Jesse Winker

[lollipopcurve]

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

Not true. How do you feel about his performance in the GCL last year? How do you feel about the reports that he did not show the upper 90s heat? How about the reports that they were working on refining his delivery? For me, all of this post-draft stuff adds up to a slow start for Travieso. Skepticism, based on what has happened since the draft -- which is not dismissal of him as a prospect -- is not unwarranted.

I look at it in the opposite way. The only reason to believe in Travieso as a better prospect than Winker at this time is if you thought he was a better prospect at the time of the draft. To suggest that nothing has changed since then is to ignore a lot of information in favor of very little.

[757690]

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

Exactly.

And plenty of people, including people who get paid to evaluate draft prospects, were very skeptical of Travieso when he was drafted. Which is why many people think that Winker has jumped over him as a pro prospect. They could be wrong, but it's a perfectly reasonable opinion to have.

[dougdirt]

Not true. How do you feel about his performance in the GCL last year? How do you feel about the reports that he did not show the upper 90s heat? How about the reports that they were working on refining his delivery? For me, all of this post-draft stuff adds up to a slow start for Travieso. Skepticism, based on what has happened since the draft -- which is not dismissal of him as a prospect -- is not unwarranted.

I look at it in the opposite way. The only reason to believe in Travieso as a better prospect than Winker at this time is if you thought he was a better prospect at the time of the draft. To suggest that nothing has changed since then is to ignore a lot of information in favor of very little.

You mean his performance that was insanely limited? I could care less about it. If you put anything into a handful of innings, then you aren't doing this prospect thing right.

I could also care less about his lack of upper 90's heat while having him focus on his mechanics. And it isn't like he was throwing 88-91.

[dougdirt]

Exactly.

And plenty of people, including people who get paid to evaluate draft prospects, were very skeptical of Travieso when he was drafted. Which is why many people think that Winker has jumped over him as a pro prospect. They could be wrong, but it's a perfectly reasonable opinion to have.

The people paid by the Reds weren't skeptical at all about it and their opinions matter more than any writer.

[Blitz Dorsey]

Much has changed since the draft. Doug wants to try and pretend that teams wouldn't change their opinions based on what's transpired since June of 2012. You know, details such as Jesse Winker raking the hell out of the baseball at high-rookie ball and now low-A ball as a teenager. Only Byron Buxton -- the No. 2 overall pick of the draft -- is performing better than Winker offensively (amongst the teenagers in the discussion from the 2012 draft).

Yeah, no way Winker would be a top-15 pick now. (Sarcasm. Extreme version.)

This reminds me of when I used to debate Doug about Cingrani. Let's see if I can go 2-for-2 here.

[Blitz Dorsey]

You mean his performance that was insanely limited? I could care less about it. If you put anything into a handful of innings, then you aren't doing this prospect thing right.

I could also care less about his lack of upper 90's heat while having him focus on his mechanics. And it isn't like he was throwing 88-91.

Why do you care at all about these things?

Oh, you COULDN'T care less, I gotcha.

(Just having some fun with you, Doug. Normally I wouldn't correct grammatical mistakes [or errors in writing style in general] from posters. But you're a professional writer and should use the phrase you're intending to use.)

[dougdirt]

Much has changed since the draft. Doug wants to try and pretend that teams wouldn't change their opinions based on what's transpired since June of 2012. You know, details such as Jesse Winker raking the hell out of the baseball at high-rookie ball and now low-A ball as a teenager. Only Byron Buxton -- the No. 2 overall pick of the draft -- is performing better than Winker offensively (amongst the teenagers in the discussion from the 2012 draft).

Yeah, no way Winker would be a top-15 pick now. (Sarcasm. Extreme version.)

This reminds me of when I used to debate Doug about Cingrani. Let's see if I can go 2-for-2 here.

First off, I never said Winker isn't of improved stock. We even talked about it in this thread. You know, where you had to back off that he was not a top 10 pick if we re-did the draft after I had to show you the guys who were there. You know, since we want to all just pat ourselves on the back.

Jesse Winker was ranked behind Nick Travieso after last season in both the Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus Reds top prospect lists. Both came out well after Jesse Winker destroyed the Pioneer League. The information hasn't changed since then. Is anyone more sold on Winker as a hitter now than they were after he hit .338 in the Pioneer League as an 18 year old? Doubtful.

[OGB]

Double post sorry

[OGB]

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.

People need to stop making the Bruce Comparison. True, they both tore up low A. True, Winker has a superior hit tool and better pitch recognition. But Jay Bruce graded out with superior power, superior speed, as a plus plus defender with a plus plus arm, who is capable of playing a more important defensive position.
They aren't the same prospect.

[757690]

The people paid by the Reds weren't skeptical at all about it and their opinions matter more than any writer.

The Reds opinions matter more than anyone else's when it comes to making the pick. After that, all informed opinions matter roughly the same. I think it's safe to say there are conflicting opinions on whose a better prospect right now between Winker and Travieso.

[mth123]

My 2 cents:

I think that Travieso, by virtue of a major league scouting organization with a pretty strong track record picking him in the first round in the most recent draft, immediately gained some credibility as a top 100 prospect candidate.

Winker was passed over by all organizations in the first round and, as a result, wasn't really a consideration to be among the elite prospects. He has certainly pushed his way into the picture by virtue of his perfromance, but IMO, it's just too soon to conclude that he's bypassed a guy that a smart organization valued more so recently. Travieso will get more innings this year and at the end of the season we'll have a better idea (maybe). I just think the draft is too recent to completely dismiss what the Reds thought of Travieso on draft day based on some sketchy info and a very limited number of innings. Winker has certainly raised his stock. That's a good thing. I hope they are both in the top 100 when the dust of the 2013 season settles.

[lollipopcurve]

Is anyone more sold on Winker as a hitter now than they were after he hit .338 in the Pioneer League as an 18 year old? Doubtful.

Sure am. One of the top hitters in the Midwest League, a tough hitters league, through May. Absolutely more sold than I was last year.

And speaking of BA's end-of-season rankings....

On Travieso: "Many observers see him as a power reliever down the road."

On Winker: "A future #3 hitter in a contender's lineup."

If you actually read those reports, you'd find it hard to see how Travieso was placed ahead of Winker.

Bottom line, once the draft is over they have to play.

[Blitz Dorsey]

First off, I never said Winker isn't of improved stock. We even talked about it in this thread. You know, where you had to back off that he was not a top 10 pick if we re-did the draft after I had to show you the guys who were there. You know, since we want to all just pat ourselves on the back.

Jesse Winker was ranked behind Nick Travieso after last season in both the Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus Reds top prospect lists. Both came out well after Jesse Winker destroyed the Pioneer League. The information hasn't changed since then. Is anyone more sold on Winker as a hitter now than they were after he hit .338 in the Pioneer League as an 18 year old? Doubtful.

Of course you know Winker has improved his stock. The question is do you agree that he's increased his stock exponentially, and it appears as though you do not.

I actually think there is a chance Winker would be a top-10 overall pick if the re-did the draft. I have no doubt he would be a top-15 pick.

And yes, I DO think that what Winker has accomplished this year at Dayton makes people "more sold" on him. Why wouldn't it? Are you saying if he was OPS'ing in the 700's instead of the 900's this year it wouldn't matter? Of course what he's doing at Dayton has helped improve his stock even more than where it was after his fantastic season at Billings. A lot of guys tear up Billings then fall off the map at Dayton. Right, Sean Buckley?

[Benihana]

My 2 cents:

I think that Travieso, by virtue of a major league scouting organization with a pretty strong track record picking him in the first round in the most recent draft, immediately gained some credibility as a top 100 prospect candidate.

Winker was passed over by all organizations in the first round and, as a result, wasn't really a consideration to be among the elite prospects. He has certainly pushed his way into the picture by virtue of his perfromance, but IMO, it's just too soon to conclude that he's bypassed a guy that a smart organization valued more so recently. Travieso will get more innings this year and at the end of the season we'll have a better idea (maybe). I just think the draft is too recent to completely dismiss what the Reds thought of Travieso on draft day based on some sketchy info and a very limited number of innings. Winker has certainly raised his stock. That's a good thing. I hope they are both in the top 100 when the dust of the 2013 season settles.

Baseball is the only sport where you cannot definitively assume a guy is a better prospect because he was drafted earlier than another guy. There are many factors that come into play.

For instance, could you assume Amir Garrett was a worse prospect than the 21 guys the Reds drafted before him? Every other team passed on Garrett 21 times as well. How about Drew Cisco in the 2010 draft? Is Jeff Gelalich a better prospect than Winker because the Reds drafted him earlier in last year's draft?

So much comes into play with draft position, but results matter more - especially when a prospect came in with a strong pedigree and his performance is not seen as flukey or attributable to some park/league/age factors. If the prospect's pedigree and projectability are there, results are what matter most. And Winker > Travieso at this point for those reasons.

[Blitz Dorsey]

Is Jeff Gelalich a better prospect than Winker because the Reds drafted him earlier in last year's draft?

Winker was taken ahead of Gelalich (both were supplemental first-rounders).

Your overriding point is exactly correct though.