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 jamesmcgillstatue on Oct 15, 2014 9:29:05 GMT -5
I don't know if this is the right thread for this, but electronic edition of Baseball America today listed their 2014 draft report cards: Best Draft
1. Indians 2. Royals 3. Red Sox
4. Cubs 5. Blue Jays Yet the only player they list is RHP Josh Pennington (29th round) under the "Best Late Round Pick" category -- and Pennington did not appear in a game for the GCL Sox in 2014. www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=milb&player_id=656837#/career/R/pitching/2014/ALL
|
|
|
Post by kman22 on Oct 15, 2014 10:01:59 GMT -5
I don't know if this is the right thread for this, but electronic edition of Baseball America today listed their 2015 draft report cards: Best Draft
1. Indians 2. Royals 3. Red Sox
4. Cubs 5. Blue Jays Yet the only player they list is RHP Josh Pennington (29th round) under the "Best Late Round Pick" category -- and Pennington did not appear in a game for the GCL Sox in 2014. www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=milb&player_id=656837#/career/R/pitching/2014/ALLAssuming that's based on the 2014 draft, how did the Brewers not rank in the top 5? They landed Gatewood, Harrison, and Medeiros, all first round ranked players.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 15, 2014 11:07:29 GMT -5
Do you have a link? I can't find this anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcgillstatue on Oct 15, 2014 12:27:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 15, 2014 12:45:14 GMT -5
I don't know if this is the right thread for this, but electronic edition of Baseball America today listed their 2014 draft report cards: Best Draft
1. Indians 2. Royals 3. Red Sox
4. Cubs 5. Blue Jays Yet the only player they list is RHP Josh Pennington (29th round) under the "Best Late Round Pick" category -- and Pennington did not appear in a game for the GCL Sox in 2014. www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=milb&player_id=656837#/career/R/pitching/2014/ALLMan it seems that almost every year we are rated in the top 5 and sometimes #1. It would be nice to see the rankings over 10 years say and then a retrospective and re-ranking.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 15, 2014 12:53:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Oct 15, 2014 13:14:53 GMT -5
I don't know if this is the right thread for this, but electronic edition of Baseball America today listed their 2015 draft report cards: Best Draft
1. Indians 2. Royals 3. Red Sox
4. Cubs 5. Blue Jays Yet the only player they list is RHP Josh Pennington (29th round) under the "Best Late Round Pick" category -- and Pennington did not appear in a game for the GCL Sox in 2014. www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=milb&player_id=656837#/career/R/pitching/2014/ALLAssuming that's based on the 2014 draft, how did the Brewers not rank in the top 5? They landed Gatewood, Harrison, and Medeiros, all first round ranked players. Cause that's a pretty bad draft, at least in my opinion. Scattering interesting athletes in a draft is good, but basing your entire draft on them is very bad.
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcgillstatue on Oct 15, 2014 13:25:56 GMT -5
Pennington was the only Red Sox draftee singled out as one of the five best players, draft-wide, in any category.
I'll leave it to some of the vets on this board -- and those who know the BA folks (Manuel and Longenecker) who compiled it -- to interpret further, but their detailed analysis of Sox draftees on page 22 mentioned Travis (best pure hitter), Chavis and Ockimey (power hitters), Mars and Kemp (fastest runners), Fisher (best defensive), Kopech, McAvoy and Cosart (best fastballs), Whitson, Beeks and Shepherd (best secondary pitches), McAvoy again and J. Betts (best pro debuts), Steen (best athlete), Travis and Beeks (closest to MLB), and Peterson (28th round) as the "one who got away."
Summary: "Boston began its high-profile draft class with two high-schoolers and tied for the most prep signees of any AL team with eight."
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 15, 2014 13:49:10 GMT -5
Oh, the digital version of the magazine, not the website. Got it.
As for "best late round pick", I'm not sure what you're asking. There aren't a lot of guys who fall to the late rounds and sign anymore.
|
|
|
Post by jamesmcgillstatue on Oct 15, 2014 14:07:53 GMT -5
I guess my question (or observation) was that the draft ranking of the Red Sox as having the third-best in 2014 might be based on overall depth, potential ceiling of prospects, etc., simply because no single player stood out among the "top five draft-wide lists." Obviously, Chavis, Kopech, etc., appear to be top prospects who might have been edged out of top-five rankings by better debuts by other draftees ...
|
|
|
Post by kman22 on Oct 15, 2014 14:13:19 GMT -5
Assuming that's based on the 2014 draft, how did the Brewers not rank in the top 5? They landed Gatewood, Harrison, and Medeiros, all first round ranked players. Cause that's a pretty bad draft, at least in my opinion. Scattering interesting athletes in a draft is good, but basing your entire draft on them is very bad. Risky? Yes. But a bad draft is a pretty bold claim 4 months removed from the actual draft, again considering the pre-draft ranking of that trio.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 15, 2014 16:31:03 GMT -5
I guess my question (or observation) was that the draft ranking of the Red Sox as having the third-best in 2014 might be based on overall depth, potential ceiling of prospects, etc., simply because no single player stood out among the "top five draft-wide lists." Obviously, Chavis, Kopech, etc., appear to be top prospects who might have been edged out of top-five rankings by better debuts by other draftees ... I guess my response would be that the top 5 in a class of drafted and signed players that's something like 900 players (rough math of 30 signed draftees on average per team, which may not even be right, but close enough here), you have to be pretty elite. That's like half of a percent of all players who signed. I think it'd be a fair question to ask if they ranked the top 30 in a bunch of different categories and there were no Sox there, but I guess I don't see the issue.
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Oct 15, 2014 19:08:28 GMT -5
Cause that's a pretty bad draft, at least in my opinion. Scattering interesting athletes in a draft is good, but basing your entire draft on them is very bad. Risky? Yes. But a bad draft is a pretty bold claim 4 months removed from the actual draft, again considering the pre-draft ranking of that trio. I disagree. In fact, Jason Parks said something similar the night of the draft (I tried finding the tweet, but it looks like Jason Parks' account is now project now that he's with the Cubs). I just see it like this: Dreaming on kids with great tools is like eating sweets, they're good in moderation, but if you rely on them to sustain you then you might look really bad in a year. Of course, I was someone who hated when the Sox picked Brian Johnson and loved it when they picked David Renfroe, so I'm not exactly batting 1.000.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Oct 15, 2014 19:38:50 GMT -5
Risky? Yes. But a bad draft is a pretty bold claim 4 months removed from the actual draft, again considering the pre-draft ranking of that trio. I disagree. In fact, Jason Parks said something similar the night of the draft (I tried finding the tweet, but it looks like Jason Parks' account is now project now that he's with the Cubs). I just see it like this: Dreaming on kids with great tools is like eating sweets, they're good in moderation, but if you rely on them to sustain you then you might look really bad in a year. Of course, I was someone who hated when the Sox picked Brian Johnson and loved it when they picked David Renfroe, so I'm not exactly batting 1.000. In that regard I think the Sox had a pretty good mix of guys you can dream on like Ockimey and Koppech to go along with safer but lower upside players like Travis and Chavis.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 15, 2014 20:11:20 GMT -5
Don't feel like the lone ranger there and with Johnson? Let's keep in mind he still needs to pitch at Pawtucket before anyone gets fired up. Still have some doubts he is anything more than another Chris hernandez/Mickey Pena.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Oct 15, 2014 21:34:09 GMT -5
Don't feel like the lone ranger there and with Johnson? Let's keep in mind he still needs to pitch at Pawtucket before anyone gets fired up. Still have some doubts he is anything more than another Chris hernandez/Mickey Pena. Is he better than abe alverez?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 15, 2014 21:44:50 GMT -5
Don't feel like the lone ranger there and with Johnson? Let's keep in mind he still needs to pitch at Pawtucket before anyone gets fired up. Still have some doubts he is anything more than another Chris hernandez/Mickey Pena. I mean, if you ignore the scouting reports and the stats, then yeah, I could see feeling that way, but otherwise.... I really don't see the connection to either player other than handedness.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Oct 16, 2014 11:29:18 GMT -5
Don't feel like the lone ranger there and with Johnson? Let's keep in mind he still needs to pitch at Pawtucket before anyone gets fired up. Still have some doubts he is anything more than another Chris hernandez/Mickey Pena. Is hep better than abe alverez? Alvarez's fastball was at least a full grade lower.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 16, 2014 11:44:56 GMT -5
Don't feel like the lone ranger there and with Johnson? Let's keep in mind he still needs to pitch at Pawtucket before anyone gets fired up. Still have some doubts he is anything more than another Chris hernandez/Mickey Pena. Mickey Pena flamed out at Double-A at the same time that Johnson was having the best season is Sea Dogs history. So, while of course there's a chance he'll bust, the idea that he might "another Mickey Pena" is a little odd.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,824
|
Post by nomar on Oct 16, 2014 12:02:02 GMT -5
I would think this offseason is a good time to trade Johnson. That's a different topic though.
Also I wouldnt call Chavis low ceiling. He could be an all star 3B or 2B if he approaches his ceiling. Good raw power, good hit tool, sneaky speed, draws walks. Well see how his glove is but he's got the potential to be a stud.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Oct 16, 2014 12:27:01 GMT -5
I would think this offseason is a good time to trade Johnson. That's a different topic though. Also I wouldnt call Chavis low ceiling. He could be an all star 3B or 2B if he approaches his ceiling. Good raw power, good hit tool, sneaky speed, draws walks. Well see how his glove is but he's got the potential to be a stud. Can't play short or CF and doesn't have plus plus power and isn't projectable. Good power but not plus plus. Most 1st round picks "have the potential to be a stud", but if Chavis really had the profile you are talking about he would have been a top 5 pick. Chavis is advanced for a high schooler but he doesn't have the crazy tools of some of the guys picked ahead of him. and he's not projectable. There is a big difference between him and Koppech who relatively speaking has better tools and projection, but is far more raw.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Oct 16, 2014 13:37:32 GMT -5
I would think this offseason is a good time to trade Johnson. That's a different topic though. Also I wouldnt call Chavis low ceiling. He could be an all star 3B or 2B if he approaches his ceiling. Good raw power, good hit tool, sneaky speed, draws walks. Well see how his glove is but he's got the potential to be a stud. I agree. Including Johnson in a trade for hamels makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by jclmontana on Oct 16, 2014 13:45:13 GMT -5
I would think this offseason is a good time to trade Johnson. That's a different topic though. Also I wouldnt call Chavis low ceiling. He could be an all star 3B or 2B if he approaches his ceiling. Good raw power, good hit tool, sneaky speed, draws walks. Well see how his glove is but he's got the potential to be a stud. Can't play short or CF and doesn't have plus plus power and isn't projectable. Good power but not plus plus. Most 1st round picks "have the potential to be a stud", but if Chavis really had the profile you are talking about he would have been a top 5 pick. Chavis is advanced for a high schooler but he doesn't have the crazy tools of some of the guys picked ahead of him. and he's not projectable. There is a big difference between him and Koppech who relatively speaking has better tools and projection, but is far more raw. Shameless trolling, that is what this is. Your criteria above is highly questionable. If a player cannot play SS or CF, doesn't have plus plus power, and they are short, then they are low ceiling. OMG! I guess I better get off the Swihart bandwagon before someone notices how dumb I really am! As Jmei pointed out elsewhere about Chavis, ( forum.soxprospects.com/thread/2350/baseball-america-league-top-20), plus plus power is pretty elusive in today's game, and an unrealistic benchmark for all but elite prospects. As for his physical projection, the question is whether he needs projectability it to be a really good prospect. He already can hit the ball a long, long way, his bat speed is upper tier, he has some speed, and his other tools grade out pretty well. You don't have to like Chavis as a prospect, but if you are going to keep trotting out this particular meme, I would love to see some links to others in the baseball world who share your sentiments about Chavis being "low-ceiling."
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 16, 2014 13:58:04 GMT -5
There are zero prospects in the current system with plus plus power, including Devers. There are no third baseman who played major league baseball in 2014 that have plus plus power. Even if Chavis does move off of short, that's not the standard. Chavis's upside is something like a dozen-time All-Star who gets Hall of Fame votes. So yeah, high upside.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 16, 2014 15:00:12 GMT -5
Is hep better than abe alverez? Alvarez's fastball was at least a full grade lower. When I first saw Alvarez pitch (I believe it was in Sarasota) I was pretty unimpressed with his fastball. At the time I was standing behind home plate to check the gun and had the chance to talk with someone who was associated with the Red Sox organization. When I mentioned my lackluster impression, he responded that Alvarez had been throwing in the low 90s prior to coming to the Sarasox. This was a long time ago of course but the idea that we had a lefty who could throw that hard was an exciting 'prospect'. It turned out that Abe pitched in the 81-85 range but had very good deception with his off-speed. That carried him to AAA but then he was tapped. I think that Johnson is not only a cut above Abe with his FB but has such good location that he will be effective. I hate to say it but I think that he ultimately will be better than Owens. Owens is more the imposing figure on the mound with a great change but he does not (yet) have the necessary command IMO.
|
|
|