Who is Redszone's #1 prospect?

[fearofpopvol1]

Alonso then Frazier then I don't think there is anyone else that's really close to where those 2 are at right now.

[OnBaseMachine]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Presumably, Soto is trying to make contact. If he's trying for homers, he's not hitting them.

Again, not too many 19-years old hit a bunch of homers. Soto has a long and wiry frame and has plenty of filling out to do. He's got good present power as evidenced by his doubles/sluggling % and great power potential.

[Lockdwn11]

Originally Posted by Betterread

Alonso was the #2 prospect in the cape cod league in 2007 - the top collegiate wooden bat/pro showcase summer league. He started three years and two elite years at the highest level of college ball. When drafted, he was deemed to be at the high A/AA level right away.
This guy is very skilled, very determined and has conducted himself as a MLer since early on at Miami. He was a very safe pick - he is a far superior hitter than Soto, Frazier and Valaika.

Says who? Even if Alonso is all you say he is and by all accounts he is a very good offensive player. What have you seen that makes you think he is FAR SUPERIOR to Soto? Soto has shown me he can hit and he is two years younger. His overall ceiling maybe higher than that of Alonso and from what I have seen and read he has a better glove . Maybe you are right and Alonso ends up being "far superior" to Soto (who knows) but to say that at this point maybe a little permature IMO.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by SMcGavin

According to minorleaguesplits, Maloney's luck-adjusted FIP in AAA this year was 3.36. What a bum. If you want to believe that Maloney can control his HR/F% even though studies suggest no pitchers really can, go for it. By the way, Maloney's HR/F was over 11%, I don't know where you are getting your numbers.

I use firstinning.com because I have found many games missing through minor league splits in the past, but have never seen incorrect information through firstinning.com (innings and at bats have been missing from players seasons at MLS).

Your "extreme flyball pitcher" line is blatantly wrong... I don't know if you are purposely exaggerating, or misinformed. Actually, I've corrected you on it before, so I'm going to assume you are purposely being misleading. His GB% in 2008 was 41.3%. The past two years it was 42.7% and 45.7%. An average groundball rate is between 43-44%. Those are the facts.

Here is Matt Maloney's GB numbers since 2006 according to FI.

Year	Age	 	Team	        GB%
2006	22	A	Lakewood	48%
2007	23	AA	Reading	        42%
2007	23	AA	Chattanooga	37%
2007	23	AAA	Louisville	42%
2008	24	AAA	Louisville	40%

Now that tells me his fly balls were 100% minus whatever his GB% was, which means it was 52%, 58%, 63%, 58% and 60% fly balls at the different levels since 2006. Thats a whole lot of balls in the air and the general rule is that the higher you go, the more fly balls you allow.

And what separates Lecure and Maloney? Nothing I suppose other than the fact that they are the same age and Maloney has performed way better at every level. I would absolutely love to hear the five starting pitching prospects that the Reds have who are better than Maloney.

Lecure and Maloney have very similar numbers and very similar stuff.
As for Maloney performing 'way better' in AA at age 23 they had FIP's of 3.96 and 4.24. They had a BB% of 9.5% and 8.3%. They had K% of 21.6% and 21.3%. They had a GB% of 45% and 42%. Way better? Hmm, I am going to have to really disagree with that. As for the 5 starters that are better than Maloney, thats pretty simple: Daryl Thompson, Ramon Ramirez, Kyle Lotzkar, Evan Hildenbrandt, Jeremy Horst.

[TOBTTReds]

For people who may not know, Lotzkar broke his elbow at the end of the season while throwing a pitch. That alone will drop him a bit.

Also, I would rank Yorman in the top 5...he is a bit more polished than Duran as well. Duran may be a freak pretty soon...but Yorman is a bit more advanced.

[SMcGavin]

So you post the numbers that show Maloney has given up a fly ball rate right around or slightly below the average 43-44%. Then conclude from those numbers that he is an extreme fly ball pitcher. Solid work there.

Ramon Ramirez at least belongs in the conversation with Maloney, but he's older and doesn't have the history of being a starter. And Maloney was a touch better this year in AAA. I guess you could make a case for Ramirez, but I don't agree. Same for Thompson (though it's health problems mostly that worry me with him).

But Evan Hildenbrant and Jeremy Horst? You literally made me laugh out loud when I read those two names. Reminds me of how you were all about Travis Wood earlier this year when I said Maloney was a better prospect than him. Don't hear you talking too much about him anymore since he got smashed around in Chattanooga.

[camisadelgolf]

Can we please get Juan Duran to replace Alonso on the next poll?

[OnBaseMachine]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

Can we please get Juan Duran to replace Alonso on the next poll?

Yep. I was gonna wait a couple days before starting the next thread but I may go ahead and start the next one tomorrow since this choice was a near land slide.

[*BaseClogger*]

Is this like to replace the thing Doug did last year?

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by SMcGavin

So you post the numbers that show Maloney has given up a fly ball rate right around or slightly below the average 43-44%. Then conclude from those numbers that he is an extreme fly ball pitcher. Solid work there.

I don't have much idea what the 'average' is or where you are getting that from, but 40% grounders and 60% balls in the air to me seems pretty dramtic. A guy is an extreme ground ball guy when he gets to the 55% groundball threshold, so I apply it the other way. 20% less than the other is fairly extreme if you ask me. Of the qualified pitchers, only 14 pitchers were less than 40% FB.

Ramon Ramirez at least belongs in the conversation with Maloney, but he's older and doesn't have the history of being a starter. And Maloney was a touch better this year in AAA. I guess you could make a case for Ramirez, but I don't agree. Same for Thompson (though it's health problems mostly that worry me with him).

Ramirez has 88 starts in the minor leagues.... and what on earth suggests Maloney was better than Ramirez this year in AAA? Ramirez struck out a hire percentage of batters, had a lower ERA, lower FIP, lower WHIP, better stuff and got a significantly higher number of groundballs.

But Evan Hildenbrant and Jeremy Horst? You literally made me laugh out loud when I read those two names. Reminds me of how you were all about Travis Wood earlier this year when I said Maloney was a better prospect than him. Don't hear you talking too much about him anymore since he got smashed around in Chattanooga.

Yeah, Hildenbrandt and Horst are both better prospects than Matt Maloney. They have better swing and miss type stuff going for them. Speaking of which, do you have a scouting report on Maloney, Hildenbrandt or Horst that you could share? As far as Travis Wood, he has fell off some as the year went along, but I still think he is on the same level of a prospect as Maloney because he actually has a swing and miss pitch that will translate to the major leagues. He needs to hone in his control, but his upside is far and away higher than Maloney.

[thatcoolguy_22]

I voted Stubbs

As far as pure prospect he has to be the number one. GG calibur defense in CF with plus power potential and plus speed. Alonso and Soto can both rip the cover off the ball but does that alone equate to a higher ranking than an offensive (potential) GG CF? Who would cost us more in prospects to obtain if everything was in a vacuum; Curtis Granderson or Mark Texeria?

[Screwball]

Originally Posted by thatcoolguy_22

I voted Stubbs

As far as pure prospect he has to be the number one. GG calibur defense in CF with plus power potential and plus speed. Alonso and Soto can both rip the cover off the ball but does that alone equate to a higher ranking than an offensive (potential) GG CF? Who would cost us more in prospects to obtain if everything was in a vacuum; Curtis Granderson or Mark Texeria?

I think the big problem here is not enough (many?) people are sold on the chances of Stubbs actually realizing his power potential.

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by Betterread

Alonso was the #2 prospect in the cape cod league in 2007 - the top collegiate wooden bat/pro showcase summer league. He started three years and two elite years at the highest level of college ball. When drafted, he was deemed to be at the high A/AA level right away.
This guy is very skilled, very determined and has conducted himself as a MLer since early on at Miami. He was a very safe pick - he is a far superior hitter than Soto, Frazier and Valaika.

But he has still yet to prove anything against professionals with a wooden bat. Im glad he did well in the Cape Cod league. Im glad he is doing well in Hawai'i. But to rank him #1 in the reds system based upon a projection is something I don't agree with. I have seen way too many top picks, safe picks, in every sport not pan out because they weren't able to clear a particular hurdle at the top level.

I may be a little biased towards him because I didn't like the way he demanded so much money and held out to the midnight hour. I thought he hurt his development as well as the clubs development. If he comes in next season and puts up a good April and May then good for him he is doing what he is projected to do. But I agree with a poster who said calling Alonso the best prospect is akin to saying Stubbs was a bust before they played in the minors.

[Orenda]

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

I may be a little biased towards him because I didn't like the way he demanded so much money and held out to the midnight hour. I thought he hurt his development as well as the clubs development. If he comes in next season and puts up a good April and May then good for him he is doing what he is projected to do. But I agree with a poster who said calling Alonso the best prospect is akin to saying Stubbs was a bust before they played in the minors.

Thats a solid point but I think another thing we should consider is perceived value. Personally I like Heisey a little better than I like Stubbs, but I recognize that Stubbs is more athletic, is a former 1st rounder who has a higher ceiling, and would bring more value in a trade. Alonso is a guy who was considered an advanced bat by the scouts and some thought he would be the number 1 guy in our system. So even if you like someone else more they aren't carrying the hype that Alonso and Stubbs are and therefore another team is probably not going to perceive other guys as the our top prospects decreasing their trade value.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

But I agree with a poster who said calling Alonso the best prospect is akin to saying Stubbs was a bust before they played in the minors.

Except that saying Alonso could be the Reds best prospect is believing in scouting reports. Saying Stubbs was a bust before he played a game in the minors is not really like that.