PDA

View Full Version : Redszone Community Prospect Vote:#8



dougdirt
11-25-2007, 11:39 AM
Vote for the player who you think is the Reds #8 prospect (the best prospect who is not yet on the list). We will go with this as far as you guys want to take it.

I will post a new list every 2 days with 10-15 options to vote on.

If you feel like making an argument on why a guy should be voted here, feel free to vote and state why you voted for that player.

If there is someone that is not currently listed as an option to vote on, vote for 'other' then just state who you want to vote for in the thread.

If there is anyone you would like to see as an option on the next poll, just say so and if they garner enough support, they will be placed on the next poll. Guys with the lowest amount of votes will usually be removed for the next few guys who were talked about in the previous thread.


Prospect 1 - Jay Bruce
Prospect 2 - Homer Bailey
Prospect 3 - Johnny Cueto
Prospect 4 - Joey Votto
Prospect 5 - Todd Frazier
Prospect 6 - Drew Stubbs
Prospect 7 - Matt Maloney

Will M
11-25-2007, 12:00 PM
I am curious: why do some people like Roenicke more than Pelland? He is a year older and a year behing in development.

Kc61
11-25-2007, 12:18 PM
I am curious: why do some people like Roenicke more than Pelland? He is a year older and a year behing in development.


Roenicke has the bigger frame and apparently throws a bit harder.

Roenicke hasn't had Pelland's problems with walks.

Roenicke struck out the world during his High-A stint.

*BaseClogger*
11-25-2007, 12:59 PM
I voted for one of the two Travis Woods. Did we clone him!? I'd love to have two of them in my Cincinnati Reds rotation!

icehole3
11-25-2007, 01:01 PM
I voted for Waring, I think he can be a right handed version of Adam Dunn.

Blue
11-25-2007, 01:03 PM
Mesoraco. Rated higher than Todd Frazier in June, 2 months of ball shouldn't change things that much.

dougdirt
11-25-2007, 01:16 PM
I am going to contact a mod to see if they can edit the poll. I was trying to put everyone in alphabetical order and in the process of moving guys around I guess I left Travis on there after I moved him.

reds44
11-25-2007, 01:57 PM
Josh Roenicke.

Can you please put Dickerson o the next poll?

dougdirt
11-25-2007, 02:04 PM
Josh Roenicke.

Can you please put Dickerson o the next poll?

I can. Did you mention it in the last thread? I read over it in a hurry trying to make this poll, so if I skipped over it... sorry.

reds44
11-25-2007, 02:06 PM
I can. Did you mention it in the last thread? I read over it in a hurry trying to make this poll, so if I skipped over it... sorry.
Nope, I didn't. Thanks though..

Mario-Rijo
11-25-2007, 02:18 PM
Pedro Viola for me, people need to really take a long hard look at him.

Degenerate39
11-25-2007, 02:24 PM
I voted for Waring, I think he can be a right handed version of Adam Dunn.

Same here

M2
11-25-2007, 02:29 PM
Mesoraco ought to be required to do something other than stink up the joint in professional baseball before he starts getting stuck on top 10 lists. Hopefully he does something next year to justify the pick, but the bar ought to at least be set high enough that he can't crawl over it.

camisadelgolf
11-25-2007, 03:32 PM
I'm sticking with Lotzkar. He has the highest upside of all the guys left, imho.

edabbs44
11-25-2007, 04:10 PM
Wood is living off his rep from 2 years ago...Lotzkar should have gone a few choices ago.

RedsManRick
11-25-2007, 04:20 PM
I'm optimistic about Roenicke's career, but as 25 year old AA relievers with 70 IP, I just can't put him above guys who are similarly productive at the same level and who are 2 years younger. Hence, I voted Danny Dorn (.309/.401/.524) yet again.

dougdirt
11-25-2007, 04:24 PM
Wood is living off his rep from 2 years ago...Lotzkar should have gone a few choices ago.

While his (Wood) season this year was forgettable, I would say he is living off of his scouting report.... His is still looking pretty good, especially given the reports that his velocity is back to normal since his arm issues midseason.

GoReds33
11-25-2007, 04:31 PM
I voted for Roenicke. I voted for him in the last two votes, and plan to until he wins. I hope he has a decent contribution in the near future for the Reds.

dougdirt
11-25-2007, 04:44 PM
I voted for Roenicke. I voted for him in the last two votes, and plan to until he wins. I hope he has a decent contribution in the near future for the Reds.

I would say the odds are good that he does. His arm is there and the improvement he showed this year was very impressive. Given he probably starts in AAA next year he should just be a phone call and an hour and a half drive away.

Stingray
11-25-2007, 04:52 PM
I voted Dickerson again.

Betterread
11-25-2007, 05:05 PM
I voted for Francisco, but where's Sean Watson on this list? I would have voted for him in the top 10. I guess he's not in the top 20 - this board doesn't consider a guy that throws mid-90s as a starter with a great curveball a prospect. If we have a breakout player poll for next year - I'll take him.

dougdirt
11-25-2007, 05:13 PM
I voted for Francisco, but where's Sean Watson on this list? I would have voted for him in the top 10. I guess he's not in the top 20 - this board doesn't consider a guy that throws mid-90s as a starter with a great curveball a prospect. If we have a breakout player poll for next year - I'll take him.

I simply forgot to put him on the list. I was erasing and rearranging names to make sure they were in alphabetical order and he just slipped through the cracks while I was doing that. That is why there is an 'other' option though, he will be on the next list as he was just an accidental omission.

Betterread
11-25-2007, 05:27 PM
I simply forgot to put him on the list. I was erasing and rearranging names to make sure they were in alphabetical order and he just slipped through the cracks while I was doing that. That is why there is an 'other' option though, he will be on the next list as he was just an accidental omission.
Thanks for adding him and thanks for doing this list. Its interesting to see the different ways people view the Reds prospects.

dougdirt
11-25-2007, 05:35 PM
Thanks for adding him and thanks for doing this list. Its interesting to see the different ways people view the Reds prospects.

Yeah, its always an interesting way to look at how things shake out in terms of how to view prospects. Almost everyone has a different way of evaluating prospects and what they look at to determine the value of a guy. Hopefully this will hold us all over until February rolls around.

AmarilloRed
11-25-2007, 05:50 PM
Danny Dorn had quite a year last year.

klw
11-25-2007, 08:10 PM
Can Carlos Guevara be added? With all the discussion of late I'm curious where he would place.

Highlifeman21
11-25-2007, 08:55 PM
Travis Wood getting more love than I anticipated.

He's at best, our 4th best SP prospect.

dougdirt
11-25-2007, 08:58 PM
Travis Wood getting more love than I anticipated.

He's at best, our 4th best SP prospect.

Bailey, Cueto and who? Even if you think Maloney is a better prospect (which I don't), what does that have anything to do with Travis Wood being a good prospect?

Highlifeman21
11-25-2007, 09:17 PM
Bailey, Cueto and who? Even if you think Maloney is a better prospect (which I don't), what does that have anything to do with Travis Wood being a good prospect?

Cueto, Bailey, Maloney, Wood.

235 career minor league IP for Wood with nothing above Sarasota doesn't give me a lot of confidence as to him being "good", but given the other SP prospects in our system, I'd list Wood as the #4, with Daryl Thompson in the argument also for #4.

dougdirt
11-25-2007, 09:31 PM
Cueto, Bailey, Maloney, Wood.

235 career minor league IP for Wood with nothing above Sarasota doesn't give me a lot of confidence as to him being "good", but given the other SP prospects in our system, I'd list Wood as the #4, with Daryl Thompson in the argument also for #4.

That doesn't address the question though.... what does him being #4 have to do with him getting support here?

Jay Bruce
11-25-2007, 10:36 PM
Travis Wood getting more love than I anticipated.

He's at best, our 4th best SP prospect.

Seeing that I (as well as others) voted for him over Maloney, a case could be made that he is our third best SP prospect. He's young (21 in February), lefthanded, and throws in the 90's.

Even last year, as he was struggling through injuries and command problems (likely due to said injuries), he managed to strike out 10.49/9. At full health, and with his arsenal of pitches, I believe that he has more upside than someone like Maloney, and worthy of being considered as one of the best prospects yet to be voted for.

Kc61
11-25-2007, 10:59 PM
Seeing that I (as well as others) voted for him over Maloney, a case could be made that he is our third best SP prospect. He's young (21 in February), lefthanded, and throws in the 90's.

Even last year, as he was struggling through injuries and command problems (likely due to said injuries), he managed to strike out 10.49/9. At full health, and with his arsenal of pitches, I believe that he has more upside than someone like Maloney, and worthy of being considered as one of the best prospects yet to be voted for.

Only pitched 46 innings last year with high ERA and high WHIP. Hard to rank a guy like this; obviously Wood has much to offer but totally unclear if he will do well at the higher levels. All you can do is hope.

Highlifeman21
11-25-2007, 11:01 PM
That doesn't address the question though.... what does him being #4 have to do with him getting support here?

Cueto, Bailey and Maloney are already off the board, so that leaves the next best SP prospect, or the next best position player for #8. If Wood is the #8, then the RedsZone faithful feel that we are strong in SP prospects. I don't share that opinion. We basically have 5 SP prospects, and after that, the rest are projects, at best.

I also don't think the Reds' farm system is as "stocked" as advertised. We have a lot of unproven question marks in the system.

dougdirt
11-25-2007, 11:06 PM
Cueto, Bailey and Maloney are already off the board, so that leaves the next best SP prospect, or the next best position player for #8. If Wood is the #8, then the RedsZone faithful feel that we are strong in SP prospects. I don't share that opinion. We basically have 5 SP prospects, and after that, the rest are projects, at best.

I also don't think the Reds' farm system is as "stocked" as advertised. We have a lot of unproven question marks in the system.

Well, every sytem is full of unproven question marks. Thats why they are in the minor leagues. The Reds have the best group of 'major league ready' talent heading into next year of anyone in baseball with the 4 guys at the top of this list.

As for the rest of the guys being projects, well yeah, thats what the minor leagues are for. Take guys with talent, and mold them. I don't know what kind of system you would think is 'stocked' if you don't think the Reds system isn't full of prospects. They aren't exactly the Devil Rays.... but they are right there with anyone else you want to pick in baseball.

*BaseClogger*
11-25-2007, 11:24 PM
Cueto, Bailey and Maloney are already off the board, so that leaves the next best SP prospect, or the next best position player for #8. If Wood is the #8, then the RedsZone faithful feel that we are strong in SP prospects. I don't share that opinion. We basically have 5 SP prospects, and after that, the rest are projects, at best.

I also don't think the Reds' farm system is as "stocked" as advertised. We have a lot of unproven question marks in the system.

Bailey, Cueto, Maloney, Wood, Thompson, Watson, Fisher, Lotzkar...

Help me out here Doug, we have more than 5 SP prospects!

Highlifeman21
11-25-2007, 11:47 PM
Well, every sytem is full of unproven question marks. Thats why they are in the minor leagues. The Reds have the best group of 'major league ready' talent heading into next year of anyone in baseball with the 4 guys at the top of this list.

As for the rest of the guys being projects, well yeah, thats what the minor leagues are for. Take guys with talent, and mold them. I don't know what kind of system you would think is 'stocked' if you don't think the Reds system isn't full of prospects. They aren't exactly the Devil Rays.... but they are right there with anyone else you want to pick in baseball.

Color me skeptical about prospects. For every Adam Dunn, there's a Brandon Larson. For every Austin Kearns, there's a Stephen Smitherman. For every Scott Williamson there's a Ty Howington. For every Rob Dibble there's a Chris Gruler. With the Reds, it seems the track record of bust, and or broken during development happens far more often than success story.

The Reds have 1 guy at the top of their prospect list (Votto) ready for MLB action, with probably another in the wings (Bruce). They have two guys that still need more time in AAA (Cueto and Bailey). To me, that's not stocked, given the situation of our franchise. To say that we have 4 guys that are "major league ready" at the top of our prospect list is very optimistic, and very short sided. We would need career years from all 4 of these "major league ready" prospects in 2008 to sniff the playoffs. That's an unfair position to put those 4 players. Be more realistic with their respective levels of readiness, as well as the overall talent level of the MLB roster. Look at the big picture. 2008 shouldn't included our top 4 seeing significant playing time as a whole at the MLB level, unless it's in a developmental capacity, which given the recent signing of Cordero, I just don't see happening.

If any of our top 4 played on a winning team, say for example the Red Sox, their development(s) would be handled correctly. Look at Pedroia, Ellsbury, and Buchholz for examples of how to correctly use your prospects. Look at Homer Bailey and the Reds, or even Phillips Hughes and the Yankees as examples of rushing prospects before they are ready. Hughes and the Yankees is a little different b/c Hughes might have actually been the difference between the Yankees making the playoffs or not making the playoffs, whereas Bailey had zero chance of pushing the Reds into the postseason.

Highlifeman21
11-25-2007, 11:49 PM
dougdirt,

Of the Reds' current prospects, realistically which ones do you see making a significant impact on a MLB roster in the next 3 years?

I'm curious as to your optimism.

dougdirt
11-26-2007, 12:22 AM
Color me skeptical about prospects. For every Adam Dunn, there's a Brandon Larson. For every Austin Kearns, there's a Stephen Smitherman. For every Scott Williamson there's a Ty Howington. For every Rob Dibble there's a Chris Gruler. With the Reds, it seems the track record of bust, and or broken during development happens far more often than success story.
This is the story of prospects. Every team has a list just like it. Its not a Reds thing, its a prospect thing.



The Reds have 1 guy at the top of their prospect list (Votto) ready for MLB action, with probably another in the wings (Bruce). They have two guys that still need more time in AAA (Cueto and Bailey).
Well we will disagree because Bailey is ready right now and Cueto very well could be too.



To me, that's not stocked, given the situation of our franchise. To say that we have 4 guys that are "major league ready" at the top of our prospect list is very optimistic, and very short sided. We would need career years from all 4 of these "major league ready" prospects in 2008 to sniff the playoffs. That's an unfair position to put those 4 players. Be more realistic with their respective levels of readiness, as well as the overall talent level of the MLB roster. Look at the big picture. 2008 shouldn't included our top 4 seeing significant playing time as a whole at the MLB level, unless it's in a developmental capacity, which given the recent signing of Cordero, I just don't see happening.
I am not sure what the team not sniffing the playoffs has to do with our system.



If any of our top 4 played on a winning team, say for example the Red Sox, their development(s) would be handled correctly. Look at Pedroia, Ellsbury, and Buchholz for examples of how to correctly use your prospects. Look at Homer Bailey and the Reds, or even Phillips Hughes and the Yankees as examples of rushing prospects before they are ready. Hughes and the Yankees is a little different b/c Hughes might have actually been the difference between the Yankees making the playoffs or not making the playoffs, whereas Bailey had zero chance of pushing the Reds into the postseason.

What do the Red Sox have to do with the Reds prospects? Give me the Reds with Bailey, Bruce and Cueto over what the Red Sox have any day of the week. Bailey wasn't helping the Reds into the playoffs, but the Reds were helping Bailey by letting him struggle in the majors. He wasn't struggling in AAA, so he wasn't learning anything. He got to the majors and had to figure out he needed to become a pitcher, because being a thrower wasn't going to work for the first time in his life.

Again though, what Bailey pushing the Reds to the playoffs has to do with him as a prospect, I don't understand.

dougdirt
11-26-2007, 12:31 AM
dougdirt,

Of the Reds' current prospects, realistically which ones do you see making a significant impact on a MLB roster in the next 3 years?

I'm curious as to your optimism.

Bailey, Bruce, Cueto, Votto, Pelland, Roenicke, Maloney and Viola could all help next year. Toss in guys like Dickerson, Janish, Lecure, Fisher, Rosales and Gardner as guys with outside shots at helping next year. Danny Dorn is right there with those guys too. That is just next year.

Highlifeman21
11-26-2007, 12:36 AM
This is the story of prospects. Every team has a list just like it. Its not a Reds thing, its a prospect thing.


Well we will disagree because Bailey is ready right now and Cueto very well could be too.


I am not sure what the team not sniffing the playoffs has to do with our system.



What do the Red Sox have to do with the Reds prospects? Give me the Reds with Bailey, Bruce and Cueto over what the Red Sox have any day of the week. Bailey wasn't helping the Reds into the playoffs, but the Reds were helping Bailey by letting him struggle in the majors. He wasn't struggling in AAA, so he wasn't learning anything. He got to the majors and had to figure out he needed to become a pitcher, because being a thrower wasn't going to work for the first time in his life.

