Higher Ceiling Gomez Or Ellsbury?

by Maine Man on Jan 21, 2008 12:22 PM EST

I've been recently debating with a Red Sox fan who said the Mets package of Santana has no true star potential in it..

I countered with Gomez has a higher ceiling the Ellsbury, but he doesn't seem to believe it..

Gomez has the potential to be a true 5 tool player, the highest Ellsbury will be is a 3 tool player.. It's Gomez's body type, and bat speed that gives him the ceiling of a 30 homerun hitter..

Now obviously if I had to choose one I'd pick Ellsbury, because he's the much safer pick.. But if we're debating ceilings I would have to think that Gomez's ceiling is much higher then that of Ellsbury..

Poll

Who Has The Higher Ceiling?

Gomez

196 votes

Ellsbury

104 votes

300 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 44 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Higher ceiling than Ellsbury

Gomez has the higher ceiling, but that's not much of a feather in his cap. A LOT of prospects out there have higher ceilings than Ellsbury because "ceiling" is a pretty abstract notion that can have an nearly zero chance of being realized.

by aCone419 on Jan 21, 2008 12:47 PM EST reply actions

+1

The "higher ceiling" concept is the same principle the Phillies used to draft Greg Golson in the 2004 first round. Every scout says he has plus tools in every category except "the ability to recognize the difference between a curve ball from a fastball (Shaking head sadly)" and "the ability to not make outs (Hitting head against desk)." Needless to say Greg Golson sucks and is a prime example of why "high ceiling" can lead to bad judgment.

FJM, down in the trenches doing the Lord's work.

by zdavis2512 on Jan 21, 2008 11:51 PM EST up reply actions

30 HR potential?

Maybe for his CAREER. He has 20 professionally in over 1400 ABs. To project a guy increases his power b/c he has good bat speed is one thing, but youre reading a lot into bat speed right there.

I really dont see Gomez hitting much. The only way he has a higher upside than Ellsbury(who isnt that great a hitter either) is that he's more of an unknown quantity. So its like arguing Moustakas or some high school tools guy is a higher ceiling prospect. Ellsbury is a more patient hitter and just a better hitter. Gomez has an interesting bat but isnt walking(MiLB OBP: .339) and isnt hitting for extra bases(MiLB SLG: .399. That's a long way for him to go and quite a leap to project. ARL is impressive, but that only cuts it so far. You actually have to produce at some point.

Does Gomez have a better chance of being a 30 HR guy than Ellsbury? Definitely. What are his chances to hitting that ceiling or even coming close? Not really that good at all. I cant imagine a major league GM taking Gomez over Ellsbury right now, even considering upside. They are both very good prospects, however, and Id take them both over lots of guys.

I think he probably ends up killing Ellsbury in this poll b/c so many think Ellsbury is overrated - and he is a good bit. However, I would probably take bets and give odds on Ellsbury having a better MLB career than Gomez.

by alskor on Jan 21, 2008 12:50 PM EST reply actions

gomez

he not only has shown no real power, he also hasn't shown an ability to hit the ball and get on base even in the minors...have you looked at his numbers?

He might be faster than Jose Reyes, but Gomez is probably the next Joey Gathright, some guy that needs to pinch run to get on base.

by IHateMitchMustain on Jan 21, 2008 1:27 PM EST up reply actions

"some guy that needs to pinch run to get on b

not really anymore.

Talkin' Sports

by BlackOps on Jan 21, 2008 2:29 PM EST up reply actions

Gomez's numbers?

What is he? 21 and he made his MLB debut?

You really can't judge him by his minor league numbers. Hell, look at Fernando Martinez's numbers! He's a top prospect, right? Granted, Martinez was playing hurt, but the Mets rush prospects. They don't care about minor league numbers. They want to see if the prospect can succeed where it really matters -- the MLB. Only in the MLB can you get enough experience and refinement to play at the MLB level.

And the guy is 6'4" and approaching 200 lbs. You'd have to consider the fact that he is huge and has a whole lot of athleticism and lower body power, as shown by his speed to see why scouts feel he has powerful potential. Some say he'll hit 15 HR per year, some say 20, some say 30 in his prime! HE'S A PROSPECT FOR CHRIST'S SAKE! THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE DO!

Plus, at the age of 21, a .777 OPS in AAA isn't bad at all, especially when on top of 17 SB in 140 AB. In the last 2 pro years, Gomez has 12 HR in 800 AB, at ages 20 and 21 in AA and AAA.

Now, I don't like Gomez. He is such a huge risk, I just say use the guy to get Johan Santana. But to use his numbers against him is void.

by METSMETSMETS on Jan 21, 2008 2:41 PM EST up reply actions

Ability to get on base?

.363 OBP in AAA.

by METSMETSMETS on Jan 21, 2008 2:41 PM EST up reply actions

.331

in the DWL.

by Brett Keith on Jan 21, 2008 4:04 PM EST up reply actions

DWL and VWL stats are useless.

by elrey34 on Jan 21, 2008 4:26 PM EST up reply actions

Why?

In those leagues it's not about development, it's about performance.

by Brett Keith on Jan 21, 2008 6:29 PM EST up reply actions

take 'em with a grain of salt

For example, take a look at Billy Butler's stats in the DWL this year.

I think he's ever so slightly better than that, don't you?

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Jan 21, 2008 7:37 PM EST up reply actions

I Understand That...

but when someone like Carlos Gomez puts up a .331 OBP in the DWL after posting a career OBP of .336 in the minors, I don't think it's out of line to question a 36 game stint in AAA where he put up a .363 OBP.

by Brett Keith on Jan 21, 2008 8:09 PM EST up reply actions

Carlos Gomez

Got hit in the head in DWL, and is still recuperating and playing at the same time. He got married also.

by METSMETSMETS on Jan 21, 2008 8:13 PM EST up reply actions

Crazy Fact

"He was only removed as a precaution, but since he's getting married this weekend, there's a good chance he's played his last game for a while. Gomez is hitting .247/.299/.321 in 81 at-bats."

-NY Daily News

So this would mean that he actually improved after getting hit in the head and playing while "recuperating"...in addition to getting married.

by Brett Keith on Jan 22, 2008 1:07 AM EST up reply actions

LOL

I just find it a bit funny that he got married after getting "hit in the head" ;)

by RollingWave on Jan 22, 2008 2:27 AM EST up reply actions

but but but

Gomez is... LATINO!!! that gives him a automatic +10 on HR ceiling over a white boy! :P

(to be fair, Ellsbury is a inj...errrr i mean Native American ;) )

kidding aside, i could agree that Gomez have more ceiling than Ellsbury, that really doesn't say much though as Ellsbury is a rather low ceiling / high skill prospect to begin with.

I'm not quiet sure where he's headed, if his strike out decrease in AAA was legit then i would be very interested. Robinson Cano / Miguel Cabrera and to a lesser extend Melky Cabrera are good example of a prospect taking off once he reached the upper minors.

by RollingWave on Jan 21, 2008 10:48 PM EST up reply actions

How about Carlos Gonzalez?

defensively he might b e a bit behind both, but ofensively has as much or better upside. if anyone can confirm, Gonzalez was only shifted to RF because Upton. anyone agree, gomez/ellsbury project m ore as top of the order hitters and gonzalez middle of the order?

by rayver723 on Jan 21, 2008 2:02 PM EST reply actions

Actually

I think you have Upton and C-Gon backwards. Carlos shifted to center for Upton but is more of a RF.

by Dfarth on Jan 21, 2008 2:31 PM EST up reply actions

Carlos Gomez

may have better overall tools than Elsbury, but at the end of the day Elsbury is proven and is the better prospect.

Carlos Gomez hasn't it put it together yet and While Elsbury ceiling may not be as high, his floor is alot better than Gomez.

You know what you are gonna get from Elsbury.

I am not a huge Elsbury fan but I take Elsbury over Gomez in a minute period.

by NYYLover1000 on Jan 21, 2008 3:03 PM EST reply actions

re

Proven what, to suck in AAA?

http://www.as-future.blogspot.com/

by blee1134 on Jan 22, 2008 1:22 AM EST up reply actions

Ceiling...lol

When somebody asks me about "ceiling" I just ignore it and get to the point... I take it as "Who will be the better player?" the concept that one guy is likely to be a better player but, the otgher could be a star is just a prospecting copout to me, sorry.

I don't believe in the whole concept of it except for in the sense that Gomez has a theoretic potential to grow more as a player because of his youth.

First of all, if you take Gomez's seasons in AA and AAA (partial) he looks like what he is a solid hitting CF when you take in his defense and running potential. I'm not speaking in fantasy language either. I dont see what is risky about him. He's either going to be a solid CF or be better than that.

As far as Ellsbury, I love the common logic on here.... He hit so WELL in the big leagues that he cant be good :-) If he hit .155 in his callup he isnt good and hitting .353! is also bad....puzzling

he's a rock-solid gold Glove CF with the skills to hit .300 in the bigs with good enough eye and some pop. He's ALREADY a hell of a player. He HELPED the Sox win it all guys! he wasn't just along for the ride.

I like Ellsbury better but, I also like Gomez. if I was a team in need of a CF i'd be delighted to give either a shot.

by casejud on Jan 21, 2008 3:11 PM EST reply actions

your contradicting your self

a bit in your post above

and the issue with Gomez is that
a. he's been a strikeout machine without a lot of power before this year in the minors. a very bad combination.

b. he was completely overmatched in the majors this year. and his minor league sample was a bit sparsed though it did suggest improvement.

minor league numbers don't always correlate with major league onces. some guys dominate the minors and then suck in the majors . some were just ok and then abosalutly owned in the show ( Pujols / Miguel Cabrera / Cano ). there are obviously things to look for (Like Cano and Cabrera doing very well in their small sample high minor results.. )

If we look at Gomez pre 07 it's difficult to see a major leaguer there without serious improvement. but the scouting report and age suggested that improvement is possible and likely. 07 was a mixed result, with possible improvement suggested in limited results but a horrendous showing in the big league mixed in.

-------------------------------------------------
As for Ellsbury. the difficult thing is that what do you really see him as? Johnny Damon with less power is the more frequent comp we hear, Damon's career OPS+ is 102 , that's nice but hardly a super star on a whole (though Damon has racked up a ton of count stats thanks to starting early) but less power than that? then your basically getting a player who's value hinges mightly on his BA.. i think Ellsbury could steal more than Damon, but how much more really? steal is hardly something that's consistent from year to year and often vanish later in one's career.

As a whole, I think Ellsbury will be pretty good in the next few season if we look at Johnny Damon's age 24 onward (where he was good for all but 3 seasons including the most recent one) but Damon was also a better prospect if you match up their MILB numbers. so if Ellsbury is a bit less than taht what is he really? a solid player with a few star season sprinkled in? that's what i see right now. but some people seem to be looking at perinial allstar.

by RollingWave on Jan 21, 2008 11:12 PM EST up reply actions

I wouldnt say less "power"

I think the comp is less HRs. Ellsbury is much faster than Damon (and Johnny was pretty fast is his day) and he'll rack up doubles and triples as a function of his speed.

The difference in HRs isnt exactly the grand canyon, either.

by alskor on Jan 21, 2008 11:14 PM EST up reply actions

true...to a point

Ellsbury's SLG might be suggestive of decent power because it will likely be inflated due to high double and triple totals thanks to his speed. However, because of the apparent lack of power in Ellsbury's game means that he will advance fewer runners than would a player who's non-HR XBH's weren't speed driven. Now, don't get me wrong. I love speed. But, there are many ways to skin a cat, and plenty of ways to arrive at the same slugging %.

Ellsbury's XBH totals are likely to be somewhat dependent on the baserunners ahead of him, since he won't be able to take that extra base if there's a slow poke in front of him. Moreover, because a good number of Ellsbury's XBH's will be of the "legged out" variety, I'd expect for him to have poorer than usual contextual statistics like RBI (even accounting for his place as the leadoff man). So, while I know it's not in vogue to discuss counting stats that are as team dependent as RBI or runs, I do think it's important to use these stats in context to understand a player like Ellsbury. He will be very valuable for his ability to score runs, but he will not drive in that many at all.

I don't believe the majority of comps floating around to Ellsbury. I see him as more of a "pure" leadoff man than most do. Taking the aforementioned Johnny Damon, who had/has quite a bit more pop in his bat than Ellsbury, and while I don't think this will inhibit Ellsbury from being a good player, I do think he'll be alot closer to Juan Pierre because of his total reliance on contact and speed than people like to think about.
And that's still a very good player.
/sorry, had to rant.

by GuyinNY on Jan 21, 2008 11:34 PM EST up reply actions

Damon

age 24-26 averaged 37 double and 10 triple along with 16 round tripper.... so if Ellsbury say... average 10 to 12 round tripper, he would need to AVERAGE over 40 double to make it up... (since it's not too easy to average more than 10 triple too and that's hard to really predict )

Damon's OBP during these 3 season were .339 / .379 / .382 ... do you see Ellsbury doing better than that on average?

those were fine seasons though, 100 OPS+ , 116 OPS+ and 118 OPS+ respectively. so he was averaging around 111 OPS+ during this time. it's good, but it's clearly not Grady Sizemore we're talking about there. Damon also stole an average of 36 bases per year during this time, I coullld see Ellsbury doing a little better than that. but to truely be a impact difference he would need to go near the 50 steal mark.. ON AVERAGE.

I coullld see Ellsbury getting to these mark, but it's pretty difficult. and if he falls below that he's really just a nice above average CF, there's clearly nothing wrong with that. but that's really not something to die over either.

Of course, i'm probably not taking Fenway into account enough last year a boat load of Red Sox had over 30 doubles.

by RollingWave on Jan 22, 2008 12:27 AM EST up reply actions

Remember ages when talking about performance

While Ellsbury has shown more in the minors than Gomez, he has been 2-3 years older at every stop. Gomez made the majors at 21, while Ellsbury was still in college at that age, and didn't make the majors until he was 23. I think that Gomez could put up similar or better performances than Ellsbury if he stayed in the minors until he was 23, and he too could hit .353 in a 33 game sample size. I'm not saying I would take Gomez over Ellsbury, but I am not sure it's fair to say that his minor league numbers were more impressive.

http://mvn.com/milb-yankees/

by lemonjello on Jan 21, 2008 3:36 PM EST reply actions

+1

Sincerely,

An age whore.

by elrey34 on Jan 21, 2008 4:27 PM EST up reply actions

Fair

It's certainly fair. Ellsbury's numbers WERE more impressive. Folks here get too enamored of the baby prospects, giving them bonus points for being young and ignoring that they simply haven't produced.

This is me being polite.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Jan 21, 2008 5:30 PM EST up reply actions

fair point

But I think that what you aren't emphasizing ENOUGH is that people NOT ONLY give them bonus points for being that young, they give them a cop-out on their statistics at the same time. I am not sure if that makes perfect sense other than in my head, but I think it should at least make some sense. It is fair to say, but he was young in AA so he shouldn't have done blah blah, ok, fair enough, his poor or average stats can be justified, that is fine. But it is not fine to sit there and say that you should just say his average stats should be better and that he should be considered better because he is younger. If he hit the same and was younger that is one thing, but you act like a guy batting .265 or .280 is impressive, it isn't. It COULD be better if he was older, ok, that is fine, but he isn't. He COULD be a five tool mlb player, ok, then maybe he will one day, but he ISN'T right now.

I think Gomez has the tools, but so did Franklin Guitierrez, Alex Ochoa, and so many people that it would take forever to mention 15 to ever 1 that became great. I understand the alleged ceiling is higher for gomez, but is it really attainable? I don't see any way he could develop the power we are talking about and not go down on his average skill set...and his average is not very good right now (and when I say not good, i mean it isn't good on paper, regardless of age).

I understand, but his ability to turn into Joey Gathright is way higher than Carlos Beltran and Ellsbury being the next Juan Pierre might not be that sexy, but that would be pretty damn good in the grand scheme of things, even if that is all he ever does become. I think I would take that as a guarantee over any "potential" Gomez has to offer.

Basically I would go out of my way to trade a guy like Gomez if GMs believe the same stuff that a ton of people on here believe, because the risk/reward is way in your favor.

by IHateMitchMustain on Jan 22, 2008 3:21 AM EST up reply actions

so Guts is washed up too?

I want you to talk to Shapiro and also the other 9 guys in my AL only league. They might think he has a brighter future after hitting 13 dingers in 270 ABs and playing a slick right field. But personally, I'm convinced.

by Yoda @ Minor League Ball on Jan 22, 2008 7:24 PM EST up reply actions

Ceiling?

If it is just a matter of which player has the highest ceiling, I don't see how you can argue against Gomez. Simply put, he has a better body, better tools and a better ARL. Now, as for what the odds are of reaching that ceiling...well, you'd pretty obviously have to side with Ellsbury.

Still, that doesn't change the fact that Carlos Gomez is a significantly better athlete who is performing at young ages on his way up the ladder. Gomez's tools are rare, indeed, and whether or not you think he's got a viable chance of converting all that athleticism into baseball skill, Gomez certainly does have greater overall potential.

by GuyinNY on Jan 21, 2008 4:42 PM EST reply actions

Tools are rare?

No his speed is rare. He has no power. If he had any resemblence of power he would have hit more than 4 homers in 278 ABs.

But I would agree he does have a higher ceiling.

by nyy601 on Jan 21, 2008 4:54 PM EST up reply actions

Power

Power does not necessarily show itself immediately. It requires learned skills, like adding loft to your swing. Gomez's bat speed, frame, and natural athleticism portend future power. Whether or not he ever learns to turn it into anything game usable is another story entirely...

by GuyinNY on Jan 21, 2008 5:06 PM EST up reply actions

the greatest quote ever

"he should develop power"...I think that back in the day they literally meant that once he gets older he will hit the roids...I don't know how many times I have seen that hilarious quote about someone and they don't make it out of AA...I am not saying it doesn't happen, but that scouting report quote is about as awesome as "his whole is better than the some of his parts" or "his ball looks like it is harder than the 86-89 he throws"

I am not saying that doesn't come true, but 90% of the time you end up with a guy that didn't develop power because he never had any at 18, 19 or 20 so why would he get it at 25...he wouldn't.

by IHateMitchMustain on Jan 22, 2008 3:30 AM EST up reply actions

Risk

Not just a game! It's also an applicable concept!

Obviously, not everybody is going to pan out and not every player will develop power. However, in this case, the question is very, very simple : who has a higher ceiling. The answer is also very, very simple : Carlos Gomez. The reason is because Gomez's possible career paths have many more ways to go, due to his potential athleticism. Notice all the qualifiers? That's his biggest boon. Gomez COULD develop the power to be a 30HR man, while retaining his speed. As it is, he's a natural athlete who is converting his tools into skills.

And speaking of tools vs skills... Because Pedro Martinez/El Duque/Eric Gagne/even Johan Santana equip themselves with a great change, they are able to make their fastball seem faster. This can also be a result of exceptional movement or deception. Further, because players like (cliche alert) David Eckstein or even Curt Schilling (today) are so wholly invested in the game, they are able to overcome what for most players are physical limitations and achieve their goal of being productive big leaguers. Whether or not you think David Eckstein is a very good player, nobody can question that he gets the absolute most out of a (relatively) bereft tool set.

ARL, physical projection, and makeup are important parts of prospecting. They can give us a peak into how/why these numbers came to be as they are, and where the career of the player who produced them is headed. So, while Carlos Gomez's statistics may be mediocre prima facie, they are trending upwards in difficult environments for a still developing player of exceptional makeup. To me, that says that there is a distinct possibility that Gomez will realize his potential, or at least something close to it. And that is enough for me to argue that yes, Carlos Gomez does have a higher, and therefore better ceiling than Jacoby Ellsbury.

by GuyinNY on Jan 22, 2008 2:53 PM EST up reply actions

Hello Hanley Ramirez

6 HR's in over 450 AB's in AA at 21.

by Bravesin07 on Jan 21, 2008 8:03 PM EST reply actions

Hey

That's two less than Hanley's career high in the minors -- which was 8 in 422 ABs in Low-A ball.

by METSMETSMETS on Jan 21, 2008 8:16 PM EST up reply actions

And

Looking into it, their performances in the minors aren't that far from each other.

by METSMETSMETS on Jan 21, 2008 8:17 PM EST reply actions

I was talking about Hanley and Carlos Gomez

Of course.

by METSMETSMETS on Jan 21, 2008 8:18 PM EST up reply actions

Who cares?

If Ellsbury and Gomez both average out about the same number of RC a year over the course of their careers, who cares how they get there?

I've heard Ellsbury comparatively would have a similar career to Ichiro: high average, decent OBP, enough power to justify himself, and good speed. Gomez appears to be better in the power department, but who can really tell if his game is going to be so much better that it's worth discussing?

by TIF @ Minor League Ball on Jan 21, 2008 11:15 PM EST reply actions

Ichiro?

whoever said that, should be shot.

Ichiro is a very very special cat. there's just no reasonable way to compare any prospect to him unless he's one of the most unique prospect in the game, and Ellsbury isn't really the top CF prospect in the game.

You do realize that Ichiro has a career of .333, the highest amoung active player... right? to project that is like projecting a guy hitting 50 HR on average.

by RollingWave on Jan 22, 2008 12:00 AM EST up reply actions

Ceiling

I have a question:

Why does everyone seem to think Ellsbury has a low ceiling and Gomez such a higher ceiling?

What are the differences between them on:

bat speed
hitting for average
hitting for power
controlling the strike zone
stealing
D
running

by pedrophile on Jan 22, 2008 2:35 AM EST reply actions

Probably

hitting for power, though that is more based on body type speculation and assumptions. since we already know that Ellsbury will most likely be below average power wise. so we assume most people have more power potential than him.

and power is obviously the biggest difference maker for most guys.

by RollingWave on Jan 22, 2008 5:48 AM EST up reply actions

Ellsbury is older

so it is assumed that his development of his tools and skills is pretty much maxed out. Gomez still has room to improve in a number of areas, particularly his power. Whether he does improve significantly or not remains to be seen, but this room for development gives Gomez a higher ceiling.

http://mvn.com/milb-yankees/

by lemonjello on Jan 22, 2008 1:49 PM EST up reply actions