Personal Prospect Lists
by gabrielsyme on Feb 20, 2012 10:22 PM EST
Email
PrintWith Spring Training upon us, the BBB Community Prospect List nearly through its top 20, and the semi-official BBB list currently being posted, it's a good time to re-evaluate our own personal prospect rankings. Over the offseason, a fair number of rankings have been released from amateur and professional sources, and some prospects seem to have increased in reputation.
By all means let us know why you're particularly high on someone, or why you can't see some other prospect working out.
This thread is for all of us to post our own personal top-prospect lists; you can post as long or as short a list as you like. I'll aggregate our rankings - at least for the top 20 prospects- and if we get enough long lists, for the top 30 and even the top 50. The theory behind the "wisdom of crowds" is that the aggregate judgement of a group of even moderately informed people can surpass the judgements of experts, so what we come up will most assuredly be the best list out there - Goldstein, eat your heart out. I've included links to various prospect lists below the fold; John Sickels, the good folks at Batter's Box and our own hardy leaders have contributed the deepest lists, and are good places to look for names if you're concerned you might overlook anyone.
Fangraphs - Marc Hulet
Baseball Prospectus - Kevin Goldstein
Minor League Ball - John Sickels
MLB.com - Jonathan Mayo
Baseball America - Nathan Rode
ESPN - Keith Law (full rankings non-public; ordinal rankings)
Batter's Box Top 30: 30-21 ; 20-11 ; 10-1 & Honourable Mentions
Jays Journal (in progress)
Our own BBB Community rankings: pitchers ; hitters ; overall
The Official Bluebird Banter Rankings: 50-46 ; 45-41 ; 40-36 ; 35-31 ; 30-26 ; 25-21 ; 20-16 ; 15-11 ; 10-6
Drunk Jays fans put out a handy colour-coded chart that includes some of the above lists to give you a visual idea of what is out there.
98 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I guess I'll go first
1. TDA – Who else, really?
2. Gose – 3 outrageous tools can’t be ignored, I’m a believer his hitting will come around after that article about how they told him to drive the ball in all situations regardless of count. But that may be my glass-half-full mentality (Mjww will disagree, as he tends to be the other way around)
3. Marisnick – This guy reminds me of Tim Allen, he’s got every tool in the box. Shame that he’s got Gose in the same system, I bet he’d be the toolsiest guy in virtually every other system. This was so close, but Gose is two levels higher and could already be a rich man’s Rajai Davis.
4. Hutch – I’ve come around on him lately, everyone seems to be low on him because his “stuff” isn’t great, but he throws average velocity with great movement from what I’ve heard. That movement, combined with his excellent command and good secondaries, not to mention his deceptive delivery, will play up his less-than-stellar fastball. Again, some optimism there.
5. Syndergaard – Electric fastball and good work ethic to hopefully turn those secondaries into great pitches too. Also, KLaw said he has control, but not command, Sickels said he has command. I’ll go with Sickels here, I don’t see anything in the stats saying he has command issues, it’s not like he’s been getting pounded for not hitting his spots, of course maybe those “command issues” will be exposed at higher levels.
6. Nicolino – Great command, decent velocity, excellent change to get righties out.
7. Sanchez – If his command comes around (big if admittedly, but again, I’m optimistic by nature) he’s got the plus breaking ball and fastball to be the new Morrow.
8. Norris – No pro data, so I don’t like including him, but excellent stuff from the left side is hard to ignore.
9. Deck McGuire – Meh, I don’t know what else to say. He’s a ho-hum type prospect, high floor but his ceiling is not much higher. Without high upside, it doesn’t really seem like prospecting because there’s no chasm between the optimistic and pessimistic, speaking of upside…
10. Cardona – Virtually the opposite of McGuire, as we don’t have much to go on beyond projection. But, he’s only 17 and has pretty good velocity, hopefully he maintains his control and develops his command. If he does that, I’m confident his secondaries will be more than adequate.
11. Jimenez – Good defensive catcher with good contact numbers to match. I think he’ll be a great backup to TDA on our world series contending teams in a few years.
12. Hechavarria – A more extreme version of Gose because his defense could be gold glove caliber but he doesn’t have quite the bat Gose does (which is saying something) or the same game-changing speed. But I do look forward to seeing him roaming the field in the Rogers Centre, especially given the GB rates of a lot of the pitchers in the system.
13. Anderson – I’m pretty high on him, I’d say he’s got the highest power upside outside of maybe TDA, but that could be debatable. Basically, from what I’ve heard, is he’ll be Marisnick with slightly more power and slightly less speed.
14. Wojciechowski – He’s in a similar boat as Alvarez, if he develops that third pitch he could be a pretty solid starter, but if not he’ll be very limited in his success as a starter.
15. 7 way tie between all the very high upside- low or nil pro data guys. In no particular order: Musgrove, Osuna, Robson, Stilson, Biggs, Gabryszwski, Comer. They’ll sort themselves out this year, I hope. They could have Sanchez years or Syndergaard/Nicolino years, but even then I have Sanchez all the way up there with them based off of stuff/upside so we may not get much more of a sorting action beyond an order to this 7-way tie.
Well there’s my personal, off-the-cuff list, hopefully this will kick-start this high upside thread.
You know what, make that an 10 way tie
Might as well throw Labourt, Dyson, and DeSchiafi (sp?)
25. Smith Jr.
My top 15 is now a confusing, befuddled top 25.
by T_Mizz on Feb 21, 2012 10:03 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
And that's basically the reality of doing this for the Jays system
There’s so many guys at the low levels on whom so little is known, that basically all you can do is put them in rough ranges. On the other hand, it’s an embarassment of riches
I’ll try to post my own later today or tomorrow.
Yeah, especially when you consider
This is all just from AA’s past 2 drafts and 2 seasons of trades stocking this system. When you start seeing the IFAs coming up (besides Cardona) you’ll see a system where the top 50 is better than most top 20s.
by T_Mizz on Feb 21, 2012 11:41 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Let us hope
What will be really interesting is if AA can maintain the excellence of the system once the new draft and IFA rules are in place. I, personally, hope Rogers doesn’t have any compunction about shoveling money under the table.
by gabrielsyme on Feb 21, 2012 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
I think it is a bit of a misconception that AA has restocked the system with trades
I think he has actually traded away more than he has received (see below, just cause I was curious). The quality of prospects received is certainly better than the prospects traded away, though some pretty good ones have been traded away too (Stewart, Pastornicky, Collins, Jaye, Molina, and Chavez).
Traded (11):
Nestor Molina (Santos)
Myles Jaye, Daniel Webb (Frasor)
Frank Gailey (Francisco)
Brad Mills (Mathis)
Zach Stewart (Rasmus)
Danny Farquhar, Trystan Magnusan (Davis)
Tim Collins, Tyler Pastornicky (Escobar)
Johermyn Chavez (Morrow)
Received (7):
Lawrie (Marcum)
Drabek, d’Arnaud, Taylor→Wallace→Gose (Halladay)
Yohan Pino (Cash)
Trystan Magnusan (Cash)
Danny Farquhar (Purcey)
by Playoffs!!!!1 on Feb 21, 2012 4:02 PM EST up reply actions
Interesting
AA certainly has not been hoarding his prospects, and when you consider that it’s only Drabek and Lawrie have lost their prospect eligibility, the depth of the system is even more outstanding.
It is interesting
I think what leads to the misconception is that AA has generally bought prospects, and seen their value rise (Lawrie, Gose, TDA) and sold generally high (at this point).
That said, I think the amount of talent in is more than the amount of talent out.
Yeah that's what I meant
The talent level he’s brought in through trades is very high. D’Arnaud, Gose, Drabek and Lawrie is really all you need to look at. Granted, anyone can get great prospects when they’re trading a guy like Halladay. Actually, maybe not the White Sox.
by T_Mizz on Feb 21, 2012 4:56 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
He got Farquhar and Magnusson backn in trades too.
None of those guys are huge losses. The best two are Stewart and Molina and they profile as back-end rotation guys or in the bullpen. He also got Uviedo in a deal as well.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
Hmm
I would say Anderson has the most conceivable power potential in the system as of now. But I would say the absolute, highest, power potential ceiling that could develop in the org. is Jesus Gonzalez. But he’s incredibly raw and has a long way to go.
by Adamthebluejay on Feb 21, 2012 10:53 AM EST up reply actions
I guess I'll re-post my prospect list from the Jays forum, with one alteration (Hawkins and Crouse)
1. d’Arnaud (A-)
2. Gose (B+)
3. Marisnick (B+)
4. Syndergaard (B+)
5. Nicolino (B+)
6. Hutchison (B+)
7. McGuire (B+)
8. Norris (B)
9. Sanchez (B)
10. Jimenez (B/B-)
11. Hawkins (B-)
12. Crouse (B-)
13. Cardona (C+/B-)
14. Hechavarria (C+/B-)
15. Carreno (C+/B-)
16. Knecht (C+/B-)
17. Perez (C+/B-)
18. Dean (C+/B-)
19. Jenkins (C+/B-)
20. Thon (C+)
21. Cooper (C+)
22. Anderson (C+)
23. Wojciechowski (C+)
24. McDade (C+)
25. Comer (C+)
26. Smith Jr. (C+)
27. Gabryszwski (C+)
28. Musgrove (C+)
29. Osuna (C+)
30. Taylor (C+)
31. Sierra (C+)
32. Vega (C+/C)
33. Arce (C+/C)
Admittedly, I was being somewhat conservative on the 2011 draft picks.
"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.
2011 Draft
It’s a very defensible philosophy. You were fairly aggressive with Dean, which is interesting.
by gabrielsyme on Feb 21, 2012 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
I like his bat, his swing, and I like the combination of those two attributes with his glove at 3B.
"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.
Definitely promising tools and profile. I gather the knock against him is whether he has enough patience and contact ability to make use of those tools. Generally I’m happy to project draftees based on scouting reports, but he’s one guy I really need to see some professional data on before being comfortable with. That said, I only have him a few spots further down.
Now that I won't over-influence anyone
1. d’Arnaud
2. Marisnick
3. Gose
4. Syndergaard
5. Norris
6. Hutchison
7. Nicolino
8. Sanchez
9. Anderson
10. Hechavarria
11. McGuire
12. Cardona
13. AJ Jimenez
14. Crouse
15. Hawkins
16. Carlos Perez
17. Wojciechowski
18. Sierra
19. Knecht
20. Musgrove
21. Comer
22. Dean
23. Osuna
24. Carreno
25. Becerra
26. Sweeney
27. Jenkins
28. Stilson
29. Thon
30. Cooper
I’ll probably add my next 20 a little later, which is a good deal more in flux than this part of my list. As you can probably see, I’m pretty tools-oriented, and as such, was very high on Anderson, and relatively high on Crouse, Sierra and Hechavarria.
If everything goes right for Sierra, I could see his upside being Jose Guillen. Issue I have with him is that the injuries he had in 2010 really pushed back his development time, and I’m concerned that that may have affected him in the long run.
"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.
Guillen seems like his 90% interval
His three-year peak (‘03-’05) does look a lot like what I’d think Sierra’s ceiling would be; although I suspect Sierra walks a little more, strikes out more, and plays better defence.
I should note
That the strong likelihood is that Sierra doesn’t get to Guillen’s overall production, much less his peak production.
and plays better defence
Reports seem to indicate that aside from his arm, Sierra really isn’t that good of a fielder in RF. His reads on flyballs aren’t the greatest, and he doesn’t have too much range nor does he have the speed to overcome some of his issues regarding his reads. Sounds like a Jose Bautista type of defender to me.
"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.
On Guillen
He was a pretty poor fielder, playing largely in an era which put less emphasis on defence, and particularly defence in the corner outfield positions. I’m pretty confident Sierra can surpass that. Better defence than Guillen does not imply good defence.
TAR HIM!!1
"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.
Another 20
32. Dawel Lugo
33. Jesus Gonzalez
34. Mitchell Taylor
35. Gabryzwski
36. Sean Nolin
37. Santiago Nessy
38. Tom Robson
39. Jairo Labourt
40. McDade
41. Arce
42. Pompey
43. Manuel Cordova
44. DeSclafani
45. Christian Lopes
46. Evan Crawford
47. Vega-Rosada
48. Griffin Murphy
49. Mark Biggs
50. Sam Dyson
51. Tyler Ybarra
Top 10
1. Travis D’Arnaud
2. Drew Hutchison
3. Anthony Gose
4. Jake Marisnick
5. Justin Nicolino
6. Noah Syndergaard
7. Daniel Norris
8. Aaron Sanchez
9. Deck McGuire
10. Adeiny Hechavarria
I like this list, I'm pretty much in agreement with this one.
Hic sunt fortuna dracones
There is only 1 "n" in Hutchison
1. TDA
2. Marisnick
3. Gose
4. Syndergaard
5. Hutchinson
6. Nicolino
7. Norris
8. McGuire
9. Sanchez
10. Cardona
11.Anderson
12. Osuna
13. Wojo
14. Hechavarria
15. AJ Jiminez
Kadri Fanboy since 2006
Norris could jump up to #4 on this list very quickly if he makes full season ball and starts off well. I rate him a little lower because all I’ve seen is a 2 minute video from his highschool days. Osuna and Cardona are also like this, both are so young but so talented I can’t wait to see more of them.
Kadri Fanboy since 2006
Assignments
It will be interesting to see where our high-school draftees get sent this coming year. None of the 2010 class were assigned to full-season ball this past year, but none were as highly regarded as Norris. I wouldn’t be shocked to see a few other HS draftees end up in Lansing as well, but Norris definitely has the best shot.
I don’t think any of the pitchers start in full year ball. There is no reason to. We have the 3 big 2010 arms plus Murphy and Taylor who could make the jump at Lansing. We have the stacked NH rotation most likely with Jenkins, Deck, Hutch and Wojo. Dunedin will have Nolin and the 2011 college arms like Stilson and DeScelifini (sic) along with some of the other older unheralded arms. I think Norris starts in extended and then when people start getting promotions he can slide in mid season to Lansing if he’s ready.
Kadri Fanboy since 2006
by WizardofNaz on Feb 22, 2012 11:18 AM EST up reply actions
That said if theres room I could see Anderson and Smith starting in Lansing. Put Anderson in CF even though he projects to RF and Smith in RF for now. Have Hawkins in LF and you have another strong OF in Lansing with the 3 from last year all in Dunedin to start.
Kadri Fanboy since 2006
by WizardofNaz on Feb 22, 2012 11:20 AM EST up reply actions
Very unlikely
I’d be very surprised to see Anderson and Smith jump right from high school to full season ball. I fully expect them to start in extended, go to Bluefield/Vancouver and maybe hit Lansing right at the end. More likely start in Lansing in 2013.
I don’t see why 2 supplemental picks can’t start in full season… its not like a team has an innings limit on batters. Plus both were said to have good bats already. We don’t have to overhaul any mechanics. At this point I think its best if we just get them games facing different pitching every day.
Kadri Fanboy since 2006
by WizardofNaz on Feb 22, 2012 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
Can't and won't are two different things
I said nothing about whether they could or could not. I was talking about what I expect the Jays to do.
Their development philosophy the past couple years for high school school draftees has been a year of extended spring/short season before hitting full season ball. Doesn’t mean it will happen for every player, but I think it’s the reasonable assumption – also, I believe I read somewhere (Batters Box?) that Anderson was slotted for short season.
Players usually start in extended if they have flaws or gaps (or an innings limit) that need to be coached. I think both players need to face live pitching more than they need extended batting practice.
Kadri Fanboy since 2006
by WizardofNaz on Feb 22, 2012 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
That's not necessarily true at all
Justin Nicolino was about as advanced a high school pitcher as you get outside of the elite guys who go at the top of draft, and he started in extended spring training. For the Jays, it’s an organzational philipsophy in the past couple years – not rushing guys, building up pitch counts, ironing out mechanics, etc before going to real games.
You’re entitled to think whatever you want, but have you ever seen either of them? Read more the limited pieces of info about them? I fail to see how you have any real basis for that opinion. Clearly, the Jays front office have thought differently in the past, and I’ll take their judgment. Fwiw, Gerry at Batters Box (look about 6 comments down), who has the connection on these things thinks along the same lines about Anderson.
Yes but he’s young and probably had an innings limit and they had a choice. Start him in A and shut him down a couple months early or limit him early and let him finish the season strong.
A hitter doesn’t have an innings limit and a high schooler can go play 140 games a year. He may get tired but he isn’t a huge injury risk like a pitcher would be.
Kadri Fanboy since 2006
by WizardofNaz on Feb 22, 2012 12:31 PM EST up reply actions
You're missing the point
It’s not about just innings count, it’s about an org. philosophy. Consider where high school position players picked high in the draft started in 2010 and 2010 (the new regime):
2010: Jake Marisnick, GCL (promoted to Lansing in August)
2011: Kellen Sweeney, GCL/Bluefield
2011: Chris Hawkins, Bluefield
Marisnick is the guy Anderson is most compared to, comp wise. I can;t see them being more aggressive with him than Marisnick (Marisnick got the higher bonus).
Again, if you think you know better than the Jays, you’re entitled. But I’d be wary of doing so
I never said I knew better. And Marisnick had a swing that needed to be revamped hence his time in extended. Hawkins just didn’t have an opening and I think Sweeney was hurt last year that is why they didn’t make it.
Also what about Knecht? He was a 2010 high pick and he started in Lansing…
Kadri Fanboy since 2006
by WizardofNaz on Feb 22, 2012 12:58 PM EST up reply actions
Largely agree
Anderson and Smith are likely to start in short-season ball. I don’t think the Jays are rigid in how they advance players, they simply have a conservative tendency. Norris is a step above any of the other HS arms we’ve drafted recently in terms of talent, so it I don’t think past practice will be determinative. Lots of 1st round HS draftees are started in full-season ball (a majority?).
Another possibility is that some of these guys start in Extended, but their first assignment is with Lansing.
At any rate, it will be something to watch.
By the way, I agree with Naz that it would be a good idea to start Anderson in centre unless they are certain he can’t manage it.
here's my top 15
1. TdA
2. Marisnick
3. Gose (epsilon behind Marisnick)
4. Syndergaard
5. Norris
6. Hutch
7. Nicolino
8. McGuire
9. Jiminez
10. Perez
11. Sanchez
12. Wojo
13. Hechavarria
14. Jenkins
15. Cardona
it is "an arbitrarily small positive quantity" in maths
as in, the difference between Marisnick and Gose is essentially nil, but they need to be ranked ordinally for the purposes of a list
An iota's difference
Interesting that students of the Sciences and the Humanities can use different greek vowels to denote the same thing semantically.
1. d’Arnaud
2. Marisnick
3. Gose
4. Syndergaard
5. Nicolino
6. Norris
7. Hutchison
8. McGuire
9. Jimenez
10. Sanchez
11. Hawkins
12. Hechavarria
13. Knecht
14. Cardona
15. Crouse
His 2011 wRC+ is 26
just after would be Dean, Perez, Anderson, Comer, Musgrove, Woj
in whatever order
His 2011 wRC+ is 26
My Top 30 from the Jays forum:
Travis D’Arnaud
Noah Syndergaard
Drew Hutchison
Jake Marisnick
Anthony Gose
Justin Nicolino
Daniel Norris
A.J. Jimenez
Adonys Cardona
Deck McGuire
Aaron Sanchez
Joe Musgrove
Asher Wojciechowski
Jeremy Gabryszwski
Marcus Knecht
Carlos Perez
Adeiny Hechavarria
Jacob Anderson
Matt Dean
Dickie Thon
Kevin Comer
Dwight Smith Jr.
Mike McDade
Michael Crouse
Chris Hawkins
Moises Sierra
Roberto Osuna
John Stilson
Santiago Nessy
Danny Barnes
by Adamthebluejay on Feb 21, 2012 11:52 PM EST reply actions
Alright, here's my Top 50 + 33 others of note
My grading system:
First, I like nuances, so there’s a lot of borderline, and in those cases the first number has in more weight. So B+ > B+/B > B/B+ > B and so on.
Basically, the As and Bs are basically along the same line as Sickels uses. I differ quite a bit once we get into the C’s. Basically, all players will get some sort of C grade, expect for the really fringe guys who I don’t even bother with. Since there are a lot of C players, and they can be quite dissimilar, I don’t feel that C+, C and C- are sufficient, so I’ve introduced a second dimension essentially. A notation of “1” (example: C+/1) indicates a higher upside type player (usually this means a lower probability, or they’d be higher than C grade). A straight C+ will generally be a lower ceiling/higher floor type, who probably projects as a part time player (reliever/bench) whereas a C+/1 will be higher upside, lower floor (could be everyday regulars, but high risk). This doesn’t mean one is automatically higher than another – it depends on the individual.
A straight C player is essentially an org guy for me, very few will contribute anything at the MLB level, but a few will surprise. A C/1 player is a player with something going for him, not quite enough for me to put into the next tier, but not an org guy either. Some of these guys end up here due to little info. Unlike C+ and C+/1, all C/1 are higher than straight C. All C/1 are shown on my list, I have not shown the C. C- are guys who essentially filler.
Finally, I tend to put more value on floors than most – essentially, the “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush” philosophy. I will add some commentary on my rankings soon.
Wow, extensive! Well worth the wait!
But I do take exception to Labourt being that low. Obviously, since he hasn’t played any American ball yet there’s little known about him but from what I’ve heard he projects to be a power lefty. Then again, that’s just me, and I couldn’t really make a strong enough arguement to put him over anyone in front of him.
But also, when do guys stop being prospects and become org guys? Chad Beck is already in his prime, there’s little to no upside as he’s already that magic age of 27. Kinda goes for Gomes, Farina and Uviedo too. Carreno gets a pass age-wise because he’s been up and done well. Crawford too because as a lefty he’s got that extra value as a LOOGY.
by T_Mizz on Feb 22, 2012 2:17 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Labourt
That’s the hell of ranking this system – honestly, you could bump Labourt up 20 spots and I wouldn’t argue….it’s just then you take the guy who replaces him and arguably do the same, and it’s a big cycle. It’ll be easier in a year (I hope! Or maybe not – hard means we have a deep system).
As for the prospect/org guy distinction, for me it’s not so much age as talent. All of those guys are older, but I think all of them have the talent to potentially pitch in MLB – they’re on the 40 man after all, over guys like Mastroianni, Hoey, Carpenter, etc who were all removed. That said, the older a player is and the lower the level, the more you have to discount the performance. Beck and Uviedo are perilously close to being across the line, but I think they’re worthy of the back end inclusion, especially given that the Jays continue to give them 40 man spots.
So when Gose, Hutch, Jenkins and McGuire need their spots later this year
Beck, Farquar, Farina, Crawford would make the jump to org guys or prospects in some other system? Obviously it is not for sure that all four of those guys will be called up, or that it will be those 4 left out of the 40-man, but you get the jist.
Also I don’t believe Uviedo is on the 40-man.
In my mind, I think the line is more ambiguous in my mind than maybe you’re thinking about it. As I said to benk below, maybe a I’m a little high on these guys. In my mind, the Jays know these guys best, and they clearly liked each enough to invest a 40 man spot over the winter, which for me means there some value there, enough to put top-50. And I think a number of those guys will pitch in the bigs, at some point, whereas a lot of C/1 probably never make it. That said, they probably don’t get a ton of chances to prove themselves either – they’re pretty fungible. If you wanted to put them as C/1, it’s basically a personal judgment call.
Uviedo's not on the 40-man?
But to me, prospect has always meant a young kid on his way up. Not saying these guys can’t be major leaguers at some point, I just have a definition of prospect as more than just someone who hasn’t played enough games in the bigs.
The Jays put them on the 40-man because they don’t want to lose them for nothing and they could be relievers if needed desperately, not because they really have that much of a future. Especially because most, if not all will be removed this year for the kids (the actual prospects, by my definition).
My criteria for inclusion is rookie eligibility – it’s an objective (though imperfect) criteria, that is widely used in making prospect lists. If the player qualifies as a rookie, he’s on my master list. If you feel differently, that’s fine.
Yes, Uvideo is not on the 40 man – and he was eligible for the Rule 5 and no one took him for $50K, so presumably no other team likes him enough to use on the big league team this year. I like him though – strong K number, and quality K/BB ratios. And he’s only 25 this season. I feel he belongs alongside Farquhar/Beck/etc so he’s in that range even though he’s not on the 40 man.
Oh yeah, rookie eligibiltity is great but
The fact is, guys who are career minor leguers and then retired are prospects, there needs to be some cutoff for what a prospect is. To me it’s upside. If you’re in the Autumn of your career years then you sir are no prospect. Uviedo’s window is shutting this year if he doesn’t get onto the roster, which I doubt he will. Beck, to me is already a non-prospect, he is what he is and that apparently hasn’t been enough to break his rookie eligibility so I’m calling it over for him, he’ll maybe see sometime as the last guy in a weak pen.
by T_Mizz on Feb 22, 2012 7:44 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Some Reasoning
But first, a couple comments
1) Age as of 4/1/2012
2) The players in the right column are not in any particular order, except for the top 5 who were all considered for the #50 spot – that would essentially make them 51-55
3) Guys with significant injuries that haven’t shown they are recovered may also end up as C/1 – they are not org guys either, but enough concerns to keep them from being higher (Sam Dyson comes to mind as an example).
I think it’s useful to think about this system in terms of tiers. D’Arnaud is the clear #1 – good hitter, good defence at a premium position. Past injuries and possibility of future injuries keep him from a straight A-. The next tier is Gose and Marisnick. They’re very close for me, but Gose’s problem is arguably the most important tool, the hit tool, and I’m skeptical it’ll ever he close to average (he’s a monster if it is).
Going down another tier, we have 5 pitchers, that can really be ranked in any order. Norris probably has the highest ceiling, but I’m wary of over-ranking a prep pitcher, especially ahead of guys like the 4 ahead of him. So a straight B, but also probably the likeliest to be in the As in one year. Likewise, the other pitchers can be ranked in various orders depending what you’re looking for. Syndergaard and Nicolino could easily be reversed, but I’ll take the lefty with a better feel for the secondaries. I don’t think either are straight B+s, just on having not done it in full season leagues. There’s very little separating them from Hutchison and McGuire. I’ve gone back and forth on putting Hutch as B+/B. I see these guys as having lower ceilings as more mid- to back-rotations starters, but obviously less risky as well.
Then, I see another drop-off to the next tier. I really like Jimenez, the defence and the contact ability at catcher are a strong package, even if the power is underwhelming. Aaron Sanchez has a ton of upside due to more developed secondaries and the physical projection, but I want to see more consistency before putting him in the next tier. Listening to some of the radio broadcasts, he would sail along and just lose it. I also like Asher Wojciechowski more than most. He didn’t overwhelm high-A hitters and is likely a MLB reliever, but he had some really solid outings. He’s probably not far away either from MLB, especially if he ends up a reliever.
After this, I see another tier (though the differences between tiers are smaller than earlier). I initially had Perez ahead of Hech, but I reversed them due to Hech having a higher floor and being closer to MLB. I’m not a big believer that the bat develops more, but he’s already a first division utility guy and possibly platoon guy, or a second division start (think Alcides Escobar) and that’s valuable. I’m not sold on Carlos Perez, but we’ll see how he handles the FSL. I think he’ll either take a big step forward or more or less fall off the prospect map. Cardonas has a massive ceiling, and some solid data in pro ball, even if it’s just complex ball, so I’m comfortable including him on this tier and a cut above a lot of the other really young, projectable players.
From 15 onwards, things really flatten out, mostly due to a plethora of young, high ceiling players with little or no pro data, and little in the way of information and solid scouting reports available. There’s a lot of gut feel involved, and if you wanted to put t#25 at #15 or vice versa, you’re not going to get much of an argument. The further you go down, the larger the variance. The guys in the back end of the top 50, I could understand being left off, I could easily understand much higher.
This has gone on long enough, I’m happy to keep the discussion going.
tough for me to agree that Hech is Alcides right now
I can easily see him struggle to post an OPS over .620/.281 wOBA in MLB. I can potentially see him as a 0.5-1 WAR guy right now if his defense is as good as they say, but I don’t think his floor is much higher than that.
Well
First, don’t take the comp too literally – the idea is, heralded prospect iniitally, great glove, little bat. And I think that fits.
Second, I think Hech could approach (and possibly exceed) a 70 wRC+ (Escobar career numbers) in the majors this season…it’s a really low bar. Regardless, the point was, if he got a starting job, he could probably be a ~1 to 1.5 WAR player, which as a floor is pretty valuable.
seems optimistic
I mean, I know it’s not that hard for a player to post a 70 wRC+ but Hech had a lower OPS in AA than Alcides did in MLB. that said, Adeiny is very young so he should improve, but there’s always the chance he doesn’t.
I’m bearing on Adeiny because I’m very worried about the bat (obviously) but I can see Alcides as, like, his 25th percentile projection, so if that’s what you meant for “floor”, I’m all for it
well "floor" is like
he doesn’t improve his bat AT ALL and puts up 2011 MLE projections at the plate for his whole career and is a defensive replacement. but you’re right, 25th wasn’t a great peg. Probably closer to 35-40 IMO
this is sort of semantics – I don’t know precisely what you consider “floor” and ceiling" but I think 20th and 80th percentile projections are better. every player has the chance to not improve at all as well as the chance for a quantum leap, but 20-80 projections capture the realm of “realism” without trying to account for unforeseen craziness. I mean, of course a toolsy guy like Marisnick has a much higher chance of a quantum leap – that would be taken into an 80th or 90th percentile projection. but maybe I’m just talking in circles here I dunno
Like I did for Gose, these were my upside, middle, floor comparisons for Hech
Upside: Alexei Ramirez
Middle: Alcides Escobar/Adam Everett
Floor: John McDonald
"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.
Hech
ZiPS projects his 2011 slash line at .241/.269/.345, which I work out to roughly around a .297 wOBA [(1.7*OBP+SLG)/2.7]. Now that’s more of a 50th percentile for 2011, not a floor for the career, so to get a floor for 2011 you’d go lower. I think .280 is a decent ballpark, maybe a little lower but we’re still firmly in Alcides Escobar territory.
When I say floor and ceiling, yeah, I’m referring to reasonable floor and reasonable ceiling. I’ve never thought really precisely about it, but I’d aslo say it’s not a symmetric distribution, because I don;t want to consider injuries (not easy to predict ahead of time), and that’s way more on the downside. If we took out injuries, I’d say 5% and 95%, taking out the really extreme development scenarios. Accounting for injuries, I tend to think maybe the 10th-15th percentile as a reasonable floor for position players and maybe 20-25th for pitchers (which is why when I drew probability distributions for prospects, the left side until around this level was invariably around 0). In terms of ceiling, I’d say 90-95th percentile, depending on ow you view uncertainty and prospect devleopment.
For Farquhar, Beck and Uvideo, maybe C/C+ would be more accurate than C+/C. C/1 works as well, but I guess in my mind C/1 was not really intended for guys on the 40 man…though that really doesn’t make sense logically.
Including the likes of those guys was basically a nod to their 40 man status, and the fact that presumably the Jays like them enough to have kept them on the 40 man over the winter, when those spots are most scarce – over guys like Jeroloman and Mastroanni. And damn it, I just realized my master list didn’t have Jeroloman, who I had removed when the Pirates nabbed him. I would have probably slapped C/1 on both of them, so I could understand Farquhar/Beck.Uvideo being anywhere from C/1 to C+/C.
Uvideo?
new version of YouTube?
but yeah, I’d agree with the C/C+ rankings. potentially C+/C for Uviedo though, i think he could be a slightly above replacement level reliever
I always spell Uviedo as Uvideo
For some reason, even though I think of it properly, my brain always associates the letters as Uvideo.
Relief prospects
So difficult to value- especially when they all seem pretty fungible (look how many good arms, no-results-to-date guys we have among our non-roster invitees). As a result, I simply have left them way down on my lists.
It's essentially my floor "bias"
All are decent bets to provide something at thge MLB level. I think that’s worthy of inclusion in a top 50. If however, you’re more interested in finding league average or better players, they’re irrelevant.
Frailty of WAR
I suspect WAR tends to overvalue middle relievers- they are, as a species, rather inconsistent, and quite fungible; moreover, the bottom guys in a bullpen tend to get low-leverage innings, and so fWAR (at least) over-rates their importance to at least that degree.
Microsoft Excel
Pretty much anything I do is in Excel…then I just grab a screenshot, copy over to Paint to save as an image
Look at it another way
I expect the regulars will boo me for this..but I think projecting prospects 3/4/5 years out is a Mug’s Game. That said, I see why it’s done and why it’s fun.
A more realistic list would focus on players with the prospect of reaching the majors with the Jays in the next two years or being traded. The rest must wait their turn.
1) TdA
2) Hutchison
3) McGuire
4) Gose
4a) Hech
5) Carreno
6) Jenkins
7) Sierra
8) Crawford
9) Barmes
And you could add Drabek, Alvarez and Perez, even Snider and Thames, to the list as prospects who may continue to bounce up and down for a few years.
Just a thought.
I agree that projecting specific prospects 3-5 years into the future is a bit of a crap shoot
however, your comment about a “realistic list” focusing on "players with the prospect of " … “being traded” is a reason why you would make the larger list that was based on the combination of closeness to the majors, upside, and risk. You may not value prospects that are further away from the Majors, but other GMs do, and those prospects can be used to acquire major league talent in trades. Now, I’m not saying your list is wrong, as it is looking at one of the key factors in prospect evaluation. However, this list is not sufficient for determining the value of a prospect, in terms of a trade.
Consider a few trades:
Jason Frasor traded for Myles Jaye and Daniel Webb – Neither of these players is close to playing the majors, would be down on any prospect list for the Jays, and were used to acquire a quality reliever.
Rajai Davis traded for Trystan Magnusan and Daniel Farquar – Farquar was a bit off from the majors when this trade happened, though Magnussan is getting on in years. Farquar is a top 50 guy, why Magnussan is not not much of a prospect anymore.
Travis d’Arnaud, Micheal Taylor, and Kyle Drabek traded for Roy Halladay – This is a trade in the other direction, but only Taylor would have been on your list, even though d’Arnaud and Drabek were key parts of the trade that landed the Phillies the best pitcher in baseball.
by Playoffs!!!!1 on Feb 22, 2012 9:50 AM EST up reply actions
Maybe Blastov meant something different
I think he was trying to say the player makes the majors within 2 yrs, whether it’s with the Jays or a different org, if traded.
It absolutely is a crapshot
For what it’s worth, you might want to check out Project Prospect – they focus basically with ETAs in the next 2 years, or guys in the lower levels with star level upside (the cream of the crop). The thing is, the method you suggest would ignore guys who make big jumps and force their way into the picture. Consider Drew Hutchison – last year at this time, he had half a year in full season ball, his ETA seemed 3-4 years out. 12 months later, he’s pitched at AA and if there’s an injury in the middle of the season may be a call-up, and regardless, 2013 seems like a good bet.
So who looks like they can jump
from low minors to the majors in by Sept 2013? Nicolino to me sounds the most polished of the starters. Stilson, if he is healthy and stays healthy might be in the 2013 bullpen at some point.
Any of Syndergaard, Sanchez and Nicolino have the talent to go on a run like Hutch and burn through Lansing and Dundedin to finish the year in New Hampshire.
Hitters would be down to Marisnick. He could cover both A+ and AA this year to the point of starting next year in AAA with Gose in the majors.
Kadri Fanboy since 2006
Better late than never
Here are 10 guys in the Blue Jays’ talent pool whom I think will have solid major league careers. There is little consideration given to when those careers begin, but once they begin they’ll be productive. There are lots of younger guys whom I don’t have a good enough feel for to comfortably project how they will develop as prospects but I’m really excited about watching them grow and I’ll list/rank some of them after this post:
1. Jake Marisnick [ has the potential to hit at the top or in the middle of the lineup for years, playing good defense with a good attitude, good combination of skill and awareness of how to use it, drive, team mentality and media presence. I’m going to go out on a limb and say he’ll be part of our core within 3 years and stick around for awhile, make several all-star appearances and help this team win some playoff games]
2. Travis d’Arnaud [ nothing new to add to what’s already been said]
3. Justin Nicolino [I agree with "Mr. Consonants" that Nicolino is going to be the best of our impressive pitching prospects. His results last year were not a fluke as FIP/xFIP agree with his counting stats; he just had an amazing year and he’s only 160lb. When that frame fills out we’re going to have someone who can dial it up when he wants to, to go along with impressive pitch selection and sequencing. He learned how to pitch when he could only get it up to 80, which means he learned to be smart and when his skills caught up he was dominant; add in some more power and we have our #2, hopefully he stays with us for the productive years]
4. Daniel Norris [probably a long ways away but his attitude and pedigree just scream out "Winner!"]
5. Anthony Gose [I’m very leery of his ability to learn how to hit, and the hit tool is really important- just ask Rajai Davis. BUT if he does, he’ll be downright filthy at the top of our lineup, and if he doesn’t he’ll still be a dynamo]
6. Drew Hutchison [He’s done everything right; he’s come out of almost nowhere to establish himself as a top prospect. You have to respect that. Realistically, I think he’ll take our #4 or 5 slot in 2013 and might work himself up to #3 in 2014]
7. Noah Syndergaard [TO Scouts saw more in Noah than anyone else and he’s showing them that his projectability is closer to ready than even they had expected. But he probably still has a lot to learn about pitching. Possible top 3 by 2015]
8. Adeiny Hechevarria [His glove is ready for the majors now; he’s been learning the all-important patience while he learns how to hit. I think he’ll impress in LV to the point that they almost have to bring him up by the end of 2012 and once he’s in the big show he’s going to display some killer instinct and not give up his roster spot. He’ll never be a major offensive threat, but he’ll be steady as our #8 or 9 hitter and get the "big hit" when it’s needed]
9. Jacob Anderson [Something about this guy has "Shawn Green" written all over him, but he’s a ways away]
10. Deck McGuire [The opposite of projectable; he is what he is, but he could well grab a bottom of the rotation slot and become our all important "workhorse". Think Lackey before he got rich.]
Note: I’m still high on Drabek’s chances of putting it all together and I’d have him at #5 ahead of Gose, but below Nicolino and Norris if he still counts as a "prospect". Other none "young gun" notables deserving mention are: Jenkins, Wojciekowski, Carreno, Jimenez, Cooper, Crawford, Knecht, C. Perez, Sierra, Hawkins, Barnes, Nolin
Young guns:
I don’t have a good enough feel for whether these guys are for real or not, but if they are there are some good ones here too:
11. Adonys Cardona, 12. Aaron Sanchez, 13. Matt Dean, 14. Jo Musgrove, 15. John Stilson, 16. Dwight Smith, 17. Kevin Comer, 18. Chino Vega, 19. Roberto Osuna, 20. Dickie Thon, 21. Jeremy Gabryszwski, 22. Thom Robson, 23. Eric Arce, 24. Dawel Lugo, 25. Jairo Labourt, 26. Jesus Gonzalez, 27. Kellen Sweeney, 28. Dalton Pompey, 29. Anthony DeSclafani, 30. Santiago Nessy
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
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
