PDA

View Full Version : My Top 20 Prospects



Prf15
08-07-2007, 03:56 PM
Please tell me what you think of this list. Personally I think the Reds have alot of talent in the minors, more than people give them credit for.

1. Jay Bruce
2. Johnny Cueto
3. Homer Bailey
4. Joey Votto
5. Josh Roenicke
6. Marcus McBeth
7. Pedro Viola
8. Daniel Dorn
9. Travis Wood
10. Justin Turner
11. Drew Stubbs
12. Brandon Waring
13. Matt Maloney
14. Todd Frazier
15. Chris Valaika
16. Alexander Smit
17. Matt Maloney
18. Carlos Guevara
19. Neftali Soto
20. Chris Heisey

Devin Mesaraco is 21st, I just don't know about him yet. He just isn't hitting for power or for that matter at all. He is walking some so that is good but 4 XBH isn't very sexy.

Anyone else think the Reds got a bright future with the talent in the minors?

dougdirt
08-07-2007, 04:00 PM
Very different from my top 20....

You sure like relievers, I will say that much. It also looks like you are basing your rankings off of performance with very little to no value of upside in the equation.

Red Leader
08-07-2007, 04:02 PM
You also have Maloney listed twice. (#13 and #17 - he's not that good. ;) )

I'm with doug. Looks like your list is based off of performance w/o taking upside into consideration (w/ the possible exception of Stubbs).

AmarilloRed
08-07-2007, 04:03 PM
You put Matt Maloney at both #13 and #17. I hadn't realized he had been cloned.;)

Benihana
08-07-2007, 04:21 PM
Sean Watson and Juan Francisco have to be in the Top 10. Daryl Thompson is missing as well. McBeth and Viola are way too high.

mth123
08-07-2007, 08:43 PM
Where is Carlos Fisher? I have him at 5 and Maloney at 6.

dougdirt
08-07-2007, 09:45 PM
Where is Carlos Fisher? I have him at 5 and Maloney at 6.

Wow, where was I on Fisher being left off?

AmarilloRed
08-07-2007, 11:15 PM
It seems both Red Leader and I noticed you had Maloney twice at about the same time; I guess that was a misprint.

Blue
08-08-2007, 12:29 AM
1. Jay Bruce
2. Homer Bailey
3. Johnny Cueto
4. Joey Votto
5. Devin Mesoraco
6. Matt Maloney
7. Drew Stubbs
8. Juan Francisco
9. Travis Wood
10. Josh Roenicke
11. Sean Watson
12. Todd Frazier
13. Chris Valaika
14. Carlos Fisher
15. Marcus McBeth
16. Neftali Soto
17. Alexander Smit
18. Justin Turner
19. Justin Reed
20. Daryl Thompson

Since you asked...

Betterread
08-08-2007, 01:21 AM
1 - Bruce
2 - Bailey
3 - Cueto
4 - Votto
5 - Chris Valaika
6 - Juan Francisco
7 - Matt Maloney
8 - Phil Dumatrait
9 - Sean Watson
10-Neftali Soto
11-Rafael Gonzalez
12-Danny Dorn
13-Devin Mesoraco
14-Drew Stubbs
15-Craig Tatum
16-Todd Frazier
17-Sam LeCure
18-Marcus MCBeth
19-Tyler Pelland
20-Travis Wood, Justin Turner and Carlos Fisher - tie

HokieRed
08-08-2007, 01:41 AM
Three points: 1. Is anybody worried that Joey Votto's power numbers are way off this year from last? He is not at the moment getting the ratio of extra base hits for times to the plate that one would expect from a top prospect. and 2. I think Adam Rosales is seriously underappreciated. Almost 50% of his hits are for extra bases, he gets an extra base hit one in 8 times to the plate (even better than Brendan Harris's 1 in 9 last year, something that certainly predicted the success he's had this year), and he walks about 1 in 10--thus will pretty consistently get a hundred point pop in his OBP and always a relatively high slugging average--which together equal good OPS. 3. Would be interesting to compare these lists to some from several years ago to see if the system is making progress--or just how it is. My sense is that it is--and that in fact it has under both O'B and Krivsky.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 02:20 AM
I am winging this here.... but here is how I would go for the Reds top 20 prospects as of today.
1. Jay Bruce
2. Homer Bailey
3. Joey Votto
4. Johnny Cueto
5. Travis Wood
6. Chris Valaika
7. Todd Frazier
8. Carlos Fisher
9. Sean Watson
10. Devin Mesoraco
11. Juan Francisco
12. Drew Stubbs
13. Neftali Soto
14. Danny Dorn
15. Justin Turner
16. Josh Roenicke
17. Scott Carroll
18. Kyle Lotzkar
19. Craig Tatum
20. Marcus McBeth

winged that one, so maybe I missed someone in there and past the top 12 or so things could be switched around quite a bit.

Blue
08-08-2007, 02:46 AM
1. Is anybody worried that Joey Votto's power numbers are way off this year from last?

If you are then that makes at least two of us.

Patrick Bateman
08-08-2007, 02:46 AM
You missed Maloney, and possibly Thompson who would merit consideration for top 20, but hardly a lock.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 03:00 AM
Kearns, if that was to me.... then yes, I did miss Maloney. Thompson, I left out intentionally. He would be in the next 10 for sure, but not in the top 20 for me. Maloney probably slides in at 16 or 17 for me.

reds44
08-08-2007, 03:35 AM
Bruce
Bailey
Cueto
Votto

Valaika
Fraizer
Wood
Fisher
Watson
Meseraco
Francisco
Soto
Dorn
Stubbs

camisadelgolf
08-08-2007, 04:17 AM
It looks like Valaika has taken a huge dive on a lot of people's lists. I know he did on mine.
1. Homer Bailey
2. Jay Bruce
3. Joey Votto
4. Johnny Cueto
5. Devin Mesaraco
6. Drew Stubbs
7. Todd Frazier
8. Carlos Fisher
9. Neftali Soto
10. Sean Watson
11. Travis Wood
12. Matt Maloney
13. Marcus McBeth
14. Alex Smit
15. Kyle Lotzkar
16. Justin Turner
17. Josh Roenicke
18. Chris Valaika
19. Scott Carroll
20. Zack Cozart/Brandon Waring/Juan Fancisco
21. Ty Pelland/Pedro Viola/Brad Salmon/Carlos Guevara
22. Chris Heisey/Dan Dorn

mth123
08-08-2007, 05:09 AM
I'm a little different. I value some success at high levels and refuse to include players with little or no time beyond the short season leagues unless its an obvious guy to include like Bailey was. The closest to making the list from this year's class were Soto, Frazier and Waring.

1. Bruce
2. Bailey
3. Cueto
4. Votto
5. Fisher
6. Maloney
7. Roenicke
8. Rosales
9. Dorn
10. McBeth
11. Valaika
12. Dickerson
13. Wood
14. Pelland
15. Viola
16. Watson
17. Francisco
18. Ruzic
19. Lecure
20. Salmon

Just Missed but interesting: Guevara, Tatum, Thompson, Perez, Dumatrait, Medina, Mateo, Geronimo, Smit, Jukich, Cumberland, Asadoorian, Rojas, Heisey, Turner

Not Eligible: Livingston, Cantu, Bray, Hamilton, Elizardo Ramirez, Coutlangus

Biggest Drops left off the list intentionally: Stubbs, Janish, Strait

Too young and at too low a level to be ranked but may appear in 2008: Soto, Frazier, Mesoraco, Waring, Chiu, Lotzkar, Jones

Triples
08-08-2007, 08:52 AM
Mth:

I have to say I agree with you on the value of success. Its fun to rank players on potential/ceiling and sometimes that's why they get drafted but once they sign their first professional contract, very little consideration is given to their ceiling with respect to getting promoted. Promotions are seldom based on ceiling and almost always based on performance (with the occasional promo to fill in for an injury). And, I've never heard of anyone ever making it to the majors because the front office thought the guy had a high ceiling. So, in my mind, once we get passed the draft, the players should be ranked based on the same criteria used to promote them.


I'm a little different. I value some success at high levels and refuse to include players with little or no time beyond the short season leagues unless its an obvious guy to include like Bailey was. The closest to making the list from this year's class were Soto, Frazier and Waring.

1. Bruce
2. Bailey
3. Cueto
4. Votto
5. Fisher
6. Maloney
7. Roenicke
8. Rosales
9. Dorn
10. McBeth
11. Valaika
12. Dickerson
13. Wood
14. Pelland
15. Viola
16. Watson
17. Francisco
18. Ruzic
19. Lecure
20. Salmon

Just Missed but interesting: Guevara, Tatum, Thompson, Perez, Dumatrait, Medina, Mateo, Geronimo, Smit, Jukich, Cumberland, Asadoorian, Rojas, Heisey, Turner

Not Eligible: Livingston, Cantu, Bray, Hamilton, Elizardo Ramirez, Coutlangus

Biggest Drops left off the list intentionally: Stubbs, Janish, Strait

Too young and at too low a level to be ranked but may appear in 2008: Soto, Frazier, Mesoraco, Waring, Chiu, Lotzkar, Jones

Kc61
08-08-2007, 10:40 AM
1. Bruce
2. Bailey
3. Cueto
4. Votto
5. Roenicke
6. Maloney
7. Wood
8. Frazier
9. Valaika
10. Fisher

11. Watson
12. Pelland
13. Mesoraca
14. Dickerson
15. Stubbs
16. Dorn
17. Valiquette
18. Viola
19. Francisco
20. Lecure

Five bonus picks -- 21 R.Gonzalez; 22. McBeth 23. Soto 24. Salmon 25. Asadoorian

Guys under 19 years old who I hardly know about were excluded as were guys with substantial MLB experience like Cantu. Players in the majors now excluded, like Dumatrait.

Benihana
08-08-2007, 11:40 AM
I agree with you mth on dropping players with little success beyond rookie ball, unless they have an enormous pedigree. Thus, here is my list:

GRADE A
1. Jay Bruce
2. Homer Bailey
3. Joey Votto
4. Johnny Cueto

GRADE B
5. Travis Wood
6. Matt Maloney
7. Carlos Fisher
8. Sean Watson
9. Juan Francisco

GRADE C
10. Daryl Thompson
11. Josh Roenicke
12. Todd Frazier
13. Chris Valaika
14. Justin Turner
15. Drew Stubbs
16. Daniel Dorn
17. Devin Mesoraco
18. Chris Dickerson
19. Neftali Soto
20. Brandon Waring

JUST MISSING THE CUT

Marcus McBeth
Craig Tatum
Rafael Gonzalez
Kyle Lotzkar
Chris Heisey

I like to make the young guys earn it.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-08-2007, 12:40 PM
Position:
1. Bruce
2. Votto
3. Francisco
4. Valaika
5. Mesoraco
6. Frazier
7. Dorn
8. Soto
9. Tatum
10. Turner
11. Heisey
12. Stubbs
13. Rosales
14. Waring
15. Reed
16. M. Perez
17. Parker
18. McKennon
19. K. Jones
20. Cozart

Starting Arms:
1. Bailey
1. Cueto
3. Maloney
4. Wood
5. Fisher
6. Watson
7. Thompson
8. Smit
9. LeCure
10.Lotzkar

Relief:
1. Roenicke
2. McBeth
3. Viola
4. Guevara
5. Rojas
6. Ruzic

COMBINED:
1. Bruce
2 .Bailey
2. Cueto
4. Votto
5. Maloney
6. Roenicke
7. Wood
8. Francisco
9. Valaika
10. Fisher
11. Mesoraco
12. Watson
13. Frazier
14. Dorn
15. Soto
16. Tatum
17. Thompson
18. Turner
19. McBeth
20. Heisey
21. Smit
22. Viola
23. Stubbs
24. Rosales
25. Waring
26. Reed
27. LeCure
28. Lotzkar
29. Guevara
30. M. Perez
31. Parker
32. Rojas
33. Ruzic
34. McKennon
35. K. Jones
36. Cozart

podgejeff_
08-08-2007, 01:26 PM
One quick question:

Why is Bruce higher than Bailey on almost every list?

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 01:28 PM
One quick question:

Why is Bruce higher than Bailey on almost every list?

Quick answer:
Becuase he is better.

Kc61
08-08-2007, 01:42 PM
Francisco at Dayton is getting a lot of notice on these lists. I listed him at 19. He has shown excellent power so far, only 20 years old. Couple of red flags though -- .741 OPS with low OBP of .302. 127 Ks and 21 walks. 22 errors.

Benihana
08-08-2007, 01:47 PM
Francisco at Dayton is getting a lot of notice on these lists. I listed him at 19. He has show excellent power so far, only 20 years old. Couple of red flags though -- .741 OPS with low OBP of .302. 127 Ks and 21 walks. 22 errors.

He is also very young for that level. The 22 errors don't concern me in the least- he will not be a 3B at the major league level (or maybe even the AA level, for that matter). He'll end up either at 1B or the OF, or perhaps wherever Todd Frazier isn't. IMO he is a top 10 prospect in the system, due to his age/level and power display.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 01:49 PM
Francisco at Dayton is getting a lot of notice on these lists. I listed him at 19. He has show excellent power so far, only 20 years old. Couple of red flags though -- .741 OPS with low OBP of .302. 127 Ks and 21 walks. 22 errors.

His lack of walks is a big red flag. Errors, I am not so worried about. Goodluck finding any young third baseman that doesn't have a bunch of errors. His power will play anywhere that he plays though, if he were to switch positions. Another thing is, this is Juan's first full season he has ever played. I wonder how much the full season is taking a toll on him. I have seen a lot of players note how their first full season is the toughest becuase your body isn't in the right shape for it becuase you just are not used to it.

Red Leader
08-08-2007, 01:52 PM
His lack of walks is a big red flag. Errors, I am not so worried about. Goodluck finding any young third baseman that doesn't have a bunch of errors. His power will play anywhere that he plays though, if he were to switch positions. Another thing is, this is Juan's first full season he has ever played. I wonder how much the full season is taking a toll on him. I have seen a lot of players note how their first full season is the toughest becuase your body isn't in the right shape for it becuase you just are not used to it.

What's his playing time like, though? The last 4 Dragons games I've gone to Francisco hasn't started, Louwsma has. Maybe that's because all of the games I've gone to the opposition has started a LHP, but even still, that means Francisco is in a platoon and thus, shouldn't be wearing down in the 2nd half. I realize that being a LH hitter, you get the bulk of the playing time in platoons, but there seems to be an extraordinary amount of LH starters in the midwest league this year, or else I've just picked the wrong games to attend. :D

Patrick Bateman
08-08-2007, 01:56 PM
1. Bruce
2. Bailey
3. Votto
4. Cueto
5. Wood
6. Mesoraco
7. Stubbs
8. Watson
9. Maloney
10. Pelland
11. Fisher
12. Frazier
13. McBeth
14. Thompson
15. Soto
16. Roenicke
17. Lotzkar
18. Valaika
19. Francisco
20. Dorn

Prf15
08-08-2007, 01:56 PM
His lack of walks is a big red flag.

That's why didn't make my cut. My list factored potential into it a little bit for 1st or 2nd yr players but I go by numbers to see how they are really doing for guys that have been in the system.

I know I rated the relievers a little high but those guys are putting up awesome numbers.

Any reason why Viola isn't getting a lot of votes for top 20? I have only been following the minors for about 2 years so some of these guys I don't know what there potential is.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 02:00 PM
What's his playing time like, though? The last 4 Dragons games I've gone to Francisco hasn't started, Louwsma has. Maybe that's because all of the games I've gone to the opposition has started a LHP, but even still, that means Francisco is in a platoon and thus, shouldn't be wearing down in the 2nd half. I realize that being a LH hitter, you get the bulk of the playing time in platoons, but there seems to be an extraordinary amount of LH starters in the midwest league this year, or else I've just picked the wrong games to attend. :D

I think you just have picked the wrong games to go to. Juan has played in 110 games this year (Dayton has played 114 games).

mound_patrol
08-08-2007, 02:00 PM
Is Travis Wood still hurt? I see he's high on a lot of lists and find that odd since his fastball barely tops 90 anymore. I realize his change is incredible but can't see that making him that high on the prospect list unless his fastball is back up to where it was when he was drafted.

Kc61
08-08-2007, 02:01 PM
What's his playing time like, though? The last 4 Dragons games I've gone to Francisco hasn't started, Louwsma has. Maybe that's because all of the games I've gone to the opposition has started a LHP, but even still, that means Francisco is in a platoon and thus, shouldn't be wearing down in the 2nd half. I realize that being a LH hitter, you get the bulk of the playing time in platoons, but there seems to be an extraordinary amount of LH starters in the midwest league this year, or else I've just picked the wrong games to attend. :D

Has 430 at bats, most on the team, in 110 games. (At bats number reflects a lot of playing time, also reflects few walks.) He is listed as a switch hitter, if true he should start against all pitching.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 02:02 PM
That's why didn't make my cut. My list factored potential into it a little bit for 1st or 2nd yr players but I go by numbers to see how they are really doing for guys that have been in the system.

I know I rated the relievers a little high but those guys are putting up awesome numbers.

Any reason why Viola isn't getting a lot of votes for top 20? I have only been following the minors for about 2 years so some of these guys I don't know what there potential is.

Viola is in his first year of baseball in America. He dominated as a starter in the DSL the past few years. The reason he didn't make my top 20 is that he is a reliever and at best the #3 or 4 reliever in the system.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 02:02 PM
Has 430 at bats, most on the team, in 110 games. (At bats number reflects a lot of playing time, also reflects few walks.) He is listed as a switch hitter, if true he should start against all pitching.

He is listed as a switch hitter, but no longer switch hits. I think that maybe when he was in the Dominican he was a switch hitter, but once he came here he was told he was a lefty.

Prf15
08-08-2007, 02:03 PM
Viola is in his first year of baseball in America. He dominated as a starter in the DSL the past few years. The reason he didn't make my top 20 is that he is a reliever and at best the #3 or 4 reliever in the system.

I guess I just got some Krivisky in me.

Doug, what do you think of the Reds minor system? Seems there is alot of talent in there, just want a expert opinion on it.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 02:05 PM
Is Travis Wood still hurt? I see he's high on a lot of lists and find that odd since his fastball barely tops 90 anymore. I realize his change is incredible but can't see that making him that high on the prospect list unless his fastball is back up to where it was when he was drafted.

He is still on the DL. Not saying he will be Cole Hamels, but Cole Hamels is a two pitch guy. He has a devastating change up and a fastball that barely tops 91 MPH. As a lefty, you don't need an overpowering fastball. Prior to his injuries though, his curveball was making progress. He was also hitting 92 on the gun.

Red Leader
08-08-2007, 02:05 PM
He is listed as a switch hitter, but no longer switch hits. I think that maybe when he was in the Dominican he was a switch hitter, but once he came here he was told he was a lefty.

In all of those last 4 games I have attended he PH late in the game (and his a freaking moon shot to RF in one of them) but hasn't started. I guess I really have picked the wrong games to attend. Geez. :eek:

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 02:08 PM
I guess I just got some Krivisky in me.

Doug, what do you think of the Reds minor system? Seems there is alot of talent in there, just want a expert opinion on it.

Top 10 system in baseball. No question in my mind. People will still claim there is no depth. Sure, the Reds arent the Devil Rays or anything, but no one really is. The Reds have a lot more depth than some people are willing to admit because 'its the Reds'. Add on top that the Reds currently have 4 prospects in the top 30-40 prospects in baseball with Bruce, Bailey, Votto and Cueto and there are very few teams that can come close to matching that.

Give me a system with 4 blue chip prospects that the Reds have and I am not worried too much about any depth issues. Have your utility infielders and outfielders, I will take blue chip guys that will be starters one day.

mound_patrol
08-08-2007, 02:10 PM
He is still on the DL. Not saying he will be Cole Hamels, but Cole Hamels is a two pitch guy. He has a devastating change up and a fastball that barely tops 91 MPH. As a lefty, you don't need an overpowering fastball. Prior to his injuries though, his curveball was making progress. He was also hitting 92 on the gun.

Fair enough. Just curious how he was so high after the year he's had this year.

ochoa30
08-08-2007, 02:47 PM
1.Bruce
2.Bailey
3.Cueto
4.Votto
5.Wood
6.Watson
7.Valaika
8.Mesoraco
9.Fisher
10.Stubbs
11.Dorn
12.Frazier
13.Thompson
14.Roenicke
15.Lotzkar
16.Smith
17.Maloney
18.Viola
19.Francisco
20.Soto

bucksfan2
08-08-2007, 02:56 PM
I am suprised that many people have dropped Bailey from the #1 prospect after a less than stellar first 4 or 5 games. I think people fail to realize that in his last start he pitched pretty good and out of his 6 starts 3 of them he gave up 2 or less runs. Its kind of like saying if Bruce hits .200 in his first month in the bigs he has lost elite status as a prospect. I dont rate Mesorasco anywhere near my top 15 and say that he is too far away from the bigs to compare him amongst the reds top 20. I also find it ironic that Dickerson doesn't find his way on many lists. IMO that a guy with that kind of speed and if he can play good defense will see quite a bit of time on a major league roster.

ochoa30
08-08-2007, 02:58 PM
I am suprised that many people have dropped Bailey from the #1 prospect after a less than stellar first 4 or 5 games. I think people fail to realize that in his last start he pitched pretty good and out of his 6 starts 3 of them he gave up 2 or less runs. Its kind of like saying if Bruce hits .200 in his first month in the bigs he has lost elite status as a prospect. I dont rate Mesorasco anywhere near my top 15 and say that he is too far away from the bigs to compare him amongst the reds top 20. I also find it ironic that Dickerson doesn't find his way on many lists. IMO that a guy with that kind of speed and if he can play good defense will see quite a bit of time on a major league roster.

Dropping bailey below bruce is no knock on him. I wouldn't rate a single player in all of the minors over him right now. Bailey hasn't fallen but bruce has taken it to another level.

Patrick Bateman
08-08-2007, 02:58 PM
I am suprised that many people have dropped Bailey from the #1 prospect after a less than stellar first 4 or 5 games. I think people fail to realize that in his last start he pitched pretty good and out of his 6 starts 3 of them he gave up 2 or less runs. Its kind of like saying if Bruce hits .200 in his first month in the bigs he has lost elite status as a prospect. I dont rate Mesorasco anywhere near my top 15 and say that he is too far away from the bigs to compare him amongst the reds top 20. I also find it ironic that Dickerson doesn't find his way on many lists. IMO that a guy with that kind of speed and if he can play good defense will see quite a bit of time on a major league roster.


I rated him lower because he has made zero progress this year. That is mainly based on his AAA performance. His major league performance didn't surprise me in the least and had little effect on the ranking.

Anyways, being rated below Bruce is not an insult. If Upton plays a ton for the rest of the year, Bruce will have a great shot at being the #1 prospect in all of baseball.

Prf15
08-08-2007, 03:09 PM
I think Cueto will turn out to be a better starter than Homer will be.

Cueto has such good control, only 30 walks compared to 130 punch outs this year.

Homer is going to have to improve his control to be effective in the majors. This is a off year for Homer, that groin injury might be a cause for this but I think Cueto will be a good ML starter.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 03:11 PM
I am suprised that many people have dropped Bailey from the #1 prospect after a less than stellar first 4 or 5 games. I think people fail to realize that in his last start he pitched pretty good and out of his 6 starts 3 of them he gave up 2 or less runs. Its kind of like saying if Bruce hits .200 in his first month in the bigs he has lost elite status as a prospect. I dont rate Mesorasco anywhere near my top 15 and say that he is too far away from the bigs to compare him amongst the reds top 20. I also find it ironic that Dickerson doesn't find his way on many lists. IMO that a guy with that kind of speed and if he can play good defense will see quite a bit of time on a major league roster.

Here is how I look at Bailey/Bruce.
Last year Baileys stock was at its highest point in his prospectdom. He was still arguably the #1/2/3 pitcher in the minors, but was certainly behind Delmon Young and Alex Gordon. Jay Bruce currently is behind maybe Justin Upton, and that is very debatable at this point. Hitters are also much less likely to be a 'miss' prospect compared to pitchers.
Its not a knock on Bailey so much as it is the leap forward that Jay Bruce has made.

BigREDSfaninKY
08-09-2007, 10:51 AM
My question is this, why isn't Maloney rated higher on some of your list? Especially behind Wood. Is it because he's 23 and in AA, remember this is his 2nd full season in pro ball after leaving Ole Miss in 2005.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-09-2007, 11:05 AM
My question is this, why isn't Maloney rated higher on some of your list? Especially behind Wood. Is it because he's 23 and in AA, remember this is his 2nd full season in pro ball after leaving Ole Miss in 2005.

I have him as my 3rd best starting pitcher in the system and 5th best prospect overall. I see no reason that he should be any lower than the 3rd best starter.

dougdirt
08-09-2007, 01:32 PM
My question is this, why isn't Maloney rated higher on some of your list? Especially behind Wood. Is it because he's 23 and in AA, remember this is his 2nd full season in pro ball after leaving Ole Miss in 2005.

Becuase he has never broke 90 MPH with a pitch. He doesn't have any plus pitch. The scouting reports on him are that all of his pitches are average across the board. Its got nothing to do with age in my book.... it has to do with what he does and his potential ceiling, which isn't very high to me.

Patrick Bateman
08-09-2007, 01:33 PM
I ranked Maloney as my 4/5th best pitching prospect. But even now, I'm still debating who's a better prospect, Watson or Maloney.

Anyways, I definitely like Wood more than him. I still like his upside, and considering his youth, he actually hasn't pitched that poorly this season. The main problem for Wood is the minor injuries. He still hasn't had anything that's going to cost him for future seasons, but perhaps he's showing he's brittle and an injury risk for the future. But still, I think he has the chance to be really good if he can get past these problems. Considering that Maloney's upside is limited more, I like Wood better, even when you consider that Maloney is more advanced.

Now Maloney has pitched very well since coming over, but his year to date has only been decent. I like Maloney and see him as a top 10 prospect in our system, but I'm just not overwhelmed by him. Of the Reds 2nd tier prospects, he has probably the best shot at reaching the majors, but I question if his role will be as a permanent fixture at the back of the rotation, or will he level out as the usual AAAA guy, and that's where I have major doubts. I see a guy with only decent stuff, even if he is fairly advanced. Still, I can certainly see the argument that would place him as the #3 starter in the system, but he's not there for me.

tbball10
08-09-2007, 01:43 PM
doug, dont u think with his current k/9 rate, that maloney has a plus pitch if not a few..

dougdirt
08-09-2007, 01:54 PM
doug, dont u think with his current k/9 rate, that maloney has a plus pitch if not a few..

No. I have not seen him pitch, but all places I have seen say he doesn't have a plus pitch. He has 4 average pitches and decently good control of them. That will get you far enough. I think in AAA his strikeout rate will plummet, just like it did for Jeremy Sowers. Sowers had a strikeout rate of 8.79 in A+ and in AA. He got to AAA and it went below 5. He didn't have an out pitch, just very good control and a nice array of pitches.

AmarilloRed
08-09-2007, 02:05 PM
I heard Maloney had a 86-88 sinker. Wouldn't that be considered a plus pitch?

dougdirt
08-09-2007, 02:24 PM
I heard Maloney had a 86-88 sinker. Wouldn't that be considered a plus pitch?

Not really. Carlos Fisher and James Avery both throw sinkers in the 90-94 range. Maloney has good movement on his, but its still a fastball thats topping out at 88 MPH.

Patrick Bateman
08-09-2007, 02:25 PM
I heard Maloney had a 86-88 sinker. Wouldn't that be considered a plus pitch?

Well it depends on the type of movement it has. The velocity only goes so far.

I don't know the answer to your question as I myself have never seen him pitch, but your only looking at half the puzzle. But guessing that the velocity isn't that great for a sinker, I doubt it's a plus pitch unless he has amazing movement.

podgejeff_
08-09-2007, 04:16 PM
That's what I was going on with my question pertaining to why everyone thinks Bruce is better than Bailey. True, Bruce might be as "can't miss" as you can call a prospect these days, but Bailey's playing a very premium position. And if you went by the discussion on here before his call-up, he was about as "can't miss" as pitching prospects get, only being discussed with Phillip Hughes.

I'm just worried that too many people are writing him off as the Reds #1 prospect only because of some inconsistent starts his first time up in the majors. If you see issues in his control or secondary pitches, that's one thing, but I'm willing to forgive a couple of good starts mixed with a couple of bad starts on a bad team for his first time up here.

Bruce is looking like a future all-star, which is great for the Reds. If Bailey lives up to his potential, he will be far greater for the Reds, IMO.

dougdirt
08-09-2007, 04:27 PM
That's what I was going on with my question pertaining to why everyone thinks Bruce is better than Bailey. True, Bruce might be as "can't miss" as you can call a prospect these days, but Bailey's playing a very premium position. And if you went by the discussion on here before his call-up, he was about as "can't miss" as pitching prospects get, only being discussed with Phillip Hughes.
Even so, the number of cant miss pitchers that have missed is very frequently. Hitters that are 'cant miss' seem to miss at a much lesser rate. Jay Bruce plays CF.... not quite starting pitcher value, but one of the most important positions on the field and when you get one that can hit, you are winning the lottery.


I'm just worried that too many people are writing him off as the Reds #1 prospect only because of some inconsistent starts his first time up in the majors. If you see issues in his control or secondary pitches, that's one thing, but I'm willing to forgive a couple of good starts mixed with a couple of bad starts on a bad team for his first time up here.
Some may be doing that. I am not. Bailey is still a top 10 prospect in baseball, but I would still put him behind Bruce.



Bruce is looking like a future all-star, which is great for the Reds. If Bailey lives up to his potential, he will be far greater for the Reds, IMO.

If Bailey lives up to his potential and Jay Bruce lives up to his, we better win a world series or two because that would leave us with a Cy Young winner and MVP on the same team.

Screwball
08-10-2007, 02:10 PM
I'd like to know where some of you guys who really follow the minors (e.g. Austin Kearns, mth, dougdirt) rank Phil Dumatrait as a prospect. Top 30? 40?

Patrick Bateman
08-10-2007, 02:22 PM
I'm not a big fan of Dumatrait. He's a really bad starter. His main problem is lack of control. He has decent enough stuff that if he had great control he could have a shot at back of the rotation, but he just doesn't have it. Considering he's 26, I don't expect for him to get a lot better.

IMO, the only hope for dumatrait is as a reliever. Dumatrait has always been more successful lefties than righties, and if used correctly out of the bullpen, I could see him becoming a decent LOOGY. If used in any other role he doesn't have much of a chance. Firstly though, the reds need to put him in the pen eventually. He might thrive like Pelland has. Likely not to the same degree, but you might see a nice rise in his K numbers, and have enough control to make it as an effective LOOGY.

So because of his limited upside, and he's no guarantee to work well out of the pen, he could be in the mix in the 35-40 range.

Kc61
08-10-2007, 02:29 PM
I'm not a big fan of Dumatrait. He's a really bad starter. His main problem is lack of control. He has decent enough stuff that if he had great control he could have a shot at back of the rotation, but he just doesn't have it. Considering he's 26, I don't expect for him to get a lot better.

IMO, the only hope for dumatrait is as a reliever. Dumatrait has always been more successful lefties than righties, and if used correctly out of the bullpen, I could see him becoming a decent LOOGY. If used in any other role he doesn't have much of a chance. Firstly though, the reds need to put him in the pen eventually. He might thrive like Pelland has. Likely not to the same degree, but you might see a nice rise in his K numbers, and have enough control to make it as an effective LOOGY.

So because of his limited upside, and he's no guarantee to work well out of the pen, he could be in the mix in the 35-40 range.

I will vote for Dumatrait to make it as a starter. I know this isn't the RedsZone consensus view. But during his minor league career he has had several periods in which he threw a number of very effective games, as a starter, almost to a point of being dominant. Not full seasons, but for a period of weeks. (Not at AAA, but at lower levels, which may or may not be a red flag.)

Dumatrait is not a soft tosser as some claim. His major issue is walks. This will make or break him. But if he can reasonably keep the walks down, I think he has the stuff to succeed.

Some pitchers avoid walks at all costs. But if the pitcher lacks deceptive stuff, the result is that he gets hit hard. Belisle, for example, has avoided walks well but has a .308 BA against him.

Dumatrait needs to cut his walks down without grooving pitches. If he can reach that balance, I think he can be a solid No.4 starter. So I would definitely put him in the top 15 Reds prospects, if he still qualified for the list.

Again, RedsZoners tend to downgrade Dumatrait so I expect this view to be challenged. But I think he has a better chance of making good, even as a starter, than some of the others on the team.

Patrick Bateman
08-10-2007, 02:40 PM
I will vote for Dumatrait to make it as a starter. I know this isn't the RedsZone consensus view. But during his minor league career he has had several periods in which he threw a number of very effective games, as a starter, almost to a point of being dominant. Not full seasons, but for a period of weeks. (Not at AAA, but at lower levels, which may or may not be a red flag.)

Dumatrait is not a soft tosser as some claim. His major issue is walks. This will make or break him. But if he can reasonably keep the walks down, I think he has the stuff to succeed.

Some pitchers avoid walks at all costs. But if the pitcher lacks deceptive stuff, the result is that he gets hit hard. Belisle, for example, has avoided walks well but has a .308 BA against him.

Dumatrait needs to cut his walks down without grooving pitches. If he can reach that balance, I think he can be a solid No.4 starter. So I would definitely put him in the top 15 Reds prospects, if he still qualified for the list.


As I said, he's 26, and he has awful control. His stuff is good enough to make it, but right now dumatrait needs a complete turn around on his ability to command the strike zone.

Anything is possible, but as a 26 year old with a long, long way to go before he can be considered a decent option at the back of the rotation, I strongly dislike his chances as a starter.

dougdirt
08-10-2007, 02:48 PM
I'd like to know where some of you guys who really follow the minors (e.g. Austin Kearns, mth, dougdirt) rank Phil Dumatrait as a prospect. Top 30? 40?

In the Reds system somewhere between 20 and 25.

Kc61
08-10-2007, 02:50 PM
I think WHIP says a lot about a pitcher. For a reliever, I want 1.3 and below. For a starter, I want 1.4 and below. For a minor leaguer, I tend to ignore a guy's "break in" period at each level and focus on his WHIP after he's gotten his sea legs.

Dumatrait had a lifetime WHIP in 7 minor league seasons of 1.36. When you consider that he had a serious injury, that he had trouble breaking in at a few new levels, this is quite good for a starter.

At AA, he "broke in" in 2005. Then when he returned in '06, his WHIP was 1.23. Excellent. At AAA this year, his WHIP was 1.32. Solid. All these numbers are as a starter. I think he has a chance of keeping his WHIP at 1.4 or below in the National League and this will be good.

So even with some control problems, this pitcher has kept the hitters off base to a reasonable degree. If his control improves, he will do even better. This is one reason why I am high on this guy.

mth123
08-10-2007, 11:16 PM
I'd like to know where some of you guys who really follow the minors (e.g. Austin Kearns, mth, dougdirt) rank Phil Dumatrait as a prospect. Top 30? 40?

I'm not the expert that AK or Doug (or some others for that matter) are, but I like to look at the stats and try to evaluate these guys, so here is my 2 cents:

In 36 Starts at AAA over 2006 and 2007, Dumatrait has had a poor K rate at well below 6 and and a borderline (on the poor side) walk rate of over 3.6. I'm not real optimistic that he is anything more than a AAAA guy who can pitch in the minors and come up and make a start in a pinch. With teams turning over every rock to find pitching, I do think he's worth a look in a lost season like this one and may as well be kept around since he's cheap. I'd probably rank him in the 30s right now but he's the kind of guy who will get passed by younger guys as they emerge and get some full season ball under their belt.

I'm thinking that Dumatrait may be on his last option and the Reds may need to make a decision on him in the Spring. Maybe some one could verify that.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-11-2007, 12:35 AM
I'm not the expert that AK or Doug (or some others for that matter) are, but I like to look at the stats and try to evaluate these guys, so here is my 2 cents:

In 36 Starts at AAA over 2006 and 2007, Dumatrait has had a poor K rate at well below 6 and and a borderline (on the poor side) walk rate of over 3.6. I'm not real optimistic that he is anything more than a AAAA guy who can pitch in the minors and come up and make a start in a pinch. With teams turning over every rock to find pitching, I do think he's worth a look in a lost season like this one and may as well be kept around since he's cheap. I'd probably rank him in the 30s right now but he's the kind of guy who will get passed by younger guys as they emerge and get some full season ball under their belt.

I'm thinking that Dumatrait may be on his last option and the Reds may need to make a decision on him in the Spring. Maybe some one could verify that.


I totally agree. I don't see Dumatrait as being anything that special. Even in his most recent ("quality") start, he fell behind consistently, was hit hard (even when they were outs) and was fortunate to get out of many jams against a pretty weak Dodger lineup (that day).

Guys like him, EZ, and Livington (with low K rates) don't get me too excited. If I had to pick one of the three to be a solid contributer to the rotation (#4 or 5), I think Livingston with his low walk rates has the best shot.

I'm hoping Cueto and Bailey make it a non-issue.

AmarilloRed
08-11-2007, 02:34 AM
I see Chris Dickerson did not make the top 20 in most of these lists. I understand a lot of people think he is no better than a fourth outfielder, and he is rather old. Where would Dickerson rate on one of these lists? I think if he could cut down on the strikeouts and make more contact, he could be a good outfield prospect.

Kc61
08-11-2007, 11:35 AM
I totally agree. I don't see Dumatrait as being anything that special. Even in his most recent ("quality") start, he fell behind consistently, was hit hard (even when they were outs) and was fortunate to get out of many jams against a pretty weak Dodger lineup (that day).

I'm hoping Cueto and Bailey make it a non-issue.

So we have the patience to watch the Reds trot out a 5.40 pitcher with a .308 BAA for 135 innings this year, yet Dumatrait is supposedly no good after two lifetime outings because he "fell behind" some hitters in his second game. And because he got outs that were "hit hard." A game in which he allowed two runs, I believe. Against a Dodger team that has a pretty good NL record.

As I read in one of the prospects lists, I believe from BA, Dumatrait has a feel for pitching. He has always been successful once he has had time to adjust to a new league. Sometimes peripheral numbers (like strikeout rate) don't tell the whole story. Peripherals are only an indicator, but the objective is to give up few runs and win games.

Maybe I'll be wrong, but let's give this guy the same shot the Reds have given other pitchers who reached the major leagues.

mth123
08-11-2007, 12:05 PM
So we have the patience to watch the Reds trot out a 5.40 pitcher with a .308 BAA for 135 innings this year, yet Dumatrait is supposedly no good after two lifetime outings because he "fell behind" some hitters in his second game. And because he got outs that were "hit hard." A game in which he allowed two runs, I believe. Against a Dodger team that has a pretty good NL record.

As I read in one of the prospects lists, I believe from BA, Dumatrait has a feel for pitching. He has always been successful once he has had time to adjust to a new league. Sometimes peripheral numbers (like strikeout rate) don't tell the whole story. Peripherals are only an indicator, but the objective is to give up few runs and win games.

Maybe I'll be wrong, but let's give this guy the same shot the Reds have given other pitchers who reached the major leagues.


I agree with giving him a shot. I just think looking at his minor league numbers he has a lower probability of being successful than Belisle does.

Benihana
08-11-2007, 05:36 PM
I think Belisle and Dumatrait should battle it out for the #5 starter job in spring training next year, with the loser getting the long relief/spot starter role out of the pen.

Patrick Bateman
08-11-2007, 07:39 PM
I think Belisle and Dumatrait should battle it out for the #5 starter job in spring training next year, with the loser getting the long relief/spot starter role out of the pen.

Dumatrait can't get minor league hitters out. Why does everyone think that means he should be a major league pitcher?

Screwball
08-11-2007, 09:15 PM
Why does everyone think that means he should be a major league pitcher?

Because of Cincinnati sports talk radio? :dunno:

Superdude
08-11-2007, 09:51 PM
Because of Cincinnati sports talk radio?

He gets more unwarranted hype than any prospect I can think of. If we had to base prospect rankings off TV and radio opinions, we'd all be calling Dumatrait the best pitching prospect in the organization.

KeyMastur
08-12-2007, 12:07 AM
I love how you guys bash on Dumatrait. You haven't even given him a chance to get settled in. I like Kc61's comments.

Down in AAA he had a few rough outings that he encountered in the middle of his season here. Early on - dominant. Before promotion - dominant. Sure he has a high BB rate. Almost was a league leader. It's like he'd struggle with 1 batter, walking him on 4 pitches. Then dominate the rest of the inning / game.

His game is pitching inside with his fastball. It's sneaky. He has a good 12 / 6 curve that he rarely throws anymore. Last few outings he stuck with just the slider (which he calls a cutter, cause i guess he's holding it different, but still does the same effect) and change up (which he can tend to slow his arm speed down on).

He's thrown 2 times. First promotion to the show I'm sure he's still got some nerves even the 2nd time pitching. It's all about feeling comfortable - so it's mostly mental. He'll get there shortly, just give him time.

AmarilloRed
08-12-2007, 12:37 AM
Did you watch his last game? He was throwing balls all over the place, and when he did throw strikes he was being hit hard. I believe he got lucky, and got a couple of hitters to hit them right at the fielders. I will admit I only watched the 3rd and 4th inning, but he will have to do a lot better with his control to stay in the majors.

KeyMastur
08-12-2007, 05:38 AM
Did you watch his last game? He was throwing balls all over the place, and when he did throw strikes he was being hit hard. I believe he got lucky, and got a couple of hitters to hit them right at the fielders. I will admit I only watched the 3rd and 4th inning, but he will have to do a lot better with his control to stay in the majors.

like i said, 2nd outing in the bigs. who isn't going to still be nervous ??? give him time.... let the catcher's figure out his game and he'll be money...he'll dominate. let him get comfortable with his teammates...

BuckeyeRedleg
08-12-2007, 09:39 AM
I could care less about Dumatrait's last outing. It isn't about that for me, although I used it as an example of how completely blah he is.

It's his 206.1 innings of AAA pitching in which he's given up 213 hits and walked 84 (1.44 WHIP), not to mention, his low K rates (5.58/9) in AAA that doesn't inspire much confidence with me - personally. Even looking at his AA numbers, I can't be too thrilled with a guy that walked 92 in 177.1 innings (4.67/9) although is K rates were better than the weak rate he's put up so far in AAA.

And I don't think I "bashed" Dumatrait. I just gave my honest opinion of him. Funny thing is that that in KC's post, he gets on me for being harsh on Dumatrait and then he takes a shot at Livingston. So is it okay to give a not so glowing opinion on Livingston, but not Dumatrait?

If it were up to me, neither of these soft-tossing non-bat misser's would be in the equation, but this is the Reds so if I had to pick one, it would be Livingston for his low walk rate.

camisadelgolf
08-12-2007, 10:58 AM
I could care less about Dumatrait's last outing. It isn't about that for me, although I used it as an example of how completely blah he is.

It's his 206.1 innings of AAA pitching in which he's given up 213 hits and walked 84 (1.44 WHIP), not to mention, his low K rates (5.58/9) in AAA that doesn't inspire much confidence with me - personally. Even looking at his AA numbers, I can't be too thrilled with a guy that walked 92 in 177.1 innings (4.67/9) although is K rates were better than the weak rate he's put up so far in AAA.

And I don't think I "bashed" Dumatrait. I just gave my honest opinion of him. Funny thing is that that in KC's post, he gets on me for being harsh on Dumatrait and then he takes a shot at Livingston. So is it okay to give a not so glowing opinion on Livingston, but not Dumatrait?

If it were up to me, neither of these soft-tossing non-bat misser's would be in the equation, but this is the Reds so if I had to pick one, it would be Livingston for his low walk rate.

I agree with you completely. Also, I don't think KeyMastur was referring to you as bashing Dumatrait.

Kc61
08-12-2007, 12:04 PM
I could care less about Dumatrait's last outing. It isn't about that for me, although I used it as an example of how completely blah he is.

It's his 206.1 innings of AAA pitching in which he's given up 213 hits and walked 84 (1.44 WHIP), not to mention, his low K rates (5.58/9) in AAA that doesn't inspire much confidence with me - personally. Even looking at his AA numbers, I can't be too thrilled with a guy that walked 92 in 177.1 innings (4.67/9) although is K rates were better than the weak rate he's put up so far in AAA.



If it were up to me, neither of these soft-tossing non-bat misser's would be in the equation, but this is the Reds so if I had to pick one, it would be Livingston for his low walk rate.

Here's where I disagree. Dumatrait's WHIP at AA was poor in his initial stint in 2005. I look at this as a breakin period. In 2006, he went back to AA and was 1.23. Then he moved up to AAA and did poorly in 2006. But in 2007 his WHIP at Louisville was 1.32.

So his history is that he needs an initial period to get used to each level and then is a relatively low WHIP pitcher. Using his combined WHIP stats, without accounting for this improvement at each level, doesn't tell the whole story.

As for soft-tossing, Livingston is one, I don't think Dumatrait is. His K rates in the lower minor leagues were fine, then in AAA were over 5 per game, which is not terrible at all. His BB rates have been too high, which I view as his potential achilles heel, but except for his initial AAA stint in 2006, he always has allowed fewer hits than innings pitched.

And in evaluating his record, consider that he had a serious injury and missed 2004. So he may get stronger as he goes on.

And as for Livingston, I think he is the classic fifth starter. Soft tossing, but deceptive and really knows how to pitch. Still he allowed 123 hits in 104 innings at AAA, which could be a warning sign. (He walks almost nobody, which helps.)

I would be satisfied to see the Reds give give both Phil and Bobby starting positions next year (assuming they progress this year and next spring). If they would spend for another good starter, Harang, Arroyo, X, Dumatrait and Livingston would be ok with me, until Homer and Cueto are ready to go.

KeyMastur
08-12-2007, 12:19 PM
If it were up to me, neither of these soft-tossing non-bat misser's would be in the equation, but this is the Reds so if I had to pick one, it would be Livingston for his low walk rate.

you weren't bashing...

i'd hardly consider phil to be soft-throwing lefty though when he throws 90-91 with a slider at 83.

when he's on he's on, and lately in AAA he was on. stats here (http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=Phil%20Dumatrait&pos=P&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=430597) except for the Pawtucket start, you tellin me you wouldn't want those numbers in the bigs ?? he threw exceptionally well and kept the team in the game for a shot at a win.

mth123
08-12-2007, 12:20 PM
Let me clarify. I have no problem giving Dumatrait a chance, but based on his mediocre peripherals in AAA over 36 Starts in 2006 and 2007, I would say the probablilty of him being a good big league starter is very low. That doesn't mean he hasn't earned a look. He should be in the mix for the 4th and 5th spots in the rotation in 2008 with Livingston, Belisle, Bailey, Cueto, Ramirez and Gosling. If I had to pick that rotation right now I'd go with Belisle and Livingston with Gosling (based on being a lefty who can turn line-ups around if needed early and double as a LOOGY if needed later) as my long reliever. Cueto and Bailey would get more time in AAA and Ramirez and Dumatrait would need to force their way in. But its not a foregone conclusion. The Red's problem will be if more than two of these guys end up in the rotation. Another established, reliable starter is needed.

KeyMastur
08-12-2007, 12:20 PM
And as for Livingston, I think he is the classic fifth starter. Soft tossing, but deceptive and really knows how to pitch. I would love to see the Reds give him a full shot at the fifth spot next year. I'd like to see Dumatrait at number four, if he progresses for the rest of this year. Harang, Arroyo, a new good number three, Dumatrait, and Livingston. I'd give it a shot until Bailey/Cueto are ready.
crafty he is.

and they did give him a full shot at 5th starter this year :) belisle just edged him out at the wire

BuckeyeRedleg
08-12-2007, 04:55 PM
crafty he is.

and they did give him a full shot at 5th starter this year :) belisle just edged him out at the wire

Do you like him much better than Livingston or are they close?

gedred69
08-12-2007, 09:48 PM
Well, this has certainly turned into a Dumatrait discussion. Wasn't his rise in the minors switch-railed by serious arm/shoulder problems? Anyhow, back to the original thread, does anyone else think Francisco could well be another Wily Mo? Awful lot of SOs to go with those HRs. Unfortunately I haven't had the opportunity to attend any Dragons games to see him. Any thoughts/observations?

AmarilloRed
08-13-2007, 12:25 AM
Well, this has certainly turned into a Dumatrait discussion. Wasn't his rise in the minors switch-railed by serious arm/shoulder problems? Anyhow, back to the original thread, does anyone else think Francisco could well be another Wily Mo? Awful lot of SOs to go with those HRs. Unfortunately I haven't had the opportunity to attend any Dragons games to see him. Any thoughts/observations?

It really has; everyone talked about Dumatrait and ignored my question about Dickerson. Although maybe that is an answer in itself.

GoReds33
08-15-2007, 12:30 AM
I like Dickerson. I would have to say he would be about 24-25 ish on my list. Thats just a guess though.

TOBTTReds
08-17-2007, 12:56 PM
like i said, 2nd outing in the bigs. who isn't going to still be nervous ??? give him time.... let the catcher's figure out his game and he'll be money...he'll dominate. let him get comfortable with his teammates...

This isn't a knock on Jorgensen, but he/you know his game as well as any catcher probably. His command was horrid in Chicago...although I in no way blame a catcher on a pitchers command. His CH drifted over the plate too much. If he is going to throw it that often, he's gotta keep it away from RH.

In reference to whether fans would want his AAA numbers in the big leagues, there is no doubt we do....but sadly, his AAA numbers don't translate to success in MLB. There are certain indicators that can tell you if he is going to be successful.

Buckeye had it right...


It's his 206.1 innings of AAA pitching in which he's given up 213 hits and walked 84 (1.44 WHIP), not to mention, his low K rates (5.58/9) in AAA that doesn't inspire much confidence with me - personally. Even looking at his AA numbers, I can't be too thrilled with a guy that walked 92 in 177.1 innings (4.67/9) although is K rates were better than the weak rate he's put up so far in AAA.


I hope he "dominates," I just don't see how it is possible though.

Kc61
08-17-2007, 01:32 PM
This isn't a knock on Jorgensen, but he/you know his game as well as any catcher probably. His command was horrid in Chicago...although I in no way blame a catcher on a pitchers command.



I hope he "dominates," I just don't see how it is possible though.


Nobody says he will be a dominant NL pitcher. But after initial break-in periods (which folks repeatedly ignore) PDum did very well in the minor leagues. Taking aggregate statistics, without considering improvement at each level, is not the way to read a minor league record.

PD has no major league experience coming into this season, not even a cup of coffee. Let's give him some time please.

I don't think an outing in Wrigley, after a long rain delay, against a tough, extreme right handed lineup, in guy's third major league performance, determines anything.

texasdave
08-17-2007, 01:54 PM
I hope Dumatrait turns out to be a spoke in the rotation wheel. That being said, I am not optimistic that he will achieve even that. I do agree that once a pitcher is brought up, and put into the rotation, they should be given a fair number of starts to adjust. It isn't easy getting major league hitters out. So, in a season as lost as this one seems to be, be patient. Giving a pitcher 2 or 3 starts to make a positive impression is a waste of time for both the pitcher and the club. How can a team reasonably evaluate someone in that short a stretch?

AmarilloRed
08-17-2007, 02:12 PM
Since this is a discussion about Dumatrait, I will put in my two cents. He has a 10.32 ERA in 3 starts. He has pitched 11 1/3 innings , given up 20 hits, 13 er, and walked nine and struck out seven in those innings. I agree with texasdave that he should be given more starts, and the Reds have said they expect him to stay in the fourth slot as well. We really have no one else ready in the minor leagues, or he would not be here. He will need to show a lot of improvement to stay in the majors when Bailey is ready. Right now, I would pick Livingston over Dumatrait. He also gives up a lot of hits, but until recently he was able to strand the runners.

Patrick Bateman
08-17-2007, 02:15 PM
Dumatrait never had a chance. He was hit hard in AAA, so it's not exactly shocking he's having the crap kicked out of him in the majors.

I'm still in favour of a move to the pen where his skills may be able to improve.

camisadelgolf
08-17-2007, 02:24 PM
I like his stuff--I just don't see him ever gaining enough command.

Kc61
08-17-2007, 02:25 PM
Dumatrait never had a chance. He was hit hard in AAA, so it's not exactly shocking he's having the crap kicked out of him in the majors.

I'm still in favour of a move to the pen where his skills may be able to improve.

This year in 118 AAA innings he was 10-5, 3.49 ERA, 118 innings and 109 hits.

"Hit hard?" Don't think so.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-17-2007, 02:43 PM
And last year in 87.2 IP he gave up 104 H.

Add it up and he's given up 213 H in 206.1 IP, while walking 84 in AAA. That's 297 baserunners in 206.1 IP for a 1.44 WHIP.

So far in Cincy he's allowed 29 baserunners in 11.1 IP.

I'm all for giving chances, especially with the state of this ball club, but what do you think you're going to get by continually running him out there? Is he all of a sudden going to find his command and learn to strike people out, because at this point - in his 8th year of pro ball, he's proven he doesn't have much past the high A or AA level.

If you are looking for a 5th starter, I don't see the need to continually bash our heads into a wall to try to develop one when we already have a Belisle.

Patrick Bateman
08-17-2007, 02:55 PM
This year in 118 AAA innings he was 10-5, 3.49 ERA, 118 innings and 109 hits.

"Hit hard?" Don't think so.

Perhaps "Hit hard" was not a great choice of words, but he was pitching poorly.

Dumatrait was getting by on fortunate luck (.269 BAPIP), his 4.30 FIP is a better indicator of his abilities than his actual ERA. Now that's not the end all, but it's a pretty good ballpark of how good Dumatrait is.

A 4.30 ERA in AAA, virtually guarantees a pitcher to get pummelled in the majors. His luck was due to run out, and since it has, Dumatrait is a very poor option for the majors.

Plus considering dumatrait has done a very poor job of keeping the ball on the ground, expect the homeruns to come flying in once he faces more difficult competition. Basically he's been knocked around so far against a very easy schedule. I'm not trying to be mean to Dumatrait here, i have always liked him, but there is tons of statistical information that shows that he's not currently a major league pitcher. As of now, he's not even that good of a AAA pitcher. It should really come as no surprise to anyone that Dumatrait is struggling.

I think his 7.15 BB/9 rate basically tells the story on him. he doesn't have the top notch stuff to fool hitters, and he doesn't have nearly enough control to make his arsenal work. He's a pitcher with poor stuff that can't hit his spots, that makes for a bad major league pitcher.

Kc61
08-17-2007, 02:58 PM
And last year in 87.2 IP he gave up 104 H.

Add it up and he's given up 213 H in 206.1 IP, while walking 84 in AAA. That's 297 baserunners in 206.1 IP for a 1.44 WHIP.

So far in Cincy he's allowed 29 baserunners in 11.1 IP.



If you are looking for a 5th starter, I don't see the need to continually bash our heads into a wall to try to develop one when we already have a Belisle.

But you seem unwilling to accept that the minor leagues exists for improvement. Dumatrait improved at every level after some time. And eventually did very well at each stop. Again, his ERA this year at AAA was under 3.5 with a 1.32 WHIP.

Look at Sean Watson, Carlos Fisher, Darryl Thompson. Three of the Reds better prospects. Each has moved up a level and has had difficulty. Does that mean they stink? No. It means that except for the highest quality pitchers -- and even sometimes with them -- you have to give guys a break-in period as they go to higher levels. Look at the numbers post-adjustment period to evaluate them.

Belisle had the highest batting average against him of National League starters over 100 innings (except for a guy who was waived). On average, the batters he faced performed like .308 hitters. That is not acceptable, even for a fifth starter. And this performance came after two full years in the Reds bullpen, not just three major league outings.

Dumatrait may fail. He is not a sure thing. But he performed well enough in the minors to deserve a full shot, not three appearances.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-17-2007, 03:07 PM
Dumatrait may fail. He is not a sure thing. But he performed well enough in the minors to deserve a full shot, not three outings.

I do not agree.

He has performed well enough to keep pitching in Louisville. Until he can succeed there he shouldn't be learning - on the job, in Cincinnati.

And the difference in my eyes between Dumatrait and the group you mentioned - Sean Watson, Carlos Fisher, Darryl Thompson is that they miss bats, have better command, and higher ceilings. they are all younger and hopefully by their 8th year in pro ball they have figured it out or are out of the system altogether.

With that said, if they continue to struggle I don't think they should someday be given an opportunity in Cincinnati just because of the possibility that they could improve. Prove it at the higher level of the minors first.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-17-2007, 03:15 PM
Belisle had the highest batting average against him of National League starters over 100 innings (except for a guy who was waived). On average, the batters he faced performed like .308 hitters. That is not acceptable, even for a fifth starter. And this performance came after two full years in the Reds bullpen, not just three major league outings.

And he's still a better option than Dumatrait and only one year older.

Dumatrait's ceiling, in my opinion, is that of Belisle and that may take three years. I just don't think it's worth all those starts of him getting hammered just to maybe have a chance to be another replacement-level 5th starter.

If he had a higher ceiling - if his K rates were off the charts in AAA- I would say yes, give him a bunch of starts and let's see what he can do.

TOBTTReds
08-17-2007, 03:47 PM
Nobody says he will be a dominant NL pitcher.

The man who knows him best here, said he would dominate. That's what I was referring to when I quoted the word.


like i said, 2nd outing in the bigs. who isn't going to still be nervous ??? give him time.... let the catcher's figure out his game and he'll be money...he'll dominate. let him get comfortable with his teammates...

camisadelgolf
08-17-2007, 03:52 PM
It's pretty much a lost season. I say to go ahead and let him have his time. If he shows no promise before the end of the year, maybe he'll get cut before spring training.

Patrick Bateman
08-17-2007, 03:54 PM
The man who knows him best here, said he would dominate. That's what I was referring to when I quoted the word.

The catcher that could get Phil Dumatrait to dominate should be given a monster contract.

TOBTTReds
08-17-2007, 04:20 PM
The catcher that could get Phil Dumatrait to dominate should be given a monster contract.

I'm with ya.

bearcatfan24
08-17-2007, 04:31 PM
How can you put Mesoraco in your top 5 if he hasnt even played a full season and is batting under 250

dougdirt
08-17-2007, 04:48 PM
How can you put Mesoraco in your top 5 if he hasnt even played a full season and is batting under 250

Potential is the name of the game in prospects. His defense is very good and its at a position where no one ever hits.

Benihana
08-17-2007, 04:55 PM
How can you put Mesoraco in your top 5 if he hasnt even played a full season and is batting under 250

I agree. IMO, you cannot put an 18 year old in rookie ball in the Top 5, especially when he is hardly taking the league by storm (granted its still early). Mesoraco is in the 10-20 range on my list, until he works his way at least through Dayton.

Superdude
08-17-2007, 05:33 PM
I like Dumatrait's stuff better than I thought I would, so I guess the potential is there for something useful. Whatever value he has though, I believe will only be useful as a middle reliever. I guess I can live with that though considering the state of our bullpen.

dougdirt
08-17-2007, 06:19 PM
I agree. IMO, you cannot put an 18 year old in rookie ball in the Top 5, especially when he is hardly taking the league by storm (granted its still early). Mesoraco is in the 10-20 range on my list, until he works his way at least through Dayton.

Devin is actually 19. I don't agree on puting him in the top 5, but I guess I could listen to an arguement for why he could be there. I certainly understand where someone would be coming from that would say it even though I would disagree with it.

GoReds33
08-17-2007, 08:16 PM
Catchers are very hit and miss. You can't ever make an early prediction on these guys. I see him having a very high celling. He may also have a very deep basement. Only time will tell.

Xavier Redleg
08-18-2007, 01:58 AM
Devin is actually 19. I don't agree on puting him in the top 5, but I guess I could listen to an arguement for why he could be there. I certainly understand where someone would be coming from that would say it even though I would disagree with it.

FWIW, Baseball America said in their last Ask BA that Mesoraco and Francisco are the top 2 prospects after the big 4.

The Reds have been making progress with their farm system and seem to have some of the best prospects in the game knocking at the door (righthander Homer Bailey, outfielder Jay Bruce, first baseman Joey Votto). Behind them they have righty Johnny Cueto and some young players. Where do you rank them overall at this point? Is Cueto moving up your overall rankings and is he considered a frontline starter despite his height?
Michael Davis
Dover, N.H.

We rated the Reds system 12th overall in our preseason talent rankings, and they stand about the same right now. Their top four prospects stack up with anyone's. Bruce is the best prospect in the minors right now, and Bailey can stake a claim to being the best pitching prospect in the minors. Votto is continuing to hammer balls in Triple-A, and we'll get to Cueto in a moment.

After those four, there's a steep dropoff. Catcher Devin Mesoraco, their 2007 first-rounder, and low Class A third baseman Juan Francisco, would be the next two prospects, and then the system consists of guys who offer some intriguing tools but also have major question marks. Cincinnati's prospect depth still ranks toward the bottom end of the 30 organizations.

I do like Cueto. He just missed making our Top 100 Prospects list in the spring, and I had him at No. 70 on my personal list. Though he's listed at just 5-foot-10, he's a sturdy 192 pounds and throws a consistent 92-94 mph fastball with a fairly effortless delivery. He hasn't had any problems holding up as a starter, and his slider and changeup should be enough to back up his heater and keep him in that role. I'm always conservative when it comes to projecting starters, but I don't see any reason Cueto can't be a No. 3.

I know BA is big on potential, but I thought that was an interesting note. For me, Devin falls in the 6-8 range.

dougdirt
08-18-2007, 03:13 AM
Personally I have Francisco just outside of my top 10 and Mesoraco right at 10 with my initial on the spot list. I also jumped Johnny Cueto just ahead of Votto to #3 on my list.

camisadelgolf
08-18-2007, 07:12 AM
Personally, I wouldn't even put Francisco in my top-20 list. His lack of plate discipline and defense are two huge turnoffs for me. Mesoraco, however, I would put in a top-10 list, largely due to his plate discipline and defense.

Kc61
08-18-2007, 10:44 AM
I enjoy listing prospects too, but sometimes the lists (or at least the ordering of prospects) becomes kind of silly. How do you compare a Mesoraco with, say, Chris Dickerson who has perhaps less upside but is on the verge of helping? Even more difficult, compare Chris Valaika and Matt Maloney who do entirely different things. Compare Kyle Lotzkar, who is a teen aged pitcher, with Brad Salmon, a minor league vet but still a prospect for the Reds.

Very young guys show that the Reds are focused on depth and the long-term future. They are also stockpiling for future trades. All commendable. I just have a hard time saying that Devin M and Juan Francisco are 5 and 6 and then there is a drop off. I see guys like Maloney, Roenicke, Frazier (doing well at Billings), maybe now Stubbs (as his bat thankfully has awakened) Viola, and others and I don't necessarily agree.

New Fever
08-18-2007, 12:30 PM
The writer said that there was a steep drop off after the Big 4, which there is. I really don't think he researched this question very well though because after those 4 you can pretty much rank the next 15 or so anyway you would like. Meaning if you like ranking prospects who are closer to the majors you can, or if you tend to rank guys with higher celings then you can. The Reds big 4 sometimes hurt them because you tend to compare the other prospects in the system to them and not the other prospects around baseball. For example last season, Cueto had to have been compared to Bailey because Cueto was 15-3 and had pitched an half of season had High A and there were multiple sources that said he was touching 97 with 2 other quality pitches. He should have been on Top 100 list last year and maybe even the top 50-70 range but he was overshadowed by Bailey. To say that the Reds system lacks depth is really saying that I haven't done any research yet.

Prf15
08-18-2007, 01:10 PM
Wait so our system is 12th but we rank towards the bottom? If I do my math right, we are better than over half of the teams. I guess I'm wrong.

Screwball
08-19-2007, 12:10 PM
Wait so our system is 12th but we rank towards the bottom? If I do my math right, we are better than over half of the teams. I guess I'm wrong.

I think the author said that the depth of the organization is towards the bottom. The reason for the #12 overall ranking is mainly because of the Big 4 - Bailey, Cueto, Votto, and The Boss.

Personally, I thought the farm system has been getting much, much better as far as depth is concerned. I guess this just goes to show how bad things had gotten under previous regimes.

Prf15
08-19-2007, 03:33 PM
I think the author said that the depth of the organization is towards the bottom. The reason for the #12 overall ranking is mainly because of the Big 4 - Bailey, Cueto, Votto, and The Boss.

Personally, I thought the farm system has been getting much, much better as far as depth is concerned. I guess this just goes to show how bad things had gotten under previous regimes.

Yeah that's probably his logic. I think we got very good depth in our minors though, maybe it is just because I follow the Reds minors and really nobody else's.

camisadelgolf
08-19-2007, 04:07 PM
The impression I get is that depth-wise, the pitching lacks guys with high ceilings. Homer Bailey and Johnny Cueto obviously have high potential, but other than that, you have a bunch of guys with middle relief and back-of-the-rotation potential. As far as position players, most of the depth is in the lower minor leagues, leaving a decent-sized void at AA and AAA.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-20-2007, 08:45 PM
37 baserunners in 13 innings now for Dumatrait (through 1.2 tonight).

Seriously, his stuff reminds me of a Branden Claussen.

That's not good by the way.

Kc61
08-20-2007, 08:51 PM
37 baserunners in 13 innings now for Dumatrait (through 1.2 tonight).

Seriously, his stuff reminds me of a Branden Claussen.

That's not good by the way.

He's off my prospects list. This isn't tolerable.

camisadelgolf
08-20-2007, 09:37 PM
It seems like he's trying to paint the corners too early. He needs to throw over the plate before the umps will start granting him the border-line strikes, I think.

lollipopcurve
08-21-2007, 01:05 PM
After those four, there's a steep dropoff. Catcher Devin Mesoraco, their 2007 first-rounder, and low Class A third baseman Juan Francisco, would be the next two prospects, and then the system consists of guys who offer some intriguing tools but also have major question marks. Cincinnati's prospect depth still ranks toward the bottom end of the 30 organizations.

Typical pap from Jim Callis. "Depth" is the BA excuse for making sure they can move organizations up or down in the their rankings according to who their best buddies are. The Reds' top 4 is as good as anyone's probably, and then you've got Francisco, Stubbs, Valaika, some intriguing bullpenners and a respectable 07 draft. Once you get past the top 10 of any organization, success depends more on right place-right time than on talent, in my opinion.

1-2 years ago Callis had his favorite club, the Cubbies, at #15 based on the supposed excellence of two players -- Felix Pie and Mark Pawelek (wow) -- and so-called "depth."
What a joke.

dougdirt
08-21-2007, 01:49 PM
Personally I think the Reds have solid depth.

HokieRed
08-21-2007, 11:05 PM
I agree there's more depth than we're given credit for. Case in point: Adam Rosales, two more doubles tonight, 50% of his hits for extra bases, now over .900 OPS at Chattanooga. He doesn't even make most posters top 15 or 20, though he'd certainly make mine.

New Fever
08-22-2007, 03:11 PM
Jim Callis sure does change his mind quick, on his chat today he says that Stubbs will be ahead of Francisco on the Reds Top 10 List. It sure seems like he really didn't research the question from last week.

dougdirt
08-22-2007, 03:20 PM
Jim Callis sure does change his mind quick, on his chat today he says that Stubbs will be ahead of Francisco on the Reds Top 10 List. It sure seems like he really didn't research the question from last week.

Was it Callis that said that last week though? I read that it was said by BA, but I didn't see which writer actually said it.

New Fever
08-22-2007, 03:23 PM
Yep, It says Ask BA by Jim Callis.

dougdirt
08-22-2007, 03:27 PM
Yep, It says Ask BA by Jim Callis.

Gotcha. Maybe he was basing his stuff off of older scouting reports and some guys came in with newer reports saying 'Stubbs adjusted this and now he is doing this, that and the other' and it looks a lot better now.

Things like that will happen. With that said though, I ranked Stubbs off the top of my head the other day in the 'My Top 20 Prospects' thread at #12. After going through and giving all a nice look Stubbs is actually my #6 prospect behind Bruce, Bailey, Cueto, Votto and Wood.

Benihana
08-23-2007, 02:54 PM
I agree Stubbs has definitely shot up the prospect list with his recent surge. My new list as of August 23 would look like something like this:

GRADE A
1. Bruce OF AAA
2. Bailey RHP AAA
3. Cueto RHP AA
4. Votto 1B/OF AAA

GRADE B
5. Wood LHP A+
6. Maloney LHP AAA
7. Stubbs CF A
8. Francisco 3B/OF A
9. Watson RHP A+
10. Frazier 3B R

GRADE C
11. LeCure RHP AA
12. Roenicke RHP AA
13. Dorn OF AA
14. Valaika 2B/3B A+
15. Thompson RHP A+
16. Rosales INF AA
17. Jukich LHP A+
18. Fisher RHP AA
19. Turner 2B A
20. Mesoraco C R

HON MENTION
Dickerson CF AAA
McBeth RHP AAA
Cozart SS A
Waring 3B R
Tatum C AA

Kc61
08-23-2007, 04:24 PM
Most of us (myself included) have dropped Janish from the lists. His bat has come alive in AAA. Still has aways to go offensively, but last year was part of BA's top ten Reds prospects. Maybe deserves some more positives on the lists.

GoReds33
08-23-2007, 09:29 PM
I would have included Janish. He's a defensive beast.

bucksfan2
08-24-2007, 11:55 AM
What I think is ironic is I was in barnes and noble earlier this spring was was looking through BA's prospect book. They had all the reds prospects listed and had Josh Hamilton either at #20 or #30 which ever was the last one they listed.

lollipopcurve
08-24-2007, 12:19 PM
What I think is ironic is I was in barnes and noble earlier this spring was was looking through BA's prospect book. They had all the reds prospects listed and had Josh Hamilton either at #20 or #30 which ever was the last one they listed.

30th out of 30. For a group that wears the badge of appreciating tools and upside, they kinda flubbed this one.

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 12:38 PM
30th out of 30. For a group that wears the badge of appreciating tools and upside, they kinda flubbed this one.

Or they kind of had little to go on and didn't expect him to stay clean?

BuckeyeRedleg
09-10-2007, 10:36 AM
6 GS
18 IP
39 H
12 BB
2.83 WHIP
15.00 ERA


Phil Dumatrait. Quite possibly the worst pitcher ever to make at least 6 starts for the Reds.

tbball10
09-10-2007, 03:27 PM
its definitely possible

Prf15
09-10-2007, 07:51 PM
6 GS
18 IP
39 H
12 BB
2.83 WHIP
15.00 ERA


Phil Dumatrait. Quite possibly the worst pitcher ever to make at least 6 starts for the Reds.

Is it sad that I almost thought that WHIP was someone's ERA before I read on.:eek: