The idea that Lars Anderson's "low-end" projection is .275/.360/.500 is absurd. Goldstein seems to have lots of contacts that he can get info from, but he's spectacularly bad at synthesizing the information he collects.
Well, geez, you go any lower than that and you really wouldn't be talking about a Number 1 prospect, would you? You might not even be taking an everyday major-league first baseman, at least not for the Boston Red Sox.
Goldstein is actually quite good, in my opinion. He seems -- over the internet, anyway -- to have a bit of arrogance about him, but he's far, far from being "spectacularly bad." I have seen a lot of these guys several times, some of them a couple of dozen times, and his take on them is more or less on the money. I wouldn't call Bard's sinker a bowling ball -- that seems a tad much -- but it is a welcome correction to the opinion, often expressed on this board by people who have never seen him, that Bard gets no movement. You see Kalish and you know what Goldstein means by a dirt dog. The take on Alamanzar is dead on, as is the report on Reddick.
And for my money, he is exactly correct in assessing the overall state of the system. It's built around high risk, but high ceiling talent, and it could regress badly if the development side fails.
Edited by someoneanywhere, 28 January 2009 - 08:58 PM.