Sign in to follow this  
brockpapersizer

Tyler Ivey- P- Astros

Recommended Posts

@brockpapersizer

Doing some research, I’m reading a lot about concern over his delivery. I’ve read this before about prospects and sometimes it ends up being just an over reaction to a player. What’s the take here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, ThreadKiller said:

@brockpapersizer

Doing some research, I’m reading a lot about concern over his delivery. I’ve read this before about prospects and sometimes it ends up being just an over reaction to a player. What’s the take here?

Analyzing pitcher mechanics isn't my forte. Might be a problem, sure, but he's made it work so far at an elite level consistently while moving up the ladder.  No prospect is without risk, especially pitching ones. Surely something to see experts discuss in future evaluations. One of the problems with crazy deliveries is consistency in finding command. So far, so good. At the beginning of this year, fangraphs seemed to think his was better than Corbin's. So, I'm optimistic. 

Another thing with weird delivery is injury risk. I can't say I'm super knowledgable about his injury history, but he pitched 110 last year, seems good for his age. Im guessing he will try to bump it up even more. If the walk rates stays low and he remains healthy, he has a big green arrow coming his way.

Edited by brockpapersizer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, brockpapersizer said:

Analyzing pitcher mechanics isn't my forte. Might be a problem, sure, but he's made it work so far at an elite level consistently while moving up the ladder.  No prospect is without risk, especially pitching ones. Surely something to see experts discuss in future evaluations. One of the problems with crazy deliveries is consistency in finding command. So far, so good. At the beginning of this year, fangraphs seemed to think his was better than Corbin's. So, I'm optimistic. 

 

Worked ok for Timmy lincecum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

Analyzing pitcher mechanics isn't my forte. Might be a problem, sure, but he's made it work so far at an elite level consistently while moving up the ladder.  No prospect is without risk, especially pitching ones. Surely something to see experts discuss in future evaluations. One of the problems with crazy deliveries is consistency in finding command. So far, so good. At the beginning of this year, fangraphs seemed to think his was better than Corbin's. So, I'm optimistic. 

Another thing with weird delivery is injury risk. I can't say I'm super knowledgable about his injury history, but he pitched 110 last year, seems good for his age. Im guessing he will try to bump it up even more. If the walk rates stays low and he remains healthy, he has a big green arrow coming his way.

 

I was just watching video of him and while his delivery is certainly “unique”, I don’t know that I see it as a real detriment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check out the note on Ivey from the below link:

https://www.crawfishboxes.com/platform/amp/2019/3/25/18279728/houston-astros-top-30-prospects-for-2019

 

14. Tyler Ivey

Current Level: A+

ETA: 2021

DOB: 05/12/96

Ivey was a high upside selection in the 2017 draft. He initially attended Texas A&M before transferring to Grayson Community College. Some saw it as a possible over draft but Ivey’s numbers, and stuff, are proving other wise. Ivey started the season with Quad Cities had a 3.46 ERA in 41.2 innings. The peripherals were even better. He had 8 BB/53 K (26.b K/BB%) and a 2.14 FIP/2.40 xFIP in those 41.2 innings. He was promoted to Buies Creek where he has a 2.69 ERA with 82 K in 70.1 innings. There he had a 2.56 FIP/2.86 xFIP and 54.4 GB%. Like Bielak, Ivey has a good fastball and an above average curveball. He also has a slider, chanegup, and cutter, though those are a little behind the other pitches. He has all the makings of a top starter.

2018 Stats: 24 G, 2.97 ERA, 112.0 IP, 86 H, 29 BB, 135 K, 10.8 K/9

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2019 at 9:05 AM, ThreadKiller said:

I would give Houston all the credit in the world for their MLB coaching staff, but I'm struggling to see why or how their success coincides with their minor league development staff?

