PDA

View Full Version : Redszone Community Prospect Vote: #10



dougdirt
11-29-2007, 01:13 PM
Vote for the player who you think is the Reds #10 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
Prospect 8 - Josh Roenicke
Prospect 9 - Travis Wood

AmarilloRed
11-29-2007, 01:32 PM
Danny Dorn. He hit for a good BA, showed some power, improved his OBP and SLG. from Sarasota to Chattanooga(admittedly in limited action), and showed he was a legitimate prospect. Time will only tell if he is a platoon player or a starting outfielder, but I think we could see him in Cincinnati before much longer.

RedsManRick
11-29-2007, 01:57 PM
Yup, Danny "Don't Call Me Roger" Dorn it is. If the biggest knock on a lefty slugger is his difficult hitting lefty pitching at age 22, I consider that a plus. He crushes righties enough to earn himself the opportunity to learn to hit lefties better.

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 02:02 PM
I have to go Devin Mesoraco here.

He is a toolsy guy as a catcher... not exactly fast, but he isn't slow (yet at least). He has very good bat speed. Has both average and power potential while playing a very important defensive position. Speaking of which, he plays it great. He has a cannon of an arm behind the plate and above average catching and recieving skills.

He had a rough debut at the plate, but he was also swinging a bat with two injured thumbs for almost the entire season.

He is far, but he has all the tools you want at a premiere defensive position and has age on his side.... I have to go with him here.

TOBTTReds
11-29-2007, 02:03 PM
Danny Dorn. He hit for a good BA, showed some power, improved his OBP and SLG. from Sarasota to Chattanooga(admittedly in limited action), and showed he was a legitimate prospect. Time will only tell if he is a platoon player or a starting outfielder, but I think we could see him in Cincinnati before much longer.

I went with Mez for this reason. Considering ceilings, Mez has a higher one than a possible platoon player. I reserve possible platoons to 11-30 if there are no possible stars left.

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 02:03 PM
RMR, Dorn turned 23 in July this past season.

M2
11-29-2007, 02:04 PM
Carlos Fisher is a large-framed man who throws hard with sharp downward bite. That's practically a blueprint for the ideal GAB pitcher. He's still got more to prove, but so does everyone left on the list.

Devin Mesoraco still has to prove he can hit his weight at the lowest level of pro ball. I'll ask again, in what universe does he merit better consideration than Lotzkar? Maybe he's got talent, but not a single one of us has seen it translate onto the field yet.

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 02:07 PM
Carlos Fisher is a large-framed man who throws hard with sharp downward bite. That's practically a blueprint for the ideal GAB pitcher. He's still got more to prove, but so does everyone left on the list.

Devin Mesoraco still has to prove he can hit his weight at the lowest level of pro ball. I'll ask again, in what universe does he merit better consideration than Lotzkar? Maybe he's got talent, but not a single one of us has seen it translate onto the field yet.

I went with Mesoraco over Lotzkar based on scouting reports (where Mes gets the slight edge... and I do mean very slight edge) . I like everything I hear about his defense behind the plate and his swing is also something I like when he has it working in tune with itself.

Kc61
11-29-2007, 02:09 PM
I think you have to include Devin M in the top ten. He was a relatively high first round pick, very toolsy for a catcher. His GCL performance is probably meaningless, particularly since he had some injuries.

In the period leading to the draft he was consistently ranked by the publications as one of the top twenty prospects in the entire draft. I don't think the Reds are so deep that such a guy is below the ten spot in the system.

Not too much support for Francisco who was a powerhouse at low-A ball. Once Mesoraco is selected, I'm on the Francisco bandwagon.

M2
11-29-2007, 02:18 PM
I went with Mesoraco over Lotzkar based on scouting reports (where Mes gets the slight edge... and I do mean very slight edge) . I like everything I hear about his defense behind the plate and his swing is also something I like when he has it working in tune with itself.

I think the standard should be that he should have to demonstrate it in more than theory before getting much credit on that front. We're past the point where we have to take the assessment of Mesoraco's abilities solely on faith, at least we should be. The problem is those supposed abilities failed to materialize on the field, so he's still a nebulous talent, hardly the sort of thing deserving of a top 10 vote.

All he's demonstrated so far is he can hit high school pitchers in central PA.

M2
11-29-2007, 02:22 PM
I think you have to include Devin M in the top ten. He was a relatively high first round pick, very toolsy for a catcher. His GCL performance is probably meaningless, particularly since he had some injuries.

God forbid somebody require him to earn that place on the field.

We'll know how meaningless his GCL performance was after 2008. If he makes a splash in Billings (or Dayton, but I've got my doubts the Reds will stick him there), then it's meaningless. If he continues to struggle, then it stands as the first piece of concrete evidence that Mesoraco was more of a kid with catching tools than a complete prospect.

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 02:28 PM
I think the standard should be that he should have to demonstrate it in more than theory before getting much credit on that front. We're past the point where we have to take the assessment of Mesoraco's abilities solely on faith, at least we should be. The problem is those supposed abilities failed to materialize on the field, so he's still a nebulous talent, hardly the sort of thing deserving of a top 10 vote.

All he's demonstrated so far is he can hit high school pitchers in central PA.

