Derek
Table Setter
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 18,221
- Reaction score
- 31,606
- Points
- 148
I think the “their guy” thing is a big part of it, too.Even the odds that 2 out of 3 of Williams/Espino/Rocchio hit at the MLB level are slim.
We talked about this somewhere a few weeks back, but ~20% of top 100 prospects stick as good MLB players.
But I also think people get too caught up with "their guy" and if you aren't "their guy" then with the abundance of stats available to literally everyone to prove literally anything it's easy to knock a guy down a peg or 2 and justify it. Always a weird thing to do with players who could make your favorite team better.
One of the hardest things to do in sports is predict a player's success in the MLB. Just like the game itself, a 30% success rate makes you good at your job. But the more bullets you have the better your odds to hit on a player.
Why teams like Cleveland and Tampa continue to be successful with few down years even with small payrolls. When you're getting your 30% off of 100 players as opposed to 30% off of 50 players because you have a deep organization and more bullets in the chamber compared to other franchises you can re-stock on the fly and be successful. Which is a reason Cleveland "hoards" prospects and thinks highly of a lot of them (per the rumor mill on how stubborn they can be when it comes to dealing their prospects), it's a big key to their operational success long term.
I’ve seen plenty of people trying to trade upper level SS prospects since before Rocchio even got to AA.
I love Rocchio, but there’s no reason to clear a path for him or any prospect. As you said in your last paragraph, it’s all about having as many bullets in the chamber as possible.