Cincinnati Reds Top 20 Prospects for 2012
by John Sickels on Jan 8, 2012 1:00 PM EST
Email
Print
Cincinnati Reds Top 20 Prospects for 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) Devin Mesoraco, C, Grade A-: Hard to believe this guy looked like a busted first round pick two years ago. Better conditioning and strike zone gains worked wonders. Should be an above-average defender who hits for power.
2) Billy Hamilton, SS, Grade B+: Ridiculously fast and he uses that speed well. Lacks power and strikes out a lot, but I remain optimistic that his hitting skills will improve and thus the grade. Might end up at second base.
3) Daniel Corcino, RHP, Grade B: Everyone makes Johnny Cueto comparisons, and it makes a lot of sense. Size and stuff are similar. Excellent component ratios in the Midwest League, demonstrates ability to throw plus fastball, solid slider and changeup for strikes.
4) Robert Stephenson, RHP, Grade B: High school first-rounder with live arm, 92-96 MPH fastball and a promising curve. Projects as a number two starter if all goes according to plan. Would have been a top ten pick in some draft classes, but the '11 group was so strong he fell to 27th overall.
5) Zack Cozart, SS, Grade B-: Good fielder with some pop in his bat, keeps exceeding expectations. Plate discipline is spotty and I doubt he hits .300+ in a full season, but he should be a solid regular.
6) Tony Cingrani, LHP, Grade B-: Borderline C+. Relieved in college for Rice but a starter now, developing slider and changeup with good results in Pioneer League. Throws strikes, has a shot at becoming a number three starter. Grade is aggressive but I like him.
7) Didi Gregorius, SS, Grade C+: Toolsy infielder from Curacao, great throwing arm, good range, still makes a lot of errors. Line drive hitter with poor plate discipline but still young enough at 21 to develop considerably.
8) Todd Frazier, UT, Grade C+: Nothing left to prove in the minors. Turns 26 in February and we have a read on his skills now after two seasons in Triple-A. He's not going to hit .300 in the majors, but he's got enough power to be useful and can play multiple positions without being a liability. In these days of large pitching staffs and small benches, that has value.
9) Yorman Rodriguez, OF, Grade C+: One of several young Latin American power hitters with poor plate discipline in the system. Age 19, has 20/20 potential but injuries and a poor hitting approach have held him back. Physical potential to be a star, but can he refine it?
10) Henry Rodriguez, 2B, Grade C+: 21-year-old switch-hitter produced .320/.372/.469 mark with 36 doubles, 13 homers, and 30 steals combined between High-A and Double-A. He has a legitimate bat, but sloppy defense and too many mental mistakes hurt his stock with scouts. If he gets his head on straight, he could be a very impressive player.
11) Neftali Soto, 1B, Grade C+: Slammed 30 homers in Double-A at age 22 but plate discipline remains poor and he has an uphill battle in the OBP and batting average departments.
12) J.C. Sulbaran, RHP, Grade C+: Live arm, posted impressive 155/50 K/BB in 137 innings in the California League although 4.60 ERA makes him easy to overlook. FIP was much better at 3.29. 22-year-old is well-known from performance in international competition a few years ago.
13) David Vidal, 3B, Grade C+: Solid production in Midwest League, .280 with 20 homers, 37 doubles. Performed well defensively. Plate discipline needs some work but an intriguing player.
14) Tim Crabbe, RHP, Grade C+: Overlooked prospect, posted solid ratios in difficult California League, 3.41 ERA with 123/46 K/BB in 111 innings, 97 hits. Above-average fastball and slider. Needs a third pitch, but there are things to build on here.
15) Kyle Lotzkar, RHP, Grade C+: Still striking people out at a good clip, driving the long road back from Tommy John surgery.
16) Juan Duran, OF, Grade C: High-ceiling power hitter knocked 16 homers in Midwest League, but has very poor strike zone judgment, fanned 152 times in 367 at-bats. Still has time to improve at age 20.
17) Gabriel Rosa, 3B, Grade C: Second-round pick out of Puerto Rico, hit poorly in rookie ball and has strike zone issues but also has all the tools to succeed.
18) Tucker Barnhart, C, Grade C: Impressive defensive catcher, lacks home run power but makes contact and switch-hits. Profiles as a reserve unless he hits more, which is possible.
19) Junior Arias, 3B, Grade C: Turns 20 tomorrow. Another young Latin American (Dominican Republic) with loads of offensive potential but a poor feel for hitting and issues with contact. High ceiling, high risk.
20) Denis Phipps, OF, Grade C: This is why teams don't like to give up on tools guys. Never hit well before, but exploded in 2011 by hitting .346/.397/.527 in Double-A/Triple-A at age 26, earning a spot on 40-man roster. This was driven by BABIP well over .400 despite striking out once per game. Seems unsustainable to me, but he continued to hit well in winter ball and he has enough tools to deserve a look at least as a reserve.
OTHERS: James Allen, RHP; Andrew Brackman, RHP; Sean Buckley, 3B: Amir Garrett, LHP (incredible ceiling but very raw); Stalin Gerson, RHP (I put my Russian history degree to use when writing the book comment); Cole Green, RHP (Sam LeCure Part Two); Brodie Greene, INF; Drew Hayes, RHP; Donnie Joseph, LHP; Josh Judy, RHP; Ryan LaMarre, OF; Donald Lutz, 1B; Chris Manno, LHP; Juan Perez INF; Josh Ravin, RHP; Daniel Renken, RHP; Josh Smith, RHP; Pedro Villareal, RHP; Kyle Waldrop, OF; Ryan Wright, 2B.
The big trade tore the top part of this system off. Grandal and Alonso are strong B+ prospects and Boxberger a B-/B. The ranking would have been Mesoraco-Hamilton-Alonso-Grandal-Corsino-Stephenson-Cozart-Boxberger. Also don't forget Torreyes and Sappelt, who would have been ranked something like 12th and 13th.
Ranking of the Grade C/C+ types is pretty much a crapshoot outside the Top Ten. Several of the "others" guys could easily fit into the 16-20 range but I wanted to write about Phipps because people ask about him.
As it stands, there is still talent here but the trades unavoidably thin things out. Mesoraco, Cozart, and Frazier are ready to help in 2012. Henry Rodriguez has a lot of talent offensively but defense and intangibles are issues. Gregorius hasn't put up the numbers yet, but he's very young and I will cut him some slack for that. If you could combine Gregorius' defense with Henry R.'s bat, you'd have a star. Alas, genetic experimentations of that type are illegal.
There is a group of guys with 1) huge power potential but 2) big flaws in their approach, beginning with Yorman Rodriguez and Neftali Soto. There's a significant risk that none of them will figure it out, although they are all young enough to improve.
On the pitching side, Corcino looks like a mid-rotation guy to me. Stephenson has the highest ceiling and could develop into a staff anchor, but hasn't pitched yet and we don't know how the scouting reports and high school performance will translate. I like Cingrani quite a bit. Amir Garrett could have the best potential of any pitcher in the system, but there is so much uncertainty about him that I want to see how things look a year from now before ranking him highly.
Keep an eye on infielder Juan Perez, a sleeper from the 2011 draft.
258 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Because of the bat, obviously.
The bird is struggling out of the egg. The egg is the world. Whoever wants to be born, must first destroy a world.
by Stupendous Man on Jan 8, 2012 1:17 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Mesoraco hit better in the same league this year than Montero did over the past 2
And he should have something like a 2 win advantage defensively. You have to think the difference in their offensive value is absolutely massive to think Montero will be more valuable. I just don’t see it. If you want to put Montero above Meso, I don’t have an issue. If you want to rank Montero an A though, I don’t know how Mesoraco isn’t one as well.
