Fangraphs' Orioles Top 15 Prospects '12-'13

[luismatos4prez]

This can be in the Orioles Talk forum, right? Link to Article

1. Bundy

2. Gausman

3. Schoop

4. E. Rodriguez

5. Hoes

6. Delmonico

7. Kline

8. Avery

9. G. Davis

10. Wright

11. Marin

12. Berry

13. Davies

14. Bridwell

15. S. Johnson

[weams]

This can be in the Orioles Talk forum, right? Link to Article

1. Bundy

2. Gausman

3. Schoop

4. E. Rodriguez

5. Hoes

6. Delmonico

7. Kline

8. Avery

9. G. Davis

10. Wright

11. Marin

12. Berry

13. Davies

14. Bridwell

15. S. Johnson

Yes and Thanks.

[Crazysilver03]

Ugh that quote about Tim Berry really drives home how bad the 2009 draft was. When your 50th round selection has a better chance of producing in the majors than your 1st round selection, then you know it was an epic fail.

[skanar]

Ugh that quote about Tim Berry really drives home how bad the 2009 draft was. When your 50th round selection has a better chance of producing in the majors than your 1st round selection, then you know it was an epic fail.

That was the Coffey/Tolliver/Wirsch draft, where they used the money saved on Hobgood to sign a bunch of risky, high-upside HS arms (including Berry). I was intrigued by the strategy at the time and thought there was a good chance it might work out. Obviously, it didn't.

However, Hulet's comment is still a little premature, or perhaps just a bit of hyperbole; there are a couple of guys who still have legitimate, albeit small, shots at the majors: Tyler Townsend, Ryan Berry, Michael Ohlman, Brenden Webb and Ty Kelly were all from that draft, Hobgood is all of 22, and Givens is trying to convert to a pitcher.

[OriolesFaithful]

Parker Bridwell at 14?! He was a disaster last year. Also, Davis at 9? That is extremely high IMO.

[Crazysilver03]

Parker Bridwell at 14?! He was a disaster last year. Also, Davis at 9? That is extremely high IMO.

Going with project ability. After #8 everyone is basically interchangeable.

[DrungoHazewood]

However, Hulet's comment is still a little premature, or perhaps just a bit of hyperbole; there are a couple of guys who still have legitimate, albeit small, shots at the majors: Tyler Townsend, Ryan Berry, Michael Ohlman, Brenden Webb and Ty Kelly were all from that draft, Hobgood is all of 22, and Givens is trying to convert to a pitcher.

I wouldn't really call it premature or hyperbole. When you're four years out and your best hope is guys like Townsend and Berry leaping forward to reestablish their chances at making the majors... well, that was a bad draft.

[hendu]

Man, I thought that we hyped Bundy, they call him a "once in a lifetime talent". Quite humorous to see Johnson #15, as one comment stated, very unlikely that #5-14 ever accomplish more in their entire careers than what he did last year. I agree that most of the others on the list have more potential, but Johnson is probably a little low. I do agree with quite a bit of it though.

[jabba72]

And no Darth Hader Vader Fader. Guess FanGraphs didnt get the memo.

[jabba72]

Kline at 7? A bullpen guy? Ugh.

[TheWall]

Johnson at #15 is an insult. He was fantastic this past season and I think he showed that he can have a very productive career. Is he a sub-3 era picture? Probably not, but he's more valuable than most of that list as far as I am concerned.

[Ruzious]

Going with project ability. After #8 everyone is basically interchangeable.

I'd even say after 4 or 5, there's a clifff.

[eb45]

Kline at 7? A bullpen guy? Ugh.

Branden Kline isn't a bullpen guy.

Dan Klein is, but he isn't on the list.

Not big on this list, really. It's like they took last year's, adjusted for performance, and slotted in the top three draft picks.

[DrungoHazewood]

Branden Kline isn't a bullpen guy.

Dan Klein is, but he isn't on the list.

Not big on this list, really. It's like they took last year's, adjusted for performance, and slotted in the top three draft picks.

Eight or nine years ago Tony had me writing up the Hangout top 30 or 40 prospects for the site. Most of the guys I didn't know from Adam, so all I had to go on was last year's writeups from Tony's observations and a stat line. Some of my profiles were pretty thin and full of filler. I saw a lot of that in this article. "Fred Jones obviously has some talent since he was a 5th-round pick in '09, but really needs to work on the consistency of his secondaries." You can write that about 60% of the pitchers in the minors.

[eb45]

Eight or nine years ago Tony had me writing up the Hangout top 30 or 40 prospects for the site. Most of the guys I didn't know from Adam, so all I had to go on was last year's writeups from Tony's observations and a stat line. Some of my profiles were pretty thin and full of filler. I saw a lot of that in this article. "Fred Jones obviously has some talent since he was a 5th-round pick in '09, but really needs to work on the consistency of his secondaries." You can write that about 60% of the pitchers in the minors.

That's about how I felt, yeah. Bearing in mind though that the primary use of lists like these isn't for the super-dedicated fans of the team the list is being made, the people who will already know all the guys and all the basic information. We're not going to learn anything from them. Like, I can tell you the pros and cons of Zach Davies, but I wouldn't expect a casual Orioles fan who is happy with a basic knowledge of the system to do that, or a fan of another team. There are lists like Tony's that are made by die-hard fans and followers of specific teams that are designed in large part for the more knowledgeable segment of that team's fanbase, and there are lists like the Fangraphs and Sickels and even BA that are designed to give casual followers an idea of where the system is at. And that's totally okay with me.