Well thats where we differ in our viewing of prospects. A guy with 200 at bats to his name is someone I am going to take his numbers with a grain of salt. When I look at his scouting reports though, things built over the last three years worth of scouting, his is ahead of everyone else on the list. Could he absolutely bomb? Sure could.... but his tools package is better than anyone left on the list for their position short of Chris Dickerson who has 5 or 6 years on him in age.

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 02:31 PM
God forbid somebody require him to earn that place on the field.

We'll know how meaningless his GCL performance was after 2008. If he makes a splash in Billings (or Dayton, but I've got my doubts the Reds will stick him there), then it's meaningless. If he continues to struggle, then it stands as the first piece of concrete evidence that Mesoraco was more of a kid with catching tools than a complete prospect.

M2, you sound like you are really offended that someone thinks Mesoraco is deserving of a Top 10 ranking. Is it really all that concerning that someone likes his package of tools and defensive abilities and is willing to not put a ton of stock into 138 at bats compared to someones scouting report? And yeah, you are going to be hard pressed to find any prospect fresh out of high school that is a 'complete prospect'.

RedsManRick
11-29-2007, 02:32 PM
I think the standard should be that he should have to demonstrate it in more than theory before getting much credit on that front. We're past the point where we have to take the assessment of Mesoraco's abilities solely on faith, at least we should be. The problem is those supposed abilities failed to materialize on the field, so he's still a nebulous talent, hardly the sort of thing deserving of a top 10 vote.

All he's demonstrated so far is he can hit high school pitchers in central PA.

I agree 100%. I'm fine with any unproven (in either direction) #1 pick in the top 20, but unless you've got an extremely thin system, I want to see performance at the professional level first.

I don't hold his 2007 performance against him, but I've seen too many catchers whose bats never really came around.

There was a great point made in the #9 thread regarding the high potential guys. If they have a breakout season, I'm quite likely to buy in to it, and treat them differently moving forward. But I'm simply not a fan of ranking prospects highly before they produce.

If on one hand you have a list of players who were very highly recommended per scouting reports but have yet to produce and the other you have people with good, but not glowing report, but who have, I'm guessing the latter groups tends to pan out more frequently. I'm guessing that there are more Reggie Taylors than Brandon Larsons.

If a Moreseco or Wood has a great season which corroborates the scouting report I could very well place them in the top 5 next year.

I'd be interested to see a list simply of "highest ceiling", regardless of performance to date.

M2
11-29-2007, 02:33 PM
Well thats where we differ in our viewing of prospects. A guy with 200 at bats to his name is someone I am going to take his numbers with a grain of salt. When I look at his scouting reports though, things built over the last three years worth of scouting, his is ahead of everyone else on the list. Could he absolutely bomb? Sure could.... but his tools package is better than anyone left on the list for their position short of Chris Dickerson who has 5 or 6 years on him in age.

I'm all for taking his 200 ABs with a grain of salt. Heck, gimme a bucket of salt.

As for his tools, what I've read leads me to believe he's the typicle "toolsy" catcher, which is code for catch-and-throw skills. Would he be a toolsy OF? Would we be talking about his power, speed and ability to hit for average at that position. I highly doubt it.

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 02:37 PM
I'm all for taking his 200 ABs with a grain of salt. Heck, gimme a bucket of salt.

As for his tools, what I've read leads me to believe he's the typicle "toolsy" catcher, which is code for catch-and-throw skills. Would he be a toolsy OF? Would we be talking about his power, speed and ability to hit for average at that position. I highly doubt it.

Well there is a large difference between being a toolsy outfielder and being a toolsy catcher. What you take out of a scouting report isn't what I take out of it. I know that you know there is a large difference between the hitting expectations of a catcher and the hitting expectations of an outfielder, so trying to use it as an example to downgrade him is being a little silly in my mind.

M2
11-29-2007, 02:38 PM
M2, you sound like you are really offended that someone thinks Mesoraco is deserving of a Top 10 ranking. Is it really all that concerning that someone likes his package of tools and defensive abilities and is willing to not put a ton of stock into 138 at bats compared to someones scouting report? And yeah, you are going to be hard pressed to find any prospect fresh out of high school that is a 'complete prospect'.

I'm unimpressed, not offended.

Plus, I've lost count of how many times I've been told a catcher with no outstanding offensive talents has great tools. We'll see if Mesoraco ever amounts to more than Terry McGriff. If he doesn't have a big bat, then he's not a complete prospect, which is what you should be shopping for in the middle of the first round.

He had a chance to backup the hype this summer and didn't. Until he does, I'd suggest a healthy dose of skepticism.

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 02:41 PM
I'm unimpressed, not offended.

Plus, I've lost count of how many times I've been told a catcher with no outstanding offensive talents has great tools. We'll see if Mesoraco ever amounts to more than Terry McGriff. If he doesn't have a big bat, then he's not a complete prospect, which is what you should be shopping for in the middle of the first round.

He had a chance to backup the hype this summer and didn't. Until he does, I'd suggest a healthy dose of skepticism.

Had Mesoraco not played an ounce because he signed late, I think you would have a different opinion of him. Instead he had all of 138 at bats in which he was swinging with 2 injured thumbs and you are unimpressed. I am unworried by 138 at bats. You obviously are very worried by them.

M2
11-29-2007, 02:55 PM
Well there is a large difference between being a toolsy outfielder and being a toolsy catcher.

There shouldn't be. It's a major industry blind spot and one of the chief reasons so much money and hope has been wasted over the years on catchers who never manage to produce at the plate.


What you take out of a scouting report isn't what I take out of it.

I definitely don't take them an unassailable statements of fact if that's what you mean. I've certainly seen enough bluster from scouts over the years to be wary.


I know that you know there is a large difference between the hitting expectations of a catcher and the hitting expectations of an outfielder, so trying to use it as an example to downgrade him is being a little silly in my mind.

And if Mesoraco had been a third or fourth round pick, I wouldn't have to mention this stuff. Then we'd all view him more akin to what he is, a kid with catching tools and perhaps a nascent clue at the plate who'll need to advance with his offense before he merits top 10 consideration.

I don't expect a catcher to hit like an OF most of the time, unless you're telling me said catcher is a first round talent. Then he'd better have a stick.

But don't do expect me to fall for the classic catcher "tools" bait and switch. Mesoraco doesn't have big tools on offense. He's not overly strong. He's not that fast. He isn't a dynamic hitter. Maybe he's toolsier than what you'd normally get in a catcher, but tools is tools and it's a false claim to state that Mesoraco possesses them in abundance.

M2
11-29-2007, 02:57 PM
Had Mesoraco not played an ounce because he signed late, I think you would have a different opinion of him. Instead he had all of 138 at bats in which he was swinging with 2 injured thumbs and you are unimpressed. I am unworried by 138 at bats. You obviously are very worried by them.

No, I didn't like him before the draft for the same reasons. What he did after the draft only reinforced what any rational person should have suspected about a HS catcher from central PA whose tools did not include big offensive skills. Don't read that as me saying he can't be good someday, just that he's got a lot farther to go than anyone wanted to admit on draft day.

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 03:04 PM
There shouldn't be. It's a major industry blind spot and one of the chief reasons so much money and hope has been wasted over the years on catchers who never manage to produce at the plate.
I disagree. In the history of baseball the number of catchers who would be able to survive offensively as outfielder is very few. The number of outfielders who could survive as a catcher offensively is probably in the 90% range.



And if Mesoraco had been a third or fourth round pick, I wouldn't have to mention this stuff. Then we'd all view more akin to what he is, a kid with catching tools and perhaps a nascent clue at the plate who'll need to advance with his offense before he merits top 10 consideration.
I just put more into scouts across major league baseball who had him as one of the top 20-25 prospects available this year than you do. Thats fine, but that alone is reason enough for me to put him in the Top 10. If the Reds entire system were put into this years draft do you really think someone would draft Carlos Fisher before Mesoraco?



I don't expect a catcher to hit like an OF most of the time, unless you're telling me said catcher is a first round talent. Then he'd better have a stick.
Well, that seems to be a major difference. I like his bats potential. You seemingly don't.



But don't do expect me to fall for the classic catcher "tools" bait and switch. Mesoraco doesn't have big tools on offense. He's not overly strong. He's not that fast. He isn't a dynamic hitter. Maybe he's toolsier than what you'd normally get in a catcher, but tools is tools and it's a false claim to state that Mesoraco possesses them in abundance.
He has no tools that aren't better than average. He can run decently. He has a great arm, he projects to hit well for both average and for power and he can play defense. What tools am I missing?

lollipopcurve
11-29-2007, 03:07 PM
As for his tools, what I've read leads me to believe he's the typicle "toolsy" catcher, which is code for catch-and-throw skills.

I don't think so. Mesoraco shows plus bat speed, decent contact rate, good power, good agility, above average speed for a catcher -- beyond the catch and throw skills. He's just a better "baseball athlete" than most catchers. We also saw that he'll take a walk -- usually a hallowed trait around here. He's got a long way to go, obviously, but for me he remains a good prospect at the thinnest of all positions -- a nice thing to have in your system.

lollipopcurve
11-29-2007, 03:24 PM
No, I didn't like him before the draft for the same reasons. What he did after the draft only reinforced what any rational person should have suspected about a HS catcher from central PA whose tools did not include big offensive skills.

So? You loved Matt Dominguez despite well-known suspicions about his long swing, and his performance at the plate seemed to bear out those suspicions. Just rattling your cage here, but I wouldn't go making claims about rationality when evaluating prospects -- we're all working off hunches and biases to a certain extent, and we're all wrong a lot.

The mitigating factors for Mesoraco were reported to be 2 injured thumbs and adjusting to catching in the brutal midsummer heat in Florida (following a full HS season of catching). I can accept those explanations. And, it's well known the GCL can be tough for HS players -- witness the opening seasons of players like Jeter and Chipper Jones. In my opinion, there's enough information there to leave open the possibility that Mesoraco will show significantly better next year. If he doesn't, then I'd start to get worried, too.

Anyway, I'm voting Lotzkar, as usual.

M2
11-29-2007, 03:27 PM
I disagree. In the history of baseball the number of catchers who would be able to survive offensively as outfielder is very few. The number of outfielders who could survive as a catcher offensively is probably in the 90% range.

Outfielders also tend to have longer, steadier careers. Shouldn't prospect valuation reflect that? If you're looking at an OF prospect who has real tools and a catcher who's got all right tools for a catcher, it's not the same the thing. You're acknowledging it's not the same thing. That's the point.