They've been able to use pitching talent they've developed in the minors in trades for Ryan Pressly, Gerrit Cole, Roberto Osuna, Justin Verlander, Evan Gattis, etc.  I'm sure you can see the correlation there.  Guys like Whitley, Martin, James, Ivey, etc. have bright futures and they are valued commodities that can be used in different ways to help the Astros maintain success.  There's a reason why they are highly regarded in developing players and premium assets in trade talks.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, I like baseball said:

They've been able to use pitching talent they've developed in the minors in trades for Ryan Pressly, Gerrit Cole, Roberto Osuna, Justin Verlander, Evan Gattis, etc.  I'm sure you can see the correlation there.  Guys like Whitley, Martin, James, Ivey, etc. have bright futures and they are valued commodities that can be used in different ways to help the Astros maintain success.  There's a reason why they are highly regarded in developing players and premium assets in trade talks.  

 

You're missing my point. Selling high on a prospect and getting MLB ready talent is one thing and I give credit to the Astros there. But it has nothing to do with what I'm saying and what you quoted that I said. Out of anyone they traded for the names you listed, only Mike Foltynewicz and maybe Musgrove has been worth anything to their new teams. And I would argue that the Braves developed Folty into what he is now, not Houston.

Again, my point was that why are they given the benefit of the doubt for their wave of pitching prospects coming up to succeed? Again, they have drafted, developed and brought up really no starting pitchers that have succeeded so where is the track record coming from that is pointing to this reputation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  Different organizations, different philosophies, different development.  Their continual development has nothing to do with Astros.

34 minutes ago, I like baseball said:

I'm struggling to see why or how their success coincides with their minor league development staff?

 This is verbatim and  I answered your question.  I didn't miss your point.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, I like baseball said:

  Different organizations, different philosophies, different development.  Their continual development has nothing to do with Astros.

 This is verbatim and  I answered your question.  I didn't miss your point.

 

No. You didn't. I think I would know whether what I was pointing out/asking was addressed or not, and your comment did neither.

Thanks though.

 

Shall I break it down more? The Astros are given the benefit of the doubt with pitching PROSPECTS developing into solid rotation pieces. The Astros seem to be at the top of the list when discussing this organizational quality. My question is where did this reputation come from? Who have they developed that has gotten them this reputation? Trading some low level minor leaguers for proven MLB talent that they are then able to get the best out of has NOTHING to do with the ability to draft and develop a player who remains with the team and sees success at the MLB level. So again, your example has nothing to do with what I'm talking about, but if you'd like to debate with me (who asked the question) that you answered it (you didn't), then I don't know what to tell you lol.

 

It's like the Pittsburgh Steelers are known for being able to develop WRs because they have a track record of doing just that. Selling high on a prospect to get a veteran is a completely different "skill" and has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. Neither does acquiring a veteran and being able to get the most out of them at the MLB level.

 

I honestly don't know why what I am saying is so confusing to anyone but Brock?

 

 

Edited by ThreadKiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, ThreadKiller said:

 

 

Shall I break it down more? The Astros are given the benefit of the doubt with pitching PROSPECTS developing into solid rotation pieces. The Astros seem to be at the top of the list when discussing this organizational quality. My question is where did this reputation come from? 

 

As someone who reads a lot about baseball and listens to a lot of podcasts, I literally give the Astros the benefit of the doubt for all development. Pitchers, starters, hitters, anything. They've earned it by making good trades, fixing guys, and developing good prospects as a whole. I've also seen a number of good players traded away from Astros merely because they had a roster crunch.  They've earned it by well respected people in the industry informing me they are doing it much better than anyone else.

They will certainly have disappointments. Every team does. My trust level with them is higher than anyone elses.  

Someone mentioned that the Brewers, and not the Astros, "fixed" Wade Miley.   Then how come no other team took a chance on him? The Astros got him for $4.5 million dollars, which is nothing for a starter for a one year deal. A win in WAR is worth roughly 9-10 million dollars currently. Wade Miley has already earned .5 WAR by May 14th. So yes, while Wade Miley showed signs of being competent last year, only one team was confident enough to spend this little  money to acquire him. Pretty much every team in the majors besides maybe the Dodgers and maybe 1-2 other teams could have used a solid back end starter for 5 million. Charlie Morton went from disappointing career to just under Ace caliber level  starter.

 

Not only are the Astros the best org in the majors, they are improving and the minor league talent in arms they have now are better than anything they had years ago and I believe there is reason to be more optimistic on some of these guys than if they were on other teams.