Again though, what Bailey pushing the Reds to the playoffs has to do with him as a prospect, I don't understand.

Teams will have different speeds for their respective prospects. The Red Sox haven't rushed their prospects, but rather allowed them to play at the MLB level when they are ready, as opposed to when the MLB club needs the prospects. That's the difference between Clay Buchholz and Homer Bailey in 2007. The Reds felt they needed Homer Bailey, and that he might help them to the division in 2007, whereas the Red Sox didn't need Buchholz to get them to the playoffs, but he was an added luxury down the stretch.

Given the Reds' situation, and acts of seemingly desperation, we've rushed Homer Bailey. Hopefully we don't do that with Cueto and Bruce. Votto's ready, so he should be the starting 1B for Opening Day. In 2007, the Reds acted and treated Homer Bailey like he was the difference maker. He wasn't. We were a 90 loss ballclub with or without him at the MLB level.

It would be refreshing if the Reds allowed their prospects to actually develop, rather than hitting the panic button when they have a hole to fill, and grabbing the most "developed" kid in the minors to fill the hole.

dougdirt
11-26-2007, 12:44 AM
Teams will have different speeds for their respective prospects. The Red Sox haven't rushed their prospects, but rather allowed them to play at the MLB level when they are ready, as opposed to when the MLB club needs the prospects. That's the difference between Clay Buchholz and Homer Bailey in 2007. The Reds felt they needed Homer Bailey, and that he might help them to the division in 2007, whereas the Red Sox didn't need Buchholz to get them to the playoffs, but he was an added luxury down the stretch.

Given the Reds' situation, and acts of seemingly desperation, we've rushed Homer Bailey. Hopefully we don't do that with Cueto and Bruce. Votto's ready, so he should be the starting 1B for Opening Day. In 2007, the Reds acted and treated Homer Bailey like he was the difference maker. He wasn't. We were a 90 loss ballclub with or without him at the MLB level.

It would be refreshing if the Reds allowed their prospects to actually develop, rather than hitting the panic button when they have a hole to fill, and grabbing the most "developed" kid in the minors to fill the hole.

Few issues with that.... 1, the Red Sox can let guys sit around and rot.... they spent 190 million dollars on their roster this year (including the posting fee for Matsuzaka) and have all stars at almost every position. 2, we will disagree about Bailey. I think that this year helped him out a lot, and he actually helped the Reds this year.

camisadelgolf
11-26-2007, 03:56 AM
Can I change my vote to Travis Wood? I have nothing against Roenicke, but I think Travis Wood is a better prospect, overall.

HokieRed
11-26-2007, 09:38 AM
I voted Wood, though I really like Lotzkar, Roenicke, and a bunch of other guys mentioned. If upside is a criterion, Wood's got a lot to offer. A lefthander with 90+ fastball and tremendous change is as valuable as anything in baseball at any level. Let's all just hope he can get it all together, because if he can, the combination of Homer, Cueto, and Wood could give the Reds starting pitching on a level the organization has hardly ever seen.

Danny Serafini
11-26-2007, 11:01 AM
I just don't get all the Roenicke love. He had a promising season, but to count on him to do anything in Cincinnati before September of '09 is really rushing it. I'd like to see more than 19 innings above A ball before I declare someone Major League ready.

M2
11-26-2007, 12:00 PM
I just don't get all the Roenicke love. He had a promising season, but to count on him to do anything in Cincinnati before September of '09 is really rushing it. I'd like to see more than 19 innings above A ball before I declare someone Major League ready.

A general truism I go by is that starters move slow, but relievers move fast.

Getting between one and six outs is a far different job than trying to work your way through a lineup three or four times. When a young reliever gets in trouble, somebody else usually gets called upon to pitch the team out of the situation. If a reliever doesn't have it going that day, it's a quick trip to the showers. A young starter has to pitch his way out of trouble, he has to give the team effective innings. A reliever can survive having a bad day every other week. A starter can't.

It's a different job. When a reliever clicks, when he's chewing up opposing hitters, he can move fast. Jensen Lewis had a cup of coffee in AA last year, converted to relief and wound up pitching in the playoffs. Roenicke's got impressive stuff that plays well and a mature physique. He's primed for a fast rise.

Kc61
11-26-2007, 12:20 PM
I just don't get all the Roenicke love. He had a promising season, but to count on him to do anything in Cincinnati before September of '09 is really rushing it. I'd like to see more than 19 innings above A ball before I declare someone Major League ready.

Nobody said Roenicke is major league ready at this moment.

But he is a combination of tools (BA's best tools reliever for the Florida State League) and performance (did well at every level so far, including AA).

Roenicke will need some more AA and AAA time, but if he is as dominant in '08 as he was in '07, he will be a Red by the end of next season.

With Cordero, Burton, and Roenicke as the late-inning guys, the Reds would have some flame throwers down there.

Blue
11-26-2007, 01:33 PM
Can we do a run-off for this one, or would that take too long? We have all offseason...

dougdirt
11-26-2007, 01:34 PM
Can we do a run-off for this one, or would that take too long? We have all offseason...

Well this poll runs through the end of today, so there is still time for something to happen. Right now though, Roenicke is leading so there is no need for a runoff at this point.

camisadelgolf
11-26-2007, 03:25 PM
I propose that in the event a prospect receives less than 25% of the votes, a runoff vote will be held. All of those in favor, say, "B.J. Szymanski is a contact hitter."

M2
11-26-2007, 03:39 PM
The last three picks have been plurality choices. If there wasn't a runoff on those choices, there shouldn't be one here either. I think we all realize there will be a greater diversity of opinion as we move down the list.

Danny Serafini
11-26-2007, 04:53 PM
Unless there's a dead heat there's no reason to have runoffs or revotes. Whoever has the most votes wins, simple enough.

camisadelgolf
11-26-2007, 05:19 PM
The last three picks have been plurality choices. If there wasn't a runoff on those choices, there shouldn't be one here either. I think we all realize there will be a greater diversity of opinion as we move down the list.

Oh, sure, leave it to a guy who voted for Roenicke to not want a runoff. :D;)

Blue
11-26-2007, 05:59 PM
The last three picks have been plurality choices. If there wasn't a runoff on those choices, there shouldn't be one here either. I think we all realize there will be a greater diversity of opinion as we move down the list.

That's true enough, but in the last poll the difference between the first and second vote getters was 18 votes. As of right now, every person in this poll with the exception of Carlos Fisher is within 18 votes of Josh Roenicke.

Kc61
11-26-2007, 06:32 PM
That's true enough, but in the last poll the difference between the first and second vote getters was 18 votes. As of right now, every person in this poll with the exception of Carlos Fisher is within 18 votes of Josh Roenicke.

My guess is that a lot of these future polls will result in close votes among many candidates. The question is whether Doug and the rest want constant re-votes. I previously suggested run-offs but was persuaded that it will result in so many polls that the whole exercise will collapse.

Maybe if the top guys are tied or separated by one or, possibly, two votes there should be a re-vote. This one might wind up that close by the end, who knows.

Betterread
11-26-2007, 06:50 PM
My guess is that a lot of these future polls will result in close votes among many candidates. The question is whether Doug and the rest want constant re-votes. I previously suggested run-offs but was persuaded that it will result in so many polls that the whole exercise will collapse.

Maybe if the top guys are tied or separated by one or, possibly, two votes there should be a re-vote. This one might wind up that close by the end, who knows.
My criteria for the runoff is the leading vote-getter's percentage of the overall votes - Roenicke has just 24% - which is really low. A Runoff between the top 3 would result in a leading votegetter with at least 33%. However, this is more work for Doug - and I would bet on Roenicke remaining the leading vote getter anway so what would the extra work achieve?

BoydsOfSummer
11-26-2007, 07:13 PM
My 8-10 guys are Wood, Mesoraco and Lotzkar. Now if I could just settle on an order.:confused:

dougdirt
11-26-2007, 07:18 PM
I think unless we have guys finishing within 2 votes of eachother there is no need for a run off. While from this point forward I don't expect any 1 player to get a solid 50% of the vote, I expect someone to pull away from the rest of the guys a little bit. Right now, Roenicke has a 5 vote lead on Travis Wood and when we are talking 83 votes, that is 6% difference, which isn't exactly far apart, but not overly close either.