By and large catchers don't have tools and the industry's habit of pretending they do is a massive inefficiency. So, unless your catcher prospect really could make it as an OF, you're probably better off not blowing seven figures on him.


I just put more into scouts across major league baseball who had him as one of the top 20-25 prospects available this year than you do. Thats fine, but that alone is reason enough for me to put him in the Top 10. If the Reds entire system were put into this years draft do you really think someone would draft Carlos Fisher before Mesoraco?

I don't think someone would draft Carlos Fisher before Devin Mesoraco. I don't think someone would trade Devin Mesoraco for Carlos Fisher. But I do think that the stuff Fisher has demonstrated translates better to actually doing something positive in the majors than Mesoraco. And it doesn't have to be Fisher, the Reds have got a whole pile of guys I'd rank ahead of Mesoraco at this moment. If Mesoraco actually translates those supposed abilities onto the field, then I'd move him up, but I don't give unearned credit.


Well, that seems to be a major difference. I like his bats potential. You seemingly don't.

I don't think much of anyone knows what his bat's potential is. Scouts think it looks all right for a catcher. That's damning a guy with faint praise. Apparently I'm making a radical suggestion when I make the case that his bat ought to be required to prove itself.


He has no tools that aren't better than average. He can run decently. He has a great arm, he projects to hit well for both average and for power and he can play defense. What tools am I missing?

Run decently? What's that? Seriously, what does that mean? This isn't the Special Olympics, either the guy is fast or he's not. I've seen 15 HR power associated with Mesoraco, that's not power. What's his scouting grade on hit for average? I'd be in shock if it was above 55. In fact, I'd be in shock if his speed or power ranked above a 55 too. And if they don't, then don't tell me he's toolsy.

We know he can throw and that he's got good actions behind the plate. Unfortunately that and a thoroughly pedestrian rest of the resume constantly gets overrated in the game of baseball.

M2
11-29-2007, 03:33 PM
So? You loved Matt Dominguez despite well-known suspicions about his long swing, and his performance at the plate seemed to bear out those suspicions. Just rattling your cage here, but I wouldn't go making claims about rationality when evaluating prospects -- we're all working off hunches and biases to a certain extent, and we're all wrong a lot.

Agreed. Though let's be honest, we're talking about an industry with a well-documented history of catastrophic hunches on catchers.


The mitigating factors for Mesoraco were reported to be 2 injured thumbs and adjusting to catching in the brutal midsummer heat in Florida (following a full HS season of catching). I can accept those explanations.

I can accept them too, but we still don't know what he plays like even if we give a mulligan. It only means we're in "Let's see what we've got here" mode.


Anyway, I'm voting Lotzkar, as usual.

I don't tend to rate pitchers until they get a year in full season ball, but Lotzkar demonstrated a lot more than Mesoraco. Where they were drafted means exactly nothing at this juncture. It's what they do that counts. If you're going to take a super green kids and project him, then I'd say Lotzkar is the right pick.

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 03:43 PM
Outfielders also tend to have longer, steadier careers. Shouldn't prospect valuation reflect that? If you're looking at an OF prospect who has real tools and a catcher who's got all right tools for a catcher, it's not the same the thing. You're acknowledging it's not the same thing. That's the point.
I don't know exactly how to answer that. What is more valuable a 10 year run as an above average catcher or a 15 year run as an average outfielder.... its a tough question to answer here.



By and large catchers don't have tools and the industry's habit of pretending they do is a massive inefficiency. So, unless your catcher prospect really could make it as an OF, you're probably better off not blowing seven figures on him.
Im not so much worried about what you feel the industry skews things to be. Could most shortstops make it as outfielders? No, but there is a reason Troy Tulowitski is incredibly valuable despite the fact that if he were an outfielder his bat would be middle of the road. Position matters. The idea of taking a catcher in the first round is generally one I stay away from, because they don't often pan out. That doesn't change the prospect that Mesoraco is.




I don't think someone would draft Carlos Fisher before Devin Mesoraco. I don't think someone would trade Devin Mesoraco for Carlos Fisher. But I do think that the stuff Fisher has demonstrated translates better to actually doing something positive in the majors than Mesoraco. And it doesn't have to be Fisher, the Reds have got a whole pile of guys I'd rank ahead of Mesoraco at this moment. If Mesoraco actually translates those supposed abilities onto the field, then I'd move him up, but I don't give unearned credit.
Well again its where we have a difference in how we view prospects.... especially guys with literally 138 at bats under their belt. Scouting reports and tools will trump on field performance every day of the week in that case for me.




I don't think much of anyone knows what his bat's potential is. Scouts think it looks all right for a catcher. That's damning a guy with faint praise. Apparently I'm making a radical suggestion when I make the case that his bat ought to be required to prove itself. Well all his bat has to play for is as a catcher. Until he moves to another position, shouldn't he be evaluated as a catcher? Why should he be evaluated as something else?




Run decently? What's that? Seriously, what does that mean? This isn't the Special Olympics, either the guy is fast or he's not. I've seen 15 HR power associated with Mesoraco, that's not power. What's his scouting grade on hit for average? I'd be in shock if it was above 55. In fact, I'd be in shock if his speed or power ranked above a 55 too. And if they don't, then don't tell me he's toolsy.
I have seen anywhere from 15-25 HR associated with him. Again, a 55 for average, especially when talking about a catcher is quite good. Catcher don't hit for average. So a guy who hits .260 or .270 as a catcher is on the right path. As for speed, he is above average, but he isn't a burner. Thats what I was trying to say with 'runs decently'.



We know he can throw and that he's got good actions behind the plate. Unfortunately that and a thoroughly pedestrian rest of the resume constantly gets overrated in the game of baseball.

Except we don't know what hes capable of in the rest of his game being that he has 138 injured in both hands at bats on his professional resume.

lollipopcurve
11-29-2007, 03:44 PM
Agreed. Though let's be honest, we're talking about an industry with a well-documented history of catastrophic hunches on catchers.

This is true. But I think what's happening is that the industry is realizing that the position is alarmingly thin. American kids don't want to catch.


I can accept them too, but we still don't know what he plays like even if we give a mulligan. It only means we're in "Let's see what we've got here" mode.

Exactly. I haven't scrawled out my personal top ten, but he may not be on it.


I don't tend to rate pitchers until they get a year in full season ball, but Lotzkar demonstrated a lot more than Mesoraco. Where they were drafted means exactly nothing at this juncture. It's what they do that counts.

I know I'm on a limb with Lotzkar. But I value high ceilings, and this kid dominated at times as a true 17 year old. Impressive.


[/QUOTE]

Benihana
11-29-2007, 03:45 PM
No way for Mesoraco here. I'm still deciding between Dorn and Lotzkar

M2
11-29-2007, 04:15 PM
most shortstops make it as outfielders? No, but there is a reason Troy Tulowitski is incredibly valuable despite the fact that if he were an outfielder his bat would be middle of the road. Position matters.

Tulo looks like he's going to be an .850+ OPS SS. That would make him a fine OF, 50 points better than the average RF. Yeah, position matters, but Tulo's giving you a nice representation for the kind of complete package you should be looking for in a top pick at SS, C or 2B.


The idea of taking a catcher in the first round is generally one I stay away from, because they don't often pan out. That doesn't change the prospect that Mesoraco is.

The first part of what you wrote there ought to lead to the question of wheter Mesoraco really is what he's being hyped to be.


Well again its where we have a difference in how we view prospects.... especially guys with literally 138 at bats under their belt. Scouting reports and tools will trump on field performance every day of the week in that case for me.

I don't think the 138 ABs define him, nor do I think the scouting reports define him. That's the problem. He's undefined.


Well all his bat has to play for is as a catcher. Until he moves to another position, shouldn't he be evaluated as a catcher? Why should he be evaluated as something else?

His offensive skills should be evaluated as offensive skills. That's the bait and switch. People buy into the line that he's got tools, but it's not tools, it's tools for a catcher, which could mean he'll be a .260 hitter, with 10 SB and 15 HR.

And I'm fine with that kind of production behind the plate, in fact I value it quite highly, but it's not silence-in-the-room-because-I-gotta-pay-full-attention-to-this-guy skills.


I have seen anywhere from 15-25 HR associated with him. Again, a 55 for average, especially when talking about a catcher is quite good. Catcher don't hit for average. So a guy who hits .260 or .270 as a catcher is on the right path. As for speed, he is above average, but he isn't a burner. Thats what I was trying to say with 'runs decently'.

Exactly. He's not fast and he doesn't have big offensive skills. He rates as a fairly average guy with the bat. No one's accusing him of being Joe Mauer or Russ Martin at this moment, which, I'm guessing, is what a lot of people are imagining for Mesoraco. He doesn't have an abundance of tools, he's just not as tools devoid as your average catcher.


Except we don't know what hes capable of in the rest of his game being that he has 138 injured in both hands at bats on his professional resume.

That's the point - we don't know. I'm saying we might want to hold off of rating him too highly until we do.

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 04:20 PM
Exactly. He's not fast and he doesn't have big offensive skills. He rates as a fairly average guy at with the bat. No one's accusing him of being Joe Mauer or Russ Martin at this moment, which, I'm guessing, is what a lot of people are imagining for Mesoraco. He doesn't have an abundance of tools, he's just not as tools devoid as your average catcher.

Again, you are trying to compare him to other positions. Why should he have to be compared against other positions when he doesn't play them? Should he have to be as toolsy as Chris Dickerson to be considered toolsy? Surely not. Just like in evluating how good a player someone is, a .300/.360/.460 shortstop is a lot stronger than a .300/.360/.460 corner outfielder..... Fact is, tools wise, he is well ahead of most other catchers, and that is how he should be evaluated.

Patrick Bateman
11-29-2007, 04:36 PM
I think he has the tools, it's just that he's about as raw as it gets. As a ceiling, I could see a Russell Martin calibre player, as he fits the similar mold since he is a very good athlete, it's just that his chances of being that good are almost non-existant.

I could also see him being a LaRue type of player. JUst replace some HBP with walks.

M2
11-29-2007, 04:41 PM
Again, you are trying to compare him to other positions. Why should he have to be compared against other positions when he doesn't play them? Should he have to be as toolsy as Chris Dickerson to be considered toolsy? Surely not. Just like in evluating how good a player someone is, a .300/.360/.460 shortstop is a lot stronger than a .300/.360/.460 corner outfielder..... Fact is, tools wise, he is well ahead of most other catchers, and that is how he should be evaluated.

Do Joe Mauer and Russ Martin play other positions? No, they don't. Yet they still have offensive tools, not just for catchers, they have legit tools.

You keep falling for your own bait and switch. There is a rather sizable gap between being a toolsy ballplayer and being catcher who doesn't totally lack tools. Know the difference. It's fine that Mesoraco is the latter type. I've got zero problem with that. Yet people keep pretending he's the former type when he's not. He's not a 60 hitter with 65 speed and power. I'd actually be interested in seeing what some scouts have him rated at on those levels, but you can tell by the "for a catcher" caveats on the reports that those tools are being talked about as relative strengths, not absolute strengths ... and relative strengths don't merit the same sort of valuation as absolute ones.

mth123
11-29-2007, 04:57 PM
My next three are Adam Rosales, Danny Dorn and Carlos Fisher. I have all three in the top 10 in place of Stubbs, Mesoraco and Wood. I think Mesoraco and Stubbs are guys who need to prove that they aren't mistakes. I like Wood a little but I was suspicious of his slight build and his ability to maintain in higher levels after 2006. Last season did nothing to remove those concerns. I would need to see 150 effective innings split between A+ and AA in 2008 to call him a top 10 prospect. If so, I'd move him up to number 6 on this list behind Frazier. As is, I have him at 14 behind Marcus McBeth. I have Stubbs at 18 and Mesoraco at 31. I obviously give a lot more weight to success at AA and above than I do draft position. Draft position coupled with immediate success (Frazier who I have at #5) means a lot more than draft position alone IMO. I guess since these rookie leagues are filled with guys drafted anywhere throughout the draft, I expect #1 picks to succeed at the lowest levels and if they don't it's a major red flag.

I think a number of people on here are so used to the Reds having such a barren system that they place too much weight on draft position alone. In prior years that was enough to get a prospect in the top 5 or 10 because everyone else was always awful. I'm thankful that the system has some talent to make draft position alone a minor criteria without some successful performance to back it up. That isn't to say that draft position doesn't have any weight. The fact that a catcher who hits .219/.296/.270 in the lowest level is on the list at all while a guy like Ryan Hanigan who had an .847 OPS at AA and spent some time on the major league roster is not ranked at all is a tip of the hat to draft pedigree.

RedsManRick
11-29-2007, 04:58 PM
Let's say he's got the ceiling of a being a plus defending catcher who can put up .280/.330/.430.

Is that ceiling fair?
How does that compare to the ceiling of the other guys in our top 10?
What are the odds he reaches that ceiling?

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 04:59 PM
Do Joe Mauer and Russ Martin play other positions? No, they don't. Yet they still have offensive tools, not just for catchers, they have legit tools.

You keep falling for your own bait and switch. There is a rather sizable gap between being a toolsy ballplayer and being catcher who doesn't totally lack tools. Know the difference. It's fine that
Mesoraco is the latter type. I've got zero problem with that. Yet people keep pretending he's the former type when he's not. He's not a 60 hitter with 65 speed and power. I'd actually be interested in seeing what some scouts have him rated at on those levels, but you can tell by the "for a catcher" caveats on the reports that those tools are being talked about as relative strengths, not absolute strengths ... and relative strengths don't merit the same sort of valuation as absolute ones.

Well here is the milb.com scouting report for Mesoraco. The only thing I can note where they talk about his tools 'as a catcher' is his running ability.



Focus Area

Comments
Hitting Ability: Mesoraco has a ton of hitting ability, using a little leg kick in his approach, and doesn't swing at bad pitches.

Power: Mesoraco has plus power. Right now, it's more pull power, but eventually he'll develop power to all fields.

Running Speed: He's a fringy-average runner, which is pretty good for a catcher.

Arm Strength: He has a plus arm and isn't afraid to use it in pick-off attempts.

Arm Accuracy: His throws are always right on the money.

Fielding: Mesoraco has plus hands behind the plate.

Range: A terrific athlete, Mesoraco is outstanding at blocking balls in the dirt.

Baseball Instincts: Off the charts. He's got great makeup, he's very aggressive and he's a natural leader behind the plate.

Physical Description: Mesoraco is a strong backstop with a body type that might remind some of a Joe Girardi or Ivan Rodriguez.

Medical Update: Mesoraco missed much of 2006 following Tommy John surgery, but now is completely healthy and clearly is having no problems with his throwing.

Strengths: He's a complete package. He can hit with power and he can play defense with a strong arm and soft hands.

Weaknesses: He tends to get out on his front foot on his swing from time to time.

Summary: Mesoraco has answered any questions about his arm following Tommy John surgery a year ago and is on the rise among catching prospects. He's a complete catching package, with hitting ability, power, good hands, a plus arm and outstanding leadership ability.


I can't post what Baseball America has to say in their scouting report on him, but nowhere did they have any caveats about 'good for a catcher'.

*BaseClogger*
11-29-2007, 05:07 PM
woo hoo carlos fisher!

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 05:08 PM
Let's say he's got the ceiling of a being a plus defending catcher who can put up .280/.330/.430.

Is that ceiling fair?
How does that compare to the ceiling of the other guys in our top 10?
What are the odds he reaches that ceiling?

I think those numbers look good with the exception of the OBP and slugging. He has shown a solid ability of walking. I would probably bump both up another 20-30 points and go with .280/.355/.455 with potential for more slugging for 2-3 years in his prime. That is decently close to what Joe Mauer put up this year (.292/.382/.426). Do I think he is in the Joe Mauer class? No, Joe Mauer is in a different class of player (the guy was also the Gatorade High School Football Player of the Year as a senior in HS). The odds of him reaching that ceiling are unknown right now.

M2
11-29-2007, 05:16 PM
I think those numbers look good with the exception of the OBP and slugging. He has shown a solid ability of walking. I would probably bump both up another 20-30 points and go with .280/.355/.455 with potential for more slugging for 2-3 years in his prime.

That strikes me as a fair ceiling. Obviously we don't know the odds, but generally they aren't good. That's why it's your ceiling, it's the maximum you're likely to attain. I'd be perfectly happy with a .260/.335/.435. In fact, I'd probably like Mesoraco better than most under those circumstances.

I just sort of doubt most people are dreaming on those sorts of numbers.

Blue
11-29-2007, 05:58 PM
Devin Mesoraco was considered a better prospect than Todd Frazier in June, and IMO, still should be. I'll vote for him a third time.

Mario-Rijo
11-29-2007, 06:53 PM
Again I vote Viola.

Prf15
11-29-2007, 07:19 PM
I went with Mesoraco this time. I have went Dorn the last 2 but I did not look at how bad he struggled against lefties this year.

OnBaseMachine
11-29-2007, 07:21 PM
I decided to go with Viola in a slight edge over Carlos Fisher.

*BaseClogger*
11-29-2007, 07:50 PM
I'm kinda suprised by the inconsistency of the voting... Fisher had no votes last go round and now Thompson has no votes...

dougdirt
11-29-2007, 07:52 PM
I'm kinda suprised by the inconsistency of the voting... Fisher had no votes last go round and now Thompson has no votes...

You have to look at where the votes are coming from and going to. Who voted for Thompson last time, and who did they vote for this time?

Kc61
11-29-2007, 09:00 PM
Francisco with 25 homers, 90 RBIs, a gun for an arm, only 20, BA's 8th selection in the Reds top ten, has no votes this round. I nominate him for prospect 11.

*BaseClogger*
11-29-2007, 09:15 PM
You have to look at where the votes are coming from and going to. Who voted for Thompson last time, and who did they vote for this time?

yeah none of them have voted yet. How did you get so smart DougDirt?:D

Betterread
11-29-2007, 09:16 PM
Thanks for posting that scouting report on Mesoraco, doug. That is such a thorough description, and informs your optimism regarding his future progress. It would be so great if he could manifest his ability sooner than later because the Reds so badly need help at that position. I'm voting for him.

Redman15
11-29-2007, 09:42 PM
The Reds drafted Mesoraco because he was the best catcher available in the draft. You need to remember that it was a down year for catchers in the draft. A player drafted in the 3rd round in 2006 could be a much better prospect than a 1st rd pick in 2007 based on the talent in the draft. I will have a better feel on Mesoraco after he gets a full year under his belt. He is not in my top 10. I went Dorn again based on results not projections.

Mario-Rijo
11-29-2007, 10:03 PM
The Reds drafted Mesoraco because he was the best catcher available in the draft. You need to remember that it was a down year for catchers in the draft. A player drafted in the 3rd round in 2006 could be a much better prospect than a 1st rd pick in 2007 based on the talent in the draft. I will have a better feel on Mesoraco after he gets a full year under his belt. He is not in my top 10. I went Dorn again based on results not projections.

Actually I believe that title belongs to Matt Wieters.

Betterread
11-29-2007, 10:36 PM
The Reds drafted Mesoraco because he was the best catcher available in the draft. You need to remember that it was a down year for catchers in the draft. A player drafted in the 3rd round in 2006 could be a much better prospect than a 1st rd pick in 2007 based on the talent in the draft. I will have a better feel on Mesoraco after he gets a full year under his belt. He is not in my top 10. I went Dorn again based on results not projections.

A down year for catchers? There were 8 catchers chosen in the first 64 picks. That is a high number compared to previous years.
Mesoraco the best catcher in the draft? Have you ever seen Matt Wieters? He's a very good ballplayer - which is why he was chosen 5th overall and given a hugh contract for 6 million dollars by Baltimore.

Blue
11-30-2007, 12:08 AM
A player drafted in the 3rd round in 2006 could be a much better prospect than a 1st rd pick in 2007 based on the talent in the draft.

Actually, 2007 was a much better year than 2006.

dougdirt
11-30-2007, 01:08 AM
Actually, 2007 was a much better year than 2006.

Correct, 2006 was considered one of the weakest drafts in many years.

M2
11-30-2007, 01:56 AM
Correct, 2006 was considered one of the weakest drafts in many years.

I thought those folks who were saying it at the time were insane and over a year later I'm convinced of it.

Look at the pitching coming out of that draft - Lincecum, Miller, Morrow, Hochevar, Scherzer, Kershaw, Kennedy, Chamberlain.

You've got position prospects like Evan Longoria, Matt Antonelli, Hank Conger and Travis Snider.

Based on early results, I expect 2006 will put drafts like the dog years of 2000-2003 to shame.

dougdirt
11-30-2007, 02:45 AM
I thought those folks who were saying it at the time were insane and over a year later I'm convinced of it.

Look at the pitching coming out of that draft - Lincecum, Miller, Morrow, Hochevar, Scherzer, Kershaw, Kennedy, Chamberlain.

You've got position prospects like Evan Longoria, Matt Antonelli, Hank Conger and Travis Snider.

Based on early results, I expect 2006 will put drafts like the dog years of 2000-2003 to shame.

Maybe it just seems that way when compared to the 2005 draft class.... could be it entirely.

camisadelgolf
11-30-2007, 04:30 AM
Speaking of taking things with a grain of salt, if a person misspells 'Mesoraco', I take what was said by that person about Devin Mesoraco with a grain of salt.

Redman15
11-30-2007, 12:36 PM
Actually I believe that title belongs to Matt Wieters.

No doubt Wieters was the best catcher in the draft.I said"The Reds drafted Mesoraco because he was the best catcher available in the draft." Maybe I should of said he was the best catcher available in the draft when the Reds picked in the 1st rd. IMO the 5 catchers drafted in the 1st three rounds in 2006 (Sapp,Conger,McBride,Tracy and Langley) are much better prospects than the 7 drafted in 2007, with the exception of Wieters. (Mesoraco,Arencibia,D;Arnaud,Williams,Donaldson, Canham and Easley) Donaldson is playing 1B and not catching. It's not the quantity of catchers drafted but the quality. I think Conger is a much bigger prospect than Mesoraco IMO. McBride is already in AA.

Kc61
11-30-2007, 12:41 PM
No doubt Wieters was the best catcher in the draft.I said"The Reds drafted Mesoraco because he was the best catcher available in the draft." Maybe I should of said he was the best catcher available in the draft when the Reds picked in the 1st rd. IMO the 5 catchers drafted in the 1st three rounds in 2006 (Sapp,Conger,McBride,Tracy and Langley) are much better prospects than the 7 drafted in 2007, with the exception of Wieters. (Mesoraco,Arencibia,D;Arnaud,Williams,Donaldson, Canham and Easley) Donaldson is playing 1B and not catching. It's not the quantity of catchers drafted but the quality. I think Conger is a much bigger prospect than Mesoraco IMO. McBride is already in AA.

You make it sound like the Reds wanted a catcher and would take the best one available when they drafted. I don't agree. If you read the pre-draft write ups, Mesoraco as one of the best prospects -- regardless of position -- remaining when the Reds picked. Watching the draft, I went down the checklist and saw Mesoraco as about the next best guy remaining.

Mario-Rijo
11-30-2007, 02:42 PM
No doubt Wieters was the best catcher in the draft.I said"The Reds drafted Mesoraco because he was the best catcher available in the draft." Maybe I should of said he was the best catcher available in the draft when the Reds picked in the 1st rd. IMO the 5 catchers drafted in the 1st three rounds in 2006 (Sapp,Conger,McBride,Tracy and Langley) are much better prospects than the 7 drafted in 2007, with the exception of Wieters. (Mesoraco,Arencibia,D;Arnaud,Williams,Donaldson, Canham and Easley) Donaldson is playing 1B and not catching. It's not the quantity of catchers drafted but the quality. I think Conger is a much bigger prospect than Mesoraco IMO. McBride is already in AA.

Ahh, my apologies I misread it, and I hate it when others do that to me.

However I thought that I read somewhere around the '06 draft that Conger wasn't necc. going to be a sure thing behind the plate and that he could end up at 3rd eventually. Perhaps It was someone else I can't recall for sure but I thought it was Conger.

camisadelgolf
11-30-2007, 02:51 PM
I suspect Danny Dorn will be #11 because people love his name.

dougdirt
11-30-2007, 02:52 PM
I suspect Danny Dorn will be #11 because people love his game.

Fixed that for ya :thumbup:

Redman15
11-30-2007, 02:58 PM
I could see Conger moving to a different position. He spent some time on the DL due to injuries last year. He only played in 87 games . I watched him in HS and he can really hit when he is healthy.

RedsManRick
11-30-2007, 04:59 PM
I suspect Danny Dorn will be #11 because people love his name.

Me, I just like guys who hit .300/.400/.500.

*BaseClogger*
11-30-2007, 08:03 PM
don't sleep on Carlos Fisher;)

gedred69
11-30-2007, 09:25 PM
This poll gets weirder and weirder. How does Dorn keep slipping? Moved up 3 leagues last year-----because he skipped Dayton, doing decent in the hard to hit Fla. League, (been to games down there, early in the season, the wind can be gale force)! And then he smoked it at Chattanooga when promoted. This guy is in the top 7 IMO.

dougdirt
11-30-2007, 10:01 PM
This poll gets weirder and weirder. How does Dorn keep slipping? Moved up 3 leagues last year-----because he skipped Dayton, doing decent in the hard to hit Fla. League, (been to games down there, early in the season, the wind can be gale force)! And then he smoked it at Chattanooga when promoted. This guy is in the top 7 IMO.

Because of his age/upside and inability to hit left handed pitching probably.

zjr1717
12-01-2007, 04:01 AM
I wanted to go with Mesoraco, but I wasn't encouraged by his performance, so I went with Daryl Thompson. I think he's going to have a big year this year.

I'll go with Mesoraco at number 11.