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.
Top 100/top 10 prospect rankings 2015
|
Post by jhenrywaugh, prop. on Feb 10, 2015 10:38:23 GMT -5
I just did a quick scan through, and didn't see the Sox rankings in the BPro top 101 posted. Reprinted with a short summary of what they say in the annual: 46: Henry Owens: Change-up easily grades as a plus pitch. Improving his fastball command his curve are the keys to him establishing self as a #3. It's ok to be disappointed with the Owens rating, but it's important to note that the BPro team has certainly seen him more than the staffs of any other national publication. So "I disagree" is fair, but "they don't know what they are talking about" is whining. To that end, it's possible they've seen him too much. Perhaps they are now more intimate with his flaws than other prospects they have seen less. Just food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 10, 2015 15:11:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 10, 2015 16:55:43 GMT -5
When Chris was on the pod, he said he'd put Bogaerts ahead of Betts but that it's close and he gets the other argument. I agree with him 100% on that.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Feb 10, 2015 18:06:51 GMT -5
I've only seen Betts through videos and then last year on those nice HDTV's many of us have these days. I did squeeze my satellite provider and got MLB TV thrown in, so I watched most of the games he played in at the end of the year. The first impression was of a lightning fast bat driven by wrist action that's a gift. His balance and the weight shift as he loads are superior as well. I remember watching him in the AFL and that was my take away, that the swing was just picture perfect.
But what really separates him from the crowd - for me - is the pitch recognition and selectivity, and the ability to make the pitcher come to him. It didn't seem as if any portion of the plate was safe, that he could drive pitches the other way with little effort. That threat, that he could take outside pitches and hammer them down the right field line, means that pitchers have to try to find holes elsewhere. But that just plays into his strength, the ability to clean out just about anything from the center of the plate in, and do real damage. That's a tough combination to deal with if you're a pitcher.
Bogaerts has his own spectacular talents. When all the parts are working he can rifle pitches everywhere, and lose balls so fast it makes my head spin. He's going to be fine I think. Last year was his apprenticeship after all. He's still just a kid.
Betts is a kid also, but he does stuff right now that 10-year vets never have and never will be able to touch. He was born to play baseball.
|
|
|
Post by cologneredsox on Feb 11, 2015 3:22:39 GMT -5
65: Eduardo Rodriguez: Smooth, repeatable delivery, but inconsistent with command and velocity. Mid-rotation ceiling. 90: Rafael Devers: Physically maxed out and needs to improve defense at third. But the bat has the potential to be good enough to provide elite value even with no defensive contribution. It's ok to be disappointed with the Owens rating, but it's important to note that the BPro team has certainly seen him more than the staffs of any other national publication. So "I disagree" is fair, but "they don't know what they are talking about" is whining. I'm much more disappointed with the Erod ranking, as the bp staff has been sceptical about Owens ceiling for a long time now. I still disagree but it's as you wrote. What I don't understand: how can our young Devers already be 'physically maxed out'?? I mean he's one of our youngest prospects???
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 11, 2015 8:41:12 GMT -5
What exactly is a 7+ hit? Like Wade Boggs/Tony Gwynn? Or more Derek Jeter?
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 11, 2015 9:57:41 GMT -5
Like I said earlier in the thread, I don't have a problem with people underrating Rodriguez right now; the gap in results and stuff between his time Bowie and Portland is a decent reason to withhold judgement a little bit. But I disagree with the comment on his ceiling ... I think he's got a higher ceiling than that based on his Portland pitching, but the reason to hold back is the likelihood of his reaching that ceiling.
Personally, I'm all in and think he and Margot could both be Top-20 prospects after this year (if Rodriguez is still eligible). Really, the Sox have three break out candidates in the back half of the top 100 in Margot, Rodriguez, and Devers.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 11, 2015 10:12:54 GMT -5
Everyone has an opinion, mine is that I'm torn between Mookie and Palonco as to who I think is the better prospect. A steak and lobster decision. I was also impressed with Pompey but he's not quite as ready as the other two yet. I saw a lot of Polanco against the PawSox in the early season and a lot of Pompey against the Dogs in the mid to late season. Pompey at this point is Mookie light but he is an exciting player to watch (Toronto).
By the way, I think Norm has it nailed, Mookie can square up a pitch anyplace and doesn't chase, he makes the pitcher pitch to him, not the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 11, 2015 12:25:56 GMT -5
What exactly is a 7+ hit? Like Wade Boggs/Tony Gwynn? Or more Derek Jeter? A 70 hit tool is generally a .300+ true talent hitter (see here or here), which I think would be more in the Jeter/Nomar category than the Boggs/Gwynn one.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 11, 2015 12:46:26 GMT -5
If Boggs and Gwynn aren't 80 hitters then I don't know what the 80 grade is for.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 11, 2015 13:00:34 GMT -5
mlb.com's top 100 out and it's pretty bizarre. Swihart 18, Owens 19 Rodriguez 89, Devers 96, Margot 99 Margot is now Officially Underrated in my book. When he gets to AA next year as a 20 year-old plus defender in center who can hit, he's going to jump up these rankings, imo. You can't really say a guy is "underrated" based on the assumption that he's going to do something next season that is by no means guaranteed. His approach isn't great and he had pretty bad K/BB numbers in his high-A stint last year. It wouldn't be the least bit surprising to see him struggle against high-A or AA pitching next year.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Feb 11, 2015 13:21:57 GMT -5
His approach isn't great and he had pretty bad K/BB numbers in his high-A stint last year. 56 PAs (2 BB), with the 639 prior PAs sporting a 9.5% bb, and great so% at every stop (including his 56 pa stint in high A). (Ignoring the DSL where his BB rate was even higher b/c few pitchers can find the plate.) This isn't a very strong argument you are making.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 11, 2015 13:26:58 GMT -5
Margot is now Officially Underrated in my book. When he gets to AA next year as a 20 year-old plus defender in center who can hit, he's going to jump up these rankings, imo. You can't really say a guy is "underrated" based on the assumption that he's going to do something next season that is by no means guaranteed. His approach isn't great and he had pretty bad K/BB numbers in his high-A stint last year. It wouldn't be the least bit surprising to see him struggle against high-A or AA pitching next year. The high-A numbers came in 56 PAs, so drawing conclusions from that is difficult. Margot's K/BB numbers throughout his minor league career have actually always been above-average to great (career 12% K, 9.8% BB), though you're right that scouts have also consistently questioned his approach and noted his aggressiveness. At such low levels, I tend to think that the scouts are more accurate than the stats with regards to his approach-- he probably does need to work on being less aggressive, and I'd bet that a lot of his high Greenville walk rate is just becauses some pitchers at that level just can't find the plate consistently (in other words, don't assume that just because he walked a lot, he has a great discipline/approach). But his low strikeout rate is a very positive sign, as that's one of the few stats in the low minors that is highly predictive of major league production. Sure, nothing is guaranteed, but Margot has consistently made a lot of contact, and that's a skill that translates relatively well as players move up the ladder, so in that regard, I think Margot is lower risk than your typical 20-year-old A+ prospect.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 11, 2015 14:04:11 GMT -5
Margot is now Officially Underrated in my book. When he gets to AA next year as a 20 year-old plus defender in center who can hit, he's going to jump up these rankings, imo. You can't really say a guy is "underrated" based on the assumption that he's going to do something next season that is by no means guaranteed. His approach isn't great and he had pretty bad K/BB numbers in his high-A stint last year. It wouldn't be the least bit surprising to see him struggle against high-A or AA pitching next year. Eh, that was more of a prediction of what will happen rather than a statement of why he should go up in the rankings now ... with his numbers (and, yeah, I'm not that concerned about his high-A numbers for the reasons jmei and josh laid out) and defensive floor, I think he's more of a 30-45 prospect right now than a 65-80, with a "one to watch" buzz for next year. Instead, he gets very little buzz, really overshadowed in the Sox system by the guys ahead of him. It's a minor thing, but if you can't make statements about quibbles like this, what can you do?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 11, 2015 14:14:52 GMT -5
You can't really say a guy is "underrated" based on the assumption that he's going to do something next season that is by no means guaranteed. His approach isn't great and he had pretty bad K/BB numbers in his high-A stint last year. It wouldn't be the least bit surprising to see him struggle against high-A or AA pitching next year. Eh, that was more of a prediction of what will happen rather than a statement of why he should go up in the rankings now ... with his numbers (and, yeah, I'm not that concerned about his high-A numbers for the reasons jmei and josh laid out) and defensive floor, I think he's more of a 30-45 prospect right now than a 65-80, with a "one to watch" buzz for next year. Instead, he gets very little buzz, really overshadowed in the Sox system by the guys ahead of him. It's a minor thing, but if you can't make statements about quibbles like this, what can you do? About 10 months ago, Mookie was ranked around 10th for most top 10 Red Sox prospect list with a few more PAs than Margot in Salem. Margot isn't that underrated. He's just too far away to be ranked higher and didn't have the pedigree of a Devers or Bogaerts so he started out lower. After one really good year, people want to see him keep it up a bit longer before he shoots through the roof.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 16, 2015 8:43:59 GMT -5
BP ranks the Sox 6th. www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=25592
6. Boston Red Sox Farm System Ranking in 2014: 4 2015 Top Ten Prospects: Link Top Prospect: Blake Swihart (17) Prospects on the BP 101: 5 State of the System: The Red Sox have routinely rated as having a strong minor-league system, and while they are routinely criticized for having an over-hyped collection of talent, this version of the Sox farm is legitimately full of big-league talent. Starting at the top with a loaded Triple-A roster that should make a difference in Boston over the course of the 2015 season and beyond, the Red Sox lack the impressive high-ceiling talent of some of the teams ranked ahead of them, but they offer more depth of talent than most organizations in the game. At the lower levels of the system, the Sox offer plenty of talent to dream on, including two fast-rising names in Manuel Margot and Rafael Devers; both of whom burst onto the scene with strong 2014 showings. All told, the Red Sox continue to maintain an impressive pipeline of future major-league players, with depth stretching from top to bottom in the organization. Must-See Affiliate: Triple-A Pawtucket Prospects to See There: Matt Barnes, Garin Cecchini, Brian Johnson, Deven Marrero, Henry Owens, Eduardo Rodriguez, Blake Swihart
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 17, 2015 8:31:09 GMT -5
Fangraphs' Kiley McDaniel's top 200 is out: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-fangraphs-top-200-prospect-list/Blake Swihart 9 Eduardo Rodriguez 23 Henry Owens 33 Manuel Margot 35 Rafael Devers 48 Brian Johnson 104 143-200 (45+ FV; unsorted): Garin Cecchini, Matt Barnes, Deven Marrero, Michael Chavis He also includes a chart showing that the Red Sox were tied for third in terms of most prospects on the top 200 with 10.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 17, 2015 9:12:25 GMT -5
Speaking of McDaniel, I'm about a month behind on this, but this is pretty much a must-read for everyone ever: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-limits-of-prospect-lists/Now if we could only get the "Will Middlebrooks was a bust and now everyone else will be waaaaaaaaaaah" portions of the media to read it...
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 17, 2015 9:29:08 GMT -5
Note that "the cut" is where he stops ranking. It's top 142 and that there are 58 45+ that are are not specifically ranked including the 4 Sox who are then also top 200.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 17, 2015 9:36:36 GMT -5
Fangraphs' Kiley McDaniel's top 200 is out: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-fangraphs-top-200-prospect-list/Blake Swihart 9 Eduardo Rodriguez 23 Henry Owens 33 Manuel Margot 35 Rafael Devers 48 Brian Johnson 104 Just missed the cut (45+ FV): Garin Cecchini, Matt Barnes, Deven Marrero, Michael Chavis He also includes a chart showing that the Red Sox were tied for third in terms of most prospect value on the top 200. That list has the value of matching up pretty much exactly with my feelings, so, you know ... good job, Kiley! He's a genius evaluator. Also, important to note his overall message that these lists are nothing but popular and efficient ways of conveying information about prospects and the actual numbering of them is fairly irrelevant beyond broad groupings. Digging in on the specific grades is more interesting (like Rodriguez getting a 60/65 grade on his fastball and a 50/60 on his change)
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 17, 2015 9:37:47 GMT -5
Speaking of McDaniel, I'm about a month behind on this, but this is pretty much a must-read for everyone ever: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-limits-of-prospect-lists/Now if we could only get the "Will Middlebrooks was a bust and now everyone else will be waaaaaaaaaaah" portions of the media to read it... So sick of that nonsense. Just keep saying "every All-Star was once a prospect."
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 17, 2015 11:02:28 GMT -5
I might be wrong but I think I read a tweet that said BA was releasing their list Thursday. As much as I like Kiley's list BA is pretty much the big elephant in the room.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,787
|
Post by nomar on Feb 17, 2015 11:42:07 GMT -5
Fangraphs' Kiley McDaniel's top 200 is out: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-fangraphs-top-200-prospect-list/Blake Swihart 9 Eduardo Rodriguez 23 Henry Owens 33 Manuel Margot 35 Rafael Devers 48 Brian Johnson 104 Just missed the cut (45+ FV): Garin Cecchini, Matt Barnes, Deven Marrero, Michael Chavis He also includes a chart showing that the Red Sox were tied for third in terms of most prospect value on the top 200. To clarify a little: he listed his top 142 in order, then the last 58 were all lumped together in the 45+ FV area in which Cecchini, Barnes, Marrero and Chavis were. So 10 of our guys in the top 200 as the chart at the bottom of the page shows. I'll take it.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Feb 17, 2015 11:45:11 GMT -5
Old friend Frank Montas comes in at 113, in the FV 50 group.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Feb 17, 2015 11:58:52 GMT -5
Fangraphs' Kiley McDaniel's top 200 is out: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-fangraphs-top-200-prospect-list/Blake Swihart 9 Eduardo Rodriguez 23 Henry Owens 33 Manuel Margot 35 Rafael Devers 48 Brian Johnson 104 Just missed the cut (45+ FV): Garin Cecchini, Matt Barnes, Deven Marrero, Michael Chavis He also includes a chart showing that the Red Sox were tied for third in terms of most prospect value on the top 200. My gosh - those distribution charts at the end are beautiful. That used to be one of the few things I liked to do to manipulate the data; glad someone is paying attention to that now so I don't have to.
|
|
|