BA SD Top 10

by rdf8585 on Dec 3, 2009 11:44 AM EST Comment 67 comments

TOP TEN PROSPECTS

1. Donavan Tate, of

2. Simon Castro, rhp

3. James Darnell, 3b

4. Jaff Decker, of

5. Logan Forsythe, 3b

6. Cory Luebke, lhp

7. Wynn Pelzer, rhp

8. Everett Williams, of

9. Edinson Rincon, 3b

10. Aaron Poreda, lhp

BEST TOOLS

Best Hitter for Average Jaff Decker

Best Power Hitter Matt Clark

Best Strike-Zone Discipline Logan Forsythe

Fastest Baserunner Luis Durango

Best Athlete Donavan Tate

Best Fastball Wynn Pelzer

Best Curveball Keyvius Sampson

Best Slider Wynn Pelzer

Best Changeup Jeremy Hefner

Best Control Chris Fetter

Best Defensive Catcher Luis Martinez

Best Defensive Infielder Beamer Weems

Best Infield Arm Lance Zawadzki

Best Defensive Outfielder Donavan Tate

Best Outfield Arm Rymer Liriano

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/rankings/organization-top-10-prospects/2010/269205.html

Poll

Are you surprised Poreda is ranked 10th?

Yes

83 votes

No

44 votes

127 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 67 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Decker too low

I would put him at #1.

The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. It reminds us of all that once was good, and that could be again.

by Savoy on Dec 3, 2009 11:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't

I’d put him at 3, with #1 being Simon Castro.

by jar75 on Dec 3, 2009 12:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Decker isn’t thought of more highly is his lack of athleticism and projection. If they do keep him, I imagine they work him out at 1b at some point this year, when they perform their due diligence on Adrian Gonzalez. He really can’t man a corner OF spot in Petco, and he doesn’t have another spot he can play…with that being said, you can’t argue with his production at this point in his career…

by thomasps3 on Dec 3, 2009 12:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Decker

I coach high school ball here in AZ and he played for a rival and I had the opportunity to watch him play over the years. He had an old man’s body when he was 16-17. Short, fat, even looked like he was balding a little! The kid can smash though and has more defensive savvy than he is given credit for. He pitched and played CF in high school. His arm is plus (threw high 80s low 90s) and he is fairly athletic for being a short fat kid. He doesn’t have much speed, but he has some quickness in CF and good instincts. If he keeps his body in check I would think he could be a very servicable LFer and maybe even man RF. Of course, if his body explodes to 240+ pounds, 1b would be his limited option

by ScottAZ on Dec 3, 2009 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He'd be an awfully short first baseman.

by aap212 on Dec 3, 2009 10:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Prince Fielder

I see him on a weekly basis at API, he’s probably about 5’10"

If you can smash, play in the NL, and have zero defensive options they will work you in somehow

by ScottAZ on Dec 4, 2009 9:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I just meant he's fighting the odds and is sub-optimal physically for first

Obviously it’s possible.

He’s also extremely named Jaff for a first baseman.

by aap212 on Dec 4, 2009 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Seems like

his position will be determined by whether or not Blanks can stick in LF. If he can, then that leaves 1st open for Decker. But one of the two will have to stay in left, and I’d say it’s more than likely Decker

by Archie A on Dec 3, 2009 12:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Decker

will have a better MLB career than anyone else on this list.

by richieabernathy on Dec 3, 2009 3:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think he deserves...

to be where he is. simon Castro is a very good pitching prospect, Tate could be a Carlos Beltran type player, and Darnell will likely move to second and with his bat he could be one of the better ones in the minors.

by joegonzo on Dec 3, 2009 5:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

better ones in the...

*majors

by joegonzo on Dec 3, 2009 5:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He very well could.

I’m not buying this lack of athleticism nonsense.

He’s not a marathon runner or an NFL running back.

The man is getting paid to mash, and that is what he does.

Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.

by Frederick0220 on Dec 3, 2009 5:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

There aren't many starting MLB outfielders Decker's size now adays...

Heck, there aren’t many MLB players his size at hardly any position period. I’m not saying he can’t or won’t succeed but he’d a throwback if he did. Matt Stairs best case which isn’t bad imo.

by Havok1517 on Dec 3, 2009 6:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Matt Stairs in his prime was a pretty darn good player

But I think the ceilings of Tate, Castro and Darnell are probably higher than that. So, while Tate and Castro are probably less likely to make the majors than Decker, they have a chance to be great, while Decker probably only has a chance to be very good. You have to weigh that sort of stuff against each other. Darnell though seems to be more likely to make the majors than Decker and has a chance to be very good, so it makes sense to me for him to be ahead of Decker.

Wisdom can not be cultivated through ignorance of information.

by Wonko on Dec 3, 2009 6:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Brian Giles

comp

by richieabernathy on Dec 4, 2009 9:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Very different body types and athleticism

The height and weight are comparable, but Decker has a baby fat build and less running speed. Giles was always jacked.

by aap212 on Dec 4, 2009 11:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

lots plate discipline and pretty good power

and similar short, stocky builds with marginal corner outfield defense, etc. also, no one would ever consider giles a premium athlete and i highly doubt you’ve ever seen decker play.

by richieabernathy on Dec 4, 2009 12:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Marginal?

Marginal is a projection – it assumes a decline – he’s good enough right now to handle CF. He’ll have to get more disciplined w/ working out and eating but couldn’t that be said of all of us at 19?

by pffriberg on Dec 4, 2009 6:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

jaff decker?

in CF?

by matthewmafa on Dec 4, 2009 6:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

CF

Jaff played there a bunch last year in the AZL and a lil in the MWL… Now I am NOT saying he’s a future CF, but he’ll likely be at least average at RF (unless his weight gets completely out of control)…

by pffriberg on Dec 7, 2009 1:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

There's no reason to assume that

He spent his entire season playing LF (90 games there and 15 at DH) and had a Total Zone Rating of -3. Now, I’m not trying to prove anything with that number, just giving out the information.

Saying that he can handle CF or RF when he’s played 128 of his 156 career games (82%) in LF or DH is based on nothing more than your assumption that he can.

by jar75 on Dec 9, 2009 6:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

we're not talking about "all of us at 19"

We’re talking about a professional athlete that was has already been paid $900k, so there is an expectation for him to remain in peak physical shape.

And while it’s certainly a small sample and a crude tool, TotalZone had him -7 runs/150 in LF. I’ve yet to see anybody predict that Decker will have the athleticism and range to play major league quality defense in CF. When he was drafted DePodesta explicitly said on his blog that the organization saw him as a corner OF.

by jibs on Dec 4, 2009 6:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Puckett

Kirby did just fine as a short pudgy guy in center field. Not saying he’ll be Puckett, just that it’s possible he could stick in the OF.

by purppride1 on Dec 4, 2009 3:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So did Hack Wilson.

But I’d bet a month’s salary against Decker actually doing it. Especially at Petco.

by aap212 on Dec 4, 2009 7:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

11 minutes?

I would have bet a lot of money on the first “Decker should be #1” post being inside of 10 minutes of the original post. Boo.

by mrkupe on Dec 5, 2009 1:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Decker

I’d take him over anyone else in the system, including Tate. Especially considering Tate’s recent run of injuries.

by seabass on Dec 3, 2009 11:56 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Defense is important too.

by slamcactus on Dec 3, 2009 2:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, but .956 OPS in the MWL.

Ridickaliss.

Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.

by Frederick0220 on Dec 3, 2009 5:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Daric Barton

Baron posted the exact number in the MWL and was 6 months younger. Is he still ridickaliss?

That’s the problem with guys like this, no real projection left. Five years from now they are the same one skill guy while some of the athletic types have honed various skills into a complete package.

by sungod7 on Dec 5, 2009 7:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

eh

Barton wasn’t just awesome in the Midwest League. Dude posted a .900+ OPS in AA at age 19. It was only once he hit AAA/MLB that his lack of work ethic really started to play a factor in his play.

Even still, at age 23, he’s still posted a .742 MLB OPS, which would be fine in context were he anything other than a 1B. And he has time to improve.

Not that I totally disagree with you on Decker. He really doesn’t have much projection left. But it doesn’t mean he can’t be a solid major leaguer . . .I’d just warn some folks here against assuming big numbers at age 19 in minor league ball = big numbers in MLB at age 25.

by mrkupe on Dec 5, 2009 9:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Poreda

With below-average command and secondary pitches, he sounds like a bullpen guy to me, so I’m not at all surprised by his ranking.

MLB Draft Examiner
twitter | jesseburkhart -- draft-related content only
AIM | jb02186

by jesse.burkhart on Dec 3, 2009 11:57 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Poreda Pt. II

It’s a good thing that he’s big, lefthanded and can touch the mid-90s, otherwise I would say that he wouldn’t belong on the list, or many others for that matter.

MLB Draft Examiner
twitter | jesseburkhart -- draft-related content only
AIM | jb02186

by jesse.burkhart on Dec 3, 2009 12:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

kind of a weird statement

“Except for the physical attributes and fastball velocity which he actually does possess, he doesn’t deserve to be ranked”.

by jibs on Dec 3, 2009 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Kinda like saying if Mo Rivera’s cutter wasn’t quite so good, he would never have lasted this long in the bigs.

by guru4u on Dec 3, 2009 12:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You're right, my statement was weird on its face.

I should have explained myself better.

I’m trying to draw attention to the fact that the only reason he made the list is because he throws hard and has a desirable pitcher’s profile, and I think every organization has several pitchers with a similar size-handedness-velo combination but virtually no pitchability to speak of.

I also think that Poreda’s inclusion in the top 10 is BA tipping their cap to Poreda’s former prospect status and guarding against the possibility that he figures it out.

http://www.examiner.com/x-28775-MLB-Draft-Examiner
twitter | jesseburkhart -- draft-related content only
AIM | jb02186

by jesse.burkhart on Dec 3, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think he's got more going for him than just size and velocity

His career minor league walk rate is acceptable at 3.6 BB/9, and he’s posted exceptional GB rates. To me he profiles like a left handed version of Justin Masterson, a 2-pitch guy that succeeds by getting batters to pound the ball in the dirt while maintaining a solid strikeout rate. Not a star, but certainly will have value in the majors.

by jibs on Dec 3, 2009 12:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I can go with some of that comp.

But it looks like Masterson had significantly better command (2.3 BB/9 in minors) than Poreda at a similar stage in their careers, and Masterson has always thrown a better changeup. Maybe I’m being too harsh with Poreda, but when I’m reading a scouting report that says below-average command with almost no feel for a changeup (after three full professional seasons), I don’t give that player any chance of becoming a respectable starter.

http://www.examiner.com/x-28775-MLB-Draft-Examiner
twitter | jesseburkhart -- draft-related content only
AIM | jb02186

by jesse.burkhart on Dec 3, 2009 1:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Masterson really doesn't throw a changeup though

3% of his pitches, as per pitch f/x algorithm.

Also, I’m not a big fan of the whole “if you exclude his worst X starts…”, but Poreda did basically implode in terms of his control after the trade to the Padres (same for Dexter Carter actually). Poreda’s walk rate while in the White Sox organization was pretty much right in line with Masterson’s career minor league rates.

Also his “three full professional seasons” comment isn’t necessarily correct. He got 46 rookie ball IP in 2007 (his draft year), then about 150 innings in 2008, then got only around 100 IP while jumping across 4 teams in 2009. He was drafted as an arm-strength project, so to give up on him after 2 1/2 seasons would be premature.

And even if he doesn’t end up being a respectable starting pitcher, he still profiles as an impact bullpen guy, and when those players are on the cusp of being MLB ready that’s generally worthy of a top 10 org ranking in my opinion (unless it’s a system that is exceptionally deep).

by jibs on Dec 3, 2009 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

Right on about Masterson’s changeup frequency – part of that is because he doesn’t have a good one either (the other part is that he naturally used it less as a reliever), which is why opinion was mixed as to whether he could cut it as a rotation mainstay. The fact that Masterson’s changeup has always been a few ticks better than Poreda’s says less about the quality of Masterson’s changeup than it says about just how bad Poreda’s is. And if there has always been questions about the quality of Masterson’s changeup (and there have been), then I can deduce that Poreda’s odds of becoming an effective innings-eater (like Masterson can be) are less than that of Masterson.

As for the three full pro seasons comment, this sounds like semantics, and I think you knew what I meant, but I will rephrase anyway. I think it’s a bad sign that his changeup grades in the neighborhood of 35 after logging more than 300 professional innings. For me, that’s enough time to show more than just a “well below-average” offering.

As for being an impact bullpen guy, I can see that – finally something we can agree upon. : )

http://www.examiner.com/x-28775-MLB-Draft-Examiner
twitter | jesseburkhart -- draft-related content only
AIM | jb02186

by jesse.burkhart on Dec 3, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

I’m not sure they received enough for Peavy.

I just got on twitter.Follow me at http://twitter.com/JDSussman
I'll be trying to post lines and analysis as much as possible.
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...

by JDSussman on Dec 3, 2009 12:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

They got rid of his contract

The fact that they got anything for him is a win.

by jar75 on Dec 3, 2009 12:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And got 4 pitchers who

escape the AL, and move to a great pitchers park says something about what they received for an injured Peavy.

by thomasps3 on Dec 3, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

they could have gotten any four pitchers then

this comment makes no sense.

by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 3, 2009 6:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree.

Not overwhelmingly impressive.

Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.

by Frederick0220 on Dec 3, 2009 5:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I thought it was decent...

but they could have gotten more if they were willing to wait a year.

by joegonzo on Dec 3, 2009 8:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I was talking about Poreda.

Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.

by Frederick0220 on Dec 4, 2009 3:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tate's most recent injury

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2009/dec/03/padres-tate-injured-atv-crash/

He has a broken jaw, which is now wired shut. Pads say he’ll be ready for spring training, but it’s possible that he could lose weight/muscle mass during that time.

Doesn’t really affect his long term prospect status, but you’ve got to think that the front office is not too happy about this.

by jibs on Dec 3, 2009 11:58 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Not good

Since the 2000 draft, eight of the Padres’ 10 top draft picks have had injury or personal troubles shortly after the draft.

The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. It reminds us of all that once was good, and that could be again.

by Savoy on Dec 3, 2009 12:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know if I would

classify Tate’s injuries as problematic at this point. Guys like Nick Schmidt, Tim Stauffer, and Matt Bush speak much much louder than Tate’s run of bad luck. Additionally, Tate has been mentioned as having spectacular makeup, so I doubt this is something that long term will be a bother to his career and the chances he meets or exceeds his projections…

by thomasps3 on Dec 3, 2009 12:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Keyvius Sampson thoughts?

Great value pick by the Padres.

Long term bullpen guy or quality 3 or 4 SP?

The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. It reminds us of all that once was good, and that could be again.

by Savoy on Dec 3, 2009 12:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

starter

saw him in a showcase and he looks like a potential 3 pitch guy to me. Fastball sat 91-92 and he has a very good breaking ball for his age. He wasn’t afraid to throw a change and while it wasn’t great, the fact he feels comfortable enough to even throw it puts him ahead of 99% of high schoolers

by ScottAZ on Dec 3, 2009 12:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

One of the best curveballs in last year’s prep class. I also see him as a starter.

http://www.examiner.com/x-28775-MLB-Draft-Examiner
twitter | jesseburkhart -- draft-related content only
AIM | jb02186

by jesse.burkhart on Dec 3, 2009 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'll be the one that says he's a reliever.

But a very good one. For me, it’s not about the quality of the pitches, it’s about the ability to last 6+ innings. He won’t be able to get out guys going through an order a 3rd or 4th time if his stuff degrades from being tired.

MLB Bonus Baby - A Draft Blog
The MLB Bonus Baby Forum
The MLB Bonus Baby Dynasty League

by Andy Seiler on Dec 3, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Everett Williams

He seems much too low to me. I’d put him at #5

by jar75 on Dec 3, 2009 12:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I was able to snag him

In a fantasy draft at 37th overall. I’m very confident in the bat, and I hope the experience comes. It sounds like he has a very good chance to move quickly as he gains experience.

Plus Bat, Plus Power, Plus Athleticism seems like a strong prospect to me.

I just got on twitter.Follow me at http://twitter.com/JDSussman
I'll be trying to post lines and analysis as much as possible.
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...

by JDSussman on Dec 3, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Pads

Their system seems to have gotten a whole lot better in a short period of time. Two years ago during a Spring Training game me and a group of other Dback season ticket fans commented on how we could at least count on the Pads being behind us in the future because their system sucked. Now they are light years ahead of us in far as minor league talent. Guys like Keyvious Sampson don’t even crack their top ten but would maybe be top 5-6 guy for us. Someone like Dexter Carter is neglated to “sleeper” role in their system but would probably be our #10 guy

by ScottAZ on Dec 3, 2009 12:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I like this system a lot.

by jar75 on Dec 3, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

agreed good depth and some mixture of talent profiles

I just got on twitter.Follow me at http://twitter.com/JDSussman
I'll be trying to post lines and analysis as much as possible.
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...

by JDSussman on Dec 3, 2009 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

My favorite...

sleeper in the pads’ system is former first round pick Craig Italiano. He was absolutely ridiculous once he moved to the ’pen last year.

by slamcactus on Dec 3, 2009 2:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Man

Tate at #1?

We don’t even know if he can hit.

"Chicks dig the long ball, although fat chicks will settle for warning track power" - Nick Diamond

by hero66 on Dec 3, 2009 8:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

It's almost like BA is relying heavily on scouting.

Which would be weird.

by PissedMick on Dec 3, 2009 10:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

they did just pay him 6.5 million

I just got on twitter.Follow me at http://twitter.com/JDSussman
I'll be trying to post lines and analysis as much as possible.
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...

by JDSussman on Dec 3, 2009 11:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I love how the only place they can put him amongst the "best tools" is "athlete".

Yeah, I doubt anybody’s denying that. The dude is definitely an athletic son of a bitch. Can he hit for average? Get on base? Hit for power? Show good plate discipline? LOL DUNNO!

(Yes, I did notice he’s also “best defensive outfielder”, not that it’s saying much.)

Fans are typically idiots.

by The Typical Idiot Fan on Dec 4, 2009 1:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I glanced too quickly...

and thought it had Tate for best father.

by aap212 on Dec 4, 2009 9:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tate

He does project to be a 5 tool player, though I question how quickly the pitch recognition will come. Personally, I wouldn’t have taken him 3rd overall because he is so raw.

I just got on twitter.Follow me at http://twitter.com/JDSussman
I'll be trying to post lines and analysis as much as possible.
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...

by JDSussman on Dec 4, 2009 9:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The truth is, you really have no idea how raw he is.

But we’ll see before too long.

by PissedMick on Dec 4, 2009 4:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

indeed

While he’s not polished, in this day and age, teams don’t spend $6+ million on a guy who has absolutely no clue how to play baseball.

As I’ve mentioned before, I really don’t think it’s a coincidence that the “Tate is an uber-raw bust waiting to happen” talk started right around the same time that his signing bonus demands became known. It’s pretty obvious that there are a LOT of teams that really like the guy . . .but maybe they don’t like him to the tune of $6 million (which is completely their right). I tend to think that this was a negotiating ploy gone amok as it ran into groupthink.

I wouldn’t be surprised if his development ends up looking a lot like Grady Sizemore’s. That might not excite people in the short-term (which is unfortunate on this site where instant gratification reigns supreme).

by mrkupe on Dec 5, 2009 1:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs