Jesse Winker

[TOBTTReds]

Agreed. He's left Travieso in the dust, IMO.

I think saying Travieso has been left in the dust is very shortsighted. Travieso's path is going to be in line with Stephenson's. If Winker were drafted the same year as Stephenson, you would have said this last year about leaving Stephenson in the dust, which looking back you would realize was shortsighted.

The comments about drafting Winker ahead of Travieso are only because he has great stats, while Travieso doesn't have any. Trust me, I have a small man crush on Winker, but his great start doesn't all the sudden make him a better prospect than Travieso. Travieso is doing exactly what was planned for him. Although I don't know his success in extended at this time, I will hope he comes up and pitches well in Billings, and then tastes a bit of A ball with the Dragons, just like Stephenson.

[dougdirt]

1. Completely disagree. The Reds, along with every other team in baseball, would rank Winker over Travieso at this point. To illustrate, I'll basically guarantee you that Winker will make the midseason Top 100 prospects lists. I'd be very surprised if Travieso even gets mentioned on any of them.

I disagree with your disagreement, unless you know something about Travieso that I don't (ie: he is hurt).

There is no way we can check on it and where each guy ranks on a midseason prospect list won't tell us much other than Winker is playing right now so he is catching more attention. I just don't think that 6 weeks, even 6 very good ones, has changed anything. Heck, Winker actually got some of his points dinged that he got with the bat because there was some conversation he could play right. It seems the Reds said no to that idea and have him in left already. Winker at the plate is doing what he did last year, with a little more power (some of those doubles are turning into home runs already), though I don't think that has surprised anyone. Winker is a Top 100 guy right now, I don't doubt that. He has gotten the exposure, has a pedigree of a higher round pick and he most certainly has the performance. Even I have laid some awfully high praise and comps on the kid. I really, really like that bat.

But at the end of the day, I just don't think that 6 weeks has vaulted him ahead of a guy that went 35 spots ahead of him in the draft when neither guy has shown some sort of change in their skillset.

[TOBTTReds]

The Reds, along with every other team in baseball, would rank Winker over Travieso at this point.

I don't mean for this to be a call out thread now, but this statement is ludicrous, especially because you make this out to be fact.

[Benihana]

TOBTT, you are just wrong.

Stephenson was a better prospect than Travieso at the time they both were drafted. The Reds were higher on Travieso than just about any other team. He was projected by BA, Sickels, and many others as a sandwich round pick. Stephenson was in a much, MUCH stronger draft class, and other teams (ie Atlanta and San Francisco) are on record as saying they had their sights set on Stephenson if the Reds didn't take him a pick or two earlier.

In fact there is precedent for what you are suggesting - Tony Cingrani dominated the whole way up despite being drafted two rounds after Stephenson, and no one claimed Cingrani to be the better prospect, despite the fact that Stephenson was pitching in EST.

On the other hand, many experts and teams alike had Winker and Travieso ranked similarly heading into their draft. The fact that Winker has come out of the gate mashing while Travieso is the only uninjured player drafted with the first 25 picks who has yet to make his Full Season debut makes Winker a unanimous (or near it) choice as the better prospect right now. In fact, I bet if we polled the board, it would be at least 90/10 which you almost never see on a Redszone poll.

[Benihana]

I disagree with your disagreement, unless you know something about Travieso that I don't (ie: he is hurt).

There is no way we can check on it and where each guy ranks on a midseason prospect list won't tell us much other than Winker is playing right now so he is catching more attention. I just don't think that 6 weeks, even 6 very good ones, has changed anything. Heck, Winker actually got some of his points dinged that he got with the bat because there was some conversation he could play right. It seems the Reds said no to that idea and have him in left already. Winker at the plate is doing what he did last year, with a little more power (some of those doubles are turning into home runs already), though I don't think that has surprised anyone. Winker is a Top 100 guy right now, I don't doubt that. He has gotten the exposure, has a pedigree of a higher round pick and he most certainly has the performance. Even I have laid some awfully high praise and comps on the kid. I really, really like that bat.

But at the end of the day, I just don't think that 6 weeks has vaulted him ahead of a guy that went 35 spots ahead of him in the draft when neither guy has shown some sort of change in their skillset.

Winker was no slouch last season either.

Assuming the two were ranked similarly (as they were by Sickels and BA) coming into the draft, who would you prefer - the one who has raked to a .950+ OPS both in Rookie Ball last year and as a 19 year old in A ball this year, or the only uninjured player drafted in the Top 25 yet to make his fullseason debut? Not that you should put a lot of stock in it, but even in the AZL last year, Travieso was hardly lights out (4.71 ERA, 1.3 HR/9, 6.0 K/9).

Sickels had Winker ranked as the 125 best prospect coming into this year. Travieso didn't make the Top 150.
BA had Travieso and Winker ranked one spot off of each other coming into this year.
Law didn't have either ranked in his preseason Top 100, but noted in this week's chat that Winker would certainly make his updated list. Do you think Travieso would?

[dougdirt]

Winker was no slouch last season either.

Assuming the two were ranked similarly (as they were by Sickels and BA) coming into the draft, who would you prefer - the one who has raked to a .950+ OPS both in Rookie Ball last year and as a 19 year old in A ball this year, or the only uninjured player drafted in the Top 25 yet to make his fullseason debut? Not that you should put a lot of stock in it, but even in the AZL last year, Travieso was hardly lights out (4.71 ERA, 1.3 HR/9, 6.0 K/9).

Sickels had Winker ranked as the 125 best prospect coming into this year. Travieso didn't make the Top 150.
BA had Travieso and Winker ranked one spot off of each other coming into this year.
Law didn't have either ranked in his preseason Top 100, but noted in this week's chat that Winker would certainly make his updated list. Do you think Travieso would?

I want the guy who I think will be a better Major Leaguer. Neither guy has done anything at this point to show me they aren't what I thought they were at the end of last season, when I ranked Travieso higher. I don't care too much about what BA, Sickels, Law or anyone else ranks a guy unless that ranking comes along with information that I don't have on a player. As of right now, no one is bringing any information on Winker or on Travieso that I don't already know about. Winker is a safer bet. Travieso has more upside. They are close, but they were close last year too. But there isn't any new information on either guy that has changed my opinion on either guy.

[Vottomatic]

I disagree with all the disagreeing going on here.

Geez. This argument still going on? I thought there was new news on Winker or something.

[TOBTTReds]

TOBTT, you are just wrong.

Man, is it really that factual?

In fact there is precedent for what you are suggesting - Tony Cingrani dominated the whole way up despite being drafted two rounds after Stephenson, and no one claimed Cingrani to be the better prospect, despite the fact that Stephenson was pitching in EST.

A lot of people still think Cingrani is a reliever because he is a one trick pony (not saying I feel that way, but that's a belief of many in the baseball world). Comparing Cingrani/Stephenson situation isn't necessarily the same as what you are suggesting, because it was pitcher to pitcher. I think other teams may rank Travieso ahead still because he is a pitcher.

The fact that Winker has come out of the gate mashing while Travieso is the only uninjured player drafted with the first 25 picks who has yet to make his Full Season debut makes Winker a unanimous (or near it) choice as the better prospect right now.

So what was Travieso supposed to do this year? The fact that he has been "left in the dust" (I realize you didn't say this) makes it seem like he is doing something wrong. The Reds FO moves their HS pitchers this way, even the best like Robert Stephenson. There is probably absolutely nothing Travieso could have done this spring to escape extended spring.

In fact, I bet if we polled the board, it would be at least 90/10 which you almost never see on a Redszone poll.

No offense to the people of this board, but I could care less what the poll results would be. To be honest I think I'd vote for Winker, but Trav would still be right behind him. You are making this way too black and white though.

[TOBTTReds]

For the record, this board is at it's best with discussion/arguments like this. I may completely disagree with Benihana right now (and think he's a complete loon ), but I'd rather have this discussion than if Chapman ate too many pastries before a game, or if Cozart should be DFA'd.

[Blitz Dorsey]

Benihana is 100 percent right. (And you know it's not easy for a Buckeye to agree with a Wolverine.) Anyone who thinks the Reds (or any other MLB team) would take Travieso over Winker if they could only have one at this point is fooling themselves. And it's nothing against Travieso. He seems like a very-good prospect. But as Benihana mentioned, Travieso and Winker were basically ranked the same by experts entering the draft. It just so happened that the Reds liked Travieso better at the time. OK, fine.

But since then, Winker has raked, raked and raked some more. His stock has skyrocketed around MLB; you better believe that. Travieso was OK during his cameo with the AZL Reds last year. We'll see how he does in Billings this summer. Should be interesting and I bet he does well. But Winker is "next level" good if you ask me. I have no doubt he would be a top-15 overall pick if they re-did the draft. I was probably pushing it saying top-10, but no question top-15 IMO.

And for those questioning his D, doesn't he have pretty good instincts out there and a good arm? Not saying he's a plus defender, I just think saying he's a bad OF is misguided. He's not fast, but he's not a snail out there either. Good arm.

[dougdirt]

Benihana is 100 percent right. (And you know it's not easy for a Buckeye to agree with a Wolverine.) Anyone who thinks the Reds (or any other MLB team) would take Travieso over Winker if they could only have one at this point is fooling themselves. And it's nothing against Travieso. He seems like a very-good prospect. But as Benihana mentioned, Travieso and Winker were basically ranked the same by experts entering the draft. It just so happened that the Reds liked Travieso better at the time. OK, fine.

Except for the experts who are paid by a Major League Baseball team to evaluate amateur talent. One guy went 14th. Then 34 other players went. Then the next guy went.

I have no doubt he would be a top-15 overall pick if they re-did the draft. I was probably pushing it saying top-10, but no question top-15 IMO.

Travieso was a top 15 pick. Regardless of what Keith Law or Jim Callis thought about him before the draft, Travieso was a Top 15 pick and really, he has done absolutely nothing to suggest he shouldn't have been.

And for those questioning his D, doesn't he have pretty good instincts out there and a good arm? Not saying he's a plus defender, I just think saying he's a bad OF is misguided. He's not fast, but he's not a snail out there either. Good arm.

The fact that you have to ask these questions is why you probably shouldn't be saying something like "Benihana is 100 percent right. (And you know it's not easy for a Buckeye to agree with a Wolverine.) Anyone who thinks the Reds (or any other MLB team) would take Travieso over Winker if they could only have one at this point is fooling themselves."

[OGB]

On pure physical talent, Travieso was ahead of Winker and remains there. Where Winker has been able to really make himself standout, and why it makes him such an exciting prospect is how advanced and mature he seems for his age. He has an approach to hitting that many teams wish their 23-25 year old prospects with more raw ability could mimick.
In his (albeit very short) career he has 64 walks compared to only 79 strike outs. He has a .428 OBP. He seems to have the ability to hit to all fields.

Just because Winker has performed at a high level, it doesn't change the type of ceiling he projects to have, it just gives you more confidence that he'll be able to hit that ceiling.
He might be a .900 OPS guy who hits 25HR and plays avg LF defense.
Travieso might be a power armed #1 starter.

For that reason I think the Reds would still evaluate and draft them the same way. Winker's first 400+ career at bats just make me feel good about his chances and how soon that may be compared to other players drafted in a similar slot out of HS.

[lollipopcurve]

I think folks are ignoring a couple things.

Travieso was not very good in his 21 innings in the GCL last year. Winker was excellent in a higher league. The prospect rankings (Baseball America), while not to be trusted as gospel, clearly reflected that Winker looked like the better prospect.

Scouting information, while scant, included statements that Travieso's stuff was not quite as good as pre-draft reports indicated (not the top end fastball). Some reports said the Reds were tweaking Travieso's delivery.

Travieso was a starter in high school for only 1 year. He remains very much a work in progress.

How you put all this information about Travieso together and still come out with a better prospect than Winker, a 19 year old who's tearing up the Midwest League much like Jay Bruce did, I don't know.

[lollipopcurve]

If Winker were drafted the same year as Stephenson, you would have said this last year about leaving Stephenson in the dust,

No, I wouldn't have. Because at this time last year we had no reason to doubt Stephenson. There's more reason to be skeptical of Travieso.

[dougdirt]

No, I wouldn't have. Because at this time last year we had no reason to doubt Stephenson. There's more reason to be skeptical of Travieso.

The only reason to be skeptical of Travieso right now is if you were skeptical of him the day he was drafted.