Community Prospect List: #13
by the pinstripes on Oct 24, 2008 8:21 PM EDT
Email
PrintHi Everyone,
After 434 votes the winner is Tim Alderson with 18% of the vote. The next highest recipient was Brett Anderson with 16%. Due to the fact everyone exceeded 4% of the vote, nobody will be removed. Derek Holland will be given another tester. Wade Davis & Mat Gamel are next in line.
1. MATT WIETERS - C (Baltimore)
2. DAVID PRICE - SP (Tampa Bay)
3. JASON HEYWARD - OF (Atlanta)
4. TRAVIS SNIDER - OF (Toronto)
5. MADISON BUMGARNER - SP (San Francisco)
6. COLBY RASMUS - OF (St. Louis)
7. CAMERON MAYBIN - OF (Florida)
8. TREVOR CAHILL - SP (Oakland)
9. NEFTALI FELIZ - SP (Texas)
10. MATT LAPORTA - 1B/OF/DH (Cleveland)
11. MIKE MOUSTAKAS - 3B (Kansas City)
12. TIM ALDERSON - SP (San Francisco)
CANDIDATES - Pedro Alvarez, Derek Holland, Brett Anderson, Rick Porcello, Chris Tillman, Dexter Fowler, Andrew McCutchen, Lars Anderson & Buster Posey
TESTERS - Tim Beckham, Jesus Montero, Jhoulys Chacin, Eric Hosmer, Michael Stanton, Jarrod Parker, Thomas Hanson, Justin Smoak, Mat Gamel, Wade Davis
Please post more ideas for testers and we will consider them
114 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
+1
As much as it pains me as a Rangers fan to vote for someone over Holland, Alvarez is a muscley mountain beast of a slugger who’s gonna set whatever league he’s in next year on fire. He’s not gonna ask, he’s just gonna take. The man should’ve been in the top 10.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Oct 24, 2008 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions
So you don't think players should be ranked before they play profesionally?
The 40 Trumps All!!!
by thedirkatron on Oct 25, 2008 2:24 AM EDT up reply actions
I think he's actually being "serious"
although I still can’t tell if his tone on this site is just an affectation or if he really is a complete idiot.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I was serious
ANYBODY, really ANYBODY…like if you folks with kids brought your 3 year old daughter to a game where Pedro Alvarez was playing theyd ask “Daddy, whos that guy who is really good?”
Im not a complete idiot but if you have to have minor league numbers to see that Pedro Alvarez is a great young talent it is possible that you might be. At least about prospects.
+1
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift
by King Billy Royal on Oct 25, 2008 2:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Anderson still
As someone who owns Anderson in one league and Alderson in another, I’d be very happy to swap Alderson for Brett, but not the other way around. I don’t see how he gets on here first, but oh well.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
the only case against brett anderson
that i see is he seems a bit of a chubby like a blanton, not too athletic…so that maybe his downfall or an issue later on his career. otherwise, the combo of stuff, control, etc is there …if he’s anywhere among the top 15-20 range, that seems about right
by Asfan4ever723 on Oct 24, 2008 8:46 PM EDT up reply actions
top 15-20
I agree with that too. I would put Alvarez in that 20 range too.
For me it’s Fowler or Porcello here.
by RoyalsFan4Life on Oct 24, 2008 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Well that's just stupid
Blanton 6’3" 256
Anderson 6’4" 215
Righty with average velocity
Lefty with above average velocity(for a lefty)
There is no comparison, outside of them both having been in the A’s system
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
Plus
There isnt a damn thing wrong with Jow Blanton eithe. Didn’t have his best season but hes a damned good #3 starter and was Oaklands ace last just a year ago.
That being said, Brett Anderson is a better prospect and the comparison isnt very apt, I agree.
Anderson
This caricature of Anderson as an unathletic chubber seems to stem from draft-day scouting reports. He’s actually trimmed up since then and added some velo to his fastball.
by CapgrasDelusion on Oct 24, 2008 9:33 PM EDT up reply actions
The difference between Anderson and Alderson is that Alderson is nearly a year younger (9 months to be exact) and in the exact same league as Anderson, Alderson put up comperable numbers through the first half of the year. Furthermore, it was Alderson’s debut and he put up similar, if lesser, numbers. Anderson is closer to the majors, but the argument is much closer than some make it.
Through the first half of the season,
Anderson: 14 games, 9 wins 3 loses, 74 IP, 4.14 ERA, 80K/18BB, WHIP 1.16
Alderson: 15 games, 6 wins 3 loses, 79.1IP, 3.29 ERA, 65K/25BB, WHIP 1.26
Anderson defiantly put up better numbers, but for his first full season (and Alderson was better in the second half) I think the argument is a lot closer than some make it.
by OmahaGiants on Oct 24, 2008 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok
Let’s take both lines from A+ ball, but let’s level the playing field and normalize both for luck and park(thank you minorleaguesplits.com)
Anderson: 3.43 FIP 9.64 K/9 2.17 BB/9 1.21 WHIP .60HR/9 59.7% GB
Alderson: 4.34 FIP 8.19 K/9 2.24 BB/9 1.42 WHIP .99 HR/9 44.5% GB
So Alderson is 9 months younger, but Anderson has the much better numbers. Then you factor in that Anderson went out, albeit in a SSS, and bettered those numbers in AA and pitched fairly well as a 20 year old in the AAA playoffs. He’s also a lefty who throws 92-94 with excellent command/control.
I’ll say again that I like Alderson, but he’s not better than Brett Anderson.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
First i am not saying that i think Alderson should be rated above Anderson, i am just arguing that the numbers are closer than the argument. Furthermore, i am not sure where you got your numbers because minorlague splits lists the following statistics for their time in High A when adjusted for park and luck factors
Alderson 3.46 FIP, 5.88 K/9, 2.08 BB/9, 1.12 WHIP, .43 HR/9, 44.5% GB
Anderson 3.73 FIP, 7.37 K/9, 2.14 BB/9, 1.16 WHIP, .83 HR/9, 59.7 %GB
As you can see, the numbers are much closer than most would argue.
by OmahaGiants on Oct 24, 2008 11:33 PM EDT up reply actions
That's their MLE, not their luck adjustment
MLE is not adjusted for park and luck factors.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Maybe
not, but is it fair to say that with such certainty? Based on what? Because he doesn’t throw 98 MPH? Whats funny is so many people base whether or not a guy can be a #1 on how hard he throws. I’m not saying Anderson will become a #1, but it wouldn’t suprise me, and I certainly can’t say that there is no chance of it happening. There is no reason what-so-ever to say that a guy who has put up the numbers he has, in the leagues he has, at his age and polish can’t become an ace. Yes, i’m assuming that the reasoning behind your comment is mainly because of his velocity, because his secondary stuff is among the best out there. Also, its not like the guy has no velocity. He’s been throwing 92-94 consistently since the beginning of the 08’ season, and as evidenced by other #1 lefty’s in MLB history when you pair that with great offspeed stuff, thats more then enough to get by.
You won't be a #1
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Wow, another poop joke?
This is like third-grade recess!
Just to get this out of the way immediately, I do have cooties.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
McCutchen till he gets on
Young than Fowler in AAA with similar skill set.
it has to be tillman...
he profiles as an ace. i was always under the impression that anderson was more of a #3. that alone should put tillman ahead of anderson here.
Hard to profile as an ace...
when you average less than 5 innings per start.
-High walk rate
-Flyball tendencies
-Iniability to go deep into games
To me, that profiles as a future closer.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
+1
not ready to say he projects as a future closer but he’s definitely got warts.
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 Oct 25, 2008 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions
I like Tillman
but unless he gets that walk rate under control, he’s not going to reach ace level. Anderson has control/command of his pitches, has plus velocity for a LHP, and induces more groundballs. Lots to like there. They both have ace upside, but Tillman has more to overcome to reach it at this point.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
+1
going Porcello until he gets on the list.
Go Pirates!!!
by cool hand Charlie on Oct 25, 2008 12:09 AM EDT up reply actions
If we're adding 2008 draftees...
Matusz should be added soon.
Nick Markakis: The Actual Greek God of Walks
So.....
Posey has kind of come out of nowhere right? I mean, he’s jumped ahead of Fowler, is one behind Anderson and two behind Alvarez. That just happened really quickly didn’t it? Or am I imagining things?
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
no kidding
It’s becoming quite obvious there are either A TON of Giants fans here (unlikely) or someone is clearly stuffing it. Bumgarner is too high, Alderson is too high, and now Posey is going to be too high.
It’s incredibly easy to stuff too if you know what your doing.
Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.
Well....
I don’t think we should validate this by letting Posey go on here if he wins, kind of like the Humber situation a year or two ago. If Alvarez or whoever finishes second, I’d say they should be the poll winner, and Posey should be off for a poll or two as “punishment”. I believe that’s what we did before, though I’m not 100% sure.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
DUDES
That is so completely ASSINININE that I cant even believe Im reding it!! Every year you guys do this list and every year this happens.
If something like what you THINK is a ballot stuffing is going on…
A) Who gives a rats ass?
B) Uh, it is inherent in your process of making a list so quit complaining about it. Thats what the community picked.
C) The most obvious one…
Buster Posey is an OUTSTANDING baseball prospect! Like, um, the best player in College baseball last season.
Quit imposing your faschist ideas about where you guys THINK a prospect should rank. That is what a PERSONAL top prospect list is for. This is a community list
I dont even agree with the community that much of the time but Posey as #13 isnt out of line IMO and even if it is my opinion doesnt have sheeitt to do with it other than my one vote, and either does YOURS
He was picked #5 in the draft this season
Where are the other four players? And, isn’t it patently absurd to think that 5 of the top 13 players were drafted this year, when minor league prospects stretch over 6 or 7 draft classes?
You’re doing the exact counterpart of what you accuse everyone else of doing— giving way, way, WAY too much credit to tiny sample sizes.
Overall this site emphasizes ceiling far too much, to the point where you wonder why teams don’t just call prospects up out of low-A ball since they’re clearly so much better than everyone in AA and AAA. And you want it to become more ceiling-obsessed? OK.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Calm the fuck down Case
Maybe if you actually took a look at what has happened, maybe you wouldn’t have gone on this ridiculous rant. Posey pulled in 36 votes out 460 in the last poll, and he now has 30 out of 204 votes, and that doesn’t smell fishy, since the last prospect voted on came from the same team? It would be one thing if Posey had been competing for the 12th spot, but he was 6th out of 9 guys on the last poll. The four other top vote getters in this poll, were the 2nd thru 5th guys on the last poll vote wise. See, that’s consistent. Posey jumping from behind all of Fowler/Anderson/Porcello/Alvarez , to ahead vying neck and neck with all of them is pretty odd.
Giants fans ballot stuffing for another Giants prospect isn’t the same thing as “that’s what the community picked”, and that’s what it tends to look like to rational observers. I’m sure you won’t do this on your list, so why not stick with running your own list, and not trying to change the process the community has used for 3 years running?
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
I am going to throw up.
I really don’t think that the McCoven give a shit where you guys rank the Giants prospects.
I vote for Giants prospects but not more than once.
Get a life.
I am Cameron Wood and this is my son and business partner CW Culberson.
Hang on
Are you saying that you only come over here and vote for Giants’ prospects when you feel they’re the best guy on the list? Or do you come over here and vote for the Giants prospect regardless of who his competition is?
The monster at the end of this blog.
I vote for them where I think they should be.
If that is not where you think they should be, well shit ,it is only one vote. Quit being a baby. This is a fun poll not a scientific one.
I am Cameron Wood and this is my son and business partner CW Culberson.
Here I was, being all cool and calm
offering you a chance to explain yourself because your initial comment was a little murky. It made you sound like a homer who couldn’t be objective… basically, making you look like an ass.
I just wanted you to clarify what you said. I’ve got no problem with you only voting for Giants prospects when you feel they’re in their appropriate place. I just did the same thing with Anderson.
As for the baby comment. Guess what, you’re the one acting like a child by insulting people. Take you’re own advice and grow up. Who knows, it just might make the world a better place.
The monster at the end of this blog.
speaking of looking like an ass, you damn good job yourself. Go grab some prozac, and take the whole bottle or something.
Adoptive Parent of Francisco Peguero. He can throw, he can run, he can hit(fastballs), and he's Dominican. What else do you need to know?
Yeah you were all cool and calm
And so was I. I just called you a baby while I was all cool and calm. You log on here and bitch because prospects that other people like are being voted for over prospects you like. This is a blog. There are going to be things on it you don’t like. Grow a pair. Deal with it. Quit bitchin.
I am Cameron Wood and this is my son and business partner CW Culberson.
I get it
You’re either ignorant or an idiot. Either way, I promise not to pick on you.
This is a blog. I thought folks were trying to have an intelligent conversation about who the better prospect was. If you’re afraid of having that kind of conversation then maybe you shouldn’t be posting in this thread.
