|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Jan 6, 2014 6:40:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Jan 6, 2014 6:51:41 GMT -5
I like the ordering of the pitchers and the relatively conservative placements .
Very high on Cecchini and Vasquez for example.
|
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Jan 6, 2014 7:07:20 GMT -5
Wow Vazquez! No Ranaudo, it seems like everyone is a bit down on him except Sickels.
|
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Jan 6, 2014 9:07:47 GMT -5
Anyone know if Workman didn't rank since he can be seen as ineligible because of rookie status?
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jan 6, 2014 9:34:56 GMT -5
Not putting him in the Top 10 for this organization is not exactly "down on him".
|
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jan 6, 2014 9:45:53 GMT -5
Not putting him in the Top 10 for this organization is not exactly "down on him". Exactly. It only has to do with the system he's in. In many others, the Yankees' for example, he'd easily make the top 5, in my opinion. And as much potential power as their #1 Sanchez has, if you're actually looking for a catcher, I'd take either Vazquez or Swihart over him. A WS trophy, and one of the best farms in baseball. Can't ask for much more. |
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Jan 6, 2014 9:57:38 GMT -5
I meant it in comparison to Soxprospects own rankings. 'down' the was probably not the correct wording, should'be said 'not as high'.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 6, 2014 10:18:30 GMT -5
Any excerpts from the scouting report anyone want to share - without sharing too much - for those of us who don't subscribe?
|
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jan 6, 2014 10:20:35 GMT -5
Not putting him in the Top 10 for this organization is not exactly "down on him". I don't have a subscription right now (unemployment sucks), so I can't read the reports and I may be wrong about this, but I'm not sure that this is really true for BP. From comments he's made on Twitter, Parks seems to be the lowest out of all the major scouting guys on all three of Cecchini, Owens, and Betts, all of whom he has in our top 10 (and two of them in the top 5), so I'm not sure he sees our system as all that strong, or that Ranaudo being out of the top 10 doesn't mean he's down on him. |
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Jan 6, 2014 10:23:37 GMT -5
I'm not surprised by the Renaudo ranking.
It is not how I view him or expect him to perform this year.
The key is for him to sustain the motion consistency and gain endurance.
It will be interesting to see the plan for him.
|
|
|
|
Post by h11233 on Jan 6, 2014 11:06:07 GMT -5
There's a few decent comments from Parks in the article's comment section.
In regards to Denney as a possible prospect on the rise: "Was absolutely in the running. I'm (Parks) high on him."
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 6, 2014 12:41:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 6, 2014 12:45:16 GMT -5
Anyone know if Workman didn't rank since he can be seen as ineligible because of rookie status? Not sure if we explicitly asked him or if it was just clear from how he was talking about it, but he was eligible. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 6, 2014 12:46:55 GMT -5
Not putting him in the Top 10 for this organization is not exactly "down on him". I don't have a subscription right now (unemployment sucks), so I can't read the reports and I may be wrong about this, but I'm not sure that this is really true for BP. From comments he's made on Twitter, Parks seems to be the lowest out of all the major scouting guys on all three of Cecchini, Owens, and Betts, all of whom he has in our top 10 (and two of them in the top 5), so I'm not sure he sees our system as all that strong, or that Ranaudo being out of the top 10 doesn't mean he's down on him. He may be the "lowest" on them (we discussed this w/r/t Owens on the podcast actually), but he's still got Cheech and Owens in the Top 101 and considered Betts, so it's not like he thinks they're terrible or anything. |
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jan 6, 2014 13:04:32 GMT -5
I don't have a subscription right now (unemployment sucks), so I can't read the reports and I may be wrong about this, but I'm not sure that this is really true for BP. From comments he's made on Twitter, Parks seems to be the lowest out of all the major scouting guys on all three of Cecchini, Owens, and Betts, all of whom he has in our top 10 (and two of them in the top 5), so I'm not sure he sees our system as all that strong, or that Ranaudo being out of the top 10 doesn't mean he's down on him. He may be the "lowest" on them (we discussed this w/r/t Owens on the podcast actually), but he's still got Cheech and Owens in the Top 101 and considered Betts, so it's not like he thinks they're terrible or anything. Yeah, I didn't mean to insinuate that he hated them, or even that he was way off from everyone else, just that he's probably at the low end for all three of them, so he's probably (or at least possibly) lower than most on our system as a whole (he also only has six guys in the top 101, which I would think is the fewest we'll likely see). |
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Jan 6, 2014 13:11:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Jan 6, 2014 13:28:38 GMT -5
"This is a very strong system, with an elite player up top, a hearty collection of depth with realistic major-league realities, and a lower tier of high-ceiling talent waiting in the wings for their chance to step up.''
