Discussion - Where to slot the new signees in our top prospect lists?
by MightyMoose on Aug 18, 2009 10:13 AM EDT
Email
Print
Well the hectic signing period has come and gone. Obviously Stephen Strasburg vaults up the prospect charts and is arguably number 1 for many. I'm curious though, where guys like Ackley and Tate fit in to your Top 25, 50 or 100 lists, if at all. Are there any other signees, like Wheeler, Matzek or Green that land on your lists?
Personally, I rank Strasburg #1 on my list, Ackley probably in the top 25 and Tate in the 30-40 range. I'd probably also include Matzek and Green 60-75 range. I honestly don't know that much about Zach Wheeler, so if you have some thoughts on him, I'd love to hear them.
54 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Strasburg...
would be 1 or 2 for me. Ackley would be in the 20s or 30s. I would put Tate and Matzek in the 50s and 60s. Then a few others like Green, Alex White, Jacob Turner, Shelby Miller, and Wheeler would fall in somewhere before 100.
If your counting other draftees too, then Tony Sanchez would probably rank in the 60-80s. I can’t really decide where because while he was considered an overdraft, he has been hitting very well since he signed. I could also see Matt Hobgood, Jared Mitchell, and Jiovanni Mier all having a ecent shot at making it.
top five
IMO, once Chapman signs as well:
1- Heyward
2- Strasburg
3- Chapman
4- Stanton
5- Bumgarner
Forgot about Sanchez
he has certainly been hot and in all likelihood should have top 50 consideration.
by MightyMoose on Aug 18, 2009 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
Disagree
While he’s had a great start to his career, I have a hard time thinking that his projection has changed.
It has changed
Just as some guys play better in college than in the pros, so it goes the other way sometimes as well.
It hasn’t changed dramatically . . .we’ll have to see how he plays next year. But a guy doesn’t play like Sanchez has immediately after transitioning to pro ball and not see his stock rise.
And you said the key phrase “it hasn’t changed dramatically.” 114 ABs in the SAL isn’t a big enough sample size for me to question the validity of the scouting reports. It’s a promising start, no doubt, but it’s hardly enough to vault him into top 50 consideration.
oh yeah
Sorry if I wasn’t clear on that . . .I don’t believe he’s deserving of that much hype just yet. But overdraft or not he still had a first round grade from plenty of teams, and as a first round talent with an absolutely blistering debut in full season ball, his stock is definitely rising.
I know I lot of teams have expressed interest
I was just wondering if he plans on coming over this offseason.
what Miguel angel Sano ?
…and would he get top 100 consideration ?
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Aug 18, 2009 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions
What exactly is going on with him?
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
Tate
There’s no way I slot him that high. I’m not overly confident in his bat, but I could see him in the 60-80 range.
Strasburg 2
Ackley 10-20
Matzek 50-75
Turner 50-75
Tate 60-80
Miller 80-100
Wheeler 80-100
Green 80-100
There are quite a few fringe top 100 guys, including Tony Sanchez, Jared Mitchell, Matt Hobgood &c.
Agreed on Tate
Top 100 for sure based on his athleticism, but top 50 seems overly aggressive until he starts playing and we can get a good read on just where his hitting skills are at.
?
I could see Matzek and Turner getting a lot of hype and being in 25-35 range.
Possibly
They’re both very talented, but I’d wait until I see how they adjust to professional baseball before moving them into my top 50.
Wheeler and Matzek
I don’t get the Matzek love and the Wheeler indifference. There’s a reason that 2 teams with excellent track records of judging pitching talent in the past 8 years (the Giants and Tigers) passed on him and it’s not money. Both the Giants (Buster Posey) and the Tigers (Rick Porcello) have not been scared away by high signing bonus demands in the last 3 drafts, so what did they not see in Matzek that they saw in Turner and Wheeer?
As for Wheeler specifically, I trust the Giants’ talent evaluators based on their track record. Here’s a list of the starting pitchers that their current group has chosen tn the 1st round in the last 8 years – it’s an unblemished record without a single dud:
2002: Matt Cain
2006: Tim Lincecum
2007: Madison Bumgarner and Tim Alderson
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Too soon to declare victory on Alderson/Bumgarner
You can’t declare two guys that are still prospects as success stories yet considering they haven’t thrown a major league pitch, let alone proven effectiveness. Bumgarner and (especially) Alderson most certainly could end up as “duds” at the MLB level. All you have to point to at this point in time is the successful drafting/development of two starting pitchers within the time span of 4 drafts, which is nice but not unheard of. And if you want to go back to one year prior to the Cain draft, the Giants took Hennessey and Lowry in the first round while passing on Dan Haren.
And as far as the Tigers go, I’d say choosing Andrew Miller over Kershaw, Lincecum and Scherzer should be considered a negative mark on their ledger, as well as Kyle Sleeth over Danks, Maholm and Billingsley. So again, they really just have Porcello (still a work in progress at that) and Verlander as success stories within your 8 year span.
Sure, it’s too soon to say Alderson and MadBum will be succesful in the majors, but we’re talking about prospect rankings here and one is a consensus top 50 prospect, while the other is a consensus top 7. That’s all that we have to judge them on so far.
The main point that I was trying to make was that it’s become a universal meme that both the Giants and Tigers skipped over a better pitcher and prospect in Matzek only because of his bonus demands. I just don’t believe that is true, and it certainly has never been proven by anybody with facts. When I look at the 3 of them together I don’t see much that separates them in terms of prospect ranking at this time.
As for the Giants 2001 draft, the Giants were handcuffed by a limited budget for signing bonuses and drafting at the tail end of the 1st round (#21 and 30). Considering that, Hennessey and Lowry certainly weren’t duds when compared to other late 1st round pick flameouts. Especially Lowry – he would most likely still be a productive middle-of-the-rotation starter today, with one of the best changeups in the league and a Jamie Moyer-esque style, if the specialists hadn’t misdiagnosed his arm problem in 2008 and performed a wrong and unnecessary surgery.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
"That's all we have to judge them on so far"
No, that’s not true. Unlike 2009 draftees, we actually have Bumgarner and Alderson’s performances to judge them upon, not just rankings. And with those performances, there are a lot of people that feel that both are overrated prospects.
In three years time Alderson could be getting rocked in AAA and Bumgarner confined to a bullpen role, or they could both be solid rotation guys. Any combination of those outcomes doesn’t give any predictive value to Wheeler’s future MLB performance – which really should be the only true basis for how he is ranked.
Using organizational bias to try and inflate/deflate prospect rankings is pretty foolish — ask the people who discounted Holland and Feliz last year because “the Rangers can’t develop pitching” how they feel about them now.
I really think the concerns about Tate's bat are overblown
Nobody really seemed worried about his bat at all until word got out that he wanted a huge signing bonus. He looked competent enough in showcases. The Padres and the A’s (traditionally teams that favor production in the present over projected production in the future) both adored the guy.
It may be that he’ll take a full season or two to really start realizing his potential (or maybe not), but I see little to complain about for the moment.
Is it fair to rank Crosby over Turner at this point?
Kind of a Tigers only question there, but I feel that Crosby’s success in pro ball, even if it wasn’t Hi A, is more impressive than Turner’s dominance of HS ball and a good scouting report.
President, Vice President and Secretary of the Casey Crosby Fanclub.
by David Tokarz on Aug 18, 2009 6:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't know
I like Casey Crosby a lot, but I have a feeling Turner will rank ahead of him on most lists.
Sanchez is better...
than a FRINGE top 100 guy. I wouldn’t rank him lower than 80. I agree that Tate should not be ranked too high(although BA probably will rank him high), but he is still ahead of Matzek and Turner. Ackley should barely crack the top twenty.
Why?
Where would you rank him in the Pirates’ top 10? I’d have a very hard time placing him higher than 5th. He has been great for 100+ ABs in the SAL, but that doesn’t mean that the scouting reports were wrong.
He has dominated so far...
in his pro debut. Also, reports had him as being a potential plus defender with potential plus power(for a catcher). The only reason they doubted him was because his inability to make contact and he has proven that he has better contact skills than thought. He is almost in the same situation Jason Castro was in last year and BA had him at 53 last year. Castro ran better and had better contact skills, but Sanchez has better power potential and some think he has a better glove behind the plate. He is also a CATCHER that was picked in the top 5 picks(overdraft or not), so that should have gotten him in the top 100 itself.
Also, he would rank 5th in the Pirates system, but the four guys ahead of him will probably make the top 65 too.
what if
Bobby Borchering absolutely rakes in a brief pro debut? Pretty much considered the best high school power hitter of the draft and the latest reports say that he will definitely stick at third base. Switch hitter as well. I’m personally high on him. Check out his video on prospecttube. Impressive swing.
by richieabernathy on Aug 18, 2009 12:44 PM EDT reply actions
This.
Borchering may turn out to be the best hitter in this draft with enough time, though Ackley’s got him beat as of now.
MLB Bonus Baby - A Draft Blog - Author
wheres my man garrett Gould??
low to mid 90s heat with the Best Curveball in the draft wiith a fast developing change up!!! First Round talent who slipped cause of signability issues… He also just turned 18 less then a month agoo!!!
no my ass
we’ll see what happens next year then well seee who say no
i just love how guys with only fastballs
and nothing near average secondary stuff are top 100 prospects but a guy like gould who has the best HS curve in the draft with a 91-94 fastball isnt ranked
there's a reason he went in the 2nd round and the other guys went top 15
however, i do like Gould a lot. and with a bit of a minor league track record, i think he’ll start shooting up some lists
theres a reason why he went in the second round....
yes i know… because he was commited to Wichita State and was going to be a tough sign
Seriously?
And Shelby Miller, Tyler Matzek, Jacob Turner and Zach Wheeler weren’t tough signs? How about the guys who dropped further and got more money than Gould?
I like Gould, but there is no way he touches a top 100 list.
im just wondering
what makes jacob turner better then gould?
All we have to go on are the scouting reports, but:
He has a better fastball to go with a comparable curve and the makings of a change-up. He has cleaner mechanics and more projection. Whether he ends up being better than Gould long term is anyone’s guess, but right now, the scout consensus is that Turner is the better prospect.
my rough quick guesstamate ....
1. Heyward
2. Stephen Strasburg
3. Stanton
4. Posey
5. Bumgarner
6. Montero
7. Smoak
8. Santana
9. Tillman
10. Aroldis Chapman
11. Matusz
12. ? Tim Beckham ?
13. N. Feliz
14. K. Drabek
15. L. Morrison
16. Dustin Ackley (around here soon)
17. Christian Frederick
18. Dominic Brown
19. Desmond Jennings
20. A. Escobar / J. Decker/ H. Rondon
Matt Moore / Eddie Freeman / Matt Latos/ Pedro Alvarez / Yonder Alonso/ Jenrry Meija
Michael Taylor ?
could be next in line
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Aug 18, 2009 6:56 PM EDT reply actions
kyle drabek
overrated……. waaayyy too high
Usually not when they're talking about pitchers without the ability to strike hitters out...
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
Yeah I could put someone like
Martin Perez there instead of Drabek
But I don’t think thats waay to high of a rank for Drabek
I’d have him top 25-30 regardless…..
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Aug 18, 2009 7:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Pedro Alvarez should be...
should be ranked 12 there. He is at least as good as everyone outside the top 10 and BA will probably rank him in the top 10.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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.
