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.
|
Post by jdb on Sept 3, 2012 17:18:50 GMT -5
Lets get this new board moving forward.
I think he could make a huge jump in prospect rankings next year (here and across baseball). What he has done following wrist surgery has been impressive. I know the 50+ SBs won't be part of his game but he's been getting on base at a great clip(.394) while showing a pretty good idea of the zone 60 BBs / 90 Ks. His bio says he could develop above average power and he has 38 2Bs coming off the surgery. Being a HS SS I'm guessing he would be able to handle a corner OF spot but would his bat play at first?
One thing he needs to improve on is hitting LHP. .318 OB/ 285 slg / .602 in Greenville. Going forward this will make or break him.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 4, 2012 17:00:57 GMT -5
I know this sounds like heresy but I would love to see if he can handle 3rd. With that OBA and SLG he would be more valuable than Middlebrooks who will be a .330ish OBA guy with a ton of Ks.
|
|
ejenson
Rookie
Voice of the Drive
Posts: 63
|
Post by ejenson on Sept 4, 2012 17:46:50 GMT -5
I agree that Garin will be a good 3B..In doing the games for the Drive, he goes at 100 percent all the time..He's going to be a good one
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Sept 4, 2012 18:03:01 GMT -5
Good point Guidas. I was just trying to think of what could happen if In a perfect world they all turn into above average regulars. It would be a good problem to have.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Sept 4, 2012 20:33:43 GMT -5
Am I missing something - why would Cecchini move off third?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 4, 2012 20:56:45 GMT -5
I think the idea of moving off third was something that came out of his defensive performance at third in Lowell, which was rough at best. Indications this year are that he has improved there dramatically though, so there isn't any reason to think he won't stick.
|
|
|
Post by futurefenwaystars on Sept 4, 2012 21:01:52 GMT -5
I, too, was very happy to see Cecchini bounce back from two injury-shortened seasons and really show his enormous talent in Greenville this year.
I am curious to see how he will perform next season in Salem and if, given his age (he will be 22 next April), the Red Sox will push him to Portland by mid-season 2013.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Sept 4, 2012 21:27:36 GMT -5
Am I missing something - why would Cecchini move off third? Sorry. More or less I was just curious if some thought he could handle it since it appears, for the time being, 3B has some organizational depth.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 4, 2012 22:24:16 GMT -5
I, too, was very happy to see Cecchini bounce back from two injury-shortened seasons and really show his enormous talent in Greenville this year. I am curious to see how he will perform next season in Salem and if, given his age (he will be 22 next April), the Red Sox will push him to Portland by mid-season 2013. That's the biggest worry with Cecchini in my mind; he's not really young for his level. If he can crack the Portland roster next season I'll start taking him a lot more seriously as a prospect.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 5, 2012 7:04:32 GMT -5
Cecchini was only 4 1/2 months younger than Middlebrooks for his Greenville season. Garin turned 21 on April 20th this year. WMB turned 21 on September 9th. Right after his season ended. WMB's slash line was 349/404/753. Not exactly scintillating. He hit 7 hr's. Garin's slash line was 394/433/827 with 4 hr's. Age is a non issue IMO. He lost a year of high school and the end of last year with injuries. He's not behind the curve.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 5, 2012 9:23:38 GMT -5
First off I don't really care what Will Middlebrook's path has been, that's a sample size of one. And for that matter it's still an open question to how good WMBs will actually be at the major league level.
Is Cecchini behind the curve? Maybe not, but he's certainly not ahead of the curve and that's what you want to see. I mean, if we're all excited that Bogaerts is in AA as a 19 year old, it would be terribly inconsistant to dismiss the fact that Cecchini is both two years older and two levels behind him. Either age matters or it doesn't. It's can't be a thing where if a guy is advanced, that's awesome, but if a guy is behind, we just hand-wave it away.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 5, 2012 10:18:27 GMT -5
It's pretty difficult to be ahead of the curve when you're not signed until you're 19. He misses his 19 year old season because Sox sign him late instead of college. He gets hurt in his 20 yr old season and misses out on a possible promotion. Agree that he's not ahead of the curve. But, I wouldn't say he's behind it. You can't compare every prospect to your best prospect. I think he'll start in Salem and be in line for an early promotion. He'll be on the same path as Jackie Bradley Jr. There b-days are only day apart ironically.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 5, 2012 10:37:10 GMT -5
It's pretty difficult to be ahead of the curve when you're not signed until you're 19. He misses his 19 year old season because Sox sign him late instead of college. He gets hurt in his 20 yr old season and misses out on a possible promotion. Agree that he's not ahead of the curve. But, I wouldn't say he's behind it. You can't compare every prospect to your best prospect. I think he'll start in Salem and be in line for an early promotion. He'll be on the same path as Jackie Bradley Jr. There b-days are only day apart ironically. That's true, but it's not an excuse. Older draft picks don't do as well: www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15295And yeah, you can compair every prospect to your best prospect... of course you can. How else would you know who the best prospect is? That's practically the definition of being the best prospect in the system-- we compared you to everyone else and you're better than all of them.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 5, 2012 11:07:33 GMT -5
Kind of silly to write someone off who isn't in the bigs at 22. The Adrian Gonzalez you're so upset that we traded didn't become a full-time starter until he was 24 in 2006. Sox have two other pretty good 3b who broke in at an advanced age. I know you hate comparisions. Kevin Youkilis and Wade Boggs.
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Sept 5, 2012 11:50:40 GMT -5
Cecchini has a lot of potential and the power will come as he continues to fill out and recover from his wrist injury in late July 2011. I sure hope they don't trade him for some over-paid, big name pitcher (e.g. Lee, Josh Johnson, etc.). The Red Sox need more high OBP like him.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 5, 2012 11:57:29 GMT -5
Obviously you can find examples of good players who lagged behind the typical aging curve. There's been a whole lot of baseball players, and therefor there's a whole lot of outliers. But so what? The whole reason we remember those guys is because they had such atypical career paths. No one remembers the legions of 25 year old rookies who never did much of anything, or the guys who reached AAA at 24 and stalled out, but there's way more of them then there are Youkilisis or Boggses.
Meanwhile, you're assuming a whole lot of things that you don't actually know. For instance, that I'm upset we traded Gonzalez (I'm not, although I have a lot more apprehension about the future of the Red Sox in the wake of that trade than most), or that I'm writing Cecchini off (again, I'm not). I'm not writing off players who aren't in the majors by 22. But it's also fair to point out that players who are in the majors at 22 or younger have a substantially better track record than players who are in the majors at 22 or older. Facts are facts, even if they're not flattering for a prospect you like.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Sept 5, 2012 12:28:13 GMT -5
The age advancement scale is a good rule of thumb but, like all generalities (see me generalize?), it doesn't take into account individual circumstances.
Since we know quite a lot about Cecchini, we don't have to judge him against a generic trajectory - he's missed time to injury, played well when healthy, and scouting says he has the tools and makeup to project well at higher levels and in the majors - God willin' an' the creek don't rise. Those are the most pertinent facts.
The Sox held him at Greenville for the full season, but assuming he continues to perform I would guess he could start to move quickly in '13.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 5, 2012 12:54:48 GMT -5
The age advancement scale is a good rule of thumb but, like all generalities (see me generalize?), it doesn't take into account individual circumstances. Since we know quite a lot about Cecchini, we don't have to judge him against a generic trajectory - he's missed time to injury, played well when healthy, and scouting says he has the tools and makeup to project well at higher levels and in the majors - God willin' an' the creek don't rise. Those are the most pertinent facts. The Sox held him at Greenville for the full season, but assuming he continues to perform I would guess he could start to move quickly in '13. I understand that there's mitigating factors with regard to his age. I'd be a lot more down on him if he was 21 in Greenville and hadn't been injured. I think he's got a good chance to put those concerns well and truly behind him next year. But for me it's not enough that he theoretically projects to do that; I want to see him actually do it. Certainly I want to see that kind of performance before I start theorizing that he's a better major leaguer than Will Middlebrooks.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Sept 5, 2012 13:51:13 GMT -5
Is Cecchini behind the curve? Maybe not, but he's certainly not ahead of the curve and that's what you want to see. I mean, if we're all excited that Bogaerts is in AA as a 19 year old, it would be terribly inconsistant to dismiss the fact that Cecchini is both two years older and two levels behind him. Either age matters or it doesn't. It's can't be a thing where if a guy is advanced, that's awesome, but if a guy is behind, we just hand-wave it away. No one is comparing Cecchini to Bogaerts and no one is dismissing the age, I don't see the inconsistency. Cecchini's upside is as a future above average MLB regular, Bogaerts has superstar potential. There's a huge difference between factoring in age and not taking him serious as a legit prospect because he isn't super age advanced. It's not like people are getting excited about A ball stats in isolation, this guy has the tools and pedigree to match. It seems like you're suggesting a guy must be excelling in an age advanced setting to be taken seriously, and I don't agree with that, you evaluate on a case by case basis. Sure, he isn't a top 20 prospect in baseball like Bogaerts is, but we're allowed to get excited about non-elite prospects, and I don't think anyone is going overboard. There's a large range of possible outcomes at this point of his development, but he's certainly a legit top 10 prospect in this system at this point imo.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 5, 2012 14:03:41 GMT -5
^ This.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 5, 2012 17:41:38 GMT -5
No one is comparing Cecchini to Bogaerts and no one is dismissing the age, I don't see the inconsistency. Cecchini's upside is as a future above average MLB regular, Bogaerts has superstar potential. There's a huge difference between factoring in age and not taking him serious as a legit prospect because he isn't super age advanced. It's not like people are getting excited about A ball stats in isolation, this guy has the tools and pedigree to match. It seems like you're suggesting a guy must be excelling in an age advanced setting to be taken seriously, and I don't agree with that, you evaluate on a case by case basis. Sure, he isn't a top 20 prospect in baseball like Bogaerts is, but we're allowed to get excited about non-elite prospects, and I don't think anyone is going overboard. There's a large range of possible outcomes at this point of his development, but he's certainly a legit top 10 prospect in this system at this point imo. What I'm suggesting is that age-advancement needs to be taken seriously. I'm not denying that there can be mitigating factors in individual cases but it's not something I'd ever completely ignore. And specifically with regards to Cecchini, it's really the one thing that stands out to me as a problem for a prospect who otherwise doesn't seem to have any major weaknesses. Here's what I'm NOT, repeat NOT, suggesting: That Garin Cecchini is a bad prospect, that Garin Cecchini has no possible future in the major leagues, that no older prospects ever succeed, that age-advancement is the be-all end-all of prospect evaluation, etc. I know that I'm the resident pessimist around here, but you don't need to automatically assume the worst about everything I say. Don't worry, when I think a guy has no future as a player, I'll tell you that explicitly. Just for the record, I'm not sure I'd have Cecchini in my top 10, but he's comfortably within my top 15.
|
|
Jon Meoli
Veteran
Senior Columnist
Posts: 253
|
Post by Jon Meoli on Sept 5, 2012 18:38:27 GMT -5
Cecchini is easily the guy I'm looking forward to getting to see more of next year with Salem. I will say that anyone expecting a power surge from any player in the Carolina League is setting themselves up for a bit of a letdown. The ball just doesn't carry in a majority of parks. That's why I was looking for a bump for someone like Vitek once he got to Portland.
That said, Cecchini is interesting. And I think the truth about prospect age isn't as black and white as people are making it out. You can be higher on Bogaerts because he's 19 but not be concerned that Cecchini is older. The point is developing into guys into Major League players. There simply isn't a clock involved. Any red flags that can be raised for older players stem from the fact that they're done developing, and that's just not the case here.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Sept 5, 2012 20:05:25 GMT -5
Could he move to 2B? Pedroia is only signed through 2014 with an option for 2015.
|
|
|
Post by justen on Sept 5, 2012 20:11:48 GMT -5
Could he move to 2B? Pedroia is only signed through 2014 with an option for 2015. I doubt this. I don't think Pedroia will be going anywhere as he not only produces consistent results but he is a true team leader and the type you build around. I think a move to one of the corner outfield spots is more likely.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 5, 2012 23:33:04 GMT -5
Could he move to 2B? Pedroia is only signed through 2014 with an option for 2015. I doubt this. I don't think Pedroia will be going anywhere as he not only produces consistent results but he is a true team leader and the type you build around. I think a move to one of the corner outfield spots is more likely. Guys, projecting a move for a player below Double-A because of who is on the roster in the major leagues is beyond silly.
|
|
|