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.
SoxProspects Rankings Discussion
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 23, 2019 15:45:29 GMT -5
To put some color on the first page of rankings for those interested:
Very clear 1 and 2. Both 50s, no real problem ranking them.
Then a 3-7 group you could really rank however you wanted. I struggled MIGHTILY trying to figure that group out and had Houck at 3 at one point on my list before eventually having him at 7. Call them the 45+ tier if we're using Fangraphs' system.
Song-Chatham-Ward form the next tier. Again, pick 'em for 8/9/10. Those are the 45s.
11-15 are maybe the 40+'s. Some structure there, but a little fluidity up or down a spot or two.
Then... chaos. I had my top 15 done, slotted Cannon in, then had to step away because I had no clue what to do. You could make an argument for anyone from 16-31 or so to be anywhere therein. How much do you drop Howlett and Flores? Does Castellanos have power now? Rafaela is Altuve's size and swings like he's David Ortiz - how does that wind up working outside the complex? How do you value the relievers?
We had an hour and a half call last night working all this out. First time we've done that as intensely. It was fun and we probably would've gone longer if I didn't have a work call at 9:45.
Lack of a real Instructs hurt. We may not send Ian down anymore because it was barely worth it, maybe we can send him to Greenville instead, or maybe even the GCL. But we usually get more data to work with on the GCL and rising DSL guys. Luckily we have contacts we got info from.
Anyway, just a snapshot on 1/3 of the Brass's thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 25, 2019 14:16:03 GMT -5
Any preliminary thoughts to where Liu Chih-Jung will slot in?
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Oct 25, 2019 14:49:28 GMT -5
Any preliminary thoughts to where Liu Chih-Jung will slot in? He seems pretty advanced. I’m guessing in the 12-20 range.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 25, 2019 16:40:21 GMT -5
Need to hear more here.
Joan Martinez can dial up 96-97. It's about what you do with it and what else you have. We’ll see.
Almost certainly top 40 though, at least.
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Nov 30, 2019 17:11:43 GMT -5
No top 20 changes but Chih-Jung Liu debuts at # 24.
Details
Summary:
- Liu at # 24
- Yoan Aybar is up from 30 to 27.
- Kyle Hart jumped up 10 in the rankings from 52 to 42.
- Kutter Crawford plummeted, down from 29 to 47.
- Edged out of the rankings this time was Luis Perales who was 60th last month.
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Jan 31, 2020 19:17:07 GMT -5
Again no changes in the top 20, but a few changes lower down.
Details
Summary:
- Jonathan Arauz makes his SP debut at # 25.
- Nick Longhi, last ranked # 13 in July of '17 before his move to the Reds organization, is back and in the top 60 again at # 37.
- Jhonathan Diaz fell from 38 to 41.
- Luis Perales, one of the "future contract" guys, had been ranked at # 60 for a few months and fell out off the list in November, but he's back now at # 43!
- Juremi Profar debuts at # 53.
- Robinson Leyer is ranked for the first time at 54.
- Devlin Granberg, Kole Cottam, Osvaldo De La Rosa, and Daniel Bakst all fell 3 spots, now at 55 - 58.
- Nathanael Cruz, at # 60, is the 3rd future contract player on the list.
Quiz: Who is the player (there's only one) who was ranked last time (11/1) who moved up this week?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 1, 2020 10:23:54 GMT -5
I think you might have missed one at the start of December when we did Perales and Cruz. I gotta remember to give you a heads up, sorry.
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Feb 1, 2020 12:21:14 GMT -5
I think you might have missed one at the start of December when we did Perales and Cruz. I gotta remember to give you a heads up, sorry. No problem, that's up to me to notice. You guys are busy enough. I saw the update on 12/1, though nothing much happened on that one. Was there an update later in the month?
|
|
|
Post by Mike Andrews on Feb 1, 2020 12:45:27 GMT -5
Ya there was a supplemental update on December 5
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Feb 1, 2020 12:49:33 GMT -5
Any preliminary thoughts to where Liu Chih-Jung will slot in? He seems pretty advanced. I’m guessing in the 12-20 range. I feel somewhat vindicated by his rankings on MLB (16) and Fangraphs (12). I understand wanting to get more looks, but I still think he should be higher than 24. (Not based on velocity, but on his apparent command both of the velocity and of advanced secondary stuff.)
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 1, 2020 13:05:28 GMT -5
He seems pretty advanced. I’m guessing in the 12-20 range. I feel somewhat vindicated by his rankings on MLB (16) and Fangraphs (12). I understand wanting to get more looks, but I still think he should be higher than 24. (Not based on velocity, but on his apparent command both of the velocity and of advanced secondary stuff.) In large part because we get to update our rankings more often, we tend to be more conservative with ranking players who've just entered the system until we've seen them. It is very possible that Liu takes a big jump after we see him. But keep in mind when comparing sources' rankings that differences could have more to do with each source's relative opinions on the players around the one player you're comparing. It's not as simple as they say 12 and you say 24. Fangraphs' rankings are very different from ours top to bottom. A lot of that is due to different evaluations of lots of different players, not just Liu. Also, MLB hasn't actually updated its rankings. They slotted him in to the old list, so that could change when they update this month. I'll add that the list Alex submitted to BA had Liu very close to where we have him, within a spot or two.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,023
|
Post by cdj on Feb 1, 2020 13:31:27 GMT -5
I also don’t think there’s really all that much of a difference between 12 and 24 in this system. They’re all guys I’d classify as interesting, so I think being conservative before having seen them is perfectly reasonable
|
|
|
Post by huskies15 on Feb 5, 2020 10:03:27 GMT -5
So is Brusdar or Casas #1 in the system? Trying to slightly move on over here
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Feb 5, 2020 12:40:10 GMT -5
So is Brusdar or Casas #1 in the system? Trying to slightly move on over here I imagine it will be debatable. I'd go with Casas personally on the basis of Gaterol's injury history and risk for relief. That said, even if he becomes a reliever, he probably projects no worse than a 50 FV reliever with upside of 55/60 so still on a similar tier to Casas.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 5, 2020 12:42:59 GMT -5
So is Brusdar or Casas #1 in the system? Trying to slightly move on over here I tend to have a strong bias towards MLB-ready guys (Houck is a guy I'd rank higher than most on that basis, for instance), but Brusdar is just about as risky as risky gets (young, hard throwing, already been hurt a bunch), so I feel like that mitigates a lot Casas's distance from the majors concerns. I'd probably give it to Casas just because 70 raw power feels like the rarest/most valuable single tool between the both of them. Seems far more likely that they could go out and trade for another Brusdar type versus a young hitter with Casas's upside. So is Brusdar or Casas #1 in the system? Trying to slightly move on over here I imagine it will be debatable. I'd go with Casas personally on the basis of Gaterol's injury history and risk for relief. That said, even if he becomes a reliever, he probably projects no worse than a 50 FV reliever with upside of 55/60 so still on a similar tier to Casas. Yeah but a 60 1b is wildly more valuable than a 60 reliever, no?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 5, 2020 12:52:38 GMT -5
The thing with Casas is he's 1B-only, which means he really needs to mash (even though I think he turns out to be a plus defensively). And he might mash, so that's cool, but the path to him being a major leaguer is relatively narrow. And he was quite good last year (and at a level he was young for), but it's not like he was dominant: .254/.349/.472 at Greenville for a first baseman isn't a can't miss sorta line.
With Graterol, there are more ways where this could go totally south (the injury concerns, the conditioning, his delivery is a little on the stiff side), but he's so close to the majors that performance-wise he's much more likely to be at least an okay major leaguer. I'd say the upside is about the same but Graterol has a better chance to be a contributor on some level and that makes him my pick.
BPro is obviously in love with him. He's above Ian Anderson and Grayson Rodriguez on their Top 101. That sounds kind of crazy, frankly, but I am hopeful.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,023
|
Post by cdj on Feb 5, 2020 12:55:30 GMT -5
There are so few people that have his stuff, throw strikes, and keep it in the park.
The only thing I’m concerned about is the injury history. But without that history he isn’t being traded
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 5, 2020 13:03:27 GMT -5
There are so few people that have his stuff, throw strikes, and keep it in the park. The only thing I’m concerned about is the injury history. But without that history he isn’t being traded Does he... do those things? I guess he's mostly suppressed home runs but there's not nearly enough sample size to go on. Particularly given that we haven't seen him against the bouncy ball essentially at all. Yes I know he throws a sinker, but the whole league is trying to lumberjack sinkers right now, and they've been doing a hell of a job... Fangraphs also has him as a 40/45 command guy, which if he's a strike thrower (is he?) but with sub-standard command, even assuming an average home run rate might be a little generous.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,023
|
Post by cdj on Feb 5, 2020 13:20:42 GMT -5
There are so few people that have his stuff, throw strikes, and keep it in the park. The only thing I’m concerned about is the injury history. But without that history he isn’t being traded Does he... do those things? I guess he's mostly suppressed home runs but there's not nearly enough sample size to go on. Particularly given that we haven't seen him against the bouncy ball essentially at all. Yes I know he throws a sinker, but the whole league is trying to lumberjack sinkers right now, and they've been doing a hell of a job... Fangraphs also has him as a 40/45 command guy, which if he's a strike thrower (is he?) but with sub-standard command, even assuming an average home run rate might be a little generous. I mean do you have access to his walk rates and homer rates?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 5, 2020 13:23:46 GMT -5
I mean do you have access to his walk rates and homer rates? His walk rates are fine but not eye-popping, and I acknowledged that the home run suppression has been there, but not in a sample size that carries almost any meaning, OR in an environment that has almost any meaning. Steamer has him at 1.20 HR/9. I wouldn't give him much extra credit beyond that.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 5, 2020 13:27:44 GMT -5
His walk rate between Double-A and Triple-A last year was 10.1%. That's not troubling or anything, especially considering his plus stuff, but it's not also in the range where I'd say his control is good.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,023
|
Post by cdj on Feb 5, 2020 13:44:44 GMT -5
His walk rate between Double-A and Triple-A last year was 10.1%. That's not troubling or anything, especially considering his plus stuff, but it's not also in the range where I'd say his control is good. Well most people with his stuff walk 5 batter per 9, so I’m glad he keeps it between 3-4 per 9 at the higher levels. He throws strikes. He throws them at 100 mph with movement. I didn’t say he was Zack Greinke.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Feb 5, 2020 13:52:22 GMT -5
His walk rate between Double-A and Triple-A last year was 10.1%. That's not troubling or anything, especially considering his plus stuff, but it's not also in the range where I'd say his control is good. Well most people with his stuff walk 5 batter per 9, so I’m glad he keeps it between 3-4 per 9 at the higher levels. He throws strikes. He throws them at 100 mph with movement. I didn’t say he was Zack Greinke. People who walk 5 batters per 9 aren't starting pitchers though.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,023
|
Post by cdj on Feb 5, 2020 13:54:03 GMT -5
Well most people with his stuff walk 5 batter per 9, so I’m glad he keeps it between 3-4 per 9 at the higher levels. He throws strikes. He throws them at 100 mph with movement. I didn’t say he was Zack Greinke. People who walk 5 batters per 9 aren't starting pitchers though. True, and that’s a good thing he doesn’t do that
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Feb 5, 2020 14:02:59 GMT -5
People who walk 5 batters per 9 aren't starting pitchers though. True, and that’s a good thing he doesn’t do that Yeah, but you're moving the goalposts by comparing him to guys who don't profile as viable starters. Who cares if he's a better bet to start than a guy like Darwinzon? The question is if he'll be a starting pitcher, and that's very much an open question right now. I'm not sure why we'd compare him to guys who profile as relievers instead of comparing him to similar prospects who became good MLB starters.
|
|
|