ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,027
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 23, 2014 12:20:09 GMT -5
(and other ranking comments, while we're at it ...)
I'd say 3rd. Clearly behind Betts, and Swihart is widely regarded as the best C prospect in the game. But given the doubts about Owens' upside and the question as to whether Devers should be 4th instead of, say, Margot, 3rd seems right.
OTOH, if someone wanted to rank him as low as 8th, that would be defensible.
I'll lock the poll on Friday morning, before he's ranked officially. leave the poll open for a while ..
I may have more to say about some other rankings later ...
|
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Aug 23, 2014 12:24:01 GMT -5
I have a problem ranking him, since he's not really a prospect. He's not really comparable to the other top prospects.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike Andrews on Aug 23, 2014 12:29:09 GMT -5
He won't be ranked.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,027
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 23, 2014 13:12:06 GMT -5
Since, however, BA will rank him (and probably others), I think the poll is even more valuable! And I won't lock it any time soon. |
|
|
|
Post by ethanbein on Aug 23, 2014 16:05:49 GMT -5
Going by how much the Red Sox paid, I'd say there's a good case for 1. Mookie's expected dollar value (not surplus value) is probably around $60-70 million, so Castillo is being paid like he should be our top prospect.
|
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Aug 23, 2014 18:25:43 GMT -5
Going by how much the Red Sox paid, I'd say there's a good case for 1. Mookie's expected dollar value (not surplus value) is probably around $60-70 million, so Castillo is being paid like he should be our top prospect. I voted for 2nd because I actually think Mookie's value might be a shade higher than that. Will probably sound ridiculous to some, but consider this - some insiders thought Brady Aiken could fetch $30m if he were declared a free agent. If, for the sake of argument, we deemed that Mookie has a similar talent level to Brady Aiken, and estimated that Aiken was far enough from the majors that there was a 75% chance he would flame out / bust, then we could value Mookie near $120m. Now that's probably a bit too optimistic (Mookie still has some remaining chance of busting himself) but $80m might actually be reasonable. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Aug 23, 2014 18:28:29 GMT -5
Dollar values should have nothing to do with a player ranking.
He better be the number 1 because if Mookie was clearly better, his signing wouldn't be necessary.
|
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Aug 23, 2014 18:34:08 GMT -5
He better be the number 1 because if Mookie was clearly better, his signing wouldn't be necessary. If it were always clear which prospect is the better one, this website might as well be shut down. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Aug 23, 2014 19:04:45 GMT -5
If Mookie betts were a free agent he wouldn't sniff a 72m contract
|
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Aug 23, 2014 19:11:11 GMT -5
If Mookie betts were a free agent he wouldn't sniff a 72m contract If he was Cuban he might. |
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Aug 23, 2014 19:15:24 GMT -5
If Mookie betts were a free agent he wouldn't sniff a 72m contract I really like how you're backing up your stance with coherent arguments. It all makes sense to me now. |
|
|
|
Post by dewey1972 on Aug 23, 2014 21:20:41 GMT -5
Dollar values should have nothing to do with a player ranking. He better be the number 1 because if Mookie was clearly better, his signing wouldn't be necessary. If you can get a good player and give up nothing but money, and you have plenty of money, you still sign him, regardless of the other players you have. It gives you another asset. Having Castillo means that they can much more easily trade any of the outfielders they have. Especially with the new CBA making it more difficult to get players through the draft, it makes sense to get players wherever you can. Whether or not he's better than Mookie is irrelevant to the signing. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Aug 24, 2014 9:26:57 GMT -5
If Mookie betts were a free agent he wouldn't sniff a 72m contract I really like how you're backing up your stance with coherent arguments. It all makes sense to me now. I'm sorry, you really need a full fledged analysis to support my assertion that Betts wouldn't receive a 72m contract right now were he a free agent. Obviously he and anyone in his position never really could be a free agent so there is no history to compare it to, but common sense needs to apply. I know people here don't like common sense because there's no number to back it up, however here's some evidence. Castillo is assumed to be an above average defensive center fielder with pop. He could certainly bust, but given his defensive ability and base running he shouldn't be a complete waste. Plus, the current success rate of top players from Cuba is impressive. Betts needs his bat to carry him and he has a limited minor league track record (albeit an impressive one) and zero major league track record. As of now he's atrocious in centerfield. If Betts were truly a free agent teams would be signing him as a second basemen and they get much lower contracts than a center fielder. However, a couple recent free agent contracts for center fielders: BJ Upton before his age 28 season and before he fell off a cliff 5/72 Bourne before his age 30 season 4/48 Sure Mookie is much younger, but he has no track record, plays lousy defense, is really a second baseman and his upside isn't better than what Uptons was when he signed and he doesn't have Uptons track record. I only brought up money because other people were discussing it as evidence of where they'd rank. |
|
|
|
Post by ethanbein on Aug 24, 2014 9:58:29 GMT -5
www.draysbay.com/2012/3/9/2847644/prospect-valuesThis is analysis from a few years ago. OF prospects 6-15 are worth approximately $50 in surplus value alone. Then add in what they get paid in pre-arb and arb ($25 million?) and it's not too hard to see Mookie being worth $70 million over those 6 years. It's worth noting that if he were a free agent he probably wouldn't get a 6 year contract, that's just too much risk for a prospect. Maybe he would get something like a 3 year deal. Like you said, they don't get to be free agents so we have no true comps. But that doesn't mean that, over those 6 years that the Red Sox control him, he doesn't have $70 million in expected value.
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979 
|
Post by dd on Sept 19, 2014 13:01:11 GMT -5
What would his grade be? I.e. current, floor & ceiling?
|
|
