KLAW's top 100 list is out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YourHouseIsMyHouse

You're seriously going to 'correct' me on something like that? 34HRs in 2 seasons looks pretty damn good for a 19-20 year old. Keep in mind he'll get stronger with time. Most teenagers don't develop power until later on. Wouldn't be surprised if he became a 25-30HR guy in peak years. He's not a slugger, but the adjective I used could have been good, above average, whatever. I wasn't using scouting terminology. He can hit long balls just as good as anyone in our minors except for Sano and to me that's great. He's also a 5 tool player if he moves back to Center Field. The move to 2nd may be good organization wise, but it's a myth that it improves his prospect status. Sticking at second really doesn't take advantage of his arm. In a way I see him as a different version of Hicks. More power, more contact (minus) switch hitting, no down year (yet), less speed, and better at managing strikeouts. I'd give Hicks the advantage in the field (Hicks has a cannon, more experience, and speed+other things=range), but Eddie certainly could provide "above average" defense there.

---

Rosario is a 5 tool player? Being a 5 tool player doesn't change based on what position you play, it just means you aren't utilizing all of your tools depending on the position. He has the hit tool, he is on the fringe of having the power tool, but I'd be willing to bet that his power tool is more in line with league average, which is still good! In fact, I'd say Rosario is probably a 1-2 tool player, but the rest of his tools are near in line with league average which makes him a very good prospect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Lein

As for comparing Arcia to Kubel (pre-injury). Kubel absolutely RAKED, and was thought of as one of the best pure hitters in the minors before he blew out the knee. I don't consider Arcia to be in that lofty of hitting territory quite yet. I like the "Kubel-light" name I've seen thrown around.

---

I think you're underestimating Arcia a bit. On his current track, he's a year younger than pre-injury Kubel and is down around .100 OPS from Jason's breakout 22 year old season. After posting a .950 OPS as a 21 year old at AA, I think the pre-injury Kubel comp is a fair one. Of course, he's going to have to step it up again in AAA to maintain that comp but for now, it's a decent one. I think "Jason Kubel Lite" ignores what Arcia did at an advanced level last season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Lein

As for comparing Arcia to Kubel (pre-injury). Kubel absolutely RAKED, and was thought of as one of the best pure hitters in the minors before he blew out the knee. I don't consider Arcia to be in that lofty of hitting territory quite yet. I like the "Kubel-light" name I've seen thrown around.

---

Arcia age 21 Season - .928 OPS between A+ and AA, 36 2B, 17 HR

Jason Kubel age 21 season - a+ ball, .761 OPS, 20 2B, 5 HR

At the same age last year, Arcia raked better than Kubel and with half his games at a higher level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrodaddyG

Arcia age 21 Season - .928 OPS between A+ and AA, 36 2B, 17 HR

Jason Kubel age 21 season - a+ ball, .761 OPS, 20 2B, 5 HR

At the same age last year, Arcia raked better than Kubel and with half his games at a higher level.

---

But that's not how I remembered it, Fro.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PseudoSABR

But that's not how I remembered it, Fro.

---

Well, Arcia did play in eight more games, so Kubel probably would have gone for 2 2B and 1.5 HR a game if he got those extra eight under his belt.

Well, to that, I say why isn't Arcia a top 20 MLB prospect like Kubel was then? This is why I would call it overvaluing him (at this point). Also, I don't buy the one year age difference you are citing to mean as much as you do. If Oz is in AAA next year, he'll be a 22 year old at that level in May. Kubel's birthday is in May as well, and he was also a 22 year old at AAA. (Did I mention May is the best month for birthdays?!)

This is called "begging the question." It begins here:

Quote:

---

Kubel absolutely RAKED, and was thought of as one of the best pure hitters in the minors before he blew out the knee. I don't consider Arcia to be in that lofty of hitting territory quite yet.

---

Rebuttal here:

Quote:

---

At the same age last year, Arcia raked better than Kubel and with half his games at a higher level.

---

And the circle is completed here:

Quote:

---

Well, to that, I say why isn't Arcia a top 20 MLB prospect like Kubel was then?

---

In simplified form this reads: "I don't think he's as good a prospect as Kubel, and despite his hitting stats being just as good as Kubel's, my evidence for my position is that he isn't as good a prospect as Kubel.

Please tell me you see the circularity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Lein

Well, to that, I say why isn't Arcia a top 20 MLB prospect like Kubel was then? This is why I would call it overvaluing him (at this point). Also, I don't buy the one year age difference you are citing to mean as much as you do. If Oz is in AAA next year, he'll be a 22 year old at that level in May. Kubel's birthday is in May as well, and he was also a 22 year old at AAA. (Did I mention May is the best month for birthdays?!)

---

Kubel forced his way onto prospect lists for the same reason Arcia has. He hit wherever he went. Maybe 8 years ago, the evaluators more heavily weighed production over tools and projectability. My 8-year-back prospect recollection is a bit rusty, but maybe I can recall why I had Kubel ranked so high on the Baseball America list pre-2005. (BTW, John Danks was the BA #59 guy on that 2005 list to compare with Law's Arcia ranking, and baseball superstar/fat-person-of-note Delmon Young was #3 on that list. So those guys are always dead on.) :rolleyes:

Arcia isn't a sexy, 5 tool player. He's a corner OF who can play respectable defense and hits the hell out of the ball from the left side. That's the exact write-up Kubel would have had in his pre-injury years. But the fact is, he's a level ahead at the same age as Kubel prior to Kubel's breakout AA-AAA season. Does he roll into this season at AA or AAA and mash the way Kubel did when he got there? I don't know, because it hasn't happened yet. But to say the Kubel comp is "overstated" is humorous. He's done the exact same or more, than Kubel , with a very similar skill set, through the same point in their careers, which Is ALL YOU CAN COMPARE. Once Arcia has had another season under his belt, then feel free to bring Kubel's breakout 2004 season into the comparison, because this upcoming season will be Arcia's comparable season to that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 70charger

In simplified form this reads: "I don't think he's as good a prospect as Kubel, and despite his hitting stats being just as good as Kubel's, my evidence for my position is that he isn't as good a prospect as Kubel.

Please tell me you see the circularity.

---

I see it as this:

As a 21 year old in AA for half a season, Arcia went .328/.398/.557, with 35 XBH RBI in 69 games.

As a 21 year old in AA, Kubel went .377/.453/.667 with 24 XBH in 37 games, then went on to hit .343/.398/.560, with 44 XBH in 90 games at AAA after turning 22.

Arcia is going to be a 22 year old in AAA this year (at some point). Do you think he's going to put up the best numbers of his MiLB career (outside of his E-Town season) in Rochester this year? Seems like you think this is a given. And do you also see how the age difference you're trying portray in comparing numbers isn't actually real? They were both 21 when at Fort Myers (and yes I'm aware Oz's #'s there are better), but you're asking for a lot if you expect Arcia to continue that trend at AAA, as he already has not exceeded Kubel's AA numbers.

But you are right, I don't consider Arcia to quite be on the level of hitting prospect that Kubel was. This is not a knock at all, as I agree that he's probably going to be very good!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Lein

I see it as this:

As a 21 year old in AA for half a season, Arcia went .328/.398/.557, with 35 XBH RBI in 69 games.

As a 21 year old in AA, Kubel went .377/.453/.667 with 24 XBH in 37 games, then went on to hit .343/.398/.560, with 44 XBH in 90 games at AAA after turning 22.

Arcia is going to be a 22 year old in AAA this year (at some point). Do you think he's going to put up the best numbers of his MiLB career (outside of his E-Town season) in Rochester this year? Seems like you think this is a given. And do you also see how the age difference you're trying portray in comparing numbers isn't actually real? They were both 21 when at Fort Myers (and yes I'm aware Oz's #'s there are better), but you're asking for a lot if you expect Arcia to continue that trend at AAA, as he already has not exceeded Kubel's AA numbers.

But you are right, I don't consider Arcia to quite be on the level of hitting prospect that Kubel was. This is not a knock at all, as I agree that he's probably going to be very good!

---

Except that you're using Kubel's "age 21 and a few weeks into age 22" season against Arcia's "I just turned 21 a few weeks ago" season. You know as well as anyone here that age does matter with prospects. It matters a lot. Guys are still growing muscle, particularly in their early 20s. A full 12 months may (or may not) do a lot for Arcia's swing, which is already wicked-fast.

Right now, Arcia has outperformed Kubel's numbers and has done it at a higher level than Jason if you lock-step their progress through the minors by age. Now, the real test will be how he compares to Kubel's breakout season at age 22.

The thing is, he already came close to doing it as a 21 year old.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Lein

Arcia is going to be a 22 year old in AAA this year (at some point). Do you think he's going to put up the best numbers of his MiLB career (outside of his E-Town season) in Rochester this year? Seems like you think this is a given. And do you also see how the age difference you're trying portray in comparing numbers isn't actually real? They were both 21 when at Fort Myers (and yes I'm aware Oz's #'s there are better), but you're asking for a lot if you expect Arcia to continue that trend at AAA, as he already has not exceeded Kubel's AA numbers.

---

The point is this: Prior to Kubel's 2004 season, Kubel wasn't a top prospect either. Not top 100. Nothing. As a prospect, he was loiwer rankings-wise than Arcia is at this age. Kubel was an under the radar, mid-round draft pick who hit well in the low minors. Then he had his big year, and jumped to the top 20, and deservedly so. But it wasn't like his AA-AAA breakout was anything anyone knew was a foregone conclusion, and if they say so, they're a liar.

Maybe Arcia keeps the ball rolling at AAA, maybe he regresses, or maybe he exceeds Kubel's numbers. We don't know because, again, he hasn't played that comparable season yet. To use the "why isn't he a top 20 prospect" argument is a bit disingenuous, because the player you are claiming he's compared to in an "overblown" manner wasn't considered a prospect of any repute until AFTER the same-age season Arcia is about to play out. If you want to go by the "rankings" note, then Arcia's ahead of the game there, too, by beginning to show up in "Top 100" lists a year earlier than Kubel did.

I don't think anyone is banking on Arcia putting up the "best numbers of his career" as he goes forward, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility, the same way Kubel found a way to have a huge year after a tepid year at Ft. Myers.

I respect the reasons for the paywall system and don't want to circumvent it completely, but since Law seems so high on Gibson, I'd be curious to read any blurbs from his write-up...any choice excerpts?

I'm just trying to show you that if you "lock-step" their progress through the Minors, they are going to end up at AAA at the same exact time. And yes age matters, but I totally believe you're making more out of their "1 year age difference" (which isn't actually 1 exact year in a lock-step fashion in their cases) than should be. If Kubel was 24/25 at AA/AAA, I would agree with your assessment, but that's not what's going on here, both were young for their levels. And as far as progressing goes, fact is both are going to end up going from the GCL to AAA in 5 seasons of MiLB ball, and while Kubel absolutely destroyed AA/AAA, Arcia hasn't hit AAA yet, and was below Kubel in AA numbers. What do you put more stock in, Rookie leagues and A-ball, or AA and AAA?!?!?

Kubel was 100% the best hitting prospect the Twins had coming up at this frame of time in their respective MiLB progressions, and while the same could likely be said about Arcia, he's not at the level Kubel displayed. I think this is just a case of Oz is a guy you guys know and have followed, therefore you believe more in him, and there's nothing wrong with that, I'm just trying to be the realist here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Lein

I'm just trying to show you that if you "lock-step" their progress through the Minors, they are going to end up at AAA at the same exact time. And yes age matters, but I totally believe you're making more out of their "1 year age difference" (which isn't actually 1 exact year in a lock-step fashion in their cases) than should be. If Kubel was 24/25 at AA/AAA, I would agree with your assessment, but that's not what's going on here, both were young for their levels. And as far as progressing goes, fact is both are going to end up going from the GCL to AAA in 5 seasons of MiLB ball, and while Kubel absolutely destroyed AA/AAA, Arcia hasn't hit AAA yet, and was below Kubel in AA numbers. What do you put more stock in, Rookie leagues and A-ball, or AA and AAA?!?!?

Kubel was 100% the best hitting prospect the Twins had coming up at this frame of time in their respective MiLB progressions, and while the same could likely be said about Arcia, he's not at the level Kubel displayed. I think this is just a case of Oz is a guy you guys know and have followed, therefore you believe more in him, and there's nothing wrong with that, I'm just trying to be the realist here.

---

I followed Kubel through the minors as well. I remember when he went down in the AFL and how bummed the forum was about it. The Twins needed that offense.

And their adjusted age difference is about 350 days. Close enough to a year to call it that. Kubel started his age 22 season in AA and had about 150 ABs there. There's a good chance Arcia starts off his age 22 season in AAA (and even if he doesn't, Arcia already has 300 PAs in AA that Kubel didn't begin to receive until the start of that age 22 season).

Again, Kubel was a marginal prospect until he completed his age 22 season. Considering how Arcia has out hit him at a younger age, I think the Kubel comp is a fair one and that "Jason Kubel Light" is the bad comp, considering that age 21 Jason Kubel was not exceptionally good at baseball, nor was he highly regarded by analysts. You keep talking about how Kubel was the top Twins hitting prospect but I don't see why that's relevant. Yeah, he should have been the top hitting prospect because he was the last decent hitting prospect to come through the system until this current batch of hitters we see today. The Twins had already promoted Hunter, Cuddyer, Morneau, Mauer, etc. and Span was never much of a prospect until he suddenly broke out of nowhere. The Twins haven't had many decent hitters in the minors since 2004. It's not surprising that Arcia is overshadowed in a farm system that contains guys like Hicks, Buxton, and Sano... Just as Kubel was overshadowed by Mauer and Morneau during his early years in the system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Lein

he's not at the level Kubel displayed.

---

Well, as long as you count Kubel's seasons from age 22 on. You know, the ones Arcia hasn't played yet. Because up to this point in their careers, side-by-side, Arcia has been just as good. If Arcia hits his AA numbers at AAA, he'll have OPSed within 3 points of Kubel's breakout AAA stats. He doesn't have to improve to compare to Kubel, he just needs to hit at AAA the way he did at AA and he's right on par with Kubel's numbers.

This has nothing to do with him being "the one I know and have followed". Many of these guys on this board were over at the ESPN boards having glowing discussions of Kubel during 2004 and were devastated to see him go down with his AFL injury. People are high on Arcia, because he's done Kubel-like things at the same time in his career that Kubel did them. At this point in his career, Kubel broke out it the high levels the following season. Arcia will have the chance to do the same in a couple months. The limits of the time-space continuum aren't something I hold against Arcia just yet.

[Edit: I walked away mid-post and then finished and see Brock made many of the same points. I wasn't intending to parrot him as much as I ended up doing.]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrodaddyG

Well, as long as you count Kubel's seasons from age 22 on. You know, the ones Arcia hasn't played yet. Because up to this point in their careers, side-by-side, Arcia has been just as good. If Arcia hits his AA numbers at AAA, he'll have OPSed within 3 points of Kubel's breakout AAA stats. He doesn't have to improve to compare to Kubel, he just needs to hit at AAA the way he did at AA and he's right on par with Kubel's numbers.

---

I guess in my world hitting .328/.398/.557 at 21 does not equal hitting .377/.453/.667 at (mostly) age 21 at the same level. Both are great, but not "just as good", one is considerably "greater". Career number wise, I'll agree with you, but Kubel still had a significant spike in his peak at the higher levels (compared to Arcia's "peak" at this point being in Rookie ball), while Arcia has been essentially static. Depending on who you talk too, one of those paths may be considered better than the other, but I'll take the extreme peaks of Kubel at AA/AAA. Do note however, this very well could change if Arcia continues to mash at AAA.

And again, in reference to their ages, look at the timeframe of when they were the specific ages at the specific levels. I'll just reiterate I don't buy the "Arcia is better because he's a year younger at level x" argument, because it's just not true for where Arcia is now. Arcia may start in AAA this year, which means he will be 21 for almost exactly a month at AAA if he starts there, and Kubel would have turned 22 but a few weeks before reaching AAA.

This is incredibly insignificant to me, and no different than trying to make this same comparison to a couple of players drafted out of high school at age 18, but happen to have birthdays a few months apart. Would you make the "They're both at AA, and the younger one doesn't have as good of numbers even though they are both good, but he's younger so he's the better prospect" argument in this case?! No, I know you wouldn't. But that's honestly how I read it. And maybe that's my problem, but I still haven't been convinced otherwise.

At least I know we can agree Arcia is the Twins best pure hitting prospect right now, right?! q;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Lein

And again, in reference to their ages, look at the timeframe of when they were the specific ages at the specific levels. I'll just reiterate I don't buy the "Arcia is better because he's a year younger at level x" argument, because it's just not true for where Arcia is now. Arcia may start in AAA this year, which means he will be 21 for almost exactly a month at AAA if he starts there, and Kubel would have turned 22 but a few weeks before reaching AAA.

---

Dude, c'mon. They both have birthdays in May. When Arcia turned 21, he was on his way to AA after a short stint in A ball. When Kubel turned 21, he was still in A ball and would be for the rest of the season. Arcia spent the bulk of his age 21 season in AA while Kubel was still in A ball.

A year difference. Yes, Kubel progressed a lot in his age 22 season but Arcia hasn't even played his age 22 season yet and already has 300 PAs in AA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Dude, c'mon. They both have birthdays in May. When Arcia turned 21, he was on his way to AA after a short stint in A ball. When Kubel turned 21, he was still in A ball and would be for the rest of the season. Arcia spent the bulk of his age 21 season in AA while Kubel was still in A ball.

A year difference. Yes, Kubel progressed a lot in his age 22 season but Arcia hasn't even played his age 22 season yet and already has 300 PAs in AA.

---

How many times does this need to be said? He's using different seasons in the development curve. I'd type something longer out myself, but I'm running late for darts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Again, Kubel was a marginal prospect until he completed his age 22 season. Considering how Arcia has out hit him at a younger age, I think the Kubel comp is a fair one and that "Jason Kubel Light" is the bad comp, considering that age 21 Jason Kubel was not exceptionally good at baseball, nor was he highly regarded by analysts.

---

One more note, I know of quite a few people who would disagree in a major way with this sequence of statements. He was a Top 10 Twins prospect for several years, so there were plenty of people out there that saw good things in him.

As for the "dude c'mon", I guess we'll have to agree we see it differently. I think you're making a mountain (Oz is better prospect) out of a mole hill (because he reached AA less than a season's worth of time sooner).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Lein

One more note, I know of quite a few people who would disagree in a major way with this sequence of statements. He was a Top 10 Twins prospect for several years, so there were plenty of people out there that saw good things in him.

As for the "dude c'mon", I guess we'll have to agree we see it differently. I think you're making a mountain (Oz is better prospect) out of a mole hill (because he reached AA less than a season's worth of time sooner).

---

I've never said Oswaldo was the better prospect. I said pre-injury Kubel was a good comp and thought "Jason Kubel Light" was not an accurate comparison. That's how I entered this argument.

And again, when Kubel was higher up in the Twins farm, the system was mediocre. He wasn't competing in a system that had Sano, Buxton, Hicks, Gibson, et al in it. Once Mauer and Morneau cleared the Major League roster, Kubel was the only decent guy left standing. His competition for "top 10 prospect" status was... not fierce.