36 replies to this topic

[philly sox fan]

As mentioned in the thread on the main board we're going to take a shot at coming up with community success probabilities for Sox prospects. We're going to go at least 50 deep going by groups of ~10 taken from various other sources. We're going to start with the BA Top 10 and go on from there.

I'm going to put up a blank table. You can just write the name along with the 7 different probabilities for each category.

						reserve	low end starter	ave regular	10 best	5 best	elite
Rank	Player	Pos	Age	Level	< 5	5	6	7	8	9	10
1	Ryan Westmorland	OF	19	R
2	Casey Kelly	RHP	19	lo-A/hi-A
3	Josh Reddick	OF	22	AA/AAA
4	Lars Anderson	1B	22	AA
5	Ryan Kalish	OF	21	hi-A/AA
6	Junichi Tazawa	RHP	23	AA
7	Reymond Fuentes	OF	18	R
8	Anthony Rizzo	1B	20	lo-A/hi-A
9	Jose Iglesias	SS	19
10	Derrik Gibson	SS	19	R

I'm going to leave these open for several days at least. I'm hoping for a minimum of 15 respondents.

[jk333]

So this is where we participate. Here goes nothing... I added Mills. 1st look at the data. If there are any obvious errors let me know. Otherwise, if things look questionable I'll relook and either edit or explain.

						reserve	low end starter	ave regular	10 best	5 best	elite
Rank	Player	Pos	Age	Level	<5	5	6	7	8	9	10
1	Ryan Westmorland	OF	19	R	40	20	15	10	5	5	5
2	Casey Kelly	RHP	19	lo-A/hi-A	35	30	20	10	5	0	0
3	Josh Reddick	OF	22	AA/AAA	25	50	20	5	0	0	0
4	Lars Anderson	1B	22	AA	50	10	20	10	5	5	0
5	Ryan Kalish	OF	21	hi-A/AA	45	25	20	10	0	0	0
6	Junichi Tazawa	RHP	23	AA	5	55	30	10	0	0	0
7	Reymond Fuentes	OF	18	R	55	20	10	5	5	5	0
8	Anthony Rizzo	1B	20	lo-A/hi-A	50	20	15	10	5	0	0
9	Jose Iglesias	SS	19		15	35	35	15	0	0	0
10	Derrik Gibson	SS	19	R	70	15	10	5	0	0	0
	Adam Mills	RHP	25	AAA	25	60	15	0	0	0	0

Couple quick explanations, I think Westmoreland is likely a reserve because of his speed (He's also a stud prospect, but even if he doesn't hit great, his D and speed may help, the same thing applies negatively to L. Anderson for being a reserve). The Sox MUST think Iglesias is Major league ready defensively now, because of the contract. Therefore, I have him high as a reserve.

I like Tazawa but don't ever see him much higher than a #4 starter. Still, he's nice depth for 2010 - 2012 for us to have. He'll likely start 40 - 60 games for the Sox and maybe he becomes effective out of the bullpen. He's a good prospect but I'm not high on him ever becoming more than a 6. And if he was a 5 I wouldn't be shocked. I like Bowden a bit better than Tazawa. Apparently BA doesn't... (is that why he's not on this list?)

Edited by jk333, 28 January 2010 - 09:33 AM.

[NoXInNixon]

Question:

What do the ranking numbers signify for pitchers? Being one of the two best pitchers in all of baseball is a lot harder to achieve that being one of the two best in baseball at any other position. Same thing for top 5 or top 10. If you're the 10th best pitcher in MLB, you're probably going to get a fair number of Cy Young votes, and there's a good chance you'll be an all-star. If you're the 10th best 1B, you're not an all-star and probably aren't going to get any MVP votes.

[jk333]

Question:

What do the ranking numbers signify for pitchers? Being one of the two best pitchers in all of baseball is a lot harder to achieve that being one of the two best in baseball at any other position. Same thing for top 5 or top 10. If you're the 10th best pitcher in MLB, you're probably going to get a fair number of Cy Young votes, and there's a good chance you'll be an all-star. If you're the 10th best 1B, you're not an all-star and probably aren't going to get any MVP votes.

This is a good point but I think its infered that its not literal. It would breakdown to something like: 10 is an elite ace starter - CC, King Felix, Lincecum etc. A 9 is a #1 or #2 starter. An 8 is a #2 or #3 starter. A 7 is a #3 or #4 starter. You're satisfied with him in your rotation but he may or may not start in the playoffs. Wakefield a few years ago was probably a 7. A 6 is a journeyman starter, maybe he signs one longterm deal but you would not ever WANT him to be one of your 4 playoff starters. A 5 is a player that pitches in the majors either as a starter for the short term or as a mop up guy.

Which brings up where do relievers fit in. Pitchers who are starters should always be calculated as starters. Its to difficult to suppose he'd be a good closer unless there's a publication or previous experience doing that. I think an elite pitcher like Papelbon or Nathan could be a 9, while lesser closers would be 8's, like a Brad Lidge. 7s might be available for part time successful closers like Mike Gonzalez. 6's could be available for successful setup men or succesful long men like Ramiro Mendoza.

In general, relievers are failed starters and will fall around 5 or 6 if they stick in the bigs, with closers perhaps being generally in the 7-8 range with the best setup guys as 6-7s.

[SoxScout]

	sub5	5	6	7	8	9	10
Westmoreland	30	15	20	15	10	5	5
Kelly	25	25	20	15	10	5	0
Reddick	20	30	25	20	5	0	0
Anderson	30	20	25	15	5	5	0
Kalish	20	25	20	20	10	5	0
Tazawa	10	35	30	20	5	0	0
Fuentes	55	25	10	5	5	0	0
Rizzo	50	20	15	10	5	0	0
Iglesias	15	35	30	15	5	0	0
Gibson	65	15	10	5	5	0	0

Looking at it I feel conservative, which is weird since I am a huge minor league believer/follower and I am excited about these guys.

Edited by SoxScout, 29 January 2010 - 09:32 PM.

[thehitcat]

						reserve	low end starter	ave regular	10 best	5 best	elite
Rank	Player	Pos	Age	Level	< 5	5	6	7	8	9	10
1	Ryan Westmorland	OF	19	R	40	5	10	25	10	5	5
2	Casey Kelly	RHP	19	lo-A/hi-A	30	20	20	15	10	5	0
3	Josh Reddick	OF	22	AA/AAA	15	20	25	35	5	0	0
4	Lars Anderson	1B	22	AA	30	5	10	25	15	10	5
5	Ryan Kalish	OF	21	hi-A/AA	20	20	25	20	10	5	0
6	Junichi Tazawa	RHP	23	AA	10	10	35	35	10	0	0
7	Reymond Fuentes	OF	18	R	50	15	15	10	5	5	0
8	Anthony Rizzo	1B	20	lo-A/hi-A	30	30	20	15	5	0	0
9	Jose Iglesias	SS	19		60	5	10	10	5	5	5
10	Derrik Gibson	SS	19	R	60	10	15	10	5	0	0

I am probably higher on Anderson than everyone else but when I saw him at Portland this year he didn't seem as bad as the numbers. Also I think his batting eye/approach helps him solidify as a top performer if he takes the next step. I also like Tazawa to be at least serviceable in the majors. I am definitely biased towards the guys near the top of our system. Anyone in Rookie Ball is a true lottery ticket in my mind and I used the spread of scores to try to show that.

I think this is going to be interesting to review as we have pull the data together. Thanks for driving this Philly.

[lonborgski]

Rank	Player	<5	reserve	low end starter	ave regular	10 best	5 best	elite
1	Ryan Westmorland	25	15	20	15	5	5	15
2	Casey Kelly	10	20	25	15	10	5	10
3	Josh Reddick	35	20	20	10	5	5	5
4	Lars Anderson	35	15	10	10	10	10	10
5	Ryan Kalish	20	20	20	25	5	5	5
6	Junichi Tazawa	10	25	25	30	5	5	0
7	Reymond Fuentes	35	20	15	15	5	5	5
8	Anthony Rizzo	35	10	20	20	5	5	5
9	Jose Iglesias	10	10	10	20	20	20	10
10	Derrik Gibson	35	20	20	15	5	5	0
	Adam Mills	25	60	15	0	0	0	0

[Eric Van]

Question:

What do the ranking numbers signify for pitchers? Being one of the two best pitchers in all of baseball is a lot harder to achieve that being one of the two best in baseball at any other position. Same thing for top 5 or top 10. If you're the 10th best pitcher in MLB, you're probably going to get a fair number of Cy Young votes, and there's a good chance you'll be an all-star. If you're the 10th best 1B, you're not an all-star and probably aren't going to get any MVP votes.

I meant to answer that. The simplest answer is to multiply the thresholds by 5 since there are 5 SP in a rotation. A 10 is consistently one of the 10 best pitchers in MLB, a 9 one of the 25, and so on.

jk333 has it pretty accurate. 10 is a super ace: Holliday, Santana, (I hate to say it) Sabathia. A 9 is a guy who can start a playoff game 1 but isn't scary, and on good teams he might even be the #2 starter. Beckett and Lackey are 9. The 8s are the 2 and 3 starters, the 7 your 4th starter and good 5th types.

You can't go wrong discriminating between 6, 7, and 8 if you ask yourself whether, as the GM for a would-be contender, you need to find someone better (6), whether you're satisfied but would be looking to upgrade (7), or whether you'd be 100% happy and would never consider upgrading (8 or above).

The scale for relievers is discounted, and jk has it pretty well again. To expand, I think Mo is probably history's only 10. Other HOF caliber closers would be 9, your elite closers 8, your ordinary closers and elite setup guys 7, your good setup guys 6 and a guy who has a career in the pen but is nothing special is a 5. On the Sox, Papelbon is an 8, Oki is a 7, Delcarmen and Ramirez are 6.

[Eric Van]

I'm going to leave these open for several days at least. I'm hoping for a minimum of 15 respondents.

I'm not going to get to this until Monday at the earliest -- busy day today, then off to NYC to see Mission of Burma. You might start a new poll every five days or so but leave each one open for 10. Or something.

I did, however, do a preliminary version of Iglesias which came out 0, 5, 15, 40, 25, 10, 5 (he's the only player who'll get a non-zero ranking in the 10 column from me). Which might seem insane, but it's based on these thresholds for SS which I'll crosspost from the main board:

With average defense:

6: .300 / .355
7: .322 / .383
8: .345 / .410
9: .357 / .425
10: .385 / .455 or something ...

With +10 defense you're basically adding a grade, although it's easier to get a 9:

7: .300 / .355
8: .322 / .383
9: .335 / .400

If you can play +15 defense (not quite Adam Everett) and hit .350 / .420, you're a 10 SS. I would obviously bet against that, but I would not quite give you 40 to 1 odds, so he sneaks in a 5 in the last column.

BTW, the shape of the Iglesias ranking (with the huge peak at 7 and 8) comes from the fact that defense is so important for SS and his defense already appears to be MLB plus or plus-plus and has hugely smaller error bars than offensive projections. I'm pretty sure that he's a 5 right now.

To sum up: I think everyone (except the Sox FO) has got Iglesias wrong: his bat may be high-risk, but he is actually a very high-floor (low downside) prospect. I believe there is less doubt about his ability to have a reasonable MLB career than anyone else in the system. The question is whether he'll kick around as a guy you wish would hit better (6 or 7), or establish himself as an asset to keep (8 to 10). It's not whether he can play at all (which is the question for virtually everyone else).

Edited by Eric Van, 28 January 2010 - 01:25 PM.

[Youks Baltic Roots]

CODE

1 Ryan Wstmrlnd OF 19 R 15 25 15 20 10 10 5
2 Casey Kelly RHP 19 A 25 10 20 25 10 5 5
3 Josh Reddick OF 22 AAA 25 25 25 20 5 0 0
4 Lars Anderson 1B 22 AA 35 20 15 15 5 5 5
5 Ryan Kalish OF 21 AA 20 20 25 20 10 5 0
6 Junichi Tazawa RHP 23 AA 15 30 30 25 0 0 0
7 Reymond Fuentes OF 18 R 25 25 20 20 5 5 0
8 Anthony Rizzo 1B 20 A 40 20 20 15 5 0 0
9 Jose Iglesias SS 19 10 20 30 25 10 5 0
10 Derrik Gibson SS 19 R 50 20 15 15 0 0 0

Edited by Lithuanian Soxfan, 28 January 2010 - 01:20 PM.

[Super Nomario]

You can't go wrong discriminating between 6, 7, and 8 if you ask yourself whether, as the GM for a would-be contender, you need to find someone better (6), whether you're satisfied but would be looking to upgrade (7), or whether you'd be 100% happy and would never consider upgrading (8 or above).

Just as a frame of reference, is this a reasonable way to rank the guys on the current Sox?

Beckett / Lackey / Lester - 9 (Lester has a chance to be a 10, maybe)
Wakefield - 7
Papelbon - 8 or 9, depending on how many more good seasons he has
Varitek - 8 (not any more, obviously)
V. Martinez - 8
Youkilis - 9
Pedroia - 9 or 10
Scutaro - probably a 6 (better than that in '09, obviously)
Lowell - like a 7.5 (not any more)
Beltre - 7, though he's been inconsistent
Ortiz - 10, maybe a 9 if you don't think his peak was long enough / you think steroids had a lot to do with it
Cameron - 7.5
Drew - 8 or 8.5

Does this seem in the ballpark for what we're going for? Am I being too harsh / not harsh enough?

[Eric Van]

Just as a frame of reference, is this a reasonable way to rank the guys on the current Sox?

Beckett / Lackey / Lester - 9 (Lester has a chance to be a 10, maybe)
Wakefield - 7
Papelbon - 8 or 9, depending on how many more good seasons he has
Varitek - 8 (not any more, obviously)
V. Martinez - 8
Youkilis - 9
Pedroia - 9 or 10
Scutaro - probably a 6 (better than that in '09, obviously)
Lowell - like a 7.5 (not any more)
Beltre - 7, though he's been inconsistent
Ortiz - 10, maybe a 9 if you don't think his peak was long enough / you think steroids had a lot to do with it
Cameron - 7.5
Drew - 8 or 8.5

Does this seem in the ballpark for what we're going for? Am I being too harsh / not harsh enough?

Pretty much on the money. I think you're underrating the defenders; Beltre's an 8 in an ordinary park and Cameron was in his prime. (As a GM I would never think I needed to upgrade either one.) Likewise, Scutaro has been a 7 (and the Sox now think he's an 8.) Drew would be a 9 if he played more, so 8.5 just about nails it. Papi gets a 9 from me because his peak wasn't long enough. Lowell is a textbook tough call between 7 and 8, an easy 8 in his good years but he was too inconsistent to give him that without a lot of thought.

Edited by Eric Van, 28 January 2010 - 01:35 PM.

[Eric Van]

Let me just say how terrific this is going to be in terms of forcing folks to actually think about what might happen.

I believe I am going to end up ranking Iglesias #2, between Westmoreland and Kelly, and I would never have ranked him that high if I hadn't been forced to think about the probabilities.

Edited by Eric Van, 28 January 2010 - 01:40 PM.

[jk333]

To super nomario -

I think you're on the money too, BUT, and Pedroia's my favorite player, right now I'd only give him a 9, and last year he was closer to an 8. And he likely doesn't get to a 10 without another 2 or 3 seasons like 2008.

Lester MIGHT be a 9 now and he might be a 10 already... but barring an injury he likely becomes a 10, in my mind the only 10 the Sox currently have. IE if I were doing Lester, I'd give him 30%/70% as a 9 and 10.

Edited by jk333, 28 January 2010 - 03:32 PM.

[philly sox fan]

I'm not going to get to this until Monday at the earliest -- busy day today, then off to NYC to see Mission of Burma. You might start a new poll every five days or so but leave each one open for 10. Or something.

That's reasonable. One thing I was hoping to do was to compile the previous group and post it with the blank table for the next group in order to give people a sense of how things are shaping up. We'll see how that goes though.

Good answers on the starter and releiver issues. Forget to mention that initially.

So far I think the discussion generated by the process has been pretty interesting. If that keeps up I'll call it a success even if the final results are kind of meh.

[Super Nomario]

To super nomario -

I think you're on the money too, BUT, and Pedroia's my favorite player, right now I'd only give him a 9, and last year he was closer to an 8. And he likely doesn't get to a 10 without another 2 or 3 seasons like 2008.

Lester MIGHT be a 9 now and he might be a 10 already... but barring an injury he likely becomes a 10, in my mind the only 10 the Sox currently have. IE if I were doing Lester, I'd give him 30%/70% as a 9 and 10.

I agree with you. It's tough to evaluate the peak value of guys who's been in the league only a couple years - and I didn't even try with Ellsbury, Buchholz, or Dice-K, probably all of whom could end up somewhere between 6-10 at this point. If it's that difficult with guys already in the majors, this exercise is even more insane with guys three years away.

I'm still going to try though, if only because I feel like we need a negative nellie to counter the unbridled prospect optimism usually on display. I'm still bitter because Juan Pena, Dernell Stenson, Steve Lomasney, Wilton Veras, Seung Song, etc. didn't work out.

[JB H]

Glad to see EV loves Iglesias too. His post sums up how I've felt about him ever since we started to see just how much scouts love his defense.

[OCD SS]

						reserve	low end starter	ave regular	10 best	5 best	elite
Rank	Player	Pos	Age	Level	<5	5	6	7	8	9	10
1	Ryan Westmorland	OF	19	R	35	15	15	10	10	10	5
2	Casey Kelly	RHP	19	lo-A/hi-A	25	20	20	15	10	5	5
3	Josh Reddick	OF	22	AA/AAA	35	25	20	10	5	5	0
4	Lars Anderson	1B	22	AA	50	15	10	10	5	5	5
5	Ryan Kalish	OF	21	hi-A/AA	40	20	15	15	5	5	0
6	Junichi Tazawa	RHP	23	AA	30	30	25	10	5	0	0
7	Reymond Fuentes	OF	18	R	55	15	10	10	5	5	0
8	Anthony Rizzo	1B	20	lo-A/hi-A	65	10	10	5	5	5	0
9	Jose Iglesias	SS	19		30	25	25	10	5	5	0
10	Derrik Gibson	SS	19	R	70	15	10	5	0	0	0

[Eric Van]

I'm still bitter because Juan Pena, Dernell Stenson, Steve Lomasney, Wilton Veras, Seung Song, etc. didn't work out.

Aren't we all? Crap, I'm still disappointed by the likes of Mike Ongarato (his OBP that first year was .411).

Of course, Pena was brilliant and then got hurt, Song went in a good trade and then got hurt, Stenson was apparently a bit of a head case (undermotivation) who may have been putting it together when he was murdered, and Veras was never much good -- I don't know which is more mind-boggling, that a manager could think a guy who hit .281 / .318 / .407 in AA was ready for MLB, or that a GM could let him get away with that. That really leaves Lomasney as the one true we-got-burned disappointment on your list. But I know I could think of a lot more if I tried. Who remembers Bobby Guindon?

[OCD SS]

For those who find the tables daunting and haven't ventured into backwash, Phrenile has set up an awesome, awesome site that will do all the work of converting an Excel table into the java script coding you want to get a nice looking table. Just copy and paste the range of Excel cells into the field, click "apply", and then copy the code and paste it into your post on SoSH.

[Super Nomario]

Of course, Pena was brilliant and then got hurt, Song went in a good trade and then got hurt, Stenson was apparently a bit of a head case (undermotivation) who may have been putting it together when he was murdered, and Veras was never much good -- I don't know which is more mind-boggling, that a manager could think a guy who hit .281 / .318 / .407 in AA was ready for MLB, or that a GM could let him get away with that. That really leaves Lomasney as the one true we-got-burned disappointment on your list. But I know I could think of a lot more if I tried. Who remembers Bobby Guindon?

Lomasney got hurt, too - I think he was throwing on the side and got hit in the eye with a foul ball. The bloom was probably a little off the rose at that point anyway - he struck out 81 times in 272 AB in AA.

But I guess we have to build in some odds in our %s that guys just get hurt and never really recover. I'll probably stop short of factoring in the likelihood that one of our prospects is murdered - no way that happens again.

[ThePieholeOfDavidWells]

						reserve	low end starter	ave regular	10 best	5 best	elite
Rank	Player	Pos	Age	Level	< 5	5	6	7	8	9	10
1	Ryan Westmorland	OF	19	R	30	10	20	20	10	5	5
2	Casey Kelly	RHP	19	lo-A/hi-A	20	10	30	20	10	5	5
3	Josh Reddick	OF	22	AA/AAA	30	20	20	20	5	5	0
4	Lars Anderson	1B	22	AA	15	15	30	25	5	5	5
5	Ryan Kalish	OF	21	hi-A/AA	35	15	20	15	10	5	0
6	Junichi Tazawa	RHP	23	AA	50	20	15	10	5	0	0
7	Reymond Fuentes	OF	18	R	70	10	10	5	5	0	0
8	Anthony Rizzo	1B	20	lo-A/hi-A	65	10	10	10	5	0	0
9	Jose Iglesias	SS	19		25	30	25	20	0	0	0
10	Derrik Gibson	SS	19	R	60	10	15	15	0	0	0

I tried to be conservative with my rankings, particularly for guys at the bottom of the table. One thing I realized about this ranking system is that it lumps defense and offense together. So Iglesias, whose value will come almost entirely from defense, probably has almost no chance to become an elite player because he'll probably never hit. His bat will almost certainly mean that he's never more than average at his position. That realization tempered my excitement about him. It's funny how shifting from a ranking model to a probability model gave me much less optimism overall about this set of prospects.

[Hairps]

Raced thru these, as I thought philly said he wanted to close these players out soon. If not, I might give it a little more thought.

Also, I figured someone (not me!) would end up aggregating everyone's different ratings, so I put these in the following reader-unfriendly/CSV-friendly format:

Westmoreland,30,15,20,10,10,10,5
Kelly,25,25,20,20,5,5,0
Reddick,25,35,20,20,0,0,0
Anderson,25,30,25,15,5,0,0
Kalish,25,25,20,20,5,5,0
Tazawa,20,20,40,20,0,0,0
Fuentes,55,25,10,5,5,0,0
Rizzo,55,20,15,5,5,0,0
Iglesias,15,35,30,15,5 ,0,0
Gibson,70,10,15,5,0,0,0

Edited by Hairps, 29 January 2010 - 03:46 PM.

[philly sox fan]

No it's going to be open at least until the beginning of next week. Mon/Tues or something.

I'll be doing the aggregating too. Reader unfriendly formant is fine.

[Dageats]

RNK Player POS AGE LVL <5 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 Ryan Westmorland OF 19 A- 30 15 15 20 10 5 5
2 Casey Kelly RHP 19 A+ 20 15 25 25 15 0 0 0
3 Josh Reddick OF 22 AAA 5 30 20 25 15 5 0 0
4 Lars Anderson 1B 22 AA 25 5 25 30 10 5 0 0
5 Ryan Kalish OF 21 AA 5 40 30 25 0 0 0 0
6 Junichi Tazawa RHP 23 AAA 10 25 35 30 0 0 0 0
7 Reymond Fuentes OF 18 R 40 25 15 10 5 5 0
8 Anthony Rizzo 1B 20 A+ 30 10 20 30 10 0 0 0
9 Jose Iglesias SS 19 DNP 5 20 25 30 15 5 0 0
10 Derrik Gibson SS 19 A- 50 20 15 10 5 0 0 0

[Eric Van]

I tried to be conservative with my rankings, particularly for guys at the bottom of the table. One thing I realized about this ranking system is that it lumps defense and offense together. So Iglesias, whose value will come almost entirely from defense, probably has almost no chance to become an elite player because he'll probably never hit. His bat will almost certainly mean that he's never more than average at his position. That realization tempered my excitement about him. It's funny how shifting from a ranking model to a probability model gave me much less optimism overall about this set of prospects.

This doesn't make any sense to me. For one thing, where are you getting this negative a take on Iglesias's bat? Not from any scouting report I've read* and certainly not from his AFL performance which was exceptional for a 19 y/o SS.

To give him a 0 in the 8 column means you would bet 40 to 1 than he doesn't play +10 defense and hit .322 / .383, or +15 defense and hit .310 / .370. The average MLB SS last year (including reserves) was .330 / .392, and both BA and Law seem optimistic about his bat being average:

*BA: "He has a short swing and makes consistent contact. Though he's small, he has bat speed and pop and could become a 10-homer hitter down the road. ... He has the upside of a No. 2 hitter"

KLaw: "a chance to hit ... probably won't be any kind of impact bat ... a bat that plays at that position. He's an aggressive hitter with a swing-first mentality, but his swing is short to the ball and should produce lots of contact, even hard contact once he gets more reps in pro ball. He'll probably max out with grade 40 or so power on the 20-80 scale, but if he can improve the quality of his contact, he'll be productive for the position. At worst, he might be Adam Everett, but I think he'll end up more than an automatic out by the time he reaches the big leagues."

Adam Everett was a 7, so what's the rationale for making Law's downside your upside?

Edited by Eric Van, 30 January 2010 - 10:01 AM.

[ThePieholeOfDavidWells]

This doesn't make any sense to me. For one thing, where are you getting this negative a take on Iglesias's bat? Not from any scouting report I've read and certainly not from his AFL performance which was exceptional for a 19 y/o SS.

Apparently you don't read Sickels. He says: "11) Jose Iglesias, SS, Grade C+: Amazing glove, but I won't rank him higher than this until he shows that he can be an adequate hitter. Could be an Omar Vizquel type if he does."

C+ is just organizational fodder. Sickels thinks there's some question about whether or not he'll be adequate with the bat, which to me means league average.

The AFL? Really? The same league where Colin Curtis posted an OPS of 1.203 to lead the league? I was actually quite disappointed with his .740 OPS in an extreme hitters league.

[Eric Van]

Apparently you don't read Sickels. He says: "11) Jose Iglesias, SS, Grade C+: Amazing glove, but I won't rank him higher than this until he shows that he can be an adequate hitter. Could be an Omar Vizquel type if he does."

C+ is just organizational fodder. Sickels thinks there's some question about whether or not he'll be adequate with the bat, which to me means league average.

Omar Vizquel was a 9. You are arguing that Iglesias should get a 0 in the 8 column by quoting a guy who just said he could be a 9.

IOW, you seem to be missing the point of this exercise. If you trust Sickels over BA and KLaw, you reflect that by increasing the probability that he's a 5, 6, 7, not by giving him a zero in 8 (not to mention 9 and 10). That there's a question as to whether he can even be adequate with the bat has nothing to do with the upside of his bat. Sickels clearly agrees with the bat upside evaluation of BA and KLaw.

[Super Nomario]

Westmoreland,35,10,10,20,15,5,5
Kelly,40,10,15,25,5,5,0
Reddick,20,25,25,20,10,0,0
Anderson,35,10,25,20,5,5,0
Kalish,25,25,20,20,5,5,0
Tazawa,20,20,30,20,10,0,0
Fuentes,60,15,10,5,5,5,0
Rizzo,45,10,25,10,5,5,0
Iglesias,50,10,20,10,5,5,0
Gibson,60,10,20,5,5,0,0

[ThePieholeOfDavidWells]

Omar Vizquel was a 9. You are arguing that Iglesias should get a 0 in the 8 column by quoting a guy who just said he could be a 9.

IOW, you seem to be missing the point of this exercise. If you trust Sickels over BA and KLaw, you reflect that by increasing the probability that he's a 5, 6, 7, not by giving him a zero in 8 (not to mention 9 and 10). That there's a question as to whether he can even be adequate with the bat has nothing to do with the upside of his bat. Sickels clearly agrees with the bat upside evaluation of BA and KLaw.

I'm basing my projection on what I see right now, and that is: poor strike zone judgment, no power and no likelihood that it'll develop (see Sox Prospects), and posting a .740 in the AFL. When I see him hit against professionals in the minors, I may change my mind. I'm open to the idea that he may be as good as Vizquel, but that seems an awful stretch right now.

On the "point of the exercise": I think there's a less than 5% chance he could be an 8, and even less chance (say 1% or less) to be a 9. The rules of the exercise state that the cutoff is 5%. As far as I can tell, the "point of the exercise" is to post our different and perhaps widely divergent projections to see what we can come up with as a group.

In any case, if I'm in the minority here, and I may well be, the other projections in the community will outweigh my one vote. I think his best chance is to be average or below average. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

If you want to change the rules so that we have to justify each projection, then I'm open to that as well.

[CYaz]

Westmoreland,30,20,10,15,15,5,5
Kelly,40,20,15,15,5,5,0
Reddick,25,25,20,15,10,5,0
Anderson,50,10,15,10,10,5,0
Kalish,20,25,20,15,10,5,5
Tazawa,40,20,20,15,5,0,0
Fuentes,45,20,15,5,5,5,5
Iglesias,20,20,20,20,10,5,5
Rizzo,35,15,20,10,10,5,5
Gibson,50,20,10,10,5,5,0

[ThePieholeOfDavidWells]

Bump.

Did this thread die?

[philly sox fan]

No. Well sorta. I've been buzy, lazy, but I swear today - now! soon even! - the next group of prospects will go up.

You can keep adding to this one for a couple more days just for real stragglers. Next group very soon and then definitely qucker so we get this done.

[Eric Van]

I'm almost done with my ratings, and I came here to compare them with others, and I see a big difference in the less than 5 column. So I thought I'd do a little research. Here are first 5 years of the "development machine" with a Y indicating that the prospect was less than 5 (the ? is Lars and I'm counting him as 50-50):

Who Was Less Than 5?

Year	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	Note
2003							Y			Y	Billy Simon, Aneudis Mateo
2004						Y	Y		Y		Chad Spann, Ave Alvarez, Juan Cedeno
2005							Y		Y	Y	Luis Soto, Ian Bladergroen, Alvarez
2006											Soto (12)
2007						?		Y		Y	Bryce Cox, Kris Johnson
Result	0	0	0	0	0	30	40	40	40	60	20 average

We haven't had a top 5 prospect who was less than a 4 since the days of Sun-Yeung Song, and Phil Dumatrait, #5 prospect in 2003, was a borderline 4 / 5 (in this table he's a 5, elsewhere I have him as <5). In the glory year of 2006, the first less than 5's were 12 and 14 (Edgar Martinez).

You can see that the average value for this column has been in the 20 range with it rising from 0 to 60 as you run from 5 to 10.

200 or a bit more seems to be a reasonable total for this column. Folks have been clocking in at 355, 435, 390, 395, 360, 345, 280, 260 --only Dageats at 220 seems in the ballpark.

(I agree that other organizations would show a less rosy picture and I'm convinced that our organization is doing something very right in player development.)

Edited by Eric Van, 21 February 2010 - 11:03 PM.

[Eric Van]

BA Top 10

Rank	Player	<5	5	6	7	8	9	10
1	Ryan Westmorland	5	5	10	35	35	10	0
2	Casey Kelly	5	5	20	30	35	5	0
3	Josh Reddick	5	10	30	40	10	5	0
4	Lars Anderson	10	20	30	25	10	5	0
5	Ryan Kalish	5	10	25	40	20	0	0
6	Junichi Tazawa	5	25	30	30	10	0	0
7	Reymond Fuentes	60	10	10	10	5	5	0
8	Anthony Rizzo	25	20	20	15	15	5	0
9	Jose Iglesias	0	5	20	40	20	10	5
10	Derrik Gibson	55	10	10	15	10	0	0

This is so interesting. Reddick beats Kalish for odds of 9 or better, Kalish beats Reddick for odds of 8 or better. Gibson is the only one with a non-linear pattern because his best skill (OBP) is the most important. Five years ago Rizzo would have been a 40 or a 50 in the <5 column but his defense is very likely to get him to the show at least in a backup capacity.

[The Best Catch in 100 Years]

Prospect Success Probabilities

Player	less than 5	5	6	7	8	9	10
Westmoreland	30	25	15	10	10	5	5
Kelly	35	30	15	10	5	5	0
Reddick	30	35	25	10	0	0	0
Anderson	35	30	15	15	5	0	0
Kalish	30	30	25	10	5	0	0
Tazawa	35	35	10	10	5	0	0
Fuentes	40	35	10	10	5	0	0
Rizzo	35	30	20	10	5	0	0
Iglesias	35	30	20	10	5	0	0
Gibson	45	40	10	5	0	0	0

Edited by The Best Catch in 100 Years, 25 February 2010 - 08:21 PM.

[The Mainahh]

Ryan Westmorland-10,20,25,25,10,5,5
Casey Kelly-5,25,30,20,15,5,0
Josh Reddick-20,40,20,15,5,0,0
Lars Anderson-30,30,20,15,5,0,0
Ryan Kalish-20,20,20,25,15,0,0
Junichi Tazawa-10,20,30,30,10,0,0
Reymond Fuentes-40,20,20,20,0,0,0
Anthony Rizzo-25,30,25,20,0,0,0
Jose Iglesias-15,25,35,20,5,0,0
Derrik Gibson-40,25,20,15,0,0,0