PDA

View Full Version : Baseball America International League Top 20



mbgrayson
10-03-2007, 10:22 AM
I got my print copy of Baseball America for October 8-21. It lists the top 20 prospects in each league. For the International League, AAA, the headline is "Headlined by Bruce, IL talent heavy on Reds".

1. Jay Bruce, OF, Louisville
2. Homer Bailey, RHP, Louisville
3. Matt Garza, RHP, Rochester (Twins)
4. Josh Fields, 3B, Charlotte (White Sox)
5. Jed Lowrie, SS, Pawtucket (Red Sox)
6. Jacob Ellsbury, OF, Pawtucket (Red Sox)
7. Brent Lillibridge, SS, Richmond (Braves)
8. Yunel Escobar, SS, Richmond (Braves)
9. Jeff Niemann, RHP, Durham (Devil Rays)
10. Joey Votto, 1B/OF, Louisville
11. Adam Miller, RHP, Buffalo (Indians)
12. Garrett Olson, LHP, Norfolk (Orioles)
13. Brandon Moss, OF, Pawtucket (Red Sox)
14. Brandon Jones, OF, Richmond (Braves)
15. Adam Lind, OF, Syracuse(Blue Jays)
16. Colin Balester, RHP, Columbus (Nationals)
17. Jason Hammel, RHP, Durham(Devil Rays)
18. Jevin Slowey, RHP, Rochester (Twins)
19. Aaron Laffey, LHP, Buffalo(Indians)
20. Jason Pridie, OF, Durham(Devil Rays)

RedEye
10-03-2007, 02:50 PM
Wow. Three top-10 AAA talents ain't too shabby. Let's hope their skills translate to the major league level very soon.

Cueto must be lurking in the next 10, right?

podgejeff_
10-03-2007, 03:41 PM
Not to mention two of those three are number 1 and 2.

GoReds33
10-03-2007, 03:43 PM
Wow. Three top-10 AAA talents ain't too shabby. Let's hope their skills translate to the major league level very soon.

Cueto must be lurking in the next 10, right?No clue why he wasn't on there. Cueto is a better prospect in my mind than Votto.:)

TOBTTReds
10-03-2007, 03:53 PM
No clue why he wasn't on there. Cueto is a better prospect in my mind than Votto.:)

Probably bc he only pitched a few games in AAA.

bucksfan2
10-03-2007, 04:40 PM
Is this the same Homer Bailey that some people have said is the back of a rotation starter at best and is better served pitching out of the pen?

Its good to see 3 reds make the top ten. I wonder if the reds have had 3 total top ten player in the last 10 years?

dougdirt
10-03-2007, 05:58 PM
Is this the same Homer Bailey that some people have said is the back of a rotation starter at best and is better served pitching out of the pen?

Its good to see 3 reds make the top ten. I wonder if the reds have had 3 total top ten player in the last 10 years?

yes, they have.

dougdirt
10-03-2007, 05:59 PM
Wow. Three top-10 AAA talents ain't too shabby. Let's hope their skills translate to the major league level very soon.

Cueto must be lurking in the next 10, right?

If Cueto had qualified, which Im sure he didn't, he would have been the guy that pushed Votto out of the top 10.

GoReds33
10-03-2007, 07:39 PM
I remember a couple years ago when all we heard was that this organization's talent was all in the low minors. It's good to see that they all progressed nicely.

OnBaseMachine
10-03-2007, 08:13 PM
Cueto or Maloney both probably didn't have enough innings to qualify because both would have been there. I'd say Cueto would rank in the top seven and Maloney around 17-20.

dougdirt
10-03-2007, 08:15 PM
Cueto or Maloney both probably didn't have enough innings to qualify because both would have been there. I'd say Cueto would rank in the top seven and Maloney around 17-20.

I would rank Cueto at #3.

