Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
Inbox
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

Von Rosenberg

  • bucco66
  • Member
  • 296 posts this site

Posted: 04/15/2013 6:14 PM

Von Rosenberg 


Does anyone know if Von Rosenberg's move to the bullpen a permanent switch or temp?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 04/15/2013 8:12 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 



bucco66 wrote: Does anyone know if Von Rosenberg's move to the bullpen a permanent switch or temp?
ZVR who?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 04/17/2013 9:42 AM

Re: Von Rosenberg 



bucco66 wrote: Does anyone know if Von Rosenberg's move to the bullpen a permanent switch or temp?

ABOVE SLOT!!!!!!



Pitt Happens. It always does.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 04/17/2013 1:04 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 


At this point, does it really matter? ZVR has been a big disappointment. Drafted as a projectable high school arm, he hasn't developed up to this point. He's basically a soft-tossing righty. I've written him- along with Dodson- off. You win some, you lose some.




I spent most of my money on beer and football. The rest I just wasted.

Last edited 04/17/2013 1:06 PM by burghsports3

Reply | Quote

Posted: 04/17/2013 1:17 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 



burghsports3 wrote: At this point, does it really matter? ZVR has been a big disappointment. Drafted as a projectable high school arm, he hasn't developed up to this point. He's basically a soft-tossing righty. I've written him- along with Dodson- off. You win some, you lose some.

Pretty much spot on, except I'm giving Dodson one more season to bounce back since he pitched well before the suspension.  Some people apparently expect us to hit on all of our draft choices lol.  In all honestly you win a few, lose most, that is how baseball works.  I've tried to explain to people what history shows to be a successful draft class, but they either ignore it or don't understand the concept.  While the 2009 draft class looks like it won't be high-impact, it is well on its way to being a successful draft on the whole plus some.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 04/17/2013 1:25 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 



cferrel3 wrote:
burghsports3 wrote: At this point, does it really matter? ZVR has been a big disappointment. Drafted as a projectable high school arm, he hasn't developed up to this point. He's basically a soft-tossing righty. I've written him- along with Dodson- off. You win some, you lose some.

Pretty much spot on, except I'm giving Dodson one more season to bounce back since he pitched well before the suspension.  Some people apparently expect us to hit on all of our draft choices lol.  In all honestly you win a few, lose most, that is how baseball works.  I've tried to explain to people what history shows to be a successful draft class, but they either ignore it or don't understand the concept.  While the 2009 draft class looks like it won't be high-impact, it is well on its way to being a successful draft on the whole plus some.


Or they just disagree with you.

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote

Posted: 04/17/2013 1:48 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 



gr1111 wrote:
cferrel3 wrote:
burghsports3 wrote: At this point, does it really matter? ZVR has been a big disappointment. Drafted as a projectable high school arm, he hasn't developed up to this point. He's basically a soft-tossing righty. I've written him- along with Dodson- off. You win some, you lose some.

Pretty much spot on, except I'm giving Dodson one more season to bounce back since he pitched well before the suspension.  Some people apparently expect us to hit on all of our draft choices lol.  In all honestly you win a few, lose most, that is how baseball works.  I've tried to explain to people what history shows to be a successful draft class, but they either ignore it or don't understand the concept.  While the 2009 draft class looks like it won't be high-impact, it is well on its way to being a successful draft on the whole plus some.


Or they just disagree with you.

It isn't a disagree or agree thing, not everything is opinion gr1111.  History shows how many players from a draft class is the norm, or "successful", there is comprehensive data over years and years and numerous teams.  There is actually a right and wrong answer here.  If you expect there to be 5 impact players from every draft, well, you're going to be disappointed most often then not.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 04/17/2013 2:00 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 



cferrel3 wrote:
gr1111 wrote:
cferrel3 wrote:
burghsports3 wrote: At this point, does it really matter? ZVR has been a big disappointment. Drafted as a projectable high school arm, he hasn't developed up to this point. He's basically a soft-tossing righty. I've written him- along with Dodson- off. You win some, you lose some.

Pretty much spot on, except I'm giving Dodson one more season to bounce back since he pitched well before the suspension.  Some people apparently expect us to hit on all of our draft choices lol.  In all honestly you win a few, lose most, that is how baseball works.  I've tried to explain to people what history shows to be a successful draft class, but they either ignore it or don't understand the concept.  While the 2009 draft class looks like it won't be high-impact, it is well on its way to being a successful draft on the whole plus some.


Or they just disagree with you.

It isn't a disagree or agree thing, not everything is opinion gr1111.  History shows how many players from a draft class is the norm, or "successful", there is comprehensive data over years and years and numerous teams.  There is actually a right and wrong answer here.  If you expect there to be 5 impact players from every draft, well, you're going to be disappointed most often then not.


It really is just a matter of opinion, and yours isn't any better than anyone else's here.

Many of us here were evaluating draft classes long before you started doing it, and don't need you to explain the concept to us.  This is a forum to discuss people's opinions about such things, and it would go much better if you didn't take the position that anyone who disagrees with you is automatically wrong.

___________

 

  

Last edited 04/17/2013 2:19 PM by gr1111

Reply | Quote

Posted: 04/17/2013 2:04 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 


If I remember correctly, there was overwhelming praise for the overslot strategy at least the first year, and especially with ZVR. I think we're all disappointed with how guys like ZVR, Dodson, Quinton Miller, etc turned out, but nobody was pissing and moaning about it at the time. 

If anything, it makes me a little nervous about the development program.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 04/17/2013 2:09 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 



WVUKowski wrote: If I remember correctly, there was overwhelming praise for the overslot strategy at least the first year, and especially with ZVR. I think we're all disappointed with how guys like ZVR, Dodson, Quinton Miller, etc turned out, but nobody was pissing and moaning about it at the time. 

If anything, it makes me a little nervous about the development program.


Keeping in mind that it is Bob Smizik, he had this to say in his P-G blog yesterday:

The MLB debut Sunday of Phil Irwin was a rare one for the Pirates. It’s not often the Pirates draft a player after the 10th round who comes on to make their active roster. It’s rare when a player drafted after the 20th round does. Irwin was a 21st-round selection in 2009.

 

This inability to cultivate low-round draft choices is a black hole in the Pirates system. Whether it’s poor drafting or poor development, the team rarely has a contributing player taken after the 10th round, let alone the 20th.

 

In this era of highly sophisticated talent evaluation, it’s understandable most good players would be taken early in the draft. But, still, other teams come up with late-round picks who make contributions and the Pirates do not.

 

The Pirates do not have a player taken after the eighth round on their current active roster. The players drafted and developed by the Pirates on the current roster are: Andrew McCutchen, Neil Walker and Pedro Alvarez, first round, Jared Hughes, fourth, Justin Wilson, fifth, Alex Presley, eighth, Tony Watson, ninth.

 

In this respect, the St. Louis Cardinals are the anti-Pirates. They not only have five players from the 2009 draft on their active roster, three of them were taken after the 10th round. Starting second baseman Matt Carpenter was taken in the 13th round; reliever Trevor Rosenthal in the 21st and  platoon first baseman Matt Adams in the 23rd.

 

This is not common, but nor, as is the case with the Pirates, is it unheard of.

 

The Atlanta Braves took catcher Evan Gattis in the 23rd round in 2010 and not only is he starting, in place of injured Brian McCann, he’s batting .324 with four homers. Along the way he won a minor-league batting title and had home-run seasons of 20 and 24.

 

The Braves took a catcher in the 23rd round in 2010 and he’s in the majors playing well, while the Pirates took a catcher in 2009 in the first round, Tony Sanchez, and he’s still in the minors.

 

The Braves took Kris Medlen in the 10th round in 2006 and he was 10-1 with a 1.54 ERA last season. He’s 1-1 with a 1.50 ERA this season.

 

In 2008, after no team had taken Brandon Beachy, a college junior, in the draft, the Braves signed him. The same year, the Pirates signed Quinton Miller, one of those clever overslot signings, for $900,000. The next year, the Pirates signed Zach Von Rosenberg for $1.2 million.

 

In 41 starts dating back to 2010, the undrafted Beachy, currently on the DL, is 12-10 with a 3.07 ERA in MLB. Miller is 0-2 with a 4.15 ERA in Class A. Last year he was 4-4 with a 6.34 ERA. Von Rosenberg is 0-0 with a 6.14 ERA in Class A. Last year he was 5-9 with a 5.73 ERA.

 

For next-to-nothing, the Braves got an MLB starter. For $2.1 million the Pirates got two players who probably would have been released by now had then not received so much money.

 

With Ryan Ludwich injured, Chris Heisey starts in left field for the Reds. He was taken in the 17th round in 2006. All-Star second baseman Dan Uggla was drafted in the 11th round.

 

Other team do it. The Pirates cannot. This is a reflection on the scouting and development staffs hired by the current management group and previous ones. It’s also another reason why the team have had 20 straight losing seasons.


http://communityvoices.post-ga...ds-in-the-rough

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote

Posted: 04/17/2013 2:37 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 


First, what does this article have to do with anything?  Everybody finds diamonds in the rough once in awhile, players always fall through the cracks.  Just not as much as usual.  The Pirates have a few, ever heard of Starling Marte?  He was an afterthought when he was signed.  What about Garrett Jones?  Does the scouting department get credit for that?  What about the aforementioned Phil Irwin?  What about prospects Casey Sadler (25th round), Matt Curry (37th and 16th), Adhelberto Santos (22nd), Jarek Cunningham (18th round), Kyle McPherson (14th)?

Finding those "diamonds in the rough" is tough, and he conveniently picked out a couple good ones, although still unproven and small sample sizes.

For your previous post, of course everyone is entitled to their opinions, but you always claim something is your opinion on things that aren't opinions.  I really don't know what you're saying.  There actually is a right and wrong answer sometimes, and there is actually a way to assess a draft.  You can choose to not follow that, but in the realm of baseball the standard to success the draft is uniform.  So you can choose not to, that is your right, but on a baseball forum you're wrong.  It might be right to you, but I thought we were discussing Major League Baseball on this Pirate forum?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 04/17/2013 2:52 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 


The Cardinals have had a knack for years/decades for finding these diamonds in the rough and having them come up and immediately contribute when they lose a player.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 04/17/2013 4:05 PM

RE: Von Rosenberg 


Cardinals draft picks to make the majors with their team

2008

Lance Lynn - Round 1 compensation

2009
Shelby Miller - Round 1
Joe Kelly - Round 3
Matt Carpenter - Round 13
Trevor Roesenthal - Round 21
Matt Adams - Round 23

Pirates draft picks to make the majors

2008

Pedro Alvarez - Round 1
Jordy Mercer - Round 3
Chase D'Arnaud - Round 4
Justin Wilson - Round 5
Matt Hague - Round 9

2009

Brock Holt - Round 9
Phil Irwin - Round 21

Certainly the Cardinals draft picks in 2009 are impressive but lets not go overboard as it's pretty much a once in a GM tenure that you will have a draft that strong. I went back to the 2006, 2007 and 2008 drafts and the Cardinals didn't have a player make the majors drafted after the 8th round. Also the Cardinals list is pretty much finished while the Pirates will still likely add Sanchez and Black to the 2009 list and possibly a few more.

The strongest draft in terms of talent thus far looks like the 2011 one. Cole, Bell, Glasnow, Dickerson, Holmes all project as not only major league starters but strong ones.

In terms of depth the 2010 draft is looking pretty strong. Late round picks with potential you have Casey Sadler taken in the 25th round of 2010, Adalberto Santos 22nd round of 2010, Matt Curry 16th round of 2010 and Drew Maggi 15th round of 2010. None of these guys will be as good as the 2011 players though.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 04/17/2013 5:05 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 


Sure, kid. If it makes you feel better to think you're opinions are "right", knock yourself out.

---------------------------------------------
--- cferrel3 wrote:

First, what does this article have to do with anything?  Everybody finds diamonds in the rough once in awhile, players always fall through the cracks.  Just not as much as usual.  The Pirates have a few, ever heard of Starling Marte?  He was an afterthought when he was signed.  What about Garrett Jones?  Does the scouting department get credit for that?  What about the aforementioned Phil Irwin?  What about prospects Casey Sadler (25th round), Matt Curry (37th and 16th), Adhelberto Santos (22nd), Jarek Cunningham (18th round), Kyle McPherson (14th)?

Finding those "diamonds in the rough" is tough, and he conveniently picked out a couple good ones, although still unproven and small sample sizes.

For your previous post, of course everyone is entitled to their opinions, but you always claim something is your opinion on things that aren't opinions.  I really don't know what you're saying.  There actually is a right and wrong answer sometimes, and there is actually a way to assess a draft.  You can choose to not follow that, but in the realm of baseball the standard to success the draft is uniform.  So you can choose not to, that is your right, but on a baseball forum you're wrong.  It might be right to you, but I thought we were discussing Major League Baseball on this Pirate forum?

---------------------------------------------

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote

Posted: 04/17/2013 5:09 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 



gr1111 wrote: Sure, kid. If it makes you feel better to think you're opinions are "right", knock yourself out.

---------------------------------------------
--- cferrel3 wrote:

First, what does this article have to do with anything?  Everybody finds diamonds in the rough once in awhile, players always fall through the cracks.  Just not as much as usual.  The Pirates have a few, ever heard of Starling Marte?  He was an afterthought when he was signed.  What about Garrett Jones?  Does the scouting department get credit for that?  What about the aforementioned Phil Irwin?  What about prospects Casey Sadler (25th round), Matt Curry (37th and 16th), Adhelberto Santos (22nd), Jarek Cunningham (18th round), Kyle McPherson (14th)?

Finding those "diamonds in the rough" is tough, and he conveniently picked out a couple good ones, although still unproven and small sample sizes.

For your previous post, of course everyone is entitled to their opinions, but you always claim something is your opinion on things that aren't opinions.  I really don't know what you're saying.  There actually is a right and wrong answer sometimes, and there is actually a way to assess a draft.  You can choose to not follow that, but in the realm of baseball the standard to success the draft is uniform.  So you can choose not to, that is your right, but on a baseball forum you're wrong.  It might be right to you, but I thought we were discussing Major League Baseball on this Pirate forum?

---------------------------------------------

lol owned.  I am right in this instance, but it wasn't from vast knowledge, it was just simply looking at the data (facts) and going with the right answer.

I always know when I have you speechless because you resort to the "kid" comments, I'm growing quite fond of it actually.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 04/17/2013 9:06 PM

Re: Von Rosenberg 


Does anybody actually think the Pirates are good at drafting & developing players?

I'm sure there is a lot that goes into this part of the game - hiring scouts & coaches who are better than the major league average at what they do & provide the support network for the GM to make good decisions.  This is obviously not the strong suit of the Pirates.  I'm not sure what their strong suit is, but the draft is not it.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 04/17/2013 9:51 PM

RE: Von Rosenberg 


I don't think you can have absolutes either way. When Huntington arrived Marte and Walker were afterthoughts. They are now core players on the major league team. Alex Presley and Kyle McPherson were roster filler and have since become fringe major leaguers.

Doesn't matter how good you are at drafting or developing players as a system. You're going to miss on a lot of guys on both. Look at Tampa Bay and Tim Beckham. First overall pick in 2008.

Here are some things people need to realize. Every general manager is going to make bad trades, bad signings, bad draft picks and have players that won't develop. It's the nature of the business. I can go to every single team and cherry pick examples of all of the above.

The key is to not have crippling moves. If you sign Clint Barmes and it doesn't work out it's not the end of the world. If you signed Vernon Wells to that contract though you really screwed yourself over.

What I like to do is evaluate the thought process and see if it makes sense. Do the moves make sense for the identity of the team? Take last year for instance at the trade deadline. The team was willing to give up prospects but only for players that would help them for multiple seasons. Brad Lincoln was traded for Travis Snider. I'll take the upside of an everyday player over the upside of a relief pitcher any day.

To answer your question of 2008 draft picks and later the Pirates are above average in terms of players that made it. A lot of people don't like Pedro Alvarez but guys who hit 30 homers don't grow on trees. Under Huntington the Pirates have four first round picks and all four are likely to make the majors. That is a lot more than some other teams can say. The Tampa Bay Rays have had 15 first round picks if you count the compensation picks for players lost to free agency since 2008. Zero of those players have made the major leagues yet. The Pirates have had four since I'm not counting Appel and all four could be in the majors this year.

I think the biggest issue is unrealistic expectations from fans. People on these boards have been complaining about the 2008 draft for years. It's quieted down a bit as that draft produced Alvarez, Mercer, Wilson, D'Arnaud and Grossman who was leveraged for Rodriguez. It's hard to complain about that draft as the Pirates did pretty well. When people were complaining not nearly enough time was given for these players. Now the focus has shifted to the 2009 draft. That draft isn't as strong and a lot of the players from it were leveraged for trades but it still will have some quality talent. Sanchez, Black and Irwin should all be serviceable major leaguers.

The drafting and developing is not perfect and it never will be. A lot of the drafting is based on projection. When Von Rosenberg was drafted they saw a guy that they hoped would add velocity. That never happened. It wasn't a bad pick or something wrong the Pirates did but simply buying a lottery ticket. It's the same thing they did with Glasnow except he did develop more velocity. It's hard to predict growth spurts and which players will increase velocity.

What can be said is that the Pirates as an organization are pretty good at protecting the arms of their pitchers and have the best farm system the team has had in over 20 years. So I would say they are above average at both drafting and developing. They can always get better though.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 04/18/2013 6:10 AM

RE: Von Rosenberg 


While I get what you are saying, katoy, I think Smizik is right in principle.  The biggest failure the Pirates have had for the past 20 years is NOT that "they never spend money in free agency" but rather that they usually spend it badly while simultaneously (and most importantly) failing to develop their own players from within.  To be sure, the current regime has a much better plan than its predecessors over the past 20 years did, but as has been said here before, the top draft picks are no-brainers (whether they ultimately pan out or not).  What separates good organizations from bad, and successful major league teams from losers, is how well they develop their own talent top to bottom.  Smizik rightly points out that some other organizations manage to find productive major leaguers lower in the draft.  The Pirates do not.  Bad scouting and poor player development are the obvious explanations.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 04/18/2013 6:30 AM

RE: Von Rosenberg 



katoy2j wrote: I don't think you can have absolutes either way. When Huntington arrived Marte and Walker were afterthoughts.
While this may be true.  Huntington arrived in 2007, Walker was drafted in the first round in 2004.  Walker should not have been an afterthought. 

Marte looks to have been developed perfectly.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 04/18/2013 9:47 AM

RE: Von Rosenberg 



williamjpellas wrote: While I get what you are saying, katoy, I think Smizik is right in principle.  The biggest failure the Pirates have had for the past 20 years is NOT that "they never spend money in free agency" but rather that they usually spend it badly while simultaneously (and most importantly) failing to develop their own players from within.  To be sure, the current regime has a much better plan than its predecessors over the past 20 years did, but as has been said here before, the top draft picks are no-brainers (whether they ultimately pan out or not).  What separates good organizations from bad, and successful major league teams from losers, is how well they develop their own talent top to bottom.  Smizik rightly points out that some other organizations manage to find productive major leaguers lower in the draft.  The Pirates do not.  Bad scouting and poor player development are the obvious explanations.

Top draft picks are not no brainers.  In 2008 there were 46 first round picks.  16 of them have not played an inning in the majors yet including the first overall pick that year.  (Should be 15 since Gerrit Cole didn't sign with the Yankees)  6 more of those players have provided negative WAR for their career thus far.

Only two players from the 2008 draft have accumulated more than 5.0 WAR for their careers.  Buster Posey at 12.4 WAR and Brett Lawrie at 7.8 WAR
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >