| By Jason A. Churchill |  | By 02-21-2009 |
With the Cactus League schedule a week away, I've been thinking about some of the more important issues for the younger talents in big-league camp.[I'll cover the same subject for the prospects not invited to the major league camp at a later date.]
Clearly it's put up or shutup time for Wladimir Balentien, and, at least defensively, that's where Jeff Clement stands, too.
Balentien has yet to arrive in Peoria due to visa issues, but when he does, he better have his hitting shoes on. In fact, he should sleep in them.
He's 25, out of options and his defense hasn't made much progress over the past year or so.
His pitch recognition is below average and he's yet to meet a breaking ball away that he didn't like. To earn his plate appearances, Wlad is going to have to show progress and a stronger, more dedicated work ethic, or he's not long for the organization.
Any lengthy stretches of the same old struggles with strikeouts and the lack of improvement, and the M's are probably going to say goodbye forever.
But, barring a trade, he's likely to get a good look this spring and into the regular season in order for the front office and coaching staff to gather enough information to evaluate Balentien's future potential.
Clement's prowess with the tools of ignorance will likely be determined once and for all this season. Whether he catches four or five days a week or splits time equally with Kenji Johjima, the M's will have plenty of data to make a decision on Clement's abilities defensively.
The 25-year-old will have to show significant improvement in receiving - he must show softer, stronger hands and pitcher-friendly framing - as well as higher levels of consistencies when it comes to throwing and blocking.
He simply may not have the athleticism to be average or better at blocking pitches wide of the plate, and his retrieval skills haven't shown well, either.
But in giving Clement the benefit of any inkling of doubt, he'll be given ample opportunities this season to show he can catch. If not, I have a first baseman's glove and a seat cushion to give him for his birthday this summer, because he'll need one or both of them as he becomes a first baseman or designated hitter.
Franklin Gutierrez brings enough to the table in other areas to warrant a longer leash when it comes to his offensive production, but there's a lot of room for improvement at the plate.
He's patient enough, though he's rarely drawn walks at a high rate, and his swing is consistent enough to expect average power. But his plate coverage is on-and-off, sometimes showing he can handle pitches on the outer half, and with some pop, while other times it shows as his greatest weakness.
Right now, Gutierrez can be beaten by decent pitchers with average stuff if they locate their pitches well and have the right plan. But while it's one thing to hit good pitching, all Gutierrez has to do be a good player is hit average pitching on a regular basis.
His approach with two strikes, however, is out of whack, too, though. He seemingly tries to remain patient during some stints, and if it burns him some, he gets overly aggressive and expands his strike zone.
Gutierrez must learn to trust his skills in pitch recognition and plate discpline. If he does so, he'll hit the average pitchers, destroy bad pitching, and he won't be helpless against the good ones, which would make him an above-average center field bat.
The middle infield may be right where Balentien is, regardless of their contracts. Both Jose Lopez and Yuniesky Betancourt have deals that guarantee them some cash through the 2010, but they aren't guaranteed starting roles in Seattle beyond yesterday.
Lopez had a fairly decent season in 2008, and was actually better at Safeco than he was on the road. He still doesn't get on base much, and probably never will, which means his batting average is more important than it should be.
He has medium power, but it's all pull power, and good pitchers will continue to exploit that weakness.
Lopez, like Gutierrez, needs to be better at going the other way, particularly on breaking balls. He's gone the other way more the past few seasons than in 2005 and 2006, but it's almost all singles and outs.
His swing is not engineered for driving the ball anywhere but left and left-center, however, so he's probably stuck being a pull-happy, medium power bat with an enormous holes in his armor - most notably the outside quarter of the plate.
Lopez makes contact, but he'd be better served working the count more and sacrificing some contact for a little more power and a few more walks.
A +50 OBP-AVG is a good goal for Lopez, whose career mark is +32. He hit .297 last season with a .322 on-base percentage and a career-high 27 walks.
