|
Post by jdb on Oct 15, 2014 10:09:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Oct 15, 2014 10:59:54 GMT -5
Could someone give information on how they project prospects WAR or even how the different projection models project MLB WAR? How much of it is scouting based/data based?
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Oct 15, 2014 11:45:54 GMT -5
From the article.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 15, 2014 12:19:00 GMT -5
Great to see FanGraphs step up to the plate, new sources are always great and I was impressed.
One comment, it seems strange that a $72m player would only be ranked 4th. I understand his logic, it just doesn't seem to "fit" baseball economics.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 15, 2014 12:20:47 GMT -5
Nothing like scrolling down the FanGraphs comments and spotting none other than Eric M. Van campaigning for Steven Wright! Eric, why aren't you writing for fangraphs? He's busy as Wright's agent.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 15, 2014 17:07:16 GMT -5
McDaniel admitted that he forgot to mention Wright, in part due to thinking he wasn't eligible, and has since added him to the "others of note" section, admitting he has no idea what will happen with him (as, let's face it, we all don't and most of us will admit that).
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 15, 2014 19:11:07 GMT -5
The way he answered leads me to believe that they haven't formed age eligibility rules yet. Castillo and Wright are not eligible at many sites. A few years ago, they wouldn't have been eligible here either but SP seems to have adopted a more subjectively flexible eligibility policy for both age and major league service time over the past few seasons.
ADD: I wanted to point out that I don't have any issues with a flexible policy. Unlike others, we specialize in one team. Having flexible policies is only a bias issue when you cover multiple teams.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Oct 15, 2014 21:44:54 GMT -5
In my mind Castillo is still an unknown. I'm hoping he contributes next season, but the fact that he might fall flat is why I think cherrington keeps Craig around.
|
|
|
Post by dewey1972 on Oct 15, 2014 22:45:01 GMT -5
Generally I like the list, and like others, I think the addition of Kiley McDaniel (and a number of people working for him) have taken FanGraphs from a place where I basically ignored the prospect coverage to a very interesting source. I think the write-up for Cecchini, however, is very questionable. I'm someone who likes Cecchini, but it's really hard not to have found this year a huge disappointment. His strikeout and walk rate were exceptional in 2013, and combined with the expectations around his plate discipline were one of the things that I think drove his stock as high as it was last year. This year both collapsed, to where they were both around average (someone probably can tell me exactly what the IL average was). In addition, after years of hoping the power would come, it seemed to disappear. He had a .108 ISO this year! I know that he finished the year stronger and that Speier kept telling us that scouts felt good about his ability to hit, but I can't believe that this year didn't worry anyone, and I can't understand how it wasn't mentioned in the write-up.
Furthermore, McDaniel says this "Cecchini was good in a limited big league look in 2014..." I don't think he looked good at all with Boston. Two of his three doubles were balls that are probably outs in any other park than Fenway--just fly balls to left that hit low off the wall. Other than those he had one double and one homer. He struck out over 30% of the time.
Like I said, it's a good list and I think there's a lot of good information there, but this one didn't reflect what I'm feeling.
On a separate note, I found the write-up and placement of Jason Garcia very interesting: 29. Jason Garcia, RHP: Garcia was the revelation of instructs; the righty sat 91-95 as a starter in 2013 in Low-A, had Tommy John surgery, returned late in 2014 and hit 97 mph, then sat 96-99 and hit 100 mph in instructs. His slider is very inconsistent and ranges from 45 to 60 depending on the day and, typically, feel for a breaking ball takes a little time to come back after elbow surgery. The command is 45 to fringy, so there’s enough for late innings if the breaking ball comes along.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,713
|
Post by nomar on Oct 16, 2014 15:03:00 GMT -5
I thought his grades undersold Devers' bat at first, but considering that he hasn't even played full season ball I think those grades are still amazingly impressive. Devers is an animal.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 16, 2014 20:03:59 GMT -5
I don't see how Devers is a top 3 or 4 guy for us though yet. He is a very long way from mlb and things can change quickly as he goes up the ladder. I don't even see that great a swing. I see a ton of raw power and good contact rates. For my amateur eye though he looks raw as heck. I have him at 8-9.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,713
|
Post by nomar on Oct 16, 2014 20:08:59 GMT -5
I don't see how Devers is a top 3 or 4 guy for us though yet. He is a very long way from mlb and things can change quickly as he goes up the ladder. I don't even see that great a swing. I see a ton of raw power and good contact rates. For my amateur eye though he looks raw as heck. I have him at 8-9. He's ranked high because of his ceiling. Everyone who's ranking him highly is aware that his rank is volatile because of his distance from the MLB and the fact that his body/conditioning will take serious maintenance. He could have plus hit and power tools when he's done developing, and he's hitting well at a very young age, which generates excitement. You can justify ranking him high right now, knowing that nothing is set it stone.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Oct 16, 2014 21:07:14 GMT -5
I don't see how Devers is a top 3 or 4 guy for us though yet. He is a very long way from mlb and things can change quickly as he goes up the ladder. I don't even see that great a swing. I see a ton of raw power and good contact rates. For my amateur eye though he looks raw as heck. I have him at 8-9. I agree. I lot can change with players this young.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 18, 2014 9:14:34 GMT -5
www.fangraphs.com/blogs/fangraphs-audio-kiley-mcdaniels-catalog-of-disappointments/Haven't listened to it now, but here's McDaniel's podcast where he discusses his Red Sox list. ADD: just listened to the Red Sox part of it. Nothing new or in-depth or anything, but there's some discussion of Rodriguez, Cecchini, and Bradley. He also later brings up that some scouts thought Chavis could be a catcher and that he was game to try it out, but that the Red Sox didn't want to try him there.
|
|