Shaknb8k
10-03-2007, 08:56 PM
Since Homer didnt reach 50 IP this year then he qualifies for their Top 10 Prospects list. Is there any chance the Reds make the Top 5 or maybe Top 3 MLB Farm Systems this year?

dougdirt
10-03-2007, 09:17 PM
Since Homer didnt reach 50 IP this year then he qualifies for their Top 10 Prospects list. Is there any chance the Reds make the Top 5 or maybe Top 3 MLB Farm Systems this year?

Top 5.... maybe, but I think its pushing it. Top 3, no. Top 10, certainly.

Shaknb8k
10-03-2007, 09:21 PM
Top 5.... maybe, but I think its pushing it. Top 3, no. Top 10, certainly.

Just curious... What do you believe they are missing? They have a top 4 that could go up against any other team I believe. So is it still depth that they are missing? Or something like Position diversity?

dougdirt
10-03-2007, 09:34 PM
Its not what they are missing. Its what other teams have more of. The Yankees and Red Sox both have better systems, due in large part to their ability to throw around money and taking risks that payed off bigtime. The Devil Rays are absolutely loaded as always. That, at best puts the Reds 4th. It all comes down to, do the Reds have the depth to make that extra step. While I think they do, a lot of others think they don't. It will be interesting to see, when or if anyone comes out with a list, but in the end it doesn't matter a whole lot. The Reds have more top end talent than almost anyone, and in the end I would much rather have that than a 20 back up infielders/outfielders and 1 top end guy.

corkedbat
10-03-2007, 09:51 PM
Not to mention two of those three are number 1 and 2.

And #10 looked anything but shabby in his September audition. :)

AdamDunn
10-06-2007, 07:26 PM
Its not what they are missing. Its what other teams have more of. The Yankees and Red Sox both have better systems, due in large part to their ability to throw around money and taking risks that payed off bigtime. The Devil Rays are absolutely loaded as always. That, at best puts the Reds 4th. It all comes down to, do the Reds have the depth to make that extra step. While I think they do, a lot of others think they don't. It will be interesting to see, when or if anyone comes out with a list, but in the end it doesn't matter a whole lot. The Reds have more top end talent than almost anyone, and in the end I would much rather have that than a 20 back up infielders/outfielders and 1 top end guy.

I was just wondering why is that? I think I would rather have 4 top end guys and four back up type guys. You can really build around guys like Cueto, Votto, Bailey, and Bruce (like the yankees did when they first started their World Series streak w/ Jeter, Williams, Pettitte, Rivera) while you can only produce Reggie Sanders type guys with the 20 back ups.

jojo
10-06-2007, 08:11 PM
Is this the same Homer Bailey that some people have said is the back of a rotation starter at best and is better served pitching out of the pen?

Really, "People have said" should be "person has said" for the most part....

dougdirt
10-07-2007, 01:04 AM
I was just wondering why is that? I think I would rather have 4 top end guys and four back up type guys. You can really build around guys like Cueto, Votto, Bailey, and Bruce (like the yankees did when they first started their World Series streak w/ Jeter, Williams, Pettitte, Rivera) while you can only produce Reggie Sanders type guys with the 20 back ups.
4 Top end guys and nothing else is a lot more valuable than a system not producing top end talent. Replacement level talent is readily available for fairly cheap....

icehole3
10-07-2007, 06:54 AM
Its not what they are missing. Its what other teams have more of. The Yankees and Red Sox both have better systems, due in large part to their ability to throw around money and taking risks that payed off bigtime. The Devil Rays are absolutely loaded as always. That, at best puts the Reds 4th. It all comes down to, do the Reds have the depth to make that extra step. While I think they do, a lot of others think they don't. It will be interesting to see, when or if anyone comes out with a list, but in the end it doesn't matter a whole lot. The Reds have more top end talent than almost anyone, and in the end I would much rather have that than a 20 back up infielders/outfielders and 1 top end guy.

Just looking at these different lists Doug it looks like the Devil Rays, Red Sox, DBacks, Dodgers and Braves have much more top end talent over the Reds. Does that look like a good top 5 to you?

dougdirt
10-07-2007, 12:11 PM
The Braves? Atlanta doesn't have 1 prospect that I would rank with the Reds big 4 guys. I am not sure they have a top 50 prospect in their entire system. The Devil Rays are far and away the best system in baseball. They graduated the #1/2 prospect in baseball from last year and replaced him with David Price and saw Evan Longoria validate his prospect status during the same time while getting steps forward with 2 other starting pitchers in Wade Davis and Jacob McGee. To be perfectly honest, the Devil Rays could realistically have 4 Top 10 overall prospects with Price, Longoria, Brignac and McGee. That is beyond insane.

The Diamondbacks graduating Justin Upton doesn't really help their ranking obviously, although he was eligible for the BA lists, but I doubt he is eligible for the year end top 100 list. They still have some solid top 100 type talent, but only Carlos Gonzalez should rank near a Joey Votto, but probably not with the Cueto's, Bailey's or Bruce's of the world.

icehole3
10-07-2007, 12:33 PM
Ok, since Im a novice at this who's your top 5, I respect your opinion? I was just looking at the lists.

dougdirt
10-07-2007, 12:56 PM
Ok, since Im a novice at this who's your top 5, I respect your opinion? I was just looking at the lists.

Devil Rays are #1 without a doubt.

The Red Sox and Yankees are also both in the top 5, just depends on who is doing the ranking. The Dodgers are close, the Reds are close, Seattle is in the discussion.....

Not exactly sure how I would rank them right now without gonig through the entire system of each team, which I don't have the time for right now, but their top talents all rank well.

cincyinco
10-08-2007, 07:32 AM
rangers are pretty loaded and I'd rank them ahead of the reds. they have a couple top end guys, and due to texiera/gagne trades & international signings their depth is also incredible. they're 20 deep IMO all with legit shots at being regulars.

royals system is in pretty good shape as well.

if you place value more on what a franchise has put ON the field & not what it retains in the minors(not my personal view but also an important factor) then I think you have to give it up to the brewcrew.

cincyinco
10-08-2007, 08:18 AM
don't mean to double post but my edit button isn't working on my palm pda..

just wanted to give a list of just SOME of the rangers talent.

impressive, incomplete I'm sure, and in no particular order:

*hurley
*volquez
diamond
mayberry
kiker
teagarden
arias
lemon
duran
davis
beaven
main
poveda
castillo
font
beltre
borbon
ramirez
greene

phew.. guys with * I'd rate as high ceiling top tier guys right now. diamond could certainly join that list but has stepped back due to injury. guys like beavon, main, font, certainly look like they could make the jump soon. some could argue teagarden as well with his reemergence. their new GM has done a more than comendable job stocking this system in a short amount of time. their draft last year was very strong & the international signings & trades have really infused their minors with a buttload of talent.

I'm envious... & I love our farm.

dougdirt
10-08-2007, 08:49 AM
The Rangers do have a very solid farm system. I don't think I would take it over the Reds system, but its real close.

kaldaniels
10-08-2007, 09:43 AM
The nay-sayers always complain about the depth or some other flaw in the Reds farm system. That said...what team doesn't look at this list and wish they were in the Reds' position. Granted, I'm sure some teams are in better shape in the minors overall...but this list speaks for it self.

kaldaniels
10-08-2007, 09:45 AM
Devil Rays are #1 without a doubt.

The Red Sox and Yankees are also both in the top 5, just depends on who is doing the ranking. The Dodgers are close, the Reds are close, Seattle is in the discussion.....

Not exactly sure how I would rank them right now without gonig through the entire system of each team, which I don't have the time for right now, but their top talents all rank well.

Doug...do you see the Ray's MLB team making a run at the Yanks/Sox in a few years. They have a long long way to go...do their prospects close the gap in a hurry...or are they starting in too big a hole right now.

dougdirt
10-08-2007, 12:49 PM
No I don't. The Yankees and Red Sox have huge payrolls and can get almost any free agent they want.... then on top of that, both are showing very strong minor league systems. The rich just get richer these days with kids falling becuase of demands and the Yankees or Red Sox can pluck them up and pay 8th round picks a million dollars.

