Jump to content

Are our prospects better than most people thought?


Gurgi

Recommended Posts

My hopes for the future is Hoes playing left, Avery being a backup OF, Schoop at 2nd and Reimold at DH. I love having a speedster like Avery.

Im happy with our OF of McLouth, Jones, Markakis and Hoes or Avery. I'd look to deal one of the other for depth elsewhere. Reimold's only place on the team for me is DH. But I guess I could see him at 1B if they let Reynolds walk at seasons end...Which I dont think will happen. I think they will try to renegotiate a lesser deal for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks to me like Machado will get enough at bats this year that he won't qualify as a prospect when this season is over. I think you probably have a few other guys rated too high.

Frobby, you're the second person to post this, and as I wrote, I'm just guessing. But I've explained where I'm coming from on most of those grades in the post above - I'd love to see an alternate set of grades/explanations.

If Machado loses his eligibility, our system will take an enormous hit, on paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hoes is an average defensive player with no power. He has speed but doesn't steal a lot of bases. Why exactly does everyone think he is going to be in LF next year?

Would you take him in LF if he was the next .310 avg close to .400 OBP player? I think we can afford to as you get power from CF (as position you usually dont), moderate power in RF, Power at 1B, Power at SS, Power at 3B, and Power at C. I think we can lesser power at 2B & LF

If Jones, Reynolds, and Davis give 25+ dingers

and you get 15-20 from Markakis, Hardy , Machado, and Wieters.

Say you get another 5-10 from each Hoes, Quintanilla/Andino.

If McLouth can hit .260 and get 550+ Abs you can also pencil him in for 20+

That team would hit around 200 Homers which should be plenty. I think 180 would be a conservative number with 220 being a solid ceiling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hoes is an average defensive player with no power. He has speed but doesn't steal a lot of bases. Why exactly does everyone think he is going to be in LF next year?

I am interested to know how much you have seen him play defense? I think he could be our starter in left field next year because he is an on-base machine. Look at his numbers as he rose through the system and the one thing he gives you consistently is OBP. We get power from several unconventional positions...CF, SS, C...power is not an issue on this team. Getting on base is a problem. He is a possible solution.

Again, I don't know where you are getting your defensive rating from, I think Tony has said in the past that he plays a pretty good corner outfield slot and could play centerfield. Plus, he has 20 stolen bases on the year...not great, but not horrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not that what you say is wrong, it's just the orange-colored glasses sort of thinking around here. Most of these guys aren't real prospects. Delmonico's value is almost entirely in his bat. He was rated the #5 prospect by many. I would hardly call a .249 AVG, a .411 Slugging PCT, and a .762 OPS encouraging for a low A player who has already turned 20. It's not terrible but this is supposed to be your #5 prospect. That's how weak the system is and putting a positive spin on other fringe prospects (Webb, Kelly) does nothing to ACTUALLY increase the real talent that's in the system, which isn't much.

Well, that is typical. Nowhere in that post was anything that said our farm is in good shape. I said there was some solid improvement with certain guys. In fact, I think I was a bit critical, just not as pessimistic as you appear to be at this moment in time. And, the last paragraph said that there was a big drop after the top 4. Hardly would I call this orange colored glasses. In fact, I seem to agree with you. I just have a less pessimistic tone.

I would refute your analysis somewhat on Delmonico with the fact that his BB/K ratio is actually fairly good and he has 22 doubles and 11 home runs for a guy in his first taste of pro ball. So what if he is 20 years old. It is his first year in professional baseball. A college junior is 21 generally when drafted, so by your remark then he is already too old for low A? And, I said I like it, I didn't say I love it. Does he need to make adjustments, well yes he does. So does every prospect, that is development and that is why he is there. 22 errors solidifies your point that his value is in his bat. The fact that he is rated highly in our system is a problem, yes I agree with you. In a good system, he would be somewhere around maybe 15-20.

For comparison, look at Mike Moustakas' stats. Not really very different, and he was a top 10-15 prospect in all the minors a few years ago. http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/profile.asp?P=Mike-Moustakas

And Eric Hosmer, another top 10 prospect a few years ago. http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/profile.asp?P=Eric-Hosmer

Those are just two recent examples. There are many many more just like them. I'm not saying that he is the same level of prospect, not at all. But I don't think you can hammer the kid for his stats and say he not having a solid, not great, first season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the beginning of the year there was a thread about how bad the system was because all the minor league teams stunk. Now you have both Bowie and Frederick fighting for playoff spots. An interesting change in attitude and fortunes in the last two months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the beginning of the year there was a thread about how bad the system was because all the minor league teams stunk. Now you have both Bowie and Frederick fighting for playoff spots. An interesting change in attitude and fortunes in the last two months.

I am the one who made that thread. At the time it was true. All the teams sucked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#19 Baltimore (Sickels Rank 19) (from this past year)

1 A, 1 A-, 0 B+, 1 B, 4 B-, 11 C+

Baltimore, Projected

2 A, 0 A-, 2 B+, 3 B, 2 B-, 9 C+

It looks to me like Machado will get enough at bats this year that he won't qualify as a prospect when this season is over. I think you probably have a few other guys rated too high.
Frobby, you're the second person to post this, and as I wrote, I'm just guessing. But I've explained where I'm coming from on most of those grades in the post above - I'd love to see an alternate set of grades/explanations.

If Machado loses his eligibility, our system will take an enormous hit, on paper.

OK, here is what I would guess:

Machado (A last year) - won't qualify

D. Bundy (A- last year) - A

Gausman (unrated last year) - B+

Schoop (B/borderline B+ last year) - B/borderline B+

LJ Hoes (C+ last year) - B or B-

Eduardo Rodriguez (C+ last year) - B-

Delmonico (B- last year) - B-

Everybody else C+ or below.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...