Offseason Notes

This edition of Offseason Notes is funnier than about 60% of all episodes of The Jeffersons.

Marginally Important News
In which the author examines news that’s just barely fit to print.

Juan Carlos Linares Getting Attention
SCOUT-leaderboard-fixture Juan Carlos Linares is discussed glowingly by Sox GM Theo Epstein and a mysterious scouty-type person. “He rakes,” says — er, actually, texts — the latter, presumably not discussing Linares’s fondness for yardwork.

Amazin’ Avenue Starts Book Club
Clearly aware that sporting news can reach absurd heights at this particular juncture of the baseballing calendar, Amazin’ Avenue’s James Kannengieser has started a virtual book club, and the first assignment is Moneyball. Among the penetrating discussion questions, we find this, for example:

5. Was early 1980s Billy Beane [pictured above right] really as handsome as the scouts declared? How would he stack up vs. other 1986 Mets in that department? As a GM, would you rather sign a lothario or a mature, married player (like Ollie)?

It’s obvious, America: Metropolitan fans are willing to ask the tough questions..

Paulino to Rockies for Barmes
Young robitronic author R.J. Anderson has already treated this, but it deserves to be noted elsewise that Felipe Paulino was a member of the very proprietary All-Joy Team last year, had a decent 2010, and throws the ball superhard. Consider: among pitchers with at least 80 IP, Paulino finished second behind only new teammate Ubaldo Jimenez with a fastball average of 95.5 mph. That’s faster than Justin Verlander and Josh Johnson.

SCOUT Batting Leaderboard
The Leaderboard
Here is the SCOUT batting leaderboard for the Arizona Fall League. (Click here for more on SCOUT, the metric that’s “sweeping” the “nation.”)

Notes
• Right now, Carson Cistulli is currently daydreaming about Conor Gillaspie and Charlie Blackmon.
• In a totally wholesome way, that is.

SCOUT Pitching Leaderboard
The Leaderboard
Same verse, very similar to the first.

Notes
Alexander Cobb started yesterday against Surprise.
• Here’s his line: 22 BF, 4.1 IP, 8 K, 2 BB, 5:0 GO:AO.
• That also somehow equals 5 R (4 ER).

Bryce Harper Watch
Bryce Harper was 2-for-4 yesterday with one these: 2B. And one of these: K.

That brings his AFL line to .343/.410/.629 in 35 AB.




Print This Post



Carson Cistulli occasionally publishes spirited ejaculations at The New Enthusiast.


15 Responses to “Offseason Notes”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
  1. DIVISION says:

    How much potential did Billy Beane have as a prospect?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • ofMontreal says:

      He was a first round pick dude, before DStrawberry!

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • bluejaysstatsgeek says:

        Right! Strawberry was first overall. Beane went 23rd, also to the to the Mets, just before the Mets chose John Gibbons. However, the Mets sent Strawberry to Rookie ball, and Beane to A ball, thinking he more developed.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • TOny says:

      Not knowing Moneyball and checking out Fangraphs is like watching porno without having ever seen a sports illustrated Swimsuit issue.

      +5 Vote -1 Vote +1

  2. dan woytek says:

    Jeans Model archetype

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  3. Krog says:

    Carson,

    I feel that your offseason notes series is really moving on up, so to speak.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  4. SOB in TO says:

    He had a high butt. (?)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  5. Steve Slow says:

    Copycats. We started a Book Club at DRB over a month ago. We’re on our second book….it’s definitely a fun concept, so I recommend other sites give it a go.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  6. The Wizard says:

    Is it possible to get the ‘BABIP’ column back in tomorrow’s SCOUT batting leaderboard?

    thanks

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  7. Derek says:

    Billy Beane was the perfect prospect from the traditional scouting prospective. Blackmon needs a trade to see everyday at-bats, but he should at least be a good fourth outfielder.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  8. Scout Finch says:

    I’m glad I clicked the Click here link and read about what it all means.

    Am I reading correctly that the z-scores are relative only to the 2010 AFL population?

    And should the Giants organization be excited about Conor Gillaspie’s SCOUT thus far ?

    He also has a major league hit if that counts for anything.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • camisadelgolf says:

      Yes, that hit means everything. He’s pretty much a guaranteed superstar because of it. He also has a .429 OBP, which bodes very well for his future. My only concern is his lefty/righty split. At the major league level, he has yet to get a hit against a left-handed pitcher.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • In re the first question, yes, it’s just the AFL population.

      In re the second, I don’t know precisely. With SCOUT, we’re using numbers to look at SKILLS that we can assess somewhat reliably with smallish samples — specifically, the ability to make contact and hit home runs. To make any strong conclusions from the information — i.e. “Gillaspie’s the best player in the AFL” — would be imprudent.

      With that caveat caveated, though, Gillaspie’s performance is encouraging. While he’s always been pretty good at making contact, his power numbers have been poor. This fall, he’s preserved the former skill while adding the latter. Yes, it’s a hitter-friendly league, but as we’re only measuring Gillaspie relative to the AFL population, that’s mostly accounted for. (Ballpark effects are another thing, and are decidedly NOT a part of SCOUT.)

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Scout Finch says:

        Yeah, that’s what I was getting at.

        Is he developing more bat speed? He seems a like a lanky type who would get stronger as he matures in his mid 20’s. The same goes for Brandon Belt who seems the hottest hitting prospect for the Giants since sliced bread or Buster Posey.

        It will be interesting to see how well this performance data correlates with what the scouts see from their AB’s.

        Keep up the good work. This makes some sense. If you can make an argument (or provide a link) why anyone should make valid inferences from BABIP, then I’m all ears.

        Thanks.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>