Washington Nationals Top 20 Prospects for 2012
Washington Nationals Top 20 Prospects for 2012
THIS LIST WAS REVISED JANUARY 19, 2012
The list and grades are a blending of present performance and long-term potential. Comments are welcome, but in the end all analysis and responsibility is mine of course. Full reports on all of players can be found in the 2012 Baseball Prospect Book. We are now taking pre-orders. Order early and order often!
QUICK PRIMER ON GRADE MEANINGS:
Grade A prospects are the elite. They have a good chance of becoming stars or superstars. Almost all Grade A prospects develop into major league regulars, if injuries or other problems don't intervene. Note that is a major "if" in some cases.
Grade B prospects have a good chance to enjoy successful careers. Some will develop into stars, some will not. Most end up spending several years in the majors, at the very least in a marginal role.
Grade C prospects are the most common type. These are guys who have something positive going for them, but who may have a question mark or three, or who are just too far away from the majors to get an accurate feel for. A few Grade C guys, especially at the lower levels, do develop into stars. Many end up as role players or bench guys. Some don't make it at all.
A major point to remember is that grades for pitchers do NOT correspond directly to grades for hitters. Many Grade A pitching prospects fail to develop, often due to injuries. Some Grade C pitching prospects turn out much better than expected.
Also note that there is diversity within each category. I'm a tough grader; Grade C+ is actually good praise coming from me, and some C+ prospects turn out very well indeed.
Finally, keep in mind that all grades are shorthand. You have to read the full comment in the book for my full opinion about a player, the letter grade only tells you so much. A Grade C prospect in rookie ball could end up being very impressive, while a Grade C prospect in Triple-A is likely just a future role player.
1) Bryce Harper, OF, Grade A: 80 power, 80 arm, 80 hype, 80 arrogance...but produces the numbers to back that hype and arrogance up. He is not just a power masher; he's got great instincts, and I have seen him make adjustments within at-bats more rapidly than most major leaguers can. Even Christopher Hitchens would believe in Harper.
2) Anthony Rendon, 3B, Grade A-: Borderline A. I want to see how his shoulder is, if his power and arm strength come back fully, before giving him the Grade A imprimatur. I still expect him to be an excellent player.
3) Brian Goodwin, OF, Grade B: Some risk here until we see him play, but I love the combination of power, speed, and walks he showed in college. Swing needs some work, but has all the tools and 20/20 potential.
4) Alex Meyer, RHP, Grade B: I respect his upside as a guy with two dominating pitches, but his command is still a work in progress, and such tall pitchers often struggle to keep their mechanics in line. Could be a superior starter, a closer, or a failure.
5) Matt Purke, LHP, Grade B-: Very difficult to grade properly until we see what his arm strength looks like in the spring. Number two starter upside (and a higher grade obviously) if his shoulder cooperates.
6) Steve Lombardozzi, 2B, Grade B-: The Tom Milone of hitters? Plays above his tools and will likely continue to do so. Terrific defense and bat keeps improving.
7) Sammy Solis, LHP, Grade B-: Velocity boost this year was pushing him into B+ consideration, but the elbow injury throws everything into doubt now. No word on if he'll need Tommy John yet.
8) Destin Hood, OF, Grade B-: Raw tools outfielder made big strides in the second half, improved his plate discipline with more power production and huge gains in baserunning and fielding. Has momentum.
9) Robbie Ray, LHP, Grade B-: Borderline C+: Limited pitch counts in Low-A, but strong K/IP ratio. Reports on stuff and projectability are mixed, but he did well for a 19-year-old in full-season ball.
10) Chris Marrero, 1B, Grade C+: Didn't seize control of first base job when he had an opportunity, and suffered a hamstring injury in winter ball. Still only 23 years old, production has never quite matched potential, but there is still a chance it will.
11) Dan Rosenbaum, LHP, Grade C+: Nice sinker from the left side, good breaking ball, changeup coming along, has very quietly built a strong statistical history. Possible back-of-rotation starter or useful relief option in a year or two.
12) Michael Taylor, OF, Grade C+: Tools outfielder still has tons of work to do with the strike zone, but flashed power/speed skills in the Sally League. Not to be confused with Oakland outfielder.
13) Dave Freitas, C, Grade C+: Borderline C. Draws tons of walks, has some power, not great at nailing runners but doesn't give up many passed balls or errors. We need to see him higher than the Sally League, but an interesting player.
14) Rick Hague, INF, Grade C: Season lost due to injury. Should hit for average with some power, position questionable.
15) Matt Skole, 3B, Grade C: Nice power potential from left side, good plate discipline. Platoon issues, defensive problems and necessity to prove himself outside NY-P preclude higher grade at this time, but has potential.
16) Jason Martinson, SS, Grade C: Draws walks, hits for power, steals bases, but strikes out a lot and needs to show skills higher than Sally League.
17) Tyler Moore, 1B, Grade C: Power hitter strikes out too much but kills mistakes.
18) Eury Perez, OF, Grade C: Speed demon lacks power but could be useful on a bench.
19) Jeff Kobernus, 2B, Grade C: Stole 53 bases in High-A, but impatience limits use at the top of the order.
20) Justin Bloxom, 3B-1B, Grade C: Doesn't have as much power as Moore, but a more balanced offensive approach.
OTHERS: Brian Dupra, RHP; Wirkin Estevez, RHP; Taylor Hill, RHP; Blake Kelso, INF; Kevin Keyes, OF; Cole Kimball, RHP; Jeff Kobernus, 2B; Pat Lehman, RHP; Rafael Martin, RHP; Estarlin Martinez, OF; Randolph Oduber, OF; Josh Smoker, LHP'; Kylin Turnbull, LHP; Zach Walters, INF.
The big trade with Oakland tore the guts out of this system, removing four of the original top ten.
You can't go wrong at the top, where Harper and Rendon are the foundation of a terrific offense, and Goodwin (and possibly Hood and Marrero) can develop into a regular. There are some very interesting role player types backing them up. Lombardozzi could start for some teams and will be a strong utility player at worst. If he doesn't pan out for some reason, you have Hague, Martinson, Kobernus, Kelso, and Walters who could. Finding solid college infielders who can be utility men and contribute something on offense seems to be a focus.
The pitching group has questions and the cautious grades for some of them reflect this, but there is upside. Meyer has the ability to be a staff anchor if the command is there. So do Purke and Solis if their health allows. Rosenbaum could be quite interesting in a Tom Milone sort of way.. Turnbull, Dupra, and Hill are college arms from the 2011 draft that could follow in their footsteps.
193 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
LOVE IT!
Even Christopher Hitchens would believe in Harper.
In case people are unaware, he is truly the modern embodiment of a devil’s advocate, in both the figurative and literal sense, as served as or at least was asked to be a devil’s advocate in the sainthood case of Mother Teresa. RIP Hitch. I can’t think of a person I agreed with and disagreed with more.
by auclairkeithbc on Dec 20, 2011 5:32 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
Ironic
But yeah.
Name drop time. My brother-in-law knew Hitchens. He edited some pieces of his for various publications. I doubt he had to do any actual editing. One on Robert Conquest, various on islam and terrorism. Hitchens indeed being such a devil’s advocate that both the right and left seem to equally mourn his passing, but mostly just lovers of good writing.
Apparently Hitchens once made spaghetti for my nephew. Didn’t make the obits, evidently. My brother-in-law posted that on his Facebook page, and I couldn’t resist asking, “a la vodka?” given Hitchens’ known proclivities.
It is indeed a nice opening sentence there on Harper, John
John would you say that the Nats' farm system has moved to the top 50%? Maybe een top 20% of baseball?
Thx, must read every year, sir…
I'd be surprised if it wasn't top 10
The top of the system is as good as it gets out there in terms of talent, and I think there’s enough depth that they should be roughly top 10. I don’t know about top 6 … off the top, I’d say they’d be on the outside looking in, but don’t have the energy to think that much.
Kudos to Rizzo. This sytstem was in pretty bad shape when he took over. Obviously having top picks and getting Harper and Strasburg can make any GM look good, but grabbing Cole, Storen, Rendon and everyone else has certainly helped. As a Phillies fan, the Nats scare me more than any other team in the East.
+1
Rizzo was lauded for his drafting ability when he was with the Dbacks, though the talent he brought in was primarily hitting and not pitching
by blue bulldog on Dec 21, 2011 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
welp, not anymore
TROLOLOLOLOL
The 2008 Rogelio Moret League Fantasy Baseball Champions!
by The Congo Hammer on Dec 22, 2011 6:19 PM EST up reply actions
Cole a B?
Granted, you note borderline B. Mildly surprised by that. Kid’s not yet 20 and had a strong season in Low A. Has the tools to move quick, and has frontline potential. A bit biased, because he was one of the more dominant guys I saw all year, but strong season, 2 potential plus pitches, developing change, some more physical growth potential, and going to be age 20 and likely in A+ ball next year.
I mean, Casey Kelly got a B+ off his age 20 season in 2009 (unless it got changed in the book, don’t recall), and I think Cole’s shown more potential for dominance than Kelly did at the same age. Molina, Syndegaard, Nicolino, Norris, McGuire, Hutchinson all got B+’s, and I think Cole has as good a potential as several of those guys while showing more last season (just picking the Blue Jays randomly). Are the upsides of Syndegaard and Nicolino definitely better than Cole? I’m not so sure about that, and Cole had a stronger season in some respects.
Michael Taylor
the link takes you to the A’s player.
Ride the tiger...You can see his stripes but you know he's clean.
dammit i deleted that link. how did it get back? weird.
by John Sickels on Dec 20, 2011 6:13 PM EST up reply actions
haha
no problem…when i saw his name i immediately thought of the A’s Michael Taylor and then i clicked on him and BAM! there it was…i thought a trade went down…because the A’s Michael Taylor is probably a B-/C+ type with potential and the write up would be similar too.
Ride the tiger...You can see his stripes but you know he's clean.
by James Westfall on Dec 20, 2011 6:21 PM EST up reply actions
Vodoo
Great list as always John. Still kinda sad the Pirates took Cole over Rendon. We will see how that pans out.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 20, 2011 6:34 PM EST up reply actions
The Pirates
I wonder how their systems will stack up? they have some really intriguing prospects, obviously when you have guys like tallion and cole its easier to get excited.
Ride the tiger...You can see his stripes but you know he's clean.
by James Westfall on Dec 20, 2011 6:41 PM EST up reply actions
It's
close, but I think I’d give the edge to the Nats. Similar depth and I think you have to take Harper and Rendon over Taillon and Cole talking about the elite guys.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 20, 2011 7:48 PM EST up reply actions
Harper over Taillon or Cole
Rendon, I’m not sure.
by BurgherKing on Dec 20, 2011 11:56 PM EST up reply actions
Ditto
Would go with either SP as a prospect over Anthony Rendon at this point.
Well I think his statement was
Harper and Rendon (as a group) over Cole and Taillon (as a group). Rendon/Cole/Taillon can be debated, but I’d say very very few people would take the Pirates top two over the Nats top two.
by auclairkeithbc on Dec 21, 2011 9:53 AM EST up reply actions
i agree
i was just pointing out that the pairing of Harper and Rendon is kind of misleading… they don’t need to be paired, because it doesn’t give us much extra information (imo).
Well.
the discussion was a comparison of the two systems. Hard to do that without grouping the prospects in each system together, and Cutch was simply, as he said himself, looking at the elite guys on each farm, which is pretty standard practice. I’m not sure what’s misleading about it.
by charles wallace on Dec 26, 2011 11:24 AM EST up reply actions
Cole
I noted this over at Athletics Nation, but I’m about 90% sure Cole is going to get a B+ when all is said and done. I got some mixed reports about his changeup and some velocity fluctuations but overall I love the guy. I want to do some comparisons with other guys in the same grade range and see who I like better
Agree
he had a great 2011. whats his defense like?
Ride the tiger...You can see his stripes but you know he's clean.
by James Westfall on Dec 20, 2011 6:47 PM EST up reply actions
Ditto again
I think he’s pretty raw in the OF still but he’s still relatively new out there. He played mostly in RF in High A, but he’ll probably end up in LF.
Sort of ‘Brandon Jacobs light’ to me in terms of body type/projection but he has already posted a nice campaign in High A & hopefully he can keep it going in AA.
I got killed for this on another thread, but I'm not as high on this system, much better
depth three or four years ago.
I’m not a passenger on the Harper bandwagon, and what are they going to do with Rendon?
Zimmerman’s the best 3B in the National League, what are they going to do, move him?
So that leaves LF for Rendon?
Rendon will be ML ready before Zimmerman is first base ready, so, meh.
I like Cole, but if he’s healthy Solis, to me, has the highest ceiling of anyone in the system, which makes Cole a future #4 behind Strasburg, Zimmermann and then Cole, with Peacock behind.
Sorry, but I’m not buying a #4.
Like Norris, the Napoli comparisons are pretty accurate.
Don’t like Purke, he’s a future patient of Dr. James Andrews.
Lombardozzi has a chance if the Nats trade Desmond, which is a possibilty, with Espinosa moving to short.
Milone’s a junkballer and a nice fall back option, but he’s the third or fourth LEFTY in the organization, so not worth discussing.
Like Hood and Marrero, Hood reminds me of Aaron Hicks with Minnesota, all the tools in the world just can’t put them together.
Marrero did grab the first base job, but missing most of, if not all of 2012 will really set him back.
Surprise Eury Perez isn’t getting any love, probably the National’s future CF and lead off hitter. Good outfielder, plus arm and speed, gets good reads and jumps.
Can’t see any Nationals’ list where he isn’t top ten, twelve at the worst.
So by your logic
Paul Maholm was better than Cliff Lee, Matt Cain, and Cole Hamels last year because he was the #1 for the Pirates, and Lee was a #2, Cain was a #2, and Hamels was a #3. Bryce Harper is the best prospect in baseball. Rendon can play 2nd and is 6 years younger than Zimmerman. Being blocked or not should not affect prospect status because they can always get traded for somebody really good if they’er an amazing prospect. Milone has put up dominant numbers.
I’m not a naionals fan but they have a great system.
no he said that Cole was a 4 because
Solis, Zimmerman, and Strasburg were all better than him, so I said, well Roy Halladay is better than Cliff Lee and Cole Hamels so if you go by that logic, Paul Maholm is better than them
"Solis, Zimmerman, and Strasburg were all better than him,"
Exactly.
So what do Halladay, Lee, Hamels and Maholm have to do with anything?
Last I checked, none of them pitch for Washington.
Swing and a miss.
what you're missing is
the label of a pitching role, number 1, 2, 3, etc are based on stuff and stats, not where they pitch in a rotation. You could move Strasburg to Philly and he’d still be a number 1 pitcher. a guy with number 1 stuff pitching in the 4 slot in the rotation isn’t a bad thing – it probably helps the team in the long run since he’d be matching up against the other teams’ number 4, a pitcher who is probably less talented
Just don't piss her off, otherwise she'll get all Dien Bien Phu up in your Boxer Rebellion - caknuck
btho Iowa State
I know that
but he said “I like Cole, but if he’s healthy Solis, to me, has the highest ceiling of anyone in the system, which makes Cole a future #4 behind Strasburg, Zimmermann and then Cole, with Peacock behind.” basically he thinks that Cole is not a great prospect because the Nationals have good pitchers in front of them so he’s a #4. I know that 1 2 3 is based on stats.
dude
you’re totally failing to figure out who’s responding to who and as a result you’re arguing with people who agree with you
pikachu and monkeyepoxy were both talking to kelsdad, not you
you're completely correct, btw
with what you’re actually saying. don’t want to seem like i’m ripping you. you’re just saying it to the wrong people
Anyone think Rendon can handle second base?
Isn’t the bat supposed to play no matter where he plays?
Just don't piss her off, otherwise she'll get all Dien Bien Phu up in your Boxer Rebellion - caknuck
btho Iowa State
Yes,
and not only was that the word almost immediately out of the draft, but Rendon’s comments on the subject have shown him embracing it. He was a plus defender at 3B, and the only worry at 2B would be the injuries (do the ankle injuries imepede mobility at the more demanding position, and does the shoulder issue linger an affect his throws on the turn), but those are true at any position. The idea above that he’d be played in LF is laughable. Why, because Espinose and Lombardozzi are blocking him? Or is it because Kelsdad had no idea that 2B has been the discussed position change? The whole “Cole is just a #4 in the Nats rotation” argument is nonsensical. If Cole gets anywhere close to his ceiling, then he’s going to be a ToR caliber pitcher. Having a ToR pitcher at the back of your rotation is a good thing last time I checked.
by charles wallace on Dec 26, 2011 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
In terms of Eury
It’s all about whether he can hit or not. He slashed only 283/319/321 at Potomac, which is obviously not enough production to be considered a huge prospect. Still, his numbers were decent heading into this year, and I’m surprised he didn’t get included in the 17-20 range.
What to do with Zimmerman
Honestly, if Rendon can reach his upper quartile projection, you just let Zimmerman go to free agency. He’s signed through 2013.
I think that’s basically perfect from Rendon: he gets one and a half to two years in AA and AAA, then making him your starting 3B.
Even if Rendon is only a 2 win player, there’s more surplus value in him than a free agent Ryan Zimmerman. Spend those free agent bucks on a hole and see what Rendon gives you.
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
You do NOT let Zim walk in favor of a prospect, ever
MOAR SEVERINO!
Agreed
unless the money he wants is simply outrageous.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 20, 2011 11:26 PM EST up reply actions
and it absolutely will be
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Dec 21, 2011 1:19 AM EST up reply actions
In that case you get a read on his demands ahead of time
And trade him. The prospects you’d get back for Zimmerman would be a lot better than whatever neutered (in the new CBA) draft pick you’d get from him walking in free agency.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
You don't understand the economics here at all.
Free agents are all the same. It doesn’t matter what system they come from.
Hence, you use free agency to fill your biggest holes that you can’t fill cost effectively.
If you have a 2 WAR player at MLB minimum, that’s way, way better than paying ZIm $20m/year for Zimmerman performance. You could spend that $20m/year to replace a position at which your team has no option.
by philosofool on Dec 23, 2011 11:13 PM EST up reply actions
yeah this is terrible reasoning
you don’t downgrade a guy like rendon because the big league squad has a player at his position. he’s still the same player. you deal with that problem later.
same with the pitching prospects. you declare 3 other SPs in the system superior to cole and then dismiss him for being “a #4”. that’s absurd. having solis in the rotation with him won’t slow his fastball down, will it? so what are you talking about?
then you say you’re “not on the harper bandwagon” but don’t even attempt to give a reason.
hood spends a season putting his tools together, you dismiss him as somebody who can’t put his tools together. he’s actually usually described as being less toolsy that you’d assume, considering he’s an outfielder who used to play football, but as a guy with a knack for hitting. that’s pretty close to being the opposite of hicks. but then you say you like him.
this is all very strange
The Aaron Hicks thing doesn't ring true to me either
I like my Brandon Jacobs comp a little more although i think the Red Sox prospect possesses considerably more power upside. Hicks wishes he had Destin Hood’s proclivity for hitting probably..
"then you say you’re "not on the harper bandwagon" but don’t even attempt to give a reason"
Not necessary
Well, uh...
…it kind of is when you disagree with the consensus #1/#2 prospect in baseball. Not saying you have to buy the consensus, but you should probably have a reason for rejecting it…
…and what are they going to do with Rendon?
who cares? the kid can HIT. Either 3B or 2B make him an even BETTER value.
by JoelGuzman'sScout on Dec 21, 2011 12:59 AM EST up reply actions
You got killed because it simply isn't true
But what do I know? I’ve only seen the majority of this list play in person at Potomac, Hagerstown, and Harrisburg over the past six seasons. Maybe I missed something over those 350 or so games…
'I’m not a passenger on the (Bryce) Harper bandwagon'
Do you care to shed some light on this? You don’t think he’s the best prospect in this organization (or do you mean you like Mike Trout more maybe)?
Yes, I like Trout more
and I don’t think Harper will have the career that people think he will.
It would seem less like trolling if you supported any of your arguments. Going against the consensus is fine. Throwing crazy talk out there and not supporting it, is trolling.
"Throwing crazy talk out there and not supporting it, is trolling"
Actually, it’s not.
I don’t have to support anything. If I don’t like a guy, I don’t like a guy.
Especially with the majority here not actually seeing the player and taking what guys like Keith Law say as gospel.
“You’re an idiot because Keith Law says he’s good..”
That is trolling because people are repeating what someone says and not offering their own opinion.
My primary reason for not buying Harper is he hits too much off his front side and relies too much on his hands.
In A ball he can get away with that, major league pitchers will have him for lunch.
Is that alright?
Well that is better
I actually like different opinions, but many of your comments come off more as jabs to incite others rather than substantive posts. We get you don’t like Harper, many people have argued in favor of him against your statements, and your responses are basically “I don’t like him, and I’m right, you’re wrong” – just a bit trollish in my opinion, but I am not saying you are purposefully doing it. But saying things like “Irrelevant” to someone’s opinion/argument, and saying you don’t have to defend your own opinion’s when they are so far from the norm is what is causing the problem. Be different, but be respectful of others’ opinions especially those in response to your own posts. Try to convince them of your point of view instead of being dismissive of other posters who have offered substantive posts on this site, some for quite a while. If you post your opinion, you should be willing to take criticism on it, especially if your opinion puts you in a extremely small minority (in the case of your war on Harper, a minority of one so far).
by cookiedabookie on Dec 21, 2011 5:55 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
"come off more as jabs to incite others"
We’re on the internet, we’re not at a bar talking over a pitcher and some wings.
I can’t control how anyone takes anything I say, no one can.
I don’t have a problem with someone disagreeing with me, I actually welcome it, because more often than not I’m going to be right.
It just drives me crazy these pretenders who question everything everyone says, yet they unabashedly worship the ground guys like Keith Law and Buster Olney just because they work for ESPN.
"because more often than not I’m going to be right"
I wonder why people think you’re trolling???
by nixa37 on Dec 21, 2011 6:10 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Track record my friend.
What’s your record look like?
Pretty good honestly, though I mostly focus on Braves guys
You’ve only been here 10 days, you’ve constantly told other people they’re wrong without providing any actual reasoning, you’ve claimed to be a former scout (maybe you are, but anyone here can make the same claim just as easily), you’ve basically told people how much smarter than them you are, etc. At no point have you earned to sort of respect where you should expect people to just accept these statements, and maybe you do, but as of now you really just come across as a huge troll. Good luck getting people to continue to engage in conversations with you if you keep up the current attitude.
by nixa37 on Dec 21, 2011 6:19 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Don't put words in my mouth.
Disagreeing with a comment and “telling people they’re wrong” which I’ve not done, are not the same thing.
You fall into the category of people who consider guys like Goldstein and Law the only authorities and discount anything anyone else says.
And yet you call me a troll?
It’s OK, I’ve been called worse.
Look, if you're gonna disagree with something...
explain why. The reason why so many people listen to Goldstein and Law is because they state the reason why they rank prospect A higher than prospect B and so forth.
You don’t think Cole is worthy of his ranking? Explain why. If you explain, I’ll be willing to listen.
Is it because his command’s off? His stuff isn’t good? Injuries? Makeup? Why?
Go ahead, make my day.
by ilikeburritos on Dec 21, 2011 6:39 PM EST up reply actions
You don’t think Cole is worthy of his ranking? Explain why. If you explain, I’ll be willing to listen.
“Is it because his command’s off? His stuff isn’t good? Injuries? Makeup? Why?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o55tLZaI_4I&feature=endscreen&NR=1
See how he throws off a short front leg and almost seems like he’s shot putting the ball?
Now look at his ass, and the area from his belt to the bottom of his rib cage.
He has no core. He doesn’t have the strength to drop and drive, so he has what is known as a “flip” delivery, a delivery which usually results in shoulder problems.
It’s even more pronounced out of the stretch.
He doesn’t have a projectable frame either, which makes him getting stronger or bigger unlikely.
Stuff wise, eh.
Nationals revamped his curve and changeup grips in during Instructs so hopefully his secondary stuff will improve enough to where he’ll have a plus second offering to go with his fastball.
Look, Stephen Strasburg wasn’t drafted out of high school, and three years later was the first overall pick.
Cole’s already a pro and won’t turn 19 years old for a couple of weeks yet, so he’s got lots of time.
The delivery bothers me more than the stuff.
Can you see him as a 200+ inning guy, or a 7+inning per game pitcher?
I can’t.
That’s why I don’t rate him as highly as some others do.
Now that's a reasonable reason.
And I totally respect your opinion.
Go ahead, make my day.
by ilikeburritos on Dec 21, 2011 8:53 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
haha
if you would just say this stuff in the first place you’d be totally fine
so i have no idea why you don’t, unless you enjoy arguing
that’s probably why people are calling you a troll
cole
In fairness that video was taken in the spring of 2009 when he was a high school junior. I see your points about the mechanics, although supposedly those have been cleaned up a bit. To me, his frame looks pretty projectable though.
As you point out, he’s got lots of time. He was equivalent of a college freshman in 2011, and since he held his own just fine in Low-A, he would have been blowing away college hitters.
by John Sickels on Dec 21, 2011 11:09 PM EST up reply actions
It's tough to change someone
the Giants tried to change Lincecum and Bumgarner and Zach Wheeler before they traded him. Luckily they gave up on the moves and allowed them to use their own natural deliveries.
They completely ruined Tim Alderson, though.
I wish I had video of him this year
but I don’t do that at games. watching that short clip, that is not the same pitcher I saw this year. There’s still some issues he runs into in re: to the points that Kelsdad makes, but to be honest, I feel like a lot HS pitchers are that way, as they can get away with their raw stuff.
The critique is still a bit valid out of the stretch (but I don’t think it’s that bad).
A.J. Cole 2011 video
courtesy of Baseball Newhound.
by charles wallace on Dec 26, 2011 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
are you using that as your basis
That’s from 2 years ago.
I saw him this year. The delivery is much improved and he’s driving the ball a lot better. Is it still a concern? Certainly, but he’s ironed out things a lot. It’s not as pronounced out of the windup as it was in the HS clip you’ve linked to. Admittedly, it’s still a slight concern with him out of the stretch, but it’s improving.
oh
I’d also add that his curve was nasty this year. Might’ve been one of the best curves I saw in the Low A level this year.
sorry one last point
In terms of frame analysis (which is, admittedly, partially guesswork), there’s enough physical bodypoint analysis, IMO, to think that he could potentially add good mass to his frame (obviously, everyone can add bad mass). I’m not so sure, off of bodypoint analysis, that it’s fair to say that he doesn’t have a projectable frame. The std points which people look at physically, at his age, are actually … well … borderline. I can see him not being able to add much, but I think there’s an argument off bodypoint analysis that he could.
I think he'll get stronger
if he’s diligent about it. He’s always reminded me of Cole Hamels in terms of his build. Not that Cole will necessarily follow that path, but would anyone looking at Hamels say unequivocally that he’d give a team 190-215 IP/year plus post-season starts?
Cole has come a long ways with his delivery since I saw him at Aflac. He’s always had above avg body control for a kid with his long levers, and the Nats did a good job of getting him out over his front leg, getting that front knee bent, and getting a better overall finish (note glove tucked in nicely to chest, arm deceleration). The FB and curve come out of the same slot. The arm is still a little long in the back, but that will probably always be the case.
by charles wallace on Dec 26, 2011 11:52 AM EST up reply actions
I'm not a big fan of either KG or Law
That’s not to say I ignore their opinion or anything, but its a single data point, and one I analyze in context of each one’s personal tendencies.
Have you read any of Law's chat transcripts?
He’s a condescending bleep.
I used to think he talked like that just to stir controversy, but I’ve heard he’s like that all the time.
I’ve talked to Rob Neyer a couple of times and he’s like that, and people who know both said Neyer’s Mother Theresa compared to Law.
And I know of one major league team that revoked Law’s credentials.
He might be the most hated guy in the media, but as long as people keep buying his website subscriptions ESPN’s not going to do anything.
And as long as he has the “ESPN” after his name, people consider him the be all, end all authority.
On other sites, maybe
But I would venture a guess that most of the long-time posters here, or even the newer active posters look at much more than one person. Hell, you aren’t even the first one on this site to go after Law. Most of us look at prospect analysis as a passionate hobby, and we put a lot of time and effort into it, not just spout off the exact same opinions of prospect “experts”, not even John – and we all love John :)
by cookiedabookie on Dec 21, 2011 9:10 PM EST up reply actions
"and we put a lot of time and effort into it"
OK, I get that.
But I don’t see it.
Look, it’s easy to bust on the new guy, trying to check out worthiness and all, but I haven’t seen anything substantive here about Harper that I haven’t seen before.
Saying he’ll be a star because he had a similar OPS to Griffey or ARod at the same age?
Saying he’ll hit fifty homers a season and comparing him to Hank Aaron?
There’s no effort there.
I can tell who knows and who doesn’t by their writings.
But the bottom line is no matter how much research you do, no matter how much effort you put into it, what you ultimately end up saying is someone else’s opinion, just condensed into your own.
I’m curious, other than John, who here as actually SEEN Harper play in person?
Well do you value video
Or does “seen in person” only mean live?
I would say everyone here has seen video, not sure how many have seen him live.
by cookiedabookie on Dec 21, 2011 10:56 PM EST up reply actions
I value video
but it’s tough for the average fan to pick stuff out of a fifty second clip because usually you’re seeing good things.
Still better than nothing, though.
I'm curious,
have you actually SEEN A.J. Cole, play in person? I mean, as someone who posted a fifty second clip (0:57 to be exact) of Cole in defense of his opinion and all…
by charles wallace on Dec 26, 2011 12:27 PM EST up reply actions
just video here
The expectations of Harper I’m seeing here do seem to be a bit much. The physical potential to be an excellent player is clearly there, but I think we all benefit from regular reality checks – even the success stories among the best prospects often result in merely “good” major league players. Assuming they don’t get eaten alive in the minors for one reason or another, eventually these guys all end up in the majors and their true talent and ability comes into focus.
One of your opinions that I, and others here, don't get is...
that according to your logic, a pitcher’s true value is based on where they are in a rotation. So if Cole slots in behind Strasburg, Zimmermann, and Solis, then does that make him a mediocre mid-rotation starter? Nope. It only indicates that the above 3 are better than him rather than that Cole’s mediocre enough to be a #4 starter.
Using your logic on a team like the Phillies, that means that Cole Hamels is a mid-rotation starter too, which is pretty far from the truth.
And using that on the Pirates, Paul Maholm was once the team’s #1 pitcher. But it never meant that he was an ace, it just meant that the other pitchers available were worse than he was.
Go ahead, make my day.
by ilikeburritos on Dec 21, 2011 6:12 PM EST up reply actions
"that according to your logic, a pitcher’s true value is based on where they are in a rotation"
That’s not at all what I said.
"I like Cole, but if he’s healthy Solis, to me, has the highest ceiling of anyone in the system, which makes Cole a future #4 behind Strasburg, Zimmermann and then Cole, with Peacock behind. Sorry, but I’m not buying a #4."
And this would indicate what?
Go ahead, make my day.
by ilikeburritos on Dec 21, 2011 6:17 PM EST up reply actions
You seem to think
that you’re making sense, but since you’re the only one who seems to know what you’re talking about, you may need to reflect a bit. No player’s evaluation or ranking depends on how good their organization’s rotation is. If Strasburg had been a Phillies or Giants minor leaguer this year, he’d be the same prospect/talent he’d be as a Pirate, Royal or Twin.
by charles wallace on Dec 26, 2011 11:58 AM EST up reply actions
please clarify..
i actually really would like to know what you meant.
Ride the tiger...You can see his stripes but you know he's clean.
by James Westfall on Dec 21, 2011 6:20 PM EST up reply actions
2009 vs 2012...according to BA...the choice is clear.
1. Jordan Zimmermann, rhp 1. Bryce Harper, of
2. Ross Detwiler, lhp 2. Anthony Rendon, 3b
3. Chris Marrero, 1b 3. Brad Peacock, rhp
4. Michael Burgess, of 4. A.J. Cole, rhp
5. Jack McGeary, lhp 5. Brian Goodwin, of
6. Derek Norris, c 6. Alex Meyer, rhp
7. Destin Hood, of 7. Matt Purke, lhp
8. Adrian Nieto, c 8. Sammy Solis, lhp
9. J.P. Ramirez, of 9. Derek Norris, c
10. Esmailyn Gonzalez, ss 10. Steve Lombardozzi, 2b/ss
Ride the tiger...You can see his stripes but you know he's clean.
by James Westfall on Dec 21, 2011 6:16 PM EST up reply actions
that came out really well. lol
even if you dont like to listen to the proclaimed “experts” the 2012 Nats minors looks significantly better…with rendon and harper at 1&2 you are looking at a system that has exactly what all systems wish they had…perennial All-Stars with outstanding offensive fire power. add in stras and zimmerman on the hill and you have one of the better offenses and pitching staffs in the game.
Ride the tiger...You can see his stripes but you know he's clean.
by James Westfall on Dec 21, 2011 6:19 PM EST up reply actions
If Harper is so flawed
I am not fan of SI but I think they may have been correct when they dubbed him a Prodigy at age 15 or 16.
He is more than holding his own in High A, AA and then the AFL while being the youngest player in those leagues. That is a very rare feat.
Major League arms make mistakes too, and Harper will crush them.
The point people is trying to get across
is that you’re basing your ranking of prospects relative to their position on the depth chart, as opposed to ranking them independently of their major league team. For example, Cole’s upside and talent level wouldn’t somehow increase if he was in the Astros’ system, which is thinner and lacking in the same high-upside prospects. He’d still be a B/B+, and a possible “ace” – which, in this usage, is a relative term based on elite stats.
Exactly.
This is pretty self-evident.
by charles wallace on Dec 26, 2011 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
Rendon
I’d worry more if he will ever get his power back than if he will find a position. I sure couldn’t put him as better than a B with what he went through last season.
I'm with you
I believe that Anthony Rendon is one of the more overrated prospects in general at this particular juncture (especially at this site).
Well
it all depends on his health.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 21, 2011 11:32 PM EST up reply actions
The concerns
about his power seem overblown. The guy still hit 20 doubles, and 80 walks reinforces reports that he wasn’t pitched to. Rice’s lineup wasn’t exactly Murderer’s Row, so there was absolutely no reason to pitch to him.
by charles wallace on Dec 26, 2011 12:05 PM EST up reply actions
So which 4 or 5 are traded for gio gonzalez?
by J.J. Miller on Dec 20, 2011 7:58 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
I'd imagine that
a package involving Cole and Peacock would get them into discussions with most of the top pitchers available. Add in a Norris and maybe a low level piece with high upside that’s a bit off the radar, and I imagine they’d be competitive for most of the top arms being bantered about.
by toonsterwu on Dec 20, 2011 8:30 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I sincerely doubt the Nationals trade Cole and Peacock, plus Norris, plus something else
Most of the trade packages that you hear about for Gonzalez (etc) are players that the A’s have asked about. Reports are that they’ve asked for a package starting with Jesus Montero and Dellin Betances from the Yankees, for example. Good luck with that.
good luck?
Maybe you haven’t noticed, but Gonzalez is already an outstanding pitcher, and he’s got several more years under team control. He’s worth at least as much as Mat Latos, and probably more.
Comparable to the prospects to the Mat Latos trade
Cole, Peacock, Norris are comparable to the prospects in the Mat Latos. Different positions. The some else make up for pitcher Edinson Volquez.
sure
I just have a hard time believing that the Nationals are seriously entertaining the thought of trading for Gonzalez without committing to the idea of trading that kind of package.
I would think the package would be less than Latos
But still something like Detwiler, Cole, Norris and some lower level prospect. Detwiler fills rotation now and has some upside but worst case fills back of rotation for next three years at a cost controlled price. Cole is the big prize for the A’s next run. Norris is the bat the team covets whether at C or 1st Base and the 4th player is someone who may fill a utility/reserve OF role or middle relief.
That said I still see the Jays making the biggest push.
Beane only wants players with less than a year of service time
Been using Milone instead of Detwiler when talking about it on AN and Feds.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Is Milone the type of guy Beane targets
I don’t know Beane’s trade history off the top, but for some reason, Milone doesn’t feel like the type of guy he’d target. Off the top, as I’m too lazy to look right now, I tend to feel that Beane targets the highest ceiling arm that he can get, even if it means a weaker overall package, and preferably in the upper levels. Hence why I think Peacock or Cole (even though I’m not a fan) is likely to be a focus.
Or are you suggesting Milone as a 3rd or 4th piece guy? Detwiler would seem to be more of a 2nd piece type of guy in a trade (don’t really buy that Beane would go after him, but just speaking generally). I guess I’m confused a bit by the connection you are drawing b/w Milone and Detwiler, or maybe that wasn’t an intentional connection you are making.
Reds vs Nats
The Red’s prospects were blocked and needed pitchers more than the Nats. The Nats are in a better position to pay a free agent than the Reds. They could still get FAs Roy Oswalt or Hiroki Kuroda. They may go for an older higher paid pitcher with less time under team control, which cost less in terms of prospects. They could even wait to mid season or next year, seeing if Ross Detwiler or one of the higher level prospects works out. I don’t know what they are going to do. I sure the Red talked to the A’s, but they cut a deal with Padre. The A’s may get a similar, better or worse deal.
I don't get what you're trying to say
The Nationals aren’t getting a lower price on Gonzalez because of a lack of need or a surplus of money. Neither Oswalt nor Kuroda is anywhere as good as Gonzalez is right now, and Gonzalez is team-controlled at a relatively low cost for the next several years.
It seems obvious that the Nationals think they need a frontline starter – they’ve been in on every available high profile arm this offseason.
I’m getting the impression that Nats fans really don’t want to see any of their youngsters dealt with the possible exception of Detwiler, who despite his solid performance last year remains a bit of a question mark.
If I'm the Nats, I don't blink on this.
I like Norris, but I wouldn’t be too worried about losing him. I think they can afford to lose a guy like Cole with the young arms already in the rotation, more on the way and Gio coming back in this trade. Depending on what else it would take to get this deal done, I’d definitely do that.
And events have proven me completely wrong, so there you go LOL
Even counting it as a 4 for 2 trade, the Nationals really felt that Gonzalez IS worth all that and a bag of chips. Here’s hoping they’re right. I do wish Peacock, Norris, Milone & Cole well in their new organization.
you sir, are from the future
what are the winning lottery numbers for next week?
The 2008 Rogelio Moret League Fantasy Baseball Champions!
by The Congo Hammer on Dec 22, 2011 6:29 PM EST up reply actions
I'd probably rank this system number one
If I felt Purke and Solis were fully healthy. As it is, it’s right up there. There certainly isn’t a better top two prospects in baseball right now.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
Number
one overall? I’m assuming you have no qualms about Rendon’s shoulder then?
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 20, 2011 9:29 PM EST up reply actions
If Purke/Solis were healthy
Then probably number one overall out of all farm systems, yes. It has both the depth and the top-end massive upside.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
My
point was. You only rue Purke and Solis’s lack of health, but nary a mention about Rendon. That surprises me because you seem to be indicating but not mentioning Rendon that you believe he is 100% and will be 100%.
Did I miss some medical reports. The last I saw was..
Pre Draft – Rendon’s shoulder is a problem
Draft – Rendon, a consensus top 2 pick when healthy, falls to #6
Post Draft – Rendon unable to play in the AFL
Immediately after the draft there was serious talk of him having to play 1B, which would severely cripple his value. I see no reason for that to have changed?
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Dec 21, 2011 2:51 AM EST up reply actions
I'm just skeptical he can be hurt badly enough to mess up his career
I worry a LOT more about pitcher injuries than I do about position player injuries, especially at the infield corners.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
Besides all that
I’m such a big believer in Rendon’s bat that I think he can be a star even if he’s limited to 1B, which I doubt will be the case.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
NO
That is NOT true!! The injury was to the right shoulder.
by John Sickels on Dec 21, 2011 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
Main worry perhaps
That doesn’t mean shoulder injuries don’t have an affect on hitting as well
Rendon and the AFL
Rendon not appearing in the AFL had everything to do with his shoulder.
No
Rendon went through two weeks of Instructs with no issues. Maybe not going to AZ was a long term residual effect, but he was healthy.
He could have been a two day a week taxi player and played third one day and DH’d the next with no problem.
Well
The word from the Nationals had been he wasn’t in the AFL because they were still working on his throwing. Not that the injury was still there, but that it had affected either how he threw or his throwing strength, which needed to be ironed out. So it sort of was because of his shoulder, but not because he was still injured.
by Armless Penguin on Dec 22, 2011 1:02 PM EST up reply actions
"So it sort of was because of his shoulder, but not because he was still injured."
That’s what I read. They clearly saw something in instructs that caused them to hold him back, but he wasn’t shut down, which is the crux.
by charles wallace on Dec 26, 2011 12:11 PM EST up reply actions
I desperately hope
that Milone gets that 5th spot on the Nationals this year. I really think he’ll end up as a Buehrle-esque soft-tosser, with some upside beyond that.
Although based on the composition of the rest of the staff, Rizzo may want to go with someone that’s a little more traditionally 2/3 oriented.
+1
he’s got IT. fields his position well and hits well too.
I chuckled at that pic up above, John.
I remember going crazy when I watched that homerun. Milone can rake and that has to add something to his value as well. He may be the best hitting pitcher in the system today now that Livan Hernandez and Jason Marquis are gone. I know that matters next to nil for his prospect status, but I dig the pic much.
Waiting to bang my drum in parades for the Nats and Caps.
I remeber when Milone was called up I said to my dad
this guy can hit too
Than look what happened!
MOAR SEVERINO!
Is there a case against Harper?
I just don’t see it other than some folks like to be contrarian. As an Angels fan I absolutely love Trout and think he’s a virtual lock to be a star and a good chance of being a superstar, but I’d have to rate Harper a fraction higher—this guy’s got legit 50 HR potential; couple that with a .300 BA, 100 walks, 20 SB, and Gold Glove RF defense and you’ve got a modern day Hank Aaron.
I just don’t see what’s not to like except for his cockiness which could actually benefit him, providing he’ll be able to swallow his pride and make adjustments when he first faces a Roy Halladay cutter.
Confidence good, rage bad
Personally, I downgrade Harper to a top 6-8 prospect, due to the emotional instability. Among position players, I put him behind Trout, Taveras, Profar, and Machado for sure.
Baseball tends to reward the more even temperament—-isn’t that supposed to be one of Trout’s greatest qualities, after all? If Trout’s even-keel outlook is a virtue, well, then isn’t Harper’s petulance/cockiness/spasmic anger a vice?
No one really takes you seriously though...you rank Taveras as a top 2 guy
Since when does baseball reward even temperament? Petulant, cocky, and/or angry guys have been among the best players throughout the history of the game. Dropping a guy purely for that reason, in spite of his ridiculous performance and tools, just seems like a selective sort of thing.
too bad
it might as well have been written in stone.
ps sorry if i sounded like a dick…muahahahah
Ride the tiger...You can see his stripes but you know he's clean.
by James Westfall on Dec 21, 2011 6:22 PM EST up reply actions
No sweat
There’s room for everyone on the nice list.
If I knew of any other prospects with a tendency to “act out” on the field, I’d downgrade them as well. It’s a separate issue from talent, and Milton Bradley-type tantrums may indicate some underlying problem with Harper’s…well, whatever you want to call it. Makeup? Personality? Temperament? Psyche? Character?
Could be the difference between a Richie Allenesque career, and a Hank Aaronesque one. Or he may not even be Richie. It’s not a disqualifier from greatness, but for me it’s a meaningful concern. Self-absorption, when taken too far, is simply a negative trait in team sports.
Barry Bonds and Ricky Henderson are two of the most self absorbed players ever
They’re also among the best players ever. And I honestly don’t think Harper is anywhere close to that level. He’s a prodigy and he knows it. There is nothing wrong with being aware of how good you are. The issue is whether or not you will continue to work hard, and there is absolutely every indication that Harper is among the hardest workers in baseball. The kid just loves the game. I honestly don’t know too many people who wouldn’t be a little self absorbed if they were this good this young.
My main worry with him...
is that the Nats rush him to the majors. If they don’t send him back to AA to prove he can hit pitching there, I’ll be a bit miffed. I don’t want to see another Delmon Young.
Goodwin's swing
Could you elaborate on what’s wrong with Goodwin’s swing?
by rlwhite on Dec 21, 2011 3:23 PM EST via mobile reply actions
goodwin
Well there was some stuff about the way he uses the lower half of his body not being quite what it should be which led to some spotty performance in college at times. I heard this was a focus in instructional league. Seems correctable.
by John Sickels on Dec 21, 2011 4:13 PM EST up reply actions
ah. here is a citation
“Goodwin flashed electric bat speed and showed a patient, gap-to-gap approach in college, but he arrived at instructional league with a rotational, upper-body, metal-bat swing. The Nationals worked with him on using his lower half more and getting his quick, strong hands into better hitting position.”
That is from the Baseball America report on him. I heard something very similar when he was being discussed as a possible first round pick, that some adjustments would be needed
by John Sickels on Dec 21, 2011 4:15 PM EST up reply actions
Hague
I liked that you mentioned Hague despite the injury — I was really disappointed that we couldn’t see what he would do against better competition.
Are there real problems with his defense? Was there talk of moving him to 2b? Because, so far, it looks like the bat could be for real, with the caveat that it’s a small sample against weak competition ;-)
Norris reminds me of Iannetta more
by CaptainCanuck on Dec 21, 2011 10:20 PM EST via mobile reply actions
yea thats a better comp
Then john’s napoli in the write up. I know he was never a high average guy, but dude hit like .315 or something this year.
Napoli
Granted his average was superior to Norris so far, but just because Napoli had a fluke high average this year, does not make him a high-average hitter.
The 2008 Rogelio Moret League Fantasy Baseball Champions!
by The Congo Hammer on Dec 22, 2011 6:26 PM EST up reply actions
Flowers doesn't have the same plate discipline
Norris takes a lot more walks, but Flowers hits for better minor league avg.
The 2008 Rogelio Moret League Fantasy Baseball Champions!
by The Congo Hammer on Dec 22, 2011 6:27 PM EST up reply actions
Wow
I really like the Gio deal … for the A’s. Much more than I liked the Latos deal (and that was a good deal), to be honest. Cole, Peacock, and Milone, to go with Norris? Wow.
by toonsterwu on Dec 22, 2011 4:16 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, that's a pretty nice haul
Kind of shocked anyone paid Beane’s ransom. Plenty of upside, and a decent chance the A’s get the better end of it in the short term.
Really?
I know this is a minor league focused blog, but people are aware of how good Gio Gonzalez is, right? I think this is a great deal for the Undead Expos & especially so in the short term.
how many pitchers
with walk rates as high as Gio end up being as good as you think he is?
by blue bulldog on Dec 23, 2011 2:45 PM EST up reply actions
Jonathan Sanchez has always come to mind,
but Gonzalez does the better job of limiting SLG and has a significantly better groundball rate, which may be the difference between getting punished for and getting away with the walks.
by charles wallace on Dec 26, 2011 12:19 PM EST up reply actions
Now people can stop calling Beane crazy
But still, this really highlights how much more he could have/should have gotten for Cahill.
The 2008 Rogelio Moret League Fantasy Baseball Champions!
by The Congo Hammer on Dec 22, 2011 6:23 PM EST up reply actions
It helps if you can create a bidding war
There were rumors of 7 or so teams chasing after Gio at one point. Nothing that suggests anyone other than the DBacks were looking to get Cahill.
there's a part of me that still feels that the Cahill trade is a bit unfairly bashed
in terms of the return the A’s got. Now, the overall package simply isn’t as good as the Latos/Gio deals, but the Cahill trade did arguably net the top individual talent in any of the three deals in Jarrod Parker. There’s obviously a level of risk, but overall, I still don’t think it’s nearly as bad as it’s occasionally portrayed to be.
It's pretty bad though
Trevor Cahill is a good pitcher on a very reasonable extension. Jarrod Parker (who isn’t even a year younger) even in a pie-in-the-sky scenario will be fortunate to ever match Cahill in his prime. While I like Collin Cowgill as an ancillary piece, I’m still having trouble reconciling that he was the second piece (presumably) in a deal for a guy like Cahill.
Billy Beane et al must have absolutely coveted Parker as I feel they could habe (& should have) recouped more.
Trade value
I guess it’s fair to say that good pitchers who make smallish money (Gio, Latos) now have considerably more trade value than great pitchers who make big money (Santana, Halladay, Lee, Sabathia, Haren).
How many years is Oakland from being a 90-win team? Four? Five? Forever?
basically waiting on the stadium
aren’t they? Until then, it’s rinse and repeat – trade for young talent, hope some develop, trade them again. Hope you get lucky and find some offense.
yeah
they need to get some offensive talent
by blue bulldog on Dec 23, 2011 1:57 AM EST up reply actions

by 













