Author Topic: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)  (Read 37920 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Battleship

  • Posts: 121
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #225: April 30, 2010, 08:38:54 AM »
Brian:  Thanks.  Why does he project Purke?  Have they been connected to him or is Callis just guessing?  I'd love to get Purke.

Offline NFA Brian

  • Posts: 1188
    • Nationals Farm Authority
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #226: April 30, 2010, 09:35:06 AM »
Brian:  Thanks.  Why does he project Purke?  Have they been connected to him or is Callis just guessing?  I'd love to get Purke.

I'm guessing that he's just guessing. Purke is a top 10 guy for 2011

Offline Battleship

  • Posts: 121
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #227: April 30, 2010, 09:57:06 AM »
Oh.  Well we know that won't happen since the Nats will be picking 30th ;) 

I was wondering if Purke would fall in the draft(not in relation to this article, just in general) since he's a sophomore.

Thanks for the info.

Offline JMUalumni

  • Posts: 7789
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #228: April 30, 2010, 11:46:58 AM »
Excellent minor league updates from Ben (talking to Doug Harris) this week.  A few of the important points:

-  J.D. Martin missed his start due to back tightness, which Harris attributed to less than satisfactory beds at the hotel Syracuse stayed at (Strasburg experienced the same issue last fall).

-  On Jack McGeary:

Quote
"He's got a great tempo, a good mound presence, he's establishing his fastball, maintaining a quality mix. He's continued to progress. The Stanford thing messes with the timeline a little bit, in the totality of what he's doing. But he's a very intelligent and focused kid. We feel good about the strides he's making."


-  Aaron Thompson is developing a cutter

-  Brad Meyers is starting to work his way back after experiencing back spasms and missing the whole season to this point.

http://masnsports.com/the_goessling_game/2010/04/this-weeks-minor-league-updates-with-doug-harris.html

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 15460
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #229: April 30, 2010, 12:25:50 PM »
Basically, yes. Callis states that Zimmerman, Zimmermann, Strasburg, Storen, Harper, and Matt Purke (his projection for Nats 2011 first rounder) will lead the Nats to the playoffs in 2013

Here at my dorm, I share my mailbox with the Rice All-American 3B Anthony Rendon. Does Jim Callis have anything about him?

Offline Smithian

  • Posts: 5461
  • Team America 2014
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #230: April 30, 2010, 01:34:14 PM »
I'd kill for Zack Cox to be a Washington National, but either he's leaving this year as a draft eligible sophomore or he's going to be way too high of a pick for us to get next year. Also, we have that Ryan Zimmerman bloke already at 3rd base. Maybe we can draft him and switch him to 2nd? I can only hope.

He hit .266  with 13 homers and 39 RBIs as a freshman. Dave Van Horn told him this year to forget about power and spray the ball around and let Eibner and Wilkins do the bombing. This year he is hitting .436 with six homers and 43 RBIs while playing in the SEC. Not half bad I must say.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37337
  • LAC 8)
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #231: April 30, 2010, 11:07:30 PM »
espinosa hit his first homer of the year ... he's batting .300

marrero had two singles ... his average is up to .270

thompson pitched a solid game ... 6.2 ip, 5 h, 2 er, bb, 4 k

...i thought arnesen was supposed to start tomorrow?  but he pitched in relief tonight.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 16835
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #232: May 01, 2010, 01:58:48 PM »
Hammonds / AC / JMU or anyone who has seen Espinosa and Desmond play:  Desmond is looking like the errors were just a product of bad fields and pressing.  He looks very rangy, athletic, and has a very good arm.  Espinosa was supposed to be the surer fielder, and BA had him as the system's best defensive infield prospect.  Suppose Desmond sticks at SS - does Espinosa have the bat to play second?  Do you think Desmond is the better fielder at SS?   Are they both good enough MI prospects that they would bring back something significant as a component of a trade?

Offline KnorrForYourMoney

  • Posts: 13878
  • Lerners = Bluth family
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #233: May 01, 2010, 02:01:56 PM »
Here at my dorm, I share my mailbox with the Rice All-American 3B Anthony Rendon. Does Jim Callis have anything about him?

Rendon is going to Baltimore first overall from what I've heard. :?

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37337
  • LAC 8)
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #234: May 01, 2010, 02:09:06 PM »
Hammonds / AC / JMU or anyone who has seen Espinosa and Desmond play:  Desmond is looking like the errors were just a product of bad fields and pressing.  He looks very rangy, athletic, and has a very good arm.  Espinosa was supposed to be the surer fielder, and BA had him as the system's best defensive infield prospect.  Suppose Desmond sticks at SS - does Espinosa have the bat to play second?  Do you think Desmond is the better fielder at SS?   Are they both good enough MI prospects that they would bring back something significant as a component of a trade?

The club has a real tough decision.  I get the feeling Riggleman and half of the think tank is really high on Desmond as the short, while Rizzo and the other half may prefer Espinosa there (and maybe move Dessie to 2B). 

I've been impressed with Desmond.  His attitude, his defense, his bat.  Sure he has plenty of kinks to work out (breaking pitches, continuing to get better with his glove, leaving one bad at bat/error in the past), but I'm happy with his progress and what he brings to the table.  He's showing flashes of "The Next Jeter" that Frank/Jimbo called him years back.

As for Espinosa, he's supposed to have a higher ceiling.  He is a switch hitter, has more pop than Desmond and can probably make the more routine play than ID (although I think Desmond has more highlight reel plays in his video library in his career). 

Honestly, I would like to see Espinosa/Kobernus as our 2B of the future, but Espinosa is closer to the bigs.  I would like to see him log some games @ 2B.

Offline Potomac Cannons

  • Posts: 3279
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #235: May 01, 2010, 02:38:03 PM »
Hammonds / AC / JMU or anyone who has seen Espinosa and Desmond play:  Desmond is looking like the errors were just a product of bad fields and pressing.  He looks very rangy, athletic, and has a very good arm.  Espinosa was supposed to be the surer fielder, and BA had him as the system's best defensive infield prospect.  Suppose Desmond sticks at SS - does Espinosa have the bat to play second?  Do you think Desmond is the better fielder at SS?   Are they both good enough MI prospects that they would bring back something significant as a component of a trade?

I actually think Desmond had the better range.  I have no doubt either could play SS or 2B and have the bat/defense for both.

Offline Potomac Cannons

  • Posts: 3279
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #236: May 01, 2010, 02:48:20 PM »
The club has a real tough decision.  I get the feeling Riggleman and half of the think tank is really high on Desmond as the short, while Rizzo and the other half may prefer Espinosa there (and maybe move Dessie to 2B). 

I've been impressed with Desmond.  His attitude, his defense, his bat.  Sure he has plenty of kinks to work out (breaking pitches, continuing to get better with his glove, leaving one bad at bat/error in the past), but I'm happy with his progress and what he brings to the table.  He's showing flashes of "The Next Jeter" that Frank/Jimbo called him years back.

As for Espinosa, he's supposed to have a higher ceiling.  He is a switch hitter, has more pop than Desmond and can probably make the more routine play than ID (although I think Desmond has more highlight reel plays in his video library in his career). 

Honestly, I would like to see Espinosa/Kobernus as our 2B of the future, but Espinosa is closer to the bigs.  I would like to see him log some games @ 2B.

Seeing them both at Potomac I would put Desmond a slight notch above for defensive range, arm and power.  Espinosa seemed to be a bit more patient at the plate and slightly better running bases.

Espinosa makes nearly as many errors as Desmond at comparable levels.  Not sure why he gets the better defensive billing.

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5192
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #237: May 01, 2010, 02:53:58 PM »
Seeing them both at Potomac I would put Desmond a slight notch above for defensive range, arm and power.  Espinosa seemed to be a bit more patient at the plate and slightly better running bases.

Espinosa makes nearly as many errors as Desmond at comparable levels.  Not sure why he gets the better defensive billing.

No way that is true. Espinosa had a career .961 FP% in the Minors compared to Desmond's .936%. Espinosa had a .965% in Potomac is which is a lot higher than desmond ever had in any level.

Offline Potomac Cannons

  • Posts: 3279
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #238: May 01, 2010, 03:10:44 PM »
No way that is true. Espinosa had a career .961 FP% in the Minors compared to Desmond's .936%. Espinosa had a .965% in Potomac is which is a lot higher than desmond ever had in any level.

FP%?  Give me UZR.  I'll take RF/G over FP% as it takes range into account while Fld% doesn't.

Desmond had a really bad 2006 defensively.  His three stints at Potomac left him with 4.64, 3.92, and 4.67 (his full season) for RF/G.  Espinosa put up 4.7 at Potomac.  Leaves them nearly even if errors aren't attributed for.  Desmond's full season had 32E compared to 22E for Espinosa.  That would cut down the negligible difference. 

Desmond's only defensive shortcoming has been his arm accuracy.

As for your Fld% argument, Espinosa put up a .937 at Vermont and has a .949 so far at AA.  Desmond put up .951 at AA in his full season there.

Not sure if Potomac last year was Espinosa playing better than he is defensively, or if he will end up the better defender, but the numbers are pretty well lined up so far.

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5192
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #239: May 01, 2010, 03:31:57 PM »
FP%?  Give me UZR.  I'll take RF/G over FP% as it takes range into account while Fld% doesn't.

Desmond had a really bad 2006 defensively.  His three stints at Potomac left him with 4.64, 3.92, and 4.67 (his full season) for RF/G.  Espinosa put up 4.7 at Potomac.  Leaves them nearly even if errors aren't attributed for.  Desmond's full season had 32E compared to 22E for Espinosa.  That would cut down the negligible difference. 

Desmond's only defensive shortcoming has been his arm accuracy.

As for your Fld% argument, Espinosa put up a .937 at Vermont and has a .949 so far at AA.  Desmond put up .951 at AA in his full season there.

Not sure if Potomac last year was Espinosa playing better than he is defensively, or if he will end up the better defender, but the numbers are pretty well lined up so far.

I didn't say that Fielding % is a valid stat. Your argument was that Desmond made errors at nearly the rate that Espinosa does. I disagree. The numbers bear that and the scouting reports do also.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 83152
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #240: May 03, 2010, 01:11:52 PM »
Balester has been so bad. I wonder what is up with him.

21 IP 37 H 27 ER 4 HR 13 BB 10 K (1-3, 11.57 ERA, 2.38 WHIP)

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5192
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #241: May 03, 2010, 04:25:09 PM »
FP%?  Give me UZR.  I'll take RF/G over FP% as it takes range into account while Fld% doesn't.

Desmond had a really bad 2006 defensively.  His three stints at Potomac left him with 4.64, 3.92, and 4.67 (his full season) for RF/G.  Espinosa put up 4.7 at Potomac.  Leaves them nearly even if errors aren't attributed for.  Desmond's full season had 32E compared to 22E for Espinosa.  That would cut down the negligible difference. 

Desmond's only defensive shortcoming has been his arm accuracy.

As for your Fld% argument, Espinosa put up a .937 at Vermont and has a .949 so far at AA.  Desmond put up .951 at AA in his full season there.

Not sure if Potomac last year was Espinosa playing better than he is defensively, or if he will end up the better defender, but the numbers are pretty well lined up so far.

Using 12 games and 59 chances sample as indicative of Espinosa's fielding in AA is ridiculous. Right now, Espinosa is at .951 Fielding % in AA. Desmond's stints at AA were .924, .951, .953. The only difference is that Espinosa has a track record that shows his Fielding % will end up around .960-.970 while Desmond never did. In fact, Desmond's career high in Fielding % is .953. Espinosa's is at .965.

Career Fielding %:
Desmond: .936
Espinosa: .961

RF/9:
Desmond: 4.40
Espinosa: 4.65

That is a significant difference.

Offline JMUalumni

  • Posts: 7789
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #242: May 03, 2010, 04:38:36 PM »
My two cents on the Desmond vs Espinosa issue from my own observations over the years.  Desmond has a bit more range than Espinosa, but you aren't going to find many SS that do have more range than Ian.  Both have been hurt by a certain degree by the conditions of the minor league fields, but both have made mental errors as well, with Espinosa making less in the specific games I have seen.  Both have great arms, but I was surprised by how strong Espinosa's actually was when I saw him, he has a rocket.  As for positioning, Espinosa always seems to be in the right place, while Desmond's positioning has been a bit off at time, but his speed allows him to make up for this.  Espinosa doesn't make the same throwing errors as Desmond, but he does attempt to go for the super play sometimes instead of the better play (i.e. throwing a runner out at home instead of the sure out).  As for glovework, I would give the clear advantage to Espinosa, he is a pro with the glove and has all the fundamentals in this respect down.  It is a bit early to be talking about having either switch positions, but if it came down to having both players on the same team, I couldn't really see any way of Desmond being displaced by Espinosa at SS.  While Espinosa would be a very good SS at the MLB level, all of his best traits (and advantages over Desmond) could translate just as well to the 2B position.  I'd take the guy with better range at SS every day, especially when the overall difference would be so little.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 16835
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #243: May 03, 2010, 08:44:04 PM »
Thanks to JMU / Potomac Cannons / HammondsNats and others.  It's a nice potential problem, with an emphasis on potential.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 83152
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #244: May 03, 2010, 09:10:38 PM »
What does Doug Slaten have to do to get a call-up? Another scoreless frame from him tonight.

His season numbers in AAA: 15 IP 11 H 0 R 0 ER 1 BB 16 K (1-0, 0.00 ERA, 0.80 WHIP).

He can't be any worse than Brian Bruney, Miguel Batista, Tyler Walker, etc.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33563
  • Lets go to work
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #245: May 03, 2010, 09:11:48 PM »
Slaten isn't on the 40 man.

He'd need someone removed for him to be on it.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37337
  • LAC 8)
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #246: May 03, 2010, 09:28:29 PM »
wow A.J. Morris continues to shine in Potomac:

5.2 IP, 2 H, BB, 4 K ... in line to get the win ... his ERA has dropped to 1.53

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 83152
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #247: May 03, 2010, 09:38:28 PM »
Slaten isn't on the 40 man.

He'd need someone removed for him to be on it.
Bruney, Batista, Walker

Offline Potomac Cannons

  • Posts: 3279
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #248: May 03, 2010, 09:46:45 PM »
Thanks to JMU / Potomac Cannons / HammondsNats and others.  It's a nice potential problem, with an emphasis on potential.

Yeah.  It's nice to think we could go into 2011 with two MI 25 or under who are league average and project to being above average to good all around players with someone like Adam Kennedy as a primary backup.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37337
  • LAC 8)
Re: Following the Minor League Teams (2010)
« Reply #249: May 03, 2010, 10:11:17 PM »
And in a lower classification ... it seems like Jack McGeary might be figuring things out. 

5 ip, 7 h, er, bb, 2 k ... his ERA is down to 3.81 and he moved to 2-0 on the season.