Community Prospect List: #41
After 345 votes Fernando Martinez has been declared the winner with 19% of the vote. Freddie Freeman came in second place with 14%. Nobody will be removed from the poll this time as everyone scored at least 4%. Jake Arrieta will be added to the poll. If you wish to vote other just list the person below. This way we're not wasting a spot.
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)
13. PEDRO ALVAREZ - 3B (Pittsburgh)
14. RICK PORCELLO - SP (Detroit)
15. DEXTER FOWLER - OF (Colorado)
16. BRETT ANDERSON - SP (Oakland)*
17. DEREK HOLLAND - SP (Texas)
18. ANDREW McCUTCHEN - OF (Pittsburgh)
19. BUSTER POSEY - C (San Francisco)
20. CHRIS TILLMAN - SP (Baltimore)
21. LARS ANDERSON - 1B (Boston)
22. JUSTIN SMOAK - 1B (Texas)
23. THOMAS HANSON - SP (Atlanta)
24. ELVIS ANDRUS - SS (Texas)
25. ANGEL VILLALONA - 1B (San Francisco)
26. JHOULYS CHACIN - SP (Colorado)
27. BRIAN MATUSZ - SP (Baltimore)
28. ERIC HOSMER - 1B (Kansas City)
29. TIM BECKHAM - SS (Tampa Bay)
30. MAX RAMIREZ - C/1B (Texas)
31. JARROD PARKER - SP (Arizona)
32. MICHAEL STANTON - OF (Florida)
33. MAT GAMEL - 3B (Milwaukee)
34. JESUS MONTERO - C (New York)
35. BRETT WALLACE - 3B (St. Louis)
36. JORDAN SCHAFER - OF (Atlanta)
37. WADE DAVIS - SP (Tampa Bay)
38. LOGAN MORRISON - 1B (Florida)
39. CARLOS SANTANA - C (Cleveland)
40. FERNANDO MARTINEZ - OF (New York)
CANDIDATES - Josh Vitters, Freddie Freeman, Carlos Triunfel, Brett Cecil, James McDonald, Yonder Alonso, Michael Bowden, Chris Carter, Jake Arrieta & Reid Brignac
TESTERS - Greg Halman, Phillippe Aumont, Michael Saunders, Ben Revere, Austin Jackson, Jeremy Hellickson, Jordan Zimmermann, Jose Tabata, Matt Dominguez, Alcides Escobar, Carlos Carrasco & Wilmer Flores
Please post more ideas for testers and we will consider them
70 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
McDonald, then Brignac
Going with the best pitcher left on the board here. After that, I don’t want to put our umpteenth first baseman on the board. In real baseball—not fantasy baseball—I think Brignac is likely to be as good or better than Andrus.
+2
I’m thinking McDonald, Vitters, Alonso
McDonald, then Carter, then Cecil
unless Hellickson shows up here somewhere.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
reverse
I’d go Brignac and then McDonald, but same difference I guess.
And agree that Brignac will clearly be a better player than Andrus. Steadier defensively, and a lot more pop. I actually like Andrus and would have thought I liked him more than most prospect followers, but shocked that he’s ranked so much higher than Brignac.
i thought 5 percent was the cutoff, when did that change? We should really have more new blood flowing in these polls. Speaking of which, how in the world is Hellickson still not on the poll? It’s just ridiculous.
For now, Arrieta gets my vote, although I would vote for Hellickson
+1
I think 5% is better. I like more turnover of the testers.
It is 5%. I think Pinstripes just had a brain cramp.
"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 Nov 9, 2008 9:40 PM EST up reply actions
Voted Alonso,
but I still think Hellickson deserves a tester and is probably the best prospect not yet listed.
+1
i think hellickson could be a really special pitcher
close
I also went Hellickson, but I don’t think Alonso looks out of place. I’d rather have a guy like Alonso that has a good eye, than a big power, high k guy like Carter. Those guys just get exposed as they move up levels.
by RoyalsFan4Life on Nov 10, 2008 12:35 AM EST up reply actions
I have no idea
Someone convince me.
The Dodgers won't win a playoff series until the Cool-a-Coo returns.
Take a look at Brignac
His ‘08 looks rough, and it was. But he’s been promoted aggressively, while making great strides with his defense at short, where he now looks perfectly capable of sticking. The power is still great for a middle infielder, and I think if they just leave him at AAA for the whole year, his average, walk rate, and strikeout rate will rebound a great deal. When you take into account how few shortstop prospects there are at all (he would be the third on the list), I think you especially have to look at Brignac.
He hasn't been promoted THAT aggressively
And his power’s only good, even for a MI. The big concern for me is his plate command – if he can get his K rate back to what it was the preceding two years, and start walking a little bit more, then he could very well be an above average major league SS as soon as next year. Otherwise, he seems to be a marginal starting SS. I’m generally optimistic about him, so I lean towards the first possibility. I think he’s a reasonable pick now, but I’d be happier if there was a better.
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Nov 9, 2008 10:01 PM EST up reply actions
Definitely
We’d all be happier if there was better. It’s a pretty top-heavy group of prospects this year.
Other
Chris Perez.
He’ll be in the major next year, throws 94-97, and his slider is a better swing-and-miss pitch than anyone’s left on this board. The level and the upside make him a better fit here than anyone else, IMO. I don’t care if he’s a reliever, if he’s the best pitcher left on the board and could be closing games at the major league level this year.
Jason Motte > Chris Perez?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I don't think so, personally
There are some suggesting that Motte may be a better pitcher NEXt year because of his better control….but thus far, he doesn’t really have the stuff that Perez has – his fastball is great, but he lacks the wicked secondary offering that Perez has.
Cards fans are psyched that Motte, a converted catcher, came on the way he did last year, but I think they’re a little irrationally exuberant if they think his upside is as great as Perez’s. He may be a little safer, but that about it….
Motte's K rate is totally insane though
He’s either got an 80 fastball or way better secondary stuff than he’s getting credit for.
Perez doesn’t do that much for me. I’m not much of a fan of relievers with minus control. I don’t see people asking for Andrew Carignan testers…
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
FB
His fastball is in the upper 90s and I know he’s been clocked at 100.
The Dodgers won't win a playoff series until the Cool-a-Coo returns.
right
he meant that Motte’s fastball is an 80 on the scouting 20-80 scale that rates pitches
Go Pirates!!!
by cool hand Charlie on Nov 10, 2008 9:17 AM EST up reply actions
I just loved John's comment about Chris Perez from the last book
Frankly, it may have been worth the whole purchase of it. He described him as having, (and I’m paraphrasing here), “an evil, Stalinist slider.”
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Nov 10, 2008 11:17 AM EST up reply actions
50 is the mininum
for rookie eligibility.
And although there is also a limit for service time, we’ve never used it in our criteria on this annual list.
He’s eligible.
50 is the eligibility limit
And we’re ignoring service time on this list.
So he’s eligible.
Freddie Freeman vs. Matt Dominguez
Can someone sell me on Freddie Freeman? Especially why he’d be selected over Matt D.?
Both players were in teh same league at essentially the same age last year.
Advantages for Freeman:
+ 0.40 advantage on OPS
Advantages for Dominguez:
- Much higher on the defensive spectrum;
- Thought to be a plus defender at that position;
Given how similar they are in things like OPS, ISOP, ARL, and walk rate, I’d like to hear why Freeman would be a better choice.
Freeman
We love our numbers around here. But in general I agree with you. Freeman is a little overrated, and Dominguez is underrated.
Keep in mind, though, that coming out of high school and even after rookie ball, a lot of scouts thought Dominguez had a pretty raw bat that was going to take a while to develop. I don’t think 345 solid ABs totally changes the equation there.
Guesses
If you wanted to make a case for Freeman here, you’d probably start with the better BB rate, the better K-rate, and the scouting reports, which have been nothing but glowing about Freeman.
But I don’t really know. I haven’t read much about Dominguez. His numbers certainly look good, and if the scouting reports about his defense are strong, then you’ve certainly got a case for him.
Better K rate
They’re pretty much the same.
Freeman does have the better walk rate, but at age 18 in A-ball, I;m not going to take a career 1st baseman over a slick 3B who can hit based just on that.
Kupe’s point about Dominguez being thought of as the bext fielder/worst hitter of the Vitters/Moose/Ahrens/Dominguez group is a valid point here….but may also be an argument in Dominguez’s favor, since he seemed to have figured it out sooner than expected.
True enough
Perhaps one reason everyone is so high on Freeman now is that he kinda came out of nowhere. Everyone was all over Heyward (naturally), but then here comes this 5th round pick 1B who absolutely rakes in his pro debut when no one was really expecting much. So I guess that could be one reason I’ve heard so much about Freeman this year: he was something of a surprise to prospect watchers relative to the rest of the field.
His K rate is also a touch better
I think I would rather have Freeman (more ABs at this level, slightly better BB and K rates), but you’re certainly right that it’s a much tighter race than most people (or I at least) assumed
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Nov 9, 2008 10:31 PM EST up reply actions
put Hellickson on
He deserves a tester here
The 2008 Rogelio Moret League Fantasy Baseball Champions!
by The Congo Hammer on Nov 9, 2008 8:24 PM EST reply actions
Michael Burgess
What’s up with the lack of support for this guy? We are supporting young, low-level players with light-tower power and high K rates when they are at 1B; Burgess has all that, but plays higher on the defensive spectrum.
Hypothesis: Burgess’s closest comp in the minors leagues is Travis Snider.
Travis Snider can make contact with a baseball
The BA and the K rate are huge concerns with Burgess and don’t compare well to Snider, especially when you take age-to-level into account.
Burgess is in danger of being a slightly better version of Rob Stratton.
Age to level?
Burgess was 19 in 2008, and played at A/A+.
At age-19, Snider was in A-ball. So age to level, they are about as close as you can get. Similar draft position, fire hydrant bodies, same fielding position, and both are high-school draftees that has a full season of A ball at age 19. So far, mighty dang similar.
Now, their walk rates are also eerily similar, and their ISOP also quite close. Both have strikeout problems, with Burgess’s being slightly worse, but they are certainly within shouting distance. You say that Burgess has a BA concern, but don’t forget that the criticism of Snider through this year was an unsustainably high BABIP and thus BA, given his own K rate problems.
Both could flame out if they don’t correct the K rate problem. But both have much more in common than they have differences, and saying that Snider’s numbers are much different than Burgess just isn’t true – at least, not thru age-19..
K rate
Snider strikes out plenty as well.
Burgess is another guy who’s being pretty underrated. He’s not a prototypical hulking slugger who gets it done through brute strength – he’s all bat speed and loft. The average should come up as the Ks come down, and with his decent eye at the plate, fast bat and youth, I see no reason why he can’t or won’t improve on that.
He’s a teenager. Why rush to conclusions?
I don't mean to rush to a negative conclusion
But I won’t rush to a positive one either, especially while his BA is so low and his K rate is so high. I’ve thought since draft day that he had the talent to really rocket up the charts, but he could just as easily profile as a guy who simply doesn’t make enough contact to be a corner outfielder in the bigs.
Right
Same goes for Snider…you do realize he had a 41% BABIP while having just a 13.7% LD rate in A ball, right? At the same age and level, Burgess had a much lower BABIP (33), on a line drive rate that was almost the same (12.7). Boom, there’s a bunch of your difference in BA right there.
I think the BA is not a very useful gauge, since it’s a function of LD and K rate. Right now, Burgess has a K problem, but is advanced ARL and showing exceptional power. If he makes the same improvements on K rate that Snider made at age 20/21, he will continue to shadow him very closely.
******************************************
In general, I feel like these last 15 prospects or so have seen relatively little debate based on evidence and comparing/contrasting, and a lot of one-line advocacy statements. I don’t know if this is because teh polls are so fast or what, but it makes me wonder if we’re going to look back and realized we flat out missed a few guys.
You're right but
I wonder if this argument is more effective as an attack against Snider than a support of Burgess. What Snider did this season at AA is undoubtedly impressive in terms of ARL, but it’s remarkably similar to what he did the previous year in A ball at 19 when one ignores the ridiculous BABIP. I don’t want to spent too much time attacking a 20 year old hitter who has already done well in the majors, but if his strikeout rate remains what it is, then what are the real chances he’ll have an OPS above .850 without a phenomenal BABIP?
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Nov 9, 2008 10:36 PM EST up reply actions
Burgess...
I always think of Pat Burrell when I look at Michael’s numbers. Burgess needs to learn to walk a little more, but I think that may be a good comp at the pro level. Of course he will be much better defensively though if he makes it.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
This is an argument for Burgess, right?
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Nov 10, 2008 11:26 AM EST up reply actions
Burgess
Hard for me to see why CC would be on here, but Burgess is not. CC was in the RK leagues at age-19, Burgess was in A and A+. In 2008, they were at the same level, despite Burgess’s being 2 yrs younger. Burgess has worse K rate problems, but is better than CC was at the same age. Finally, Burgess profiles to stick at RF, whereas CC is likely a 1B only.
Thoughts?
Blanks
Don’t think he should be going yet, but his numbers are impressive and is worth considering.
Other
Wilmer Flores time, how many 16 year olds put up the production that he did, at any level?
Also, probably time to consider Brad Holt as well, his numbers in Brooklyn were just gaudy and John Manuel said he was probably his favorite pick in the entire draft, call it a tester or whatever, but he deserves some love now.
Not yet for any of those guys.
"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 Nov 9, 2008 9:41 PM EST up reply actions
Mets
Too early for Flores but he should be in the top 50 IMO.
Holt and Niese should be in the top 100, but in the 80s or 90s.
Evans has too many AB.
Carp is top 150, but not 100.
Holt +
I wouldn’t have thought Holt would be a top 100 guy, even considering his excellent production in SS-A, but after hearing BA gush about him without any prompting, I’m starting to re-consider… and I’m a met fan.
Flores should be 60-70, Niese 75-85, Carp outside the top 100
Alcides Escobar
is next.
ProjectProspect.com - Sullivan10x@yahoo.com
Been saying it for a while
Unless we are making a fantasy only list!!
Austin Jackson and Desmond Jennings time?
It really bothers me that we’re going to end up with a dozen first basemen in our top 50. Let’s get A-Jax in there.
I'll vote for Jennings when he plays 130 games in a season
Right now he looks like the next Chris Snelling.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Let's not say things we can't take back
I agree that Jennings needs to demonstrate the ability to make it through a year (at least to the degree that Orlando Hudson ever does). But comparing a guy to Snelling isn’t nice. Snelling doesn’t just get injured; he’s the baseball equivalent of the law school hypothetical of the guy who gets shot while falling from a building.
He causes profound, yet solipsistic musings on proximate causality?
I must have missed that series at Lookout Landing.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I know Revere is up for a tester...
but I think that both Aaron Hicks and Angel Morales might be better CF prospects in the Twins system. I think Hicks should get a tester soon,
Relax, all right? Don't try to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
Crash Davis

by 












