2019 Twins Midseason Top Prospect List: 26-30

Man that is a lot of good talent at the bottom of the top 30.  I am going to quibble with a couple of picks in this range though.  First is Smeltzer.  I essentially compare him to Gonsalves they both were dominant in AA and AAA.  Neither one has elite stuff but they both have a good pitch mix.  Smeltzer has better control, performed better on the MLB stage and is essentially two years younger than Stephen.  At this point why wouldn't he be ranked higher?  What does Gonsalves have that Smeltzer doesn't.  It  feels like there might be some sort of player bias happening there?  The narrative doesn't fit for me. 

Second is Raley.  He is Rooker with good speed and position flexibilty.  Why would Raley be ranked lower?  They are both the same age. Rooker does have some monster power but his lack of defensive ability makes him a potential liability in the field. When measuring a prospect Defense is almost as important as offense and certainly a separator when comparing players.  Raley K's less, walks more with almost as much power.  Feels like the ratings are opposite of what they should be.  Is this Draft position bias at play?  Given what I know I don't see Rooker as the better player even despite his recent hot streak with the bat as he will never be as good in the field as Raley.

I am happy to see Celestino further down the list as he seems a light hitting Center fielder with a decent eye at the plate.  Unfortunately that could make him a fourth outfielder if he doesn't find more extra base pop.  Granted he is only 20 with time to grow into the man muscle.  Time will tell but right now given what we know he belongs down here.  I might even have him slightly lower.

I never was big fan of Diaz because it was an all bat pick and I really didn't think he would produce.  He is proving me wrong on a daily basis these days.  His 13 HR's in half a season at High A is very impressive.  This guy could be Rooker part 2 with a better eye at the plate.  I don't know much about his defense but don't believe it is great so I think he is good where he is.  If he continues to hit for power and average on his way up then he will need to move up this list.

That's my two cents.  I just appreciate you guys putting these lists out as it is fun to follow these players.

Everything here looks pretty good, though Celestino's stats suggest to me that he is overmatched at the moment.

I wonder if Raley would be in the majors right now if not for the ankle surgery.

About Diaz.  Remember how we heard good things about Kepler but didn't see much of it until he reached AA, where he raked.  Raking in AA is a good sign.  Diaz is raking in AA. Maybe he'll follow Kepler into the Majors. 

DMAN, liked your post but decided not to copy for brevity sake. (That's really saying something for ME, LOL)

I don't want to speak out of turn for Seth, or anyone else, but I suspect Gonsalves is rated higher...partially due to not being downgraded due to injury...because his build and velocity is bigger and a couple MPH better on average. He also has more time at AAA. And even though he was hit and cold in 2018, there were stretches where he was awfully good. But I hear and see your point 100%. Both guys just have the "pitchability" factor that should never be ignored.

I'm also with you on Raley. I even made some statements early in the season that I felt Raley was a better overall prospect than Rooker. And that's NOT a shot at Rooker, who probably has even more power, but Raley seems to have way more positional flexibility. For goodness sake, even in ST they put him in CF. Seems to me he's "similar" to Kepler in many regards, but probably not as natural in CF.

Seems like Diaz has been around FOREVER. And then I see he's only 22, at AA, maybe having his best season ever, and has matured mentally and physically. He keeps this up, he could be top 20 by season's end, despite depth in the system.

Disappointed we probably won't see Canterino this year. But it makes sense. I wont use tbe word "abused", but most college SP log a lot of IP already when drafted between their season and various "off season" leagues they appear in.

I just don't know enough about Celestino to comment. Simply going to trust the informed TD staff on this one. But would love to hear more about projections regarding him.

I really like your Raley, Kepler comparison.  I hadn't thought about that before and if that holds up what a find Raley is.  It is super hard to find right fielders with Keplers speed, plate discipline and power and having Raley who is close to that is nice to have in the system.  I also think it proves Raley is more valuable than a player like Rooker.  Rookers hit tool would have to be elite as in one of he best in MLB to overcome his lack of defensive ability\ flexiblity compared to Raley.  Raleys sklll set is much harder to find than a power hitting 1st baseman\DH.  I know right now Rooker is on a hot streak and I still like him as a prospect I just think being so limited to just the bat diminishes how high he should be on a prospect list and or that Raley deserves a bit more love than he is getting.

 

 

I like Raley, was the high man on him in the prospect handbook by a decent margin, so I don't want to make it seem like I don't see it, but his offensive potential is nowhere near the same class as Rooker, in my opinion. We're seeing what Rooker can do when he's on right now, and it's incredible.

While I agree despite the current stats I like Rooker better as a hitter long term but to say Raley is nowhere near the same class belies the current statistical data we have on both players.  Raleys OPS was better than Rookers last year and they both hit 20 home runs.  Raley had hit 7 home runs and had a 300 average before Rooker was even close to getting hot this year, Is that really not in the same class?  It sure seems like they have been pretty close offensively so far and Raley is the superior defender. 

Maybe that will all change.  Maybe Raley goes back to the 270 hitter he has been and Rooker moves into the 300 range with power and you get your future separation but I wouldn't hang my hat on that especially with Rookers K issues.  Personally I like both bats but like Raleys defense better.  Doesn't matter to me that Rooker can hit a 500 foot HR and Raley a 400 foot one.  They both count the same.

Stats aren't everything, but something to keep in mind about Raley's OPS is his OBP has been supported somewhat by taking an insane number of hit by pitches. Raley's been hit with 29 pitches the past two seasons. Here are their K and BB rates the past two seasons. 

 

Rooker: 28.7 K%, 10.8 BB%

Raley: 26.0 K%, 6.2 BB%

 

Raley may be the superior defender, but I don't see his fielding ever really being an asset at the MLB level anyway. I like Raley, he was a good find, I'm not trying to say he's hopeless or anything. I just think Rooker's ceiling is much higher.

I guess I am struggling with your view of ceiling.  Does it not include defense?  I mean would you rather have Josh Willingham (Rooker) in left field or Rosario (Raley) in left?  I think defense matters and plays into ceiling a fair bit.  Granted very good to great hitters can be hidden at 1st, and DH and Left field if so desired but you are going to lose runs with poor defensive players think of the Tigers Nick Castelanos.

Sure offensively Rooker has some things going for him right now.  I like that the K rate is down a bit and the walks are up that is a good thing, but is it impossible for Raley to do the same?  Is it impossible for Raley to improve?  These guys are 25 how much ceiling is left?  They have been comparable offensively until Raley got hurt.  Do you really think Rooker will be a 300 hitter with a 30- 40%% K rate in MLB? To me that is about the only ceiling that would really separate him from Raley.  They both seem like 270 mashers with high K rates and hopefully decent walk rates. Maybe Rooker can separate himself but he is going to need to continue to improve quite a bit from where he is now to get to the ceiling you imagine IMO.

If Raley was anywhere near close to the defender a Max Kepler or Eddie Rosario is, that would certainly change the equation. But Rooker vs. Raley is a lot closer to Willingham vs. Grossman than it is Willingham vs. Rosario. Either way, you're not going to be very excited about either of them patrolling the outfield for you. The bat is going to have to carry both these guys.

 If that is the case then I like Rooker better.  But if what you say is true then why does the MLB site say this about Rooker:

"The big question surrounding Rooker is where he might play defensively. He saw time at first and left field in 2018, and the plan is to give him a consistent time split at both. He's below-average in both spots, with the hope that he can become adequate enough at one so he's not a DH at a very young age."

And this about Raley:

"Raley has played first base and both outfield corners and has shown an ability to play both well. He's athletic enough to fill in as a center fielder in a pinch as well, which bodes well for him to start his career as a left-handed bat off the bench. He could hit his way into a more regular role in the future."

Fangraphs is pretty much the same.  With higher grades on speed, arm and Fielding.

Based on what I have read Rooker is a below average defender pretty much everywhere while Raley is not.  While Raley may be no Kepler or Rosario he certainly is no Willingham or Rooker in the field either.

I get it we like both players I just don't see why there would\should be that a large of a difference between the two as their strengths and weakness's seem to even things out IMO.

MLB pipeline has Raley at a 55 fielding tool, versus a 40 for Rooker.
I think you are significantly underselling Raley's defense. I have to imagine that 55 is pretty close to what Kepler and/or Rosario would have graded when they were prospects.

Looking back the MLB archives we get the following scouting grades from MLB.com

Luke Raley 2019

Hit: 45 | Power: 55 | Run: 50 | Arm: 55 | Field: 55 | Overall: 45

Eddie Rosario 2014

Hit: 60 | Power: 40 | Run: 50 | Arm: 50 | Field: 45 | Overall: 50

Max Kepler 2014

Hit: 50 | Power: 45 | Run: 50 | Arm: 45 | Field: 50 | Overall: 45

So from a defensive perspective they appear to rate Raley as having a better arm and the better overall fielder with a run grade the same as Max and Rosie.  So I don't think it is out the relm to think that Raley should be a good defender in the outfield at least if we take any stock in these grades at all.

I wonder if they incorporate OF position into their fielding metric. Rosario and Kepler came up playing mostly CF (on non-byron buxton teams), while Raley has played <5% of his innings in CF.

I thought the same thing I am not completely sure on the fielding metric.  In the write up they mention him as an outfielder and he is listed as outfielder\1st base.  I agree it is hard to say what position they are referencing.  The run grade is similar though and that is typically an important part of outfield defense getting to balls and or cutting them off to prevent extra base hits.  Arm is also important for outfield assists\throwing runners out and Raley's arm grades out above both Max and Rosie.

So like I said if you believe in these numbers then Raley should be comparable and in some ways better than both Rosario and Kepler in the outfield.  Granted bigger guys tend to get slower faster as they age. The reference to Robbie being noted he is no spring chicken anymore at 29 and his speed obviously declined since he was a prospect so again hard to say how Raley's speed will hold up but given the fairly recent scouting reports on MLB.com they don't see him as a liability in right or left field at this time.

OK now I see what you mean.  I don't know that is a very good question though.  Center field defense is a lot different than the corners but I think run grades are just run grades regardless of position.  Fielding grades might be different for center though as your running and throwing ability factor in more to your fielding grade for center I would think.