MILB.com's top 50 prospects - how many O's prospects will land there?

[Stotle]

I think we are counting our chickens before they hatch. It seems that everbody has forgotten about our other prospects, like Erbe, Hernandez and Spoone to name a few who could develop to be major players.

I always felt that it was better to play up to your competition then to play down and thats what Tillman would be doing. All he would be doing is blow AA hitter away. I believe all our prospect need a challenge and AAA ball would be doing that.

Well, that was sort of my point -- that none of them are ML-factors until they sort out MiL issues (regardless of how minor or serious those issues are).

[Stotle]

Personally, I'd like to see him start at Norfolk because I feel he put up the numbers and showed me enough command that I feel he would benefit from facing more mature hitters that will make him attack the strike zone more. Whether he's in Norfolk or Bowie though not really should matter at this point because the key to this all is for Chris to find more consistent command of his breaking ball and increase his ability to use his changeup.

There is something to be said about a player wanting to move on and returning him to a level in which he did very well could be set back psychologically for some players (not saying it would for Tillman, but it should be put into the decision making process.)

I don't think it's the end of the world if he starts the year back in Double-A, especially if they return pitching coach Mike Griffin to Bowie, but Tillman has done enough to move onto Triple-A and is he pitches well enough, I could see him pitching in Baltimore by the second half of next year if a need arises.

I defer to you with regards to command issues -- you've seen more of Tillman than I have, I'm sure. I agree that neither AA or AAA makes a huge difference, but I disagree with the arguments I've read on here that his production at AA last year should assure him of a start in AAA. I just don't think that's the case. One can argue for AAA (and you did just that) but there is also an argument to made for AA (which you cover as well). To say "it isn't fair to Tillman" or "it would be more of the same" is not the right way to approach the issue, in my opinion.

Laying odds, what order to you have for arriving at ML (taking injury out of the equation)? I'm already on the record with:

Arrieta

Matusz

Tillman

though I could see it going the opposite way based on how I interpret the Orioles's feelings about the three (through what I read hear and in the press).

I'd say ML-ready, from a "stuff/pitchability" standpoint, it would be (for me):

Matusz

Arrieta

Tillman

[NoVaO]

My issue with all the talk about leaving Tillman in AA is that Arrieta's problems seem to go unnoticed. Tillman's BB% was just .2% higher than Arrieta's at a higher level (11 vs. 11.2) and Tillman's K% was better than Arrieta's (26 vs. 26.6) at a higher level.

So why is Tillman's performance not good enough for an automatic promotion and Arrieta's performance is?

The ability to go deep into games could be an issue but not nearly big enough to hold him back. If the argument is because he might actually have better competition in AA, I don't believe that is the case. If it's age, my feeling is that if he shows himself to be ready or on the cusp of being ready, bring him up and let him take his lumps/learn how to get MLB hitters out--age shouldn't factor into that equation unless you really believe he doesn't have what it takes mentally to get major league hitters out.

[Lucky Jim]

My issue with all the talk about leaving Tillman in AA is that Arrieta's problems seem to go unnoticed. Tillman's BB% was just .2% higher than Arrieta's at a higher level (11 vs. 11.2) and Tillman's K% was better than Arrieta's (26 vs. 26.6) at a higher level.

So why is Tillman's performance not good enough for an automatic promotion and Arrieta's performance is?

The ability to go deep into games could be an issue but not nearly big enough to hold him back. If the argument is because he might actually have better competition in AA, I don't believe that is the case. If it's age, my feeling is that if he shows himself to be ready or on the cusp of being ready, bring him up and let him take his lumps/learn how to get MLB hitters out--age shouldn't factor into that equation unless you really believe he doesn't have what it takes mentally to get major league hitters out.

Apparently he commands his FB considerably better than Tillman, which makes the K/BB and BB/9 numbers only deceptively similar.

[Frobby]

My issue with all the talk about leaving Tillman in AA is that Arrieta's problems seem to go unnoticed. Tillman's BB% was just .2% higher than Arrieta's at a higher level (11 vs. 11.2) and Tillman's K% was better than Arrieta's (26 vs. 26.6) at a higher level.

So why is Tillman's performance not good enough for an automatic promotion and Arrieta's performance is?

The ability to go deep into games could be an issue but not nearly big enough to hold him back. If the argument is because he might actually have better competition in AA, I don't believe that is the case. If it's age, my feeling is that if he shows himself to be ready or on the cusp of being ready, bring him up and let him take his lumps/learn how to get MLB hitters out--age shouldn't factor into that equation unless you really believe he doesn't have what it takes mentally to get major league hitters out.

Apparently he commands his FB considerably better than Tillman, which makes the K/BB and BB/9 numbers only deceptively similar.

I agree that's the explanation we've heard, but I think NoVaO's question is a good one. In any event, Arrieta will start at AA, as he should. If Tillman's still there, Arrieta will have to outperform him on the mound to leapfrog him as some are suggesting.

[TakebackOPACY]

Jonathan Mayo wrote this excellent article in response to the crazy criticism/questions (and some more respectfully offered criticism/questions) he's received concerning the MiLB Top 50 list.

Many of the questions can be answered with an explanation of how the Top 50 are chosen. Here it is in a nutshell: Scouts around Major League Baseball are polled anonymously. They are asked to provide a list of who they think are the Top 30 prospects in all of baseball. Using an AP poll-type format, each list is dumped into a spreadsheet. If, say, David Price was first on the list, he got 30 points. Matt Wieters at No. 2 got 29 and so on. That's how the total votes that appear on each player page were derived. Ties were broken in-house, but otherwise, the overall rankings were based on these polling results.

In other words, taking personal shots at the author's integrity, intelligence, credibility, etc., is unwarranted. This isn't a case of trying to shirk responsibility -- I stand by the list -- but chill out, OK?

QUESTION 1: "No Pedro Alvarez in the Top 10? not even the Top 50? That's pathetic, man."

QUETION 2: "How do you omit the best player drafted from a Top 50 prospects list? Did you marry into this job or were you born into it? Pedro will dominate and make you look dumber than Dave Littlefield."

QUESTION 3: "Thanks for putting this list together so that us diehard baseball fans have something else to discuss other than hot stove rumors. Can you clarify why Pedro Alvarez was not on this list? Was it due to not being eligible because he didn't get into any Minor League games? I can't imagine the exclusion was solely based on talent/merit, or lack thereof. So, assuming it was based on eligibility requirements for the list, where do you feel he would have been slotted had he been eligible?"

MAYO: In case you're curious, I like the third question best...