BA Top 100 (5 Twins, no Stewart)

[nicksaviking]

Steward was working on different stuff.  Fastball is not his out pitch the slider is and Twins wanted the slider limited to work on other offerings.  BA only looked at results and what he was using.  This could easily change this year.  Still seams like a drop on their part.

 

That's almost certainly true, but I also wonder if they also had him sparingly use his slider because the team doesn't want the extra stress on his arm at this time.  The team sure seemed to blame the slider on Liriano's TJ surgery and were reluctant to let him go back to using it with the same frequency after his recovery. 

 

Hopefully they're just saving the pitch for this year and when he gets ready for the big stage.

[twinsfanstreif]

I've also not seen so many draft picks from that year make it on a top 100 list, usually the first 5 or 6 guys make the list, there are 15 (that I counted) of this years picks that made it and the first overall didn't sign so he wasn't there, that's an insane jump from years past and from other lists. It's also interesting that Schwarber was the 2nd highest of the group when he was considered an extreme reach (by BA) when he was drafted, although he did hit well in his shortened season this year it's kinda odd that he would skyrocket up to #19 overall after being considered the #18 best prospect in the draft just prior to being drafted by BA just because he hit .300 as a 21 y/o in A ball.

[bird]

Building a composite of all the lists should probably be done for the full picture. This is an outlier, for sure, but that is interesting as well. I don't regard Stewart to be quite as awesome as many around here, but he still is a top 6 Twins prospect (even this BA list confirms that, ultimately). 

Here's a quick crack at it, with some yet to publish, like Sickles:

 

Numbers below are in the order of ESPN, MLB, BA, BPro, and Fang

 

Buxton: 2,1,2,1,2

 

Sano:   15,11,13,12,15

 

Berrios: 97,32,36,48,24

 

Meyer:  30,29,62,14,71

 

Stewart:  53, 36, WTF, 28,73

 

Gordon: 43,33,61,70,72

 

Thorpe made BPro at 91, Fang at, oh, 150

 

Polanco made Fang at 108, was cited as "just missed" elsewhere

 

Burdi made BPro at 99, was Honorably Mentioned once or twice

 

Rosario missed all, was #56 with Sickles last year, but haven't heard his name in chats myself

 

May has been ignored this season and last 

 

Kepler hasn't been ranked since last year at #131 by someone

 

Gonsalves has been mentioned once or twice in chats as one to watch

 

Minier has also

 

Lewin Diaz was recently reported to have drawn buzz from scouts this winter

[Shane Wahl]

Here's a quick crack at it, with some yet to publish, like Sickles:

 

Numbers below are in the order of ESPN, MLB, BA, BPro, and Fang

 

Buxton: 2,1,2,1,2

 

Sano:   15,11,13,12,15

 

Berrios: 97,32,36,48,24

 

Meyer:  30,29,62,14,71

 

Stewart:  53, 36, WTF, 28,73

 

Gordon: 43,33,61,70,72

 

Thorpe made BPro at 91, Fang at, oh, 150

 

Polanco made Fang at 108, was cited as "just missed" elsewhere

 

Burdi made BPro at 99, was Honorably Mentioned once or twice

 

Rosario missed all, was #56 with Sickles last year, but haven't heard his name in chats myself

 

May has been ignored this season and last 

 

Kepler hasn't been ranked since last year at #131 by someone

 

Gonsalves has been mentioned once or twice in chats as one to watch

 

Minier has also

 

Lewin Diaz was recently reported to have drawn buzz from scouts this winter

 

Thanks! It takes a bit of work to do that. I also like how you listed Stewart's rankings!

[Shane Wahl]

Personally, my favorite baseball site is BP (by far) so I always pay more attention to how they view these things. 

[Secondary User]

Isn't it pretty unusual for a top prospect to make a full season debut with that low of a K rate? Not sure if he deserves much benefit of the doubt yet -- he was a high school draftee, so he was basically all projection. First full season results matter, and guys do not get high rankings based on low-A H/9 rate alone.

 

It's also unusual for the player to be a two sport star like Stewart was who spent as little time as a pitcher as Kohl did.  Coming in, he was unpolished, even by High School pitcher standards.  This was something that was known.

 

And don't get 'two sport star' confused with 'two sport athlete'.  While most people who end up becoming professional athletes probably did well in other sports they played, Kohl was a top football recruit, and it was uncertain whether he was going to choose football or baseball.

[Otto von Ballpark]

He didn't show anything?! A 2.59 ERA and 1.14 WHIP while using his best out pitch sparingly?! That tells me nobody was squaring him up... And frankly, I think he was better (by a good amount) than Berrios was in the MWL at the same age...

 

 

He definitely wasn't using it much. I know Seth wrote an article where Stewart himself said he didn't throw a single one in the game discussed.

 

The idea, from what I've gathered, was because he was a HS draftee who didn't focus full time on baseball until being drafted. All the potential is there, but the best way to get him to reach that potential was focusing on the most important aspect of pitching, which is locating the fastball, as he hadn't actually spent a ton of time pitching to develop this based on his multi-sport background.

 

All the reports and profiles leading up to the draft praised the slider as his best strike-out pitch, and a swing-and-miss one at that (plus). I would think it's quite logical (and obvious) that he wouldn't rack up as many K's as expected if he was throwing 5 or less of them per game, or none at all.

Problem is, this assumes his slider is already so good that it doesn't need any work in the pros, or at least that he can skip working on it in game situations at his first full season level. That seems like a pretty huge assumption, especially for a raw 18 year old HS quarterback. Maybe if he had previously demonstrated the skill, like Liriano or Meyer, I understand working on other offerings or protecting the arm. But at this point, it feels like counting chickens before they hatch.

 

If I were a prospect evaluator, I would have to factor in the concern that his slider may not be that great/consistent/sustainable, which would take a big bite out of his projected value.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Shelving Stewart's slider in A-ball last year because it is so good would be like DHing Buxton in 2013. A skill has to be demonstrated before it is protected, right?

 

Or, telling Buxton just to make contact on his swings, and we will worry about power later (in 2013 mind you, before he even demonstrated power out of rookie league ball).

[Dantes929]

This all actually makes me feel kind of good.   Makes me feel like with all the stats and tests and reports its still baseball and players can't be pigeonholed with pinpoint accuracy.   Guys outside the top 150 will make it to the major leagues and do well and some in the top 30 might never make it.   I mean these guys that make the lists are experts, right? and one expert says Stewart is top 30 and another rates him at least 73 spots lower.     Reaffirms my opinion in general.    Experts are those that are right half the time and us poor shmuck amateurs are wrong half the time.

[jimmer]

This all actually makes me feel kind of good.   Makes me feel like with all the stats and tests and reports its still baseball and players can't be pigeonholed with pinpoint accuracy.   Guys outside the top 150 will make it to the major leagues and do well and some in the top 30 might never make it.   I mean these guys that make the lists are experts, right? and one expert says Stewart is top 30 and another rates him at least 73 spots lower.     Reaffirms my opinion in general.    Experts are those that are right half the time and us poor shmuck amateurs are wrong half the time.

I think what it tells me is that considering how many players are in the minors, the fact that most of the experts see the same players as being the best ones is a good sign, regardless of the differences in the ranking of those mostly same players.  A lot of times, the difference are explained.  Some guys put more emphasis on players closer to the majors, some put more on overall potential, some don't consider players who have hit the majors at all, some consider players who have hit the majors and yet still have rookie status, etc.

 

And the fact that, you know, they are actually out all over the country doing the scouting, unlike us.  I haven't spent one day on a field scouting even one player in a long time and even when I did, I couldn't compare him to the bunches of minor leagues out there because I was just limited to the minor teams that played in my area.  I've watched video of some guys but not all the players in the minors.

[Steve Lein]

Shelving Stewart's slider in A-ball last year because it is so good would be like DHing Buxton in 2013. A skill has to be demonstrated before it is protected, right?

 

I disagree with this thought process for reasons already stated.

 

I think they know already the slider is a good pitch, but being that he is relatively unpolished for a high-school pitcher due to playing (and excelling at) another sport, he had other things they wanted him to work on and develop first -> fastball command.

 

Along the same thought process, you can (potentially) keep him healthy longer by not using a so called "stressful" pitch too much early in his career.

 

[Dantes929]

Shelving Stewart's slider in A-ball last year because it is so good would be like DHing Buxton in 2013. A skill has to be demonstrated before it is protected, right?

 

Or, telling Buxton just to make contact on his swings, and we will worry about power later (in 2013 mind you, before he even demonstrated power out of rookie league ball).

In hindsight I wish they had made these assumptions on Buxton and Dh'ed him in 2014.  I don't think the analogy is quite apt as no other sport or position has the same risk or the same caution as pitching.   

[Steve Lein]

Had a question about the Top 100 discussed earlier here and answered in their chat:

 

"Steve L. (Minneapolis,MN): I notice Kohl Stewart is ranked ahead of NIck Gordon and Alex Meyer on your Twins Top 10, but is missing from the Top 100. I know opinions can change, but question the consistency?!

John Manuel: Consistency can be a great thing in a player; I argue for flexibility with prospect rankings. And if you check the BA grades for those players in the Prospect Handbook, they are very similar. Stewart and Gordon are both 60 Highs and Meyer is a 55 Medium. Those are really on the same level. So one being 4 and one 6, we don't do ties in the book, but they have the same grades. Gordon being a middle of the diamond position player is less risky, for me, than Stewart. Meyer has similar stuff and has done it in Triple-A. Stewart was in that 101-110 range, almost made it, but he carries a lot of risk, and that 6.4 K per 9 rate last year is a red flag for me. I want to see a supposed raw stuff guy do a bit more than that."

 

He makes this omission sound worse with this answer, if you ask me (see bolded comments). Higher grades for Stewart, but misses the list. Calls the K-rate a red flag because of "raw stuff" while not failing to acknowledging or realize he wasn't using all of it to it's full potential.

[Steve Lein]

Another Twins prospect came up in the chat:

 

"Greg T. (Lake Central): Who, not on this list, has a chance to make the biggest jump onto the 2016 list?

Ben Badler: Jorge Polanco has the skill set that tends to get overlooked, so I'm not sure if he's going to jump high next year, but I'm definitely higher on him than most. Marcos Molina, Forrest Wall, Ozhaino Albies, Brett Phillips, Nick Williams, Jorge Mateo and Gleyber Torres are all names to watch for next year."

 

Good to see Polanco get some love. Agree he kind of goes a bit unnoticed, even around here!

[twinsfanstreif]

Had a question about the Top 100 discussed earlier here and answered in their chat:

 

"Steve L. (Minneapolis,MN): I notice Kohl Stewart is ranked ahead of NIck Gordon and Alex Meyer on your Twins Top 10, but is missing from the Top 100. I know opinions can change, but question the consistency?!

 

John Manuel: Consistency can be a great thing in a player; I argue for flexibility with prospect rankings. And if you check the BA grades for those players in the Prospect Handbook, they are very similar. Stewart and Gordon are both 60 Highs and Meyer is a 55 Medium. Those are really on the same level. So one being 4 and one 6, we don't do ties in the book, but they have the same grades. Gordon being a middle of the diamond position player is less risky, for me, than Stewart. Meyer has similar stuff and has done it in Triple-A. Stewart was in that 101-110 range, almost made it, but he carries a lot of risk, and that 6.4 K per 9 rate last year is a red flag for me. I want to see a supposed raw stuff guy do a bit more than that."

 

He makes this omission sound worse with this answer, if you ask me (see bolded comments). Higher grades for Stewart, but misses the list. Calls the K-rate a red flag because of "raw stuff" while not failing to acknowledging or realize he wasn't using all of it to it's full potential.

I would rather have a guy post a 6.4 K/9 and post a sub 3 era with a 1.1 WHIP rather than have a guy post an 11 K/9 with an 11 ERA and 2.250 WHIP like Toussaint did, how is that not a red flag?!

[dxpavelka]

Definitely surprising to not see Kohl Stewart on this list, especially when he's as high as 27 overall on one list somewhere. 

Which goes to show that nobody really knows and that all of this is just speculation and we should take it all with a grain of salt.  In  the end the only opinion that should matter to any of us is our own.

[jimmer]

'Definitely surprising to not see Kohl Stewart on this list, especially when he's as high as 27 overall on one list somewhere.'

 

Where was that?

[Han Joelo]

I'm not saying he is top 100, but I am surprised Eddie Rosario has not been mentioned Anywhere, be it list, chat, or honorable mention. I won't be at all surprised if he figures in ROY voting this year.

 

Also, nice to see a little pushback on the Red Sox and Braves rankings, especially after Fangraph's gushing. I hate to go down the bias rabbit hole, but given the lack of success De la Rosa, Webster, Middlebrooks, Bradley, and even Bogaerts showed, I think it's smart to view the Red Sox rankings with a grain of salt.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I think they know already the slider is a good pitch, but being that he is relatively unpolished for a high-school pitcher due to playing (and excelling at) another sport

 

Seems like a big contradiction there. He's young and unpolished, yet somehow we know the slider is good? A pitch he has barely thrown to pro batters? And this pitch more than any other informs us of his ceiling. I am not surprised if some evaluators are less aggressive in ranking him at this point.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if the Twins were being super-cautious with his health, as he is their most expensive amateur pitcher ever. But it also wouldn't surprise me if the Twins were willing to sacrifice some potential upside in the process too.

[jimmer]

'Also, nice to see a little pushback on the Red Sox and Braves rankings, especially after Fangraph's gushing.'

 

On the Fangraphs top 200, Atlanta didn't have a single player in the top three tiers of prospects and Boston had two 60s, to go along with zero 65s and zero 70s.   Of the two 60s Boston has, they didn't draft one of them (a LHP who tocuhes 96) and the other is Swihart, and offensive catcher slugging in the high 400s. Swihart is the top catching prospect according to ESPN, the 17th prospect according to BAs list in early Feb and Law had him at 10 (with the LHP that touches 96 at #29)

 

Both teams may have a good amount of overall prospects on the list, but does that really show that FANGRAPHS is gushing over both systems?

 

And how prospects before worked out before in an organization doesn't have any effect on how other prospects for the same organization are going to work out.  Just like the Cubs having such a huge history of losing doesn't have any affect on any Cubs team going forward.  New players, new management, etc.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I'm not saying he is top 100, but I am surprised Eddie Rosario has not been mentioned Anywhere, be it list, chat, or honorable mention. I won't be at all surprised if he figures in ROY voting this year..

He was pretty bad in AA last year, and showed very little plate discipline in the AFL. I would be very surprised if he is among the best MLB rookies this year.

 

After so many prospects disappointing us, I think Danny Santana is skewing expectations the other way.

[jimmer]

He was pretty bad in AA last year, and showed very little plate discipline in the AFL. I would be very surprised if he is among the best MLB rookies this year.

 

After so many prospects disappointing us, I think Danny Santana is skewing expectations the other way.

and he missed the first 50 games of the 2014 season.

[Steve Lein]

Seems like a big contradiction there. He's young and unpolished, yet somehow we know the slider is good? A pitch he has barely thrown to pro batters? And this pitch more than any other informs us of his ceiling. I am not surprised if some evaluators are less aggressive in ranking him at this point.

 

We may just have a different idea of what "unpolished" means. Mine is he hadn't pitched nearly as much as a lot of other high High school draft picks as pitchers, therefore he's behind the curve in development and polish as a pitcher (mechanics, command, track record, actual amount of pitching he has done). This has zero little initial relation to the quality of the pitches he can throw (velocity, movement).

 

Fastball command is absolutely the #1 thing a pitcher needs to have. Nothing else they can do will offset an inability to throw a fastball for strikes.

 

Therefore, they wanted him to further develop that ability -> throwing strikes with his fastball. The next thing to come, will be using that slider to put away hitters. And yes, he'll have to develop and polish that pitch just the same, but focusing on one thing at a time isn't a bad plan to me. I don't think he turned pro and all of the sudden lost the ability to throw a pitch that every evaluator loved leading up to that draft.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I don't think he turned pro and all of the sudden lost the ability to throw a pitch that every evaluator loved leading up to that draft.

I don't think so either, but plenty of guys/pitches/skills that evaluators love in HS don't succeed in the pros. I would be surprised if those evaluators thought Stewart's slider could be skipped to high-A straight from HS competition, which is essentially what the Twins are doing. Imagine a raw hitter who hit for a ton of power is HS, but little power and a high AVG in his first pro season, and he and his team said "we are just working on contact now." The promise of future power would be met with some skepticism at that point. (Although even power is something guys often "grow into" more than a slider for a top draft pick, I think.)

[Steve Lein]

I don't think so either, but plenty of guys/pitches/skills that evaluators love in HS don't succeed in the pros. I would be surprised if those evaluators thought Stewart's slider could be skipped to high-A straight from HS competition, which is essentially what the Twins are doing.

 

I understand the first part, but don't think the second part is what the Twins are doing.

 

To reiterate again: They wanted him to work on fastball command as a raw, highly talented, high-school pitcher.

[gunnarthor]

Keith Law said in his chat a few weeks ago that Stewart was still more of a thrower than a pitcher when the Twins took him, wasn't concerned about the strike outs and thought the Twins were doing a "hell of a job" with his development.  So don't be too concerned about his placement at this time.  If he develops like a lot of people think, he still has front of the rotation potential and he'll be high on these lists next year. 

 

He's a competitive young man, maybe he takes not being on the BA list as a slight and uses it to have a better year.

[jimmer]

Keith Law said in his chat a few weeks ago that Stewart was still more of a thrower than a pitcher when the Twins took him, wasn't concerned about the strike outs and thought the Twins were doing a "hell of a job" with his development.  So don't be too concerned about his placement at this time.  If he develops like a lot of people think, he still has front of the rotation potential and he'll be high on these lists next year. 

 

He's a competitive young man, maybe he takes not being on the BA list as a slight and uses it to have a better year.

And Law had him at like 53 right?

[h2oface]

Stewart is definitely on the "slow develow".  I don't blame BA at all. I like to see results, too, and not just so called experts (and not so experts) spouting off on perceived potential.  Hopefully, he did some good work in the off season and is ready to become this year, and not be babied. I personally don't care about the rankings. I actually like it when they are proved wrong.  

[Otto von Ballpark]

I understand the first part, but don't think the second part is what the Twins are doing.

 

To reiterate again: They wanted him to work on fastball command as a raw, highly talented, high-school pitcher.

To the complete exclusion of allegedly his best pitch, for an entire season, an entire level of competition? Even if that's not the Twins goal, it is a side effect of this "devote a year to only fastball command" approach.

[jimmer]

I understand the first part, but don't think the second part is what the Twins are doing.

 

To reiterate again: They wanted him to work on fastball command as a raw, highly talented, high-school pitcher.

I think in about three years we'll all be very happy with how the Twins developed him. I am not the least bit concerned at this point.