MLB.com Top 100 Prospects
Jays on the list:
25. Travis d'Arnaud
57. Anthony Gose
58. Jake Marisnick
95. Noah Syndergaard
4 months ago
Frag
68 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Lot of really bad calls
Any list with Manny Banuelos at 12 loses credibility in my eyes. Same with Betances at 41.
He left a lot of Jays pitchers off the list, which is fine – depending on what you emphasize I can see any of one of our guys not being top-100 worthy. What I don’t understand is some of the inclusions. Alex Meyer? Brody Colvin? Jeurys Familia (likely reliever)? Includes Jed Bradley at the back end, but leaves off McGuire who in many ways is similar to Bradley as a mid-first round pick with a mid-rotation ceiling (and McGuire has already had a good full year of pro ball)?
Way too many logical inconsistencies on this list. Billy Hamilton at 34 is way too high. Tim Beckham is not top-100 material at this point, not 150 for me either. This is just at a first glance
Do you watch these said prospects? How does MLB.com of all places lose credibility, its mlb.com sheesh
by boltspeedman on Jan 25, 2012 10:48 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not so sure those are egregious errors you listed
Keith Law really likes Banuelos and Betances. Banuelos is a lefty with good velocity and a pretty good changeup IIRC. Betances throws hard and when he’s on, he’s lights out. Betances may be a little on the high side but according to most scouts, Banuelos is the real deal.
Jed Bradley is a much better prospect than McGuire is. Big power lefty and the only reason they had similar draft positions is because the 2011 draft was so deep. Bradley would have been a top 10 pick any other year.
I’m not in love with Hamilton, but he does have the best speed tool of anybody in the minors. 34 may be a little too high though. Tim Beckham had a bounceback year this year and still is young for the level he plays at. That combined with his #1 overall draft pedigree would put him in the top 100.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
Really?
Age 23 season at AA:
21 games started, 9.8 K/9, 4.7 BB/9, 2.09 K/BB, 7.3 H/9, 0.6 HR/9, 3.42 ERA/.3.70 FIP. He walks a few too many but he also strikes out a lot and doesn’t get hit around much. 23 is not a bad age to be at AA and he also had 4 starts at AAA as well last year. His ERA was pretty close to what his peripherals say he should be.
I’m sure we’d love to have a 23 year old AA pitcher who gets a lot of strikeouts and doesn’t get hit around much.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
Compare Betances 2011 numbers with Kyle Drabek's 2010 numbers
Betances are slightly better at the same age and level. I believe Drabek was a top 30 prospect going into last season.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
4.7 BB is poor
23 is not young for AA (though it’s not really old, per se, either). and many, many scouting reports say he’s going to end up as a reliever.
He has electric stuff
No one doubts that. But his control is lacking, and has not shown the capacity to harness it consistently, hence the 4.7 BB/9 (which is not an aberration, it’s normal for him)
Well, if he doesn't improve his control, then he's not going to do well in the Majors
I’m just saying, based on his stuff, that his ranking isn’t that far out of line. Kyle Drabek had slightly worse numbers (better BB/9 but nothing great either and a lower K/9) at the same age and level the year before and he got a #12 ranking overall in last year’s ranking by MLB.com.
If you ask me, Drabek has the same major question mark, can he control his stuff?
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
In hindsight, Drabek was too high
What’s your point? I’m not talking about Drabek and last year, I’m talking about Betances and this year. The purpose is not to make the same mistakes year in year out because someone was too high one year.
And as a side note, though I wasn’t into prospects as much last year, there’s no way I’d have had Drabek as high as that (you can accuse me of hindsight bias if you want, and you’re entitled). But Drabek’s K and BB numbers were underwealming, that’s the first thing I look at. Drabek reminds me of Jarred Cosart – supposed great stuff, but it doesn’t show up on the numbers. And for the record, Cosart is not on my Top 100, and I think he’s also overrated, though the industry consensus is closer to Mayo.
Prospect lists generally go off of tools rather than performance
At least, that’s the case with Baseball America. Mayo may take their approach as well. If you look at guys like Betances, Cosart or Drabek from that point of view, then the rankings are justified. Guys with good velocity and nasty breaking stuff will always do better than a Hutchison or Molina that have good control and command but just average velocity.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
I don't care what they go off
The point of a prospect list is to try and determine who will have better major league success. Tools correlate to major league success, as does superior minor league performance (accounting for ARL, etc). So I don’t really care about the means, so much as the end. I’m not saying ignore the tools, Im saying wieght them with other evidence that correlates with MLB success. Guys who at 23 have iffy command tend to end up relievers.
And I would suggest a little caution in your wording – throwing around “always” is usually not a good idea when talking about people, who are inherently unpredictable. Greg Maddux, as a counterexample, had great control and command, average at best velo, but was a lot better than a ton of guys with better stuff.
If someone wants to make a tools lists, and put Gose and Hamilton at the top, great. That’s fine. Just don’t pretend that it’s a prospect list, in terms of picking the most successful major leaguers. Same thing with a ceiling list – it’s useful, just dont pretend that a guy with a massive ceiling and but chance if reaching it (Gose, for example) is as valuable (in terms of expected MLB success) as a guy with a lower ceiling, but much higher chance of reaching it).
I meant "always" in the context of ranking in a prospects list
I’m not saying you’re wrong, it’s just not the methodology these prospect rankers use.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
Did Mayo explain his metholdogy?
I don’t see it. My point is, the methodlogy should be such that it is predictive as possible of chossing the best major league players. If you choose a methodology that is suboptimal, or even poor (for example, weighting tools to the exclusion of anything else) then it shouldn’t be taken seriously (or at least seriously discounted), as it lacks credibility. Now, I’m not saying Mayo is useless or his list is garbage, but I am saying that a process that puts Banuelos at 12 is flawed in my opinion, and I discount the course accordingly.
I'm not sure what Mayo's methodology is
I’m guessing it’s tools based by the rankings of guys like Banuelos and Betances but he may just be swayed by big names.
I actually don’t mind a ranking based solely on tools, because that info is hard to get. I can check MiLB.com or Baseball Reference for minor league numbers and see how a guy performs relative to his league and age. Tools info is not obvious from the numbers though.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
Well, you're entitled to the opinion
Banuelos is undersized – 5’11’’ is not optimal for a pitcher. He has good stuff, but still walks too many, though he’s young enough you hope he can imporve that. He’s a good prospect, I’m not saying otherwise. But he’s not the 12th best prosect in baseball. For me, he’s around the 5th best LHP prospect in baseball. Take a look at Robbie Erlin. He’s similarly undersized, and lacks the pure stuff, but it’s much more refined. You don’t see him getting talked about as top 50 material. If he weren’t a Yankee, there’s no way he’s that high.
I disagree that Jed Bradley is a whole lot better than McGuire. Had he been in the 2010 draft, he would have gne ahead of McGuire, and he does have the lefty advantage. However, he lacks the plus pitches to give him an ace ceiling.
Hamilton at 34 is nuts. Gose is the same age, played 2 levels higher, had better results. He has speed on the same level and a much better arm, and far more power.Both have significant contact problems. Gose is about right on the list, I might even have him further back. But Hmilton beglong behind him by any objective measure.
Beckham’s draft pedigree means nothing at this point, 4 years out. He’s failed to develop as he was thought was going to happen. He had a bounceback, off a very low base. He doesn;t belong on the top 100 at this point.
Another whiff – no Oscar Tavares. That’s crazy. Couple other Cardinal prospects left off. I don;t want to trash Mayo, but it seems like his list is tilted towards big names, big bonuses in big market cities.
I don't doubt that there may be some big name bias in there
However, I don’t think it’s always fair to throw that against Yankee prospects. Banuelos was only 20 at AA with good stuff, that gives him some credibility for his ranking, although it is probably too high. However, the reason why a guy like Erlin gets no love is because good command/control guys with underwhelming velocity usually do well in the low minors (where guys are bigtime hackers) but get exposed at the higher levels or at MLB when the hitters have more patience. For that kind of guy to succeed at the MLB level, they need a plus changeup or other secondary pitch like Marcum or Moyer.
Other biases come into play as well, like Beckham’s #1 overall draft position. That buys him years of top 100 appearances, especially since he was drafted as an 18 year old. I agree with you on Beckham not being a top 100 guy, I don’t think he sticks at SS and his bat doesn’t play anywhere else.
I agree with you on the Hamilton/Gose thing too. I think having the single best tool blinds prospect rankers as well.
I disagree on Bradley/McGuire though. I don’t think Deck is anything special and I can understand a high ranking on a lefty power pitcher, they don’t come along that often.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
To be clear
I’m not saying Erlin should be as high as Banuelos. I’m saying that they should be far closer together, for me, there isn’t 100 spots of more of difference. I understand why Erlin gets dinged, but from the scouting reports I’ve read, he has 3 pitches which should be MLB average or better, excellent command and control. That’s a mid rotation starter. Which is where I see Banuelos, though he has a higher ceiling ( a #2, I’d say Erlin tops out as #3, but with a higher floor as well).
That buys him years of top 100 appearances, especially since he was drafted as an 18 year old.
I understand there are biases, but I profoundly disagree with that statement. It’s the job of a professional to see through the biases as best he can, not to exacerbate them. I understand that a 1-1 pick will be quite high the first year after, that reflects his evaluation. If he bombs his first year, you cut him some slack, in other words, you weight the draft position with the updated info. But 3 or 4 years out, the draft position means precious little, as the player is completely different than when he was drafted.
I looked at the Yanks and BoSox lists.
Jeez, really? I’m sorry but I’m really not buying the Killer Bs as eeeelite prospects. I’m not denying they have to tools, but their command is so lacking. Watching AJ Burnett get his head beaten in when his command is slightly off should give Yanks fans a taste of what they should expect from both of them if their command doesn’t start improving.
If they produced those numbers without lousy command then I’d buy their rankings, but I don’t at all.
In honor of the Jays 2nd Baseman who played with fire in more ways than one.
by Damaso's Burnt Shirt on Jan 25, 2012 10:47 PM EST reply actions
I'd be willing to buy Banuelos as a top 100 prospect, maybe even a top 50 if you're really high on him
but Betances being top 50 is a joke
His 2011 wRC+ is 26
Especially a guy projected as a MLB reliever.
Maybe if he was the 2nd coming of Mariano but otherwise, no.
In honor of the Jays 2nd Baseman who played with fire in more ways than one.
by Damaso's Burnt Shirt on Jan 25, 2012 11:02 PM EST up reply actions
Anyone think
that Marisnick will pass Gose on this list next year? (if Gose doesn’t graduate this year that is.)
Yeah, with this list who knows
But on the whole, I think Marisnick will not pass Gose, my reasoning is that Gose will get the typical Vegas bump and everyone will see some giant average and huge power and have him much higher than he should be.
by T_Mizz on Jan 26, 2012 12:07 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
okay
but I assumed Lutherie actually meant “anyone think Marisnick will be a better prospect than Gose next year” and wasn’t actually referring to this specific (and inherently meaningless) list, though I might be wrong
Yes.
I really meant will he be more widely seen/accepted (and therefor rank higher on the majority of lists, not just this one) as the better prospect. I wasn’t really trying to put credit in this list where it might not be deserved. Personally I am more excited to see him in higher levels than Gose (not to sneer at Gose’ talent..), was wondering if others felt the same.
Well yeah I said on the whole
Most will see that bloated average and inflated power and think he’s fixed, same thing will happen for Hechavarria I think. From that perspective, you’ve got Gose, who’s got 3 tools better than Marisnick already, appearing as though he’s corrected the last 2 and nobody will put Marisnick higher.
But, guys who make lists based off more than stats and go in depth to scout all those players will probably, and rightfully, put Marisnick higher.
by T_Mizz on Jan 26, 2012 9:14 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
you're right
but Marisnick’s ceiling with the bat is way higher than Gose’s, which is the most important tool
Oh I don't disagree
I’ll take Marisnick over Gose any day of the week. But the question was whether Marisnick will surpass Gose on lists next year and I don’t think so (on many, not all lists) for the reasons I outlined. Gose will destroy the ball in Vegas (as everyone seems to) and people will probably forget about the very real concerns over his hit tool.
by T_Mizz on Jan 26, 2012 11:46 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
I doubt that
people who know enough to put together top prospect lists know that the PCL/Vegas are crazy hitter’s environments
Thing is though
It’s hard to objectively tease out the effect of the PCL. Yes there’s ballpark factors and the like but what I mean is how much will people credit to him and how much will people credit to the league. I for one, believe that they’ll give him the benefit of the doubt, they’ll throw in “the PCL is notorious for inflating numbers” but at the end of the day I think he’ll put up numbers that will be hard to ignore.
by T_Mizz on Jan 26, 2012 12:57 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Not always
Angels and Dodgers prospects leap to mind of guys that got overrated because of big PCL numbers. Brandon Wood, Andy LaRoche, and James Loney all leap to mind and the only major leaguer in the group is Loney. IIRC, the Dodgers were in Vegas when LaRoche and Loney came up.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
Brandon Wood was viewed as an elite prospect
even before he hit AAA. 2007 was the first year he had regular playing time in AAA, and he was ranked #8 pre-2007.
His 2011 wRC+ is 26
He also played in a hitters league at A+ ball
The California League is almost as bad as the PCL in inflating minor league stats.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
I know nothing about the Texas League
How does it play? Hitter’s league? I think Northwest Arkansas has a notorious hitter’s park but I don’t know about the league in general.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
So two hitters' leagues and one league average
I’m not surprised he was a bit of a mirage to the prospecters.
I just remembered another one, Dallas McPherson from the Angels system. There’s another one I bet was a product of minor league parks.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
Gose will destroy the ball in Vegas (as everyone seems to) and people will probably forget about the very real concerns over his hit tool.
See, I don’t really buy this. Gose’s power numbers will do up, sure. But his problem is making contact. Now, those PCL parks might take the bite out of some breaking balls and help a little there, but overall, it’s not suddenly make him better at making contact. To me, the PCL seems more suited to taking a line drive, high contact guy like Cooper and inflating his numbers, because it helps the balls he hit carry, and those batted balls have so much more room to fall in the massive outfields. But Gose – he has to make contract first.
That's true but
there are more factors to be considered, there’s that whole question of his instruction last year, where he was apparently told to just drive the ball in all situations which could have contributed to his high K rates. Not sure if this will really have the drastic effect that some people seem to think it will, but I think it will have some. Then there’s the idea that the Jays tend to protect their best pitching prospects from the PCL (at least the first time around) so maybe others do this as well, so instead of facing the likes of 2010 Drabek or 2012 Hutch, McGuire, Jenkins, or 2011 Alvarez he’ll be facing 2011 Drabek, 2011 Cecil, Mills, Perez, etc. Again, not sure if this is actually how other PCL organizations operate but it’s possible. There’s the possible Chad Mottola edge, the one that gave Hechavarria such a great last month. Not sure if that will continue (obviously it won’t to the same degree as it had) to some extent, but it’s something. And then there’s just the possibility that he’s a year more developed, which for a young player can be a lot.
There’s a lot of maybes (granted, very little certainties) but I just think enough will happen and inflate his numbers.
Then there’s the idea that the Jays tend to protect their best pitching prospects from the PCL (at least the first time around) so maybe others do this as well
Having listened to a lot of PCL baseball, this is indeed the case, especially in the conference Las Vegas plays in – no point in sending them to get mauled, especially since you can’t develop breaking balls.
There’s the possible Chad Mottola edge, the one that gave Hechavarria such a great last month.
You mean the .471 BABIP on the back of a 27.6% LD%, neithe ros which are sustainable? Let’s see what happens over at least a couple months.
Again, I have no doubts Gose’s numbers are very likely to look better – that’s what the PCL does. But I doubt that it will fundamentally mask his biggest weakness – that is, his inabilit to make contact. We’ll see
Oh yeah for sure
I said not to the same extent and that it’s still not certain that there is one but I remember reading something last year talking about how he saw something in hech’s swing (getting too tight or something) and fixed it. Again, this one is kinda just throwing it out there as it may have an effect, however slight.
But the other one I think will go a long way towards helping that contact rate increase. You’ve got guys who can’t throw very good breaking balls in the first place, who are now having their breaking balls not breaking as much.
by T_Mizz on Jan 26, 2012 6:00 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Cashman is a Dump
In 2006 when the Dodgers made the 51’s their AAA affiliate I got a job as one of those annoying on field guys that were supposed to entertain the crowd in between innings. I didn’t make it through the entire season, but was there for a bit when Matt Kemp got called up. Now understand this in context, I’ve always been a huge baseball junkie, and guys like Nomar, Martin, Broxton, Billingsly, LaRouche, Either, Loney act. played on the team. I would chat them up and the team never minded and I always knew when to do it and when not to.
Sadly, Brian Harper of the Salt Lake team, Angles AAA, got me fired because I was chatting Kendry Morales up and we really weren’t supposed to talk to visiting players. The funny part is that it was Kendry who asked me what my favorite nudie bar was.
Fun job, but man is Cashman is dump. And at the time, a company called Mandalay owned the team and they were just mean.
Nah
I had no hard feelings. I didn’t really like the job to begin with. The best part was just talking ball with the team. But alas I was living a lie and had to pretend to be this huge Dodger fan, which growing up in LA surprisingly destroyed for me.
My mom is from Toronto and my first game was a Blue Jays game at the old Expo park. It was the opened air one. They played The KC Royals and won. I was hooked from the start. Sadly, that would be the 2nd to last time I’d see them win in person. The 2nd and only win I’d witness was in Seattle during ARods last year there. Every other time I’m in attendance they lose.
I remember telling Kemp and Either how much more they’d love Toronto than LA. Kemp clearly didn’t remember this important coversation and resigned. Hey, I tried for us. I really did.
far from unlikely
they’re really, really close right now. I mean, one spot away on a top 100 list means absolutely nothing. if Marisnick has a good year – certainly anything close to his 2011 – he could be a top-20 prospect. if he has a merely decent year, he probably stays where he is. and of course, Gose’s relative performance is pretty important too
Marginally better
… than the very eccentric Seedlings to Stars list. Tim Beckham, Francisco Peguero, Drew Smyly and Chris Archer as top 100 prospects? You can defend every Blue Jay grade on the list, but they’re all near the bottom of where they could rank, and the omission of all four of Norris, Hutchison, Nicolino and McGuire strikes me as aberrant.
I think it's a notch above the Seedlings to Stars list
That one has a ton of headshakers. I don’t think Mayo sees a ton of these guys, it seems like the bigger names tend to show up on this list
Seedlings to Stars
Well, so I was saying. I might, however, take the S2S top 50 over the MLB top 50. Most of their out-of-left-field picks are in the 51-100 range, and while there’s a bunch of unusual picks in their top 50, I like a lot of their reads as well – Montero around 40, Taveras in the top 50.
I will say that MLB’s top 10 looks pretty good. I might have my top 10 as Moore, Harper, Trout, Miller, Teheran, Profar, Bauer, Mesoraco, Machado, Taillon which is very similar.
This List Cracks Me Up
I just laughed hard. Chris Archer should be on the list. I think he projects as a really good closer one day.
I totally missed that...
Probably because I was laughing so hard at the top 20.
MjwW you’re my hero!
Jays not in top 10 team list?
I’m wondering how it is that the Jays seem to be ranking right at the top of the farm system rankings of late, but here on John Mayo’s team ranking by his “team points” measure, the Jays don’t even crack the top 10.
Might this be because a lot of the Jays depth is still in the lower minor-league levels, whereas this top 100 prospects in baseball would presumably be geared towards the prospects closest to making an impact at the big-league level?
But then it doesn’t seem so, because one of the Jays’ four players on this list is Noah Syndergaard , who’s barely reached A-ball Dunedin. So how then to explain how the Jays’ farm system can be ranked at the top by some reviewers, yet middle of the pack here by Mayo?.
It's because of his metholody
He only gives points for players in the Top 100 (top player = 100 points, 100th player = 1 point), and the vast majority of the Jays strength is in thier incredible depth. Also, we don’t have as much “high end” takent as other system.
I don’t like this system particularly, it vastly overrated the top players in relation to their real world value. It needs to be smoothed out to have any use.
So, long short, I would play almost no attention to these rankings, since they measure a system only by their few best players, and don;t value these players well in relation to each other
Not to mention a ton of our players are in Low-A/High-A
So they naturally are ranked way lower due to blow up factor.
by Mike Andrew on Jan 27, 2012 11:39 PM EST up reply actions
His methodology is weak. Real weak.
According to Mayo methodology, the Yanks AND the O’s (!!!!???!) have slightly better farm systems than the Jays. The O’s are there thanks to having Machado and Bundy.
The irony is that I don’t see anything wrong with where the Jays prospects are ranked.
In honor of the Jays 2nd Baseman who played with fire in more ways than one.
by Damaso's Burnt Shirt on Jan 28, 2012 11:09 AM EST up reply actions
If he's not considering depth?
Yeah, that would be a very weak methodology.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
Well, it's basically just GIGO
If you try to build a model to represent something, you have to think about inlcuding the right information and getting the parameters right. Otherwise, it’s just garbage in, garbage out, which is what we have here.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
- The Juice: Mesoraco’s grand slam helps Reds complete four-game sweep of Braves
- Please hold: Indians’ Joe Smith jumps the gun on relief appearance
- Local radio host honors Cubs’ Tony Campana with parody song
