BA Top 100 (lost spots you do not like)
by jsmall404 on Feb 24, 2009 11:29 AM EST
122 comments
Link : http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/rankings/top-100-prospects/2009/267698.html
Overall, I like KG's list a little more (even with his infatuation with younger players).
Here is what I found interesting in BA's top 100:
Hanson was #4 overall and the top pitcher.
Bumgarner at #9 is the lowest I have seen him
ALcides Escobar at #19 is just flat out high to me
Positionless Matt Gamel at #34 is high
Jason Castro at # 53 is just aweful IMO
Brett Cecil at #72 is low
John Niese is actually on the list
One pitching wonder Brad Holt at $94.
0 recs |
122 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Hanson at #4 is ridiculous
Give me Feliz any day.
Fernando Martinez at #30 is too high
Vitters at #51 is too low
Austin Jackson at #36 is too high
churchofbaseball.com
by MJMars on Feb 24, 2009 11:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hardly
It is not unreasonable to rank Hanson so highly.
Others have taken the promise of MadBum over Hanson’s actual results or Feliz’s 2 pitches over Hanson’s 3-4 putches, but no approach is either defiinite or ridiculous.
One might argue that to immediately follow Hanson with Heyward is inconsistent, though.
by parish on Feb 24, 2009 2:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow.
This has to be the most odd list I’ve seen from BA. Odd in that my list usually reasonably close to theirs. Definitely some disagreements – and some are pretty major. Not sure if that means I’ve changed or they have, or maybe even a little bit of both. I suppose they have seeing as there is a lot of new blood over there.
I definitely like Goldstien’s list better overall.
by slurve on Feb 24, 2009 11:59 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
David Price still pitches, so he’s the #1 pitcher on the list.
Also the difference between the #5 and #10 prospect in baseball is so minute, yet people get so up in arms over rankings.
I’m interested in seeing Bumgarner this year and what he does. I’m not so sure he’s the slam dunk that everyone else sees. It’s been widely talked about that left handers with good fastballs and command often dominate Low-A. We will see how he fares as he moves up the ladder.
by loop on Feb 24, 2009 12:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I was personally pretty surprised to see James McDonald not make the top 100 (unless I missed him). Apparently they’re discounting for the fact that he’ll be a reliever in the bigs next season, but he was very good in the minors last year.
I was surprised to see Daryl Jones not on the list. I’d rather have him than Gerardo Parra.
I think Mike Stanton is too high at 16, and I don’t think the difference between Logan Morrison (18) and Freddie Freeman (87) is that much. Either one is too high or one is too low.
Weird to see both Brad Holt and Christian Friedrich in the top 100.
by WrenFGun on Feb 24, 2009 12:10 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
McDonald's there
I’ll save you the trouble.
56 JAMES
McDONALD RHP, DODGERS
7: Strikeouts in 51⁄3 scoreless innings against the Phillies in last year’s National League Championship Series.
Opening Day Age: 24 ETA: 2009
The 2008 Rogelio Moret League Fantasy Baseball Champions!
by The Congo Hammer on Feb 24, 2009 12:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ba
Fair list, some things…
Arrieta, Lawrie were lower than expected… Lingo had Arrieta 48, Callis had Lawrie 42 (book)
Freeman is low… should be in the 50’s, not the 80’s. Yet Morrison is in the teens?
A 2010 ETA for Hosmer is super-aggressive.
by rdf8585 on Feb 24, 2009 12:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
+1
KG also listed Freeman in the 80’s. As a Braves fan, I would like to know the big difference between he and Morrison
by jsmall404 on Feb 24, 2009 12:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
At least Law had him in the mid 60’s. Is it a stretch to say Freeman was better than Morrison was in low-A? Freeman was younger too, I think.
by rdf8585 on Feb 24, 2009 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But...
Morrison’s High-A performance is what rocketed him up lists.
by aCone419 on Feb 24, 2009 12:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no kidding
but 13 HR in high A aint all THAT great..obviously he hit for a high avg, but he is a 1B.
Freeman had a better year than Morrison did at the same level (when Morrison played low A last year)
Not saying Morrison isnt good or Freeman is awesome..but to me it is hard to justify 60 spots.
by jsmall404 on Feb 24, 2009 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
League difference
IIRC, Freeman was in a hitters league and Morrison was in an extreme pitchers league…
by Ophidian on Feb 24, 2009 1:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think there is a big difference between the two myself
But Jupiter is one of the worst hitters parks out there, especially for power numbers. What Morrison did there was pretty damn impressive.
by aCone419 on Feb 24, 2009 4:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
why?
He didnt hit for much power lol. 13 HR is nothing to write home about..obviously he is a very nice prospect though.
by jsmall404 on Feb 24, 2009 5:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
look at his OBP and SLG
and doubles. which, with more strength, and friendlier ballparks = more jacks
by daveh33 on Feb 24, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
jsmall404,
apparently you don’t understand how his home park is horrible for any hitter with pop. His home park is the equivalent of an EXTREME pitchers park. It makes Petco Park look average, hence the ridiculous amount of doubles he produced.
"When Justin Upton faces Lincecum, I think Christ might appear in the heavens, and the world will end." -JakeFree
by JT12340 on Feb 25, 2009 1:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
right
so hitting only 13 HRs there is about what someone would expect…people are acting like he hit 25 in a pitchers park.
by jsmall404 on Feb 25, 2009 2:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You don't seem to understand
Morrison was in the top 10 in the league in homers and he led the league in doubles; the whole FSL is a pitchers league. But even for that league, Jupiter is an absolutely horrid place for HRs. According to MiLB.com, it has a park factor for homers of .57. .57!
For the context, Morrison showed above average power to go with his EXCELLENT hitting skills.
by aCone419 on Feb 25, 2009 10:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
re
dont tell me I dont freaking understand what the hell a pitchers park is. you people are crowning his the next Pujols when he hasnt played above high A yet.
The original discussion is that he is 60 spots better than freeman, and YOU dont understand “park factor” aint a good enough reason.
by jsmall404 on Feb 25, 2009 10:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Okey dokey
crowning his the next Pujols
Way to stay rational.
by aCone419 on Feb 25, 2009 11:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hyperbole wasted
No one has said anything remotely close to that. This appears to be nothing more than attacking an opposing view since the other one doesn’t seem to be holding up.
We’re talking about A-ball stats here – remember? The scouting on Morrison has been very positive, while it has been good for Freeman – it just isn’t on that level. I agree Freeman isn’t 60 spots below Morrison, but don’t have much of a problem with it either.
by slurve on Feb 25, 2009 11:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure why you are attacking Morrison so much
I agree that Freeman is underrated by both KG and BA. But that doesn’t mean that Morrison was overrated by BA. I think BA put him in exactly the right spot. The guy had a MONSTER year given the context, and then followed up with an even more impressive AFL. If anything, KG missed the boat a bit by ranking Morrison so low.
That all being said, if anyone was crowning him the next Pujols, you would see him universally ranked #1 overall. I think it’s pretty safe to say the next Pujols SHOULD be the #1 overall prospect, no matter what position he plays. Your hyperbole holds no water.
by guru4u on Feb 25, 2009 11:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
clearly
the Pujols comparison was hyperbole..obviously no one has compared Morrison to him.
I just dont see that MONSTER year everyone else does.I see a very good year for a promising player than will have to hit a ton to play 1B..I am not hating on him though at all, I thought he would be in the late 20s and Freeman in the 50s
by jsmall404 on Feb 25, 2009 1:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Morrison's AFL performance probably helped him too
Players in the AFL get a lot of scrutiny, and Morrison looked quite good in his time there.
by jibs on Feb 24, 2009 2:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Chat
Somene asked almost the exact question in the BA chat:
Why is there such a gap between Morrison and Freeman? Freeman was as good or even better than Morrison was in low-A in 2007. And Freeman was younger last year than Morrison was in 07.
A:
Jim Callis: Morrison made a huge leap this year, winning the MVP award in the Florida State League and tearing up the Arizona Fall League. I like Freeman a lot, but he can’t match Morrison’s accomplishments. Scouts raved about Morrison in the AFL, and while they like Freeman, they haven’t raved about him yet.
there is out answer, not that i really agree with it
by jsmall404 on Feb 24, 2009 2:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with that
Freeman was in low A ball.
Big power numbers in low A don’t really tell you enough. Morrison was simply doing it against much tougher competition. Freeman is ahead of where Morrison was a year ago, but Morrison didn’t rate nearly this high a year ago.
by acerimusdux on Feb 24, 2009 2:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There SHOULD be separation between the two
But I agree that the separation should not be teens to 80’s…. more like teens to 50’s.
People still tend to underrate Morrison, and I’m not sure why. At least BA had Lars and Morrison back to back – there really is no difference between the two.
by guru4u on Feb 24, 2009 3:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wish
they would just list the top 100 so I could see the damn thing without having to scroll between 10 pages.
by Galt on Feb 24, 2009 12:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
reformatted
1 Wieters, Matt
2 Price, David
3 Rasmus, Colby
4 Hanson, Tommy
5 Heyward, Jason
6 Snider, Travis
7 Anderson, Brett
8 Maybin, Cameron
9 Bumgarner, Madison
10 Feliz, Neftali
11 Cahill, Trevor
12 Alvarez, Pedro
13 Moustakas, Mike
14 Posey, Buster
15 Fowler, Dexter
16 Stanton, Mike
17 Anderson, Lars
18 Morrison, Logan
19 Escobar, Alcides
20 Beckham, Gordon
21 Porcello, Rick
22 Tillman, Chris
23 Smoak, Justin
24 Hosmer, Eric
25 Matusz, Brian
26 Santana, Carlos
27 Laporta, Matt
28 Beckham, Tim
29 Parker, Jarrod
30 Martinez, Fernando
31 Holland, Derek
32 Davis, Wade
33 Mccutchen, Andrew
34 Gamel, Mat
35 Alonso, Yonder
36 Jackson, Austin
37 Andrus, Elvis
38 Montero, Jesus
39 Hicks, Aaron
40 Wallace, Brett
41 Zimmermann, Jordan
42 Schafer, Jordan
43 Arencibia, J.P.
44 Villalona, Angel
45 Alderson, Tim
46 Chacin, Jhoulys
47 Flores, Wilmer
48 Brown, Dominic
49 Lambo, Andrew
50 Blanks, Kyle
51 Vitters, Josh
52 Carrasco, Carlos
53 Castro, Jason
54 Inoa, Michael
55 Cunningham, Aaron
56 Mcdonald, James
57 Halman, Greg
58 Weglarz, Nick
59 Revere, Ben
60 Frazier, Todd
61 Viciedo, Dayan
62 Hernandez, Gorkys
63 Poreda, Aaron
64 Dominguez, Matt
65 Saunders, Michael
66 Marson, Lou
67 Arrieta, Jake
68 Adenhart, Nick
69 Donald, Jason
70 Walden, Jordan
71 Ramos, Wilson
72 Cecil, Brett
73 Teagarden, Taylor
74 Cardenas, Adrian
75 Tabata, Jose
76 Carter, Chris
77 Niese, Jonathon
78 Brignac, Reid
79 Samardzija, Jeff
80 Jennings, Desmond
81 Lawrie, Brett
82 Miller, Adam
83 Bowden, Michael
84 Ramirez, Max
85 Skipworth, Kyle
86 Perez, Martin
87 Freeman, Freddie
88 Parra, Gerardo
89 Triunfel, Carlos
90 Cortes, Daniel
91 Perez, Chris
92 Brackman, Andrew
93 Aumont, Phillippe
94 Holt, Brad
95 Friedrich, Christian
96 West, Sean
97 Gonzalez, Gio
98 Bard, Daniel
99 Flowers, Tyler
100 Jeffress, Jeremy
by Galt on Feb 24, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Format
I agree, I don’t like how BA has formatted the list the last two years.
"In 1962 I was named Minor League Player of the Year. It was my second season in the Bigs." - Mr. Baseball, Bob Uecker
by prince of power on Feb 24, 2009 12:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
+!
I’m with you….I hate the stupid “by the numbers” format they use that just (for the most part) gives useless information and/or trivia. Its lazy writing on BA’s part.
Compare and contrast to the much superior format of 2007 which actually had some very good qualitative analysis and scouting opinions. Best of all…….in one page!!!
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/263445.html
by fartballs on Feb 24, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
This new format isn’t change I can believe in.
by rdf8585 on Feb 24, 2009 1:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It is...
change I can believe in…POOPING ON!
by DrunkIrish on Feb 24, 2009 2:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Too high, too low
Five too high, and five too low
Too high:
Alcides Escobar #19 – great fielder, but won’t be a good hitter….I don’t see why he is higher than Andrus, considering Andrus is 2 years younger.
Mat Gamel #34- good hitter, but good enough to overcome the fact that he can’t field?
Dominic Brown #48- is he even better than Michael Taylor? A lot of people would say no.
Jason Castro #53 – I don’t even get that at all…
Jonathon Niese #77 – not sure he belongs on the list.
Too low:
Brett Lawrie #81 – maybe swap him and Castro!
Jake Arrieta #67 – should at least be in the top 50, borderline ace stuff
Ben Revere #59 – given his batting eye and speed, I’d put him about 20 spots higher
Brett Wallace #40 – surprised to see Alonso ahead of him
Derek Holland #31 – based on his lights out combination of stuff and performance last year, should be top 20 material
by BaseballBrain on Feb 24, 2009 1:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Castro is a legitimately good prospect
Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.
by doublestix on Feb 24, 2009 1:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Jason Castro
He gets way under rated by some. Only Pedro Alvarez, Yonder Alonso and Brett Wallace in the last draft were clearly better hitters. But none of them play a premium defensive position. Castro is about as good a bat as Posey (and may be better with wood), who he outhit by a pretty good margin both this summer in Hawaii and last summer in Cape Cod (on the same team).
You also have to consider that his college line this season, .376/.429/.613, was done at a school with the 5th stongest schedule in College, and a park factor of only 82, or 86 counting all parks played in (link).
A lot of people were sleeping on him a year ago, because he struggled in 2007 coming back from a broken hamate bone. But that is pretty common with that injury. Look at his track record over the last year, including the .922 OPS in Cape Cod, the 1.043 OPS for the college season, which park adjusts to about 1.130, and the .925 OPS in Hawaii.
Posey has a higher defensive ceiling, but I haven’t seen anyone suggest that Castro won’t remain behind the plate. He’s reportedly a solid defender there.
by acerimusdux on Feb 24, 2009 2:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
umm
Throw Smoak and Gordon Beckham in there with the clearly better hitters ( I assume you mean from college).
Castro looks like he will be a solid major league catcher, but 53 still seems high
by jsmall404 on Feb 24, 2009 2:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure
Yeah, I should have included G Beckham and J Smoak. Still, those guys are at 20 & 23 here.
Who is he ahead of that was better at 53? He was arguably picked a bit high at #10 in the draft, when the Astros could have had Smoak or Wallace, who both went in the next 3 picks…but those guys are rated higher here (as is Hicks).
Just looking at the positional talent ranked after him, I think Halman is a guy who could clearly have a higher ceiling, but I also see names like Aaron Cunningham, Nick Weglarz, and Todd Frazier. I think Castro fits in very well in that company.
by acerimusdux on Feb 24, 2009 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And one year
Mitch Einertson was the best hitter of all the draftees in short season ball. That’s not much of a sample size to base things on, and it seems like a big jump when you consider that they rated him worse than a bunch of guys he’s ahead of at the time of the draft.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Feb 24, 2009 4:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Who?
Maybe they under rated him at draft time. A lot of people had him under rated a month or two before the draft. And look at the actual draft, and Skipworth is the only guy I see drafted higher and ranked lower here. And I see a few drafted after and ranked higher.
As for sample sizes, you’ve got about 150 PA in summer ball, about 300 PA in the college season, about 160 PA in short season ball and about 95 in winter ball. Sure there’s some small samples there. But combined it’s about as much as you have for any 2008 draftee. And the combined record compares favorably to most, especially when you consider position scarcity for a guy who seems to be pretty good behind the plate.
The college season is the largest sample size of those, but also the only one of them using metal bats. And a lot of guys who put up big numbers there, like Buster Posey and Conor Gillaspie, don’t have the power Castro has with wood bats.
by acerimusdux on Feb 24, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"Who?" is my point
If they underrated him at draft time, that’s one thing, but they should come out and say it. Based on their own scouting, Castro was well behind Posey and Skipworth in terms of catchers. They already knew his wood bat evaluation because he played two years in the Cape Cod League. 150 ABs of good, but not great, performance in short season ball should not be enough to overturn that evaluation. Every year there are guys who bust out in short season, then never follow up on it again.
