A's take #1 in MLB Prospects?
by AthleticsReign on Jul 17, 2008 8:49 PM EDT
137 comments
Just throwing this out to see where you all think the A's stand at this point? Have they done enough these last two trades to overtake Tampa as #1? Looking at their top 10 is just scary good. Their top 20 could potentially all be decent mlb players as I don't think its even a question of who has the most prospect depth. Off the top of my head this is my personal list.
1. Gio Gonzalez
2. Trevor Cahill
3. Brett Anderson
4. Adrian Cardenas
5. Michel Inoa
6. James Simmons
7. Sean Doolittle
8. Chris Carter
9. Vince Mazzaro
10. Aaron Cunningham
The amout of quality players is just sickening.
3 recs |
137 comments
Email
Print
Comments
HAHAHA
Get serious. They lack the high upside prospects the Rays have. Who out of that group are you convinced can be an elite MLBer? And dont say Inoa, the kid is 16.
by bravitos5122 on Jul 17, 2008 9:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
A's are only better than the Rays based on Depth.
Price is better than any of the A’s prospects but A’s have much more depth.
When will then be now? Soon.
by Syphon on Jul 17, 2008 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would put the Rays ahead of them
and maybe the Rangers, especially if Daniels is able to land some more talent this month in a trade or two. In a couple of years both the A’s and Rangers might be beating up on Seattle and LAA regularly with the talent they have on hand.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
by t ball on Jul 17, 2008 9:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
For now the A's are ahead of the Rangers ...
the Rangers’ strength is depth - they lack even as much high end talent as the A’s have (which is their system’s weakness) - but, for now, at least, the A’s have surpassed the Rangers in terms of depth.
The Rays clearly have more high end talent—but the A’s have more depth of good or better talent … which is more valuable? Good question …
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on Jul 18, 2008 4:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is good topic
to revisit after the trade deadline. The Rays might deal away someone (even to the A’s or Rangers) and the A’s might deal Street, the Rangers have several players they could deal (Millwood or Padilla, Bradley, one of the catchers, Blalock, Guardado or Wright from the bullpen, Catalanotto have all been rumored to be available.)
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
by t ball on Jul 18, 2008 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who
of that group could be elite MLBr’s?? Well lets start out by asking who behind Price the Rays have that YOU think can be and elite MLB’r?? It all depends on what you consider elite. I think Price is the best prospect out of either organization, but behind that i’ll take the A’s system. More depth, and more consistency. IMO any of Cahill/Gio/Anderson/Simmons/Mazzaro could be future all-stars. And yes, we will mention Inoa because he’s legit. He could be pitching in the big leagues by the time he is 19-20, and many scouts say that at 16, he would have went in the top 5 in this years draft. The A’s have more pitching then that worth noting, but I am short on time. Doolittle/Cardenas/Carter/Cunningham and more have the potential to be above average MLB hitters, and Beane likely isn’t even done trading yet.
by JPShark on Jul 17, 2008 9:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What?
Do they have left to trade? I’m sure all the playoff contenders will be knocking down Billy’s door to get their hands on Emil Brown and Jack Hannahan. LOL
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Jul 18, 2008 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about Street or Duchscherer?
Nothing left to trade, huh?
by aap212 on Jul 18, 2008 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or Embree.
Or Mark Ellis.
Or Bobby Crosby.
Or Murton.
by jibs on Jul 19, 2008 8:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly
how much could they get for any of those guys save Street?
by FirebatM3 on Jul 19, 2008 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think they can get a decent (B-/C+) prospect for Embree from a contender
Duke would obviously command a premium return the way he’s been pitching this year. Ellis is hard to gauge—he’s actually an outstanding player but teams that don’t know how to evaluate defense (probably >50% of them) will just see a below-average hitter. Crosby is dreck, the A’s would be lucky to get someone to claim him on waivers. Murton would have to be thrown in on a deal (perhaps with Street).
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 19, 2008 10:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Inoa?
already in head of Doolittle and Simmons? I’m pretty high on Inoa, but I wouldn’t put him above those players.
by asyouwish33 on Jul 17, 2008 9:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Rays have more talent developing
Nick Barnese is a pitcher that is following the McGee/Davis/Hellickson pipeline and is pitching very well in SS-A tonight he K’d 10 guys in 5.2 IP and has a 1.57 ERA on the season.
by Bravesin07 on Jul 17, 2008 9:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
depth is overrated
Depth is nice but fans can overrate it. I will always take the system with less depth but produces more core players than a system who produces a lot of major leaguers but few difference makers.
by bravitos5122 on Jul 17, 2008 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
Top prospects collapse all of the time. Jake McGee was probably a better prospect than anybody the As have, but a single injury and though he might come back, it’s rather uncertain. In terms of hitting prospects, I think you have a better point, except the As are relatively weak in terms of elite hitting prospects
www.loftylantern.com
by OldProspects on Jul 17, 2008 9:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Since most prospects don't make it
Depth is far more important than having one or two “Sure thing” future All-Stars. I can barely even comprehend the opposite argument.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 20, 2008 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
Rangers and Rays 1 and 1A…Oakland is in the top 10 though.
Josh Hamilton is better than you.
by Longhorn on Jul 17, 2008 9:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Says the Rangers fan.
When will then be now? Soon.
by Syphon on Jul 17, 2008 10:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Truth hurts?
Josh Hamilton is better than you.
by Longhorn on Jul 18, 2008 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your truth differs from my truth.
So no.
"With 16-year-old Dominican righty Michel Inoa in tow, Gio Gonzalez improving at Triple-A and lefty Brett Anderson carving up Double-Abatters along with Simmons and Trevor Cahill, Oakland’s pitching depthis officially the envy of baseball." - BaseballAmerica.com
by Syphon on Jul 18, 2008 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who are the Rangers even going to have after this year?
Neftali Feliz is terrific, Eric Hurley, Kasey Kiker, Michael Main and Teagarden are good, and Elvis Andrus is interesting but once Davis and Max Ramirez get promoted, their system will look a bit thin, no? Granted that’s for the best of reasons, but I can’t imaging them being stronger than either the Rays or the As
www.loftylantern.com
by OldProspects on Jul 17, 2008 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Rangers after this year
Even without Davis, Hurley, and Ramirez the system is stocked pretty well. Feliz, Smoak, Andrus, Main, Beavan, Kiker, Teagarden, Beltre, Harrison, Holland (very under the radar lefty), Hunter, Vallejo, Font, Martin Perez, Madrigal. I think all of those guys would be in most any team’s top 20, with the possible exception of Perez and Font simply because they’re so young.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
by t ball on Jul 17, 2008 11:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Response
No mention of John Mayberry?
The guy’s splits against LHP over the last few years, including this year in AAA, indicate that his floor is 4th outfielder/backup 1B capable of being one half of a very formidable platoon. If he’s figured out how to make things work consistently against RHPs, he could be a very good regular.
by mrkupe on Jul 17, 2008 11:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I know his ceiling isn’t great, but I think he is underappreciated on this site. I see him becoming a 260-270 type hitter with an OBP in the 330s. Draws 50 walks or so a season, strikes out 120+ times and hits 25-30 homers. That’s pretty nice to have, especially in AAA. I could see him getting a lot of playing time next year in the majors. Move Murphy to LF and put Mayberry in RF (don’t know much about his defense but I don’t hear bad things about it… and no news is good news).
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Jul 18, 2008 1:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't try to list everyone
Mayberry belongs there too.
I think one of the real strengths of the Rangers’ system is in the youngest guys. They have a lot of guys in A ball who are very interesting, and several young Latin arms that look promising.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
by t ball on Jul 18, 2008 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
By your own count
Having 15 players who would make the average team’s top 20 is not exactly proof that the system would be the best in the major leagues.
I’m not arguing that the Rangers don’t have a strong minor league system; of course they do. It’s even more impressive when you consider the set of people that they’ve graduated (which might include Matt Harrison, btw). But the list of people you’re mentioning doesn’t have as much elite talent as do the Rays, or as much depth as the As.
www.loftylantern.com
by OldProspects on Jul 17, 2008 11:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Andrus is more than interesting.
He’s 19 in AA, hitting for average and getting-on-base. He’s essentially doing what Fernando Martinez is doing except with great defense at SS instead of average defense in LF.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Jul 17, 2008 11:09 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Point taken
www.loftylantern.com
by OldProspects on Jul 17, 2008 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's pretty arguable
Elvis is hitting the Texas league for absolutely no power. Fernando is hitting in the Eastern league, slugging over .400 (which Elvis is not even close to) and he’s playing centerfield.
by Lunkwill Fook on Jul 21, 2008 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rangers are not in the top 3
Rays are definitely #1. Oakland is definitely #2. After that is a pretty big drop-off.
Oakland and Tampa will each have three guys in the top 25 (Cahill, Anderson, Cardenas, Price, Davis, Hellickson – all top 25) and still good depth after that. Feliz will be top 15 prospect. Tegarden, Andrus, Smoak may be in the 30-50 range – if that.
Rangers AT BEST are #3, and they are way far away from either Tampa or Oakland. If I thought on it more, I may come up with teams better than Texas (San Fran? Boston?
by Galt on Jul 18, 2008 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Smoak
Definitely top 25. Andrus is borderline, but Cardenas isn’t in his league and Davis is borderline too.
by bushe on Jul 18, 2008 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Smoak is definitely top 25?
Compare him to Matt Laporta for example from last year. LaPorta did obscenely well in his first try out in A ball, and still only made #22. Granted, Smoak is a stronger defensive player than LaPorta, but I don’t think he’d make the top 25 unless he signs relatively quickly and does very well. That isn’t to say he isn’t an excellent prospect – he is – but probably not an immediate top 25 pick
www.loftylantern.com
by OldProspects on Jul 18, 2008 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Better defense, as stated
And a year younger.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Stuff-You-Need-Brett-Favre-action-figure-bench?urn=nfl,93739
by BudLight on Jul 18, 2008 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Smoak didn't have a bad year like LaPorta
and doesn’t have questions about his ability to use wood
by bushe on Jul 21, 2008 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
smoak
hasn’t proven anything in professional ball, and he did have problems in the cape cod league after his sophmore year. I love the guy but I find it hard to automatically put him in that kind of class. Tons of top prospects wash out every year, at least LaPorta has proven his worth.
by zeisenbe on Jul 22, 2008 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rangers in top 25
Feliz for sure. Andrus maybe. Smoak probably. Then you might have Beltre/Main/Beaven depending on if they can tear it up in the 2nd half.
This is the Texas Rangers, professional destroyers of hope, we're talking about. - BAC
by nikpin on Jul 19, 2008 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
Andrus and Smoak aren’t going to be top 25. Andrus has do absolutely nothing in the minors. Great, he’s young. At some point he has to at least produce. He’s empty average and that’s it. No walks, no power, no speed.
Smoak wasn’t even one of the top 10 prospects of the ‘08 draft, and now he’s going to be a top 25 prospect in all of baseball? Please remove your rose colored glasses. He still hasn’t even played a game.
The As are volumes better than the Rangers.
by Galt on Jul 19, 2008 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Andrus
and by saying he has no speed, I of course meant that he only has 37 steals.
Point still remains that he’s got a sub .700 OPS, he doesn’t walk much, strikes out a fair amount, and does truly have no power. And I mean NO power.
by Galt on Jul 19, 2008 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Andrus
While I agree that Andrus isn’t a top-25 prospect, I think this is a clear case of looking only at some superficial numbers instead of all the ways in which a ballplayer can help win games. If Andrus becomes a .350 OBP guy in the bigs, as he’s been doing this year in AA (at a super-young age), he’s extremely valuable because of his outstanding defensive skills at a middle infield position. Neither Ozzie nor Omar were able to post a .350 OBP in a season until their age-29 seasons. Now, I’m not saying Andrus has as much range as those two greats, but – by all reports – he’s not too far behind.
by BobbyMac on Jul 19, 2008 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
R U High?
KLaw had Smoak as his #3 player. I could never find BAs draft ranking but in their mock they had him going #5 to San Fran. Kevin Goldstein had him #4. I don’t know if you have heard of Jon Sickels but he had him ranked #5. So if you would take that crack pipe out of your mouth and open your eyes that would be awesome.
I’ve seen many people far smarter than you opinion that Smoak will be the Rangers #1 prospect following this year. Then one Neftali Feliz emerged and BA recently ranked him #12 overall in their midseason re-rank, one spot ahead of Oaklands best pitching prospect. I would think you would know that considering you referenced it above. So even if Feliz has passed him by, wouldn’‘t that put Smoak in the 15-25 range.
And on Andrus I see you amended your comment about him having no speed which is obviously inaccurate. He’s a 19 year old SS in AA, but I guess hes got to hit 20 homers to impress you. Hes got the potential to play gold glove D at SS with an MLB average bat. But seeing your above rational makes me realize you might think that has no value. After 71 games this year Andrus was hitting .298/.356/.353 this year and has been on a tear after coming back from an early season injury. Hes obviously no Barry Bonds but he does walk more than never as you previously stated. I don’t know what kind of power your really expecting a 19 year old in AA that weighs maybe 180 LBS.
Not to mention the Rangers have a 22 year old First Baseman actually succeeding upon being called up. Who if he had been left in the minors this year would be in the top 15 right up there with Feliz. I guess it would be better for us to have guys like Daric Barton, Travis Buck and Carlos Gonzalez so we could send them back down to maintain their prospect eligibility. After all that’s what it’s all about right?
I could write another something about Engel Beltre but you can just go to BA and look at the Prospect Hot Sheet.
This is the Texas Rangers, professional destroyers of hope, we're talking about. - BAC
by nikpin on Jul 19, 2008 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As an exercise
I’m still trying to figure out where Cardenas, a “2B”/maybe LF, ranks in terms of Rangers positional prospect.
Obviously, I have him below Davis and Ramirez, and Andrus and Smoak as well.
Is he a better position prospect than Teagarden? Lemon? Borbon?
by FirebatM3 on Jul 19, 2008 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Answers to your questions
Yes, yes, yes
by mrkupe on Jul 19, 2008 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cardenas
I would assume he’s in the 30-40 range when they release them this winter. But if he has to come off 2B, which a lot think he will, his bat won’t play so well in LF.
This is the Texas Rangers, professional destroyers of hope, we're talking about. - BAC
by nikpin on Jul 19, 2008 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
3B is a LOT more likely than LF
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 19, 2008 10:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The scouting reports I've read say otherwise
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 20, 2008 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bit of a late answer
but Jim Callis said that he thought Cardenas would end up at third in his chat o’ the week at BA…
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Response
I think his bat’s going to play reasonably well most anywhere. High batting average, at least a fair number of walks, average pop, solid speed. He might be the sort of guy who plays 2B for a team one year, then LF the next, then 3B the year after that . . .but I think the point is, he’s going to play, and he’s going to perform at a very respectable level.
by mrkupe on Jul 20, 2008 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the reason he's been tried other places is that he was with the Phils
Who, you know, have an ok 2B for the next several years. Cardenas is too special a player to get blocked behind Utley, so they looked other places.
As for PT’s comment, one place is here
Strengths: Thick and strong, Cardenas has an easy, compact stroke from the left side that produces consistent line drives with good loft power. He squares up breaking balls and fastballs equally well, and he makes hard contact to all fields. He exhibits above-average arm strength at his new position.
by nevermoor on Jul 22, 2008 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
re
I like the jab you take at the way the A’s do things.
If it’s one thing the Rangers have proven its that they know how to handle their talent better than the A’s, right?
by blee1134 on Jul 19, 2008 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rangers
This discussion is about the A’s and Rangers. I was merely pointing out that the Rangers had graduated a lot of their upper echelon hitting talent while the A’s hitters aren’t quite hitting like they should.
I think its Goldstein that considers players under 25 to be prospects and when you have guys like Davis/Boggs/Ramirez/Duran all up in the big leagues it makes a big difference in how your system looks compared to the A’s when Gonzalez can’t even beat out Emil Brown for a job.
This is the Texas Rangers, professional destroyers of hope, we're talking about. - BAC
by nikpin on Jul 19, 2008 6:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
re
Gonzalez can’t beat out Brown? Are you really trying to use that as an argument?
How about when Chris Davis couldn’t beat out Chris Shelton?
by blee1134 on Jul 19, 2008 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
When was this?
I seem to remember Chris Shelton being DFA.
This is the Texas Rangers, professional destroyers of hope, we're talking about. - BAC
by nikpin on Jul 19, 2008 10:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"How about when Chris Davis couldn’t beat out Chris Shelton?"
When did that happen?
"Sooner or later, prospects kill you, because you hang onto them." - Greggo, 11/22/2005
by Agreen07 on Jul 20, 2008 10:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
re
in the same sense that Carlos Gonzalez couldn’t beat out Emil Brown
by blee1134 on Jul 21, 2008 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry
I didn’t realize that Oakland has begun playing RF in CF that weren’t really interested in playing defense to begin with. But that probably was a bad comparison by me. My other two posts were written in a bit of a blinding rage. A more apt comparison might be Travis Buck not being able to beat out Emil Brown for those 295ABs hes received this year.
Also I don’t see how Chris Davis jumping up two levels this year to render the Broussard/Shelton/Cat epic first base disaster a distant memory.
This is the Texas Rangers, professional destroyers of hope, we're talking about. - BAC
by nikpin on Jul 21, 2008 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh my.
Yep! Just the center fielder for the best defensive team in the majors!!!
Good thinkin!
by Emmett89 on Jul 21, 2008 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
That’s why I was extremely confused when I saw Gonzalez playing CF. I know he has the arm and speed to play out there but who knows maybe in the last 4 months hes taken an interest in actually playing defense.
This is the Texas Rangers, professional destroyers of hope, we're talking about. - BAC
by nikpin on Jul 21, 2008 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It sure looks like he has
Because he’s been pretty good out there.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 21, 2008 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gonzalez has been pretty outstanding defensively
Offensively… not so much. But at least he’s showing potential.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 1:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're getting in
over your head, here. You’re reaching.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
by t ball on Jul 19, 2008 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was drafted 11th
thus not even the top 10 in that draft. I realize it’s that cut and dry, but you are absolutely on crack if you think he’ll crack top 25 this offseason.
by Galt on Jul 19, 2008 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So Jason Castro
is a better prospect than Justin Smoak? Ike Davis is better than Gerrit Cole?
Basing the quality of prospects solely on draft position is dumb.
by FirebatM3 on Jul 19, 2008 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good Argument
You said Smoak wasn’t one of the ten best prospects in the draft. Feel free to admit your wrong.
This is the Texas Rangers, professional destroyers of hope, we're talking about. - BAC
by nikpin on Jul 19, 2008 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and enough
with the condescending douchebaggery.
go fuck yourself.
by Galt on Jul 19, 2008 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don't think Andrus
will make the top 25, but you’re underselling him a bit. He’s the youngest player in the league, and he has more than held his own. His numbers have improved every single month, not exactly the mark of an overmatched player. Andrus’s OPS numbers by month:
April – .612
May -.662
June – ..777
July – .796
Add in his speed and defensive potential and he’s nothing to sneeze at. Cardenas is an awfully nice player, but he’s a year older and playing at a lower level.
And you’re right, there is no condescending douchiness needed here. We ALL have rose colored glasses on to a certain degree. And we could all make solid cases with details about a number of prospects on our favorite teams.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
by t ball on Jul 19, 2008 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats witty.
This is the Texas Rangers, professional destroyers of hope, we're talking about. - BAC
by nikpin on Jul 19, 2008 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
None of Daric Barton, Travis Buck, or Carlos Gonzalez still has prospect eligibility
Please to be removing head from hiney, yes?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 19, 2008 10:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Response
This character made it inside the top 30 last year despite being drafted No. 14.
Just saying. It could happen.
by mrkupe on Jul 19, 2008 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
Not to mention it has been stated by many people in the know that a lot of the upper echelon talent has been graduated leaving a far weaker top end than usual. Which leaves a lot of room for guys that in stronger years might not be considered.
