BA California League Top 20

by Brett Keith on Sep 24, 2008 5:50 PM EDT Comment 70 comments

1 - Trevor Cahill

2 - Carlos Santana

3 - Lars Anderson

4 - Brett Anderson

5 - Jhoulys Chacin

6 - Tim Alderson

7 - Pablo Sandoval

8 - Josh Reddick

9 - Henry Rodriguez

10 - Cedric Hunter

11 - Julio Borbon

12 - Jordan Walden

13 - Greg Halman

14 - Chris Carter

15 - Carlos Triunfel

16 - Sean Doolittle

17 - Peter Bourjos

18 - Sean O'Sullivan

19 - Josh Donaldson

20 - Kellen Kulbacki

Now remember, these lists lean more towards performance than other BA lists, and rankings are in context of the league. NOW you can start whining.

0 recs | Comment 70 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

jeez

Carlos Santana over Lars is a joke. Lars is the next white Big Papi.

by Vitters4Life on Sep 24, 2008 7:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

shouldnt

we wait till he slugs over .500 somewhere besides lancaster (his luck adjusted slg in AA was below .500 as well) before we anoint him the next ortiz?

by skiinginNJ on Sep 24, 2008 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wait...What?

We should wait till he slugs over .500 somewhere other than Lancaster? Ok, done waiting, he did it in AA Portland. Oh, but it doesn’t count because of his his luck adjusted numbers! Damn, so close.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Sep 24, 2008 9:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

your right

he is very likely to sustain that .432 BABIP going forward, my mistake

by skiinginNJ on Sep 25, 2008 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

the fact that his BABIP

was so high is in NO way a bad thing.
Sure it might not stay that high going forward but it is an undeniable mark of hitting talent

by nms on Sep 25, 2008 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

sure

but his LD% was ~19.5%, meaing his eBABIP would be .315

even the luck adjusted #’s peg his BABIP at .365, and that drops his slg to .477

and a .432 BABIP is not an undeniable mark of hitting talent, a BABIP that ridiculously high is a mark of good luck. not even the best hitters in the majors of career BABIP that high

by skiinginNJ on Sep 25, 2008 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My Point...

Has nothing to do with Anderson, and everything to do with what you said not making sense.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Sep 25, 2008 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

what

doesnt make sense? adjusting a players numbers based on a huge BABIP that he wont be able to replicate or comparing lars anderson to david ortiz ?

by skiinginNJ on Sep 25, 2008 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

is saying to wait till a player slugs .500 somewhere other than Lancaster, knowing full well that the player DID slug .500 somewhere other than Lancaster, but basically saying it doesn’t count because he was “lucky”. If you want him to slug .500, luck adjusted, say that.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Sep 25, 2008 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i did

say it, i just put it in parenthesis

by skiinginNJ on Sep 25, 2008 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No...

You said we should wait till he slugs over .500 somewhere other than Lancaster, not saying anything about the numbers being adjusted. Then you happened to mention that his luck adjusted SLG% at AA was below .500.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Sep 25, 2008 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ease up guys

Getting a little bogged down on this point.

Anyway, he mentioned the luck adjusted in a parenthetical in the same post right after bringing up slugging 500 away from lancaster. Not like he tricked people into giving an answer and then sprung the new condition on them.

by wobatus on Sep 25, 2008 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

we

can get into semantical arguments all we want, but i certainly qualified the .500 slg% with the adjusted numbers originally.

still not as nonsensical as comparing him to david ortiz

by skiinginNJ on Sep 25, 2008 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Its not a joke.

The position is a HUGE difference. A catcher on the defensive spectrum is miles away from a 1st Baseman. Lars is a good prospect, they are ONE spot away from each other. But if you think a power hitting catcher isn’t more valuable then a power hitting first baseman (even if the bat is better, which is debatable) your crazy.

Remember: baseball guys... baseball...

by Metty5 on Sep 24, 2008 10:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

"I don’t know of a single thing Obama’s done except talk and write." - Newt Gingrich

by knockoutking on Sep 25, 2008 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Umm i thought the Cal league lists came out tomorrow

California League Sept. 25
Carolina League Sept. 26
Florida State League Sept. 29
Eastern League Sept. 30
Southern League Oct. 1
Texas League Oct. 2
International League Oct. 3
Pacific Coast League Oct. 6
Independent Leagues Oct. 7

by laxtonto on Sep 24, 2008 7:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I Got The Issue With All The Lists Yesterday

So it came out today via me.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Sep 24, 2008 7:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

BA did awful this year

by Bravesin07 on Sep 24, 2008 7:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

BP has better lists

by Bravesin07 on Sep 24, 2008 7:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

where?

I don’t see BP league ranking lists on their site, did I miss that somehow?

by scooter on Sep 25, 2008 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm

suprised to see Santana over Anderson, but I guess Santana is more of a positional value thing. Catchers with his offensive upside are pretty rare. I’m also suprised to see Chris Carter so low, with Henry Rodriguez rated so high (and above Carter).

by JPShark on Sep 24, 2008 7:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The position of Rodriguez is quite ridiculous

as is that of Carter, for that matter. 39 HR and he’s 14th in the league? Behind Julio frickin’ Borbon? You’ve got to be kidding me.

They sure do love them some slap-hitting center fielders.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 24, 2008 10:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They always do

These lists are all crap, like usual.

Anyone know who makes these lists? They hire beat writers to do the yearly top 10’s and that’s why those are always so crappy. They arent even from BA writers most of the time. I think Callis does a few still though. This is probably the same crap.

by alskor on Sep 24, 2008 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

these list suck! i hate to be so critical but that’s how i feel. i can’t wait to read the chats.

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 Sep 24, 2008 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Most Of The Team Lists...

Are done by regular BA writers, atleast looking at the BA Prospect Handbook it seems that way. The High-A lists were done by Will Lingo, Josh Leventhal, and J.J. Cooper.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Sep 25, 2008 12:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

In past years, these lists were compiled by the scouts and team coaches/officials from that particular league. I’m not saying a BA writer didn’t make these rankings but it was my understanding that they don’t. They don’t make the “Best Tools” lists either, those are based on MLB scouts, coaches and executives to my knowledge.

by jfish26101 on Sep 25, 2008 8:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

all i want to know

is who pegged cole hamels with the 3rd best curve in the NL? now THAT is comedy.

by robcast23 on Sep 25, 2008 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

thats a combo

of different sources

who was above him?

"I don’t know of a single thing Obama’s done except talk and write." - Newt Gingrich

by knockoutking on Sep 25, 2008 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sort of both

The BA guys make the lists, but they do so based on the opinions of league observers.

by aCone419 on Sep 25, 2008 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

i want to say managers, scouts, and BA staff?

"I don’t know of a single thing Obama’s done except talk and write." - Newt Gingrich

by knockoutking on Sep 25, 2008 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I Don't Think...

The lists were compiled by scouts, coaches etc., but that those were sources of information. It’s always been my understanding that they DO make these rankings, hence they have the chats where they answer questions about how they ranked the players. As for the “Best Tools”, I know the big league lists are purely from people inside the game, not sure how much influence writers have in the tools rankings for the minors and draft.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Sep 25, 2008 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My larger point

was that they dont agonize over making these lists like the people on this site agonize over every little detail of them… maybe there’s a lesson in that…

by alskor on Sep 25, 2008 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

From The Chat...

Q: Phil from Tempe, AZ asks:
Will – why should I take this list seriously? Is it a top prospect list or a league’s top performance list? If its a prospect list, that would explain the inclusion of Triunfel – because certainly his 750 OPS wasn’t a top performance. If its a league performance list, why are slap hitters like Hunter and Borbon ahead of Carter? If this list is about CAL League performance, then how can Cedric Hunter and Julio Borbon be ahead of the league’s top power hitting threat Chris Carter? Not to mention when the best power hitter in the league is ranked behind two slap hitters (Hunter/Borbon) and just ahead of an attitude-filled Triunfel?

A: Will Lingo: Wow, I’m sensing anger there, Phil. A BA prospect list is everything you mentioned: there’s a player’s potential to consider, as well as how he performed in the league. We try to balance it all and line the guys up based on what we’ve learned from talking to people who have watched the league all season. And power is not the only tool there is. Both Hunter and Borbon could (quite literally) run circles around Carter in the field, and both could end up as better all-around offensive players. So you should take it seriously because we take it seriously, and we try to blend all these different points of view into a balanced list.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Sep 25, 2008 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's a bullshit answer from BA

Both Hunter and Borbon could (quite literally) run circles around Carter in the field, and both could end up as better all-around offensive players.

WTF? Of course the COULD. Its just quite unlikely at this point. He danced around the question without explaining the actual rationale behind the decision.

They should just rename these lists: “Toolsiest Players We Get a Hard On For Despite A Lack of Performance”

by alskor on Sep 25, 2008 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Isn't Saying...

“both could end up better all-around offensive players” kind of letting you know their thinking? The defensive value and athleticism probably factored in too.

I think they considered that name for the lists, but they felt it would lead to far too many overly critical, kinda angry, seemingly bitter, possibly crazy prospect fans getting a collective priapism, causing a halt in productivity, and many uncomfortable moments around the nation.

"I hate the people that love me, and they hate me!"

by Brett Keith on Sep 26, 2008 1:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

brett anderson

a little surprised he beat out chacin and alderson, although they are close.

by wobatus on Sep 25, 2008 12:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Organizationally

I wonder when all the lists come out, could someone post team-by-team how many each team had on lists combined?

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 25, 2008 12:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Of all the posters who said the list is a joke, which other prospects would you have put on it?

[Crosby] "Guy that has driven in some big runs for the A's over the years" - Vince Cotroneo

by WaddellCanseco on Sep 25, 2008 12:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Thoughts

Carter – Seems to me to be too high on this list. Doubt he will be more then a strikeout prone error filled machine. Find it humorous when people defend his defense.

Cahill – I was totally wrong on this guy. I thought there was no chance he would keep up his great start. He proved me wrong and is a top 20 prospect in baseball.

Chacin, Anderson, Alderson – With Cahill, these guys have the potential to be impact in the majors in the near future (2010?). Looking forward to an exciting NL West down the road.

Lars Anderson – Kid can RAKE!!!!!

Halman – Personal favorite. Oozes tools. His game is coming together at breakneck speed. Five tool potential makes him one of my favorites in the minors. High risk, high reward prospect.

Triunfel – Lose the attitude Carlos. People are beginning to not only question his mental abilities but also his physical tools. That is never a good thing.

"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 Sep 25, 2008 4:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

i feel inclined to note

that two time MVP ryan howard is also a strikeout prone, error filled machine.

and isn’t truinfel a bit of a wide load? i like that in my runningbacks, but the only SS i know with that build is cristian guzman.

ANATOMY OF ERA:
Variables Don't; Constants Aren't

by variablesdont on Sep 25, 2008 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Howard

Only one MVP for Mr. Howard. And if he wins this year that will be an abomination.

by aCone419 on Sep 25, 2008 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

again, phils fan

he’s a two time MVP. he just hasn’t been crowned yet.

ANATOMY OF ERA:
Variables Don't; Constants Aren't

by variablesdont on Sep 25, 2008 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Pujols disagrees

"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 Sep 25, 2008 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

what about chipper?

if you think pujols is worthy, and he certainly is, chipper’s also gotta be in the conversation.

i don’t know, maybe i’m just a hopeless (hopeful?) partisan hack. the award isn’t for highest OPS or most WARP, there;s intentionally some vagaries involved. ryan howard has most definitely not been the best player in the league, hell not even on his own team, but it ain’t easy to hit 50 HRs, and drive in 150 RBIs.

ANATOMY OF ERA:
Variables Don't; Constants Aren't

by variablesdont on Sep 25, 2008 9:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Howard winning the award this year would be even more of a sick joke

than Rollins winning it last year.

And that’s saying a lot, because that was easily the dumbest MVP award in the last 20 years, in either league.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 25, 2008 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wouldnt that be weird

Howard stealing the award from Pujols in 2 out of 3 years.

Never, Never, NEVER give up

by hero66 on Sep 25, 2008 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hi

I’m Justin Morneau and you’re wrong.

by bushe on Sep 26, 2008 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Morneau?

Please tell me you are not inferring that Jeter deserved it?

"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 Sep 26, 2008 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That one was bad, but, sorry, Rollins was worse

Rollins was about 6 wins worse than Pujols and Utley last year. He was barely above average.

Morneau at least was a very good player in 2006, even if he wasn’t AS good as some others.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 26, 2008 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A 118 OPS+

with 41/47 steals and good SHORTSTOP defense is barely above average?

I’m sorry… WHAT!?
Thats retarded

by nms on Sep 26, 2008 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

oh

and he played in all 162 games just for some extra credit

by nms on Sep 26, 2008 8:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

By the metrics I saw, his defense was abysmal last season

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 26, 2008 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol

He’s not taking it this year. If he does some how, everyone should be stripped of their right to vote for the award.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Sep 25, 2008 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also

Please do not compare Howard to Carter. I know you love the A’s but let’s be realistic.

"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 Sep 25, 2008 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i'm a phils fan, firstly

and second, comparing chris carter to ryan howard seems very apt. i’ve been around when ed wade was calling chuck lamar asking for dennys baez in return for howard, and still getting turned down. kip wells was too much to ask for. ted lilly, too.

you cannot forget how many doubters there were of howard’s ability to make contact all through the minors (unfortunately i have a hard time forgetting that half of them were the phillies front office). i think carter’s got a major advantage in that his organization is seemingly happy to have him, but just because one player has had success doesn’t mean that a similar player cannot succumb to his shortcomings.

ANATOMY OF ERA:
Variables Don't; Constants Aren't

by variablesdont on Sep 25, 2008 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

thats nonsense

Wade labeled Howard untouchable as far back as high-A ball.

by nms on Sep 25, 2008 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

triunfel

good second half and only 18. Maybe he’ll have to move to third.

by wobatus on Sep 26, 2008 1:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

sure

But scouts have said his tools have regressed for one reason or another. That’s never a good sign.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Sep 26, 2008 2:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

tools regressed/skills up

Tools may have regressed but his production went up. Let’s see—

2007, 296/333/367 including low A. 17/55 bb/k, 7 steals 12 caught stealing

2008 2d half (after the benching and big first half slump) 335/382/491. Full year 30/52 bb/k, 30-9 sb/cs.

Scouts are funny. Sour on a guy as he translates tools to skills.

Maybe he isn’t as fast and will have to play a different position. he is still 18 and maybe he just won’t be the type of player the scouts envisioned. But sign me up for the skill improvement (although I know he was in a great hitting environment).

by wobatus on Sep 26, 2008 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

30%

…of that list is within the A’s Organization (Stockton).

by Colorado Fan on Sep 25, 2008 6:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Plus Cardenas in the FSL

[Crosby] "Guy that has driven in some big runs for the A's over the years" - Vince Cotroneo

by WaddellCanseco on Sep 25, 2008 8:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If Donaldson qualifies so does Cardenas

I would think? Unless his AA promotion didn’t give hime the AB’s

by Bud Light on Sep 25, 2008 11:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

can anyone post A's related questions

from the BA chat?

by Asfan4ever723 on Sep 26, 2008 1:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Nope

You need to be a suscriber. If people start posting protected information then Sickels can be held liable.

"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 Sep 26, 2008 1:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not sure that

really applies here. The information isn’t protect for the first day or two after the chat – it’s fair game at that point, what they do with it afterwards, such as making it “subscriber only” is moot as it began as information in the public domain.

by slurve on Sep 26, 2008 8:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It is usually protected less then an hour after the chat end

by Wheelhouse on Sep 26, 2008 9:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

And why risk it when in the end it will only cost John?

"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 Sep 26, 2008 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's not a risk

I have since checked. Once it hit’s public domain, it’s fair game. The only thing you should do is cite BA.

by slurve on Sep 26, 2008 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even if it doesn't

What BA does after the hour is change the link. In other words, the original page where the chat took place remains free for all people, non-subscribers as well, but it just becomes harder to find it after the chat finishes. I realized this the other day when I had been checking the chat while it was taking place, and then had to leave in the middle, and realized when I came back that I could still access even the answers that I hadn’t been around to see. The only annoyance is that because the link is to an active chat page, it continues to reload every two minutes. You can get in if you ever are in an active chat, but for example, the link to today’s is http://www.baseballamerica.com/chat/chat.php?id=2008092601&rnd=107. If you notice, the address includes a day (this, for example, is for 09/26/2008), so by changing the address to accommodate the date you’re looking for, you can access an older chat that you may have missed.

www.loftylantern.com

by OldProspects on Sep 26, 2008 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs