User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Page rendered in 5.1907 seconds
62 querie(s) executed
|
| |||||||||
|
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
| |||||||||
Sox Therapy — Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox Saturday, December 15, 2007Minor League Thread: Sickels Likes Sox Prospects, Not Sox FansSickels has put out his top 20 list for the Red Sox. A couple highlights:
1 Clay Buchholz, RHP, Grade A
I’m a little surprised to hear John trash two big segments of his fan base:
|
My BookmarksYou must be logged in to view your Bookmarks. Hot Topics |
||||||||
|
About Baseball Think Factory | Write for Us | Copyright © 1996-2008 Baseball Think Factory
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
| Page rendered in 5.1907 seconds | |||||||
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
He's 17 and hit .298 in a league where the average age is 3-4 years older.
He may not be Nomar but he's definitely someone to watch develop.
In contrast, Yankees fans are shockingly bitter. Yes, they also overrate their prospects (as I suspect most fans do). But they can't turn around without bad-mouthing the Red Sox. Skim through the LoHud Yankees blog some time and you'll see as much whining about the "overrated Red Sox" as you do commentary on the Yankees. I'm sure this is only a part of their fanbase, but it is an annoyingly vocal segment.
As for Sickels ratings, is there ANYBODY who feels he was unreasonably critical of the Red Sox prospects? I wouldn't personally kvetch too much if he thought Ellsbury were a B+ player (citing limited star potential). But Lowrie A-? I've got high hopes for the kid, but don't understand how he can possibly be given a "can't miss" grade. Neither have Masterson/Bowden/Hagadone proven enough to merit a grade higher than their current B. Both Goldstein and Sickels seem exceptionally high on Kalish, given how FAR he is from the majors, but I'll take that as a vote of confidence in his tools.
And the rest? Bates hasn't proven anything until he hits outside of Lancaster. Same with Bubba Bell (a true long-shot to make the majors at his age). Is there ANYBODY who merits a B- or better grade who was neglected?
There are a lot of Red Sox fans who talk about Yankees fans as being bitter front-running jerks, though. They even compare them to the Evil Empire. I think it's pretty safe too assume that both fanbases have a bunch of jerks and some really great fans like me and Mankhan.
I could see a fan of a certain prospect deciding that it's an outrage that said player wasn't higher. And I'm sure that there are so many Sox fans that a) there are a lot of different favorites and b) John's site and email box get stuffed with lots of angry messages about a perceived snub.
Maybe I was too hard on John above (Sorry John). I can see why he gets frustrated but I don't think calling attention to the rabid looonies is going to help him.
As for his grades, they all seem pretty reasonable to me, except for Lowrie. To me, a grade in the A range means that a player has a reasonable chance to be a star. Is that Lowrie? He seems more like he has a great chance to be a average to good player. I'd put that type of player in the B to B+ range. I was also a little disappointed not to get more insight from John on Lowrie's defense. That's a big deciding factory in how high he should rate.
Another one I might quibble with is Bowden. He was rated a B+ last year and then destroyed high-A before moving to AA at age 20. Every peripheral except hits allowed was good (could the hits be attributed to playing in front of Lowrie/Natale/etc?). I would have thought he'd at least remain at B+.
Darren, watch your hubris, for real.
Could be become Carlos Guillen?
2. I think both Lowrie and Ellsbury should both be listed as B+/4-Star prospects.
i was in the fence whether or not they were a- prospects, but if njasdf thinks they're b+'s, then it's pretty clear that they are at least an a-.
I still get the sense that he's underrated as a prospect by most - not by Sickels (who probably swung around too fair to the other end.)
Honestly, almost every grade here looks about a third of a letter grade high, other than Bowden's, which I like.
i'd rather have a gold glove center fielder than somebody that might stick at shortstop.
Really? I'm surprised, since I thought Ellsbury projected to a .350-.360 OBP. Can you explain the discrepancy?
In any case, Ellsbury is special for his legs -- not his bat.
Chone's MLE has Ellsbury at .294/.344/.392 - I suspect if you factor in Ellsbury's time in the majors, his combined line becomes superior.
If that's the case, then Ellsbury isn't special (offensively).
he should be solid offensively, special defensively.
Ellsbury destroyed his reputation by hitting .350 in the majors in September. If he had only hit a simple .270, maybe people would be more willing to acknowledge his value? Instead he gets slapped with the "overrated" tag and dumped into the dustbin with Otis Nixon. Same is true of Buchholz -- I think he has fewer proponents now than he did before throwing that no-hitter in September.
if he had swung and missed more, maybe his walk rate would have been higher!
This is what I don't get. If Lowrie is a fringe SS, you would think he could be at least average at 2B and it's not like there's lots of offense to be typically had at 2B, so while this may hurt Lowrie's value to the RS, it shouldn't hurt the fact that he's still a very valuable property as someone who can hit while at least appearing competent at an up the middle position.
no. try again.
no. try again.
Betty Grable?
tell me which starting pitching prospect is better. seriously.
The blind man and the elephant... Are you incapable of seeing the whole package? Seems to me we have some people focusing on his average offensive talents and ignoring his speed and defense. We have other people focusing on his speed and comparing him to guys who are complete zeros with the bat like Otis Nixon and Gary Pettis.
Step back for a minute and try to view the whole. What do you call an average hitter who runs like a deer and plays plus defense in centerfield? You sure as hell don't call him Gary Pettis!
Devon White?
Just struck me -- the people arguing Ellsbury is overrated seem to come up with comps that suggest he will underperform his CHONE projections. While I suppose that is possible, it is rarely the "smart" bet.
Context? It's OBP-heavy, but these are very similar OPS+ numbers at a glance, and .270 EqA for White (which is where PECOTA has Ellsbury sitting, although from last year's batch of projections). I'm also under the impression that White played historically great defense, so it sounds OK to me if Ellsbury is a really special defensive player.
Brandon Moss went from a B+ to a C+ in a year, and got beat buy a bunch of long-shot guys hitting in Lancaster for no frakking reason.
He's above average in LF, average in RF, good arm, his developmental curve has been slow, but he's been progressing along. He's had decent #s everywhere he's hit, and he did not look out of place in his cup of coffee.
What happens? he gets dropped a whole frakking grade and beaten out by a bunch of Lancaster longshots.
If we're just looking at overall value and ignoring specific talents, then why not compare Ellsbury to Mike Lowell or Kevin Youkilis? Don't let their differences stop you -- the WARP should be similar. :-) ;-) :-)
Or its a counterbalance reaction to Kevin's insistence that Ellsbury = Sizemore.
.294/.344/.392 in 436 ABs, .353/.394/.509 in 116 ABs, weighted is a .306/.354/.417, is no Sizemore, but it is a damn sight better than Pettis or Otis Nixon.
Kevin Youkilis, Raul Ibanez, Garret Anderson, Dustin Pedroia, Travis Hafner, and Carl Crawford all had similar MLVr this year but their styles of play are very different:
Youkilis (.288/.390/.453) and Hafner (.266/.385/.451) have high OBPs, one more heavily reliant on BA than the other. Neither has much speed. Ibanez (.291/.351/.480) and Anderson (.297/.336/.492) are your prototypical hackers. Decent BA, few walks, good SLG. Also not much speed. Dustin Pedroia (.317/.380/.442) has a high OBP and a little speed. Carl Crawford (.315/.355/.466, 50 SB) has a relatively low OBP and a ton of speed.
Position and defense aside, which of these six hitters was most valuable this year? Or does the shape of the production not influence your choice?
He's 25, and his translated numbers last year were something like .245/.315/.400. He's basically a 4th OF who can't play center.
I'd guess Youk, Hafner and maybe Crawford, but that's because I think there's some subtle difference there. As for which was most valuable, I have no idea. That would have to be based on something that isn't context neutral. If those were true talents and they all reflected +20 offense or whatever, I don't see why I'd care.
If there's a better answer, then I'd love to hear it (really).
Would you trade Lowrie straight up for Fukudome *if* Fukudome was being paid according to his MLB service time and not whatever he eneded up getting for the Cubs (so you'd get him for six cost controlled years just like Lowrie)? I know it depends on what the team needs are and all that, but in a vacuum...?
He's 23.
You know who his minor league #'s look like?
Trot F Nixon
http://withleather.com/post.phtml?pk=4606
Moss profiles as a nice 4th OF/borderline nonhorrible starter right now.
Moss profiles as a nice 4th OF/borderline nonhorrible starter right now.
In other words, he'll probably hit for 135 *OPS+ once he gets traded.
I miss Wily Mo
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main