BA's Untouchable Prospects

[Benihana]

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today...09/268579.html

No Carlos Santana. No Alcides Escobar. No Reid Brignac. No Dee Gordon. No Michael Taylor.

All guys I think would be worth pursuing. The first three are blocked by All-Stars at the major league level. The other two have been mentioned in possible deadline deals.

The Dodgers, Brewers and Phillies want veteran pitching (Harang, Arroyo, etc.)

The Indians probably want impact prospects at positions other than catcher, assuming they keep VMart (Alonso? Stewart? Wood?)

I'm not sure exactly what the Devil Rays would want, but between Bartlett, Zobrist, and Beckham, I don't think there is much room for Brignac. I'm also not sure if Brignac would be a significant upgrade over Zach Cozart, although the Reds might feel differently. He is closer to the majors than Cozart.

[dougdirt]

Dee Gordon is someone you want to target? A 145 pound shortstop (regardless of what he is listed at, if he weighs more than 150 pounds I would be incredibly surprised) with no power, power projection and at 21 years old is OPSing .740 in Low A is really someone we want to target? What separates him from a guy like Miguel Rojas other than the steals?

[GIDP]

doesnt Brignac have some D troubles?

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by GIDP

doesnt Brignac have some D troubles?

No, he doesn't. When he was drafted his scouting report was basically 'can hit, will he be good enough defensively to stick at SS'.... now it basically reads 'can field, will he hit enough to stick in the majors as a starter'.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Dee Gordon is someone you want to target? A 145 pound shortstop (regardless of what he is listed at, if he weighs more than 150 pounds I would be incredibly surprised) with no power, power projection and at 21 years old is OPSing .740 in Low A is really someone we want to target? What separates him from a guy like Miguel Rojas other than the steals?

A career OPS that is 200 points higher.

Rojas has looked good in the last six weeks but was anemic before that. Either way, why not stockpile a couple of guys like that and see if one of them can turn into a Jose Reyes-lite type?

I would love to see an Arroyo/Weathers deal for Gordon/E.Martin. Sure it doesn't help much for the big club in the next year or two, but it does lighten the purse load to pursue a Matt Holliday signing. Meanwhile, Arroyo and Weathers are replaceable by guys like Bailey and Roenicke, and you're restocking the farm system with some guys with promise.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Benihana

A career OPS that is 200 points higher.

Career OPS based on half a season of rookie ball and then 3/4 of a season in the Midwest League? Regadless of that, who cares about their OPS. Look at their skillsets. What makes one better than the other? Rojas looks like he has a better idea at the plate. Gordon has better speed and is a better base stealer.

I like Rojas too. Why not stockpile a couple of guys like that and see if one of them can turn into a Jose Reyes-lite type?

Well because we have to trade talent to get a guy who profiles pretty similarly to a guy we already have at the same exact spot in their careers. Doesn't make a ton of sense to me to stockpile 'clones' at the same level in the hopes that one of them turns into a super star unless that player is already performing at a super star level and neither of those guys are.

I would love to see an Arroyo/Weathers deal for Gordon/E.Martin, even if the Reds forked over a little bit of cash. Sure it doesn't help much for the big club in the next year or two, but it does lighten the purse load to pursue a Matt Holliday signing. Meanwhile, you're restocking the farm system with some guys with promise.

Ethan Martin isn't being traded unless its for a stud Major Leaguer. Got that from a guy who works in scouting for the Dodgers. I would be ok with Gordon as a throw in to a deal, but Ethan Martin isn't going to be the main guy the Reds or just about anyone else are getting back.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Career OPS based on half a season of rookie ball and then 3/4 of a season in the Midwest League? Regadless of that, who cares about their OPS. Look at their skillsets. What makes one better than the other? Rojas looks like he has a better idea at the plate. Gordon has better speed and is a better base stealer.

Doug, you love to use stats when you need 'em but talk of "skillsets" when the stats don't support your arguments. What happened to Adam Rosales being the Reds' 1B of the future?

Well because we have to trade talent to get a guy who profiles pretty similarly to a guy we already have at the same exact spot in their careers. Doesn't make a ton of sense to me to stockpile 'clones' at the same level in the hopes that one of them turns into a super star unless that player is already performing at a super star level and neither of those guys are.

Depends on what you'd have to give up. The Dodgers strike me as a team willing to trade off most of their minor leaguers for win-now pieces. Look at last year's Carlos Santana trade as an example. I never said I'd give up a major piece for Gordon, but I would consider moving a veteran role player with no role on the current, non-contending Reds.

[GIDP]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

No, he doesn't. When he was drafted his scouting report was basically 'can hit, will he be good enough defensively to stick at SS'.... now it basically reads 'can field, will he hit enough to stick in the majors as a starter'.

oh word?

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Benihana

Doug, you love to use stats when you need 'em but talk of "skillsets" when the stats don't support your arguments. What happened to Adam Rosales being the Reds' 1B of the future?

Stats can often dictate skillsets. Outside of April, Rojas has hit every bit as well as Gordon has this year in the Midwest League. They have a pretty similar skillset.

As for Rosales, should I really go through and dig up every instance you were wrong about something? What does Rosales have to do with either Miguel Rojas or Dee Gordon other than you wanting to suggest I am wrong?

[GIDP]

for the record I still think Rosales could be a pretty good major leaguer.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Stats can often dictate skillsets.

Are you sure it's not the other way around?

Outside of April, Rojas has hit every bit as well as Gordon has this year in the Midwest League. They have a pretty similar skillset.

Here we go with the month-by-month cherrypicking again.

As for Rosales, should I really go through and dig up every instance you were wrong about something?

You can't- I'm never wrong.

What does Rosales have to do with either Miguel Rojas or Dee Gordon other than you wanting to suggest I am wrong?

It was an example of you using "stats" to back up your arguments when they are convenient, yet say "who cares about stats" when they are not. This thread and your defense of Mesoraco are the latest examples of the latter.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by GIDP

for the record I still think Rosales could be a pretty good major leaguer.

He's a utility guy at best. No way should he be a long term solution at any major league position.

[GIDP]

Originally Posted by Benihana

He's a utility guy at best. No way should he be a long term solution at any major league position.

His AA year I could easily see someone thinking he had a good shot at being a major league regular. He has shows some good flashes.

He could probably still develop into a regular infielder somewhere but hes certainly not going to be a long term one.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Benihana

Are you sure it's not the other way around?

Either way you want to slice it, the two guys have very similar skillsets.

Here we go with the month-by-month cherrypicking again.

Yeah, because the first month of the season in Low A ball isn't nearly as valuable as looking at the more recent ones, especially when the skillsets and stats suggest a major change (particularly with the plate discipline went from 9/1 K to BB in April to 21/23 in May-now). I could care less about what happened in April because his skillset has certainly changed.

It was an illustration of you using "stats" to back up your arguments when they are convenient, yet say "who cares about stats" when they are not. This thread and your defense of Mesoraco are the latest examples of the latter.

The stats dictated and still do, that Rosales has a chance to be a regular in the majors. And I also recall saying that Rosales had a chance to be guy the Reds could use at 1B or 3B, not that he would be an All Star of some sort. As for Mesoraco, I stand by what I say. The fact that you disagree doesn't make me right or wrong, it simply means I disagree with you.

[DTCromer]

Originally Posted by GIDP

for the record I still think Rosales could be a pretty good major leaguer.

What the hell GIDP? Why do I agree with you again? I think he could be decent, just not long term. I see him as a super utility guy that all clubs need. I want him on the Reds as the 5th IF.