Betancourt has a better swing than Lopez, and could probably do well going to right and right-center field if he worked at it. All of Betancourt's power is to left also, and he, too, could benefit greatly from giving up some of the low-K totals to work a few more bases on balls and perhaps land on a few more extra-base hits.
The one thing about Betancourt's swing that needs to change is his swing path - he's geared up to hit fly balls, and with his slightly below-average bat speed and pitch recognition, he's bound to fly out to left and center field quite a bit.
One scout I talked to suggested that Betancourt close his stance some - spread his feet apart beyond shoulder width and close his shoulder past zero - and work on hitting the ball to center field on anything not middle-in.
His hips open quick enough for him to turn on fastballs on the inner portion of the plate, and he might get more of those if he proves he can do something with pitches in all other locations, which, in turn, would likely result in more doubles and home runs.
Contrary to most hitters, Betancourt flies out because of his swing, not because he's late. If he does what he's asked to do by Jose Castro and Alan Cockrell, I'd guess some of this would be covered and Betancourt would have a chance to truly improve significantly.
In related news, Betancourt weighed in at 184 pounds in Peoria, down from the 198 he posted a year ago, and the 195 he weighed in 2007. Some believe he was 205-ish for most of last season.
Ryan Rowland-Smith doesn't need more coaching than any other proven veteran, but if he's able to improve his changeup and shore up his command, he's more than a No. 5 starter.
The left-hander's curve ball is already above-average and despite an average fastball and average command, Rowland-Smith pitched well in all roles in 2008.
The one must-have for RRS is a more effective pitch against left-handed batters, who hit .311/.390/.480 against him in 2008. A better, more consistent change would help, but creating a better angle would be of assistance as well. He does pitch from the first base side of the rubber, but there's 4-6 inches more to take there.
We've talked about Mark Lowe's pure stuff being very good, and it is, though his slider is not where it was in 2006 prior to his elbow surgery, and the plane on his fastball was not there last season.
Lowe dips at the knee and his entire upper half drops, including his arm, which is robbing him of not only a better vertical angle, but probably some control and velocity, too.
Before the injury, Lowe was bending the knee, but springing forward and vertical simultaneously, which is why he was able to create the downward plane.
His slider would probably improve with better mechanics, too. But Lowe has to throw strikes more consistently either way.
In 2007, Lowe had this to say about his transition to the bullpen, and why he went from being a mediocre starter to a good reliever.
"I just started attacking the lower half of the strike zone with everything. I wasn't nibbling, I was throwing my change less, so I was only worried about two pitches. My fastball has natural sink to it, so staying down in the zone works for me."
I'd say as long as Lowe follows that same mode of attack, he'll be fine. This is year three since the surgery, so if he's ever going to get it all back, this is the year.
I'll cover Brandon Morrow in a separate piece later during Spring Training, but control, command of the fastball and the progress of his secondary offerings are obviously most important to the right-hander.
And he and the M's see eye-to-eye on his physicality - he must get stronger, from head to toe. He weighed in at more than 200 pounds last week, after weighing in at 186 a year ago, though he was sick last winter and didn't regain the weight loss before he went to Peoria.
Matt Tuiasosopo will be covered in the Handbook, as will Justin Thomas, Rob Johnson, Adam Moore, Stephen Kahn, Gaby Hernandez, Greg Halman, Mike Carp, and all prospects no invited to the major league portion of spring camp.
Other big-league camp invitees: Garrett Olson has been covered here, Luis Pena here, and Ryan Feierabend will be covered later this spring, along with Reegie Corona, Cesar Jimenez, and Jose Lugo.
Photo "Hyphen" of Ryan Rowland-Smith by Paul Marsh PaulMPhotography.
spring-developments
Comments
The following 63 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: ThePaul on 02-21-2009 18:27:51 Wow, great writeup Jason. This is the best article I've read on Spring Training all winter b/c like a lot people - the upside of young talent is really exciting to follow compared to the vets on whom we have a pretty good idea on how they're going to perform. This is why we all follow your site! It seems like this year is going to be big on determining which players have places in the organization. |
| 2. By: Slurve on 02-21-2009 18:51:19 I'm not gonna lie that's a pretty hot picture of the hyphen... There are so many things to be accomplished this ST and it's exciting to see how it'll all play out in the end before the season starts. |
| 3. By: littlelinny6 on 02-21-2009 22:08:33 Good write up Jason. It is so nice to read a detailed article about the M's that is not about clubhouse chemistry. It seems all the beat writers talk about these days when there are actual good on-field battles to be covered in spring training like you mentioned he. When is the handbook set to be printed? Also, do you see Cedeno supplanting Lopez/Betancourt if each don't show marked improved plate discipline/defense? Thanks. |
| 4. By: Blowgun7 on 02-21-2009 23:00:18 I dont understand why people want Cedeno to challenge Lopez... Jose is a better hitter with more upside and graded out pretty much average defensively last year. Cedeno is a no bat player, with limited offensive potential, and it's not like he's a sick defensive second basemen. He's a nice utility player, who you could maybe argue should challenge Yuni, do to how abysmal Yuni has become in the field and with the bat |
| 5. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-21-2009 23:13:37 Don't count on Lopez's defense producing the same results in those defensive metrics. He didn't actually improve as much as the numbers say he did. I think there's a lot of luck and circumstance hidden in those statistics. |
| 6. By: dewey on 02-22-2009 01:06:43 Thanks Jason i really apprecite someone other then me saying how screwed up defensive stats our.Im a firm believer stats on defense can say whatever you want them to.If anyone who wtches our have ever seen the Mainers play think Lopez is a even close to avg defender is blind our just plain iggnornt to trusting there own eyes i think, Is he a good hitter yes can he run anymore no does he have power very little ..So we want him to play first?I think lopeys dys our numbered but to no ones surprise everyone who bumbling Bill gave multi yer deals too none of them have pnned out what a schocker.. |
| 7. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-22-2009 03:14:42 I just think that defensive metrics, while useful, for sure - they are the most concrete numbers we have to quantify defensive performance - but they aren't ACTUALLY concrete like on-base percentage and batting average. If you went one-for-four, that's a .250 average, no beans about it. There are so many dozens of variable that come into play with the defensive stats, that the margin for error is quite large, inherently. They aren't useless, but they aren't as effective as the offensive statistics most widely used by even the new-age talent evaluators. This is why the smartest analysts and evaluators compile multiple seasons of the defensive data for a player before coming to any intelligent parts of a conclusion on a player's defensive performances and abilities. How else do you explain the odd defensive numbers for Beltre? Ya gotta see players play so you can either back up what the stats suggest, or combat them to force your scouting department to dig even deeper. |
| 8. By: 01v-dubs on 02-22-2009 03:37:36 Jason, how long of a leash do you think Balentine will have to proove himself. He doesn't exactly scream 4th outfielder to me as he's not a plus defender, and is a pretty streaky hitter even at his best. The fact that the new regime basicly said Chavez was the teams LF made me think that they already had very little faith in him. I just don't want to see him let go for nothing and do well somplace else with a little more patiance, a la Shin-Soo Choo. |
| 9. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-22-2009 03:48:28 [B-a-l-e-n-t-I-E-n] The new regime also just said Griffey is the left fielder. How long a leash? provided he's doing the right things between games and this spring, he'll get ample at-bats the first few months, and they'll evaluate off that. If he's getting better, he'll earn more. |
