Prospects?
Are any of the following prospects a Top 50 prospect possiblity for next season and if so, where would you rank them?
Kyle Drabek
Brad Holt
Brandon Crawford
Nick Noonan
Brett DeVall
Michael Taylor
Dan McDaniel
Adrian Ortiz
Aaron Shafer
Clayton Tanner
Joe Savery
Travis D'Arnaud
Sebastian Valle
I have these prospects in a Sim league and was just curious how they project. For the most part, I have the Phillies farm system and will have whoever they draft in this year's draft. Are there any players they're obviously targeting in the upcoming draft?
Thanks.
0 recs |
26 comments
Comments
From the guys I know from the list
My opinion is this:
Drabek, I would have him in the 35-50 range
Holt, 50-100
DeVall, 50-100
Crawford, 50-100
Taylor, also in the 35-50 range
by DJSlam on May 27, 2009 5:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Sounds right.
Adoptive Parent of Francisco Peguero. He can throw, he can run, he can hit(fastballs), and he's Dominican. What else do you need to know?
"Obviously I’m not doing things like going toe-to-toe with a ninja. Find me a ninja, for one."--Brian Wilson
by haverecords on May 28, 2009 12:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mine
Drabek will be top 30. Easily. Could be one of the best pitchers in the minors this year.
Taylor too. I see the Phillies easily having 3 top 50 prospects and maybe 3 top 30.
A noob or n00b is someone that lacks intellegance or common sense, most people think that noob is a word used only in the online gaming world, but in reality it is becoming an ever popular word with teenage society.
a noob could be simply a level 100 running round shouting ‘’WTF DO I GO!?’’ or someone calling someone else a noob and then getting hit with a brick, anyone can call anyone a noob, but normally they are noobs themselves
-robert_d_wilfong
by cwhitman412 on May 27, 2009 5:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
McDaniel/Shafer - my 2 cents
I don’t see Shafer as anywhere near top 100 status. He has “pitchability” but doesn’t have the stuff. He’s been struggling in the MWL, which isn’t a good sign. Maybe he picks up a bit as the season progresses.
McDaniel, on the other hand, may be flying under the radar a bit for most folks. a nasty 1-2 combo, 4 solid pitches, can run it in the mid-90’s. A lot depends on how he finishes this season, but I could see him as a borderline top 100 option. I have a hard time buying top 50, though, much as I am high on him.
Speaking of McDaniel, I’d love to see a thread on emerging players/surprising lines. I’d love to see how he compares against some other people.
As for the rest, basically agree with what’s been said above. As of now, I think Taylor/Drabek are the best shots at to 50. A lot depends on how they finish. As of now, I’d think both are in that 40-50 range, but they could both move up (and obviously, down). I’ve always been wary of Holt for some reason, but I’d guess he’s a top 100 candidate, perhaps in that 60-80 range. I think Crawford is probably in that 80-100 range, but with the potential to move up depending on how he finishes. I think DeVall/McDaniel are both in that borderline range. I prefer McDaniel, as I like his stuff a bit better, but then again, fully acknowledge I have my biases as a Cubs fan.
All this should end with the fact that it’s still early.
by toonsterwu on May 27, 2009 8:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
re: emerging players
i’ve got something cooking, but i want to see one more outing before i spring it. this guy is in BA’s prospect handbook as throwing 88-92, but at age 25, in his second MLB season, moving from the bullpen to the rotation, the guy is peaking at 96 MPH. it absolutely blew my mind when i checked him out a few days ago.
human beings, who are almost unique in their ability to learn from the experiences of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
by variablesdont on May 27, 2009 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am very curious who you are referring to
I was actually referring to having one post about minor leaguers that have been surprising, have interesting lines, sort of stuff under the national radar, though. But that would work also – guys that have surprised in the bigs or something like that.
But now I am very curious. 25 year old, 2nd MLB season, BP to rotation, tossing mid-90s? I’m looking at the list of 25 year old arms … only one or two seem to fit that parameters you’ve set. Since you are waiting, don’t want to you to spill your post, but any hints? Handedness?
by toonsterwu on May 27, 2009 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's clayton richard.
he pitches again on friday, so i want to see it one more time, but in his last 2 starts, viewable here and here, he touched 96.
also, i only looked at 3 or 4 relief appearances, but i found this one just now, and it shows richard had a peak velocity of 98!
as i said, this revelation absolutely floored me
human beings, who are almost unique in their ability to learn from the experiences of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
by variablesdont on May 27, 2009 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yesterday's Game
7 IP, 6 H, 2 ER, 1 BB, 7 K
Granted it was against a bad hitting KC club, but that’s 3 impressive starts in a row. I’d been jaded by his horrible starts last year to notice his last couple of outings. Could be a breakout if he keeps this up, too soon to tell though. Biggest difference looks to be hits allowed. BTW, just looked through my old BA prospect books. They had Richard topping out at 94 when he was drafted so it isn’t that big of a jump in velocity …
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on May 30, 2009 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
McDaniel/Shafer
I’m guessing he’ll end up in the 6-10 area for most people’s Cubs Top 10 lists come the offseason. He’s pitched very well this season and could really help his stock as a future starter if he keeps this up. I still think he’ll be a power reliever down the line, but there’s some potential there for him as a starter.
As for Shafer…eh. He hasn’t recovered the velocity he lost after surgery, although he still has very good control. Unless his velocity makes a comeback, I don’t see him making the majors.
by Outshined_One on May 27, 2009 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right now
Me personally, I think McDaniel should be in the top 5. My top 5 goes Vitters/Jackson/Samardzija/McDaniel/Cashner – Cashner has better raw stuff but I’m a bigger believer in McDaniel’s arsenal being enough to be a starter vs. Cashner’s change developing enough for him to be a starter, and I value starters more. That said, I’m sure a lot of folks would put Flaherty up there, and I wouldn’t complain as I’m not too worried about Flaherty’s struggles in the MWL. If it wasn’t for the injury, Rhee’s raw ability would probably vault him up there. Cases could probably be made for Lee, Hoon, and maybe even Castro.
That said, I’ve liked McDaniel a lot more than other people, but I do think he’s flying heavy under the radar, even for Cubs fans. 4 pitches, 2 plus pitches, is fairly consistent in that 92-94 range, and good performance in High A so far.
I agree on Shafer. Was never huge on him – thought he got overhyped by some Cubs fans this offseason due to the round he was picked in.
by toonsterwu on May 27, 2009 9:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Holt
Any word on how his secondary pitches (slider/change?) are coming along? His numbers are pretty impressive so far. If not for his bad bad bad 1st start, his numbers would be 1.41 era, 0.88 whip, 39 k / 31.2 ip. Obviously it’s too convenient to disregard bad starts cuz we could apply it to every prospect. I just wanted to point out Holt’s stellar numbers over his last 6 starts.
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on May 27, 2009 8:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Holt
is the only guy on this list I’m really familiar with — I’m not too intense of a prospect watcher — but his curveball’s looking nice. It’s a hard pitch, a real power curve, and he’s learning to use it well and has been commanding it. I haven’t heard nor seen nothing too special on his changeup, but I’m assuming that pitch is showing at least modest improvement, or else his HR numbers would be a little higher.
Of course, I’m still trying to figure out where my boy Mejia fits into all this.
by METSMETSMETS on May 27, 2009 11:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Drabek and Taylor
I am with eeveryone else, those are top 50 guys to me.
Noonan has really disappointed me, I liked him alot…
by jsmall404 on May 28, 2009 12:01 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Drabek and Taylor
Definately top 50 prospects. Speaking of prospects, does anyone have an update on Jake Mcgee??? Thanks
by Patriotreign3 on May 28, 2009 9:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
McGee
Ya, I’m also interested in an update on Jake McGee. Any news out there?
by jepmotors on May 28, 2009 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Throwing. No word out of instructs.
Tools Whore
by Tyler on May 29, 2009 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hey variables: can we please stop with the BS?
your schtick has gotten old. you aren’t a scout. you aren’t ‘uncovering’ anyone. in fact, you are a BS artist. we don’t care which player/s you’ve found. if i had my druthers, you’d be removed from this site.
by psugator on May 28, 2009 10:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
+1 (except for the removal part)
I was looking up a scouting profile on Brooks Brown and accidentally stumbled onto this guy’s old blog. I think it’s pretty clear that this is just one of those guys who falls in love with mediocre pitchers because when they’re right they can boast knowing more than everyone else, and when they’re wrong, no one noticed anyway:
of the 2006 draftees, i prefer (brooks) brown to (brett) anderson because of brown’s ability to get the most favorable outcome. anderson’s immaculate record combined with his FB tendencies scare me off a little bit.
Brown’s "most favorable outcome" is usually to do anything but strike the batter out, with his impressive 15/18 BB/K in 49 IP between AA/AAA at age 24. I don’t know who that Anderson guy is, must be some non-prospect, but he has a good fastball so he must be bad, just like Strasburg.
http://variablesdont.blogspot.com/2008/01/2008-arizona-diamondbacks.html
http://rswanzey.blogspot.com
by rswanzey on May 28, 2009 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
right. how dare anyone not rehash for the 200th time who of alex gordon or delmon young is the better prospect.
here’s a hint, the better player is elijah dukes.
as far as i can tell, the only thing you add to this site is bile. every 5th post is you following me around, calling me a drunkard in so many words.
great job there.
human beings, who are almost unique in their ability to learn from the experiences of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
by variablesdont on May 28, 2009 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and the funny thing is, even if i'm right on the ball about both strasburg and gibson,
you’ll still think you’ve got more right to your opinion than i’ve got to mine. and you’ll never admit that i might know more than you think regardless of what i say, or what i demonstrate.
human beings, who are almost unique in their ability to learn from the experiences of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
by variablesdont on May 28, 2009 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
well if it were just me, then ...
that would be one thing…but as you can see, there are a number of people on this site who don’t like you and don’t prefer your ‘antics’….
by psugator on May 28, 2009 1:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
yeah, but
here’s what you’re apparently too disinterested to understand; you saying what you’re saying in every thread i post in adds nothing to the conversation that’s taking place. i’ve counted 5 separate times now that you’ve directly come at me, without at all addressing the points that i make.
and you thinking that people agreeing with you means that you’re right is one of the major problems with our species, though that’s probably over your head.
now you’ll probably dismiss this too, so i won’t go on, but if you bother posting on this site, you should at least have some interest in a LHP who adds 4-6 MPH on his fastball at age 25. i mean, if that doesn’t excite you, you don’t belong here.
human beings, who are almost unique in their ability to learn from the experiences of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
by variablesdont on May 28, 2009 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it must be all the....
HGH he’s doing. Players don’t typically add 4-6 mph on their fastballs at age 25. Unless it was a mechanical flaw that a pitching coach spotted, he’s on something. Even with that extra MPH on his fastball he’s still only averaging 6.3 K per 9. That’s up from 5.5 last year. He’ll get hit around soon enough and be back in the minors within a month or so.
by Looney4baseball on May 28, 2009 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
steroids. right.
if you’re gonna dismiss any increase in performance or ability by simply saying the guy’s on steroids (or HGH, for that matter), then just go away.
there’s actually a reasonable explanation as to why this gain happened, but you’ll have to wait a day or so for it to be spelled out.
human beings, who are almost unique in their ability to learn from the experiences of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
by variablesdont on May 28, 2009 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
peace pipe?
if you’d like to smoke the peace pipe with me, then that’s fine. i’m all for reaching some kind of accord here. i am going to be in philly on june 18 for phils’ game (it’s a day game and for some reason i think it’s against the jays) and i was going to message you about meeting. thought it might be cool to chat with someone who knows baseball. here’s my problem with you and it seems like every league that focuses on minors has someone like you in it: you purposely downgrade the top prospects, throw crazy players out there and then brag to other people when one of those crazy players hits. it’s like poker when you have pocket aces, someone else has pocket 10s, you’re both all-in, and the person with pocket 10s hits a set on the river AND THEN BRAGS ABOUT IT. enough with the mystery players, enough with the ridiculous posts about how kyle gibson should get taken ahead of stephen strasburg……it’s not even the strasburg vs. gibson debate that bothers me because at least that was (almost intelligent) debate, though the nats woud be ridiculed for years for passing on SS and you know that. it’s the BS mystery player….you were named MOD and all you did for three days was go on and on about a mystery player, all because you were trying to get our attention. well you got our attention but you did so in such a way that you pissed everyone off. i’m 37 and i’d like to think that i act mature in this forum. how about you start acting mature as well and knock it off with mystery players and ridiculous debates. so……..will you be in philly on june 18??? if so, we should catch a game
by psugator on May 28, 2009 8:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 












