Engel Beltre not being ranked top 20

by sully10x on Dec 26, 2007 2:43 AM EST Comment 12 comments

He says Beltre doesn't deserved to be ranked because the tools are there but the performance wasnt. He OPSed .762 last year with 11 SB and 9 HR.

Now, Angel Villalona, who probably figures to be a a top 3 Giant in the ranking, OPSed .772, with 2 SB and 5 HR.

So how does Beltre not get ranked in the top TWENTY?

0 recs | Comment 12 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

What are you talking about?

by novaoakland on Dec 26, 2007 4:34 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

you're talking about Sickels's Rangers list. I disagree with him, but I can see waiting until we get more numbers out of the boy to boost him in the rankings. If he keeps going he will be in the Rangers top 5 in everyone's list next year.

Remember the Rangers system is very deep right now. The Giants system is definitely not, so Villalona is up there for his talent and by default.

by t ball on Dec 26, 2007 7:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Anger

These angry, semi-accusatory posts directed at John are starting to get annoying. I come here for John's content and for the community discussion, not to read fanboys throwing conniption fits over every single ranking.

If I end up reading one more post of "OMG why is [insert random prospect] ranked a B while [insert fanboy's favorite prospect] only a C+???" I think my brain will melt from the inanity.

by aCone419 on Dec 26, 2007 8:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

+1

ugh...

by yacck23 on Dec 26, 2007 11:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Beltre should be top 20?

I can sorta see the argument for his inclusion. As Sully mentioned, his overall OPS was comparable to Villalona's, and he was 17 all season last year.

According to Kevin Goldstein, "Engel's raw tools are absolutely tremendous, with both his power and speed rating as well above average. He has strong wrists and incredible bat speed, and some see him as a 30/30 player down the road. He shows good instincts in the outfield and has a solid arm. On a purely athletic level, there's really nothing he can't do." and "Beltre's ceiling is higher than any other position player in the system, and it's not even close. He's miles away from where he can be, but he has true impact potential."

Goldstein has him ranked 5th for Texas. I'm not saying Goldstein is the end-all-know-all, but the difference between #5 and #21+ is significant. I think Sully was just asking for some answers here, not to be called a troll or annoying. I also don't see the "anger" in his post, but he gets jumped on by some of you guys.

Also, Sully, here is what John wrote about why he doesn't have Beltre higher:

Sickels wrote:
Everyone is all up in arms about Engel Beltre and John Mayberry Jr. Grade B is an aggressive grade for Mayberry, I admit that. But he did hit 30 homers and steal 16 bases in 18 attempts this year. Perhaps Grade B is too high and I will consider it more.
But I do NOT understand all the love for Beltre. He's got tools out the wazoo, sure, but he also could barely clear .200 in the Gulf Coast League, and has major problems making contact. He has 75 strikeouts in 65 career games. He's a prospect, sure, but he is a LONG way away, and in my system that makes him a C+ type until the numbers start living up to the hype.

I think that is a pretty fair explanation, and Goldstein seems to love upside and tools more than some others. Personally, I like tools too and would have Belter higher, but somewhere in between 12-14.

by killa on Dec 26, 2007 10:49 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Beltre

Thanks for not jumping all over me for no reason like everyone else...

What I'm saying is that Beltre put up similar if not better statistics than Villalona, doesn't that at least deserve to get him ranked in the top 20, considering his tools?

I don't believe it's fair to point out that a guy "could barely clear .200 in the Gulf Coast League" without mentioning that he could also "Nearly OPS 1.000 in the Arizona League"

Just doesn't seem fair to discredit him, when he produced far greater statistically AFTER that.

by sully10x on Dec 26, 2007 2:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

There's more to it than OPS

and John pointed out what he thought his flaws were. Pretty major ones. If you can't hit above .200, you have some problems. If you're striking out at more than once a game at that level, you also have some problems. OPS, especially at the lower levels, is not the end all of statistics. It's a whole lot more about projection and John stated his reasons why, as of right now, Beltre has a long way to go before he merits a higher ranking. Plus, the Giants system is horrible. Beltre would probably rank somewhere in the Giants system. The Rangers are much deeper.

by andwoo on Dec 26, 2007 5:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

redsoxfan

I just noticed your name was "redsoxfan"

It all makes sense now.

by sully10x on Dec 26, 2007 5:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not a Red Sox fan...

You forgot to mention that Angel Villalona is a year younger than Beltre.
Texas has many more good prospects than the Giants. So, a ~21 ranking in the Rangers may be a top 10 in the Giants.
Personally, I think the INTL FA players are being hugely overranked. Wilson Betemit was awesome as a 17/18 year old....Now? Elvis Andrus was another "hot" prospect...

by omambiyick on Dec 26, 2007 10:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

good points, plus...

9 months, but who's counting? :>
This was the point I was going to make, too... Texas seems to have lots of players now. Giants actually do, too, maybe even more, but they most are risky enough to be rated lower then either Beltre or Villalona.
I am STILL waiting for Betemit to break out! LOL. :) In fairness, he "aged" 2.5 years in Agegate, IIRC. Joel Guzman was signed very young, also, and he hasn't been "all that" yet.

by BobbyMac on Dec 27, 2007 6:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs