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.
2022-2023 National Rankings (offseason)
|
Post by incandenza on Feb 3, 2023 10:53:54 GMT -5
Kiley McDaniel has the Sox at #14: 14. Boston Red Sox ($196.5 million)
Last year: 16th, $209.5 million Top-100 prospects: 3 The top of the system -- Marcelo Mayer and Triston Casas -- did what was expected and continued moving up the list. Beyond that, last season was a mixed bag for Red Sox prospects. Here's what happened to prospects Nos. 3-11, in order: Nick Yorke was downgraded due to a tough season in which he was a bit unlucky with outcomes, Jarren Duran graduated but still hasn't found much big league success, Jeter Downs went to the Nationals on waivers, Gilberto Jimenez and Wilkelman Gonzalez went unpicked in the Rule 5 draft after up-and-down seasons, Jay Groome was traded to the Padres in the Eric Hosmer salary dump, Ronaldo Hernandez was outrighted off of the 40-man roster, Chris Murphy was fine but nothing more in the upper minors, and Noah Song was selected in the Rule 5 draft by the Phillies.While that stretch of the list wasn't very good, there were a handful of breakout campaigns (Miguel Bleis, Ceddanne Rafaela, Blaze Jordan, Eddinson Paulino) of players who now move into that range in the team rankings along with some players added in the draft (Mikey Romero, Roman Anthony, Cutter Coffey) who also belong up there. Given how things are going at the big league level, the Red Sox need a strong next wave of players coming behind Casas and Mayer. More steps forward from this group are crucial. www.espn.com/mlb/insider/insider/story/_/id/35490490/top-30-mlb-farm-systems-prospects-list-2023-kiley-mcdanielSome of this is really more a reflection of a less-than-stellar job ranking these prospects in the first place than it is a reflection of underperformance. Why were Bello, Mata, Bleis, and Walter not in the top 11 a year ago? Why did they still have Downs, Jimenez, Hernandez, and Song that high? The soxprospects ranking from last spring has aged much better.
|
|
|
Post by 0ap0 on Feb 3, 2023 10:54:01 GMT -5
Let me know when Tomase acknowledges this McDaniel article. Why do you care what Tomase does or doesn't acknowledge?
|
|
|
Post by 0ap0 on Feb 3, 2023 10:59:22 GMT -5
.... I happen to think 5-20 and even 5-30 in our system look very strong, even if its skewed strongly toward hitters. I personally found this quite palpable throughout the season while paying attention to Kavadas. I'm really not used to having to scroll so far down the list to read about someone interesting. Simultaneously, I've never felt as if he were particularly misplaced on the list -- the whole group of 1-~30 have been prospects that seem like worthwhile players.
|
|
|
Post by seamus on Feb 3, 2023 11:04:47 GMT -5
I feel like the misnamed their own article. It seems to be about which prospect is most likely to make a leap into the top 100 next year rather than who is currently ranked immediately after each team's lowest-ranked Top 100 guy. It's possible that Romero is their #5 guy for the Sox (though I think putting him over Yorke at this point would be a bit of a hot take), but the way the blurbs are written seem to be more about 2024 projection than on current standing.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Feb 3, 2023 11:13:11 GMT -5
I agree that the depth is strong. I don't think it's very often that a teenaged up the middle defender with solid tools can't crack the top ten after putting up an 830 OPS in full season ball.
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Feb 3, 2023 11:15:11 GMT -5
I could care less about rankings. Law is basically docking them for having horrible pitching in his opinion. Everyone has their own way of ranking guys and even if you don't agree with him it makes sense. A balanced system is certainly the ideal system. Yet I'd point to the DD systems as proof that rankings suck, nevermind the results of the system DD was given. As to the Tomase piece I think it has some merit. The guys hitting the majors starting year 4 are DD guys. For all of his wheeling and dealing, going after prospects close to majors the results so far are horrible. The biggest worry being can Bloom actually identify talent in high A to AA? Given his model that's a legit worry. I certainly don't agree with the 5 years starts now, prospects take time and Bloom has leaned towards HS players. Which I actually like. I also am a big fan of going positional players more because they are safer. That being said Bloom has to start getting some high end starting pitching prospects either in the draft or international market. Also fair to knock how he's handled the loss of a bunch of top 20 to top 30 guys starting with Groome at the deadline. Now maybe this is him actually being good at identifying talent and those guys will all suck. We'll see and I truly hope it's just that. Now I would have preferred he handled things differently, yet if this is him showing he can identify talent, I call live with it. That's crazy important to his model of team building. This is in large part because the guys left over from the DD regime have had more time to incubate. If Bloom were fired tomorrow and we jumped forward 3-4 years most of the graduates would probably be his guys too. As a wise man once said, "prospects take time" DD's system was ranked poorly for good reason. I'm pretty sure Houck is the only player drafted or acquired over his tenure to make any sort of an impact at the major league level thus far. The system hasn't produced a starter on either side of the ball since Devers in 2017, and he was of course acquired by the previous GM four years prior, as is tradition. That track record is in good agreement with the broader perception of the farm, so I don't think the rankings were selling it short at all, even if Casas and Bello end up making the impact we hope this year.
I'm curious to dig into your statement that "a balanced system is certainly the ideal system" - do others have thoughts on that? My initial instinct was that the only thing that matters is having impact players, and that where they play and which side of the ball doesn't matter much because you can always trade them for players that fit the team better. I have no confidence in that stance, though. I could see it being a tricky needle to thread; if you have a logjam, other teams will know that, and you'll lose some leverage. Is it fair to assume you can get roughly equal value back when trading prospects from a position of surplus? I don't know. Also, does having a glut of position players hurt their development at all by forcing them to play out of position, or cutting into their playing time, or forcing promotions/demotions that you would have preferred to avoid? Given the Sox' drafting patterns lately they don't seem too worried about keeping the system balanced. Is that worthy of criticism or not?
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Feb 3, 2023 11:43:58 GMT -5
www.nbcsports.com/boston/red-sox/red-sox-bottom-10-farm-system-ranking-indictment-teams-entire-plan?cid=Yahoo&partner=ya4nbcsIn the vein of Keith Law's rankings, has anyone seen this gem of an article from Tomase? I don't like Tomase, haven't for years but this may take the cake as one of if not his dumbest articles written. Let's write a whole article crapping all over the Sox and Bloom's plan and use one guys rankings who compared to the other major farm ranking writers/publications is a pretty big outlier. It's either lazy writing and he didn't want to bother checking the other publications or he didn't care and cherry-picked Law's rankings because it fit his narrative of the last year+ to crap all over the Sox and the FO. This got my blood to boil
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Feb 3, 2023 11:45:53 GMT -5
Kiley McDaniel has the Sox at #14: 14. Boston Red Sox ($196.5 million)
Last year: 16th, $209.5 million Top-100 prospects: 3 The top of the system -- Marcelo Mayer and Triston Casas -- did what was expected and continued moving up the list. Beyond that, last season was a mixed bag for Red Sox prospects. Here's what happened to prospects Nos. 3-11, in order: Nick Yorke was downgraded due to a tough season in which he was a bit unlucky with outcomes, Jarren Duran graduated but still hasn't found much big league success, Jeter Downs went to the Nationals on waivers, Gilberto Jimenez and Wilkelman Gonzalez went unpicked in the Rule 5 draft after up-and-down seasons, Jay Groome was traded to the Padres in the Eric Hosmer salary dump, Ronaldo Hernandez was outrighted off of the 40-man roster, Chris Murphy was fine but nothing more in the upper minors, and Noah Song was selected in the Rule 5 draft by the Phillies. While that stretch of the list wasn't very good, there were a handful of breakout campaigns (Miguel Bleis, Ceddanne Rafaela, Blaze Jordan, Eddinson Paulino) of players who now move into that range in the team rankings along with some players added in the draft (Mikey Romero, Roman Anthony, Cutter Coffey) who also belong up there. Given how things are going at the big league level, the Red Sox need a strong next wave of players coming behind Casas and Mayer. More steps forward from this group are crucial. www.espn.com/mlb/insider/insider/story/_/id/35490490/top-30-mlb-farm-systems-prospects-list-2023-kiley-mcdanielMuch better. This season will get better because we didn’t have a good season.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Feb 3, 2023 11:47:30 GMT -5
Let me know when Tomase acknowledges this McDaniel article. Of course he won’t, this won’t help him sell or get more views. Whatever helps them get paid.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Feb 3, 2023 12:18:15 GMT -5
Baseball Prospectus also seems to have them somewhere in the 10-14 range, continuing to rise after bottoming out at 30th in 2019.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Feb 3, 2023 12:48:07 GMT -5
Let me know when Tomase acknowledges this McDaniel article. Of course he won’t, this won’t help him sell or get more views. Whatever helps them get paid. I think we have to accept the fact that it's how a bit of the mass media works these days. For many casual fans who's attention isn't focused on a range of sources, the uninformed take from a single review will be forgotten. The writer will just move on to the next vein of fools gold and keep mining eyeballs.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Feb 3, 2023 12:56:04 GMT -5
I could care less about rankings. Law is basically docking them for having horrible pitching in his opinion. Everyone has their own way of ranking guys and even if you don't agree with him it makes sense. A balanced system is certainly the ideal system. Yet I'd point to the DD systems as proof that rankings suck, nevermind the results of the system DD was given. As to the Tomase piece I think it has some merit. The guys hitting the majors starting year 4 are DD guys. For all of his wheeling and dealing, going after prospects close to majors the results so far are horrible. The biggest worry being can Bloom actually identify talent in high A to AA? Given his model that's a legit worry. I certainly don't agree with the 5 years starts now, prospects take time and Bloom has leaned towards HS players. Which I actually like. I also am a big fan of going positional players more because they are safer. That being said Bloom has to start getting some high end starting pitching prospects either in the draft or international market. Also fair to knock how he's handled the loss of a bunch of top 20 to top 30 guys starting with Groome at the deadline. Now maybe this is him actually being good at identifying talent and those guys will all suck. We'll see and I truly hope it's just that. Now I would have preferred he handled things differently, yet if this is him showing he can identify talent, I call live with it. That's crazy important to his model of team building. This is in large part because the guys left over from the DD regime have had more time to incubate. If Bloom were fired tomorrow and we jumped forward 3-4 years most of the graduates would probably be his guys too. As a wise man once said, "prospects take time" DD's system was ranked poorly for good reason. I'm pretty sure Houck is the only player drafted or acquired over his tenure to make any sort of an impact at the major league level thus far. The system hasn't produced a starter on either side of the ball since Devers in 2017, and he was of course acquired by the previous GM four years prior, as is tradition. That track record is in good agreement with the broader perception of the farm, so I don't think the rankings were selling it short at all, even if Casas and Bello end up making the impact we hope this year.
I'm curious to dig into your statement that "a balanced system is certainly the ideal system" - do others have thoughts on that? My initial instinct was that the only thing that matters is having impact players, and that where they play and which side of the ball doesn't matter much because you can always trade them for players that fit the team better. I have no confidence in that stance, though. I could see it being a tricky needle to thread; if you have a logjam, other teams will know that, and you'll lose some leverage. Is it fair to assume you can get roughly equal value back when trading prospects from a position of surplus? I don't know. Also, does having a glut of position players hurt their development at all by forcing them to play out of position, or cutting into their playing time, or forcing promotions/demotions that you would have preferred to avoid? Given the Sox' drafting patterns lately they don't seem too worried about keeping the system balanced. Is that worthy of criticism or not?
100% prospect for prospect trades are very rare. So it's not like it's easy to flip them and equal out the system. What you get is teams using up the cheap years and trading guys off while in arbitration. So if you want the best value, good young pitchers making peanuts you need them to come through your system. Yeah rule one gets the best prospects you can, absolutely. Yet if you want ideal, you want the Dodgers system producing impactful prospects for positional and pitching prospects.
|
|
|
Post by oldfaithful2019 on Feb 3, 2023 13:03:00 GMT -5
I feel like the misnamed their own article. It seems to be about which prospect is most likely to make a leap into the top 100 next year rather than who is currently ranked immediately after each team's lowest-ranked Top 100 guy. It's possible that Romero is their #5 guy for the Sox (though I think putting him over Yorke at this point would be a bit of a hot take), but the way the blurbs are written seem to be more about 2024 projection than on current standing. Too bad the MLB article does not indicate where each of these players would be ranked. Is Romero # 110 or 175 ? It does seem a stretch to put him above Yorke already, but what other assumption can be made. I do think Romero could very quickly become that depth redundancy that the Sox could deal from in a couple years if he does become a top 100.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Feb 3, 2023 14:21:15 GMT -5
I could care less about rankings. Law is basically docking them for having horrible pitching in his opinion. Everyone has their own way of ranking guys and even if you don't agree with him it makes sense. A balanced system is certainly the ideal system. Yet I'd point to the DD systems as proof that rankings suck, nevermind the results of the system DD was given. As to the Tomase piece I think it has some merit. The guys hitting the majors starting year 4 are DD guys . For all of his wheeling and dealing, going after prospects close to majors the results so far are horrible. The biggest worry being can Bloom actually identify talent in high A to AA? Given his model that's a legit worry. I certainly don't agree with the 5 years starts now, prospects take time and Bloom has leaned towards HS players. Which I actually like. I also am a big fan of going positional players more because they are safer. That being said Bloom has to start getting some high end starting pitching prospects either in the draft or international market. Also fair to knock how he's handled the loss of a bunch of top 20 to top 30 guys starting with Groome at the deadline. Now maybe this is him actually being good at identifying talent and those guys will all suck. We'll see and I truly hope it's just that. Now I would have preferred he handled things differently, yet if this is him showing he can identify talent, I call live with it. That's crazy important to his model of team building. This is in large part because the guys left over from the DD regime have had more time to incubate. If Bloom were fired tomorrow and we jumped forward 3-4 years most of the graduates would probably be his guys too. As a wise man once said, "prospects take time" DD's system was ranked poorly for good reason. I'm pretty sure Houck is the only player drafted or acquired over his tenure to make any sort of an impact at the major league level thus far. The system hasn't produced a starter on either side of the ball since Devers in 2017, and he was of course acquired by the previous GM four years prior, as is tradition. That track record is in good agreement with the broader perception of the farm, so I don't think the rankings were selling it short at all, even if Casas and Bello end up making the impact we hope this year. I'm curious to dig into your statement that "a balanced system is certainly the ideal system" - do others have thoughts on that? My initial instinct was that the only thing that matters is having impact players, and that where they play and which side of the ball doesn't matter much because you can always trade them for players that fit the team better. I have no confidence in that stance, though. I could see it being a tricky needle to thread; if you have a logjam, other teams will know that, and you'll lose some leverage. Is it fair to assume you can get roughly equal value back when trading prospects from a position of surplus? I don't know. Also, does having a glut of position players hurt their development at all by forcing them to play out of position, or cutting into their playing time, or forcing promotions/demotions that you would have preferred to avoid? Given the Sox' drafting patterns lately they don't seem too worried about keeping the system balanced. Is that worthy of criticism or not?
Good thought exercise! It seems the better ROI is drafting (mostly) positional players. I'm not sure what the realistic ideal scenario from a farm system would be. Maybe 1 starting caliber rookie in the starting lineup as a positional player or starting pitcher, 2 out of every 3 years? Doesn't seem having an impact minor league "logjam" causes teams to lose leverage in trades either.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 3, 2023 14:26:41 GMT -5
Baseball Prospectus also seems to have them somewhere in the 10-14 range, continuing to rise after bottoming out at 30th in 2019. I wonder which year was the one they put Dedgar Jimenez in their top 20, after which he became a MLFA and nobody signed him...
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Feb 3, 2023 18:01:21 GMT -5
I’ll be honest and of course just my opinion. I don’t think too much of Mata because I think he just amounts to a bullpen piece I really don’t think much of Walter who will turn 27 in September and is just now sniffing AAA So for me as far a prospects go the pitching is barren. I am Excited for Perales but he is a long ways off from the majors Dismissing Walter because of his age is kinda ignoring his entire path to becoming a relevant prospect in the first place. It’s more about me being skeptical about his AA numbers given his age. He is very much an all prove it and no projection Let’s not pretend that we wouldn’t be projecting him much better if he was 22 in AA last year. So since he was 26 I’m taking the other side of that thinking
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Feb 3, 2023 18:10:43 GMT -5
Dismissing Walter because of his age is kinda ignoring his entire path to becoming a relevant prospect in the first place. It’s more about me being skeptical about his AA numbers given his age. He is very much an all prove it and no projection Let’s not pretend that we wouldn’t be projecting him much better if he was 22 in AA last year. So since he was 26 I’m taking the other side of that thinking Sure he's going to be 26 and there's perhaps not much projection left in terms of his body and the such but stuff and ability is the same whether he's 22 or 26. My biggest concern with Walter is his lack of IP and ability to stay healthy.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Feb 3, 2023 22:04:22 GMT -5
Kiley McDaniel has the Sox at #14: 14. Boston Red Sox ($196.5 million)
Last year: 16th, $209.5 million Top-100 prospects: 3 The top of the system -- Marcelo Mayer and Triston Casas -- did what was expected and continued moving up the list. Beyond that, last season was a mixed bag for Red Sox prospects. Here's what happened to prospects Nos. 3-11, in order: Nick Yorke was downgraded due to a tough season in which he was a bit unlucky with outcomes, Jarren Duran graduated but still hasn't found much big league success, Jeter Downs went to the Nationals on waivers, Gilberto Jimenez and Wilkelman Gonzalez went unpicked in the Rule 5 draft after up-and-down seasons, Jay Groome was traded to the Padres in the Eric Hosmer salary dump, Ronaldo Hernandez was outrighted off of the 40-man roster, Chris Murphy was fine but nothing more in the upper minors, and Noah Song was selected in the Rule 5 draft by the Phillies. While that stretch of the list wasn't very good, there were a handful of breakout campaigns (Miguel Bleis, Ceddanne Rafaela, Blaze Jordan, Eddinson Paulino) of players who now move into that range in the team rankings along with some players added in the draft (Mikey Romero, Roman Anthony, Cutter Coffey) who also belong up there. Given how things are going at the big league level, the Red Sox need a strong next wave of players coming behind Casas and Mayer. More steps forward from this group are crucial. www.espn.com/mlb/insider/insider/story/_/id/35490490/top-30-mlb-farm-systems-prospects-list-2023-kiley-mcdanielMuch better. This season will get better because we didn’t have a good season. This matches up with my assumption that the Sox farm is average, or just above/just below. They have two guys who are on the MLB team (Bello - no longer a prospect - and Casas), one, Rafaela, who may make it late this year (if no one in CF goes on a prolonged IL stint -sooner if someone does), or more likely, next year. After that, Mayer likely in 2025 and wait and see on everyone else. So with the players mentioned here, it’s an improving system with a few guys who could be MLB average or better. There’s no true core cohort like the Sox had in 2016/17, or this year’s Orioles, but more like one average player a year for each of 2023-2025. After that, the odds say if the other guys he mentioned ( Blaze Jordan, Eddinson Paulino, Mikey Romero, Roman Anthony, Cutter Coffey and maybe Yorke), if they’re truly top 10 in the system, two and maybe more will get at least a cup pf coffee in the show, though we can’t say for sure who or when. So, in short: it's a system heavy on projection (the guys in A and below) and lighter on solid opportunity - i.e. at or within 1-2 years of MLB (Mayer, Rafaela, Casas).
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 7, 2023 7:43:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bellhorndingers21 on Feb 7, 2023 8:34:00 GMT -5
Giminez was an interesting choice
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Feb 7, 2023 9:46:28 GMT -5
Giminez was an interesting choice I've reopened the article at least 4 times just to make sure I saw that correctly. Waiting on the edit
|
|
|
Post by seamus on Feb 7, 2023 10:16:01 GMT -5
He also completely dismissed Yorke's injuries as too minor to explain his drop in production, not even acknowledging that his best stretch - in the AFL - came when he was at his healthiest. That combined with Jimenez being ranked at all means I'm pretty much going to ignore Law's scouting on every team. If I don't buy it for the system I know best, there's no reason to accept it for the systems I don't know about.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Feb 7, 2023 10:25:30 GMT -5
He also completely dismissed Yorke's injuries as too minor to explain his drop in production, not even acknowledging that his best stretch - in the AFL - came when he was at his healthiest. That combined with Jimenez being ranked at all means I'm pretty much going to ignore Law's scouting on every team. If I don't buy it for the system I know best, there's no reason to accept it for the systems I don't know about. If you come across a ranking that doesn't have a single questionable or surprising placement that's a sure sign that they're just herding toward the consensus. Whether Law's ranking is good or not, he's in the sweet spot where it mostly makes sense and one or two iffy choices let you know he's being honest. And in any case, Jimenez doesn't seem like that crazy of a choice to me; he was a consensus top-10 prospect a year ago, and if you're willing to give him a little more leash to regain the promise he showed in the past is seems reasonable enough to keep him around toward the back of your top 20. I actually think Perales merely getting an honorable mention is the bigger surprise.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Feb 7, 2023 10:39:40 GMT -5
I don't know how any one human being can be informed about the top X prospects in every team's farm system, and so what his rankings are most useful for are not the numerical rankings but the handful of tidbits in the commentary that are sourced from either personal looks or scouts. (Sort of how like the price targets in sell-side analyst reports are not very useful, but you should read them for the analysis/commentary.)
|
|
|
Post by seamus on Feb 7, 2023 11:04:05 GMT -5
Okay, that makes a lot of sense. I was up most of the night with a sick kiddo and was in an uncharitable mood!
|
|
|