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 jimed14 on Feb 5, 2020 14:10:31 GMT -5
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. Nothing in his profile, scouting report or statistics says that he can't be a starter because of his control. So why are we talking about it? It's all about developing his changeup. He made the majors at age 20 because the Twins were in win-now mode and no other reason. In 2018 when he was a full-time starter, he threw 102 innings, struck out 108, walked 28 and gave up 3 home runs. Bashing these guys because people didn't want to trade Mookie is already super aggravating.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 5, 2020 14:19:13 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. You're also not addressing his scouting reports or his projections.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 5, 2020 14:19:53 GMT -5
I don't think clarifying why someone might rank him #2 in the system behind Casas qualifies as bashing him. I don't think anyone has suggested lower than that. (I think I'd have him #1, even with my concerns).
Right now his changeup is behind and his delivery is stiff--those are the negatives. His fastball is excellent and his slider is good, among the better two-pitch mixes in terms of pure stuff in the minors--those are the positives. His control is fine, not where I'd deem it anything close to a red flag, but also not a reason to prop him up.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Feb 5, 2020 14:23:49 GMT -5
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. Nothing in his profile, scouting report or statistics says that he can't be a starter because of his control. So why are we talking about it? It's all about developing his changeup. He made the majors at age 20 because the Twins were in win-now mode and no other reason. In 2018 when he was a full-time starter, he threw 102 innings, struck out 108, walked 28 and gave up 3 home runs. Bashing these guys because people didn't want to trade Mookie is already super aggravating. We were talking about it because a poster suggested his walk rates were good, and then me and multiple posters pushed back against that. Then, the poster moved the goalposts and said well his walk rate isn't as bad as guys who profile as relievers, and I questioned why that's important. I never said his command is what will keep him from being a starter, I'm more worried about his delivery being sustainable as a starting pitcher. I wasn't bashing him at all, and if you think he's a lock to be a starter good for you. The Twins own pitching coach called his delivery "violent" and literally said they were trying to make it more healthy. So yeah, I'm skeptical he'll be a starter but I'm rooting for him. He's talented and certainly could do it, but questioning if he'll be a reliever is not bashing, in fact prospect lists who rate him highly suggest he could ultimately be a reliever too. He could be an excellent reliever with real value.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 13,872
|
Post by cdj on Feb 5, 2020 15:19:20 GMT -5
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. How am I moving the goalposts when I said he throws strikes when he does? People say that all the time, I don’t think they know what it means. My point has not wavered. No goalposts have been changed Literally nobody has suggested his control is an issue when it comes to being a starter. GUESS WHAT? THATS BECAUSE HE THROWS STRIKES. I didn’t say he’s a control specialist Jfc. I get being emo about the trade but get a grip
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 5, 2020 15:33:43 GMT -5
"He throws strikes" is commonly used to indicate someone with good control. You seem to be using it as shorthand for "his control isn't a negative." Not a big deal, but it's more than a pedantic difference and there was definitely a communication issue, which is where the disagreement came from.
This is the second time you've used "being emo" to lash out at people who you disagree with. Let's not do that.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 13,872
|
Post by cdj on Feb 5, 2020 15:37:00 GMT -5
"He throws strikes" is commonly used to indicate someone with good control. You seem to be using it as shorthand for "his control isn't a negative." Not a big deal, but it's more than a pedantic difference and there was definitely a communication issue, which is where the disagreement came from. This is the second time you've used "being emo" to lash out at people who you disagree with. Let's not do that. Let’s not accuse people of moving goalposts multiple times when they aren’t doing that too. Btw his career is 2.7 BB/9 in the minors and 1.9 BB/9 in a limited sample in the majors. But yeah whatever guys
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Feb 5, 2020 15:39:18 GMT -5
"He throws strikes" is commonly used to indicate someone with good control. You seem to be using it as shorthand for "his control isn't a negative." Not a big deal, but it's more than a pedantic difference and there was definitely a communication issue, which is where the disagreement came from. This is the second time you've used "being emo" to lash out at people who you disagree with. Let's not do that. This. I mean, I'd push back against someone who would say a batter "hits baseballs" but rocks an average or worse K rate. I mean sure, technically he does hit baseballs, but it's a weird way to communicate. It would be even stranger if it was followed up with "well at least his K rate isn't 35%".
|
|
|
Post by willacky on Feb 5, 2020 17:53:25 GMT -5
graterol's similar to severino when he was a prospect. They dominated minors at young age, never had BB issues and both had durability concerns too. I'm not saying that graterol's going to be an ace like severino but I think he's overlooked heavily by some people. luis castillo was like them too.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Feb 10, 2020 12:37:38 GMT -5
I'm assuming Jeter joins at #1 (or #2 if the guys really like Casas more than national rankings), but what about Connor Wong?
Based on Fangraph's grades, he could go anywhere from 6-19 (a whole bunch of 40 FV). I'm thinking #11 right after Thad Ward.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 10, 2020 13:14:45 GMT -5
Likely 11-15 for Wong.
We're debating 1-2. Not sure what you mean wrt national rankings. BA, for example, has Casas at 70 and Downs at 86, while MLB Pipeline has Downs at 44 and Casas at 77. Those are the only two lists out from the outlets I refer to, so I wouldn't say there's a consensus.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Feb 10, 2020 14:34:56 GMT -5
Jumping off of my short notation that Jeter Downs was available in that 2017 draft, but we went with Tanner Houck. Rather than using this as a "how could they have picked X instead of Y" argument (though I still wanted Austin Matthews over Ball), has this site put together any primer on the Dombrowski draft years? My sense is they were underwhelming, a contributing factor to the lack of prospects. The safe picks like Chatham and Cannon are slowly working their way through, with meh expectations. The "save money for" guys like Cole Brannen, Decker and Northcutt, Perry have been underwhelming. Really the only hit is Casas (and Dalbec doing what some hoped, though still with questions).
I know Mike Rickard is a throughline, so perhaps Dombrowski is blameless, but could someone closer to the situation explain if our drafts really are as underwhelming as they seem (and if we can expect better from Chaim's Tampa history)
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 10, 2020 14:43:11 GMT -5
Never an in-depth analysis, but here are my thoughts:
-2016 draft looks very good, even without any contributions yet from Groome. Dalbec, Anderson, Chatham, Nogosek, Espinal, and Shawaryn all have or will make the majors, and there's potential for impact players. Wouldn't be at all surprised if the draft turned in at least four long-term major leaguers. -2017 was a disaster other than Houck. Hard to spin it otherwise, probably the worst draft of the decade other than 2013. -2018 looks solid so far. Casas looks like a hit, jury is out on Decker but I think he's about where you'd expect a 2nd rounder to be, and they got good value lower in the draft on Ward and Duran. Shugart and Howlett are very interesting and didn't get a ton of money. It's still too early to give up on Northcut but it definitely wasn't the type of year you wanted. -2019 looks pretty strong considering where they were picking. Cannon was the 43rd pick in the draft, I think people have normal first-round expectations for him which isn't really fair. Love the Lugo, Zeferjahn, and Song picks.
|
|
|
Post by kman22 on Feb 10, 2020 14:52:55 GMT -5
Jumping off of my short notation that Jeter Downs was available in that 2017 draft, but we went with Tanner Houck. Rather than using this as a "how could they have picked X instead of Y" argument (though I still wanted Austin Matthews over Ball), has this site put together any primer on the Dombrowski draft years? My sense is they were underwhelming, a contributing factor to the lack of prospects. The safe picks like Chatham and Cannon are slowly working their way through, with meh expectations. The "save money for" guys like Cole Brannen, Decker and Northcutt, Perry have been underwhelming. Really the only hit is Casas (and Dalbec doing what some hoped, though still with questions). I know Mike Rickard is a throughline, so perhaps Dombrowski is blameless, but could someone closer to the situation explain if our drafts really are as underwhelming as they seem (and if we can expect better from Chaim's Tampa history) Not sure a franchise Center was what the Red Sox needed, but he can definitely score goals.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 11, 2020 12:14:25 GMT -5
Downs entering at 2. Wong entering at 12.
Granberg and De La Rosa fall off.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Feb 11, 2020 12:30:32 GMT -5
Wong highest ranked catcher in the system. Cole Cottam at #58.
|
|
|
Post by soxin8 on Feb 11, 2020 12:43:12 GMT -5
Never an in-depth analysis, but here are my thoughts: -2016 draft looks very good, even without any contributions yet from Groome. Dalbec, Anderson, Chatham, Nogosek, Espinal, and Shawaryn all have or will make the majors, and there's potential for impact players. Wouldn't be at all surprised if the draft turned in at least four long-term major leaguers. -2017 was a disaster other than Houck. Hard to spin it otherwise, probably the worst draft of the decade other than 2013. -2018 looks solid so far. Casas looks like a hit, jury is out on Decker but I think he's about where you'd expect a 2nd rounder to be, and they got good value lower in the draft on Ward and Duran. Shugart and Howlett are very interesting and didn't get a ton of money. It's still too early to give up on Northcut but it definitely wasn't the type of year you wanted. -2019 looks pretty strong considering where they were picking. Cannon was the 43rd pick in the draft, I think people have normal first-round expectations for him which isn't really fair. Love the Lugo, Zeferjahn, and Song picks. This was a good answer to steve's question. The other thing to remember, and Jim Callis has emphasized this, is that if you get 1 or 2 major leaguers in a draft, it was a good draft. I think sometimes when there is a really good draft like Mookie's, the thought is why can't we get 5 major leaguers in every draft? The other thing, Downs wasn't the big miss instead of Houck, who may still turn out to be our 5th starter, it was Pearson taken by Toronto 4 spots after Houck, who is the number 8 prospect according to MLB pipeline (not that anyone was supposed to know that before the draft). Also, Steve brought up the good question of how involved the GM is in the draft. I would think he is more responsible for putting good scouting people in place to make good decisions than actually making all the decisions himself.
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Apr 1, 2020 13:14:50 GMT -5
Just a few changes, but a big one for Bonaci..
Details
Summary:
- Branier Bonaci jumped up to #20 from #42.
- AJ politi rose from 52 to 37.
- Jhonny Pereda debuts at 55th.
- Returning to the list at #60 is Tyler Esplin who was last ranked at 53 last July.
- Edit: Esplin actually came back into the rankings after Bakst retired in January.
- Juremi Profar fell out of the top 60 from # 55.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Apr 1, 2020 16:55:35 GMT -5
And actually, Esplin entered a few weeks ago when we learned that Daniel Bakst had retired. At least, I think!
The Bonaci and Politi moves were based on the fact we were anticipating moving them up after seeing them in camp, the question was to where. With no camp until who knows when, we pulled the trigger. As I've said, Instructs not really being a fertile scouting ground last year really put us behind on the upcoming DSL guys, who we usually get our first look at there.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 13,872
|
Post by cdj on Apr 1, 2020 22:40:33 GMT -5
Damn, didn’t realize Bakst retired. Not all that surprising...seems like the kid thinks there is more to life than baseball. He’s not wrong. Go finish that Stanford degree fella
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Apr 2, 2020 11:39:12 GMT -5
And actually, Esplin entered a few weeks ago when we learned that Daniel Bakst had retired. At least, I think! Correct as usual, sir!
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by gerry on Apr 5, 2020 3:36:50 GMT -5
Saw Bakst play at Stanford. He is a standout.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Andrews on Jul 3, 2020 9:59:31 GMT -5
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Jul 3, 2020 22:29:40 GMT -5
We're Baaaaaack!
Details
Summary:
- Noah Song got promoted to the # 4 spot in the rankings this month (quarter?) even though is career is yet to get off the ground. He was #9 in April.
- Jay Groome fell from 4 to 8.
- Nick Yorke joined the club at # 11. Now if only he'd sign.
- Jordan Blaze debuted at 13th.
- CJ Chatham fell from 10 to 14.
- Connor Wong and Ryan Zeferjahn both down 5, landing at 17 & 18.
- Antoni Flores down from 21 to 27.
- Pedro Castellanos & Brand Howlett also fell four spots down to # 30 & 31.
- Shane Drohan stars out at 32nd.
- Ceddanne Rafaela down from 22 to 33, but he remains high on the best name list.
- Luis Perales is at 40, up from 48. That's a bigger jump than it seems given the new names above him.
- Chase Shugart down from 34 to 41.
- Kyle Hart up from 47 to 42.
- Felix Cepeda at 45, down 6.
- Joan Martinez fell from 38 to 46.
- Brandon Cellucci and Blake Loubier both up 6 and now at 47 and 48.
- Nick Northcut down 7 at # 49.
- Nathanael cruised up from 59 to 50.
- Ryan Fitzgerald plummeted to 53 from 35 in April.
- Albert Feliz and Jeremy Wu-Yelland are ranked for the first time at 56 & 57.
- Yoelvis, at # 59, almost left the building.
- Falling out of the top 60 this month are Nick Longhi (previously # 44), Denyi Reyes (48), Alex Scherff (49), Josh Ockimey (51 (and once the # 4 prospect)), and Zach Schellenger (52).
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Jul 4, 2020 10:14:52 GMT -5
We're Baaaaaack!
Details
Summary:
- Noah Song got promoted to the # 4 spot in the rankings this month (quarter?) even though is career is yet to get off the ground. He was #9 in April.
- Jay Groome fell from 4 to 8.
- Nick Yorke joined the club at # 11. Now if only he'd sign.
- Jordan Blaze debuted at 13th.
- CJ Chatham fell from 10 to 14.
- Connor Wong and Ryan Zeferjahn both down 5, landing at 17 & 18.
- Antoni Flores down from 21 to 27.
- Pedro Castellanos & Brand Howlett also fell four spots down to # 30 & 31.
- Shane Drohan stars out at 32nd.
- Ceddanne Rafaela down from 22 to 33, but he remains high on the best name list.
- Luis Perales is at 40, up from 48. That's a bigger jump than it seems given the new names above him.
- Chase Shugart down from 34 to 41.
- Kyle Hart up from 47 to 42.
- Felix Cepeda at 45, down 6.
- Joan Martinez fell from 38 to 46.
- Brandon Cellucci and Blake Loubier both up 6 and now at 47 and 48.
- Nick Northcut down 7 at # 49.
- Nathanael cruised up from 59 to 50.
- Ryan Fitzgerald plummeted to 53 from 35 in April.
- Albert Feliz and Jeremy Wu-Yelland are ranked for the first time at 56 & 57.
- Yoelves, at # 59, almost left the building.
- Falling out of the top 60 this month are Nick Longhi (previously # 44), Denyi Reyes (48), Alex Scherff (49), Josh Ockimey (51 (and once the # 4 prospect)), and Zach Schellenger (52).
Well done. Also, Ockimey is probably a little underrated if he's off the board, right? He's a platoon guy at best but I think that he could at least his major league righties and for that, I think he's worth a ranking. I guess the fact he didn't make the player pool isn't a great look.
|
|
|