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.
Scouting reports for lower ranked players
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Mar 9, 2015 11:16:51 GMT -5
I have a suggestion. Now that the top 40 is the threshold for a player receiving a full scouting report, I would like to see younger higher ceiling players favored over older lower ceiling players even if the younger players are extremely raw. Obviously if they system has a breakout player over the next couple of years it's going to come from the former group as opposed to the latter. I would be much more interested in a scouting report on Josh Ockimey or Yoan Aybar over John Arro and Joe Gunkel to use two examples.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 9, 2015 11:36:14 GMT -5
I have a suggestion. Now that the top 40 is the threshold for a player receiving a full scouting report, I would like to see younger higher ceiling players favored over older lower ceiling players even if the younger players are extremely raw. Obviously if they system has a breakout player over the next couple of years it's going to come from the former group as opposed to the latter. I would be much more interested in a scouting report on Josh Ockimey or Yoan Aybar over John Arro and Joe Gunkel to use two examples. Not sure what this has to do with new scouting reports. I'm actually leaning more towards the higher floor prospects lately but understand the argument either way. I think they are pretty neutral here. |
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Mar 9, 2015 11:44:52 GMT -5
I too am interested in hearing more about guys like Ockimey, but I also understand that one reason there aren't extensive scouting reports on them is because how much has anyone actually seen guys like him play since being drafted???
Soxprospects and the greater scouting community will get eyes on guys like him this year and I'm sure avid soxprospects fans will be some of the first to read it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 9, 2015 11:50:18 GMT -5
For what it's worth, we will not be changing our philosophy on how we rank players.
We will also continue to write about guys on the News Page in the same way we have in the past, so perhaps that addresses the concern raised?
|
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Mar 9, 2015 12:00:15 GMT -5
For what it's worth, we will not be changing our philosophy on how we rank players. We will also continue to write about guys on the News Page in the same way we have in the past, so perhaps that addresses the concern raised? Perhaps....I just hope that when it comes to July and you only have time to update one scouting report, that you'll choose a guy like Aybar over a guy like Arro. I certainly understand that there is limited time to do the project as most of you are working on it part time. I just would prefer to see more about the younger higher ceiling guys as opposed to the older low floor guys and I don't think I am alone in that regard. A lot of the guys that are ranked past 20 aren't going to be covered by the major national outlets unless they blow up, so this would be the only place one could learn more about them short of watching the box scores. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 9, 2015 12:10:07 GMT -5
It would be difficult to use a different ranking system past 20. But I guess if there's a toss up, you could lean towards the higher ceiling, because really, someone like Travis Shaw or Bryce Brentz has a ceiling of never playing for the Red Sox except as emergency depth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 9, 2015 13:01:01 GMT -5
For what it's worth, we will not be changing our philosophy on how we rank players. We will also continue to write about guys on the News Page in the same way we have in the past, so perhaps that addresses the concern raised? Perhaps....I just hope that when it comes to July and you only have time to update one scouting report, that you'll choose a guy like Aybar over a guy like Arro. I certainly understand that there is limited time to do the project as most of you are working on it part time. I just would prefer to see more about the younger higher ceiling guys as opposed to the older low floor guys and I don't think I am alone in that regard. A lot of the guys that are ranked past 20 aren't going to be covered by the major national outlets unless they blow up, so this would be the only place one could learn more about them short of watching the box scores. As I stated in the first blog post related to this project, we're comprehensively updating every scouting report for all active players. That doesn't mean we have updated info on all of them, but they'll contain our latest info. The top 40 are just getting expanded scouting reports, but they're not the only ones getting any updates. The point is that we aren't going to try and write a scouting report describing every tool for an org guy who'll never reach Portland, so that's why we're cutting off who gets blown out reports. But like I said, everyone's getting updated. Part of the idea is that, in the future, when we get new info, we'll go in and update that scouting report. We'd fallen behind a bit, and so such a system didn't make sense to implement quite yet. |
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Mar 9, 2015 13:28:31 GMT -5
The new reports are great, both that they are updated, and that they are broken out. And I agree it makes sense to just flesh out reports as new info comes in and/or new guys are moved up inside the threshold of relevance.
I do wish that someone, anyone would come up with a new scouting system. It just doesn't make sense to me that fielding and hitting seem to carry the same weight as throwing and power. I'm guessing some teams are formally breaking hitting down into categories (for example), and I can't wait till that kind of reporting becomes mainstream (or at least public knowledge). I hypothesize that a modernized scouting report could be "the new moneyball", not to mention easier for the lay-person (and aren't most owners baseball outsiders?) to grasp fully. Till then, keep up the good work.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 9, 2015 13:41:15 GMT -5
They aren't weighted equally, though. If they were, Marrero and Bradley would ranked near or even ahead of Bogaerts. All skills/tools all considered, but no player's value comes from just averaging his tools together. As a rough example, someone who has a 35 hit, 55 power, and 70 defense won't be close to as good of a prospect as someone who is, say, 65 hit, 55 power, and 40 defense.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 9, 2015 13:44:56 GMT -5
It would be difficult to use a different ranking system past 20. But I guess if there's a toss up, you could lean towards the higher ceiling, because really, someone like Travis Shaw or Bryce Brentz has a ceiling of never playing for the Red Sox except as emergency depth. But seriously, the rankings already do take this kind of stuff into account, which is why Javier Guerra ranks ahead of Shaw and Anderson Espinoza ranks ahead of Brentz. Remember, but guys like Shaw and Brentz are pretty much locks to make the major leagues, which is more than you can say about a lot of prospects. I wouldn't be so certain to declare that their ceilings are "emergency depth," either-- the same things were said about guys like Kevin Youkilis or Brandon Moss or Daniel Nava or Brock Holt, and there are even some org guys who proved to be more than that (think Hunter Strickland or Ryan Pressly or Michael McKenry). Plus, with respect to Aybar and Ockimey specifically, I think a big part of it is just that it's hard to get eyes on the DSL/GCL guys. Much of the time, it's not about picking and choosing which players get scouted, as geographical/real world time/money constraints mean that certain affiliates (the entirety of the DSL, and much of the GCL) just can't get scouted much during the year. There are fewer updates on those guys, but it's not by choice, it's because those guys really only get scouted intensely during Spring Training and Fall Instructs. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 9, 2015 14:14:53 GMT -5
It would be difficult to use a different ranking system past 20. But I guess if there's a toss up, you could lean towards the higher ceiling, because really, someone like Travis Shaw or Bryce Brentz has a ceiling of never playing for the Red Sox except as emergency depth. But seriously, the rankings already do take this kind of stuff into account, which is why Javier Guerra ranks ahead of Shaw and Anderson Espinoza ranks ahead of Brentz. Remember, but guys like Shaw and Brentz are pretty much locks to make the major leagues, which is more than you can say about a lot of prospects. I wouldn't be so certain to declare that their ceilings are "emergency depth," either-- the same things were said about guys like Kevin Youkilis or Brandon Moss or Daniel Nava or Brock Holt, and there are even some org guys who proved to be more than that (think Hunter Strickland or Ryan Pressly or Michael McKenry). Plus, with respect to Aybar and Ockimey specifically, I think a big part of it is just that it's hard to get eyes on the DSL/GCL guys. Much of the time, it's not about picking and choosing which players get scouted, as geographical/real world time/money constraints mean that certain affiliates (the entirety of the DSL, and much of the GCL) just can't get scouted much during the year. There are fewer updates on those guys, but it's not by choice, it's because those guys really only get scouted intensely during Spring Training and Fall Instructs. I mentioned this in the Hamels trade thread, but I think that guys like Youkilis, Moss, Nava and Holt are a somewhat rare occurrence where a prospect breaks through their former realistic ceiling at a later age. Holt is probably about right at his ceiling of utility infielder that he has been, though a pleasant surprise at the added ability to play any position pretty well. Plus a lot of these players can have outlier seasons that are even further ahead of their prospect report like David Murphy with a 3.9 fWAR season at age 31. And then there is Jose Bautista. |
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Mar 9, 2015 14:17:14 GMT -5
It would be difficult to use a different ranking system past 20. But I guess if there's a toss up, you could lean towards the higher ceiling, because really, someone like Travis Shaw or Bryce Brentz has a ceiling of never playing for the Red Sox except as emergency depth. That's pretty much what I meant. It's only an issue for players 30-40. I don't mind reading about Shaw or Brentz because they they are both close to the majors and there is a good chance they will both appear on the major league roster at some point. I agree with that. I don't want you wasting time on an org guy. But when everyone is talking about Yoan Aybar in a couple of years say, I'd love to impress my friends by saying, "oh yeah I know all about him and his tools from reading Sox Prospects"  For the GCL guys they did do I thought they were very thorough. The DSL guys are tougher unless you see them in instructs or have some contacts who scout the DSL regularly. The site does have a unique advantage in that they can devote all of their time to the prospects of one team. They have some guys who obviously know what they are doing, plus I would guess access to Chris M anytime they want.....finally I don't want to throw cold water on you guys because I really did enjoy and appreciate what your work. Read more: forum.soxprospects.com/thread/2557/scouting-reports-lower-ranked-players?page=1#ixzz3Tv0lnmc3 |
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Mar 16, 2015 13:35:20 GMT -5
They aren't weighted equally, though. If they were, Marrero and Bradley would ranked near or even ahead of Bogaerts. All skills/tools all considered, but no player's value comes from just averaging his tools together. As a rough example, someone who has a 35 hit, 55 power, and 70 defense won't be close to as good of a prospect as someone who is, say, 65 hit, 55 power, and 40 defense. When I said they "seem to carry the same weight" I meant it appears that way because of the system. If a system is a)illegible and b)doens't have real rules for combining the numbers, then it's not a grading system, it's a shorthand notation system. I want a better notation system that both is legible and qualifies as a grading system. That is all. Sorry to derail this otherwise useful convo. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 16, 2015 14:56:06 GMT -5
You can't do that though because prospect grades and weights are subjective and not uniform nor should they be. Some people value skills differently as they should. It's not cookie cutter so giving the grades for each thing then allows an individual to weight them how they want rather than forcing it on us
|
|
|