| 10. By: ASUBoyd on 02-22-2009 16:10:01 Awesome article Jason, thanks. |
| 11. By: Pumpkin on 02-22-2009 20:46:54 Great article Jason, this is the best info I have seen anywhere so far about the players at this years spring training. If we do have to get rid of Balentien do you think we could maybe pair him with Johjima to get him away from us, and though I doubt we could do this with Johjima, maybe we could with Washburn to get a prospect in return. I remember a few years back some people viewed him pretty highly as a prospect, has this mostly disappeared? |
| 12. By: The Great Pumpkin on 02-22-2009 22:35:58 No one wants Johjima or Washburn right now, and throwing in a guy like Balentien isn't sweetening the pot very much. No chance of getting a prospect for that package. |
| 13. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-22-2009 23:02:16 Washburn is tradeable. Johjima is not. I'm not even sure I can think of a team that would take Johjima and 24 million in cash. |
| 14. By: Slurve on 02-22-2009 23:10:57 Johjima is dead weight right now... Hopefully he chooses the opt out route but there's a lot of money for him even if he just decides to be benched... This is kinda a pickle but Wash can be traded and throwing in Balentien might make him look even more interesting since he has some nice power even though he has some obvious faults. |
| 15. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-22-2009 23:29:42 If you have to throw in Wlad, just release Washburn. What's the point in giving away talent? |
| 16. By: bikozu on 02-22-2009 23:49:49 We have enough 5th-starter arms that it shouldn't matter if we lose Washburn, and possibly ones that could outperform him. So under what conditions does he become tradeable and how much of his salary will we have to eat? If a team has a SP injury and suddenly finds Washburn attractive, will they pay half of his salary? |
| 17. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-23-2009 00:00:25 At this point, nothing is likely to happen. Teams are pretty much set as they move into the spring schedules. Where Washburn could become a hot topic again is if and when a few clubs have a guy go down with an injury, or a young pitcher they were giving a shot to has a rough spring and is being sent back to AAA or to the pen... or even where a veteran looks unexpectedly bad and his club is convinced they need someone a little more reliable. Remember, Washburn, while not GOOD in the least, wasn't god awful last year. Batista and Silva were, Washburn was simply below league average to bad. But there is some value in his reliability. He makes his starts 30 per year or so, and has never had a serious injury. If the Mariners make him a 3-4 million pitcher by attaching cash to the deal or taking bad similar amounts in a contract, someone will want him. |
| 18. By: marinerseric on 02-23-2009 03:55:30 Jason do you think Griffey will hit thrid this season, due to PR? If not, where do you envision him at? It has been a long time since we had a true number 3 hitter. |
| 19. By: marinerseric on 02-23-2009 03:56:36 Jason do you think Griffey will hit thrid this season, due to PR? If not, where do you envision him at? It has been a long time since we had a true number 3 hitter. |
| 20. By: jgstecker on 02-23-2009 09:04:57 There are a few destinations that could work out for Washburn this Spring. Washington, in a salary swap for Johnson. Philly for Geoff Jenkins. St.Louis if Rasmus creates a jam in their OF and Carpenter isn't ready. The Dodgers could see Washburn as an upgrade to their in-house 5th starter candidates too. I'm not too worried about trading Washburn though. It won't kill Olson to spend a little more time in AAA, and RRS is likely in the pen whether Washburn is here or not. I think Wlad should be the starting LF vs. LHP. If he candle handle that, great, then he gets more playing time. But lets start him out with that. The rest of the lineup depends entirely on Johjima. How much will he play? If he's catching at all vs. RHP, then Clement is your DH and Griffey is your LF. When he's not, Clement is catching, Griffey is the DH, and Endy is in LF. Joh should at least start vs. LHP, which would force Griffey and Clement to share DH duties, allowing each of them to get their rest in. And, Griffey will probably hit third because he's pretty much the best hitter on the club besides Ichiro. You generally like to have someone with an OBP over .330 that high in your lineup (man, this offense is ugly). |
| 21. By: kevin_ess on 02-23-2009 16:53:37 I'm scared, Jason. My PI firefox ticker says Griffey is not on the M's radar! :) |
| 22. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-23-2009 20:18:05 I'm locked out! I can't change it! And six weeks ago he wasn't, it was all Abreu til the day he signed in LAA. Eric, No, if Griffey bats third, it'll be because Wak thinks that's where he fits best that day. Verus RHP, which is where Junior should be used, this is how I'd go. 1. Ichiro 2. Lopez 3. Griffey 4. Beltre 5. Branyan 6. Clement 7. Gutierrez 8. Betancourt 9. Chavez |
| 23. By: marinerseric on 02-23-2009 22:28:03 I think if we use Griffey the right way he can be productive. So in that case, if used against right handers, then the last time he should start against a lefty would be opening day? Since we should assume Liriano is going to start for the twins? Or would you sit him for that game? I read on mariners.com about Clement trying to take ground balls at first base. It said emergency, but isn`t that already a bad idea since he has a bad knee? Speaking of which I need to get going on paying for next months subscription. |
| 24. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-23-2009 22:43:02 if you subscribed, Eric, it's an automated system. |
| 25. By: Uncle Al on 02-23-2009 23:21:52 Jason Don't you think your line up will change before the start of the season or during it. After Atlanta signed Anderson, it took one more team out of the Swisher sweepstakes. He'd be perfect for the M's to be a OF/1B/DH but it appears that circumstances aren't right to make that trade now. There are other OF'ers that will be available later this year. Do you think they'll try and make two trades this year? If Batista really was hurt last year, that would allow both Washburn and Batista to be traded if they have a good year. If they trade for another OF'er, then either Balentien or Chavez must be traded as they are both out of options and will only have room for one. And then there is the Beltre and Bedard situations which will get sorted out sometime later this year. They also have a million RP's and should be able to use a few in trades. Do you see at least one trade happening before the start of the season? |
| 26. By: DAMellen on 02-24-2009 00:54:53 On another note, Jason, who do you think will be the Mariners' closer this year? |
| 27. By: bilbo on 02-24-2009 01:57:16 LOVED this piece about Green over the w/e (on BA by Dave Perkin): "Once the game began, Green found the swing that had been missing most of the weekend. He had two hits in three at-bats, drove in one run, scored two and stole two bases as USC dropped a 5-4 decision to the Dirtbags. Green's first hit of the 2009 season was a line-drive home run, ripped into the netting beyond the left-field fence. Speed (6.6 seconds over 60 yards) and defense are Green's primary assets. He seemed a bit tentative with his throws Sunday, bouncing one early toss and making a throwing error later on. Green's glove work, however, is spectacular. In all areas that defense encompasses—hands, range, arm, play-making ability—Green is darn close to being major league ready right now. He also shows the smoothness, fluidity and ease of actions emblematic of all outstanding defensive players. Green had 10 assists in Sunday's game, and he made a string of excellent plays: ranging to his left, coming in, short-hopping the ball, making off-balance and on the run throws, etc. His almost balletic play at shortstop makes Green perhaps the defensive finest player in all of college baseball." I was interested to hear about his D because I thought there was concern about him sticking at SS. Man, I hope Ackley, Green, White and a couple others go bananas this year and give the Ms some serious choices at #2, maybe even force WAS off of Strasburg. :) |
| 28. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-24-2009 02:51:33 I think Walker and Lowe ultimately get the most shots to close. |
| 29. By: safecochatter on 02-24-2009 03:32:10 chapill hill sure is abuzz over ackley. perhaps he and green will step to the front of the draft. i ran into an baltimore site last week and they were gettin excited about ackley being available at #5 pick. and that was before his awesome weekend. i'am thinking there will be an ackley thread in the future. but,somewhere i read he had tj surgery in the past. and that's why he's getting so much time at 1st base. could that keep him out of cf at the major league level? |
| 30. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-24-2009 03:58:33 That's exactly why, chatter. He's expected to be eased back into the outfield, but there are questions about whether he can stick in center. He runs well, and is adequate in terms of range and instincts, but the arm could be a big problem if he doesn't regain all if its original strength and accuracy. |
| 31. By: Gustafson on 02-24-2009 11:27:35 Jason, Re: Ackley With pitchers don't we usually hear that w/in a year or 18 months after TJ surgery, the pitcher is actually throwing harder than before? Bedard had TJ surgery years ago and his elbow hasn't been a problem. The question I have is whether the M's will think "well, Ackley is clearly the best hitter in this draft, but he projects as an LF and that just isn't worthy of the #2 pick when Grant Green is sitting there at short." Everything I've read about Ackley suggests he is going to be a terrific hitter. But doesn't add a bunch on defense. Whereas Grant Green might just be an average shortstop but at least he's a shortstop. At the risk of losing any credibility amongst sabermetricians everywhere, I'd say go with the better bat. Because you don't know for sure where Green will end up defensively anyway... |
| 32. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-24-2009 11:38:51 Bedard's elbow HAS been a problem, first of all. Late 2007 they called it a back or a side injury, that wasn't true. But not every TJ surgery is equal to the next. Jesse Foppert has has a hell of a time getting the strength back. There's about 75% success rate, but that means 1 of every 4 fails. Ackley will likely recover enough to be fine, and I think a lot of the caution right now is about protecting him, making sure he doesn't ruin his career by pushing it. Re: Green I watched about 22 of Green's innings over opening weekend (I had a bird dog in the stands video taping Green... not the pitcher-batter) and as I wrote this morning at the four-letter network, I'm pretty much convinced he's a shortstop. Ackley's defensive questions are greater than Green's, too. If he can play outfield, great, but that doesn't mean he sticks in center. If he's a corner guy, he's not ideal offensively. The draft is about long-term value. Weighing a player's upside versus his probability and median value is difficult, but if you asked me today, I'd lean toward Green, now that I'm not worried much at all about Green's defense. |
| 33. By: Gustafson on 02-24-2009 12:41:41 Re: Green Wow - great info re: Green sticking at short... And are you comfortable that he will hit in the majors? |
| 34. By: bilbo on 02-24-2009 13:39:42 so then the question about Green now would be what about his bat? Is it special enough to warant the #2 pick? Especially as a RH in Safeco? |
| 35. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-24-2009 13:42:32 I'm concerned about his on-base skills, but I think he should provide enough pop and contact to be an average bat, at least. The physical skills are certainly there. If Ackley was a true center fielder, I'd still lean that way over Green, but Green can play short. |
| 36. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-24-2009 13:44:19 The question is whether Green's total package warrants taking at No. 2 THIS year. We don't care, really, that in last year's class Green would probably rank between 15-30. His BAT doesn't have to carry the load, though. He plays a premium defensive position, and plays it adequately at worst. |
| 37. By: Gustafson on 02-24-2009 13:59:27 Wow. Sucks that this year's draft is so much weaker. I hope White, Green or Ackley jumps up and becomes worthy of the pick |
| 38. By: 01v-dubs on 02-24-2009 14:49:08 A buddy of mine saw Green this weekend, and while he's no scout or anything he seemed to think that the Longoria, Tulo comps were a bit much. He said that Green looks like a RH Stephen Drew. Seems pretty intersting. |
| 39. By: Slack on 02-24-2009 16:27:18 The weakness of this draft is a bit discouraging. I agree with that. But the Mariners will still get talent. I don't doubt that. |
| 40. By: Newbee on 02-25-2009 08:57:26 Thanks for some great information. I have been lurking for some time without posting and I want to start by saying I have found this site a great source of information. Thanks for all the hard work! I particularly appreciate the recent detailed player evaluations. I am really looking forward to this draft as a chance for the organization to upgrade it's young talent level. To the casual observer the Milwaukee system looks like it drafted better than average, do you expect that to continue here and how would you describe the current administration's draft philosophy as compared to the previous one? |
| 41. By: MMjohns195 on 02-25-2009 15:00:15 Jason, With Ryan Feierabend having to have Tommy John surgery is he done with the Mariners? Can they really hold onto a guy who doesn't seem to really have a out pitch or great command? Who do you think takes his place on the 40 man roster btw? |
| 42. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-25-2009 16:31:44 Newbee, First off, welcome. Don't be a stranger. And yeah, the M's are certainly going to strong in the draft. It's Zduriencik's strengths. It'll almost happen without them trying. MMjohns195, There's no harm in them hanging onto him for the short-term. Some guys come back, a small percentage but some, with more velo, and who knows, maybe the reason Ryan can't sustain the 90-93 velo and above-average curve he showed in 2005 because of the elbow issues. Who takes his place? Not sure the club needs to make such a move right now. Why not wait and see what happens this spring? There's no reason to replace Feier right now. They'll use that spot if an NRI is going to make the club, anyway. |
| 43. By: 01v-dubs on 02-25-2009 17:19:34 That would be pretty cool if Fier came back stronger, or like his old self. I always thought it was strange how his stuff got worse as he developed, not the opposite which is what should happen. |
| 44. By: 01v-dubs on 02-25-2009 17:22:20 Also, Jason I am really enjoying the draft blog at ESPN. I had no idea you'd be as involved as you are, and I am really enjoying the articles, I especially liked todays one on Lincecum. Hopefully this leads to bigger and better things for you. |
| 45. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-25-2009 17:32:46 Thanks, dubs, I really appreciate it. And you aint seen nothin' yet. Wait til Keith gets out on the road to scout the top guys. My goodness is that blog going to be good. Also, it'd be great if you guys commented on the blog over there, too. The more comments, the better. |
| 46. By: slick on 02-25-2009 19:08:06 BA top 100 came out yesterday M's have 4 in the top 100. Halman leads all M's prospects at 50. Suanders,Aumont and Triunfel are the others. Jim Calis on his Q and A for BA said if Crow was signed by the Nationals that he would be ranked 30-40. Jim Calis also stated the Josh Fields is somewhere between 150-200 for him. |
| 47. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-25-2009 19:19:38 Goldstein and BA are smoking the same stuff, unless they have documented evidence that Triunfel is at least 2-3 years older than his bio claims he is. Otherwise, Triunfel is ranked far too low. I think Aumont is grossly overrated, and so is Halman. I'm just not big fans, not to that extent. High ceilings, but reckless risk. |
| 48. By: Slack on 02-25-2009 20:45:26 I was really surprised to see Chris Tillman ranked right behind Rick Porcello. I did a double take on that one. Tillman has upside but I thought Porcello would be further ahead than that. |
| 49. By: The Great Pumpkin on 02-25-2009 20:46:08 Just out of curiosity, could you give me an idea of what MLB players these guys project to be similiar to if they reach thier full potential? (I hope that makes sense) In other words, which player would Truinfel be compareable to if he reaches his full potential? |
| 50. By: 01v-dubs on 02-25-2009 21:02:11 49. I'm not Jason, but the comp on Triunfel I've heard a lot was Tejada. I got to see Triunfel in the AFL and I can see why, they are both built the same, and Triunfel hits the ball hard everytime much like Tejada in his prime. As for Halman BA comps him phisically to Andre Dawson. If Halman improves his plate disipline I could see the comp holding up when he reaches the bigs. |
| 51. By: The Great Pumpkin on 02-25-2009 21:05:41 Thank you for the info. What about Aumont? Any idea? |
| 52. By: 01v-dubs on 02-25-2009 21:15:13 I think right after we drafted him Jason comped Aumount at least phisically to Roy Halliday, but I don't know how much that holds now. I think with Aumount it depends on the development of his other pitches outside of his sinker and FB he hasn't shown much of a feel for a breaking ball or changeup. Honestly I can't think of a good comp for Aumount but, he's 6'7 and throws in the low 90's with plus-plus sink, and BA claims he can dail his 4 seam FB to the upper 90's. Like I said before he's still developing his other pitches. Jason should be able to describe him, Triunfel and Halman better then me, better yet buy the handbook and you'll learn more about M's farmhands then any national publication will teach you. |
| 53. By: shemberry on 02-25-2009 21:41:00 I like Aumont, but I would give anything to go back in time and have the M's take Heyward. He was who I wanted them to take months before the draft. |
| 54. By: Pumpkin on 02-25-2009 22:18:55 Amazing, Halman walked and didn't strikeout in first spring training game. What is this world coming to! |
| 55. By: StandinPat on 02-25-2009 23:57:42 Slack, why on earth would Porcello be that far ahead of Tillman? Tillman has showed great success a full level ahead of Porcello while only being 7 months older. Tillman has a great pitchers frame, has a mid 90's FB and the makings of a great curve. Don't even sweat what you think Porcello might be, because Tillman IS one of the better SP prospects right now. |
| 56. By: acqb1424 on 02-26-2009 08:23:30 Shermberry, I totally agree with you. I remember watching the draft (that was the first one ESPN televised) and I was sitting there crossing my fingers that someone would take Aumont before us so we could snag Heyward because it seemed pretty obvious that the M's were really high on Aumont, not that I'm disappointed with Aumont, I just thought that Heyward would be a high impact bat for us, and was a little safer to project than Aumont. |
| 57. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-26-2009 10:57:00 Porcello is typically ranked 20-35 spots higher than Tillman on most reputable Top 100 lists... I think a tad less of Porcello and a little more of Tillman than some, but I'd still take Porcelli ahead of Tillman, by at least 15-20 slots on a top 100. |
| 58. By: Slack on 02-26-2009 12:33:28 I was very happy with Aumont at the time and i still am but I can see now that Heyward would have been better. I was hoping for Porcello or Harvey in that draft but more than anything, I was just relieved that Casey Weathers was gone by the 11th pick. Thank you Colorado! |
| 59. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-26-2009 12:45:01 Heyward and maybe even Matt Dominguez. I'm very, very concerned about Aumont's elbow long term and short term, and he's almost two years removed from the draft and has 50 innings of pro experience. There are other issues, but that'll have to wait for the handbook. Harvey, Slack? |
| 60. By: Slack on 02-26-2009 13:06:20 Yeah, I really liked him at the time. I thought he had really good stuff. I'm not near as sold on him now as I was at the time. His delivery was cause for concern because of the way he would start slow and then speed up. But yeah, I liked him a lot at the time. What was your take on Harvey, Jason? |
| 61. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-26-2009 13:15:57 Matt Harvey? At the time, good arm, frontline guy but not an ace. I asked Keith Law about Harvey the other day, too, right after his first start of the year for UNC. He said "good, not great," so nothing has really changed, at least no at this point. Some think he is in the driver's seat to be the top pick in 2010. I just think that's because there isn't anyone else at the forefront right now. It's probably a prep kid next year. |
| 62. By: John_S on 02-26-2009 13:25:33 I'm really excited to see how Triunfel develops this year. I was hoping that the M's didn't sign Fields because I guy I liked a lot was Ryan Jackson, SS from Miami. He's not a power guy but he seemed real smooth out on the field and made solid contact. Jason, What do u think of Jackson? |
| 63. By: Jason A. Churchill on 02-26-2009 14:36:08 I haven't seen Jackson myself, but from what I have heard, he's got a chance to be pretty solid. An average big-league shortstop. It'll depend on which direction he goes defensively this year. He was better last year than in '07, if he takes another step, it'll all be about his bat. But either way, he's one of those C+/B- level prospects that will go between 20-40. I might prefer Robbie Shields, but I haven't seen him, either. And I won't see Shields. Jackson I'll catch on TV, but that won't help me check out his defense. He could be there at 27, though. |
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 |