PDA

View Full Version : Who is Redszone's #2 prospect?



camisadelgolf
10-14-2011, 06:49 PM
Who is Redszone's #2 prospect?

#1 C Devin Mesoraco

dougdirt
10-14-2011, 07:00 PM
Yasmani Grandal. His bat is pretty polished. He has above average offensive tools across the board and solid plate discipline. His defensive reports have been a little lackluster compared to what they were coming out of college, but I tend to think that just about any and all catching scouting reports for non pro's are exaggerated because they guys they are catching simply aren't the same caliber. Still, he is expected to stick at catcher and his bat will absolutely play well at the position.

thorn
10-14-2011, 07:17 PM
Alonso's bat in LF for this team next year will be HUGH, regardless of his defense.

camisadelgolf
10-14-2011, 07:22 PM
Alonso's bat in LF for this team next year will be HUGH, regardless of his defense.
Hugh Duffy is a Hall of Famer, so I think your expectations might be a little high, but I hope you're right.

Kc61
10-14-2011, 07:27 PM
IMO, it's between Hamilton and Grandal. Earlier this year, I picked Grandal, who seems to be a strong two-way catching prospect just behind Mes.

But with his incredible baserunning ability, Hamilton is potentially a star player IMO. Over the years, certain players have become disruptive weapons with their baserunning ability. Hamilton can become such a player.

He obviously will have to develop his hitting. And with his errors, SS may not be in his future. But this guy seems like a great athlete who will adjust to some position, perhaps CF. He can be a tremendous weapon some day, he's my No. 2.

I see Alonso in the top five but I agree with some posters that, given his limited defense, he will have to hit a ton to be a star player. The top first basemen (his true position) are great hitters. That's a lot to ask from Alonso, not sure he'll be quite that good.

mth123
10-14-2011, 07:56 PM
This is tough for me. In past years I've made the mistake of assuming too much for some of these top prospects. Alonso's bat looked really good, but there have been lots of players at 1B who have flashed a good bat and ended up with a career as a PH or part time player (Harry Spilman anyone?). Many are assuming he can automatically OPS .850 every year in the big leagues and I think that is too aggressive. I have him pegged as somebody along the lines of Adam Laroche w/o the defensive prowess. A Solid every day 1B who can hit in the middle of the order but not a star. OTOH, Zach Cozart is a strong defensive SS who looks like a guy who can be steadily solid in the field and has some power and speed potential. A comp that keeps coming to mind is Greg Gagne of the Twins. A steady 75 to 90 OPS+ with real solid defense at a vital defensive position and a chance to OPS a little higher in his good years. The question for me is which is more valuable. Cozart's glove looks to be a constant and at his position should keep him around as a solid contributor even if the bat falters a bit. Alonso is bat or bust and given the competition at his position seems to have a much higher bar to clear to be an average player. Based on that, I think Cozart has a ittle less downside than Yonder, though if Yonder hits like he did in his audition this year, he'll blow everyone on this list away. I'm going with Cozart based on my estimation that he has a higher floor.

Kc61
10-14-2011, 08:01 PM
Zach Cozart is a strong defensive SS who looks like a guy who can be steadily solid in the field and has some power and speed potential. A comp that keeps coming to mind is Greg Gagne of the Twins. A steady 75 to 90 OPS+ with real solid defense at a vital defensive position and a chance to OPS a little higher in his good years. The question for me is which is more valuable. Cozart's glove looks to be a constant and at his position should keep him around as a solid contributor even if the bat falters a bit. Alonso is bat or bust and given the competition at his position seems to have a much higher bar to clear to be an average player. Based on that, I think Cozart has a ittle less downside than Yonder, though if Yonder hits like he did in his audition this year, he'll blow everyone on this list away. I'm going with Cozart based on my estimation that he has a higher floor.

And to think everybody dissed the Reds for drafting Cozart so high.

camisadelgolf
10-14-2011, 08:12 PM
I forget who said, but I loved whoever made the post about waiting until Zack Cozart takes his first major league walk before crowning him as the Reds' next great shortstop. (I deem myself RZ's official first supporter of Cozart fwiw.)

mth123
10-14-2011, 08:17 PM
I forget who said, but I loved whoever made the post about waiting until Zack Cozart takes his first major league walk before crowning him as the Reds' next great shortstop. (I deem myself RZ's official first supporter of Cozart fwiw.)

Who's crowning him great? My exact point is that we shouldn't crown any of them great. A run of the mill SS > a run of the mill 1B.

camisadelgolf
10-14-2011, 08:26 PM
Who's crowning him great? My exact point is that we shouldn't crown any of them great. A run of the mill SS > a run of the mill 1B.
Okay, crowning him as the Reds' next average-to-good shortstop then--but I wasn't really speaking in regards to his prospect status.. Like I said, I've always been a supporter of his, but I'm not sure I've seen enough from him to expect him to be the Reds' best option at shortstop in 2012.

mth123
10-14-2011, 08:59 PM
Okay, crowning him as the Reds' next average-to-good shortstop then--but I wasn't really speaking in regards to his prospect status.. Like I said, I've always been a supporter of his, but I'm not sure I've seen enough from him to expect him to be the Reds' best option at shortstop in 2012.

I'm guessing .675 to .700 OPS with solid defense. Who do the Reds have who is better than that or who could they get without it costing them an arm and a leg?

camisadelgolf
10-14-2011, 10:28 PM
I'm guessing .675 to .700 OPS with solid defense. Who do the Reds have who is better than that or who could they get without it costing them an arm and a leg?
I think that's a reasonable expectation, but there's no way I'd bet a lot of money on it. I don't have a 'better' suggestion. All I'm saying is that Cozart is from a guarantee to produce in 2012, and I hope the Reds get some insurance for that through trade or free agency.

crazybob60
10-15-2011, 02:07 AM
I am going with Cozart here. I just think he has a good all around game that will provide us the SS that we have been needing with a little pop as well. He won't be 'great' but he will be the little umph that the Reds need. What separated him and Alonso to me was the positions that they play and their ability to play them. I just think that Cozart will offer more to the Reds not only next season but in many more years down the road (with his bat, his glove, and personally I think his leadership many more years down the road) and with Alonso I think it will be just his bat that he will offer to the Reds. Therefore I am going with Cozart here at number 2.

mace
10-15-2011, 11:46 AM
For me, it was Cozart or Hamilton. While Hamilton is unique, he is also conspicuously undeveloped. At this point, you can't really say that he will ever hit or field as well at AAA as Cozart did, much less the big leagues. So gotta go with Cozart.

The DARK
10-15-2011, 12:21 PM
There are a lot of really good players listed here. I go Grandal.

RedRedhawk
10-15-2011, 12:50 PM
Pitching, pitching, pitching, pitching, pitching, pitching, pitching. Circino has the most value in the system after Mes. He is my number 2.

reds1869
10-15-2011, 01:12 PM
I went with Grandal, but it was honestly a toss up with Yonder. I love Alonso's bat but I believe Grandal has a higher ceiling at a position where you can never have enough depth.

BuckeyeRedleg
10-15-2011, 01:53 PM
When I think of top prospects, I think of who has the most trade value.

Cozart is solid and I know he fits under the definition of "prospect", but I don't see him having more trade value than Alonso, Grandal, Hamilton, Corncino, Stephenson, etc.

dougdirt
10-15-2011, 01:54 PM
When I think of top prospects, I think of who has the most trade value.

Cozart is solid and I know he fits under the definition of "prospect", but I don't see him having more trade value than Alonso, Grandal, Hamilton, Corncino, Stephenson, etc.

While I don't think of prospects like that, I am with you in that I don't see Cozart as being ahead of those guys... well, perhaps Hamilton. They are really close.

redsfandan
10-15-2011, 03:22 PM
While everyone has their own way of valuing prospects, Cozart is the only one of those guys that should be able to help the 2012 Reds both offensively and defensively. When's the last time the Reds had a decent shortstop that wasn't an offensive liability? It's been awhile. And while some of those guys have a higher ceiling, some come with bigger "flaws" and some are far enough from the majors that I don't think we can know for sure that everything will go right with them just yet. Cozart has to get healthy. So, maybe until he's 100% he shouldn't be counted on for anything just yet. But, I haven't heard anywhere that we have to worry about that. Obviously, upside matters and trade value is notable as well but you can't always count on that stuff. Expected floor and the likelihood of helping the big league club matter alot too.

dougdirt
10-15-2011, 03:36 PM
While everyone has their own way of valuing prospects, Cozart is the only one of those guys that should be able to help the 2012 Reds both offensively and defensively. When's the last time the Reds had a decent shortstop that wasn't an offensive liability? It's been awhile. And while some of those guys have a higher ceiling, some come with bigger "flaws" and some are far enough from the majors that I don't think we can know for sure that everything will go right with them just yet. Cozart has to get healthy. So, maybe until he's 100% he shouldn't be counted on for anything just yet. But, I haven't heard anywhere that we have to worry about that. Obviously, upside matters and trade value is notable as well but you can't always count on that stuff. Expected floor and the likelihood of helping the big league club matter alot too.

I think Dave Sappelt certainly fits the "should be able to help the Reds both offensively and defensively" mold. But, why does one have to help on both sides of the ball? Isn't it the totality that counts?

redsfandan
10-15-2011, 03:48 PM
I think Dave Sappelt certainly fits the "should be able to help the Reds both offensively and defensively" mold.

True but Cozart should be a bigger upgrade than Sappelt don't ya think?


But, why does one have to help on both sides of the ball? Isn't it the totality that counts?

Because sometimes the player has defensive limitations (like Alonso) that drag down his overall value.

dougdirt
10-15-2011, 03:53 PM
True but Cozart should be a bigger upgrade than Sappelt don't ya think?

Upgrade doesn't matter because that includes what we had last year at the big league level, not the actual players we are talking about. If I were playing shortstop last year it shouldn't mean that another shortstop should be valued higher, because their ceiling is their ceiling and it is going to make them worth X, not X-whatever Doug was worth.



Because sometimes the player has defensive limitations (like Alonso) that drag down his overall value.

Sure, but you implied that positive offensive value + positive defensive value is going to be more valuable than positive one only one side and that isn't always true.

redsfandan
10-15-2011, 04:03 PM
Upgrade doesn't matter because that includes what we had last year at the big league level, not the actual players we are talking about. If I were playing shortstop last year it shouldn't mean that another shortstop should be valued higher, because their ceiling is their ceiling and it is going to make them worth X, not X-whatever Doug was worth.

Ok, you can disregard the upgrade if you'd like (I wouldn't). There's position as well. Cozart can be a starting shortstop that's a little above average. How likely is it that Sappelt will be an above average centerfielder (offensively and defensively) instead of a good backup?


Sure, but you implied that positive offensive value + positive defensive value is going to be more valuable than positive one only one side and that isn't always true.

Again, going back to Alonso, how much offense does he have to produce to offset the bad defense? Sure, there are exceptions. If you'd rather take Alonso that's up to you. I wouldn't.

dougdirt
10-15-2011, 04:10 PM
Ok, you can disregard the upgrade if you'd like (I wouldn't). There's position as well. Cozart can be a starting shortstop that's a little above average. How likely is it that Sappelt will be an above average centerfielder (offensively and defensively) instead of a good backup?

I think that Cozart and Sappelt are nearly hand in hand in terms of value. Sappelt has a better chance to be an above average hitter for his position IMO (assuming that position in center). Defensively, I think its a wash. Cozart has the better overall defensive game, but Sappelt has great range in center. His arm brings it back a little bit, but an arm in the outfield really only comes into play so often when compared to the amount of outs you are recording on fly balls/line drives.



Again, going back to Alonso, how much offense does he have to produce to offset the bad defense? Sure, there are exceptions. If you'd rather take Alonso that's up to you. I wouldn't.

Well, I think that the first thing is, are you judging him as a left fielder or a first baseman? I think that just about every scout is going to be evaluating his value as a first baseman and I think that we should too. His value as a prospect shouldn't be tied to the fact that the Reds might play him in left field for 1000 at bats before moving him to first base. So at that point, I would say that his bad defense goes away because he is solid average defensively at first base.

redsfandan
10-15-2011, 04:20 PM
I think that Cozart and Sappelt are nearly hand in hand in terms of value. Sappelt has a better chance to be an above average hitter for his position IMO (assuming that position in center). Defensively, I think its a wash. Cozart has the better overall defensive game, but Sappelt has great range in center. His arm brings it back a little bit, but an arm in the outfield really only comes into play so often when compared to the amount of outs you are recording on fly balls/line drives.

That's kinda an important assumption though. This is a ranking of the Reds top prospects. Not mlb prospects or even NL Central prospects. For the Reds, one will likely be a starter at a very important position while the other isn't. Now I know you'll say that doesn't matter and I understand that to you it doesn't. To me it does.


Well, I think that the first thing is, are you judging him as a left fielder or a first baseman? I think that just about every scout is going to be evaluating his value as a first baseman and I think that we should too. His value as a prospect shouldn't be tied to the fact that the Reds might play him in left field for 1000 at bats before moving him to first base. So at that point, I would say that his bad defense goes away because he is solid average defensively at first base.
So, his bad defense just magically goes away now. This is something we probably won't agree on. That the Reds want to turn him into Adam Dunn doesn't matter to you but it does to me. He's a REDS prospect and his value AS A RED will very likely (barring a trade) be as a left fielder.

mth123
10-15-2011, 04:21 PM
I wouldn't sell Sappelt short. He's in the top 7 as well and after Mes, the top 7 are pretty close IMO. I could see the argument for just about any order from 2 through 7. After that there is a gap and then another clear group of 6 or so that are close. Then there is a big gap IMO.

dougdirt
10-15-2011, 04:32 PM
That's kinda an important assumption though. This is a ranking of the Reds top prospects. Not mlb prospects or even NL Central prospects. For the Reds, one will likely be a starter at a very important position while the other isn't. Now I know you'll say that doesn't matter and I understand that to you it doesn't. To me it does.
A prospect is a prospect is a prospect is a prospect. His value shouldn't be determined at all by the team that he plays for. He either is a player of X value or he isn't. Ranking a prospect should be based on the value that the player is going to provide over his career. No team is going to truly change that value much unless they take a starter and make him a closer or something like that and he never really gets back to his shot at starting, but 95% of the time, that doesn't happen.



So, his bad defense just magically goes away now. This is something we probably won't agree on. That the Reds want to turn him into Adam Dunn doesn't matter to you but it does to me. He's a REDS prospect and his value AS A RED will very likely (barring a trade) be as a left fielder.
If Alonso stays a Red for the next six seasons (before reaching free agency), I would be willing to wager a whole bunch of money that he spends at least 3 times as long at first base as he does anywhere else on the field. And no, the fact that he is a Red doesn't mean his value is different than if he were a Royal or Rockie or Ray. It may mean for a season or two his value is lesser because the Reds are going to play him out of position, but it doesn't change how good he actually is. Prospects are evaluated in a vacuum. They are evaluated that way by scouts and every prospect evaluator out there (BA, BP, PP, Sickels). The reason is because things can change as quick as a phone call. Yonder Alonso is a first baseman and should be evaluated as one because no one really thinks his long term future is anywhere else. Essentially, you are saying he isn't as valuable because of someone else (Joey Votto). That isn't how the prospecting thing works.

redsfandan
10-15-2011, 04:40 PM
A prospect is a prospect is a prospect is a prospect. His value shouldn't be determined at all by the team that he plays for. He either is a player of X value or he isn't. Ranking a prospect should be based on the value that the player is going to provide over his career. No team is going to truly change that value much unless they take a starter and make him a closer or something like that and he never really gets back to his shot at starting, but 95% of the time, that doesn't happen.