This is the Texas Rangers, professional destroyers of hope, we're talking about. - BAC
by nikpin on Jul 19, 2008 6:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree on Hellickson
I realize you aren’t the only one putting him top 25, but I think it’s a huge reach. He has very average stuff. I’ve seen him a couple of times this year and really wasn’t that impressed. The command was certainly impressive. But he’s just not a top 25 talent. He shouldn’t rank much different from a guy like Will Inman, who put up similar numbers in the low minors with similar stuff. Somewhere in the back end of the top 100.
by acerimusdux on Jul 19, 2008 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
BA top 25
that came out a week or so ago, Hellickson was ranked up there. I think that’s what he was referring to.
I happen to think Hellickson’s stuff is better than Inman’s, but then again I haven’t seen Inman lately.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Jul 19, 2008 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And
even if his stuff isn’t better, his control is significantly better.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Jul 19, 2008 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm probably under rateing him some
It helps to be able to actually see these guys, but there are some things you still aren’t going to get from watching one or two games. You aren’t going to notice the difference between a 1.9 BB9 and a 0.6 BB9 (about what Hellickson did in the FSL). So maybe I wasn’t giving quite enough credit to that phenomenal 16.6 K/BB rate, amongst other stats, and relying too much on my own initial impressions.
But I still see his potential as more a Joe Blanton type than a top of rotation guy. Maybe his odds of success are worth a high ranking, given where he is now for his age. But with what he’s doing right now he still is going to have some work to do just to succeed in AA. Maybe once I see he’s at least made that adjustment, I’ll like him a little better. I’d also like to see him start to average more than 5.5 IP per start.
So maybe better than Inman, but still not top 25 for me, yet.
by acerimusdux on Jul 22, 2008 6:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A's
They have nice depth but as a lot of people have said, lack real top talent. The Braves are a team that probably have better talent and equally as impressive depth in their system.
Heyward, Hanson, Rohrbough, Hernandez, Lillibridge, Locke, Morton, Teheran, Jones, Medlen, Gilmore, Hicks, Flowers, etc.
by was385 on Jul 18, 2008 12:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Pitching
I disagree a bit with the people who say the A’s system doesn’t have top end talent.
The A’s have top end pitching talent in Inoa, Cahill, Anderson, and Gonzalez—all of whom have a chance to reach ace level. And that is just the tip of the iceberg of their pitching.
What they don’t have is top end position talent. Getting Cardenas-Scout.com’s #1 ranked second baseman in the minors-may have helped but besides him, Doolittle, and Carter the list of players you would expect to be above average position players quickly drops off.
Now that could change by next year with people like Dixon, Leyja, Brown, and Christian slowly making names for themselves, but at least for the next year their position player depth needs improvement.
Sometimes life will strike you out on a curve ball and the only choice you have is to flip off the umpire and walk to first base anyway.
by Threepwood XX on Jul 18, 2008 12:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Cunningham looks like he could be an above average CF.
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jul 18, 2008 12:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cunningham
I know a lot of people like Cunningham, but I’m not quite sold on him yet. He’s an intriguing prospect, one could say he’s the Greg Smith of center field, but I’m still not convinced he’ll be better then Ryan Sweeny, and if the A’s can’t start doing better then the Ryan Sweeny’s of the world in their batting order then they’ll never compete.
Sometimes life will strike you out on a curve ball and the only choice you have is to flip off the umpire and walk to first base anyway.
by Threepwood XX on Jul 18, 2008 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Twins have basically been competing with lineups full of Ryan Sweeneys for years
and yes, I know they have Morneau, but they also have Nick Punto, so I figure that’s pretty much a wash.
In any event, I think Cunningham is a better prospect than Sweeney because he plays superior defense and has more power. Maybe not a lot better, but better.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 18, 2008 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't agree that Cunningham has more power
PT, you’ve never really (that I’ve seen) responded to my repeated comment that Sweeney is playing 2 levels higher and doing what Cunningham is doing in AA. And Sweeney is only a year older.
I’ll take Sweeney’s .408 major league slugging at Age 23 over Cunningham’s .468 SLG in AA at age 22. I like Cunningham a lot, but I just think it’s silly to say a guy who is only one year younger (and much less developed) is a better prospect than a guy who is getting the job done now. Oh, and according to most, he has the power upside, too.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 20, 2008 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cunningham has much more power than Sweeney
Years Sweeney has had a SLG over .450 with at least 100 AB: 1 (of 5 qualified)
Years Cunningham has had a SLG over .450 with at least 100 AB: 6 (of 6 qualified)
Sweeney Career Homeruns: 38 in 2211 AB
Cunningham Career Homeruns: 39 in 1333 AB
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jul 20, 2008 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's not doing what Cunningham is doing
Cunningham has an OPS that’s near a hundred points higher.
And, as noted, he’s hit way more home runs (which, last I checked, was the best way to measure power). I grant you that Sweeney has the body type to potentially hit 15-20 HR a year, but his swing is a pure-average swing. He goes inside-out on everything on the inner half. He’s going to have to virtually be rebuilt from the ground up to become a power hitter (and there’s no guarantee that his ability to hit for a high average would survive that).
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 20, 2008 10:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But he's doing in two levels below Sweeney
I think Sweeney would be a 20-25 HR guy in AA at this point.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 21, 2008 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You've got to be kidding me
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 23, 2008 1:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sweeney's MLB numbers arn't exactly eyepopping. They are good because everyone else on the A's offense sucks.
Cunningham has better numbers than Sweeney in the minors, doesn’t he?
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jul 18, 2008 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Slightly better, but he's older for the leagues than Sweeney was
Sweeney hasn’t been in AA since he was 20. Cunningham is in AA now at 21.
http://bocropleasestopswingingatbadpitches.blogspot.com/
by thejd44 on Jul 20, 2008 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
#1 2B because most prospects aren't 2Bs
Anyways I think I’d prefer Jose Vallejo to Cardenas and he isn’t even in the rangers 10 best
by bushe on Jul 18, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK
You’re on crack, you know that, right?
Their hitting track records aren’t even in the same ballpark.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 18, 2008 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cardenas
has a whole 1 year of track records to draw from.
I think Cardenas is a superior hitter, but Vallejo is a far better fielder and baserunner. While I think Cardenas is clearly the better prospect right now, I can certainly understand how someone would prefer Vallejo.
by FirebatM3 on Jul 18, 2008 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Marcus Lemon and Cardenas both have very similar numbers, probably a better comp
.001 point off in OPS this year, Cardenas has a little more pop, Lemon much better OBP. The biggest difference is that Lemon is 8 moths younger, and will stay at SS, while Cardenas most likely will end up at 3rd.
Lemon wont make the Rangers top 10… Cardenas’s ranking has as much to do with the Phillies system as it does to his high end talent. Is Juan Castro worth Porcello? They are both their organization’s top prospect…
by laxtonto on Jul 18, 2008 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
isn't lemon
in the hitter’s paradise that is the cal league and cardenas was in the pitcher friendly fsl?
that explains alot huh
by samthefan on Jul 18, 2008 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
3 year park average
Team R H 2B HR BB SO
Bakersfield 0.98 0.99 1.01 0.98 1.01 0.97
Clearwater 0.99 0.99 1.04 1.06 1.01 0.99
by laxtonto on Jul 18, 2008 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
um...
Those modifiers are relative to the league the park is in, not to some “neutral league/park”.
by BobbyMac on Jul 19, 2008 12:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How big of a difference
is there between the two prospects though?
by FirebatM3 on Jul 19, 2008 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
well...
I wasn’t commenting on that. But since you ask, I’m a bit clueless on the excessive Cardenas love, though I certainly think he’ll be a major leaguer, probably a regular. Lemon certainly has flown under the radar, I agree. It’s inexcusable that BA didn’t even include him in their book last year. If he’s really able to stay at SS and play quality defense, he looks like he could be a major-league regular, too. Though he won’t have as much power as Cardenas, his abilities to play SS and to get on base will make up for a lot of that.
by BobbyMac on Jul 19, 2008 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fail
Park factors are calculated relative to league. FSL’s league factor is in the neighborhood of .85, Cali’s league factor is around 1.20.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Jul 19, 2008 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
All of the above is moot
Lemon’s numbers are not Cal League based. His patience is well established at this point. At all 3 of his minor league assignments his OBP has been around 100 points above his avg with very healthy walk rates and power trending up. If you want to question Lemon’s value, it’s his defense that may keep him from being an everyday player.
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted.
by t ball on Jul 20, 2008 5:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As a Rays fan
I think the As and Rangers have passed the Rays’ system. It’s been a tough year for Rays’ prospects. Hellickson has broken out and Barnese is starting to look like he could do well, but other than that, most guys in the system have either stagnated or fallen off. Of course, that will also depends on who gets signed and who graduates this year. Rays could still end up #1 if Price retains his eligibility, they can sign Lobstein and/or Carpenter, and other people graduate as expected.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Jul 18, 2008 12:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
on the DRays blog, in the trade thread
Grover did his usual; Rays are rumored to be interested in some A’s players (Huston Street and Matt Murton, mainly), so who exactly do the Rays have in the Minors. The conclusion, after talking to Rays fans, were that they had three or so top SP prospects with Price being absolutly untouchable, and several position players that have severley dissapointed expectations. So the thought was that if the A’s and Rays made a deal, it would probably involve one of the top SP prospects and then a combination of the lower position players.
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jul 18, 2008 12:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd be for that
As long as one of those lower position players had 25+ home run potential.
Sometimes life will strike you out on a curve ball and the only choice you have is to flip off the umpire and walk to first base anyway.
by Threepwood XX on Jul 18, 2008 1:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oakland's depth of pitching prospects
could easily be turned into young hitting prospects through trades. The one thing I kept reading this last off season is how valued young pitchers are and how teams are reluctant to trade them. In Oakland’s case, where they have roughly 10-12 prospects who could all be quality starting pitchers within the next 1-3 years, that’s quite a bit of trade bait that other teams would love to have. Don’t be surprised when they go on a run like they did in the 90’s.
by joltinjoe on Jul 18, 2008 3:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Following the Twins Model!
Looks like Beane is using the Twins model of acquiring as many promising pitchers as possible and hoping they eventually shake out. It takes a lot of pitching prospects to find a few good ones.
by meatdox on Jul 18, 2008 10:01 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
in fairness
it’s not hard to do when you decide to sell off every marketable piece you have…..haren, swisher, harden, blanton – and i’m sure street isn’t far behind…..any team could assemble a good minor league system by doing that
by Wheelhouse on Jul 18, 2008 11:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
except that few GM's have the guts and savvy to do it and keep a winning product on the field
As an A’s and Reds fan, I was thinking this morning, “WWBBHD (what would Billy Beane have done)” if he’d been GM this past offseason. I wondered if he could have gotten the package from Arizona for Harang that he got for Haren. I wondered if he would have unloaded Griffey. I wondered if he would have done the Hamilton/Volquez swap.
It takes more than just selling your team. You first have to have some players worth selling, then you have to get good players back. If it were as simple as just selling the team, the Pirates and Royals would have top farm systems and be over .500.
"To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no music, no choreography, and the dancers hit each other." - Jack Handey
by JJ on Jul 18, 2008 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's not guts or savvy
it’s job security…....most are more worried about keeping themselves on the payroll and thus won’t do such an obvious tanking that beane is currently…......they are making a run at staying competitive to keep the GM and fans moderately satisfied….....beane is lucky in that he has the owner’s buy-in and doesn’t have to worry about his job…....he also has disciples such as you who think he can do no wrong, so he doesn’t have to worry so much about the fan base turning on him
don’t confuse what beane is doing for guts – he’s doing it cause it makes sense AND he can get away with it…....not all GM’s have that luxury
by Wheelhouse on Jul 18, 2008 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Beane is "obviously tanking", he's sure doing a crappy job of it
seeing as how the team is 7 games over .500 and whatnot.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 18, 2008 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
talk to me in a month
it is OBVIOUS that billy doesn’t think they have a chance this year…......if he did, he wouldn’t be dealing away vets like harden and blanton….....other GM’s in his position in the standings would be feeling public pressure to at the minimum not sell vets and in most cases add more vets…....billy doesn’t have to worry about that and can turn his attention to next year
by Wheelhouse on Jul 18, 2008 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He doesn't think they have a chance to win the WS
That doesn’t mean they’re not a decent team right now
www.loftylantern.com
by OldProspects on Jul 18, 2008 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have they really gotten that much worse with the trades of Harden and Blanton? If Harden stays healthy for the rest of the year they’ve lost maybe a win or two. If he gets hurt, which is likely, they probably break even. With Blanton, I believe they’re actually better off now. At worst, they’re about even again.
Also, your posts need more ….........
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
by marcello on Jul 18, 2008 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rays system is no longer number 1
Longoria has graduated.
They have:
Price – stud, but overrated IMO
Brignac – has always been overrated
McGee/Davis/Hellickson are all overrated, McGee maybe the less of the 3 but he is hurt.
Jennings – Out for the season again, very injury prone
Barnese – looks solid, but in short-season
Then what is there after that?
Mason? Niemann? both are mediocre
A’s sytem is so much better than the Rays.
ProjectProspect.com - Sullivan10x@yahoo.com
by sully10x on Jul 18, 2008 1:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Other than that
Uh, you forgot Tim Beckham.
Also:
Jaso, a catcher with twice as many walks as strikeouts hitting .800+ OPS in a pitcher’s league
Perez, who’s every bit as athletic as some top CF prospects, just much older (and as I’ve argued for years, because he took up the game so late in life, the ARL isn’t as big of a concern because he had a steep learning curve and has improved every year)
Both of those two made Keith Law’s top 75 last year, and neither has really fallen off much this year.
Cobb is a big time sinkerballer who was a HS athlete. Doesn’t strike out many, but he has major league stuff and is a prospect.
Rollins, who has had great performance but has fringy major league stuff.
James Houser, formerly a top 100 guy, lost his velocity but has gained some of it back, dominated SL this year before callup to AAA.
I’d put the first four ahead of Niemann and all six ahead of Mason. Not necessarily the best prospects in the world, but there is some depth. That’s not even getting to former top prospects having off years (Morlan, Royster, Gibson, Walker, Townsend), relievers who project as future major leaguers (Reid, Moore, Ayers) and the guys who are already fringe major leaguers (Ruggiano, Talbot).
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Jul 18, 2008 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what what what?
[Fernando Perez] made Keith Law’s top 75 last year, and neither has really fallen off much this year.
Perez OPS is down from .903 last year to .763 this year. That’s a dramatic fall off. Also, because he strikes out so damn much he’s need a BABIP > .410 just to achieve that mediocre OPS. Fast guys can achieve BABIPs better than league average – but anything near .400 is not sustainable in the bigs. Right now unless he takes a leap forward in contact skills he’ll be lucky to be more than a 5th OF in the majors.
by fourthandeye on Jul 18, 2008 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Law and Order (or at least Law and Jaso)
- Jaso was ranked #78 by Law, at least on his Feb1 list.
