re: Official Tim Tebow Workout Thread (Scout grades on page 6)

quote:

---

spending any real money on a 29 year old with 0 playing experience past high school is outrageous

---

You are assuming anyone is going to do this.

quote:

---

You're an idiot. In the link his projected future grades were slightly better.

Hitting 40
Power 55
Speed 25
Arm 55
Fielding 50

Nor did I make the case that this translated to Tebow becoming Albert Pujols. My single point I made was that scouts don't always get it right. Next time I'll try to write it in crayon for you.

---

No you are still an idiot, Pujols was 19 when they made those PROJECTIONS and yes clearly he is better than hi projections and YES the scouts were off predicting what type of player a 19 YEAR OLD KID will become but when looking at at 29 YEAR OLD FULL GROWN MAN they have a pretty good idea of what type of player he is going to be because he already is that player

quote:

---

No you are still an idiot, Pujols was 19 when they made those PROJECTIONS and yes clearly he is better than hi projections and YES the scouts were off predicting what type of player a 19 YEAR OLD KID will become but when looking at at 29 YEAR OLD FULL GROWN MAN they have a pretty good idea of what type of player he is going to be because he already is that player

---

I'm having a hard time finding the part where I said Tebow was guaranteed to make the majors and be an above average player for years to come. You're setting up your own arguments to combat. You're not even arguing to my point. You're arguing something I never said.

Also, it's an understatement to say Pujols is better than his projections.

How do they have a pretty good idea of what type of player a guy who hasn't played baseball in 10 years is going to be based on one showcase?

quote:

---

I'm having a hard time finding the part where I said Tebow was guaranteed to make the majors and be an above average player for years to come. You're setting up your own arguments to combat.

How do they have a pretty good idea of what type of player a guy who hasn't played baseball in 10 years is going to be based on one showcase?

---

I am having a hard time finding the part where I said you said that?
you think this is the first time hes played in 10 years? there is 0 chance he hasn't been training every single day and they know because that's their job they do it everyday and with someone who is 29 and fully developed they don't need to see him to many times to know what type of player he is.

quote:

---

I am having a hard time finding the part where I said you said that?
you think this is the first time hes played in 10 years? there is 0 chance he hasn't been training every single day and they know because that's their job they do it everyday and with someone who is 29 and fully developed they don't need to see him to many times to know what type of player he is.

---

Extremely disingenuous. You called me an idiot because I made a statement that scouts don't always get it right. I proved my point by posting pujols draft scouting report from when he was 19 and his future scouting grades.

Your name is appropriate considering you're in complete denial about what I've said versus what you're implying I said.

If you really think that Tebow training every single day for the last year is comparable to playing organized baseball, then you've got less cognitive ability than I thought. I've been wasting my time responding to you.

I just can't figure out why you are so sensitive to the fact that Tebow, with development, has the potential to crack a major league roster.

ETA: Just to add on to the Pujols stuff. You said pujols had 10 years to develop? The baw made his MLB debut at 21 and was well above his scout grade from day one in the majors. So once again since I have to write it in crayon, I'm not saying Tebow=Pujols. I'm saying scouts can and do get it wrong from time to time.

As someone who knows nothing ho should I interpret his performance? Sounds like he did well enough to get a tryout with a minor league team.

Why are there variations of these numbers? I understand different number for different abilities what I am asking if why are the different raters having variability for the same abilities? Is the inter rater reliability not reliable in baseball?