Turn Off Ads?
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 84

Thread: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

  1. #61
    Member kpresidente's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,068

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Quote Originally Posted by HokieRed View Post
    There's absolutely nothing in it for him to consider a move to catcher.
    Then why don't all catchers who can hit demand to be moved?

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #62
    Moderator RedlegJake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    North Kansas City, Mo
    Posts
    5,866

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    When I look at catchers in other organizations I don't see any great seperation from Mesaraco or after a point from Hanigan. Wieters, Clement, Towles, Conger, Teagarden and Montero plus the new guys Posey and Skipworth. Skipworth and Montero are years away. Wieters is in a class by himself. Towles and maybe Conger are next. Clement isn't looking like the beast he was once thought to be. Neither is Teagarden, though both have a ton of upside. Mesaraco compares favorably with most of the rest - I'd rate him ahead of Bryan Anderson, Cervelli, Salome, Navarro, Josh Donaldson, Mitch Canham for instance. I'd rate Hanigan favorably with any of that group although he is older - Ryan is not going to get a lot better than he is - he just needs to put up similar numbers as his did inthe minors, while a coupleof these guys could develop some power but so far the griup looks a lot like him actually. Same good OBP but little power. Max Ramirez can flat hit but his defense is really iffy. Chris Stewart is a backup. Max Sapp has been really disappointing actually, Jesus Flores looks pretty good but not immeasurably better as a prospect than Mes. Yes, there are a lot of names and some organizations can count 3 or 4 reasonable prospects behind the plate, basically one at each level. The Reds have basically one real bullet in Mesaraco unless one of the kids in the GCL or Billings suddenly steps up. Saying that Hanigan is AAA filler, though, is a ridiculous statement on the same level with saying Mesaraco isn't even a top twenty catching prospect. But what burns me most I guess is when someone disagrees and gets called clueless, unimaginative or deficient in ideas. COULD the Reds convert one of their players like Yonder or Francisco? Sure, if the kid agreed to it and the Reds felt he could do it but I'm not sure that would solve the problem as much as some think itwould. It might even backfire and take the focus from improving plate discipline from a kid like Francisco.

  4. #63
    High five! nate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    6,976

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Quote Originally Posted by HokieRed View Post
    Moving him to catcher will shorten his career, reduce his stats, and probably the money he'll make over a career. It will almost certainly slow down his progress to the majors. He's already on the fastest of tracks. There's absolutely nothing in it for him to consider a move to catcher.
    I'd say there's a pretty big payday awaiting him if he can hit well and catch OK.
    "Bring on Rod Stupid!"

  5. #64
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,193

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Quote Originally Posted by RedlegJake View Post
    Saying that Hanigan is AAA filler, though, is a ridiculous statement on the same level with saying Mesaraco isn't even a top twenty catching prospect.
    Hanigan's got a light stick, always has, always will (.372 SLG in the minors). He just turned 28. He's not a stellar defender (e.g. like a Henry Blanco). That's the kind of guy you generally keep stashed in AAA as filler, to be called up in case of emergency.

    Could he be a passable backup? Certainly. It's not like that requires any outstanding ability, but in terms of age/ability/experience Hanigan absolutely qualifies as the sort of fellow you commonly find employed as AAA filler.

    As for Mesoraco, we've seen reports this year that his catching mechanics are poor and his swing has gotten slow and long. His raw numbers are positively yawn inducing. Given the number of kids who had good seasons in high A and AA, three top 10 picks in this year's draft and a few kids from the 2007 draft who've probably passed Mesoraco in terms of prospect luster (D'Arnaud, Lucroy, Norris), Devin would be hard-pressed to make a top 20. Again, BA just named 19 kids in its article about all the nifty catching prospects in the minors. Do you think they'd omit a clear top 20 selection? I don't think so.

    Mesoraco might make the tail end of a top 20 list, but it's far from a given. There are 29 other organizations out there, some of which have something to brag about in the catching ranks. Assuming Mesoraco makes a top 20 strikes me as a case of being generally unaware of what else is out there. Maybe he would. Maybe he wouldn't. It will be interesting to see if Mesoraco makes BA's MWL top 20, which should be out soon.

    None of that means Hanigan shouldn't be given a shot to be on a major league roster or that Mesoraco's dropped eternally from the land of hot prospectdom, but Hanigan's ceiling is "passable" and Mesoraco's yet to thrive in professional baseball. I fail to see where anyone should be smug about those guys.
    Last edited by M2; 09-10-2008 at 10:31 AM.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  6. #65
    Moderator RedlegJake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    North Kansas City, Mo
    Posts
    5,866

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    None of that means Hanigan shouldn't be given a shot to be on a major league roster or that Mesoraco's dropped eternally from the land of hot prospectdom, but Hanigan's ceiling is "passable" and Mesoraco's yet to thrive in professional baseball. I fail to see where anyone should be smug about those guys.
    I agree on Hanigan's ceiling but think he's likely to reach it for a couple years anyway. I also have reservations about Mes but point out that a great number of BA's prospects have some holes in their game, either hitting or fielding. I still feel Mes fits in the second ten as well as any of them. The top 9 or 10 guys on the list though are well ahead of him, that I agree with. And it's thin as heck at catching (in the Reds system), I agree with that. There are two key positions where the hopes ride on only a single guy - the other is SS. If Mesaraco or Cozart don't develop there is a huge vacuum. I think SS is a bigger problem, though. While it's probably harder to find a great catcher, imo it's easier to find a "passable" catcher, than it is a decent SS.

  7. #66
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,193

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    I think it's probably fair to guess that all Reds fans are nervous about the SS situation as long as the team doesn't have an annual All-Star at the position. I know I am.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  8. #67
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    8,843

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Quote Originally Posted by HokieRed View Post
    Why would Alonso be interested in being a catcher?
    This is the point that I wanted to bring up for all those who think converting kids from other positions is the way to go.

    Who says these guys "want" to be converted? Catching is not for everyone.

    While it'd be great to get some of these kids converted (or try to get them converted), I just don't think it's a given that this is what they want to do.

    I don't think these kids would care about the fact that they could be above average offensively at their position. To take it a step further, at least for the kids that are in the high minors (or even high A), learning a new position only means it's going to take longer for them to get to the majors.

    There is just not a lot of upside, as a player, to becoming a catcher unless you're really fantastic or really mediocre.
    Last edited by fearofpopvol1; 09-11-2008 at 12:32 PM.

  9. #68
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,193

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Quote Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1 View Post
    Who says these guys "want" to be converted? Catching is not for everyone.
    I agree with that to an extent, but there's a question the organization can ask them to help them along with that choice - do you want to play in the majors?

    For Alonso and Frazier, they probably don't need to squat behind the plate to get a regular gig in the majors. Yet for others, it might be the choice between a fringe infielder or a plus catcher.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  10. #69
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    8,843

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    I agree with that to an extent, but there's a question the organization can ask them to help them along with that choice - do you want to play in the majors?

    For Alonso and Frazier, they probably don't need to squat behind the plate to get a regular gig in the majors. Yet for others, it might be the choice between a fringe infielder or a plus catcher.
    Yeah, I agree. I just think it would be tough to get kids who are older or in the high A and above class to convert. The younger kids in rookie ball though I think would be great targets. The Reds would be smart to invest in scouts that specialize in catching and have them give their best guesses on who would be good fits and who wouldn't be.

    I think your original point/idea is spot on...the Reds do need to start to explore some additional options to strengthen the catching in the system.

  11. #70
    Member kpresidente's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,068

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    It can't hurt to ask, can it?

    Like I said earlier, Alonso grew up playing catcher, up until college. He was originally drafted as a catcher. He might prefer it. It's not like you're asking somebody to do something they've never done before.

  12. #71
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,506

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Here is a name to toss into the catcher equation. Logan Parker. He is currently a first baseman, but there doesn't seem to be a future at the position.

  13. #72
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    504

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Logan Parker is left handed isn't he?

  14. #73
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,506

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Quote Originally Posted by Redman15 View Post
    Logan Parker is left handed isn't he?
    Yeah.... I for some reason had it in my head he threw righty and hit lefty. Don't mind me.

  15. #74
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    504

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    It's too bad he is not a righty. He would of of been a good candidate. Good size,
    hits from the left side and has decent pop.

  16. #75
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,565

    Re: Year of the Catcher? Not for the Reds

    Some years ago I thought Rosales would be the ideal guy to do this with but it's probably too late. I think we don't want to underestimate Castillo. This kid could be the kind of guy who just gets better and better each year and will be a very good answer at the position by two years out.


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