If Alonso stays a Red for the next six seasons (before reaching free agency), I would be willing to wager a whole bunch of money that he spends at least 3 times as long at first base as he does anywhere else on the field. And no, the fact that he is a Red doesn't mean his value is different than if he were a Royal or Rockie or Ray. It may mean for a season or two his value is lesser because the Reds are going to play him out of position, but it doesn't change how good he actually is. Prospects are evaluated in a vacuum. They are evaluated that way by scouts and every prospect evaluator out there (BA, BP, PP, Sickels). The reason is because things can change as quick as a phone call. Yonder Alonso is a first baseman and should be evaluated as one because no one really thinks his long term future is anywhere else. Essentially, you are saying he isn't as valuable because of someone else (Joey Votto). That isn't how the prospecting thing works.

Like I said, I knew this would be something we'd disagree on. I don't want to drag this out needlessly. To sum up, I'm viewing Alonso based on what position he's expected to play. It's as simple as that. That it might be for only a season doesn't matter to me. I'm thinking about what is known. I don't know that there'll be a trade or anything like that. I know that right now he's expected to compete to be the left fielder. So, that's what I'm basing my opinion of him on. I know you'll say that's wrong, Doug. Agree to disagree I guess.

Scrap Irony
10-15-2011, 06:57 PM
I picked Grandal, as Alonso's likely production is lesser now that, IMO, he's likely to play at least a couple seasons in LF. Since he, Grandal, Hamilton, and Torreyes are all really close on my list, this may knock Alonso a few spots.

Kc61
10-16-2011, 12:02 PM
Here's a slightly different take on things.

I see two players with "star" ability on the Reds list. Mesoraco and Hamilton.

I see a third player who, given his position, could make the "star" list. Grandal.

To me, those are your top three prospects. I understand that they are at different points of development. But these are guys with very rare abilities, given Hamilton's athleticism and baserunning ability, and given Mes and Grandal's talent and position scarcity.

I see two players who, if I'm correct, project as solid players, perhaps starting players, but not "stars." Those are Cozart and Alonso. I'd probably go with Cozart 4 and Alonso 5 because of position scarcity and all around skills. But I can see Alonso 4 and Cozart 5.

I recognize that Cozart and Alonso are well more advanced and more polished than someone like Hamilton. That counts. But in ranking prospects, I tend to put upside as the first order of business. And I tend to put potential stars at the very top.

On Alonso, I think he is being rewarded in the poll for a good hitting stint in the majors. And certainly he can help the Reds. But there are many good hitting first basemen. He isn't a powerhouse guy, like a Ryan Howard. He isn't even a Sean Casey IMO, Sean having "off the charts" minor league numbers, well above Alonso. Nor do I see Alonso as the new Votto.

So I view this as Mesoraco, Hamilton, Grandal, Cozart and Alonso as the top five, for those reasons. All good prospects, just a different view of the order.

And, by the way, if these are the top five, I have Boxberger at number 6. Again, huge upside as a potential closer. If Box was a starter, with his stuff, he'd be even higher IMO.

redsfandan
10-16-2011, 12:22 PM
Here's a slightly different take on things.

I see two players with "star" ability on the Reds list. Mesoraco and Hamilton.

I see a third player who, given his position, could make the "star" list. Grandal.

To me, those are your top three prospects. I understand that they are at different points of development. But these are guys with very rare abilities, given Hamilton's athleticism and baserunning ability, and given Mes and Grandal's talent and position scarcity.

I see two players who, if I'm correct, project as solid players, perhaps starting players, but not "stars." Those are Cozart and Alonso. I'd probably go with Cozart 4 and Alonso 5 because of position scarcity and all around skills. But I can see Alonso 4 and Cozart 5.

I recognize that Cozart and Alonso are well more advanced and more polished than someone like Hamilton. That counts. But in ranking prospects, I tend to put upside as the first order of business. And I tend to put potential stars at the very top.

On Alonso, I think he is being rewarded in the poll for a good hitting stint in the majors. And certainly he can help the Reds. But there are many good hitting first basemen. He isn't a powerhouse guy, like a Ryan Howard. He isn't even a Sean Casey IMO, Sean having "off the charts" minor league numbers, well above Alonso. Nor do I see Alonso as the new Votto.

So I view this as Mesoraco, Hamilton, Grandal, Cozart and Alonso as the top five, for those reasons. All good prospects, just a different view of the order.

And, by the way, if these are the top five, I have Boxberger at number 6. Again, huge upside as a potential closer. If Box was a starter, with his stuff, he'd be even higher IMO.

I think most people would have those guys as the top 5 (with Mes #1). Who is actually in which spot just depends on the person.

Scrap Irony
10-16-2011, 01:12 PM
Here's a slightly different take on things.

I see two players with "star" ability on the Reds list. Mesoraco and Hamilton.

