Other (Please Name)
Your point about Smith showing his warts is exactly the reason I don't like ranking kids who have yet to play a single inning of pro ball. They haven't had the opportunity to show us their warts yet (and rest assured, there are warts). We've seen enough of Smith to know what he can (and can't) do. We have no idea what Constante can (and can't) do. I prefer the known to the unknown.
Last edited by Steve4192; 02-22-2013 at 11:23 AM.
I went Smith here as well, though Romano, Rosa, and Constante are pretty close behind as well. I'd have Smith higher than LaMarre on my list if not for his seeming inability to take a walk this past season; we've seen too much of LaMarre and too little of the power potential he had coming out of college... Smith has made better use of his tools to date, and his problem is definitely fixable.
I completely agree on the other point though. I could probably fly anywhere in Arizona right now and swing around one of Dusty's toothpicks at arms length and poke at least three back up outfielders. Unless it's someone like Heisey that brings a good bat off the bench, those guys don't provide anything you can't pick off the scrap heap in the offseason.
Here is a high school scouting report on Romano. (Not too cheesy)
Sal Romano, RHP, Southington (Conn.)
Hometown: Southington, Conn.
Weight: 220 lbs
Scout’s Take: "Sal'’s another one of those big body high school kids we’ve been blessed with this year. His delivery has some work to do, but he’s shown great velocity on his fastball, up to 93. The feel for the spin on his breaking ball is advanced for his age. His signability demands may push him down in the draft this year, but he’s definitely one to follow."
Heads of state that ride and wrangle. That look at your face from more than one angle. Can cut you from their bloated budgets. Like sharpened knives through Chicken McNuggets.
You are right. There isn't a ton of upside there. But there is a relatively high floor.A guy like Bryson Smith just doesn't seem to have much upside.
Yes, Romano was a 23rd rounder, but he also got $450,000 to put his name on his contract. He was a projected 2nd-3rd rounder who fell.As for Constante vs. Romano, how can you compare a 23rd round pitcher who pitched only 64 innings of pro ball poorly to a guy who just got a $700,000 bonus and has a good fastball, potential plus slider and a developing change-up? Doesn't he also get a bump for being a lefty (ie positional scarcity)? I guess Romano's peripherals weren't as bad as his ERA, but certainly 64 innings of a 5.32 ERA in rookie ball doesn't count as a significant experience advantage for Romano.
Romano has an incredible similar scouting report as Constante (but with a curve instead of slider), but from the right side. And we know for a fact that he can throw the pitches for strikes. As for his ERA.... it is the Pioneer League. And he was 18. He was the youngest pitcher in the league. That is a very significant advantage for Romano over a guy who hasn't thrown a single pitch against a professional hitter. And no, being left handed doesn't give someone a boost for me. Your job is to get hitters out. The arm you throw with doesn't matter.
Last edited by dougdirt; 02-22-2013 at 02:21 PM.
Steve and doug,
I have absolutely no idea where you are coming up with your % chances that Smith and Constante will make the bigs. Where does 50-60% come from?
Also, I completely disagree that Constante only has a 2-5% chance of pitching in the bigs. I don't have any stats to support this (and likely neither do you), but I would believe that lefties who throw 92-94, with a potential plus slider and a developing change who get paid $700,000+ K bonuses have at least a double digit % chance to make the bigs (this has to be a pretty small sample size), especially if they have never suffered a major arm injury and if they do in the future, they have the most advanced surgery procedures to get them back into shape.
Either way, why would you want decent chance for a cheap bat off the bench who will never be much above replacement level, when you could have a guy who has a lower chance to have a much higher impact (like superdude says, Bryson Smith's are a dime a dozen)? I guess if you truly think he only has a 2-5% chance of cracking the bigs, that is your answer. However, I truly believe Constante has a much higher chance of cracking the bigs than 2-5% and if he does get to the bigs, he will do much more than Bryson Smith will.
There are all sorts of Bryson Smith types that are free agents every year for cheap. If Constante hits his ceiling, he could be the kind of guy who doesn't make it to FA, because he is one of the most valuable guys on your team.
Yes, if Constante hits his ceiling, he could be a good #3 pitcher. But what if he goes out and walks 7 batters per 9 innings this year and has no control with batters in the box? We don't know that he isn't going to do that because he hasn't shown he is any better than that at this point.
For me, it is about weight risk and reward. With Smith, there is very little risk, but also not much reward. With Constante, there is a solid, but not great reward (he isn't Robert Stephenson or Billy Hamilton type without improving his current "stuff" dramatically). But the risk is that he never makes it out of rookie ball and turns into a lesser hyped Michael Ynoa who signed for $4.25 million bucks in 2009 and has a grand total of 39.2 innings in his minor league career with 29 walks and 36 strikeouts.
With a guy like Constante, who was a big, but not huge signing, I am taking another handful of guys ahead of him who have proven things. He isn't a Yorman Rodriguez type of international signing who is a true 5 tool MVP type of guy if he reaches his ceiling. Smith is one of those guys. If I were ranking guys simply on pure upside, my list would look a whole lot different than it does currently.
Last edited by dougdirt; 02-22-2013 at 04:33 PM.
[QUOTE=Edd Roush;2806879]How does a potential 4th outfielder have more value than a guy who could be a starting pitcher in the major leagues?
I know the burnout rate is higher for starting pitchers than for outfielders due to an assortment of arm injuries, but isn't that more evidence that you need to stockpile those arms due to the attrition rate?
A guy like Bryson Smith just doesn't seem to have much upside.
As for Constante vs. Romano, how can you compare a 23rd round pitcher who pitched only 64 innings of pro ball poorly to a guy who just got a $700,000 bonus and has a good fastball, potential plus slider and a developing change-up? Doesn't he also get a bump for being a lefty (ie positional scarcity)? I guess Romano's peripherals weren't as bad as his ERA, but certainly 64 innings of a 5.32 ERA in rookie ball doesn't count as a significant experience advantage for Romano.
I think we are really missing the boat with our rankings of Constante and Reynoso on our prospect list.
Last edited by j_m_t_us; 02-22-2013 at 04:41 PM.
Smith doesnt have any upside? How did you come to that assumption? Cause he was a late round pick? The guys a pretty good player and should be ahead of many already picked!
The Reds have several years to figure out if Constante can throw strikes. They will give him as many chances as they can to reach that ceiling of a #3 starter. #3 starters do not grow on trees. They get paid eight figure salaries in free agency and only then to multi-year deals compared to the bench guys who get 1 year, 1 million dollar deals. Wouldn't you rather have a medium-risk, high reward prospect, than a low-risk, low-reward prospect?
And yes, I know Michael Inoa did not make it. That being said, you know the exception does not make the rule. Inoa had a golden arm that didn't work out. Inoa's lack of success has nothing to do with Constante's chances. Constante has a lower chance of making the bigs, but if he does make the bigs, he has a much greater chance of providing surplus value to the Reds.