#13 Prospect - LJ Hoes

[Tony-OH]

Vidro was a GREAT player for about a five year run.

This Hoes pick certainly is a flyer, as any high placement of an 18 year-old fresh out of the draft and the GCL would be. But here's the logic, I think:

If you believe Bergesen and Montanez are both pretty close to being known quantities, and they might help the MLB squad but they're nothing special, then who would you rather have in your organization? Would you rather have the easily replaceable okay 4th OF'er? Would you rather have the easily replaceable half way decent reliever? Or would you rather have the 18 year-old who has a very good chance of being less of a player than Bergesen and Montanez, but who just might be significantly better?

If I could only have one of the three, I'll take the kid. And I won't be embarrassed by that pick if he turns out to be nothing.

By the way, it isn't my intention to stir a debate about projections for Bergesen and Montanez. The premise is, "If you believe this projection for Bergesen and Montanez, then you might consider Hoes to be the better prospect."

I may have to hire you to explain me.

You are right on. Going off my philosophy of who would I rather have right now, Hoes is the guy among the young inexperienced players I like because I have something to go off of a little bit. I can see the plate discipline and I've talked to the scouts and folks who have seen him and they are rave about his ability to have a game plan at the plate and the ability to put the game plan into action.

This is an upside pick, not a "who has the best chance to play in the majors pick."

[wildcard]

This is an upside pick, not a "who has the best chance to play in the majors pick."

Tony, this a interesting statement.

I thought the basis for picks were: "Who has the best chance to be the best major league player." You seem to go away from that philosophy here. Can you explain what your basis for picks are? (Not just Hoes.)

[Satyr3206]

I usually either agree with you or see your logic but this is way too high for a guy in the GCL. I know you like upside but I can remember a lot of upside guys that are bagging groceries and washing cars now. I could see this high a ranking if he had more competition in a higher league but this one baffles me.

[murrayfan420]

No, he squares-up on the ball well. He's just a little undersized. His power-potential comes from incredibly strong wrists and hands, and a very quick bat. Regardless of whether or not he hits his power ceiling that Tony described (15-20 HR), he should have good gap-to-gap power. His advanced approach at the plate will help him to make the most out of his physical attributes, which I see as a 8-13 HR guy with plenty of doubles a plus-speed on the bases. Good first-to-third (on a single) and first-to-home (on a double) type of base-runner.

EDIT - To be clear, I agree 15-20 HR would be his target ceiling. Further, he has the baseball acumen and physical ability to reach that if he maxes out on his frame and his swing.

That sounds like our current 2b.

[NCRaven]

I had Bergesen here, based on his productivity at a much higher level, and my feeling that he still profiles as a starter. But, I can't kick to much about this pick. His ceiling is certainly higher than the others. I just think a guy should prove something against more than GCL competition to be this high on the list. Still, he has a good chance to earn this position, or higher, in the future.

[hoosiers]

I had Bergesen here, based on his productivity at a much higher level, and my feeling that he still profiles as a starter. But, I can't kick to much about this pick. His ceiling is certainly higher than the others. I just think a guy should prove something against more than GCL competition to be this high on the list. Still, he has a good chance to earn this position, or higher, in the future.

I like Bergesen, don't get me wrong, but if his upside is limited to fourth/fifth starter as has been implied here, I would take swap him for a second/third round pick of the Avery/Bundy/Hoes variety in a heartbeat.

[NCRaven]

I like Bergesen, don't get me wrong, but if his upside is limited to fourth/fifth starter as has been implied here, I would take swap him for a second/third round pick of the Avery/Bundy/Hoes variety in a heartbeat.

Understand completely. If they both reach their ceilings, I'd much rather have Hoes. Especially since we have no other 2B prospect with his potential and we seem to have at least 3 very high ceiling pitchers (Tillman, Matusz, Arrieta) and several mid-rotation type prospects (Spoone, Patton, Albers, Bergesen, Berken, Hernandez, Erbe, Butler, Bundy, etc.). I really am not complaining about Hoes here, just respect what Bergesen has done vs. what some of the high school draft picks might do against higher levels of competitition.

Note: At 2B, love Adams bat (this season vs. last season), hate his glove. And, what ever happened to Paco Figureroa. Injuries seem to have killed him and his brother. Also, guys that I listed as mid-rotation like Spoone, Patton and Bundy, could be higher, just need to see them post injury or at a higher level.

[Stotle]

That sounds like our current 2b.

Well, Roberts is a plus-defender at a very valuable position. Hoes is a long ways from there. Further, Roberts was a much more refined offensive player when he arrived, but Hoes is certainly showing he has the mental approach to make the most out of his physical abilities.

Just my take.

[NCRaven]

Further, Roberts was a much more refined offensive player when he arrived...

Also, college player vs. high school, so I'm not at all surprised by your evaluation. Hoes will certainly be one of our more interesting prospects to watch as he progresses.

[Tony-OH]

Tony, this a interesting statement.

I thought the basis for picks were: "Who has the best chance to be the best major league player." You seem to go away from that philosophy here. Can you explain what your basis for picks are? (Not just Hoes.)

No, my picks have always been of the players remaining in the system (not listed yet), and if I could only have one of them which one would I take.

Obviously Montanez has the best chance to play in the majors because he's already done it, and had some success while he was at it. However, if someone wanted a prospect and I had to give one up, I'd give up Montanez before Hoes because I think Hoes has more upside.

It's a bit tricky at this stage because there are some advanced players who probably have a good chance of having some type of role in the big leagues compared to some young inexperienced players who have tools, but we really don't know how they are going to do against advanced competition.

It just comes down to philosophy a bit at this point. Would you rather have the young guy with upside or the experienced player who has a lower ceiling but a better chance of having some role in the majors because they've had success against experienced competition.

Really, there's no wrong answer here.

[Tony-OH]

Not a fan of this selection.

The draft position and respective signing bonuses were reflective of the values of Avery, Hoes and Bundy in June. I am glad we have all three in the fold, but I think it's a bit early to be re-setting the prospect order of these three.

It certainly is a valid decision to base your raw guys off of their draft status (Obviously Bundy would have been higher if not for the injury), but for me, I already have some data to compare Avery and Hoes, and obviously Hoes showed more. Avery is very raw and although his tools grade out a bit higher and he's a physical specimen, I'm a plate discipline guy and if you give me something to work with, I'll take the guy with the better plate discipline unless the other guy is an extreme power guy.

I could very easily have placed Bundy into the top ten if we went by pure ceiling, but I need to see him pitch plus I need to see some stats before I start placing him too high and I'm not going to place him over a guy who's already had some success. Next year might be a different story, but you also have to remember there's a ton of injury risk for a young pitcher.

[Three Run Homer]

Not a fan of this selection.

The draft position and respective signing bonuses were reflective of the values of Avery, Hoes and Bundy in June. I am glad we have all three in the fold, but I think it's a bit early to be re-setting the prospect order of these three.

But prospect rankings should adjust over time as we observe players' actual performance. I think Avery played about as well as expected in the GCL--he showed good tools but a raw approach, just as advertised. Meanwhile, Hoes played well above expectations, showing an unusually mature hitting approach for a kid just out of high school.

GCL managers had no problem ranking Hoes a better prospect than Avery in BA's top 20 list, after watching both of them play for a whole season.

Maybe Avery graded above Hoes on draft day, but right now it looks like Hoes was a bargain. If the draft was done over based on what we know today, you can bet that Hoes would go higher than he did on draft day, maybe higher than Avery.

[hoosiers]

Agree completely with the opinions of the prior two posts.

Hoes has not displaced Avery or Bundy, IMO, but I respect it if others feel differently.

[Frobby]

Tony, I was a little surprised to hear that Hoes could start as high as Delmarva next year - I had assumed Aberdeen was his likely next destination. Would you peg his odds of going to Delmarva at higher than 50%?

[Tony-OH]

Tony, I was a little surprised to hear that Hoes could start as high as Delmarva next year - I had assumed Aberdeen was his likely next destination. Would you peg his odds of going to Delmarva at higher than 50%?

With David Stockstill you never really know. He's very conservative when it comes to promotions, but I don't see any reason why he can't make the jump to Delmarva with his advanced plate discipline. Nate Spears made the jump a few years ago and had similar stats in the GCL and he held his own the next year at Delmarva.