May 13, 201610 yr Yeah, though I didn't find this very surprising. I thought his prospect lists were just kind of meh, though maybe he just got off to a really bad start and that clouded my perception. Either way, I wasn't paying too much attention to them. It wouldn't shock me if there was mutual agreement that it wasn't a good fit. In many ways I wish he had a weekly column, not unlike the fringe-five that Cistulli does, where he identifies a few under-the-radar hitters that he really likes. I think he has plenty of credibility with regard to predicting hitter performance based on swing mechanics (he almost single-handedly changed my pessimism on Park, which looks correct so far). But his overall prospect analysis seemed uninspired. I wasn't surprised when Kiley left last year, either, though for the opposite reason - he seemed like he was too good for the job and some team would hire him away.
May 13, 201610 yr I thought he did great work. Not quite as well as Kiley of course, who was likely the best in the business, but still a quality prospect guy. Look forward to reading his stuff in the future.
May 14, 201610 yr I thought he did great work. Not quite as well as Kiley of course, who was likely the best in the business, but still a quality prospect guy. Look forward to reading his stuff in the future. I'll edit this to some degree and say that he was a quality prospect guy...with hitters. I was never a fan of his evaluation of pitchers. He simply overvalued things that do not translate up the ladder. The Braves list was a not-so-famous expression of this.
May 14, 201610 yr Where is Farnsworth going? I agree that I thought Kiley was a pretty good prospect guy - IIRC, he was a huge Kepler guy. But that might have been the guy before him?
May 17, 201610 yr I have no idea what it is...... but that amount of work is daunting. Maybe he found out it wasn't for him? I agree, I wish he had a column or two a week, analyzing swings and stuff.
Create an account or sign in to comment