Tell you what, if you want to have a serious discussion about the question I originally posed then we can do that. If you just want to throw insults then I’ll leave you be, knowing I’m the better poster.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Right. You know me. I forgot.
People are trying to have an intelligent conversation about who the better prospect is and you are slinging shit at the people who took the initiative to develop this poll. Make your own poll if you don’t like it. If you are too lazy to make a poll that you like and that you can control, well, you could try going back to AN and talking about why A’s prospects are better than other team’s prospects. If you are too lazy to do that, well, you could shut the fuck up. Either way I don’t have to click on this post and read your bitching. Oh and I bow to you, better poster. I only hope one day I can achieve the internet reputation you have procured.
I am Cameron Wood and this is my son and business partner CW Culberson.
OK. I finished laughing
Seriously though, what are you ranting about? Who am I slinging shit at? I haven’t said word 1 to pinstripes or KBR, you know, the guys who “took the initiative to develop this poll.”
Why are you making yourself look like an idiot?
The monster at the end of this blog.
So if Jemile Weeks got ranked #14
You’d be fine with that even if it was obvious that a bunch of A’s fans came over and stuffed the ballot box. Because that’s what the “community” voted.
I thought this was supposed to be an informed poll.
The monster at the end of this blog.
"Ballot stuffing"
Pinstripes and myself will not be taking action against supposed ballot stuffing. We can’t prove that it is going on and I don’t have the time or energy to care. It isn’t like any of the prospects on this list would look awful as top 15 players. Personally, I would hope people respect this site and John enough not to do that. However, even if they are stuffing I don’t plan on any “punishment”.
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift
by King Billy Royal on Oct 25, 2008 2:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, I wish you would
Ballot stuffing is exactly the kind of thing that eventually drops interest in this whole process and causes people not to care anymore. Frankly, if someone is going to take on this exercise, I’d prefer they be willing to spend a little energy on the ballot stuffing issue before it gets so common that all the dedicated people on this site stop caring.
This is one of things that can be dealt with effectively, if whoever running it cares enough.
Ballot stuffing is fairly easy to detect, for anyone that has some basic training in trend recognition. And making someone ineligible for one iteration is a terrific way to nip the ballot stuffing in the bud.
You can claim it;s not scientific, but the fact is, this community list will be set up alongside other Top 50 or Top 100 lists once February rolls around, and I’d like to see it be competitive against other lists.
by siddfynch on Oct 25, 2008 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
Well said Sidd, not that I’d expect much less really though. On top of what you’ve said, I want to add that I’m afraid that announcing we’re not going to worry about ballot stuffing will actually encourage more of it and totally ruin the list. Once I pointed out the oddity of the Posey voting, and suggested following the previously followed approach to correcting it, suddenly things returned to a more normal level. I’d be happy to jump the gun and call an odd trend stuffing now and then if it heads things off at the pass and keeps people honest.
But I do think for this list to maintain any value in the end, we do have to deal with ballot stuffing and not just ignore and allow it.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
Exactly
I would say that dealing with ballot stuffing is one of the 4 or 5 most essential parts of managing this process. I no particular order, the critical things are:
- a consistent and defensible system of rotating players among ballot, on-deck, and tester
- ending voting at an appropriate time, balancing the need for input (and discussion) with the need to keep the pace going
- defending the process against input from dozens or hundreds of false votes
- facilitating the discussion, since this is often the most valuable thing to come out.
- responding to and often incorporating the considerations and requests from the community
Anyway, that’s my two cents from participating in the last few years and seeing where things go wrong and right. Call me stubborn, but I’m not interested in a list that nobody can be proud of.
etc.
ballot stuffing
in no way shape or form do i “not care about” ballot stuffing. in fact, i said my peace ove on lonestarball when the feliz issue occurred.
that said, if any of you see ballot stuffing going on pls bring it to the forefront and we will deal with it. i’m not interested in a flawed list either.
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 Oct 25, 2008 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
OMG
Oh no! People are voting for players you don’t like.
Tears.
Ah yes, so sweet.
I am Cameron Wood and this is my son and business partner CW Culberson.
oh I know
you stay up at night thinking about how your favorite prospects were wronged. If you really have that big of an issue with this poll why do you keep clicking on it?
I am Cameron Wood and this is my son and business partner CW Culberson.
Sigh
Camwoody, this is probably your last chance to step back, relax, and be quiet. It’s late, and I’m sure you’re tired. You’re acting like a moron. I normally wouldn’t care, but you sir, are embarrassing Giants fans everywhere.
First off, the poll is for fun. However, we as a community participate in the polls because we believe it is a fair process. After all, how ‘fun’ could it be when one person is singlehandedly manipulating the results?
I understand you’re trying to defend against what you perceive as a slight against Buster Posey, or Tim Alderson. That’s not the case at all – the accusations are against some ‘rogue fan’ who is singlehandedly wrecking the polls. Nobody here has some vendetta against Buster Posey(nor did the rest of the community hate Philip Humber last year) – in fact, I’m sure many of us here are big fans, and believe he has a bright future. Your repeated accusations at gatling and doublestix are not only immature, but just plain wrong. They are not anti-Giants, and have no personal stake in this – only to preserve the validity of the polling process so it can be fun for all of us. Doublestix is a Royals fan – he’s not lobbying for Eric Hosmer or any other player for this particular poll. He is a longtime member of this community, and deserves to be treated with some respect. Similarly, gatling is a Bay area sports fan who voted for Bumgarner at #3, #4, and #5.
Buster Posey is an “acceptable” choice at #13 – a stretch, but with all prospect debates, there is no clear cut answer. I personally would not rank him here myself, but that does not preclude you from using your one vote on him, camwoody. In fact, any Giant fan by nature must “believe” in Buster Posey to some extent, just as any Mariner fan must “believe” in King Felix, or to go to another sport – a Warriors fan in Monta Ellis. For a franchise cornerstone to become a bust/severely injured would be devastating. Nobody faults you for using your single vote on Buster – and any ensuing debate is good. If you can somehow convince the community to vote him on at #13, it would be a controversial decision, but an acceptable one in my view.
That’s not what is happening here. The problem is that his vote count at this point is statistically unlikely, considering his support in previous polls, and the voting trends of this poll. All of just want to see a fair process – nobody is treating this poll as a “big thing”, but at the same time, it ruins the fun for all of us when polls are rigged and our vote means absolutely nothing.
The good news is that despite this likely ballot stuffing, Posey does not have the lead, and would need another run of ballot stuffing to win this poll. With all of us aware of the possibility, I’m sure it would be fairly easy to spot.
Either way, it is just a poll, the results don’t matter one way or another. No need to insult each other over such a trivial issue. Everybody please relax, and remember to treat other members with some respect.
On another note, I just wanted to thank King Billy Royal and pinstripes for running this list – keep up the great work.
And a random shout-out to jpahk and DrBGiantsFan. I was perusing some old records to see if I could locate the identity of this obnoxious Giants fan (with no success) and saw you guys were still around. Nice to see you are still with us.
+1
Boy, the next time I need to make a point and want to be sure I don;t come off sounding like Paul Thomas(or even Crimson Liederhosen, for us old timers), I’m going to ask you write it up for me. Very well said sir, and I thank you.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
So....
Last night around 10pm Brett Anderson received 7 votes in a short period of time (20 minutes).
Are A’s fans stuffing the ballot box? Could be?
Odds are some A’s fan posted something on some A’s board about the poll, and some newbies voted.
I’m sure it’s happened on every vote so far
Does anyone really care……nope
It’s a poll……get over it.
A’s fans always crying about something.
by Calvn n Hobbs on Oct 25, 2008 9:01 AM EDT up reply actions
Alvarez gets high marks and deservedly so
But Brett Anderson has actually experience pro ball and has done quite well, reaching AA two years after being drafted. Anderson is younger and more experienced than Alvarez, shouldn’t that give him an edge?
The monster at the end of this blog.
No
It shouldnt. Or else you’d just give the edge to EVERYBODY who came out of High School over every player who went and played College ball. the reason why you shouldnt is because all the high svhool signees arent better players.
In 2006 a whole lot of guys where ranked higher than Tim Lincecum becuase of “EXPERIENCE” and of course, none of them were better.
Its perfectly okay to rank a guy like Alvarez on a list like this without him having one at bat of pro experience because many of us have seen him play more than guys in the minors.
That's false.
I’m not suggesting that ANY player with pro experience is inherently better than a 2008 draft pick, I’m saying that a highly rated prospect like Anderson (who’ll earn no worse than a B+ grade from Sickels and might crack BA’s Top 20 list for 2009) deserves more respect than a guy like Alvarez who might earn the same grade but hasn’t played an inning of pro ball.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I guess
…but under that rasonale why not put EVERY player who played pro ball ahead? you arent saying that but in past years there have been college stars who were drafted that season who left off the list completely.
More people on here have seen Alvarez swing a bat than have seen Alderson pitch, I bet. I’ve seen both and I love Alderson but its more the principal of people acting as though a top College player like Alvarez HASNT PLAYED ANY BASEBALL. That is esssentially what all you guys are saying…every season
" I cant judge Pedro Alvarez, or David Price, or Tim Lincecum, or whoever becaue I cant see a future star unless he has minor league stats"
Thats fine, but OTHER PEOPLE can. Sometimes it isnt even particularily difficult. I wish this was a contest sometimes. This isnt a merit system. ..Alderson has earned more badges. ..Its looking at ballplayers and picking which ones are better than the others.
Given that Anderson pitched 3 games in the Olympics and in the futures game, I suspect this is no longer true
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Anderson. Brett Anderson. Not Alderson.
You’re basically saying that since people fucked up before we can’t do the poll right this time.
Where’s a wall, I need to bang my head against it.
You know, I should probably just walk away but I can’t stand to have people put words in my mouth. I haven’t knocked Pedro Alvarez in the slightest, I’ve even gone so far as to suggest that he’s going to earn the same grade as Brett Anderson does when Sickels writes his book. All I’ve said is if the two players share the same grade then it makes sense that the more advanced prospect gets the nod.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Doesn't Sickels already rate more advanced prospects higher than equally talented
but less advanced ones. If a AAA player and a Rookie League player actually get the same rating, isn’t it likely that the Rookie Leaguer is more talented?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Oct 25, 2008 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
Rating boost?
I don’t recall Sickels ever expressly saying so (he might have & I just don’t remember) but I think he’ll give a guy with marginal stuff a slight boost (say C to C+) if he’s had success in the upper minors. He also has a tendency to give guys like Chris Pettit (2007 version) an aggressive grade if they put up big numbers their first full season. Pettit was a guy the scouts weren’t sold on but he destroyed A-ball pitching in 2007 so Sickels gave him a B-.
I think when you’re talking about the top guys though, the ones who’ll end up on the 50/50 list (which will definitely include Anderson and I’m assuming will include Avarez) I think he’ll only give a bump when he’s undecided between giving the player an A- vs. a B+. Either grade means you’ve got a really good prospect on your hands.
The monster at the end of this blog.
There's a large range within each grade
The point of ranking 1 – 100 is to try to delineate that range.
Anyway, this just seems like faulty logic to me. This isn’t the Hall of Merit. We’re not raking guys based on their stats and tangibles. Everyone can use the measuring stick they want to.
Personally, I’ve been voting for Alvarez since #3, simply because I believe he’ll be a beast. I watched enough of him in college to have a feel for how he’ll do as a player, and I will continue to regard him highly even if he has a mediocre first year, since he’s coming off an injury. To me, Alvarez’s upside is much greater than Anderson’s, and to be frank, I also think his chance of reaching it is much greater than Anderson as well.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
My measuring stick includes performance in pro ball
I’ve got no problem admitting that if I’m looking at two guys who are real close I’ll lean to the guy who’s gotten it done at the higher level. I wouldn’t vote for Alvarez at #3 but there you go, you get your vote and I get mine.
I gotta say this though. Anderson is going to be at least a #3 SP, maybe a #1 (I see a lot of Mark Mulder in him but I realize not everyone considers vintage Mulder to be a #1 SP) and at this point the only way he doesn’t reach his ceiling whatever it might be is if he gets injured.
Which would suck.
The monster at the end of this blog.
other
Vitters. but I’d be ok with Porcello, Tillman, or Posey
Please don’t close the poll too quickly. If Posey wins here, it is rather crazy: can there really be that many giant fans visiting the site? Those that habitually post here are pretty fair minded…Strange.
Adoptive Parent of Francisco Peguero. He can throw, he can run, he can hit(fastballs), and he's Dominican. What else do you need to know?
Brad Holt
where do you guys see Brad Holt a 4-star prospect? dominated in the NY-PENN league this year most K’s and win and he said before the draft he need to find a second pitch to rely on and looks like he did
Not top 100 yet
He looks like he was a good grab where they got him in the draft.
The CB is apparently better than advertised.
And the FB is one of the better ones in the minors (for a SP).
But, while the CB shows promise, overall the secondary stuff still needs quite a bit of refinement. At the moment, I think most still see him as a likely bullpen arm. Give him time though, and if the secondary stuff comes along, he’ll have a good chance to make a list like this in a year or two.
Holt is top 100
although I haven’t bothered to tote up my top 100. If I have to knock out wes hodges or lou marson or someone (not to bust on wes and lou), so be it.
Carlos Santana ....
would get my vote before Buster Posey. I really don’t understand how he can even be garnering votes against some of the other options but that’s just me.
I have a question though. Where do we put a guy like Michael Inoa?
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 Oct 25, 2008 10:22 AM EDT reply actions
Inoa
I don’t think he should sniff the Top 25 at this point. That said, a tester around that point would probably be fair, as I’m sure there are some who see him a bit higher than me.
Really?
I know the scouting reports are great and all, but has anyone actually seen this kid throw a pitch? I’ll be honest and say as an A’s fan I hope he lives up to the hype, but I’d rather err on the side of caution with him and wouldn’t personally consider him before #40 at least. Just too much of an unknown to be a top 25 guy this year I think.
"So's your mom"-David Sloane
And even then, what would be our basis for voting or not voting for him?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Oct 25, 2008 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree 100%
You’ve got to think though that the #25 poll has 10 guys on it, plus a queue of 5 or so guys. That group basically represents the Top 40. Again, I wouldn’t have him that high, but a tester in that group somewhere couldn’t hurt. If he doesn’t get much support, then we can bump him down the list.
Shouldn't even be in the top 100
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Not sure about that
But I do believe there’s a big difference between a college player who most of us have seen actually play at some point and where we know the statistical trends, versus a high schooler where the stats are relatively useless but we might have seen some live scouting clips, versus a kid with no stats at all where all we’re relying on is what a few scouts have said, and even what they’ve said has generally been pretty vague.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
Where was Felix Hernandez ranked when he first got signed?
That’s a bit of a cop out but it’s the closest comp I can think of. SF’s Angel Villalona didn’t make BA’s Top 50 list until after he made his American debut, it wouldn’t break my heart if the same thing happened to Inoa. I mean, the guy is obviously impressive if he could get the A’s of all teams to drop $4.25 million on him but he’s got a long road to haul and he’s only pitched in Instructs. Make him earn his spot on any Top 50 list by actually playing in a pro game or three first.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Community Prospect #14
I’m going to let this poll run until around 1 eastern time. Thanks!
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 Oct 25, 2008 10:25 AM EDT reply actions
My Mets Poll
This is a great idea which is why I’ve created a poll like this on the Met’s site vote if you would like
Posey
I haven’t read this whole thread so I don’t know if anyone has pointed this out already but no way is Posey the 13th best prospect in baseball and no way is Alderson the 12th best. I wish Giants fans would stop voting for their players and take a more subjected view – it is starting to take away from the poll.
For the record I went with Porcello
I have alderson
and I don’t think he deserves spots ahead of other players I have. But I’ll just take this list with a bit of a grain of salt. I do think alderson is pretty good, and won’t dwell on it.
As soon as Posey is on, it will be interesting to see what happens with Big V or Gillaspie who I know Giants fans like very much. I’m interested to see where Big V will be slotted anyhow but if this continues, it could be really interesting because the prospecting community seems to be swaying away from him ever doing much.
OH NOES! BUSTER GOT 13% OF TEH VOTES!
everyone panic! it must be the evil Giants fans stuffing the box! Voter fraud! VOTER FRAUD!
(meanwhile, Alvarez and Anderson are in the lead… didn’t some “experts” like Posey more than Alvarez?)
Psycho killer, qu'est-ce que c'est?
+1
Thank you Shik!!!
Posey received 13% of the vote
Posey wasn’t even in 2nd place
Was nowhere close to winning the poll, and a few posters get their panties all wet.
by Calvn n Hobbs on Oct 25, 2008 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
nothing wrong with wet panties
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 Oct 25, 2008 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions
LOL... Freudian slip, CH?
me thinks he meant “panties in a bunch” or “sand in their vajayjay”
Psycho killer, qu'est-ce que c'est?
I'd swear
it is a buncha SF fans and others creating new logins just to vote. Too funny. It’s not the community list, it’s a few members of the community. Either that or John is just really popular in the Castro.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
