Author Topic: Rank the Nats top prospects  (Read 4112 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Potomac Cannons

  • Posts: 3279
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #75: September 07, 2010, 07:01:42 PM »
To be fair. I don't think Bowden is checking the Nats system daily for stats on the guys he drafted. He probably checked a few weeks ago and saw Burgess having a mediocre season in A ball. Burgess has been a disappointment. He had a .982 OPS and .561 Slg his first year. Then had 24 HR and .477 SLG his second year as a 19 year old. Since then he has been disappointing. In 3 seasons in Potomac, he has a .427 SLG and .762 OPS. That is disappointing for a guy touted as a guy with a lot of raw power.

Good job ignoring the age factor and ignoring Burgess playing much better the last 2 months at Potomac this year then tearing up Harrisburg in his first month long stint there (1.039 OPS).

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33585
  • Lets go to work
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #76: September 07, 2010, 07:04:10 PM »
Be nice, he's new.

Offline Potomac Cannons

  • Posts: 3279
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #77: September 07, 2010, 07:05:43 PM »
Be nice, he's new.

And one of the 7 living Royals fans.  You're right.

Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15528
  • Future
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #78: September 08, 2010, 04:28:34 PM »
And one of the 7 living Royals fans.


:rofl: That gave me a good laugh.

Offline Burgess

  • Posts: 343
  • K MONSTER!
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #79: September 08, 2010, 06:25:03 PM »
If you have a crap system, why would you go with safe picks? The team was devoid of talent. You aren't winning by drafting Jeff Kobernus or Trevor Holder. I'm pretty sure the team recognized that they needed to rebuild which is why they punted 2006-2008 and hoped that the draft talent would take over from there. The Royals did a similar thing. Had the worst farm system when Dayton Moore entered in 2006. Now they are lights years ahead of any other system.

But you win with Danny Espinosa and Drew Storen.

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5193
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #80: September 08, 2010, 08:54:26 PM »
But you win with Danny Espinosa and Drew Storen.
I'll chime in here. Espinosa was never a safe pick. He was regarded as guy with decent tools and a good background (Long Beach state SS). His signing bonus was 525,000. Compare that to Trevor Holder's 200,000 bonus. Drew Storen doesn't prove anything. In fact, you can win with any relief pitcher as the Nats are proving. Where did Tyler Clippard, Doug Slaten, Joel Peralta come from? Out of nowhere and they are producing similar to Storen. Sean Burnett was a failed starter and was moved to relief. Plenty of failed starters can become good relievers which is why drafting a relief pitcher that high is dumb unless you are guaranteed Mariano Rivera.

Offline Burgess

  • Posts: 343
  • K MONSTER!
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #81: September 09, 2010, 03:03:37 AM »
I'll chime in here. Espinosa was never a safe pick. He was regarded as guy with decent tools and a good background (Long Beach state SS). His signing bonus was 525,000. Compare that to Trevor Holder's 200,000 bonus. Drew Storen doesn't prove anything. In fact, you can win with any relief pitcher as the Nats are proving. Where did Tyler Clippard, Doug Slaten, Joel Peralta come from? Out of nowhere and they are producing similar to Storen. Sean Burnett was a failed starter and was moved to relief. Plenty of failed starters can become good relievers which is why drafting a relief pitcher that high is dumb unless you are guaranteed Mariano Rivera.

My point was, if your team sucks, it's better draft college draftees since they make the majors faster....

Offline GMUTrkstar

  • Posts: 760
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #82: September 09, 2010, 06:29:27 AM »
Are you saying that you would rather have the Nats system than the Royals system?

The Royals have 5 guys who are top 30 prospects in baseball (Hosmer, Moustakas, Montgomery, Myers, and Lamb). Not to mention Duffy, Melville, Colon, and Dwyer. That is 9 guys who are potential Top 100 guys. How many teams could say that? Tell me what Nats pitching prospects are better than Montgomery, Lamb, Duffy, or Dwyer? You tell me how many Nats prospects will make the top 100? Maybe 4 (Espinosa, Harper, Ramos, Norris).

Royals have arguably the best system in baseball. Callis and other prospect guys have said so numerous time. That being said you can't compare what Rizzo has done in two drafts to what Moores been able to do in 4. Y'all have more quality prospects than us at this time but none of the guys u mention above have the potential of Harper or Strasburg.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 27558
  • Hell yes!
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #83: September 09, 2010, 09:00:26 AM »
My point was, if your team sucks, it's better draft college draftees since they make the majors faster....

I don't agree with that.  What that strategy does is result in a lower talent level overall in the system, by choosing players closer to the majors but with less upside potential.  In the short run, you pick up a few wins, but it cements your future in mediocrity.

Online blue911

  • Posts: 16228
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #84: September 09, 2010, 09:52:51 AM »
I don't agree with that.  What that strategy does is result in a lower talent level overall in the system, by choosing players closer to the majors but with less upside potential.  In the short run, you pick up a few wins, but it cements your future in mediocrity.

Is that because Josh Smoker is so much better than Stephen Strasburg?

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 27558
  • Hell yes!
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #85: September 09, 2010, 09:56:09 AM »
Is that because Josh Smoker is so much better than Stephen Strasburg?

Are you saying that had we drafted Strasburg in high school and Smoker out of college, Smoker would be the better talent?

Online blue911

  • Posts: 16228
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #86: September 09, 2010, 09:58:20 AM »
Are you saying that had we drafted Strasburg in high school and Smoker out of college, Smoker would be the better talent?

No, you're the one making an assumption based upon age. Your Jedi mind tricks won't work on me, Skywalker.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 14593
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #87: September 09, 2010, 10:02:22 AM »
Is that because Josh Smoker is so much better than Stephen Strasburg?

Strassburg is the ultimate outlier, a guy who goes undrafted out of high school then gets picked 1 over all.

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5193
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #88: September 09, 2010, 11:52:45 AM »
Is that because Josh Smoker is so much better than Stephen Strasburg?
What he is saying is draft the best player and player who projects to be the most productive at the spot. That means no more Trevor Holder's. Strasburg was easily the best player in that draft. He was MLB-ready the day he was drafted.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 27558
  • Hell yes!
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #89: September 09, 2010, 12:34:19 PM »
What he is saying is draft the best player and player who projects to be the most productive at the spot. That means no more Trevor Holder's. Strasburg was easily the best player in that draft. He was MLB-ready the day he was drafted.

Right.  Don't choose a college player who is a lesser talent simply because he's older and closer to MLB ready, if the younger guy is a greater talent.  On the other hand, if the college player has it going for him (Zimmerman, Zimmermann, Strasburg for three), go for it.

Offline Terpfan76

  • Posts: 3814
  • ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #90: September 11, 2010, 07:40:44 PM »
Yeah, it seems pretty simple, draft the best player available, especially early. I don't care about needs or "blocks", the best available player is how to build a good team. Later on is the place to take risks. Like Cole, 4th round pick was a risk, but the talent/reward was worth the risk.


As for Marrero, it seems as though some around here just assume that because he'll be 23 next July, he's pretty well washed up, well don't forget, Ryan Howard didn't make his debut until he was 24 and didn't play his first full MLB season until age 26. Let's not throw Marrero on the scrap heap yet.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 27558
  • Hell yes!
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #91: January 10, 2011, 01:49:03 PM »
From Kevin Goldstein, BP

Future Shock - Monday Morning 10-pack

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=12696

Quote
While interest in baseball's draft has grown exponentially over the last few years, the overwhelmingly majority of that attention is given to the first round, or in the case of last year's television coverage, the first day of picks, which included a total of 50 selections including the supplemental round. There were 1,475 selections after that, and here are ten who will be a lot more well-known 12 months from now.




Robbie Ray, LHP, Washington Nationals

Despite drafting and signing Bryce Harper with the first overall pick last June, the Nationals spent plenty of cash elsewhere in the draft, including a $2 million bonus for fourth-round righty A.J. Cole and just under $800,000 for Ray, a lefty taken in the 12th round. Scouts had high expectations for Ray heading into the spring, but he was unpredictable all year at Brentwood (Tenn.) High, with one scout describing his velocity as ranging from 86-94 mph, and the evaluation of his curveball and changeup being just as varied. Long and lanky at 6-foot-3 and a generously listed 175 pounds, Ray is full of projection. When he was on, he looked like a first-round talent.


Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 17165
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #92: January 10, 2011, 02:00:19 PM »
Ray has a rich selection of potential walk up tunes. 

Offline PatsNats28

  • Posts: 8384
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #93: January 10, 2011, 02:33:49 PM »

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 15782
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #94: January 10, 2011, 02:45:03 PM »
And one of the 7 living Royals fans.  You're right.

On the other hand, that means 14.3% of all Royals fans are Joe Posnanski-level writers. Which is impressive! :D

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5193
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #95: January 10, 2011, 03:19:50 PM »
On the other hand, that means 14.3% of all Royals fans are Joe Posnanski-level writers. Which is impressive! :D
Posnanski is a Royals fan also so that makes it 28.7% of the fans which is better than 8% of Nats fans.

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 15782
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #96: January 10, 2011, 03:26:40 PM »
Posnanski is a Royals fan also so that makes it 28.7% of the fans which is better than 8% of Nats fans.

ROFL I meant Joe Posnanski was the first 14.3%

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7971
  • Leprechaun
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #97: January 10, 2011, 05:49:56 PM »
Where does Corey Brown rank now among our prospects?  I have reasonably high hopes for him.  Karhl called him a left handed Justin Maxwell type.  If he's Maxwell without the strikeouts, that's not bad at all. 

On a totally unrelated note, I hope Rizzo drafts three college pitchers with the 3 first rounders we have this year.  I think we'll have like 3 of the top 35 picks or so.  Unless there is just an outstanding bat available, we really should get someone like Mike Leake or even Chris Sale, assuming they make him a starter.   If we can get another solid SP ready to contribute in 2012 or 2013, we'll be in great shape.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 33585
  • Lets go to work
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #98: January 10, 2011, 05:50:56 PM »
The Nationals need position players like nobodies business.

Pitching can wait.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7971
  • Leprechaun
Re: Rank the Nats top prospects
« Reply #99: January 10, 2011, 06:38:50 PM »
The Nationals need position players like nobodies business.

Pitching can wait.

I think this offseason has helped drive home the point of how hard it is to get quality MLB pitching.  We can always buy the next Werth.  I think we'll be in decent shape, anyway, with Zim, Werth, Harper, LaRoche, Desmond, Ramos (or Norris) and then filling in the rest as needed.  Hopefully a quality CF, too.

But I disagree - I think we need more quality starters.  If we ever get too many, trade one to the Cubs.