Turn Off Ads?
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 60 of 60

Thread: Jim Callis Espn Chat

  1. #46
    BobC, get a legit F.O.! Mario-Rijo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Ohio
    Posts
    9,052

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve4192 View Post
    Regardless of how this group of prospects compares to the 2000 group, there is one thing we know for certain ... most of them will never come close to reaching their potential. Chances are that a one or two will reach their ceiling, an additional two or three will become useful major leaguers, and the rest will replacement level chattel or complete washouts.

    The trick is identifying the one or two studs and having to the cahones to move the rest if/when the right deal comes along. Unfortunately, the Reds chose to hold onto the entire 2000 crop only to watch the majority of them crash and burn and lose all of their trade value. I would like to see them avoid that mistake this time around.
    I'd say that's probably pretty accurate. Just my opinion but I would have to think that Bruce and Cueto are the 2 that reach their ceilings. Now just need to figure out who's left that won't be useful major leaguers and deal them.
    "You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

    --Woody Hayes

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #47
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,635

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    I'd say that's probably pretty accurate. Just my opinion but I would have to think that Bruce and Cueto are the 2 that reach their ceilings. Now just need to figure out who's left that won't be useful major leaguers and deal them.
    The term "useful major leaguers" really needs to be specifically defined. At this point I'd suggest all of these guys (Bruce, Votto, Cueto, and Bailey) will at least be useful major leaguers. A fourth outfielder or a middle reliever is a useful major leaguer albeit neither are awe-inspiring roles for prospects some grade at the A level. Still there is value to even filling those roles at the major league level.

    I think you're suggesting the Reds need to properly value the major league contributions these guys will make and keep the ones that will surpass the Reds' arbitrary threshold of acceptable performance given their prospect status (which I'm assuming most would argue is tied to their current trade value) and trade the ones that won't meet this threshold.

    I know this might seem like hairsplitting to some but this really isn't a trivial exercise IMHO. Basically, what are the chances that a prospect can equal/outperform his current trade value (and I'd argue relative costs of production and implications for playoff baseball have to be considered along with risk)?
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  4. #48
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,159

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    The term "useful major leaguers" really needs to be specifically defined. At this point I'd suggest all of these guys (Bruce, Votto, Cueto, and Bailey) will at least be useful major leaguers. A fourth outfielder or a middle reliever is a useful major leaguer albeit neither are awe-inspiring roles for prospects some grade at the A level. Still there is value to even filling those roles at the major league level.

    I think you're suggesting the Reds need to properly value the major league contributions these guys will make and keep the ones that will surpass the Reds' arbitrary threshold of acceptable performance given their prospect status (which I'm assuming most would argue is tied to their current trade value) and trade the ones that won't meet this threshold.

    I know this might seem like hairsplitting to some but this really isn't a trivial exercise IMHO. Basically, what are the chances that a prospect can equal/outperform his current trade value (and I'd argue relative costs of production and implications for playoff baseball have to be considered along with risk)?
    Fair points. Probably the standard ought to be everyday plus player at his position or above average starter for at least a three-year stretch.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  5. #49
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    86

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    One of the concerning points of the Reds #3 ranking is the fact that unlike Texas or even TB, the Reds are aboutot graduate a large portion of the top of the system. With Baily and Bruce's loss of prospect status the minor league sytem is set to drop back to the middle teir at best. It seems the system is top heavy and lacks overall depth

  6. #50
    BobC, get a legit F.O.! Mario-Rijo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Ohio
    Posts
    9,052

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Quote Originally Posted by laxtonto View Post
    One of the concerning points of the Reds #3 ranking is the fact that unlike Texas or even TB, the Reds are aboutot graduate a large portion of the top of the system. With Baily and Bruce's loss of prospect status the minor league sytem is set to drop back to the middle teir at best. It seems the system is top heavy and lacks overall depth
    Perhaps TB but I don't know how much I agree with Texas being as good. I think Texas' certainly isn't as top heavy but I question how their top 4 prospects can even come close to ours in terms of ceiling.
    "You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

    --Woody Hayes

  7. #51
    BobC, get a legit F.O.! Mario-Rijo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Ohio
    Posts
    9,052

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    Fair points. Probably the standard ought to be everyday plus player at his position or above average starter for at least a three-year stretch.
    What's the avg total VORP for an everyday, plus player? That would help to determine what a reasonable line is? And the same goes for pitchers.
    "You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

    --Woody Hayes

  8. #52
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,094

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Quote Originally Posted by laxtonto View Post
    One of the concerning points of the Reds #3 ranking is the fact that unlike Texas or even TB, the Reds are aboutot graduate a large portion of the top of the system. With Baily and Bruce's loss of prospect status the minor league sytem is set to drop back to the middle teir at best. It seems the system is top heavy and lacks overall depth
    Except thats not true at all. While it appears 'top heavy' it only seems that way because they have 4 top 30 overall prospects. Drew Stubbs, Devin Mesoraco, Todd Frazier, Matt Maloney, Josh Roenicke, Travis Wood, Danny Dorn, Adam Rosales, Juan Francisco, Kyle Lotzkar, Pedro Viola..... That sounds like pretty good depth right there and I would make an argument that any one of those guys makes other teams top 10s (for the most part).

  9. #53
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,159

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    What's the avg total VORP for an everyday, plus player? That would help to determine what a reasonable line is? And the same goes for pitchers.
    Depends on the position. Here's the overall positional totals for 2007 from BBP's EQA breakdown. Obviously if you're going to be in an OF corner or at 1B, you've got to do a lot of hitting to get above the average. Defense belongs somewhere in the conversation too (I'll leave it to personal taste as to whether to use linear or cumulative weights).

    As for pitchers, I'd go for something pragmatic. Ultimately you want run prevention, so pick an ERA+ to your liking (probably somewhere from 100 to 110) and go from there. If you get a three-year run better than that, you're likely to be a pretty happy camper (e.g. look at Harang from 2005-7).
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  10. #54
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    princeton, nj
    Posts
    9,482

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Quote Originally Posted by laxtonto View Post
    One of the concerning points of the Reds #3 ranking is the fact that unlike Texas or even TB, the Reds are aboutot graduate a large portion of the top of the system. With Baily and Bruce's loss of prospect status the minor league sytem is set to drop back to the middle teir at best. It seems the system is top heavy and lacks overall depth
    Prospects 6-12 could be stronger, it's true. Below that, it gets relatively good again.

  11. #55
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    86

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    It tends to happen in systems when prospects jump lvls. The bad part about it is that its going to coincide when the Reds should start making a real push. That missing lvl will either force the Reds to trade the low teir high potential guys to attempt finish filling the holes or wait a year or two and waste time on the arbitration clock of the young guys.

    Top 6 guys are great, but i agree the 6-12 guys are weak and may end up all getting passed up by other prospects this year.

    As far as some of them being #1 in other orginzations, maybe in ChiWS or Hou

  12. #56
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,111

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Its great that the Reds were ranked #3 - matches the rating in 2001.
    I agree with Doug that the 2008 top 5 compares favorably with the 2001 top 5. In retrospect, Henson, Sardinha and Espinosa were highly overrated by BA.

    2008
    1.Bruce
    2.Bailey
    3.Votto
    4.Cueto
    5.Stubbs

    2001
    1. Kearns
    2. Dunn
    3. Henson
    4. Sardinha
    5. Espinosa

    I am concerned about the dropoff from 5 to 10. Those are the optimal players to trade - not your top guys but still very attractive to other organizations.

  13. #57
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,673

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    I have heard the Bailey era group being mentioned as a historical group in prospectdom.

    It will probably be awhile before the Reds get a such a haul again.

  14. #58
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,635

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    What's the avg total VORP for an everyday, plus player? That would help to determine what a reasonable line is? And the same goes for pitchers.
    I back engineered BP's VORP formula back in the day (it must've been a rainy day) because I was wondering about the difference between league average and replacement level. Below is the VORP generated by being league average offensively at each position (assuming 600 plate appearances) for the 2006 season:

    Code:
    POS	League	VORP
    C	AL	26
    C	NL	31
    1b	AL	25
    1b	NL	29
    2b	AL	14
    2b	NL	15
    3b	AL	17
    3b	NL	25
    ss	AL	14
    ss	NL	10
    LF	AL	19
    LF	NL	25
    CF	AL	14
    CF	NL	11
    RF	AL	25
    RF	NL	24
    DH	AL	20
    DH	NL	17
    PH	AL	0
    PH	NL	13
    Check of formula		
    Player	BP	Me
    05Dunn	45	46
    06Dunn	24	25
    06Ross	22	22
    So if an outfield prospect simply became a league average right field bat, he'd be good for roughly 2.5 wins over replacement over the course of a full season. Replacement level defense is essentially neutral so that prospect's worth would increase further if he was a plus defender or decrease if he was a minus defender when considering his overall value.

    Wins are roughly worth $4M right now so assuming the hypothetical prospect was a league average RF bat and a neutral defender (overall value equals 25 runs or 2.5 wins over replacement), his production would be worth roughly $10M. At league minimum, he's a bargain even though from our view as fans, he might be considered a disappointment.
    Last edited by jojo; 01-08-2008 at 09:33 PM.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  15. #59
    Member Cedric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Monroe
    Posts
    6,392

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    That's highly revisionist. The Reds were rated #3 heading into 2001 and will be rated #3 heading into 2008. While they may not be exactly the same, the 2008 group projects no stronger than the 2001 did on paper.

    Insisting that this crop of youngsters is naturally better is just a neat way of not learning from recent history. What the Reds need to do is identify the absolute keepers and the kids who should be traded while they've got top markets. Imagine what might have happened if the JimBo regime had moved Gookie Dawkins instead of Mike Cameron. Imagine what Austin Kearns and Ty Howington might have fetched. That could have gone a long from transforming the Reds from also rans to a winning ballclub.

    The Reds would be well advised to try to know now what will be known by all later. Being ranked #3 doesn't mean the future is assured, it means the club has a hand of cards to play.
    Of course you are dead on that the Reds need to identify the keepers and trade away the hype. I don't think Doug was advising anything other than that. Unless I'm wrong I think he was talking about the top end talent and even at that time none of those players had the raw talent and production that the top five has now.

    Look at the BA top 5 from 2001 and then look at it to the group we have now and it's really not even close. Henson was Yankee/Wolverine hype with raw talent and not much production. Sardinha and Espinoza were completely hype.

    Only one player in the current top five is lacking production and is rated more on ceiling. Three of the top five in 01 were almost complete hype.

    I'd suggest that if Maloney was #5 like he should be this wouldn't even be a question. Not even mentioning that the 01 class wasn't diverse at the top like this year. I think you both have good points, just maybe Doug didn't come clear that he was talking about top end ready to produce talent. He said that and by any measure he's right , IMO.
    This is the time. The real Reds organization is back.

  16. #60
    Member 11larkin11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Bellefontaine,OH
    Posts
    2,332

    Re: Jim Callis Espn Chat

    Lotzkar, Mesoraco, Stubbs, Frazier lead the next stardom group with Soto, Waring, and Wood on the hump.
    Domo Arigato, Here Comes Joey Votto

    ---TRF

    "I do what I want to do and say what I want to say."

    --Bronson Arroyo


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25