Los Angeles Angels Top 20 Prospects for 2008

by John Sickels on Dec 1, 2007 4:53 PM EST in News Comment 67 comments

Los Angeles Angels Top 20 Prospects for 2008.

Brandon Wood, 3B, Grade B+
Nick Adenhart, RHP, Grade B+
Hang Conger, C, Grade B+
Jordan Walden, RHP, Grade B (high praise for a rookie ball pitcher)
Sean O'Sullivan, RHP, Grade B
Sean Rodriguez, SS, Grade B (I am sticking to my guns, I like him)
Chris Pettit, OF, Grade B-
Trevor Bell, RHP, Grade C+
Stephen Marek, RHP, Grade C+
Jeremy Haynes, RHP, Grade C+
Hainley Statia, SS, Grade C+
Peter Bourjos, OF, Grade C+
David Herndon, RHP, Grade C+
Terry Evans, OF, Grade C+
Matthew Sweeney, 3B, Grade C+
Miguel Gonzalez, RHP, Grade C+
Felipe Arredondo, RHP, Grade C+
Robert Fish, LHP, Grade C+
Anthony Ortega, RHP, Grade C
Jose Arredondo, RHP, Grade C

Although this system doesn't look much better than the Astros on the surface, there are a lot of guys at the lower levels who got Grade Cs but who look like very promising guys to me, we just need to see more from them at higher levels. This includes guys like Michael Anton, Douglas Brandt, Barret Browning, Clay Fuller, Andrew Romine, and Trevor Reckling, all of them Grade C but with intriguing potential.

Of course, full statistics and reports on over 1,000 other players will be in the 2008 Baseball Prospect Book, now available for pre-order. Ships the first Monday in February!

0 recs | Comment 67 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Walden

I agree on your decision to give Jordan Walden a B. He pitched amazing last season in rookie ball...

by Abbath on Dec 1, 2007 5:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Wow

I didn't know Wood's high K rates caused him to convert into a pitcher lol

Hey fish, leave those kids alone!

by The Congo Hammer on Dec 1, 2007 5:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

3B

Brandon Wood is a 3B, not an RHP.

The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. It reminds us of all that once was good, and that could be again.

by Savoy on Dec 1, 2007 5:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

typo

typo on wood. thanks.

by John Sickels on Dec 1, 2007 6:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Madrigal

Could we get a grade for Madrigal...you alluded to him being mentioned with LAA in the Texas Comments.

by NMUWildcat027 on Dec 1, 2007 6:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

As a Ranger fan, I want to know more about what they just stole from the sleeping Angels...

by t ball on Dec 2, 2007 1:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ARL

Player A at A ball (this year): WHIP=1.11, K/9=7.11

Player X at A ball (last year): WHIP=1.18, K/9=7.05

Player X was two years, seven months younger than player A when each played at A ball, Player X gets a "B-" (last year), Player A gets a "B" (this year). Similar stats, much better ARL for X, but a worse grade.

Player C at AA ball (this year): WHIP=1.46, K/9=6.82
Player X at A+ ball (this year): WHIP= 1.17, K/9=6.62

Player X is two years, eight months younger than Player C, both get "B+'s." Similar stats, much better ARL for X, both get the same grade.

How does age relative to league work in the grading? (A is Sean O'Sullivan, X is Delios Guerra, C is Nick Adenhart). I assume the problem is Guerra, like F. Martinez, is especially difficult to grade because of the ARL issue.

by dopey on Dec 1, 2007 6:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'm guessing...

So, you want us to ignore GB-rate, control, pure stuff, injury history, and pretty much every other stat?

I'm not trying to an a*hole, but then again, maybe I am? You can't compress everything for a player into K/9 and WHIP.

by omambiyick on Dec 3, 2007 1:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No need to guess

Your point is well taken. But . . . K/9 does a pretty good job measuring "pure stuff" and WHIP does a pretty good job on control (though bb/9 might be better, WHIP picks up some "stuff" in it too, so it is somewhat a matter of taste).

The point in using two stats that are serviceable proxies for "stuff" and "control" is to avoid having to list every single stat. I imagine that is why people simplify to OPS when discussing hitters.

Anyway, here are some other stats

GB/AO: A--1.34 X(last year)--1.27
X(this year)--1.51 C--1.45
BB/9: A--2.27 X(last year)--4.08
X(this year)--2.51(this year) C--3.82
HR/9: A--.34 X(last year)--0.33
X(this year)--1.23 C--.41

The big difference is in HR/9, but otherwise the stats are similar. If keeping the ball in the park despite similar GB/AO and WHIP ratios is a repeatable skill, then maybe this makes a difference. I have no opinion in that regard (ok, I do have an opinion--it is probably not repeatable). I still think the similarity between the three is an interesting way to get at whether ARL is over or undervalued (I suspect the latter at this point).

Guerra obviously has way more projectibility than the other two (listed at 6-5, 200), Adenhart has the worst injury history.

I'm not sure what an a*hole is so I can't comment.

by dopey on Dec 3, 2007 7:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Adenhart

Am I the only guy who thinks Adenhart is being way overrated, and not just by John?

I get that he's a bit young for his level, but a K/9<7? BB/9 almost 4? K/9 dropping steadily at each level? At this rate, it'll be down to around 4 by the time he gets to the majors!

It's not like we have a small sample size of stats to evaluate him by. Neither the stats from last year nor the trends over the last 3 years are at all encouraging. Those are the numbers of somebody with not so great stuff and not so great command of said stuff.

There's that nagging history of TJ to factor in too.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 1, 2007 7:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

+1

I think Adenhart is way overhyped. Nice pitcher, but at best, a 2, IMO, and looks more like a 3 to me. Certainly has the upside, and is still young enough that maybe I can buy an uptick in ability ... but some people talk about him as if he's an elite prospect. I see him more as a B grade type personally.

by toonsterwu on Dec 1, 2007 8:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

I'll take Walden over Adenhart any day. Waldis Joaquin as well for that matter.

I heard Tim Lincecum will win 1 Cy Young & 11 Tim Lincecums. Question is, how many Cole Hamels will he win?

by the pinstripes on Dec 2, 2007 1:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

(sung as a song)

you guys
who keep micro-analyzing adenhart's numbers
cannot see
the forest
because you are in
the tundra

by wily mo on Dec 2, 2007 2:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Microanalyzing?

Not sure if you are being facetious here, but also not sure what is microanalyzing about such basic stats as ERA, BB/9, K/9.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 2:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Count me as an Adenhart fan...

I've said this in a previous post regarding Adenhart, but to me, his most impressive stat is the ability to keep the ball on the ground and therefore, his extremely low HR rate. When you combine that, with an above average minor league K rate (7.98), I think you'd be foolish to overlook a guy who at age 21 will be starting the year in AAA and has plus stuff by most accounts.

These HR numbers are tough to ignore:

2005 AGE 18 RK LG 50IP 0HR
2006 AGE 19 MW LG 106IP 2HR (A Ball)
CA LG 52IP 1HR (A+ Ball)
2007 AGE 20 TX LG 153IP 7HR (AA Ball)

TOTALS 361IP 10HR

by ftheyankees on Dec 2, 2007 6:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Derek Lowe?

So his ceiling is Derek Lowe with more walks? Those kinds of pitchers make good 3's and 4's. Not so good 1's and 2's.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 9:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not a bad comparison...

But I still see more upside in Adenhart, especially when you consider their raw stuff and analysis from scouts (Adenhart was the best high school arm in the country just three years ago). Actually, through their age 20 seasons, the comparison isn't that close. Adenhart has been far superior to Lowe.

Also, Dlowe has been starting for 5 seasons, he's been below average in one of them (2004), average in one of them (2003), and a front of the rotation starter in the other three. Calling him a 3 or 4 is slightly misleading.

by ftheyankees on Dec 2, 2007 1:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Lowe

I wasn't calling Lowe a 3-4, but I don't think he's much more than a good #3. I was saying Derek Lowe with more walks is a #3, 4 which is what Adenhart looks like to me.

Perhaps you could post a link for Adenhart ever being the best arm in the country? I don't remember ever reading that.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 1:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Class of 2004

I'll assume you haven't followed the Adenhart story very closely if you don't recall him being the #1 high school arm in the country.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/leagues/NCAA/031120recruiting100.html

Kind of a fun list to look through. Lots of solid names towards the middle and bottom of the list.

by ftheyankees on Dec 2, 2007 2:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thank You

That must be before his TJ surgery. I started following him just before the draft when another Giants fan speculated that Brian Sabean might draft him because he'd drafted several other pitchers who'd had TJ.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 3:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You are correct

He had TJ either during his SR year of HS or in the summer following. The Angels took the gamble with a later round pick (14th) and signed him away from college (North Carolina I believe). A nice gamble by the Angels.

by ftheyankees on Dec 2, 2007 3:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Response

Adenhart blew his elbow out about a week and a half before the draft, IIRC.

by mrkupe on Dec 2, 2007 7:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well....

That's a fun list. Here's my favorite:

56. Billy Butler, rhp, Wolfson HS, Jacksonville, Florida

by Steve-o on Dec 2, 2007 11:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

lol

by doublestix on Dec 3, 2007 12:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

derek lowe is the mid grade

carlos silva is the downside.
roy halladay is the upside.

ORGANIZATIONAL DEPTH REPORTS (link fixed)
variables don't; constants aren't

by overlord on Dec 2, 2007 2:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Mid Grade

That's probably fair. I was thinking of Silva for a comp, then though it might be too snarky. What percentage of pitching prospects with similar stuff make to to the Halliday/Webb level?

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 3:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't see it

When has Adenhart shown GB tendencies?

2006 - A - 53% GB rate - 106 IP
2006 - A+- 57% GB rate - 52.1 IP
2007 - AA- 51% GB rate - 153 IP

Webb
2006 - 68% GB
2007 - 64% GB

Halladay
2006 - 60%
2007 - 55%

I don't see him being a groundball pitcher like Webb/Halladay/Hudson/Lowe. Maybe somewhere in the 46-48% GB rate, which seems about average to me.

by omambiyick on Dec 3, 2007 1:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

I think Conger is overrated, too. No way is he a B+.

by ISC on Dec 2, 2007 9:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Conger

I think you could make a stronger case for Conger being a B+ than Adenhart, but I agree it's iffy. Care to share with us why you don't think he's a B+?

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 10:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Respone

His stuff is actually fantastic. Excellent fastball, nice change, potential knockout curve. Nobody seems to doubt that.

He needs to learn to work the zone better, but with his stuff, it's purely a mental rather than physical obstacle.

I see an awful lot of Brandon Webb in this one. If Adenhart works out, that's the type of pitcher he can become: an extreme groundball pitcher with multiple plus secondary pitches.

The injury thing is still something of a concern. I do have questions as to how he's going to hold up, but then again he's managed to throw 150 innings in each of the last two years.

by mrkupe on Dec 2, 2007 11:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Brandon Webb?

You're comparing a kid with a GO/AO=1.45 to Brandon Webb? Isn't Webb's close to 3?

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Response

Nick Adenhart, 2007:
http://www.minorleaguesplits.com/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?pl=444440&tm=ArkTEX&bp=p
(G/F ratio: 1.84, G percentage = 64.8, BABIP .331)

Brandon Webb, 2006
GB percentage: 67.8, BABIP .293 (source: Baseball Prospectus 2007)

Doesn't look like they're all that different to me as far as keeping the ball on the ground. YMMV.

by mrkupe on Dec 2, 2007 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

We'll See

Brandon Webb is a very unusual pitcher. Pretty tough to project anyuone to be THAT.

For now, it looks like they must be hitting the GB's harder off Adenhart than they are off Webb.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Unusual?

What's so unusual about Webb? He's a severe ground ball pitcher who keeps the ball in the ballpark better than anyone else in the league, and, happens to be pitching in the weaker of the two leagues.

by ftheyankees on Dec 2, 2007 1:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Better Than Anyone Else?

I think you just ponted out what's unusual about Webb yourself.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 1:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

definition of unusual

Fair enough, but I guess we differ on the definition of the word unusual. Calling someone unusual because they throw GB's, and by extension give up few home runs, seems a bit odd. I'm sure we can both agree that GB pitchers like Webb, Halladay, Wang, Carmona, Lowe, etc. will always be near the top of the HR/9 leaderboard.

by ftheyankees on Dec 2, 2007 2:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Better

Webb just does it better and more consistently than anyone else.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 3:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

hey, mrkupe...

Your data is a little faulty.

To get Adenhart's GB, you did GB/(GB+FB)

For, Webb's GB by BP they did GB/(all balls hit into play)

So, in 2006, using your system, Brandon Webb had...

463 GB - 114 FB

So, his GB/(GB+FB) = 80.2%

If you use all the stats from minorleaguesplits for Adenhart, his GB (using BP's formula) is..

238 GB - 474 total BIP

his GB/BIP is 50.2%.

by omambiyick on Dec 3, 2007 1:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Response

My bad there. I used two different statistics and should've caught myself. I was scurrying about trying to get ready to go out today and messed up.

BP has Adenhart's GB percentage from 2006 at 52.5 in the Midwest League and 57.8 in the Cal League. Not quite as glowing as I mistakenly made it out to be, but still well above-average. Also note the extremely low number of HR he gives up . . .basically, he does a pretty dang good job of keeping the ball on the ground, even if I did a poor job of showing it.

As DrB noted, Webb is a special case and I'd be skeptical of projecting Adenhart (or too many pitchers for that matter) to be that sort of perennial Cy Young-level performer; he's the very best there is at what he does. The profiles are remarkably similar, though: heavy fastball with good velocity, nice assortment of secondary pitches.

Of course, Webb also took a while to develop, and wasn't nearly the pitcher in the minors that he's become in the majors. Am I saying that we should take Adenhart to be the same way? Not in the least. But I do think it's a fine example of where patience with a good arm paid off, and compels us to be a little patient here . . .Adenhart certainly has the goods to be excellent once he puts everything together.

by mrkupe on Dec 3, 2007 1:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Lightening

Couldn't you say the same thing about a whole bunch of pitching prospects? What really separates Adenhart from at least 100 out there with great arms and mediocre results? Just because lightning struck Brandon Webb doesn't mean it's going to happen to every pitching prospect who has a 90's FB and a GO/AO>1.

Brandon Webb probably wasn't considered much more than a C prospect, and rightfully so. You bet against a guy like Brandon Webb and you'll be right 99 times out of 100.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 3, 2007 6:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Side Question on Adenhart

I'm never been too big on Ervin Santana, but seeing the Heyman report on the Angels and Miguel Cabrera caught my eye. Namely, the report seems to put on Adenhart and Santana on the same level. I may think that Adenhart is a tad overrated, but I like him better than Santana. Is that more a knock on Adenhart, or a plus on Santana?

by toonsterwu on Dec 2, 2007 6:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

their stuff

has been considered similar, which means both have very good stuff, the knock on Ervin is his pitchability and his head. Adenhart has these things but Ervin seems often disinterested on the hill and lacks focus.

by SoCalSoxFan on Dec 4, 2007 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

sweeney

almost posted a .200 OPS as a 19 year old in A ball. Dude is a SLEEPER

by krgrecw on Dec 1, 2007 8:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

200 OPS

i guess thats good for a 19 year old but I think lots of people could have done that as a 14 year old

by ab03 on Dec 1, 2007 8:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

now

posting almost an 800 OPS (782) is pretty good

by ab03 on Dec 1, 2007 8:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

damn i meant an ISO of 200

by krgrecw on Dec 1, 2007 11:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Expect...

Trevor Bell to break out. This guys been one my favorite arms since he was drafted. Similar stuff to Ben Sheets when he was drafted, anyone have a recent scouting report?

by SenorGato88 on Dec 1, 2007 8:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Go Brian?

WTF?

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 9:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Trends

But, the overall talent at the major leaugue level has been steadily deteriorating for at least 5 years in spite of mortgaging the farm system to "win now."

To be fair, Brian has continued to show he can find and develop pitching even without top draft choices and the last two drafts are very encouraging for the future, but the MLB club and high minors are a mess as far as position players go.

by DrBGiantsfan on Dec 2, 2007 11:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I still like Wood at #1

Many people have soured on him, but I still believe he can be a real slugger like Troy Glaus, and there's still a good chance that he will play at shortstop, which would at the very least raise his fantasy value a good amount.

Hey fish, leave those kids alone!

by The Congo Hammer on Dec 2, 2007 3:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Arredondo - why so low?

He was deadly in AA and was sent down to A for disciplinary reasons and sulked. And had poor numbers there.

He has the talent and performed at AA. I would think he would be around the midpoint of this list and even higher if there was no attitude concerns.

BTW - did you hear anything on what the actual situation was that had him sent down?

by pedrophile on Dec 2, 2007 4:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

RE: Jose Arredondo

Jose Arredondo saw himself as a closer and didn't like it when he was inserted into a game situation on June 6 where he couldn't get a save (the Travs were ahead in the 9th 5-0). He pitched poorly and, when his manager came out to yank him, he stormed off the mound without turning over the ball to the manager. After the game, veteran outfielder Curtis Pride approached him and Arredondo took a swing at him.

Showing up his manager on the field was bad enough, but trying to punch a deaf man widely loved and respected by everyone in the organization was too much to ignore.

I happened to be in Arkansas the day after it happened. Arredondo came to the park the next day and watched the game from behind home plate, but disappeared after that. The front office couldn't make any public announcement as it was up to the Angels to do that. Arredondo was suspended for a week and then demoted to Rancho, where he pitched poorly for the second half.

I had some information on FutureAngels.com about it when it happened but couldn't go into depth out of respect for the Travelers.

by FutureAngels on Dec 2, 2007 4:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nick Green

I'm surprised that not only didn't Nick Green make your top 20, but didn't even deserve a mention in the gaggle of "others receiving votes." I hope he will show up in the book as in the top 40. Other than HRs surrendered, his numbers were comparable to Adenhart's at the same level.

by favrerocks on Dec 2, 2007 10:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

green

I like Nick Green and he is in the book.

by John Sickels on Dec 3, 2007 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the response, John

I worry about the MPH separation between Green's FB and changeup, as that could be problematic in the majors, but somehow he is getting the job done so far. Now if he could only hold on to the ball a split-second more before release, his HR numbers would go down and he'd keep the ball lower in the zone, which is a must for him to progress to the majors.

by favrerocks on Dec 3, 2007 4:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No One Has Really Talked About Him

But I love Jordan Walden. Watch for him to be a top prospect next year.

by Dfarth on Dec 2, 2007 10:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Madrigal??

love Madrigal and did not know that the Rangers had signed him. He'll be on there somewhere. Will write his comment when I get to the Angels.

by John Sickels on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 12:25:07 PM CDT

You want to give us a hint on him? Im already getting the book, but atleast a little info if you please

Batting practice tomorrow you be there....I have Pop, everyday

by laxtonto on Dec 2, 2007 10:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Angels Fouled Up Madrigal's Paperwork

The Angels lost Warner Madrigal because the new GM Tony Reagins fouled up Warner's paperwork. Here's a link if you want to learn more:

http://futureangels.mlblogs.com/futureangels/2007/11/whither_warner_.html

It basically boiled down to Warner's six-year free agency came up and Reagins let it pass because he thought he had more time to negotiate. When the error was discovered, the Angels tried to put him on the 40-man roster hoping no one would notice, but when the Rangers inquired MLB voided the transaction. Texas then signed Warner, probably for more money, and put him on their 40-man roster.

by FutureAngels on Dec 2, 2007 11:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think he's just asking again

what John's comments on Madrigal are. I'm curious as well.

by Brett Perryman on Dec 2, 2007 11:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

C+

Madrigal gets a C+. I like his arm strength and fresh arm....but we need to see how his command holds up at higher levels. Good pickup by the Rangers.

by John Sickels on Dec 3, 2007 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

#3

Thanks John

Batting practice tomorrow you be there....I have Pop, everyday

by laxtonto on Dec 3, 2007 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Young-Il Jung

Now I know he did terrible in limited action this year, however for a player so highly thought his star has quickly dimmed. An overreaction to a poor first year or just jitters to start his U.S. baseball career?

by arsenal on Dec 2, 2007 11:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Young-Il Jung Was Injured

Young-Il was injured most of 2007. The last I heard he was shut down due to an elbow ligament problem, although I don't think he was having surgery. From what little I saw of him in spring training, his mechanics are pretty unorthodox and violent although supposedly they got some of that out as the year went by.

by FutureAngels on Dec 2, 2007 11:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs