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.
Sickels Red Sox Top 20/MLB Top 200 Prospects
|
|
Post by nothingball on Dec 30, 2016 12:58:55 GMT -5
I thought we usually gave John Sickel's top 20 Red Sox prospects lists its own thread, but consider how down most folks here are on our current minor league system, I'll just add it here. I would like for everyone to read the last sentence of our #1 prospects write-up, as this wasn't something I expected to see and is certainly something positive to discuss! www.minorleagueball.com/2016/12/29/14119404/boston-red-sox-top-20-prospects-for-2017 |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 30, 2016 13:20:34 GMT -5
I thought this was worth it's own thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Costigan on Dec 30, 2016 13:22:51 GMT -5
Sickels gave Mata a C+ grade, continuing his rising prospect status in our organization.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 30, 2016 13:31:54 GMT -5
A few scattered thoughts:
-What nothingball is alluding to above is that Sickels has Benintendi as the #1 prospect in baseball. I think that's the first time we've seen that, although it's been alluded to a few times (most notably, by Alex Speier). It's certainly a defensible position.
-I think Sickels is underrating Brian Johnson, although, to be fair, he's tough to rank both because of his anxiety/arm issues and because those issues have limited his innings in recent years.
-Sickels means it as a compliment, but seeing the back half of your top 20 be filled with relievers is not ideal.
|
|
|
|
Post by xycosis on Dec 30, 2016 14:14:34 GMT -5
A few scattered thoughts: -What nothingball is alluding to above is that Sickels has Benintendi as the #1 prospect in baseball. I think that's the first time we've seen that, although it's been alluded to a few times (most notably, by Alex Speier). It's certainly a defensible position. -I think Sickels is underrating Brian Johnson, although, to be fair, he's tough to rank both because of his anxiety/arm issues and because those issues have limited his innings in recent years. -Sickels means it as a compliment, but seeing the back half of your top 20 be filled with relievers is not ideal. I think that Baseball America's 2017 edition will have Benintendi on the cover. |
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,656 
|
Post by gerry on Dec 30, 2016 19:55:23 GMT -5
A few scattered thoughts: -What nothingball is alluding to above is that Sickels has Benintendi as the #1 prospect in baseball. I think that's the first time we've seen that, although it's been alluded to a few times (most notably, by Alex Speier). It's certainly a defensible position. -I think Sickels is underrating Brian Johnson, although, to be fair, he's tough to rank both because of his anxiety/arm issues and because those issues have limited his innings in recent years. -Sickels means it as a compliment, but seeing the back half of your top 20 be filled with relievers is not ideal. Agree on the cluster of RPs but anticipate some farm rebuilding if several of them work out. Not a terrible thing. |
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 30, 2016 22:31:59 GMT -5
I like that he has Dalbec ahead of Travis with the same letter grade. For me, I prefer the longshot high ceiling to safer high floor bet.
|
|
|
|
Post by slam761 on Dec 31, 2016 1:00:59 GMT -5
A few scattered thoughts: -What nothingball is alluding to above is that Sickels has Benintendi as the #1 prospect in baseball. I think that's the first time we've seen that, although it's been alluded to a few times (most notably, by Alex Speier). It's certainly a defensible position. -I think Sickels is underrating Brian Johnson, although, to be fair, he's tough to rank both because of his anxiety/arm issues and because those issues have limited his innings in recent years. -Sickels means it as a compliment, but seeing the back half of your top 20 be filled with relievers is not ideal. I agree it's not ideal to have all those RP, but if it may help to prevent DD from needing to trade our other prospects for bullpen help again over the next few years, isn't that still worth something? |
|
|
|
Post by costpet on Dec 31, 2016 8:07:21 GMT -5
2 A's and 5 B's What a farm system.
|
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Dec 31, 2016 12:30:22 GMT -5
Was it just me or did he seem a little conservative with some of his ceiling projections? I would've thought that Groome's "upside" was that of an ace, given that he was seen as arguably the top overall talent in his draft class. I also thought most scouts have graded Dalbec and Devers' raw power more like 65-70, particularly Dalbec?
|
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 31, 2016 13:43:52 GMT -5
Was it just me or did he seem a little conservative with some of his ceiling projections? I would've thought that Groome's "upside" was that of an ace, given that he was seen as arguably the top overall talent in his draft class. I also thought most scouts have graded Dalbec and Devers' raw power more like 65-70, particularly Dalbec? There's a difference between raw power and power grades. For Dalbec, he said "60-grade power at least". That would be the current power grade including both power components, raw power and mechanical things like bat speed, swing angle, loft, etc. To me, "at least" says he's on the 70 cusp, most analysts don't use numbers like 65. For Devers, he said "60-grade raw power and excellent bat speed". That combo should yield about a 70 current power grade. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 31, 2016 19:03:28 GMT -5
You're never going to have better in-game power than raw power. That doesn't make any sense. In-game power is essentially like what percentage of your raw power you're able to tap into based on your hitting skills.
But as for ctfisher's points, 1) Just because you may have been the top pitching talent in a draft doesn't mean you have an ace ceiling necessarily. I get not thinking he has an ace ceiling. 2) He didn't give a ceiling for Dalbec, and I second pbf's point that he's probably talking in-game power. 3) He's very wrong that Devers only has 60 raw, imo. Maybe in-game it plays at 60, but it's more than 60 raw. Of course, very possible that my opinion is swayed by how many times I've happened to see him go deep in person.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Dec 31, 2016 22:20:06 GMT -5
I cant be the only one still puzzled by the Chatham pick last year.
|
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 31, 2016 22:53:50 GMT -5
I cant be the only one still puzzled by the Chatham pick last year. For me, the pick made sense. He likely wasn't the usual best player available but in his case, he was the best college shortstop in a weak college shortstop year. That fact could easily turn him into a future trade chip or the longshot that there's enough pop and defense that he could develop into a very solid prospect. He's a big athletic guy for a shortstop. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 1, 2017 5:10:25 GMT -5
2 A's and 5 B's What a farm system. I'd say there's 2 more A's at the major league club in Xander (A-) and Mookie (A+) and 1 more B with Eduardo Rodriguez. Swihart also has a chance to be a B at some point in 2017 or later too. These players are all 25 or younger heading into 2017. Pretty good position to be in. I'll trade that for a stronger farm system anyday. Just to add, the Yankees have 1 A prospect and about 10 B type prospects. While they have much more depth, the Sox have the more elite type talents in the A department with both Benintendi and Devers. I'll gladly take that too. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on Jan 5, 2017 23:09:26 GMT -5
Anybody want to make a guess for a likely player comp for Dalbec. I know am reaching here, but something maybe like Butch Hobson from 77-79. 250 hitter with high strikeout rate and 30 HR power?
|
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Jan 6, 2017 8:43:30 GMT -5
Good comparison. What I find more interesting though is that mlb.com has dalbec rated 16th and sickels and sox prospects have him in the 5 range. To me that is a BIG diff. Not sure what each one sees or does not see. To me it shows that dalbec is truly in the boom or bust category.
|
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 6, 2017 8:49:39 GMT -5
Good comparison. What I find more interesting though is that mlb.com has dalbec rated 16th and sickels and sox prospects have him in the 5 range. To me that is a BIG diff. Not sure what each one sees or does not see. To me it shows that dalbec is truly in the boom or bust category. MLB.com hasn't updated yet. |
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 6, 2017 9:05:52 GMT -5
Dalbec isn't like Hobson because Dalbec can play defense. The glovework/range aren't standout, but the arm is.
|
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 6, 2017 9:17:13 GMT -5
Dalbec isn't like Hobson because Dalbec can play defense. The glovework/range aren't standout, but the arm is. Yeah but can he crash headlong into the stands ? |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 6, 2017 14:09:37 GMT -5
Good comparison. What I find more interesting though is that mlb.com has dalbec rated 16th and sickels and sox prospects have him in the 5 range. To me that is a BIG diff. Not sure what each one sees or does not see. To me it shows that dalbec is truly in the boom or bust category. MLB.com hasn't updated yet. It kind of kills me that they update all the time in terms of players coming and going, but then don't update the rankings. I think that confuses a lot of people. I've seen writers citing their rankings as though they were updated and it makes me cringe for Jim and Mayo whenever I see it. |
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 6, 2017 14:54:56 GMT -5
MLB.com hasn't updated yet. It kind of kills me that they update all the time in terms of players coming and going, but then don't update the rankings. I think that confuses a lot of people. I've seen writers citing their rankings as though they were updated and it makes me cringe for Jim and Mayo whenever I see it. To a large extent they bring it on themselves by slotting in those players because it takes some thought (Kopech in Chicago, for example). That's on Callis and Mayo, not MLB. |
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Jan 9, 2017 11:17:47 GMT -5
Hey James, I sold my Strat-o matic cards decades ago, and I don't remember Hobson's fielding rating, but remember that he was the backup quarterback for Alabama and considered to have a very strong arm. Also, when he threw wretchedly during that '78 stretch run and was replaced by Jack Brohamer at third and shifted to DH, it was because his arm was so badly injured he couldn't fully bend it.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,962
|
Post by jimoh on Jan 9, 2017 19:19:37 GMT -5
Hey James, I sold my Strat-o matic cards decades ago, and I don't remember Hobson's fielding rating, but remember that he was the backup quarterback for Alabama and considered to have a very strong arm. Also, when he threw wretchedly during that '78 stretch run and was replaced by Jack Brohamer at third and shifted to DH, it was because his arm was so badly injured he couldn't fully bend it. Yeah, I think Hobson had movable pieces of bone in his elbow, and for each pitch would rearrange them as he got set, hoping to be able to throw. |
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,634
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 9, 2017 20:15:59 GMT -5
Hey James, I sold my Strat-o matic cards decades ago, and I don't remember Hobson's fielding rating, but remember that he was the backup quarterback for Alabama and considered to have a very strong arm. Also, when he threw wretchedly during that '78 stretch run and was replaced by Jack Brohamer at third and shifted to DH, it was because his arm was so badly injured he couldn't fully bend it. With his injury, Butch Hobson showed he could still throw the bomb as I would guess that he air mailed his 1b quite frequently, not that the Boomer could move by then. I would think his arm was quite strong. I remember Bill Lee writing something to the effect that with Butch Hobson it wasn't making the play that thrilled him but wondering how badly hurt he could get making the play as in how hard can I ram into the wall and make this catch, something of that ilk. Now that I think of it, Bobby Dalbec could very well be Butch Hobson, although I'd hope he'd be better defensively, and I hope his hit tool proves to be better, and I hope he can show some plate selectivity as Hobson was a low BB/high K, low BA with power type of player, kind of like Middlebrooks, who also reminded me of Hobson offensively. |
|
|
