08-20-2009, 09:07 AM
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->QUOTE (BT @ Aug 19 2009, 09:52 AM) *
QUOTE (Ace @ Aug 19 2009, 06:56 AM) *
QUOTE (BT @ Aug 18 2009, 10:34 PM) *
QUOTE (Ace @ Aug 18 2009, 07:07 PM) *
QUOTE (BT @ Aug 18 2009, 01:07 PM) *
QUOTE (Ace @ Aug 18 2009, 06:34 AM) *
QUOTE (Coach @ Aug 18 2009, 07:32 AM) *
Flaherty has run through some bad luck in the average category, but has performed much better than it appears.
Shrug. He's a three-year starter in college, he's 23, and he's in A ball with an OPS under .800. I'm not saying he's not still a prospect, but he's been top five on peoples' lists all season. I don't see it.
Kevin Goldstien at BP would politely disagree.
QUOTE
Ryan Flaherty, INF, Cubs (Low-A Peoria)
While Double-A is a bit of an aggressive push for a player's full-season debut, for a guy like Flaherty, a supplemental first-round pick last year out of Vanderbilt, beginning the year at Low-A seemed a bit conservative, so his slow start to the year was cause for genuine concern. Happily, not only has he found his stroke, he's also maintained his power; after hitting homers on Saturday and Sunday, he's now hitting .301 since the All-Star break, and .267/.333/.467 overall. As a player with that kind of pop who can at least hold his own at three infield positions, he's definitely still a prospect.
Um, how does that disagree with what I said?
In lawyer speak? It doesn't specifically. In tone? Both Goldstien and Coach seem much higher on him than you. Goldstien says he is definitely a prospect. You said "shrug".
I did say shrug. I also said - explicitly - that he is still a prospect.
Explicitly? No. You said you weren't ruling out the fact he could be a prospect. I'm not trying to split hairs here, but since you've taken offense at my initial post, saying:
QUOTE
I'm not saying he's not still a prospect, but he's been top five on peoples' lists all season. I don't see it.
isn't anywhere near "explicitly" saying he is a prospect. In fact it's pretty far from it.
I'm only keeping on this because it's you, BT, and you like precision. Not a fight. Just being precise.
What part of "I'm not saying he's not still a prospect" is unclear? I know there's a double negative in there, but that's me EXPLICITLY saying he's still a prospect. There's not really another way to read that.
Coach and Goldstein sound higher on him than I do, sure. But Goldstein said almost exactly the same stuff I did.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sold on him totally, as I just said that he had played better than the numbers had shown.
Also, I have yet to find someone that has him ranked in the Cubs top 5, as you said.
Anyways, Goldstein and I basically said the same thing.
QUOTE (Ace @ Aug 19 2009, 06:56 AM) *
QUOTE (BT @ Aug 18 2009, 10:34 PM) *
QUOTE (Ace @ Aug 18 2009, 07:07 PM) *
QUOTE (BT @ Aug 18 2009, 01:07 PM) *
QUOTE (Ace @ Aug 18 2009, 06:34 AM) *
QUOTE (Coach @ Aug 18 2009, 07:32 AM) *
Flaherty has run through some bad luck in the average category, but has performed much better than it appears.
Shrug. He's a three-year starter in college, he's 23, and he's in A ball with an OPS under .800. I'm not saying he's not still a prospect, but he's been top five on peoples' lists all season. I don't see it.
Kevin Goldstien at BP would politely disagree.
QUOTE
Ryan Flaherty, INF, Cubs (Low-A Peoria)
While Double-A is a bit of an aggressive push for a player's full-season debut, for a guy like Flaherty, a supplemental first-round pick last year out of Vanderbilt, beginning the year at Low-A seemed a bit conservative, so his slow start to the year was cause for genuine concern. Happily, not only has he found his stroke, he's also maintained his power; after hitting homers on Saturday and Sunday, he's now hitting .301 since the All-Star break, and .267/.333/.467 overall. As a player with that kind of pop who can at least hold his own at three infield positions, he's definitely still a prospect.
Um, how does that disagree with what I said?
In lawyer speak? It doesn't specifically. In tone? Both Goldstien and Coach seem much higher on him than you. Goldstien says he is definitely a prospect. You said "shrug".
I did say shrug. I also said - explicitly - that he is still a prospect.
Explicitly? No. You said you weren't ruling out the fact he could be a prospect. I'm not trying to split hairs here, but since you've taken offense at my initial post, saying:
QUOTE
I'm not saying he's not still a prospect, but he's been top five on peoples' lists all season. I don't see it.
isn't anywhere near "explicitly" saying he is a prospect. In fact it's pretty far from it.
I'm only keeping on this because it's you, BT, and you like precision. Not a fight. Just being precise.
What part of "I'm not saying he's not still a prospect" is unclear? I know there's a double negative in there, but that's me EXPLICITLY saying he's still a prospect. There's not really another way to read that.
Coach and Goldstein sound higher on him than I do, sure. But Goldstein said almost exactly the same stuff I did.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sold on him totally, as I just said that he had played better than the numbers had shown.
Also, I have yet to find someone that has him ranked in the Cubs top 5, as you said.
Anyways, Goldstein and I basically said the same thing.