GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently August 25 19, 12:40 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: February 18 15, 2:19 pm 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: January 9 08, 5:30 pm
Posts: 6805
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-fang ... pect-list/

Quote:
76. Alex Reyes, RHP, St. Louis Cardinals
81. Stephen Piscotty, RF, St. Louis Cardinals
82. Marco Gonzales, LHP, St. Louis Cardinals
99. Rob Kaminsky, LHP, St. Louis Cardinals
123. Jack Flaherty, RHP, St. Louis Cardinals

Grichuk and Mags Sierra are lumped into the #143-#200 group at the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 19 15, 2:39 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7238
Location: Chicago, IL
We discussed in the misc. ramblings thread about gaps between current/future being important, and it's cool that FG puts those grades in so we can see the gaps they have assigned.

JP Crawford is a SS with 20/55 hit, and 20/45+ Game Power, but who can currently run and field and throw. If those future hit/power tools are not met, he's not going to justify a #10 ranking.

Correa is a 20/60 hit. If that 20 doesn't get up to 50, he's not going to be a very valuable player.

OTOH Bryant is 40/50+ hit, and 75/80 power, and 55/70 game power. He's mostly gotten to where he needs to be. We don't need to project him to project him, if that makes sense.

Seager they have at 40/55 hit and 55/60 power. His and Bryant's rankings are not based on IF they can close a gap of 20/60, but are based on them being good enough to hit in the show right now. They're probably the two safest rankings in the top 10, both to make the show (they both should by June 1 this year) and to become and impact player.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 19 15, 3:00 pm 
Offline
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you

Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm
Posts: 50681
That 20/x thing is pretty weird, I've never seen 20's thrown around like that for current tools by prospect of this caliber. Not sure what that is about. I think BA has Bryant/Buxton as 1/2 as well.

I really can't wait to see Julio Urias. There is a chance he will be wearing Dodger blue as an 18 year old.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 19 15, 4:04 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7238
Location: Chicago, IL
If they were in the majors right now, they'd hit at a 20 level, is what they're saying. And I think it's valid, and it's something that's not addressed enough, and it's a big part of what fueled our big exchange. If Lindor were in the show right now he'd hit .200. I know you live near Kane County, and I'm sure you've seen plenty of toolsy low-A 17-19 year old SSs come through. How many can you remember seeing and thinking "oh, yeah, he could hold his own (hit .250) at the MLB level right now"? But if you ever saw Taveras or Trout in low-A, heck even if you saw MMGA which I think you did, you knew the second you saw them the difference at the plate between all those toolsheds and a pure hitter. The ball leaves the bat different. It sounds different. It travels different, gets where it's going faster. That's not the case with Lindor, even in BP.

Urias should be fun, I agree.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 19 15, 4:17 pm 
Offline
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you

Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm
Posts: 50681
I know that's what how he's using it, but the current/future grades aren't really used like that. Otherwise a scout would be putting down 20's and maybe a 30 for every high school hitter he sees. Very few 17/18 year olds could step into a MLB role and hit .220-230 straight out of HS. I don't know how to describe what I thought current means (UK, where are you??), but to me for hitting it's more of a range where the future is the upside. To me it's describing the tool as it exists today, that with experience, will be a 30,40,50... I don't interpret that to be right this moment in time he is a 230,250,280 MLB hitter etc...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 19 15, 4:44 pm 
Offline
Sobbing quietly during Fox programming

Joined: June 9 06, 3:51 pm
Posts: 8518
jim wrote:
I know that's what how he's using it, but the current/future grades aren't really used like that. Otherwise a scout would be putting down 20's and maybe a 30 for every high school hitter he sees. Very few 17/18 year olds could step into a MLB role and hit .220-230 straight out of HS. I don't know how to describe what I thought current means (UK, where are you??), but to me for hitting it's more of a range where the future is the upside. To me it's describing the tool as it exists today, that with experience, will be a 30,40,50... I don't interpret that to be right this moment in time he is a 230,250,280 MLB hitter etc...


Jim, this is how I do it when I put out prospect lists as well. I'm not saying they're a 60 hit guy in the major leagues right now, that's what I expect based on their athleticism, looseness of swing, plane of swing, pitch recognition, and use of their legs/torso.

Bat speed is numero uno though...bat speed is like velocity for a pitcher- you need to have it at a certain level to even enter the picture, and it declines as you age, so you really need to be a level above acceptable to be considered a good longterm bet at the big league level. If you can't hit 93 mph down the middle, you can't play in the big leagues regardless of your athleticism, hands, arm, power, baseball skills etc. (position players, obviously).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 19 15, 4:54 pm 
Offline
Everyday Player

Joined: August 21 06, 4:22 pm
Posts: 208
Location: MO.
Phins, have you given an ETA on your top 21? It's the highlight of the off season!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 19 15, 7:17 pm 
Offline
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you

Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm
Posts: 50681
phins wrote:
jim wrote:
I know that's what how he's using it, but the current/future grades aren't really used like that. Otherwise a scout would be putting down 20's and maybe a 30 for every high school hitter he sees. Very few 17/18 year olds could step into a MLB role and hit .220-230 straight out of HS. I don't know how to describe what I thought current means (UK, where are you??), but to me for hitting it's more of a range where the future is the upside. To me it's describing the tool as it exists today, that with experience, will be a 30,40,50... I don't interpret that to be right this moment in time he is a 230,250,280 MLB hitter etc...


Jim, this is how I do it when I put out prospect lists as well. I'm not saying they're a 60 hit guy in the major leagues right now, that's what I expect based on their athleticism, looseness of swing, plane of swing, pitch recognition, and use of their legs/torso.

Bat speed is numero uno though...bat speed is like velocity for a pitcher- you need to have it at a certain level to even enter the picture, and it declines as you age, so you really need to be a level above acceptable to be considered a good longterm bet at the big league level. If you can't hit 93 mph down the middle, you can't play in the big leagues regardless of your athleticism, hands, arm, power, baseball skills etc. (position players, obviously).


I agree with you 110% about bat speed. And bat speed is one of those unteachable skills - you either have it or you don't. If a guy has a lightening fast bat but major mechanical issues, that's where I could see a large gap between current and future. A guy that has like you said that has that skill to enter the picture of some rating but has to change approach/mechanics etc... So when I see a 40/60, I thinking this is a guy that has the unteachable tools (bat speed) to be a 60, but if he doesn't or is unable to fix some of the more teachable elements he's a 40. I said in another thread that hitting is teachable unlike some other skills (speed, arm strength ...), but as you said only *if* the unteachable part is there. You have to have the bat speed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 20 15, 11:06 am 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: December 10 06, 6:41 pm
Posts: 4273
Location: Baseball Purgatory.
jim wrote:
I know that's what how he's using it, but the current/future grades aren't really used like that. Otherwise a scout would be putting down 20's and maybe a 30 for every high school hitter he sees. Very few 17/18 year olds could step into a MLB role and hit .220-230 straight out of HS. I don't know how to describe what I thought current means (UK, where are you??), but to me for hitting it's more of a range where the future is the upside. To me it's describing the tool as it exists today, that with experience, will be a 30,40,50... I don't interpret that to be right this moment in time he is a 230,250,280 MLB hitter etc...


I usually never go more than a 15 difference between current/future when doing reports, most of time its around 10 even for HS' ers. It's more about bat speed, bat path, approach rather than saying a 17 yo would hit .220 so he must have a 20 bat. You could never get a crosschecker to come to a game if he had 20/60 bat, 20/60 power despite a likely OFP of top 5 rounder.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group