Modified Reds Top 15 Prospects

[reds44]

No way I would have Stubbs over Watson. I'm going to see how are rookies hit before I put any of them on the list, and Votto has played 0 games in the majors, he is still a prospect.

Bruce
Votto
Cueto
Watson
Fisher
Thompson
Wood
Francisco
Medlock

Stubbs doesn't even make my top 10. Right now I see him and Dickerson as very similar players. Only difference is Stubbs walks a but more then Dickerson, and Dickerson is older and higher up in the organization.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by BigREDSfaninKY

How do you see Votto being called up with Conine/Hatteberg still in Cincinnati? Expecting Hatteberg to be traded soon?

Yes, Votto has another few weeks in the minors at the most. He will be on the Reds by August 1 at the latest, guaranteed.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by Austin Kearns

Here's my list with Bailey and Votto excluded:
3. Devin Mesoraco - His immense upside puts him ahead of the rest IMO. He obviously hasn't played pro ball yet, but few of the Reds' other prospects have succeeded at high levels. He's not that far behind the rest of the bunch.

4. Drew Stubbs - I'm a big fan of his potential, and even though he has lacked any kind of success, I still think his ceiling warrants this spot over the others.

15. Kyle Lotzkar - Of course he's extremely raw, but I like the package he offers. With two potential plus pitches, I really like his upside as a power arm. Patience is required, but there's little depth in the system, so Lotzkar gets the nod. The final spot came down to Lotzkar and Ravin for me.

I'm sorry, but it is very difficult to include the HS guys on the list now. I threw Mesoraco on there simply because he is the only catcher with a dime, but its still a stretch. While I like Lotzkar, there is no reason for him to be on there over a Josh Ravin, who also has no business on the list at this point.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by reds44

No way I would have Stubbs over Watson. I'm going to see how are rookies hit before I put any of them on the list, and Votto has played 0 games in the majors, he is still a prospect.


Stubbs doesn't even make my top 10. Right now I see him and Dickerson as very similar players. Only difference is Stubbs walks a but more then Dickerson, and Dickerson is older and higher up in the organization.

While Stubbs does have more "upside", I generally agree. Stubbs is a 23-year old who can't dominate in Dayton. Right now he is almost turning into a fringe propsect IMO. If he doesn't improve soon, this offseason he won't sniff the top 10.

[IslandRed]

Originally Posted by AdamDunn

I have Valaika low because he's older and doesn't have the defense to stay at short. While I have never seen him play, I have my doubts whether he can play any position, based on what I've read of him.

He's only six months older than Frazier. :

I'm curious as to what you've read that would lead you to the conclusion above. I've never read anything that suggests he's a subpar defender, only that he lacks the range of a big-league shortstop.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by Benihana

I'm sorry, but it is very difficult to include the HS guys on the list now. I threw Mesoraco on there simply because he is the only catcher with a dime, but its still a stretch. While I like Lotzkar, there is no reason for him to be on there over a Josh Ravin, who also has no business on the list at this point.

I disagree completely.

I did my list in the thinking of if I had to get rid of a prospect for nothing which one would I get rid of? I sure wouldn't want to lose Mesoraco at the cost of say Stubbs, Watson, etc.

Another point is, if say Carlos Fisher entered the draft last Thursday with everyone aware of how he had pitched in pro ball to this date, where do you think he would go? I could guarantee that Meseraco would go well before him, becasue he is the better prospect. Fisher at this point would be the equivelant of a polished college pitcher with low upside, the types that can be round in the lower end of the 1st round, or into the second (at best).

I chose that of Lotzkar and the rest of the prospects, I would rather keep Lotzkar than the rest Just because he hasn't played pro ball doesn't mean he can't make a prospect list. Hell, BA does it every year and they have some idea what they are doing. And just for the record, BA had Ravin ranked number 13 last season in their guidde. BA is not the end to this discussion obviously, but I would say #13 is a pretty good ballpark for where he should be ranked. He may be far away, but he has massive potential. He has everyright to make this list.

I completely disagree with your list. I think you put too much emphasis on polish and likeliness to make the majors than actual talent. I sure hope that the Reds have at least 3 prospects better than a guy who may only have a ceiling as a utility infielder. Or that Justin Turner, a guy who doesn't project to be a regular is rated ahead of Drew Stubbs, a guy who can already field at the major league level and has enormous potential. I know his flaws, but he is definitely more valuable at this point than back-up infielders.

[Red Daddy]

I totally agree with you Kearns!!!! You have to judge on potential. That is the position of Baseball America. These guys drafted in the first round have tons of potential and that must be considered. They may not pan out but most prospects don't pan out anyway including ones who pound the ball in the minors.

Watson is my personal example. I hated that pick!!! His numbers were horrible last year, but he was a 2nd round pick with a mid 90s FB and a plus breaking ball. Steve Kelly on the other hand had a decent year last year but that doesn't mean Kelly, who throws in the high 80s, is a better prospect than Watson in potential.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by Austin Kearns

I disagree completely.

I did my list in the thinking of if I had to get rid of a prospect for nothing which one would I get rid of? I sure wouldn't want to lose Mesoraco at the cost of say Stubbs, Watson, etc.

Another point is, if say Carlos Fisher entered the draft last Thursday with everyone aware of how he had pitched in pro ball to this date, where do you think he would go? I could guarantee that Meseraco would go well before him, becasue he is the better prospect. Fisher at this point would be the equivelant of a polished college pitcher with low upside, the types that can be round in the lower end of the 1st round, or into the second (at best).

I chose that of Lotzkar and the rest of the prospects, I would rather keep Lotzkar than the rest Just because he hasn't played pro ball doesn't mean he can't make a prospect list. Hell, BA does it every year and they have some idea what they are doing. And just for the record, BA had Ravin ranked number 13 last season in their guidde. BA is not the end to this discussion obviously, but I would say #13 is a pretty good ballpark for where he should be ranked. He may be far away, but he has massive potential. He has everyright to make this list.

I completely disagree with your list. I think you put too much emphasis on polish and likeliness to make the majors than actual talent. I sure hope that the Reds have at least 3 prospects better than a guy who may only have a ceiling as a utility infielder. Or that Justin Turner, a guy who doesn't project to be a regular is rated ahead of Drew Stubbs, a guy who can already field at the major league level and has enormous potential. I know his flaws, but he is definitely more valuable at this point than back-up infielders.

Well I completely disagree with your list! And that, my young friend, is what makes the world go 'round. You can't sit here and tell me what I "have to judge on." I agree, the ceiling of the prospect is very important, but their track record is quite important as well. You can talk about Baseball America and how they evaluate the Reds Top Prospects year after year, but they are the same publication that will stick a guy at the top of a list simply because of their draft status. (See: Gruler, Espinosa, Sardinha, etc.) Now I'm not saying that ceiling is not an enormous factor when evaluating a prospect (hence, I put Francisco in the top 10), but you have to pay attention to age, track record, minor league level, and other factors as well. Drew Stubbs has done absolutely nothing since being drafted in the first round a year ago. Therefore, he does not make the top 10 in my book. Yes, he has a great glove, and has some potential at the plate, and that is why he hasn't completely dropped off of the top 15 list, but his likelihood to be a starter at the major league level based off of his performance as a pro so far has greatly diminished.

And don't get me wrong, I'm very high on the young pitchers- Ravin, Lotzkar, etc. as well as Mesoraco. However right now, I would never put a guy who has never played a meaningful game on a bigger stage than a high school in rural Pennsylvania ahead of guys who have dominated at AA. I just wouldn't.

As far as young pitchers without any professional track record making the list just on pure potential go, if you were a little older you would remember the days of Chris Gruler, Justin Gillman, Ty Howington, Ryan Snare, Ryan Mottl, and Ricardo Aramboles. Josh Ravin might have made BA's list last year, but so did all the guys listed above, and that was before the Reds farm system came on really strong (as it has this year).

[Red Daddy]

As far as young pitchers without any professional track record making the list just on pure potential go, if you were a little older you would remember the days of Chris Gruler, Justin Gillman, Ty Howington, Ryan Snare, Ryan Mottl, and Ricardo Aramboles. Josh Ravin might have made BA's list last year, but so did all the guys listed above, and that was before the Reds farm system came on really strong (as it has this year).[/QUOTE]

Gruler, Gillman, Howington, and Aramboles were great prospects before INJURIES. You can't predict that. All of them had great stuff and was deserving of a high ranking.

Prospect ranking is about who has the best shot at the majors, not who is doing best in the minors. A drafted pitcher hitting 95 on the gun with a plus breaking ball has a chance to make it to the majors where some guy like Steve Kelly who only throws about 88 and dominates AA has no chance.

[Red Daddy]

Originally Posted by Red Daddy

As far as young pitchers without any professional track record making the list just on pure potential go, if you were a little older you would remember the days of Chris Gruler, Justin Gillman, Ty Howington, Ryan Snare, Ryan Mottl, and Ricardo Aramboles. Josh Ravin might have made BA's list last year, but so did all the guys listed above, and that was before the Reds farm system came on really strong (as it has this year).

Gruler, Gillman, Howington, and Aramboles were great prospects before INJURIES. You can't predict that. All of them had great stuff and was deserving of a high ranking.

Prospect ranking is about who has the best shot at the majors, not who is doing best in the minors. A drafted pitcher hitting 95 on the gun with a plus breaking ball has a chance to make it to the majors where some guy like Steve Kelly who only throws about 88 and dominates AA has no chance.[/QUOTE]

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by Benihana

Well I completely disagree with your list! And that, my young friend, is what makes the world go 'round. You can't sit here and tell me what I "have to judge on." I agree, the ceiling of the prospect is very important, but their track record is quite important as well. You can talk about Baseball America and how they evaluate the Reds Top Prospects year after year, but they are the same publication that will stick a guy at the top of a list simply because of their draft status. (See: Gruler, Espinosa, Sardinha, etc.) Now I'm not saying that ceiling is not an enormous factor when evaluating a prospect (hence, I put Francisco in the top 10), but you have to pay attention to age, track record, minor league level, and other factors as well. Drew Stubbs has done absolutely nothing since being drafted in the first round a year ago. Therefore, he does not make the top 10 in my book. Yes, he has a great glove, and has some potential at the plate, and that is why he hasn't completely dropped off of the top 15 list, but his likelihood to be a starter at the major league level based off of his performance as a pro so far has greatly diminished.

And don't get me wrong, I'm very high on the young pitchers- Ravin, Lotzkar, etc. as well as Mesoraco. However right now, I would never put a guy who has never played a meaningful game on a bigger stage than a high school in rural Pennsylvania ahead of guys who have dominated at AA. I just wouldn't.

As far as young pitchers without any professional track record making the list just on pure potential go, if you were a little older you would remember the days of Chris Gruler, Justin Gillman, Ty Howington, Ryan Snare, Ryan Mottl, and Ricardo Aramboles. Josh Ravin might have made BA's list last year, but so did all the guys listed above, and that was before the Reds farm system came on really strong (as it has this year).

I'm not telling you how to do things, I'm telling you how the most successful prospect graders do things. They aren't the definitive answer, but I don't see the logic of rating guys who don't project to be good major leaguers even if they do develop over guys who potentially do, even if the odds are worse.

The same goes for Medlock. Sure he is going to make the majors, but if it's only as a middle reliever, what is so exciting about him? Middle relievers are easy to come by (at least they should be) and simply aren't worth that much. Drew Stubbs has obviously struggled, but when you are as talented as he is, he needs to take priority over potential middle relievers.

Here's an example I like to think about. If you were starting a farm system from scratch, would you take 15 guys who all project to be role players, middle relievers, and fringe starters, or would you take 15 guys who all project very highly even if say only 2 of them work out?

If I were a major league team, I would take the high ceiling group every time. The ones that do develop are so much harder to come by than middle relief types. If you have the good players, you can fill in holes much easier than if you are trying to find the core players.

Every organization has guys the calibre of Turner or Medlock. These guys are not uncommon. But not every team can throw multiple talents like Stubbs at you. Even Stubbs is likely to make the majors even if it's only as a role player because he does laready have major league assets. All he has to do is hit to the calibre of a Norris Hopper.

My point was bringing up BA, is that you said that Ravin doesn't even merit consideration on the top 15 list. If BA has him in their top 15, then Ravin definitely merits consideration. You don't have to include him by any means, but simply ignoring him is foolish IMO. BA is the most successful at what they do especially at judging projectability, so I would take their ranking of Ravin at 13 as something worth consideration, even if the numbers don't support it yet.

Some guys like Howington are bad examples. He really started to get huge press when he started itching well in AA. He was rated highly at times when he had pro ball success too. That goes for guys like Richie Gardner, Thomas Pauley, Dumatrait, Chick, Basham, etc. who all got high grades because of their success at young ages.

I took into consideration all of the different factors in prospect evaluation in making my list, and I don't see how the success of Fisher makes him a number 2 prospect, when even if he develops he will only be a complimentary player. Success only goes so far. Without the tools, success in some case can be meaningless. Stubbs is obviously struggling, but he isn't exactly Casrto. He is still holding his own, and IMO, is pretty close to breaking through.

if you were a little older you would remember the days of Chris Gruler, Justin Gillman, Ty Howington, Ryan Snare, Ryan Mottl, and Ricardo Aramboles

By the way, I remember each and every one of those guys. I have followed the Reds in every way possible since I was 11 (during the 1999 season) and have been a Reds fan since I was about 3.

I know the stories of those guys. Mottl was never considered a good prospect. Snare wasn't great either. Aramboles actually showed success, he's hardly the same case as Ravin.

[mth123]

My own personal rule on prospects is to stick with guys who have had success in a full season league. I know there are exceptions, but I think that there are an awful lot of top picks who fade away (John Oliver says hello). My list w/o Homer, Votto or McBeth :

1. Jay Bruce
2. Johnny Cueto
3. Carlos Fisher
4. Sean Watson
5. Juan Francisco
6. Chris Valaika
7. Calvin Medlock
8. Rafael Gonzalez (Rising)
9. Daryl Thompson
10. Tyler Pelland
11. Adam Rosales
12. Travis Wood (and Falling)
13. Justin Turner
14. Sam Lecure
15. Carlos Guevara

Sleeper to watch: Marcos Mateo

[HokieRed]

mth, I like your list. Seems balanced and reasonable, taking into account a variety of things that make for and indicate success and promise. I want to look at it more carefully, but I do like the fact you've got Rafael Gonzalez on it, though maybe just a little high, and also Adam Rosales, whose production is solid and who deserves an immediate promotion. Stubbs is a big disappointment, but I think I'd still have him in the top 15 on ceiling.

[Superdude]

1) Jay Bruce: Obvious
2) Johnny Cueto: Looked mediocre early in the year, but is coming on lately. Power stuff and dominating '06 numbers are too hard to ignore.
3) Sean Watson: A promotion is in order here, and a successful one could move him above Cueto in my mind. Has the stuff, size, and polish to be a well above average starter.
4) Devin Mesoraco: Great tools, and the way he shot up draft boards conjures up memories of someone else on this list... "Jay Bruce"
5) Drew Stubbs: I backed him up last year, but I'm quickly losing patience. His numbers are REALLY not good at all right now. This ranking is based solely on the fact that his cieling is about as high as anyone.
6) Carlos Fisher: Groundball/Strikeout Fisher knows how it's done. How much his K rate holds up will decide his potential. Looks like a good #3-4 innings eater in the making.
7) Chris Valaika: Solid.
8) Travis Wood: We've all been frustrated by his season, but you can't overlook his stuff or what he's done the last two years. The upside is still there.
9) Todd Frazier: Looks like a great pick at this point, especially if he sticks at third
10) Juan Francisco: great tools + poor approach = cautious optimism. If his batting average holds up, he's an ideal #5-6 hitter.
11) Sam Lecure: Has gotten results at AA and his stuff is good enough that he shouldn't pull a Steve Kelly.
12) Daryl Thompson: Eat it Bowden!
13) Tyler Pelland: Guevara and Medlock are good, but he's the only one of the three who could be a late inning shut down guy.
14) Kyle Lotzkar: I hear the argument about not having experience, but I have a hard time placing a 17 year old with his stuff below "potential" middle relievers and utility players.
15) Calvin Medlock: Should be in the majors right now Wayne!

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by mth123

11. Adam Rosales

Okay, I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but these prospect lists are bugging me. I don't see any argument for why Rosales is rated ahead of Stubbs. I'm not trying to be snippy here, I just don't see it.

Last season, at an older age than Stubbs, Rosales struggled just as much as Stubbs (if not more) is now. I actually see more in Stubbs' stats as he was showing better on base skills. The only advantage Rosales had was doubles, but he also did that while being a half year older.

Now of course Rosales has taken a step forward this year, but his stats are not all that great for a 24 year old. He needs to be doing this type of stuff in the high minors considering he doesn't have a lot of projection left. Plus he still hasn't developed much power. So basically, we are talikng about a guy that has major questions about his bat, is playing at a level below his age, can't field, and doesn't play a skill position. I hate to tear into a guy like this, but he has basically nothing going for him. He doesn't posess one asset that makes him an even mildly intriguing major league calibre player.

Stubbs is too a little old for his level, but I like what I'm seeing in his plate approach,and if that can continue he just needs the power to come along. Considering he has displayed big time power in college, I do like his chances of developing to a degree here. There's the possibility it remains absent, but again the tools are there for it to happen. In Rosales' case, the tools are non existent.

Add that to a guy who can already play big time defense at a skill position, and you really don't need the bat to develop to that huge of a degree. He just needs to be able to OPS around .750 to be a useful starter. Stubbs is not close yet, but he doesn't need to improve at nearly the rate Rosales does. In Rosales' case, he needs to get towards the .850 level, and quite frankly, at the age of 24, he is only able to do that in high A ball.

I honestly can not think of one reason to rate Rosales ahead of Stubbs, and I'm trying to be as objective as possible.