Oakland Athletics Top 20 Prospects for 2010
by John Sickels on Dec 28, 2009 4:42 PM EST
Email
PrintOakland Athletics Top 20 Prospects for 2010
All grades are EXTREMELY PRELIMINARY and subject to change. Don't get too worried about exact rankings at this point, especially once you get beyond the Top 10. Grade C+/C guys are pretty interchangeable depending on what you want to emphasize. Complete reports on these and over 1,000 other players will be in the 2010 Baseball Prospect Book, now available for pre-order, shipping on February 2nd!
1) Chris Carter, 1B-OF, Grade A-: I just absolutely love this bat, enough to override the questions about defense and give him an A-. He added pure hitting skills to go with the power.
2) Michael Taylor, OF, Grade B+: Borderline A-. This was a great pickup: he fits into Oakland's needs more easily than Brett Wallace. More defensive value than Carter, but a year older and doesn't have quite as much power.
3) Grant Green, SS, Grade B+: Glove is very fine at shortstop, and I'm optimistic about his bat. At worst a steady regular, and could develop into a star.
4) Grant Desme, OF, Grade B: Strikeout rate precludes a higher grade, but he's always had good tools and put them to use last year.
5) Adrian Cardenas, 2B, Grade B-: I'm not sure why, but there's just something here holding me back from giving him a straight B. Todd Walker type with better glove?
6) Jemile Weeks, 2B, Grade B-: I don ‘t think we've seen him at his best. Between Cardenas and Weeks they have two good options for future second basemen.
7) Tyson Ross, RHP, Grade B-: Reminds me of a young Scott Erickson with hard sinker, let's see if he can keep his command in gear.
8) Max Stassi, C, Grade B-: Glowing scouting reports from high school are nice, need to see some performance before ranking higher. Baseball people rave about his intangibles.
9) Josh Donaldson, C, Grade B-: Great plate discipline, nails baserunners, still polishing other defensive aspects and power remains largely untapped.
10) Sean Doolittle, OF-1B, Grade B-: Knee injury was badly timed. Needs a fast start to separate himself from the 1B/OF pack in this organization.
11) Henry Rodriguez, RHP, Grade B-: 5.77 ERA at Sacramento was deceptive; FIP was 4.20 and he still has the amazing K/IP ratio. I'm going to cut him some slack for one more year, but obviously he needs to get the walks down.
12) Corey Brown, OF, Grade C+: On a good day he looks like a cross between a young Kurt Gibson and Jeromy Burnitz. On a bad day he looks completely helpless. No way to know what we'll get here.
13) Fautino De Los Santos, RHP, Grade C+: Could move quickly back up the prospect charts now that Tommy John is further behind him. Will stuff and command both return?
14) Michael Ynoa, RHP, Grade C+: Impossible to rank or grade accurately at this point. Still has all-world potential, but we need to see him take the mound against real hitters.
15) Arnold Leon, RHP, Grade C+: Gets a lot of attention from A's fans for some reason. I think he's a good prospect as a fourth starter or strong reliever but I don't see ace potential in him.
16) Pedro Figueroa, LHP, Grade C+: Live-armed lefty needs better control as he moves up.
17) Ben Hornbeck, LHP, Grade C+: Amazing K/IP ratio in the California League stands out. Upper-80s fastball with strong changeup and decent breaking ball. Will have to prove himself in Double-A but I lean towards optimism.
18) Sam Demel, RHP, Grade C+: Funky delivery with above average stuff, could help in pen soon if command sharpens up.
19) Anthony Capra, LHP, Grade C+: Decent stuff with strong K/IP ratios, walk rate a bit higher than it should be, Double-A transition should be interesting.
20) Connor Hoehn, RHP, Grade C+: Unhittable as a closer in the Northwest League, could move fast in that role but more slowly if he starts.
21) Justin Marks, LHP, Grade C+: I liked him a lot coming out of college at Louisville, advanced feel for pitching with decent stuff, but we need to see some innings.
22) Mickey Storey, RHP, Grade C+: Amazing statistical performance at four levels last year, finishing strong in Triple-A pen. Could help in middle relief due to pinpoint command of curveball.
OTHERS: (Grade C): Jeremy Barfield, OF; Bobby Cassevah, RHP; Jason Christian, 3B; Dusty Coleman, SS; Conner Crumbliss, 2b-OF; Rashun Dixon, OF; Brad Kilby, LHP; Ian Krol, LHP; Tyler Ladendorf, SS; Josh Leyland, C; Clayton Mortensen, RHP; Ryan Ortiz, C; Shane Peterson, OF-1B; James Simmons, RHP; Paul Smyth, RHP; Wilfredo Solano, SS-3B; Justin Souza, RHP; Matt Sulentic, OF.
I like this system a lot, and it's not because Billy Beane gave me an interview.
Chris Carter and Michael Taylor are two of my very favorite prospects. The more I study Carter, the more I think he can be a special hitter, enough to override concerns about his glove. Taylor is a tools guy who made good; blocked in Philadelphia, he'll get a chance much sooner here and I trust Oakland to be patient with him if he has any growing pains. Grant Green could end up being one of the steals of the 2009 draft. Desme still has some questions, but I've liked him since he was in college and I'm not going to stop after this season. So right at the top, this system ranks well.
There is a huge mass of B-/C+ types. Cardenas, Weeks, Stassi, Donaldson, and Doolittle all have the potential to develop into regular major league players. Stassi has the highest ceiling of the group, but is also the furthest away. All of the others could contribute as soon as 2010 under the right circumstances, although more probably 2011. I don't think any of them except maybe Stassi will become stars, but they should all have long careers, at worst as productive role players. Corey Brown could turn into something very interesting too. Shane Peterson and Matt Sulentic could also prove valuable, although they are more likely to get lost in the shuffle than the other guys.
Hitting at the lower levels thins out. Rashun Dixon has amazing tools but is so raw that I can't give him anything higher than a Grade C right now. 2009 international signee Wilfredo Solano has great scouting reports for his power potential, but it is really easy to get burned by these Latin free agents until we actually see them play against real competition. He gets a "Grade C with higher potential" for now. Jason Christian and Dusty Coleman both have some tools and flash skills, but both have uncertain bats. I put Ladendorf in the book because Oakland was going to draft him in '08 before the Twins beat them to it, then they asked for him in the Cabrera trade. His numbers aren't much at this point, but he's got tools too.
Last year's graduations thinned out the pitching at the upper levels, but there is still some talent here. I don't like Tyson Ross' mechanics, but I didn't like Scott Erickson's either. Their stuff is similar and if Ross can improve his command a bit he could take off quickly. Rodriguez has amazing stuff and I'm going to give him an aggressive Grade B-. There are a variety of interesting arms behind them, with potential relief options and possible four/five starters being predominant. Ynoa is the big wild card, but as with Solano we need to see some game action.
Overall, I think there is a lot to like here: impact bats, several potential role players, interesting arms, skill guys, some tools guys. They could use some additional arms and it will be interesting to see what direction they take in the 2010 draft.
256 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Why Desme so far ahead of Brown?
They seem to have the same skill set, but Brown plays slightly better defense and makes more contact.
Brown doesn't really make more contact
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
Brown made a bit more contact in 2009
Desme whiffed in 30.5% of his AB, while Brown was at 27.6%. That’s a difference of 17 balls in play over 600 AB. Desme also K’d a bit more often in the AFL.
I think they’re pretty even as prospects and am wondering why Desme rates so much higher.
His contact was near-Dixonesque in 08 though
For their careers, K/PA, Desme is 27.75%, 9.85 BB%. Brown is 28.5%, 11%. The better BB rate is a reason to prefer Brown, but not more contact. Desme improved both rates significantly in Stockton vs. KC.
I agree they’re pretty even. I prefer Desme because I think he’s more likely to get the K% into an acceptable range just because he hasn’t shown the poor discipline for as long and is more likely to significantly improve since he’s seen a year less action.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
desme/brown
I’ve seen them both, but I’ve seen Brown more than Desme dating back to college days.
I think Desme is better.
by John Sickels on Dec 28, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions
Cardenas grade seems odd given that he was a B the last two years
and he had a good year.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
card
I’m thinking that I might have overrated him in the past.
by John Sickels on Dec 28, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions
The A's plan on having him play 3B next year
Does that change anything in your opinion? And can you point to something that keeps you from making him a B?
The monster at the end of this blog.
Solid split season
Cardenas had a solid split season between AA & AAA & he’s only 21 so I can be a little patient with the lack of power that he appears he may develop. He appears to have solid plate dicipline, & a decent eye, he’s not afraid to take a walk 55BB/73K’s. He did have 41 doubles between the two levels & he isn’t known to be fleet of foot so with a little more development & some refinement to his swing, some of those doubles should become homers. My hope is that unless he shreds the competition in spring training he gets some more seasoning at AAA, but I would not be shocked to see him make the opening day roster or get a midseason promotion.
Aditional: Solid split season
I’d say he at the least should continue to maintain his solid B rating if not be elevated to a B+, but based on everything I have read & heard about him I really can’t wrap my mind around his rating being dropped to a B-.
I would not be shocked to see him make the opening day roster
i think almost everyone else would be.
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05
Especially since he's not already on the 40-man
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 2:13 AM EST up reply actions
That wasn't much of a barrier for Cahill, Anderson or Bailey in 2009.
I think he could make the Opening Day lineup if he shows he can not be overmatched by major league pitchers in ST, can handle 3B defensively, if Chavez and McPherson are hurt, if Fox is terrible at 3B, and if they can’t acquire anyone else better. So it’s not likely, but not all that implausible either.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 4:53 AM EST up reply actions
It just means he has an extra hurdle to climb since the A's would have to say goodbye to someone to put him on the roster
Not impossible, but he’s going to have to be really good. Or, as you say, if Chavez is hurt and 60-day DLd, that could be an opening. I’m sure others will be hurt, too. I just don’t see them looking to start his clock just yet.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 9:34 AM EST up reply actions
I think with Cardenas
With the organization knowing he takes some adjustment between each promotion they aren’t going to rush him like they did Anderson and Cahill….
"Did you know you can comment on Athletics Nation from your phone or PDA? SB Nation has launched mobile commenting. Check it out next time you’re at the game or bar and have something to say."
by stranahanahan on Dec 29, 2009 1:44 PM EST up reply actions
Ynoa is basically the same talent he was a year ago.
He still has amazing potential. By all accounts his injury was not serious and a 17 year old with his talent his no different to an 18 year old with his talent.
ynoa
I gave him a B- a year ago. but that was probably too high. I’m getting more conservative about guys who have nothing but wonderful scouting reports.
by John Sickels on Dec 28, 2009 5:02 PM EST up reply actions
Isn't that all Stassi has?
His 50 pro AB can’t make that much of a difference…
hitters/pitchers
Hitters/pitchers, apples and oranges. Plus Stassi played high-level competition as an amateur, scouts have a better read on him.
by John Sickels on Dec 28, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
Ynoa’s rating on BP made me get rid of my subscription to that website, so I really appreciate your caution here.
BP also recieved a lot of flak
For rating Neftali Feliz as a 5 star prospect a few years back. On the other hand, Jeff Clement…
The 2008 Rogelio Moret League Fantasy Baseball Champions!
by The Congo Hammer on Dec 28, 2009 9:06 PM EST up reply actions
It doesn't mean they're ultimately wrong
Just that they’re foolish to be so aggressive on complete unknowns.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 28, 2009 9:12 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, that Ynoa kid sure was a bust
Oh wait, he still hasnt pitched. Are you going to pay BP the back money if he turns out to be an All Star?
Also KG does not equal BP. BP is not a collective voice.
No, I’m not.
I have said for quite a while that there is no sense rating a pitcher who hasn’t pitched stateside, nevermind in the minors, a five star…whether he works out or not. I prefer my prospect ratings to exercise caution, actually consider floor, etc, which it was clear that entry doesn’t do.
Youre going to miss some very good players that way
I understand your concerns. I just dont have a problem with high ratings for guys like Ynoa – though I would have him and would have had him last year significantly lower than KG.
The problem is that if you rate them lower than KG (ie lower than the
person who rates them the highest), you probably won’t acquire said player.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 1:33 PM EST up reply actions
If you believe a player is good...
wouldn’t you give him a high grade no matter the point in his career he is. Take for example Bryce Brown (.. might have his name wrong) the kid from Las Vegas who will be eligible in the 2010 Amateur Draft and likely the first pick. I’ve not seen him take one swing, but I have a feeling from the moment he’s picked he’ll be in the top 50 prospects. This means he’s at least a B+ grade wise. Take for example other prospects, Zach Wheeler didn’t throw a pro inning last year. Yet he’s probably in the top 75 earning him at least a solid B grade. Are you telling me you can tell the difference between Ynoa and Wheeler in terms of skills just because Ynoa is 17 and Wheeler pitched in an american high school? I couldn’t but I would rank Ynoa >>> Wheeler based on the scouts reports alone.
No, because age matters
For example, it’s reasonable to slightly penalize any pitcher still too young to have passed the injury nexus scot-free.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 9:11 PM EST up reply actions
I support this philosophical change for whatever my opinion is worth.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 28, 2009 9:11 PM EST up reply actions
Cardenas
Does your opinion of Cardenas change now that he’s going to be playing third base to replacing Wallace?
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Doesn't seem like that should move him up at all;
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
card
if anything that hurts. Don’t think he has the power for 3B.
by John Sickels on Dec 28, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
PT, where are you?
I thought 2B and 3B were relatively equal…I don’t know the statistics well enough to make a coherent argument here, though.
"HARK! BUT LOOK OVER HERE, IT'S A COST CONTROLLED COCO CRISP! DOES MY USE OF ALLITERATION HYPNOTIZE YOU?" (PL78)
by CaliforniaJag on Dec 28, 2009 7:34 PM EST up reply actions
The positional values are considered equal on defense
The tool sets required for the positions vary and not everyone agrees that the offensive expectations are interchangeable. I don’t exactly know what John’s feelings are regarding WAR and wOBA but it seems rude to jump down his throat on the subject after he’s done such a nice thing and released the A’s report.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Not trying to be rude,
Just saying that I don’t personally feel that a player who can handle 2B offensively can’t handle 3B offensively. Cardenas will never be a monster power hitter, but he’ll hit plenty of doubles. I dunno, maybe I like Cardenas too much. I see him as Freddy Sanchez with more patience.
"HARK! BUT LOOK OVER HERE, IT'S A COST CONTROLLED COCO CRISP! DOES MY USE OF ALLITERATION HYPNOTIZE YOU?" (PL78)
by CaliforniaJag on Dec 28, 2009 8:30 PM EST up reply actions
And that's fine
But there are others who feel that 3B demands more offense (especially power) than 2B and from his Cardenas comment John seems to lean in that direction.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Does anyone believe that?
not everyone agrees that the offensive expectations are interchangeable.
It’s clear that 3B outhit 2B. If one believes that 2B and 3B are equally valuable defensively, one does not think 2B and 3B are interchangeable. Rather, one believes that 3B are more valuable than 2B.
3B only outhit 2B because a lot of people still think 3B = 1B on the other side of the field
When it’s clearly not.
Some teams haven’t realized that you can’t just put a statue over at third because he can swing the bat.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 9:35 AM EST up reply actions
That still doesn't work
Let’s start with the premise that 3B and 2B are equivalent, defensively. If teams started putting better defensive players at 3B until 3B hit the same as 2B, then 3B would be better defensively than 2B. In the end, 3B would still be better than 2B.
So you're saying that a team with a lousy 2B is better off converting a 3B
than choosing from the pool of 2B. For example Chase Headley should move to 2B. Also Gordon Beckham. Hey that might happen! St Louis moved Skip Schumaker from CF to 2B, and the results weren’t that bad after a painful adjustment period.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 11:31 AM EST up reply actions
I've seen enough comments that yeah, I think there are people who believe that
The monster at the end of this blog.
I guess you're right
Some people seem to think that all positions are necessarily equal, so a defensive equivalence between 2B and 3B means there’s also an offensive equivalence between 2B and 3B.
But it’s quite clear that 3B hit better than 2B.
But the point is that most of those 3Bs should not be anywhere near 3B!
A 1B can hit better than a shortstop, too. The thing is, baseball people long ago figured out SS was a far more important defensive position, so 1Bs aren’t at short. The problem is that baseball people are only just now starting to realize that a 3B really needs to be a better fielder than a 1B, so a lot of slugging 3Bs of the past won’t exist in the future because teams won’t put horrendous fielders there as often.
What? The A’s might have Jake Fox as a starting 3B this year? Fuck.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 1:09 PM EST up reply actions
Whose point is that?
That’s certainly not the point of the people who came up with the idea that people who play 3B in the majors are just as good defensively as people who play 2B. That’s whole basis of 2B and 3B having the same positional adjustment in WAR.
See my response to you above.
"the point" is the exact opposite of what you're saying... 2b=3b implies that the guys who
have been playing 3b in the majors are too good defensively and some of them should go to 2b.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
If they're "too good" for third, why move to second when they're considered equals?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 1:44 PM EST up reply actions
Also, isn't average wOBA for 3B and 2B the same, or close to it, anyway?
I was assuming, based on Danny’s comment, they weren’t. But I just did a little (as in one link) research and I think the offense is equal.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 1:46 PM EST up reply actions
It was close to equal for 2009
~30 Ops point difference for 2005-2008. If 3bs and 2bs are equally good at defense and 3Bs hit better by a decent amount, it means the 3B are better players as a group than the 2Bs and therefore some of them should move to 2B to displace the worst of the 2bmen.
you can look through the league averages here.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
Thanks for that link
Anyway, while I do buy into the idea that the positions are “equals,” I also think that different skills are required for each, so simply switching might not work. I know that most of the guys who have switched between the two have done so with no noticeable change in performance, but I think that has a lot more to do with the players who are moving (utility guys and other players managers deem more athletic and able to handle position switches, etc.) than the fact that just anybody from those spots can be interchangeable.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 9:18 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed.
2B needs to have more range and is required to turn a double play, 3B needs to have a better arm and has a lot more “bang bang” type plays
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
While I concede that the evidence isn't perfect,
I basically believe 2B and 3B to be interchangeable, yes.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
The one concern I have
is the lost opportunity for a team (especially a small market team) to have some power from a spot where its easy (and cheap) to find. You could do pretty well with a team of Cardenas (or lets say Ichiro) style hitters, but ideally you would want a well rounded offense. I havent seen any studies on this but Ive mentioned it to a few people and I believe it. So, if you ideally want your team to have a certain amount of power compared to other teams then you’ve lost a place where you can get it by playing a low power player at 3B (see Mark Grace at 1B). Its not a huge concern, and it wouldnt keep me from playing the best player, but all things equal Id definitely prefer to get power from 3B.
I honestly see no advantage to "well-rounded"
Good is good is good. There are different ways to be good, of course, but I don’t think having multiple different ways makes you better. This isn’t the same as other sports, where a team can effectively shut down your primary weapons (say in football if you have great passing, it’s possible to limit that).
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 12:58 PM EST up reply actions
I want to add that I'm talking about a team
A well-rounded player is a better bet if only because if he loses one skill, he still has other skills to make him useful. A player who can really only do one thing better not lose that ability, or he’s finished. I don’t think that applies to a team of similiar players though.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 12:59 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, as far as I can tell, run production is run production
and exactly how you do it isn’t very important. Maybe around the margins, but it’s a minimal consideration compared to just putting the best players on the field.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
Flexibility helps a lot against extreme opponents or in extreme conditions
It’s great to have a team whose offense relies on the HR if that offense scores runs, but if you’re playing a crucial game down the stretch against a low-HR pitcher in a low-HR park, then your sluggers will be neutralized and you won’t have a plan B to fall back on. On the other hand, if you rely on the running game and you’re up against Andy Pettitte you’re in a lot of trouble there, too.
All things being equal, you’re in a better position if your offense is flexible and diverse.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
But you're talking about one game
GMs don’t (and shouldn’t) build teams for that one game. They need to build teams for the long haul.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 31, 2009 1:41 PM EST up reply actions
Other than The Twins system
This is probably my next to favorite to follow….
I know quite a bit about this system, I’m not completely sure as to why…
but I really really like this ranking of the A’s prospects…great work John
I wish you were higher on Arnold Leon, (maybe right behind or even 1 in front of Josh Donaldson, but That is just nitpicking and I’m OK with where he’s at anyway)
A question for other(s) (commenters or John)
^
who has the highest ceiling and the best chance to stick as a regular between
Short-Stops Jason Christian and Dusty Coleman?….. I really like Coleman.
I'd rather have Nick Punto playing 3B and Felipe Lopez playing 2B
than Punto playing 2B and Kouzy, Crede, DeRosa or Glaus playing 3B.
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Dec 28, 2009 5:07 PM EST reply actions
I'd say Coleman
Apparently he was carrying a wrist injury for most of the season. Up until that point he had a .900+ OPS. Obviously he has major question marks with contact but I think his potential is higher.
yes, coleman by far
hes actually a pretty good sleeper. i wouldnt be suprised to see him in the top 10 next year if he can come back healthy and pick up where he left off. he destroyed the MWL in april and may, and, if you believe having a broken wrist can make you hit worse, its reasonable to assume that his struggles in june/july do not reflect his true ability. hed probably be starting this season in midland if he hadnt gotten hurt. the a’s signed him for $675k as a draft eligible sophomore out of witchita state after he starred in the cape cod league, so he’s got draft pedigree and track record. and from everything ive heard, it sounds like his defense will play at short.
plus hes got an above average baseball face. and dusty coleman is just a seriously gritty name.
by NRC on Dec 28, 2009 11:27 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Christian's been moved to 3B.
I say Coleman as well. Personally I’d take Nino Leyja over Christian, but John disagrees. I’d be curious why.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 28, 2009 8:45 PM EST up reply actions
^btw, I somehow forgot Grant Green
but I think the rest of those names will already be in the majors for at least a year or two before Green gets there.
I'd rather have Nick Punto playing 3B and Felipe Lopez playing 2B
than Punto playing 2B and Kouzy, Crede, DeRosa or Glaus playing 3B.
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Dec 30, 2009 5:11 PM EST up reply actions
Green
What is the biggest difference between G Green (B+) and many of the other high 2009 guys you rated so far as B/B- (Crow, MItchell, Sanchez, Minor, Leake, Wheeler, Hobgood, Miller). Would you say that he has one of the highest floor’s of the 2009 crop of 1st rounders because of his glove & position?
pitchers
Most of those guys are pitchers. And I just like Green better than most of them.
by John Sickels on Dec 28, 2009 5:11 PM EST up reply actions
+1
I like the Grant Green grade a lot. I had him pegged as an upper level B, but I definitely can get behind B+
Im totally behind it
I think people are missing the boat on Green. The only thing that sort of bothers me is how low intensity he is, but then I think how good JD Drew is…
I don't want intense baseball players
It’s a sport that requires calm, concentration, and the ability to stay on an even keel. Going all Paul O’Neill on a water cooler doesn’t make somebody better at baseball.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 2:15 AM EST up reply actions
But going all Albert Belle on Fernando Vina is kinda cool
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 4:56 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I dont have strong feelings either way
but I do typically prefer effort guys. That doesnt mean Paul O’Neill phony BS stuff. I mean effort in the field and on the basepaths. Im not saying this is right. Its just a natural preference. When I see a low effort player I subconsciously think “not an impact player.” I love Green though and I try not to be married to those preferences.
Big disagreements
Leon: I really value top performance and pitchability more than pure stuff. Similar but smaller-magnitude disagreement on Hornbeck, who I think is on the B-/C+ border.
Brown: I don’t get ranking him and Desme this far apart. I think he’s better than Desme outright, and even if one disagrees, 2 grades apart? That can’t be right.
Cardenas: I think his power will come back once he’s not playing at levels he’s extremely young for.
Rodriguez: I think he’s basically complete garbage. I’d never consider trusting him with a multirun lead, given his propensity for walking the tying run to the plate. I could see using him as some kind of specialist for situations where a walk won’t harm your chances (man on third, <2 outs), but that’s about the only utility I can see him ever having for a major league team. B- is crazy. Relief pitchers should only get that grade if they combine dynamite K rates with great command.
Kilby: Speaking of which. C is not fair to his track record. He’s struck out more than a batter an inning pretty much everywhere he’s pitched, including the majors. C+ is plausible, B- is a reach but I really think he’s a great reliever waiting to happen. He has better stuff than, and similar deception to, Hideki Okajima. I’d never even consider trading him for Rodriguez.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
grades
I’ve seen Brown several times dating back to his college days. He’s a very interesting player but I think Desme is better and more likely to reach his ceiling. Brown is a C+ with potential. Desme could be cut back to a B- but no lower, and right now i think i’m going to stick with going out on a short limb for him.
I don’t think Cardenas will have the power for third base. Won’t change that grade.
I love Kilby but given his age I can’t rank him that much higher. Could be talked into a C+.
HA Rodriguez; Could be talked into a C+ due to the command troubles…but my gut is staying stick with the B-. Maybe indigestion. I’ll sleep on it. His upside is just so enormous, and he doesn’t turn 23 until February.
by John Sickels on Dec 28, 2009 5:30 PM EST up reply actions
Agree on HRod...
Combo of 100mph, age, and K rate is just too tantalizing to ignore right now. I know the BB rate is outrageous, but at 22, it’s way too soon to give up on that arm.
ProspectTube.com
You Video. You Scout.
by ProspectTube.com on Dec 28, 2009 6:29 PM EST up reply actions
I'm one of Henry's biggest fans, so I'm happy to see him ranked about as high as I would have.
I could go either way on the B- or C+, but he’s the best of the C+s for me or the bottom of the B-s.
The Desme rating was really surprising. I had him in the low teens right next to Brown at a C+. It’s not just he strikeouts, it’s also his age. He’s got less time than other prospects to cut down on the Ks.
I had Ynoa a lot higher, but John’s rating is consistent with how he rates everyone, so that’s just a philosophical difference. In addition to the scouting reports, we also have the bonus amount as a piece of information though.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 28, 2009 8:56 PM EST up reply actions
Also Donaldson was rated a lot higher than I would, but the comments sort of convince me
that I’ve underrated him. I still wouldn’t give him a B-, but I can sort of squint and see it.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 28, 2009 8:57 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe Josh Donaldson is better than you think he is?
"Since other people actually read these threads, though, probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged." - PT
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Dec 28, 2009 11:43 PM EST up reply actions
I really hope so.
If you’re convinced he can be an average catcher in the bigs defensively and get a .370/.370 line for 5 years or so, I guess that’s pretty valuable. Personally I think it’s a longshot but I’m glad others can see it.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 4:58 AM EST up reply actions
I dont see it
Im really not sure what the fuss about Donaldson is. This feels like the argument that Wallace could play 3B or that Alderson wasnt a top pitching prospect all over again. I really doubt that Donaldson is in the A’s plans in any major way.
He's just another guy for me
I thought so when he was with the Cubs, too. Nothing special with the bat, not sure he’ll even be a catcher.
The post was more an inside joke from AN fanpost I made with the same title
but I think he can be a 3 WAR solid big league starter. Whether or not hes in the A’s plans isn’t really that important IMO, but I think that he is usually underrated and as such he is less likely to be traded.
"Since other people actually read these threads, though, probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged." - PT
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Dec 29, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions
I'm glad you see what I see with Brown
I have never seen Desme play, but I’ve been pretty vocal here about not being a big believer in Brown. I really do think this is a case where you have to see the flaws in his game to truly understand why he can’t really be rated as a top prospect. He can fix it, sure, but if he doesn’t make those drastic changes he’s going to be a huge bust.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 28, 2009 9:15 PM EST up reply actions
It's funny jd
I feel the same regarding Desme
"Chicks dig the long ball, although fat chicks will settle for warning track power" - Nick Diamond
H-Rod
I dunno, I mean he has flashy stuff, but no matter the upside he’s still a reliever. And minor league relievers with good stuff and bad command and poor results seem pretty plentiful. I don’t agree with PaulThomas that he is “garbage,” but he seems like a prototypical C+ to me.
I agree on the C+ if you think he can never ever be a starter.
I don’t see why he can never convert back though. He’s got plenty of arm strength, and he’s had a good slider and a good change at various times, although not at the same time, and neither very consistently. Sure it’s not the most likely outcome, but he’s got a much better chance of being a starter than almost any other relief prospect I can think of.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 5:00 AM EST up reply actions
Ill tell you why he cant convert back: Option years and he was a bad SP
By the time Rodriguez can accumulate enough IP to start he will run out of option years.
"Since other people actually read these threads, though, probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged." - PT
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Dec 29, 2009 1:25 PM EST up reply actions
Duchscherer converted at 29 or something. Wilhelm at 36! It's never too late!
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 1:32 PM EST up reply actions
Duke didn't make it through the whole year and was pitching a lot more RP innings
"Since other people actually read these threads, though, probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged." - PT
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Dec 29, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions
So that just means Rodriguez has to work up to it
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
Well considering he was a pretty miserable failure at it last time in high A ball it really isn't encouraging.
"Since other people actually read these threads, though, probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged." - PT
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Dec 29, 2009 4:18 PM EST up reply actions
He was pretty successful in High A. So much so that he was
quickly promoted to AA, where he was a miserable failure.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 9:07 PM EST up reply actions
It was just a small sample of play, like 4 or 5 starts
The team assumed it meant something. It didn’t. He just got lucky for a month.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
All performance means something.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 10:32 PM EST up reply actions
He was friggin' awful as a starter
Well, actually, he’s been awful as a reliever too. So I guess that’s not a good distinguishing characteristic.
I’m not sure “he’s equally awful at both!” is exactly something to hang one’s prospecting hat on, however.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
I think concerns of power for both Card & Donaldson are overblown...
Remember, Midland has a very high outfield wall that make have stolen some homers. Might be why Carter hit only 28 as well.
"Chicks dig the long ball, although fat chicks will settle for warning track power" - Nick Diamond
Oh Henry
He’s 22 and had nearly a 15 K/9 last season in AAA – a B- is aggressive, but not crazy. If he can get his walks under control (which is a definite possibility) he could be one of the best relievers in baseball. Could definitely flame out, but he’s got dominating stuff. Big fan of the B- grade.
Henry is a headcase
His mechanics look fine. Maybe they need to teach him a 2 seamer or cutter. Or maybe throw. 94-96mph w/ improved control. Than 97-100 mph. I’m afraid he’s another santiago casilla. But at 22/23 yrs old he has a bit more time to progress and could be recalled in late 2010.
Or another Mark Wohlers?
That’s probably his best case upside, where he puts it together for 2-3 years and dominates. Both had horrendous walk rates in the minors at young ages, but somehow figured it out for a small period of domination.
ProspectTube.com
You Video. You Scout.
by ProspectTube.com on Dec 28, 2009 6:31 PM EST up reply actions
I'd say his UPSIDE is 2009 Carlos Marmol
who accumulated a sterling WAR of all of 0.6.
I don’t think he even has good upside, much less enormous.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
Henry Rodriguez = Joel Zumaya
at best…minus the “guitar hero” antics. He can throw very hard. Yippee! Let’s see him throw the ball over the plate with a little more regularity before we crown him the next Mariano Rivera.
Zumaya had a lot better control as a prospect.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 28, 2009 8:47 PM EST up reply actions
Mo?
Who crowned him Mo? I’ve read nothing but doubt, and rightfully so, from everyone on these boards.
But he also does three things REALLY well – throw the chit out of the ball, strike people out, and have a birth certificate with a DOB of 1987.
ProspectTube.com
You Video. You Scout.
by ProspectTube.com on Dec 28, 2009 8:49 PM EST up reply actions
What difference does his date of birth make?
There’s virtually no difference between a young relief pitcher who sucks and an old relief pitcher who sucks. As minimally relevant as ARL is for pitchers generally, it’s even more minute for relief pitchers.
Jason Motte is 5 years older than Rodriguez and was awful in 2009 and I’d still prefer him every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Would he get a straight B?
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
Where do you get the idea that age is irrelevant for pitchers?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 5:09 AM EST up reply actions
He said minimally relevant, not irrelevant.
Changing the words someone says and then trying to argue with them really isn’t a good thing to do.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 9:36 AM EST up reply actions
Where do you get the idea that age is minimally relevant for pitchers?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
It's not my idea. I just hate when people change what someone said, and then debate the fictional argument
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 1:00 PM EST up reply actions
OK here's an article from Bradbury that concludes for pitchers
K’s peak at 23-24
BB’s are least around 32-33
HR are least around 27-28
ERA and RA are best around 29
Tango’s study is even more confusing:
K’s peak around 25
BB are least around 39!
HR’s are fairly constant
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
I think old pitchers just say "here, hit it" a lot more
I’d suspect a lot of them “pitch to contact” (if that’s even a thing) because they know they can’t throw as many pitches and are no longer able to strike out guys anyway.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 1:42 PM EST up reply actions
The point is that age is not just "minimally relevant"
in either of these studies.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions
Really do either of those say that?
What matters is how sharp the rise and fall pre and post peak is to prove your point.
"Since other people actually read these threads, though, probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged." - PT
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Dec 29, 2009 4:19 PM EST up reply actions
Those studies say that skills change over time
which is true.
Not sure how it’s relevant to the point at hand, though.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
It indicates that age is more than minimally
relevant for pitchers. If you want to refute it, go ahead. If you want to retract your statement, go ahead. Please don’t pretend that it’s not relevant to your thesis.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 10:27 PM EST up reply actions
It says that the skills that pitchers are good at change over time
That is not relevant to the question of whether “being really young for a level” is more important than doing well at that level. Or if it is, I don’t see the relevance. I’m not being facetious here. I genuinely don’t see what point it is making other than that old pitchers are not the same as young pitchers.
In particular, young pitchers have better stuff than old pitchers. ARL is not concerned with stuff. It’s concerned with the questions “given that we have two pitchers with the same stuff, would you prefer a young one with worse performance or an old one with better performance?” and “given that we have two pitchers with the same performance, would you prefer a young one with worse stuff or an old one with better stuff?”.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
It also shows that pitchers improve
up to about the age of 25, with increasing K-rates and declining BB-rates (see Tango’s study).
Bradbury goes further and concludes that they keep improving till around 29, but that’s more controversial.
Therefore one can conclude that a 21 year old pitcher probably has substantially more improvement left in him than a 25 year old. Whether you prefer the 21 year old or the 25 year old depends on how much better the 25 year old is….and a bunch of other stuff like whether you see a specific improvement you can make, contract status, team position in success cycle, injury history, mechanics, etc.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 30, 2009 4:07 AM EST up reply actions
HRod is a B-/C+ for me
Because the upside for a closer is there.
As for age, I disagree with your premise that it’s minimally relevant for a pitcher like HRod, who’s only thrown 308 Inn’s over 4 seasons. If HRod was 26 with 1000 IP under his belt, and he still couldn’t figure out how to throw the ball near the plate, we’d be in agreement, he’s garbage.
The likelihood he fails is much higher than the likelihood he figures it out. But when you throw 100 and figure it out, you dominate, that’s what I’m holding out for.
ProspectTube.com
You Video. You Scout.
by ProspectTube.com on Dec 29, 2009 10:46 AM EST up reply actions
Im inclined to agree with you
Yes, he does kind of suck now. BUT Id rather take the high ceiling, high velocity guy and hope he figures out enough control to be a pretty effective reliever. It happens. Player development is not linear.
Evidence?
As minimally relevant as ARL is for pitchers generally, it’s even more minute for relief pitchers.
Thanks in advance.
My evidence is that it is not merely "heard of,"
but positively routine for good relief pitchers to pop up at late ages. Betancourt… Ziegler… Nathan… the list goes on and on. It’s pretty rare to find a starter or a position player who missed 2 or 3 years to injury, or didn’t enter pro ball until he was 23, or converted to pitching at a late age, or something— but for relievers, it’s par for the course. Stuff and performance are more important variables.
This is actually an interesting study topic, so I may have more on the topic later.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
The plural of anecdote is not data
You haven’t provided any evidence that a 21 year old reliever is less likely to develop than a 25 year old, and you haven’t given any reason why this might be more true for relievers than for starters.
Why 09 and not 07?
I agree with you, it’s not likely that he figures it out, not many guys who BB as many as him do. But if we’re talking pure upside, I see no reason why it’s not the 09 version of Marmol.
ProspectTube.com
You Video. You Scout.
by ProspectTube.com on Dec 28, 2009 8:47 PM EST up reply actions
...the fact that he's never approached that level of control at any level of the minors, ever?
I mean, if we’re just randomly inventing things that might happen, then I claim Shane Peterson should be an A prospect since he might hit 60 home runs in a season.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
Except that Peterson's power tool has never been graded that high.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 5:09 AM EST up reply actions
... has Rodriguez's "control tool" ever been graded that high?
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
No one's saying he's going to be a control artist.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 10:28 PM EST up reply actions
C'mon Paul...
why take the debate there? It doesn’t help the cause.
So at age 22, and a total of 309IP, HRod is who he is, that’s your argument here?
I’m not randomly inventing a 99mph fastball and a K/9 of 14.6. It’s obvious he has a ways to go, and the BB rate is insanely high. But suggesting that type of player could figure it out is a lot different than suggesting a guy who hit 1 HR last year is going to hit 60.
ProspectTube.com
You Video. You Scout.
by ProspectTube.com on Dec 29, 2009 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
Pitchers are freaky
No one is saying he’s a top prospect. He just has the talent to be very good IF he fixes that problem. Sometimes its a little adjustment one coach makes. No way do I take some of the mediocre, low ceiling but useful guys over him. Take the live arm. He is nothing special, though.
Would you "take" Corey Brown or Michael Ynoa or Ben Hornbeck or Rashun Dixon over him?
According to this list, he’s better than all of those players.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
I'd take Ynoa over him, but none of the others.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 10:29 PM EST up reply actions
I'd take Brown and Hornbeck
Not Dixon. Dixon is the hitting version of Rodriguez, but in low-A ball and four years earlier.
"HARK! BUT LOOK OVER HERE, IT'S A COST CONTROLLED COCO CRISP! DOES MY USE OF ALLITERATION HYPNOTIZE YOU?" (PL78)
by CaliforniaJag on Dec 30, 2009 1:33 AM EST up reply actions
i would definitely take brown, ynoa, or hornbeck over herod, but not dixon.
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05
Can someone educate me
on why a a reliever such as: Brad Kilby, should be viewed as a much better prospect than H-Rod? I have a lot of hope for Henry, when I viewed his MLB debut up close and personal at the Coliseum none of the batters could adjust their timing to his velocity. In contrast the next inning Kilby’s ball disappearing trick had a optical illusion success…But why am I not excited about him?
Youre not excited because he doesn't throw as hard
which really doesn’t matter at the meta level. Kilby is better at not creating disasters with his control, which is more boring than someone that pumps it in there at 100mph.
"Since other people actually read these threads, though, probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged." - PT
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Dec 29, 2009 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
Kilby is much, much more likely to
actually succeed at the MLB level.
If HRod puts it together, he’s going to be a stud out of the pen and obviously has a higher ceiling than Kilby. If he doesn’t, he’s a near lock colossal bust. I can’t see him being better than replacement level if he doesn’t take HUGE steps forward; that’s not the case with Kilby IMO. Kilby’s floor is much higher than HRod’s right now IMO.
"I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it" ~ Mae West
Because Kilby has put up better numbers
And has better stuff due to his control?
"Chicks dig the long ball, although fat chicks will settle for warning track power" - Nick Diamond
I agree with the B- grade
Granted his command is awful at the moment. Oakland’s organization is one of the better ones to help a young pitcher adjust and mature. I have a hunch Henry will pull through.
For a farm system that graduated
Anderson
Cahill
Gio
Outman
Bailey
Mazzaro
and some others, you would think the depth wouldve thinned out. But with a solid last 2 drafts, a very good college heavy draft in 07 this system is still in a good shape. Now it is this next wave of hitting prospect in 2010/2011 that will decided how good or bad the A’s are into the next decade
Thoughts on Andrew Carignan
How much of a difference is there between Andrew Carignan and Sam Demel. Both looked nasty when I saw them in person, and Carignan got promoted from A+ to AA relatively quickly.
Awaiting his arrival in SF: Jesse English
Carignan and Demel
Yes, they promoted carignan much faster in 2008, tested him the AFL, etc. Demel spent a full season in high A,then had a terrible HWB league in 2008. Demel and even Storey right now looks to have jumped ahead of the injured Carignan, but all 3 are likely on similar progression paths. Not sure where they fit in depending on the health and production of wuertz, ziegler, and devine.
The difference is that one is healthy and one isn't
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
I think Weeks is a B...
I really like him. I think he is much better than his brother too. I really like Green and think he could be a top SS in a few years. I have always like Taylor and I even liked him better than Dom Brown when he was with Philly(just my personal opinion). Carter obviously has that special power, but we have to wait with guys like him sometimes. Could struggle a little like Chris Davis did this year but I still think he will show really good power. One guy who I liked before but have completely forgotten about is Fautino De Los Santos. I hope he does good now that he is healthy.
I can't quibble much
Although I do disagree with the Leon ranking. His stuff may not be sterling, but he’s shown he can pitch, and has done so consistently against older competition while more than holding his own.
I also don’t think that Rodriguez warrants much interest unless he can show he can go back to being a starter, which I don’t think is even in the works. Even the best, most surefire relief prospects are still just relievers. And best and surefire aren’t words I’d use to describe HenRod at the moment.
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
Leon
“Gets a lot of attention from A’s fans for some reason.”
His 4.26 FIP as a 20 year old at AA certainly goes a long way in explaining why. We need to regress that HR/FB rate towards 10%, but he still had a tremendous 2009 campaign. He may not have ace potential, but even as a solid 3-4 starter he’s probably more valuable than H-Rod at his peak.
by CapgrasDelusion on Dec 28, 2009 8:16 PM EST reply actions
I never thought Mazzaro would be a future ace, yet I like Leon.
Mazzaro never K’d enough in the minors for me. I always thought the A’s should trade him while his value was high for hitting, but then Duke and Outman both were injured for the year and that option disappeared.
Leon, on the other hand, was dominating AAA level hitting at 18—if a Yankees prospect did that he’d be deemed the second coming of Cy Young.
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 Dec 29, 2009 5:22 AM EST up reply actions
Well that's overstating the case.
Leon at 18 had a 1.94 ERA in 41.2 IP in the Mexican League as a reliever. His K/BB was 38/24, or 8.2/5.2 per 9 IP. Impressive enough, but it’s not like he was Dwight Gooden 1984 had he been in the PCL.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 11:26 AM EST up reply actions
Eh, his numbers look much better if you include the ones from that year's winter league
and since most of the players and parks are similar, it’s hard to make an argument why you wouldn’t.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
OK, include them and make your argument then.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 10:30 PM EST up reply actions
hmmm
Ortiz and Krol stick out to me as guys who should be C+’s. Ortiz has great plate discipline from a premium position and Krol has good polish for a HS arm.
Jack "The Must, Just has no Rust, ain't no Bust, after him the ladies Lust, turns pitchers into Dust, likes his pizza with no Crust" Cust
Krol is a huge unknown.
We THINK he could be the next Brett Anderson, but there is very little data of him in highschool or professional ball.
If the bag of tools that is Dixon gets a C and not a C+, then a C for Krol is also fair.
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 Dec 29, 2009 5:28 AM EST up reply actions
Stassi
he stuck around a while longer than I thought he would in the draft and I wished the Rangers had picked him.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
Carter
Interesting that the Carter rating appears to be non-controversial here. I tend to side with the optimists on him but there are those who definitely see the glass as half empty. I suspect that there will be more than a few top 100 lists from relatively reputable sources that leave him out altogether—and others that have him top 25.
Any top 100 list
That wouldn’t include Carter automatically would lose credibility. There is NO WAY a top 100 list could leave a guy like Carter out of it altogether…defensive issues would push him slightly out of the top 25 but not much more than that…
Jack "The Must, Just has no Rust, ain't no Bust, after him the ladies Lust, turns pitchers into Dust, likes his pizza with no Crust" Cust
Correction
“defensive issues would push him slightly out of the top 25 in those lists that take the more conservative route in grading him
Jack "The Must, Just has no Rust, ain't no Bust, after him the ladies Lust, turns pitchers into Dust, likes his pizza with no Crust" Cust
I cant imagine any credible list having him outside the top 20
and even placing him as high as15-20 is absolutely ridiculous
I'm a huge Carter (and A's) fan, but there are legitimate arguments for him not being a Top 20 prospect
Unless you’re limiting it to hitters and not pitchers. If Carter truly is just a DH, his bat had absolutely better be as good as it can be, or he’s not a superstar. There’s an argument to be made there anyway.
I tend to think he’ll be able to play a passable (like -10 runs) LF.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 2:17 AM EST up reply actions
-10 runs in LF is functionally indistinguishable from DHing
(which is really what he should be doing anyway)
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
Well it did allow Manny and Ortiz to be in the lineup at the same time.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 5:03 AM EST up reply actions
I thought a guy would have to be -20 at first to essentially be a DH
And isn’t LF worth 5 runs over 1B (meaning a guy would have to be -15 runs in left to be too DH-y for the field)? Are my numbers wrong here or my logic?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 9:39 AM EST up reply actions
So if Jason Giambi is worse than a -5 at 1B or if Jack Cust is worse than
-10 in RF they should both DH!
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 11:16 AM EST up reply actions
The conclusion to draw from that is they should not be on the same team, and you should trade one of them
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
Or not sign the one who was so fucking obviously going to fall off a cliff in 2009
Yes, I’m still bitter about the Giambi move.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions
Ideally, yes
Part of constructing a roster is avoiding those kinds of diminishing-returns scenarios.
The A’s haven’t been very good at that lately, though. (Exhibit B: Coco Crisp.)
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
Exhibit C: Matt Holliday Trade #1
"I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it" ~ Mae West
His upside is enough to overcome that
I really dont see the argument. I tend to think he’ll play a slightly below average 1B, but his bat still makes him a top 20 for me, easy.
Does it matter that the A's seem determined to play him in left field?
Serious question. He might end up at first, but the A’s don’t seem resigned to that (yet).
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions
Have they said that?
I think there’s a possibility that is the best fit for him, but I was under the impression he’s ticketed for 1B. I think KG said today the organization has given up on those ideas and views him as a 1B/DH now.
Metty5: KG, people mentioned Carter as a potential LF, is that possible? I find that hard to believe.
Kevin Goldstein: They’ve tried him there, and at third base, where he played in high school. Neither worked well at all, and he’s seen as a 1B/DH.
http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9891
Dunno.
They definitely hadn't given up as of the end of the season.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
I could swear Beane said they were hoping he could play left
And this was sometime in the offseason. Any of the A’s fans here remember that? Am I having Chris Carter dreams again?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 1:41 PM EST up reply actions
From the interview with John
JOHN SICKELS:
You mentioned the wave of young hitters who will be ready soon. Where does Chris Carter fit into that? Can he really play the outfield?
BILLY BEANE:
Chris is far more athletic than people think. He needs work out there, but he has a better chance to stick in the outfield than the other candidates like Barton. We haven’t given up on Barton at all by the way, we still believe in his potential. But Chris’s bat looks special. It would really help us fit him into the lineup if he can play the outfield.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 1:53 PM EST up reply actions
This doesnt seem mutually exclusive with KG's comment above
Wasnt that interview before the Wallace trade, too…?
I doubt theyve actually given up on Carter in LF. His bad hands and raw athleticism point to a decent fit there rather than 1B. Theyre probably not optimistic, though. Plus, they have lots of good LF options now, so they may have squeezed him out and back to 1B.
With Carter, I hope they just pick a position and let him practice
there and trade whomever they need to make room for him, including Barton, Sweeney or Davis. Or else just make him the DH.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 2:14 PM EST up reply actions
is it possible for the A's to have
Michael Taylor in Right
Grant Desme in Center
and Chris Carter in Left ???
for years and years to come….
With Barton/ Doolittle 1st base and DH
Cardenas at 3rd
Coleman or Lejya at Short
Weeks at 2nd
and Donaldson the STARTING catcher behind the plate?
if so, I’ll really like what Beane and co. have done…
I'd rather have Nick Punto playing 3B and Felipe Lopez playing 2B
than Punto playing 2B and Kouzy, Crede, DeRosa or Glaus playing 3B.
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Dec 30, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
Desme in CF?
I was under the impression that he was merely adequate in RF. Can he play a passable CF?
That combination would probably be the worst defensive outfield in the major leagues
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
But they'd have like 100 homers and 300 RBI between them
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
maybe...
If those guys are really the best we’ve got, I’d play Doolittle at LF or RF, and DH Carter.
I think Grant Green will be the A’s next young SS though…
Totally agree.
If the A’s give him a starting job for an extended period of time, I think he can lock up one of the corners.
But then, that means one of the OFers at the MLB level has to be traded.
But the “calling him up to be benched” mentality must stop.
"I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it" ~ Mae West
Well
KG’s comment could easily mean “he’s seen as a 1B/DH [LONG TERM]” and he could play somewhere else for a while. He could also be talking (most likely) to scouts, not guys far up in baseball ops.
I really never saw much about him moving to LF. I saw a couple little things leaving the possibility open, but it always seemed more like something A’s fans were pimping, and that b/c of Wallace and Barton…
I agree
Weeks has huge injury and durability issues.
As a switch hitter, he’s useless hitting from the right side.
He lacks fluidity and instincts on defense. Very erratic defender that attempts to make easy plays more difficult. I just don’t see his body type holding up to everyday major league grind, reminds me of a jerry hairston type but less upside. He might profile better as a platoon/utility player. IMO cardenasis more of a sure thing, more solid bat and less durability questions.
by MagicMike23 on Dec 28, 2009 11:05 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, so I was arguing for a straight "B" for both
Weeks: Injury issues and durability issues, but not “huge.” People are just assuming he’s his brother. There is some concern there, but its being far overstated. Its far too early to say he’s useless from the right side. He’s only had 141 career ABs vs LHP and the numbers, while lagging behind his numbers vs RHP, arent truly terrible. With such a SSS, a few extra hits or one extra HR could make it look much different. His components from each side are very similar and dont hint at a major issue. His defense improved this year.
What does Weeks do well? He rakes. He’s patient and has a great approach. He showed more power than expected. He looked better on defense than expected (and even if, worst case, he as to move to CF I like him plenty there). Weeks is also a very good athlete and has lots of speed. I think John is seriously underrating him.
Cardenas: People have made the case well above. He’s pretty good and the lack of power just isnt damning, even though people think it is. He’s a solid overall package.
For what it's worth, I was covering the game at Wrigley in 2008 when Weeks got hurt
It was one of those “lunging for first base” things. He was trying to (and almost did) beat out a routine grounder, lunged for first and just planted wrong. I guess that should be chalked up to fluke injury.
That said, I do think Cardenas is a better prospect, but only slightly, and only because I think he’ll develop his power. Either way, Cardenas at third and Weeks at 2nd in a couple years works for me.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 2:19 AM EST up reply actions
Why do you think Cardenas will develop power?
Just curious. Everyone seems to have written it off. I was hoping someone would make a case for it. Im very skeptical.
Well, I think that even if he doesn't develop home run power
He’ll have enough gap power (something he’s showing already) to have a high enough SLG to be a really good hitter.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 30, 2009 2:46 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think he will develop HR power.
I do think he’ll develop gap power.
40 doubles across the levels in ‘09. 20+% of balls hit were line drives. He’s not fueling his BA based on weak grounders, he’s spraying line drives.
"I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it" ~ Mae West
Again
I think his contact skills are impressive enough that it makes up for his lack of power. His plate discipline is more of a concern for me (though also not a major one). Overall, I definitely take Weeks over him, though.
The guy hit 18 home runs in his senior year of high school
and 49 XBH last season. He’s not frickin’ Willie Bloomquist.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
+1 on the not-making-judgments-on-platoon-splits-based-on-absurdly-tiny-sample-sizes bit
I’m worried about his injury history. Not worried about his pro numbers as a right-hander. That’s just ridiculous. He was fine there in college.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
Looking at last year's book
John gave Cardenas a B heading into ‘09; now he’s convincingly advanced beyond AA and he loses half a grade?
The monster at the end of this blog.
Talking about Weeks?
He was pretty bad in AA this year. They might want to be aggressive with his advancement anyway, but I could see him in AA to start the season.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 9:41 AM EST up reply actions
yes
“convincingly advanced beyond AA” made me laugh"
by richieabernathy on Dec 29, 2009 10:00 AM EST up reply actions
How the Hell did you get Weeks from my comment?
C-A-R-D-E-N-A-S.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Reading comprehension...
Did you truly expect people to pay attention to what you actually wrote?
by nobodyinparticular on Dec 29, 2009 12:54 PM EST up reply actions
He must have been confused when you said "convincingly advanced beyond AA"
.251/.317/.372 in 207 ABs ≠ convincingly advanced beyond AA
326/392/446 in AA counts as a passing grade in most books
Plus he earned a promotion to AAA.
I’m not sure how anyone could possibly think Adrian Cardenas needs more time in AA.
Although I admit that “convincingly advanced beyond AA” is a little wordy, which can happen when posting at 1:15 AM.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I'm at work and doing this real quick so I dont have time to look up the exact numbers
but I want to say Cardenas OPS’d .780ish during his 2nd stint in AAA this season. His first stint was pretty bad, no doubt, but the only reason he ended with a slash line of .251/.317/.372 was because he did quite well the second time around.
.175/.246/.263 in the first stint in May, and
.304/.364/.439 in the second stint in August/Sep.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
This
"HARK! BUT LOOK OVER HERE, IT'S A COST CONTROLLED COCO CRISP! DOES MY USE OF ALLITERATION HYPNOTIZE YOU?" (PL78)
by CaliforniaJag on Dec 30, 2009 1:36 AM EST up reply actions
Wow, I have no idea.
I need to not read these boards so early in the morning. I totally missed Cardenas in the post.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 1:05 PM EST up reply actions
Try it while mixing vicodin and beer
:-|
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Man, James Simmons has really fallen off the radar
Is there any possibility that last year was a fluke bad year?
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 2:33 AM EST reply actions
I never understood why he was considered such a sure thing to be a major league starter in
the first place. It’s not like he had 3 average to plus pitches or anything. I still don’t see why he can’t be a useful reliever in the Tim Worrell mold though.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 5:07 AM EST up reply actions
I never understood why the A's drafted him.
The argument was he could be Joe Blanton if everything breaks just right, but people forget that Joe Blanton was originally a strikeout pitcher who threw in the low ’90s. That argument never carried a lot of weight for me.
Players almost never reach their full potential. It was one thing for Blanton to never quite hit his celene because you can do a lot worse then a #3 starter and innings eater, but when you draft with that expectation like Simmons was and he doesn’t hit it, you are left with a mop-up man.
What we have learned is those “polished” collage players have just as much chance of never fully developing as those high upside highschoolers.
