Kevin Goldstein likes Dee and Chris
by bhsportsguy on Feb 8, 2010 8:52 AM PST
278 comments
But Lambo is ranked below Kyle Russell in his Top Prospects column.
It seems like every year when Baseball Prospectus is going to issue the Dodgers' top prospects, the publication is delayed. While whether or not it was delayed, here is the list (most of the analysis is only available to subscribers.)
Five-Star Prospects
1. Dee Gordon, SS
2. Chris Withrow, RHP
Four-Star Prospects
3. Ethan Martin, RHP
Three-Star Prospects
4. Aaron Miller, LHP
5. Scott Elbert, LHP
6. Trayvon Robinson, OF
7. Garrett Gould, RHP
8. Ivan DeJesus Jr., SS
9. Josh Lindblom, RHP
Two-Star Prospects
10. Kenley Jansen, RHP
11. Kyle Russell, OF
Four More:
12. Andrew Lambo, OF: He isn’t an athletic corner outfielder, and is instead a bat-only prospect who might not have enough bat.
13. Allen Webster, RHP: A highly projectable righty, Webster has the potential to rocket up this list after his 2010 full-season debut.
14. Pedro Baez, 3B: He needs to overcome an injury bug and plate discipline issues, but his tools remain outstanding.
15. Nathan Eovaldi, RHP: This Tommy John surgery survivor was kept on a short leash in 2009, but he was brilliant at times while showcasing one of the more live arms in the system.
2 recs |
278 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Really?
I wouldn’t consider Elbert to a top 100 prospect right now. He’s 24, has an injury history, and shown good stuff/bad results in the majors. Him being a 3 star prospect is fine.
+1
nobody besides us on this blog is that high with elbert..
and this injury history you talk about… 1 injury is called injury history?
Does that surprise you that people aren’t high on him? He’s not a Phillies, Yankees, or Red Sox prospect. Can you honestly look at Elbert’s minor league success and tell me that he doesn’t seem at all special? I’m not saying he’s at Kershaw’s level, or even Billingsley’s at all, but to think he couldn’t be a good 3 starter after what he’s shown is just insane to me.
That “injury history” is so bogus. He had one injury and has been back since the start of 08 and been just fine. He’s actually been better than that, really. It’s unbelievable to me that so many people just write Elbert off after how well he’s done in the minors, and apparently just base their opinions of him off of one injury 3 years ago and 25 innings in the MLB.
Kyle Russell the enigma
Canuck hates him, everyone else has pegged him as the 10-15th top prospect. Who was the last prospect whose power scaled 80 on a scale of 20 to 80? Billy Ashley?
From BP analysis:
The Good: Russell’s power is undeniable, with his raw power rating as a pure 80 on the scouting scale. He hit several tape-measure shots during the 2009 season, and he can pull rockets over the right-field wall as easy as he goes the other way. More than just a one-dimensional slugger, he’s a long, loose athlete who plays well in the field, has one of the best arms in the system, and is an above-average runner who stole 20 bases in 22 attempts.
The Bad: To say the Russell has contact issues is to be far too kind, as he whiffed 180 times last year, a disturbingly high number for a player from a major college program in Low-A. He has real trouble against lefties, against who he hit just .235/.336/.417 with a strikeout for every 2.4 at-bats.
Ephemera: With 281 home runs, Paul O’Neill is the all-time leader in home runs among players drafted 93rd overall. Javier Valentin is second with 45.
Perfect World Projection: He has to tools to be an absolute stud…
Path to the Big Leagues: …but those possibilities come with a ton of risk.
Timetable: Russell could put up some huge numbers in the hi-A California League this year, but we might not know much more about his future until he gets to Double-A.
Most prevailing opinions are against Russell making it, but if he maintains or slightly decreases his K rate at AA when he gets there, I would tend to think that he starts to get very valuable. A .230-.240 hitter with 30+ HR power while playing good D could be valuable at the big league level. I am willing to give him more time.
.230 hitter?
he better be ryan howard with Runners on base then.. othewise he would be pretty bad
He'd be Carlos Pena
which would be fantastic.
by Michael White on Feb 8, 2010 10:34 AM PST up reply actions
No its not. Slugging is dependent on average. There’s no reason to walk Russell if he can’t show he can actually hit a ball.
A guy can hit .200/.350/.500 and he would still be quite a valuable hitter. Yes he would be only getting 1 hit in every 5 at bats, but that hit is more likely to be a double or homerun than a single. I will take .200/.350/.500 hitter over a .300/.330/.400 hitter every single day of the week, because the first one can actually hit for power while the 2nd one is hitting mostly singles and doubles.
The problem is that most teams wouldn’t, and I know the Dodgers wouldn’t.
More importantly, nobody hits like that. Not even Adam Dunn, the closest line Dunn has is his age 26 season .234/.365.490 in 683 PAs for a 114 OPS+
A .200/.350/.500 from a corner outfielder is a disappointment, and should be upgraded.
I’m saying it’ll get your butt benched, yes. Or rather, you’ll wouldn’t be able to get to a full season of .200/.350/.500 in the first place. You’d be replaced first.
I’m not saying they do, it was just a hypothetical. But if there was a player like that, I would take them over Juan Pierre every day of the week. Since when is an .850 OPS a disappointment from a corner outfielder? Either has a career .853 OPS, is he a disappointment? Kemp’s is even lower than that.
I don’t think anyone is disputing the value of that. But the question regarding Russell is, and has always been, will he produce as he advances. Having the ability to hit for power and have great patience is awesome, but does Russell have that ability now because he is more physically and/or mentally mature than his competition?
Also, at 23, is there room enough for improvement to be able to continue his production as he advances against tougher competition? There is certainly enough doubt there.
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 11:52 AM PST up reply actions
I’m not concerned about that…I’m concerned that Russell will never be a high SLG guy, at least in the majors.
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 11:56 AM PST up reply actions
ya
i dont even think he will be a high OBP guy…
He was traded after hitting .231/.359/.474 in 2007, and was singled out by Ned as a disappointment.
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 11:58 AM PST up reply actions
By the way you appear to be right
I can find no one who had a BA < .235 and a OB >.360 and a slug% > .500 who played at least 100 games. Sal Fasano came the closest in 1999 with 75 at bats
But Russell apparently plays top flight defense
This is where Russell is such an oddity, because his power has people hoping for Pena, Howard and Dunn, Russell might actually have the oppurtunity to contribute by being an excellent defender. His hitting alone might not get him on the field, but Ned is an “old school” guy who still values defense.
by Michael White on Feb 8, 2010 11:58 AM PST up reply actions
That gives me hope
that he doesn’t fit the profile of the immobile slugger types, the John Jaha beer league softball types.
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 11:59 AM PST up reply actions
Plenty of doubt
which is why he’s not a top five prospect. He’s right where he should be, a guy with most power in the system, solid plate discipline, solid defensive tools yet his ability to make contact is the joker thus the back end of the top 10 or in some cases the back end of the top 15.
However if he can hit .230/.360/.500 then as we have been arguing with Tripon that person has value.
jack cust in his minor league days
age 19 to 22 when he was young..
was regualry putting up .450 OBP…. his plate discipline is 1000 times better then russell…
and striking out a little less at higher levels at a younger age
I understand the concern of him being so old and playing such young competition. For right now, though, Russell has shown great ability and skill and should get a shot to play at higher levels and failing before just writing him off like so many do.
He’ll get that shot. The Dodgers will try him in AA this year or next at the latest. I don’t know that people are “writing him off” so much as placing him low on their prospects lists because they believe the odds of him making it are very low, not matter what the power potential.
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
Found this study a couple of weeks ago regarding the correlation of strikeouts to performance.
Essentially, strikeouts correlated positively with performance in the majors and AAA, but correlated negatively with performance in rookie ball and low A, with no significant relationship in between.
Basically, they found that the “weeding out” of players with high K rates happens in the transition from low A to AA. Which makes this year that much more important for Russell.
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 12:03 PM PST up reply actions
Exactly...
…which is why I said the Russell will stall in Double A. He is not going to hit more than .210 there and that is not going to get him advanced beyond Double A.
by CanuckDodger on Feb 8, 2010 12:08 PM PST up reply actions
I will flat out call you wrong saying that he won’t hit higher than .210. I’d be willing to bet on that.
I would guess that he won’t hit lower than .235, and I expect him to hit at least .260.
League Environment Is Irrelevant When It Comes To Russell's Problem
Russell strikes out at a ridiculous rate facing 19 and 20-year-old pitchers, and he does it as a 23-year-old. In Double A pitchers can actually throw change-ups and get their breaking stuff in the strike zone more often than once in a blue moon.
by CanuckDodger on Feb 8, 2010 12:31 PM PST up reply actions
I am quite curious to see how this plays out
Never quite seen Canuck so adamant about a Dodger prospects failure before.
Do I need to make a Russell 210 jersey to go with the Belliard 209???
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 12:34 PM PST up reply actions
i don't necessarily disagree with him either
unless they fix his swing plane he’s an all or nothing disaster that’s going to get shat on by advanced breaking balls
maybe not .210 EVER but certainly not great unless he fixes it
Indeed, Meercat...
…in the past plenty of people have disagreed with me about different Dodger prospects, but it has usually been with me in the role of advocate for the player against his detractors. And while I am not AGAINST Dee Gordon, I am certainly someone who believes he is being way over-rated.
What can I say, I have to “call ’em like I see ’em.” At least now people can’t try to dismiss my analysis of Dodger prospects as a manifestation of homerism, something non-Dodger fans used to accuse me of quite often.
by CanuckDodger on Feb 8, 2010 12:49 PM PST up reply actions
i like it
it’s what prospect projection is all about
if you were gonna scale your ratings to meet what everybody else thought, there’s no point
yes
it seems like every good prospect site is coming out with their own pay book though :o
i can sorta understand why but it sorta sucks
the amount of time i spend doing them
is why i can understand :o still sucks though
though it would be a dream job if i got paid to do it year round like sickels
I agree
I’m impressed you are standing 100% behind what you feel. I’ve used your arguments a few times. Now that all the major prospect rankings are out for teams, who do you think is being under appreciated the most?
Meercat...
I think Scott Elbert is one of the most underrated prospects in all of baseball, and the fact that people keep going on about his “injury history” (one injury since 2004!) and “fragility” just makes me want to scream. Lambo is also being terribly underrated. The people who are rating him under Boston’s Lars Anderson (Keith Law and Goldstein) should pretty well be shot.
And not that he should be considered a Top 10 guy in our organization, but Scott Van Slyke is being underappreciated. People are wary because his first good year coincided with his season in the Cal League — I get that — but I think that really is just a coincidence. His home park in San Berdoo is relatively pitcher-friendly, actually, and he hit well there as well as on the road (unlike Austin Gallagher in 2008). I also think Jonathan Garcia and Jerry Sands should be getting more hype. I was pleased that Goldstein picked Sands as his sleeper, but BA ranking him below Blake Smith is a true palm-in-face-exasperation mistake.
Kind of agree
with most of what you said. I am wary of Van Slyke but am keeping an open mind. Thanks for the detailed response.
Goldstein names his sleeper which is the same guy many of us consider our sleeper
The Sleeper: An obscure 25th-round pick in 2008 out of tiny Catawba College in North Carolina, first baseman Jerry Sands has hit .276/.380/.554 so far as a pro, and he has breakout potential based on his combination of power and the ability to make consistent contact.
Yup
i said he was a sleeper months back. Expecting him to breakout this year.
by Julio Nievas on Feb 8, 2010 10:20 AM PST up reply actions
Top 10 talent under 25
1. Clayton Kershaw, LHP
2. Matt Kemp, CF
3. Jonathan Broxton, RHP
4. Chad Billingsley, RHP
5. Dee Gordon, SS
6. James Loney, 1B
7. Chris Withrow, RHP
8. Ethan Martin, RHP
9. Aaron Miller, LHP
10. Scott Elbert, LHP
Curious to see Elbert there and not Gould.
Elbert actually pitched in the majors, and has a history of work you can compare others to. Gould pitched only a couple of pro innings plus his high school years were spent in Kansas, which isn’t as tough of a pitching environment than say, Texas.
Yes
but he has them both as 3 Star prospects and you’d think he’d go with the guy six years younger. I agree with Elbert on the list just surprised given the writeup he did on both of them that he picked Elbert instead of Gould.
The consensus
seems to be on Elbert that he may not have the shoulder strength to stay in a rotation but that at minimum he will be an impact relief pitcher. He threw in a nice stat, he K’d 40 of the 79 LH he faced in the minors last year.
Also just want to add that he expects Gould to start with the Loons. I know Canuck and I disagreed on this so I’ll be pleased if that happens.
Loney turned 25 last May, so most consider 2009 to have been his age-25 season. How does he qualify for this list?
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
Goldstein Says Age 25 At April 1st.
Loney doesn’t turn 26 till early May.
Thanks. How conventional is the usage of June 1? I was under the impression that it was fairly widely used.
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
It Is July 1st.
And all stat services and sites use it. Even Baseball Prospectus itself in their annuals. Goldstein is just doing his individual thing, and as long as he is specifying April 1, I don’t have a problem with that.
Right, my mind said July, but my fingers typed June. The only problem with using guidelines outside the usual is that comparisons of opinions from various sources get harder to make. Not a huge deal, but it is something. Besides, any date used is arbitrary, so why choose a different date than everyone else. It’s not like it’s a better (or worse) choice, therefore the consistent choice has the most merit.
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
Final thoughts on our 25 and under group
It’s easy to forget just how young the Dodgers’ core talent is. Clayton Kershaw is an ace in the making, and if anyone is going to prevent Tim Lincecum from winning a third straight Cy Young award, he’s your best pick. Kemp is another budding superstar who is still just scratching the surface of his abilities. Broxton crossed into that unreal dominance level last year, and he should keep it up. Billingsley has regressed a bit, and conditioning may have played a role; he still has the raw stuff to be a front-line starter. Loney is a highly overrated talent, because in the end he’s a first baseman with on-base skills that are average at best and below-average power. Just missing the list are James McDonald, a decent middle reliever, and Blake DeWitt, a former first-round pick who admittedly has a beautiful swing, but has never put up big numbers at any level.
Kemp is another budding superstar who is still just scratching the surface of his abilities.
Everyone (media) is hyping up Kemp this year to produce godly-like numbers. But BJ, PECOTA, etc are projecting numbers like last year’s.
by Julio Nievas on Feb 8, 2010 10:24 AM PST up reply actions
Bizarro day in baseball
Selig is getting a freaking statue in Milwaukee, at Miller Park, and the White Sox are going to un-retire the #11 of HOFer Luis Aparicio so Omar Vizquel, fellow Venezuela native, can wear it this year.
Agreed. The only exception that might be OK (stressing might) is if the retired player himself authorizes it, but one would hope the team wouldn’t put the retired player in such a position.
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
Shame on the White Sox for suggesting this to begin with..
You honor the greats of the franchise because they did special things for that franchise. I think it’s a slap in the face for Luis
by Julio Nievas on Feb 8, 2010 10:52 AM PST up reply actions
Apparently Vizquel reached out to Aparicio first. Per Scott Merkin (MLB.com):
Vizquel said when he got up the courage to ask Aparicio about wearing No. 11, Aparicio thought about it, smiled and said, “It will be nice to have No. 11 come out again on the field. If there is somebody that will wear that number, I would like you to do that.”
He should never have asked. Vizquel is an old guy finishing out the string on a new team and he wants to wear the retired number of an HOFer who played ten seasons there and is (I assume) revered in their shared home country? Just pick a new number Omar. Eric will make a “111” jersey for you.
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
I agree. The number should stay retired. Maybe a Venezuelan pitcher (Felix?) can take it upon himself to start a Jose Mesa-esque feud with Vizquel and just throw at him every time up :)
If I had a guess, I’d say that Webster shoots to 4th on the list next year, while Lindblom and Elbert officially graduate.
His reply:
molokai
(2744)
While Withrow went from unranked last year to number two I would not be surprised to see a similar jump with Webster next year.
Feb 08, 2010 10:20 AM
BP staff member Kevin Goldstein
BP staff
(27460)
There are plenty of scouts who agree with you, but it’s not universal.
Feb 08, 2010 10:25 AM
link
Post Reply
Star rating system
I like it because it easily distinguishes the talent level we have. Of course, not everyone will agree with the ratings, but it’s better in some ways than just a straight list.
I like Goldstein
but he moved Lambo from number one last year to no stars and number 12 based on his performance as a 20 year old in AA. I’m not a huge Lambo fan but I think that drop is a bit premature.
Goldstein is consistent in this regard, he moved Lars Andersen to 9th on the 2010 Red Sox list after his horrible season. Andersen is somehow still a 3 star prospect though.
Unless Lambo really regresses
It’s almost impossible for him not to improve based on BABIP and then all of a sudden he will be a top 5 prospect again
Doesn't like Van Slyke
we kind of have a Canuck versus Goldstein on the outfield front. Canuck likes Van Slyke, hates Russell, Goldstein likes Russell, not a believer in Van Slyke.
Must have some tools
even though the production so far has been limited. The HQ scouts are also still high on him.
The writeup of Kenley Jansen
really show a raw raw talent.
The Good: Jansen has massive arm strength, unleashing 94-97 mph fastballs that have touched as high as 99 when he really rears back. He throws a low-80s slider than flashes plus at times.
The Bad: Jansen is much more of a thrower than a pitcher at this point. “He looks like a catcher throwing as hard as he can,” said one scout, as his delivery is quite violent, and his breaking ball is highly inconsistent. He does not repeat his release points, and his command and control are all over the place.
BA vs. BP
I’ve been a believer in BA’s list for years, but would you guys say BP is on a similar level when it comes to prospects? I know they’re more stat based.
Since Goldstein took over
I give as much credence to them as I do BA. Before him they were totally stat based. I do like it when Nate compares his stat based ranking with Goldsteins.
Withrow vs. Gordon
I guess it doesn’t matter too much, but outside of TBLA, it seems everybody ranks Gordon above Withrow. I’m curious as to why that is. Is there anybody on this board who ranks Gordon higher than Withrow?
Both could be stars
one could be a bust while the other could still be a dominant relief pitcher. I’m very curious where the tender elbow stuff keeps surfacing from. Can anyone enlighten me because whenever I ask the writers of that line they never respond with anything concrete.
Statwise Gordon looks like he needs huge improvements, but then you see lines like this:
He’d be up there on the list. It’s a tough thing, As you are watching a guy hit .300, steal 70+ bases and get to balls at short no human should get to, and you realize he’s doing it without really having much of an idea of what he’s doing out there. That creates tons of understandable excitement, but it doesn’t come without its reservations as well.
and you tend to get excited.
I keep on hearing about Jimmy Rollins comparisons, but Rollins doesn’t hit for a high average, or walk. In the majors or minors
Gordon in his short time has has been able to do both. Of course its the minors, and if and when Gordon is promoted he could very well become similar to Rollins, but just looking at the stats, I’m not seeing it. Maybe scouts are seeing it in the way Gordon handles himself.
Black SS
with good speed seems to be why they use the comparison. Based on skills I’d think Jose Reyes is the more apt comparison. Right now Gordon’s whole offensive game is built around his uber speed just like Jose. The big difference is that Jose was already in the major leagues at the age Gordon is still learning the game in A ball.
Yep
Full season in AAA, then MLB debut late in his age 21 season
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 10:53 AM PST up reply actions
At 21, Henry Rollins was already fronting Black Flag.
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
by David Young on Feb 8, 2010 10:57 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Reyes is more likely to me, but
the age thing is just that, because baseball wise, he might as well be 18 or 19.
Much like McDonald is really 3 years younger on the pitcher development curve.
Weird
I’m glad I guess. I suppose it will be nice for the West to have at least 1 guy who is a true center.
by Michael White on Feb 8, 2010 11:29 AM PST up reply actions
Some numbers on Gordon
From minorleaguesplits.com, where, Strange-ly enough they have him with more playing time (28 ABs) than baseball-reference.com and thebaseballcube.com have for him:
Split GB% LD% FB% IF/F%
Overall 59.1% 12.4% 28.5% 12.3%
vs LHP 65.4% 10.0% 24.6% 15.6%
vs RHP 56.8% 13.3% 30.0% 11.3%
Home 57.3% 16.4% 26.3% 9.9%
Away 60.6% 9.1% 30.3% 14.4%
Last28dy 46.8% 19.1% 34.0% 16.0%
Line drive pct not that impressive but hot at the end of the season. High BABIP because of his speed? 38 AB were bunts, 27 (!) hits, 7 sacs. Some drop against LHP, esp. Slg%, but not too bad. Big drop off in production on the road, really struggled to make good contract away from home?Split AVG OBP SLG OPS BABIP
Overall .304 .363 .400 .763 .364
vs LHP .288 .384 .344 .728 .365
vs RHP .311 .353 .423 .776 .363
Home .344 .418 .422 .840 .422
Away .272 .313 .382 .695 .318
Last28dy .311 .353 .426 .779 .419
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
If that is true his bunt for a hit % is insane
Good hitter at home which was one of the toughest offensive environments in the minor leagues.
isnt it a tough envirement for
Power Hitters?
but for hitters who want to hit bloops and soft liners… it helps? cause the park is bigger?
Right, plus the fielders in low A are generally pretty poor. It’s not like they have the range or arm strength to properly contain a guy like Gordon. Obviously, that will change as he goes up the ladder.
by Michael White on Feb 8, 2010 12:00 PM PST up reply actions
I enjoy the massive fluctuation of analysis
that prospects go through from year to year when the reality is that their skill set remains very similar.
When is the Dodger Prospect Profile book going to be ready:)
Most of us don’t want to wait until August to read about Webster.
i really really really want to see an allen webster video...
i wanna see the guy pitch..
also i dont think eovaldi hits 95 or even 93 like the reports said he does...
otherwise he could easily strike out more low a hitter with big time gas..
but i would really like to see a video of him pitchng too..
before he figured it out
Verlander used to throw 101 and no have huge k numbers with detroit
I wouldn’t underestimate pro hitters. Not that hard to make contact with mid-90s, hard to hit it well :o
yes IN THE MLB
low a hitters cant hit or have a much harder time hitting 95 then mlb hitters who can do it with their eyes closed
not in low a
yes in the majors they can.. but not many low a hitters can catch up with high 95 mph fastballs..
Honestly
I think you’re mistaken
It’s the reason batters can pound out rookie league and a ball but once they move to up AA pitchers with advanced breaking balls, they start to stall
see
i understand… but look… you are talking about hitters not strking out… im talking about pitchers strking someone out
Well i'm looking it from eovaldi's point of view
his breaking stuff is not advanced and his refinement is poor, especially since he lost a year of development and then spent a year trying to get everything back in order, so since we know (or I believe) hitters can easily put the ball in play if they aren’t thinking about a nasty hook, i’m not surprised that hitters make contact against him
it’s not like eovaldi throws stephen strasburg type shit, you know?
oh shitt
in those appearances.. was he throwing 93 to 95?
gah i don't want to give away everything
i want you to cry in anticipation for me
i mean that his velocity fluctuation seems to vary based on how long he knows he might have to go
in appearances that he had a limited amount of time or fixed pitch count the guy doing the video had him at 94 tops
dunno where 96 is coming from
anyway, but in some of the starts, especially earlier, when he didn’t know how long he would have to pitch, he was as low as 87
It's relative, like everything else
If your expectations were as a #1 pitcher, yeah, you should probably stop with that.
He could still be a good reliever like that though, sitting 91-92 and hitting 94 with a plus breaking pitch if it develops
Another possibility is that the stamina and arm strength is not all the way back yet and he needed another year to build with
for example
college pitchers without plus arms that throw 88-92 but have refined offspeed stuff post great k numbers at lower levels
from my experience/observation, it’s the breaking stuff that non-advanced hitters struggle with
yea
kershaw billz ethan martin withrow and gould.. all great curveballs
yes in the mlb
we are talking about low A… the hitters arent very good in low a…
and kershaww had 1 great secondary pitch
until he started using his slider in the end of the season.. yet he was still racking up Ks with a fastball curve combo..
the prospect stuff
really shows scouting’s shortfalls in a lot of ways
for the reason you just mentioned
10 different scouts might see him pitch 5-10 different games and come away with different opinions without really knowing much since it’s only 10 games :o
agree
I had a scout tell me in 2005 the best pitcher he saw pitch all year was a high rated dude coming back from surgery. However the game he saw was the last great game he ever pitched. The name totally escapes me but I think he was a Diamondback prospect.
that's why i try to balance it
with their overall statistical profile, but nothing is ever going to be fool proof, I think
was it bret prinz?
I love when guys get moved up to AA though
So much more tape :o
Getting DSL anything is close to impossible.
/Rant
perfect platoon 4th outfielder
with randy winn….
thames kills lefties and winn does pretty well against righties..
Pretty much guaranteed now that Jamie Hoffmann will be waived / offered back.
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
will the dodgers pay the money?
to get him back?
Heyman also tweets:
thames gets $900,000 base, plus incentives, if he makes team. with winn’s $1.1 mil, that’s the $2 mil cashman had to spend
That $1.1 million for Winn is less than the $2 million previously reported for Winn’s contract (his deal became official today)
Though I don't think Torre
would be able to implement such a strategy. Luckily Earl Weaver is still alive and might be able to explain it to him.
You seem to be the Mayor of Crazy Town with your idea that…
(a) the Dodgers want to trade Manny;
(b) there are teams that want to trade for Manny
Manny would also have to waive his no-trade.
Under certain unfortunate circumstances, that could make a lot of sense come 8/31/2010. Suppose the Dodgers are out of it but Manny is still hitting, there is a hot race in the AL East, Nick Johnson gets hurt (shortest odds here), and the Yankees want a DH upgrade….
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
who would the Yankees give us?
For this to happen, Manny would be raking and we would somehow be out of it… I dont know who the prospects would be…
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Feb 8, 2010 2:48 PM PST up reply actions
I don't subscribe to the theory
the Dodgers have to be out of it to trade Manny. As Eric said I’m Mayor of Crazy Town but I don’t expect Manny to be a Dodger come Sept 2nd.
Wow.
So you think he gets dealt of the Dodgers are leading the division. Are you thinking straight salary dump?
The only way they would trade him
is if they are out of contention. Two scenarios:
a) Dodgers are in contention
If they trade Manny, they save something like $6.5 million. But if they are in contention, that means they are close to the playoffs, and playoff money is where McCourt is at. They would keep Manny, spend the $6.5m with the hopes of making that back, and then some, in the playoffs
b) Dodgers are out of contention
This I could see, but I bet they would make the team pay as much remaining salary as possible, which would lessen the prospect return.
They are pretty catcher rich
and we could use some. Montero or Romine would make my short list.
you think theyd give us Montero?
Wow… The Yankees see him as the long term DH option. And if lucky, catcher of the future. Tex is at 1st, which is where Montero should be playing when they realize he isnt a C…
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Feb 8, 2010 3:09 PM PST up reply actions
Im not sure if my post got deleted
So if this double posts, I apologize.
The Yankees wouldnt give us Montero, IMO, for anyone that isnt making a serious impact in the majors and has years of control. They see him as the DH of the future if his C defense doesnt improve. He should be a 1B, but Tex is there and therefore that isnt an option.
With Romine, I think they actually believe he is the Catcher of the future. He may get some looks this year if Posada cant catch everyday
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Feb 8, 2010 3:12 PM PST up reply actions
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the Yankees are looking to get rid of either of these guys, but if they are at the point where they are looking to pick up Manny, it would have to be a pretty extreme situation. Hence, a pretty extreme price tag.
fair enough
I just see no way they give us Montero… although i think the Dodgers would sacrifice the playoffs next season to have Montero…
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Feb 8, 2010 5:50 PM PST up reply actions
Won’t McCourt be happy if they just pick up the rest of Manny’s salary?
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
for Manny, while hitting, I dont think so
If Manny comes back, that means McCourt will be getting more money on merchandise as anyone who doesnt own Manny stuff(and some that do) will buy more for their kids.
If he sucks, then this is a non issue, because no one will want Manny
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Feb 8, 2010 3:14 PM PST up reply actions
I've been there before
Manny legs will break down but he will hit when he can play.. Dodgers will realize he makes to much to be a pinch hitter, some team with money will lose their DH to injury (Nick Johnson or David Ortiz) or the Rays will be in the running and realize Manny at DH could be what they need to take them over the hump. Just staying true to what I’ve always said since we first did the Manny debate, that Manny will breakdown if he has to play to much outfield at this stage of his career. We never found out last year because he got a 50 game suspension.
haha
Manny back to Bos.
But I dont think he gets traded. We have too much talent for us to completley fall out of the race. It would take multiple slumps (season long) and injuries.
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Feb 8, 2010 2:47 PM PST up reply actions
No he didn't
He said it shouldn’t be played
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
The club hasn’t made any decisions as to 8th inning entertainment, but I would imagine DSB ain’t coming back, at least to start the year.
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 12:30 PM PST up reply actions
I think that’s more likely to return, but the club hasn’t commented on either.
by Eric Stephen on Feb 8, 2010 12:33 PM PST up reply actions
You mean the Jeff Fuller theme song?
She was married when we first met
Soon to be divorced…
by prosellis on Feb 8, 2010 2:56 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Does anyone know what they said about Withrow
I dont have the subscription and am quite curious…
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Feb 8, 2010 3:15 PM PST reply actions
Quick note, I did link the story but I did not highlight the link
It was the bit.ly cite that I changed in the body of the story.
Also, the perfect world projection is no. 2 starter or closer if change up doesn’t develop.
I See So Many Worse Pitching Prospects With Other Teams....
…getting projected as aces. It’s aggravating.
If ours only have two plus pitches they are destined for the bullpen
while the others are still destined for great things.
Until This Year...
…Kershaw only had two pitches. Heck, for MOST of 2009 he only had two pitches. Heck, Madison Bumgarner has only ONE pitch that isn’t below average. When you are talking about a 20-year-old pitcher and you do a “perfect world future projection” (i.e., ceiling) you take future development of the guy’s third-best pitch as a given. Everybody understands that a ceiling is something that may not be reached. Was Justin Verlander as a 20-year-old college pitcher as good as Withrow was in 2009? I doubt it.
Kershaw developed a 3rd pitch last yr..slider..pretty good. basically shelved changeup late last yr. maybe he will pick it (CH up) up again th is yr??
Verlander stats i n college were pretty good..better than withrows
age 20 ..verl…….116ip..era-2.40…..94h..43w…139K…1.18whip.
age 20 withrow..113ip.. era-4.50..104h.57w…131ks..1.42whip
Verlander is not a good example for withrow.Verlander had better command than withrow- which will make withrow or break him. Withrow’s projection seems to be below CBills based on actual performance in minors .
BTW, CBILLs in AA at age 20..146 ip…era-3.51…116h…50w..162 Ks..1.14whip..
that is what withrow need to do thi s yr to be on track to be #2sp ..imho.
except that Billz is still improving
Many feel that Billz is an ace, not a #2. i think his career will be that of a #2 or #1, but not an ace(I say an ace is the very top of baseball pitchers).
With Kershaw, he said in the fan chat that he is working on his changeup. He has had the pitch and it is a good pitch, but he doesnt have confidence…. lets put it this way, Kershaw with a changeup makes him better than Lincecum.
Kershaw didnt start throwing the slider until June and it is already a plus pitch. This kid learns SO fast… its amazing
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Feb 8, 2010 5:53 PM PST up reply actions
From a scouting perspective
I think he is a projected #2.
Just because to project somebody as a #1, you are putting them in Roy Halladay/Cliff Lee/Felix Hernandez/Zack Greinke/Johan Santana territory.
I would have had him as a #2. BA had him as a #1, if I remember correctly.
Though I suppose Billingsley was on track to be up there with the #1s if he didn’t blow up last year.
Im pretty sure Sickels also had him as a #1
And said he could be on a similar level as Felix. Yea, they were high on Billz.
I really cant wait for Withrow to get to the majors. To see Kershaw, Billz and Withrow; all 3 could easily be #2 or better, in the same rotation… Im pumped
And I dont think Billz last year should affect him long term. It seemed to be an outlier year and he lost no potential, IMO, because of last year. I could still see Billingsley become an ace, he is built like an ace and has the stuff of an ace. I have always thought he fits in the group of Cain and Hamels… really good pitchers that could be aces but their career will most likely follow the #2 path
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Feb 9, 2010 3:19 PM PST up reply actions
For Me
Kershaw-#1
Billingsley-Tweener #1/#2
Withrow-#1
Martin-#2
Miller-#3
Absolute ceilings.
Based on raw stuff and command, I would have had Billingsley as a #2, but i’m forced to almost include him in the #1 category just because of what he achieved in reality. If I was scouting him though, I would say #2 for sure.
There Is No Minor League Statistical "Track" To Being A #2
…Billingsley and Withrow are completely different. Bilingsley had no projection left at all when he was drafted. He was already a short (for a pitcher), thick-bodied player who was fairly polished right out of high school. If anything, Bills has LOST fastball velocity as he has gotten older. Withrow is quite lanky and just seems to throw harder the older he gets. And Withrow is less polished than Billingsley was at the same age. Withrow still has a lot of room for growth as a pitcher.
You Can't Compare College and Pro Stats...
The level of play in college ball is below even low A. Withrow has succeeded in Double A while being a full year younger that Verlander was when he was drafted. My comparison was based on Verlander and Withrow being lanky RHP’s who as 20-year-olds could sit in the mid-90’s with their fastballs while both also having been clocked as high as 99 MPH. That is a pretty exclusive club, especially if we are talking about starters and not relievers.
Canuck to me the telling stats between Withrow and Verlander is relalted to commend and walks..Withrow does not have good command yet but verlander at same age ..seemed to have decent command.
If Withrow—to be proven…can improve on his command he will be something special. Throwing fast doesn’t mean much if you can’t hit target.
I am hoping Withrow will show he can command that FB and curve and continue developing that changeup this yr..
I Just Said Above You Can't Compare Pro and College Stats...
..so I don’’t know how you expect me to respond to a statement about a college walk rate. If Withrow were pitching to college hitters instead of pro hitters those hitters would be drawing a LOT fewer walks. That is just the way it is. College competition is a joke compared to what Withrow faced this past year.
I was trying to relate what other scouts have said about withrow..good stuff but needs to improve command of Fb and curve.
Verlander on the other hand did not need command improvement to the same extent as measured by college stats and then minor stats and MLB stats. so for me diff between players..
I think we both would agree Withrow needs command improvement ….when he gets it he will be something. I am skeptical he will improve command very much but hopeful he can improve somewhat to be a #2sp.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on True Blue LA
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
NL West Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
San Diego
|
60 | 42 | .588 | 0 | Lost 2 |
|
San Francisco
|
60 | 45 | .571 | 1.5 | Won 2 |
|
Los Angeles
|
54 | 50 | .519 | 7 | Lost 4 |
|
Colorado
|
54 | 50 | .519 | 7 | Won 3 |
|
Arizona
|
38 | 66 | .365 | 23 | Lost 1 |
(updated 7.31.2010 at 9:51 PM PDT)
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
