Chuck Lofgren gets the same grade as Adam Miller? Not hardly.

The book will ship the last few days of January or the first couple days of February depending on when it comes back from the printer.

Is a surprise at # 4. I would think Drennen & Crowe would be reversed, as Drennen has had little time to prove himself and was good not great at low A. What do you see in him that merits the ranking? (I really know little about him).

Max Ramirez -- down a tick, his glove is apparently brutal, so to me he looks like he might stick as a mediocre DH. I don't think that warrants a B-.

Sipp and Crowe -- both up a notch to B. Sipp maybe even B+. He has dominated at every level, and really does have power stuff. The kid will be in the Cleveland bullpen in 2007. Crowe had figured out AA before the ankle injury slowed him in August. I think he'll show more power than you think.

Drennen hasn't done enough yet to warrant a B so I'd take him down to B- or C+ just to be conservative. Snyder simply isn't showing enough power for me to overlook the massive amout of Ks, so I'd knock him down to C+. Do you really think he'll make contact in the majors?

I also think JD Martin should be in that top 20, at least ahead of Jensen Lewis. Martin is only a year older and he'd already mastered AA (IMO) before the TJ surgery. And it'll be 18 months since the surgery when ST rolls around.

I'm starting to sound like indiansfan so I'll shut up now.

John, I know Marte moved up, but just out of curiosity, where would he rank amongst this group?  Would he still be a top prospect, or has his slide from favor in the prospect community bumped him down the order?

Guys, these are all good questions. But I'm working 12-14 hour days trying to get the book done and I have to concentrate on that right now.

Is he still with the Indians' organization?  I saw he looked to have a nice run in Hawaii and made their All-Star team.  If he is still with the Indains is he getting too old to be considered a prospect?  Otherwise, how close was he to making the list?

I'm shocked that Crowe is rated as low as he is on here.  Every other list I've seen has had him top 3.  Also, big kudos for going outside the box in the lower half, IMO.  You have a lot of players in there that project as major leaguers in a middle relief role (Mastny, Perez, Mujica).  However, I'd switch a few things up.  I was completely off the Snyder bandwagon, then the end of the year gave me just enough hope for him.  His numbers got dramatically better when they put him up in the 1/2 area of the lineup.  I think the grade on him might be too high though.  I'd put Crowe at B and Snyder at B-.  I also think I'd switch Martin and Slocum.  Slocum hasn't really impressed me yet.  He's getting decent results, but he's a lot like a RH Brian Tallet to me.  He gets decent numbers, but I can't figure out how when I watch him.  Martin has had more dominant numbers, when he's been able to stay healthy.  If he stays healthy, I think he projects as more than a swing starter, like Slocum tops out at in my mind.  Thanks for the Tribe list, John.  

Hello everyone,

I've been away for a bit - nice to be back, and on the day when the Indians are discussed!  :-)

Regarding Lofgren, at first, I was thinking a #1 starter, but over the last 1-1.5 years, I'm thinking more of a #2.  He has made improvements in his command, but still has a bit more work repeating his delivery and developing that third pitch.  Plus, his velocity ranges from 89-96 (at times,) so he takes some off, puts some on, etc., which would indicate to me that's he probably a #2, or a very good #3 at worst (presuming he develops of course, a sizable IF with virtually all pitchers.)

Other thoughts:

Crowe - keep an eye on him - his AA numbers may be below Ellsbury, but keep in mind that the 2B position change may have had something to do with that.  I actually did an analysis of when Crowe only played in the OF, compared to 2B:

From 7-7 to 8-21-06 (period when Crowe arrived at AA to his first game played at 2B):

20 of 57 = .351

From 8-8 to 8-21-06 (period when Crowe returned from his ankle injury to his first game played at 2B):

9 of 28 = .321

After 8-21-06 (when he started playing at 2B):

4 of 33 = .121

Granted, these are all small sample sizes, but I find it a bit hard to believe that it was just a coincidence that Crowe's AA numbers dropped off that much and his playing at 2B didn't have something to do with it.

And while relying on AFL numbers isn't the greatest indicator either, Crowe finished with a line of .329/.449/.405 (26 H in 79 ABs) compared to Ellsbury's .276/.342/.371 (29 H in 105 ABs.)  Plus, Crowe's BB/K ratio was 18/10; Ellsbury's was 8/16.  And, Crowe, not Ellsbury, was named as part of the 2006 AFL's All-Prospects Team.

Personally, I don't think Crowe will need much more time at AA, and probably will mostly return there because the AAA Buffalo OF will be stacked, especially since it sounds like Brad Snyder is going there (even though I don't think he'll handle AAA that well - his K rate improved less than 1% from 2005 - from 30.9% of his ABs in 2005 to 30.2% of his ABs in 2006 - that merits a promotion to AAA?!  Not in my opinion it doesn't.  Crowe likely would handle AAA better than Snyder likely will.  Plus, Snyder's SLG dropped considerably from 2005 to 2006, .539 to .446.)

Therefore, I think the grades of Ellsbury and Crowe should be much closer, especially when you consider that Crowe is actually 2 months younger than Ellsbury.  I could see both of them being Bs, but I don't see Ellsbury being superior to Crowe.  Even defensively, Crowe is only going to LF because of Sizemore's presence, even though I believe Crowe has the stronger arm and is considered pretty good in CF (I'd personally shift Sizemore to LF - his offense should handle a corner spot nicely as well.)  So, while Ellsbury might be a great defender, Crowe is no slouch either when it comes to defense.

Keep in mind as well that the reason Ellsbury was selected to play CF over Crowe in the AFL was because Ellsbury was Boston's premier prospect (or something like this) - that's why he got priority over Crowe, not necessarily because he is a better defender than Crowe.  Also, being that the Indians are planning on keeping Sizemore in CF for now, they probably were amenable to the move, feeling that Crowe will be their future LFer long-term because it seems they don't want to move Sizemore to LF, even though his arm is only average.  

Regarding Barton, I think defensively, could be similar to Cameron (plus arm, good range, can play all 3 OF positions,) but at this point, I think he could hit for a consistently higher BA.  When he was at High-A Kinston, some remarked about his resemblance to Dave Winfield, look-wise, though one scout made a joke about him only looking it in the face, not the rest of his body or in his skill-set.  Well, he probably doesn't have Winfield's power, but Barton has a nice skill-set, and being that he is a college draftee and went to a very solid program at the Univ. of Miami (FL,) I don't think his older-than-ideal age is a huge deterrent at this point, especially if he keeps advancing like he has.  

Regarding Head, others have mentioned about his odd peripherals - many of his peripherals (like BABIP) suggest he should have hit for a higher BA than he did.  His other peripherals, like his BB/K ratio, are solid.  Also, I read that the Kinston Indians worked with him on his swing and he became less pull-conscious towards the last 4-6 weeks of the season (I know this from checking the game logs each night) and he finished the season on a hot streak (over .300,) plus hit over .300 in the Carolina League playoffs, so I'll be curious to see whether he can continue that in 2007.  I don't know if the Indians plan on moving him to AA Akron right away, but being that Aubrey is virtually a non-factor at this point, (for me at least,) I think the door could be open for Head at AA in early 2007 if the Indians feel it was more bad luck than lack of actual skill on why his BA was so low at High-A Kinston in 2006.  I think he's another one to keep an eye on, as he could bounce back onto the prospect list next year if his improvement at the end of last year is for real.

In case I'm not back before Christmas (though I'll try,) Happy Holidays to everyone and have a happy, safe, and prosperous 2007!  :-)

Hello everyone,

I meant to comment on this before:  I can't believe that Boston would ask for Carmona, Crowe, AND Miller for Ramirez, who is no longer in the prime of his career (age-wise at least, if not his skillset slightly declining.)  And then, to ask Cleveland to pay the rest of Manny's contract?!  Theo had to know Shapiro would say NO!

I would be hesitant even if it is was for the Manny who played in Cleveland - that is a very high price for any player, but for the Manny who plays for Boston, with periods of offensive inconsistency, as well as no defense, and the Indians already have a very good hitter who fills the DH role and can't play on the field due to a bad elbow, so Manny would have to play the OF, that is a definite NO in my book!  I'm glad Shapiro had the same view I did.  

After all, the Indians' real problems last year were more due to the bullpen, not the offense, even with an off-year by Peralta, growing pains with Marte, and inconsistency from some other players at times, so trading for Manny was not the right move for the Indians in my opinion, especially at that price!

Just my 2 cents!  :-)

Take care and have a great day!

Hello everyone,

jaguar2490 - that trade is more appropriate in value (presuming Cleveland pays Manny's contract,) but because of Manny's age, and in my opinion, his being a bit more prone to slumps than earlier in his career, I still wouldn't make the deal.  Plus, Cleveland's main problem isn't offense, and I think if Cleveland could improve in one area offensively, it would be having a real top-of-the-order threat that can be a base-stealing threat, which I think Crowe can fill.

Others may disagree with me on that - if Manny was still in his prime, I'd consider that deal more strongly, but being Manny is in his mid-30s now, and likely will start to decline at some point (just a question of when,) I'd pass on the deal.  Nice deal proposal, though - much more realistical than what the Red Sox were proposing.  :-)

JimBeau - Austin Creps is also known as "Daniel A. Creps" and was drafted in the 6th Round of the 2006 MLB Player Draft out of Texas A&M University.  He is a RHP.  The Baseball Cube does not show any stats for him, and I don't recall his name in any Minor League box scores, so I don't think he played in the Indians' system last year.

In his three years at Texas A&M, he had a combined record of 7-5 with a 3.89 ERA; however, he was a reliever his first year and part of his second year (he made 11 appearances, 7 starts, in 2005.)  

As a full-time starter in 2006, he was 3-4 with a 2.20 ERA, giving up 64 H in 69 IP, 2 HR, 13 BB, 51 K.  Averaging only 6-7 K as a starter in college, my guess is, he's probably more of a mid-rotation starter, but still a solid prospect.  John would have to explain more on why he chose him as one of the "Others of Note."

Take care everyone, have a Happy Holiday season, and a happy, safe, and prosperous 2007!