 

 

Edited by brockpapersizer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, ThreadKiller said:

Shall I break it down more? The Astros are given the benefit of the doubt with pitching PROSPECTS developing into solid rotation pieces. The Astros seem to be at the top of the list when discussing this organizational quality. My question is where did this reputation come from? Who have they developed that has gotten them this reputation?

The Astros are in the forefront, along with the Rays, of the pitching analytics in baseball.  Their prospects are saber friendly and have yielded plenty of minor league success.  In turn, they've been able to use to assets to supplement their major league roster to maintain a high level of success.  There's more than one way to utilize prospects to help your franchise.  Their ability to develop there prospects, especially pitching prospects, is also why so many of their development team are highly coveted and/or have been hired on by other teams.  Why do you think Mike Elias is now running the Orioles?  

52 minutes ago, ThreadKiller said:

Trading some low level minor leaguers for proven MLB talent that they are then able to get the best out of has NOTHING to do with the ability to draft and develop a player who remains with the team and sees success at the MLB level.

Do you understand that there's a difference between this statement and the one I answered previously?

Obviously not.

As I said earlier, their continued success and development has nothing to do with the Astros.  Maybe a reason why some of their success has stalled is because they are no longer with the Astros anymore.  Just a thought.  Or, they flame out because well... most prospects flame out.  How they develop once they're out of the Astros' hand isn't relevant as they aren't the ones developing them anymore.  here's a reason why everyone has been trying to emulate what they've been doing.

 

 

 

Edited by dzemens
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

 

As someone who reads a lot about baseball and listens to a lot of podcasts, I literally give the Astros the benefit of the doubt for all development. Pitchers, starters, hitters, anything. They've earned it by making good trades, fixing guys, and developing good prospects as a whole. I've also seen a number of good players traded away from Astros merely because they had a roster crunch.  They've earned it by well respected people in the industry informing me they are doing it much better than anyone else.

They will certainly have disappointments. Every team does. My trust level with them is higher than anyone elses.  

Someone mentioned that the Brewers, and not the Astros, "fixed" Wade Miley.   Then how come no other team took a chance on him? The Astros got him for $4.5 million dollars, which is nothing for a starter for a one year deal. A win in WAR is worth roughly 9-10 million dollars currently. Wade Miley has already earned .5 WAR by May 14th. So yes, while Wade Miley showed signs of being competent last year, only one team was confident enough to spend this little  money to acquire him. Pretty much every team in the majors besides maybe the Dodgers and maybe 1-2 other teams could have used a solid back end starter for 5 million. Charlie Morton went from disappointing career to just under Ace caliber level  starter.

 

Not only are the Astros the best org in the majors, they are improving and the minor league talent in arms they have now are better than anything they had years ago and I believe there is reason to be more optimistic on some of these guys than if they were on other teams.

 

 

 

It was me who mentioned that and yes, no other team took a chance on him. Wouldn't we call it a saavy front office move for the Astros to get him? I guess I am separating credit within an org where some are lumping it all together. I see them getting Miley as a win for the front office and being able to get the most out of him is a win for the MLB coaching staff. To me that is entirely separate from the parts of an organization that drafts and develops a pitcher from the very beginning.

All of the points that seem to be being made (most that I agree with) seem to point to the Astros as being a very saavy organization (bringing in veterans and getting the most out of them, selling high on a prospect to get MLB ready talent who can contribute now) but none are examples of when they actually drafted and developed their own guy into anything worthwhile.

Regarding Ivey, the Astros have more of a track record of selling high and getting an MLB ready player in return only to see Ivey go and do nothing with his new team. So if that's the outcome, why does it give Houston a reputation as being the best at drafting and developing a pitching prospect? I've still yet to see any examples that would point to them having this reputation.

Edited by ThreadKiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, I like baseball said:

The Astros are in the forefront, along with the Rays, of the pitching analytics in baseball.  Their prospects are saber friendly and have yielded plenty of minor league success.  In turn, they've been able to use to assets to supplement their major league roster to maintain a high level of success.  There's more than one way to utilize prospects to help your franchise.  Their ability to develop there prospects, especially pitching prospects, is also why so many of their development team are highly coveted and/or have been hired on by other teams.  Why do you think Mike Elias is now running the Orioles?  

