| By Jason A. Churchill |  | By 04-18-2011 |
The minor league season is less than two weeks old but scouts are already talking, which means we have notes on the top prospects, both in and out of the Seattle Mariners organization.
Subscribers can check out this week's Intel by clicking here.
If you are not a subscriber, click here to gain access and become an insider.
prospect-intel:-04.18.11
Comments
The following 30 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: acqb1424 on 04-18-2011 08:22:30 Great stuff Jason. Do you have any info on whatever happened to Jose Valdiva? It would be great to hear what he's doing, still in the system, etc. |
| 2. By: harrison on 04-18-2011 10:17:35 @1. acqb1424 Had Tommy John surgery. Is in Arizona working on stuff right now. |
| 3. By: acqb1424 on 04-18-2011 10:49:34 Thanks Harrison, I hadn't heard that, appreciate the update! |
| 4. By: Jerry on 04-18-2011 10:50:59 Great info Jason. Thanks. Maybe I'm just a geek, but I'm definitely more interested in the young guys in the organization than the standings. Perhaps that's just low expectations. I find that the main reason I watch M's games now is to see guys like Pineda and Smoak, and I can't wait to see Ackley come up in a few months. Is it too early to anoint Smoak as the next great M's slugger? He looks great thus far. Love the walks and doubles, and I think the power will come soon. I think he's the most interesting guy on the team. But its still just mid-April. |
| 5. By: formerstarQB16 on 04-18-2011 12:01:11 I'm sure this has been asked before, but I can't seem to find it anywhere... Who are Ackley's projected comparables (Ceiling, Floor, Most likely)? Most scouting services I've seen seem to rate his as a top prospect more for the safeness of his development than for his ceiling. With how difficult our big league club has been to watch the past few years, our top prospect projecting as a solid starter/fringe All-Star doesn't really provide me with a ton of excitement about the future. Thanks |
| 6. By: Jason A. Churchill on 04-18-2011 12:45:30 Valdivia had TJ 14 months ago -- he's on the "Next 10" which is ready to go for Wednesday. formerstarQB, Ackley's unique so it's difficult to toss a comp out there. He has the speed and on-base skills to use Chase Utley, but not the power or the range at second. He's more of a line drive hitter and a patient bat than is Dustin Pedroia ... He's a mix between several players, but to give you an idea of numbers, I'd say he has a ceiling of .330/.430/.475. |
| 7. By: StandinPat on 04-18-2011 12:51:50 What's scary is that line would give him a wOBA of over .390, which would make him one of the top 15 hitters in all of baseball.... as a 2B! And if his offense is that good, he can still be a star even with well below average defense as well. |
| 8. By: formerstarQB16 on 04-18-2011 13:49:50 Thanks Jason. That's a pretty impressive slash. Basically his ceiling would be a top 5 second basemen in slugging (with 20-ish HR's) and would be competing with only Pujols for best OBP in the game. I know we shouldn't mention counting stats... but at that clip, batting leadoff, with his speed (and with some semblance of an offense behind him) he'd score 130-ish runs a year. |
| 9. By: StandinPat on 04-18-2011 13:57:20 With that line and the lack of offense elsewhere in the lineup, I might be looking at Ackley in the 3 hole. |
| 10. By: 24fan4life on 04-18-2011 14:08:29 Jason, considering the mariners hitting woes, do you think there's any chance the mariners would pass on Cole (if the pirates select Rendon), to get a bat. And if so, who do you think it would be? |
| 11. By: Jason A. Churchill on 04-18-2011 14:19:17 Reminder -- that was a ceiling/peak line, not his every-year production. 24, No. If Cole is there, I think they take him. |
| 12. By: Edman on 04-18-2011 14:30:52 Have to agree with Jason, if both are healthy, it's either Rendon or Cole, whichever one the Pirates pass on. |
| 13. By: baseballman on 04-18-2011 14:34:35 I would love to get a bat, but passing on Cole is hes there would be foolish, IMO. Either way, Im going to be happy with Rendon/Cole |
| 14. By: Jason A. Churchill on 04-18-2011 14:37:00 I'm not even sure Rendon is the No. 2 prospect right now. Bubba Starling and Dylan Bundy have drawn rave reviews. |
| 15. By: baseballman on 04-18-2011 14:42:49 Ive seen that Starling has more potential than Rendon, but since Rendon is a college bat, wouldnt he be more likely to fulfill his potential, especially at a much quicker rate? I would hate to not draft the best player at 2, but at the same time, I think that this FO might go the college route just because, like youve stated, that player is going to help us quicker than a HS player. When do you think you'll start rating the players for the draft? |
| 16. By: Jason A. Churchill on 04-18-2011 17:07:13 baseballman, But if Rendon isn't healthy enough to play third -- or hit like a top prospect -- maybe he shouldn't be the No. 2 pick. |
| 17. By: Jason A. Churchill on 04-18-2011 17:07:47 Oh, and what exactly do you mean "start rating the players for the draft?" |
| 18. By: baseballman on 04-18-2011 17:30:16 Very true about Rendon's health. I sure hope he checks out medically, but if he doesn't, we should still get one heck of a player. I meant to type "ranking" not "rating." Just because it seems like there's a bit of shifting going on within the top prospects. |
| 19. By: Edman on 04-18-2011 17:37:05 I certainly hope that the M's draft the player with the greatest potential impact, regardless of how close they are to the majors. That would be drafting for need, similar to Fields and Clement, and we all know how well that turned out. |
| 20. By: dawgncarolina on 04-18-2011 18:08:34 "I certainly hope that the M's draft the player with the greatest potential impact, regardless of how close they are to the majors. That would be drafting for need, similar to Fields and Clement, and we all know how well that turned out." Nice to see you finally agree the drafting of Fields was a terrible decision. |
| 21. By: Lailoken on 04-18-2011 19:05:05 Projection is so tough. Improved mechanics, a shortened swing, a second pitch... all can make a HUGE difference. Love these reports, please keep em coming. Can't wait for the next ten article. JAC, if the M's go on another losing streak could we get an absurdly early look at top prospects for the 2012 draft? Also, what do you think of the splitting starts plan the M's minor-league staff have been testing out over in Clinton? |
| 22. By: StandinPat on 04-18-2011 19:56:53 "I certainly hope that the M's draft the player with the greatest potential impact, regardless of how close they are to the majors. That would be drafting for need" It really depends on how closely the two players are rated. If Rendon was rated just slightly less than Starling, but would be ready to contribute in 1 year rather than 4, then he would be more valuable to the M's. Earlier returns have some value in and amongst themselves. |
| 23. By: Talkbaseball on 04-19-2011 00:20:14 Church, Who are we looking at the top of the draft board 2012 because we know this team as structured is losing at least 100. Can someone tell me again why Langerhans is playing. I mean if we have to sit through this pathetic attempt at baseball we might as well get to enjoy some youth. On the bright side Nick Franklin has been on fire of late. |
| 24. By: Jason A. Churchill on 04-19-2011 02:57:55 We'll tackle the '12 draft when the time comes -- June. Lailoken, As far as the split starts, it's called piggybacking, and it's something used quite often to make sure pitchers get the work they need while not overusing others, particularly early in the season. It's very similar to spring training until the final three weeks. |
| 25. By: Edman on 04-19-2011 11:34:56 Pat, they should pick whoever they have on their board as the best talent available when they pick second overall, no compromize. Compromizes lead to mistakes in judgement. If they picked Clement, because they felt comfortable with Bettencourt as short, instead of Tuli, then they drafted for need. At the time I didn't see much difference. However, when you start swaying from draft board because of any need, be it how close to the majors they are, or positional strengths, you're nt taking full advantage of a pick that high. Take the best player available, period. Worry about the other stuff, later. |
| 26. By: subterranean on 04-19-2011 13:50:50 |
| 27. By: subterranean on 04-19-2011 13:53:13 dang - sorry for the blank comment. I just wanted to add, Edman, that while I think you are right about taking best talent available, part of what weighs into that is risk. I don't think that Jack should get into a situation where they are drafting a college player out of need (need to keep his job by delivering immediate results) but I do think they should consider the risk of drafting someone who is better established where there is more certainty than in drafting someone who is years away but carries a higher risk of flaming out |
| 28. By: bunvt on 04-19-2011 19:27:43 Haven't seen him hit personally, but.... Carlos Peguero = M's version of Pedro Cerrano? |
| 29. By: StandinPat on 04-20-2011 00:54:24 "Pat, they should pick whoever they have on their board as the best talent available when they pick second overall, no compromize" Google search came back "did you mean compromise?" But either way, that's not actually true. Returns in the now have more value than similar returns in the future. It's why players/people in general seldom take deferred payments, and why you pay interest later to get a loan to have money now. That's not called a drafting for need, that's called drafting for value. If two players both had the exact same comp, and had the exact same bonus demands, but one was a collegiate player roughly a year away from the majors, and one was a prep player at least 4 years away, which one do you think every team in baseball would select? Quick hint, its also the player that has more seasoning versus more advanced competition and typically a higher floor, due to being a more known commodity. "If they picked Clement, because they felt comfortable with Bettencourt as short, instead of Tuli, then they drafted for need" Considering there were many who questioned Tulo's ability to stay at short, I find it hard to believe Yuni was the reason they went with Clement. As it turns out, Tulo turned out to be a stud at SS, but that's not the defensive player most predicted him to become. "However, when you start swaying from draft board because of any need, be it how close to the majors they are, or positional strengths, you're nt taking full advantage of a pick that high." And what if you have players such as Felix, Pineda, Vargas, Fister, Gutierrez, Saunders, Smoak, Ackley, Lueke, Cortes, Wilhelmsen, etc all between the ages of 22-28? Is selecting a player whose prime should coincide with the rest of your core not "taking full advantage?" "Carlos Peguero = M's version of Pedro Cerrano?" Or Carlos Peguero = Lucky Rabbits foot! Never send that guy back to Tacoma! |
| 30. By: sugar2323 on 04-20-2011 20:32:22 I am unable to get into the subscriber information |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
|
|
 |
|
|
| Copyright 2010 Prospect Insider | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome |