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 brianthetaoist on Feb 12, 2016 10:24:17 GMT -5
klawchat going on now : "Kopech might have made the [top 100] list if he hadn't been suspended and had shown he could hold that stuff all year. He was off the charts in short stints in instructs. Definite candidate to be top 50 next offseason." Fair enough ... I've mentioned before that I think people are sleeping on Kopech, but that's a reasonable position to take. Especially by a guy who thinks Espinoza's "scary good" but keeps him at 38 because of injury/distance from majors. And, yeah, he seems to be a bit of an outlier on Devers, but Rafael has the upside, that's for sure. If all of the Big 4 have good years, it's going to be quite a Sox bunch near the top of next winter's lists (making the relatively safe, but not assured, assumption none of them graduate). |
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Feb 13, 2016 9:44:55 GMT -5
Okay thank god for Alex Speier, he mentions that BA has the Sox ranked 4. Also Marc Normandin mentions that Laws top 100 most of the kids on the list are older than Xman, Betts, E-Rod. This is what has been eating at me with this list. I keep seeing the same kids on these teams and in the meanwhile we have all new prospects. So Law can keep his list. I keep seeing Gallo from the Rangers ,Twin's prospects have been on this list for two years in a row. In a way it makes me laugh. I can keep going. I want us to feel good about where the Red Sox are and future.
One more thing when this high end prospects graduate from some of these teams are they gonna maintain there status?
|
|
|
|
Post by malynn19 on Feb 13, 2016 10:41:23 GMT -5
7) Devers 17) Moncada 18) Benintendi 25) Margot 34) Guerra 38) Espinoza My god, he LOVES him some Devers, doesn't he? I mean, he's consistent about it, so it's fine by me, but good lord does he take the 90th percentile projection on him. Nothing wrong with that. Everyone here seems to forget him. I was trying to write a post on Devers' page (when MLB did their list) and I couldn't find it until the 7th page. I am very happy with all our prospects, but I am "Bullish" on Owens, Devers (Our top 2 trade bait) and Kopech. |
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,667 
|
Post by gerry on Feb 14, 2016 13:18:33 GMT -5
My god, he LOVES him some Devers, doesn't he? I mean, he's consistent about it, so it's fine by me, but good lord does he take the 90th percentile projection on him. Nothing wrong with that. Everyone here seems to forget him. I was trying to write a post on Devers' page (when MLB did their list) and I couldn't find it until the 7th page. I am very happy with all our prospects, but I am "Bullish" on Owens, Devers (Our top 2 trade bait) and Kopech. Don't know why we would trade: Devers, with 3B so unsettled, the need for power after Papi retires, his improvwd athleticism, and years of team control at reasonable rates. We will see how well thia young team progresses, but trading is for need-fulfillment and we may not need anyone worth Devers. He is in a league with Beni and Moncada; the Sox future core. Owens, showing so much promise already, and needing his high quality depth this season and next, trading him seems equally self-defeating, no? |
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Feb 14, 2016 13:33:44 GMT -5
No reason to trade any of our top prospects right know. Boegarts, betts, swihart, Bradley, Ebro along with devers, beni,moncada,and Espinoza in the next couple of years represents a great core of players. Team is in a great place to contend now and in the future, we need to exhibit patience this year if the season doesn't break right. Took the royals core 4 to 5 years to fully develop and I like our core a lot better.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 14, 2016 14:12:40 GMT -5
I just have a lot of problems with his rankings this year. Normally I think his rankings are some of the best. He loves upside players, which some other sites seem to overlook at times. I think he has Devers and Margot way too high. I think Moncada has to be ranked above Devers. What he did last year was special in the second half of the year. After such a big layoff its not a surprise he needed time to get things going. I see Devers as a top 20 guy. Not going to go into another huge anti Margot rant, but nothing he did last year deserves to be ranked this high. I am shocked Kopech isn't on his list. I also think Travis has to be close to a top 100 guy. We lost some depth but I like our top 7 against almost all other systems.
|
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Feb 14, 2016 14:24:27 GMT -5
I'm also surprised Travis didn't make any top 100 lists. To me he seems like a pure hitter, might not have the power projection, but will get his share of doubles.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Post by nomar on Feb 14, 2016 15:43:05 GMT -5
I'm also surprised Travis didn't make any top 100 lists. To me he seems like a pure hitter, might not have the power projection, but will get his share of doubles. Looking at the bottom part of the top 100, I think it's justifiable to say they're better prospects than Travis. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 14, 2016 20:28:54 GMT -5
I'm also surprised Travis didn't make any top 100 lists. To me he seems like a pure hitter, might not have the power projection, but will get his share of doubles. Looking at the bottom part of the top 100, I think it's justifiable to say they're better prospects than Travis. Travis is the type of player Law misses on all the time. He doesn't have a huge ceiling because of limited power and the fact he can only play 1B. On the other hand he can flat out hit and has good on base skills. He has hit almost the same at 4 different levels in the minors over his first 2 years and just had a very good fall league. That's 5 different stops in 2 years and he has hit well at all 5 stops. That is very hard to do and a great sign for his future success.
|
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Feb 14, 2016 20:43:53 GMT -5
Looking at the bottom part of the top 100, I think it's justifiable to say they're better prospects than Travis. Travis is the type of player Law misses on all the time. He doesn't have a huge ceiling because of limited power and the fact he can only play 1B. On the other hand he can flat out hit and has good on base skills. He has hit almost the same at 4 different levels in the minors over his first 2 years and just had a very good fall league. That's 5 different stops in 2 years and he has hit well at all 5 stops. That is very hard to do and a great sign for his future success.
|
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Feb 14, 2016 20:48:41 GMT -5
Exactly he might not have the highest ceiling, but there is a very good chance he's going to be a solid major league hitter. I've seen a lot of toolsy prospects fail, I'd be surprised if there is 100 mlb prospects that have a better career then him.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 15, 2016 0:12:42 GMT -5
Travis is the type of player Law misses on all the time.
Citation Needed. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 16, 2016 2:41:43 GMT -5
Travis is the type of player Law misses on all the time.
Citation Needed. What exactly does that mean??
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 16, 2016 2:46:08 GMT -5
ESPN today came out with its Zips rating for top 100 prospects. Have to say I am not sure what to make out of it. Has Devers ranked where I think he should, but really seems to be low on a bunch of our other prospects. List Margot as 6th best prospect in baseball, which blows my mind. It does though have Travis ranked 93rd overall.
|
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Feb 16, 2016 2:52:02 GMT -5
What exactly does that mean??
It means cite some examples of when law missed on that type of player. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 16, 2016 4:05:26 GMT -5
It's Keith Laws own words from a podcast. Was asked about two prospects and why one was ranked higher then the other, when the higher ranking player had worst stats. Keith said its all about upside with him, would rather miss small then miss big. Said he will always rank a player with higher upside over a player with better stats and a lower upside.
Look at the Zips projections it has about 30 prospects in the top 100 that Law doesn't. Which includes Brian Johnson and Sam Travis, two player I think will have much better success then many of the players Law has in the top 100.
Two players that come to mind are Brandon Workman and Christian Vazquez. I have not looked this up, but if I remember right Law wasn't high on either player. Now injuries have really hurt them, but in the stretch run of a title season Workman was a beast in the pen and Vazquez in his short time in the majors had people calling him one of the best defensive catchers in baseball. They will never be stars but they will have much better careers then a ton of players ranked before them.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,780
|
Post by mobaz on Feb 16, 2016 6:56:10 GMT -5
Law also admits he hugely downgrades 1B-only prospects. It's kind of confusing, because it's still a position.
|
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Feb 16, 2016 7:52:58 GMT -5
So you claim Law misses on a certain kind of player "all the time" and you name two examples, high of whom have done virtually nothing in their major league career. I'm pretty sure Klaw never said, "Workman will never have a half a season of being a decent middle reliever."
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Post by nomar on Feb 16, 2016 8:48:38 GMT -5
Law also admits he hugely downgrades 1B-only prospects. It's kind of confusing, because it's still a position. Not necessarily. He's high on Dom Smith, way more than I would be. Honestly Smith and Travis have similar profiles, Smith with an advantage in power ceiling (although both are far from theirs) and age. Keith Law is obviously very smart, but I think sometimes he relishes having hyperbolic views for the attention it brings. |
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Feb 16, 2016 9:28:46 GMT -5
Looking at the bottom part of the top 100, I think it's justifiable to say they're better prospects than Travis. Travis is the type of player Law misses on all the time. He doesn't have a huge ceiling because of limited power and the fact he can only play 1B. On the other hand he can flat out hit and has good on base skills. He has hit almost the same at 4 different levels in the minors over his first 2 years and just had a very good fall league. That's 5 different stops in 2 years and he has hit well at all 5 stops. That is very hard to do and a great sign for his future success.
Not sure about this. Travis still has a lot to prove and may not have the pop typically associated with first base. Let's see how he looks after 600 ABs between AA and AAA. The differences in each level are huge. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 16, 2016 9:38:42 GMT -5
So you claim Law misses on a certain kind of player "all the time" and you name two examples, high of whom have done virtually nothing in their major league career. I'm pretty sure Klaw never said, "Workman will never have a half a season of being a decent middle reliever." Very surprised by this take. Law himself will admit and has admitted that he will miss on these types of prospects. He is a big upside guy. I am not going to take the time to proof a point that the MAN himself has said is true. Do you understand the data one would have to go through to get a list of players he missed on?? I am also not a big prospect guy outside of the Red Sox.
Another name that just came to mind is Josh Reddick.
I think you forget how good Workman was in the playoff 7 games 8.2 innings, 1.15 whip and 0.00 ERA. Then look at the first 3 months of 2014 again a very good pitcher(3.02 ERA) till arm trouble started to become a problem for the last 3 months and then made him miss all of 2015. Can't blame him for getting injured, it happens. He's all not just a bullpen arm he was also a swing starter. As for Vazquez his 55 games and 1.1 rWAR is more then a bunch of top 100 guys will ever do. You get that a large share of the top 100 guys will never go on to become even an average major league player right??
So over the last what 4 years you have Reddick, Workman, Vazquez, Johnson and Travis. Now do that for all teams and you have a ton of players that have turned out a lot better then the guys on Laws top 100 rankings. Also you seem to be forgetting the 30 so players that Zips ranks in the top100 that Law doesn't. So where do you get only 2 players?
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 16, 2016 9:51:05 GMT -5
Law also admits he hugely downgrades 1B-only prospects. It's kind of confusing, because it's still a position. It does in a way make sense. Your teams has to have a need at 1B or you have no wear to play. Look at Betts, if he was only a 2b it would have been a lot harder to get him AB's and playing time. At the same time that approach can lead you to miss on a prospect because he only plays 1B. |
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Feb 16, 2016 10:08:10 GMT -5
Currently, the top headline on ESPN Boston is: "Keith Law lays out his top 10 prospects for the Boston Red Sox, including talented young third baseman Nomar Mazara." Cool, the Sox got Nomar Mazara and converted him to third. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 16, 2016 10:14:11 GMT -5
So you claim Law misses on a certain kind of player "all the time" and you name two examples, high of whom have done virtually nothing in their major league career. I'm pretty sure Klaw never said, "Workman will never have a half a season of being a decent middle reliever." Very surprised by this take. Law himself will admit and has admitted that he will miss on these types of prospects. He is a big upside guy. I am not going to take the time to proof a point that the MAN himself has said is true. Do you understand the data one would have to go through to get a list of players he missed on?? I am also not a big prospect guy outside of the Red Sox.
Another name that just came to mind is Josh Reddick.
I think you forget how good Workman was in the playoff 7 games 8.2 innings, 1.15 whip and 0.00 ERA. Then look at the first 3 months of 2014 again a very good pitcher(3.02 ERA) till arm trouble started to become a problem for the last 3 months and then made him miss all of 2015. Can't blame him for getting injured, it happens. He's all not just a bullpen arm he was also a swing starter. As for Vazquez his 55 games and 1.1 rWAR is more then a bunch of top 100 guys will ever do. You get that a large share of the top 100 guys will never go on to become even an average major league player right??
So over the last what 4 years you have Reddick, Workman, Vazquez, Johnson and Travis. Now do that for all teams and you have a ton of players that have turned out a lot better then the guys on Laws top 100 rankings. Also you seem to be forgetting the 30 so players that Zips ranks in the top100 that Law doesn't. So where do you get only 2 players?
It's hard to take a complaint that someone missed on Workman seriously. |
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Feb 16, 2016 10:42:04 GMT -5
I follow KLaw pretty closely. While he has never ranked Travis, Vazquez or Johnson in his top 100, he has always been positive about all three. If you go back and read the full body of his work, I think you'll agree he sees all three as potentially serviceable Major Leaguers, and Vazquez as maybe a bit more.
He tends to favor upside and gloves, and you have to weigh that when reading his material. However, he has shown a reasonable appreciation for these three players, and his assessment of Johnson has consistently been more optimistic than that of many on this board. He was complimentary of the pick when it was made.
|
|
|
