The Elite Prospects: 2003 through 2006
by John Sickels on Feb 6, 2026 3:40 PM EST
Email
Print
Last week, I looked at the Top 30 Position Players in 2011 (according to Fangraphs WAR) and how they were rated as prospects. Today I'm doing something slightly different, and looking at all prospects that I rated Grade A or A- between 2003 and 2006.
I'm not doing earlier years because the way I rated players in the old STATS Minor League Scouting Notebooks was slightly different than the way I do it in the Baseball Prospect Book. I'm not looking at years past 2006 because I want to look at guys who are firmly established. I am not looking at players who had lower ratings than Grade A- because I want to keep the focus manageable and looking just at the super-elite, top 20 type guys. Keep in mind that there is often not a lot of difference between a Grade B+ and a Grade A-.
First, here is how I define Grade A/A- prospects in my book:
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 A or A- Hitters, 2003 through 2006. The year the player was an A or A- is in parentheses. Players are listed alphabetically.
Erick Aybar (2005): 629 games, 2376 PA, Peak WAR: 4.0, Total WAR: 10.0. He developed into a regular.
Daric Barton (2005, 2006): 438 games, 1765 PA, Peak WAR 5.1, Total WAR 7.2. Has seen regular playing time, had one excellent year so far.
Miguel Cabrera (2003): 1351 games, 5777 PA, Peak WAR 7.3, Total WAR 43.7. Developed into a superstar.
Hee Seop Choi (2003): 363 games, 1086 PA, Peak WAR 1.4, Total WAR 3.1. One of the more famous "busts" of the last decade, career sabotaged for a variety of reasons, but when he played he was a decent hitter, according to the numbers anyway.
Jeff Clement (2006): 129 games, 397 PA, Peak WAR 0.3, Total WAR -0.2. Massive bust. Value took a nosedive after he moved off catcher.
Bobby Crosby (2004): 747 games, 2846 PA, Peak WAR 3.7, Total WAR: 7.2. Career got off to a very good start, a star in the making, but he fell apart. I don't regard this one as a failure for the grading scheme.
Mike Cuddyer (2003): 1139 games, 4555 PA, Peak WAR 3.1, Total WAR 14.6. Developed into a solid long-term regular.
Stephen Drew (2006): 733 games, 3090 PA, Peak WAR 5.1, Total WAR 12.0. Excellent peak, a regular but erratic.
Prince Fielder (2004, 2005, 2006): 998 games, 4210 PA, Peak WAR 6.4, Total War 23.4. Developed into a superstar.
Adrian Gonzalez (2003): 1017 games, 4346 PA, Peak WAR 6.6, Total WAR 27.5. Developed into a superstar.
Alex Gordon (2006): 559 games, 2332 PA, Peak WAR 5.3, Total WAR 11.8. It took a bit of time but he verified.
Joel Guzman (2005, 2006): 24 games, 62 PA, -0.1 WAR. Turned into minor league slugger. Tools bust with contact issues, and perhaps he wasn't as young as everyone thought.
Travis Hafner (2003): 1035 games, 4220 PA, Peak WAR 6.0, Total WAR 21.4. Verified.
Scott Hairston (2003): 643 games, 2001 PA, Peak WAR 2.2, Total WAR 5.2. Became a role player, disappointing.
Jeremy Hermida (2005): 619 games, 2234 PA, Peak WAR 2.5, Total WAR 2.7. A strange case. Did he just peak early?
Conor Jackson (2006): 658 games, 2485 PA, Peak WAR 3.2, Total WAR 4.3. Looked good until injuries intervened.
Howie Kendrick (2006): 655 games, 2638 PA, Peak WAR 5.8, Total WAR 15.1. Played like a star last year. Verified.
Casey Kotchman (2003, 2004, 2005): 791 games, 2891 PA, Peak WAR 2.9, Total WAR 5.3. Didn't live up to expectations, but he's had good moments and playing time as a regular.
Jason Kubel (2005): 753 games, 2846 PA, Peak WAR 2.7, Total WAR 3.9. Doesn't look too hot with WAR, but he can hit and has held a regular job when healthy.
Nick Markakis (2006): 946 games, 4085 PA, Peak WAR 6.3, Total WAR 20.1. A very solid long-term regular and an underrated player.
Andy Marte (2004, 2005, 2006): 302 games, 924 PA, Peak WAR 0.4, Total WAR -2.0. A gigantic bust. Age-relative-to-league didn't pan out with this one, and maybe there is a reason.
Victor Martinez (2003): 1149 games, 4819 PA, Peak WAR 5.4, Total WAR 29.0. A star. Verified.
Jeff Mathis (2004): 426 games, 1360 PA, Peak WAR 0.2, Total WAR -1.8. There was a brief moment in time when I thought he would develop as a hitter. At least I gave up sooner than the Angels did.
Joe Mauer (2003, 2004): 918 games, 3911 PA, Peak WAR 7.9, Total WAR 35.7. Superstar.
Dallas McPherson (2005): 139 games, 414 PA, Peak WAR 0.6, Total WAR 1.3. Undone by injuries and too many strikeouts, but he's actually been slightly above average in his limited playing time.
Lastings Milledge (2006): 433 games, 1659 PA, Peak WAR 0.6, Total WAR 1.1. Great tools, but hasn't developed them.
Justin Morneau (2003, 2004): 1017 games, 4237 PA, Peak WAR 5.1, Total WAR 20.5. Excellent when healthy.
Chris Nelson (2005): 80 games, 216 PA, Peak WAR -0.3, Total WAR -0.6. Lots of injuries here. Wants to be Brandon Phillips when he grows up, but that's a huge longshot at this point.
Brandon Phillips (2003): 1041 games, 4366 PA, Peak WAR 6.0, Total WAR 23.0. Looked like a bust at first, but blossomed into a star.
Carlos Quentin (2005, 2006): 616 games, 2432 PA, Peak WAR 4.8, Total WAR 8.0. One really good year, has held a job, effective when healthy.
Hanley Ramirez (2005): 852 games, 3757 PA, Peak WAR 7.5, Total WAR 31.1. Excellent player.
Jeremy Reed (2004, 2005): 483 games, 1376 PA, Peak WAR 2.5, Total WAR 2.3. An old lesson: don't be seduced by pretty batting averages. He did have one decent year according to WAR.
Jose Reyes (2003): 1050 games, 4840 PA, Peak WAR 6.4, Total WAR 33.4. Excellent.
Jarrod Saltalamacchia (2006): 353 games, 1285 PA, Peak WAR 2.5, Total WAR 2.9. Lots of injuries. He was good last year and this one could yet verify as a long-term regular.
Grady Sizemore (2004): 892 games, 4047 PA, Peak WAR 8.0, Total WAR 30.2. An excellent player for awhile.
Ian Stewart (2005, 2006): 432 games, 1418 PA, Peak WAR 1.5, Total WAR 3.3. Disappointing so far, but this one could still verify, and he'll stick around awhile.
Jason Stokes (2003): Never reached majors. Career over at age 26 due to injuries.
Mark Teixeira (2003): 1374 games, 6034 PA, Peak WAR 7.4, Total WAR 39.7. Verified as a superstar slugger.
Rickie Weeks (2004, 2005): 760 games, 3338 PA, Peak WAR 6.5, Total WAR 18.6. Injury issues, but verified as a very productive regular.
Brandon Wood (2006): 272 games, 751 PA, Peak WAR 0.1, Total WAR -2.6. Handled poorly, but ultimately undone by severe contact problems.
David Wright (2004): 1106 games, 4783 PA, Peak WAR 8.9, Total WAR 39.3. Verified as an excellent player.
B.J. Upton (2004): 820 games, 3430 PA, Peak WAR 5.0, Total WAR 19.8. Very effective.
Justin Upton (2006): 581 games, 2402 PA, Peak WAR 6.4, Total WAR 14.6. Excellent.
Chris Young (2006): 784 games, 3225 PA, Peak WAR 4.6, Total WAR 13.5: Solid regular.
Delmon Young (2005, 2006): 729 games, 2967 PA, Peak WAR 1.8, Total WAR 1.6. WAR hates him due to butchery defense but I can't say I see him as a bust.
Ryan Zimmerman (2006): 845 games, 3669 PA, Peak WAR 7.3, Total WAR 30.2. Verified as an excellent player.
For me, I consider it a success and a verified grade if a Grade A or A- turns into a superstar, star, or long-term regular.
The successes are obvious, but I think we learn more from our failures. If a guy sees his career ruined by injuries, but demonstrated regular-caliber skills when healthy, I don't see that as a failure for the grading system.
What do the busts have in common, and what can we learn from them?
We will look at the pitchers tomorrow then try to draw some conclusions.
80 comments
|
Add comment
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Joel Guzman
What’s the back-story on Guzman?
by wanderinredsfan on Feb 6, 2026 4:34 PM EST reply actions
All projection
He was a pretty big bust his first two years as a pro but then had a very good year in 2004 between A+/AA while he was only 19. His impressive size (6’4") and raw power from the SS position had everyone drooling, but he never got over his contact problems and eventually had to be moved to 1B/3B. Much of his hype was due to his position and age relative to level, but the contact problems should’ve been a bigger red flag and it seemed from the beginning that he wouldn’t stick at SS.
by overkill94DT on Feb 8, 2026 2:47 PM EST up reply actions
I like WAR
but it’s defensive components can be pretty bad. Not sure it’s a perfect stat for this.
by Gunnarthor on Feb 6, 2026 4:40 PM EST reply actions
No stat is a perfect stat for anything
And it’s better than just ignoring defensive value.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
by Brickhaus on Feb 6, 2026 5:04 PM EST up reply actions
Not sure
If it’s defensive value is actually wrong, it might be better to ignore it. Catcher WAR comes up a lot in that discussion (Joe Mauer might be a lot better than fWAR gives him credit for). bWAR thinks Ryan Zimmerman’s defense isn’t anything special, fWAR disagrees. I’m not trying to get in a WAR discussion but why use one stat that we know has limitations, esp in a review like this? Ignoring the problems with WAR could lead to forgetting about them, esp with its defensive values.
by Gunnarthor on Feb 6, 2026 5:27 PM EST up reply actions
WAR is probably the best overall stat, that's why.
It does an excellent job of predicting win totals. Which is obviously the most important thing to consider when evaluating players. The only stats that evaluate better are variations of WAR and the improvement in evaluation is microscopic and debatable.
Is there a stat you would prefer?
Or alternatively, we could list a whole bunch of stats. That’s the point of WAR though, to give you a quick and accurate glimpse method of evaluating a large number of complex variables…The best way to deal with the 2-3 sample size needed for WAR defense is to regress defense values to the mean. This is especially important when dealing with extreme defense values, as its unlikely that, at least for most players, that players are historically horrible or great defensively within a particular season.
by silverbook1 on Feb 6, 2026 7:51 PM EST up reply actions
Sample sizes are big enough and even then, it shouldn’t make a huge impact on the outcome.
by Sniderlover on Feb 6, 2026 5:59 PM EST up reply actions
For something like this
It’s probably fine (as it provides a flat number to apply to a cursory list), but I agree with your larger point I think. For something that is supposed to (borrowing from below) provide a ‘quick and accurate glimpse method of evaluating a large number of complex variables’, it misses the boat far too often when reconciled with what you’re actually seeing.
by Matt0330 on Feb 7, 2026 9:17 AM EST up reply actions
Of course...
What “you’re actually seeing” is prone to human error and cognitive biases, so the error may be the other way around just as frequently.
Now writing for BaseballInstinct.com
by Franchise887 on Feb 7, 2026 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
No doubt, but that wasn't the point
I think WAR or any other statistic is far from all encompassing & people who overly rely on it tend to lend it carte blanche almost even in the face of common sense & even when supposedly being cognizant of its ample flaws. When there is disconnect, in my opinion, somebody shouldn’t necessarily say ‘Oh, but I saw it this way’ or ‘WAR tells me x, so x has to be true’ (Sideshow Bob-esque shudder), but rather look further into other arenas that might better shed light on whatever player, team or facet of baseball said somebody wants to learn more about. I’ll bow out now so as to not further upset the acolytes.
by Matt0330 on Feb 7, 2026 2:56 PM EST up reply actions
Just a quick list
of guys who have generated less than 6 WAR:
Hee Seep Choi, Jeff Clement, Joel Guzman, Scott Hairston, Jeremy Hermida, Conor Jackson, Casey Kotchman, Jason Kubel, Andy Marte, Jeff Mathis, Dallas McPherson, Lastings Milledge, Chris Nelson, Jeremy Reed, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Ian Stewart, Jason Stokes, Brandon Wood, and Delmon Young
by blue bulldog on Feb 6, 2026 5:17 PM EST reply actions
Hm...
so the way I think about it, based on historical BA data, Top 25 hitting prospects (A/A- prospects) should generate at least $25 million in surplus value. Since back then, WAR was worth around $4 million per WAR, that’s 6 WAR in surplus. If you use a 40-60-80 model of Arb 1-Arb 2-Arb 3, then that basically means the breakeven point for a prospect is 9 WAR in their cost-controlled years.
So I guess we should add Daric Barton, Bobby Crosby, and Carlos Quentin to the list above (though Quentin is almost a near guarantee in my opinion to break the 9 WAR threshold this upcoming season).
I guess the way I think about it is, BA is essentially an off-the-counter ranking system. So in order to improve on that system, we’ve got to find ways to identify and remove guys who are lower than the 9 WAR threshold from the Top 25 hitters list, and substitute them with guys further down the list who can generate more than 9 WAR.
Honestly though, i think it’ll be incredibly difficult. For instance, I think it’s pretty much impossible to remove a guy like Conor Jackson, who looked like he had a high chance to hit that 9 WAR threshold, then contracted valley fever, and was never the same. Most injury risks for hitters are just going to be something that is a sunk risk for every ranking system.
Just quickly looking up some of the names, I think ARL awareness helps in eliminating some prospects (and maybe helps in promoting others further on the list), as well as maybe being more wary of PCL performances.
by blue bulldog on Feb 6, 2026 5:39 PM EST up reply actions
well
I hate trying to “quantify” things like saying “$25 million in surplus value.” I don’t even know what that means.
