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 Oregon Norm on Oct 22, 2015 9:49:19 GMT -5
Rankings are hard, no doubt about it. Player trajectories, their histories, skillsets,... are all so varied. You're also trying to peer into a future that may include development that can be very unpredictable.
Mookie Betts is the recent example that comes to mind. During his time in Lowell, he looked like a high OBP guy with little pop. A completely different player emerged after that. But that's what happens when we try to figure out what 18-20 year olds will look like when their development is complete. There are a lot of intangibles.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 23, 2015 20:38:13 GMT -5
lavarnwayguy, please just answer me this: You understand that nobody here thinks Benintendi sucks, and that we pretty much all think he's really good and certainly a Top 100 prospect, right? I get that Chris. There is no question about that. I ask you folks this: "What does it take for you guys to consider Benintendi higher than Margot?" We can agree to disagree but that doesn't mean you guys are right. That's not how that works. Just because the braintrust at Sox prospects gives the edge to a player doesn't ordain that position as inherently superior to my position, or someone else's opinion. We don't come here to talk baseball and automatically defer to the judgement of 4-5 people on the website just because they are nominally in charge. Lots of us here think Benintendi has the edge. It's not a preposterous position to take. I don't see where this conversation has "gone south". Thinking Benintendi having an edge is certainly debatable on it's merits. I'm not being schooled here. No one has shown me where Margot is inherently a better prospect. It's not just me who gives the edge to Benintendi. It's roughly half of this forum and things like the BA poll obviously support that. If 30 teams are polled and they essentially consider him one of the top 2-3 players in that draft at this point that's kind of good. It's beyond what those teams probably think of Margot in my opinion. Most people inherently trust their eyes more than the data but studies have shown that 6 times as many neurons of the brain are consumed evaluating visual data as compared to processing the visual cortex ( the mechanics of seeing ). Many of you at soxprospects see these guys in florida and get invested in them even emotionally sometimes ( I imagine ). We all do to a degree I think but that probably happens even more with more personaly association with them. For me, if push comes to shove, I generally prefer the data. Even in the low minors in some instances. I've seen scouts wrong so many times it is ridiculous really and I don't see Margot as a lock for anything in the majors for the reasons I've probably already cited at least twice. I get the "don't scout the box score" concept and agree with it in general but then again, it's something a scout who gets paid to go see every game would also say isn't it. Scouts and FO personnel for the Redsox probably are encouraged inherently to "talk up" redsox prospects. That is a natural skew to an objective evaluation also. We need to try to stay objective and to me it should be a combination of all data points, including what all scouts see and say and who they work for and every aspect of that player's being just about. Their ability to overcome adversity, their mental health, their propensity for alchoholism....add 500 more things here with more weight being given to bat speed than to IQ of course but give me every data point available and I will weigh that against what I see also and have an opinion. And what scouts say, and what sox prospects management say is included in that evaluation of course. I'm just not going to be defined by it.
|
|
|
Post by ethanbein on Oct 23, 2015 22:31:56 GMT -5
Question for those who prefer Margot (which is completely reasonable): who do you think reaches the majors first, and by how much?
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 23, 2015 22:53:00 GMT -5
lavarnwayguy, please just answer me this: You understand that nobody here thinks Benintendi sucks, and that we pretty much all think he's really good and certainly a Top 100 prospect, right? I get that Chris. There is no question about that. I ask you folks this: "What does it take for you guys to consider Benintendi higher than Margot?" We can agree to disagree but that doesn't mean you guys are right. That's not how that works. Just because the braintrust at Sox prospects gives the edge to a player doesn't ordain that position as inherently superior to my position, or someone else's opinion. We don't come here to talk baseball and automatically defer to the judgement of 4-5 people on the website just because they are nominally in charge. Lots of us here think Benintendi has the edge. It's not a preposterous position to take. I don't see where this conversation has "gone south". Thinking Benintendi having an edge is certainly debatable on it's merits. I'm not being schooled here. No one has shown me where Margot is inherently a better prospect. It's not just me who gives the edge to Benintendi. It's roughly half of this forum and things like the BA poll obviously support that. If 30 teams are polled and they essentially consider him one of the top 2-3 players in that draft at this point that's kind of good. It's beyond what those teams probably think of Margot in my opinion. Most people inherently trust their eyes more than the data but studies have shown that 6 times as many neurons of the brain are consumed evaluating visual data as compared to processing the visual cortex ( the mechanics of seeing ). Many of you at soxprospects see these guys in florida and get invested in them even emotionally sometimes ( I imagine ). We all do to a degree I think but that probably happens even more with more personaly association with them. For me, if push comes to shove, I generally prefer the data. Even in the low minors in some instances. I've seen scouts wrong so many times it is ridiculous really and I don't see Margot as a lock for anything in the majors for the reasons I've probably already cited at least twice. I get the "don't scout the box score" concept and agree with it in general but then again, it's something a scout who gets paid to go see every game would also say isn't it. Scouts and FO personnel for the Redsox probably are encouraged inherently to "talk up" redsox prospects. That is a natural skew to an objective evaluation also. We need to try to stay objective and to me it should be a combination of all data points, including what all scouts see and say and who they work for and every aspect of that player's being just about. Their ability to overcome adversity, their mental health, their propensity for alchoholism....add 500 more things here with more weight being given to bat speed than to IQ of course but give me every data point available and I will weigh that against what I see also and have an opinion. And what scouts say, and what sox prospects management say is included in that evaluation of course. I'm just not going to be defined by it. You keep quoting the BA poll, but it doesn't compare Benintendi and Margot. It compares Benintendi to his draft peers. You're making a specious argument if you claim that that means those scouts think AB is better than Margot. It looks more like 2:1 Margot:Benintendi to me as far as this forum goes. And it's not just mods/Sox prospects employees who disagree with you. It's a lot of people. I don't have a horse in the race really, as I like AB's high hit/power ceiling but concede that Margot's defense/speed/low risk make him the "better" prospect *at this moment*. If AB hits in AA by June at all like he did this year in Greenville, I'd be comfortable with him being lower risk than he is now, more likely to reach his ceiling, and the better prospect overall. I think that's the crux of what the "Margot-first" side is. And regardless, it's not your position that people are critiquing, **it's the inherent lack of logic in your arguments**. You've contradicted your own points about experience and taken massive leaps of inductive faith, such as the BA poll thing. Nobody's saying you're inherently wrong. They're just saying that your argumentation of your position is as watertight as a sieve. And you keep doubling down on the same arguments. Even when the BA/MLB/KLaw rankings come out and Margot is above Benintendi in all of them (and I'm near-certain that'll happen, because Margot is younger and in AA, and thus much-lower risk, which is important to those evaluators), you still won't be "wrong," but you also still won't have effectively argued your position. Quoting neurobiological "facts" doesn't support your position any better either. Never mind that you're talking about a cognitive process that involves far more than simply eye-optic nerve-lateral geniculate nucleus-visual cortex. (I'd love to know your reference for numbers you cite, btw, since I've never heard of any human studies that allowed for in vivo measurement of neuronal generation, mostly because I can't imagine any IRB panel allowing it unless it uses technology I'm not aware of). It's smoke and mirrors that detracts from a simple point you're trying to make: that familiarity breeds comfort. It's like a political candidate dancing around the real question as saying some pre-prepared talking point to make themselves look smart. And while your point may very well be true, the converse is also often true: prospect fatigue is real, and people tend to overrate the shiny new over the tried-and-true, because there's more to dream on. Look at Appel and Gray, and Trey Ball, in the 2013 rankings. Trey Ball was a top-100. And Appel was top-20, about 20 over Gray. Again, I have no issue with your position, and I think it's an arguable one. But you haven't presented arguments that people find compelling.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 23, 2015 23:07:16 GMT -5
Question for those who prefer Margot (which is completely reasonable): who do you think reaches the majors first, and by how much? I think Margot makes a cameo or two next July/August, probably due to injury, and because he's a plus defender who I expect to be up for good in September. That said, I would not be even remotely surprised if Benintendi pulled a Conforto and blew through three levels next summer, passing Margot to come up for good in August. One consideration is early 40-man roster slot issues, although neither is a must for next winter, so it may not matter. I genuinely think AB's hit tool may be a future 70, and if he has even 55 game power, he's going to be an incredible hitter. I love his approach, and his ability to clean out mid-90s heat. He's got ferocious bat speed but it looks butter-smooth. The only thing that puts him behind Margot for me right now is that he hasn't faced even remotely advanced pitching. I just can't put a guy with gaudy stats against low-A pitchers ahead of a player who's four months younger and had success against AA pitching (not to mention substantially better speed and defense). That I consider them so close is testament to what I think is reasonably reachable perennial All-Star offensive potential on Benintendi's part. I love his offensive ceiling, I'm just not sold that he'll reach it yet, but if he picks up where he left off, I'll be all-in pretty quickly.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 24, 2015 0:25:07 GMT -5
I can see why Margot is the higher considered prospect at the moment. This guy has potential to go in so many directions with a very high ceiling. If his power develops he can hit 20 homers. He could very well be a .300 hitter. Can steal 40 bases per year and play an excellent CF.
That's a very high ceiling. I don't think he'll be that player. I can see him being a .270 - .300 hitter with 40 steals and a great glove. I don't know that he will hit with a lot of power and his lack of selectivity because of his great bat to ball skills could limit his walks keeping his OBP in an ordinary range.
Benintendi will probably not wind up a CF. He probably won't swipe 40 bags. His power is still in question. He has yet to hit at AA because he hasn't gotten there yet.
His ceiling is lower.
But for me, I think the odds that he becomes a better player than Margot are pretty good.
I can see Benintendi maximizing his ceiling. I can see him hitting 25 - 30 homers, and hitting near .280 - .300. I can see him with an OPS in the mid .800s down the road while playing a strong corner OF defense. That's an excellent player.
My feeling about how this turns out could be way off. But I can see why some would see Margot as the better prospect (not to mention the obvious - that he's younger and has already held his own at a higher level than the older Benintendi has), but also think that Benintendi could wind up the better player in the long run.
Who knows? If the Sox hold onto them both they could wind up with two all-stars in the OF, or 3 assuming Betts is also holding the other OF position.
I think Margot could be a Sept call up next year (about a month after we see Sam Travis) if he's not dealt. I think we'll see Benintendi around May 2017 just before we see Moncada come up.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 24, 2015 7:24:19 GMT -5
The idea that Benintendi might be a better prospect now than Margot is a perfectly reasonable idea, though I disagree with it
The claim that people who like Margot better than Benintendi do so because they are relying on their "eyes" rather than the "box score" is completely false, not supported by a shred of evidence, and one more preposterously bad argument.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 24, 2015 9:58:59 GMT -5
lavarnwayguy, please just answer me this: You understand that nobody here thinks Benintendi sucks, and that we pretty much all think he's really good and certainly a Top 100 prospect, right? I get that Chris. There is no question about that. I ask you folks this: "What does it take for you guys to consider Benintendi higher than Margot?" We can agree to disagree but that doesn't mean you guys are right. That's not how that works. Just because the braintrust at Sox prospects gives the edge to a player doesn't ordain that position as inherently superior to my position, or someone else's opinion. We don't come here to talk baseball and automatically defer to the judgement of 4-5 people on the website just because they are nominally in charge. Lots of us here think Benintendi has the edge. It's not a preposterous position to take. I don't see where this conversation has "gone south". Thinking Benintendi having an edge is certainly debatable on it's merits. I'm not being schooled here. No one has shown me where Margot is inherently a better prospect. It's not just me who gives the edge to Benintendi. It's roughly half of this forum and things like the BA poll obviously support that. If 30 teams are polled and they essentially consider him one of the top 2-3 players in that draft at this point that's kind of good. It's beyond what those teams probably think of Margot in my opinion. Most people inherently trust their eyes more than the data but studies have shown that 6 times as many neurons of the brain are consumed evaluating visual data as compared to processing the visual cortex ( the mechanics of seeing ). Many of you at soxprospects see these guys in florida and get invested in them even emotionally sometimes ( I imagine ). We all do to a degree I think but that probably happens even more with more personaly association with them. For me, if push comes to shove, I generally prefer the data. Even in the low minors in some instances. I've seen scouts wrong so many times it is ridiculous really and I don't see Margot as a lock for anything in the majors for the reasons I've probably already cited at least twice. I get the "don't scout the box score" concept and agree with it in general but then again, it's something a scout who gets paid to go see every game would also say isn't it. Scouts and FO personnel for the Redsox probably are encouraged inherently to "talk up" redsox prospects. That is a natural skew to an objective evaluation also. We need to try to stay objective and to me it should be a combination of all data points, including what all scouts see and say and who they work for and every aspect of that player's being just about. Their ability to overcome adversity, their mental health, their propensity for alchoholism....add 500 more things here with more weight being given to bat speed than to IQ of course but give me every data point available and I will weigh that against what I see also and have an opinion. And what scouts say, and what sox prospects management say is included in that evaluation of course. I'm just not going to be defined by it. It will take Benintendi to catch up. Low A to AA is a huge jump and Margot is younger. And for the 100th time, the BA poll did not judge Margot. Just because BA said Benentendi is the best 2015 college prospect, doesn't mean he's the best prospect in baseball or that he's better than Margot. No matter what you believe, you cannot use the BA poll as evidence of anything other than what it says. What you're doing is something like this example - I got the best grade on the test so I must be smarter than Margot even though he didn't take it. The other think it takes is more than 239 professional plate appearances. At some level, pitchers will find a weakness and then let's see how he adjusts. He hasn't been challenged yet. If you would have stuck him in AA or AAA this year, so that he'd be at the same level as Margot at the same age, he probably would have been challenged and then we could have compared apples to apples. As of now, it's impossible to do anything more than guess how Benintendi would have done at a higher level or Margot would have done 2-3 levels lower at the same age.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 24, 2015 14:42:38 GMT -5
At this point, I don't even find it worth my time to read some of these posts. When I cite a BA poll of 30 teams it's not a specious argument. It's not apples to apples but it sure as hell is not irrelevant. For me to even have to respond to such ridiculous positions is what is incredible to me. That is what should be called out.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 24, 2015 15:08:53 GMT -5
It's like that Flight of the Conchords song
You're the most beautiful women in this room And when you walk down the street You're probably the most beautiful woman on the street Depending on the street
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Oct 24, 2015 15:37:36 GMT -5
I tried to figure it out, but as guess I just don't get what this argument is about. I like Benintendi more (mostly because he's shiny and new) but I also think Margot is the slightly better prospect. It really is OK to hold both of these views at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 24, 2015 15:46:33 GMT -5
And if Benintendi hit 31 HR last year I don't think his power is all that much in question. The player whose power is more in question is Margot. BA gave Benintendi the "2nd best power bat" rating in last year's draft. There is no reason to think that Benintendi's power is in question. He's small but he's crushing the ball.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 24, 2015 15:58:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 24, 2015 17:58:43 GMT -5
And if Benintendi hit 31 HR last year I don't think his power is all that much in question. The player whose power is more in question is Margot. BA gave Benintendi the "2nd best power bat" rating in last year's draft. There is no reason to think that Benintendi's power is in question. He's small but he's crushing the ball. Power... power? Who said anything about power? There's that straw man lurking in the bushes again. If Benintendi carries his tools forward to AA, I think the board would be ecstatic to see him advance in the ratings. By then Margot should be in the majors in Boston or somewhere else. So the burr under your saddle will be gone by then.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 24, 2015 19:58:43 GMT -5
And if Benintendi hit 31 HR last year I don't think his power is all that much in question. The player whose power is more in question is Margot. BA gave Benintendi the "2nd best power bat" rating in last year's draft. There is no reason to think that Benintendi's power is in question. He's small but he's crushing the ball. Power... power? Who said anything about power? There's that straw man lurking in the bushes again. If Benintendi carries his tools forward to AA, I think the board would be ecstatic to see him advance in the ratings. By then Margot should be in the majors in Boston or somewhere else. So the burr under your saddle will be gone by then. Yeah, actually someone did say "his power is in question" because he's only hit in the low minors. But counting the HRs a college player hit in college and the NYPL is pretty funny. First-rounder Mark Fischer hit 24 HRs his last year in college, followed by 5 at Lowell, and never made it past AA. Benintendi is better than Fischer, and we all love Benintendi, and we all hope he someday meets the challenge of hitting in AA. But still, pretty funny.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 24, 2015 20:41:51 GMT -5
And if Benintendi hit 31 HR last year I don't think his power is all that much in question. The player whose power is more in question is Margot. BA gave Benintendi the "2nd best power bat" rating in last year's draft. There is no reason to think that Benintendi's power is in question. He's small but he's crushing the ball. Power... power? Who said anything about power? There's that straw man lurking in the bushes again. If Benintendi carries his tools forward to AA, I think the board would be ecstatic to see him advance in the ratings. By then Margot should be in the majors in Boston or somewhere else. So the burr under your saddle will be gone by then. I mentioned there were question marks about his power. He showed very little power his first season and then suddenly went off in his 2nd college season. When he was drafted one of the questions was how much of that power would translate to the wooden bat. He answered it pretty well obviously, but he still has to do it above A ball. I do believe he will hit with power in the upper minors and eventually the majors too. I'm a believer. Margot has to prove he can hit for power as well, but ultimately, I think his power will be limited and he'll make up for it with his speed and defense and a good hit tool. At this point I have no idea why Lavarnway is carrying on this argument, whatever the hell it is. It's not hard to see why Margot is ranked ahead of Benintendi at the moment, and it's also not hard to see Benintendi ultimately being the better player, too. The last several pages are all about semantics. I personally like Benintendi better as a prospect, but I have no problem with him being ranked behind Margot, who I also like. It's kind of like the whose better argument from a decade ago? A young Papelbon or a young Lester? And they developed into two very good but different type of pitchers, which is fine. I suspect Benintendi and Margot will turn into two very good, but different type of players, and if neither one is traded, we will enjoy them immensely.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 24, 2015 20:45:21 GMT -5
Benintendi's *game* power is "in question" because his stats were compiled against relatively weak competition. Don't get me wrong...I'm inclined to believe it's real, but 75% of his HR came against the equivalent of SS-A pitching. It's nice to see that he continued to mash in the Sally league, but it's still just low-A ball. The list of players whose power fell off after low-A is far more extensive than those who continued to hit for power or developed it later. There's uncertainty there, whether one wants to admit it or not.
And yes, saying that AB ranked high on BA's post-draft tools list, or top performers lists, or won CPOY...and that that makes him a better prospect than Margot is absolutely a specious argument, BECAUSE NONE OF THOSE SCOUTS WERE COMPARING HIM TO MARGOT NOR WAS MARGOT ELIGIBLE FOR THOSE AWARDS. I genuinely can't make it any clearer than that. There is no direct link between the two players in that line of reasoning, and to argue otherwise is to completely defy logic. Is it evidence that AB is a terrific prospect? Of course. But it says absolutely nothing, zilch, zero, about Margot. Or Moncada. Or Espinoza. Or any other prospect you want to compare Benintendi to.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Oct 24, 2015 20:49:05 GMT -5
It's not hard to see why Margot is ranked ahead of Benintendi at the moment, and it's also not hard to see Benintendi ultimately being the better player, too. I personally like Benintendi better as a prospect, but I have no problem with him being ranked behind Margot, who I also like. Your answer of Margot now, but Benintendi in the long term had me confused. If offered a premier pitcher, and the other team says 'which of the two would you give up" who do you pick? I would give up Margot, which is why I have Benintendi rated higher on my rankings.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 24, 2015 21:06:03 GMT -5
Your answer of Margot now, but Benintendi in the long term had me confused. If offered a premier pitcher, and the other team says 'which of the two would you give up" who do you pick? I would give up Margot, which is why I have Benintendi rated higher on my rankings. I personally would offer Margot before Benintendi because I think that Benintendi will be more likely to reach his full potential than Margot will. I believe that ultimately that Margot won't get the kind of plate discipline you'd look for in a leadoff man nor do I think he'll hit with 20 HR power either. He does have the tools to hit for more power according to the scouting reports, but will he reach that ceiling? He should hit for high average but if his plate discipline doesn't improve he could also get himself out a lot. However if he does hit for high average and it improves as his selectivity improves, and he drives the ball with more authority, mix that in with great CF defense, and you have a potentially superior player to Benintendi, especially if he doesn't max out his 25 - 30 HR potential. If I were a gambling man, I'd bet on Benintendi having the better results down the road. That doesn't mean that it's unreasonable that Margot is currently ranked ahead of him. The kid has some serious tools and is very young with a lot of room to grow. Honestly, if the Sox could get a good hitting OF who can play decent defense and be a rental type player, I'd entertain dealing JBJ just as easily as I would entertain dealing Margot. I could be just as happy down the line with a Benintendi/Margot/Betts OF as I could a Benintendi/JBJ/Betts OF.
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Oct 25, 2015 9:07:46 GMT -5
I saw Benintendi a couple of times in Lowell. Yes he appears slight but he appears to generate a lot of power which is likely to increase as he fills out a little more. His swing reminds a lot of Mattingly. I have not seen Margot in person but he certainly has performed quite well and perhaps has a little more speed than Benintendi.
Also, I suspect that Margot may be traded as a part of something package to acquire someone like Sonny Gray this off season.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 25, 2015 9:37:48 GMT -5
I really love Margot's contact. With his speed, he should be able to be a very good contact hitter which goes along really nicely with his defense. I think he could be like a RH version of Ellsbury if he continues his development on the same path he has been on. Though it's impossible to say anyone is going to be a 70 base stealer... So ranking Benintendi ahead of him is impossible for me at this point in time because Margot is much closer and easier to project.
And I also love Benintendi. He's my avatar.
Unrelated, but is there any news on minorleaguecentral.com? I never noticed that the stats haven't been updated since June. What a shame if that goes away.
|
|
|
Post by humanbeingbean on Oct 25, 2015 13:46:12 GMT -5
I don't understand why a Margot versus Benintendi debate is even relevant. The only time this should even be discussed is if we're talking about made-up trade scenarios in which we have to part with either Margot or Benny, if they hold the same value. My personal opinion is that Margot, at the very least, is a 4th OF with some contact, speed, an elite glove, but maybe his power doesn't develop enough to warrant a starting job. Benintendi, at the least, may face a power drop-off versus higher-level pitching, and he may not be such a standout player any longer.
For Benintendi, I think his floor is only realized if his slight frame doesn't allow him to keep up his power numbers at higher levels. But that should obviously never be a barometer of power potential, as Betts just hit 18, and likely will continue that pace or exceed it in his prime, and Pedey hit 21 a few years back.
Benintendi is a polished college hitter with special plate discipline, and I think he'll be fine against better pitching. I think his batter's eye stays the same, but maybe his power levels off to 18-22 homers, peaking at 25. Definitely not counting out more than that, though.
Margot, though, could very well develop into a perennial .300 hitter with a decent OBP and an elite glove and speed. A center fielder like that is a diamond in the rough.
Benny very well may blow through the minors and reach the Sox by September, maybe even around the same time as Margot and Sam Travis. In that case, why can't we all just celebrate what we have instead of pitting them against each other? There's no point in debating their respective worths or who's better until we have to package one or the other in a trade, and even that may not happen. So, until then, let's just watch them both and hope they both develop into their ceilings and make positive contributions to the Red Sox in their unique ways. Benintendi, with more plate discipline, power, and a polished hit tool, and Margot with speed, contact, and an elite glove. They're different ballplayers but that does not mean we have to judge them, at least until a trade situation arises.
It isn't worthwhile to pick sides, even if we won't admit to it, because that just means we're rooting for the other to fail, and that does NOT help the Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 25, 2015 17:20:04 GMT -5
Well said in many ways humanbeingbean. I don't think any of us want to run down a player from the Sox and ideally we would want all of them to be all stars and we win every world series. We also probably benefit some from realistic assessments of these players though because some will get traded and some will not. Some will be moved to other positions or some will benefit from a positive critique here and there and yes even from some negative ones from time to time. It's all part of a natural maturing process where each player has a realistic self image and works to improve their game optimally.
We all see Margot's elite speed and contact rate. If he maximizes his potential he probably is a better player long term than Benintendi in my view but will he find a way to convert that elite speed to an elite percentage of successful stolen bases as Ellsbury did, or will he continue at just a little above a minimum successful steal percentage. If you are getting thrown out 1/3 of the time ( whatever it is in detail ) every year in the minors over 2-3 years worth of teams then maybe we can't realistically project him to be the 30-40 steal player some of us are projecting. Maybe he will, maybe he won't. If the CS doesn't improve I don't care if he's a 30-40 steal guy. He's borderline plus as a base stealer now in my book but probably overall a plus base runner for sure. Just being a plus base runner is a big contribution to any team but he needs a better base stealing success rate to me for him to be a major base stealing threat in the majors.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it generally easier to steal bases in the minors? If his CS rate is what it is now consistently at every team he plays for why do we think it will improve in the majors? He's young so maybe it will but then again maybe it won't. Hopefully he sees this obvious positive skill set that he has just waiting for him to develop which might well make a huge difference for his career and he works on that skill like crazy to improve it.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 25, 2015 17:58:10 GMT -5
The same could be said about Margot's contact rate and how that relates to him actually being a high percentage OBP guy in the majors. So far he has not put up big OBP numbers in the minors. He seems to have the raw material but it hasn't converted to a plus .400 OBP yet at any level. Again, he has been extremely young so maybe after he settles in as a 23-24 year old player and gets more age appropriate for his level he achieves more on base success. It is real tough to do that though and we have seen many players put up gaudy OBP numbers in the minors only to have them drop like a rock in the majors. Even with out of this world OBP numbers in the minors, Betts has settled in as about a .350 OBP guy so far. If Margot's OBP numbers drop by 50 points like Bett's numbers have since he made the majors, Margot will be a .275-.300 OBP guy. I just don't see a lot of reason to think he will ever be a high OBP guy. Maybe some years with that great contact rate some hits fall the right way for him but he will have to change a lot as a hitter to ever be a high OBP guy to me, but he is very young so that does give us hope for him still.
This same sort of analysis could of course also happen to Benintendi and Benintendi is playing at a lower level as has been stated over and over here. At the same time Benintendi already appears to hit with significant power while not striking out much at all. That alone is worth a small fortune in his game and he already looks to be at least an average defender and maybe even stick in CF or be a plus corner OF defender. He also appears to get on base real well. He seems to really be toying with the minors at this point. What was up with only 2 doubles in Lowell, but 7 HR and 4 triples? The guy is locking in and murdering the ball. He toyed with Lowell and was clearly going for HR. He was setting those pitchers up for the kill.
What is the value of a guy who can hit with power while not striking out much and get on base and be a plus base runner and defender? I would contend there is a tremendous amount of value in a player like that. We need more players like that.
Look, I know EVERYONE in mlb is going to rate Moncada higher and when I look at Devers numbers it just screams major league success and great value also and look at the hype around Espinoza but I actually have Benintendi as my #1 redsox prospect. Call me crazy but so far he has shown significant power with a great walk to K rate and with all the other factors I've mentioned I give him a slight edge. I love significant power numbers with a very low walk to K rate and if the guy is also a slightly above average base runner and defender I want that guy on my team. Look how hard it is to find power in the major leagues without sacrificing something else. For example, Exhibit A, Hanley Ramirez.
To me, we literally have 4 players who could be top 30 prospects right now in MILB.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 25, 2015 18:12:08 GMT -5
... I actually have Benintendi as my #1 redsox prospect. Call me crazy ... OK.
|
|
|