Yup
|
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Jan 6, 2014 13:47:50 GMT -5
Anyone know if Workman didn't rank since he can be seen as ineligible because of rookie status? The question on Workman is asked at the 31 minute mark in the podcast that Chris posted above and you can listen to the response as I am now. Too much talking to write it all down. |
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Jan 6, 2014 14:44:20 GMT -5
Excellent podcast with lots of good info. The discussion of Swihart was particularly informative. It sounds like he is headed For the top of the list...June 2015 is my prediction. One point made was his size and build now will keep him at catcher which is excellently news. I would love to see a 3to2split with Vasquez starting late next year to save both of them. Thanks to all who contribute to the excellent podcasts and #50 in particular was well timed. |
|
|
|
Post by hairps on Jan 6, 2014 16:36:37 GMT -5
Really enjoyed the podcast. Thanks, guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Jan 6, 2014 17:36:06 GMT -5
Trey Ball ahead of Ranaudo makes me cringe a bit. Absolutely love the love for Vazquez though.
|
|
|
|
Post by juanpena on Jan 6, 2014 18:38:01 GMT -5
Anyone know if Workman didn't rank since he can be seen as ineligible because of rookie status? Not sure if we explicitly asked him or if it was just clear from how he was talking about it, but he was eligible. How well does it speak of the system that the guy who pitched the eighth inning of the World Series clincher isn't in the Top 10? |
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Jan 6, 2014 18:50:09 GMT -5
Trey Ball ahead of Ranaudo makes me cringe a bit. Absolutely love the love for Vazquez though. Ball and Webster are the only two true possible top of the rotation starters that we have in the system right now. Ranaudo has had a healthy year followed by an injured year every year so far. I think Ranaudo is starting to be viewed as a future back of the bullpen arm and that reduces his potential impact. When I listened to Speier over a couple podcasts, he noted that compared to Owens and Barnes... Ranaudo doesn't miss many bats with his fastball. He thinks that this will translate towards him not being able to be a starter in the majors and will be a bullpen arm. He noted Webster and Ranaudo as the two most likely to end up in the bullpen out of our top pitching prospects (for different reasons). That's not a terrible thing as Papelbon was a starter when he first got called up to the Sox. He also noted that RDLR was well on his way to being better than what Workman could be before his injury. He expects RDLR to make a big leap this year since he is a year out from Tommy John and if he does that he is a more dominant pitcher than Workman as either a starter or relief pitcher. |
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Jan 6, 2014 19:03:39 GMT -5
Not sure if we explicitly asked him or if it was just clear from how he was talking about it, but he was eligible. How well does it speak of the system that the guy who pitched the eighth inning of the World Series clincher isn't in the Top 10? I was seeing some guys like Workman, Hassan and a couple of other players as not getting recognized in these lists that have come out lately. I also don't see Hinojosa on any lists even though we thought enough of him to give him a $4.2 million deal. That's why I created my own list on here to try and fill in the gaps with the way the Red Sox do business. I as a fan put more value in guys that I project as being more of a sure bet to contribute on the major league roster. That said... it doesn't suck to have a pitcher who showed results in the World Series off the top ten list... it certainly speaks of the strength of the system! :-D |
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 7, 2014 9:56:01 GMT -5
The podcast is great, thanks for the link! Especially loved the info on Deavers. Been waiting for so real info on him.
Listening to it reaffirms what I've heard/read regarding the Sox pitching prospects. While #3 starters are nothing to sneeze at, it sounds like, as I've heard before, this is really where our best arms are likely to end up.
This is where it must be alternately fascinating and nerve-wracking to work in a front office and decide whom to keep and whom to deal while hype/external projections remain high (specifically Owens, Webster, Barnes).
FWIW, one of the college coaches I know strongly believes Barnes - who he saw a lot - and Ball, who he scouted heavily, are both more sizzle than steak. He actually thinks Ball has a better chance to make it as a position player, thinks Barnes is ultimately a reliever, says Cecchini has great plate coverage but may end up like Hassan - good minor league OBP without enough pop for a position he can play. He is very high on Xander (like everyone else), Bradley, Swihart, and Denny.
|
|