Maybe the difference in how each player performed in their brief big league callups was taken into account as well? Small sample size, of course, but Montero hit with authority, while Mesoraco scuffled. I think both will be excellent players, though, and Mesoraco will definitely stick at catcher.
The bird is struggling out of the egg. The egg is the world. Whoever wants to be born, must first destroy a world.
by Stupendous Man on Jan 8, 2012 1:33 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Well I'm sure it plays a small part
But its an incredibly small sample size. Look, I don’t have any problem with someone thinking Montero will be the better hitter. In fact, I agree with that. I just don’t think the difference is anywhere near enough to make up for the 20+ run difference in defensive value.
Fair enough.
The bird is struggling out of the egg. The egg is the world. Whoever wants to be born, must first destroy a world.
by Stupendous Man on Jan 8, 2012 1:48 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
20+ run difference?
I have a hard time believing that number.
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Jan 8, 2012 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
I'm guessing
nixa is including positional adjustment in the 20 run difference, not strictly a RAA difference in their defense.
http://bullpenbanter.com
RIP Randy "Macho Man" Savage
Exactly
The 20 runs is the difference between playing all your games at C compared to 2/3 at DH and 1/3 at C. I’m not even including how well they actually play C into the calculation.
I don't thin Montero can play 1/3 at catcher
I thin he’s an emergency catcher. That’s a 30 run difference. If Montero plays C, he’ll be beyond horrible, he had a 20% CS% last year. You have to take that into account.
i think the 1/3 at catcher
is based off latest reports of the yankees’s intention
whether montero can do that or not is another question
Why wouldn't he be able to do that?
The question should be: “will he be able to do that WELL.” Generally, tho, the less time you spend in a defensive position as a defensive liability, the less the impact of your bad defense will have on your overall value.
I mean, if you’re committing one error every 100 plays but you only play 99 plays, you’re flawless right?
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Jan 10, 2012 2:51 AM EST up reply actions
i'm not sure what you mean
i’m sure the Yankees will play Montero at C for whatever amount of plate appearances they think will optimize his value
in general, it’s meaningless to move a C to DH unless his defense is incredibly bad (30 runs per 162 games bad). presumably, the Yankees think that increasing number of games at C decreases Montero’s marginal effectiveness at C.
ideally, the Yankees would play Montero at C for X amount of games, such that at the margin, the additional game played at C would shift Montero’s defense from less than negative 30 runs per 162 games, to more than negative 30 runs per 162 games. kinda poorly worded, but do you get what i mean?
the Yankees think X = one-third of the season. obviously, nobody really knows what X equals, and that’s something that the Yankees and the rest of the world is going to have to figure out/see through real-life experiment next season
by blue bulldog on Jan 10, 2012 4:26 AM EST up reply actions
I don't think
the Yankees think Montero can play catcher, I’ve heard emergency catcher, not backup, a bunch of times.
Where did you read that the Yankee's think this?
Any links from legit sources?
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Jan 10, 2012 9:33 PM EST up reply actions
You're losing the missing the forest for the trees
First, there is more than 1 catching option on the team. At no point do you mention Russell Martin and his ability to play C at a much higher level than Montero. Its not about maximizing Montero’s value, its about maximizing the teams value. The question is whether the difference is Montero’s and Martin’s defense is worth the difference in offense between Martin and whoever would play DH when Montero catches.
Second, there is no good way to measure catcher’s defensive contributions at this point. From some of the stuff that was done on framing pitches, the difference between the best and worst catchers is massive (over 30 runs between best and worst) and that’s not including blocking pitches and throwing out basestealers.
you are correct
it’s about maximizing the team’s value, and the other C that will be catching non-Montero games needs to be taken into account
i was just trying to illustrate the “cost of defense at the margin” point. otherwise, if the only question you have to address “is whether the difference is Montero’s and Martin’s defense is worth the difference in offense between Martin and whoever would play DH when Montero catches” then it would be an all or nothing gambit. either Montero spends full time at DH or spends full time at C. however, if you believe in “cost of defense increasing at the margin as Montero spends more time at C” then there should be some amount of games that maximizes the team’s value.
as for there being no good way to measure catcher’s defensive contributions, that’s probably true. regardless, i’m sure good teams make the best estimation possible. again, i’m just trying to illustrate the analytic framework/logic behind using Montero for X amount of games at C next year. not trying to actually determine what X equals.
by blue bulldog on Jan 11, 2012 12:01 AM EST up reply actions
Maybe John factored in future projection
Rather than just using 2011 AAA stats.
Put me in the camp that believes Montero’s bat very well could be that much better than Mesoraco’s bat…. and I like Mesoraco quite a bit.
why is Montero's bat so good?
the last time he’s destroyed a level was at 2009 in high A in a very small sample size.
show me an example of a player
who didn’t destroy the upper levels and was a star hitter.
This is a bad argument approach to take.
Robinson Cano is an immediate answer I can come up with off the top of my head.
The reason it’s bad, though, is that you’re asking for perceptions of what it means to “destroy the upper levels”, which is asking for a pissing match.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Jan 8, 2012 11:08 PM EST up reply actions
Not sure I'd call Cano a star hitter
Even in his best offensive season he was “only” the 15th best hitter in the league by wRC+.
Not that I’m agreeing with everything Bososx13 is saying
Geez I hope you were being sarcastic.
Because saying someone was “only” the 15th best hitter in the major leagues by wRC+ pretty much qualiifies to everyone (except you) that the player is a star hitter.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 9:32 AM EST up reply actions
So then Aubrey Huff is a star hitter?
Because he finished ahead of Cano that year. Like I said, that was in Cano’s best year. Outside of that season, he’s never finished better than 35th in wRC+. If Cano fits your definition of a star hitter, then there are something like 40 star hitters in the league, and I apparently just have a different definition of what is a star than what you do.
Really?
What in the world would you call Robinson Cano then? I know, I know, he doesn’t walk a lot, but classifying him as anything other than a ‘star hitter’ seems like a case of missing the woods for the trees (especially considering that he’s an up the middle player).
331, 334 and 332 total bases the last 3 years and the guy doesn't think he's a star hitter.
gotta love it.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 9:40 AM EST up reply actions
Who ranks hitters on total bases?
I would hope he would finish high considering the number of ABs he gets and his home park. Look at a more accurate measure of offensive value like wRC+, and while Cano is still a very good hitter, he falls short of what I would consider a star. He hasn’t even been among the 70 best hitters in baseball in terms of wRC+ since he entered the league.
He hasn’t even been among the 70 best hitters in baseball in terms of wRC+ since he entered the league.
that has to be one of the most ridiculous statements I’ve seen in here condisering he’s just entered his prime. How has he done his last 3 years?
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
Most of the guys on the list weren't in their prime
Plus Cano just finished his age 28 season. He’s right in the middle of his prime.
Over the last 3 years (why not 4? Oh right, then we’d have to include a bad season), he’s 29th. If you think there are 29 star hitters in baseball, then we simply disagree on what constitutes a star hitter.
doesn't matter what it is, we disagree on everything.
Yeah he had a bad year 4 years ago, so what? You can take the last 2 and he looks better. Surprise, you disagree about his prime, how many seasons to compare and if he’s a star hitter or not. There’s not 1 thing we agree on. I prefer it that way.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:33 AM EST up reply actions
Considering that would be 1 per team is it really that far out of the realm of possibility?
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:40 AM EST up reply actions
There is not 1 star hitter per team
Just like there is not 1 ace per team.
Yet you still don't get it.
What are you, in your early to mid 20’s?
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:42 AM EST up reply actions
Don't get what?
There’s nothing to get. Like I said, if you really think there are that many star hitters, than so be it, but I disagree. To that point, I compared the situation to hitters to the situation with pitchers. It is widely agreed that there aren’t 30 aces in the league.
And again, you’re really just comparing Cano at his peak to everyone else. If you do a more fair comparison, he doesn’t even come out that high.
so because there's not 30 aces there can't be 30 star hitters?
Your logic is amazing. Exactly where do you cut off the “star hitter” category, just for reference? I’m sure it’s just short of where Cano falls.
Cano is at his supposed very peak this year and probably has 2 more years as the downside gradually begins.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
Not set amount
Probably in the range of 15 though. To me a star hitter is a guy you would feel comfortable with as being clearly the best hitter on a championship contending team. I just don’t see Cano being on that level.
so you're basing it on your feelings and opinion
exactly what you bashed me for. Nice.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
I've said from the start
If you really believe there are that many star hitters, than you’re welcome to believe that. I was simply explaining my position.
So you stated it was in the range of 15 above but in a previous comment
you stated, “Not sure I’d call Cano a star hitter Even in his best offensive season he was "only" the 15th best hitter in the league by wRC+.”
Then you stated, “To me a star hitter is a guy you would feel comfortable with as being clearly the best hitter on a championship contending team. I just don’t see Cano being on that level.” Now it’s your opinion that he’s not, which is what you contend is all I provided.
So it’s ok for you to dismiss my comments based on my opinon, but when you state your opinion, it should somehow be valid?
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 12:54 PM EST up reply actions
At his very best he just barely qualified
So yes, for that one season he was a borderline star level hitter.
I’m done arguing with you over specific opinions. Have a good one.
Different population size
Pitchers – 5*30 = 150
Hitters – 8.5*30 = 255
So 150/255*100 = 59% more starting positional players than pitchers. So if you think there are 10 aces, then 16 star hitters is reasonable.
by cookiedabookie on Jan 9, 2012 8:50 PM EST up reply actions
Understandable
I just base it off the number of teams, not the population of each. Look at it as the guys you’d be comfortable with as your best hitter/pitcher if you want to compete for a title. I think there are similar numbers of each.
and you use your own statement against you on Cano:
“I could care less if Mesoraco (Cano) struggled in 2008 and 2009 (2008). He’s not the same player he was then.”
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:37 AM EST up reply actions
That's just ridiculous and you know it
You’re comparing a prospect’s first two full professional seasons to an established MLB player’s fourth season in the league.
you calling something ridiculous
is ridiculous in itself.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:41 AM EST up reply actions
So you think that's reasonable then?
Comparing an established MLB player to a prospect that’s just starting out?
Nah, it's never fair and a 25 year old never has a bad year in the majors.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:44 AM EST up reply actions
Did I say that?
I simply commented on how you just happened to leave that year out. Guys have bad seasons all the time. It happens.
Still, comparing that to a prospect struggling in his first exposure to professional baseball makes no sense in my mind though. I’ll just leave it at that as far as this particular subject.
I left it out because it was 4 years ago
what he did 4 years ago isn’t relevant to the player he is now. If you want to look up last year’s stats and base it on that then to quote you, “I really don’t care”.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 11:18 AM EST up reply actions
Let's compare Cano to the other 2 examples given below
Matt Holliday and Hanley Ramirez are actual star hitters. They have career wRC+ of 139 and 134 respectively, compared to Cano’s 119. In fact, Cano is closer to being an average offensive player than he is to being a Matt Holliday level hitter. Do you see the difference?
So take 2 other star players, compare their wRC+ to Cano and then discount Cano.
love your logic.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:23 AM EST up reply actions
He's not even close to them as a hitter
Like I said, he’s closer to being average than he is to Holliday. If you want to compare him to guys around his level in wRC+ then we can do that.
Here’s a list of retired players with higher career wRC+ (and all these guys went through their decline, which Cano obviously hasn’t done yet): Ray Lankford, Andy Van Slyke, Rusty Staub, Jackie Jensen, Heinie Groh, Gary Matthews, Roy Sievers, Rusty Greer, Troy Glaus, Lonnie Smith, etc.
As for current players that have been better than him: Derek Lee, Carlos Pena, Jayson Werth, Hunter Pence, Paul Konerko, Josh Willingham, Pablo Sandoval, etc.
Do you really think everyone of those guys is/was a star hitter?
and Cano hasn't completed his prime yet.
But let’s make useless comparisons shall we.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:43 AM EST up reply actions
So you have no real response then?
And why are the comparisons useless? Because they don’t paint Cano in the same light you see him in?
no because he hasn't competed his prime yet.
All those players had a prime, but you’re comparing them to someone that hasn’t had his full one yet. I see the start of the comprehension slipping on your part again.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:49 AM EST up reply actions
They also went through their decline
If you want to argue that those don’t quite cancel out go for it. I don’t really care.
Of course you don't care.
It’s evident in everything you write.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:54 AM EST up reply actions
Right
I look up stats and provide evidence, while you just give your opinion. But I’m the one that doesn’t care. Look, I’m not going to let this get personal. If you want to talk baseball, then let’s talk baseball. This has nothing to do with baseball.
Right, you look up stats
and fail to see anything other than the stats you want to see. You “provide evidence” of 1 stat and totally disregard all others because to you WAR and wRC+ are the end all, be all stats.
Meanwhile, I asked someone I know who writes for a major site and used to have his own site if he thought Cano was a star HITTER and his response was “Yes”. Since you know more than him, you should start your own site.
BTW, I was talking baseball until you started making comments that you don’t really care. If you don’t want to get off the topic of baseball, then stick to baseball comments as well.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
+1000
. . . and im only one person. I ouldn’t agree more. The stat is traeted as the final evidence, when it can (and does) have flaws as well;
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
WAR and wRC+
Correlate to wins and runs scored better than other stats. Why wouldn’t you place more emphasis on them?
Winner!
Because they are no more valid than any other measure and have their flaws. The better question is why wouldn’t you place emphasis on ALL stats, not primary emphasis on just 1?
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 11:23 AM EST up reply actions
How are they not more valid?
They correlate better with what they are supposed to be measuring? That’s what good statistics are supposed to do.
again, because using 1 measurement that encompasses all statistics
ignores all of the other statistics. Using 1 statistic to measure the overall performance of players is like using 1 pick up line on all women.
On another note, it’s amazing how you cut of your list of the top hitters at around 15, calling Cano not a top hitter when his best season wRC+ was 15th. Seems like the arbitrary cutoffs and opinions you claim that I provide are not only left to me.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
wRC+ does ignore all other stats
In fact it includes a plethora of other stats.
The 15 number is simply a number I’m used to using for the relative number of aces in the league. That’s the main reason I quoted it. Had nothing to do with Cano finishing 15th once. If I was trying to skew things, why wouldn’t I have done 10, 12, or 14 or something like that?
Love the metaphor..
‘Using 1 statistic to measure the overall performance of players is like using 1 pick up line on all women’
I’d say that you should probably know your overall audience though if you’re assuming a high level of relatability. Call it a hunch.
I'm gunna have to agree with nixa37 here
it’s stats vs. reactionary sarcasm
Fuck lion say what! i got a fuck lion now come fuck wit me
It's nice you agree with him
but it’s hardly reactionary sarcasm because I disagree with 1 stat as the tell all, be all of statistics.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
No
. . . but, they are all very good hitters. The real question you should be asking is “Is this stat measuring these players accurately?”. It is actually obvious that Cano is a better hitter than half of those guys – Carlos Pena dude? – anybosy can tell that Cano is a better hitter than him, regardless of what that stat says.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
Based on what?
Just because the stat doesn’t agree with your preconceived notion doesn’t make the stat wrong. Perhaps you should reevaluate your position? Cano has a slightly higher SLG, while Pena has a small advantage in OBP. What exactly makes Cano clearly better?
The slugging
. . does not accurtately measure the two players ability to move runnersa around the bases. Cano swings the nat more and does this. In MOST offensive situations, i would prefer Cano. I think you would too.
I’m not going to let a stat like that go ahead of my common sense.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
A walk doesn't preclude runners from moving up
In fact it puts another guy on base for the next hitter. I get, you don’t agree with new stats, so its not really worth getting into.
I like accurate stats
. . .I do not care if they are new or old. I don’t like someone using a stat that does not jibe with reality. I think it is to otally worth getting into but, thats just me.
I just think it is funny when someone sees a stat that tells then that Cano is as good of a hitter as carlos pana and doesn’t question the STAT, just the people who disagree with it.
There is a very clear thing that the stat is missing, as well as several “new” stats.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
What are new stats missing then?
And what is inaccurate about the stat I used? It doesn’t measure the exact same thing as TB, but its very similar. It just gives guys credit for walking, instead of punishing them for it like TB does. What’s inaccurate about that?
Tbs
. . . don’t “punish” anything. You need them to get runs across. A linup full of guys who walk a lot and have power but, dont rack up total bases, doesn’t funtion as well as you may think.
Getting an actual base-hit of any kind is a the occurance that usually gets an actualk run on the board.
Getting on base is essential but, getting total bases is essential too. Its total bases that are “punished” more in some of these stats.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
Not really
wOBA (on which wRC+ is calculated) gives significantly more value to a 1B than to a walk.
The only reason I made up that stat was to show how much things changed as soon as BBs were a part of the equation.
Like I said though, I’m not in the mood to argue about which statistics are best.
He's a star PLAYER because he plays 2B
If he were putting up the same production at say 1B or DH, he wouldn’t be a star. He’d be more on the level of a Paul Konerko. Very good player in my mind, but not a star. If he’s the best player on your team, your probably not competing for a title.
He's a star PLAYER because he's that good.
6th in TB in 2011, 5th in 2010 and 8th in 2009. Lat year he had more TB than Fielder, Votto, Pujols and Bautista. The only ones better were Ellsbury, Kemp, AGonz, Braun and Cabrera. Becasue he didn’t hit 40 hme runs doesn’t make him less of a star.
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 10:12 AM EST up reply actions
Total bases are a terrible way to measure hitters
You’re rewarding Cano for the fact that he doesn’t walk nearly as much as those guys. If you simply add in BB to TB, Fielder beats him by 59, Votto beats him by 58, Pujols beats him by 3 (in 12 fewer games), and Bautista beats him by 74. Amazing how that works huh?
Walks
are NOT total bases. Why would you add them to total bases?
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
Because TB isn't a good stat
Do they not reach base on a BB? Why should we disregard it? Just because they didn’t initially include it doesn’t mean that’s right.
disagree
its actually total bases that are disregarded way more than reaching base. BOTH are important skills. Its the backlash against RBIs that has tilted too far in the other direction.
In the mioddle of a lineup with lots of guys on base, a hitter like Cano has a ton of value. he is a big, big star.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
Like I mentioned
TB are calculated into wOBA and therefore wRC+. Guys are given credit for the average change in expected runs based on the type of hit they get. 1B are given significantly more value than BB to reflect the issues that you have.
He's as good a hitter as Konerko
AND plays 2b. If you don’t think he’s a star, i don’t know what to tell you Buddy.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
Did you even read through the thread?
I specifically said Cano is a star PLAYER because he plays 2B. My whole point from the start is that he isn’t a star HITTER. If Montero only turns into Cano as a hitter and doesn’t stick at C full time, then he won’t be a star player.
I specifically disagree with you
. . Cano is just as good of a HITTER as Konerko AND, he plays second base. Konerko is a star. Cano is a much bigger one.
the stat you are using is underselling Cano in my opinion.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
Then you simply think there are a lot more stars than I do
Like I said above, I’m not arguing the validity of the stats because you’re not going to change your mind regardless.
This is simply not true
I have a very specific reason for not likeing a part of that . . . particular . . . stat. I am njot close minded to stats at all…or, eveidence.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
the sequence in which the events occur
Pena is better than cano when leading off an inning or, maybe when the bases are loaded and a team needs maybe 1 run but, almost ecvery other situation Id prefer Cano.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
The whole point is it doesn't look at context
That way, we can look at it, and get an idea of who will be better if we gave them the same number of ABs in the same situations.
And why wouldn’t Pena be better anytime there is no one on?
Jesus its right in the post you responded to
Are you serious?
Calm yourself
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
I said he was a star
And then you responded to me saying
If you don’t think he’s a star, i don’t know what to tell you Buddy.
Do you not see how that could be incredibly frustrating?
No, I do not
Because JKonerko is star and if you stuck Cano at first base he would be a star as well. As a second baseman, he is closer to a superstar.
That stat you are using is selling him short. In my opinion.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
because it doesn't
… take into account sequence or, offensive situation. It lumps all offensive players together and doesn’t takle into account specifically what it takes to make an offebnse that works, in my opinion.
"Does it make your life easier to just throw a quick, racist term at somebody? A man who has seen the things I’ve seen… experienced the loss and pain that I’ve experienced… I transcend race, hombre." - Kenny Powers
Go Reds!
I thought this thread was about Reds’ prospects. Couldn’t you start a “Is Robinson Cano a Star Player” fanpost?
He is, by the way.
What! Are you kidding?
The first thing you said was:
“Not sure I’d call Cano a star hitter”.
That’s what got this whole thing started! Now, 100 posts later you can"t even remember what you said? All i have to say is this, stats are stats, anyone who knows anything about baseball will tell you that Cano is a Stud! All you have to do is watch the games and your eyes will tell everything you need to know. I swear, i think sometimes people get all caught up in these crazy new stats and forget to watch a game once in a while instead of reading numbers on a spreadsheet. You don’t need (wRC+) or any of these other crazy (letters) to tell you who the STAR players are. However, if you need (letters) try these: SS, as in Silver Slugger that Cano has won the last 2 years. 2 years that, oh by the way, he finished 3rd & 6th in AL MVP voting. Throw in a Gold Glove, and I think you have a STAR Player, not just a STAR Hitter!
by Captain Jeter on Jan 10, 2012 12:55 AM EST up reply actions
LOL...Are you kidding?
Did you miss this?
Like I said, Cano is a star PLAYER because he hits at a high level while playing an up the middle position. However, I don’t consider him a star HITTER because IMO there are only about 15 of those in the league, and Cano hasn’t shown that he is one of them.
I’ll say the same thing about a player from my team. Brian McCann (who has similar offensive value to Cano) is a star player, but he is not a star hitter.
I think you missed the context of the conversation that led to this. This amazingly enough started about Jesus Montero. My point was essentially that if Montero “only” hits at Cano’s level, while playing significant time at DH, he’s not anywhere close to being a star player. If he ends up playing mostly DH he has to be a true star hitter to be really valuable.
No, I saw that post.
Not sure you want to use that as part of your defense. You say that Cano would only be as valuable as Konerko if he played 1B. Well using your precious (wRC+) Konerko ranked #21 in MLB last year. That’s pretty STAR Quality if you ask me. Cano was actually #30. As far competing for a title with those guys, my bet is every GM and Manager in baseball would sign up to have that kind of production from the right side of the infield.
by Captain Jeter on Jan 10, 2012 1:56 AM EST up reply actions
So you saw me call him a star player?
And then act all incredulous when I jokingly responded to a guy saying no one said he wasn’t a star player? Please explain how that makes any sense. Seriously, I really want to hear it. I never said Cano was anything but a star player.
I’ve been clear with what I think qualifies as a star hitter. IMO I think its a guy a championship caliber team would feel comfortable running out there as the best hitter on their team. I don’t think most teams would be comfortable with Konerko or Cano as their best hitter. I mean most teams did have a hitter better than Cano last year. You’re welcome to disagree wit my opinion, but its not really something worth arguing about.
It specifically takes into account
What makes an offense work. That’s why it correlates so well to runs scored. It looks at how many runs the player would have added with average players around him.
I'm pretty sure I'd consider Cano a star hitter at this point.
He may not be our ideal, but he’s getting the job done quite well. Plus, he’s a Yankee, that automatically makes him a “star”.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Jan 10, 2012 2:52 AM EST up reply actions
I love how TTIF said "destroying the upper levels" was a bad argument
because it depends on perceptions of what “destroy” constitutes…
And then there were like 80 posts arguing about what constitutes a “star” player.
Nice work, everyone.
You know...
I originally typed:
The reason it’s bad, though, is that you’re asking for perceptions of star players and what it means to "destroy the upper levels", which is asking for a pissing match.
Damn my selective editing…
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Jan 10, 2012 2:56 AM EST up reply actions
Matt Holliday
"Self-control is the chief element in self-respect, and self-respect is the chief element in courage." ― Thucydides
Hanley Ramirez
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Jan 9, 2012 7:58 AM EST up reply actions
HanRam
was the first guy who came to mind.
by charles wallace on Jan 9, 2012 5:49 PM EST up reply actions
Did I say anywhere that I was only basing it on stats?
I mentioned them to give an idea of current talent level. Obviously future projection plays a role. That’s the biggest part of what we’re doing. I just see no reason to project Montero’s bat to improve that much more than Mesoraco’s. I mean let’s not act like Mesoraco doesn’t have great tools. There is a reason he went in the top half of the first round back in 2007.
because the grades aren't final yet.
I am thinking about moving Montero to an A-.
However, keep in mind that Montero is younger than Meso. That matters quite a bit.
another point is that I am simply more confident in Montero's bat than in Meso's.
Meso has the edge on defense, obviously.
Is Montero’s bat strong enough to make up for that. I don’t know yet. This is the kind of decision I will be making in the next couple of days.
not that it matters, but I would stick with Montero as a straight A
it says that you think he has a strong likelihood of being a middle-of-the-order, impact bat. That’s a) what you think and b) valuable to communicate.
by AndrewTorrez on Jan 8, 2012 10:49 PM EST up reply actions
Mesoraco will stay at C
whereas Montero likely spends a LOT less time there. Catchers are next to pitchers in unpredictability and that alone would make me less way of Montero’s projections.
Some see a glass half empty, some a glass half full. I see a glass that's twice as big as it needs to be. - George Carlin
Personally I just feel Montero is an A-
Which is why I asked the question. My intent wasn’t to say your rankings are wrong, but to try and understand the thinking that went into these particular rankings.
i'ts ok
I wasn’t offended or anything. I was just trying to say that I’m aware that not every grade “lines up properly” yet.
It is all part of the process and I have to do things in a certain order or I’ll go nuts
I think an A-
is fine for Montero, I would go B+, but an A- is fine. I just can’t justify giving him an A though, Mesoraco is ahead of Montero by a decent amount in my book, the positional difference is 30 runs, I don’t think Montero will out hit Mesoraco by 30 runs, I think Mesoraco might even be the better hitter, I am a big fan of Mesoraco though, I would put him 6th overall and give him an A, I have a lot of confidence in his bat and he plays a position that is such a bonus.
Two players can have equal value for different reasons.
If you’re doing a straight up catcher comparison, obviously Montero looks worse.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Jan 8, 2012 3:37 PM EST up reply actions
Two things
Mesocaro = 23
Montero = 21
Plus longitevity. Montero has consistently been a top prospect, while Mesocaro is a guy who was once considered a bust.
Actual difference is less than 1.5 years
And if anything, I’d hold Montero’s lack of progress against him. I could care less if Mesoraco struggled in 2008 and 2009. He’s not the same player he was then.
Assuming Montero is really 21...
/runs away!
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Jan 8, 2012 3:38 PM EST up reply actions
Montero turned 22 on 11/29, Mesoraco turns 24 in June.
Montero and Mesoraco both began their pro careers at the same time, 2007.
The fact they are still equal in development is more a negative against Montero than Mesoraco.
Age factor is over-stated at times.
Didn't pick up on that, did you?
I’ll try harder next time.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Jan 8, 2012 11:10 PM EST up reply actions
How exactly is that they are still equal in development more a negative against Montero?
At 22, Mescoraco was still in A+/AA ball.They had the same amount of time to develop, but Montero is 1.5 years younger and at the same level as Mesocraco. Then you say it’s more a negative against Montero?? Where do you come up with this stuff?
by Looney4baseball on Jan 9, 2012 9:54 AM EST up reply actions
I would argue
That they didn’t quite have the same amount of time to develop. From age 13-18, Montero was able to play baseball year round because of where he lived. From those same ages, Mesoraco was able to play for about 4 months a year because of where he lived.
Just playing devils advocate here though. I think the age difference is noteworthy, at least for offense.
Of course its meaningful
But then again, so is the huge difference in defensive value. That’s all I’ve been trying to get at.
why does 1 1/2 years of age make
up for 30 runs in positional adjustment and Mesoraco also hitting better? while I think Montero will hit better in the majors, nowhere close to 30 runs better.
Hamilton
How Billy significantly different from guys like Willy Taveras, Freddy Guzman, etc. guys who are wheels-only prospects – who don’t have at least a minimum level of power consistently do not work in the big leagues… I get that he’s a true 80 runner but why do we expect his future to be different than those who’ve proceeded him? BH is exciting but because of the failures of previous, similar prospects, I think the collective prospect-expert community is overrating this one…
-peter
by PeterF on Jan 8, 2012 1:35 PM EST via iPhone app reply actions
Well
if he can turn into a .270/.350/.390 guy or so, he’ll be able to steal enough bases to be an absolute game changer. You keep reading 90 speed instead of 80. I see no reason why he can’t steal 80 bases in the major leagues.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jan 8, 2012 2:14 PM EST up reply actions
except
Guys who hit .270/.350/.390 are exceedingly rare. People always throw out these kinds of ifs with speed guys and it pretty much never happens, because it’s extremely difficult to maintain a .350 OBA if you’re not a great hitter (.270) and have no power (.390). And even if you do, and steal all those bases, you’re pretty much Juan Pierre, who I don’t think anyone would call a game changer.
by jdr on Jan 8, 2012 2:25 PM EST up reply actions
Juan Pierre didn't steal as many bases as Hamilton is capable of
And he would have been much more of a game changer if he could have possibly held down SS.
SS
If Juan Pierre was a SS his numbers would have carried a lot more weight.
For me it all comes down to if Hamilton can stick at SS. If he has to be moved to 2b or CF he loses all his value IMO
A move from SS to 2B or CF only costs 0.5 wins
According to fWAR. So I think it is a bit much to say he loses all of his value if he moves.
by cookiedabookie on Jan 9, 2012 9:00 PM EST up reply actions
One thing I don't get
Billy Hamilton gets a B+ and Gose gets a B. Hamilton is only 1 month younger than Gose, yet has similar issues with the bat while playing two levels lower.
As well, Gose showed better numbers in AA than Hamilton did in A last year aside from the differences in K%:
Hamilton: 135 G, .340 OBP, .082 ISO, .353 wOBA, 120 wRC+, 9.2 Spd, .360 BABIP, 21.8% K%, 8.5% BB%
Gose: 137 G, .349 OBP, .161 ISO, .364 wOBA, 124 wRC+, 8.6 Spd, .332 BABIP, 26.2% K%, 10.6% BB%
The higher K-rate could be explained by a combination of contact issues as well as level difficulty (Age relative to level) and the restrictions the team had on Gose.
Better glove? Gose is considered one of the best defensive CF in the minor leagues, and Hamilton is no slouch with the glove at SS either. Both are very valuable positions, with the edge going to Hamilton on position value. In the end, I think it’s at least draw between the two in that aspect.
I’ll give Hamilton credit, HE’S FAST. I’d say he’s probably the fastest kid in the minor leagues. Even faster than Gose! Though, Gose is probably still in the top 5 (possibly top 3) in the minor leagues where speed is concerned, so I wouldn’t consider it a huge advantage over Gose.
The only huge advantage I see is Hamilton being a switch hitter, while Gose is merely a left-handed hitter.
Overall, I’d actually take Gose over Hamilton. If Gose is a B, then Hamilton should be a B- IMO.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
As well, Gose showed better numbers in AA than Hamilton did in A last year aside from the differences in K% and speed-related stats:
Fixed
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
Yep
Gose has shown a similar skill set to Hamilton but actually has power. When you combine that with Gose outstanding defense he should at least be equal to Hamilton’s grade and likely higher.
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Jan 8, 2012 3:01 PM EST up reply actions
Disagree
I think that you’re not giving enough points to Hamilton for being a well above-average defender at SS. A good defensive SS with Hamilton’s offensive upside is worth a lot more than a great defensive CF even when the CF has a better offensive upside.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
Hamilton's an above average defender at SS?
Why is there talk of him moving to 2B then?
This is what I don't get
Billy Hamilton has the potential to be an ELITE level shortstop. His range is beyond elite. I say this with all seriousness…. he makes plays on baseball’s that very good defensive shortstops only wish they can touch. His range truly is that good.
What I think happens when people bring up him moving to second base is this: Hamilton is still working on his throwing issues. In the first part of the season he would often drop his arm and side arm it/submariner it to first base and it led to a bunch of throwing errors. The staff worked with him on it and while it still happens from time to time, he significantly cut down his error rate in the second half of the year as he improved on that aspect of the game. Another thing is that Hamilton, especially early in the season, wasn’t quite sure mentally on what to do with say, high choppers, whether to charge them or wait on them. That improved as the season went along.
There is a chance he can’t get things to the point where he is an elite level shortstop, but there is also a chance that he can. The tools are there. He doesn’t have elite hands, but they aren’t bad either. He does have the arm and his range, as noted, can be absolutely elite level.
Good to know...figured with his speed the tools were probably there
Still doesn’t really sound like a guy who is currently above-average to me.
No one
In the Midwest League is currently above-average. That is why they are in the Midwest League.
I am not as high on him as a prospect as the national guys are, but I think the backlash seems to be going too far with him at times too.
I mean its one level higher
But Andrelton Simmons is already considered above average defensively.
reminds me of the negativity on
Dee Gordon the last few years. Similar players.
Ray Guilfoyle
www.faketeams.com
www.minorleagueball.com
www.mlbdailydish.com
by Ray Guilfoyle on Jan 9, 2012 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
I agree for the most part
I wasn’t a big fan of Gordon. Still not. I think Hamilton is a slightly better overall athlete with a higher ceiling, but believe that at this point the comparison is very valid.
Hamilton's range is not elite.
And even if you want to argue that it is, what good does it do if you can’t catch or throw the ball?
He’s a 2B in the majors.
His range is absolutely elite
I am not arguing it. I am stating it as a fact.
And while I would agree with you that it doesn’t do you any good if you can’t catch or throw, he can do those things. But like most young shortstops, he needs to improve upon each of those things. He has a .948 fielding percentage in his career. If he couldn’t catch or throw, it certainly wouldn’t be close to that high. He needs some work, but he isn’t Adam Dunn with the glove or Edwin Encarnacion with the arm.
You're opinion.
And you know the saying about those.
How many times have you seen him play?
I have seen him play about 75 times, about 30 in person. His range is elite. Without a shadow of a doubt.
There is a true story about something that happened in spring training this year….. A player hit a fly ball toward left and Hamilton broke back on the ball, then realized the outfielder was calling for help because he lost it. Hamilton turned it into an extra gear….. and caught the ball on the outfield warning track on the fly. That isn’t a myth. It happened. That is the kind of stuff that Hamilton can do. Defensively, he has the potential to be a legit difference maker that doesn’t come around much.
In person or online/tv?
I have to say that you are the first person I have talked to, scout or otherwise, who doesn’t seem to think Hamilton has elite range.
In person
From BA’s 2011 scouting report,
“His quickness gives him plenty of range for either middle-infield position….”
From 2012,
“Hamilton shows excellent range at shortstop…”
Excellent range.
There is a difference between “excellent” and “elite.”
You’re the only person I’ve heard use the word elite to describe his range.
+1
no joke, but Ozzie Smith range.
I’m saying just range, not hands, footwork, arm accuracy, etc.
I watched him extensively last ST in Surprise and he reaches balls that maybe 10 guys (minors included) on the entire planet reach. The pop he ran down from SS that he caught near the LF warning track is of legend at this point
"I watched him extensively last ST in Surprise"
The Reds don’t train in Surprise…
I’m not questioning Hamilton’s range.
I’m questioning his range being described as “elite”
semantics
obviously you don’t live in AZ if you are trying to call me out on the difference between Goodyear, Surprise, Litchfield, or anything else on the westside
As for Hamilton, can question it all you want, that is what this website is for; arguing and debating prospects, but if you’ve seen the guy play you would not question his range
If you would read entire thread..
you would notice where I referenced to seeing Hamilton a half dozen times.
You’re right, it’s opinion.
Semantics?
I live in Surprise, and it’s 47 miles round trip between my house and the press lot in Goodyear.
That’s not semantic difference, that’s actual distance.
re
either you live on the very fringe of Surprise and are treking to the very most southern fringe of Goodyear, or your odometer needs to be checked oldtimer.
Hell, driving from Phx to Case Grande is less than 50 miles.
below is a map that may be of interest to you:
http://www.azstoneveneer.com/greater-phoenix-map-425.gif
I didn’t read your posts directed towards other posters, just read what you wrote to me and it was safe to assume you hadn’t seen him play if you were questioning his range. Arm yes, footwork yes, range = no
His range is beyond elite
Saw him last year working out in the big league camp and he has Ozzie Smith range.
Hands and arm is another story. Ave hands, and he throws 2 seemers to 1B, but the range is as good as anyone you’ve ever seen
I do understand this comment
Everyone says he’s probably the fastest player in baseball, yet you don’t this increases range?
@DavefrmLville.....is fun to follow on twiiter!
by Dave from Louisville on Jan 9, 2012 4:20 PM EST via iPhone app up reply actions
I just think Gose is more likely to make it to the big leagues than Hamilton. Gose played two levels above Hamilton at a similar age (1 month difference), while showing similar or better offensive numbers aside from K% (though, both are above 20%) and the speed stats.
At the very least, both should have equal grades. If I had a choice between the two, however, I’d take Gose over Hamilton. I like Gose’s upside more, even if Hamilton’s is pretty good.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
I like Gose’s chance of reaching his upside more, even if Hamilton’s upside is pretty good.
Fixed.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
I
think it was fine the first time.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jan 8, 2012 5:51 PM EST up reply actions
Hamilton’s defence looks to be positive, but it’s not nearly as strong as Gose’s. Everyone thinks Gose will be an above-average Major League CF, while some (at least) think Hamilton will move over to 2nd. Others clearly see him as a good defensive SS, but there’s nevertheless a lot more defensive uncertainty about Hamilton than Gose.
agree
I’m a Gose supporter and have said he’ll be a left handed version of Chris Young: a GG centerfielder, 20 HR, low ave and plenty of walks.
Overall a very valuable commodity
i think Chris Young
is what you hope Gose can somehow develop into. it’s not even close to a given.
at the same age in AA, Chris Young had a lower strikeout rate and a higher walk rate and a much much higher ISO
best case but
I believe that he will reach that potential.
I have followed him since I saw him at the Compton Academy and he is a completely different player. Back then he was a 5’11", 150 pound slap and dash Juan Pierre type of player. I saw him again this year in the AzFL and he’s now 6’1", 190 pounds with rapidly developing power. I believe the jump from 7 to 16 homers this past year is for real and will continue to translate this year. I’m guessing 20+ homers, but as you say, the ave will probably always remain quite low.
Comping him head to head with Young and there are some similiarities IMO. Gose has better speed (a true 80 while Young is a 65), better arm (again, Gose is an 80 while Young is probably a 50), both are excellent defensively in CF. The power development is what will make or break Gose IMO. He becomes a 20 HR bat and the low ave and high Ks are palatable. He is just a 10 HR guy and he’s a 4th OFer.
I have posted this before, here it is again
If his offensive ceiling is Vince Coleman, which I think is reasonable, than I am okay with a B ranking. Coleman averaged about 2.4 fWAR in his top five seasons. However, he played left field. With a similar slightly below average defense, if Hamilton stays at SS, he will get a 15 run, or 1.5 fWAR boost just from postitional adjustment, putting his ceiling at about a 4 win player. That is pretty good (borderline all-star, only 8 shortstops in majors last year reached 4 fWAR).
Now, if John is more confident he will stay at SS and continue progressing as a hitter into the majors, I can understand him going out on a limb with the B+.
by cookiedabookie on Jan 8, 2012 2:50 PM EST up reply actions
Coleman as a comp
While I can’t necessarily disagree with Coleman being Hamilton’s ceiling, I have a hard time believing that Hamilton will ever be that good. While Coleman was a year older when he played in low A back in 1982 he batted .350 while striking out 16.6% of the time (he also stole 145 bases!). He ended up striking out in 16% of his major league plate appearances while posting a .264/.324/.345 line in 5970 trips to the dish. Considering that Hamilton posted a .278/.340/.360 line while striking out 21.8% of the time does not bode well for his odds of being able to produce at Coleman’s level at the plate.
Hamilton’s true test will come when he gets to AA. If he can post similar numbers in AA then I’ll start believing in him as a SS version of Coleman, but until he does count me off that bandwagon. Because if I had to guess, he’ll strikeout closer to 25% of the time and be completely useless as a regular player because he also does not hit for much power.
Different era but
Vince Coleman was a much more dynamic offensive player in his short prime than those ‘WAR’ #s indicate in my estimation. His lack of power might have been more pronounced these days & teams (by & large) don’t run as much as those St. Louis teams did, but Coleman was a multiple All Star with 2 Top 15 NL MVP finishes in his days with St. Louis. I have trouble attempting to reconcile that Coleman was only worth ‘2 wins more’ than a run of the mill AAA guy in the mid-late 1980s & especially so when applied to the actual teams that he played on before departing for Flushing.
Not seeing that Hamilton has a ton of upside.
If everything goes right for Hamilton, his absolute ceiling could be a slightly below average hitter(with stolen bases included) and an above-average defender at SS. This would make him similar to Andrus last year- a 4.5 WAR. Considering that Hamilton will need to do all of: nearly cutting his K rates in half, improving his defense greatly, and learning to hit the ball on the ground more, the chances are slim that he reaches anywhere near this ceiling. Looking at just one factor – cutting strikeout rate to a large degree while moving up levels- is very difficult.
When compared to many other prospects, especially those with B grades, other prospects would be 5+ WAR players after making the advances in skills Hamilton needs to make to reach his ceiling. For example, Didi Gregorious needs to improve his skills less to become a 5 WAR player and he’s only 7 months older. Combine that with the likelihood that Hamilton is nothing more than a MLB reserve if he moves off SS, and I don’t see him as a B+ prospect. That said, Mr. Sickels knows a lot more about Hamilton than I do and might be basing this grade of info to which I am ignorant.
BTW, stolen base ability is never “game-changing” if by that you mean forcing the other team to change their strategy or using a better throwing catcher or pitcher who gets ball to plate quicker, instead of a strategy or player who is more valuable overall. Look at one of the best seasons ever by a base-stealer- Vince Colemans 1986 season when he stole 107 bases and was only caught 14 times. He added about 1.5 WAR through his stolen base efforts, which is significant but is not an extremely valuable skill. Not sure if it really needs to be said, but I wouldn’t project Hamilton to be capable of that type season.
"He added about 1.5 WAR through his stolen base efforts"
I think WAR can be useful, and I can certainly appreciate it.
But the devil’s advocate response to your assertion above is that perhaps WAR does not know how to properly value 145 steals.
When a statistical indicator DOES NOT support what you think you’ve seen with your own eyes, you need to question the validity of both. Another way of saying it is the old adage that “all models are wrong, but some are useful.”
This is coming from a guy who makes his living in stats, BTW.
Yeah it can be off on steals
The biggest reason being that there are times they’re incredibly valuable because its a high leverage situation. Being able to steal second (and possibly even third) in the ninth inning of a game where it tied or you are down 1 is incredibly valuable. WPA would probably be a better measure for stolen bases.
WAR works. It's more likely that steals are overrated because they are exciting and seem to be helpful in big situations.
Steals can be extremely damaging in big situations too, although those instances are not “remembered” by most people.
The 1986 Cardinals teams that Coleman was on, whose 262 steals were 70 more than any other team, were projected win 76 games based on WAR. The Cardinals won 79 games. Throw in baserunning and WAR is likely right on or even over-predicting the 1986 Cardinal’s record. In this case, it doesn’t appear as if a great stolen base ability was undervalued.
+1
There has been no way IMO to accurately quantify the effects of that type of speed. What it does mentally to the pitcher, catcher. Shifts it causes on defense. Changing of pitch patterns to the next batter. The slowing up of the game and the added pitch counts, pitchouts, pickoffs.
A Vince Coleman/Rickey Henderson type baserunner adds so much that we have not been able to translate in one simple formula
Ryan LaMarre
Did LaMarre not make the top 20 more due to age?
by forloveofthegam3 on Jan 8, 2012 1:35 PM EST reply actions
Battled leg injuries all season
Which could be a reason the power was down….. but I am with you, if his power doesn’t improve quite a bit, I am not sold on him being a starter.
Personally
I’d grade Mesoraco and d’Arnaud the same – A-. I just think they’re close with both the bat and glove.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
Agreed on this
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Jan 8, 2012 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
Small changes I would have
Sulbaran to a B-, Stephenson to a B-, Hamilton to a B, Mesoraco to an A.
Sulbaran to a B-
That’s my feeling too. He’ll be in Double-A at 22, has a sound delivery and starter’s build, a history of above avg strikeout rates supported by stuff. His 2011 numbers look even better when you realize he was a 21-year-old pitching in the Cali League.
Cingrani, FWIW, has an incredible hook when his arm is extended in the back. It’s not as noticeable on video of mediocre quality or that doesn’t feature front and side angles. It didn’t seem to affect his command this season, but it’s pretty exaggerated, and worth monitoring as he faces more advanced competition.
by charles wallace on Jan 8, 2012 4:56 PM EST up reply actions
Everything else
about Cingrani’s delivery looks pretty sound, so maybe it doesn’t end up hurting him too much. I’m trying to think of a major league starter I’ve seen with that pronounced a hook. Eovaldi, a recent prospect known for a hook, is nowhere close to as extreme for instance.
by charles wallace on Jan 8, 2012 8:04 PM EST up reply actions
grades
I will also point out again that the last step in this whole process is to do the top 50/50 list and make adjustments so that guys slot properly where I want them.
I can’t worry about that until the body of the book is done. Then I make sure it all fits. It is like a giant puzzle but I skip steps, things get messed up.
I can't imagine how tough it is to get all this stuff together
Even if we disagree, we really do respect what you’re doing here.
+1
Adoptive father of 18th round draft pick and future ace, BRANDON ALLEN
by Nnamdi Asomugha on Jan 8, 2012 9:58 PM EST up reply actions
Amir Garrett
I’m really interested to see how he performs this year.
To Nitpick
If Amir’s ceiling is that high, how can he be a C?
Amir
telling about his attitude and desire towards baseball:
a basketball signee for St Johns, the kid couldn’t qualify academically. Most would think that if he was actually serious about baseball he’d take this as a sign and now devote all his energies towards baseball. Nope, he’s at a prep school and baseball is on the back burner for a sport he could potentially never qualify for academically.
This tells me where baseball is on the priority list. If I were the Reds I’d tell him to f-ck off at this point
Garrett is at St Johns right now
And playing. I saw him play this past weekend when they were here in Cincinnati.
Billy Hamilton
I think an excellent research article would be to research the difference between a Juan Pierre and Michael Bourn type player (ie. speed only guys who have gone on to have successful careers) vs. jason tyner type players who never even cracked a starting job. Was there something in the stat lines of these players that pointed to them being able to make it, or is it mostly just on a scouting level where the difference can be seen.
Hamilton looks way too high. The B+ puts him ahead of Segura, who, at the same level, produced much much more.
RIP Nick Adenhart
by miketrout on Jan 8, 2012 3:00 PM EST via mobile reply actions
These grades take ultimate ceiling into account as well, I assume. And it can be argued that Hamilton’s ceiling is considerably higher than Segura’s.
The bird is struggling out of the egg. The egg is the world. Whoever wants to be born, must first destroy a world.
by Stupendous Man on Jan 8, 2012 3:11 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I would disagree with that statement
If you think Hamilton’s ceiling is “significantly higher” than Segura’s ceiling, then you are underrating Segura’s ceiling. I can understand the injury concerns with Segura and using that as an argument to rate Hamilton higher, but one based on ceiling is inaccurate IMO.
How I see it, Segura will likely hit for a much better average with substantially power, while being a better fielder. He will likely also be able to put up 30+ steals annually reasonably.
All of this, combined with the fact that Segura has less of a chance to flame out since he is more complete now, makes me think that he deserves the higher grade.
RIP Nick Adenhart
OT
Stalin Gerson? Seriously, what were his parents thinking?
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
gerson
Gerson is a more or less generic RHP with a decent arm. He may or may not develop into a useful middle relief type.
But i HAD to write about him.
no
I know the name Vladimir gets used in Latin America more than you might think due to Cuban influence (Lenin), but I don’t know how Gerson got the name Stalin.
Probably some reasonable answer as to why..
… his parents Imelda and Saloth would name him after a dictator.
by slacker george on Jan 9, 2012 8:21 AM EST up reply actions
Cherry Hill time machine
Former Boston College DL Stalin Colinet was rolling with that name in the mid-1990s. I believe of at least some Caribbean heritage (DR?). Very good collegiate lineman & an NFL draftee (Minnesota).
Stalin Gerson was signed by the Reds out of the Dominican Republic in 2007. He hasn’t received much attention yet, being overshadowed by more prominent prospects in the Red organization. Yet Stalin is gradually improving his game, and could easily come out of the shadows and surprise people when they least expect it. He has a low-90s fastball and a good changeup, but his breaking ball needs work for him to thrive at higher levels. He is vulnerable to home runs at times, not showing sufficient caution with pitches high in the strike zone. At age 23 he is a bit old for a player who has yet to fully establish himself in A-ball. This defect is more tolerable for pitchers than for hitters, but it is not a negligible detail. Grade C.
by John Sickels on Jan 8, 2012 4:05 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
true, but
There is a little more to it than that…
The comment contains some direct phrases from Lenin’s Testament where he advised the Bolsheviks to remove Stalin from the position of General Secretary.
Lenin thought Stalin needed to improve his secondary offerings?
Personally, I think Stalin had other, more glaring shortcomings.
yeah
Yeah Lenin was concerned that Stalin’s changeup wasn’t good enough to stand up to Trotsky’s plate discipline.
Stalin’s screwball certainly doesn’t help him in the long run.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
makeup
I think the bigger issue is Stalin’s makeup. He’s got a great work ethic and works hard on the field, but he tends to alienate the clubhouse.
You'd be a brave umpire
to call ball four though.
Hahaha
How we know your almost done with the top 20 list. Off topic You seem less stressed with deadlines this year. Good to see.
"I couldn't do that. Could you do that? Why can they do it? Who are those guys?"
+1 on the work ethic
I hear he watches tons of video, and keeps a file on just everyone in the league.
Drew Cisco
I wish he hadn’t blown out his elbow. I really liked him coming out of high school.
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain
sorry
about that what I was going to say was. Im really not a fan of Hamilton because he’s really fast, but he can’t hit
He has only been a switch hitter for 2 years.
Personally i think he will be blocked and dealt.
by Eastwindquinn on Jan 9, 2012 12:28 PM EST up reply actions
Hamilton
I think it should noted that Hamilton is still learning to switch hit, which makes him even more badass. Probably 3 yrs from the majors, but that’s okay.
If he learns to hit decently from the left side he will be that much close to 1st.
@DavefrmLville.....is fun to follow on twiiter!
by Dave from Louisville on Jan 9, 2012 4:33 PM EST via iPhone app reply actions
Hey John...
Someone mentioned Yankees and you’re up to 238 comments in this thread… half about Montero…
It does work!
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Jan 10, 2012 2:58 AM EST reply actions
that's the great thing
There’s this huge argument about Cano, which starts from something someone said about Montero, and Montero isn’t even on the Reds himself.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Jan 10, 2012 7:53 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah,
and that lasted all of four comments. lol
Cancer comes to mind.
by charles wallace on Jan 10, 2012 9:20 PM EST up reply actions
Don't hate...talking bad about the Yanks ups John's page views
Though honestly that had nothing to do with why I got in the argument. I just have trouble walking away from certain argumentative styles…
"I just have trouble walking away from certain argumentative styles…"
Abundantly clear, mon frere. It’s a pathology at this point. ;)
And not to imply that you’re a cancer. I was referring to the growth of the sub-thread and the way it killed the host.
by charles wallace on Jan 11, 2012 2:16 PM EST up reply actions
Outside that sub-thread it was a normal number of comments for these posts
Doubt it had too much of an effect of killing any other conversations
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.