- Jaso is a 24-year-old slugging about .400 at AA ball. His OBP is sweet, but I don’t see how he’s a top 100 prospect since he’s not any good at the defensive aspects of catching.
by BobbyMac on Jul 19, 2008 12:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rollins
Rollins stuff isn’t that fringy. His FB/SL are better than Hellickson’s FB/CB. He really needs to improve the change up. But, though he doesn’t have Hellickson’s command, I think he may have more potential at higher levels.
by acerimusdux on Jul 19, 2008 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not even close
If his FB/SL were Hellickson’s league, he’d be a lock for the Top-100. Rollins touches 92 on a good day sitting in the high 80’s. Hellickson sits at 92 touching 95. Both has very good control, although I’ve heard not so good things about Rollins command within the strike-zone. And his breaking pitch is more of a slurvy pitch.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Jul 19, 2008 7:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who has Hellickson sitting 92 touching 95?
When I saw him this year he was sitting around 90.
by acerimusdux on Jul 19, 2008 7:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Saber scouting has:
http://www.saberscouting.com/2008/05/23/jeremyhellicksonreport/
I’ve ready touching 95 other places, but he’s got him at 91-93 and he sits with scouts when he watches prospects.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Jul 19, 2008 8:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll buy that I guess
But I think Rollins is about the same. I’m watching these guys from behind home plate too, but not checking with the radar readings. I have only seen him twice, and once was very early in the season, so it’s possible I didn’t see his best stuff as well.
I don’t see a difference in the two arms. Maybe Hellickson’s curve is the better pitch, but that’s not a big difference either. I think the big difference between the two are in the change up and command. Those are pretty important differences, and Hellickson is the better prospect because of it. But I don’t think Rollins ceiling is less if he gets more consistent with his command and improves the change up.
BTW, some splits from the FSL:
vs. RH:
AVG OBP SLG OPS
.194 .224 .329 .552 Rollins
.200 .235 .335 .570 Hellickson
vs LH:
AVG OBP SLG OPS
.270 .310 .413 .723 Rollins
.233 .254 .353 .607 Hellickson
As you can see, Rollins is just as tough on RH hitters; the difference in results has been mainly against LH hitters. Rollins is also currently leading the FSL in strikeouts, partly because that slider is pretty good. On a good day, he might have the command of Hellickson, but he’s far more inconsistent.
So Rollins is more raw, partly because he was a two way player who only focused on pitching after being drafted, but I still maintain his ceiling would be similar to Hellickson if everything goes right. Hellickson should rate higher, but even the scouting report you posted grades his current stuff as pretty much average across the board as well, but suggesting he will pitch above his stuff. So it’s more #4 stuff, but a good chance to pitch up to a #3 because of his consistency, command, and how his overall repertoire works together.
I might have been better saying Rollins might have “as much” potential at higher levels, if he continues to improve his command. Hellickson is the safer bet and more complete repetoire right now. But it’s really only Rollins’s change up that is behind in terms of “stuff”.
by acerimusdux on Jul 19, 2008 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice to hear
but when you look at ARL, it’s pretty obvious which one is the better prospect, if the guy who is 2 years younger is doing only slightly better on the same team.
I hope you’re right about Rollins, but I see him as a future reliever, whereas I see Hellickson as a 2 – 4 starter, depending on how much he improves.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Jul 19, 2008 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
When did "slurve" become pejorative?
Is it just because the word sounds like “slur”?
I thought it just meant a breaking pitch with a “tilt” somewhere between that of a curve and a slider.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 19, 2008 10:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A's
And you didn’t even list the most impressive SP at the Futures Game: HRod
by Rupert Pupkin on Jul 18, 2008 1:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
He's most likely a reliever
but if he gets his command down he could be a starter. But nothing wrong with a closer who throws 98+ consistantly.
"With 16-year-old Dominican righty Michel Inoa in tow, Gio Gonzalez improving at Triple-A and lefty Brett Anderson carving up Double-Abatters along with Simmons and Trevor Cahill, Oakland’s pitching depthis officially the envy of baseball." - BaseballAmerica.com
by Syphon on Jul 18, 2008 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The A's system dominates.
The afforementioned plus Henry Alberto and Fautino DLS.
by METSMETSMETS on Jul 18, 2008 3:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Rays/Rangers/A's
I’d say it goes TB, Tex, Oak at this point. Once Davis/Hurley/Max lose their status then I think the Rangers fall out of the conversation.
by groundingout on Jul 18, 2008 4:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Rangers
after this year (assuming Max, Davis and Hurley (and even Harrison) graduates, a 1-2-3 of Feliz-Andrus-Smoak and the good depth behind them keeps them at least in the conversation.
by FirebatM3 on Jul 18, 2008 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Go with the Goldstein System
Go with the Kevin Goldstein system where you include major leaguers 25 or under. The A’s are still near the top, but it’s a better indication of the Rays being tops.
by aap212 on Jul 18, 2008 6:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