Frankly, I think this rating, together with the strangeness of the rankings in general, is because three of the six guys putting together the list are new and just don’t have nearly as much experience as Callis and the others in knowing what actually makes a good prospect. Thus, they overrate a guy like Castro, who had good enough numbers on their face and a good enough draft position, but who don’t really keep up with the college scouting reports and would be prone to overrate someone simply because he’s that team’s best prospect.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Feb 24, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
agreed mostly
but how much higher would you have holland and revere?? i mean..you cant go THAT much higher on him..wallce I felt should have been more around mid 30s but i cant nitpick over 5 spots.
by jsmall404 on Feb 24, 2009 1:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Escobar
He has a very high ceiling- perennial gold glove winner, .300/350/420. Then when you consider how bare the minor league cupboard is right now for short stops it is clear he is in a league of his own. The only one close is Andrus, as you mentioned, and I think he should be ranked higher as well.
by Birdfan01 on Feb 24, 2009 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
there's no way
Alcides Escobar will get on base 35% of the time in a full season in the Major Leagues.
by richieabernathy on Feb 24, 2009 2:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I like how..
you just throw his ceiling numbers arbitrarily…I havent seen one publication say that is his hitting ceiling and he has only slugged over 400 ONCE.
by jsmall404 on Feb 24, 2009 2:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
260/330/370
with top 25% of league in SS fielding to me totaly justifies the ranking and think those numbers are very achievable.
Even down grading those to 240/310/350 if he is truly gold gove caliber defender justifies his ranking.
by novaoakland on Feb 25, 2009 2:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no it dosent
it justifies a top 40 ranking..not 19th overall.
by jsmall404 on Feb 25, 2009 2:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
to me it does
and clearly so does BA
by novaoakland on Feb 25, 2009 8:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
um good comeback?
especially when the whole thread is about what we disagree with..if you wanna agree with everything BA tells you, go start your own thread.
by jsmall404 on Feb 25, 2009 10:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Escobar last year at Huntsville
328/363/434
“Won’t be a good hitter” seems bold.
by Lovejoy on Feb 24, 2009 2:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
assuming he can repeat it
His season was all batting average driven, and his average jumps all over the place from year to year. Even if you think he’s a 300 hitter in the major leagues, given his poor plate discipline, that would put him around 300/330/400. That’s not a good hitter in my book, and I’ll be surprised if he ends up with a career average of 300.
by BaseballBrain on Feb 24, 2009 2:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Its still a bold claim. Here’s one scouting report:
Good understanding of strike zone, battler at the plate, a tough out. More strength to come than you’d think as he matures.
and another:
His bat has come a long way and now profiles as a good top-of-the-order threat, maybe a No. 2 hitter.
Maybe its a crazy long shot, but sometimes skills develop.
by Lovejoy on Feb 24, 2009 4:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
Sometimes skills develop, true. If Escobar hits around 330 again, I’ll probably be a believer. The problem is that he has to hit 300 or above, even with some increased power, to be an offensive threat.
Last year, his BB/SO ratio was 31/82. While that’s not pathetically awful, it’s certainly not good. I’m not a believer yet, and I actually believe more in Andrus’ bat than Escobar’s, though that might put me in the minority.
My impression is that Andrus got better as the year went on, has better speed, and a little better plate discipline than Escobar NOW, and he’s two years younger. Andrus is at least as “big bodied” as Escobar, so might be projected to hit for equal power down the road (Escobar had only 12 XBH as a 19 year old; Andrus had 25 XBH at the same age at a higher level)
Escobar is a good prospect, no doubt; I just think he’s somewhat too high. I’d put him about where Andrus is on the list (35-40 range). I’d put Andrus a bit ahead of him somewhere around #25-30.
by BaseballBrain on Feb 24, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What about Defense
From what I have read Escobar has the potential to have a mantle full of gold gloves before it is all done while Andrus profiles as being above-average.
by Birdfan01 on Feb 24, 2009 11:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not 53 good
Top 100 yes, but in the back end of it. Does not project as a star and still has aways to go
churchofbaseball.com
by MJMars on Feb 24, 2009 1:34 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Rasmus
Anyone else think that 3rd overall ranking is a little ambitious.
by Birdfan01 on Feb 24, 2009 2:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
definitely
guy remains a great talent, but after having a so-so year, there are more deserving guys for #3
"Sometimes Joe (morgan) doesn't like facts to get in the way of his opinions."- billy beane
"That was a great pick...if this was 2002" Me, to guy who selected Barry Zito in a fantasy draft
www.27ClubPeak.blogspot.com
by harendaman365 on Feb 24, 2009 3:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
7 skills
He has them all in spades. I find it hard to argue either Snider or Maybin over Rasmus given their inability to make contact. Maybin at least is a great fielder as well, but he has shown no ability to hit for power. Snider is a horrible fielder who makes little contact
Rasmus was injured most of the year, so his ‘08 performance was subpar, but his ’07 was amazing. I think Heyward, given his extreme lack of track record is a bit over-ranked as it is (ditto Hanson) so I wouldn’t put them ahead of him.
by Galt on Feb 24, 2009 3:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hanson lacks a track record???
How in the world did you come to that conclusion? He dominated low-A in the 1st half of 2007, before having some struggles when moving up to high-A. Starting in high-A again this year, he was completely unhittable before the Braves moved him up to AA. He wasn’t that dominate to start at AA, but as soon as he started throwing the slider in late June he just got better and better, raising his K rate from the mid 8’s in May and June to 11.0 in July to 13.2 in August to 15+ in the AFL.
Given that he already has 320+ IP in the minors and he’s had great stats at every stop, I don’t really know what else you’re looking for track record wise.
by nixa37 on Feb 24, 2009 3:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rasmus
Agreed. I’d take Heyward over him everyday of the week and twice on Sundays.
"In 1962 I was named Minor League Player of the Year. It was my second season in the Bigs." - Mr. Baseball, Bob Uecker
by prince of power on Feb 24, 2009 2:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hellickson...
Scouts really seem down on him last year. No clue what that’s about.
by slamcactus on Feb 24, 2009 2:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
He seemed to get hit pretty hard in AA
His 1.79 HR/9 rate and 84 H in 76.2 IP in AA has a lot of people concerned.
by jibs on Feb 24, 2009 3:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He allowed 5 HR in his first game up at AA
I know you can’t really be selective about stats, but if you take that out of the equation, his AA performance was in line with the rest of his performance.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Feb 24, 2009 4:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He's good, stuff is still average
His stuff isn’t necessarily better than a guy like Jess Todd. He put up monster numbers at lower levels with great command, but has a couple of adjustments to make at AA. If he can keep the ball down, pitch a bit deeper into games this year, and get a bit sharper with the curve he’ll be up there next season.
by acerimusdux on Feb 24, 2009 5:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Texas C
73 Teagarden, Taylor
84 Ramirez, Max
Ramirez is gonna be so much better then Teabags, its not even funny
by ufo on Feb 24, 2009 2:54 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
umm...
hopefully you dont mean behind the plate, because if that is what you would mean, you are very wrong.
by jsmall404 on Feb 24, 2009 2:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
sorry, meant offensively
im looking from a fantasy perspective … so i sea Tea like a Brad Ausmus maybe slightly better… and Max like a 25hr with good avg / production
by ufo on Feb 24, 2009 2:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Might be right
but understand that is not what they are thinking when ranking Tea above Max
churchofbaseball.com
by MJMars on Feb 24, 2009 3:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
from a fantasy perspective
Teagarden at catcher is going to be much more valuable than Ramirez at DH.
by Galt on Feb 24, 2009 3:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
good luck with that
Max has improved defensively and will likely stick at C .. Tea is a 220-230 avg at Mlb level
by ufo on Feb 24, 2009 3:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
get the facts right
Ramirez isnt “likely” to stick at C except maybe in your own little world..and there is no reason to think teagarden will be that bad…240-250 is much more like it without being too pessimistic or optimistic
by jsmall404 on Feb 24, 2009 4:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no, but i just gave you a glimpse
copy all this down so i can laugh at you guys as soon as next year
by ufo on Feb 24, 2009 9:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
haha
you would take his worst year striking out and bring it up….since you know, one year says it all.
by jsmall404 on Feb 25, 2009 12:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
he always k'd alot
minor league career = 756 ab’s, 249 k’s, and 143 walks … thats alot of k’s, and decent walk rate ..but the only time he walked alot was when he was in A ball at 23 year old, a bit old for that level … i like his power, but still think Max will be much better offensively
by ufo on Feb 25, 2009 3:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You are in the minority there
Teagarden will be great defensively and should have 20 hr pop with plenty of walks. Ramirez will be a liability behind the plate. If he stays there
churchofbaseball.com
by MJMars on Feb 24, 2009 2:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not for Mark Teahen
he’s earned it with his weak ass hitting style.
Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.
by doublestix on Feb 24, 2009 6:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no taylor or salome
Taylor was BP 55 and salome 79.
On the other hand, Cunningham is 55 here and not on BP list.
I think all 3 are top 100.
Question is who to boot.
Maybe I’d take Vicieda and Adenhart off the list. Although I know some are still high on Adenhart. I also don’t know if Brackman belong top 100. Friedrich and West seema little high, maybe a few more iffy ones. Niese I actually kinda like but he may be tail end or just below.
by wobatus on Feb 24, 2009 2:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Salome
leaving him off the list here is a pretty clear sign that BA doesn’t think he can stick at catcher defensively. Looking at how Brett Lawrie just got moved off the position though, I’m not sure the Brewers agree.
by DrunkIrish on Feb 25, 2009 1:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I've got a fever...
and the only cure is more Jonathan Lucroy!
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Feb 25, 2009 4:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hanson
Glad to see Hanson rated as highly as his performance has indicated.
Of course, on the chat, they went on and one about how there was absolutely no consensus beyond the first two players. Basically, 3-20 was a tossup.
by mraver on Feb 25, 2009 12:20 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Escobar is perfect
And I feel such redemption after pushing him so long on the community list.
I think people underestimate just how valuable a good defensive SS is.
by novaoakland on Feb 25, 2009 1:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
?
How valuable is a guy like Yunel Escobar? He hits more than Alcides and is a top 5 defensive SS. Its a great thing to have, but you need to hit more to be a top 20 prospect.
by jsmall404 on Feb 25, 2009 2:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hitting prospects fail
Name one defense guy who stoped being able to field. That sure thing more than justifies any lack of hitting.
by novaoakland on Feb 25, 2009 8:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
knoblauch
TPJ...you're dead to me
by billybeingbilly on Feb 25, 2009 11:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't get this?
If Yunel Escobar were somehow eligible for this list, he’d probably rank pretty highly.
by aCone419 on Feb 25, 2009 10:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no kidding
he would now..but he never did when he was their age. I thought that was pretty obvious.
by jsmall404 on Feb 25, 2009 10:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
?
When he was Alcides’ age, he was yet to be drafted.
As for never being high on lists, he was rather old and lost eligibility during his breakout year, thus never really getting the chance to be ranked. Yunel was a rather irregular prospect.
by aCone419 on Feb 25, 2009 11:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Escobar
He would have to be as good of a defensive SS as Ozzie Smith to justify his ranking, given the 700’ish OPS which he’ll likely put up.
by BaseballBrain on Feb 25, 2009 10:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Scouts absolutely rave about the glove
But he doesn’t have to be Ozzie Smith to justify the ranking. He needs to be a slightly lesser version of Omar Vizquel to justify the ranking, which I think is what BA and a lot of others see him as.
by guru4u on Feb 25, 2009 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not really
Considering that guys like Jason Bartlett are 2+ win players, I think you’re underrating how important glove can be at a premium defensive position.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Feb 25, 2009 12:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Funny you should mention Bartlett
That’s about what I see when I see Escobar. A.E. might have a bit better glove and a bit better power, Bartlett has a bit better plate discipline.
I wouldn’t put a guy who’s a 2+ win player in the top 20, personally, but whatever. I guess the difference between #19 and #39 (which is about where I’d put him) isn’t that huge.
I see that A.E. got some pretty good scouting reports from some places, but he was also tailing off towards the end of the year, which gives me pause. Let’s see him repeat it; then I’ll believe.
by BaseballBrain on Feb 25, 2009 12:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A .700 OPS...
from Escobar would make him a ~ +3 win player if he can put up even +5 defense. If he can be +10, which reports seem to indicate he’s capable of, he’s a +3.5 guy at your offensive baseline.
Any offense above that, he’s a star.
He just doesn’t need to hit that much to be incredibly valuable.
by slamcactus on Feb 25, 2009 1:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You’re overvaluing slugging for one. Chicks may dig the long ball but different types of hitters add value. You’re also weighting your formulas that determine his future rather highly. You’d think you’d have a bit of pause when scouts rate him much higher than you do, especially when they talk about things like his understanding of the strike zone and competing at the plate.
by Lovejoy on Feb 25, 2009 12:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, if he aint slugging
he aint adding value in any other way – his patience/on-base skills are pretty pathetic to this point. If you’re not slugging, you better be getting your ass on base with great contact skills and/or drawing walks. He’s not doing that.
by slurve on Feb 25, 2009 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pathetic...
is going a bit too far. He’s not Yuniesky Betancourt up there. 31 walks in 546 ABs is nowhere near enough, but it’s something to build off for a guy going into his age 22 season.
by slamcactus on Feb 25, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
slugging
Power peaks on average around age 27-28. Sometimes later. For a guy who is a true plus defensive SS, at age 21, hitting .328 in AA with 8 HR, 24 2B, and 76 RBI may be offense enough.
He’s not completely devoid of power. An XBH every 16 PA would certainly be weak for a 1B or LF prospect, but it’s not bad for a true SS. Since John is reviewing past SS prospects this week, take a look at the two Alex Gonzalezes on those old lists. Neither of those guys ever had an OPS over .800 in the minors (or the majors, obviously). A. Escobar is actually a bit bigger than either and probably has a bit more offense projectible. But at worst his contact skills will be enough for him to be a solid starter somewhere given his defense.
by acerimusdux on Feb 25, 2009 2:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
forgot to mention
both those Gonzalezes were top 20.
by acerimusdux on Feb 25, 2009 2:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Austin jackson and lambo
overranked. Jackson just wasn’t that great in AA. They could both deserve this ranking or even higher eventually, but I don’t think they have earned it yet.
by wobatus on Feb 25, 2009 2:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
lambo
he might be high but not by more than 5 or 6 spots..a 19 year old who hit lefties extremely well in Low A while showing some power then jumps all the way to AA and dosent miss a beat while there.
by jsmall404 on Feb 25, 2009 3:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Lambo BP # 77
That’s about right for now. He did ok in Midwest League. It is a pretty tough hitter’s league. AA was a very small sample. Still, he did quite well there.
One of several top 50s still available in my league (twirls wax mustache, rubs hands together, laughs maniacally).
by wobatus on Feb 25, 2009 5:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
BA rankings
A few of the “safe” picks like Blanks, Cunningham, Donald, Marson were a bit high for me, though I don’t really object to them being on the list. Though Marson would be on the fringe for me.
Guys I might have left off altogether:
71. Wilson Ramos – potential there, I’m not sold yet on this high
92. Andrew Brackman – high ceiling, too many doubts
95. Christian Friedrich – wasn’t a big fan at draft time, haven’t changed my mind really
Guys I’d have taken instead:
Michael Burgess – maybe getting discounted too much just because he’s a National?
Brandon Erbe – I’ve got to take him over Brackman right now.
Neftali Soto or Travis D’Arnaud – two guys who I think will move up lists next year.
by acerimusdux on Feb 25, 2009 4:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Soto +1
going to be making all the lists next year
by smoooooth on Feb 25, 2009 6:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
About Jason Castro
People need to stop thinking its odd that he’s ranked so high. He has now been ranked #53 by BA, and I believe #76 by BP.
by byronlhsdrmr on Feb 26, 2009 12:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Why does nobody criticize the Marlins for picking Skipworth?
Has any rating person rated him as high as Justin Smoak or Gordon Beckham or Yonder Alonso? Quite a few seem to have ranked Jason Castro above him, including BA which put him more than 30 slots higher
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Feb 26, 2009 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
he is farther away than those guys...
is the obvious reason..but, his ceiling remains quite high..i would venture to see he needs to play well in Low A this year to justify taking him ahead of those other guys…
by jsmall404 on Feb 26, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sickels...
Smoak: A-
Beckham: B+
Skipworth: B+
Alonso: B+
Jason Castro: B
I think Skipworth is a hugely underrated prospect.
by aCone419 on Feb 27, 2009 5:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
