RSS Twitter Facebook YouTube
Expand Menu

Roehl and Judy

Talk shop about the various prospects and teams that make up the Cleveland Indians organization.

Roehl and Judy

Postby dnosco » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:51 am

Not much was mentioned but both pitched very well yesterday when Reyes got the early hook.

Judy is on the radar of prospects but Roehl gets no respect even though he continues to put up numbers.

Good to see both guys perform well on the big stage, though. I think Roehl even got some ABs vs the Cubs big htiters.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby kman » Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:10 pm

Wow some one else thinks like me. I have been waiting for some one to ask about roehl. He got off to a rough start last year, but who wouldn't after your team leaves u for dead them expects you to come in a game and throw 3 innings after not throw that much in three years. Well this year Roehl seems to have it. I just hope that the trip dosen't miss out on a guy that they didnt draft high. I hate how team seem to just give up on a guy just becauce some one else got more money up front. Just give this guy and other like him a chance. I mean heck four years ago he only lead the minors with a 1.71. And not a word that he throw last week against the white soxs or that he throw well yesterday against the cubs. Sorry to rant,just hope guys like roehl and judy get there far shake
kman
Undrafted Free Agent
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:59 pm

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby carnegie44115 » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:38 pm

I think it is a shame what has happened to Roehl, the guy hasn't been given much of a chance his whole career. Although I will say this, 2006 and 2007 weren't great but they were still decent, but 08 def was great for him, 2.54 ERA, 3.4 BB/9 and 9.6 K/9, that man deserves to be in AAA not Matt Herges or Greg Aquino.

Also to boot, why is Jack Cassel or Kirk Saarloos in the AAA rotation anyways? I understood last year and every other year when we didn't have credible talent to back us up in the rotation so we had the Matt Ginter's and the Jeff Harris's, but that job belongs to Huff, Sowers, and Laffey. Frank Herrmann or Ryan Edell could be in those two spots. I know Edell is becoming a reliever, but why I ask, his K/9 did go down, but his WHIP, BB/9 and his K/BB went down so doesn't strike me as the needs to be made a reliever kind of a guy.
carnegie44115
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:12 pm

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby TonyIBI » Sat Apr 04, 2009 4:43 am

Roehl, for whatever reason, is just not liked much by scouts.

I was at Akron last year and two scouts from different organizations flat out said he was "an organizational pitcher". I never got into exactly why they felt this way, but the lack of a plus pitch and a fastball with little movement I believe don't help. That said, it is good to see he is getting another chance this year in Akron.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby dnosco » Sat Apr 04, 2009 8:40 am

As I said, I will never understand the Indians and how they think. Heck, looking at Baseball America's 2009 Almanac and the guys who got their first ML experience these guys stand out:

Eider Torres
Jon Van Every
Argenis Reyes
Ivan Ochoa

This means, if you don't count Kobayashi, that the rest of baseball gave more chances to FORMER Indians' prospects than the Indians gave to their own! And this was in a year where we gave up on the season in June!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Indians had the fewest players of any team in the majors make their ML debuts last year (3, not counting Kobayashi), yet they used the following AAAA guys:

Valendia
Gonzalez
Tyner

Bauer
Ginter

and they used Fasano, Rincon, Donnelly who they got off the scrapheap, as well.

In all that turmoil and tryout situation stuff in the last half of last season they gave ML experience to all of THREE of their prospects: Aubrey, Scott Lewis and Rich Rundles.

That is just not the way to run an organization, IMHO.

Plus, as Tony has said, all this has a ripple effect on the rosters of every team in their minor leagues.

Finally, as I have said before, the only issues with bringing these guys up are:

a. It starts their option and FA clock
b. It creates a potential waiver loss situation if you have to DFA the guy when you send him back to the minors
c. The guy may not perform as well as the AAAA guy in an emergency callup situation

Well, if the guy is TRULY considered an organizational guy then a. and b. are irrelevant and, looking at the stats from 2008 and 2007 we know these AAAA guys just continue to stink when we call them to the majors.

Hey, when the Giants can give 16 prospects a shot, most of them from their top 30 list of the year before, and the Padres can give 14 prospects a shot and the Rangers and A's 13 and the Reds, Cardinals and Nationals 10, we should be doing more. Also, if you want to look at these teams and say they stunk, remember we had the fewet players make their debuts in all of baseball including the two WS teams, Tampa (8 making their debut) and Philly (6) we SHOULD be giving our own a chance.

Face it, when the rest of baseball gives more of your prospects...and even some of your less prominent prospects...a shot and you don't...well, to me, that is a significant issue.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby indianinkslinger » Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:32 am

dnosco wrote:As I said, I will never understand the Indians and how they think. Heck, looking at Baseball America's 2009 Almanac and the guys who got their first ML experience these guys stand out:

Eider Torres
Jon Van Every
Argenis Reyes
Ivan Ochoa

This means, if you don't count Kobayashi, that the rest of baseball gave more chances to FORMER Indians' prospects than the Indians gave to their own! And this was in a year where we gave up on the season in June!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Indians had the fewest players of any team in the majors make their ML debuts last year (3, not counting Kobayashi), yet they used the following AAAA guys:

Valendia
Gonzalez
Tyner

Bauer
Ginter

and they used Fasano, Rincon, Donnelly who they got off the scrapheap, as well.

In all that turmoil and tryout situation stuff in the last half of last season they gave ML experience to all of THREE of their prospects: Aubrey, Scott Lewis and Rich Rundles.

That is just not the way to run an organization, IMHO.

Plus, as Tony has said, all this has a ripple effect on the rosters of every team in their minor leagues.

Finally, as I have said before, the only issues with bringing these guys up are:

a. It starts their option and FA clock
b. It creates a potential waiver loss situation if you have to DFA the guy when you send him back to the minors
c. The guy may not perform as well as the AAAA guy in an emergency callup situation

Well, if the guy is TRULY considered an organizational guy then a. and b. are irrelevant and, looking at the stats from 2008 and 2007 we know these AAAA guys just continue to stink when we call them to the majors.

Hey, when the Giants can give 16 prospects a shot, most of them from their top 30 list of the year before, and the Padres can give 14 prospects a shot and the Rangers and A's 13 and the Reds, Cardinals and Nationals 10, we should be doing more. Also, if you want to look at these teams and say they stunk, remember we had the fewet players make their debuts in all of baseball including the two WS teams, Tampa (8 making their debut) and Philly (6) we SHOULD be giving our own a chance.

Face it, when the rest of baseball gives more of your prospects...and even some of your less prominent prospects...a shot and you don't...well, to me, that is a significant issue.

I don't know how anything could be more insignificant to any organization. This is endless minutiae that makes no difference at all to the success of the Cleveland Indians. This is another rant about nothing, the sole purpose of which is to raise irrelevance to the point of absurdity. WOLF!!!!! This is just the way to run an organization. Get rid of the borderline organization players and focus on the prospects who mean something. Look at the players we are supposed to get excited about!!! How an anyone believe that any player discussed in this thread means anything to the viability of the Indians organization?

What is going to happen when there is a real wolf and we have been spending our time on this nonsense?
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby artgold » Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:10 pm

I think the player that I was most puzzled about not getting much of a major league look was Joe Inglett. I had seen him play a few times in person and thought he was an adequate defensive middle infielder. I always liked his bat, a tough out.

Overall though, the Indians haven't lost too many "plus" players. It appears that Ryan Ludwick is really our big miss, however his minor league performance indicated too many strikeouts to be much of a major leaguer.
artgold
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:00 am

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby indianinkslinger » Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:35 pm

artgold wrote:I think the player that I was most puzzled about not getting much of a major league look was Joe Inglett. I had seen him play a few times in person and thought he was an adequate defensive middle infielder. I always liked his bat, a tough out.

Overall though, the Indians haven't lost too many "plus" players. It appears that Ryan Ludwick is really our big miss, however his minor league performance indicated too many strikeouts to be much of a major leaguer.

Both were certainly superior to these dogs but hardly earthshattering. The ML career of all four combined shows 1 HR, 11 RBIs, 56 Ks and 9 BBs. What a loss to the organization!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can the Indians survive if these incredible rookie performances are lost to them forever? We must perservere and put Roehl on the Indians to get our rookie appearance stats up. Maybe we can get these four back along with Roehl and call the fans the dog pound! What a novel idea!
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby artgold » Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:21 pm

Well, I view baseball as a bit of a jigsaw puzzle, and believe that synergism exist in a clubhouse.

At that time, Belliard was at 2nd, and unlike many folks I kind of liked Ronnie. However, I didn't care for Ramon Vazquez, and thought that Inglett would be a better option. I also thought his intense approach would be a good fit for the Indians, which was a little bit of a laid back team at that time.

ML career for Ludwick and Inglett is a bit better than what you show, though. So we do "suffer" some losses. Inglett hit .297 and played almost every defensive postion for Toronto, and Ludwick was an all star, just about the best overall batter in the entire NL (OPS+ of 150) last season.

Overall though, I think the Indians have done a decent job of managing their assets. However, I also have found some of their moves a bit confusing.


http://www.baseball-reference.com/playe ... jo01.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/playe ... ry01.shtml
artgold
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:00 am

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby indianinkslinger » Sun Apr 05, 2009 6:05 pm

artgold wrote:Well, I view baseball as a bit of a jigsaw puzzle, and believe that synergism exist in a clubhouse.

At that time, Belliard was at 2nd, and unlike many folks I kind of liked Ronnie. However, I didn't care for Ramon Vazquez, and thought that Inglett would be a better option. I also thought his intense approach would be a good fit for the Indians, which was a little bit of a laid back team at that time.

ML career for Ludwick and Inglett is a bit better than what you show, though. So we do "suffer" some losses. Inglett hit .297 and played almost every defensive postion for Toronto, and Ludwick was an all star, just about the best overall batter in the entire NL (OPS+ of 150) last season.

Overall though, I think the Indians have done a decent job of managing their assets. However, I also have found some of their moves a bit confusing.


http://www.baseball-reference.com/playe ... jo01.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/playe ... ry01.shtml

Stayed a year too long with Belly. He got lazy and more out of shape. Couldn't revise history and say I thought Phillips definitely should have replaced him but I had doubts. Never thought Vasquez was a good option. Lesser of two evils type of thing. Less enamored with Inglett's skills than you. Loved how he brought it everyday but defensive skills were real marginal at every position, even 2B. Don't think I didn't notice that the only offensive stat you included was BA. Other offensive stats are underwhelming to say the least.

A lot of teams could be criticised for giving up on Ludwick. At least 4 others that he signed for. He was healthy and right now is a one year wonder and hoping to stay healthy and do it again. You really think it was an Indian mistake or good fortune for the Cards?
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby artgold » Sun Apr 05, 2009 6:53 pm

I only mentioned BA for Inglett because I didn't want to belabor the point, however I viewed him as a tough out who would likely put up a .350+ OBP in the majors with some doubles and triples pop in his bat. Defensively he was limited in range, but seemed to have a decent set of hands and good instincts. I thought he'd be a plus utility player.

Ludwick didn't show sufficient contact, and I stated that in my earlier posting.

Although I think the Indians generally do a decent job of identifying and moving their prospects, I also think they have some flaws in their approach. For example, this season they are starting with Jack Cassel in the AAA rotation, though he has clearly demonstrated that he won't be a major league pitcher. However Ryan Edell, who will turn 26 this July, had a decent year last season at Akron. He finished second in the entire league (qualifiers) in WHIP, and 14th in ERA. Is he a prospect, probably not. But didn't his performance at least earn him a couple of month look at Columbus this season? Apparently not, they stick him back in Akron and now "demote" him to the bullpen. Why not at least let him go to the Columbus bullpen?
artgold
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:00 am

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby indianinkslinger » Sun Apr 05, 2009 8:55 pm

artgold wrote:I only mentioned BA for Inglett because I didn't want to belabor the point, however I viewed him as a tough out who would likely put up a .350+ OBP in the majors with some doubles and triples pop in his bat. Defensively he was limited in range, but seemed to have a decent set of hands and good instincts. I thought he'd be a plus utility player.

Ludwick didn't show sufficient contact, and I stated that in my earlier posting.

Although I think the Indians generally do a decent job of identifying and moving their prospects, I also think they have some flaws in their approach. For example, this season they are starting with Jack Cassel in the AAA rotation, though he has clearly demonstrated that he won't be a major league pitcher. However Ryan Edell, who will turn 26 this July, had a decent year last season at Akron. He finished second in the entire league (qualifiers) in WHIP, and 14th in ERA. Is he a prospect, probably not. But didn't his performance at least earn him a couple of month look at Columbus this season? Apparently not, they stick him back in Akron and now "demote" him to the bullpen. Why not at least let him go to the Columbus bullpen?

I don't disagree with you, Art. But why bring him up to Columbus as a LH starter even if he has earned a shot? It is a huge stretch to imagine how much would go wrong for him to get an ML starter slot. The LHers ahead of him are not only better, they are younger for the most part. Let him learn his craft as a reliever in AA and move him up when he is ready. Shouldn't be long IMO if the conversion goes well. It's a little harder for me to accept the same logic with Herrmann who I view as a pitching prospect with a better ceiling than Edell. I thought he had legitmate, although borderline, potential as a #5. Not sure the Indians think the same! Too many missed chances lead to the conclusion he is organizational in their view. Cassell is filler, Art. He may not survive April. Just some random thoughts on the subject. :s_drinks
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby artgold » Sun Apr 05, 2009 10:08 pm

I agree about Herrmann, and would toss him in with Edell. I view baseball as a "merit" process, where your performance determines your placement. In not rewarding performance, not only do I think you discourage those who were comparatively successful, you also send a bit of a mixed message out to the remaining prospects too.

If they viewed Edell as a lefty reliever, why not give him the chance to "fail" in AAA, instead of retreading back to AA? He already was a success at that level. If they viewed him as a reliever all along, and were only trying to give him some extra innings, why didn't they convert him during last season?

If you take a look at Edell's splits, not only was he one of the better starting pitchers in the Eastern League, he also lowered his WHIP and K rate from the prior year, when he pitched at very pitching friendly Kinston. In addition, his July and August performances were outstanding, getting a remarkable 0.88 WHIP rate over the last two full months of the season.

I just strongly believe in rewarding performance, and at the very minimum I think he earned a pitching slot at AAA to start this season (as did Herrmann). I don't see the need for a Cassel placeholder. I think he is blocking "merit", and this has a cascading effect at each level.
artgold
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:00 am

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby Hermie13 » Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:10 am

I don't think I'd ever include Ludwick in our 'mistake' category......he was with 2 organizations before us, one of which at the ML level (Texas and Oakland)....and was even with Detroit after us before going to St. Louis (yet didn't even get a ML at-bat despite hitting 28 HRs in AAA). I mean, would it have been nice having him still? Absolutely. But we did give him shots over 3 different seasons. He just couldn't stay healthy long enough to do anything and he admits as much himself. You can't fault the Tribe here for giving up on Ludwick. 3 seasons is long enough, and they needed to move on.


I'm also not really disappointed with the 4 'prospects' that were mentioned who got their ML debut's and were former Indians. Van Every was 28 last year and barely played. Ochoa in his years with the Tribe NEVER had an OPS over .670. That is just down right terrible. Reyes couldn't hit either....had nice speed though. He was also designated for assignment by the Mets already......and Torres was pretty bad his second full year at AA.

So we lost 3 guys who 'may' on their best days be decent utility guys and a 5th OFer on his best day....


It was a bit sad to see only 3 'prospects' make their ML debut's last year.....but who really deserved one other than those guys? Huff probably did but the extra innings he had shot that idea down. Sipp was coming back from major arm issues. Torregas had to be demoted to AA cause he couldn't hit....which is why we got Fasano. Gimenez was still learning the catcher position, plus was struggling at AAA at the time.

Only 1 guy at AAA last year had an OPS over .800 with 100 or more at-bats.....and that was Todd Linden. He has been in the ML's and was released by the light hitting A's last year before being pickup up by us....

There really wasn't a pitcher that stood out at AAA either. Hermann had a great showing...but already threw over 150 innings and wasn't 'that' great at AA before. He needs more time.


The thing last year was how incredibly poor our farm system was at the upper levels. There just wasn't any talent worth bringing up....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Roehl and Judy

Postby indianinkslinger » Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:13 am

[quote="Hermie13"]I don't think I'd ever include Ludwick in our 'mistake' category......he was with 2 organizations before us, one of which at the ML level (Texas and Oakland)....and was even with Detroit after us before going to St. Louis (yet didn't even get a ML at-bat despite hitting 28 HRs in AAA). I mean, would it have been nice having him still? Absolutely. But we did give him shots over 3 different seasons. He just couldn't stay healthy long enough to do anything and he admits as much himself. You can't fault the Tribe here for giving up on Ludwick. 3 seasons is long enough, and they needed to move on.


I'm also not really disappointed with the 4 'prospects' that were mentioned who got their ML debut's and were former Indians. Van Every was 28 last year and barely played. Ochoa in his years with the Tribe NEVER had an OPS over .670. That is just down right terrible. Reyes couldn't hit either....had nice speed though. He was also designated for assignment by the Mets already......and Torres was pretty bad his second full year at AA.

So we lost 3 guys who 'may' on their best days be decent utility guys and a 5th OFer on his best day....


It was a bit sad to see only 3 'prospects' make their ML debut's last year.....but who really deserved one other than those guys? Huff probably did but the extra innings he had shot that idea down. Sipp was coming back from major arm issues. Torregas had to be demoted to AA cause he couldn't hit....which is why we got Fasano. Gimenez was still learning the catcher position, plus was struggling at AAA at the time.

Only 1 guy at AAA last year had an OPS over .800 with 100 or more at-bats.....and that was Todd Linden. He has been in the ML's and was released by the light hitting A's last year before being pickup up by us....

There really wasn't a pitcher that stood out at AAA either. Hermann had a great showing...but already threw over 150 innings and wasn't 'that' great at AA before. He needs more time.


The thing last year was how incredibly poor our farm system was at the upper levels. There just wasn't any talent worth bringing up....[/quote]
Not trying to upset something we agree upon but I am not sure we should be concerned that we did not force feed more prospects into the parent. The circumstances might have been an equal or greater contributor than the lack of talent which was certainly a factor. First, I think they managed the 40 man as soon as July. In retrospect, they did a hell of a job. Second, they wanted to look at new toys. Some of the acquired players had ML experience, notably Jackson and Reyes, and they needed to assess their potential. Third, last looks at Marte and Aubrey. Fourth, players on the DL had to take spaces on the 25. Foremost is Choo but others caused roster "crowding" as well. Combine all this with the Olympic participation of some better prospects and you have an unusual set of circumstances. :s_drinks
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm


Return to Indians Prospect Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests