The hype of Hanley Ramirez

by blee1134 on Nov 27, 2005 3:34 PM EST Comment 9 comments

I posted this on my blog and thought it was worth posting here.

Ever hear of Gregorio Petit? That's ok, he's an A's prospect and most A's fans have never heard of him.

He's a SS about exactly a year younger than Hanley and he's in Low A. Now, I understand that is a big difference between Low A and AA, so we wont look just at their numbers this season, we'll go back and look at Hanley at the same level.

Hanley in Low A 2003 at 19: 422 AB's, 73 K's, 35 XBH'S (8 hr's), .275/.327/.403

Gregorio Petit in Low A at 20: 287 AB's, 44 k's, 23 XBH'S (9 hr's), .289/.349/.446

Yes, Hanley was 1 year younger, but he was also a little more experienced entering that season than Petit was entering 2005. It should also be noted that Petit is considered one of the better defenders at shortstop in all of the minors.

After 2003, BaseballAmerica had Hanley as the #19 prospect in all of baseball. Now after 2005, they might not even have Petit in the top 20 of just the A's system.

Why, because Hanley has "tools"? How about a little production?

Please keep in mind that I'm saying we should hear more of Petit, just that we should hear less of Ramirez and he should hardly be the key to a deal for a good starter.

0 recs | Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I'm not a huge Hanley booster, but...

With those tools and decent numbers at AA for a 21-year-old, he's still got great promise. The difference between that and a prospect who is a year older, two levels lower, and without the physical promise, is HUGE.

As a Sox fan, I'm still rooting for him, even on the Marlins. So long as Beckett/Lowell/Mota perform well too.

by abbreviatedman on Nov 27, 2005 3:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Red sox abused the Marlins in this deal

How anyone ranks Hanley high enough to get that type of talent Mota and Beckett is beyond me.

by novaoakland on Nov 27, 2005 4:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

ON side note

I think Marlins abused the Mets as Petit is a stud.

by novaoakland on Nov 27, 2005 4:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hanley

blee 1134,

Couldn't agree more. I did a comparison (in a thread a couple weeks ago) of Hanley to Ranger shortstop prospect Joaquin Arias, who also played the entire year at AA, though he's nearly a year younger than Ramirez. They put up nearly identical numbers.

Now Arias is considered a Top 100 prospect, but he's generally thought of in the 75-100 range, not in the 10-20 range, as Ramirez is. Arias is also very toolsy and athletic. So why the disparity in how these two players are rated by many national analysts?

by RCCook on Nov 27, 2005 4:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Arias

Context, context, context...
Arias and Hanley did have similar numbers but Arias played in a better hitter's league and Hanley simply has better 'tools'.
Scouts revere tools for a reason, because those evaluation methods have led them very well in the past and continue to do so.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Nov 27, 2005 5:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Arias vs Hanley

Yes, the Eastern League is tougher on hitters than the Texas League, but I would think any league difference would be nearly evened out by Arias' age-relative-to-league advantage.

Frisco also happens to be one of the better pitchers' parks in the Texas League; it's not Portland, but it's not Midland either.

I haven't seen Ramirez play personally, so I can't comment on his toolsiness, but Arias is a solid defender, has good speed and an above-average arm.

by RCCook on Nov 27, 2005 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Eastern League

I think most people I've seen comment grossly underestimate how much of a pitcher's league the Eastern League was last year. If you simply look at Team ERA's from top to bottom, both the lowest and the highest are almost 1 full run/game less than any other league and almost 2 runs/game than the big hitters leagues like the Cal League and the PCL. There was only one player, an older prospect I believe, who had an OBP of >.400 whereas most leagues had about 10 or so. I believe there were less than 10 players in the league with BA's over .300.

Take league context, age factors and tools, Hanley Ramirez is still a darn good prospect. I saw him play on TV in the futures game and I would be ecstatic if he was the Giants SS of the future.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 27, 2005 5:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

as far as prospects go...

I think that scouts generally put emphasis on tools players, because they have a better chance to stick in the league in the long term. Prospects who aren't overly athletic can succeed by compensating with better skills/body control/experience, but as they age, their physical ceilings tend to be exposed. Things like bat speed, defensive range, and base running are examples of how a tools player would have a natural advantage over more experienced but less athletic players. That being said, tools players are generally one serious injury away from losing their value. Nomar Garciaparra, for example, was an exceptional shortstop, and always a threat to steal. But he suffered an ankle and later, groin injury, suddenly dropping him to a below average defensive player (lack of range for his position) and went from a base stealing threat to a station-to-station runner.

by forage on Nov 27, 2005 5:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs