| By Chris Crawford |  | By 02-06-2013 |
We're now under a week -- also known as 'six days' -- until the Seattle Mariners pitchers and catchers report for spring training. Today I'll talk about Keith Law's top 100 prospect list, and the intra-division trade between the Athletics and Astros.
Keith Law's top 100
For those of you who live under a rock, Keith Law released his top 100 prospects Tuesday and four Seattle Mariners made the list. I won't divulge any of the scouting reports he released since that is subscriber-only information, but since the rankings are privy to everyone, I'll talk about the omission of James Paxton and the "low" placement of Danny Hultzen.
First -– and this should be obvious but for some reason it's not –- just because a prospect isn't included on the list doesn't mean that Law dislikes the prospect, so try not to overreact. In fact, you probably shouldn't overreact to any prospect list, but that's another article for another day.
As for his lack of inclusion, I probably would have had Paxton in the top 100 but it wouldn't have been terribly high. The fact remains that he's still a volatile arm and if the stuff or command drop even a non-significant amount, there's a great chance he ends up in the bullpen.
As for Hultzen, I think it's just a matter of upside. The reason why so many disapproved of his selection with the second pick in the draft was because he didn't have ace projection. Then he did what he did in Double-A, and I think our eyes got bigger than our stomachs.
The numbers he put up in Jackson was unsustainable by 1984 Doc Gooden, much less Danny Hultzen. I'm still a big fan of his left arm, and I think he'll contribute to the Mariners sooner than later, but he's still closer to mid-rotation starter than ace and I think his ranking accurately reflects that.
The other three Mariners on the list are Mike Zunino, Nick Franklin and Taijuan Walker.
The Lowrie deal
You don't see a lot of win-win trades in baseball anymore, but I think both teams did well in the deal that saw shortstop Jed Lowrie and right-hander Fernando Rodriguez go to the Athletics for slugger Chris Carter, right-hander Brad Peacock and catcher Max Stassi. The Athletics' infield isn't without talent, but Jemile Weeks, Josh Donaldson and Hiroyuki Nakajima are all question marks, and Lowrie can step in for any of the three and be above-average offensively and adequate or better defensively.
As for Houston, I think they did very well. Carter has enormous power and a good idea at the plate -- despite the high strikeout total -- and I think he can at least be an average first baseman at the big league level, if not a factor in a corner outfield spot. Peacock was awful in Oakland, but he's got above-average stuff and mid-rotation potential. At worst he could be a very good reliever.
Stassi is the lottery ticket; a guy who slipped in the 2010 draft because of signing concerns and has had some arm issues since. He has above-average pop in his bat and profiles to be at least average defensively. Not a bad haul for a guy that has never played 100 games in a season.
Also of note; this is the third not-minor deal between AL West teams to occur this season. It's nice to see teams getting better by ignoring stupid archaic ideas like not trading within your division. Who knows, maybe we'll see less bunting next year, and teams will ignore silly things like not starting two left-handed pitchers in a row.
Probably not, but a man can dream.
spring-training-countdown:-6-days
Comments
The following 37 comment(s) for this article are shown below:
| 1. By: leos_world on 02-06-2013 05:46:42 http://www.nydailynews.com/ex-yank-montero-caught-bosch-ped-clinic-article-1.1256495 Thoughts? |
| 2. By: leos_world on 02-06-2013 05:46:42 http://www.nydailynews.com/ex-yank-montero-caught-bosch-ped-clinic-article-1.1256495 Thoughts? |
| 3. By: Marlin Man on 02-06-2013 10:53:17 You suppose this will keep Montero out of the HOF??? seriously, guess he didn't get enough juice M.M. |
| 4. By: maqman on 02-06-2013 11:38:28 I think the best way of dealing with juicing is to forget about 50 game suspensions and void the contract of any player caught and not allow them to play again for a full year and then only with their previous team at half the AAV and time period contracted for unless the team accepts to keep them for the period contracted for. If they don't accept then give them a lifetime ban. 50 games doesn't seem to scare many players now. They have polluted the game too long and too much, they should pay. Minor leaguers should have to repay their bonuses as well. |
| 5. By: WSChamps2014 on 02-06-2013 12:12:10 Someone on USSMariner brought up that Jesus Montero has a younger brother who played in Florida this past year (2012) and who has the name Jesus Montero, as well. It might be that his brother is the one caught up in this and not Jesus Montero of the Mariners. Also, he had an injury in 2012 which might cause him to take steroids to get healthy quicker. It's also worth noting as the person said, they didn't list his name on the report because they lacked the evidence to concretely say he was involved and to that end, which of the two Jesus Montero brother is the one taking steroids, if the inference is correct that ONE Jesus Montero took steroids at all. |
| 6. By: masonb on 02-06-2013 12:19:09 WTF. I hope you're right, but what kind of parent names two of their children the same thing? Weird. |
| 7. By: MoneyMike on 02-06-2013 12:59:48 masonb: The answer is...George Foreman. |
| 8. By: WSChamps2014 on 02-06-2013 14:32:16 As for the Top 100, I think our farm system is still getting knocked for the Gillick and Bavasi years. I could make an argument for 9 guys in our system. Mike Zunino Taijuan Walker Danny Hultzen Nick Franklin James Paxton Brad Miller Stefen Romero Brandon Maurer Victor Sanchez To think that Law only named 4 is ridiculous. While he may do a good job evaluating talent, I think he works with some form of bias, maybe because he talks to Jason so much that he may feel he overvalues the Mariners farm, so he tries to account for that in a hope to be more unbiased, with the result being unfairly low rankings. I remember Jason nailing the Mariners for having a system in the past full of high risk/high reward players like Greg Halman and low risk/low ceiling pitchers like Blake Beavan, which is completely what the Rangers system is made of. Outside of Profar, Olt, and Martin, I don't like anybody in their system better than our top 15 guys. Could they be better in the future, sure. But to say their farm system is equal or better than the Mariners is hard to swallow. I get the knock on High Desert, but are we going to knock Marder, Hicks, Morban, and every reasonably talented player for their home field, while not giving equal credit in the reverse for players like Anthony Fernandez and Carson Smith? Why isn't Anythony Fernandez in the top 10 behind Victor Sanchez if our evaluations of High Desert are reasonable and without bias? I would not trade Hultzen for any lefty straight up in the minors and most of the righties as well. I don't know what people consider "ace" stuff that Hultzen supposedly lacks, but touching 95-96 with his fastball, a solid slider at 83, and a good circle change at 81 is a great arsenal. He also has a solid pitchers frame at 6'3" and 200-210 lbs., so no I'm not going to knock him for a handful of starts at AAA in his first full-season of pro ball. As for Paxton, while he's volatile and injury prone, his stuff is even better than Hultzen's repertoire, which eats up a lot of worry about injury and command when trying to distinguish between the two. Cliff Lee the definition of control posted a 3.4 BB/9 IP at 23 y.o. and 4.3 BB/9 IP at 24 y.o., so let's not pretend that command and control aren't the last things to develope for a pitcher. Basically anything below 5.0-5.5 BB/9 IP has the potential to be fixed if it's paired with stuff + 7+ SO/9 IP With Paxton's setbacks, I'd say he's even a year younger in his development and should be evaluated as you would a 22 year old because of development problems. His stuff is fine and he just needs more innings. I don't see a huge difference between Olt and Romero in terms of value. The biggest difference is that Olt is better defensively and draws more walks, while Romero is a much better hitter, is more versatile, strikes out less, and has more intangibles teams look for (character, work ethic, leadership, etc.), because they tend to result in a more fluid transition to the majors, as Jack mentioned in the Fan Fest interviews. How many players have Maurer's age, velocity, stuff, and control in the minors? Enough that he shouldn't be in the Top 100 prospects in baseball? I can think of a good number of guys that throw hard but don't know how to control the baseball or have under-developed secondary offerings like A.J. Cole, who is only 17 months younger than Maurer, while playing at two levels below Brandon. Maurer is what everyone hopes Cole will develope into, yet Cole constantly gets talked about as a top 100 prospect, while Maurer gets zero respect as a 22 year old entering AAA or possibly even the majors in 2013. How does Nick Franklin constantly break the top 30 prospects in baseball and never worse than top 50, while Miller a more likely candidate to stay at SS (positional value is greater at SS) who is as good or better offensively and only a year older, gets left off almost every top 100. I think Profar is a great prospect and would love to have him in our farm system, but I would not say he is definitively better than Franklin and Miller. He has things he does better like contact and drawing walks, but I'll bet Franklin hits for more power and will be a more efficient base stealer. Profar will probably be a better overall baserunner and better fielder, but there's lots of ways to be productive and Profar is not going to add much to his slight frame and that will probably lead to greater injury risks/durability issues and prevent him from ever being a 20 HR guy, even in Texas. Remember you have to stay on the field to be useful and that's what these rankings are supposed to indicate, usefulness. My point, people have their favorites and tend to be rather stubborn about them. Another example from Texas, Martin Perez. Great stuff, but again, look at his size, look at his inconsistency. I never thought he'd be more than a LH setup guy and never understood why anyone thought he'd make 200 IP a season and be a potential #1 or #2, which requires durability as well. Remember how everyone talked about what Jose Fernandez did in 2012? If he would've been born a month earlier, he would have been 20 years old not 19 and he wouldn't be a top 20 prospect, as he is now. Look how he got ate up at 18 (almost 19) in short-season A-ball. Victor Sanchez was a true 17 year old in 2012 (born Jan. 30, 1995), a full 2 1/2 years younger than Fernandez, yet Victor was just one level below, and yet he showed similar polish, similar poise, and was only missing the strikeouts and plus-plus fastball. As with all young players, they add velocity in their late teens and early 20s, so expect him to peak around 96-98. My point, why isn't he even rated after being easily one of the best pitchers in the league, while being 5 years younger than the average age of the kids playing in short-season ball? I know that the industry knows the true talent levels of the players and that Top 100s shouldn't be considered gospel in terms of prospecting baseball players, but it's annoying that we have what I would consider the most complete system in baseball (St. Louis has nothing at SS to backup Furcal and Kozma, while we can fill any hole on the diamond from within) and we get lumped in the middle of the pack in terms of organizational rankings. Hicks defensive ability combined with athleticism, and even a marginalizing of his High Desert stats should be on the outside of the top 100 looking in, as he profiles similar to Kurt Suzuki. What about guys like Marder who offer the rare ability to play at almost all defensive positions on the field. Morban doing what he did at advanced A-ball considering he didn't get bit by the equally tough pitching parks in the league says that his talent is real and he's another breakout candidate who could be on a lot of top 100 prospects come mid-season. It just feels that 5 or 6 prospects should have been the minimum and 7 or 8 would have been much more realistic. Too many times guys get put on prospect top 100 sheets because of tools or potential, but that can never turn them into anything tangible. I think if you haven't produced anything close to an above-average season or two, you shouldn't make it on tools alone. I would also put Texas' system closer to 15th with a drop into the 20s once Profar, Olt, and Martin are no longer prospects. In reality their system is the most overrated in baseball comparing true talent versus preceived talent. How many guys besides Profar, Olt, and Leonys Martin, who are still prospects and expected to start the season in AAA, have made the major league team in the last two years? We have a better system and we've already graduated to the majors Seager, Ackley, Triunfel(jury is still out), Robinson(traded), Smoak, Montero. When we acquired Smoak and Montero, we could've put them in the minors to let them mature more and keep their prospect status, so we acquired them as prospects, not proven MLB players. Erasmo Ramirez, Blake Beavan, Stephen Pryor, Carter Capps, etc. We have done a great job of transition prospect to the majors and should be rewarded for that in terms of prospect rankings. I know some haven't quite produced at the major league level, but the signs are there that they will. The Rangers farm system doesn't produce results (not even role players like they used to with Moreland, Gentry, and Murphy) and shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt on a large number of projected tools type players, just because Profar, Martin, and Olt have done well in the minors, they all as well have had challenges adjusting to the majors, so it's not just Seattle, and they were all top 30-40 prospects. That's a 1st round pick (Olt), a guy who signed for $15M(Martin), and another 7-figure bonus baby (Profar). They don't do well with finding lower draft picks and unknown international prospects and the restraints on the international signings and draft pick compensation have already begun to hurt them significantly. It's why Zduriencik can trade top talent and know more will push up from the bottom, while the Rangers are scared to part with anyone in trade. I just want people to fairly evaluate the prospects in our system. It's pretty much the only thing we have to look forward to as Mariners fans until they start winning and people involved in professional baseball, don't even seem to want to give us that. I guess we'll see if I'm "biased" or "unbiased" in the next season or two when these guys start making it to the majors. I'll take the over and guess the Mariners have 6-8 top 100 prospects, even if Law, doesn't say so. |
| 9. By: WSChamps2014 on 02-06-2013 14:35:39 I know, long, but I can't make a statement like that, without backing it up. What you want me to just go throwing my opinion around as fact like "somebody on here", without actually doing, you know, research, and supportive statements, that affirm what I'm saying? I know Edman, too long, too thorough, but hey, no comment about WAR, so there's that! |
| 10. By: jbltzfk on 02-06-2013 15:26:25 WSC2014 - thanks for the write-up. I agree with you on two things - our minors are stacked with good prospects; the nat'l writers are not worth reading. I don't know for sure what the un-made Upton deal contained, but GMZ can act from a position of strength. (I'm glad Upton is elsewhere. . . ) Head case? or like Hamilton, no bright lights? I believe your time schedule is correct - playoff contender this year, WS contender next. With many more years to follow. PS - Kelley should be happy to get $900k this year, because with our bullpen growing stronger all the time, he may be out of work before he wants to be. |
| 11. By: short on 02-06-2013 15:42:43 WSC2014 has me all excited about our system. Hopefully your log in name is correct. A good way to think about our system is that if Smoak or Ackley fizzle and Ryan never gets his bat back we have guys in the minors that might replace each one of them. That's nice depth to have. |
| 12. By: micahjr on 02-06-2013 16:02:31 If we strung WSChamps2014's posts of the last 2 weeks together, there would be more writing than in my MSc dissertation. That is partly because I knew that I needed to cut down material and make the most succinct argument I could. WSChamps2014, the long posts are annoying. You often make good points, but for Pete's sake you don't have to make every point you can think of every time. Split up your posts. Let other people get involved. Sometimes it is really rewarding to see someone else make a point that you would make. Saying that prospect lists are filled with people's favorites is blatantly obvious. You just did the same thing by listing off your prospects you thought were slighted. Also, don't bother fighting with Edman, it is a waste of time, and he couldn't care less. It just makes you look immature when you fight with him. Every time I see someone fighting with Edman I think 17 year old. |
| 13. By: cdiggins@whidbey.com on 02-06-2013 17:31:14 WSchamps, I like your looooong posts. You have a lot to say and I sure hope it is accurate. And if what you say is true than it CANNOT be true that Jack Z's job is in jeoprady if M's don't win big this year? It is not his fault that Smoak, Ackley, and others are not hitting. He has created the best team possible with his picks, trades, and player advancement. IT will come to fruition very soon. M's with their acquisitions, are better that Texas and Oakland and Angels if the players play up to potential |
| 14. By: Edman on 02-06-2013 17:56:40 WSChamps, you can write complete articles if you wish, I just don't have the time to read them at work, which is where I do most of my reading (on breaks, just to head that one off at the pass). I do think you could get more to the point, but as a writer/editor, it's what I'm paid to do. If you wish to take jabs at me, be my guest. But, at some point, you might want to stop wasting everyone's time with it. And I do appreciate your non-WAR position in your post :^D |
| 15. By: Paul Martin on 02-06-2013 18:13:20 @14 night shift at McDonalds??? |
| 16. By: Edman on 02-06-2013 18:43:53 Really Paul? Shows what kind of a person you are. |
| 17. By: southpaw360 on 02-06-2013 21:40:04 #14. I'm not sure where WSChamps was jabbing at you in that post? Maybe something in the past that I don't know of? I thought it was very well written and easy to read. I say thank you for posting that and I agree with alot of it. |
| 18. By: whereswoody on 02-06-2013 23:58:03 I dont understand how Romero is not on the top 100. He raked in High Desert, and I understand it is more of a hitters ballbark then Coors, but THEN raked at Jackson. His numbers last year were off the charts. |
| 19. By: rjfrik on 02-07-2013 00:09:21 Yeah. WSChamps was throwing jabs at Edman. In fact he made a point to not include all of his WAR stuff to appease Edman. Sounds like some posters are trying to stir the pot here. |
| 20. By: on 02-07-2013 01:31:57 10, yeah it's great having depth and I think people are worried too much about getting even value in trades. As good as Jack and McNamara are at finding guys, they can over pay whenever they want without too much worry. They have one of the best farms and an above average player at every position on the diamond, plus two or three more on the bench in the majors, which is amazing. Remember three years ago when Bradley, Lopez, and Kotchman were our middle of the order or in 2011 when we had Kennedy, Cust, and Olivo as our MOTO bats? Look how far we've come and we have done it from within, not by signing Werth or Swisher for x2-x3 their value, while still stacking the farm. We also expanded the minors to 7 teams from 6 a few years back, while as Jack put it, winning more games in a single season last year (2012) than any organization as has won as a whole in the history of baseball. That takes talent and depth. 11, I'm excited too and I feel we need more people like us sharing our excitement to drown out the sound of the nay-sayers and pessimists who think every day it will rain! 12, I know I'm not the best writer in the world, but I'm passionate and I take my time to write my best for you all. I spend twice the time it takes for you to read it, just doing my research. If I can put in the time to write the posts, than maybe you could at least respect those that want to read them. Maybe while you are at it, you could stop thinking that scrolling is too difficult to prevent turning this site into a hub of nazi censorship and respect the freedom of speech. Just as I respect your freedom to disagree with me. You do have to co-habitate in this world with 7 billion other people so why don't you start with the 100 or so on here that want to contribute without being sucker punched for offering thoughts and opinions that don't fit your time/space/opinion criteria. Maybe you should apply to be the editor-in-chief of the comment section. If you'd rather you are welcome to sign up for the Mars space program that starts in 2022. It's not like I use profanity or derisive language all willy nilly in my comments, so if you can't get along with me, you should take a hard look in the mirror and decide if this is the right planet for you. They're accepting applications right now in fact, you just can't have any future plans beyond 2022 on planet earth or have a connection to any people on the planet that would prevent you from leaving. As for my "favorites", I used logic and reason. Ask Law to defend HALF his list without refering to tools and potential for guys that have ZERO statistical proof that they will realize their potential and you'll probably hear more ummms and uhhhs than a Miss America contestant trying to explain how they will solve world hunger or global warming by wearing a tiara and a ribbon. My point about the guys rated higher than ours is simple, they depend SOLELY on what they MIGHT BECOME as opposed to our guys having shown that they have BOTH tools AND production, which should make them that much better than projected talent with ZERO results to warrant their ranking. I never base my opinion on hope and tools alone. I always have to see the tools translate to the stat page in some way. Austin Jackson is atleast a 65-70 speed rating on the 20-80 scouting scale and he can't even break 20 SBs as a 25 year old. Remember when people predicted him stealing 30-40 every year like is was ordained by God when he was a Yankee prospect? Always my opinions on players are based in part on what they've done and in part on their tools and potential, but never just one-half of the equation. Too put it simply I'm conservative in my evaluations, while Law is very liberal. An example, Nick Franklin has less speed than Jackson and Leonys Martin but he's proven he can use it more effectively than they can their own plus speed, so should you rate the tool or the application of the tool. In my opinion, that counts for something and while I won't find the diamond in the rough like an Oscar Taveras, I also won't put a guy like Martin Perez in the top 20 prospects in baseball because he's the latest Justin Bieber of the baseball world or sign a guy like Guillermo Pimentel to a $2M deal when he clearly can't hit a breaking ball or lay off an outside slider. Law gets paid to be psychic and find the diamond in the rough, so he'll throw toolsy players against the wall like spaghetti noodles to see if they stick. He can wash away his misses with the occasional "find" of a guy like Taveras. Have you ever seen the turnover in his prospect sheets and how many Seagers he misses as a result of his bias towards tools and potential? I have biases towards results + tools based analysis. If the player fits my formula, I like him, if he doesn't, I don't. So no, I don't bias a specific player. I'm like a 17 year old for defending myself? So in your opinion a guy who puts his hands in front of his face or who hits first when he KNOWS he WILL BE hit is an antagonist? Wow, and commenting about my commenting is the actions of what age range exactly? Even though you were antagonistic and abrasive, I still found a nugget of value in your post and will try and leave some things for others to say. However, if I get raked over the coals by certain posters because I didn't explain my position well enough, don't be surprised if I call you on the rug for peeing where you shouldn't have. 13, thanks for the positive comments. I think you'll find that I do a good job evaluating talent in general. I wouldn't have seen Morban the way Jason did a couple years ago until his breakout of sorts in 2012, but that's why I come here, because Jason always gets me thinking about guys I might have missed when combing through the minors. You're right about Jack doing a good job. They wouldn't have let him re-hire his whole staff if they didn't like the leadership he brings and the scouting/drafting/signing that McNamara does under him. In fact, I might go so far as to say that McNamara is the reason Jack has a job still and that they'll keep Zduriencik despite all his warts to keep probably the best director of amateur scouting in the business, Tom McNamara. Nobody does as much with as little as he does. Though it's easy to see why they canned Carmen Fusco and Tom Allison is yet to impress me with any of his evaluations based on the moves they've done on the big league roster since his hire. He probably had a say in Bay as he's from the Red Sox organization and had probably a few discussions about him there as they might have thrown around ideas as to why he performed worse in Queen. I think Zduriencik seemed to do his best when he didn't have a Pro Scouting director as Fusco was responsible at least in part for the League/Morrow trade and Allison seemed to be the one to point out how Jaso didn't fit with the Mariners anymore. As of a year ago, they were excited about Jaso as a catching option and shortly after Allison came on board, they were selling him to the highest bidder. The change in front office mentality, may be closely tied to the likes and dislikes of Allison. I'll wait to make a final opinion on Allison until after a season with him as the acting pro scout director, but hiring a guy from a team that finished with 66 wins seems odd to say the least, especially when his specialty is on major league player evaluations. Yeah, you're right about the players needing to perform as well, it's like the old saying, "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make 'em drink." Zduriencik can find the talent and put players in a position to succeed, but at the end of the day, he's not swinging the bat, fielding the balls, or throwing the pitches. 14, no jabs, it's just I believe the key to a strong defense is a good offense. Read a couple paragraphs, then go back to work, then read a couple paragraphs, then go back to work, and then later you can take my comments out of context and quote me incorrectly when you have more time. It's okay, I'm a patient person. What do you get paid to do again? So let me get this straight, you read and critique us, while you are at work, so this means that you are technically a writer/editor? How does working at McDonald's make you a writer or editor? Do you do the menus above the cashiers? I hate when they misspell McMuffin. I keep screaming in my head, it's two F's why the hell don't you know McMuffin has two F's. Damn. Anyways, I'm glad you are there to make sure the menus are accurate. Thanks. 15, so how'd you find out Edman worked at McDonald's? Did he give you a homey hookup (Edman, that means a discount in ebonics!)? Lucky. 16, and shows what kind of person you are, way to take care of a fellow reader of ProspectInsider. You going to hookup the rest of us if we come by? I promise, "no more jabs at you" if you hook me up with a McFlurry! 17, lefty thanks for positive thoughts and I'm glad you agreed, it's nice to know me and some of the bloggers on here find common ground! |
| 21. By: WSChamps2014 on 02-07-2013 01:59:17 18, that was kind of my point with Romero, I was disappointed that he didn't fall somewhere in the 80-100 range for ANYONE after he just destroyed two levels. I'm not even being greedy, saying he should be in the top 50, but it wouldn't be crazy, it's not like he came out of nowhere, he played in a pitcher heavy league for Clinton and did awesome. Something to think about... Stefen Romero playing for the Generals in a pitching league: 347/392/620 Miguel Cabrera winner of the MLB triple crown: 330/393/606 And Stefen Romero didn't even crack the top 100. Wow. I know it doesn't guarantee him anything and that stats don't translate exactly, but when you add in his makeup and his tools, how much are they knocking his defense? Don't tell me about his lack of position because Cabrera fields like he's using the same oven mitt in games that he uses after games to sculpt his athletic figure. He literally almost gave away all of his positional value at 3B with his iron-handed defense. Yet, Stefen Romero projects to being a similar type player offensively (we'll call him Cabrera Light) with better defensive value, so how is he not ranked ANYWHERE?? From everything I've "seen", everything I've read, and everything that's been projected by guys like Jason, Jay over at USSM, and other guys who have followed Romero and the Mariners prospects in general, he's going to be a 290/350/450 hitter worst case, with the upside to be a 320/380/550 guy. I'm not sure why he didn't add him, but I'd like to hear Law defend that, so if Jason can get Law on the phone and get him to defend his exclusion from the Top 100, I'd be curious to hear it. |
| 22. By: Paul Martin on 02-07-2013 03:42:13 Actually Edman doesn't work at McDonalds. People that work fast food ACTUALLY HAVE TO WORK HARD. He probably has some GOVERNMENT JOB that allows him to sit around and surf the net all day on our tax paying dollar... |
| 23. By: ajhedglin on 02-07-2013 06:19:57 WSChamps2014: I also enjoyed your write-up. No doubt you spent a great deal of time researching you points. I'm definitely excited about the future of the organization. Hopefully some of that exciting future begins this April. Edman is alright in my book. He is a little brash at times, but with all of the posts on here that I read, I scroll down to read Edman's comments to gain further perspective. For the record, you all make good points. Some I agree with, others not as much. But I come here to get pumped up about the Mariners and you guys help me achieve that goal. |
| 24. By: ripperlv on 02-07-2013 07:06:35 I then Keith Law does a great job. |
| 25. By: DKulich44 on 02-07-2013 07:34:36 WSChamps, While I can definitely tell you're passionate about prospects and the Mariners system, I think you should give a little more credit to Mr. Law than you have. He's very good at his job, and in my ~5 years of following minor leaguers, reading every prospect magazine, and getting to know every top 100 list, Law ranks up near the top of the list for detail and accuracy. It's not just a guessing game, and Keith is pretty liberal, does prefer tools over results, and understands age and competition is important. Kevin Goldstein was probably my favorite prospect "ranker", but obviously he's gone on to better things. Keith rarely gets his info from teams, and generally does most of his own scouting. He doesn't rely on statistics, as they are very misleading when considering minor leaguers. I will say this, Keith is not biased, what so ever. That's silly. I think instead of saying he's wrong about the Mariners, take a step back for being a Mariners fan for a moment, and see why he's not as high on the system as you. For me, the Mariners system is very good, but lacks superstar upside that some of the ones ranked ahead of it have. Walker has a chance to be special, but his stock has dropped based on his mixed bag last season. He lost command and his curve ball for long stretches. Zunino had a chance to be a very special backstop, but likelyhood is he'll be an above average piece. As for the rest of the kids your rankings all consider the absolute peaks for these guys, but neglect that a lot have very low floors, and they're not likely to turn the corner and hit those peaks. With prospects, you need to keep expectations low. Any farm system looks great if you ignore the negatives. Keith likes superstar potential, Profar, Tavares, Myers, etc all have that. The Mariners have some good pieces, but their ceilings aren't nearly as high and their floors are much lower based on their age and scouting reports. I'm very happy with Keith's assessment, and think maybe Maurer or Miller could have been on the list, but upwards of 9 players is slightly outrageous. That said, it is nice to see some one passionate that backs their stuff up with good info, albeit pretty long winded. |
| 26. By: Jerry on 02-07-2013 08:21:12 I agree with Dkulich44. My initial reaction to reading Law's piece was to think he underrated the M's system as well. In particular, I thought he was quite low on Hultzen and Paxton (especially the latter) and expected that Victor Sanchez and Maurer would have snuck into the bottom of the list. I also expected the system as a whole to be ranked in the top 5. However, I do think that many people on this blog need to step back and realize the limits of their own knowledge. The fact is, pretty much everyone on here knows a lot about the M's farm system, and much less about the non-elite guys on other teams. Most of the appraisals here are way too optimistic on M's guys (like #8). In almost all cases, you are focusing on the good things about M's prospect and ignoring all their faults, then doing the exact opposite with guys on other teams. #21 compares Steffen Romero to Miguel Cabrera! It's great to be excited about players in the M's system, but keep in mind that WE are he biased ones. I see no reason why Keith Law would be prejudiced against the M's. I thought some of his rankings were odd, but the guy knows a lot more about the farm systems of MLB teams than anyone here. If there is bias, it's on OUR end. We follow one team, predominantly. Most fans do. That's fine. But if you think Law is way off base, I'd suggest going and looking at similar blogs as this one that cover other teams. You'll see similar arguments about how Law has criminally underrated their favorite clubs, listing unrealistic evaluations of B-level prospects from those orgs. The interweb is surely full of hash criticisms of Keith Law today. But the fact is, most teams have guys like Capps, Sanchez, Maurer, and Romero. However, most of us have never heard of them, because we don't pay that much attention. Again, that's fine. I don't have the time to do research prospects to that level. I already spend enough time reading about the M's! But that doesn't mean you can't recognize the limits of your own knowledge. The M's farm system is better tha most, but it's not historically excellent. |
| 27. By: Edman on 02-07-2013 08:23:46 So Paul, with all your hard work, when do you have time to post here? You really think you're making me look bad? Good luck with that. |
| 28. By: ajhedglin on 02-07-2013 09:04:47 #26: Perfectly stated. Borderline poetry. |
| 29. By: Bookbook on 02-07-2013 09:20:38 If you look at John Sickels top 50 hitters and top 50 pitchers lists, you could extrapolate out that he has 8 Mariners in his top 100. (What would the proper mix be for a top 100, 70 hitters to 30 pitchers? If so, it may be as few as six. Though Romero may be in the 51-70 hitter range, bringing it back up to 7.) As Miller's greatest advocate among prospect gurus, he probably has Miller in the 70-75 range. He also ranks the M's farm system #2 overall. In the end, it doesn't matter what any of these gurus say. Que sera sera. |
| 30. By: maqman on 02-07-2013 11:31:42 The good news is we can stop talking about prospects before long and start watching them. I signed up for MiLB-TV this year for the first time so I can add eyes to numbers and names. I could end up knowing what I'm talking about. |
| 31. By: Jerry on 02-07-2013 11:45:51 Holy shit! Guess we can stop wondering about what to do with Felix after 2014. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2013/02/07/seattle-mariners-felix-hernandez-contract-highest-paid-pitcher/1899241/ |
| 32. By: Edman on 02-07-2013 11:53:51 Hearts stopped for a moment for many New York Yankee fans, with the hope that they could steal yet one more great player. A great day for Seattle fans. Now, let's end the having to "prove" to Felix that Seattle wants to win. Evidently, he believes so. |
| 33. By: masonb on 02-07-2013 11:58:35 Hopefully this can put to bed the detractors who say the Mariners don't have a willingness to spend money. This carries a ton of risk. Nice move by the FO to get him locked up. Now let's get the guys some wins! |
| 34. By: DRWheelock on 02-07-2013 12:03:51 A week to go before Spring Training and what is crossing my mind and "hoping" happens is all these prospects are going into camp high-fiving Felix and all the excitement that the Mariners are going to be "paying for performance" and this all will "light a fire" under all of our offensive and pitching prospects IMMEDIATELY as ST starts and carry right into the season! |
| 35. By: Paul Martin on 02-07-2013 12:05:28 VIVA KING FELIX!!!!! YES!!! |
| 36. By: DRWheelock on 02-07-2013 12:06:19 If this doesn't motivate young talent and prospects, I don't know what wouldn't! All of our prospects KNOWING Seattle just spent the "largest" contract in history for an ace pitcher and they have the opportunity to grow with him as a future teammate. |
| 37. By: DKulich44 on 02-07-2013 15:06:06 Jerry @ #26, Thank you for stating what I was trying to say in a much more concise and eloquent manner. It is for this reason that I'm an eye doctor and not a writer! You're spot on with pretty much everything I was trying to say. Good stuff, chap. |
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!
|
|
| Copyright 2013 Prospect Insider, Inc. | Created by AQ Central Prospect Insider is optimized for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome |