran catcher and was certainly a bad receiving catcher who pitchers probably hated. He was traded in June, the day after my daughter bought his shirsey at Wrigley Field.
SKQuote Reply
SK,
I can’t remember for sure but I assume Henry Blanco was the other catcher back then. I remember Lou really got sick of Barrett’s shitty defense. Don’t really know how all this fits in with your point or my point. You might be correct or I might be false, but it could go either way.
SKQuote Reply
That’s what TheHawk was saying on his blog and BTF around that time. I thought you’d get what I mean by people saying that, but his sentiments were believed by many likeminded fans. The point I’m making is that Hendry and Lou figured a rookie catcher was good enough so I have a difficult time believing a more forward thinking organization isn’t going to feel the same way. I’m also fairly sure Schwarber would have stuck around behind the plate least year if they didn’t have Montero. I don’t think this front office cares about that stuff and nor should they. They pay the pitchers to pitch. Sure, they’d probably all love it if the Cubs went out and grabbed Yadier Molina so they could pitch to one of the best defensive catchers in history.
dmick89Quote Reply
Ah, the glory days. If we implore TheHawk, do you think he will impart some of his wisdom upon this lowly and unworthy blog?
ceruleanQuote Reply
cerulean,
Derosa, I hope not
berseliusQuote Reply
I didn’t see this earlier, but I suppose it’s fitting that I am not the only one who has Miller on the mind.
Also, imagine this seventh, eighth, and ninth.
ceruleanQuote Reply
http://obstructedview.net/series-preview-philadelphia-phillies-26-21-at-chicago-cubs-31-14/
berseliusQuote Reply