Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

[HokieRed]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Put another way --

Francisco will be in the middle of the Reds' lineup when most of these other guys are still in the minor leagues working on their walk rate.

Agreed. Reason I gave JF the slight nod over TF.

[GOYA]

I'll keep voting Cisco until he gets a spot. Frazier is not in my top 5.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by mace

As an interesting note (to me, at least) that probably means very little, Frazier's apparent election here represents the third straight first-rounder, one for each of the last three drafts. (OK, he was a supplemental first-rounder, behind Mesoraco, but a first-rounder nevertheless.) That pattern suggests . . .

1) the Reds are doing an excellent job with their highest picks;

2) they're not doing so hot overall, with very few players stepping up and distinguishing themselves;

or

3) the constituency here is heavily swayed by the perceptions that attend first-round draft picks.

Not sure which it is. But I wouldn't count out No. 3.

(My guess for the fourth-rated prospect is Yorman, who was of course not drafted but, by dint of tools and hoopla, clearly falls into the same kind of categorization.)

(For what it's worth, I do like all these players. I'm especially intrigued by Frazier's intangibles.)

I think you omit a variant of #3. There are some players who have performed well and whose underlying skills suggest that the player is likely to continue to do well. Then there are guys who have performed well superficially but whose underlying skills and/or component performances suggest that the player is likely to experience a big hurdle down that road. Often, those #1 picks are the guys who have the underlying skill sets that validate their performances.

What makes a top prospect is a combination of the two -- and it's what separates Todd Frazier from Juan Francisco. For me, a prospect rating is essentially -- I'm simplifying -- (Ceiling) * (Likelihood of Reaching Ceiling). Likelihood is a combination of the underlying skill set as identified by scouts, it's development over time, and its validation through performance to date.

On a scale of 100, Fransisco or Rodriguez might have a 90 ceiling, but a 40 likelihood. Meanwhile, Frazier is sitting there at 80 and 80. Obviously the numbers are made up to illustrate the point, but that's my approach.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

On a scale of 100, Fransisco or Rodriguez might have a 90 ceiling, but a 40 likelihood. Meanwhile, Frazier is sitting there at 80 and 80. Obviously the numbers are made up to illustrate the point, but that's my approach.

Your method only works with realistic numbers. I don't find these examples to be realistic. Francisco dominated AA, AAA, and did well at Cincy. His likelihood is the same as a 16 year old OPS'ing in the .600s at Rookie ball? I don't find JF's consistent home run, RBI, slugging percentage and extra base hits to be superficial.

What's superficial to me are evaluations praising players based on certain peripherals when the player doesn't show particularly good or consistent production.

Let's face it, it's all subjective. Maybe more than anything, there are opinion leaders who adopt certain philosophies and people tend to buy into them.

IMO, what gets left out too often is actual production. Who has exhibited special abilities in the minor leagues. Lots of talk about walk rates. Not too much about HRs, extra base hits, knocking in runs on a consistent basis, hitting the ball with authority.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by GOYA

I'll keep voting Cisco until he gets a spot. Frazier is not in my top 5.

Sorry if I missed it, but I've noticed that you have concerns about Frazier. Can you elaborate?

[11larkin11]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Put another way --

Francisco will be in the middle of the Reds' lineup when most of these other guys are still in the minor leagues working on their walk rate.

I really like Francisco as a hitter as long as he ISN'T in the middle of the order. If our order lives up to its true potential, with a 1-5 of Stubbs-Bruce-Alonso-Votto-Phillips, then I want JF to be a true "cleanup" hitter in the 6 or 7 spot, knocking in those guys who are on base. Unfortunately, he doenst get on enough to be in the heart of the order, but he definitely can get some RBIs in the 6 spot.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by 11larkin11

I really like Francisco as a hitter as long as he ISN'T in the middle of the order. If our order lives up to its true potential, with a 1-5 of Stubbs-Bruce-Alonso-Votto-Phillips, then I want JF to be a true "cleanup" hitter in the 6 or 7 spot, knocking in those guys who are on base. Unfortunately, he doenst get on enough to be in the heart of the order, but he definitely can get some RBIs in the 6 spot.

The guy just turned 22. He won't start out in the middle of the order. He will wind up in the middle of somebody's order when the maturation process is more complete.

[fearofpopvol1]

Originally Posted by Kc61

The guy just turned 22. He won't start out in the middle of the order. He will wind up in the middle of somebody's order when the maturation process is more complete.

Tell that to Wily Mo (who accomplished more at 22 than JF has by a lot).

