Jump to content

New Rankings with Rule 5 guys


now

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, hoosiers said:

Have to like these two additions.  Disagree with a chuckle that there is "no big impact" to adding a top 15 prospect rated a few slots behind a recent supplemental first rounder and ahead of supplemental second rounder - basically for free.  We'll see the impact on the field.

Yes, of course, on the field. If he's an Ozzie Smith, Vizquel, or Belanger, big impact! Ryan Flaherty, not so much. Plus he's got Grenier four spots ahead of him (on that list) and Carmona right behind.

Great to have multiple options and possible ceilings, for sure!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Statements like that are why I refuse to get excited by rule V players and am generally against adding them to the team.

I don't think you should get excited about them, but I think with the state of the projected 25 man roster, Martin and Jackson are probably upgrades right away over Wilkerson and Valera. Jackson I'd say has maybe a 10%ish chance of being a regular. So while not exciting, it's useful and more upside than the players they may supplant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

I don't think you should get excited about them, but I think with the state of the projected 25 man roster, Martin and Jackson are probably upgrades right away over Wilkerson and Valera. Jackson I'd say has maybe a 10%ish chance of being a regular. So while not exciting, it's useful and more upside than the players they may supplant. 

I note that 2080 had Martin first among their predraft infielders, then Wong, VanMeter, and Jackson. Of Martin they say he's a top overall pick, but even at that, he has the "ceiling of a borderline regular, likely a safer bet to profile as a solid role player."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

I don't think you should get excited about them, but I think with the state of the projected 25 man roster, Martin and Jackson are probably upgrades right away over Wilkerson and Valera. Jackson I'd say has maybe a 10%ish chance of being a regular. So while not exciting, it's useful and more upside than the players they may supplant. 

I'm not sure I overly care about who the placeholders are.

I don't think the roster inflexibility is worth the advantages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, now said:

I note that 2080 had Martin first among their predraft infielders, then Wong, VanMeter, and Jackson. Of Martin they say he's a top overall pick, but even at that, he has the "ceiling of a borderline regular, likely a safer bet to profile as a solid role player."

First, they didn't do a ranking. They did three tiers, top of crop, other notables, and long shots. Wong, VanMeter, Jackson, and Martin are all in the same tier.

So a regular is a 50, so they are saying his ceiling is like a 45 or a tad more and a safer bet to profile as a solid role player which is a 40. 

So assuming there is some risk of him not becoming a solid role player, which is almost always the case, that makes him a low/moderate risk FV 40 with a reasonable ceiling as a 45, which is actually exactly how I'd grade him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Martin has been plagued by nagging knee injuries since being drafted. Not saying that he’s a future all star, but he may surprise some if he can just get healthy and come to spring training in the kind of shape you would hope he should be. If he comes in around 200 lbs, he’ll be going back to Oakland. He needs to get leaner, and embrace that athleticism he has. He needs a great spring and get off to a good start. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...