Sneak Peek: BA's Carolina League Top 20

[Ruzious]

16 - Brandon Snyder

Snyder probably should be higher.

Great find. I'm not familiar with all of the guys ahead of him, but 16 can't be too bad when stud prospects like Flowers and Hicks are at 12 and 13.

Btw, anyone catch #19? Is he related?

[hoosiers]

We have nothing at Norfolk, and apparently BA isn't too impressed with what we have in the lower levels of the minors.

This is just not the right way to look at these lists. How many guys did we have drafted in the first three rounds at Aberdeen or DelMarva? Only Adams. Joe Jordan's most recent early picks were college players (Wieters, Arrieta and Matusz) who skipped these levels. When HS picks Snyder and Rowell went through DelMarva, both were on last year's list.

Also, these are 16 team leagues. It's not the end of the world if we don't place Britton, Adams or Angle on a list this low in the minors. Sure, I would prefer these guiys get on a list, but it's very wrong to conclude BA is not impressed with what we have in the lower levels of the minors in 16 team leagues.

[Tony-OH]

Also, let's not forget this is really not BA's list. They usually talk to scouts and front office folks for their organizational lists, but if I recall, these top 20 lists are the managers picks.

So far, the only thing I've been surprised with is Britton not being in the top 20, but that may be because he doesn't have overwhelming velocity. He's a grounball pitcher and I think managers overlook that sometimes and like those guys with the blazing fastballs.

I don't know enough about the other guys on these lists so I can't really make too much of a stink, but som far I'm surprised Britton was not on the list and Erbe was so high on the Carolina list.

[Frobby]

This is just not the right way to look at these lists. How many guys did we have drafted in the first three rounds at Aberdeen or DelMarva? Only Adams. Joe Jordan's most recent early picks were college players (Wieters, Arrieta and Matusz) who skipped these levels. When HS picks Snyder and Rowell went through DelMarva, both were on last year's list.

Also, these are 16 team leagues. It's not the end of the world if we don't place Britton, Adams or Angle on a list this low in the minors. Sure, I would prefer these guiys get on a list, but it's very wrong to conclude BA is not impressed with what we have in the lower levels of the minors in 16 team leagues.

I think you may be misunderstanding what I am trying to say. I am not criticizing Joe Jordan because we don't have a lot of top prospects in the lower levels. I agree with you diagnosis for why that is so. I'm simply saying that when you evaluate the whole organization, the strength we have at AA and A+ has to be weighed against the weakness we have in the lower minors. That imbalance may have been the result of a conscious, reasonable choice by the Orioles, but it's there.

Putting aside the top 20 lists, you can just look at the records of the teams at Norfolk, Aberdeen, Bluefield, GCL and the Dominican and see they are not very good. Delmarva had a good record, and in my opinion, there are a few good prospects there (especially Britton) even though we didn't get one in the top 20. Frederick, despite the kudos from BA, had a losing record and the five players who made the list appear to be the only ones who have any realistic shot at a major league career.

I'm not opining at all on where I think BA will rank our system overall. We've clearly got better talent at the top (i.e. our best 3-5 prospects) than we have had in many years, and our top 20 prospects or so are much better than they were. I still think our depth ends about there, and that there are deeper organizations around, including some in the AL East.

[snatch311]

I would rather have 5 of the top 20 in the Carolina League, than 10 of the top 20 in the GCL.

[hoosiers]

I'm simply saying that when you evaluate the whole organization, the strength we have at AA and A+ has to be weighed against the weakness we have in the lower minors.

Why?

What does it matter if there are three potential all-star players at AA and none elsewhere in the organization versus if they are spread out?

The guys at Frederick and Bowie have survived so far the "attrition" of prospects at the lower levels and are more valuable than the guys at the lower levels.

[Tony-OH]

Why?

What does it matter if there are three potential all-star players at AA and none elsewhere in the organization versus if they are spread out?

The guys at Frederick and Bowie have survived so far the "attrition" of prospects at the lower levels and are more valuable than the guys at the lower levels.

I think what Frobby is pointing out is in his opinion there is very little talent to be excited about in the lower half of the system and that's concerning when it comes to keeping the pipeline flowing.

Obviously if I had to shoose between the better prospect being in the low part of the minors or upper half I'd choose the upper half because of the attrition issue you brought up.

However, the system will be a true top five system when there are high ceiling prospects throughout the system.

[orioole28]

It will not be easy for one team to get 5 players in the Eastern League top 20. Remember, that's a 12-team league. The Carolina League is an 8-team league so getting 5 on that list was a little easier. That said, Wieters and Tillman are locks and strong arguments can be made for the other 3. I hope you won't be too bummed if DH doesn't make it, because it's going to be a close call.

As to whether our organization is in the top 10, I don't think you can tell just from the top 20 lists of the Eastern and Carolina leagues. We have nothing at Norfolk, and apparently BA isn't too impressed with what we have in the lower levels of the minors. It just so happens that we have a confluence of talent at AA and A+, with little in front of it or behind it.

Philosophically, if you have 10 players talented enough to make a BA top 20 list, is it better to have 9 of them stacked up at AA and A+, or would it be better to have 1-2 of them at every level of the minors?

If the Orioles were already a solid team at the majors league level, I might prefer the "steady flow" model. But since we're awful, I kind of like the idea that we have a large number of players 1-2 years away.

By the way, let's not sleep on Matusz, Spoone and Patton, who won't be on any top 20 list but who are very much in the mix in the coming wave of talent.

You might be very right, because he did get ommitted from the initial pick for the all-star game, so why not now?? It would be a shame as far as I'm concern because of the season he had. Let's not forget the he was 3rd in ERA and 1st in strikeouts and had a BAA of .217. You made a very good point on the 8-team league vs the 16-team league.

[orioole28]

I would rather have 5 of the top 20 in the Carolina League, than 10 of the top 20 in the GCL.

I agree, I would rather have ML ready players than have it spread around. Also, Hoosiers made a great point in how Jordan drafted in the last couple of years('05 and '06), which were more college players that would of skipped the lower levels. I also agree that we need to get better in scouting the International players.

[Frobby]

I think what Frobby is pointing out is in his opinion there is very little talent to be excited about in the lower half of the system and that's concerning when it comes to keeping the pipeline flowing.

Obviously if I had to shoose between the better prospect being in the low part of the minors or upper half I'd choose the upper half because of the attrition issue you brought up.

However, the system will be a true top five system when there are high ceiling prospects throughout the system.

Yes, this is more or less what I was saying. And BTW, maybe BA will say we are a top 5 system because we're so strong at AA and A+. But I'm sure they will consider the fact that we are weaker in other places.

On a somewhat related topic, how many of our players will make BA's overall top 25/50/100? Wieters is obviously a top 5 guy (I'm not sure if being named the player of the year necessarily makes him the no. 1 prospect). I think any of Tillman, Arrieta or Matusz could land in the top 25, and have a really good shot at top 50 and are nearly certain to be in the top 100. I'm guessing that our other top prospects will fall outside the top 100.

[tywright]

It will not be easy for one team to get 5 players in the Eastern League top 20. Remember, that's a 12-team league. The Carolina League is an 8-team league so getting 5 on that list was a little easier. That said, Wieters and Tillman are locks and strong arguments can be made for the other 3. I hope you won't be too bummed if DH doesn't make it, because it's going to be a close call.

As to whether our organization is in the top 10, I don't think you can tell just from the top 20 lists of the Eastern and Carolina leagues. We have nothing at Norfolk, and apparently BA isn't too impressed with what we have in the lower levels of the minors. It just so happens that we have a confluence of talent at AA and A+, with little in front of it or behind it.

Philosophically, if you have 10 players talented enough to make a BA top 20 list, is it better to have 9 of them stacked up at AA and A+, or would it be better to have 1-2 of them at every level of the minors?

If the Orioles were already a solid team at the majors league level, I might prefer the "steady flow" model. But since we're awful, I kind of like the idea that we have a large number of players 1-2 years away.

By the way, let's not sleep on Matusz, Spoone and Patton, who won't be on any top 20 list but who are very much in the mix in the coming wave of talent.

Last year I think only Kolodny was in the top 20 for GCL and NY-Penn league prospects, so that was not a good sign, but don't forget we didn't have a 2nd and 3rd rd pick and we took college guys with the 4th and 5th picks. Also when you draft Wieters and Arrieta and start them at A+ ball then you kind of have to accept that we won't have many good prospects at the lowest levels. Also we weren't highly invested in Latin American prospects, which dominate the low leagues' lists. I'd be more worried if we don't start seeing more guys pop up on the SAL and NY-Penn league when Avery, Hoes, Joseph, etc start really developing. Also don't forget Justin Moore, Gleason, Angle, Flagello were decent picks in 2007 that are still toiling in the low minors. Also our 2006 draft picks that have had success have already move passed low A ball.

Also BA's already stated we'll be a top 10 farm system and I won't be surprised to see us as a top 5 because of Wieters, Tillman, Matusz and Arrieta.

[tywright]

Great find. I'm not familiar with all of the guys ahead of him, but 16 can't be too bad when stud prospects like Flowers and Hicks are at 12 and 13.

Btw, anyone catch #19? Is he related?

Thanks...

Tex is spelled differently

[tywright]

I think what Frobby is pointing out is in his opinion there is very little talent to be excited about in the lower half of the system and that's concerning when it comes to keeping the pipeline flowing.

Obviously if I had to shoose between the better prospect being in the low part of the minors or upper half I'd choose the upper half because of the attrition issue you brought up.

However, the system will be a true top five system when there are high ceiling prospects throughout the system.

To strenghten that pipeline, we need to:

1. Invest more in Latin American and Asian prospects
2. Draft more high schoolers
3. Sign "unsignable" guys in the later rounds

[hoosiers]

However, the system will be a true top five system when there are high ceiling prospects throughout the system.

I guess I disagree with this and Frobby's assertions. I don't care where the prospects are from a dispersal point of view. And I doubt any system ranking is going to care where the prospects are, just that there are sufficient prospects to warrant a top five rating.

I would like to have top prospects up and down the system, but the fact is that we did not have many high draft picks in these middle leagues. Joe Jordan's biggest picks the past two years, the ones that could be at Aberdeen and DelMarva were at Frederick, Bowie and while Avery/Hoes were playing at the very bottom rung. If Joe Jordan is going to find and draft exceptional college talent that avoids these lower level stops, why are people getting upset about it?

IMO, the two things to be possibly upset about in these lists is that A) Joe Jordan does not seem to have "hit" with any quality prospects outside the top three or four rounds (save Arrieta) since Spoone/Hernandez in 2005 - though the jury is still out in some cases (clearly the 08 class has quality outside the top five rounds while Henson, Kolodny and others are doing good, but not great) and that we do not have any quality international players coming through the system.

[Stotle]

Yes, this is more or less what I was saying. And BTW, maybe BA will say we are a top 5 system because we're so strong at AA and A+. But I'm sure they will consider the fact that we are weaker in other places.

On a somewhat related topic, how many of our players will make BA's overall top 25/50/100? Wieters is obviously a top 5 guy (I'm not sure if being named the player of the year necessarily makes him the no. 1 prospect). I think any of Tillman, Arrieta or Matusz could land in the top 25, and have a really good shot at top 50 and are nearly certain to be in the top 100. I'm guessing that our other top prospects will fall outside the top 100.

My guess as of right now:

Wieters - Top 2

Tillman - Top 20

Matusz - Top 40 (because he hasn't played, yet; I think he shoots up the list)

Arrieta - Top 60

Erbe - Top 90

Reimold - Top 100

Snyder/Hernandez/Spoone/Patton/Britton could all be in the next 50

These aren't necessarily my rankings, but rather what I think BA will have.