[GOYA]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Sorry if I missed it, but I've noticed that you have concerns about Frazier. Can you elaborate?

Only defensively. I think he's going to end up a LF and his bat doesn't rate there. I still like Frazier but I don't see him among the elite in our minors. I might be making a quick call after seeing him in Louisville but he just didn't seem to move well enough to play IF. With his size, it's understandable. Some guys can move well at his size and some can't. His hands didn't look very good either but I'm more concerned with his movement.

[OnBaseMachine]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Your method only works with realistic numbers. I don't find these examples to be realistic. Francisco dominated AA, AAA, and did well at Cincy. His likelihood is the same as a 16 year old OPS'ing in the .600s at Rookie ball? I don't find JF's consistent home run, RBI, slugging percentage and extra base hits to be superficial.

Francisco posted an OPS of .712 in the GCL as a 19-year old. Yorman Rodriguez posted an OPS just 43 points lower in that same league at age 16. Yorman had a nice season considering his age, IMO. I can understand why people are voting for him to be in the top three. I'll probably vote for him at #4/5.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Your method only works with realistic numbers. I don't find these examples to be realistic. Francisco dominated AA, AAA, and did well at Cincy. His likelihood is the same as a 16 year old OPS'ing in the .600s at Rookie ball? I don't find JF's consistent home run, RBI, slugging percentage and extra base hits to be superficial.

You won't find a guy with Francisco's K/BB in the minors who has had success in the majors over anything resembling a career. There simply isn't anyone that fits his bill. The cloest guy anyone has found was Wily Mo Pena and he surely doesn't fall into the 'good hitter' category. Francisco's entire value is going to come from his bat, and well, his bat isn't something that is close to a sure thing. He didn't dominate AA. He had an .818 OPS in AA. That is solid. Its not very good and it surely isn't dominant. Yorman has similar issues though, except that right now his value is likely to come from his defense. He has a plus arm and plus range in center field, right now as a 17 year old. He has a ways to go in improving his game before its ready for the major leagues (yes, more than Francisco has to go), but his ceiling is also higher than that of Francisco because of the position he plays and how well he does play it.

What's superficial to me are evaluations praising players based on certain peripherals when the player doesn't show particularly good or consistent production.

What is likely to transfer forward, a players peripherals or a players 'production'? If you are looking at a guys walk rate, strikeout rate and power rate, then you go with his peripherals. If you are looking at anything else offensively, you are looking at the wrong things because the rest of it won't transfer forward. AVG, RBI and the likes don't transfer forward to the major league level.

IMO, what gets left out too often is actual production. Who has exhibited special abilities in the minor leagues. Lots of talk about walk rates. Not too much about HRs, extra base hits, knocking in runs on a consistent basis, hitting the ball with authority.

No one ignores power. Walk rates are important though too. Just as important if not more. Just look at the major leagues to see that. Players who don't walk generally don't produce at a league average level. You simply can't just ignore history and pretend that Francisco can get it done today without making some sort of dramatic change. He would literally have to up his walk rate by 50% just to be in a 'below average' range for a walk rate. The math has been shown in this forum before. Unless Francisco walks more or strikes out less (or hits 75 HR a year), he is going to struggle to OBP .320 in the major leagues. You simply can't be a very productive player like that even if you hit 30 HR.

[*BaseClogger*]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Francisco dominated AA, AAA, and did well at Cincy.

I wouldn't call an 818 OPS at AA "dominant". The other two samples are 92 ABs and 21 ABs, respectively...

[dougdirt]

Juan Francisco, has 1 stop in his career with over 100 at bats with an OPS over .800. Just throwing it out there. .712, .763 and .799 at the other stops.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1

Tell that to Wily Mo (who accomplished more at 22 than JF has by a lot).

WMP was rushed to the major leagues because of his contract. He was very young for his minor league levels. He did very well at Dayton. He didn't do particularly well at AA. He then started well at AAA and went to the majors at age 21. Not really comparable at all.

I understand the stereotype. I also understand the argument about walk rate. I just think this guy, JF, is in the process of understanding the game, and his ability is off the charts. I prefer him to many of these solid, all around, traditional guys who may not have these special abilities. That's all.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by *BaseClogger*

I wouldn't call an 818 OPS at AA "dominant". The other two samples are 92 ABs and 21 ABs, respectively...

Look at the trajectory. Age 21, started slowly at AA. Look at the second half numbers. Add in AAA. Add in Cincy. Not too shabby.