Kevin Goldstein Prospect Q&A
Jason Parks
Is Tanner Scheppers pitching on borrowed time?Esteemed Baseball Prospectus author Kevin Goldstein, widely regarded as one of the foremost experts in the field of prospect evaluation, was generous enough to devote some of his valuable time to sit down and chat with me about the Texas Rangers' minor league system.
Please check out Goldstein's excellent Rangers prospect rankings and analysis on Baseball Prospectus here.
● ● ● ● ●
Q: What are you hearing about Jurick Profar that prompted such an aggressive ranking?
Goldstein: I started to get the sense that something special was going on with Profar when a non-Rangers scout actually called me from the ballpark during the Fall Instructional League to ask me everything I knew about this kid. It's always a good sign when a scout is excited enough to actually call you from the ballpark. You know you are onto something when that happens. Then I talked to a couple other scouts outside of the Rangers' camp and they had the exact same stuff to say.
From talking to Rangers officials, (who, I must say, will always be pretty straight up with me and will tell me when a prospect is playing well and when a prospect isn't doing what they want him to do), I get reports of them really going crazy for the guy. So between their evaluations and the fact that I can get non-Rangers, outside-the-division scouts backing up these statements, I felt comfortable putting him that high.
Q: What makes Profar the No. 5 prospect on your list, yet excludes a highly sought-after Venezuelan shortstop like Luis Sardinas from even being mentioned? Seeing how both players have yet to play a professional game, both players received bonuses in excess of $1 million, and both players have major league-quality tools, is the separation in talent really that extreme?
Goldstein: I think you can trap yourself by thinking there is a pure dollar-to-muscle equivalent, like one guy goes for $1.5 million and the next guy gets $1.55 million, yet they are practically the same player (not speaking of Profar/Sardinas). We've seen a lot of inflation over the last few years in both the Dominican [Republic] and Venezuela, so that's a big part of it. There was a lot of competition for Sardinas, but you can't just look at the bonus money a player receives; it's not always about the dollar amounts. The Rangers were really able to win out with Sardinas because of their presence in Venezuela. I mean, right now, players in the Dominican Republic grow up wanting to be Red Sox and Yankees and players coming up in Venezuela want to be Rangers. That's what you get by having such a strong presence in these places.
When it comes to the Profar signing, the Rangers have literally known him for years and years and years. I think the key to actually signing Profar was the fact that the Rangers looked at him as a shortstop, and, of course, Profar wanted to be a shortstop and wanted to be a Ranger because of their presence in Curacao. I think he could have received much more money if he decided he wanted to pitch. I think he felt comfortable with the relationship with Texas and that, plus the fact he wanted to play shortstop, ended up meaning more than the money in the end. You can't just look at the money a player receives.
Q: Why didn't more teams view Profar as a shortstop?
Goldstein: You know this. One of the things is the amount of eyeball time you give a player. I mean, you can watch a kid throw 20 pitches and come away with a really good feel for what he can do. From those 20 pitches, you can see if a player has a good delivery; you can see what the radar gun has to say; you can see him spin a breaking ball; and you can determine whether or not you like that.
If you want to evaluate a guy as a shortstop, you have to see a lot of him. It takes a lot of time to get a handle on what a position player can do; you have to see a lot of at-bats against different type of pitching; you to see him run in different situations; you have to see him field in different situations; can he go to his left; can he go to his right; can he go up the middle; can he throw from the hole; can he throw off-balance; can he rush the throw, etc. When you are talking about a guy like Profar, it's possible that teams just didn't get enough of a look at him to feel comfortable with him as a shortstop, whereas they saw enough of him on the mound to feel comfortable with him as a pitcher. I think that is a huge part of it.
Q: What do you expect from Profar in 2010?
Goldstein: It's funny, because right now even the Rangers aren't even sure what to do with him. They are tempted to start him in [Low-A] Hickory, but they aren't completely sold on the idea. I think they are still deciding whether throwing him to the wolves in the Sally League is a good idea or not. I wouldn't expect crazy things from Profar in 2010, but I think he can hold his own and I think that's the key. You hear all this stuff about his make-up and his maturity, but his game is what is really mature. Even if they short-season him, it would probably be in [short-season] Spokane rather than a complex league.
Q: What makes Martin Perez the top left-handed pitcher in the minors?
Goldstein: The combination of where he is right now (with his age), what he has done so far, and where he can be. This is not the first left-handed teenager to dominate a full-season league and then hold his own at a higher level. It's just a matter of how he is doing it. He's not just throwing fastballs by people; he is showing a mature repertoire. As you know, he has very real secondary pitches and a good idea of how to pitch. There is so much more to come out of this kid that it's scary. The Johan Santana comps are unavoidable at this point, and frankly a bit lazy, but you can understand them at least: he's left-handed, he's Venezuelan, he has a helluva change-up, and he has a plus fastball. It's so rare to find a pitcher his age who is that complete a product. He just needs to refine. He doesn't have holes in his game. To have that at such a young age is very rare.
Q: Is Tanner Scheppers a dominant reliever or a top-of-the-rotation starter, and when will he see Arlington?
Goldstein: If it were up to me, I would start him at Triple-A [Oklahoma City] and get him to the majors as fast as possible, as a reliever. Here's the thing: Tanner Scheppers is pitching on borrowed time. Tanner Scheppers is going to break. It's not a matter of if; it's a matter of when. HE IS GOING TO BREAK! Every time he throws a pitch in the minors, you are taking a risk. You are wasting your time. You have to be able to reap major league benefits from this talent as soon as possible, because at some point between now and the time he is 30 (if not sooner than that), he is going to break. I would fast-track him and get him into the bullpen as soon as possible.
Q: Are you concerned about Justin Smoak's future as a switch-hitter, given his awful splits against left-handed pitchers?
Goldstein: I don't think so. I think there are a lot of factors with that. I think the oblique thing really bothered him last season. When he got to Triple-A, I talked to some people who had watched him closely in Arizona and [Double-A] Frisco and they said his timing just wasn't the same in Oklahoma City. I'm not concerned about him at all. A comp I used coming out of the draft was a switch-hitting Justin Morneau, and I'm not going to back off that.
Q: Why is Robbie Ross a better prospect than Kasey Kiker?
Goldstein: The first thing I want to say is that Robbie Ross is 11th on this list and Kasey Kiker is 13th. It's not a big difference. For me at least, Kiker is a bullpen guy. I think Ross has a chance to start. That's the major difference to me. I think Kiker's size and command issues will prevent him from being a starter. I think Ross is a more efficient pitcher.
Q: Which player not featured on your 2010 list has the talent to climb the most spots by next season's list?
Goldstein: Good question. I'm going to name three players and they are all pitchers.
Wilfredo Boscan: The Rangers definitely have a lot of faith in Boscan and I certainly understand why.
Kennil Gomez. Gomez is a guy that other teams ask about and other teams want, and that says a lot about him.
Shawn Blackwell. Blackwell is a big kid with three pitches, and that is always a good starting point. He has a very impressive arm and he was a very nice sign for Texas. He's a guy, much like Profar, who you have to give Texas a lot of credit for identifying and signing.
Q: What are your thoughts on Edwin Escobar? Several sources, Baseball America being one, think his build will prevent him from starting. What say you?
Goldstein: I understand the concern, but I think it's too early to do that.
Q: Who is the best under-the-radar Latin American prospect in the system?
Goldstein: Luis Sardinas. Is he under the radar?
Parks: I think he has to be considered under-the-radar, given the fact that Profar is ranked No. 5 in the system and Sardinas isn't on the list.
Goldstein: Yeah, okay, Sardinas. I'm more than comfortable, based on what I've heard so far, to rank him high on the list. (Yet, you didn't KG. Take that!) The Rangers are really high on this kid and he has the classic Venezuelan shortstop profile.
Q: What is it about Michael Main that keeps him in the top 10 of most Rangers-specific prospect lists over pitchers that have been able to stay healthy and find (arguably) more professional success, e.g. Omar Poveda and Blake Beavan?
Goldstein: Well, how much success have Blake Beavan and Omar Poveda actually achieved? They reached Double-A and what else? I think you have to give Main a mulligan for '09; he got sick in a very bizarre way. Athletically, he blows every pitcher in the Rangers' system out of the water. When he's healthy, his stuff is so much better than guys like Beavan and Poveda. Poveda is just a very generic, hittable right-hander. The Rangers have a very good system, but guys like Poveda aren't going to be in the top 10. He's just a generic right-hander that every system has. Main has electric stuff and he isn't in the same class as Beavan or Poveda.
Q: What does Wilmer Font need to do next season to become a Felizian-level prospect? Does he have the stuff to remain a starter?
Goldstein: Yes; he's another pitcher that could go either way, but I think it's way too early to even think about that. As it stands right now, Wilmer Font is still a thrower. That needs to change, but it's a tough hurdle and some guys never get over it. You have to love his raw ability, though. He needs a lot more refinement. He has a long way to go.
Q: What do you think about power-hitting third baseman Tommy Mendonca? Is he Chris Davis 2.0?
Goldstein: If I thought he was Chris Davis 2.0, I would have him on the list. I think the second half Davis had last year was real and that he made legit adjustments. I understand they have similar profiles, with Mendonca having 60-grade or 65-grade power [on the 20-to-80 scouting scale]. But Davis has legit 80-grade power. Mendonca has a power-only approach, so I'm not ready to go there yet. I think he's an okay player who I thought was a slight overdraft where they took him. I think he has some potential, but he's not Davis 2.0.
Q: Braden Tullis is an interesting sleeper prospect heading into next season. What are your thoughts on him and how do you think he will develop going forward?
Goldstein: I think he surprised a lot of people with his performance in '09; he showed above-average stuff with a good idea of what to do with it. When you get a guy like Tullis, you just have to throw him in the Hickory rotation and see what he does. He's a nice sleeper and a nice find. A lot of scouts have been saying that they like this Tullis kid.
Q: How close was Tomas Telis to making your list? What does he have to do in 2010 to please you?
Goldstein: I don't think he was very close. Honestly, we discussed a lot of guys who didn't make the list so far and I would probably put them all above Telis.
Q: What do you think about Danny Gutierrez's reluctance to develop his change-up? Is he just stubborn, which plays into the make-up questions surrounding him, or is his change-up just really without hope and therefore not worth the effort? Thoughts?
Goldstein: Gutierrez has genuine make-up issues. There is no debate about that. That said, I don't think his make-up issues have anything to do with his inability to develop his change-up. His make-up issues are off-the-field and they are very, very real. There is a reason the Royals gave him away for two guys who wouldn't sniff this list. He really can pitch quite well, but his inability to behave is what has limited him.
Look, he doesn't need a great change-up to be successful as a starter. He doesn't need a Cole Hamels change-up. With his fastball and curvebabll, he could do well as a starter with just a show-me change-up. Change-ups are hard. They are a hard pitch to learn and it goes against everything you think. It's a mental pitch. It's a difficult thing to throw.
Q: Who would be your top five Rangers prospects in 2011?
Goldstein: Awesome! Well, first I'd have to say Perez because I think he will still be eligible. If we see Perez in Texas this year, I'm not going to be shocked. Is Smoak going to get enough at-bats to qualify? I'd say it's 50/50. I'm going to say probably not, so that's two. Scheppers isn't going to get 50 innings in 2010, so he is three. Profar is four, but if he's No. 2 or No. 3 I wouldn't be shocked. After that, I'll say Gutierrez -- if he holds up. If he can focus on baseball, he has the talent to be No. 5.
Q: What type of player can Miguel Velazquez become?
Goldstein: He's a guy who could really jump up the list next season. He could become a very classic prototypical corner outfielder that hits for average and for power. He just needs to make up for lost time and have a good start. He can't really afford a setback on the field or off the field. He's a guy who, unlike Gutierrez, people feel confident that the things he did off the field are behind him. I don't think the Rangers are going to waste a lot of time with him. If he's in Hickory mashing, they will probably just throw him in [High-A] Bakersfield for the second half to get him back on the developmental track. Here is a guy, on a talent level, that can take a big step forward on the baseball field.
Q: Is 2010 the year Engel Beltre either figures out how to turn his tools into baseball skills or flames out?
Goldstein: Oh, yeah. He's obviously still very young and you have to think he repeats Bakersfield this season (where he will still be quite young for the California League), but he has to start making adjustments. The most frustrating thing about Beltre's season, besides the numbers stinking, was that he would fall back into the same crap; he is very stubborn. He has a weird make-up. He knows he's talented and he knows he's good, but he needs some humility. He needs to learn how to play smart, especially at the plate. He has all the talent in the world, but he isn't going to make it unless he starts making adjustments and playing smarter. Period.
Q: Is Vin DiFazio a legit sleeper prospect, or an organizational guy who had a good offensive season against inferior competition?
Goldstein: He's a keep your eye on guy, but he certainly didn't sniff my list.
Q: Why do you hate Elvis Andrus so much? Seriously, what do you have to say to Rangers fans that think Elvis was robbed for the Rookie of the Year Award, or that he could still turn into a Hanley Ramirez-esque hitter? Let them have it.
Goldstein: Elvis Andrus didn't have a good year last year. He barely put up a .700 OPS last year. If you still think he's going to be good, that's one thing. If you think he was good last year, especially at the plate, he wasn't. Anyone who thinks Elvis is going to be a Hanley Ramirez type is in serious need of psychological counseling. Seriously? That's a joke. Look, he's going to be a plus to plus-plus defender and hit .290 to .300; that's a helluva player. That's a helluva player. He's not Hanley Ramirez or anything close. Please.
Q: Is Blake Beavan a major league pitcher? What happened to his stuff?
Goldstein: Here's what happened to Beavan: Blake Beavan was drafted as a classic Texan monster; a big nasty kid that throws hard. His delivery in high school was really ugly. It was Afghanistan violent. The Rangers had to clean it up because there was no way he wasn't going to break. They cleaned him up and they smoothed him out, but it doesn't work. That's always a risk you take. Often you can clean a guy up and he will only lose a couple of ticks, but Beavan lost 6-7 ticks and his slider is flat and single plane. Now all he can do is throw strikes and he has a decent change-up. I can see him as a long-reliever who can throw strikes, but that's about it.
Reader Comments (39)
Thanks Jason, and KG, excellent work!
The comment about Andrus, I can live with. I don't think anyone expected Elvis to be another Hanley, but I do think that the year Adnrus had, sub-par or not, was excellent for his age and level. To think that he cannot build on that and become even better than just a helluva player, though, is not very forward thinking either. Elvis may very well never become a Hanley Ramirez clone, but I am very confident that he also won't turn into a SS version of Pat Listach.
As for the aggressive schedule of Tanner Scheppers. Wouldn't rushing Tanner have an advanced effect on blowing up his arm? He might be pitching on borrowed time in the minors, but I'd rather have him fully ready for the MLB than rushing him and not knowing how he'll fare and thus, probably advancing his 'inevitable' arm injury.
Would have been interesting to have had him answer the question about Telis, though. Maybe he's a prospect us Rangers fans have too high of an opinion of?
Great Q&A, though. Thanks, Professor Parks, for roping KG in for a great session!
HypoLuxa: I don't see any reason why rushing a pitcher to the majors increases his chance of injury.
@Trip: Obviously I defer to your judgement, but isn't the potential to try too hard to catch up to ML hitters an obvious hurdle for anyone to overcome, ticking time-bomb or not. And if you try to hard, you tend to mess up your mechanics, and therefore the arm could go pop. Is that not a fair concern?
I don't think anyone's preaching over-conservatism for Schepp, but to fast track him JUST because he could blow at any moment seems a bit extreme.
HypoLuxa: For untrained pitchers, over-exertion would be an injury concern. For a trained pitcher, fatigue is the primary concern. The question is whether or not the pitcher will actually over-exert himself because he's facing Major League hitters.
Even when someone's delivery looks smooth and easy, if there's a batter in the box, I promise you he's already throwing 95-100% of his max effort.
Thanks JP, and props to Mr.Goldstein for the term "Afghanistan ugly".
Trip Somers
great having your depth of knowledge and insight on the sight. Thanks
Great stuff Jason. I love Goldstein's stuff but I disagree on Scheppers and Beavan.
How about some props for Richard Bleier? His stats compare very favorably with Beavan's, maybe even better, yet I rarely see any respect for his ability and upside. In college he was 90-92, and with his control, ko/walk/ ao ratios, I see a breakout year for him. Care to comment?
Great interview....thanks for sharing with us. Great to hear that KG is still bullish on Martin Perez and Chris Davis.
Its also good to see Kennil Gomez getting some love, I really think he will break out next year.
I am disappointed there was no mention of Moreland. :(
Trip. Do you think Scheppers is at more risk pitching in the bullpen or the rotation?
Larry: Bleier might have been 90-92 in college, but he has been in the 86-90 range as a professional. The reason you don't read much about his upside is that his projection is very limited. He was very successful last season, but I'm not sure he has the stuff to break-out against better competition. I assume you are a family member, so I don't need to mention what a great guy Bleier is or how much I hope he defies the odds to one day pitch in the major leagues. That said, pitchers with mid 80s fastballs and solid but not spectacular secondary pitches usually get exposed at the higher levels.
FTQ: Q: What does Wilmer Font need to do next season to become a Felizian level prospect? Does he have the stuff to remain a starter?
Felizian? I like it!
THanks for the interview. Several very interesting points.
I don't know who was throwing around the "Andrus will be HanRam" comps. But I don't need to compare Elvis (a super defensive SS who will hit like Ozzie Smith) to a SS who hits like a 1b but fields SS like an 1b, too.
I don't expect Elvis will ever hit like Hanley. I would rather he keep his Ozzie-like range and glove than try to bulk up and hit like HanRam.
I am convinced that the majority of the Ranger defensive improvement last year came from Elvis' SS play.
Great Q&A Jason. I bow to you, good sir. And David. And maybe Trip, too, if he ever wrote anything (kidding, of course ... or am I?)
Regarding Andrus: I think there's some confusion proliferating with respect to the "Elvis wasn't good offensively in '09" remark. In the context of the entire league (which is what KG is referring to), yeah, Andrus wasn't good offensively. In the context of the shortstop position, Andrus fared just fine ... but, again, I don't think that's what KG was referring to.
I've disagreed with his position on Andrus as far back as mid-2008, and I think he has undersold Andrus to some degree, but whatever -- I certainly won't begrudge him his position, and after stepping back and thinking about it for a while, maybe we shouldn't get so damn defensive about it. Surprised, sure, but not defensive.
BTW, are there any thoughts on KG's apparent bearishness on Telis? Interesting stance.
Thanks Jason. That was a great read. I've sensed some hesitation from people in the org on Toro Telis's development behind the plate and that may be where KG's lack of interest in the kid comes from. Because if he doesn't pan out as a catcher, there's literally nothing that can be done with him. Your thoughts?
GREAT READING, all us little "lightweights" out here really appreciate the inside stuff you guys put out. Your understanding of ability and mindset and how to separate the two are good teachers for us "readers". Keep up the good work, because there are more of us than there are of you, plus we are the ticket buyers......
Really looking forward to the coming year, win or challenge, it will be rewarding..
Spanky, yes, Elvis was a big part of the defensive improvement, but check out how much better Kinsler was in '09 than '08 in UZR. The Rangers were good up the middle last year.
Mike: I agree completely. I've seen Telis behind the plate on several occasions and his defensive abilities never tickled my fancy. That said, Telis was a converted shortstop and learning how to play a challenging position like catcher will take years of instruction and his game-calling will take years of game-experience to improve.
I've spoken to a few AZL/NWL league scouts who really liked his hit tool. They mentioned his compact swing with nice balance and good barrel awareness and how it should continue to produce high contact rates as he climbs the ranks. The real question about Telis is what kind of hitter will he become? Is he going to be a singles/doubles guy with a high BA and limited power or will the power arrive during the developmental process making him a more complete hitter? Either way, Telis is going to be limited defensively because of his size, so if he can't stick behind the plate, his bat will have to be special.
I have what may be a stupid question; is Kevin Goldstein responsible for only the Rangers, a small handful of teams, or the entire league?
No way he knows every team's minor league system as well as he knows the Rangers, right?
BTW, the term he used was "Afghanistan violent"... not "Afghanistan ugly"
Sounds like Danny Gutierrez and Beltre need some 1 on 1 time with Nolan.
I don't agree with the Sheppers assesment at all. If the Rangers knew that he would eventually break, why would they draft him as high as they did and then pay him way above slot $$? (i guess you could turn that around and ask why he lasted so long on draft day)
If it turns out that Goldstein is right, and he does have big time arm>elbow>shoulder problems, JD and co. deserve some criticism. Unless they felt that the farm is so loaded with top notch (pitching) talent that they could take a risk on Sheppers, and if he goes belly up, it's only money that was wasted.
Who in the heck is Shawn Blackwell? Goldstein mentions that he was a great signing. Was he drafted or a FA signing? Strange name to come out of Latin America, no?
Pabloesque:
*Kevin Goldstein covers all of minor league baseball for BP and has an in-depth knowledge of every team.
*How exactly would 1 on 1 time with Nolan help Beltre? I didn't realize conversations with Nolan could cure developmental hurdles, especially offensive ones.
*If Scheppers does in fact break down the line, the criticism the front office will receive will be dependent on how much production he offers them before the hypothetical injury occurs. Personally, I think he was worth the risk regardless of what happens.
*Shawn Blackwell was a 24th round pick in the 2009 draft out of Clear Creek high school in Texas.
Gutierrez has his own ideas about what he is and isn't going to do, and it doesn't help that Scott Boras is his agent. For example, if it wasn't for Boras insisting on dictating how Gutierrez would rehab his shoulder injury last year he wouldn't have missed the bulk of the season. I hope the Rangers have better luck with him than the Royals did. A good first step would be to actually play the entire season - between injuries and his off-field issues he has missed substantial time every year since he was drafted.
Guys named "Goldstein" watch baseball instead of play it.
Espn type of guys.
Tiger 15: Guys named "Tiger 15" hang out near elementary schools to watch kids play.
NAMBLA type of guys.
Oh SNAP! Mr. Parks.
:)
Guys named Cliff watch baseball on TV whille drinking beer and eating nachos (Or microwved dim-sum if you live in China)
This is just a great post. Also some great comments.
Thanks.
I remember that some people did throw out Hanley Ramirez as Andrus' upside prior to last year. I don't know how anyone could have ever come up with that from a power prospective. Does anyone else see a little Jeter? High average, see a lot of pitches with a fair share of walks and maybe some 15-20 home run power later in his career.
Somebody piss in your Cheerios Jason Parks? Are you the one everyone refers to as "Professor Parks"?
My point on Nolan was that it sounds like those guys need boot inserted in ass... and who better than your team prez, and legend, to deliver it?
Tiger 15 made a good point; guys like Goldstein... and guys like you, and your peers at BBTIA, The Newberg Report, etc... are giving us their OPINION... granted, it may be an educated opinion, but it's an opinion none the less. I think that's all Tiger was trying to say... and yet you proceeded to call him a child molesting creeper. That's kind of like using a shotgun to kill an ant, don't you think?
Joey,
Wouldn't "Professor Parks" comments, aimed at Tiger 15, be eligible for deleting? It sure sounds like he's calling him a big time weirdo perv... and the last time I checked, that's a personal attack. Isn't it? If what you say below is true, and there really isn't a double standard for the A. Stephens, T. Somers, Jason Parks, etc... of this blog, wouldn't you delete his comments? FYI... they are still there.!
Your comments:
"To those who have been commenting on their appreciation of the civil tone on this blog in comparison to, say, the DMN Rangers blog, just know that I'm hearing you. I could care less if people fling personal attacks in my direction, and I've opted for a "wait-and-see" approach on profanity, but any comments that degenerate into personal attacks against other posters will be deleted on sight. I was hoping this would never become a problem, but that time has apparently come and gone."
Pabloesque:
We obviously have a different interpretation of Tiger 15's comments. I didn't see them as innocent and I certainly didn't just assume he was alluding to KG's opinions, especially when you consider the fact that he said, "Guys named 'Goldstein' watch baseball instead of play it." It seems rather obvious to me, but whatever. Regardless, I responded to it the way I saw fit and I didn't solicit opinions on the matter after the fact.
I'm a loyalist and I'm not going to have a close friend of mine (and of this blog) slandered on this site. I took offense to Tiger 15's comment and unless he surfaces to clarify his remarks, I will not issue an apology or remove my retort. If you have a problem with that, I suggest you either get over it or find another blog to frequent.
From Kevin Goldstein via Twitter: "Wow, I hadn't had someone criticize me or my work with an anti-semetic tone in quite a while. Good times."
Clearly I wasn't the only person who found Tiger 15's comments to be out-of-bounds.
I don't know KG personally, but I greatly appreciate his time in giving us that interview. For some TOOL to criticize his name like Tiger 15 did deserves JP's response. the comeback was funny and perfect, in fact.
I agree with Professor Parks. There was nothing innocent about Tiger 15's comment. If he's going to bring that tone here, he's opening the door for personal attacks.
Now, would removing his comment have been a more civil response? Certainly, but given his history of brow-beating the authors of this blog, I feel that we should practically frame his comment as an example of the kind of character he has.
If things escalate from there, we can always take action to completely ban and remove him.
Pabloesque,
just caught that you mentioned me in your post to Joey. You've listed me in good company, but those guys are all contributors here, I'm just a reader and commenter. I'm a big fan of this site, having known Joey and Jason from the Newberg forum, and being a supporter of their work back to their MVN days.
In my view they've built a community here that typically engages in informed and rational discourse. They're younger guys but they have set the example for maturity and level headedness in most of their argument and advocacy. That said, yes, I did note JP's response to Tiger15. I figured T15 might be someone he knew, or, as has turned out to be the case, there may have been some context I wasn't getting. Regardless, he's earned the benefit of the doubt from here.
Good catch on "Afghanistan violent".
I never interpreted T15's (man, this guys getting more play than the real Tiger) "guys named Goldstein" comment as being racist. Maybe I'm naive but I think the guy was just trying to hammer home the point that KG's opinion is just that, an opinion. Maybe I'm wrong...
Now, if this guy has a history of saying stupid things (racism certainly qualifies as stupid) then I can see why you reacted the way you did. I check this site daily for my Rangers news and I've never seen him post on here... granted, I'm guilty of skimming over the comments... but his name didn't look familiar.
The funniest part of T15s commnts is the fact that, iirc, KG isn't Jewish.
Pablo: The poster currently known as 'Tiger 15' also went overboard (e.g. not entirely civil) in ripping David and Trip when they published their evaluations of Hunter/Beavan last summer, so this isn't a first-time offense. Ripping us for our opinions is one thing, but devolving into hate speech?
I perceived his comment the same way that Jason and others (including KG, whose opinions drove this entire article) did upon first seeing it, and while I can't say that I would have said/done the same thing that Jason said, I inherently trust his judgment, and if he believes that the poster behind some anti-Semitic remarks deserves to be made an example of, then I'll support that. Should T15 pull this stunt again, he'll be IP-banned from viewing the site (which can be circumvented, of course, but it's something).