I want to know why the guys who didn’t pan out didn’t pan out. Looking at some possible “buckets” to put them in….and some guys fit into more than one bucket:
Let’s see we have the:
GOT HURT BUCKET
BAD PLATE DISCIPLINE BUCKET
HANDLED POORLY BY TEAM BUCKET
by John Sickels on Feb 6, 2026 6:04 PM EST up reply actions
this is why it's so difficult haha
the “Got Hurt” and “Handled Poorly by Team” buckets aren’t all that predictable. and in the case of “Handled Poorly by Team” bucket, i’m not even sure if anyone really takes that into consideration when they rank prospects
the “Bad Plate Discipline” bucket has some potential i think, when it comes to maybe overvaluing certain prospects that show great tools/results but don’t have great plate discipline to back it up. just curious, but when you refer to plate discipline, are you speaking of BB tendencies, or also K tendencies? or do you usually think about strikeouts as a contact, as opposed to plate discipline, issue?
by blue bulldog on Feb 6, 2026 7:26 PM EST up reply actions
"plate discipline"
Well, when i say “plate discipline,” I’m actually talking about two different things: discerning the strike zone, and making contact. This is something that I used to conflate in my mind and that still comes out in venacular speech, but in my actual analysis I’ve been looking at the two things seperately for many years now.
Statistically, this will show up in the BB/K/PA ratio. Note that it is not necessary to draw a huge number of walks to have an idea of the strike zone, although it certainly doesn’t hurt.
There are different flavors here. Ideally, you want someone with a high walk/low strikeout combo, but those are rare. You also have high walk/high strikeout, low walk/low strikeout, and low walk/high strikeouts.
Low walk/high strikeout types seem like the riskiest type to me.
by John Sickels on Feb 6, 2026 8:53 PM EST up reply actions
I have an extremely similar way of viewing plate discipline...
K:BB:PA is the first thing I check because plate discipline is a must. There’s very few low BB/high K guys I like unless he’s got other skills (base stealing, defense, power, BA, something). A good example of a high K/low BB guy I like is Junior Lake on the Cubs because he’s a good base runner, hits for decent average, and has some power to go along with the raw athleticism and tools.
That said, I usually trash guys like this going back to Francouer as a prospect. Lake might just get the benefit of me still thinking I’m a Cubs fan.
I like these look backs recently Mr. Sickels.
by SenorGato on Feb 6, 2026 10:56 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Can't forget the most important bucket
Whats between the ears bucket. Talent only takes these guys so far. What really counts is how they respond to not being the best hitter/pitcher on the field. It happens to everyone some day.
by huztler on Feb 6, 2026 11:14 PM EST up reply actions
+1
And that is really difficult to predict/project.
by John Sickels on Feb 7, 2026 12:54 AM EST up reply actions
The crazy thing about "handled poorly by team"
is that those are the exact prospects that were graded very highly in most instances. I doubt there were that many potential major league stars who were graded B and were then handled so poorly by their teams that they didn’t develop properly. B prospects who are destined to become MLB stars force their teams’ hands by great play. A prospects get rushed up (read handled poorly) exactly because they have so much talent that you have to grade them A.
There is no way to get rid of this group from the A list unless one or two teams consistently shows that they are doing this to their guys.
John 3:16
"If they want to pay me like Mike Gallego, I’ll play like Gallego." - Rickey Henderson
by A'sFanDFW on Feb 8, 2026 5:08 PM EST up reply actions
categorizing failures
CHOI: Didn’t live up to expectations, but he was also handled poorly and under different circumstances could have had a produtive career
CLEMENT: Handled poorly, injuries, couldn’t catch, contact/discipline issues
by John Sickels on Feb 6, 2026 6:08 PM EST up reply actions
GUZMAN: Too many strikeouts, discipline never improved, may not have been as young as officially listed
by John Sickels on Feb 6, 2026 6:08 PM EST up reply actions
Guzman
I’ve never heard that about him before…..interesting. Plus, did he really have a position?
Ray Guilfoyle
www.faketeams.com
www.minorleagueball.com
www.mlbdailydish.com
by Ray Guilfoyle on Feb 7, 2026 7:59 AM EST up reply actions
You shouldn't look at cost controlled years
If you are evaluating prospects. That is only relevant from a team perspective.
by auclairkeithbc on Feb 6, 2026 8:12 PM EST up reply actions
I mean
Of course those years count, and for a lot of these guys that is all the data we have so far, but the rest of their careers count as well.
by auclairkeithbc on Feb 6, 2026 8:13 PM EST up reply actions
right
We don’t know if Stewart is a true bust yet.
We don’t even know about Delmon.
by John Sickels on Feb 6, 2026 8:54 PM EST up reply actions
i know most ppl
care about careers
but to be honest, i don’t really care about that when i’m looking at prospects. i always think about prospects from a “how does he help his team” standpoint, whether that’s a direct benefit through actual on-field production, or indirect benefit through value as a trade chip. so the cost-controlled years matter a lot for me.
especially since after the cost-controlled years, the guy is a free agent, which means that you’re most likely getting little surplus value over market prices. i care about the years when a prospect is generating value over his price.
by blue bulldog on Feb 7, 2026 12:29 AM EST up reply actions
One could actually say the opposite...
Cost controlled years are a team’s number one concern; failure to produce in those years is a critical failure either in management or development.
Now writing for BaseballInstinct.com
by Franchise887 on Feb 7, 2026 1:58 PM EST up reply actions
Here be defensive issues
May not bode so well for Montero as hoped…
There are also more than a couple of those guys who were arguably mishandled by their teams (Choi, Clement, Wood, Milledge, Salty?, etc.), as analysts at the time pointed out
by bookbook on Feb 6, 2026 5:45 PM EST up reply actions
Salty's problem wasn't the Rangers
He’s the Rick Ankiel of catchers. Something just wasn’t right when he threw back to the pitcher. The trade seems to have helped that.
John 3:16
"If they want to pay me like Mike Gallego, I’ll play like Gallego." - Rickey Henderson
by A'sFanDFW on Feb 8, 2026 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
How is Joe Mauer a superstar and David Wright is not?
the guy hits in the grand canyon, throw him a bone.
by Matty Kid on Feb 6, 2026 6:52 PM EST reply actions
i think
you’re slightly missing the point of the exercise
by blue bulldog on Feb 6, 2026 7:11 PM EST up reply actions
huh?
What are you talking about? I love David Wright
by John Sickels on Feb 6, 2026 7:23 PM EST up reply actions
I realize this isn't an AQA...
…but do you have ANY idea of what to expect out of David Wright going forward? He’s 29, and if this isn’t the definition of a “crossroads”, then I don’t know what is.
by GuyinNY on Feb 6, 2026 7:32 PM EST up reply actions
John, I love this idea to review past grades
Adn I agree with blue bulldog above, the plate discipline vs. tools debate is interesting. Might be insightful to look at “toolsy” players, break up into successes and failures, and see if there was any underlying statistical results that could better inform decisions on these types of players. Or it could just be an issue of psychological/emotional development, which you have raised before, and which is much harder to quantify/predict.
I think it would be really interesting to look at your past C+ prospects that succeeded (like Kemp, Cano), and again look at what could have been missed, to inform future rankings.
by cookiedabookie on Feb 6, 2026 7:46 PM EST reply actions
Agree with this and suggest age by plate discipline criteria.
I like the idea that plate discipline relative to age could be an even better predictor of success than age/level. It could filter for players that are being pushed aggressively while lacking promising peripherals.
I would also propose a short piece on the relationship between contact % and K/BB ratios. My hunch is that there are a number of players with good hand-eye coordination that do not succeed at high levels because they do not learn to manage the strike zone or work counts well (K/BB). A graph comparing these two traits could be useful, color-coded by age.
In any event, I think there’s a pretty good success rate here if we disregard injuries. I realize positional value is a big part of the prospect ranking, but it might also be an interesting exercise to say “which of these prospects is likely to post the higher OPS+ values?” in an attempt to see how fielding and positional valuation may skew evaluation of a prospects other tools.
by goyo70 on Feb 7, 2026 9:23 AM EST up reply actions
Multiple year guys
Seem to underperform this list.
Also I am too lazy to break it down but it looks like corner guys are more reliable than middle guys.
by ttnorm on Feb 6, 2026 8:53 PM EST reply actions
multiple year
Well, small sample size and all.
Guys who show up just a year often reach the majors very quickly, or were B+ in previous seasons and got moved into the A-range at some point.
by John Sickels on Feb 6, 2026 8:55 PM EST up reply actions
bobby crosby
I always wondered if Bobby Crosby’s prospect status wasn’t artificially inflated, for three interlocking reasons:
(1) Once it was accepted that Miguel Tejada was going to leave Oakland, people started focusing on Crosby since he was the organization’s most advanced shortstop prospect.
(2) Right when people began looking at him, he had a great Triple-A season where he walked, hit for average, and hit for power better than ever before (in the PCL).
(3) “Moneyball” had just been published and lots of people were ready to believe the best about an Oakland minor-league prospect.
I’m wrong about a lot of prospects, but I was never impressed by Crosby.
by whichthat on Feb 6, 2026 9:10 PM EST reply actions
Angels
Man, I remember being stoked about the Angels potentially having an all home-grown GREAT infield. Kotchman/Kendrick/Aybar/McPherson/Mathis. In the end, only 2 of them really turned out to be quality players. Kotch is a nice bench option, however
by deltarich on Feb 6, 2026 9:31 PM EST reply actions
Plate Discipline
that jump from AA or AAA to majors seems a lot of guys can’t connect enough with the deeper staffs- even newer guys like C Carter- some figure it out some don’t but maybe those contact rates are a red flag that gives us more pause when they don’t transition -
a rating like A- on talent, minor league results with an * for contact risk
by ribman on Feb 6, 2026 10:14 PM EST reply actions
K:BB, Contact %
John mentioned this above, and it’s where my evaluation starts. If they guy isn’t good at baseball, I don’t care how hard he hits or how fast he runs.
