Keith Law Top 100

[J Dorian Gray]

22 minutes ago, jamalshw said:

Law always seems to love the athletic types. He had a thing for Adam Hall back in the day which didn't pan out. His latest fav that he was higher on than others for the Orioles was Ortiz before he was dealt (though he still has him higher than most). Now, it's Bradfield. These are the types that can sometimes exceed the consensus expectations, but they're also volatile and can underachieve as well. If there's not enough threat there in a guy like Bradfield, his ability to get on base will struggle as he will constantly get challenged, making it harder to draw a walk. BUT as has been stated already in this thread if he shows a bit of power (and it doesn't even have to be home run power, just the ability to get it in the gap and off the wall) he has the tool set to succeed. And so by putting guys like Bradfield higher on his last than others, he can say "see, I was right" if he hits, meanwhile most forget it and chalk it up to "prospects are hard to predict" when he's wrong. 

I've seen Bradfield make a couple of other top 100 list somewhere from 60-100.  The thing with him is his floor is so high. We know the speed and defense make him no worse than a dynamic 4th outfielder.  If he ever elevates the ball AT ALL and develops more of a line drive swing he's a potential all-star.  66% ground ball rate with low exit velos is absurd even for a guy with his speed.  With his current profile, MLB pitchers are going to consistently challenge him in the zone (which you highlighted), but I don't think it matters. He doesn't miss, and a walk or hit are effectively the same thing to him.  He may end up a 3 WAR guy on defense alone. Hopefully we see him full time in 2026.

[byrdz]

Keith Law's take on Cowser last year this around this time: article here

"Cowser looks like he’ll be as advertised — a very solid, reliable regular, maybe a 55, but perhaps not a star. Cowser has very good feel to hit, at least against right-handed pitching, as he hit .307/.432/.530 off them, but struggled against lefties with a 33 percent strikeout rate and just a .194/.329/.287 line on the season. He took off when he reached Double A in late June, moving to a slightly better ballpark for left-handed hitters, and didn’t stop hitting until he reached Triple A in September, where he was overmatched by offspeed stuff of all varieties."

 

 

[CP0861]

20 hours ago, emmett16 said:

I

I’ve said it 100 time now and I’ll say it again.  There’s no chance Holliday isn’t on the OD roster.  He’s too good.  

I think people have been so enamored with Adley and Gunnar and they're on such a high from those two (and rightfully so, not knocking it)....that they can't wrap their head around the fact that Jackson is almost certainly the best of the 3.

I think Holliday should be on the OD roster, but I won't be surprised if he's not.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, CP0861 said:

I think people have been so enamored with Adley and Gunnar and they're on such a high from those two (and rightfully so, not knocking it)....that they can't wrap their head around the fact that Jackson is almost certainly the best of the 3.

I think Holliday should be on the OD roster, but I won't be surprised if he's not.

I think people are so amazed by Holliday’s meteoric rise through the minors last year that they can’t get their head around the idea that at 20 years old he might not be ready to be a dominant player in MLB.   

ZiPS is projecting both Adley and Gunnar to be significantly more valuable than Holliday over each of the next three seasons.  I’m not saying ZiPS is right, but there’s plenty of reason to think we might need to tap the brakes on Holliday just a bit.  
 

Edited February 6 by Frobby

[Sports Guy]

10 hours ago, byrdz said:

Keith Law's take on Cowser last year this around this time: article here

"Cowser looks like he’ll be as advertised — a very solid, reliable regular, maybe a 55, but perhaps not a star. Cowser has very good feel to hit, at least against right-handed pitching, as he hit .307/.432/.530 off them, but struggled against lefties with a 33 percent strikeout rate and just a .194/.329/.287 line on the season. He took off when he reached Double A in late June, moving to a slightly better ballpark for left-handed hitters, and didn’t stop hitting until he reached Triple A in September, where he was overmatched by offspeed stuff of all varieties."

 

 

Well he did have a lot of swing and miss on off speed stuff in 2023 too.

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think people are so amazed by Holliday’s meteoric rise through the minors last year that they can’t ERAs their head around the idea that at 20 years old he might not be ready to be a dominant player in MLB.   

ZiPS is projecting both Adley and Gunnar to be significantly more valuable than Holliday over each of the next three seasons.  I’m not saying ZiPS is right, but there’s plenty of reason to think we might need to tap the brakes on Holliday just a bit.  
 

I believe it’s FG that is projecting to be worth 3.2 WAR this year.  If he’s doing that at 20, I see no reason to tap the brakes. 

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I believe it’s FG that is projecting to be worth 3.2 WAR this year.  If he’s doing that at 20, I see no reason to tap the brakes. 

I just mean tap the brakes on expectations that he’ll be better than Adley or Gunnar any time soon.  

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Frobby said:

I just mean tap the brakes on expectations that he’ll be better than Adley or Gunnar any time soon.  

If he ends up at SS within the next few years, I think there’s a reasonably good chances he’s leading the team in WAR.

[Orange]

22 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

He has to show he can cause damage.  He can’t really just be a slap hitter.  And yea I know Pierre or Butler but I don’t see how citing a few expectations changes what the odds are.

5-10 homers is a number many of us have said and Law said the same thing here.  But 40+ doubles and triples combined should also be in play.  45-50 extra base hits overall…something like that.

With his speed he should be able to hit for a good average.  A 280/360/400 type line would be great.  Combine that with his speed and defense and he’s probably a 4+ WAR player.

Why does he have to hit for power? Serious question... Are you saying that being a power threat will alter the pitches he sees or something? To me, if he maintains a high contact rate, gets on base, plays great defense, and generally does Juan Pierre or Vince Coleman types of things (and he's not another Billy Hamilton)... that would be a huge benefit to a team. A single and a SB is more or less the same thing as a double. Does it make that big of a difference if he hits 15 homers or 5?

[RZNJ]

6 minutes ago, Orange said:

Why does he have to hit for power? Serious question... Are you saying that being a power threat will alter the pitches he sees or something? To me, if he maintains a high contact rate, gets on base, plays great defense, and generally does Juan Pierre or Vince Coleman types of things (and he's not another Billy Hamilton)... that would be a huge benefit to a team. A single and a SB is more or less the same thing as a double. Does it make that big of a difference if he hits 15 homers or 5?

Defenses will play in.  Pitchers will challenge him more making walks less likely.  Infield hits in college and A ball decrease as you move up and the defenses get better.  Outfielders will play more shallow and take away hits since they aren’t afraid of getting beat deep.   

[Orange]

2 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Defenses will play in.  Pitchers will challenge him more making walks less likely.  Infield hits in college and A ball decrease as you move up and the defenses get better.  Outfielders will play more shallow and take away hits since they aren’t afraid of getting beat deep.   

Makes sense... Why were Pierre and Coleman different? I guess they were just once a generation outliers and you shouldn't build up a prospect to be like those guys because it isn't likely to work.

[Sports Guy]

12 minutes ago, Orange said:

Why does he have to hit for power? Serious question... Are you saying that being a power threat will alter the pitches he sees or something? To me, if he maintains a high contact rate, gets on base, plays great defense, and generally does Juan Pierre or Vince Coleman types of things (and he's not another Billy Hamilton)... that would be a huge benefit to a team. A single and a SB is more or less the same thing as a double. Does it make that big of a difference if he hits 15 homers or 5?

Simply because he will get challenged more and that likely means he doesn’t perform as well.

I mean, we can bring up names from 30+ years ago but that’s not relevant to todays game, how this managed, the stuff pitchers have now, etc…

In 13 seasons, Coleman was worth 12.5 WAR and only had an OPS+ that was 100 or better in 2 seasons. For the last 7-8 years of his career, he was at or below replacement level most of the time.

Pierre was a better player than Coleman but he also struggled to get his OPS+ over 100, doing it only twice…but he did hit for more doubles and triples than Coleman would and had 3 seasons with a WAR of 3 or higher and another one at 2.  Problem is, he wasn’t much of a contributor outside of those 4 years.

[RZNJ]

3 minutes ago, Orange said:

Makes sense... Why were Pierre and Coleman different? I guess they were just once a generation outliers and you shouldn't build up a prospect to be like those guys because it isn't likely to work.

Neither Pierre or Coleman walked much but those are two good examples of players who hit for average with little power.    Bradfield is probably still a ML starting CF with that type of power.  With some power he’s probably a perennial all-star.

[LookinUp]

7 minutes ago, Orange said:

Makes sense... Why were Pierre and Coleman different? I guess they were just once a generation outliers and you shouldn't build up a prospect to be like those guys because it isn't likely to work.

Yes, they were outliers, but they still weren't that valuable in the aggregate. I do think this type of player can play a massive role within the context of a team, but I don't see a path to a really high WAR career unless he hits the ball with authority.

[Edit: As RZNJ points out, it's important to acknowledge that his BB rate/swing decisions seem better than those guys, which is great.]

Edited February 6 by LookinUp

[Orange]

2 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

Yes, they were outliers, but they still weren't that valuable in the aggregate. I do think this type of player can play a massive role within the context of a team, but I don't see a path to a really high WAR career unless he hits the ball with authority.

[Edit: As RZNJ points out, it's important to acknowledge that his BB rate/swing decisions seem better than those guys, which is great.]

It would be lots of fun to have a guy stealing 100 bags, though. But everything y'all are saying makes sense. Would it be fair to say that it's not as much hitting for power that is the need, but the ability to make authoritative contact when a pitcher challenges you? If you get challenged and smack a single 35% of the time, that works right? (The aforementioned BB rate/swing decisions being a big part of this... along with contact %.) Tony Gwynn was about a 6 homer a year guy for his first twelve seasons... but he hit with such authority that the power wasn't as important. (Another outlier, to be sure. Dude had a SLG of .511 in 1987 with only 7 homers.)