BA top 100

[LookinUp]

"Getting to the Majors" is less an issue than "being a first division starter". Watch Matt Dominguez and how Florida handles him and his potential as an everyday player. He's probably a better defender than Esposito, but a reasonable comp for what you might expect as "likely outcome" for Espo.

If you think Dominguez is tolerable as an everyday MLer, than you will probably be okay with Esposito (this assuming Esposito's profile doesn't drastically change).

Is it fair to assume that profiles don't often drastically change? This may not be generalizable, but are profile changes often due to pro instruction or are they mostly attributable to physical growth/hard work? How often is the level of instruction a player has had previously so inferior that you can look at a guy and allow for a little more projection versus a similar player from a better program?

[Stotle]

Is it fair to assume that profiles don't often drastically change? This may not be generalizable, but are profile changes often due to pro instruction or are they mostly attributable to physical growth/hard work? How often is the level of instruction a player has had previously so inferior that you can look at a guy and allow for a little more projection versus a similar player from a better program?

College players can outdistance their draft profile, depending on the aspect of the game, due to pro instruction. It is largely dependant on the limiting factor affecting the player's projection in that aspect of his game.

Physical growth can outdistance projection, though that occurs more often with HSers. There's also a danger that players physically developing off the projected path could negatively impact other aspects of that player's game.

[Frobby]

"Getting to the Majors" is less an issue than "being a first division starter". Watch Matt Dominguez and how Florida handles him and his potential as an everyday player. He's probably a better defender than Esposito, but a reasonable comp for what you might expect as "likely outcome" for Espo.

If you think Dominguez is tolerable as an everyday MLer, than you will probably be okay with Esposito (this assuming Esposito's profile doesn't drastically change).

I think of Brandon Inge and Joe Crede as two guys who were solid at 3B because they had above average gloves and were OK at the plate. That would be my hope for Esposito. I've never seen the guy play, and he hasn't played in the minors, so I don't know if it is reasonable to hope that he can play at that level or not.

[LookinUp]

College players can outdistance their draft profile, depending on the aspect of the game, due to pro instruction. It is largely dependant on the limiting factor affecting the player's projection in that aspect of his game.

Physical growth can outdistance projection, though that occurs more often with HSers. There's also a danger that players physically developing off the projected path could negatively impact other aspects of that player's game.

Pujols and Cabrera were 3b. Sort of laughable now, but I'll take that tradeoff.

Is it fair to assume that most orgs know many of the programs that have inferior/superior instruction?

[Stotle]

Pujols and Cabrera were 3b. Sort of laughable now, but I'll take that tradeoff.

Scouts had a hard time pegging the ultimate ceiling for those hitters for different reasons, though (age/accessibility).

Is it fair to assume that most orgs know many of the programs that have inferior/superior instruction?

Orgs vary in their appraisal of college programs -- some have stronger feelings than others. Keep in mind that college coaches have an obligation to their programs/schools to win and bring in money. The great ones can do that while also developing with MLB in mind, but the vast majority of college kids aren't pro prospects and the vast amount of instruction has to be geared towards the college game.

[NCRaven]

...Physical growth can outdistance projection, though that occurs more often with HSers.

Look at the difference in Strassburg coming out of high school (undrafted) and college (#1 overall pick). Huge change over those few years.

[Stotle]

Look at the difference in Strassburg coming out of high school (undrafted) and college (#1 overall pick). Huge change over those few years.

True, though Strasburg's changes were driven heavily by conditioning and life style changes. The argument can be made that Strasburg would never have been a pro prospect had he not gone to SDSU and clicked with Gwynn and staff. I'm thinking along the lines of "if Machado were to grow into a 1b body, unexpectedly." You could see a big jump in projected power, but at the expense of his positional value.

[allstar1579]

"Getting to the Majors" is less an issue than "being a first division starter". Watch Matt Dominguez and how Florida handles him and his potential as an everyday player. He's probably a better defender than Esposito, but a reasonable comp for what you might expect as "likely outcome" for Espo.

If you think Dominguez is tolerable as an everyday MLer, than you will probably be okay with Esposito (this assuming Esposito's profile doesn't drastically change).

I think that's actually the EXACT reason why I'm so hopeful for Esposito, because I wanted Dominguez bad that year and they didn't take him

[Scrat1]

I know I probably shouldn't be, but I'm still hung up on the "slider bat speed" line about Esposito. That seems like a pretty huge hurdle.

[Sports Guy]

Just got my BA prospect handbook...I like how they have attached a number and a "risk level grade"

The number determines how good they think they will be and the risk level grade is based on a high, medium, low thing...Low being low risk, etc....

[Tony-OH]

Just got my BA prospect handbook...I like how they have attached a number and a "risk level grade"

The number determines how good they think they will be and the risk level grade is based on a high, medium, low thing...Low being low risk, etc....

I agree. I've been looking for a way to convey that type of stuff and I think BA hit on the head. I don't necessarily agree with their list as some of their picks are absolute head scratchers (Waring and Pelzer on the list and Bobby Bundy and Glynn Davis are not), but still, they did an excellent job this year in depicting ceiling and chances of reaching that ceiling.

[TakebackOPACY]

I think of Brandon Inge and Joe Crede as two guys who were solid at 3B because they had above average gloves and were OK at the plate. That would be my hope for Esposito. I've never seen the guy play, and he hasn't played in the minors, so I don't know if it is reasonable to hope that he can play at that level or not.

I'm sure they're very different players, but Crede was a an offensive threat in the minors. He almost won a Triple Crown in the Carolina League. And in his AA and AAA seasons, he was top 5-10 in those leagues in numerous offensive categories. Of course some of that comes from spending a full season at each level.

I'm guessing that if Stotle is right then we can't expect that kind of production in the minors. But maybe we can hope that whatever he does produce holds up better at the majors.

[Tony-OH]

We must have different versions. Bundy is #17 and Davis is #19. I agree that some of the picks are head scratchers. I can't see how Waring is on the list at this point. Pelzer went on to prove just how wrong BA was last year.

Ok, I'm going to shut up now until I literally read through BA's list. This is what I get for skimming and then making comments. I should know better.

Maybe it was Drake I was thinking of. Is he on the list? Can't remember and don't have access to the book. Either way, Waring and Pelzer should not be on any prospects lists unless they are going to 50 or maybe even more.