This is why I stopped subscribing to BA. Their prospect list is a constant rotation of guys who look good during practice or against weak competition, with the guys who are actually good at baseball ranked below. This is why their top prospects are always recent draftees and single A guys.
BA Prospect Rankings: The sexiest players during batting practice, who haven’t proved they suck yet.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 6, 2026 10:54 PM EST reply actions
interesting that hanley has more WAR than prince in less games...
but prince is a superstar and hanley is an excellent player
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Feb 6, 2026 11:48 PM EST reply actions
OMG
It was a turn of phrase. You are taking it way too literally. Same thing with the statement about David Wright above.
They are both superstars. Excellent. Terrific. Superb. Wonderful. etc etc etc
by John Sickels on Feb 7, 2026 12:56 AM EST up reply actions 6 recs
i shouldve elaborated...
if you asked people, i think the majority would say that prince has been the better player, simply due to hanley’s percieved attitude issues, when in reality, hanley has been significantly more valuable.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Feb 7, 2026 10:24 PM EST up reply actions
ummm
Joel Guzman (2005, 2006): 24 games, 62 PA, -0.1 WAR. Turned into minor league slugger. Tools bust with contact issues, and perhaps he wasn’t as young as everyone thought.
we all make mistakes.
by JoelGuzman'sScout on Feb 7, 2026 3:16 AM EST reply actions 6 recs
hahahahahaha
flayed ones stealth mode
"Fleshling! Do not shoot! For I am one of you fleshy things. It is I. Your Uncle Stan. Can't you tell by the long strips of fleshy substances covered in bodily fluids? Trust me! I have fleeeeeeeeesh."
by mob16151 on Feb 7, 2026 5:53 AM EST up reply actions
Your 2003-04 picks fared much better than those from 2005-06
In 2003, nine of 14 picks became superstars, stars or regulars with one or more all-star type years.
In 2004, seven of 12 attained that level.
In 2005 only two of 16 reached that level, three if you count Quentin, though his injuries have made him an unreliable starter.
In 2006, only four of 18 attained that level.
A few more observations:
(1) You pick catchers at your own peril as the transition to the majors is especially tough. Mauer and Martinez were universally viewed as elite players who showed patience, contact skills and power, a complete offensive package, but all your other catcher picks were lacking in one or more of those key skills.
(2) I agree with you that you under-valued the importance of plate discipline, which I would define as the ability to lay off pitches that you can’t drive, and while that mostly includes balls, it also includes strikes in areas of the zone where you are weak.
(3) I think you need to stop looking for the next Mark Grace or Keith Hernandez since there are few 1B who succeed long-tern without substantial power. (Your Kotchman pick)
(4) Consider mental/psychological factors more when they seem extreme on the negative side: Delmon Young and Milledge. (I think Young has been much more of an unmitigated failure than do you. His defense is atrocious, his ability to get on base poor, his power only decent and inconsistent and his presence in the clubhouse not that helpful. He has the ability to improve but his track record screams that improvement is unlikely)
by Rotofan on Feb 7, 2026 5:57 AM EST reply actions
One other thing
I appreciate your honest critique of your past picks, good, bad and otherwise. It’s one of the reasons I enjoy your analysis.
by Rotofan on Feb 7, 2026 6:00 AM EST up reply actions
seems unfair to Milledge to say that he had extreme negative mental factors
He never threw his bat at an umpire like Delmon Young, as far as I know. Most of the allegations against Milledge seemed like pretty petty bullhockey to me — high-fiving fans? appearing on a rap record? Doesn’t seem much worse than anything you might get from a Bryce Harper or a Logan Morrison. (And FWIW, Kevin Goldstein thinks his high-school troubles were about interracial dating.)
Milledge was pretty much an exemplary citizen with the Pirates — I think he might have got in trouble for wearing the wrong shoelaces — but he still couldn’t hit well enough to hold down his spot. We probably have to look somewhere else to explain what happened to him..
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 7, 2026 12:30 PM EST up reply actions
Perhaps, but you seem to go to the other extreme
What you describe as appearing in a Rap record was in fact heading a short-lived studio, producing and writing a Rap song that included "wealthy (N word)," a "top-notch ho" and having "a different bitch for every night" on the sexually explicit song "Bend Ya Knees."
The criminal investigation associated with his being expelled from high school was focused, publicly, on his relationship with his 15-year-old girlfriend, which was by itself a bogus issue regardless of race. The more serious allegations, reported by the Daily News at the time, was that he had sex with girls two and three years younger than his girlfriend, and that he wasn’t charged because he agreed to a juvenile arbitrated diversion program. Now cops and prosecutors can be wrong and perhaps they were but the allegations led close to 10 major league teams to pass on him in the first round before the Mets selected him 12th.
As for his time with the Mets beyond the Rap song, by most accounts the organization was concerned by what it viewed as immature behavior, conduct that some believe was a factor in his trade from his team.
I agree there were other factors that also contributed to his failures, including the speed with which the Mets promoted him when they should have focused on improving some of his weaknesses. I just wouldn’t be so quick to lump him in with the likes of Harper or Brett Lawrie, to name another player whose competitive streak has rubbed some veterans the wrong way. There was more there to be concerned with, though “extreme” over-states it.
by Rotofan on Feb 7, 2026 5:42 PM EST up reply actions
taking your three points one by one
- I don’t particularly like the misogyny of most rap (and a lot of rock, and most of the rest of our society), but what you’ve described is basically a completely generic rap song. I don’t think it’s an indication of any extreme character flaw.
- Well, that’s a bigger concern than the stuff that was actually on the record. It’s also something he allegedly did at 16 (and i don’t think there were any allegations of sexual misconduct in his professional career, were there?) and is sourced to an anonymous letter and some releases from the sheriff’s department that Milledge never got the chance to defend himself against.
- On a character basis, if I had to choose between a guy who high-fived fans — which is why I brought up Harper, because he’s shown up opposing pitchers to a much greater extent than that — and the guys who trashed him to reporters instead of keeping it in the clubhouse, I’d choose the first guy. Being late to things is bad — though I think I should probably have brought up Hanley instead of LoMo on that point.
All told, I don’t think we disagree that much — there’s something to be concerned about there, but I don’t think it’s extreme, and I’m not even sure that it’s anything that would be noticed much if he’d been more successful. (Like all those stories about the Boston clubhouse that would never have come out if they’d won two more games.) His character concerns aren’t huge red flags like Delmon Young or Elijah Dukes. They’re not even on the level of Lonnie Chisenhall, I’d say.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 7, 2026 8:59 PM EST up reply actions
I hate autoformatting
For once I was trying to do the numbered list thing on purpose, and it still didn’t work.
Not actually affiliated with whygavs.
by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 7, 2026 9:00 PM EST up reply actions
'(Brett Lawrie's) competitive streak has rubbed some veterans the wrong way'
Is this true? I’ve never seen that in print definitively.
by Matt0330 on Feb 8, 2026 8:37 AM EST up reply actions
Google "brett lawrie" brewers attitude
40,000 hits.
by Rotofan on Feb 9, 2026 2:19 PM EST up reply actions
Or you could just answer my question
You know, either way.
by Matt0330 on Feb 9, 2026 4:02 PM EST up reply actions
Interested to see
What c or c+ prospects from 03 to 06 made it to starter or star status
by Arfuture1985 on Feb 7, 2026 12:39 PM EST via Android app reply actions
Very interesting.
Ian Stewart, please testify! I mean, verify!
"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach
by daver on Feb 7, 2026 5:49 PM EST reply actions
mathis is written off as done after 5 years
now or never for stewart
by e-gus on Feb 8, 2026 10:33 PM EST up reply actions
One Oddity
It seems that several of the guys with multiple Grade A rankings fell short of the mark. I would have though these guys would have been sure-fire types working their way to the top - the Bryce Harpers and Mike Trouts who continuously prove that MiLB is beneath them on their way to superstardom. The results don’t support that though. Obviously, this really pares the sample size from 4 years to a subset of 2, but it’s still… it’s odd nonetheless.
Listing:
Daric Barton (2005, 2006): 438 games, 1765 PA, Peak WAR 5.1, Total WAR 7.2. Has seen regular playing time, had one excellent year so far.
Joel Guzman (2005, 2006): 24 games, 62 PA, -0.1 WAR. Turned into minor league slugger. Tools bust with contact issues, and perhaps he wasn’t as young as everyone thought.
Casey Kotchman (2003, 2004, 2005): 791 games, 2891 PA, Peak WAR 2.9, Total WAR 5.3. Didn’t live up to expectations, but he’s had good moments and playing time as a regular.
Andy Marte (2004, 2005, 2006): 302 games, 924 PA, Peak WAR 0.4, Total WAR -2.0. A gigantic bust. Age-relative-to-league didn’t pan out with this one, and maybe there is a reason.
Joe Mauer (2003, 2004): 918 games, 3911 PA, Peak WAR 7.9, Total WAR 35.7. Superstar.
Justin Morneau (2003, 2004): 1017 games, 4237 PA, Peak WAR 5.1, Total WAR 20.5. Excellent when healthy.
Carlos Quentin (2005, 2006): 616 games, 2432 PA, Peak WAR 4.8, Total WAR 8.0. One really good year, has held a job, effective when healthy.
Jeremy Reed (2004, 2005): 483 games, 1376 PA, Peak WAR 2.5, Total WAR 2.3. An old lesson: don’t be seduced by pretty batting averages. He did have one decent year according to WAR.
Ian Stewart (2005, 2006): 432 games, 1418 PA, Peak WAR 1.5, Total WAR 3.3. Disappointing so far, but this one could still verify, and he’ll stick around awhile.
Rickie Weeks (2004, 2005): 760 games, 3338 PA, Peak WAR 6.5, Total WAR 18.6. Injury issues, but verified as a very productive regular.
Delmon Young (2005, 2006): 729 games, 2967 PA, Peak WAR 1.8, Total WAR 1.6. WAR hates him due to butchery defense but I can’t say I see him as a bust.
That’s 2 total busts (Guzman, Marte) and 3 near busts (Kotchman, Reed, Stewart, Young) out of 11. Also, Barton and Quentin aren’t quite in the elite either. It’s interesting to note that 2 of the 3 guys who’ve reached the elite (or, at the least, near to it) category are from John’s professed favorite team.
No idea what any of this says. Just an interesting note.
by theatlfan on Feb 7, 2026 6:10 PM EST reply actions
I'd take Delmon Young over Daric Barton in a nanosecond
Carlos Quentin too & it’s not close . Yeah, & Jeremy Reed is most certainly a ‘bust’ if he was graded anywhere near this highly.
by Matt0330 on Feb 8, 2026 8:36 AM EST up reply actions
Barton
The only place where Barton is any good is in theoretical models. He’s the arm chair economist’s player, where important facets of the game that are difficult to quantify are marginalized in favor of assembling a model.
Sure, if the pitchers are bad enough to walk a Barton type of player, he might add some value by standing there. Any pitcher that can command more than 1 pitch is going to carve him up.
It’s like the notion that Gardner’s defense in LF made up for the difference between him and Pujols. WAR has completely distorted perception of the way the game is played. There are dozens of guys who can play LF similarly to Gardner. There is not a single person on earth that can hit like Pujols.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 9, 2026 2:11 AM EST up reply actions
you do realize
quite a few players hit better than Pujols last year right? purely from a hitting standpoint?
by blue bulldog on Feb 9, 2026 10:14 AM EST up reply actions
Not the point at all.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 9, 2026 10:32 AM EST up reply actions
"There is not a single person on earth that can hit like Pujols"
Pretty sure that was your point.
And to act like defense can’t save runs like offense can create them is a bit shortsighted. Can other players play defense in LF like Gardner? Sure, if you moved a very good center fielder to LF, he probably could. And Gardner probably should play CF, and would for most other teams. But the fact is, his defense actually happened, and he created real value there. Added to the fact that he also creates offensive value via OBP and Steals, and I am not sure why it is so hard to think he could match a slugger’s value. There is more to the value of a baseball player than HRs and RBIs. However, given the quicker degradation of defensive value than offensive value, then long-term you should expect the offense-oriented player to maintain more value.
Now, if given the choice between Pujols and Gardner, I would choose Pujols. But it is much closer than the traditional view of player value would leave you to believe.
by cookiedabookie on Feb 9, 2026 11:20 AM EST up reply actions
Vehemently Disagree
I’ll sidestep the semantics discussion re: Pujols being the best hitter.
Gardner is not anywhere near Pujols’ value. We’ve had this chat here already. Sabermetrics has completely destroyed your perception of the game.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 9, 2026 11:25 AM EST up reply actions
Well I will have to disagree with you assertion
That “Sabermetrics has completely destroyed your perception of the game”. I think it has helped my perception of the game. And I have posted on this website in the past that focusing too much on stats, especially predictive sabre-stats, makes people miss the forest for the trees. Ryan Vogelsong had a great year in 2011, even if we can’t expect him to repeat it given his peripherals. But to completely ignore sabremetrics is just as faulty as to completely rely on it.
by cookiedabookie on Feb 9, 2026 12:58 PM EST up reply actions
Love Sabermetrics
Hate how it’s misinterpreted in the general public.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 10, 2026 12:14 AM EST up reply actions
I can promise you
That having had the exact same conversation with SheaWasBettor about a month ago, you’re not going to change his mind or him you, so you may not want to bother going down this road (in the sense that’s it’s futile). Anyway, just a friendly heads up.
by MjwW on Feb 10, 2026 12:15 AM EST up reply actions
Actually it isn't.
His point is different, but maybe it’s too much effort for you to realize this.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 10, 2026 2:47 AM EST up reply actions
"you’re not going to change his mind or him you"
I blame the political system for the frequency of such cheap ploys in debates.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 10, 2026 4:07 AM EST up reply actions
"you’re not going to change his mind or him you"
I blame the political system for the frequency of such cheap ploys in debates.
Most arguments are really about context.
by SheaWasBettor21 on Feb 10, 2026 4:06 AM EST reply actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
- Start posting on Minor League Ball
- Minor League Ball on Facebook
- Follow @MinorLeagueBall
- Follow Minor League Ball on your Android Device!
- Subscribe to Minor League Ball Stories
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
What's In A (Middle) Name?
+4 updates
Tim Wakefield Announces Retirement
The Boston Red Sox And 4,828 Fifth-Starter Candidates
More from Baseball Nation >
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.