I see a third player who, given his position, could make the "star" list. Grandal.

To me, those are your top three prospects. I understand that they are at different points of development. But these are guys with very rare abilities, given Hamilton's athleticism and baserunning ability, and given Mes and Grandal's talent and position scarcity.

I see two players who, if I'm correct, project as solid players, perhaps starting players, but not "stars." Those are Cozart and Alonso. I'd probably go with Cozart 4 and Alonso 5 because of position scarcity and all around skills. But I can see Alonso 4 and Cozart 5.

I recognize that Cozart and Alonso are well more advanced and more polished than someone like Hamilton. That counts. But in ranking prospects, I tend to put upside as the first order of business. And I tend to put potential stars at the very top.

On Alonso, I think he is being rewarded in the poll for a good hitting stint in the majors. And certainly he can help the Reds. But there are many good hitting first basemen. He isn't a powerhouse guy, like a Ryan Howard. He isn't even a Sean Casey IMO, Sean having "off the charts" minor league numbers, well above Alonso. Nor do I see Alonso as the new Votto.

So I view this as Mesoraco, Hamilton, Grandal, Cozart and Alonso as the top five, for those reasons. All good prospects, just a different view of the order.

And, by the way, if these are the top five, I have Boxberger at number 6. Again, huge upside as a potential closer. If Box was a starter, with his stuff, he'd be even higher IMO.

Add in Neftali Soto and Ronald Torreyes, and I agree with you about star potential, then above-average starters.

dougdirt
10-16-2011, 02:08 PM
Yorman Rodriguez - Star potential.
Robert Stephenson - Star potential.

Billy Hamilton - Not star potential except in fantasy baseball, because even at his best, guys who don't slug .425 aren't going to be stars.

The DARK
10-16-2011, 02:19 PM
Stephenson also has star potential (much more than Corcino), as far off as he is right now. He'll be up there in my rankings.

mace
10-16-2011, 02:32 PM
Billy Hamilton - Not star potential except in fantasy baseball, because even at his best, guys who don't slug .425 aren't going to be stars.

Maury Wills? Lou Brock? Rickey Henderson?

dougdirt
10-16-2011, 02:41 PM
Maury Wills? Lou Brock? Rickey Henderson?

Rickey Henderson had power that Billy Hamilton can't dream of. So did Lou Brock. Maury Wills had one season with an OPS+ over 100. Yeah, he won an MVP once upon a time. He shouldn't have. He had a .720 OPS that year. In no way, shape or form was he better than Mays, Aaron or Robinson that year. Stars, especially in todays game, have to hit. Otherwise Brandon Phillips would be a star. But he isn't.

And lets be honest, slugging .425 back then was a lot different than it is now.

Scrap Irony
10-16-2011, 03:10 PM
Yorman Rodriguez - Star potential.
Robert Stephenson - Star potential.

Billy Hamilton - Not star potential except in fantasy baseball, because even at his best, guys who don't slug .425 aren't going to be stars.

Respectfully disagree.

A guy like Hamilton (at his ceiling) could very well put up an 8.0 WAR at the major league level.

That's a star in any league.

dougdirt
10-16-2011, 03:14 PM
Respectfully disagree.

A guy like Hamilton (at his ceiling) could very well put up an 8.0 WAR at the major league level.

That's a star in any league.

How are you breaking that down? Because his bat, I just can't see being any more than 2.5 WAR. He simply doesn't hit well enough, nor will he, to ever be better than that IMO.

mace
10-16-2011, 03:22 PM
Doug, come on. Your statement was, "guys who don't slug .425 aren't going to be stars." All those guys were under .425 for their careers. Henderson was close, Brock was somewhat close and Wills wasn't close to close.

The point about the eras being different is somewhat valid but not compelling. The league slugging average for the NL this year was .391. At the midpoint of Wills' career (1966) it was .384. At the midpoint of Brock's career (1970) it was .392. At the midpoint of Henderson's career it (in the AL) was .395.

dougdirt
10-16-2011, 03:33 PM
Doug, come on. Your statement was, "guys who don't slug .425 aren't going to be stars." All those guys were under .425 for their careers. Henderson was close, Brock was somewhat close and Wills wasn't close to close.

The point about the eras being different is somewhat valid but not compelling. The league slugging average for the NL this year was .391. At the midpoint of Wills' career (1966) it was .384. At the midpoint of Brock's career (1970) it was .392. At the midpoint of Henderson's career it (in the AL) was .395.

Henderson and Brock both put up 20+ HR seasons. Billy Hamilton is never going to hit 10. Who has been a star in the last 20 years who didn't hit 10 HR's in a season aside from Ichiro? Jose Reyes has had some seasons like that, but he also has some seasons where he has slugged over .475 and gone well over 10 HR's as well.

My ceiling for Hamilton is about a .275 hitter with 50 walks and no power to speak of, unless he completely revamps his game at the plate. He is a guy who struggles to make contact and has no power. He has an incredibly long way to go before he is even a bad MLB type of hitter.

Let's think about it like this.... Lou Brock had 4 seasons of an OPS+ between 123 and 129. That is what Jay Bruce has been the last two seasons. Do you ever think that Billy Hamilton could come close to the kind of hitter that Jay Bruce has been the last two seasons? Rickey Henderson actually led the league in OPS+ once with a 188 mark. That is 17 points better than Joey Votto was in 2010. So really, the comparison of those two players to Billy Hamilton is, in my opinion, way off base.

Kc61
10-16-2011, 03:41 PM
Yorman Rodriguez - Star potential.
Robert Stephenson - Star potential.

Billy Hamilton - Not star potential except in fantasy baseball, because even at his best, guys who don't slug .425 aren't going to be stars.

I disagree on Hamilton, although perhaps we just have different definitions of a star player.

As for Yorman and Stephenson, I'm just reserving judgment for now. Both need to show a little more in pro ball (certainly in Stephenson's case) before I would rate them this high. We'll know a lot more about each in a year I think. Both could potentially have star potential.

dougdirt
10-16-2011, 03:45 PM
I disagree on Hamilton, although perhaps we just have different definitions of a star player.

As for Yorman and Stephenson, I'm just reserving judgment for now. Both need to show a little more in pro ball (certainly in Stephenson's case) before I would rate them this high. We'll know a lot more about each in a year I think. Both could potentially have star potential.

Yorman Rodriguez had a better OPS in Dayton than Hamilton and was two years younger. Now of course that doesn't account for defense.... but I am curious as to why you disagree on Hamilton but reserve judgment to see more on Rodriguez.

Kc61
10-16-2011, 04:18 PM
Yorman Rodriguez had a better OPS in Dayton than Hamilton and was two years younger. Now of course that doesn't account for defense.... but I am curious as to why you disagree on Hamilton but reserve judgment to see more on Rodriguez.

For a player like Hamilton, I don't view OPS as the be-all and end-all. He won't have the SLG component, it's not his game. He's a potential lead off hitter, with an almost unique baserunning skill.

Hamilton had a .340 OBP (higher than Yorman) at Dayton and all those stolen bases.

Hamilton is a very raw player at this point, but if he can OBP .360 or so - certainly attainable since he's already at .340 - he can be a star player given his baserunning IMO.

It's apples and oranges to me. Very different types of player.

Scrap Irony
10-16-2011, 04:18 PM
How are you breaking that down? Because his bat, I just can't see being any more than 2.5 WAR. He simply doesn't hit well enough, nor will he, to ever be better than that IMO.

If you extrapolate his second half numbers this season in Dayton to the major league level, his offensive WAR would be more than a point over your lowball guess.

IMO, at his ceiling right now, he's a 2009 Denard Span at SS with better basepath speed and a possible Gold Glove.

That'd be an 8.0 WAR guy and a star.

What's cool about this is that he has a chance to be even better than that. He's still only scratched the surface of his abilities. As he learns more about the game, what type of player he is, and his own swing, he could be as disruptive a force as the game has to offer.

dougdirt
10-16-2011, 04:24 PM
If you extrapolate his second half numbers this season in Dayton to the major league level, his offensive WAR would be more than a point over your lowball guess.

Sure, if you don't account for crappy low A defense or his high BABIP. Billy Hamilton, as a LHH, hit .339 on ground balls FIELDED by the shortstop or third baseman this year. Dude is fast. But that is never going to last. He hit .294 on balls fielded by the pitcher. Never going to last. He hit .429 on balls fielded by the catcher. Never going to last.

So you can't just extrapolate his second half Low A numbers to the MLB level, because they were achieved in a way that simply isn't going to happen at the MLB level.

Scrap Irony
10-16-2011, 04:41 PM
Sure, if you don't account for crappy low A defense or his high BABIP. Billy Hamilton, as a LHH, hit .339 on ground balls FIELDED by the shortstop or third baseman this year. Dude is fast. But that is never going to last. He hit .294 on balls fielded by the pitcher. Never going to last. He hit .429 on balls fielded by the catcher. Never going to last.

So you can't just extrapolate his second half Low A numbers to the MLB level, because they were achieved in a way that simply isn't going to happen at the MLB level.

His BaBIP will be close, as his speed is that good, doug. It's more than good. It's game-changing.

And his second half improvement wasn't just BaBIP related; he showed a MASSIVE improvement.

And it's not like I'm saying he's going to suddenly go all mid-90's Barry Larkin. He's likely Denard Span-- a high obp, low slugging guy who will steal a ton of bases while playing a premium position.

The difference is that Hamilton has a chance at stealing 100+ bases and playing Gold Glove defense at SS.

That'll round into an 8.0 WAR.

dougdirt
10-16-2011, 04:52 PM
His BaBIP will be close, as his speed is that good, doug. It's more than good. It's game-changing.

And his second half improvement wasn't just BaBIP related; he showed a MASSIVE improvement.

And it's not like I'm saying he's going to suddenly go all mid-90's Barry Larkin. He's likely Denard Span-- a high obp, low slugging guy who will steal a ton of bases while playing a premium position.

The difference is that Hamilton has a chance at stealing 100+ bases and playing Gold Glove defense at SS.

That'll round into an 8.0 WAR.

HE also has a chance of not hitting .225 in AA.

And no, his second half wasn't just BABIP related, but his BABIP certainly carried a lot of weight on his entire season.

And while his speed is incredible, he isn't a guy who is 2-3 steps faster than anyone in baseball. And no one in baseball could come close to his average on balls on the infield. Not Ichiro at any point in his career (who was probably just as fast on most infield balls because he is getting a head start because of his swing earlier in his career). Not Michael Bourn. I haven't been able to find anyone who was within 30 points (Emilio Bonafacio is the closest).

Here is why I feel his infield hits will dry up some. As a right hander, he hit .133 on balls fielded on the infield. As a lefty, he was 90 points higher than that. He is only .1 of a second faster from the left side than the right side in terms of his time from contact to first base. The main difference in those two averages came from balls to the shortstop and third base side of the infield. When he gets to the Majors, the fielders will be better and have stronger and more accurate arms. So as a lefty, he is going to start losing those singles to shortstop and third base as a left hander.

Scrap Irony
10-16-2011, 06:13 PM
HE also has a chance of not hitting .225 in AA.

Absolutely. Which is why I didn't vote Hamilton as the first or second-ranked prospect. His ceiling is, IMO, the highest of any Red prospect, but his floor is low as well. He'll have to put together an entire season as good as his second half before I do that.



And no, his second half wasn't just BABIP related, but his BABIP certainly carried a lot of weight on his entire season.

He's a speed guy. You can expect his BaBIP to be high.



And while his speed is incredible, he isn't a guy who is 2-3 steps faster than anyone in baseball. And no one in baseball could come close to his average on balls on the infield. Not Ichiro at any point in his career (who was probably just as fast on most infield balls because he is getting a head start because of his swing earlier in his career). Not Michael Bourn. I haven't been able to find anyone who was within 30 points (Emilio Bonafacio is the closest).

And, as he ages, he'll also get better with the bat, fill out some, and hit the ball with more authority. It'll even out a bit in the wash. But Hamilton's total package is talented enough to think Hamilton a star.



Here is why I feel his infield hits will dry up some. As a right hander, he hit .133 on balls fielded on the infield. As a lefty, he was 90 points higher than that. He is only .1 of a second faster from the left side than the right side in terms of his time from contact to first base. The main difference in those two averages came from balls to the shortstop and third base side of the infield. When he gets to the Majors, the fielders will be better and have stronger and more accurate arms. So as a lefty, he is going to start losing those singles to shortstop and third base as a left hander.


I get that. It even makes sense. But I'm guessing he'll learn to bunt better, he'll also get stronger, and he'll still have that incredible speed to beat out balls that aren't hit right at an infielder.

His ceiling is star level.

His floor is as a MWL All Star.

It'll be interesting to see where he lands.

dougdirt
10-16-2011, 06:29 PM
He's a speed guy. You can expect his BaBIP to be high.

I don't know that is always true. Just a little sample looking through fangraphs... I checked the top 30 base stealers in baseball (21+ steals). Some guys had high BABIP. Some guys, not so much. There were 12 guys under .300 and 13 guys over .320. Now all of those guys aren't as fast as Hamilton and some aren't even close to it. But some are. Michael Bourn is. Emilio Bonafacio is. Brett Gardner is. Jose Reyes is. The first two guys listed there, have had pretty high BABIP's. The other two guys have been more mixed, with Reyes dropping into the .280's and reaching the .350's. So speed doesn't always mean a high BABIP. Juan Pierre has had a sub .300 BABIP 4 times in his career.



And, as he ages, he'll also get better with the bat, fill out some, and hit the ball with more authority. It'll even out a bit in the wash. But Hamilton's total package is talented enough to think Hamilton a star.
That is assuming that he can make the adjustments to better pitching, which he may not. He has problems with pitch identification right now. And even if he does fill out some, which I am still not sure he has much filling out left, but he still isn't going to find much more power. His swing isn't conducive to power at all.



I get that. It even makes sense. But I'm guessing he'll learn to bunt better, he'll also get stronger, and he'll still have that incredible speed to beat out balls that aren't hit right at an infielder.
Perhaps, but even if you take out the bunts this year, his average was still at an incredibly high rate that shouldn't be expected.

mdccclxix
10-17-2011, 12:48 AM
I had Grandal #1, Mez #2, so I'm hoping I don't have to stump too long for Grandal. I think in a way fans don't want to wed themselves too much to the idea of Gradal because a) he's in line behind a hard working success story in Mez b) if he's really an option that means we've traded Mez or Mez has struggled c) Grandal is a good trade piece so it's hard to envision him in a Reds uni d) the need for upgrades in Cincinnati almost necessitate Grandal getting moved in many trade scenarios. e) he wasn't really a rousing pick, it almost felt strange that he fell so far down, so people have never counted on him. He sort of just appeared that day instead of a list of many others people thought would be here. If you get past all that, he's a really compelling prospect. In his second full year, he'll be in AAA. By 24 or 25 he could really add a tough out to a lineup.

dougdirt
10-17-2011, 01:21 AM
I had Grandal #1, Mez #2, so I'm hoping I don't have to stump too long for Grandal. I think in a way fans don't want to wed themselves too much to the idea of Gradal because a) he's in line behind a hard working success story in Mez b) if he's really an option that means we've traded Mez or Mez has struggled c) Grandal is a good trade piece so it's hard to envision him in a Reds uni d) the need for upgrades in Cincinnati almost necessitate Grandal getting moved in many trade scenarios. e) he wasn't really a rousing pick, it almost felt strange that he fell so far down, so people have never counted on him. He sort of just appeared that day instead of a list of many others people thought would be here. If you get past all that, he's a really compelling prospect. In his second full year, he'll be in AAA. By 24 or 25 he could really add a tough out to a lineup.

I imagine that he will be the #3 guy. I personally have him at #2.

camisadelgolf
10-17-2011, 01:23 AM
Hamilton has a long way to go before he'll be an 8-win player on any level. However, the 'star' label isn't always applied to the games most elite players. We have the likes of ESPN to thank for that. Speaking of which, don't rule out the possibility for Hamilton to make enough highlight-reel plays to launch him into stardom. And for what it's worth, Jose Reyes has been a star pretty much ever since he was called up, and he slugged .426 over the first 5 years of his career.

dougdirt
10-17-2011, 02:57 AM
And for what it's worth, Jose Reyes has been a star pretty much ever since he was called up, and he slugged .426 over the first 5 years of his career.

Of course Jose Reyes was also the same age as Hamilton is now when he had 300 PA's in the Majors.

Now, Jose Reyes was indeed a light hitter at age 20 in the Majors. But he also slugged .462 in the FSL at age 19 with 10 doubles, 11 triples and 6 HR's in about half a season after slugging .462 as an 18 year old in the South Atlantic League, which is the Midwest League's rival Low A league. Jose Reyes was a slugger at age 18 in that league. Billy Hamilton couldn't break .360 SLG more than one month in the entire season and never once topped .421 (in a month where he hit .333).

Edd Roush
10-17-2011, 02:40 PM
Based on this thread's conversation, I would have no idea that Alonso is running away with this vote.

I guess I will speak for the silent majority of Alonso.

We all have different opinions of what makes a "top prospect." I tend to agree with the poster who said that it equates to total value or trade value. Right now, I have to think Alonso is the second most valuable minor leaguer. He has done the most in the bigs and has a great pedigree. His minor league numbers are deflated because of the hamate bone injury. I hope he can replicate his 2011 AAA line in the bigs. .296/.374/.486 in 409 PAs. His big league line of .330/.398/.545 was obviously tremendous in a small sample of only 98 PAs. Right now, he has the highest floor of any prospect on this list and he is the most valuable to the Reds not named Mesoraco. I know Yasmani had a great year and Billy could be a legend, but right now I wouldn't trade Alonso for either of them if Billy or Yasmani were on another team, straight up.

Give me Alonso at #2.

My first tough decision will be Cozart vs. Yasmani at #3.

TRF
10-17-2011, 04:11 PM
I went with Soto. unreal power. 30 HR's in 379 AB's at AA? woof. He needs to walk more obviously, but it looks like in a 162 game season he'd walk about 45 times. He'll be at AAA in 2012 and I think he builds on last year's monster season.

redsfandan
10-17-2011, 05:16 PM
I went with Soto. unreal power. 30 HR's in 379 AB's at AA? woof. He needs to walk more obviously, but it looks like in a 162 game season he'd walk about 45 times. He'll be at AAA in 2012 and I think he builds on last year's monster season.

I used to think that Alonso could eventually be the in house replacement for Votto at 1st if Votto doesn't stick around. But, lately I've thought that Soto could be that guy.

crazybob60
10-17-2011, 05:30 PM
I have a question regarding this voting....it appears that Alonso will get the #2 prospect rating here. I voted for Cozart at #2. Now since Alonso will be gone and Cozart will still be there, how is the voting supposed to go at #3? Am I supposed to go with my #3 guy or go with the best guy left next (Cozart again until he is off the board) or how does that work? Just curious how most of you all do this?

Edd Roush
10-17-2011, 05:32 PM
I have a question regarding this voting....it appears that Alonso will get the #2 prospect rating here. I voted for Cozart at #2. Now since Alonso will be gone and Cozart will still be there, how is the voting supposed to go at #3? Am I supposed to go with my #3 guy or go with the best guy left next (Cozart again until he is off the board) or how does that work? Just curious how most of you all do this?

I always select my best remaining player at the spot, not my personal player in the spot. So to answer your question, if I believed what you believe in Cozart being #2, I would again select him at #3 or until he gets enough votes to be put on the list.

mdccclxix
10-17-2011, 06:20 PM
I always select my best remaining player at the spot, not my personal player in the spot. So to answer your question, if I believed what you believe in Cozart being #2, I would again select him at #3 or until he gets enough votes to be put on the list.

...and if you'd like to share what order your picks are in you can do that within the thread. So if you constantly have to pick Cozart until, say 8th or something, then you can let people know that you had xyz players in 3rd, 4th, 5th etc.

camisadelgolf
10-17-2011, 06:21 PM
I have a question regarding this voting....it appears that Alonso will get the #2 prospect rating here. I voted for Cozart at #2. Now since Alonso will be gone and Cozart will still be there, how is the voting supposed to go at #3? Am I supposed to go with my #3 guy or go with the best guy left next (Cozart again until he is off the board) or how does that work? Just curious how most of you all do this?
Go with the best guy left. That's what most or all of us do anyway.