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.
2023 National Rankings (in season)
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Apr 9, 2023 12:20:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Apr 13, 2023 13:44:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Apr 25, 2023 9:19:35 GMT -5
Casas graduated as a prospect in BA's rankings.
|
|
|
|
Post by evanstonredsox on May 8, 2023 14:13:45 GMT -5
BA updated their top 100
Mayer 13
Yoshida 39
Rafaela 75
Bleis 96
Casas graduated, Yoshida made a big jump, no Yorke
Volpe moved up to 4 and finally surpassed Mayer on BA's list after being the only outlet to prefer Mayer for the last year or so
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,022 
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on May 8, 2023 14:16:10 GMT -5
Yoshida being one of the best hitters in the MLB and being #39 lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 8, 2023 15:22:14 GMT -5
BA updated their top 100 Mayer 13 Yoshida 39 Rafaela 75 Bleis 96 Casas graduated, Yoshida made a big jump, no Yorke Volpe moved up to 4 and finally surpassed Mayer on BA's list after being the only outlet to prefer Mayer for the last year or so Yorke wasn't in there (unless you meant only to point out he hadn't jumped back in, which I don't think would be warranted myself). For reference, their previous rankings 10. Mayer 29. Casas 71. Rafaela 87. Yoshida 88. Bleis |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 8, 2023 15:25:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by evanstonredsox on May 8, 2023 17:33:06 GMT -5
BA updated their top 100 Mayer 13 Yoshida 39 Rafaela 75 Bleis 96 Casas graduated, Yoshida made a big jump, no Yorke Volpe moved up to 4 and finally surpassed Mayer on BA's list after being the only outlet to prefer Mayer for the last year or so Yorke wasn't in there (unless you meant only to point out he hadn't jumped back in, which I don't think would be warranted myself). For reference, their previous rankings 10. Mayer 29. Casas 71. Rafaela 87. Yoshida 88. Bleis Just brought up Yorke since hes probably the only other Red Sox who could feasibly make the list. Thanks for pointing out Volpe, didn’t catch the last update. |
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 8, 2023 20:06:29 GMT -5
Wait, Mayer moved down three spots? The heck?
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,022
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on May 8, 2023 20:34:59 GMT -5
Wait, Mayer moved down three spots? The heck? Yoshida just won AL player of the week and isn’t even top 30! He is barely top 40!! Reminds me of the family guy “mystery box” scene. Yoshida is Yoshida but those prospects ranked ahead of him can be anything- if they luck out they can even be Yoshida!! You know how much we’ve always wanted one of those!!! |
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 8, 2023 20:50:33 GMT -5
I mean he'll be 30 years old in two months. It's very possible that he's already in his decline phase. He's also pretty clearly the best player on that list at present. That's part of why it seems so nonsensical to rank veteran players. But for the purposes of this list, you wouldn't be able to trade him straight up for most of the players ahead of him, right? Like if you called up the Diamondbacks and offered him for Druw Jones, they're laughing at you.
EDIT: It'd be akin to trying to figure out where to put, like, Cedric Mullins on a prospect list. Just kind of silly as an exercise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on May 8, 2023 22:35:05 GMT -5
Like if you called up the Diamondbacks and offered him for Druw Jones, they're laughing at you. It's the Diamondbacks bro, they'd probably jump on Jones, an AA arm and a lottery ticket to sweeten the deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 9, 2023 9:41:33 GMT -5
Wait, Mayer moved down three spots? The heck? Using Wayback Machine because BA doesn't archive this stuff: Graduated: Henderson, Carroll Moved ahead of Mayer in post-ST update: Volpe Moved ahead in this update: Holliday, Wood, Carter, Lawlar. I get Volpe and Holliday for sure. The others, I'm not sure how you have information now that justifies the movement after one month. Carter has been destroying the Texas League at the same age so I kind of get that but the other two, meh? |
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on May 9, 2023 9:48:11 GMT -5
Wait, Mayer moved down three spots? The heck? Using Wayback Machine because BA doesn't archive this stuff: Graduated: Henderson, Carroll Moved ahead of Mayer in post-ST update: Volpe Moved ahead in this update: Holliday, Wood, Carter, Lawlar. I get Volpe and Holliday for sure. The others, I'm not sure how you have information now that justifies the movement after one month. Carter has been destroying the Texas League at the same age so I kind of get that but the other two, meh? Is that Carter as in Evan, the Rangers' prospect? I don't have a BA sub. If so, hell of a job doing the eval on him, as people were BAFFLED by that pick when it was made. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 9, 2023 9:53:03 GMT -5
Using Wayback Machine because BA doesn't archive this stuff: Graduated: Henderson, Carroll Moved ahead of Mayer in post-ST update: Volpe Moved ahead in this update: Holliday, Wood, Carter, Lawlar. I get Volpe and Holliday for sure. The others, I'm not sure how you have information now that justifies the movement after one month. Carter has been destroying the Texas League at the same age so I kind of get that but the other two, meh? Is that Carter as in Evan, the Rangers' prospect? I don't have a BA sub. If so, hell of a job doing the eval on him, as people were BAFFLED by that pick when it was made. Yeah. Carter started the year as a top 30 guy and he's been crushing AA, albeit in a hitter-friendly league. They note his main question was power and he's hitting with power, so I get it. Keep in mind they probably discussed all this prior to Mayer's big week that completely changed the complexion of his line (which I think is an argument for why you don't move guys a ton a month into the season). |
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on May 14, 2023 22:04:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 15, 2023 8:22:07 GMT -5
Interesting they've somewhat downgraded Bleis' projection closer to a 55 than 65. I don't understand how this is done in general when a guy has yet to see advanced pitching. My guess is it's pure guesswork by the evaluator. For those unaware, a 55 makes him an average to above average MLB player. A 65 is a perennial All Star. We shall see. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 15, 2023 9:03:25 GMT -5
Interesting they've somewhat downgraded Bleis' projection closer to a 55 than 65. I don't understand how this is done in general when a guy has yet to see advanced pitching. My guess is it's pure guesswork by the evaluator. For those unaware, a 55 makes him an average to above average MLB player. A 65 is a perennial All Star. We shall see. A couple things here: 1) 55 = above-average. 50 = average. You're spot-on that a 65 is an all-star though 2) I think you might be mistaken that they ever had him graded as a 65. There isn't a single 65 on the list currently. If he was listed somewhere as a 65, then it almost certainly was a mistake. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on May 15, 2023 9:53:00 GMT -5
I put all the National Rankings in a spreadsheet as soon as they come out and none of MLB, BA, FG (via Top 100 and "Imminent" list since their overall ORG list STILL hasn't come out), ESPN or Prospects Live had him as a 65 (or a 60, for that matter).
|
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on May 15, 2023 10:19:30 GMT -5
I put all the National Rankings in a spreadsheet as soon as they come out and none of MLB, BA, FG (via Top 100 and "Imminent" list since their overall ORG list STILL hasn't come out), ESPN or Prospects Live had him as a 65 (or a 60, for that matter). Pipeline has zero 65 grades, Fangraphs "the board" gave 65s to Carroll and Henderson. None even on their international, Murakami is the highest at 60. |
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 15, 2023 10:57:37 GMT -5
Interesting they've somewhat downgraded Bleis' projection closer to a 55 than 65. I don't understand how this is done in general when a guy has yet to see advanced pitching. My guess is it's pure guesswork by the evaluator. For those unaware, a 55 makes him an average to above average MLB player. A 65 is a perennial All Star. We shall see. A couple things here: 1) 55 = above-average. 50 = average. You're spot-on that a 65 is an all-star though 2) I think you might be mistaken that they ever had him graded as a 65. There isn't a single 65 on the list currently. If he was listed somewhere as a 65, then it almost certainly was a mistake. My bad, I had him on a spreadsheet as ranging from 55-65 and had MLB as the source for 60 to 65, but no link. Above average it is. I'm good with that. However, that means he's not untouchable, as many people here describe him. Not like they'd be moving him for a reliever, but he's certainly a guy who would be in play in a package for a controllable MLB player in a position of need, if that's what the Front Office decided was the difference going forward. I think the only untouchable* is Mayer (*being that everyone is technically in play, but it would take a player who checks a whole lotta boxes to have Mayer in a deal for him). |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 15, 2023 11:19:11 GMT -5
Well herein lies the problem with watering down an evaluation to a single number, right?
He's a FV55 for Pipeline, but the ceiling is much higher while the floor is also much lower. Kind of narrows the kind of deal he even fits into.
For what it's worth though, had anyone labeled him as truly untouchable? Like you're not trading him for a half-year rental (as you allude to), but would anyone say they wouldn't move him for multiple years of team control of a proven MLB 55 or better?
|
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on May 15, 2023 11:25:46 GMT -5
Well herein lies the problem with watering down an evaluation to a single number, right? He's a FV55 for Pipeline, but the ceiling is much higher while the floor is also much lower. Kind of narrows the kind of deal he even fits into. For what it's worth though, had anyone labeled him as truly untouchable? Like you're not trading him for a half-year rental (as you allude to), but would anyone say they wouldn't move him for multiple years of team control of a proven MLB 55 or better? Obviously this trade didn't quite work out (although Pomeranz's 2017 was awesome, which I don't remember), but it seems like a pretty comparable case to Anderson Espinoza. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 15, 2023 14:22:00 GMT -5
Y'know, that's not a bad comp at all. I think the only big difference is that Espinoza, to me, felt like a big injury risk looking at his size compared to his stuff, which kind of bore out. Although it was such big stuff that maybe the injury risk brought him back into the Bleis range a bit? (For those who don't recall, think Perales but with even bigger stuff and smaller.)
They got 2.5 years of Pomeranz there, although my recollection, which is kind of confirmed by the trade analysis Ian wrote at the time, was that it was a very steep price to pay in a win-now deal, perhaps made a bit easier to swallow because the system was loaded in those days. We noted the deal allowed them to keep the Moncada, Benintendi, Devers trio, but that Espinoza was at the time better than Jay Groome (who signed the day of the trade!) and Michael Kopech.
I'll add though that even since just 2016, the landscape for trading minor leaguers below Double-A has changed drastically. I wonder if teams would make that deal today given the risk of exactly what happened to Espinoza happening. Teams want guys close to MLB now.
Wasn't that also the deal, though, where the Padres were being sketchy about Pomeranz' medicals?
|
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on May 15, 2023 14:35:34 GMT -5
Y'know, that's not a bad comp at all. I think the only big difference is that Espinoza, to me, felt like a big injury risk looking at his size compared to his stuff, which kind of bore out. Although it was such big stuff that maybe the injury risk brought him back into the Bleis range a bit? (For those who don't recall, think Perales but with even bigger stuff and smaller.) They got 2.5 years of Pomeranz there, although my recollection, which is kind of confirmed by the trade analysis Ian wrote at the time, was that it was a very steep price to pay in a win-now deal, perhaps made a bit easier to swallow because the system was loaded in those days. We noted the deal allowed them to keep the Moncada, Benintendi, Devers trio, but that Espinoza was at the time better than Jay Groome (who signed the day of the trade!) and Michael Kopech. I'll add though that even since just 2016, the landscape for trading minor leaguers below Double-A has changed drastically. I wonder if teams would make that deal today given the risk of exactly what happened to Espinoza happening. Teams want guys close to MLB now. Wasn't that also the deal, though, where the Padres were being sketchy about Pomeranz' medicals? |
|
|
