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 jmei on Feb 17, 2015 12:41:19 GMT -5
Edited my post above to clarify the 45+ FV guys.
|
|
|
Post by dewey1972 on Feb 17, 2015 22:24:52 GMT -5
Worth noting that McDaniel feels like people should look at the tiers of future value more than the ordinal numbers. A good way to think about it, I think. Which means that he'd likely consider Rodriguez (23) closer to Swihart (9) than Owens (33) and Margot (35) because they're both 60 FV, whereas Owens and Margot (as well as Devers) are 55s. Of course, they're all close, and he had Owens as a 60 when he did his Sox list. Owens wasn't addressed specifically, but he said that when there was a grade change it was because when he talked to a broader group of people they felt the player was too high (or low).
|
|
|
Post by dewey1972 on Feb 17, 2015 22:32:34 GMT -5
Another thing that McDaniel talked about recently (I think in a podcast, but could've been in a chat) and that Dave Cameron also mentioned recently is that it's popular to rank farm systems but different teams use their farm systems differently. I think both talked about how the Tigers system has consistently been terrible recently, but that's partly because they keep using their minor league assets to acquire major league talent while the Rays essentially never trade minor leaguers but are constantly trading FOR prospects. Yet what really matters is the major league team.
I bring this up to point out that not only do we have a top system but, obviously, we have a strong major league team. What's more, Bogaerts, Betts, and Bradley are products of the system and will likely provide excellent, cheap value for the next few years, but they aren't part of our minor league system anymore. I know it's obvious, but it's easy to forget.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Feb 18, 2015 0:18:31 GMT -5
Thanks for the reminder. I hadn't pulled these up yet and it's good stuff. Mellen is tough on himself, as good an evaluator as he is (and probably why he is): I hope we hear from him again if he gets a chance to scout Betts this year. And this from Skorupa, on ranking Betts above Bogaerts: As Hatfield mentioned, Mellen in the podcast talked about how close he felt it was. The BP analysis of the system, and the comments that follow, speak to the fact that they've been in the same boat as many of us, finding it difficult to pick between them. I see that as a very good thing for this iteration of the Red Sox team. And that's before we talk about the rest of the up-the-middle strength at catcher and second base.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater on Feb 18, 2015 9:50:40 GMT -5
Old friend Frank Montas comes in at 113, in the FV 50 group. That Peavy trade looks ill advised at this point. Yeah we needed an extra arm in 2013, but he really wasn't that key down the stretch, especially in the playoffs. We essentially traded Montas and Iglesias for Escobar, Hembree and one year of a #5 starter. meh.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 18, 2015 9:57:34 GMT -5
Old friend Frank Montas comes in at 113, in the FV 50 group. That Peavy trade looks ill advised at this point. Yeah we needed an extra arm in 2013, but he really wasn't that key down the stretch, especially in the playoffs. We essentially traded Montas and Iglesias for Escobar, Hembree and one year of a #5 starter. meh. It might not have been great in hindsight, but it's not really one that hurts us at all. And we won a World Series (which we probably would have won anyway, but who knows?).
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 18, 2015 11:47:35 GMT -5
Old friend Frank Montas comes in at 113, in the FV 50 group. That Peavy trade looks ill advised at this point. Yeah we needed an extra arm in 2013, but he really wasn't that key down the stretch, especially in the playoffs. We essentially traded Montas and Iglesias for Escobar, Hembree and one year of a #5 starter. meh. Don't forget the three playoff starts, two of which were very good. Yeah, maybe they're OK if Doubront makes them instead, but hey, if we're playing the hindsight game, I'll trade Iglesias and Montas for the certainty of the 2013 title.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 18, 2015 12:17:49 GMT -5
Jake Peavy helped the Red Sox win the World Series. I'm positive that's worth the 113th-best prospect in baseball.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Feb 18, 2015 12:18:34 GMT -5
I've reflected on Peavy's value during 2013..first of all, we had a borderline overtaxed pitching staff, so any additional innings allowed relief of this, and enabled more optimal performance-something key but not easily measured. He allowed Workman to go to the pen, pitched well during most regular season starts- and we just beat Oakland by one game, so the playoff schedule may have been different and tougher otherwise. Then, as stated he helped in the playoffs by closing out a tough Tampa bay series. Easily worth it.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Feb 19, 2015 17:00:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Feb 19, 2015 21:32:20 GMT -5
Baseball America's top 100 prospects are being unveiled on MLB Network right now. List will be released online at 10PM.
100. Rafael Devers 83. Brian Johnson 73. Manuel Margot 60. Eduardo Rodriguez 45. Henry Owens 22. Rusney Castillo 18. Blake Swihart
ADD:
Players who could jump into Top 100 this season:
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Feb 19, 2015 22:19:02 GMT -5
Baseball America's top 100 prospects are being unveiled on MLB Network right now. List will be released online at 10PM. 100. Rafael Devers 83. Brian Johnson 73. Manuel Margot 60. Eduardo Rodriguez 45. Henry Owens 22. Rusney Castillo 18. Blake Swihart Not that it matters, but every player should move up one spot. So Swihart 17th, Rusney 21st etc.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 19, 2015 23:34:26 GMT -5
Baseball America ?@baseballamerica 27m27 minutes ago Scout’s Video View: Blake Swihart ow.ly/2UUndi Baseball America ?@baseballamerica 30m30 minutes ago Scout’s Video View: Henry Owens ow.ly/2UUndf Pete Abraham ?@peteabe 1h1 hour ago Average ranking for Blake Swihart in the Baseball America, Fangraphs, ESPN and Baseball Prospect top 100 prospects lists is 13.2.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 20, 2015 8:00:31 GMT -5
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. Ah, just seeing this ... see, this is where I disagree. He may not have quite the pedigree of Devers and his "top hitting prospect in the IFA class" profile, but he certainly has at least equal to Bogaerts and more than Mookie when you look at signing/draft status. And Mookie, remember, was a guy who got moved off SS and had no power at all in Short-A. So the A-ball success came somewhat out of nowhere. Some caution was warranted. Margot had a better year in Lowell with more power and was a year younger than Mookie. To me, he was a highly touted guy when he signed, even more when he was coming stateside after beating up on the DSL, and he has checked off all the boxes of performance and development since then, a guy with all the tools at a premium position. But I think the pedigree point is a correct diagnosis of people's views of Margot, and it's what I'm getting at with my point that he's a touch underrated because of the depth of the Sox system. If Bogaerts and Betts (and Swihart) hadn't been around, Margot would've gotten a lot more attention all along the way and would be perceived as a guy with a big "pedigree" and a lot of buzz. Again, this isn't that big a deal; it's not like I'm upset about his ranking or feel like there's some huge injustice. It really doesn't matter if he's 35 or 70, unless it has some effect on the perception of his trade value (which it may). I just think it's an interesting thought experiment on how guys get ranked in the 30-70 range of these top 100 lists.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 20, 2015 9:38:26 GMT -5
I think if he has another year like last year and doesn't drop off in AA, he'll probably be in the top 20 a year from now.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 20, 2015 10:11:19 GMT -5
I think if he has another year like last year and doesn't drop off in AA, he'll probably be in the top 20 a year from now. That's pretty aggressive. Consider that Dalton Pompey isn't in either BA's or BP's top 20. Not saying it can't happen, but he'd have to have a pretty big year to jump into the top 20. That's not something that you can just sort of do.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Feb 20, 2015 11:02:41 GMT -5
I was slightly, just a little perplexed that BA had Owens fastball ranked ahead of his change up; 60 on the fastball 55 on the change.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 20, 2015 11:31:01 GMT -5
Chris Mitchell at Fangraphs runs a Top 200 ranked by his KATOH projection system's projection of their WAR, results here. Some notable results for Sox: - Margot rated much higher than the consensus, up at #23 (generally around 60-80 consensus) - Swihart much lower, down at #85 (instead of 10-20) - Wendell Rijo wildly higher, coming in at #52 (instead of completely ignored) - Sean Coyle, also much higher at #79 (also with the ignoring) - Owens about the same at #43 - Johnson completely drops off the map - Some love for Travis Sam and Shaw Travis (or whatever their names are), Mauricio Dubon, Garin Cecchini, and Javier Guerra in the back half of the list. Take with however many grains of salt you'd like ... he makes no claims of greater accuracy from the more traditional lists. Just something to think about, like the fact that it's interesting that it's discounting Brian Johnson so completely, and it does make me wonder about Rijo's potential to pop. You can follow links around to find the explanation of the system edit to add: since it seems unfair to drop this without at least some context, here's an explanation of the hitters' projections. Relevant to Swihart: "Unsurprisingly, KATOH tends to underrate players who man premium defensive positions–like catcher, center field, and shortstop–whose offensive abilities may not be the most valuable part of their game." Pitchers are here. I've never seen any counter-arguments to his methodology, but there may be many. I just ran across KATOH last fall somehow ...
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Feb 20, 2015 12:02:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 20, 2015 12:03:07 GMT -5
I was slightly, just a little perplexed that BA had Owens fastball ranked ahead of his change up; 60 on the fastball 55 on the change. Link?
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Feb 20, 2015 13:50:18 GMT -5
I was slightly, just a little perplexed that BA had Owens fastball ranked ahead of his change up; 60 on the fastball 55 on the change. Link? Behind a pay wall nowI also saw that last night but forgot to link it. Had a 60 on his fastball and 55 on his changeup, which caught me off guard too. If I remember correctly, Swihart had 60-Arm, 65-Fielding, 60-Hit, 55-Power, 50-Run, or something along the lines of that. Johnson had all 4 pitches and command between 50-55. Can't fully remember for the others, but I'm pretty sure Margot's speed was graded at 65. Just about every site puts him around here, which I find too low.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 20, 2015 13:55:17 GMT -5
Owens' change at 55 is low and makes no sense. It doesn't even need to improve to be a 60.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Feb 20, 2015 14:10:28 GMT -5
Owens' change at 55 is low and makes no sense. It doesn't even need to improve to be a 60. Keith Law has his change as a 70, Callis/Mayo 65 and Kiley McDaniel 55/60
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Feb 20, 2015 14:32:49 GMT -5
www.baseballamerica.com/minors/top-100-prospects-tools-2/I was just going by the Top 100 prospects-tools article. At first I thought I might be using the tool ratings of the guy below (but Brandon Nimmo doesn't pitch). I'm no scout, I just found it a bit odd compared to seemingly everyone else's opinion on his stuff. Not trying to knock BA, I still think they are the closes thing to the gold standard we have when it comes to prospect rankings (aside from soxprospects of course)
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 20, 2015 15:17:18 GMT -5
Wow, really hoping that's a mistake, because it also would mark the return of the mythical Henry Owens slider...
|
|
|