Top 20 2010 Toronto Blue Jays Pre-Season Prospects in Review
by John Sickels on Aug 9, 2010 9:00 AM EDT
Email
Print
2010 Toronto Blue Jays Top 20 Prospects in Review
Here is a review of the 2010 Blue Jays prospect list, originally published December 23, 2009. THIS IS A REVIEW OF THE OLD LIST AND PRE-SEASON GRADES. THIS IS NOT A NEW LIST. The 2011 list and new grades won't be ready until the season is over and I start writing the book.
1) Brett Wallace, 1B-3B, Grade B+: .301/.359/.509 for Vegas, 6-for-21 so far since being traded to Houston. His plate discipline has slipped and as first baseman now he really has to hit, but I wonder if there has been a bit of an overreaction with his reputation. But on the other hand, for some reason he's been traded three times now. Seems a bit odd.
2) Zach Stewart, RHP, Grade B+: 3.67 ERA, 92/48 K/BB in 115 innings for Double-A New Hampshire, 108 hits. Much better recently after a slow start. I took a gamble rating him so highly but I don't regret it.
3) Kyle Drabek, RHP, Grade B+: 2.92 ERA, 110/54 K/BB in 142 innings, 110 hits for New Hampshire. I'll rank him slightly ahead of Stewart now.
4) Travis d'Arnaud, C, Grade B: .259/.315/.411 for High-A Dunedin. Has caught 30% of runners, other defensive stats are strong. Would like to see an offensive step forward next year.
5) Chad Jenkins, RHP, Grade B-: 3.63 ERA, 64/13 K/BB in 79 innings, 87 hits for Low-A Lansing, 4.66 ERA, 30/10 K/BB in 46 innings for Dunedin, 55 hits. Great K/BB ratios, but quite hittable. Gets ground balls at least.
6) David Cooper, 1B, Grade B-: .238/.306/.417 for New Hampshire. More homers this year with 15, but at the expense of OBP. Stock is slipping very quickly.
7) Josh Roenicke, RHP, Grade C+: 3.53 ERA, 44/17 K/BB in 43 innings for Las Vegas, 4.97 ERA, 12/11 K/BB in 13 innings in the majors. Has the stuff, but command still a big problem and he's 28 now.
8) Henderson Alvarez, RHP, Grade C+: 4.12 ERA, 74/24 K/BB in 103 innings for Dunedin, 127 hits. Gets grounders, hittable, good command, young at 20. Breakthrough candidate for next year.
9) Carlos Perez, C, Grade C+: .302/.389/.481 for Auburn in the NY-P. I am liking this one a lot, will rank highly on next list.
10) Brad Mills, LHP, Grade C+: 4.20 ERA, 85/39 K/BB in 96 innings for Vegas, 92 hits. Pretty solid numbers considering the environment.
11) Jake Marisnick, OF, Grade C+: .287/.373/.459 in 35 games for GCL Jays, just up to Lansing where he is .233/.258/.367 so far in eight games. 15 steals in 17 attempts combined. Love the tools. Plate discipline a question.
12) Eric Thames, OF, Grade C+: .287/.366/.514, 21 homers, 42 walks, 100 strikeouts in 418 at-bats for New Hampshire. Showed what he can do when he is healthy. Should be strong platoon bat.
13) Brad Emaus, 2B, Grade C+: .287/.403/.472 between New Hampshire and Vegas, 68/57 BB/K in 341 at-bats. Love the bat control and plate discipline, tools decent.
14) Ryan Schimpf, 2B, Grade C+: .234/.329/.414 for Lansing, six homers but 10 triples and 22 doubles. Some gap power, but I thought he could do better than this.
15) Dan Farquhar, RHP, Grade C+: 4.34 ERA, 63/35 K/BB in 58 innings for New Hampshire, 44 hits. Like the Ks and the low Hs, needs to get the walks down.
16) Robert Bell, RHP, Grade C+: 6.24 ERA at New Hampshire, 34/12 K/BB in 49 innings, 63 hits, 11 homers. Now on rehab assignment following injury.
17) J.P. Arencibia, C, Grade C: .303/.360/.639 for Las Vegas, went 4-for-5 with two homers in his first game with the Jays. I was very skeptical about him entering 2010. His numbers last year were quite poor, and when I saw him in person for Vegas last year he looked awful, flailing at everything. He's improved greatly this year without question, although I do wonder what his batting average will look like long-term, though it won't matter much with firepower of this magnitude.
18) Justin Jackson, SS, Grade C: .232/.312/.290 for Lansing in 155 AB, 18 walks, 50ks. No skill growth at all. Despite his tools and the fact that he is still just 21, I no longer see much reason for optimism.
19) Reidier Gonzalez, RHP, Grade C: This didn't go so hot....8.63 ERA, 74/53 K/BB, 200 hits in 122 innings between Vegas and New Hampshire.
20) Tim Collins, LHP, Grade C: Traded to Braves then Royals. 2.10 ERA, 91/22 K/BB in 56 innings, 33 hits combined between New Hampshire, Mississippi, and Omaha. Expect to see him in KC next year and I think he'll do well.
The big news of course is Arencibia, who got some command of the strike zone and unleashed his power. He looked so bad last year at Vegas, in person and on paper, that I was very doubtful he could do this. Carlos Perez is also an interesting young catcher, and the Stewart/Drabek combo should be able to help next year. I like Thames a lot. Too bad about Justin Jackson though.
103 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Drabek vs Stewart
I always figured that Drabek should be ranked higher. He has a much better feel for his pitches with better stuff.
by King Billy Royal on Aug 9, 2010 10:52 AM EDT reply actions
I think it is a tough comparison. Stewart would already be getting MLB hitters out if he had been in the pen, but that of course drops his value. On the other hand, I’m still worried about Drabek’s health down the road. I don’t have a problem with them even, or one slightly ahead of the other, but I still really like Stewart personally.
Still some immaturity in Brett Wallace
That’s my impression after watching those 21 ABs. It almost feels like he’s two different hitters at times. Sometimes he gets a great, patient at bat, laying off pitches outside the zone and flicking off borderline offerings when he has two strikes until he draws a walk or gets a pitch he can handle. That’s happened a number of times already.
Other times, he goes up there over-eager, hacking at anything within two feet of the strike zone and he’s out on three pitches.
Anyway, even following the puzzling (but I’m not arguing with it!) Gose-Wallace swap, I still like the Jays’ system. And who knows, maybe it’ll click for Gose and he’ll live up to his potential. Brad Emaus is a personal favorite on basically the opposite end of the tools vs. skills spectrum.
Wallace
I was really down on that trade, but it is starting to look like he may not have the bat to play firstbase. If that is the case, than his value really takes a hit since he can’t handle any other position defensively. You are starting to hear whispers from people that ’there must be a reason that he has been traded so often" but at this time I will take that as just rumour.
by King Billy Royal on Aug 9, 2010 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions
He'll have the bat for first
He probably won’t ever be the star people thought when he was coming out of college, but I think he’ll be able to hold down the position as an average-ish contributor even on the downside, with the upside to become an above average, Billy Butler-ish player. His defense is also underrated at first base.
I still think this one trade was patently ridiculous for the Jays. Not because they were so high on Gose, but because they surely could have extracted more than just him for Wallace.
His downside is way worse than an average-ish 1B
If you really think that, you’re just not being realistic. His downside is a .275/.330/.420 type player. Lyle Overbay with less power and fewer walks. He’s definitely got a solid chance of being an average-ish 1B, and I’d probably have that around his 50th percentile outcome, but he certainly has a lot more downside.
He’s also going to have to improve a lot to be a similar player to Billy Butler (who is highly thought of because he’s already this good and is just 4 months older than Wallace). Wallace struck out a lot more in AAA than Butler has stuck out in the majors and Butler also walks quite a bit more than Wallace did in AAA when pitchers were more likely to pitch around him because of the PCL.
.330/.420/.750 looks like lowballing him a bit to me
I believe the major league average for first baseman is a little over .800 OPS. So when I say I see his downside as being “average-ish”, we’re not actually that far apart; I’m just being a little bit more optimistic.
I see his floor is being right around that level, probably in the .775-.825 OPS range. (And please don’t feed me MLEs. I don’t care.)
I brought up MLEs one time to put Kila's PCL performance into perspective to a guy that thinks he's currently a .900 OPS bat based on dominating the PCL
I don’t think they’re particularly useful either, but I’m not sure where else I could turn to put a great PCL line into perspective. For the love of God, John Bowker (of the .678 MLB OPS) posted a 1.047 OPS there at a younger age than Kila is now, and I didn’t hear anyone talking about him a legit .900 OPS slugger.
If you really think Wallace’s floor is an OPS in the neighborhood of .800, you’re kidding yourself. He’s a 1B with with decent power, bad BB rates, and a K rate that isn’t particularly impressive. His OPS this year was barely above the Vegas team average. Sure, he could become a solid ML hitter, but to call that his floor is just insane.
It's because...
I’m in complete agreement with the many evaluators who have stated throughout his career that they see him as a .300 hitter at the ML level. You have to be much more of an empty contact hitter than Wallace is to bat .300 and post only .750 OPS.
Sure, his K-rate overall is unspectacular, until you look at the adjustments he’s made over the course of this season. When a guy is only in his second full pro season you have to take month-by-month breakdowns more seriously. His strikeout rate since June at AAA was 14.4%. K-rate stabilizes in 150 ABs, and this is a nearly 200 plate appearance sample size.
It’s pretty much a no-brainer that Wallace is going to hit 10-15 homers and plenty of doubles even if he never walks much and doesn’t hit for as much power as people originally expected from him.
So now his floor is a .300 hitter?
I can see how a .750 OPS seems low if you actually believe there’s no chance he’s more of a .270-.280 hitter.
I believe there is only a small chance that he doesn't hit for average
I love what I see from him at the plate in terms of his hit tool (not factoring in the walk rate). He gets a good pitch to hit, his bat speed is fantastic, and his bat stays in the zone a long time. The question for me is more how his patience and power develop.
Orem is correct
that the average N.L. 1B is OPS-ing just over .800 this season. I think the batting average was .272, with an OBP of .350-something, and I think that Wallace has to live up to the claims that he’ll hit for average to get on-base at league average. That said, I think he’ll do it. I also agree that he has a floor of a .260-.270 hitter, so if he only hits in that range without improvement in his walk rate then he probably gets on-base below league average. I actually agree with nixa’s proposed floor, but also agree with Orem that he should exceed it.
It’s funny how detractors always concentrate on floor while boosters act as if the ceiling is the median. Orem is shooting down the middle to me, and not being unrealistic. For pete’s sake you’d think being a league average player in your early 20s was a black mark against you. So he’s not the Next Big Thing. I don’t take anything Orem’s said as implying that, so berating him as if he made such a claim is pointless. And it doesn’t hurt that he actually gets to watch Wallace play. Why not take a breath and see what Wallace does for the rest of the season?
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm focusing on his floor because Orem said his downside was league average at 1B, which I happen to disagree with
Based on your own comments you disagree with it as well. I have no problem with saying that Wallace is likely to be around league average as a 1B. I happen to think he’ll likely settle in as a below average 1B, but an above average (greater than 2 WAR) player, as 1B tend to have more value than the average positional player.
Define
below average. I’ve proposed one way that he could be with my OBP comments. And Orem didn’t technically didn’t say Wallace’s downside was league average as league average is the upper bound of what was, admittedly, a pretty broad floor. .800 would actually be 20+ points of OPS below average, which is significant.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Orem didn’t technically didn’t say Wallace’s downside was league average?
Maybe you want to reread the comment I was initially responding to? The one where Orem specifically said:
I think he’ll be able to hold down the position as an average-ish contributor even on the downside
Personally, I think Wallace will settle in as an ~.800 OPS hitter at 1B, but I think his downside is significantly lower than that.
Average-ish
Note the “ish”. I guess that was intentionally a little vague. Silly me. Maybe we should move on now and just admit I’m a little bit more optimistic than you and leave it at that.
Silly me
I responded to his concrete .775-.828 OPS prediction instead of seizing on the vaguer portions of his response and arguing against them. lol
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Silly me
I guess thinking a downside of around average for Wallace is overly optimistic is just plain crazy.
Just plain crazy
says the guy who’s ostensibly “emotionless”. lol
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Clarifying my position
Makes me emotional…interesting take
Or are you saying crazy is an emotion?
Color me confused
/shoulder shrug
Not sure
where you come from that “just plain crazy” isn’t considered (at best) inflammatory) and (at worst) downright insulting. You were the one saying that no one could divine your state of mind on the internets, but I think your choice of verbiage betrays you…
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe if I called someone else just plain crazy or something like that
I was applying it to my own opinion. It was hyperbole meant to note that I don’t think its crazy for me to argue that Wallace’s downside is worse than average.
I’d appreciate it if you’d actually focus on the topic at hand instead of focusing on me and trying to figure out my state of mind based on my choice of words.
Since I can see how it would be confusing, this is what I meant by that statement
Am I just plain crazy for thinking a downside of around average for Wallace is overly optimistic?
You're missing the point
By attributing that to me, or Orem, or anyone else, you’re betraying your won state of mind. I take it the class you’re ignoring isn’t Psych?
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not attributing it to anyone
I’m sarcastically saying that its crazy to argue that Orem’s take was overly optimistic. Thus, I’m betraying my state of mind that I don’t think its crazy to disagree with his take?
I don’t think most Psych professors would agree with your opinion that you can figure out someone’s state of mind based on a one sentence post on the internet, but I’m a math major, so maybe they actually believe something like that is possible.
Actually
I know a couple of psych professors and have discussed the ways in which internet personas (personae?) function, and I think you’d be surprised how much your posts “say” about you. And FWIW, I’m not basing anything on one sentence; most people are pretty consistent if you’re paying attention. It’s something that’s been of great interest to me since I first encountered bulletin boards on the early web.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Let me put this another way, if Wallace's floor is an OPS around .800, what's Freeman's?
Freeman has a better batting line in a tougher league for hitters while being more than 3 years younger. Clearly if Wallace’s floor is a .775-.825 OPS, Freeman’s has to be significantly higher. What, maybe in the .825-.875 range, or even .850-.900? I’m a Braves fan, and even I realize his floor is much lower than that, and I don’t think that predicted floor is an less reasonable than the floor you’re predicting for Wallace.
Floor/ceiling
Freeman’s youth compared to Wallace suggests his ceiling is higher, but doesn’t increase his floor.
He's a better hitter at 20 than Wallace is at 23
That most certainly means his floor is significantly higher.
Banking on future development due to age
Seems the very definition of “ceiling” to me, but whatever. We’re arguing semantics now.
You seem to purposefully be ignoring the part where Freeman is better
Like right at this moment, he’s a better hitter than Wallace. He strikes out less, walks more, and has shown considerably more current power when you factor in league and home park.
And yeah, I’m also saying that guys who hit as well as Freeman is in AAA at the age of 20 tend to be better hitters than guys who hit worse at age 23 at the same level, even when we start looking at the low end of the spectrum where they stagnate and don’t develop as much.
Well
Obviously, I don’t rely solely on statistics to evaluate prospects, or even primarily on statistics (necessarily). Maybe about 50/50.
However, I do cautiously agree that Freeman’s floor is higher right now, although I have some slight hesitation because he didn’t exactly light the world on fire last year.
Again, though, I don’t think his ARL means his floor is higher. Sometimes guys deteriorate rather than improve, or just maintain their stock. That’s why we distinguish between upside and current ability.
However, ARL has a huge impact on how we view ceiling.
Younger guys are less likely to deteriorate than older guys
Thus, why younger guys (especially those playing at a higher level) have a higher floor than older guys.
Maybe
but we’re also talking about entirely different development tracks. Wallace is a college hitter, and has that polish, but he actually has a lot less pro experience than Freeman and is also learning a new position at the highest levels of the minors. Just saying, it’s not as straightforward as just lining their triple slash up and comping.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions
A lot less pro experience?
I don’t know if I’d describe a 400 PA difference as a lot.
It's
the better part of a full season. Funny thing is, Freeman doesn’t exactly have a fantastic walk rate himself, and the more I look at the two, the less I’m prone to simply say that Freeman has a huge advantage based simply on the age difference. I think there’s an edge, but the idea that this is as linear as all that isn’t borne out by my experience. Both guys look good to me, and I’d take Freeman because his team probably gets more major league usage based on his age.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
8.5% is a good bit better than 6.4%
Add in the Freeman strikes out in just 16.3% of his PA, compared to 19.6% for Wallace and its pretty clear that Freeman has the better discipline/contact rate combo.
Then there’s the fact that Freeman’s .202 ISO in the IL is way more impressive than Wallace’s .208 mark in the PCL, and I really don’t see how its close.
Even if you completely remove the relative ages from the question, Freeman walks more, strikes out less, and has more current power. What exactly does Wallace have going in his favor.
For one thing, I like his swing a lot more
Although I still agree that Freeman is the better prospect overall.
You like his swing a lot more?
Please feel free to provide your breakdowns on the pros and cons of each swing. Personally I like the far simpler timing mechanism employed by Freeman.
Only thing I'd agree with there
Is that Wallace probably keeps the bat head in the zone longer. Wallace has too many moving parts for me to agree with the balance and staying back parts.
Forgot to mention that a walks in the PCL and IL aren't equivalent
There’s a reason the BB rate in the PCL is so much higher than the BB rate in the IL and it has nothing to do with pitching talent.
That might mean something
if I was comparing the two walk rates, which I am not. When I say the more I look at thw two, the more than when I weight them separately on their own merits I don’t favor one much over the other except for the reasons I’ve already cited.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
So Freeman's extra power, contact, and patience don't play into it at all then
You only weigh Freeman more highly because his age will allow his team to get more usage out of him? Can’t say I agree with that.
The power
definitely plays into my liking him more, but the walk rate isn’t high enough for me to consider it anything but average at best, and since the contact isn’t translating to elite batting average, despite high BABIP, I have no opinion on how it will translate. Bottom line, anyone who says they “know” how minor league performance is going to translate to the majors, or what the significance of a couple of percentage points in distinguishing two players is, is suspect to me. All this exercise does is set up a false dichotomy that gives the illusion of applying some uniform standard to players, as if things were that linear and simple. I have absolutely no reason to compare Freeman and Wallace. It’s arbitrary imo. I guess it’s the same mentality that wastes such an inordinate amount of time debating the placement of players on Top 100 lists?
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions
I've tried to clarify my position
The point of bringing up Freeman was to bring up a similar sort of prospect that Orem doesn’t have the same sort of attachment too. Given how things played out, I sort of wish I hadn’t gone that direction, but it is what it is. I personally like Freeman’s floor a good deal more than Wallace’s and I wanted to see where Orem would stand with regards to the comparison.
I know
but you can see that it’s a straw man, right?
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't consider it a straw man at all
They’re very comparable players. They play the same position, have similar BB and K rates, and have similar questions about their projected power. Seeing how you rate one with respect to the other gets to heart of whether you’re wish-casting on a guy because the Astros have him or objectively evaluating his talents without respect to his affiliation.
After discussing things with you, I think you’re a little overly excited with Wallace, but I can at least see your reasons for liking him as much as you do.
I think
that’s why I’m confused. Orem titled his initial post Still some immaturity in Brett Wallace, I explicitly agreed with your floor and said that I thought he’d have to hit for a high batting average to get on-base at a league average rate. Both of us acknowledged several times over that he’s a flawed player. It’s not really about like with me so much as not getting too up or down on the guy. Saying that he has a good chance to be a league average 1B is overly excited? If anything, you’re overly unenthusiastic imo, which is probably what strikes me as odd.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Also
comparing two players based on position and some peripherals ignores a lot that makes those players specific and peculiar. The ARL question alone muddies things. It’s an overly reductive methodology, and one that is too often leaned on. As such, it is the definition of a straw man because it assumes that the comparison is not only valid, but also necessary, when it is in fact neither.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Clearly we interpret the statement
“he’ll be an average-ish player on the downside” to mean different things. I take that to mean he’s unlikely to be below average. You take it to mean he has a good chance to be league average. I guess our disagreement just comes down to that.
Perhaps
though that’s Orem’s statement, so you and I aren’t disagreeing on those grounds. Actually, I don’t think we specifically disagree on much other than the efficacy of directly comparing players on the basis of facile similarities. I don’t tend to disagree with opinions so much as their underlying methodology or what I perceive to be unwarranted conviction.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Also...
Wallace’s strikeout rate in the last two months (June through July) is much better than Freeman’s.
Freeman’s strikeout rate has risen as he’s been hitting for more power lately. This is a little bit concerning to me when you couple it with his strange uppercut swing.
Remember that a two-month sample size is significant in prospect evaluation. That’s roughly the same number of at bats as a full college season. And plate discipline numbers stabilize around 150-250 ABs.
Freeman's ISO and BB rate have also gone up while the strikeout have
The BB rate is up to 10% over that period, while his ISO is around .215.
Doesn’t it worry you that Wallace’s extra contact came at the expense of his power, as his ISO dropped to .173 over that period?
Both of their changes are overall positives
As reflected in their respective upward-trending on-base plus slugging percentages over those months.
However, I tend to place more value on improving plate discipline numbers in these sample sizes because they are actually stable for strikeout rate and walk rate, and they are not stable for ISO.
What I’m trying to say is that I see Freeman’s change in strikeout rate as something where you have a stable sample size suggesting something changed in that period. Wallace’s decline in ISO could just be statistical noise because ISO doesn’t stabilize until 550 PA.
Is there a direct correlation
simply because the events occurred at the same time? Tempting to think so, but I’d like some eyeball testimony to back up that surmise. It evokes another lightning rod of a player who seemingly traded power for batting average, Zack Cox.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
that's
more a response to nixa’s question of a correlation between Wallace’s rise in contact and drop in ISOP, but as a general rule of thumb such cause and effect propositions are questionable.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Gotcha
I was the one who originally implied the idea about Freeman, so it’s only fair that I point that out. However, you were right that there isn’t enough evidence to suggest a correlation (for either player).
I've
been breaking myself of that habit, and a lot of others, after years of thoughtless assumptions. Like you, scouting is an increasingly larger peice of my evaluation pie. I’ve been watching minor leaguers turn into major leaguers (or not as the case may be) since the late 80s, and the bulk of that time was marked by number-crunching and projections with the odd scouting report factored in. It’s amazing how much easier it is to see prospects on video in just the last two years, and it’s been a revelation. Of course, it just leads to further disputes over how to interpet what you’re seeing. lol
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions
What does Freeman
have to do with anything?
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Easy point of reference
He has almost the exact same line (.306/.368/.508 v. .301/.359/.509) at the same level and plays the exact same position. Orem is an Astros fan, so I was trying to force him to look at a player he has less of a personal attachment to and see if the same sort of aggressive projection looked as reasonable when he looked at a player as an unbiased third party.
Follow up
In your opinion what’s wrong with comparing the two?
I don't see the point
in comparing players most of the time. Similarities in stat lines may obscure fundamental differences in skill set. I agree that all things being equal I probably take the younger guy in terms of upisde, but not without looking at a lot more than statistics. I don’t even disgree that Freeman is probably the better prospect, so the point seems moot.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions
When someone has an attachment to a specific player
I think comparing them to another prospect they don’t have an attachment to is a great way to make sure they’re keeping things in perspective. I’m not sure why you’d disagree with that thinking.
I don't see a floor around .800 OPS...
In an average season as being overly aggressive for either Freeman or Wallace. You can’t be a good first base prospect (and both of them are) without a floor around that, or a little lower and an exceptional (plus-plus) glove relative to the position.
See why not everyone thinks he's a good 1B prospect?
I don’t think he’s a bad prospect and he’s a good fit with the Astros as a cheap 1B option that should provide decent production, but I don’t think people would care about him nearly as much if he hadn’t been so hyped when he was drafted.
Well
at least that explains why you’re expending so much energy on it. I never understand why folks get so offended that others think a player is better than they do. lol
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, because typing on the internet while wasting time in call takes so much energy
I’m not at all offended that Orem thinks Wallace is better than I do. I just really disagree with the idea that at worst he’s going to be an approximately average 1B. This whole website is built around people debating the relative merits of prospects. I guess I missed the memo where we were supposed to stop disagreeing.
Your response
isn’t really dispelling the notion that you’re getting more huffy than “disagreement” implies. It’s not the disagreement, it’s the level of seriousness you attach. To that degree I completely agree with you, the whole site takes these discussions far too seriously.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Seriously?
I’d love to find out how you can tell how “huffy” someone is getting based on emotionless typing on the internet.
Keep in mind that reply had nothing to do with my thoughts with regards to Wallace but the insinuation that I was actually expending a lot of energy and getting offended about the argument itself, which I happen to take a little more personally, especially when you cap it off with a little lol action.
That's helping
At this point I’m giving you a projection of self-righteous with a floor of obnoxious/utterly humorless. So, you know, average-ish for these parts.
by blackoutyears on Aug 9, 2010 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Not really
I think you’re concentrating on the wrong parts of the thread. Regardless, it’s hardly an atypical back and forth for this site, so I’m not sure why you’d bother to comment.
by blackoutyears on Aug 10, 2010 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
The point is
That projecting a minor league player to have a floor of .300/.800 is very rare. Only a few top prospects really get that, because those are very good numbers in the majors. Brett Wallace is not one of those players. Even among the good prospects, you’re going to have many of them flame out. Wallace might make it, might not as a solid 1B. But his floor is way lower than .800 OPS. I’d say about .270/.700 is a good floor.
Not to prolong this
but nobody, not Orem, not me, not anyone, projected him to hit .300. I said that I’m of the opinion that if his walk rate doesn’t improve that he’ll have to hit .300 to put up a league average OBP for an N.L. 1B. I also said he has a decent chance to hit for a high average, but did not say that was his floor. I agreed with nixa’s proposed floor. The only reason I said anything was because there is a contingent of people who are ridiculously down on Wallace, presumably because they imagine some need to counter-balance what they perceive to be unwarranted exuberance. FWIW, I like his floor more in the range of .750 to Orem’s lower bound of .775 because I believe he’ll hit. It’s not science, and people need not get so incensed simply because faintly praises him.
by blackoutyears on Aug 11, 2010 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
well
301/.359/.509 in the context of Vegas iisn’t particularly impressive, of course Vegas screws the context so much that it ’s really hard to have a definitive say on the matter…
Still, even a quick look at just the decent to pretty good 1B in the bigs, most of them KILLED AAA, their context in AAA was much more impressive than Wallace’s so far. (and i’m not talking about the Pujols of the world, but the Overbay / Posedneik / Butler types)
Arencibia
He got Lasik done in the off season. That’s probably helped him pick the ball out a bit more. I think he also was having some health problems last year other then that. I think Arencibia will hold down C for a few years here til one of D’arnaud, Jiminez or Perez comes up, at which point he’ll move to one of the corner OF spots, DH or 1B.
lasik
yeah I should have mentioned that
by John Sickels on Aug 9, 2010 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Lasik -
Apparently, he was quoted as saying that before the surgery the ball was actually blurry from the time it left the pitchers hand – if so – you really have to wonder if this year’s 300 BA + 600 SLG might just not be his real level. Scary.
Arencibia HR potential?
What do you think his HR potential will be? I know he was in a hitters park in AAA, but his numbers there are with 2 months still to go. My guess, even before the debut, was 30-35 HR per year with potential to have one or two 40 HR seasons.
by mattp31 on Aug 9, 2010 1:06 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
He may have...
Javy Lopez type ability. I expect him to strike out a little more though.
ETHAN MARTIN!!!!
Our pitchers can't repel firepower of that magnitude!
by Outshined_One on Aug 9, 2010 1:19 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Thames
While his platoon splits don’t look good this year, I’ve been told that in previous work they are not like that. perhaps it’s an aberration?
I look forward to your reviews over the winter of guys who didn’t make that list either because they have been imported or because they step up. noteably Adeiny, Aaron Sanchez, and Gose
i've saw Auburn a few times this yda
Perez: Looks a lot like Carlos Santana at the plate and a lot of his triples have hit the outfield wall as Auburn is a pitcher’s park.
Pierre: Set up is the same as Hanley Ramirez, in fact looks like a deadringer to Hanley, but extremely raw bur there are some elite tools there.
Hutchison: Could be a nice #3 someday as he throws around 90 with a great changeup.
All these interesting Jays prospects, and I have to sift through a boring argument about boring Brett Wallace.
I’d like to hear what people think about Marisnick’s tools and ceiling. He showed a great approach at Rookie Ball, which gets me excited about players with his skillset. Any thoughts/comparisons?
No one's
making you read anything. Whining on the internet. Really.
by blackoutyears on Aug 10, 2010 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Sorry, I'm with PissedMick on this one
When I saw there was 90+ comments in this thread I was excited, expecting some real discussion on some of the more interesting guys in the system. Instead like 80% or more of the posts was 2-3 guys arguing over Brett Wallace. That’s fine and all, it’s certainly their right to discuss him. It was just disappointing once I got into the comment section.
http://bullpenbanter.com
If
anyone would like to send me the make and model of the gun that’s being held to their head while they’re forced to read words on the internet I’ll call in the 911.
by blackoutyears on Aug 11, 2010 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Plate Discipline
I realize he’s struck out quite a bit in his brief Lo-A appearance but his plate discipline was very strong in the GCL so I don’t think this is all that big an issue.
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.
