Community Prospect #48 RUNOFF: Lars vs. Geo Soto

by wily mo on Dec 31, 2007 5:31 PM EST

we're having some polling problems, so in keeping with our longstanding zero-tolerance policy we're going to take a step back. lars and soto were within 1% or tied in the last two polls once you delete the somewhat-suspicious winners, so i'm going to put them in a runoff for a while while we sort things out.

this is for slot #48 - bill rowell has been taken off the list for the time being.

geo soto sounds like a car.

Poll

winch, fetch me a pie.

Lars Anderson 1B BOS

118 votes

Geovany Soto C CHC

135 votes

253 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Player A vs Player B

Player A=18th round pick, 6'4", 215 lb, Age 19, level:A, AB/HR 44.1, K% 21.0, BB% 14.2.

Player B=22nd round pick, 6'2", 205 lb, age 19, level:A, AB/HR 18.9, K% 19.2, BB% 9.6.

Their age is one month apart and they played in the exact same league. One player is getting lots of hype to be on the community list now, one hasn't even been mentioned. One was rated a B+ by John, the other a C+. Which is which?

by rwperu34 on Dec 31, 2007 7:42 PM EST reply actions

Stats only tell half the story...

what are the scouting reports on each guy?

But just to play along, somewhat, I think I prefer the top line has a significantly better walk rate and is bigger, so just by what's given, I'd say his power projection may be stronger, and given that power is the last thing to come, I don't mind his poor AB/HR ratio, but would like to see his %XBH.

by beastball on Dec 31, 2007 8:25 PM EST up reply actions

The Story

EBH%-Anderson 10.3, Morrison 10.6, counting HR. Anderson obviously hit more gappers. ISOP Anderson .154 Morrison .216, "Generic" batting average, Anderson .242, Morrison .274.

In this case, the stats should be telling less than half the story since these are A-ball guys. The problem is, the story they tell is a very violent beating in favor of Logan Morrison. I can see scouting reports narrowing the gap or even giving Lars Anderson a slight edge. Having Anderson make the list at #50 and Morrison at #75 wouldn't be a big deal. B+ vs C+ is a big deal.

Anderson may end up hitting with more power than he's shown so far. Heck, it's expected. The point is, he has a long way to go to show the power than Morrison has shown already.

Again, I can see an argument in favor of Anderson based on scouting reports, even though I wonder how much of those scouting reports are biased by the Boston media. What I can't justify is having one ranked > 50 spots higher with three grades difference.

by rwperu34 on Dec 31, 2007 11:07 PM EST up reply actions

And it could easily be the case...

that in a year that Morrison is the superior prospect. Every year there are plenty of relatively unknown players who vault their way into the headlines, which is why I like the community list debates because there are always names brought up that I hadn't heard of, and the people who bring them up are fans for one reason or another and are normally knowledgeable about the player.

And I don't know how much Boston bias I'm subject to, but I was just going off his draft story and scouting report, and then his write-up in the BA top 20. And then all of his ratios were strong except homers.

by beastball on Jan 1, 2008 1:39 AM EST up reply actions

Violent beating?

WTF are you talking about? They had almost an identical OPS (.826 vs. .826) at the same level in the same league, and then Anderson was promoted to A+ where he verged on an OPS of 1.000 in the few at bats he had there. Statistically, Anderson has the advantage, and projection-wise he does as well.

Further, Lars' pedigree is much better than Morrison's. He was drafted in the 18th only because other teams were scared off by his bonus demands.

by aCone419 on Jan 1, 2008 3:33 AM EST up reply actions

One other thing that impacts my ranking....

Is the fact that Morrison wasn't even ranked in the top 20 prospects within his league. Those head-to-head rankings are rare at this point, and can't be ignored.

I think it speaks to him as a ballplayer when the managers and scouts of the league don't place him in the top 20. Hell, the guy couldn't even crack Florida's top 10, compiled in part by the organization.

So, I don't see the source of outrage for Lars getting a B+ and Morrison a C+, it seems that this view is shared by the prospecting community as a whole, given what we know to this point.

by beastball on Jan 1, 2008 10:36 AM EST up reply actions

scouting reports

The reports on Lars Anderson are much, much sexier than Logan Morrison (at least the ones I've seen). I think Morrison is underrated a bit, but Anderson was projected as a possible first round pick that fell simply because of demands.

by doublestix on Dec 31, 2007 8:47 PM EST up reply actions

Rowell

I voted for Rowell in poll #48 and there was quite a bit of discussion going on about him during that time. The Rowell vote doesn't look fishy at all to me.

I should also say that I would normally have voted for Chris davis there, but by the time I got to vote, he was out of the race. Instead of wasting my vote on Davis, I gave it to Rowell.

As for Conger, I think he's a legitimate selection at #49. The difference in value is really shrinking. Getting on at #49 or #70 is going to have less of a value gap than getting on at #5 and #10. This time I voted for Hu, because not only did he need the most support to stay on the poll, I felt like he was the best prospect of those available to vote for.

by rwperu34 on Dec 31, 2007 7:52 PM EST reply actions

conger

as far as conger being a legitimate choice to be voted in at #49, i don't even necessarily disagree. i just think it's pretty obvious that that isn't what happened.

rowell is a bit foggier, and i didn't see it as weird enough to spike at the time. but it did tweak my radar, and that combined with the conger thing is enough for me to go on.

by wily mo on Dec 31, 2007 8:11 PM EST up reply actions