Jump to content

Who are the 2020 #1 and #2 Prospects?


Tony-OH

Who are the 2020 #1 and #2 Prospects?  

50 members have voted

  1. 1. Who are the 2020 #1 and #2 Prospects?

    • Rutschman and Hall
      4
    • Rutschman and Gunnar Henderson
      0
    • Rutschman and Kjerstad
      1
    • Rutschman and Mountcastle
      7
    • Rutschman and Rodriguez
      38

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Tony-OH said:

Who are the 2020 #1 and #2 Prospects?

Tony,  I’m already a paying member here, but I wish there were some serious way I could show my genuine gratitude for the work you do here, especially with prospects, and especially alone, without anyone to bounce ideas off of. I know that as much as you enjoy it, it does get tedious, but you have a set a deadline and you always accomplish it.

I’m grateful.

Edited by Philip
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ChosenOne21 said:

I'd be shocked if it wasn't Rutschman and Rodriguez. Mountcastle did well, but he doesn't have the ceiling of Hall and Rodriguez and maaaaybe not Kerstad? Henderson probably has a comparable ceiling to Mountcastle, though with less offense and more defense

Yeah, it's got to be Rutsch & Rod

Whatever one thinks of his bat, MC’s defense is a big problem. Grey-Rod has TOR potential, is a rare player with rare gifts. I’m lousy at picking prospects, but I got this one right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Philip said:

Tony,  I’m already a paying member here, but I wish there were some serious way I could show my genuine gratitude for the work you do here, especially with prospects, and especially alone, without anyone to bounce ideas off of. I know that as much as you enjoy it, it does get tedious, but you have a set a deadline and you always accomplish it.

I’m grateful.

Thanks Phillip. I do bounce things off guys and even though I'm making the final list and calls this year, I still have people I talk to. Without a season I didn't really have the video work to do as much so it was less work. 

Still, appreciate the thoughts.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Philip said:

Whatever one thinks of his bat, MC’s defense is a big problem. Grey-Rod has TOR potential, is a rare player with rare gifts. I’m lousy at picking prospects, but I got this one right.

I think the trickiest question is where to place Kjerstad.   I cannot put him above Grayson without having played a MiL game.   But he’s got a credible argument for the no. 3 spot, even if you view him as more like the 7th/9th best talent in the draft rather than the 2nd best.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

The question is, does Tony agree that Kjerstad was the second best player in the 2020 draft?  If he does, than you go Kjerstad, if you don't, it's Rodriguez who has separated himself from Hall.  Mountcastle is too flawed and Henderson hasn't accomplished enough.

I disagree with much of this.  Kjerstad could be the second best pick (I doubt he was) and Rodriguez could still be better.  I also don’t think Mountcastle is too flawed.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

I disagree with much of this.  Kjerstad could be the second best pick (I doubt he was) and Rodriguez could still be better.  I also don’t think Mountcastle is too flawed.

His offensive flaws are less than I thought.    He’s not much of a defender.    He’s still got time to improve on his weaknesses.   I’m pretty happy with how he’s working out so far.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

I disagree with much of this.  Kjerstad could be the second best pick (I doubt he was) and Rodriguez could still be better.  I also don’t think Mountcastle is too flawed.

I'm a Mountcastle fan but between the defense and plate discipline I don't think you can rank him #2.

As far as Kjerstad, if you agree with what we were told about him than as a college position player I would rank him over a pitcher that hasn't pitched in advanced A ball yet.

 

I'm personally not that bullish on Kjerstad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Great post.  I like your optimism, and I'll try to believe this team can turn things around just in the nick of time like some classic Hollywood baseball movie.
    • I think Elias has mostly done an excellent job with one exception -- he seems like he treats the bullpen like an afterthought.  I doubt that will happen again this coming offseason. I don't really blame him for the current offensive struggles overall.  Just too many injuries late in the season.  That said I don't understand how we went from dealing Austin Hays, Connor Norby and Ryan McKenna just so we could land the right handed bat of, gulp, Austin Slater.  
    • Man this team has no shot. Right now they may not even make it. 
    • Most of these guys are only playing because of injuries to starters.  But Austin Slater I'm guessing was brought in to replace the traded Austin Hays.  The problem is that Slater has shown little ability to hit lefties this year, after hitting them pretty well up to this season.  This must be why two teams dropped him before the O's picked him up.  I know he was let go much earlier in the season, but is Ryan McKenna actually worse than this guy?  I don't understand how the front office went from releasing McKenna to later trading Hays and Norby -- thinking their right handed bats could adequately be replaced by someone like Slater.  
    • I'm willing to give Elias some rope because of the strict limitations he was under with JA but he better not be so damn conservative again this year and let every serviceable FA out there sign with other teams while he's busy picking up reclamation projects again. Minus Burns of course.  
    • I agree completely that it’s irrelevant whether it worked.  But I don’t agree that bunting is clearly the right decision in either scenario, and I think that decision gets worse if it’s intended to be a straight sacrifice rather than a bunt for a hit. To be clear, the outcome you’re seeking in tonight’s situation, for example — sacrifice the runners over to 2nd/3rd — lowers both your run expectancy for the inning (from 1.44 to 1.39) and your win expectancy for the game (from 38.8% to 37.1%). It increases the likelihood of scoring one run, but it decreases the likelihood of scoring two runs (which you needed to tie) and certainly of scoring three or more runs (which you needed to take the lead).  And that’s if you succeed in getting them to 2nd/3rd. Research indicates that 15-30% of sacrifice bunt attempts fail, so you have to bake in a pretty significant percentage of the time that you’d just be giving up a free out (or even just two free strikes, as on Sunday). The bunt attempt in the 3rd inning on Sunday (which my gut hates more than if they’d done it today) actually is less damaging to the win probability — decreasing it only very slightly from 60.2% to 59.8%. More time left in the game to make up for giving up outs, I guess, and the scoreboard payoff is a bit better (in the sense that at least you’d have a better chance to take the lead).   At the bottom of it, these things mostly come down to gut and pure chance. The percentages are rarely overwhelming in either direction, and so sometimes even a “lower-percentage” play may work better under some circumstances. You would have bunted both times. I wouldn’t have bunted either time. Hyde bunted one time but not the other. I don’t know that anyone is an idiot (or even clearly “wrong”) for their preference. Either approach could have worked. Sadly, none of them actually did.
    • Wasn't Hyde always thought of more or less as a caretaker? I'm on the fence about him coming back. I totally get the injuries and that needs to be taking into consideration but man this collapse some heads have to roll who's I'm  mot sure 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...