Turn Off Ads?
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 134

Thread: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

  1. #76
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,283

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    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.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #77
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,871

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    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.
    "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. #78
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine View Post
    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.

  5. #79
    Member OnBaseMachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    34,844

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlifeman21 View Post
    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.
    I miss Adam Dunn.

  6. #80
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine View Post
    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...

  7. #81
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,097

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    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.
    Last edited by lollipopcurve; 01-25-2009 at 07:31 PM.
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  8. #82
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by lollipopcurve View Post
    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.

  9. #83
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,296

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine View Post
    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.

  10. #84
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,296

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine View Post
    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.

  11. #85
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,871

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by edabbs44 View Post
    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....
    "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

  12. #86
    Socratic Gadfly TheNext44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,228

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    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.

  13. #87
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    All around
    Posts
    7,576

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Kingspoint; 01-25-2009 at 08:49 PM.

  14. #88
    Member OnBaseMachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    34,844

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlifeman21 View Post
    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.
    I miss Adam Dunn.

  15. #89
    Member OnBaseMachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    34,844

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by edabbs44 View Post
    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.
    I miss Adam Dunn.

  16. #90
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Keith Law (Organizational Rankings) Reds ranked 26th

    Quote Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine View Post
    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...


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