New Fever
10-08-2007, 03:49 PM
No I don't. The Yankees and Red Sox have huge payrolls and can get almost any free agent they want.... then on top of that, both are showing very strong minor league systems. The rich just get richer these days with kids falling becuase of demands and the Yankees or Red Sox can pluck them up and pay 8th round picks a million dollars.



If Tampa Bay increases their payroll to about 50 million, they should be able to compete with the young talent they have. They have a top 5 pick every year and they have drafted well in the middle rounds as well (Davis,Mcgee,Jennings). TB could be very similar to the '07 Indians team in a couple of years.

AmarilloRed
10-08-2007, 09:46 PM
I think the Rangers really helped their team and their farm system with all the prospects they got back from Atlanta at the trade deadline. I live in Texas and watched what some of those kids could do in televised games.

cincyinco
10-09-2007, 02:40 AM
I think the Rangers really helped their team and their farm system with all the prospects they got back from Atlanta at the trade deadline. I live in Texas and watched what some of those kids could do in televised games.

couldn't agree more. I think the only spect I mentioned in my post from the bos/atl deals was engel beltre.

didn't even count guys like salty, matt harrison, elvis andrus..etc.

sorry everyone. I'm not a big believer that depth is the most important thing about a system, but its a top factor.

the rangers don't have 4 top tier prospects like we do.. but they have a couple in Hurley & volquez. but their depth is so good, it cripples the reds's depth IMO & bridges the gap between the two easily. beyond our 10 there are guys with far more questions to them than what sits in TX.

Top talent is good, but so is depth. balance the two & you have a winning combination. a pipeline of talent has been built seemingly overnight.

kudos to the rangers.

MartyFan
10-11-2007, 04:12 AM
I am not sure what makes an organization a top 5 organization...The Reds seem to have talent that is ready to come to the big league and deliver...but beyond this coming year...how does the system look?

I mean to be considered a good organization wouldn't it require that a team have a few levels deep of top end talent?

Just asking and if that is the way the question is framed, how to the Reds fair?

Steve4192
10-22-2007, 02:13 PM
Depth is pretty damn important.

Even the best prospects sometimes fall flat on their faces, and sometimes a 'depth' guy who is projected a a backup ends up being an all-star. Take a look at some of the old BBA prospect lists and you'll find plenty of complete busts among their top 10 prospects. You'll also find a number of fantastic players who never rose above the 'honorable mention' list as prospects.

All that a higher ranking means is that a player has a higher probability of becoming a star. The likelihood of a top 10 prospect becoming a star is akin to the likelihood of a coin flip coming up 'heads'. Meanwhile, the likelihood of a guy ranked in the 100-150 range becoming a star is a akin to the likelihood of a roll of a die coming up 'one'. For the most part, you would rather have the coin flip, but if someone gives you a choice between six rolls of the die or a single coin flip, you take the six rolls of the die.

When it comes to prospects, quantity is almost as important as quality.

dougdirt
10-22-2007, 02:25 PM
Depth is pretty damn important.

Even the best prospects sometimes fall flat on their faces, and sometimes a 'depth' guy who is projected a a backup ends up being an all-star. Take a look at some of the old BBA prospect lists and you'll find plenty of complete busts among their top 10 prospects. You'll also find a number of fantastic players who never rose above the 'honorable mention' list as prospects.

All that a higher ranking means is that a player has a higher probability of becoming a star. The likelihood of a top 10 prospect becoming a star is akin to the likelihood of a coin flip coming up 'heads'. Meanwhile, the likelihood of a guy ranked in the 100-150 range becoming a star is a akin to the likelihood of a roll of a die coming up 'one'. For the most part, you would rather have the coin flip, but if someone gives you a choice between six rolls of the die or a single coin flip, you take the six rolls of the die.

When it comes to prospects, quantity is almost as important as quality.

I think its about 70-30 in the quality/depth department. Depth is important, but quality at the top is more valuable in my mind, due to the better odds of them turning out.

Steve4192
10-22-2007, 02:39 PM
I think its about 70-30 in the quality/depth department. Depth is important, but quality at the top is more valuable in my mind, due to the better odds of them turning out.

I agree that quality is more important, but I think a lot of folks overestimate the actual probabilities involved with a prospect becoming a star.

Some fans assume that just because Jay Bruce, Justin Upton, Cam Maybin, Evan Longoria are all top 20 prospects, they are all mortal locks for superstardom. The truth of the matter is, one of 'em will probably end up being a star, two of 'em will probably end up being good but not great players, and one will probably wash out completely. Yes, even the great Jay Bruce stands a chance (however small) of being a total bust.

For every Albert Pujols who meets &/or exceeds expectations, there are ten Austin Kearns who don't come close to meeting expectations.

Aronchis
10-22-2007, 03:56 PM
That is the key point. Really, rating farm system's should be done backwards, how many did pan out and do well?

If Bailey,Bruce,Votto and Cueto all pan out as we expect, history will look at the 2006-07 systems with glee. If they don't, then it goes in steps.

dougdirt
10-22-2007, 04:05 PM
I agree that quality is more important, but I think a lot of folks overestimate the actual probabilities involved with a prospect becoming a star.

Some fans assume that just because Jay Bruce, Justin Upton, Cam Maybin, Evan Longoria are all top 20 prospects, they are all mortal locks for superstardom. The truth of the matter is, one of 'em will probably end up being a star, two of 'em will probably end up being good but not great players, and one will probably wash out completely. Yes, even the great Jay Bruce stands a chance (however small) of being a total bust.

For every Albert Pujols who meets &/or exceeds expectations, there are ten Austin Kearns who don't come close to meeting expectations.

Well of the four you named, I would say that Maybin has the furthest to go before he reaches any stardom. He can't hit to save his life.... where as the other three don't really have that problem.

Of course. what defines a 'star' and a 'quality' player? I would make an argument that while Ryan Braun falls into the 'star' category and Troy Tulo falls into the 'quality' player category, that Tulo is actually more valuable to his team, and therefore the better player.... For all the crap that Austin Kearns gets for not living up to his potential, he is a solid guy to have on your team. Defensively, he is likely the best player at his position in all of baseball and probably worth 13-16 runs on defense alone over the course of a season.

Steve4192
10-22-2007, 04:56 PM
My point really wasn't about any of those individual players. Perhaps I could have chosen better examples. My point was that a lot of folks get these pie-in-the-sky notions about prospects ranked in the 1-20 range, and the players rarely live up to those expectations.

For any given year, the top 20 list usually ends up something like the following:

2 perennial all-stars.
4 above average starters who will have a long MLB career and might make an all-star game along the way.
5 league average guys who who can hold down a starting position for a few years.
4 guys who are above replacement level but won't hold down a starting job on a good team
3 guys whose careers are completely derailed by injuries.
2 guys who fall flat on their faces and never make an impact in the show.

My point is that many fans assume that most of the uber-prospects will be guys with 10+ year careers and multiple all-star appearances. The reality is, a whole bunch of those guys will end up as busts, disappointments, backups, or placeholders.

M2
10-22-2007, 05:36 PM
My point is that many fans assume that most of the uber-prospects will be guys with 10+ year careers and multiple all-star appearances. The reality is, a whole bunch of those guys will end up as busts, disappointments, backups, or placeholders.

That's the chief reason why I'm no fan of those "Reds three years from now" projections. It usually involves assuming every prospect in the system turns up roses, everyone arrives early and no one ever has a rough adjustment. You never see projections based on what happens if you experience a 2/3 prospect failure rate (which would actually be a pretty low prospect failure rate).