Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
Sox Therapy
— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox

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.

   1. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: January 12, 2007 at 01:59 AM (#2278987)
Can someone explain Doubront to me? It seems like the case for him has very little to do with (a) his results or (b) his stuff. Both are nice, but no more than a bunch of high schoolers are capable of / throwing. The key statement above, then, is that he's 18, tall, and projectible. The stuff and pitchability are good enough now that if his pitches improve with time as scouts expect, he can be a good prospect.

I guess I'm willing to accept that in a #16 prospect in a kinda eh system, now that I've talked it out, but I wanted to be clear that's what we're seeing in Doubront. yeah?

And on Egan - I thought just a year ago everyone was raving about his ability behind the plate? It's hard not to see the amazing inverse relation between a catcher's bat and his glove.
   2. philly Posted: January 12, 2007 at 02:05 AM (#2278991)
That seems pretty reasonable. If Lowrie really can stay at SS, then I think you can argue he should be over Negron and Martinez. And hell, given the attrition of GCL catchers and pitchers maybe over Egan and Doubront too.

Nice writeups overall especially noting Martinez regresson last year. I think one of the reasons that people overrate prospects is because they get a positive snapshot of a player - like Martinez' generally positive reports last winter - and then they lock in on that snapshot even if the player starts to go backward which Martinez seems to have.
   3. Darren Posted: January 12, 2007 at 03:07 AM (#2279022)
Can someone explain Doubront to me?

He's ranked #20 in a good--not great--system. Is that some kind of high praise? I agree, though, that his stats aren't very exciting. I'd rather have seen Natale sneak in here, but I realize that that is probably my bias toward underdogs.
   4. Xander Posted: January 12, 2007 at 03:21 AM (#2279029)
You can argue that Doubront doesn't deserve to be where he is on the list off numbers alone. However, I like him because 1)He has shown flashes of dominance, not steady mediocrity 2)The Sox believe in his upside and maturity 3)He is projectable, but he also has an advanced understanding of how to pitch.

If I hear next season that Natale's defense improves, my opinion of him will change. But, while I like his bat, the reports on his defense are too brutal to trust him right now.

Negron is just faith/sleeper pick. I'm going on instinct there. I'm sure there are people you can argue in over him (Kyle Jackson, Mark Wagner), but no one worth worrying about.
   5. Darren Posted: January 12, 2007 at 03:44 AM (#2279045)
Oops, he's actually #16, not #20.

#20 is Lowrie, who I still think is a prospect. I think the injuries slowed him down last year quite a bit. He still controls the strike zone well, and hit very well in August, including 9 2B. I suspect he'll have a strong showing in high A next year.
   6. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: January 12, 2007 at 04:16 AM (#2279062)
You can argue that Doubront doesn't deserve to be where he is on the list off numbers alone.
Or on his stuff, right? That's more the point I was making - he throws ~90 and his breaking stuff is "advanced", but not "plus". Now, as I said, Doubront is #16 in a pretty eh system, so any upside at all justifies the ranking, and I don't dispute that Doubront has upside. I'm just trying to nail it down, that the upside is in his youth, height, and whatever other elements of projectibility are irreducible to that.

Thanks for the work here, Temple. By the way, what are your sources? How broad a base of opinions are you working from in writing these up, and how much of your own observation is involved?
   7. Darren Posted: January 12, 2007 at 04:20 AM (#2279066)
Somehow, MC, I missed the entire 2nd paragraph of your first post. I'm dumb.
   8. Xander Posted: January 12, 2007 at 04:46 AM (#2279083)
I'm just trying to nail it down, that the upside is in his youth, height, and whatever other elements of projectibility are irreducible to that.

His upside lies in his already present "pitchability" in combination with advanced pitches for an 18-year old in combination with a projectable frame.
By the way, what are your sources? How broad a base of opinions are you working from in writing these up, and how much of your own observation is involved?

My sources are basically what you would expect: season ticket holders to the minor league affiliates, first-hand observers, what I see in first person, what I can pull from Mike Hazen, and all the prospect reviews from great sites like Baseball America, Minorleagueball.com, Scout.com, etc.
   9. Balerion Posted: January 12, 2007 at 06:44 AM (#2279133)
Doubront's success on the mound is really what's pushed him ahead of other "projectability" guys. He's pitched very well over two years displaying good control. If the fastball gains even 3-4 mph, he'll start looking really good. Given his frame, he's just as good a bet to gain velocity on his fastball as a HS fireballer is to learn secondary pitches and/or control. He's #17 in my personal top 20, so clearly my opinion on him doesn't differ from Temple's all that much.

Kris Negron is kind of a trendy deep-sleeper pick, but I wouldn't place him as high as #19. He's gotten surprisingly good scouting reviews for a 7th round draft pick, but for a guy with that kind of draft pedigree, I want to see some results in full season ball before I hop aboard the bandwagon. Unfortunately he's the best we have to offer at SS (I don't see how Lowrie could possibly stick at SS), but hopefully Moises Tejada will make some waves at that position in the next two years.


As an aside, does anyone want to move down to Greenville for the summer with me?

C Jon Egan
1B Lars Anderson
2B Chih-Hsien Chiang
SS Kris Negron
3B Manny Arambarris
RF Jason Place
CF Ryan Kalish
LF Carlos Fernandez
DH Mike Jones

That team is going to mash.
   10. Xander Posted: January 12, 2007 at 07:11 AM (#2279145)
FTR:

21. Mark Wagner
22. Chih-Hsien Chiang
23. Kyle Jackson
24. Aaron Bates
25. Ryan Kalish
   11. bibigon Posted: January 12, 2007 at 07:31 AM (#2279162)
That team is going to mash.


We hope.
   12. 1k5v3L Posted: January 12, 2007 at 07:41 AM (#2279166)
That team is going to mash.


Well, that team's average age is 26, they'd better mash.

Btw, Kevin Goldstein had his BoSox top 10 list recently:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5798

Excellent Prospects
1. Clay Buchholz, rhp
Very Good Prospects
2. Jacoby Ellsbury, cf
3. Michael Bowden, rhp
Good Prospects
4. Jason Place, cf
5. Daniel Bard, rhp
6. Bryce Cox, rhp
Average Prospects
7. Dustin Pedroia, 2b
8. Craig Hansen, rhp
9. Kris Johnson, lhp
10. Justin Masterson, rhp

Dustin has slipped all the way to average. I won't bring up Goldstein's assessment of Callaspo.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5694
   13. Xander Posted: January 12, 2007 at 07:51 AM (#2279168)

Well, that team's average age is 26, they'd better mash.

I don't get it.
   14. 1k5v3L Posted: January 12, 2007 at 07:59 AM (#2279171)
Fast internet connection --> typing without thinking --> Darren in heaven

E.P.P., it was supposed to be a snark about some of the BoSox prospects (i.e., Natale, Pedroia) being a bit too old and too polished in college while in low A ball, and thus "mashing".

In other words, more of my usual inanity.
   15. bibigon Posted: January 12, 2007 at 08:01 AM (#2279172)
Dustin has slipped all the way to average. I won't bring up Goldstein's assessment of Callaspo.


Except you will, and you did.

What's your point anyways? Did anyone even mention Pedroia?
   16. 1k5v3L Posted: January 12, 2007 at 08:02 AM (#2279174)
Well, bibigon, Pedroia will be mentioned eventually. Not by me though. I'm done.
   17. Xander Posted: January 12, 2007 at 08:04 AM (#2279175)
E.P.P., it was supposed to be a snark about some of the BoSox prospects (i.e., Natale, Pedroia) being a bit too old and too polished in college while in low A ball, and thus "mashing".

Oh, Ok. The oldest player on that list is 21 and not one of them went to a 4-year college. If that really is the lineup for the Drive, I would be surprised if it wasn't the youngest team in the SAL.
   18. 1k5v3L Posted: January 12, 2007 at 08:11 AM (#2279177)
Thanks, E.P.P. I actually figured that would be a pretty young team but a low hanging fruit was there for the pickin'...

Incidentally, the Red Sox do have quite a bit of very young (maybe underrated because of it?) players in the system. It'll take time to sort them out, but Peter Gammons will be a very happy guy in a couple of years...

Btw, in the Goldstein article I referred to, he mentions that the Red Sox are most likely going to skip Buchholz directly to AA to save him from the California League and Lancaster. I'm guessing this will prompt Kevin to write a long letter to Theo Epstein, explaining how Buchholz should be subjected to the harshness of the CAL league, so that he could experience difficulty and build his stamina and character. Because we all know that if he failed in Lancaster, he wouldn't have the cojones to succeed in the majors...

[/end rant]
   19. Steamer46 Posted: January 12, 2007 at 10:57 AM (#2279203)
Anyone else notice Egan's birthdate coincides with one of the greatest games in Red Sox history?

Also for those that enjoy birthdateology... our new #1 and #5 hitters are born 2 days before and two days after our #3 hitter. Maybe the Sox just really like the Karma brought by that #3 hitter...
   20. Josh Posted: January 12, 2007 at 01:36 PM (#2279213)
Great write ups, Temple.

There will be scant players on this list, I imagine, who have a pro track record of success. That is just how things are right now, though some of these players could still move quickly (eg, Bard & Cox).

Only 1 player on the BPro list has more than 1 full-year of pro ball. For comparison's sake (and without trying to re-summon Levski), all but 3 of the AZ Bpro top 10 list has more than 1 full-year of pro ball.
   21. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: January 12, 2007 at 03:17 PM (#2279251)
Btw, in the Goldstein article I referred to, he mentions that the Red Sox are most likely going to skip Buchholz directly to AA to save him from the California League and Lancaster.
I think that's the right thing to do, if they think it's possible for Buchholz to handle AA right now. That is the big question, though.

That is one upside-heavy list from Goldstein. Buchholz a full level above Ellsbury? Cox, Place, and Bard a full level above Pedroia? There's basically no weight given to how much chance a player has at being average in MLB. That's a valid methodology, but it's certainly striking.
   22. Darren Posted: January 13, 2007 at 10:46 PM (#2280185)
From Rosenthal's latest:

The Marlins continue to explore trades for young center fielders, focusing on the Red Sox's David Murphy, Indians' Franklin Gutierrez and Devil Rays' B.J. Upton and Elijah Dukes.

Murphy is an interesting target; one scout calls him a "sleeper," believing that he eventually will hit for power. The Rays rejected an Upton-for-Ricky Nolasco deal earlier this off-season. Talks between the teams currently are dormant.


What would they give for Murphy? I'll take it!
   23. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: January 14, 2007 at 07:54 PM (#2280434)
What would they give for Murphy? I'll take it!

I won't. If the Marlins think he's good, he mustbe!

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Randy Jones
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.3231 seconds
60 querie(s) executed