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.
Margot vs. Benintendi debate
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Aug 31, 2015 17:20:08 GMT -5
I've been following Keith Law a lot over many years now as have you all. To me, he is wrong so often it is like a coin flip. I don't even consider his opinion all that important any more. Nothing against him other than him being wrong, a lot.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,345
|
Post by radiohix on Aug 31, 2015 17:23:31 GMT -5
The knock on Manny Margot is that he doesn't walk enough, which make you think that he's some kind of hacker at the plate...and I disagree with that 'cause he's making a lot of contact (very small K%) which makes me think that he's an agressive hitter vs pitches in the strike zone. When you look at his BB/K at all the levels he's been through (and boy, he's been pushed agressively!), it's been always around 1 and that's very good. As a prospect, he reminds a lot of the Cardinals' Piscotty: above average power, not many walks but minimal strikeouts too.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Aug 31, 2015 17:23:57 GMT -5
I would give more cred to Guidas, than Keith Law, except on this issue.......but this team is nothing without Ortiz!
Margot's saving grace is his contact rate. It may well allow him to succeed.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Aug 31, 2015 17:29:25 GMT -5
And plays a premium position, CF. Also, FWIW, in his mid-season Top 50, Keith Law said Margot was the Sox Prospect opposing scouts were most excited about. Can someone provide an actual quote here? I find this hard to believe.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Aug 31, 2015 17:43:48 GMT -5
Benintendi by a mile. Has nothing to do with stats. Benintendi has Both a fantastic approach at the plate and very good bat speed. Those guys become very good hitters almost all the time. Margot's bat is a question mark.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Aug 31, 2015 17:45:27 GMT -5
Benintendi cause I like shiny.... ooh, it's football season!! (both sarcasm and probably truth, though not intentionally my thought process)
I'll add that seeing Bradley and Betts go through the system without any hiccups (other than JBJ for two years in Boston, that little thing) probably predisposes me to prefer the guy who has been perfect so far. I also haven't seen the two play defense, so I'm not likely giving Margot enough credit for that. Lastly, I'm probably deducting from Margot for proximity to the roadblock above him (though in the end, Benintendi might be ready first/is older, so that's probably not fair either.) I still FEEL like I like Benintendi better, but I'm understanding the other point much better now. That's what I've ben intendin' ta say.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 31, 2015 17:52:50 GMT -5
I've been following Keith Law a lot over many years now as have you all. To me, he is wrong so often it is like a coin flip. I don't even consider his opinion all that important any more. Nothing against him other than him being wrong, a lot. Almost everyone is wrong a lot. Go through the old prospect books and ratings lists. It doesn't matter who did them, a good share of the time they were wrong. Callis seems to be the best as far as I can tell. I like Law because he usually gives pretty good reasons for his ratings or his doubts, and he isn't reluctant to admit when he is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Aug 31, 2015 18:09:41 GMT -5
And plays a premium position, CF. Also, FWIW, in his mid-season Top 50, Keith Law said Margot was the Sox Prospect opposing scouts were most excited about. Can someone provide an actual quote here? I find this hard to believe. Scouts absolutely adore Margot -- more than one has told me he'd put Margot ahead of Devers and Moncada in Boston's system -- not just because of his tools but because of his instincts, with Margot potentially a plus-plus defender in center who has an excellent eye at the plate. He's already in Double-A and performing well even though he won't turn 21 until after the minor league season ends. insider.espn.go.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=4096
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Aug 31, 2015 18:18:40 GMT -5
Benintendi cause I like shiny.... ooh, it's football season!! (both sarcasm and probably truth, though not intentionally my thought process) I'll add that seeing Bradley and Betts go through the system without any hiccups (other than JBJ for two years in Boston, that little thing) probably predisposes me to prefer the guy who has been perfect so far. I also haven't seen the two play defense, so I'm not likely giving Margot enough credit for that. Lastly, I'm probably deducting from Margot for proximity to the roadblock above him (though in the end, Benintendi might be ready first/is older, so that's probably not fair either.) I still FEEL like I like Benintendi better, but I'm understanding the other point much better now. That's what I've ben intendin' ta say. Oh, how soon we forget ... anyone remember Mookie's first year anymore? They're close in prospect status. I don't think anyone is saying that Benintendi *won't* do well in AA, just that he *hasn't* ... and when you judge prospects, success needs to be taken into account. Margot has already conquered A-ball at both levels, really forced a promotion to AA due to crazy-good production in Salem outside of when he was playing hurt. I project Benintendi to do the same, but he hasn't yet. He hasn't had the chance, so it's not a knock, but there ya go. And to be down on Margot is crazy talk. He's got elite contact ability, really fast, already a plus defender in CF, shows signs of average power, and is extremely age advanced. Kid's a stud prospect, as good a position player prospect as the Sox had in years before Bogaerts/Betts/Swihart, a run which seems to have spoiled some folks around here. But he could reach Swihart-level with a strong 2016. edit to add: I'd bet serious money that when prospect lists come out in the offseason, Margot will be ranked higher than Benintendi on almost all of them, significantly higher on most.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Aug 31, 2015 18:23:36 GMT -5
I've been following Keith Law a lot over many years now as have you all. To me, he is wrong so often it is like a coin flip. I don't even consider his opinion all that important any more. Nothing against him other than him being wrong, a lot. Pretty much all the prospect evalutators are wrong 40-60% of the time. That's the nature of the game.
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Aug 31, 2015 19:13:53 GMT -5
The knock on Manny Margot is that he doesn't walk enough, which make you think that he's some kind of hacker at the plate...and I disagree with that 'cause he's making a lot of contact (very small K%) which makes me think that he's an agressive hitter vs pitches in the strike zone. When you look at his BB/K at all the levels he's been through (and boy, he's been pushed agressively!), it's been always around 1 and that's very good. As a prospect, he reminds a lot of the Cardinals' Piscotty: above average power, not many walks but minimal strikeouts too. Okay, here's where I have problems. Where is this "above average power" projection come from for Margot? 4 HR in 2012, 1 HR in 2013, 12 HR in 2014, 4 HR in 2015. I might be going a little anal on the stats right now, but he hasn't hit over .300 in any level in the minors. Optimistically you could say he projects out to be Ender Inciarte. That's a good player, but not a great one, which is my point. Benintendi could be a great player and I really don't see that out of Margot unless you're counting on his defense being at a similar level to Bradley Jr. The primary reason this is an issue is you have 2 starting caliber CF on the roster already, so it's very likely an OF will be moved to fill in the void in the pitching staff. I really hope that player is Margot and not Betts, Bradley, or Benintendi.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Aug 31, 2015 19:14:14 GMT -5
Margot has been caught stealing a lot for a guy with 65 speed. His stolen base numbers are not any better than Cechinni's were at the same levels. There is no indication he will be a prolific base stealer in the majors. Did you just make this up? Cecchini had that one outlier season in Greenville, but other than that your statement is false. A+: Margot: 23 steals and 7 CS in 254 plate appearances Cecchini: 15 steals and 7 CS in 262 plate appearances So 53% more steals with basically the same number of PA. AA: Margot: 16 steals and 6 CS in 244 PA Cecchini: 8 steals and 2 CS in 295 PA So 100% more steals in fewer PA. Plus Cecchini 193 BB+1B (rough estimate of times on 1st) compared to Magot's 112. So that would be 38 steals in (roughly) 112 chances for Margot (34%) compared to 24 steals in (roughly) 193 chances for Cecchini. It isn't even close.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Aug 31, 2015 19:34:02 GMT -5
I understand it's difficult comparing a college player to a Latin player. But, I think you guys are severely over-looking how good you have to be in order to win The Golden Spikes Award in college baseball. Here's a list. Sure there are flops. But, there are also quite a few players whom were better than Benny or Margot will ever be. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Spikes_Award
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Aug 31, 2015 19:41:17 GMT -5
chavopepe2, Although you seem to go out of your way to find fault with my posts regularly, you are stretching it bigtime in this instance. Look:
Cechinni steals in Greenville: 51, CS 6
Perhaps you conveniently overlooked that data because it didn't fit your intense desire to find fault. Or maybe you just didn't see this one either:
Cechinni Pawtucket Steals: 11, CS 1
Cechinni minor league steals total: 100, CS = 20
Margot minor league steals total: 129, CS 44 ( including 33 steals in the DSL )
Considering the caught stealing numbers, to me Cechinni has put up clearly better numbers. A much higher success ratio is generally good, no?
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Aug 31, 2015 20:05:23 GMT -5
chavopepe2, Although you seem to go out of your way to find fault with my posts regularly, you are stretching it bigtime in this instance. Look: Cechinni steals in Greenville: 51, CS 6 Perhaps you conveniently overlooked that data because it didn't fit your intense desire to find fault. Or maybe you just didn't see this one either: Cechinni Pawtucket Steals: 11, CS 1 Cechinni minor league steals total: 100, CS = 20 Margot minor league steals total: 129, CS 44 ( including 33 steals in the DSL ) Considering the caught stealing numbers, to me Cechinni has put up clearly better numbers. A much higher success ratio is generally good, no? I'm sorry you feel that way, but look back at what you wrote again: "His stolen base numbers are not any better than Cechinni's were at the same levels." 1. They have been more impressive when you consider any metric of opportunity. 2. You are implying with your statement that Cecchini's numbers were the same at multiple levels. Cecchini had one notorious outlier of a season in Greenville. That is one level. So perhaps you can loosely look at total minor league SB and CS numbers and see they are comparable, but all you're doing is undermining the point you are making by using bunk statistics. This seems to be a common thread in your posts: You have a legit point and then you undermine it by making a completely unnecessary and useless comparison that undermines the argument. If you want to make a case that Margot hasn't shown himself to have strong base running skills and gets caught stealing to much, then go for it. There might be something to that point. But it has nothing to do with Garin Cecchini and the fact that he was a singles hitting, walking machine that took advantage of being more advanced than his opponents in Greenville.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Aug 31, 2015 20:41:44 GMT -5
Margot has been caught stealing a lot for a guy with 65 speed. His stolen base numbers are not any better than Cechinni's were at the same levels. There is no indication he will be a prolific base stealer in the majors. You make a good point about his CS%. He does need to improve that, as shown below. 75% is roughly considered the break even point to make it worth attempting a steal, and he hovers right around there. You're off on the Cecchini comparison though. Every scouting report on Cecchini when he was in Greenville mentioned how he would not steal bases at higher levels, and sure enough, he started getting thrown out much more in the Carolina League and became more of an opportunistic basestealer. So in Double-A, while Margot has a steal every 3.5 games, Cecchini stole a base every 8.25 games. Add that Cecchini got on base a lot more than Margot, and the frequency with which Margot steals bases per opportunity is far higher. (I'm sure there's numbers for this kind of thing somewhere, so if someone can point those out, I'd be grateful.) Margot: SS: 18yo, 49 g, 18/26 (69%), 1 SB every 2.72 games, .351 OBP A: 19yo, 99 g, 39/52 (75%), 1/2.54, .355 OBP A+: 19-20yo, 62g, 23/30 (77%), 1/2.70, .331 OBP AA: 20 yo, 56g, 16/22 (73%), 1/3.5, .307 OBP Cecchini: SS: 20yo, 32 g, 12/14 (86%), 1/2.67, .398 OBP A: 21yo, 118 g, 51/57 (89%), 1/2.31, .394 OBP A+: 22yo, 63 g, 15/22 (68%), 1/4.2, .469 OBP AA: 22yo, 66 g, 8/10 (80%), 1/8.25, .420 OBP AAA: 23-24yo, 223 g, 19/20 (95%), 1/11.73, .313 OBP EDIT: I obviously hadn't seen the second page of this thread, but the thing is, yeah, Cecchini has been more successful, but he also has stolen bases a LOT less often above Greenville.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,345
|
Post by radiohix on Aug 31, 2015 20:53:10 GMT -5
"Above average power" doesn't mean X amount of dingers, it means a good number of XBH. I don't like counting stats so I chose to look at rate stats like IsoP and except for the NYPL, Manny Margot has put some power numbers above the league average while being one of the youngest players. BTW as much as I love Margot, I have a slight preference for Benny Baseball What I wrote above was a reaction to the people who think that MM is overated and has too many holes in his game so we should trade him ASAP
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Aug 31, 2015 21:18:57 GMT -5
"Above average power" doesn't mean X amount of dingers, it means a good number of XBH. I don't like counting stats so I chose to look at rate stats like IsoP and except for the NYPL, Manny Margot has put some power numbers above the league average while being one of the youngest players. BTW as much as I love Margot, I have a slight preference for Benny Baseball What I wrote above was a reaction to the people who think that MM is overated and has too many holes in his game so we should trade him ASAP Even looking at his ISO numbers, you're looking at .138 2012, .081 2013, .175 2014, .128 2015. This is far below what Benintendi is putting up right now, far below what Mookie put up, and also below Bradley. Bradley and Mookie have both been mentioned as fringe average 15 HR guys coming up, so what does that make Margot? Like I said, I think he could be a solid 3 WAR player in his peak, which is clearly a valuable asset. That's not someone who's unmovable though and I think Benintendi's potential is definitely higher due to his power and plate discipline combination. With Margot's plate discipline and general lack of power, I feel he's still a considerable risk to only be a backup outfielder. Next year will say a lot about both guys though depending on how quickly they move.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Aug 31, 2015 22:32:54 GMT -5
If Margot isn't stealing bases at a good percentage now even counting his time in DSL, low A etc...then I think it's unlikely he develops that ability to be a major base stealing threat in the majors. My point was that maybe that aspect of his game has been overated here. Contrasting Cechinni was to make the point that Margot has not put up better base stealing numbers overall than even Cechinni. I think Margot is a solid prospect but I have him around # 7 on my list, even behind Johnson and Owens, although in hindsight probably that was an error. I do things quickly sometimes as I'm a very busy person. Except for the past couple days I haven't been here for a month or so. I wish I had time to research every detail. A lot of time I go from memory, such as with Cechinni's base stealing numbers but overall I think what I said was relevant and on target. I think Margot will never be a great base stealer. Probably 15-25 per year if he's a starter and unless his percentage improves he shouldn't even run that much.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 1, 2015 2:20:32 GMT -5
If Margot isn't stealing bases at a good percentage now even counting his time in DSL, low A etc...then I think it's unlikely he develops that ability to be a major base stealing threat in the majors. My point was that maybe that aspect of his game has been overated here. Contrasting Cechinni was to make the point that Margot has not put up better base stealing numbers overall than even Cechinni. I think Margot is a solid prospect but I have him around # 7 on my list, even behind Johnson and Owens, although in hindsight probably that was an error. I do things quickly sometimes as I'm a very busy person. Except for the past couple days I haven't been here for a month or so. I wish I had time to research every detail. A lot of time I go from memory, such as with Cechinni's base stealing numbers but overall I think what I said was relevant and on target. I think Margot will never be a great base stealer. Probably 15-25 per year if he's a starter and unless his percentage improves he shouldn't even run that much. As Chris alluded to earlier, you continue to almost entirely ignore the scouting reports and rely purely on SB/CS numbers from the low minors, which really undermines your argument. We know that Margot has plus-to-better speed, which portends well for his future basestealing success. Yes, his instincts/reads look like they need work, but that's something a prospect can learn and improve on as he moves up on the system, and he's still young enough that that's highly possible, if not likely. At lower levels, and for the speed and defense tools, I put far, far more weight on the scouting reports than I do the SB/CS numbers (or errors committed/fielding percentage, which I've seen you cite in the past), as I find the scouting reports to be far more predictive of future success for players that far from the majors.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Sept 1, 2015 6:25:14 GMT -5
Do I have to pick one?
|
|
|
Post by wskeleton76 on Sept 1, 2015 6:49:18 GMT -5
I believe that Margot has a bit better tools while Benny is more advanced. Prospects followers always love tools. Some admit they are tool suckers. They expect prospects will develop skills over time. But we know that they will break your hearts very often. Tools or Skills? whatever you could choose.
I gonna pick Benny over Margot even though I love Margot's ceiling. Young and toolsy guys are sexy but I think good baseball players are more valuable on the field.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,781
|
Post by mobaz on Sept 1, 2015 6:51:00 GMT -5
Given that we have 3 CFs already in the majors and two top-fifty prospects there too, yes probably you do.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 1, 2015 6:58:17 GMT -5
I believe that Margot has a bit better tools while Benny is more advanced. Prospects followers always love tools. Some admit they are tool suckers. They expect prospects will develop skills over time. But we know that they will break your hearts very often. Tools or Skills? whatever you could choose. I gonna pick Benny over Margot even though I love Margot's ceiling. Young and toolsy guys are sexy but I think good baseball players are more valuable on the field. There's more than tools there with Margot. The glove is already there. Didn't someone say he may be as good defensively as JBJ in CF with a lot more speed? If that's true, how well does he really have to hit to be a 1st division starter?
|
|
|
Post by wskeleton76 on Sept 1, 2015 7:39:55 GMT -5
I believe that Margot has a bit better tools while Benny is more advanced. Prospects followers always love tools. Some admit they are tool suckers. They expect prospects will develop skills over time. But we know that they will break your hearts very often. Tools or Skills? whatever you could choose. I gonna pick Benny over Margot even though I love Margot's ceiling. Young and toolsy guys are sexy but I think good baseball players are more valuable on the field. There's more than tools there with Margot. The glove is already there. Didn't someone say he may be as good defensively as JBJ in CF with a lot more speed? If that's true, how well does he really have to hit to be a 1st division starter? I do know Margot's glove is really good. I think he will be a plus CF in the big league. Possilbly better than that. But I would rather not tag him as JBJ caliber CF. First, prospects' defense tends to be exaggerated. We are hearing GG caliber SS or CF prospects too often. Second, he doesn't have strong arm like JBJ.
|
|
|