You can view the page at http://www.twinsdaily.com/content.ph...gust-1-Edition
You can view the page at http://www.twinsdaily.com/content.ph...gust-1-Edition
I think your grades are low on Gibson, Hicks, Benson, but doesn't look too bad. I might put Danniel Santana higher along with Walker and Vargas in the top 20?
You forgot Felix Jorge. He's thrown just as many innings as Berrios whom you overrated imo. Jorge would have been somewhere in my 20's before the season and he hasn't disappointed yet.
I think you also overrated Harrison based on his appy league stats. His bat is good but he likely carries no defensive value. I'll take Kepler easily since he is younger, less developed as a European, performing better and will have more defensive value.
I also don't get the love affair with Herrmann. he's only ranked 16 here (not ridiculously high) but he's a 24 yr old that has a <.800 OPS (sub .750 OPS) and he doesn't have good enough defense to be more than an occasional catcher. And by love affair the constant mention that Doumit's 2/7 contract is seemingly going to block him from being an MLB'er. His mediocrity is going to block him from being an MLB'er.
pretty sure hudson boyd wasn't born in 82... just saying :)
This appears to be more tools based, I'd probably rearrange most of the top 10. Berrois is way to high, and you can argue Arcia should be 1/2. Rosario at 3. I'd bring Gibson up higher too, and Benson.
Thanks for all the feedback.
Santana, Walker and Vargas were all guys that were moved down in my last edit. #15-27 aren't separated by much and I tried not to overvalue what Vargas has done over the last two weeks. If he continues this tear, he'll move up.
Felix Jorge was omitted.
He should slot in at #21, between Boer and Walker.
P Jorge, Felix 55 Extreme 1/24/94
I'm very high on Berrios. He might not have the build of a Jose Fernandez (Miami), but I could see him shooting up prospect rankings in a similar fashion. Some aren't convinced he can start, that's never been a question for me. I thought he could have been drafted as high as 15 or 20.
Kepler vs Harrison argument is valid. Does Kepler's recent power surge continue? I changed his risk from "extreme" to "high" recently, so no doubt he's on the rise.
I think Herrmann's ceiling is of a platoon player - that's where he slotted in - and that you're undervaluing his defense.
If that were the case, he'd be much lower. :\ Fixed now.Quote:
Originally Posted by diehardtwinsfan
You could make all those arguments and I wouldn't fight you on them. But that's why prospect lists are fun!
I too think that Hicks is to low, also the 55 seems a bit conservative as well. At the very least I think he is a 60 "solid major leaguer" and he really doesn't lack any tools at all at this point. If the power is legit (thinking 15-20 HR a year) and he can manage to hit .270 or so, he suddenly becomes a very nice CF, and possibly one of the best leadoff men in the game.
So where would you put Eduardo Escobar on this list if you thought he would still be counted as a prospect?
And Parmelee?
Fun list. I like Berrios a lot and was hoping the Twins would take him in the supp draft before they did but #5 is a bit aggressive. Hicks would be above Arcia for me but again, that's why these things are fun.
Kepler, Hicks, Arcia are all having pretty good years which really helps our farm system. I liked last years draft, even if Michael is struggling a bit, and it's good to see Harrison and Boyd doing well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by diehardtwinsfan
This list is tools based, because that is what prospects are ranked/ drafted/ traded based off.
Fun read.
I'm also on the Berrios bandwagon.
Jeremy, love the write up. For someone who doesn't get the handbook (which I sometimes deeply regret), your summary is much appreciated. I can't help but notice there aren't any "safe" or "low" risk prospects on the list. I assume the Twins have called those players up already (DeVries, Dozier, Parmelee), but do teams typically have a number of of these prospects in the minors? Or are they called up quickly?
I think this is a good list, in general I would rank the guys below A ball lower as the disappointment rate between E town and Beloit is really high. However I am far more excited about the system than I was a couple of years ago and there is a good balance of good prospects that we will see this Sept or next year and some very high upside guys that are still 2-4 years away.
One question, when you say that Polanco needs to show that he can hit do you mean next year at Beloit? Because his line at E town is .314/.400/.480 which I think is pretty solid; as a comparison Niko Goodrum is 16 months older (and ranked 32 spots higher) and his line at E town isn't any better: .242/.377/.470
I think your Hicks rating is right on. A first-division regular is pretty high praise. Hicks has the look of a 2nd-division regular with a chance to be a 1st if he learns to hit both lefties and righties. 55 is the perfect rating for him. Part of the problem is definition, because a 55 as defined incorporates risk. That is, a 55 medium is actually a 60 high.
How am I underrating Herrmann's defense? He's not good enough to be an everyday catcher and his bat isn't good enough to be a starter at any position (OF/1B) other than catcher. I fail to be impressed at all with a 24 yr old that has a .717 OPS his second time thru AA.
I like Berrios A LOT but this is too high too fast imo. There is absolutely no way that I can be convinced to put him over Gibson.
I would also move Minier's upside up a tick or two. He has more risk than those around him in the rankings but he also has more upside.
Hard to tell with those things :)
But... If you have Buxton at 70, Rosario at 65 and Arcia at 60 as far as potential goes, kind hard for me to see how Hicks at 55 and Benson at 50 make sense... Buxton and Rosario probably too high and Hicks and Benson too low. All of those guys, other than Buxton, who should probably be +5 should be at the same potential. And Rosario probably little lower, but his 2B transition raises him
You got Josh Burris and Mason Melotakis way low, I think compared to people like Hudson Boyd and Luke Bard
Buxton is the top prospect the Twins have. He actually has two talents that would rate as an 80 on the 20-80 scale no other Twins prospect has an 80 rating. Sano might have a 70 in Power. Buxton has an 80 in speed and an 80 arm. He has the most potential. I assume you don't rate Chris Parmelee and Liam Hendriks as propsects anymore even though if they were traded they would be prospects. Both in the Top 12 in the Twins system. Guys like Wheeler and BJ Hermesen have fun numbers in the minors but are 5 starters at best. Look at the K rates look at the competition. Not top 15 at all. Berrios is maybe top 15 but certainly not top 10 yet or even close to 5. That must have been a - Look what I did throw in. Alex Wimmers is to low. He has 3rd starter stuff and that still counts for something compared to guys like Wheeler and BJ.
kab, I'm also not impressed with Herrmann. He looks like a back-up catcher to me at this point. Catchers that can hit a little bit and play adequate defense stay around for a awhile, so I'm not saying he is a terrible prospect.
Matt- I think most prospects include a lot of risk. Many of these guys are in the minors because they have things to work on to get better. As prospects work up the ladder and stay consistent the risk drops and potential is clearer. Arcia, for example, would have less risk on my list since he has performed so well and stayed consistent. Every prospect has risk.
top 10 is same as mine....different order, no biggie.
Some disagreements in 2nd top...again no biggie as I see/hope Adam Walker is a top guy mostly
Am I wrong to think MN will be top 10 for team prospects next year
Lots of good feedback...
VodkaDave: Hicks needs to show power. That's the missing tool. #3-6, really, though, aren't separated by much.
enge: I would rank Parmelee as 50/Low (between Kepler and Benson) and Escobar as 45/Low (in between Goodrum and Hermsen). Dozier (45/Low) would slot in before Goodrum and Hendriks (50/Medium) right before Benson... basically all in that 10-15 range.
gunnarther: #5 on Berrios is aggressive. I said before the draft I thought he could be a #2 starter... I didn't want to back off of that now.
Matt VS: There are not many players labeled "safe". (I think only Matt Moore.) Bryce Harper and Mike Trout were "low"... many others that have MLB experience, but are still prospects are low. BA had Hendriks and Doyle as "low". I had Dinkelman as a 35/low, but he didn't make the cut. As far as purchasing the handbook, you would never regret it.
Jeff P: Polanco is hitting now (100 ABs in the Appy League), but has never hit over .250 before. The Appy League is a hitter's league and it's a small sample size. He needs to sustain. Hitting in Beloit would be a good continuation of this year. The difference between Polanco and Goodrum has a lot to with their body builds.
twinstalker: 55/Medium and 60/High are very similar, I went between the two for Hicks. Change those two, his ranking doesn't change, imo.
kab: Herrmann is a good defensive OF. So when your 4th OF and your 2nd (or 3rd) catcher can be the same person, there is value. I had Minier rated much higher in my initial list. Way higher... but I want him to play in a game before I rank him too high. I agree with you though.
thrylos: It's more than just the number though. I like to think of the risk factor as the floor. So Benson is 50/45, Hicks is 55/50, Arcia is 60/55, Rosario is 65/55, Buxton is 70/55. You can make a case that Benson could be higher. I've never been a huge believer. We can call Hicks 60/high (or 60/50), but I still think Arcia is a safer bet to reach a similar ceiling (albeit much different skills). But all is very debatable.
Burris is a reliever with control issues. Maybe he's too high. Melotakis, if he stays in the pen, which is expended, lowers his ceiling. Boyd and Bard are rated as guys that will have to pitch out of the rotation. Funny though, all four of those guys I had a hard time placing.
seans - Wheeler and Hermsen are back of the rotation guys for sure. Innings-eaters, which is exactly where I rate them. I think Wheeler can improve cause he's a big body. A velo increase isn't out of the question and the K-rate could come up. If not, yeah, he's a #5.
I wouldn't argue with you about Buxton being #1.
I had Wimmers higher, but TJ surgery is going to set him back. He was a 50/Medium (which rated him in the 12-13 ranger)... too many question made him a 50/High.
Again, thanks for all the feeback... it's hard to argue with any of the points that were made.