Prospect #8 runoff vote

[Screwball]

Originally Posted by JayBruceFan

I voted for Francisco because I don't like voting for a young minor leaguer that hasn't played against anyone important yet

I like players that are producing now, not someone that may produce a few years from now

Um, Francisco isn't producing now (not where it counts anyway), and he still won't until "a few years from now."

I think the right vote is Duran. With prospects, ceiling and projectabilty have a lot to do with it IMO. JD has boatloads of both. He probably has the highest ceiling of any prospect in the Reds' MiL system, and that's keeping in mind that I think very highly of Yonder Alonso and Neftali Soto. Given Francisco's glaring need to vastly improve his OBP skills, I gotta give the nod to Duran over him.

Having said all that, hopefully what JF is showing in the AFL can be sustained and subsequently carried over to AA. If so, we really do have a potential star on our hands.

[Kc61]

Duran is such a raw prospect at this point it's very difficult to rate him.

Dickerson strikes out one third of his official at bats, that's tough to overcome.

Francisco doesn't walk enough but produces big time and is only 21. The poster who commented that "he isn't producing now", must be ignoring or discounting 34 doubles and 23 homers with 92 RBIs for a 20-21 year old at High A ball. Guess that doesn't count for some reason.

It's Francisco.

Also, it's up to OBM, but sometimes a run-off will be most conclusive if it's limited to two guys.

[OnBaseMachine]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Also, it's up to OBM, but sometimes a run-off will be most conclusive if it's limited to two guys.

Yeah, I was hoping to limit it to only two guys but only four votes separated the three. Either way, it looks like this one is gonna be very tight again.

[OnBaseMachine]

Three hours of voting left. I was hoping for around 80 votes, so far we're at 78.

[kpresidente]

Originally Posted by mth123

I think Age is a bit over-rated in the free agent era. Top guys become too expensive after 5 or 6 years so looking longer than that when evaluating what a prospect could mean to a team may not be real useful. Age is important when projecting a player and how he'll perform, but once he's ready, the longevity angle is low on the list of things to consider. Since my criteria is based solely on how I think the player will help the Reds, I don't consider the age they hit they big leagues so much. They'll be free agents after 6 years anyway, so its only the cheap years that the team really gets benefit from them. (If we're simply projecting who will have the better career, I'd probably give age a lot more weight, and that may be the objective of these polls, but I'm looking at it only from a value to the Reds standpoint.)

Just curious, do you consider Danny Richar a prospect? His career numbers are similar to Valaika's, although he had a bad year last year. The difference being that he's 3 years older. How about Rosales? Given your criteria, I'd think those guys would rank higher than they would on a "pure prospect" list.

[gedred69]

Originally Posted by icehole3

in a perfect world we'd all like the Reds to have 4 teams of minor league all-stars who are sure fire hall of famers, relax dude its all in fun.

I'm totally relaxed, "Dude". Give that advice to those who opted to assail my comment. I'm merely saying, there are other prospects with a shot at helping the org. at the MLB level a lot sooner.

[mth123]

Originally Posted by kpresidente

Just curious, do you consider Danny Richar a prospect? His career numbers are similar to Valaika's, although he had a bad year last year. The difference being that he's 3 years older. How about Rosales? Given your criteria, I'd think those guys would rank higher than they would on a "pure prospect" list.

I have Valaika at number 16 on my list. Rosales is at number 24 (but maybe under-rated a bit as I think about it now) and Richar not rated. In the cases of both Valaika and Rosales, they are decent bats if they can stay at MI defensively but I have doubts that either will be able to. They don't have enough bat for a corner spot IMO. I'd consider moving Rosales higher because I actually think he is more likely to able to handle 2B than Valaika, but Valaika is the more noted player so I rated him higher because I think he has more value on the trade market. They could both be supersub types though, and while I think that is valuable those seem to be easier to find these days than in earlier eras. I don't think Richar even has enough bat for the MI.

They differ from Dickerson because Dickerson projects as a plus defender in CF and his bat should be plenty for his position. Dickerson could be an everyday player (or at least a most of the time player based on him being the LH side of a platoon). I don't see any of the players you mentioned holding any position on a regular basis on the major league level.

[camisadelgolf]

FWIW, Richar no longer qualifies as a rookie.

[New Fever]

Originally Posted by mth123

I have Valaika at number 16 on my list. Rosales is at number 24 (but maybe under-rated a bit as I think about it now) and Richar not rated. In the cases of both Valaika and Rosales, they are decent bats if they can stay at MI defensively but I have doubts that either will be able to. They don't have enough bat for a corner spot IMO. I'd consider moving Rosales higher because I actually think he is more likely to able to handle 2B than Valaika, but Valaika is the more noted player so I rated him higher because I think he has more value on the trade market. They could both be supersub types though, and while I think that is valuable those seem to be easier to find these days than in earlier eras. I don't think Richar even has enough bat for the MI.

They differ from Dickerson because Dickerson projects as a plus defender in CF and his bat should be plenty for his position. Dickerson could be an everyday player (or at least a most of the time player based on him being the LH side of a platoon). I don't see any of the players you mentioned holding any position on a regular basis on the major league level.

MTH123, it has been said numerous times in the BA chats by different analysts that Valakia would be an above average second baseman defensively. Are you saying that he will have to move off short or he can't play second either?

[kheidg-]

Forgot about Rosales, maybe he should be added sometime in the near future. Along with Hanigan.

[mth123]

Originally Posted by New Fever

MTH123, it has been said numerous times in the BA chats by different analysts that Valakia would be an above average second baseman defensively. Are you saying that he will have to move off short or he can't play second either?

I have my doubts that he can play either one. A lot of guys move to second by default when they can't play SS, it doesn't make them good 2B. I don't want a defender at 2B in the Todd Walker, Jeff Keppinger mold unless his bat is in the Jeff Kent mold. What evidence is there that he can play 2B? The team is still fooling around with him at SS. Valaiaka needs to play 2B regularly the same way Frazier needs to get an extended look at 3B. This team needs to find out what they really have and if they have positions that match their bats. Up the middle players better be plus defenders or sent packing IMO unless the bat is top notch. Valaika projects as a .750ish OPS guy in his prime and that requires a plus defender to hold a regular spot up the middle.

[BigRed07]

Didn't the Reds have Valaika play 2nd in Hawaii last year? Maybe after seeing him play 2nd that they felt that he was a better prospect at SS. I think he can play SS at the next level.

[Betterread]

Originally Posted by mth123

I have my doubts that he can play either one. A lot of guys move to second by default when they can't play SS, it doesn't make them good 2B. I don't want a defender at 2B in the Todd Walker, Jeff Keppinger mold unless his bat is in the Jeff Kent mold. What evidence is there that he can play 2B? The team is still fooling around with him at SS. Valaiaka needs to play 2B regularly the same way Frazier needs to get an extended look at 3B. This team needs to find out what they really have and if they have positions that match their bats. Up the middle players better be plus defenders or sent packing IMO unless the bat is top notch. Valaika projects as a .750ish OPS guy in his prime and that requires a plus defender to hold a regular spot up the middle.

I have multiple responses to your post:
1. I agree with you about trying Valaika and Frazier and different positions. It would be great if one of them could play good SS with their better than average bats, but it seems the Reds don't see them as SSs. It will be interesting to see how the Reds handle these guys.
2. The Reds should not be focused on no less than plus defenders up the middle. Let's just try to improve on the below-average defense we currently have (excluding BP) up the middle. IF the Reds have average or better, that's sufficient improvement for me. Then we can look at 3B....
3. I don't know what projections you are relying on for Valaika - but his major league hitting projects as a safe .800 to .850. He doesn't have Jay Bruce potential, but he's a legitimate hitter with a mature plate approach. The issue with him (as you correctly identified) is where will he play?

[OnBaseMachine]

One hour left of voting and we're tied. LOL.

[kpresidente]

Originally Posted by mth123

They differ from Dickerson because Dickerson projects as a plus defender in CF and his bat should be plenty for his position. Dickerson could be an everyday player (or at least a most of the time player based on him being the LH side of a platoon). I don't see any of the players you mentioned holding any position on a regular basis on the major league level.

See, that's the thing. Richar has the exact same career minor-league OPS as Dickerson at a weaker offensive position. He's rangy in the field, although he makes a lot of errors. I don't see how one's a top-10 prospect and the other's not even on the list.