Indians Prospect Insider - Covering the Cleveland Indians from the Minors to the Big Leagues

IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Talk shop about the various prospects and teams that make up the Cleveland Indians organization.

IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:25 pm

Okay, on the eve of my trip down to Goodyear I am getting a ton of things lined up. On record interviews with several front office and instructors/coaches. Already set to talk at length on record with the likes of Scouting Director John Mirabelli, Amateur Scouting Director Brad Grant, Minor League Pitching Coordinator Dave Miller, and Lake County Pitching Coach Jeff Harris. Will talk to Farm Director Ross Atkins too of course, and a host of other coaches and players.

The reason for this post, is if there is ANYTHING you want to know, please post it here. I'll try to ask.

Also, if there are any specific players you would like me to target and what you'd like to know, let me know that too. With 150 or so guys in camp, I want to target the guys people want to know more about. Thanks.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby wrestlecd4 » Wed Mar 09, 2011 11:14 pm

Big Chisenhall fan. Would love to know more about him. He is the future and would be good to know about him before he "arrives". Basically where he came from and adversity he has faced (theft, etc) and how he has overcome these adverse situations.
wrestlecd4
Undrafted Free Agent
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 10:50 pm
Location: Kent

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby homerawayfromhome » Wed Mar 09, 2011 11:30 pm

Alex White and Drew Pomeranz ...what was their impression this far of camp? does any one thing stick out to them? What do they like to do in the offseason? What are they working on (holding runners, etc)?
Will Travis Buck go to AAA if he doesn't make the squad at the end of camp?
homerawayfromhome
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2277
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:17 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby InsaneJedi » Wed Mar 09, 2011 11:52 pm

What does the organization really think about Cord Phelps? With him getting squeezed between Kipnis at AAA and Cabrera in the show, do they truly see him playing a role in the future of this team?
InsaneJedi
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 11:34 am

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby elrod enchilada » Thu Mar 10, 2011 1:45 am

It seems like their starting rotations all the way down to Lake City are filled with legitimate prospects. I cannot remember a situation like this for a very long time, if ever. I would be interested in getting his take on who looks like a contender to make a leap this year. I am especially interested in Matt Packer, Austin Adams, Nick Hagadone and Joe Gardner
elrod enchilada
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby GeronimoSon » Thu Mar 10, 2011 10:19 am

Tony.. there are a few things that would be of interest...

-Nick Hagadone & Zach McAllister: Both come from organizations that are considered "elite" with respect to their Major League teams. What I'd like to know: what are the differences (physical training, mental training, expectations, etc) in the system each of these guys came from as compared to the Indians system? This curiosity comes from several direct discussions with the one of the NYY's minor league coaches who claimed that EXPECTATION of winning is deeply ingrained in everything they do.. It seems as if both the Red Sox and the Yankees instill that attitude.. Do either or both of these guys see the same thing with the Indians, or are there subtle differences?..what are those differences.. dig.... dig DEEP..

-Walk Up Music: Name the players and who they want to hear as they approach homeplate...

-Nicknames: Old ones and new ones.. e.g. Carlos "Black Magic" Santana, Travis PRONK Hafner.. Name the players and the Nicknames.

-Character Stories: Everyone of these guys has quirks or peccadillos, some boastful, some self effacing.. There appears to be a LOT of sanitizing of the image of young MLB players.. It starts with learning "cliche'd" answers to baseball questions.. Get past that.. While you don't want the Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh "really out there" stuff... Fans want to see 'colorful'.. If I have to watch another, stiff, formal, surrounded Rick Manning / Matt Underwood interogation interview.. I'm gonna scream... These stories endear these youngsters to the fans that follow..
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby criznit2009 » Thu Mar 10, 2011 1:13 pm

I guess the 1B position in Columbus... Who is gonna get looks there this year - a committee or is someone (Goedert) or (Brown) gonna get a shot to lock it down? How will McBride factor in, what about Hodges (trade/cut is my guess) Also, Mills what do they expect out from him this year, anything or have they decided he's no longer fits into long term plans.. Also I would like to know how aggressive they plan on being with Hagadone and Packer this season, and really how fast they plan on expediting(not to the show per say) any one (older guys?) who are having a killer seasons. Guys like Tice, A. Adams, Burnette, Frawley etc.
criznit2009
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1180
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 9:27 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby petes999 » Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:00 pm

I would like to hear how that "3rd" pitch is coming for Pom, White, Knapp and others on whether they are getting it to be a top line starter versus pen/BOR guy.

I would also like to hear what they will plan for with Adams and even Rondon on being starters versus pen (Rondon with his injury may need to get to the bigs that push him to pen)? When do we have enough relievers in the pipeline that they may start pushing people harder to start and grooming them for that versus being pushed or labeled as a pen guy earlier on like a Putnam? Guess my real question is will Adams piggy back start to possibly be a starter and get that 3rd/4th pitch or does he do it with the intent of just getting more reps for his 1st and 2nd pitch to be a pen guy like possibly Hagadone?
petes999
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby MadThinker88 » Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:39 pm

Would love to hear more from the players that have been part of or are going to be part of a piggy-back situation. Their feelings/ beliefs/ outlook on it/ etc.

With the number of talented right-handed relievers at AA & AAA, I would love to hear how those guys place themselves and view the situation they are in how the Tribe bullpen is shaping up for 2011. I'm not talking Hermann or Pestano or Todd. I'm refering to Bryson, Stowell, Putnam, Judy, CC Lee, etc. Are some feeling slighted if they didn't get a NRI? Do they think they can get to the show this season?
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Upper Box Woodchuck » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:32 pm

I'd be interested in knowing which players the Tribe are looking at as serious shots for a second season in short-season ball(MV/AZL).
Upper Box Woodchuck
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:47 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby toledobuck » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:36 pm

What would Mirabell's, Grant's, or Atkins' best guestimate on who will be in the Tribe's starting rotation in 2013 picking from only the players in our system now?
toledobuck
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:07 am

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby theshow » Fri Mar 11, 2011 2:59 pm

They might find this to be insulting, but when a type A player's arbitration years run out, does the fact that they don't have to pay signing bonuses to players acquired in a trade play a role in why we trade guys like Lee, Martinez, and Sabathia and don't take the 2 draft picks?

Another question--What is wrong with this business model?
*Spend between 35-40 million every year on the draft
*Draft a player who is overslot every single round of the draft, and sign every tough sign there is
*Never ever resign a major league player (keep a player 6 years and let them walk, or trade them for prospects)
*Never ever sign a free agent
*Never ever would your payroll go above about $25 million (and when you take into consideration all the draft money, it would be like having a team with a $60 million payroll doing it this way).

I see no flaws in this. I know baseball doesn't like teams going overslot, but can they really block them from going overslot. It seems like my model is far more genious than MONEYBALL, or anything else that has ever been done. This team would be stacked every year it seems like to me, especially once you hit on some star players and start trading them for even more prospects.
theshow
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 12:00 am

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby indianinkslinger » Fri Mar 11, 2011 3:39 pm

theshow wrote:They might find this to be insulting, but when a type A player's arbitration years run out, does the fact that they don't have to pay signing bonuses to players acquired in a trade play a role in why we trade guys like Lee, Martinez, and Sabathia and don't take the 2 draft picks?

Another question--What is wrong with this business model?
*Spend between 35-40 million every year on the draft
*Draft a player who is overslot every single round of the draft, and sign every tough sign there is
*Never ever resign a major league player (keep a player 6 years and let them walk, or trade them for prospects)
*Never ever sign a free agent
*Never ever would your payroll go above about $25 million (and when you take into consideration all the draft money, it would be like having a team with a $60 million payroll doing it this way).

I see no flaws in this. I know baseball doesn't like teams going overslot, but can they really block them from going overslot. It seems like my model is far more genious than MONEYBALL, or anything else that has ever been done. This team would be stacked every year it seems like to me, especially once you hit on some star players and start trading them for even more prospects.

I proposed a similar idea months ago so we are on the same page. Hermie, in particular, had comments that were not flattering. I probably would not spend that much on the draft. eight figures + is good for me. A system can be overloaded with prospects and stifle promotions for the best. And I am thinking that attendance will dictate a budget of $40-55 million. Don't forget that you are going to have much of the ML team in arbitartion with only a 15-20% turnover in the 25 man roster. I also think I would avoid long term contracts. If the Indians actually get to the point where they are not a welfare team then they reconsider the plan but I see the chances of 3 million in attendance unlikely in the near future. :pleasantry: :friends:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Fri Mar 11, 2011 7:03 pm

theshow wrote:They might find this to be insulting, but when a type A player's arbitration years run out, does the fact that they don't have to pay signing bonuses to players acquired in a trade play a role in why we trade guys like Lee, Martinez, and Sabathia and don't take the 2 draft picks?

Another question--What is wrong with this business model?
*Spend between 35-40 million every year on the draft
*Draft a player who is overslot every single round of the draft, and sign every tough sign there is
*Never ever resign a major league player (keep a player 6 years and let them walk, or trade them for prospects)
*Never ever sign a free agent
*Never ever would your payroll go above about $25 million (and when you take into consideration all the draft money, it would be like having a team with a $60 million payroll doing it this way).

I see no flaws in this. I know baseball doesn't like teams going overslot, but can they really block them from going overslot. It seems like my model is far more genious than MONEYBALL, or anything else that has ever been done. This team would be stacked every year it seems like to me, especially once you hit on some star players and start trading them for even more prospects.


I see several flaws in this.

First off....how can you spend $40M on a draft? Just looking at last year's draft...who was available when we picked....no way can I come up with $40M...well, unless I just start burning unneeded money.

Second, your payroll would be over $25M...or at least I hope. If your payroll is under $25M, then you have a horrific team as it means that all your young players who are arby eligible must SUCK since they didn't get very big raises. Unless you're dumping players after their 4th year (not 6th) you will have a higher payroll...or you will suck big time....so guess you could have a payroll under $25M. But it's not a smart idea....at least for more than 1 year.

Third....while I have no problem building through the draft....draft misses happen a lot. Trading for a prospect can be more beneficial at times as you've seen what the kid can do. For example, you brought up the CC trade.....what the Tribe got actually looks better (on paper) than what the Brewers got for their picks after CC left. The CC trade is a great example of why it is better to trade players than just take draft picks actually. with how messed up the system is, you could easily end up with only a 2nd round pick instead of a 1st.

Four....you ignored international free agency. While the Tribe can't compete with the huge bonus guys, can still find gems and have to get involved at some level there.

Five...who would the Indians be "stacked" ever year? I mean....we've seen how rare it is for a player with less than 3 years experience to be a star. You're suggesting that we have on average half our team like that? Really? If you took the top 25 under 6 year players in baseball now and put them on the Indians....we very likely dont' win the World Series. You NEED vets and guys that have experience. Just thinking about how our rotation would look....yikes.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Fri Mar 11, 2011 7:05 pm

I do wish we'd spend more on the draft (like this past draft) though. :drinks:

Could be a moot point though after this year.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Lloyd Christmas » Fri Mar 11, 2011 7:27 pm

First off....how can you spend $40M on a draft? Just looking at last year's draft...who was available when we picked....no way can I come up with $40M...well, unless I just start burning unneeded money.


Gilbert could do it am I right? :good:
Lloyd Christmas
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:18 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby artgold » Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:08 am

theshow wrote:They might find this to be insulting, but when a type A player's arbitration years run out, does the fact that they don't have to pay signing bonuses to players acquired in a trade play a role in why we trade guys like Lee, Martinez, and Sabathia and don't take the 2 draft picks?

Another question--What is wrong with this business model?
*Spend between 35-40 million every year on the draft
*Draft a player who is overslot every single round of the draft, and sign every tough sign there is
*Never ever resign a major league player (keep a player 6 years and let them walk, or trade them for prospects)
*Never ever sign a free agent
*Never ever would your payroll go above about $25 million (and when you take into consideration all the draft money, it would be like having a team with a $60 million payroll doing it this way).

I see no flaws in this. I know baseball doesn't like teams going overslot, but can they really block them from going overslot. It seems like my model is far more genious than MONEYBALL, or anything else that has ever been done. This team would be stacked every year it seems like to me, especially once you hit on some star players and start trading them for even more prospects.


We are going a bit off topic here, but liked your idea enough to follow through a little with a discussion.

Though I somewhat disagree with you I appreciate your creative approach to team building. My comments about your proposal would be that $25 million would probably be more than adequate to cover your draft concept, even considering drafting tons of tough sign players. I'd then bump up the payroll to $50 million, and the combined total for players and the draft would still be on the lower side of baseball teams. Finally, a major risk with your approach would be Rule 5, you'd so pack your system every year that you would lose a lot of the guys you gave significant bonuses to a few years ago.

But, I do like your approach overall, and think it is at least interesting to consider for discussion with folks running the team.
artgold
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:00 am

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby theshow » Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:41 am

Hermie13 wrote:
theshow wrote:They might find this to be insulting, but when a type A player's arbitration years run out, does the fact that they don't have to pay signing bonuses to players acquired in a trade play a role in why we trade guys like Lee, Martinez, and Sabathia and don't take the 2 draft picks?

Another question--What is wrong with this business model?
*Spend between 35-40 million every year on the draft
*Draft a player who is overslot every single round of the draft, and sign every tough sign there is
*Never ever resign a major league player (keep a player 6 years and let them walk, or trade them for prospects)
*Never ever sign a free agent
*Never ever would your payroll go above about $25 million (and when you take into consideration all the draft money, it would be like having a team with a $60 million payroll doing it this way).

I see no flaws in this. I know baseball doesn't like teams going overslot, but can they really block them from going overslot. It seems like my model is far more genious than MONEYBALL, or anything else that has ever been done. This team would be stacked every year it seems like to me, especially once you hit on some star players and start trading them for even more prospects.


I see several flaws in this.

First off....how can you spend $40M on a draft? Just looking at last year's draft...who was available when we picked....no way can I come up with $40M...well, unless I just start burning unneeded money.

Almost every round there are Baseball America top 200 guys available. Plenty of high school talent who people don't want to touch. Make someone like Austin Wilson an offer he can't refuse. Someone like Gerritt Cole a few years back you just bite the bullet and sign him. Maybe 40 million is unrealistic, but how about 25 million, and then spend the other 15 million on International guys like Miguel Sano

Second, your payroll would be over $25M...or at least I hope. If your payroll is under $25M, then you have a horrific team as it means that all your young players who are arby eligible must SUCK since they didn't get very big raises. Unless you're dumping players after their 4th year (not 6th) you will have a higher payroll...or you will suck big time....so guess you could have a payroll under $25M. But it's not a smart idea....at least for more than 1 year.

Arbitration year 1 is never that much money. Choo only got 4 million. Year 2 would be where is would start to get pricey, and you are right you may eventually get over 25 million. That number is not fixed, it could increase if you have players good enough to get paid in year 5. I would maybe look to move the guy year 6 when the number ballooned up. However, if guys command that much salary, it probably means you are in a good situation with great players

Third....while I have no problem building through the draft....draft misses happen a lot. Trading for a prospect can be more beneficial at times as you've seen what the kid can do. For example, you brought up the CC trade.....what the Tribe got actually looks better (on paper) than what the Brewers got for their picks after CC left. The CC trade is a great example of why it is better to trade players than just take draft picks actually. with how messed up the system is, you could easily end up with only a 2nd round pick instead of a 1st.

No question. I don't see your point here, we are not dissagreeing on this. I encourage trading stars up for a contract extension for prospects in my potential plan.

Four....you ignored international free agency. While the Tribe can't compete with the huge bonus guys, can still find gems and have to get involved at some level there.

International signings I consider part of the draft. I have considered this. If you say it is so hard to spend $40 million on prospects, I say spend the money you are having a tough time putting into the draft on this.

Five...who would the Indians be "stacked" ever year? I mean....we've seen how rare it is for a player with less than 3 years experience to be a star. You're suggesting that we have on average half our team like that? Really? If you took the top 25 under 6 year players in baseball now and put them on the Indians....we very likely dont' win the World Series. You NEED vets and guys that have experience. Just thinking about how our rotation would look....yikes.


If we did my plan pretty much exclusively the way I laid out, I think we would be good every year. Does that mean the odds on favorite to win the World Series every year? Maybe not. But I do think once this plan had been in action for a while, you could slightly alter your plan and maybe in some scenario trade your prospects for a major league need (like how the Cubs got Garza) and still have a stacked system.

You made many comments Hermie, but I feel like I had an answer for all of them. I am telling you I think this would work. I know this would work. But there must be more too it. They must have a rule in place where a team can't go over a certain amount of spending on the draft. Otherwise, the Yankees and Red Sox would both put 30 million into it every year. I mean why not? It is only 30 million to them.
theshow
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 12:00 am

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby theshow » Sat Mar 12, 2011 3:06 am

artgold wrote:We are going a bit off topic here, but liked your idea enough to follow through a little with a discussion.

Though I somewhat disagree with you I appreciate your creative approach to team building. My comments about your proposal would be that $25 million would probably be more than adequate to cover your draft concept, even considering drafting tons of tough sign players. I'd then bump up the payroll to $50 million, and the combined total for players and the draft would still be on the lower side of baseball teams. Finally, a major risk with your approach would be Rule 5, you'd so pack your system every year that you would lose a lot of the guys you gave significant bonuses to a few years ago.

But, I do like your approach overall, and think it is at least interesting to consider for discussion with folks running the team.


Very much off topic. Sorry Tony. But just hoping something along these lines gets asked. You are right about rule 5. My plan might be a little on the extreme side, I like the way you are thinking, Art. But I think we would be much better off getting closer to my model then say, spending 10 million dollars on Kerry Wood. Aren't you almost assured to hit on 1 player if you buy 10 million dollars worth of draft picks? Star prospects are assets that are valued increasingly more as the game evolves. If you have enough high end prospect you can pretty much pluck any player off of any team. I gaurentee you if the Royals offered the Mariners Moustakos and Hosmer, they could get King Felix. That is what I am talking about. Prospects are a huge asset, and you need good ones.
theshow
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 12:00 am

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby GeronimoSon » Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:37 am

Hermie says: I see several flaws in this. First off....how can you spend $40M on a draft? Just looking at last year's draft...who was available when we picked....no way can I come up with $40M...well, unless I just start burning unneeded money.

The Show says: Almost every round there are Baseball America top 200 guys available. Plenty of high school talent who people don't want to touch. Make someone like Austin Wilson an offer he can't refuse. Someone like Gerritt Cole a few years back you just bite the bullet and sign him. Maybe 40 million is unrealistic, but how about 25 million, and then spend the other 15 million on International guys like Miguel Sano

G'Son says: Covering this first issue: The actual amount of money to be spent, be it, $ 40 MM or $ 25 MM or some number, there should be plenty of unneded money that can burned.. should someone bring marshmallows and sticks? In this hypothetical "outside the box" concept, this is quibbling, not dicussion..what a shock. If you don't like the number, pick another one, but the concept remains...

Hermie says: Second, your payroll would be over $25M...or at least I hope. If your payroll is under $25M, then you have a horrific team as it means that all your young players who are arby eligible must SUCK since they didn't get very big raises. Unless you're dumping players after their 4th year (not 6th) you will have a higher payroll...or you will suck big time....so guess you could have a payroll under $25M. But it's not a smart idea....at least for more than 1 year.

The Show says: Arbitration year 1 is never that much money. Choo only got 4 million. Year 2 would be where is would start to get pricey, and you are right you may eventually get over 25 million. That number is not fixed, it could increase if you have players good enough to get paid in year 5. I would maybe look to move the guy year 6 when the number ballooned up. However, if guys command that much salary, it probably means you are in a good situation with great players.

G'Son Says: The second issue: Team Payroll Number: 25 guys at $ 0.5 MM give you a minimum payroll of $ 12.5 MM, which is NOT happening. The assumption is that there will be no ARB-3 guys, So, If 10 of the 25 guys on the team are ARB-1 & ARB-2 [.6*(~ $ 4 MM) + .4(~$ 7 MM)]*10 = $ 52 MM + [15*$ 0.5 MM] = ~ $ 60 MM.. that would be a reasonable number and would require approximately 1.8 MM fans to show up at Progressive for Mr Dolan to break even. In other words, it's dooable, provided no mega contract guys are around. If a player is post ARB-2 and still within the budget.. that works too.. If a player expects to be paid in excess of this hypothetical budget, trade him for more upside prospects. Talented players are the asset that will create and sustain a competitive advantage. The Indians can 'cover' some of the draft misses this way, as well.

G'Son says: Points three and four, are offshoots, restatements and iterations of the second point..

Hermie says: Five...who would the Indians be "stacked" ever year? I mean....we've seen how rare it is for a player with less than 3 years experience to be a star. You're suggesting that we have on average half our team like that? Really? If you took the top 25 under 6 year players in baseball now and put them on the Indians....we very likely dont' win the World Series. You NEED vets and guys that have experience. Just thinking about how our rotation would look....yikes.

The Show says: If we did my plan pretty much exclusively the way I laid out, I think we would be good every year. Does that mean the odds on favorite to win the World Series every year? Maybe not. But I do think once this plan had been in action for a while, you could slightly alter your plan and maybe in some scenario trade your prospects for a major league need (like how the Cubs got Garza) and still have a stacked system.

G'Son says: Here is your pre-ARB-3 rotation and ($alarie$): Tommy Hansen ($ 435 K), Clayton Kershaw ($ 500K), David Price ($ 1.25 MM), Clay Buchholz ($ 500 K), Gio Gonzalez ( $ 500 K) 2011 Starting Rotation Total salary $ 2,960 MM <== you might win a few games with these five guys on the hill for you. (assuming this theoretical model has scouts and drafting that allows you to acquire this level of talent.. it won't be the $$$ that is the issue, it will be the coaching and development staff that will be under the gun), BTW, even if you aren't winning the WS every year, every year the club would be interesting and entertaining.

The Show says: You made many comments Hermie, but I feel like I had an answer for all of them. I am telling you I think this would work. I know this would work. But there must be more too it. They must have a rule in place where a team can't go over a certain amount of spending on the draft. Otherwise, the Yankees and Red Sox would both put 30 million into it every year. I mean why not? It is only 30 million to them.

G'Son says: Can this model work? With as many caveats as you'd like to place on it, yes. Is this the best way to build the club?.. I don't think so.. As hermie pointed out, without veteran leadership, a team can go off the rails quickly and permanently.. So, a combination of THIS MODEL (as the primary driving force) with a touch of the ARB-1 and ARB-2 guys or guys at that salary level, would benefit the team most. A down side to the plan would be merchandise sales of "named' player jerseys would take a hit as..who wants to buy an Indians jersey for a guy who's stay in Cleveland will max out at less than 6 years.. (psst..I would, but that's just me).
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby artgold » Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:11 pm

I agree there is some limited need for veteran leadership, which is one of the reasons I shifted the model to be a $25 mil bonus and $50 mil payroll, allowing you to keep a couple of players beyond their 6 years with the club or acquire some veteran talent. Also, I'd like to point out that veteran leadership doesn't need to be expensive, just look at the cost of Aubrey Huff ($3 mil) and Pat Burrell (under $1 mil) for the Giants last season.
artgold
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:00 am

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby GeronimoSon » Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:07 pm

artgold wrote:I agree there is some limited need for veteran leadership, which is one of the reasons I shifted the model to be a $25 mil bonus and $50 mil payroll, allowing you to keep a couple of players beyond their 6 years with the club or acquire some veteran talent. Also, I'd like to point out that veteran leadership doesn't need to be expensive, just look at the cost of Aubrey Huff ($3 mil) and Pat Burrell (under $1 mil) for the Giants last season.
Wouldn't it have been nice to see Omar back wearing the I that looks like a feather on his cap?.. for that exact purpose?.. hmm...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Sat Mar 12, 2011 4:03 pm

theshow wrote:If we did my plan pretty much exclusively the way I laid out, I think we would be good every year. Does that mean the odds on favorite to win the World Series every year? Maybe not. But I do think once this plan had been in action for a while, you could slightly alter your plan and maybe in some scenario trade your prospects for a major league need (like how the Cubs got Garza) and still have a stacked system.

You made many comments Hermie, but I feel like I had an answer for all of them. I am telling you I think this would work. I know this would work. But there must be more too it. They must have a rule in place where a team can't go over a certain amount of spending on the draft. Otherwise, the Yankees and Red Sox would both put 30 million into it every year. I mean why not? It is only 30 million to them.


No, the Tribe would not. sorry to burst your bubble, but your plain just simply does not work. Most pitchers take a few years to develop. Heck, even CC didn't get to his Cy Young level til 2007. Following your plan, he would have been gone. He would have been a 6 year free agent after the 2006 season.

So CC is gone after 2006 with your plan.....gotta replace him. Unless we always have a Tim Lincecum, we're gonna be the royals ever year. And speaking of Lincecum....how much did he get his first year of arbitration? Lot more than $4M. GREAT players get big bucks in arbitration. Guys like the Tribe has, the Cabrera, Smiths, lewis of the world...yeah they don't get big raises. Heck, even blake got $6M his last year. If the Team is good....it'll have several guys making big bucks in arbitration, thus making it close to impossible to have a $25M payroll for more than 1 year or so.

Try building a bullpen too with only rookies or near rookies.....not pretty. And let's not even get into the rotation of all non-arby guys (or even all less than 6 year guys) *shudders*

You definitely had an answer for all my questions/concerns, some were good...others still ignored issues. You also have ignored the fact that the Indians have some of the worst fans in baseball. Having a $25M payroll will kill this team's attendance/fan base to a point it may never recover. Fans (or most) don't care about how good your system is or how good your draft was (til 5 years later). Sad, but true unfortunately.

There actually is no rule on how much you can spend. The reason the Yanks and Red Sox don't spend $40M (or even $25M) is because it's simply not worth it and at the end of the day, pretty much impossible unless you're just trying to give away unneeded money (as I said). Just because there are still BA top 200 guys later in the draft doesn't mean that they deserve $3-4M bonuses in the later rounds.


I am telling you I know your plan will not work, and simply can not work. Sorry for being aggressive here. I'm all for outside the box ideas. Just can't see this one ever working.

I think it's funny that you say "it will work" and stuff...then next sentence say there must be more to it....nahhh, REALLY?! :rolleyes:



And again, this all could very much be a moot point with the very real posibility of a hard draft cap coming in the next CBA.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby theshow » Sat Mar 12, 2011 5:58 pm

Hermie13 wrote:I am telling you I know your plan will not work, and simply can not work. Sorry for being aggressive here. I'm all for outside the box ideas. Just can't see this one ever working.

I think it's funny that you say "it will work" and stuff...then next sentence say there must be more to it....nahhh, REALLY?! :rolleyes:


Your whole CC Sabathia didn't get good until after his 6th year is true. But not true of all guys. Look at the rotation Geranomoson pointed out:

Tommy Hansen ($ 435 K), Clayton Kershaw ($ 500K), David Price ($ 1.25 MM), Clay Buchholz ($ 500 K), Gio Gonzalez ( $ 500 K)

You wouldn't like the Indians odds with that rotation? I would.

I said it will work, and the next line said there is more to it in reference to spending excessively on the draft and why there must be some reason why the Yankees don't spend 30 million a year on the draft (behind closed doors the MLB must not allow that to happen). I also am not saying that you couldn't in some situation slightly alter the plan. Like trading for an established player, or signing your cornerstone player through 1 free agency year.

I think Geranomo son and Art are the voice of reason in all this. If you followed this plan ver batum, and never strayed from it you may run into some pitfalls. But if you follow this plan 90% of the time, and every once stray from it in special circumstances, I think it would be great. Whatever the case, the Indians need to get closer and closer to this model, and further and further away from like a Chicago White Sox model.
theshow
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 12:00 am

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Rocky55 » Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:05 pm

Tony, this may sound stupid but I've always wondered about it; do the draft guys in the FO ever ask their own players about players in the draft? I mean like asking Pomeranz about the SEC guys or Wolters about the Cal HS players, strengths/weaknesses/is the guy a dick, whatever. Star players from the same area play each other from elementary school travel ball on up through college sometimes. I know they're not scouts but they might have insights that even scouts don't have.

Really appreciated the bit on Aviles. Sounds like a kid with a need to prove himself. We won't have to worry about whether he wants to put in the work that's required.

Like to hear some stuff on the other Tonys-Wolters & Dischler.

On the show's dream draftee rotation, you're not getting Price or Kershaw unless you're drafting in the top 10. Not that you can't get studs out of the top 10 but if your plan is successful you have to allow for drafting later due to more wins at the ML level. We got Chiz late so it isn't impossible. I'm a big draft guy but I'd like to see every method of player acquisition emphasized. We didn't draft C. Perez or Choo. Trying to buy out some FA years on certain players isn't a bad idea either. You're right though, that the draft is the place that it all begins. That's why Brad Grant is the man.
Rocky55
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1545
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:13 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby indianinkslinger » Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:15 pm

theshow wrote:
Hermie13 wrote:I am telling you I know your plan will not work, and simply can not work. Sorry for being aggressive here. I'm all for outside the box ideas. Just can't see this one ever working.

I think it's funny that you say "it will work" and stuff...then next sentence say there must be more to it....nahhh, REALLY?! :rolleyes:


Your whole CC Sabathia didn't get good until after his 6th year is true. But not true of all guys. Look at the rotation Geranomoson pointed out:

Tommy Hansen ($ 435 K), Clayton Kershaw ($ 500K), David Price ($ 1.25 MM), Clay Buchholz ($ 500 K), Gio Gonzalez ( $ 500 K)

You wouldn't like the Indians odds with that rotation? I would.

I said it will work, and the next line said there is more to it in reference to spending excessively on the draft and why there must be some reason why the Yankees don't spend 30 million a year on the draft (behind closed doors the MLB must not allow that to happen). I also am not saying that you couldn't in some situation slightly alter the plan. Like trading for an established player, or signing your cornerstone player through 1 free agency year.

I think Geranomo son and Art are the voice of reason in all this. If you followed this plan ver batum, and never strayed from it you may run into some pitfalls. But if you follow this plan 90% of the time, and every once stray from it in special circumstances, I think it would be great. Whatever the case, the Indians need to get closer and closer to this model, and further and further away from like a Chicago White Sox model.

Hermie's goal is to wear you down. The Rays have been using this approach for years and have shown some success. And the Rays revenues are not nearly as bad as the Indians. Hermie is just providing opinionated conjecture as fact. It doesn't look to me like the Tribe has a whole lot of choice given their revenue situation. I think your points are well made! :good:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby GeronimoSon » Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:23 am

Rocky.. the Indians have been drafting in the top ten for the last couple of years.. The players in this "hypothetical rotation" (sky-hooked names without consideration to their actual draft position at the time) were drafted as follows:

Clayton Kershaw: 7th overall pick in the 2006 draft
David Price: 1st overall pick in the 2007 draft
Tommy Hansen: 667th overall pick in the 2005 draft
Clay Buccholz: 42nd overall pick in the in the 2005 draft
Gio Gonzalez: 38th overall pick in the 2004 draft

The effectiveness of a club's projection of players is the issue.. Hansen & Buchholz were both selected well after the Indians made their first & second picks (Trevor Crowe and John Drennan, ugh).. So, players with this type of ability have been there.. the Indians "trade for" players has been relatively decent... the Indians draft, draft and follow.. and development has to be better for the "the show-plan" to be most effective..
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Sun Mar 13, 2011 12:48 pm

indianinkslinger wrote:
theshow wrote:
Hermie13 wrote:I am telling you I know your plan will not work, and simply can not work. Sorry for being aggressive here. I'm all for outside the box ideas. Just can't see this one ever working.

I think it's funny that you say "it will work" and stuff...then next sentence say there must be more to it....nahhh, REALLY?! :rolleyes:


Your whole CC Sabathia didn't get good until after his 6th year is true. But not true of all guys. Look at the rotation Geranomoson pointed out:

Tommy Hansen ($ 435 K), Clayton Kershaw ($ 500K), David Price ($ 1.25 MM), Clay Buchholz ($ 500 K), Gio Gonzalez ( $ 500 K)

You wouldn't like the Indians odds with that rotation? I would.

I said it will work, and the next line said there is more to it in reference to spending excessively on the draft and why there must be some reason why the Yankees don't spend 30 million a year on the draft (behind closed doors the MLB must not allow that to happen). I also am not saying that you couldn't in some situation slightly alter the plan. Like trading for an established player, or signing your cornerstone player through 1 free agency year.

I think Geranomo son and Art are the voice of reason in all this. If you followed this plan ver batum, and never strayed from it you may run into some pitfalls. But if you follow this plan 90% of the time, and every once stray from it in special circumstances, I think it would be great. Whatever the case, the Indians need to get closer and closer to this model, and further and further away from like a Chicago White Sox model.

Hermie's goal is to wear you down. The Rays have been using this approach for years and have shown some success. And the Rays revenues are not nearly as bad as the Indians. Hermie is just providing opinionated conjecture as fact. It doesn't look to me like the Tribe has a whole lot of choice given their revenue situation. I think your points are well made! :good:


Rays have not been following this plan either. In the last 5 drafts, only once have then spent over $8M....sorry for my "opinionated conjecture" here :rolleyes:
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Sun Mar 13, 2011 12:57 pm

theshow wrote:
Hermie13 wrote:I am telling you I know your plan will not work, and simply can not work. Sorry for being aggressive here. I'm all for outside the box ideas. Just can't see this one ever working.

I think it's funny that you say "it will work" and stuff...then next sentence say there must be more to it....nahhh, REALLY?! :rolleyes:


Your whole CC Sabathia didn't get good until after his 6th year is true. But not true of all guys. Look at the rotation Geranomoson pointed out:

Tommy Hansen ($ 435 K), Clayton Kershaw ($ 500K), David Price ($ 1.25 MM), Clay Buchholz ($ 500 K), Gio Gonzalez ( $ 500 K)

You wouldn't like the Indians odds with that rotation? I would.

I said it will work, and the next line said there is more to it in reference to spending excessively on the draft and why there must be some reason why the Yankees don't spend 30 million a year on the draft (behind closed doors the MLB must not allow that to happen). I also am not saying that you couldn't in some situation slightly alter the plan. Like trading for an established player, or signing your cornerstone player through 1 free agency year.

I think Geranomo son and Art are the voice of reason in all this. If you followed this plan ver batum, and never strayed from it you may run into some pitfalls. But if you follow this plan 90% of the time, and every once stray from it in special circumstances, I think it would be great. Whatever the case, the Indians need to get closer and closer to this model, and further and further away from like a Chicago White Sox model.


Those pitchers are good....though odds of us having 5 guys like that even with spending $40M on a draft is virtually nil. On paper your idea works, but in reality, it doesn't. Plus, if we're spending $40M or $25M or whatever it is....we'll be giving out a lot more contracts like David Price's where pitchers and hitters are getting ML deals upon signing....which also increases the 25-man roster payroll.

And no, there is no conspiracy keeping teams from spending what they want on the draft. Teams simply realize it's not economical to spend that much on the draft. Guys simply aren't worth that much money, period.


Point is your "plan" is way over the top. spending $7-10M on the draft is the way to go, not $25-40M. Some people put WAY too much emphasis on the money part of the draft. Doesn't matter if you spend $10M or $4M. Have to draft well. Should the Tribe have spent $3M on their 2008 1st round pick like the Red Sox did 1 pick after us (Casey Kelly)? Or were we better off spending less than $1M on Chiz?

Indians are already nothing like the White Sox model. Not sure where that came from. Probably can't find a team more different than the Tribe acutally...
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby GeronimoSon » Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:07 pm

Hermie: Those pitchers are good....though odds of us having 5 guys like that even with spending $40M on a draft is virtually nil

They were selected because they are good.. and at least three or the five would have been available to the Indians who selected other players.. As you've illustrated here:

Hermie: Some people put WAY too much emphasis on the money part of the draft. Doesn't matter if you spend $10M or $4M. Have to draft well.

Drafting well is absolutely the one area the Indians must get right..and keep getting it right. If the Indians are convinced of the talent of a prep school player, spending over slot should be considered (as it was done in the 2010 draft).. How the 2011 season goes with respect to recent draftee's and traded players progress..it's going to be interesting in that regard..

Regarding the CWSox...You wouldn't be able to find a team more different than the Indians..? Wouldn't you agree that the CWSox just use a higher volume?...in the dollars they spend.. KW's lack of conservative trades... their reliance on veteran players?.. Which way to you mean?.. just curious...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:08 pm

GeronimoSon wrote:Regarding the CWSox...You wouldn't be able to find a team more different than the Indians..? Wouldn't you agree that the CWSox just use a higher volume?...in the dollars they spend.. KW's lack of conservative trades... their reliance on veteran players?.. Which way to you mean?.. just curious...


A higher volume?...in the dollars they spend. Not sure what you mean here. You talk like Yoda. White Sox have spent less on the draft than us...so hope that's not what you meant. If you're referring to how KW spends on free agency then ok...but it has nothing to do with this discussion.

The White Sox over the last 5 years have been basically nothing like the Tribe. Their system is always in the bottom 10.


Tribe is still using the same model that got them to the cusp of the 2007 World Series. Drop payroll for a while, build the system, then when the time is right spend. It nearly worked in 2007. Tribe dropped payroll after 2001, got down to the $30M range I believe at one point. Then graduatlly built it back up to over $80M. Tribe is down in the $40M range.....have built up a nice system. Hopefully this time around they get over the hump and win it all :drinks:
Last edited by Hermie13 on Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby JayAre » Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:12 pm

I'm enjoying this theoretical rotation. Like we could have gotten Kershaw and Price by spending more money on the draft. And those 5 would be getting $60M combined by their second year of arbitration. So much for the $25M payroll.
JayAre
Undrafted Free Agent
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 2:10 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:19 pm

I will say this about the White Sox "plan"....I do wish the Tribe would be a bit more active on guys like Alexei Ramirez. The international players who cost pennies compared to the Dice-K's and the Chapmans of the world.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby indianinkslinger » Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:05 pm

Really enjoyed the game today. I missed getting together with the "fearless Leader" but maybe tomorrow at he minor fields. Both Masterson and Gomez got tagged real good on balls up in the zone. No excuse for either but the Home Plate umpire was really squeezing all the pitches in the low zone for both teams. Both had good sliders but each got fast balls up in the zone. Neither had a great change but part of that was probably the tight zone. Gomez fast ball has the speed, probably low to mid 90s, but it flattens out with little movement when he gets it up. He made two room service fast balls to Carter.

Watched the "fringe" players closely. Hanahan looked better at the plate than he has but his defense was not good. He misplayed two outs into hits from what I saw. Slow break on an IF single and wiffed on a liner. I think we can forget Buck as a CF. He misplayed three balls very badly. REal surprised how good Duncan looked defensively at 1B. He hits LHP hard but he is really slow. EZ is very instinctive defensively. Durbin threw three pitches for strikes. Not great stuff but location and movement. :yahoo:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:13 pm

indianinkslinger wrote: I think we can forget Buck as a CF. He misplayed three balls very badly.


Worse.....Buck in CF or Garko in RF? :s_tongue
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby GeronimoSon » Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:19 pm

Hermie13 wrote:
indianinkslinger wrote: I think we can forget Buck as a CF. He misplayed three balls very badly.


Worse.....Buck in CF or Garko in RF? :s_tongue
Garko was horrendous in the OF.. Buck was blinded by the light (something NE Ohioans cannot completely understand.. the sun being out..) Buck is never going to have to worry about his gold glove status as he's an average to below average fielder.. He's in the mix for a roster spot because of injury and his bat...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby GeronimoSon » Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:27 pm

To Hermie... Volume: as in " More of..." as in more money spent.. as in taking a higher risk for trades made...etc.. same path/direction, just higher volume.. Now, my paduan learner.. wiser you are....
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:40 pm

GeronimoSon wrote:To Hermie... Volume: as in " More of..." as in more money spent.. as in taking a higher risk for trades made...etc.. same path/direction, just higher volume.. Now, my paduan learner.. wiser you are....


ha, the fact that the Tribe spent more money on the draft than the White Sox the last few years was why I said something. Your post (as usual) made no sense (as you just showed yourself). We were talking about the draft there bud. :good:

White Sox do NOT use a higher "volume" in the draft. As you said "Wouldn't you agree that the CWSox just use a higher volume?...in the dollars they spend"

No, I would not agree...cause that is false when it comes to the draft :drinks:
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby GeronimoSon » Tue Mar 15, 2011 9:53 pm

White Sox do NOT use a higher "volume" in the draft. As you said "Wouldn't you agree that the CWSox just use a higher volume?...in the dollars they spend"
You may be just talking about one aspect of the spending that you think supports your argument, but, that would be just you: take a small aspect of the total subject and break it out to support your argument.. "small minded and limited" aren't what PROSPECT TALK is about... the whole body of spending is open for discussion. Censorship of the topic is not permitted.. don't try.. you'd lose that argument as well..

The CWSox projected spending including payroll is double what the Indians are projected to spend..

The CWSox have made some wild unconservative trades.. the Indians.. don't...

Keep trying, my paduan..learn from the master you will....
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Mar 15, 2011 11:19 pm

GeronimoSon wrote: You may be just talking about one aspect of the spending that you think supports your argument.


My arguement was that the Indians and White Sox follow completely different paths when it comes to the draft. You have to go back to 2004 to find a draft where this isn't true. I zoned in on one aspect of spending cause that was the argument (it's like talking to a 2 year old).

Censorship? Not trying to censor you dude, just getting you back on topic and correcting you when wrong.


Anyhoo.....spring training.....


Starting to wonder what the odds are of Hannahan making this club regardless of Donald's health. I still say it makes more sense to have 2 infielders on the bench, especially if one is Nix (ability to play the OF). Hannahan can back up 3rd for Donald if healthy and even 1B. He's traditionally been a very much above average defensive 3B (was his best attribute when he was younger)...something the Tribe could use. Nix, Hannahan, Duncan, and a backup catcher....seems pretty reasonable to me :drinks:
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Prosecutor » Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:20 am

Getting back to the prospects, I read Tony's 3/15 report with the quotes from another org's scout, and it was pretty discouraging. His impression seems to be that the Tribe has a lot of future average or fringe major leaguers in their system. I've heard this before, that we're long on quantity but short on impact players.

He described Chiz, who is possibly our top prospect, as a future Jhonny Peralta (.280, 20-25 HRs in a good season, a lot of doubles). Most of the other guys he talked about have "low ceilings". Alex White is a future #4 starter. None of the relievers stand out as potential closers, and if you're not a closer you're just another bullpen arm passing through (according to this scout).

He described our 5th ranked prospect, Nick Weglarz, as a platoon outfielder or maybe a starter for a bad team. Hagadone has lost arm strength since coming over from the Red Sox, which is very bad because he can't throw strikes, either. Bryce Stowall got guys out at AA because they chased his fastball out of the zone, which won't happen as he moves up to AAA.

All in all, not much to like in this report. He didn't talk about Pomeranz, Kipnis, and Washington, so maybe if these guys (and Santana) turn out to be Choo level players and hopefully Carmona as well, we'll have a decent team at least.
Prosecutor
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 904
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby davidkey » Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:52 am

Prosecutor wrote:Getting back to the prospects, I read Tony's 3/15 report with the quotes from another org's scout, and it was pretty discouraging. His impression seems to be that the Tribe has a lot of future average or fringe major leaguers in their system. I've heard this before, that we're long on quantity but short on impact players.

He described Chiz, who is possibly our top prospect, as a future Jhonny Peralta (.280, 20-25 HRs in a good season, a lot of doubles). Most of the other guys he talked about have "low ceilings". Alex White is a future #4 starter. None of the relievers stand out as potential closers, and if you're not a closer you're just another bullpen arm passing through (according to this scout).

He described our 5th ranked prospect, Nick Weglarz, as a platoon outfielder or maybe a starter for a bad team. Hagadone has lost arm strength since coming over from the Red Sox, which is very bad because he can't throw strikes, either. Bryce Stowall got guys out at AA because they chased his fastball out of the zone, which won't happen as he moves up to AAA.

All in all, not much to like in this report. He didn't talk about Pomeranz, Kipnis, and Washington, so maybe if these guys (and Santana) turn out to be Choo level players and hopefully Carmona as well, we'll have a decent team at least.



Indeed, not exactly a glowing report from that scout. But I for one am not surprised. Whether from other scouts, Baseball America guys or whomever, we've been hearing for months that the system has very few impact players. If depth in future major leaguers were the main criteria, our system would be probably be top 5. As this scout opines, we have a lot of guys who should make it to the majors, but who probably won't light the world on fire. I bet Keith Law (i think it was him) relied on this rationale when he rated our system only #15 in all of MLB (something like that). Just think back to where our farm system was 2 years ago. Thank goodness it's much better now, but it still isn't exactly 2003 caliber.

No doubt this year is huge for our minor league system to develop talent (and of course for the individual talent to do well). Fingers crossed that Knapp stays healthy and moves up the system. I'm optimistic DeLaCruz could be talked about as a mid-rotation starter a year from now (chalk up the mediocre 2010 to being his 1st year back from TJ....Tommy John, not Tijuana.....coming back from either place requires upwards of 2 full years to recover); Pom keeps doing what he's doing; 'he shall be LeVon' Washington and a few others (say, a Bo Greenwell here, an Urshela there, a Sterling there, etc) take big steps; and they gotta get an impact player with that 1st round pick in this year's draft :) IF this, or some variation of it, happens in the minors this year, then next year we hopefully will have more blue chippers next year.
davidkey
Undrafted Free Agent
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Hermie13 » Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:12 pm

davidkey wrote:Indeed, not exactly a glowing report from that scout. But I for one am not surprised. Whether from other scouts, Baseball America guys or whomever, we've been hearing for months that the system has very few impact players. If depth in future major leaguers were the main criteria, our system would be probably be top 5. As this scout opines, we have a lot of guys who should make it to the majors, but who probably won't light the world on fire. I bet Keith Law (i think it was him) relied on this rationale when he rated our system only #15 in all of MLB (something like that). Just think back to where our farm system was 2 years ago. Thank goodness it's much better now, but it still isn't exactly 2003 caliber.


Just wanted to point out that Baseball America did rank us the 7th best system in baseball, so some people do take depth into consideration. They also mentioned that teams who are in the top ten 3 years in a row (which we have been) tend to good shortly after.

Seems to be a lot of diversity in how scouts and such view the Tribe system too. For example, both Callis and Manuel over at BA had 4 Indians in their top 50 prospects in baseball (Chiz, Kipnis, White, and Pomeranz). :drinks:
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7093
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Lloyd Christmas » Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:21 pm

His impression seems to be that the Tribe has a lot of future average or fringe major leaguers in their system. I've heard this before, that we're long on quantity but short on impact players.


Yeah that seems to be the general consensus. Its interesting how drastically different the Indians minor league system would be looked at if Santana had a few less Major League at bats.

Alex White is a future #4 starter.


At least they have him as a starter!

He described Chiz, who is possibly our top prospect, as a future Jhonny Peralta (.280, 20-25 HRs in a good season, a lot of double


As long as its Peraltas 05 season Id take that for the next 7 or 8 years
Lloyd Christmas
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:18 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby daingean » Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:17 pm

I think the scout was fair. We have a lot of bullpen arms and he said he doesn't get excited by them unless they are closer types. Only time will tell how our starter prospects fare:

Knapp
Rondon
Gomez
Haley
House
De La Cruz
Alex Perez
White
Pomeranz

I am sure I'm missing some others but I think we will find a FOR guy in one of the group above.
daingean
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1533
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 12:06 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:27 pm

The two scouts I talked to for that piece just laid it all out....and was the reason for the posting. Sometimes guys values can be inflated some or we do it because of what is written or said from org or media types....but I always feel it is good from time to time to take a step back and get a dose of reality from those who are impartial to the Indians.

Now, that said, I talked to another scout today from another org who had a much more glowing report on the likes of White, Chisenhall, Kipnis, Weglarz and others. It's the way the scouting world works. Sometimes guys just get a different feel for guys, and sometimes catch them at the right (wrong) time.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Rocky55 » Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:56 pm

Prosecutor wrote:Getting back to the prospects, I read Tony's 3/15 report with the quotes from another org's scout, and it was pretty discouraging. His impression seems to be that the Tribe has a lot of future average or fringe major leaguers in their system. I've heard this before, that we're long on quantity but short on impact players.

He described Chiz, who is possibly our top prospect, as a future Jhonny Peralta (.280, 20-25 HRs in a good season, a lot of doubles). Most of the other guys he talked about have "low ceilings". Alex White is a future #4 starter. None of the relievers stand out as potential closers, and if you're not a closer you're just another bullpen arm passing through (according to this scout).

He described our 5th ranked prospect, Nick Weglarz, as a platoon outfielder or maybe a starter for a bad team. Hagadone has lost arm strength since coming over from the Red Sox, which is very bad because he can't throw strikes, either. Bryce Stowall got guys out at AA because they chased his fastball out of the zone, which won't happen as he moves up to AAA.

All in all, not much to like in this report. He didn't talk about Pomeranz, Kipnis, and Washington, so maybe if these guys (and Santana) turn out to be Choo level players and hopefully Carmona as well, we'll have a decent team at least.

I think I read the same report, but:
The way he described Chiz(above avg. hitter, solid power, lots of doubles, high teen HR's, one of the best left handed swings in the minor leagues, etc) sounds closer to Vic Martinez than Peralta with the bat. Add some good defense, plug him in at 3rd for 6-8 yrs. Problem solved.

Alex White: "I rate him as a number four starter but he may be better than that". Maybe a #3? So maybe he's Matt Garza; what's wrong with that? This scout actually likes White. He saw him as a reliever & now likes him as a #4.

He sees Carrasco as having an issue with toughness. I used to call Sabathia the "Chubby Choker". If one CC can outgrow it so can another. The catchers & pitching coach have a lot to do with it. And maturity.

I agree with him about Bryce Stowell but Stowell did have a .167 BAA in Cbus plus & 28 K's in 19.2 IP, so it's not like they were smacking him around in AAA. He's really wild though.

I've said that Wegz needs to be at 1B. He had an .889 OPS in AAA last year. Imagine if he stays healthy for a year(a large stretch of the imagination) & settles in somewhere.

Hagadone's arm will be stronger this year. He's just finishing recovery. I'm more worried about his control than his arm strength.

As far as the relievers as a group, whatever. He didn't see Bryson, who is my choice as the best closer prospect of the bunch. If he believes that all relievers are dime-a-dozen unless they're closers, that's ridiculous. Plenty of non-closer relievers have had huge impacts on the game over the years. Give me a group of above average relievers & Chris Perez as a closer & I like our chances in the late innings.

As you mentioned, he didn't say anything about Pom, Kip, LeVon, Wolters, Aviles, Gardner, Chen, Lavisky, Knapp, et al, all high end guys in our system.

Let's forget that we're Cleveland fans & look at the bright side for a change.

One more thing: Brad Grant!!! :drinks:
Rocky55
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1545
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:13 pm

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby Edible14 » Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:03 pm

I think it's important to note that prospects always have a chance to exceed expectations. If you haven't seen it, I'd read this:

http://angels.ocregister.com/2011/02/23 ... ter/73283/

Guys like Pujols, Miguel Cabrera and Carlos Zambrano far exceeded expectations. Guys like Utley, Cliff Lee, Hanley Ramirez and Grady Sizemore weren't even in the top 100 prospects. So, having guys with a lot of upside who are raw/unknown is something that can really help a team out in the long run (as the article points out, few knew of Hanley Ramirez when that list was put together), and the Indians do have some of those types of guys. Additionally, just having guys with some potential at every level means that perhaps some of them exceed your expectations and become that impact player you're in need of.

So, I don't buy into the "we don't have impact guys" argument. Of the position players in the top 30 on the 2001 list, only 3 really became impact guys (Josh Hamilton, Vernon Wells and Ichiro... and all of them could get an asterisk for various reasons). We could very well have impact guys. Maybe they're just too young to really hit the radar of most scouts. Maybe they'll bloom once they get to the bigs or closer to it. But it seems to me that oftentimes the guys who everyone projects to be "impact" guys just end up being good but not great for a long time (Kearns, Nick Johnson, etc.) or don't ever figure it out (Drew Henson, Andy Marte and Corey Patterson come to mind).
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1018
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby artgold » Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:49 am

My view of Chisenhall pretty much matched up with the statements from the external scout. Nothing wrong with a solid lineup full of major league average players, if you have a couple of plus bats in the mix too. In my view, Kipnis and Santana have the best potential of becoming our plus bats, with LaPorta currently my biggest concern.
artgold
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:00 am

Re: IPI 2011: Spring Training coverage

Postby GeronimoSon » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:37 am

Edible14: Thanks for posting the article.. Yes..amazing how far off some of the projections/rankings are.. flipping a coin wins !!..

Chisenhall spent his time in big league camp doing what he was supposed to do as a highly thought of prospect: He performed as he could.. did very well.. and gave Manny clear indication that he will be ready when it's his time to play. You just can't ask for much more than what he did..

Hagadone: had his velo in the + 95 mph by the end of the season.. as far as him not being what he was with the Red Sox.. so friggan what.. ancient history with no discernable value..

Weglarz: 13th round draft choice by the Indians from a town outside of Chicago (Peoria) had the same kind of stuff said about him.. MLB Net just compared Thome's swing to the Babe's...amazin..

I missed not having a game yesterday..but didn't miss Underwood/Manning's call....
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3795
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Next

Return to Indians Prospect Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron