SportsBubbler.com

Matt Rogers

Last post 05-30-2008 1:31 PM by CheapSeats440. 20 replies.
Page 2 of 2 (21 items) < Previous 1 2
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 05-08-2008 11:20 AM In reply to

    Re: Matt Rogers

    TrueBrew:

    Go look at the angels first round draft picks for the last ten years and tell me how many didn't make it to the majors or weren't very productive. 

    1. Troy Glaus
    2. Seth Etherton
    3. Chris Bootcheck
    4. Casey Kotchman
    5. Joe Saunders
    6. Brandon Wood
    7. Jered Weaver

    Those guys arent reliable major leaguers, right? Not at all, right? The only exception might be Wood, but he still has "super-prospect" branded on his behind. If one team can make 7 selections in 9 tries that yeild reliable tallent, does it not suggest that you have better insight? Through an extremely inexact science, they managed to draft those fellas.

     

    TrueBrew:

     It hasn't worked out like I said before looking at it right now they would have been better off with someone else.

    My exact point, which you seem to be missing.

    TrueBrew:

     

    1.  Weaver looks better right now, I don't argue that.

    2.  The draft isn't a total science and no teams makes all of the right picks. 

    3.  Rogers is younger and still has a chance to succeed.

     

    1. Undeniable

    2. The Brewers should have made better picks, other teams obviously have somehow insider info to make picks like the Angels did.

    3. 1-2 in 19 career games, none above AA, no pitching in 2008 yet, but a decent K/BB ratio and your telling me that he could surpass Jered Weaver in usefulness? Somehow he has "Ben Sheets type stuff" but is 1-2 in 19 games. If by "Ben Sheets type stuff" you mean injury prone, your right.

    Yost is a n00b
  • 05-08-2008 11:56 AM In reply to

    Re: Matt Rogers

    I guess if you consider a 6.30 era for etherton productive than yeah you can count him in there. Bootcheck aslo has an ERA approaching 6 for his career, so no I would not consider those guys reliable major league players, and I really don't think anyone can.  Yeah they made it to the bigs but they haven't been productive.  I think wood will be good but that still makes it 5 in 9 tries not seven as you suggest. 

    The brewers have drafted Prince Fielder who is better than Kotchman.  Braun who was better in his rookie year than Glaus, Weeks who has at least been more productive than wood.  They also have Laporta in the minors who everyone seems to think will hit. 

    The brewers still have Jeffress, Rogers, and Jones in the minors so they can't be discounted yet, but they don't look very god yet.  However, your point that the angels have better insight is not true.  The brewers have done quite well with their picks, and you could argue the pitching hasn't been as good, but you can't argue that they know more than the brewers.  A lot has to do with luck, and perhaps the brewers are better at picking hitters and the angels are better at picking arms. I would concede that arguement. 

    I am not missing your point about Rogers and Weaver.  I understand it looks better now.  I am arguing that the pick isn't as foolish as you are making it seem. 

    NO NO NO.  For the last time I am not telling you that Rogers is better than weaver.  Rogers had more potential to be a dominant pitcher.  Potential doesn't mean anything if you can't get to the major leagues or live up to the potential, but that is where the better stuff comes from.  I think we are on a different page as far as the "stuff" goes.  It has nothing to do with numbers.  In my opinion stuff is the god given talent to throw a baseball 95-98 MPH with a big breaking ball.  Weaver throws about 91-93 tops, but is by far a better pitcher at this point.  Based on that fact that he knows how to get guys out and understand how to pitch and take advantage of the stuff he does have.  I never argued that Rogers is a better pitcher only that he had more potential to be a dominant pitcher than weaver has.  And the arm injury to Rogers changes everything, he may not have the same stuff when he comes back and he will have to learn how to pitch by thinking instead of relying on his natural talent.  Many guys who have talent like him can't do that and never make it to the Majors. 

    Think of it like Sheet and Gallardo.  Sheets looks more dominant when he is on and has his 95 mph fastball and sharp breaking curveball than Yo does with his 91-93 MPH fastball and curveball.  However, Yo gets about the same results with less stuff and thus you could argue he is as good a pitcher as sheets is.  That is where the stuff comes in.  Rogers had Sheets type stuff (doesn't mean he would have been as good, but had the potential) and Yo is closer to what Weaver has (both have shown they can get guys out with that stuff, Rogers hasn't).

  • 05-08-2008 12:58 PM In reply to

    Re: Matt Rogers

    TrueBrew:

     

    NO NO NO.  For the last time I am not telling you that Rogers is better than weaver.  Rogers had more potential to be a dominant pitcher.  Potential doesn't mean anything if you can't get to the major leagues or live up to the potential, but that is where the better stuff comes from.

     

     

    Thank you. You just made my case.

    Yost is a n00b
  • 05-08-2008 3:29 PM In reply to

    Re: Matt Rogers

    I wasn't trying to argue with you about that.  I just don't think the brewers picks have been horrible and that pick can't be considered a bust YET.  Thats all.  I can see your point of view and I understand what you are saying but I think you need to wait a little longer to evaluate the pick.

  • 05-29-2008 7:35 PM In reply to

    Re: Matt Rogers

    stevec10502:

    What has happen to him I know he had surgery 2 years ago, is he a complete bust.  I see alot of you havent' even put him in your top 10 of prospects.

     

    Who is Matt Rogers?
  • 05-30-2008 1:31 PM In reply to

    Re: Matt Rogers

    ghostdog_on_the_beach:
    Who is Matt Rogers?

    You're about a month late.

    Yost is a n00b
Page 2 of 2 (21 items) < Previous 1 2