SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Midseason Top 50 Prospect Lists
|
Post by mgoetze on Jul 17, 2014 21:12:56 GMT -5
Xander Bogaerts is #23 on Dave Cameron's midseason (non-prospect) trade value rankings over at Fangraphs. Dustin Pedroia is #39.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jul 17, 2014 23:45:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jul 21, 2014 11:22:58 GMT -5
Ben Badler ?@benbadler 4m Henry Owens, Daniel Norris, Blake Swihart, Dalton Pompey. Evaluating four Top 50 prospects in one night, with video: bit.ly/1qXzWkTcan someone summarize?
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Jul 21, 2014 11:53:19 GMT -5
Ben Badler ?@benbadler 4m Henry Owens, Daniel Norris, Blake Swihart, Dalton Pompey. Evaluating four Top 50 prospects in one night, with video: bit.ly/1qXzWkTcan someone summarize? They also have an article about Christian Vazquez that I was eager to hear about. Regarding Vazquez, I think his overall defensive game is so valuable that Blake Swihart is expendable. By that I mean that Vazquez's presence makes it easier for me to deal Swihart as the centerpiece of a big trade, whether it's for Stanton or some other big name corner outfielder. I also wouldn't mind keeping both Swihart and Vazquez, and figuring a way to rotate both of them (once the DH position is freed up). Obviously this isn't ideal as the trade value of one of them is greater than keeping both, but it's still a possibility that I wouldn't mind seeing.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 21, 2014 12:12:41 GMT -5
Ben Badler ?@benbadler 4m Henry Owens, Daniel Norris, Blake Swihart, Dalton Pompey. Evaluating four Top 50 prospects in one night, with video: bit.ly/1qXzWkTcan someone summarize? Owens: his plus changeup and deception make his fastball play up, gets late swings even on high-80s velo. He'll throw his changeup in any count, throwing it for strikes or doubling up on it (but he needs to keep it down). The curveball comes and goes-- it's league-average when it plays up, but in its slower range, hitters can read its spin and either let it go or crush it. His control has improved, and if he continues to improve his command and his curveball, he could be a #2 or #3 starter. Swihart: athletic, good footwork and hands, 1.91 pop time, two-way threat with above-average potential.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Jul 21, 2014 12:42:11 GMT -5
This I don't understand: Taylor Guerrieri at Law's #44. That seems like Law picking a kid in the draft and just stubbornly keeping him on his list.
Kind of how he did with Lars Anderson. He was hot for him in the draft and helped start the whole buzz around him.
In terms of Swihart being ranked so high, we see the 52% CS rate and the .833 OPS for a catcher. The guy is hitting balls all over the field and a lot of them are doubles, triples and HR. And maybe the best thing about him IS his defense ( surprise, surprise ). There is a reason why he is so highly rated. He warrants it.
With all the buzz around Xander and Mookie and JBJ and Owens and the starting pitching prospects in AAA, it just seems to me that we should be thinking more about developing our core going forward, than winning this year. We have an opportunity to maybe have the best young core in baseball in a few years, particularly if we maximize it now by adding a few more top prospects. A potential dynastic core. I'm all for the fire sale even though we do have a chance of making the playoffs this year. We have a tremendous opportunity to restock right now. A game changing opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Jul 21, 2014 12:53:57 GMT -5
Perfectly put. Worst thing this current team could do is go on the current winning streak they have embarked upon, even continue it and either not unload some of the veterans (Peavy, Drew), or even trade some of those kids for people just like them in a futile attempt at a wild card, or DC shot with a weak team like they have.
This isn't the NYY, they are allowed to rebuild, especially when they developed a strong farm system. LET THEM USE IT!
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 21, 2014 14:00:39 GMT -5
This I don't understand: Taylor Guerrieri at Law's #44. That seems like Law picking a kid in the draft and just stubbornly keeping him on his list. Kind of how he did with Lars Anderson. He was hot for him in the draft and helped start the whole buzz around him. I believe Callis was the one who was highest on and stuck with Lars the longest, not KLaw. That said: if Law truly does value him there despite the suspension and injury, wouldn't you want him to keep the player ranked where he thinks he should be? If an evaluator believes in a player, I'm of the belief he should stick his neck out and stick to his guns.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jul 22, 2014 13:16:15 GMT -5
|
|
CMF
Rookie
Posts: 91
|
Post by CMF on Jul 22, 2014 13:28:54 GMT -5
1-Cubs 2-Twins 3-Astros 4-Mets 5-Pirates
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Jul 22, 2014 13:39:14 GMT -5
Law ranks the farm systems. Cubs are #1. 1-Cubs 2-Twins 3-Astros 4-Mets 5-Pirates Only relevant point for us is that he feels there's a gap between the Mets and the rest (damn, almost rhymes).
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jul 23, 2014 6:06:10 GMT -5
1-Cubs 2-Twins 3-Astros 4-Mets 5-Pirates Only relevant point for us is that he feels there's a gap between the Mets and the rest (damn, almost rhymes). I'm not sure if he includes players in the majors or not because he doesn't for his mid-season top 50. I think when he made his list, Mookie and CVaz were in Boston. I also don't know if that would have made the difference in his ranking.
|
|
|
Post by thebogeyman on Jul 23, 2014 11:39:09 GMT -5
Only relevant point for us is that he feels there's a gap between the Mets and the rest (damn, almost rhymes). I'm not sure if he includes players in the majors or not because he doesn't for his mid-season top 50. I think when he made his list, Mookie and CVaz were in Boston. I also don't know if that would have made the difference in his ranking. It excludes players in the majors, but there is no cut-off date, so it is unclear if he considered Mookie given the timing of his demotion, but technically, he should have considered him based on the publication date. CVaz would not have been considered part of the Sox farm.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,966
|
Post by jimoh on Jul 27, 2014 20:54:36 GMT -5
new mlbpipeline ranking being announced, with Mookie #14 "Jim Callis ?@jimcallismlb 1m I'll go @cubs, @twins, redsox. @nathan_3535: Which would you say are your top 3 farm systems after doing the new rankings?"
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,966
|
Post by jimoh on Jul 27, 2014 21:07:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Jul 27, 2014 21:30:32 GMT -5
Very surprised to see Cecchini at 62. Also surprised to see Coyle so low on the Sox list (15 I think it was).
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jul 27, 2014 21:45:59 GMT -5
My two biggest 'surprises' are Cecchini and Marrero. If those two were flip flopped everyplace I'd have been less surprised. They also have Hedges slightly ahead of Swihart with Alfaro close behind which isn't a major surprise, I think they're close, just pointing it out. . . . . MLB Pipeline ?@mlbpipeline 2m Teams ranked by "prospect points" (100 pts for #1 prospect; 99 for #2, etc.): @cubs 520 @twins 459 @pirates 345 redsox 332 @astros 254 A hokey way to do it but....
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Jul 27, 2014 21:56:13 GMT -5
Jim Callis off the cuff organizational rankings: Cubs, Twins, Red Sox
|
|
|
Post by sdiaz1 on Jul 27, 2014 22:20:57 GMT -5
Am I crazy for thinking that Joey Gallo is being insanely over rated by these publications? Yes he has 80 power, and yes he is very young for AA and is currently having success, but the guy is striking out in 42% of his plate appearances. I don't care how prodigious your power is, if you strike out at that rate there is really no way to sustain success in any level of organized ball.
This is not saying that he is not a good prospect, but to declare him elite, while he has such a glaring weakness seems absurd.
It should be noted that while 170 PA's is a rather small sample it is more than enough for k rates to normalize.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 27, 2014 22:39:15 GMT -5
Interesting they have Ranaudo with a ceiling of a #2! rating 2 of his pitches plus. They make that projection as a 2/3 with very few of the usual significant caveats (i.e. "if pitcher X could only make significant improvements to his 50 control..."). In fact, they seem indicate his success is solely predicated on health (as opposed to a more development a la Webster and Owens's scouting thumbnails).
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 27, 2014 22:40:39 GMT -5
Am I crazy for thinking that Joey Gallo is being insanely over rated by these publications? Yes he has 80 power, and yes he is very young for AA and is currently having success, but the guy is striking out in 42% of his plate appearances. I don't care how prodigious your power is, if you strike out at that rate there is really no way to sustain success in any level of organized ball. This is not saying that he is not a good prospect, but to declare him elite, while he has such a glaring weakness seems absurd. It should be noted that while 170 PA's is a rather small sample it is more than enough for k rates to normalize. No, you are not crazy. He may have big pop, but elite status on that few number of PAs seems like hyperbole to me, too.
|
|
|
Post by sammo420 on Jul 28, 2014 4:07:29 GMT -5
Am I crazy for thinking that Joey Gallo is being insanely over rated by these publications? Yes he has 80 power, and yes he is very young for AA and is currently having success, but the guy is striking out in 42% of his plate appearances. I don't care how prodigious your power is, if you strike out at that rate there is really no way to sustain success in any level of organized ball. This is not saying that he is not a good prospect, but to declare him elite, while he has such a glaring weakness seems absurd. It should be noted that while 170 PA's is a rather small sample it is more than enough for k rates to normalize. No, you are not crazy. He may have big pop, but elite status on that few number of PAs seems like hyperbole to me, too. Did Wily Mo hit that hot dog stand in Kansas city or just come damn close? In his next at bat didn't he swing on a pitch out?
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Jul 28, 2014 6:17:27 GMT -5
Keep in mind that this is not just Jim Callis' list. It's a consensus, like BA, so it still contains the input of other, uh, elements from MLB.com, and we all know their history.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 28, 2014 7:03:27 GMT -5
It should be noted that while 170 PA's is a rather small sample it is more than enough for k rates to normalize. Totally agree with you, until this sentence To get back to the normalization talk for a moment: previously, we [in the royal, abstract, not really we sense) talked about how Jake Peavy's BB% "normalized" after about 44 ip and a BB rate of over 5, and Travis Shaw's SO% "noramlized" around 10% after whatever number of PAs he had. Since then, Peavy has walked 2.4/9 ip, and Shaw SO in 23% of his AAA at bats (though he is much better recently). All normalization means -- in general -- is that the displayed rate is likely within the range of expected outcomes, not that it is not on the edges of expectation. And even then, it is very very far from perfect, so much so that it really isn't that useful, imho. It is just an excuse to use the language of finding small sample sizes to be predictive when they still are not. Anyway, I think gallo is likely a high SO hitter, and they scare me when they are in the minors, therefore I agree with you. His 42% SO rate is likely indicative of a guy who strikes out more than 25% (we just don't know if his TT is 25%, 45% or 55%, or whatever), and that in itself is enough to be cautious.
|
|
|
Post by thebogeyman on Jul 28, 2014 7:31:28 GMT -5
Interesting to see how weak first base is in the minors. Shaw was ranked as the #9 first baseman, and he is the Sox 20th ranked prospect. I guess some guys from other positions will eventually get moved to 1B, but it is strange that there is so little talent there.
|
|
|