Well Well Well other NashvilleU Player just went into the portal and he is friends with Matt and we do need depth in the infield
Pack 9 Recruiting and Portal News
409,214 Views |
1888 Replies |
Last: 1 mo ago by JCooke93
Joined:
Jul 13, 2017
Posts:
55,958
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Depth? Bro starters are neededJCooke93 said:
Well Well Well other NashvilleU Player just went into the portal and he is friends with Matt and we do need depth in the infield
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Just a guy on the sunshine squad.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001's favorite poster.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001's favorite poster.
Yes there are
We are aligned in our thinking, I think.Jtilley said:They are bringing in Thompson who is proven and another Juco bat. Jaros hit .343 in limited sample with as many walks as strikeouts and was top 150 recruit.StateFan2001 said:The difference is most of those guys were proven college hitters. I am just surprised coming off a CWS run and having a strong NIL budget that we are landing unproven hitters vs. guys who we have already seen succeed in college baseball.Jtilley said:
Here are the transfers/juco hitters we have taken over the last seven years that made it past fall ball.....
2024- Amak, Pennington, Butters, Hogue
2023- Harrison, Trice, Candelaria, Nolan
2022- Gino, Piolli, Hood, Lavoie, Oldham, Godman
2021- Truitt
2020- Murr
2019- Butler
2018- Edwards
That is an extremely high hit rate, and the ones that didn't pan out were mostly depth pieces anyways.
We can split hairs over Ozzy but you aren't finding many kids with his power upside in the portal. He is worth the risk.
I mean if we bring in a dude that hit .258 his prior season and had never hit over .300 in his career people would complain about that. "Why are we bringing in a guy that doesn't hit good!?!" They wouldn't be using the "proven college hitter" trope. I'm also not sure how a JUCO kid is considered a proven hitter.
Both Jaros and Ozzie played in summer collegiate leagues against college players and crushed it just weeks after graduating HS (Ozzie was Cal Ripken Collegiate league hitter of the year last summer). Jaros hit .378 in 111 plate appearances in another collegiate summer league. There's data there that these kids can play and both have the 'crootin pedigree that some love as well.
What should also not get lost in all of this are the connections that the staff has with these two. Jaros (as mentioned frequently) is from Cranford, NJ where we have massive connections ranging from Rob Chmra, Ryan Williamson, Andrew Ciencin to current Pack player Shane Van Dam. Do we not think that our staff didn't talk to Danny Hall and his staff about Jaros?
Ossenfort attended the same HS as former Pack player David Vazquez. Stoneman Douglas is coached by Todd Fitz-Gerald who also coached Vazquez and he's sending his son Devin to play at State (assuming the draft cooperates). I think Hart got all the info he needed on Ozzie.
I think Coach Fitz-Gerald has had something like 20 plus kids drafted over his HS coaching career.
I chose to be excited about these kids but that's just me.
Joined:
Jul 13, 2017
Posts:
55,958
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
Personally I'm glad James said it.
We can hope relatively "unproven" guys turn out to be multi-year studs.
But from a team that was 3 outs away from being in a major position to try and win a championship I'm kinda shocked that the guys we've gone after aren't already collegiate studs.
Maybe these adds are just competitive depth for now but I was definitely expecting AMak/Pennington level replacements out of the portal. Maybe we are still going after them. But so far I'm not on the "wow these are great options" train
We can hope relatively "unproven" guys turn out to be multi-year studs.
But from a team that was 3 outs away from being in a major position to try and win a championship I'm kinda shocked that the guys we've gone after aren't already collegiate studs.
Maybe these adds are just competitive depth for now but I was definitely expecting AMak/Pennington level replacements out of the portal. Maybe we are still going after them. But so far I'm not on the "wow these are great options" train
Absolutely you bring these guys in but they are viewed in the same vein as HS guys to me. THey aren't penciled in as starters. We need to find some proven college hitters at the corners - at least 1 of the corners and maybe we can take a flier with the other. Also, need to find another bigtime bat for the OF.Jtilley said:They are brining in Thompson who is proven and another Juco bat. Jaros hit .343 in limited sample with as many walks as strikeouts and was top 150 recruit.StateFan2001 said:The difference is most of those guys were proven college hitters. I am just surprised coming off a CWS run and having a strong NIL budget that we are landing unproven hitters vs. guys who we have already seen succeed in college baseball.Jtilley said:
Here are the transfers/juco hitters we have taken over the last seven years that made it past fall ball.....
2024- Amak, Pennington, Butters, Hogue
2023- Harrison, Trice, Candelaria, Nolan
2022- Gino, Piolli, Hood, Lavoie, Oldham, Godman
2021- Truitt
2020- Murr
2019- Butler
2018- Edwards
That is an extremely high hit rate, and the ones that didn't pan out were mostly depth pieces anyways.
We can split hairs over Ozzy but you aren't finding many kids with his power upside in the portal. He is worth the risk.
We had success this late season primarily because our pitching staff became really good. Our offense was still well behind most of the CWS level offenses (maybe UK the one exception) and we lose almost all of that production.
Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
Just a guy on the sunshine squad.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001's favorite poster.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001's favorite poster.
How many dudes in the portal fit the description of collegiate studs?kbdavis33 said:
Personally I'm glad James said it.
We can hope relatively "unproven" guys turn out to be multi-year studs.
But from a team that was 3 outs away from being in a major position to try and win a championship I'm kinda shocked that the guys we've gone after aren't already collegiate studs.
Maybe these adds are just competitive depth for now but I was definitely expecting AMak/Pennington level replacements out of the portal. Maybe we are still going after them. But so far I'm not on the "wow these are great options" train
Just a guy on the sunshine squad.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001's favorite poster.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001's favorite poster.
Oh you've done it now!wilmwolf said:Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
I choose violence today.metcalfmafia said:Oh you've done it now!wilmwolf said:Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
Just a guy on the sunshine squad.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001's favorite poster.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001's favorite poster.
hahawilmwolf said:Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
I remember James talking about guys needing to play to produce as well.
Look, I get his concern but what puts me over the top is the fact that Hart and staff have these massive connections to these kids. These aren't blind takes by the coaching staff.
Yup. If or until Hart fields a team of dudes that can't produce, I just can't doubt him.CLTWolf said:hahawilmwolf said:Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
I remember James talking about guys needing to play to produce as well.
Look, I get his concern but what puts me over the top is the fact that Hart and staff have these massive connections to these kids. These aren't blind takes by the coaching staff.
Just a guy on the sunshine squad.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001's favorite poster.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001's favorite poster.
Back to portal talk- shout out to the coaches, and our collective, etc for keeping a very good young core around.
Unless any very late entries, we didn't lose a true impact player to the portal this year, that deserves props. Lots of really nice players sticking around! Excited to project the future! ()
Unless any very late entries, we didn't lose a true impact player to the portal this year, that deserves props. Lots of really nice players sticking around! Excited to project the future! (
) 
From looking at their HS tapes and some of their PG evaluations these guys have high starter potential. Some just got stuck behind more experienced players.
For years we've been talking about getting players similar to Vandy type guys. Now we're getting a few and now we need more experienced guys. I've been around Hart enough to have 100% faith in his ability to spot talent. We still need pitching and 1-2 middle infield guys. The draft will tell us where we need to go from there.
For years we've been talking about getting players similar to Vandy type guys. Now we're getting a few and now we need more experienced guys. I've been around Hart enough to have 100% faith in his ability to spot talent. We still need pitching and 1-2 middle infield guys. The draft will tell us where we need to go from there.
I asked a ref if he could give me a technical foul for thinking bad things about him. He said, of course not. I said, well, I think you stink. And he gave me a technical. You can't trust em.
Working on it
100
wilmwolf said:Yup. If or until Hart fields a team of dudes that can't produce, I just can't doubt him.CLTWolf said:hahawilmwolf said:Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
I remember James talking about guys needing to play to produce as well.
Look, I get his concern but what puts me over the top is the fact that Hart and staff have these massive connections to these kids. These aren't blind takes by the coaching staff.
Let's not act like we go to the Supers every year. We have misses all the time. We are acting like we have some impeccable track record for talent acquisition.
Joined:
Jul 13, 2017
Posts:
55,958
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Who was Marvin Harrison/Emeka Ebuka at Vanderbilt or GT? The guy who Vandy is choosing over Ossenfort hit 5 HRs and .250 last year IIRC. Vandy had 2 guys hit double-digit HRs on the team (10/13), they didn't have 2 1st rders starting ahead of Ossenfort.wilmwolf said:Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
Kind of shockd they didn't find a way to get Ossenfort's pop in that weak lineup, but maybe those guys are Marvin Harrison and Ebuka!!!!
So no, I don't see the comparison to Noah Rogers.
Joined:
Jul 13, 2017
Posts:
55,958
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Yes, these are HS projections. We take guys all the time who don't pan out as HS projections.CLTWolf said:hahawilmwolf said:Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
I remember James talking about guys needing to play to produce as well.
Look, I get his concern but what puts me over the top is the fact that Hart and staff have these massive connections to these kids. These aren't blind takes by the coaching staff.
I'm confused on why it's an issue to at least have some pause to these takes as projected starters. Shouldn't that be obvious?
Joined:
Jul 13, 2017
Posts:
55,958
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Why do you need college studs? I want proven, college starters.wilmwolf said:How many dudes in the portal fit the description of collegiate studs?kbdavis33 said:
Personally I'm glad James said it.
We can hope relatively "unproven" guys turn out to be multi-year studs.
But from a team that was 3 outs away from being in a major position to try and win a championship I'm kinda shocked that the guys we've gone after aren't already collegiate studs.
Maybe these adds are just competitive depth for now but I was definitely expecting AMak/Pennington level replacements out of the portal. Maybe we are still going after them. But so far I'm not on the "wow these are great options" train
Buttersworth, Thompson, A Mak, Candalaria, Pennington, all fit that.
Why am I not surprised by this insanely dumb post.StateFan2001 said:wilmwolf said:Yup. If or until Hart fields a team of dudes that can't produce, I just can't doubt him.CLTWolf said:hahawilmwolf said:Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
I remember James talking about guys needing to play to produce as well.
Look, I get his concern but what puts me over the top is the fact that Hart and staff have these massive connections to these kids. These aren't blind takes by the coaching staff.
Let's not act like we go to the Supers every year. We have misses all the time. We are acting like we have some impeccable track record for talent acquisition.
Everyone has misses including LSU, Tennessee, FSU, unc, etc.
You are acting like we don't have a track record of hitting on guys. Jeez dude.
James Henderson said:Why do you need college studs? I want proven, college starters.wilmwolf said:How many dudes in the portal fit the description of collegiate studs?kbdavis33 said:
Personally I'm glad James said it.
We can hope relatively "unproven" guys turn out to be multi-year studs.
But from a team that was 3 outs away from being in a major position to try and win a championship I'm kinda shocked that the guys we've gone after aren't already collegiate studs.
Maybe these adds are just competitive depth for now but I was definitely expecting AMak/Pennington level replacements out of the portal. Maybe we are still going after them. But so far I'm not on the "wow these are great options" train
Buttersworth, Thompson, A Mak, Candalaria, Pennington, all fit that.
Candalaria was our worst hitter in ACC play, FWIW. Not a great example. I realize he had good overall numbers, and was dinged up in ACC play, but still started 25 of 29 games and was not productive.
So if that is what you want, go ahead. I'll take my chances on Jaros having better than a .670 OPS in conference play.
Joined:
Jul 13, 2017
Posts:
55,958
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
So you wouldn't want Candalaria in your lineup after what we just saw from last year? Yeah, we disagree.pack2010 said:James Henderson said:Why do you need college studs? I want proven, college starters.wilmwolf said:How many dudes in the portal fit the description of collegiate studs?kbdavis33 said:
Personally I'm glad James said it.
We can hope relatively "unproven" guys turn out to be multi-year studs.
But from a team that was 3 outs away from being in a major position to try and win a championship I'm kinda shocked that the guys we've gone after aren't already collegiate studs.
Maybe these adds are just competitive depth for now but I was definitely expecting AMak/Pennington level replacements out of the portal. Maybe we are still going after them. But so far I'm not on the "wow these are great options" train
Buttersworth, Thompson, A Mak, Candalaria, Pennington, all fit that.
Candalaria was our worst hitter in ACC play, FWIW. Not a great example. I realize he had good overall numbers, and was dinged up in ACC play, but still started 25 of 29 games and was not productive.
So if that is what you want, go ahead. I'll take my chances on Jaros having better than a .670 OPS in conference play.
We can replace him with Groover though if that works better.
We will be fine
Joined:
Jul 13, 2017
Posts:
55,958
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
I agree, but I think for some not being over the moon about projecting at two power spots = mad/upset/worried they won't hit.JCooke93 said:
We will be fine
RJ Austin, arguably Vandy's best player played 45 games at first on the year. Seems strange that he would get that much time there but he did. Holcomb was a top 40 HS guy but played only 13 games at first this year. Austin was the guy that slotted into the position once Maldonado got hurt and was out for the season. He was behind their best player and highest rated HS recruit.James Henderson said:Who was Marvin Harrison/Emeka Ebuka at Vanderbilt or GT? The guy who Vandy is choosing over Ossenfort hit 5 HRs and .250 last year IIRC. Vandy had 2 guys hit double-digit HRs on the team (10/13), they didn't have 2 1st rders starting ahead of Ossenfort.wilmwolf said:Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
Kind of shockd they didn't find a way to get Ossenfort's pop in that weak lineup, but maybe those guys are Marvin Harrison and Ebuka!!!!
So no, I don't see the comparison to Noah Rogers.
Noah didn't need to beat out Marv or Emeka. He needed to beat out Fleming and Carnell Tate, who was the buckeyes highest rated recruit in Noah's class.
some are mad/worried/upset tho....that's the issue. hahaJames Henderson said:I agree, but I think for some not being over the moon about projecting at two power spots = mad/upset/worried they won't hit.JCooke93 said:
We will be fine
James Henderson said:So you wouldn't want Candalaria in your lineup after what we just saw from last year? Yeah, we disagree.pack2010 said:James Henderson said:Why do you need college studs? I want proven, college starters.wilmwolf said:How many dudes in the portal fit the description of collegiate studs?kbdavis33 said:
Personally I'm glad James said it.
We can hope relatively "unproven" guys turn out to be multi-year studs.
But from a team that was 3 outs away from being in a major position to try and win a championship I'm kinda shocked that the guys we've gone after aren't already collegiate studs.
Maybe these adds are just competitive depth for now but I was definitely expecting AMak/Pennington level replacements out of the portal. Maybe we are still going after them. But so far I'm not on the "wow these are great options" train
Buttersworth, Thompson, A Mak, Candalaria, Pennington, all fit that.
Candalaria was our worst hitter in ACC play, FWIW. Not a great example. I realize he had good overall numbers, and was dinged up in ACC play, but still started 25 of 29 games and was not productive.
So if that is what you want, go ahead. I'll take my chances on Jaros having better than a .670 OPS in conference play.
We can replace him with Groover though if that works better.
No where did I say that. He was a solid player, but stats are stats. You want proven, college starters. I simply provided stats that proved Candalaria really struggled in ACC play. I would PROJECT Jaros to do better, statistically. That is what projecting is.
Also, Groover was a stud. Not just a proven college starter. So that isn't a good comparison.
Joined:
Jul 13, 2017
Posts:
55,958
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Carnell Tate was the No. 1 WR in the country in that class. Fleming was in his class and also played some slot. I doubt we'd view Noah any diff. if he got the 17 catches or whatever it was Tate had in minimal snaps behind Ebuka/Marv.CLTWolf said:RJ Austin, arguably Vandy's best player played 45 games at first on the year. Seems strange that he would get that much time there but he did. Holcomb was a top 40 HS guy but played only 13 games at first this year. Austin was the guy that slotted into the position once Maldonado got hurt and was out for the season. He was behind their best player and highest rated HS recruit.James Henderson said:Who was Marvin Harrison/Emeka Ebuka at Vanderbilt or GT? The guy who Vandy is choosing over Ossenfort hit 5 HRs and .250 last year IIRC. Vandy had 2 guys hit double-digit HRs on the team (10/13), they didn't have 2 1st rders starting ahead of Ossenfort.wilmwolf said:Do we have a year of these transfers not producing? It's not like either of these dues started 50 games and just weren't good. As pointed out before, this is very similar situation to your boy Noah Rogers, yet you are taking the opposite stance. Weird.James Henderson said:Yeah only diff. is you have the 1 year of the transfer not producing vs. the hope of not having that type of year from a HS recruit.wilmwolf said:
I don't see much difference in taking a transfer who hasn't played much and taking a high school recruit, and we've had plenty of success with high school recruits who come in and play right away.
Like I don't think we'd be taking Chance Mako as a transfer expecting him to play a major role for us in 2025 based on what he did this year.
Kind of shockd they didn't find a way to get Ossenfort's pop in that weak lineup, but maybe those guys are Marvin Harrison and Ebuka!!!!
So no, I don't see the comparison to Noah Rogers.
Noah didn't need to beat out Marv or Emeka. He needed to beat out Fleming and Carnell Tate, who was the buckeyes highest rated recruit in Noah's class.
You also could have played Ossenfort's pop at DH given how little power Vandy had.
Joined:
Jul 13, 2017
Posts:
55,958
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Groover at CLT: .351 BA/.870 OPS/4 HRs, 14 Doublespack2010 said:James Henderson said:So you wouldn't want Candalaria in your lineup after what we just saw from last year? Yeah, we disagree.pack2010 said:James Henderson said:Why do you need college studs? I want proven, college starters.wilmwolf said:How many dudes in the portal fit the description of collegiate studs?kbdavis33 said:
Personally I'm glad James said it.
We can hope relatively "unproven" guys turn out to be multi-year studs.
But from a team that was 3 outs away from being in a major position to try and win a championship I'm kinda shocked that the guys we've gone after aren't already collegiate studs.
Maybe these adds are just competitive depth for now but I was definitely expecting AMak/Pennington level replacements out of the portal. Maybe we are still going after them. But so far I'm not on the "wow these are great options" train
Buttersworth, Thompson, A Mak, Candalaria, Pennington, all fit that.
Candalaria was our worst hitter in ACC play, FWIW. Not a great example. I realize he had good overall numbers, and was dinged up in ACC play, but still started 25 of 29 games and was not productive.
So if that is what you want, go ahead. I'll take my chances on Jaros having better than a .670 OPS in conference play.
We can replace him with Groover though if that works better.
No where did I say that. He was a solid player, but stats are stats. You want proven, college starters. I simply provided stats that proved Candalaria really struggled in ACC play. I would PROJECT Jaros to do better, statistically. That is what projecting is.
Also, Groover was a stud. Not just a proven college starter. So that isn't a good comparison.
Candelaria at Davidson pre-State: .342 BA/1.059 OPS/13 HRs/62 RBIs/19 Doubles
I'd argue Candalaria was certainly a stud on paper when State took him if you consider Groover to have been one.
You responded to me stating what Candalaria was when State landed him, not what he did at NC State.
Joined:
Jul 13, 2017
Posts:
55,958
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
I think it's certainly fine to question replacing A Mak and Pennington's production with unknowns given the other unknowns with the lineup relative to power.CLTWolf said:some are mad/worried/upset tho....that's the issue. hahaJames Henderson said:I agree, but I think for some not being over the moon about projecting at two power spots = mad/upset/worried they won't hit.JCooke93 said:
We will be fine
I certainly see a case where Jaros and Ossenfort pan out but we've just not seen that profile at State (outside of Truitt) so it's hard to feel 100% confident in the projection. Surprised that's a controversial take.
Now do Pilolli. He is the best comp IMO for someone that transferred in with limited sample size.James Henderson said:Groover at CLT: .351 BA/.870 OPS/4 HRs, 14 Doublespack2010 said:James Henderson said:So you wouldn't want Candalaria in your lineup after what we just saw from last year? Yeah, we disagree.pack2010 said:James Henderson said:Why do you need college studs? I want proven, college starters.wilmwolf said:How many dudes in the portal fit the description of collegiate studs?kbdavis33 said:
Personally I'm glad James said it.
We can hope relatively "unproven" guys turn out to be multi-year studs.
But from a team that was 3 outs away from being in a major position to try and win a championship I'm kinda shocked that the guys we've gone after aren't already collegiate studs.
Maybe these adds are just competitive depth for now but I was definitely expecting AMak/Pennington level replacements out of the portal. Maybe we are still going after them. But so far I'm not on the "wow these are great options" train
Buttersworth, Thompson, A Mak, Candalaria, Pennington, all fit that.
Candalaria was our worst hitter in ACC play, FWIW. Not a great example. I realize he had good overall numbers, and was dinged up in ACC play, but still started 25 of 29 games and was not productive.
So if that is what you want, go ahead. I'll take my chances on Jaros having better than a .670 OPS in conference play.
We can replace him with Groover though if that works better.
No where did I say that. He was a solid player, but stats are stats. You want proven, college starters. I simply provided stats that proved Candalaria really struggled in ACC play. I would PROJECT Jaros to do better, statistically. That is what projecting is.
Also, Groover was a stud. Not just a proven college starter. So that isn't a good comparison.
Candelaria at Davidson pre-State: .342 BA/1.059 OPS/13 HRs/62 RBIs/19 Doubles
I'd argue Candalaria was certainly a stud on paper when State took him if you consider Groover to have been one.
You responded to me stating what Candalaria was when State landed him, not what he did at NC State.
We liked that transfer until everyone learned he was still hurt and never really recovered.
James Henderson said:Groover at CLT: .351 BA/.870 OPS/4 HRs, 14 Doublespack2010 said:James Henderson said:So you wouldn't want Candalaria in your lineup after what we just saw from last year? Yeah, we disagree.pack2010 said:James Henderson said:Why do you need college studs? I want proven, college starters.wilmwolf said:How many dudes in the portal fit the description of collegiate studs?kbdavis33 said:
Personally I'm glad James said it.
We can hope relatively "unproven" guys turn out to be multi-year studs.
But from a team that was 3 outs away from being in a major position to try and win a championship I'm kinda shocked that the guys we've gone after aren't already collegiate studs.
Maybe these adds are just competitive depth for now but I was definitely expecting AMak/Pennington level replacements out of the portal. Maybe we are still going after them. But so far I'm not on the "wow these are great options" train
Buttersworth, Thompson, A Mak, Candalaria, Pennington, all fit that.
Candalaria was our worst hitter in ACC play, FWIW. Not a great example. I realize he had good overall numbers, and was dinged up in ACC play, but still started 25 of 29 games and was not productive.
So if that is what you want, go ahead. I'll take my chances on Jaros having better than a .670 OPS in conference play.
We can replace him with Groover though if that works better.
No where did I say that. He was a solid player, but stats are stats. You want proven, college starters. I simply provided stats that proved Candalaria really struggled in ACC play. I would PROJECT Jaros to do better, statistically. That is what projecting is.
Also, Groover was a stud. Not just a proven college starter. So that isn't a good comparison.
Candelaria at Davidson pre-State: .342 BA/1.059 OPS/13 HRs/62 RBIs/19 Doubles
I'd argue Candalaria was certainly a stud on paper when State took him if you consider Groover to have been one.
You responded to me stating what Candalaria was when State landed him, not what he did at NC State.
Candalaria was absolutely a great take out of Davidson, he had a fantastic career there. And I am happy he spent his last year in Raleigh.
At this point I think you are arguing just to argue. I am stating that sometimes your proven, college starters struggle in ACC play. It is a different animal. Candalaria was a bad offensive player over 25 games. If you want to dispute that, sure. But your proven guys don't always work out. Jaros/Ozze could be great players next year, they could be duds that get benched. We don't know what will happen. Just like we didn't project Canalaria to be a poor hitter in ACC play or Parker Nolan to be benched down the stretch, things happen.
Featured Stories
See All
COMMIT ALERT: Purdue OL Jalen Grant Picks NC State
by P.J. Williams
14:18
2h ago
264
IPS IN 5: Thoughts On Today's ACC Basketball Slate
by James Henderson
5:05
1d ago
1.3k
Jonathan Paylor: "You Have To Actually Know The game"
by James Henderson