LookinUp

I just have a feeling that payroll can't be added this offseason. They need fans. He does make sense though.

11 is Lowther based on the other threads. 12 is between Diaz and Vavra, IMO. I chose Vavra. Getting some CF time, at a minimum, raises his floor. Or, it indicates they don't like his infield defense, which could stink. I don't think he's here because of the unknowns, but I love the write-ups on Mayo and think he could be a top 5 prospect in 2 years. And I still think Diaz can be a LF/RFer of the future here. I really want to see his production if he actually stays healthy. Maybe it's a character thing. I don't know. Seems to have more upside than the stat sheet is telling us.

I'm hopeful that our definition of mid-rotation is a much stronger pitcher than it has been for us in the past. These 4/5 types have been our 2's/3's, like Chris Tillman, for example. Not saying these guys will become as good as him at his best, but they might throw a whole lot of innings better than the mid case of Tillman's production.

I also don't love the choices here, but I do love Lowther. Someone mentioned Davies about another pitcher, but I think in some ways the comp fits with Lowther too (more pitcher than velocity/thrower). If Wells and Akin had a brother, it might be Lowther, lol. So, I say Kremer and Lowther. Really great depth in this system if Diaz isn't even in the top 10. And there are a lot of high potential relative unknowns that will become apparent too. We're still a few years away, but this org is growing it's own talent for the first time in a long time.

I think it's fair to assume that some of our best future prospect talent (2 recent drafts, maybe int'l) will be hidden in the ratings this year just because they're hidden on the field. I'm much more interested in the potential than their rank order. That's kinda always true, but much moreso this year. It's a blind spot, even within the org to some extent, I'd guess.

I'd say to look at Curt Schilling for a guy who used his 4-seemer in the zone at varying levels. It can definitely be effective. [As an aside, this is quite a talent to be sitting at #7. If he's healthy, he could be a really important piece down the road. I absolutely believe he belongs above Kremer/Akin/Diaz et al.]

If the extra pitch and health stories are both true, it’s hard for me to see Baumann this low on the list.

Went Baumann first, but fear the injury. Went Westburg second, but hope it’s Diaz. I swear he’s about to click big. I know, odds are I’m wrong, but I think he can be a real good offensive player with consistent health.

Already loving the improved depth of this system. Guys with legit upside but injury/performance concerns are falling a little farther every year.

Am I the only one who is pretty fired up that we had a few hitters able to excel against Grayson Rodriguez in Bowie? That's noteworthy to me. I'm sure it reflects on Rodriguez some, but he's still bringing legit stuff, and we apparently have guys who can barrel that. Cool.

This is a conservative write-up from Tony, IMO. The power/obp combo is a higher ceiling than Mountcastle. I agree with the ranking. Mountcastle is here. Kjestad is a long way away. I could even see this guy as far as #6. Still, the ceiling in Camden Yards is awesome.

If you don't like this guy at this point, I don't know what to say. I could see how some will say he won't hit this well when the league adjusts and thus his profile would be as an average starter. I like the power though, so think he's more. Plus, they haven't adjusted yet and I think he has some range in the outfield.

I guess I wouldn't be totally shocked if Henderson made it here. The reports on him from Bowie were very nice. I'm sure Tony heard more. On the other hand, Baumann got shut down for an injury I don't know enough about. That said, Baumann had helium before being shut down. Power arm that really made positive steps last year. I have Hall at 5 and Baumann at 6. Not sure where Henderson fits in. If not here, I assume he's next, but could imagine a case for a guy like Kremer based on his ML success.

Nailed it, for once.

I voted 5 minutes ago and already forgot what I voted. that said, thinking Mountcastle‘a probability is essentially 100% right now as a very nice stick and average LF/1b. He’s valuable and here, so I say he’s 3. Went with Kjerstad at 4 on draft pedigree and some of the gaps in Hall’s game. Personally, I love Hall on massive upside, but I’m saying he’s 5 here, which is nice.

Just so it’s seen...interesting development.

I think there are two excuses, or flat out reasons, that are just as likely as any others. 1. People go through slumps. It happens all the time. Timing gets off. The feel goes away. Happens to the best of them. 2. Maybe he was given a tweak from one of our coaches/hitting systems and he tried to implement it. That could definitely be a situation where you take a step backward before taking two steps forward. Either way, they're perfectly fine explanations that have nothing to do with his high ceiling talent and probabilities of getting close to it.

Yeah, it's a tough exercise to do unless you break it down into something like: 1. ML Ready 2. 1-2 years away 3. 3+ years away. There, we'd grade like D, D, B-.

I feel like the knock on him was fringy spin rates and velocity, so basically just not dynamic stuff.

I think I'm more bullish on the arms than many here. I agree that an A is steep, but an A-/B+ fits well, IMO. I like the depth, but acknowledge the depth at the top isn't great (e.g., Grayson, Hall and who else?). Still, I think we can fill #3-5 easily with good bullpen depth behind them. In a year, if Grayson or Hall looks truly special, that could bump things up. Baumann's "injury" also dampens my enthusiasm a bit, as he's one of those upside arms that theoretically could be the one to hit it big if he's healthy.

I think part of the issue here is how we grade. Let's talk just about either Mancini or Mountcastle. I'd argue they're close in value, though Mancini's cost would bring him down some. But on talent alone, what do you grade them at? For me, at best it's an A-. Neither is a gold glover, so we're going strichtly off of their bats. Is either a top of the game type of player? Sure they're really good hitters, but I cannot give either of them an A alone. If you have a strong A+ category, I suppose there's an argument at 1B. So beyond them, we have Gunnar, Welk and Mayo, IMO. In a year, Gunnar might look like a top 100 guy, but now he's a kid that we've never seen play. Welk's a small school guy who's old for his level. Mayo is all about projection. Again, in a year you might have a case that we're set at these two positions. For now, we're in the C+ range IMO because we appear to have 1B locked up with good to very good production for the next several years. That's valuable. 3B is a black hole for at least another 2 years, and probably more. That's not good.

I think you could say our corner outfield is B+/A-. That's Kjerstad, Mountcastle, Diaz, Santander, etc. The ceiling there is very nice. Our CF is C-. Sure, if Hays becomes a 150 game/year guy, it's better, but will he? I have 0 confidence in McKenna, though it's not crazy to think he can be a 4th outfielder (really 5th, defense only). Composite, probably a B/B-.

I think the grade is generous. I liked Hernaiz before Covid. Westburg and Vavra are nice additions, but don't exactly profile as first division starters. This is a part of the organization that basically profiles as "could have some talent, but nothing special is apparent yet." That's a C- at best for me, and that's if you like Vavra, Westburg and Hernaiz beyond what their production has shown.

I am excited to see our prospect list after the 2021 season. I’d bet we have a couple exciting international guys by then.

Batman is hurt. I believe Lowther was hurt, but is back now. Zimmerman has apparently impressed though, tonight notwithstanding.