Do you understand that there's a difference between this statement and the one I answered previously?

Obviously not.

As I said earlier, their continued success and development has nothing to do with the Astros.  Maybe a reason why some of their success has stalled is because they are no longer with the Astros anymore.  Just a thought.  Or, they flame out because well... most prospects flame out.  How they develop once they're out of the Astros' hand isn't relevant as they aren't the ones developing them anymore.  here's a reason why everyone has been trying to emulate what they've been doing.

 

 

 

 

Again, it seems you are missing my point. There are (3) things being discussed here but you seem to be lumping them all together.

1. Being savvy and bringing in veterans and getting the most out of them.

2. Selling high on a prospect in order to get MLB ready talent.

3. Drafting, developing a pitcher who then sees success in MLB.

Those are all separate skills and the Astros are amazing at the first 2. I have yet to see a pitching prospect that they have developed who is now having success in MLB on any team (Musgrove?) that would point to them having the reputation they have.

EDIT: Not worth it.

Edited by ThreadKiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Let's bring this back to talking about Ivey specifically. It's an interesting discussion and I appreciate the back and forth @brockpapersizer.

Perhaps a separate thread could be created where we discuss how we value specific teams ability to draft, develop, etc but I'm not sure how much action they would get.

Edited by ThreadKiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ThreadKiller said:

 

 

Those are all separate skills and the Astros are amazing at the first 2. I have yet to see a pitching prospect that they have developed who is now having success in MLB (Musgrove?) that would point to them having the reputation they have.

 

Dallas Keuchel? Pretty big one there. Lance McCullers was a top 30-40 arm for a while. Corbin Martin is currently ranked #50 on Pitchers List top 100 current starters.

Last year the Astros didn't need a 6th starter until like August. AUGUST.  That's insane. This isn't just luck here. I don't think they've had many pitching prospect failures. I think the aspect of them developing more home grown starters is more recent, because I like I said, they are still improving.  I also think if we're looking at the entire majors, there arent many teams with multiple studs in their rotation that have been home grown and drafted.  The Mets have pushed some great pitchers through and mishandled them with injuries. 

I get your point that making savy veteran moves is different from drafting and developing guys, but at a certain point when they are major league ready, it's about how they use them, and the Astros are ahead of the curve.   Like sure, Charlie Morton isn't a home grown stud for them, but no other team was remotely able to get out of Charlie Morton what the Astros did.  That's not luck.  You think they are able to bring the best out of 35 year olds and that skill doesnt correlate to developing young arms? I disagree.  Pitchers are pitchers. If there is talent there, I like the Astros chances to unlock it better than almost any team if not any. Gerrit Cole's career was stagnating even with the great Ray Searage before he went to Houston

 I kinda think the evidence you're looking for to put trust in the Astros seems to be a little too much, just my opinion. There are a lot more failures in baseball than success stories and the Astros have managed to stay completely stacked year after year without any big free agent signings. Kinda think the prudent thing to do is just make a leap of faith and say the Astros know what they are doing and find a way to personally benefit from it (in this case owning Tyler Ivey).  If you need to wait 4-5 years until you've seen more studs develop from the draft to the majors, you are welcome to do so.  There are multiple other prospect pitchers in the Astros who are on my radar and I'll discuss if they get to the point where I warrant owning them. Ivey crossed that threshold for me recently, and I think there's a case to be made it should have been last year. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

Dallas Keuchel? Pretty big one there. Lance McCullers was a top 30-40 arm for a while. Corbin Martin is currently ranked #50 on Pitchers List top 100 current starters.

Last year the Astros didn't need a 6th starter until like August. AUGUST.  That's insane. This isn't just luck here. I don't think they've had many pitching prospect failures. I think the aspect of them developing more home grown starters is more recent, because I like I said, they are still improving.  I also think if we're looking at the entire majors, there arent many teams with multiple studs in their rotation that have been home grown and drafted.  The Mets have pushed some great pitchers through and mishandled them with injuries. 

I get your point that making savy veteran moves is different from drafting and developing guys, but at a certain point when they are major league ready, it's about how they use them, and the Astros are ahead of the curve.   Like sure, Charlie Morton isn't a home grown stud for them, but no other team was remotely able to get out of Charlie Morton what the Astros did.  That's not luck.  You think they are able to bring the best out of 35 year olds and that skill doesnt correlate to developing young arms? I disagree.  Pitchers are pitchers. If there is talent there, I like the Astros chances to unlock it better than almost any team if not any. Gerrit Cole's career was stagnating even with the great Ray Searage before he went to Houston

 I kinda think the evidence you're looking for to put trust in the Astros seems to be a little too much, just my opinion. There are a lot more failures in baseball than success stories and the Astros have managed to stay completely stacked year after year without any big free agent signings. Kinda think the prudent thing to do is just make a leap of faith and say the Astros know what they are doing and find a way to personally benefit from it (in this case owning Tyler Ivey).  If you need to wait 4-5 years until you've seen more studs develop from the draft to the majors, you are welcome to do so.  There are multiple other prospect pitchers in the Astros who are on my radar and I'll discuss if they get to the point where I warrant owning them. Ivey crossed that threshold for me recently, and I think there's a case to be made it should have been last year. 

 

To the first bolded point: Couldn't that be because their rotation is built of players developed elsewhere though?

Second point: Very good points and I hadn't looked at it that way. Almost an "aha!" moment....Once a player is MLB ready, they are great at utilizing MLB ready pitching. No argument here. So I suppose it's all about trusting their ability to deem when a player is MLB ready...If Houston seems them as worthy of being in their rotation, then that is worth trusting.

Another thing to think about: Let's say the Astros move Ivey at the deadline for an MLB piece, would likely help their MLB roster but wouldn't Ivey then lose a bit of value since obviously a savvy team like Houston moved on from him? Pitching prospects they trade don't seem to have much success historically.

 

I think I was looking at it more black and white. Like "the Astros have developed so and so and so and so pitchers who are successful right now in MLB and that's why they should be known as being able to develop pitchers well." It's more complicated than that though so I think we might be on the same page now. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you primarily trust their ability to know who has ability worthy of their rotation and if they are in Houston's rotation, they are likely a good player. I agree with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ThreadKiller said:

 

Another thing to think about: Let's say the Astros move Ivey at the deadline for an MLB piece, would likely help their MLB roster but wouldn't Ivey then lose a bit of value since obviously a savvy team like Houston moved on from him?

He would certainly lose some value to me because he's not going to have the brains behind the Astro's office front office fixing him or utilizing him in the most efficient way possible.  To be clear though, I don't think many of the guys the Astros trade away are guys who are like "Oh, we need to sell high on this guy, they suck and he's not a part of our future"  it's more like "We only have a 40 man roster and we are trying to win a championship every year, we need the best guys possible right now, and we can't wait on all of these guys to develop to their maximum potential"  Musgrove is very clearly a major league mid rotation starter to me. A guy ilke that who you can control for 5-7 years is extremely valuable, but that player's value is limited on the Astros who only have so manning spots and innings to give up.  I think we will see a lot of guys the Astros trade away have good careers elsewhere.  If the Astros trade away Tyler Ivey in a package for someone like Verlander or Cole, I don't think its a knock on Ivey as much as how good those other players are and the current need of the Astros.

 

A list of pitchers the Astros have traded away recently that I still like, but they opted to give away for present need: Patrick Sandoval, Jorge Alcala, Joe Musgrove, Ken Giles, Trent Thornton, Albert Abreu, Jorge Guzman, Eliser Hernandez, and Franklin Perez.  Giles is a great closer again, some of these guys are going to be very productive starters, some of course will certainly bust. 

 

There's a reason why the Astros are able to get Verlander and Cole. They produce so many prospects that so many of them can be expendible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, brockpapersizer said:

He would certainly lose some value to me because he's not going to have the brains behind the Astro's office front office fixing him or utilizing him in the most efficient way possible.  To be clear though, I don't think many of the guys the Astros trade away are guys who are like "Oh, we need to sell high on this guy, they suck and he's not a part of our future"  it's more like "We only have a 40 man roster and we are trying to win a championship every year, we need the best guys possible right now, and we can't wait on all of these guys to develop to their maximum potential"  Musgrove is very clearly a major league mid rotation starter to me. A guy ilke that who you can control for 5-7 years is extremely valuable, but that player's value is limited on the Astros who only have so manning spots and innings to give up.  I think we will see a lot of guys the Astros trade away have good careers elsewhere.  If the Astros trade away Tyler Ivey in a package for someone like Verlander or Cole, I don't think its a knock on Ivey as much as how good those other players are and the current need of the Astros.

 

A list of pitchers the Astros have traded away recently that I still like, but they opted to give away for present need: Patrick Sandoval, Jorge Alcala, Joe Musgrove, Ken Giles, Trent Thornton, Albert Abreu, Jorge Guzman, Eliser Hernandez, and Franklin Perez.  Giles is a great closer again, some of these guys are going to be very productive starters, some of course will certainly bust. 

 

There's a reason why the Astros are able to get Verlander and Cole. They produce so many prospects that so many of them can be expendible. 

 

True, maybe "selling high" wasn't the term I should've used. But to be fair, none of the guys they have traded for the names discussed have been useful yet IMO so it's still tbd. Most have seen their star fade quite a bit tbh (Paulino, Perez, etc).

Interesting point about Giles and he must be an anamoly since he was good with all teams he's been on except Houston where he was pretty terrible most of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Well damn, saw all the new posts and thought there was some more news on Tyler Ivey, nope, just  talking about team development and who's better at it....and while it's a great topic for conversation, it's one that would be better served in the appropriate thread, just not in a specific players thread(you know, since you did go off topic and all) or in a pm chat...again, it is a worthy discussion, very interesting, but you veered off of Tyler Ivey a while ago...and yup, I admit mine isn't about him in the first section, but someone did ask for you guys to take it to pm earlier(which was removed, and mine will be too) and that was ignored as well. I guess some need to be asked multiple times? thanks gentlemen....

 

Someone mentioned Tyler's violent delivery, and the potential impact...it reminds me a little of Mad Max with the head movement and arm whip, which he obviously overcame. Time will tell on Tyler, but it's working now, and he is in good hands as far as his development goes. Love owning him in a dynasty and look forward to the finished product.

Edited by FISH ON
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ThreadKiller said:

Shall I break it down more? The Astros are given the benefit of the doubt with pitching PROSPECTS developing into solid rotation pieces. The Astros seem to be at the top of the list when discussing this organizational quality. My question is where did this reputation come from?

 

 

In the last couple years the Astros has gotten very good at seemingly turning anyone pitching in their organization into a high strikeout pitcher.   I think it is too early to tell if this going to have a huge impact at the big league level  

The Astros don't really have any big names on their pitching staff at Fayetteville in the Carolina League.  However, their pitchers are average 11.1 strikeouts per game. The next best team is Lynchburg (Singer, Lynch and Kowar) at 9.58 strikeouts per game. They also don't have any big named pitching prospects in Quad Cities where their stadium is flooded and that team is averaging 11.5 strikeouts per game.

  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ThreadKiller said:

You're missing my point. Selling high on a prospect and getting MLB ready talent is one thing and I give credit to the Astros there. But it has nothing to do with what I'm saying and what you quoted that I said. Out of anyone they traded for the names you listed, only Mike Foltynewicz and maybe Musgrove has been worth anything to their new teams. And I would argue that the Braves developed Folty into what he is now, not Houston.

Again, my point was that why are they given the benefit of the doubt for their wave of pitching prospects coming up to succeed? Again, they have drafted, developed and brought up really no starting pitchers that have succeeded so where is the track record coming from that is pointing to this reputation?

I don't think it's everyone else missing the point here... Houston can't help what a guy does when he leaves. So if they were on Houston and putting up very solid numbers, you'd accept them as part of the argument then? On top of squeezing a cy young out of keuchel, or putting together a bullpen of guys who weren't really highly sought but making a good bullpen (like Pressly)?

21 hours ago, I like baseball said:

  Different organizations, different philosophies, different development.  Their continual development has nothing to do with Astros.

 This is verbatim and  I answered your question.  I didn't miss your point.

You're wasting your time here. He wants you to list front end aces developed by the front office who are there now. There simply aren't any. 

The Mets have deGrom, Syndergaard, Wheeler, but I would much rather have a player the Houston farm is developing, even if they don't have any front-line ace examples in the rotation now. 

At the end of the day, what matters is how much the MLB coaches can get from the talent on their roster. How they are acquired is beside the point. If they can make guys like Wade Miley, Collin McHugh, Brad Peacock, etc. relevant, I'm more than excited to see what they can do with a guy who has tantalizing tools. 

Point 1

Tyler Ivey has some nice tools. He looks great. 
 

Point 2

Houston has been known for getting big performances out of underwhelming arms in the past, or pushing them to a higher level. The better the toolset, the higher the ceiling with that coaching staff. 

If Ivey can become a part of the rotation, he could have an impact similar to what Josh James did last year. 

I am very excited for Ivey. I don't really care if they don't have a rotation of home grown guys they developed. I do care that they get so much from their pitchers and have been churning out a lot of nice prospects in the past few years. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, sngehl01 said:


I am very excited for Ivey. I don't really care if they don't have a rotation of home grown guys they developed. I do care that they get so much from their pitchers and have been churning out a lot of nice prospects in the past few years. 

Basically what I've been saying and I agree with all of this. 

My main dynasty is a points league where about 500 prospects are owned.  To find a Astros starter who checks off a bunch of boxes for me and is already in AA is like finding a $100 bill on the floor. It doesn't hurt that multiple analysts whose opinion I listen to have basically insinuated he's around top 100 right now. 

Kinda think that having Forrest Whitley still in the minors is overshadowing some gems, like it did for Corbin Martin.

Edited by brockpapersizer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

Basically what I've been saying and I agree with all of this. 

My main dynasty is a points league where about 500 prospects are owned.  To find a Astros starter who checks off a bunch of boxes for me and is already in AA is like finding a $100 bill on the floor. It doesn't hurt that multiple analysts whose opinion I listen to have basically insinuated he's around top 100 right now. 

Kinda think that having Forrest Whitley still in the minors is overshadowing some gems, like it did for Corbin Martin.

 

Side note, I've been interested in points leagues. Do you mind PMing me the point setup you use out of curiosity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2019 at 5:42 PM, brockpapersizer said:

Seems like the laziest comp ever, but I feel the way I do about Ivey now that I did Corbin Martin last year.  I kinda think most likely a mid rotation guy most years with some better years in between. Top 40-50 pitcher, with some upside. Really hard for me to put ace upside on just about anyone though.  Lot of the aces in baseball today are guys who didn't have that upside as prospects. 

Just by their fangraphs pages, Ivey has FIVE pitches compared to Corbin's 3 and a better current command grade.

I've seen 0 lists with Tyler Ivey as a top 100 guy, and I think he's going to be on just about all of them by the end of the year.

 

 

 

Corbin Martin is the poster boy for your argument that Houston scouts develops pitchers better as well or better than anyone else.  What a scouting and then development job by them.  

 

FWIW I'm with you on Ivey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2019 at 3:13 PM, FISH ON said:

Well damn, saw all the new posts and thought there was some more news on Tyler Ivey, nope, just  talking about team development and who's better at it....and while it's a great topic for conversation, it's one that would be better served in the appropriate thread, just not in a specific players thread(you know, since you did go off topic and all) or in a pm chat...again, it is a worthy discussion, very interesting, but you veered off of Tyler Ivey a while ago...and yup, I admit mine isn't about him in the first section, but someone did ask for you guys to take it to pm earlier(which was removed, and mine will be too) and that was ignored as well. I guess some need to be asked multiple times? thanks gentlemen....

 

Someone mentioned Tyler's violent delivery, and the potential impact...it reminds me a little of Mad Max with the head movement and arm whip, which he obviously overcame. Time will tell on Tyler, but it's working now, and he is in good hands as far as his development goes. Love owning him in a dynasty and look forward to the finished product.

 

The head whack only mstters if it affects his command.   James Shields had one as well and was a command master in his prime. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this