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 Dec 29, 2009 5:41 AM EST up reply actions
Well I wouldn't go that far. Simmons is still 22 in AAA. He's not hopeless.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 11:18 AM EST up reply actions
And he didn't do horrifically
A 4.27 FIP in AAA isn’t terrible, though he’s not an ace
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Dec 29, 2009 5:17 PM EST up reply actions
Well they supposedly really liked poreda
and were interested in tim alderson who went a couple picks earlier.They werent going to draft porcello. Frazier couldve been a better fit.
by MagicMike23 on Dec 29, 2009 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
Eh
I don’t think your last sentence is justified, or at the very least it should be qualified with the observation that players who were deemed as “polished” and lacking upside often turn out to have much more upside than people dismissed them as having, too.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
I liked him when he was drafted
Thought it was an overdraft, but that he was being underrated by many. Pitchability college guy, fast mover. Him and Bailey both looked good to me. Simmons stuff and velocity is a tick below where it was and it was really bad for a guy like him who was already a borderline guy in those areas.
See, I've never understood the appeal of "fast movers"
As someone said upthread, good is good is good. I don’t see the benefits in drafting a guy with #3-4 upside just because he can get there faster than someone who could – or should – wind up better in the long run.
Not that what I’m saying applies really directly to Simmons, just more of a philosophical thing I’ve never quite gotten.
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
by walk off bunt on Dec 29, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
Time value of money, less time to get hurt
But yeah, I’d pretty much always take the guy I thought had the most talent.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 2:31 PM EST up reply actions
I just meant he was seen as having good pitchability and was nearly ready
Risk is a huge element in this though, and a fast mover, presumably, has much less risk than most. Its not a huge factor and I wouldnt pass up a better player, but all things equal, youd rather have a fast mover than a project, no?
Depends on whether you're looking for success now or a few years down the road
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
His stuff was really terrible this year
I don’t think it was a fluke. He’s actually a demonstrably worse pitcher now than he was when drafted.
O'Hara: Detective Lassiter is literally on fire.
Spencer: What kind of fire are we talking about-- "Michael Jackson in the Pepsi commercial" fire, or "misusing the word literally" fire?
Carter
Although I don’t necessarily disagree with the A-, I do have guys like Domonic Brown, Casey Kelly, Ryan Westmoreland, and even Michael Taylor above him. I still strongly believe that Brown deserves an A-, but I have only minor quibbles about the other 4 in the B+/A- range.
Adoptive parent of Kyle Nicholson
So you don't buy his "special bat"?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 5:08 AM EST up reply actions
I'm partially sold on his special bat.
But Carter is a guy with a lower floor and a lower ceiling than a guy like Jesus Montero, would I would have as a fringe A/A-, because of his defense. However, the lack of a defensive abilities, even at the least valuable position, plus an abundance of strikeouts makes Carter a guy that I’d give a B+. That might just be me, but I love players with no holes, or as few of holes as possible. Aside from Kelly, who is a completely different breed, since he’s a pitcher, the other 3 guys I listed have higher floors, and similar ceilings to Carter, plus they play above average defense at their respective positions.
Adoptive parent of Kyle Nicholson
Former super prospect Javier hererra milb FA sign by yankees
BA ranked him A’s #2 prospect in 2005 and 2006. Injuries, steroid suspension, lack of consistency, and other OF prospects passing him.
Ironically, Yankees also got Richie Robnett last summer after being released from cubs months after the Mike Wuertz deal. Danny Putnam was traded to San Diego last yr. Travis Buck the last remaining member of the failed OF prospect group from 3 or 4 years ago.
The only reason Herrera was the A's #2 prospect in '05 and '06 was because the A's farm system was so pathetic.
If Herrera circa ‘05 were in the A’s system today I don’t see how he cracks the top 15.
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 Dec 29, 2009 5:46 AM EST up reply actions
i may be mistaken, but wasn't herrera near the lower end of top 100 prospect lists back in 05-06?
so basically you’re saying the a’s have around 15 of the top prospects in all of baseball?
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05
Herrera was #74 in 2006 and #68 in 2005 per BA
So he’d be around the Green level maybe?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 11:21 AM EST up reply actions
BP A's top 11
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9891
Five-Star Prospects
1. Chris Carter, 1B
2. Michael Taylor, LF
Four-Star Prospects
3. Michael Ynoa, RHP
4. Grant Desme, CF
5. Grant Green, SS
Three-Star Prospects
6. Max Stassi, C
7. Jemile Weeks, 2B
8. Tyson Ross, RHP
9. Adrian Cardenas, 2B
10. Corey Brown, OF
11. Pedro Figueroa, LHP
I'm amazed and encouraged by the Desme love from TWO! experts.
Both see him as a Top 100 guy it looks like.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Dec 29, 2009 11:33 AM EST up reply actions
+1
I don’t have the balls to consider him that highly just yet. I want to, I really do. I just can’t though.
I need to see how he does against some tougher competition this year.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 29, 2009 1:10 PM EST up reply actions
wow cardenas is quite low on that list
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05
Also, HRod is still the worst nickname ever conceived.
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
How about
Henry Rodriguez..
or hundrend mile henry. Or anything ever again being _-Rod.
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - danmerqury
Yeah right
This A-Rod, I-Rod, H-Rod, C-Gon phase people seem to be going through has always pissed me off. Talk about a lack of imagination
They all have other nicknames, anyway
Ster-Rod
Pudge
Oh Henry!
Patrol Craft
"HARK! BUT LOOK OVER HERE, IT'S A COST CONTROLLED COCO CRISP! DOES MY USE OF ALLITERATION HYPNOTIZE YOU?" (PL78)
by CaliforniaJag on Dec 30, 2009 1:40 AM EST up reply actions
I like Patrol Craft.
Ster-Rod? LMAO. I hate roid jokes but even I find that funny.
"I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it" ~ Mae West
a-roid
A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05
I prefer a-fraud, cuz it rhymes.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
"Rod" and "Fraud" are not supposed to rhyme
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Dec 31, 2009 1:45 PM EST up reply actions
On the other hand...
If he proves himself able to bail out other pitchers who get into trouble, I suppose he could be called Preparation H.
C-Gon is stupid
Which is whY I refuse to use it and find CarGo much much better.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I like Henriguez personally
"Since other people actually read these threads, though, probably best that your particular brand of wrongness not go completely unchallenged." - PT
There are differing opinions on me. According to Iglew "DFA is PT with a sense of humor. PT is DFA with introspective self-doubt. I like them both" but according to sirbed Im "The Stats Killer"
by designatedforassignment on Dec 30, 2009 1:09 AM EST up reply actions
John, I do think you have Cardenas too low
I think you’re giving too little credence to his age (21 all last season) and too much to his perceived lack of power. Given his line drive, all fields swing, and the fact that he’s not considered “weak” — just not “a power guy” — it’s pretty likely that Cardenas will hit plenty of doubles.
Combine that with a potential .300 BA (which gives him a .040 head start on slugging over a .260 hitter), and good plate discipline, and I don’t see why he wouldn’t project to hit as well as, say, .300/.360/.440, no matter what his HR totals look like.
On Athletics Nation, I think an excellent comp was suggested and it’s not Placido Polanco (who is a better defensive player and has less power), or Todd Walker (worse fielder than I expect Cardenas to be), but rather Bill Mueller. A guy with a .300 bat, good plate discipline, enough power to slug decently without a ton of HRs, who played a solid-if-not-spectacular 3B/2B, and finished with a career OPS of .797.
Cardenas put up this line in 2009 in two AAA stints:
.175/.246/.263 in the first stint in May
.304/.364/.439 in the second stint in August/Sept
The first stint, he did poorly while being young for his league. The second stint, he did very well while being young for his league.
Seems to me that Cardenas is still a solid “B” at lowest — the guy has just turned 22 and is almost a lock to make it to the big leagues with a chance to prove himself as an every day starter.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
+1
"To tell the truth, I'm not excited to go to Cleveland, but we have to. If I ever saw myself saying I'm excited going to Cleveland, I'd punch myself in the face, because I'm lying" - Ichiro
by Philip Christy on Dec 31, 2009 1:39 PM EST up reply actions
Aaron Hill?
Hit had line drive power, until this past year.
Everytime you use RBI as anything other than an indicator of where a guy is hitting in his team's lineup, another cute snuggly animal dies a horrible death.
- PT
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Minor League Ball
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.
