Elvis Andrus = Luis Rivas?

by slackerjack on Jul 31, 2007 9:33 AM EDT Comment 25 comments

Does everyone remember when Luis Rivas was working his way through the Twins system? The comment was always, "his numbers are crap, but he's so young for his league, so he is a prospect". The same thing happened with Cesar Izturis.

I think that some base level of production is required in order for a "super young" prospect to be legitamite, especially free agents who are signed before the age of 18.

Tabata, injured wrist and all, looks like a prospect. Andrus does not.

0 recs | Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

He looks better ...

... when you take into account his home/road splits.

by northtexan95 on Jul 31, 2007 9:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

He could be but

His road numbers are pretty damn good for an 18 year old .296 .379 .413 and he plays in a home park that kill offensive numbers for the most part. Edgar Renteria whom i've compared Andrus to hit .253 .307 .292 .599 as an 18/19 year old in high A and the year before hit .203 .268 .232 .500 in low A. Edgar broke out the next year .289 .329 .388 .717. We'll see how he turns out.

by Bravesin07 on Jul 31, 2007 9:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

don't think so

first: RAndrus' numbers were quite a bit better at Rookie ball, better in low A ball, and now in high A are roughly the same -- a bit worse or a bit better depending on how much you figure should be adjusted for hitting in Myrtle Beach.

second: while I'd give some weight to his home/road splits, I wouldn't give as much weight as Braves07 does. That said, Myrtle Beach is a factor (as was Rome before that, also a tough place to hit).

third: a different set of splits is also telling: .632 OPS in May, .651 in June, .700 in July, .727 since the all-star break. Maybe that's illusory progress, but between that, his road numbers, and his ARL, Andrus is: young, performs better, and seems to be improving as one would hope.

Lastly, Andrus is a SS, not a 2B.

And I don't think one can discount scouting, either -- I don't give full credit to a guy having 'tools' etc etc, but I don't discount it, either. Andrus has performed plenty well for me to certainly consider him a top 40 prospect, still.

Be very interesting to see how he does in Bakersfield. I sort of wish the Braves hadn't traded him as it's interesting to see his steady upward progression in the same park. Bakersfield kind of messes that up in that it's an easier hitting environment, on the one hand, but, on the other hand, we don't know what the psychological effect will be of his first trade.

Two other comparisons. You mention Tabata, but is 75 poiints of OPS that much better considering he's a RFer?

And, lastly, the heir apparent at SS now for the Braves is Yunel Escobar. His OPS at age 22 in low A was .828, at age 23 in AA it was .702..

there'd be nothing optimistic about saying Andrus would likely OPS at around .700 in AA next year -- obviously much more impressive given his age.

I'm impressed both with Tabata and Andrus, and think people get tired of waiting for the next big thing to be a big thing...but it takes time for a 17 kid to develop. I happen to think Texas will have a stud at SS in 3-5 years.

by scooter on Jul 31, 2007 10:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Yunel

I love how the Andrus enthusiasts have to attack Yunel Escobar on his age. Escobar isn't old and it isn't his fault he was born in Cuba.

Obsessing over celebrity is wrong. Unless that celebrity is BACON!!!

by McLovin on Jul 31, 2007 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Attack?

That didn't read like an attack on Escobar. He reportedly IS the heir apparent at SS, that's pretty relevant to the conversation as are his stats. He was pretty doo in high A and has struggled a bit in AA but you don't hear anyone panicking about that.

God rested one day out of 7, Felix rests 4 out of 5.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Jul 31, 2007 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

huh?

too much caffeine this morning? that's nonsensical....

by scooter on Jul 31, 2007 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

JS isn't god but...

Hey everyone,

I have a real problem when John wants to trade a player. He needs to give up value to get Tiex but clearly Andrus was more valuable in the eyes of other teams therefore expendable to the Braves. He is very young and has a great build. His numbers aren't horrible he has put up a nice amount of doubles but is also striking out more than I'd like to see for a middle infielder. He walks about every 10 plate appearances which isn't horrible either. But I trust JS and if he trades someone who was as untouchable as he was then either he really believes this is there last shot for a while or he doesn't have faith in Andrus.

E-Mail me at JS127266@Albany.edu to get into the JSMiLB Fantasy League!

by Metty5 on Jul 31, 2007 10:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

when was andrus "untouchable"?

i must have missed that quote from JS

by Wheelhouse on Jul 31, 2007 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

maybe untouchable was the wrong word

But someone who was as highly touted as Andrus you think he'd be close to that. Especially the way people talked about him at one point.

E-Mail me at JS127266@Albany.edu to get into the JSMiLB Fantasy League!

by Metty5 on Jul 31, 2007 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

True

But that's really the genius of JS, if you will. He recognizes that few of the #1s in any minor league system ever turn into superstars, and the yield's not that much worse (in terms of turning into superstars) for a #5 or #10. And, of course, the #1 has a lot more value. So, throw in some excellent scouting and the "makeup" analysis the Braves love, and voila--trade bait.

I don't think it's a coincidence that Marte and Salty (and Meyer?) were #1s during their time in the Braves organization and were dealt while some of the relatively-less heralded guys like McCann and Francouer are the ones JS kept.

by Yakker on Jul 31, 2007 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

BA

Baseball America cited Rivas as there downside guy in the "Risk Factor" doohickey they put on the most recent Top 100.

by aCone419 on Jul 31, 2007 12:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Response

Andrus is certainly a prospect, but at the same time you bring up something that shouldn't be ignored. Lots of guys get minor league experience at age 17-18 and obviously a good percentage of them flame out, even as they're accompanied by positive scouting reports. There's really no reason why we should give the likes of Andrus or even Jose Tabata or Fernando Martinez a free pass simply for just playing at a given level. The "performance" in "grading by performance at a given level" is not something to be taken lightly.

You really have no clue what a kid might be at age 16-17 despite great scouting reports, simply because they have much maturation to do both mentally and physically Andrus might end up hitting in the majors one day, but right now you'd have to say his development track is pointing in the "not gonna hit" direction. If he were playing in the Sally League he MIGHT be posting a .730-.740 OPS this year . . .if he was an 18 year old American kid in his first full pro season there, would we really be all that impressed beyond some good scouting reports?

by mrkupe on Jul 31, 2007 2:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Speaking of Brave deadline deals.....

Who recalls when San Diego traded Fred McGriff to Atlanta for Melvin Nieves, Vince Moore and Donnie Elliott?

by sdbaseballfan on Jul 31, 2007 3:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well

It's not as if the Padres weren't HUGE sellers that deadline. They also made a deal in the same timeframe of Sheff for a bunch of prospects (including Trevor Hoffman) and Bruce Hurst for a bunch of prospects (including Andy Ashby and Brad Ausmus). They took the same tack that the Marlins did last year - dealt for prospects in bulk, and when you take that strategy, even if you get burned on an individual deal, chances are that you get more of what you need in the long run. When you also consider that Ausmus was subsequently flipped for Chris Gomez, that series of trades was absolutely key in getting them to the WS in 1997, which probably made a couple years of floundering worth it.

Vice-Chairman of the Sonnanstine Underground Railroad

by Brickhaus on Jul 31, 2007 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

nitpick

you mean 1998 - the padres were the team privileged to get crushed by the 98 yankees. 97 was marlins-tribe.

by wily mo on Jul 31, 2007 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

none of them were as big of prospects

I don't think any of them were top 10 prospects.

by Bravesin07 on Jul 31, 2007 3:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

false

by bleedjaxblue on Jul 31, 2007 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't remember the deal

I was under 10 years old when it was done, and was just starting to follow the Braves.

by Bravesin07 on Jul 31, 2007 3:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

understandable

but, even if you don't remember Melvin Nieves, you have to figure the Padres wouldn't INTENTIONALLY trade McGriff for nothing, right?

by bleedjaxblue on Jul 31, 2007 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nieves was a good prospect

But he was about the fifth best position prospect the Braves had. Chipper, Javy Lopez, Ryan Klesko, Mike Kelly...

If JS paid market rates for Tex, then the Padres did basically give McGriff away for nothing.

by aCone419 on Jul 31, 2007 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

See my post above

this situation isn't a good analogy. The goals are different when you're making a single deal versus when you trade away all of the good players on your team.

Vice-Chairman of the Sonnanstine Underground Railroad

by Brickhaus on Jul 31, 2007 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

the analogy isn't perfect, because the Padres were in the midst of a firesale.

all i'm saying is that Melvin Nieves was considered hot property at the time. do you disagree with that?

by bleedjaxblue on Jul 31, 2007 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

read that list again....

no shame in being the fifth best position prospect there. Chipper Jones is a #1 overall pick who was a future HOF. Javy is a catcher who's hit over 40 homers in a year. Klesko was a stud early in his career. Kelly's the only one who didn't pan out but, as a far as "prospect status" goes, he was as good as any of them (the Roberto Clemente comps were being thrown around like rice at a wedding).

there's a reason the Braves won that many divisions in a row -- they had a deep system. Nieves was more than just depth in that system though.

by bleedjaxblue on Jul 31, 2007 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Their entire Richmond team from 92-94

was loaded with prospects from the starting lineup through the rotation down to the bench. The entire OF was considered MLB worthy, in particular Nieves and Mike Kelly. Their IF was loaded, Lopez behind the plate, Klesko at 1B, Chipper at SS. Even their pitching was hearlded: Minchey, Borbon, Gomez, etc...

Vince Moore was in A+ at the time and considered a 5 tool prospect in the Bo Jackson mold (football player/super athlete turned baseball player). Donnie Elliott was in AA if I remember correctly and was a fireballer who everyone thought was the next great power pitcher.

It just goes to show, no matter how talented guys appear, only a few developed to have long, quality MLB careers.

"Standard disclaimer: it's baseball, even if he's cooked, someone'll overpay." -drjayphd

by JT12340 on Aug 1, 2007 4:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs