PDA

View Full Version : Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th



New Fever
01-21-2009, 05:04 PM
Ha! Ha! Ha! He ranked them behind the Diamondbacks and right in front of the Cubs.

OnBaseMachine
01-21-2009, 05:07 PM
Keith Law continues to show why he is an idiot. I have no clue how that guy has a job covering baseball. Did he interview with the Reds and they turned him down or something? Because it sure seems like he has a vendetta against anything related to the Reds. Remember when he said Harang was just a #4 starter? LOL. Idiot.

New Fever
01-21-2009, 05:09 PM
Keith Law continues to show why he is an idiot. I have no clue how that guy has a job covering baseball. Did he interview with the Reds and they turned him down or something? Because it sure seems like he has a vendetta against anything related to the Reds. Remember when he said Harang was just a #4 starter? LOL. Idiot.

His reasoning for the Reds being one of the worst farm systems in the game is the fact that Devin Mesaraco had a bad season. I guess no one else mattered.

edabbs44
01-21-2009, 05:12 PM
I think he has a point. The system has many question marks.

OnBaseMachine
01-21-2009, 05:16 PM
The Reds system is somewhere in the 12-17 range. I think 14/15 is fair.

New Fever
01-21-2009, 05:21 PM
I think he has a point. The system has many question marks.

Have you seen the Diamondbacks system? Dallas Buck would rank in the top 5 in that system.

edabbs44
01-21-2009, 05:32 PM
The Reds system is somewhere in the 12-17 range. I think 14/15 is fair.

Cincy doesn't have much in the way of proven high level talent. That will severly hurt them in these types of rankings for 2009.

OnBaseMachine
01-21-2009, 05:43 PM
Cincy doesn't have much in the way of proven high level talent. That will severly hurt them in these types of rankings for 2009.

J.J. Cooper of Baseball America seems to be pretty high on the Reds system. He noted that they have very good depth and pointed out that nobody produces a Jay Bruce, Johnny Cueto, and Joey Votto every year. Naturally the Reds system is going to drop off some after graduating three talents like that (plus another top 10 prospect in Homer Bailey).

There's a chance the Reds could receive some help from Alonso, Frazier, Thompson, and maybe Stubbs by late 2009, early 2010. And don't forget Homer Bailey. He's no longer considered a prospect due to him losing his rookie status but there's still a chance he could put things together.

edabbs44
01-21-2009, 05:47 PM
J.J. Cooper of Baseball America seems to be pretty high on the Reds system. He noted that they have very good depth and pointed out that nobody produces a Jay Bruce, Johnny Cueto, and Joey Votto every year. Naturally the Reds system is going to drop off some after graduating three talents like that (plus another top 10 prospect in Homer Bailey).

There's a chance the Reds could receive some help from Alonso, Frazier, Thompson, and maybe Stubbs by late 2009, early 2010. And don't forget Homer Bailey. He's no longer considered a prospect due to him losing his rookie status but there's still a chance he could put things together.

They have some depth and potential, but it is hard to really project a system where their best players are mostly unproven.

The first rounders of the past few years have hurt the rankings. Alonso hasn't played yet and Stubbs/Mesoraco have question marks.

Bip Roberts
01-21-2009, 05:49 PM
I get the impression that keith law just does enough work to keep a paycheck

dougdirt
01-21-2009, 05:51 PM
They have some depth and potential, but it is hard to really project a system where their best players are mostly unproven.

The first rounders of the past few years have hurt the rankings. Alonso hasn't played yet and Stubbs/Mesoraco have question marks.

Alonso having a small track record of 150 PA doesn't matter really. These guys know what he is capable of. He isn't a high school kid without a track record. He is an ACC College Baseball player without a long pro track record. Big difference.

Still, its funny how far things range in terms of where they rank. I have seen them as high as 12 and as low as 26. Thats a HUGE disparity that simply shouldn't happen.

BuckeyeRedleg
01-21-2009, 06:11 PM
Ranking systems is stupid if you are punished for providing a bunch of youth to the the big league roster the year before. That should be taken into account.

Bip Roberts
01-21-2009, 06:23 PM
all ranking should have a disclaimer that tells how you lean when you rank.

dougdirt
01-21-2009, 06:28 PM
Brewers
Reds
Cardinals
GAP
Pirates
GAP
Cubs
Astros

Thats our division. Take it for what its worth.

lollipopcurve
01-21-2009, 06:42 PM
Hilarity. I hope he's willing to review these rankings about 3 years from now.

Mario-Rijo
01-21-2009, 06:47 PM
Brewers
Reds
Cardinals
GAP
Pirates
GAP
Cubs
Astros

Thats our division. Take it for what its worth.

Agreed.

edabbs44
01-21-2009, 07:42 PM
Alonso having a small track record of 150 PA doesn't matter really. These guys know what he is capable of. He isn't a high school kid without a track record. He is an ACC College Baseball player without a long pro track record. Big difference.

Still, its funny how far things range in terms of where they rank. I have seen them as high as 12 and as low as 26. Thats a HUGE disparity that simply shouldn't happen.

From the rankings:


I considered the entire list of prospects in each system in ranking the organizations, but I gave much more weight to top prospects, particularly high-impact prospects, than to organizational depth in average to fringe-average prospects. I also considered how much major league value each organization is likely to produce over the next few years; Boston had a number of very promising, high-upside prospects in short-season leagues this past year, but even in a best-case scenario, that group of players will not produce any major league value before 2012. So a system with high-impact prospects who are relatively close to the majors ranks high, even if the system lacks depth in second- and third-tier prospects.

This should alleviate some of the concerns of this board.

sixfigure
01-21-2009, 08:02 PM
From the rankings:



This should alleviate some of the concerns of this board.

RU Keith Law??...LOL!!:cool:

OnBaseMachine
01-21-2009, 08:25 PM
There's no doubt in my mind that nearly everyone that posts on this board knows more about baseball than Keith Law.

edabbs44
01-21-2009, 08:42 PM
There's no doubt in my mind that nearly everyone that posts on this board knows more about baseball than Keith Law.

Wow.

OnBaseMachine
01-21-2009, 08:53 PM
Wow.

Yeah, wow. He's awful. I don't see how any Reds fan can like him. I mean, Aaron Harang is at best a #4 starter? That is hilarious.

edabbs44
01-21-2009, 09:08 PM
Yeah, wow. He's awful. I don't see how any Reds fan can like him. I mean, Aaron Harang is at best a #4 starter? That is hilarious.

Do you have in what context that was said?

I read somewhere (thanks Google) that he said that Harang would be a #3 or #4 in the AL.

OnBaseMachine
01-21-2009, 09:12 PM
Do you have in what context that was said?

No, but I remember him saying it. There was a thread on here about it. The guy is a tool.

OnBaseMachine
01-21-2009, 09:14 PM
Recently, one of ESPN's top analysts, Keith Law, suggested that if Reds ace Aaron Harang was in the American league he would be nothing more than a #4 starter. His argument is based on Harang's numbers being inflated due to him pitching in the weakest division in baseball. This entire point is of course contradictory to tons of statistical evidence.

http://reds-hawks.blogspot.com/

GoReds33
01-21-2009, 09:51 PM
There's no doubt in my mind that nearly everyone that posts on this board knows more about baseball than Keith Law.Have you been over to the Sun Deck recently?:cool:

We're deserving of a much better rating than this. We still have plenty of prospects, such as Stubbs, Devin M., and Alonso. We also have some of the less-developed players like Frazier and Soto. We deserve top 20, and probably top 15.

Patrick Bateman
01-21-2009, 10:02 PM
Recently, one of ESPN's top analysts, Keith Law, suggested that if Reds ace Aaron Harang was in the American league he would be nothing more than a #4 starter. His argument is based on Harang's numbers being inflated due to him pitching in the weakest division in baseball. This entire point is of course contradictory to tons of statistical evidence.

http://reds-hawks.blogspot.com/

Hey OBM, want to know something funny? That is MY blog, that I wrote on a few years ago, and I actually traded a few emails with Keith Law about this very subject (and he even registered an account here that he almost began posting with but thought a huge can of worms would open up), to the point where he conceded that he was being hyperbolic. I knew that all along, but I just wanted him to admit it :). He had a few decent points, but all he could come up with were maybe 2-3 teams that were close enough to being arguably having 3 better pitchers than Harang.

In the end, his point became "on the elite pitching staffs in the American League, Harang is nothing more than a #3/4 pitcher." After that he told me I should start a blog, which I did for a few days, before a fantasy hockey site liked my work and decided to pay me to write such articles.

Anyways, thought you'd appreciate that little story. Never thought I'd ever see that blog again, thanks for bringing it back haha.

edabbs44
01-21-2009, 10:12 PM
No, but I remember him saying it. There was a thread on here about it. The guy is a tool.


Evan (Washington, DC): Glen (Chicago) I think meant Aaron Harang.

Keith Law: That's too bad. Harnag sounded like a good partner for the Kerrek. Anyway, Harang's not an ace, just a good innings-eater, would be a 3/4 on a contending club.

11larkin11
01-21-2009, 10:15 PM
I opened up the home page, scrolled down to the minor league forum, and saw Keith Law (Organizational...

I literally said out loud...Oh God

OnBaseMachine
01-21-2009, 10:34 PM
That is still a stupid comment, IMO. Harang is at worst a good #2 starting pitching on a championship caliber team. Guys who routinely throw 210+ IP of above average ball don't grow on trees.

OnBaseMachine
01-21-2009, 10:38 PM
Hey OBM, want to know something funny? That is MY blog, that I wrote on a few years ago, and I actually traded a few emails with Keith Law about this very subject (and he even registered an account here that he almost began posting with but thought a huge can of worms would open up), to the point where he conceded that he was being hyperbolic. I knew that all along, but I just wanted him to admit it :). He had a few decent points, but all he could come up with were maybe 2-3 teams that were close enough to being arguably having 3 better pitchers than Harang.

In the end, his point became "on the elite pitching staffs in the American League, Harang is nothing more than a #3/4 pitcher." After that he told me I should start a blog, which I did for a few days, before a fantasy hockey site liked my work and decided to pay me to write such articles.

Anyways, thought you'd appreciate that little story. Never thought I'd ever see that blog again, thanks for bringing it back haha.

Cool story.:) All I did was type in "Keith Law Aaron Harang #4 starter" and that blog popped up on the top of the second page.

Mario-Rijo
01-21-2009, 11:02 PM
Hey OBM, want to know something funny? That is MY blog, that I wrote on a few years ago, and I actually traded a few emails with Keith Law about this very subject (and he even registered an account here that he almost began posting with but thought a huge can of worms would open up), to the point where he conceded that he was being hyperbolic. I knew that all along, but I just wanted him to admit it :). He had a few decent points, but all he could come up with were maybe 2-3 teams that were close enough to being arguably having 3 better pitchers than Harang.

In the end, his point became "on the elite pitching staffs in the American League, Harang is nothing more than a #3/4 pitcher." After that he told me I should start a blog, which I did for a few days, before a fantasy hockey site liked my work and decided to pay me to write such articles.

Anyways, thought you'd appreciate that little story. Never thought I'd ever see that blog again, thanks for bringing it back haha.

Good stuff!

M2
01-22-2009, 12:16 AM
#26 may be harsh, but the Reds system is in a lull at the moment. Turning out Votto, Cueto and Bruce in a year was heady stuff, but the remaining kids on the farm in no way resembled those three players circa 2007 (or even 2006). The problem with the system is the starting pitching on the farm is flat out poor. The position players lack a certain wow factor too - Frazier and Alonso profile more as steady players than annual MVP candidates. I've got nothing against steady players, but no one gushes over them while they're in the minors.

The Brewers and Cardinals are the class of the division in terms of the farm system at the moment. The Pirates have the most drool-inducing top end prospects (Pedro Alvarez and Andrew McCutcheon). The Cubs have power arms and shortstops. The Astros are a joke.

The Reds have a lot of kids with something to prove in 2009. If they do, then the plaudits will follow, but I think it's fair for the jury to be out on the Reds system at this moment.

Caveat Emperor
01-22-2009, 12:32 AM
The Reds have a lot of kids with something to prove in 2009. If they do, then the plaudits will follow, but I think it's fair for the jury to be out on the Reds system at this moment.

What probably hurts their ratings most of all is that they've got a lot of former #1 picks (Bailey, Stubbs, Mesoraco) with things to prove this year.

Mario-Rijo
01-22-2009, 12:55 AM
#26 may be harsh, but the Reds system is in a lull at the moment. Turning out Votto, Cueto and Bruce in a year was heady stuff, but the remaining kids on the farm in no way resembled those three players circa 2007 (or even 2006). The problem with the system is the starting pitching on the farm is flat out poor. The position players lack a certain wow factor too - Frazier and Alonso profile more as steady players than annual MVP candidates. I've got nothing against steady players, but no one gushes over them while they're in the minors.

The Brewers and Cardinals are the class of the division in terms of the farm system at the moment. The Pirates have the most drool-inducing top end prospects (Pedro Alvarez and Andrew McCutcheon). The Cubs have power arms and shortstops. The Astros are a joke.

The Reds have a lot of kids with something to prove in 2009. If they do, then the plaudits will follow, but I think it's fair for the jury to be out on the Reds system at this moment.

Or maybe guys like Colby Rasmus have a better PR staff than Alonso and Frazier. McCutcheon I get but other than him I'm not sold any of the others listed above these 2 having better actual potential.

edabbs44
01-22-2009, 06:06 AM
Or maybe guys like Colby Rasmus have a better PR staff than Alonso and Frazier. McCutcheon I get but other than him I'm not sold any of the others listed above these 2 having better actual potential.

Rasmus put up .275/.381/.551 in AA as a 20 year old. Frazier hasn't seen a pitch above A ball and Alonso has barely seen a pro pitch.

That's why, for now, some would rank him higher.

Bumstead
01-22-2009, 09:43 AM
I quit reading Keith Law long ago. I never found anything worthwhile or well-researched in anything he wrote. And it's not like his writing is entertaining...I'd prefer to read Baseball America and John Sickels (someone who has a passion for prospects) than waste time on Law.

The Reds system, while appearing not to have many impact prospects right at this moment, has a lot of depth. Compared to the D-Backs and Cubs...c'mon, it's not even close!

Bumstead

TRF
01-22-2009, 11:04 AM
#26 may be harsh, but the Reds system is in a lull at the moment. Turning out Votto, Cueto and Bruce in a year was heady stuff, but the remaining kids on the farm in no way resembled those three players circa 2007 (or even 2006). The problem with the system is the starting pitching on the farm is flat out poor. The position players lack a certain wow factor too - Frazier and Alonso profile more as steady players than annual MVP candidates. I've got nothing against steady players, but no one gushes over them while they're in the minors.

The Brewers and Cardinals are the class of the division in terms of the farm system at the moment. The Pirates have the most drool-inducing top end prospects (Pedro Alvarez and Andrew McCutcheon). The Cubs have power arms and shortstops. The Astros are a joke.

The Reds have a lot of kids with something to prove in 2009. If they do, then the plaudits will follow, but I think it's fair for the jury to be out on the Reds system at this moment.

I actually think The Reds have 3-4 players in the mold of the three that graduated in 2008.

Danny Dorn. His splits are an issue, but a career .915 OPS in the minors is pretty good. He missed some PT in 2008 due to a laceration. He doesn't seem to be injury prone. He's the power hitting LF for the Reds, probably makes his debut late 2009 and the job is probably his in 2010. If he tears up AAA in the first 2 months and LF is a problem, we might see him sooner.

Francisco/Alonso/Frazier are all at AA, and will likely "graduate" around the same time. That's a ton of power.

The AAA rotation looks to promote at least one starter in 2009.

OnBaseMachine
01-22-2009, 11:24 AM
Both Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus have stated they think Yonder Alonso can develop into a .300/.400/.550 type of hitter. That would make him an MVP caliber hitter, IMO.

I would rank the NL Central farm systems in this order:

1. Brewers
2. Reds
3. Cardinals
4. Pirates
5. Cubs
6. Astros

dougdirt
01-22-2009, 11:47 AM
Both Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus have stated they think Yonder Alonso can develop into a .300/.400/.550 type of hitter. That would make him an MVP caliber hitter, IMO.

I would rank the NL Central farm systems in this order:

1. Brewers
2. Reds
3. Cardinals
4. Pirates
5. Cubs
6. Astros

Copy Cat. :D

edabbs44
01-22-2009, 12:34 PM
Alonso 76
Stubbs 89

That's it.

Nasty_Boy
01-22-2009, 01:02 PM
I love Alonso's game. He was a joy to watch at The "U", and I just love his approach at the plate. I used to play college ball and Alonso has a presence at the plate that I was only able to put together for a couple of weeks during my career. Once a player learns to command the strike zone in that way and only hit his pitch, not letting the pitcher force him to chase, the game becomes much easier. A guy like Pujols is a perfect example, you never see him get fooled. He always controls the AB... I see a lot that discipline and control in Alonso (of course Alonso's power will probably never touch Albert's). Hopefully he continue to do that as he climbs through the ranks.

OnBaseMachine
01-22-2009, 02:10 PM
Alonso 76
Stubbs 89

That's it.

That list is a joke. He has Josh Vitters #14 and Neftali Soto unranked.

REDblooded
01-22-2009, 02:40 PM
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60554&highlight=keith+law+harang

Kingspoint
01-22-2009, 05:50 PM
I have never heard of Keith Law, and now I know why.

Bip Roberts
01-22-2009, 06:58 PM
Have you been over to the Sun Deck recently?:cool:

We're deserving of a much better rating than this. We still have plenty of prospects, such as Stubbs, Devin M., and Alonso. We also have some of the less-developed players like Frazier and Soto. We deserve top 20, and probably top 15.

not like the ORG is top notch either

Kingspoint
01-22-2009, 07:15 PM
#26 may be harsh, but the Reds system is in a lull at the moment. Turning out Votto, Cueto and Bruce in a year was heady stuff, but the remaining kids on the farm in no way resembled those three players circa 2007 (or even 2006). The problem with the system is the starting pitching on the farm is flat out poor. The position players lack a certain wow factor too - Frazier and Alonso profile more as steady players than annual MVP candidates. I've got nothing against steady players, but no one gushes over them while they're in the minors.

The Brewers and Cardinals are the class of the division in terms of the farm system at the moment. The Pirates have the most drool-inducing top end prospects (Pedro Alvarez and Andrew McCutcheon). The Cubs have power arms and shortstops. The Astros are a joke.

The Reds have a lot of kids with something to prove in 2009. If they do, then the plaudits will follow, but I think it's fair for the jury to be out on the Reds system at this moment.

M2, in your honest assessment, have the REDS' overall organizational ranking taken a step backwards under Jockety? There are many ways to assess this. Has he developed what he inherited properly? Has he improved it at all? Has he stood pat too much? etc...

M2
01-22-2009, 08:53 PM
M2, in your honest assessment, have the REDS' overall organizational ranking taken a step backwards under Jockety? There are many ways to assess this. Has he developed what he inherited properly? Has he improved it at all? Has he stood pat too much? etc...

I don't think Jocketty's really had anything to do with it as of yet. He spent last year running Krivsky's system.

Krivsky has set the modern Reds gold standard for how to run a system. What the pipeline accomplished in 2006-8 was remarkable when you consider that almost every kid on the farm was struggling under DanO's regime. In fact you probably have to go back to Bill Bergesch to find a Reds GM who ran a similarly productive farm system.

Unfortunately the one thing that didn't happen under Krivsky was the selection of impact players with the top picks. Stubbs and Mesoraco may yet turn out to be good major league players, but they aren't making superstar fairies dance in anyone's head. The club also didn't collect many toolsy players (who tend to go supernova up the ratings charts when they play well) or notable power arms. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but scouts don't get to see every game, so they tend to latch onto the obvious. What the Reds don't have in the system at this moment is a lot of players with obvious gifts.

Now, a kid like Todd Frazier may turn out to be a very good major leaguer, but he'll probably be taken a bit for granted until that happens ... or at least until he posts some gaudy numbers in the upper minors.

Anyway, the charge for the Jocketty regime in 2009 is to have some hitters dominate (none really did in 2008) and have some starting pitchers put together a full season of excellence (a half season of Daryl Thompson was as close as anyone got in 2008). And I don't know that a lull in the system can be avoided seeing that the team went from the wilderness to three impact rookies in 2008. Fits and starts may be the theme of the next few years.

Caveat Emperor
01-22-2009, 09:03 PM
I don't think Jocketty's really had anything to do with it as of yet. He spent last year running Krivsky's system.

Krivsky has set the modern Reds gold standard for how to run a system. What the pipeline accomplished in 2006-8 was remarkable when you consider that almost every kid on the farm was struggling under DanO's regime. In fact you probably have to go back to Bill Bergesch to find a Reds GM who ran a similarly productive farm system.

Unfortunately the one thing that didn't happen under Krivsky was the selection of impact players with the top picks. Stubbs and Mesoraco may yet turn out to be good major league players, but they aren't making superstar fairies dance in anyone's head. The club also didn't collect many toolsy players (who tend to go supernova up the ratings charts when they play well) or notable power arms. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but scouts don't get to see every game, so they tend to latch onto the obvious. What the Reds don't have in the system at this moment is a lot of players with obvious gifts.

Now, a kid like Todd Frazier may turn out to be a very good major leaguer, but he'll probably be taken a bit for granted until that happens ... or at least until he posts some gaudy numbers in the upper minors.

Anyway, the charge for the Jocketty regime in 2009 is to have some hitters dominate (none really did in 2008) and have some starting pitchers put together a full season of excellence (a half season of Daryl Thompson was as close as anyone got in 2008). And I don't know that a lull in the system can be avoided seeing that the team went from the wilderness to three impact rookies in 2008. Fits and starts may be the theme of the next few years.

Spot on post, as usual M2.

The Reds have fantastic organizational depth and the makings of a system that will turn out a lot of quality major leaguers. What it doesn't have is a lot of gaudy star-power at the top -- the kids people have been raving about since AAU ball that made headlines on draft day when they signed.

For years, it'd been the opposite with the franchise; a Dunn here, a Kearns there, and then lots and lots of AAAA ballers and toolsy players who never put it all together. The William Bergollas and Rey Olmedos of the minor league world.

IowaRed
01-22-2009, 10:25 PM
Was Jocketty known as a draft and develop GM in STL? I know his work in finding pieces for the major league club but I'm not really familiar with his record in developing the overall STL organization. Pujols was obviously the gold nugget but I'm not sure how much of that was Jocketty

REDblooded
01-22-2009, 11:05 PM
Was Jocketty known as a draft and develop GM in STL? I know his work in finding pieces for the major league club but I'm not really familiar with his record in developing the overall STL organization. Pujols was obviously the gold nugget but I'm not sure how much of that was Jocketty

Jocketty, from what I've seen, doesn't have a great record as a draft and develop guy... Most of their success came from working with a higher budget, and risk/reward signings like Carpenter. Yeah, they hit on Pujols, but that's about the only one. Guys with big upside like Anthony Reyes never panned out.
Jocketty is good at plugging in role players to make everything work though. It's just now, based on the success of their last draft, that their farm is starting to climb again.

dougdirt
01-22-2009, 11:41 PM
Jocketty's draft record doesn't matter much, because the GM doesn't really deal much with the draft. Thats a lot more on the scouting director and our current guy has a strong track record.

REDblooded
01-23-2009, 03:28 AM
Jocketty's draft record doesn't matter much, because the GM doesn't really deal much with the draft. Thats a lot more on the scouting director and our current guy has a strong track record.

Jocketty still has some pull there doesn't he? I have a bunch of friends that are strong Cardinals fans, and when we got Jocketty, they told me to expect way less drafting of HS players.

dougdirt
01-23-2009, 10:17 AM
Jocketty still has some pull there doesn't he? I have a bunch of friends that are strong Cardinals fans, and when we got Jocketty, they told me to expect way less drafting of HS players.

Sure, Jocketty has some pull.... but he is going to listen to his scouting director who is going to listen to his scouts. We still have the same scouting director and the same scouts as we have for the last few years.

TRF
01-23-2009, 11:20 AM
I don't think Jocketty's really had anything to do with it as of yet. He spent last year running Krivsky's system.

Krivsky has set the modern Reds gold standard for how to run a system. What the pipeline accomplished in 2006-8 was remarkable when you consider that almost every kid on the farm was struggling under DanO's regime. In fact you probably have to go back to Bill Bergesch to find a Reds GM who ran a similarly productive farm system.

Unfortunately the one thing that didn't happen under Krivsky was the selection of impact players with the top picks. Stubbs and Mesoraco may yet turn out to be good major league players, but they aren't making superstar fairies dance in anyone's head. The club also didn't collect many toolsy players (who tend to go supernova up the ratings charts when they play well) or notable power arms. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but scouts don't get to see every game, so they tend to latch onto the obvious. What the Reds don't have in the system at this moment is a lot of players with obvious gifts.

Now, a kid like Todd Frazier may turn out to be a very good major leaguer, but he'll probably be taken a bit for granted until that happens ... or at least until he posts some gaudy numbers in the upper minors.

Anyway, the charge for the Jocketty regime in 2009 is to have some hitters dominate (none really did in 2008) and have some starting pitchers put together a full season of excellence (a half season of Daryl Thompson was as close as anyone got in 2008). And I don't know that a lull in the system can be avoided seeing that the team went from the wilderness to three impact rookies in 2008. Fits and starts may be the theme of the next few years.

IMO Krivsky's system worked because of DanO's, not despite it. That isn't to say DanO had a good system, or even a clue. What he did do however protected the young arms. More serendipitous than design, but arm surgeries all but disappeared under DanO. That likely helped Krivsky. The take a first pitch, while idiotic, may have helped some hitters. Not necessarily with pitch recognition as pitchers were grooving fastballs on the first pitch, but with the idea of patience at the plate. It didn't do a thing for top talent guys like Votto, but it might have helped some fringe prospects up their value. Krivsky was able to peddle those prospects for decent returns. Can Walt?

Kingspoint
01-23-2009, 07:36 PM
I don't think Jocketty's really had anything to do with it as of yet. He spent last year running Krivsky's system.

Krivsky has set the modern Reds gold standard for how to run a system. What the pipeline accomplished in 2006-8 was remarkable when you consider that almost every kid on the farm was struggling under DanO's regime. In fact you probably have to go back to Bill Bergesch to find a Reds GM who ran a similarly productive farm system.

Unfortunately the one thing that didn't happen under Krivsky was the selection of impact players with the top picks. Stubbs and Mesoraco may yet turn out to be good major league players, but they aren't making superstar fairies dance in anyone's head. The club also didn't collect many toolsy players (who tend to go supernova up the ratings charts when they play well) or notable power arms. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but scouts don't get to see every game, so they tend to latch onto the obvious. What the Reds don't have in the system at this moment is a lot of players with obvious gifts.

Now, a kid like Todd Frazier may turn out to be a very good major leaguer, but he'll probably be taken a bit for granted until that happens ... or at least until he posts some gaudy numbers in the upper minors.

Anyway, the charge for the Jocketty regime in 2009 is to have some hitters dominate (none really did in 2008) and have some starting pitchers put together a full season of excellence (a half season of Daryl Thompson was as close as anyone got in 2008). And I don't know that a lull in the system can be avoided seeing that the team went from the wilderness to three impact rookies in 2008. Fits and starts may be the theme of the next few years.

Thanks, bro, for sticking your neck out on that. Very nice post.

Kingspoint
01-23-2009, 07:38 PM
I'm hoping our "B"-level players can be packaged into a few "A-"-level players.

LoganBuck
01-24-2009, 03:04 PM
I think we see some Reds prospects jump up the charts. Once the players get out of Sarasota and the FSL they really seem to come quickly. My guess is that players like Frazier, Alonzo, and Francisco tear up AA until June and then move up to AAA around the minor league All Star break. If that happens they will all be highly ranked.

jojo
01-24-2009, 11:12 PM
Edabbs44 and M2 are pretty much spot on.

If Law's criteria irks some, look at the Reds farm this way.... pretend the Reds had a crack at an upper tier major leaguer that could put them over the top for a couple of years.... what from the current farm would get the trade done?

Is Law really off his rockers?

OnBaseMachine
01-25-2009, 12:09 AM
Yes, Law is off his rockers.

The Reds farm system is average at worst according to Baseball. JJ Cooper thinks it's better than that. I think 12-15 is fair.

Highlifeman21
01-25-2009, 12:20 AM
Yes, Law is off his rockers.

The Reds farm system is average at worst. It probably ranks around 12-15.

I dunno OBM...

Looking at RedsZone's group effort to rank our prospects, there's plenty of question marks even in the Top 10, much less the rest of the list.

We all hope Yonder Alonso will prove to be the next big thing, but will he?

Frazier will probably end up being a serviceable MLB player, but IMO he won't be an everyday star. He'll be a nice guy to have in the future, but certainly not the guy you build a lineup around.

Soto's probably the biggest question mark in our Top 10...

Stubbs... well... the guy can play D, that's for sure. But, can he hit? Can he stay healthy?

Valaika is the man without a position. He won't be a SS as a MLB player, so why are they wasting his time and the organization's time playing him as one in the minors? IMO, he'll be a more legit prospect once the Reds figure out where to put him on the diamond.

After Valaika, huge drop off in talent....

IMO, the Reds farm has a lot to prove after Cueto, Votto and Bruce making the big team in 2008. There's not much left down on the farm in terms of guys that are "sure things"

OnBaseMachine
01-25-2009, 12:29 AM
I dunno OBM...

Looking at RedsZone's group effort to rank our prospects, there's plenty of question marks even in the Top 10, much less the rest of the list.

We all hope Yonder Alonso will prove to be the next big thing, but will he?

Frazier will probably end up being a serviceable MLB player, but IMO he won't be an everyday star. He'll be a nice guy to have in the future, but certainly not the guy you build a lineup around.

Soto's probably the biggest question mark in our Top 10...

Stubbs... well... the guy can play D, that's for sure. But, can he hit? Can he stay healthy?

Valaika is the man without a position. He won't be a SS as a MLB player, so why are they wasting his time and the organization's time playing him as one in the minors? IMO, he'll be a more legit prospect once the Reds figure out where to put him on the diamond.

After Valaika, huge drop off in talent....

IMO, the Reds farm has a lot to prove after Cueto, Votto and Bruce making the big team in 2008. There's not much left down on the farm in terms of guys that are "sure things"

Every organization has questions marks. I don't know why people act like it's just the Reds organization. Baseball America thinks the Reds farm system is average at worst (#15). I certainly trust their opinion over Keith freakin' Law.

And scouts disagree with you on Frazier. No one expects him to be a Hall of Famer but scouts think he'll develop into a good major league hitter with good power.

I wish the Reds had more question marks like Soto. The guy has did nothing but hit at every level so far. He's got good contacts skills and his power grades out as a 60/65 on the 20-80 scale. That's plus category.

The talent drops off after Valaika? Really? Kyle Lotzkar has great stuff and is viewed as a potential #2 big league starter. Juan Duran has been touted as one of the best hitting prospects to ever come out of the Dominican Republic. Yorman Rodriguez has been described as a human tool shed and is tools are compared to those of Eric Davis, Carlos Beltran, and Cesar Cedeno. Yeah those guys are years away but they each have incredible ceilings.

Highlifeman21
01-25-2009, 08:56 AM
Every organization has questions marks. I don't know why people act like it's just the Reds organization. Baseball America thinks the Reds farm system is average at worst (#15). I certainly trust their opinion over Keith freakin' Law.

And scouts disagree with you on Frazier. No one expects him to be a Hall of Famer but scouts think he'll develop into a good major league hitter with good power.

I wish the Reds had more question marks like Soto. The guy has did nothing but hit at every level so far. He's got good contacts skills and his power grades out as a 60/65 on the 20-80 scale. That's plus category.

The talent drops off after Valaika? Really? Kyle Lotzkar has great stuff and is viewed as a potential #2 big league starter. Juan Duran has been touted as one of the best hitting prospects to ever come out of the Dominican Republic. Yorman Rodriguez has been described as a human tool shed and is tools are compared to those of Eric Davis, Carlos Beltran, and Cesar Cedeno. Yeah those guys are years away but they each have incredible ceilings.

While I'm not trying to defend Keith Law by any means, I see where he's coming from and the point of his ranking for the Reds.

Sure, the Reds have some guys with the kind of ceilings we want from prospects, but at this point we don't know their basements, and they certainly are many years away from contributing to the MLB team.

The Reds just lack guys that are "sure things", which was the point of Law's ranking. He also pointed out that we've wasted 1st round draft picks recently. Hopefully Alonso changes that pattern.

OnBaseMachine
01-25-2009, 12:03 PM
The Reds haven't wasted any first round picks lately. A wasted first round pick is an overdraft or a punt. The Reds haven't did that. Mesoraco had a disappointing first full season but it's way too early to write him off, IMO.

jojo
01-25-2009, 12:10 PM
The Reds haven't wasted any first round picks lately. A wasted first round pick is an overdraft or a punt. The Reds haven't did that. Mesoraco had a disappointing first full season but it's way too early to write him off, IMO.

I think it comes down to this regarding the rankings: if you only have one, which is better-impact talent or depth?

Right now the Reds basically have depth.

lollipopcurve
01-25-2009, 12:16 PM
I think it comes down to this regarding the rankings: if you only have one, which is better-impact talent or depth?

Right now the Reds basically have depth.

Neither Votto nor Cueto were considered "impact" players while in the minors. Bailey was.

jojo
01-25-2009, 12:18 PM
Neither Votto nor Cueto were considered "impact" players while in the minors. Bailey was.

They were half of the "Big Four". They ended up getting quite a bit of attention as minor leaguers. BA ranked both Cueto and Votto as top 50 prospects (34 and 44 respectively going into last season).

OnBaseMachine
01-25-2009, 12:20 PM
Exactly, lollipop.

And I would say that Alonso IS an impact talent. Both Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus have projected Alonso as a future .300/.400/.550 type of hitter. That's an MVP caliber hitter. And Drew Stubbs has a chance to develop into an impact player if his power develops. Gold glove caliber defender, good on-base skills ... if he can develop into a Mike Cameron type of player that's an impact player in my book.

jojo
01-25-2009, 12:22 PM
Exactly, lollipop.

And I would say that Alonso IS an impact talent. Both Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus have projected Alonso as a future .300/.400/.550 type of hitter. That's an MVP caliber hitter.

Alonzo is one player.

OnBaseMachine
01-25-2009, 12:23 PM
Alonzo is one player.

One or two impact players and great depth behind it. I'll take that any day of the week.

jojo
01-25-2009, 12:30 PM
One or two impact players and great depth behind it. I'll take that any day of the week.

Nobody is arguing that depth is a bad attribute in a farm system. It's just that depth is kind of like 4 doors on a car. Impact is like having a racing transmission.

dougdirt
01-25-2009, 12:55 PM
Nobody is arguing that depth is a bad attribute in a farm system. It's just that depth is kind of like 4 doors on a car. Impact is like having a racing transmission.

Yeah, but when you have a racing transmission and racing wheels, but its on a 1988 Dodge Dump truck (like a few of the teams ranked ahead of the Reds) it doesn't really matter because its a complete boom or bust as there is nothing behind the top 2-3 guys.

nate
01-25-2009, 01:12 PM
I understand what Jojo is saying. With Bruce/Cueto/Votto, we had the racing tranny that got put into another car. Now we have four doors. We just need to put both concepts together at the same time.

I think Alonso could at least be a nice knurled wood knob for the shifter though.

Orenda
01-25-2009, 01:32 PM
If the reds have a lot of depth in their minor leagues that will breed one thing. COMPETITION....competition is great way to get guys to push themselves to improve, and it is a good way to weed out guys who might be more tools heavy but who lack pitch recognition or can't locate a fastball. Some systems might have the top guys, but they lack the depth that could prevent the need for an organization to rush a guy to the majors.

RedsManRick
01-25-2009, 03:08 PM
I think the question about impact vs. depth is pretty easy -- it's neither. It's simply a matter about how much value your minor league system can add to the major league roster. Maybe that's role players who can allow you to invest in a free agent or keep a stud you developed. Maybe it's a guy or guys who can form your core. Maybe that's guys who can be traded to fill needs.

For a good GM, minor league talent is largely liquid. It can be used in many ways to generate major league wins. The quality of a minor league system is in its aggregate value. As it stands, the Reds have a minor league system with a good amount of talent, clearly top 20, though probably not top 10. My concern is that the current composition of talent begs for trades. Turn the glut of major league ready or near ready back-of-rotation guys in to a SS. Use some of those young bullpen arms instead of spending $13M on a good, but not elite, closer and millions on mediocre middle relief.

My fear is that the value in our major league system will go somewhat unrealized by a largely uncreative management team. The talent brought in through drafts will be mediocre, trades that add talent will be rare, and the talent we have will slowly bleed out as guys who don't turn in to studs wither on the vine. The biggest constant over the last decade has been a grossly inefficient use of resources. Whether you rank us 13th or 26th, using our talent efficiently and strategically will be the real determinant of our success.

jojo
01-25-2009, 03:41 PM
What's easier though.....getting a Teixiera type for for Salty/Andrus/+ or getting an Andrus for a Thompson/Maloney/Dorn?

dougdirt
01-25-2009, 05:34 PM
What's easier though.....getting a Teixiera type for for Salty/Andrus/+ or getting an Andrus for a Thompson/Maloney/Dorn?

Well, maybe we just need a publicist like Andrus has and we can have a bunch of better prospects on lists. That could be a start. Kids the most overrated prospect I have seen in a LONG time. There is no upside offensively. He hasn't come close to having a strong minor league season yet. Sure, he is young.... but his bat has no projection in it at all and he has a minor league OPS for his career of .704. How he is a consensus top 50 prospect literally gives me headaches.

jojo
01-25-2009, 05:58 PM
Well, maybe we just need a publicist like Andrus has and we can have a bunch of better prospects on lists. That could be a start. Kids the most overrated prospect I have seen in a LONG time. There is no upside offensively. He hasn't come close to having a strong minor league season yet. Sure, he is young.... but his bat has no projection in it at all and he has a minor league OPS for his career of .704. How he is a consensus top 50 prospect literally gives me headaches.

Andrus has been young for each level-he was just 19 last season in AA ball and his performance improved as the season went along. He's going to be a plus defender whether he develops power or not.

Highlifeman21
01-25-2009, 06:37 PM
The Reds haven't wasted any first round picks lately. A wasted first round pick is an overdraft or a punt. The Reds haven't did that. Mesoraco had a disappointing first full season but it's way too early to write him off, IMO.

Overdraft/Punt:
2007 (drafted for need)
2006 (drafted for need, I guess?)
2004 (jury's still out on that kid)
2003 (punt & no longer with team)
2002 (punt & no longer with team)
2001 (never signed, aka punt)
2000 (does this kid even play baseball anymore?)
1999 (injury)

So, to say the Reds haven't wasted any first round picks lately is laughable. Stubbs (2006) and Bailey (2004) are the only 2 that could end up being something, and even both of them are iffy at best.

OnBaseMachine
01-25-2009, 06:50 PM
Overdraft/Punt:
2007 (drafted for need)
2006 (drafted for need, I guess?)
2004 (jury's still out on that kid)
2003 (punt & no longer with team)
2002 (punt & no longer with team)
2001 (never signed, aka punt)
2000 (does this kid even play baseball anymore?)
1999 (injury)

So, to say the Reds haven't wasted any first round picks lately is laughable. Stubbs (2006) and Bailey (2004) are the only 2 that could end up being something, and even both of them are iffy at best.

By recently, I meant the last three/four years. And the Reds didn't punt in 2006 and 2007. Stubbs was viewed as a top 10 pick and Mesoraco was rumored to go as high as #4 in the 2007 draft. Tim Lincecum would have been the best pick but Stubbs wasn't a punt.

Highlifeman21
01-25-2009, 07:04 PM
By recently, I meant the last three/four years. And the Reds didn't punt in 2006 and 2007. Stubbs was viewed as a top 10 pick and Mesoraco was rumored to go as high as #4 in the 2007 draft. Tim Lincecum would have been the best pick but Stubbs wasn't a punt.

You said overdraft or punt.

Stubbs was an overdraft. Given what we had in the organization for OF, Stubbs was an overdraft, and we should have drafted basically anyone but him.

Mesoraco was rumored to go as high as #4, yet we took him at #15, so I'm supposed to feel good about that punted draft pick? Just b/c he was rumored to go #4 doesn't mean he was the smart choice for us @ #15. We drafted for need, rather than taking the best available. That's an epic fail punt of a draft pick...

lollipopcurve
01-25-2009, 07:27 PM
Stubbs was an overdraft. Given what we had in the organization for OF, Stubbs was an overdraft, and we should have drafted basically anyone but him.

Stubbs was not a reach. Lots of clubs in the top 10 were rumored to be considering him. Remember, it wasn't a particularly strong year for top 10 talent.

As far as the organization being stacked at the position, I don't see lots of pure CFs running around. Besides, not a good idea to draft for need at the top of the first round.

Highlifeman21
01-25-2009, 07:35 PM
Stubbs was not a reach. Lots of clubs in the top 10 were rumored to be considering him. Remember, it wasn't a particularly strong year for top 10 talent.

As far as the organization being stacked at the position, I don't see lots of pure CFs running around. Besides, not a good idea to draft for need at the top of the first round.

So why didn't we take a pitcher?

We didn't need an OF, and he wasn't the best available.

edabbs44
01-25-2009, 08:04 PM
By recently, I meant the last three/four years. And the Reds didn't punt in 2006 and 2007. Stubbs was viewed as a top 10 pick and Mesoraco was rumored to go as high as #4 in the 2007 draft. Tim Lincecum would have been the best pick but Stubbs wasn't a punt.

Mesoraco was rumored to go #4 more on his signability than his talent.

edabbs44
01-25-2009, 08:09 PM
Exactly, lollipop.

And I would say that Alonso IS an impact talent. Both Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus have projected Alonso as a future .300/.400/.550 type of hitter. That's an MVP caliber hitter. And Drew Stubbs has a chance to develop into an impact player if his power develops. Gold glove caliber defender, good on-base skills ... if he can develop into a Mike Cameron type of player that's an impact player in my book.

Alonso is an impact talent, but many Alonsos have flamed out in the minors before. I am sure he will rocket up the charts and erase any doubts if he starts posting those numbers in the pros.

jojo
01-25-2009, 08:10 PM
Mesoraco was rumored to go #4 more on his signability than his talent.

If I was a high school catcher, I'd be rumored to be signable if drafted in the top ten too.... :cool:

TheNext44
01-25-2009, 08:38 PM
I considered the entire list of prospects in each system in ranking the organizations, but I gave much more weight to top prospects, particularly high-impact prospects, than to organizational depth in average to fringe-average prospects. I also considered how much major league value each organization is likely to produce over the next few years; Boston had a number of very promising, high-upside prospects in short-season leagues this past year, but even in a best-case scenario, that group of players will not produce any major league value before 2012. So a system with high-impact prospects who are relatively close to the majors ranks high, even if the system lacks depth in second- and third-tier prospects.

If this is Law's criteria, then his ranking kinda makes sense, although, I would probably have the Reds closer to 20th than 30th.

However, that is just a stupid way to rank organizations.

Depth and number of impact players should be valued equally, which is how most minor league talent evaluators do it. High impact prospects are no guarantee to be high impact major leaguers, just ask Homer Bailey, who was considered the best of the bunch last year. Sure they most likely will help the team quickly, but AAA is loaded with ones that never did.

That is why depth is just as important. With depth, you know that you will always have guys ready to help fill out your roster or to use in trades to acquire ready major league talent. You know this precisely because there is depth. Most won't make it, but if you have true depth, then every year you will have a few who do.

If all you have is high impact players, you could go through streaks of not having any players deliver production for years, since it is a crap shoot, which is why depth is needed. Winning organizations are able to maintain a level of competitiveness at nearly every roster spot, and definitely at every key position. With at least competitive players at every position, they can then go out and get stars to put them over the top, or develop a few high impact players.

Championships are won not with superstars, but with a strong roster 1-25. This can only be achieved with depth throughout your farm system. That is why valuing high impact prospects over depth is just plain stupid.

BTW, Law's assessment of Harang was not nearly as bad as his assessment of Volquez. Before the season last year, Law said that Volquez would never be a successful starter, let alone a top of the rotation one, because he only has two pitches.

Kingspoint
01-25-2009, 08:45 PM
I think it comes down to this regarding the rankings: if you only have one, which is better-impact talent or depth?

Right now the Reds basically have depth. I'd rather have depth. With injuries always occurring, I'd rather have more options. A decent General Manager can parlay depth into some impact talent, too.

OnBaseMachine
01-25-2009, 09:36 PM
You said overdraft or punt.

Stubbs was an overdraft. Given what we had in the organization for OF, Stubbs was an overdraft, and we should have drafted basically anyone but him.


You can keep telling yourself that but it's not true.


Mesoraco was rumored to go as high as #4, yet we took him at #15, so I'm supposed to feel good about that punted draft pick? Just b/c he was rumored to go #4 doesn't mean he was the smart choice for us @ #15. We drafted for need, rather than taking the best available. That's an epic fail punt of a draft pick...

Again, feel free to keep telling yourself the Reds punted that pick but it still doesn't make it true. Looking at the players drafted behind Mesoraco, I only see one player (Porcello) who was worthy of a top 15 pick. I liked Tim Alderson a lot but he was viewed as a late first rounder/supplemental pick.

OnBaseMachine
01-25-2009, 09:37 PM
Alonso is an impact talent, but many Alonsos have flamed out in the minors before. I am sure he will rocket up the charts and erase any doubts if he starts posting those numbers in the pros.

Yep, and many prospects from other organizations have flamed out too. That's a risk with any prospect, not just Reds prospects.

Highlifeman21
01-25-2009, 10:07 PM
You can keep telling yourself that but it's not true.



Again, feel free to keep telling yourself the Reds punted that pick but it still doesn't make it true. Looking at the players drafted behind Mesoraco, I only see one player (Porcello) who was worthy of a top 15 pick. I liked Tim Alderson a lot but he was viewed as a late first rounder/supplemental pick.

Re: Stubbs

Tim Lincecum
Max Scherzer
Ian Kennedy
Kyle Drabek (possibly)

Guys we should have and could have taken rather than young Robert Stubbs.

Re: Mesoraco

Rick Porcello (had a signability issue, IIRC?)
Tim Alderson
Nick Schmidt
Andrew Brackman

Guys we should have and could have take rather than Devin Mesoraco.


Sorry if I'm unimpressed by the Reds lack of ability to draft in the 1st Round. I know I'm not in the minority there...

dougdirt
01-25-2009, 10:11 PM
Andrus has been young for each level-he was just 19 last season in AA ball and his performance improved as the season went along. He's going to be a plus defender whether he develops power or not.

He might be a plus defender who hits .270./.310/.380 though. Sure, it has some value.... but his bat's ceiling is that of a .740 OPS guy and he is pretty far from that at this point. His age has little to do with it because no one projects his bat to get much better than it currently is. Age only matters if there is projection left that is untapped. No one see's that projection with Andrus.

dougdirt
01-25-2009, 10:23 PM
Re: Stubbs

Tim Lincecum
Max Scherzer
Ian Kennedy
Kyle Drabek (possibly)

Exactly what has Ian Kennedy shown other than his stuff isn't all that good and he has been beaten around in the majors to this point? Kyle Drabek has already had TJ surgery and has a full 100 innings in the minors in 2.5 seasons. So I don't really think either of those guys can be looked at as guys you should have taken over Stubbs.



Re: Mesoraco

Rick Porcello (had a signability issue, IIRC?)
Tim Alderson
Nick Schmidt
Andrew Brackman


Porcello wanted 7+ million and a Major League deal. Sure, he would be great to have.... but his demands were insane and 25 teams passed on him when he was the #1 guy on the board. Andrew Brackman is already a TJ surgery veteran who can't find the strikezone at all, and he never really could even before the surgery. Nick Schmidt, another guy with TJ surgery under his belt and all of 7 innings in the minors pitched at age 23 heading into next season.

While Mesoraco has a ways to go, I think you are reaching extremely far here with two of those guys.

edabbs44
01-25-2009, 10:24 PM
Yep, and many prospects from other organizations have flamed out too. That's a risk with any prospect, not just Reds prospects.

I'm not saying anything about the Reds. I am saying that many top DPs have flamed out in the minors. If Alonso destroys the minors this year then he will surely climb the charts. But the guy has barely seen pro pitching...true studs are going to find their way to the top of the rankings without barely playing pro ball. If Law isn't that big a fan of his, then he has him ranked correctly (in his eyes). Now it is Yonder's job to prove him wrong.

edabbs44
01-25-2009, 10:28 PM
Re: Stubbs

Tim Lincecum
Max Scherzer
Ian Kennedy
Kyle Drabek (possibly)

Guys we should have and could have taken rather than young Robert Stubbs.

Can add Travis Snider to this list as well.

Hindsight is 20/20, but there were a few good ones out there.

Another one that killed me in 2006 was the Sean Watson over Brett Anderson 2nd round choice. Ugh.

jojo
01-25-2009, 10:34 PM
He might be a plus defender who hits .270./.310/.380 though. Sure, it has some value.... but his bat's ceiling is that of a .740 OPS guy and he is pretty far from that at this point. His age has little to do with it because no one projects his bat to get much better than it currently is. Age only matters if there is projection left that is untapped. No one see's that projection with Andrus.

He doesn't need to hit 20-25 hrs. If he just has a major league average bat given his defense at short, he'll be an incredibly valuable player.

dougdirt
01-25-2009, 10:35 PM
Can add Travis Snider to this list as well.

Hindsight is 20/20, but there were a few good ones out there.

Another one that killed me in 2006 was the Sean Watson over Brett Anderson 2nd round choice. Ugh.

The Reds couldn't use Travis Snider.... we don't have a DH position in the NL and that kid plays defense like my grandma (who has been dead since 1994) and strikes out like its his job (25% in low A, 33% in A+ although a small sample, 27.4% in AA, 22.9% in AAA in another small sample size and 28.8% in the majors).

OnBaseMachine
01-25-2009, 10:35 PM
Re: Mesoraco

Rick Porcello (had a signability issue, IIRC?)
Tim Alderson
Nick Schmidt
Andrew Brackman

Guys we should have and could have take rather than Devin Mesoraco.


Sorry if I'm unimpressed by the Reds lack of ability to draft in the 1st Round. I know I'm not in the minority there...

I liked Alderson but he was viewed as a late first/supplemental round pick. Highsight is 20/20 there. Nick Schmidt? Seriously? The same Nick Schmidt that has thrown a total of seven pro innings in two seasons? Yeah, what a great pick that would've been. Andrew Brackman? He's yet to throw a professional pitch in two seasons except for 2.2 innings in Hawaii. You may be unimpressed with the Reds first round picks, but yours are even worse, IMO. Both of those guys would have been overdrafts ... now factor in that both have combined for roughly 10 pro innings ... both would have been far worse picks than Mesoraco.

And as I've said before, IMO Lincecum was the better pick, but that doesn't mean Stubbs was a punt. A punt is like what the Reds did in 2001 with Jeremy Sowers. Stubbs was neither a punt nor an overdraft.

dougdirt
01-25-2009, 10:36 PM
He doesn't need to hit 20-25 hrs. If he just has a major league average bat given his defense at short, he'll be an incredibly valuable player.

The issue is he doesn't project to hit 10 HR. Some scouts don't project him to hit more than 5 in a full season. Its real tough to be an incredibly valuable player when you are lucky to OPS .725, even at shortstop.

jojo
01-25-2009, 10:39 PM
The issue is he doesn't project to hit 10 HR. Some scouts don't project him to hit more than 5 in a full season. Its real tough to be an incredibly valuable player when you are lucky to OPS .725, even at shortstop.

I'm kind of a fan of the scouts that Texas employs. :cool:

dougdirt
01-25-2009, 11:01 PM
I'm kind of a fan of the scouts that Texas employs. :cool:

Me too. I haven't heard anything from anyone who talks to their scouts that suggests he will even hit 10 HR in the majors.

jojo
01-25-2009, 11:13 PM
Me too. I haven't heard anything from anyone who talks to their scouts that suggests he will even hit 10 HR in the majors.

He doesn't have to hit 10 homers. A better fielding Escobar with a couple less homers is very valuable. A better fielding Renteria is a valuable thing.

dougdirt
01-25-2009, 11:46 PM
He doesn't have to hit 10 homers. A better fielding Escobar with a couple less homers is very valuable. A better fielding Renteria is a valuable thing.
Sure, but he won't be Renteria unless he cuts down on his strikeouts by about 30-40% of his current rate. Its not something I would count on him doing, but I guess it is possible. His skills right now suggest he is a .260 hitter in the majors with no power to speak of. That will lead to walks drying up and a low OBP to go with a low SLG. He needs to cut his strikeout rate from the current 17% he is at to about 10-12% in order to be a guy like Renteria. Thats a pretty big jump.

*BaseClogger*
01-25-2009, 11:59 PM
Renteria is a great comp; they advanced at exactly the same ages. Glancing over the numbers, Andrus has easily outhit Renteria thus far and is regarded as an even better defender. That's a top prospect if you ask me, Doug...

jojo
01-26-2009, 12:04 AM
Sure, but he won't be Renteria unless he cuts down on his strikeouts by about 30-40% of his current rate. Its not something I would count on him doing, but I guess it is possible. His skills right now suggest he is a .260 hitter in the majors with no power to speak of. That will lead to walks drying up and a low OBP to go with a low SLG. He needs to cut his strikeout rate from the current 17% he is at to about 10-12% in order to be a guy like Renteria. Thats a pretty big jump.

He can't even legally buy a beer yet.

dougdirt
01-26-2009, 12:12 AM
He can't even legally buy a beer yet.

Which is fine, but is he going to strike out a third of the time less in 3 years than he is now?

Baseclogger, yeah he has. But is he going to take the same step forward with making a lot more contact in the majors like Renteria did? If he doesn't, and I am not counting on it, then he isn't in the same realm as Renteria.

jojo
01-26-2009, 12:23 AM
Which is fine, but is he going to strike out a third of the time less in 3 years than he is now?

Baseclogger, yeah he has. But is he going to take the same step forward with making a lot more contact in the majors like Renteria did? If he doesn't, and I am not counting on it, then he isn't in the same realm as Renteria.

He already strikes out less than Stubbs. :cool:

RedsManRick
01-26-2009, 12:25 AM
Doug, what I am missing with Andrus? 91 SO in 500+ PA isn't great, but it's hardly a bad sign as a 19 year old in AA. Is this the Stubbs argument about contact rates stabilizing in the upper minors based on the presence (or absence) of power? At the major league level, .700 OPS with a plus glove a glove at SS and the ability to add 5-10 runs on the bases makes him above average. I guess I see his upside as Rafael Furcal with a bit less power.

*BaseClogger*
01-26-2009, 12:25 AM
Baseclogger, yeah he has. But is he going to take the same step forward with making a lot more contact in the majors like Renteria did? If he doesn't, and I am not counting on it, then he isn't in the same realm as Renteria.

But he doesn't have to make nearly as much of a jump as Renteria did because he's already starting with 17 points of BA, 18 points of isoD, and 25 points of isoP. Plus, he's Omar Vizquel with the glove. In fact, there's another comp...

Mario-Rijo
01-26-2009, 12:59 AM
A few years down the road, would you rather have Elvis Andrus (Braves) or Alcides Escobar (Brewers)? Is there any other shortstop that you would put in their class? Would Jose Reyes be a valid comparison for either of them?

Zach Ellenthal
Wilton, Conn.

I'd rather have Escobar, though there's not a big difference between the two. They're similar offensive players, with Escobar having more power and Andrus being a better basestealer. They're both very good defenders, with Escobar maybe rating a slight edge. Andrus is nearly two years younger than Escobar and they've both made it to Double-A at this point, so Andrus may have more room for improvement. Then again, Escobar is still very young at 22.

When I put together my personal Top 50 Prospects list for the 2009 Prospect Handbook, I listed two shortstops ahead of Escobar (No. 27) and Andrus (who didn't make my cut, and in retrospect I may regret that decision). I put the Rays' Tim Beckham at No. 11 and the White Sox' Gordon Beckham at No. 23. Tim Beckham is a shortstop in the traditional mold like Escobar and Andrus, and I think he'll be more of an offensive threat than they will, especially in the power department. Gordon Beckham has more pop than any of them, though he's more of an average defender than a plus with the glove.

I wouldn't compare Andrus or Escobar to Reyes, who debuted in the majors the day before he turned 20. He has more dynamic speed and significantly more strength. If Andrus and Escobar continue to develop, you could dream that they could become the second coming of Reyes, but that's not too realistic.

Does the Dodgers' Ivan DeJesus Jr. profile better as a shortstop or second baseman at the major league level? What could prevent him from being an everyday shortstop: his glove, arm or instincts? Also, do you see him as a potential leadoff man, if he keeps improving his hitting and plate discipline?

Dustin Nosler
Elk Grove, Calif.

I'll take Shortstops for $200, Alex . . . DeJesus profiles better as a shortstop, though Rafael Furcal has a firm hold on that job after re-signing with the Dodgers for three years and a $30 million. With Blake DeWitt, Mark Loretta and Tony Abreu available at second base, DeJesus probably faces a full season in Triple-A.

He profiles better at shortstop because he's solid enough to handle the defensive responsibilities, making him more valuable there. While he's coming off his best offensive season, having hit .324/.419/.423 and led the Double-A Southern League in on-base percentage, I'm not sure he'd give a team the extra offense it would want in a second baseman. He has a chance to hit at the top of the lineup if he continues to show that kind of bat and offensive ability, but he's not going to hit for much power or steal many bases.



I put this recent article in for fun, because I'd get after player #3 DeJesus.

I personally don't buy the Andrus hype as Vizquel-esque even though you hear it plenty. Reason being his arm isn't special and is considered questionable (strength wise) at least by one scout asked on the subject. Yeah he has great hands and range but he's a 2nd bagger if his arm isn't good enough. Of course he is still young yet so his arm has time to get stronger, which is why people "project" him to be a special defender. But his bat and more specifically his plate discipline is not good as of yet. I think he makes the major regardless but will he be a rich mans Rey Ordonez (great glove/poor bat but with wheels)? If so then the hype isn't warranted.

*BaseClogger*
01-26-2009, 01:09 AM
I personally don't buy the Andrus hype as Vizquel-esque even though you hear it plenty. Reason being his arm isn't special and is considered questionable (strength wise) at least by one scout asked on the subject. Yeah he has great hands and range but he's a 2nd bagger if his arm isn't good enough. Of course he is still young yet so his arm has time to get stronger, which is why people "project" him to be a special defender. But his bat and more specifically his plate discipline is not good as of yet. I think he makes the major regardless but will he be a rich mans Rey Ordonez (great glove/poor bat but with wheels)? If so then the hype isn't warranted.

-Omar Vizquel never had a really strong arm.

-I think you underestimate how bad of a hitter Rey Ordonez was.

-Andrus had a .055 isoD in AA last year as a 19 year old and for his career his isoD is .068. That's pretty darn good for a glove-first shortstop...

dougdirt
01-26-2009, 02:53 AM
Doug, what I am missing with Andrus? 91 SO in 500+ PA isn't great, but it's hardly a bad sign as a 19 year old in AA. Is this the Stubbs argument about contact rates stabilizing in the upper minors based on the presence (or absence) of power? At the major league level, .700 OPS with a plus glove a glove at SS and the ability to add 5-10 runs on the bases makes him above average. I guess I see his upside as Rafael Furcal with a bit less power.

Its not a bad sign at all. Its just that he comes with zero current power and zero power projection by everyone I have talked to on the matter. In order for his OBP and SLG to be even close to average for the position given he has no power, he has to start putting the ball in play more than he is now, by quite a bit because his BABIP can only carry him so far when he hits 5 HR over 550 AB's but is striking out 16% of his PA (over 600 PA thats 96 K's). Basically, right now he projects to be Willy Taveras, but at SS.

Kevin Goldstein sums up how I feel pretty nicely about Andrus:

Q: Elvis Andrus: Great shortstop prospect or greatest shortstop prospect?

- Trip Somers

Goldstein: Neither. None of the above. I pick C. I'm a guy who just isn't an Andrus believer, and there's a reason for that. Offensively, he's a guy without secondary skills. He doesn't work the count very well and he doesn't have any power. He's a very good defensive shortstop, but he's not a crazy great defensive shortstop; he's not a Gold Glove-caliber shortstop, he's a really good shortstop. I feel the guy is going to hit .280 or .290 and steal some bases, but at the same time he's going to draw 30 walks and hit four home runs for you. He's an everyday shortstop that is going to hit seventh for you. That's not an All-Star, that's a regular shortstop. I mean, what has he really done? He's not just going to find it. It's not there to find.

dougdirt
01-26-2009, 03:03 AM
But he doesn't have to make nearly as much of a jump as Renteria did because he's already starting with 17 points of BA, 18 points of isoD, and 25 points of isoP. Plus, he's Omar Vizquel with the glove. In fact, there's another comp...

He isn't Omar with the glove. Not sure where that comp comes from, but its wrong from everything I have ever read about Andrus.

And he does have to make a pretty big jump. Right now he is projecting to he a guy who strikes out around 16% of the time, walking about 6-7% of the time and hitting for no power. Here is what his line looks like with that walk rate, that K rate and a .320 BABIP with 5 HR.


PA AB H 2B 3B HR BB K HBP SH SF AVG OBP SLG BABIP
600 555 150 30 5 5 35 96 5 4 1 .270 .319 .369 .319


He needs to really cut down his K rate to something in the 12% range which would give him these numbers if he kept similar power


PA AB H 2B 3B HR BB K HBP SH SF AVG OBP SLG BABIP
600 555 158 32 5 5 35 72 5 4 1 .285 .332 .387 .320

Highlifeman21
01-26-2009, 06:41 AM
Exactly what has Ian Kennedy shown other than his stuff isn't all that good and he has been beaten around in the majors to this point? Kyle Drabek has already had TJ surgery and has a full 100 innings in the minors in 2.5 seasons. So I don't really think either of those guys can be looked at as guys you should have taken over Stubbs.



Porcello wanted 7+ million and a Major League deal. Sure, he would be great to have.... but his demands were insane and 25 teams passed on him when he was the #1 guy on the board. Andrew Brackman is already a TJ surgery veteran who can't find the strikezone at all, and he never really could even before the surgery. Nick Schmidt, another guy with TJ surgery under his belt and all of 7 innings in the minors pitched at age 23 heading into next season.

While Mesoraco has a ways to go, I think you are reaching extremely far here with two of those guys.

Ok, so the guys I listed have had surgery. That would definitely make them fit right in with other Reds 1st Round Draft picks (Gruler & Howington). There was buzz around the guys I listed, and what's the difference between the guys I listed and Stubbs or Mesoraco? They all have a common theme: none of them may ever make their respective MLB club, and if they do it may only be for a big cup of coffee.

Highlifeman21
01-26-2009, 06:46 AM
I liked Alderson but he was viewed as a late first/supplemental round pick. Highsight is 20/20 there. Nick Schmidt? Seriously? The same Nick Schmidt that has thrown a total of seven pro innings in two seasons? Yeah, what a great pick that would've been. Andrew Brackman? He's yet to throw a professional pitch in two seasons except for 2.2 innings in Hawaii. You may be unimpressed with the Reds first round picks, but yours are even worse, IMO. Both of those guys would have been overdrafts ... now factor in that both have combined for roughly 10 pro innings ... both would have been far worse picks than Mesoraco.

And as I've said before, IMO Lincecum was the better pick, but that doesn't mean Stubbs was a punt. A punt is like what the Reds did in 2001 with Jeremy Sowers. Stubbs was neither a punt nor an overdraft.

Since when is having too much pitching a bad thing? Granted, the guys I listed all met the knife, but then we would have just filed them in the Gruler or Howington folder in the file cabinet. If the best player(s) on the board at the time are pitchers, I don't see how it's bad to draft a pitcher, rather than attempting to draft for a need.

Sure, the guys I listed haven't worked out, but there was buzz about them in their respective years.

*BaseClogger*
01-26-2009, 10:32 AM
He isn't Omar with the glove. Not sure where that comp comes from, but its wrong from everything I have ever read about Andrus.

And he does have to make a pretty big jump. Right now he is projecting to he a guy who strikes out around 16% of the time, walking about 6-7% of the time and hitting for no power. Here is what his line looks like with that walk rate, that K rate and a .320 BABIP with 5 HR.


PA AB H 2B 3B HR BB K HBP SH SF AVG OBP SLG BABIP
600 555 150 30 5 5 35 96 5 4 1 .270 .319 .369 .319


He needs to really cut down his K rate to something in the 12% range which would give him these numbers if he kept similar power


PA AB H 2B 3B HR BB K HBP SH SF AVG OBP SLG BABIP
600 555 158 32 5 5 35 72 5 4 1 .285 .332 .387 .320

"Right now" isn't a great way to judge a 19 year old prospect. You don't think he can improve, I and others think he can. I think that's where we aren't going to agree...

penantboundreds
01-26-2009, 12:10 PM
Alright, sorry guys, I have to steer somewhere different but I don't feel it is worthy of it's own thread so sorry for hi-jacking, an answer would be awesome though....

Would you rather have Clay Bucholz or Phillip Hughes for fantasy baseball this upcoming season?

camisadelgolf
01-26-2009, 12:19 PM
Alright, sorry guys, I have to steer somewhere different but I don't feel it is worthy of it's own thread so sorry for hi-jacking, an answer would be awesome though....

Would you rather have Clay Bucholz or Phillip Hughes for fantasy baseball this upcoming season?

There's actually a fantasy baseball forum here, and that's totally worth a new thread. You could even make a poll if you wanted.
http://www.redszone.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16

dougdirt
01-26-2009, 12:41 PM
"Right now" isn't a great way to judge a 19 year old prospect. You don't think he can improve, I and others think he can. I think that's where we aren't going to agree...

Well what makes you think he can and will improve? The scouts don't really see it. What do you see that makes you think he will?

*BaseClogger*
01-26-2009, 01:31 PM
Well what makes you think he can and will improve? The scouts don't really see it. What do you see that makes you think he will?

I'm not saying he's going to have plus power, but think as he develops he can improve his contact and have the ability to leg out some doubles and triples with his speed...

redhawk61
01-26-2009, 01:40 PM
I'm not saying he's going to have plus power, but think as he develops he can improve his contact and have the ability to leg out some doubles and triples with his speed...

doesn't seem to work for Taveras

jojo
01-26-2009, 02:56 PM
Well what makes you think he can and will improve? The scouts don't really see it. What do you see that makes you think he will?

What might happen to his contact rate if he repeated AA as a 20 yo?

Mario-Rijo
01-26-2009, 02:59 PM
doesn't seem to work for Taveras

Or Patterson or Pie or......{insert name here}. Yes they all look great once upon a time but sometimes they just don't acquire the skill to go along with their talent. Andrus looks like he has a better chance of figuring it out but it's too soon to be sure. Corey Patterson for example is a guy who actually if he just did one thing differently could turn it all around, quit swinging at pitches that not much good can hardly ever come from and get a little better in the bat control dept. But if he just did that 1st thing he'd be an All Star. Andrus currently does this same thing, and if he hits well in s/t he is gonna be a major leaguer this year sometime. Too freaking soon if you ask me.

dougdirt
01-26-2009, 03:29 PM
What might happen to his contact rate if he repeated AA as a 20 yo?

Who knows? Time will tell, but the point still remains he either needs significantly more power than he has now and no one thinks he will get it, or he must improve his contact rate dramatically in order to post season OPS's over .700.

camisadelgolf
01-26-2009, 03:29 PM
The problem with Patterson is that he started listening to Dusty Baker. I don't mean to hijack the thread, but look at how much better CPat was doing when he struck out all the time. Dusty got it in Patterson's head that he has to put the ball in play.

jojo
01-26-2009, 03:34 PM
Time will tell, but the point still remains he either needs significantly more power than he has now and no one thinks he will get it, or he must improve his contact rate dramatically in order to post season OPS's over .700.

I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise.

camisadelgolf
01-26-2009, 03:36 PM
I've been skimming. Would it be accurate to say that we can all agree that Andrus is overrated as a prospect, but the disagreement is in dougdirt's assessment of how overrated Andrus actually is.

jojo
01-26-2009, 03:43 PM
I've been skimming. Would it be accurate to say that we can all agree that Andrus is overrated as a prospect, but the disagreement is in dougdirt's assessment of how overrated Andrus actually is.

My opinion-Andrus isn't the next AROD but he has a legitimate chance to be an above average major league shortstop. That can be pretty valuable and makes him a legitimate prospect.

dougdirt
01-26-2009, 03:44 PM
I just don't think his defense is good enough to overcome a .740 OPS to become more than average at shortstop.

M2
01-27-2009, 01:26 AM
The Reds should only be so lucky as to have an overrated 20-year-old SS heading into AAA.

dougdirt
01-27-2009, 01:46 AM
The Reds should only be so lucky as to have an overrated 20-year-old SS heading into AAA.

No one is suggesting he wouldn't be something good to have, but he is currently overrated by a whole lot of people

Milb.com had him ranked 21st in the minors.

I just can't buy into the fact that there are only 20 better prospects in baseball better than him. He is young, fast and plays above average defense. His bat projects to be a .700 OPS type of bat though. His defense isn't gold glove ability, much less Ozzie or Omar ability, so his bat just isn't going to justify him being a top 25 type guy for me.... or even a top 50 guy right now. He is a top 100 type of guy though because I think he is a safe bet to be a major leaguer and maybe even an average one. The upside just isn't there for me though to rank him that high.

edabbs44
01-27-2009, 08:26 AM
No one is suggesting he wouldn't be something good to have, but he is currently overrated by a whole lot of people

Milb.com had him ranked 21st in the minors.

I just can't buy into the fact that there are only 20 better prospects in baseball better than him. He is young, fast and plays above average defense. His bat projects to be a .700 OPS type of bat though. His defense isn't gold glove ability, much less Ozzie or Omar ability, so his bat just isn't going to justify him being a top 25 type guy for me.... or even a top 50 guy right now. He is a top 100 type of guy though because I think he is a safe bet to be a major leaguer and maybe even an average one. The upside just isn't there for me though to rank him that high.

Doug, I took this excerpt from the milb.com ranking profile on Andrus:


Statistically speaking: The biggest sign that Andrus is adjusting is how he improved at the plate over the course of the season. He hit .260 with a .612 OPS in April. That improved to .278 and .666 in May. He took off in June (.309/.782) and particularly in July (.330/.804). A teenager raises his batting average 36 points and his OPS 95 points from first half to second is always going to raise some eyebrows.

Now, you used similar logic (IIRC) when speaking about Stubbs' 2nd half bump after he started choking up noting his 2nd half numbers. So why would you project him at a .700 OPS when it appears as if he has shown improvement and could easily continue on that upward trajectory?

dougdirt
01-27-2009, 12:47 PM
Now, you used similar logic (IIRC) when speaking about Stubbs' 2nd half bump after he started choking up noting his 2nd half numbers. So why would you project him at a .700 OPS when it appears as if he has shown improvement and could easily continue on that upward trajectory?

Stubbs walks more than Andrus and still has plenty of projectability in his bat, while playing better defense at his position.

Andrus on the other hand just doesn't really have much offensive projection in his bat (or so the scouts tell me). He doesn't have power now and doesn't project to have it ever. And I don't mean 20 HR power, I mean 10 HR power.

Look at his month to month splits last year.


Split PA AB ISOP HR BB% K% BABIP GB% LD% AVG OBP SLG wOBA
April 106 100 .050 0 3.8% 17.9% .321 73% 14% .260 .302 .310 .278
May 100 90 .044 0 8.0% 22.0% .368 67% 17% .278 .340 .322 .304
June 79 68 .088 1 8.9% 15.2% .364 44% 23% .309 .380 .397 .348
July 110 97 .093 2 8.2% 18.2% .400 49% 19% .330 .382 .423 .356
August 134 122 .090 1 7.5% 11.9% .343 51% 22% .303 .351 .393 .330


He carried a .357 BABIP for the season and posted a .717 OPS. He is Willy Taveras at the plate right now. The problem is, he doesn't project to be much better than Taveras offensively either. He doesn't control the zone well, he won't hit HR's and he strikes out at about the same rate. His growth as a hitter just isn't there. He needs to cut down his strikeout rate to around where he was in August to be a consistent .700 OPS type of hitter. I am not sure he can do it.

TRF
01-27-2009, 03:00 PM
After looking at Andrus' numbers, one thing I do like is that he got better as the season went, but all at AA. Opposing staffs got multiple looks at him and he adjusted. I don't think that should be discounted. Ideally, you'd like to see about 20 more BB's, but he did well for a guy his age at that level.

That said, the kid is being rushed a bit. I'd certainly slow up a bit and have him repeat AA.

dougdirt
01-27-2009, 03:09 PM
That said, the kid is being rushed a bit. I'd certainly slow up a bit and have him repeat AA.

I think that would be a good idea too, but it sounds like Texas is really looking at continuing to rush him. The talk is to give him a look in ST and if he looks even half way decent he is going to be there on Opening Day.