|
Post by chinmusic on Jul 2, 2018 13:23:14 GMT -8
David Esquer and his pitching coach did a good job with their Stanford team early in the season and that momentum carried them deep into the season. From observing them in our series and one other I watched on the P-12 net, when they lost their catcher, Maverick Handley from that on-campus skateboarding accident they were suddenly exposed defensively. They had no Troy Claunch waiting to step up - their backup was a part-time catcher that (no other way to put it), killed them. Recalling our series, it appeared the pitchers never got comfortable with him and the inability to hanle the low pitch (past balls/errors) was damaging.
I thought another mitigating circumstance was that Stanford had a solid ballclub and did win 46 games and the conference title, but over a 55 game season was never going to match Oregon State's overall talent and depth. In the long run, the Beavers were still the best team in the PAC-12 and in the country for that matter. Stanford didn't catch any breaks in their Regional either drawing scoring machine-Wright State, a good Baylor team, and our friends from CSU-Fullerton who won it.
In fairness, Stanford exceeded expectations. Nobody predicted a 46 win season and certainly not a PAC-12 championship (PC picked them to win the PAC (he couldn't pick his own team and 10 other coaches picked the Beavs to win). Not winning their Regional was disappointing but I thought there were bigger "underachievements" in the desert southwest during 2018.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jul 2, 2018 13:41:36 GMT -8
Of course the media loves Stanford. It's the only Ivy League-quality school with serious athletic chops. (23 straight Directors Cups! 117 National Championships!) Stanford reps the Pac really well, overall. I'll forgive them an occasional face-plant. It's the bottom half of the conference that costs our conference. Even the biggest SEC honks admit that the top of the Pac is a match for the top of the SEC. But the bottom half of the Pac stunk this (and most) years, while the bottom half of the SEC is still pretty good. Pac-12 v. SEC #4 Arkansas 1 - #6 Arizona 0 @ San Diego, CA #14 ALABAMA 12 - #10 Washington State 4 #14 ALABAMA 8 - #10 Washington State 2 #14 ALABAMA 9 - #10 Washington State 3 #4 ARKANSAS 4 - #9 USC 0 #9 USC 3 - #4 ARKANSAS 1 #11 Texas A&M 9 - #5 California 5 @ Frisco, TX #4 ARKANSAS 7 - #9 USC 6 #6 Vanderbilt 6 - #4 UCLA 3 @ Dodger Stadium #2 OREGON STATE 14 - #8 LSU 1 #2 OREGON STATE 12 - #8 LSU 0 #9 Mississippi State 1 - #3 Washington 0 @ Omaha, NE #2 Oregon State 12 - #9 Mississippi State 2 @ Omaha, NE #2 Oregon State 5 - #9 Mississippi State 2 @ Omaha, NE #4 Arkansas 4 - #2 Oregon State 1 @ Omaha, NE #2 Oregon State 5 - #4 Arkansas 3 @ Omaha, NE #2 Oregon State 5 - #4 Arkansas 0 @ Omaha, NE The worst team in the SEC swept the 10th best team in the Pac-12 by a combined 20 runs. The 11th-best team in the SEC beat the Pac-12's fifth-best team by four at a neutral site. The ninth-best team in the SEC beat the Pac-12's third-best team at a neutral site. The top 10 or 11 teams in the SEC are comparable to the top four teams in the Pac-12, which is why the SEC gets 10 teams in and the Pac-12 only gets four.
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Jul 2, 2018 13:45:10 GMT -8
. . . but how much of that talent is really due to great player development? Nick was a known quantity coming in, but were all these guys such hot prospects. Has anyone done a recruiting analysis for baseball like we do for football and basketball every few hours? To give us some perspective on that consider the following recruiting class rankings (from Perfect Game: link ) CLASS RANK SOME PLAYERS IN CLASS2015 26 Madrigal, Grenier, Larnach, Kwan, Femel...2016 19 Eisert, Gambrell, Rutch...2017 44 Abel, Claunch, Foster....
Based on the strength of the recruiting class it doesn't appear the Beavs should have done more than get a chance to play in the post season. Instead they became one of the most dominate teams of the last two decades. Of course there are many factors but my take from this data indicates a very strong correlation between "great player development" and the success of Oregon State Baseball.
FWIW - TSDR recruiting class ranks were (2015-2017): 14,21, and 56. They are similar to OSU, but the results were drastically different. You can draw your own conclusions.
P.S. If you go to the Perfect Game link, check out some of the teams in the top-10 for 2015-2017. You may recognize some of them. I didn't do one, but an analysis of the top 10 for each year might indicate a strong correlation between recruiting and success, more so than great player development and success.I wonder if these recruiting rankings are done the same way as the football ones: As in - they are never updated to reflect who actually made it into school/on to the team. For baseball, there's a LOT more recruits who will never make it onto campus, so not updating for that factor is a big deal. I'd also say that I believe baseball talent is a bit more difficult to gauge than football talent is. Football is an easier game to dominate with pure physical talent than baseball is, and pure physical talent is easier to identify than straight up baseball talent.
|
|
|
Post by rainmanrich on Jul 2, 2018 13:48:10 GMT -8
To give us some perspective on that consider the following recruiting class rankings (from Perfect Game: link ) CLASS RANK SOME PLAYERS IN CLASS2015 26 Madrigal, Grenier, Larnach, Kwan, Femel...2016 19 Eisert, Gambrell, Rutch...2017 44 Abel, Claunch, Foster....
Based on the strength of the recruiting class it doesn't appear the Beavs should have done more than get a chance to play in the post season. Instead they became one of the most dominate teams of the last two decades. Of course there are many factors but my take from this data indicates a very strong correlation between "great player development" and the success of Oregon State Baseball.
FWIW - TSDR recruiting class ranks were (2015-2017): 14,21, and 56. They are similar to OSU, but the results were drastically different. You can draw your own conclusions.
P.S. If you go to the Perfect Game link, check out some of the teams in the top-10 for 2015-2017. You may recognize some of them. I didn't do one, but an analysis of the top 10 for each year might indicate a strong correlation between recruiting and success, more so than great player development and success.I wonder if these recruiting rankings are done the same way as the football ones: As in - they are never updated to reflect who actually made it into school/on to the team. For baseball, there's a LOT more recruits who will never make it onto campus, so not updating for that factor is a big deal. I'd also say that I believe baseball talent is a bit more difficult to gauge than football talent is. Football is an easier game to dominate with pure physical talent than baseball is, and pure physical talent is easier to identify than straight up baseball talent. I think Perfect Game updates if the recruit signs a pro contract.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jul 2, 2018 13:50:25 GMT -8
David Esquer and his pitching coach did a good job with their Stanford team early in the season and that momentum carried them deep into the season. From observing them in our series and one other I watched on the P-12 net, when they lost their catcher, Maverick Handley from that on-campus skateboarding accident they were suddenly exposed defensively. They had no Troy Claunch waiting to step up - their backup was a part-time catcher that (no other way to put it), killed them. Recalling our series, it appeared the pitchers never got comfortable with him and the inability to hanle the low pitch (past balls/errors) was damaging. I thought another mitigating circumstance was that Stanford had a solid ballclub and did win 46 games and the conference title, but over a 55 game season was never going to match Oregon State's overall talent and depth. In the long run, the Beavers were still the best team in the PAC-12 and in the country for that matter. Stanford didn't catch any breaks in their Regional either drawing scoring machine-Wright State, a good Baylor team, and our friends from CSU-Fullerton who won it. In fairness, Stanford exceeded expectations. Nobody predicted a 46 win season and certainly not a PAC-12 championship (PC picked them to win the PAC (he couldn't pick his own team and 10 other coaches picked the Beavs to win). Not winning their Regional was disappointing but I thought there were bigger "underachievements" in the desert southwest during 2018. Oregon State got very lucky with that injury. Maverick Handley was unequivocally the Cardinal's best infielder. Stanford was 38-6 (.864) in games that Handley played and 8-6 (.571) in games that he missed. The Cardinal were a top five team with him in but not a top 10 team with him out. The Cardinal were lucky to limp their way to a Pac-12 Championship without Handley.
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Jul 2, 2018 13:56:28 GMT -8
David Esquer and his pitching coach did a good job with their Stanford team early in the season and that momentum carried them deep into the season. From observing them in our series and one other I watched on the P-12 net, when they lost their catcher, Maverick Handley from that on-campus skateboarding accident they were suddenly exposed defensively. They had no Troy Claunch waiting to step up - their backup was a part-time catcher that (no other way to put it), killed them. Recalling our series, it appeared the pitchers never got comfortable with him and the inability to hanle the low pitch (past balls/errors) was damaging. I thought another mitigating circumstance was that Stanford had a solid ballclub and did win 46 games and the conference title, but over a 55 game season was never going to match Oregon State's overall talent and depth. In the long run, the Beavers were still the best team in the PAC-12 and in the country for that matter. Stanford didn't catch any breaks in their Regional either drawing scoring machine-Wright State, a good Baylor team, and our friends from CSU-Fullerton who won it. In fairness, Stanford exceeded expectations. Nobody predicted a 46 win season and certainly not a PAC-12 championship (PC picked them to win the PAC (he couldn't pick his own team and 10 other coaches picked the Beavs to win). Not winning their Regional was disappointing but I thought there were bigger "underachievements" in the desert southwest during 2018. Oregon State got very lucky with that injury. Maverick Handley was unequivocally the Cardinal's best infielder. Stanford was 38-6 (.864) in games that Handley played and 8-6 (.571) in games that he missed. The Cardinal were a top five team with him in but not a top 10 team with him out. The Cardinal were lucky to limp their way to a Pac-12 Championship without Handley. Don't skateboard during baseball season, kids.
|
|
|
Post by NativeBeav on Jul 2, 2018 14:11:38 GMT -8
I am just impressed by Casey’s approach to all things baseball... when he get’s buy in, not even with number 1 athletes, but with guys that they hand pick to slot into a winning system. I know they lose a lot from this year’s team, however, I am pretty sure that his guys will overachieve again. You just do not see the same attention to detail that permeates Casey’s program and staff. You see small ball, power ball and all variations in between - but Pat has his guys schooled for success based on their individual strengths and team dynamics. That means that every guy in the lineup, and on the bench is a positive contributor at any point during the season and during a game. The perfect example was beating the field in Corvallis and Omaha, and they did it in Omaha without Kwan, and with Madrigal and Heinrich and Fehmel having an uncharacteristic run of bad luck. So fun to watch... Go Beavers ! Agree with what you say, except the 'overachieve again' part. The talking heads at Omaha were pretty consistent in saying that only Florida matched up with OSU on a talent level, and the draft reflected that. Finishing in the top 4 the last two years was pretty much 'achieving', given the talent level. And I say that not meaning to take anything away from Casey's coaching, I'm just pointing out he's not winning with players playing over their heads. At this point, he's winning with serious MLB talent that wants to visit Omaha via Corvallis in route to the bigs. Not according to the talking heads at Baseball America. Even though they admit we are returning lots of talent and experience from this team, we do not even make the top 8 teams to be in Omaha next year -
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Jul 2, 2018 14:21:54 GMT -8
Agree with what you say, except the 'overachieve again' part. The talking heads at Omaha were pretty consistent in saying that only Florida matched up with OSU on a talent level, and the draft reflected that. Finishing in the top 4 the last two years was pretty much 'achieving', given the talent level. And I say that not meaning to take anything away from Casey's coaching, I'm just pointing out he's not winning with players playing over their heads. At this point, he's winning with serious MLB talent that wants to visit Omaha via Corvallis in route to the bigs. Not according to the talking heads at Baseball America. Even though they admit we are returning lots of talent and experience from this team, we do not even make the top 8 teams to be in Omaha next year -
Shhhhhh! Don't tell them - That's how we like it! Actually i wouldn't vote us in at the moment given that we have to replace LH, our middle infield, Kwan, Larnach, Gretler, Anderson, Nobach... That's a lot of production, a lot of leadership and just a bunch of cool customers in general. I think we'll be fine - but I totally get the omission...
|
|
|
Post by mbabeav on Jul 2, 2018 14:43:45 GMT -8
Not according to the talking heads at Baseball America. Even though they admit we are returning lots of talent and experience from this team, we do not even make the top 8 teams to be in Omaha next year -
Shhhhhh! Don't tell them - That's how we like it! Actually i wouldn't vote us in at the moment given that we have to replace LH, our middle infield, Kwan, Larnach, Gretler, Anderson, Nobach... That's a lot of production, a lot of leadership and just a bunch of cool customers in general. I think we'll be fine - but I totally get the omission... I would have a hard time putting us into the top 8 too. As ESPN commentators pointed out, the top of our order had around 20 million in signing bonuses coming (assuming Adley goes where he belongs), and I don't know of any team that has had that kind of position player 1-6 quality in as long as I have followed college ball. So we have a lot of runs to replace, and there is going to be an experience issue too - such is the curse of having so much talent for the past three years, sigh........ But I think our pitching is going to be really solid, and we will be a top 20 team to start - hopefully with a sharp upward trend. And I would like to thank all the people that created the RPI in it's current iteration. It's now been 19 years since the number 1 seed has won the CWS, and us going in #3 made me feel very comfortable.
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Jul 2, 2018 14:46:54 GMT -8
Agree with what you say, except the 'overachieve again' part. The talking heads at Omaha were pretty consistent in saying that only Florida matched up with OSU on a talent level, and the draft reflected that. Finishing in the top 4 the last two years was pretty much 'achieving', given the talent level. And I say that not meaning to take anything away from Casey's coaching, I'm just pointing out he's not winning with players playing over their heads. At this point, he's winning with serious MLB talent that wants to visit Omaha via Corvallis in route to the bigs. Not according to the talking heads at Baseball America. Even though they admit we are returning lots of talent and experience from this team, we do not even make the top 8 teams to be in Omaha next year -
This pitching staff ought to be pretty good next year. The biggest loss to the pitching staff just might be the up the middle defense. Luke obviously ate up a LOT of quality innings, but the returning staff had a cumulative ERA of 3.37. Returning all but one guy off the nations #12 pitching staff has got to count for something. I'm not saying OSU is Omaha bound, but if the pitching staff is up to snuff and we get average hitting, winning 35-40 regular season games should not be surprising to anyone.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jul 2, 2018 22:48:17 GMT -8
Agree with what you say, except the 'overachieve again' part. The talking heads at Omaha were pretty consistent in saying that only Florida matched up with OSU on a talent level, and the draft reflected that. Finishing in the top 4 the last two years was pretty much 'achieving', given the talent level. And I say that not meaning to take anything away from Casey's coaching, I'm just pointing out he's not winning with players playing over their heads. At this point, he's winning with serious MLB talent that wants to visit Omaha via Corvallis in route to the bigs. Not according to the talking heads at Baseball America. Even though they admit we are returning lots of talent and experience from this team, we do not even make the top 8 teams to be in Omaha next year -
Baseball America predicts Oregon State to finish in the top 16 in the same article. Stanford was dynamite before Handley got hurt. And I don't think that any team in the Pac-12 returns a better 1-2 punch at pitcher than Pettway and Garcia. Plus, in 2018, Stanford and UCLA came to Corvallis. In 2006, Oregon State went 7-2 against Arizona, Stanford, and Washington. In 2007, Oregon State went 3-6 against Arizona, Stanford, and Washington. The difference? The Beavers played the Wildcats, Cardinal, and Huskies in Corvallis in 2006 and played on the road in 2007. In fact, excluding those three teams, Oregon State went 32-12 (.727) in 2006 and 35-11 (.761) in 2007. The Beavers were conference champions and hosted a Regional in 2006. The same team was the last team in the Tournament in 2007. Oregon State went 6-3 against the other top four teams in the Pac-12 last year, but all three series were in Corvallis.
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Jul 3, 2018 7:23:29 GMT -8
. . . but how much of that talent is really due to great player development? Nick was a known quantity coming in, but were all these guys such hot prospects. Has anyone done a recruiting analysis for baseball like we do for football and basketball every few hours? To give us some perspective on that consider the following recruiting class rankings (from Perfect Game: link ) CLASS RANK SOME PLAYERS IN CLASS2015 26 Madrigal, Grenier, Larnach, Kwan, Femel...2016 19 Eisert, Gambrell, Rutch...2017 44 Abel, Claunch, Foster....
Based on the strength of the recruiting class it doesn't appear the Beavs should have done more than get a chance to play in the post season. Instead they became one of the most dominate teams of the last two decades. Of course there are many factors but my take from this data indicates a very strong correlation between "great player development" and the success of Oregon State Baseball.
FWIW - TSDR recruiting class ranks were (2015-2017): 14,21, and 56. They are similar to OSU, but the results were drastically different. You can draw your own conclusions.
P.S. If you go to the Perfect Game link, check out some of the teams in the top-10 for 2015-2017. You may recognize some of them. I didn't do one, but an analysis of the top 10 for each year might indicate a strong correlation between recruiting and success, more so than great player development and success.I think Chamberlain should have made the short list for your "SOME PLAYERS IN CLASS" column for 2017...
|
|
|
Post by vhalum92 on Jul 3, 2018 8:13:32 GMT -8
What is odd is that Chamberlain is not on the Perfect Game list.... more reasons why these rankings are more hype than reality. I also believe Beau Philip was listed in the 2016 class and he is now in the 2018 class.... after going JC? In my mind... just keep winning Pac 12 and National Championships. That is the best way to rank a 2-3 year group of recruits. Win on the field
|
|
|
Post by rainmanrich on Jul 3, 2018 8:27:41 GMT -8
To give us some perspective on that consider the following recruiting class rankings (from Perfect Game: link ) CLASS RANK SOME PLAYERS IN CLASS2015 26 Madrigal, Grenier, Larnach, Kwan, Femel...2016 19 Eisert, Gambrell, Rutch...2017 44 Abel, Claunch, Foster....
Based on the strength of the recruiting class it doesn't appear the Beavs should have done more than get a chance to play in the post season. Instead they became one of the most dominate teams of the last two decades. Of course there are many factors but my take from this data indicates a very strong correlation between "great player development" and the success of Oregon State Baseball.
FWIW - TSDR recruiting class ranks were (2015-2017): 14,21, and 56. They are similar to OSU, but the results were drastically different. You can draw your own conclusions.
P.S. If you go to the Perfect Game link, check out some of the teams in the top-10 for 2015-2017. You may recognize some of them. I didn't do one, but an analysis of the top 10 for each year might indicate a strong correlation between recruiting and success, more so than great player development and success.I think Chamberlain should have made the short list for your "SOME PLAYERS IN CLASS" column for 2017... Indeed
|
|