RSS Twitter Facebook YouTube
Expand Menu

2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

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

2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby indianinkslinger » Sat Oct 23, 2010 7:54 am

Tony made a post earlier that the Indians graduated so many players to the majors and off the prospect list that the organization prospect list would be weaker in 2011. I thought that statement was reasonable. I recently started looking at the site bible, Tony's 2010 guide, and I am not sure it is cut and dried. Tony likely did not have a chance to look at the distribution of the graduating prospects from 2010 which is interesting. While we have a lot of prospects to replace, a comparative few come from premium talent positions 1-10 and 11-20. Many of the graduating prospects are from 40 and above and should be easily replaced by the July trade acquisitions, some of which may find their way into the top 20. While there are some droppers from the top 20, several are from injury whose talent may be delayed but not lost. Taking a brief look at the likely changes in the distribution.

In the top 10 prospects, there are 3 graduations. Number 1, Santana; number 4 Brantley and number 9 Carrasco have graduated. Number 5 Abreu will likely drop because of performance issues and number 8 Rondon because of serious injury. In 11-20, number 14 Sipp; number 18 Marson and number 19 Gomez graduate while number 15 Brown and number 16 Perez may drop somewhat because of performance and injury. Number 20 rivero will drop precipitously because of performance. In 21-30, only Donald graduated; 25 Mills and 26 Hodges are likely droppers.

These changes may well be offset not only by the acquisitions but by a solid draft class that will likely add prospects to the top 20. But the biggest improvement may come from jumpers whose stock will rise one ranking level or more in 2011. IMO these prospects include:

13 Kipnis, 22 Barnes, 24 Judy, 29 Phelps, 34 Lee, 37 Bellows, 39 Cook, 43 Henry, 45 Popham, 46 Bryson, 47 Greenwell, 48 Drennen, 49 Adams, 52 Rodriguez, 53 Miller, 54 Gardner, 56 Espino, 58 Stowell, 60 McFarland, 66 Jones, 67 Mahalic, 70 Perez, 75 Smit, 77 Sarianedes, 78 Pestano, 80 Moncrief, 81 Tice, 84 Brach, 88 Langwell, 89 Guilmet, 92 Burns, 94 Chen, 99 Goedert, UNR Packer.

This does not include Latin prospects or other unrated prospects besides Packer. I tried to include those who had a chance to be in the top 30-40 prospects on Tony's new list. Because of he depth, some may not make the list at that point but many will. While I do not see a replacement at #1 the quality of Santana, the top levels overall may be even stronger/deeper than 2010. I am looking forward to this years book. :yahoo:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby TonyIBI » Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:09 am

The Indians minor league system lost what is viewed as their three highest impact prospects going into 2010 in Brantley, Carrasco and Santana due to eligibility, and Rondon for the year due to TJ surgery which will really hurt his prospect status in the short term. Depth guys like Sipp, Gomez, Marson and Donald who many were high on as at least major league role players also have lost their eligibility. That's 7 of their Top 23 going into 2010 are no longer eligible, and two others Rondon and Alexander Perez are coming off TJ surgery.

The system is going to take a hit because of the absence of as many legit major league prospects and impact prospects in the upper levels. The system looks very strong below Double-A, yes, but we need time to sort all these recent draft picks out to see who is legit. Overall, the system is strong....but they are not as strong with near ready top shelf prospects.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby indianinkslinger » Sat Oct 23, 2010 9:42 am

TonyIPI wrote:The Indians minor league system lost what is viewed as their three highest impact prospects going into 2010 in Brantley, Carrasco and Santana due to eligibility, and Rondon for the year due to TJ surgery which will really hurt his prospect status in the short term. Depth guys like Sipp, Gomez, Marson and Donald who many were high on as at least major league role players also have lost their eligibility. That's 7 of their Top 23 going into 2010 are no longer eligible, and two others Rondon and Alexander Perez are coming off TJ surgery.

The system is going to take a hit because of the absence of as many legit major league prospects and impact prospects in the upper levels. The system looks very strong below Double-A, yes, but we need time to sort all these recent draft picks out to see who is legit. Overall, the system is strong....but they are not as strong with near ready top shelf prospects.

I actually think they have more near ready top shelf products but it is not a sure thing. Using your number of 9 of the top 23, let's consider these as potential to lose prospect status by year end 2011. Chisenhall, Hagadone, Weglarz, White, Kipnis, (Brown), Putnam, Judy, Phelps, (Hermann), Bryson, Rodriguez, (Miller), Stowell, Pestano and (Goedert) from last years book may well make the top 23 and would not be prohibitive longshots to play for the indians next year IMO. In addition, there are three players, Kluber, McAlistair and Carrera, not in last years book who also fall in the same category IMO. Those in parentheticals would likely not make my top 23 but may well make yours or be close. You may well argue with some of this list but I don't think you can dismiss them all. While it is 9 of the top 23, it is only 3 (4 including the injured Rondon) of the top 13. Barring injury, I would consider many of those on the list to be close to sure things by the end of 2011. We have disagreed before. No big deal! :pleasantry:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby jellis » Sat Oct 23, 2010 12:56 pm

TonyIPI wrote:The Indians minor league system lost what is viewed as their three highest impact prospects going into 2010 in Brantley, Carrasco and Santana due to eligibility, and Rondon for the year due to TJ surgery which will really hurt his prospect status in the short term. Depth guys like Sipp, Gomez, Marson and Donald who many were high on as at least major league role players also have lost their eligibility. That's 7 of their Top 23 going into 2010 are no longer eligible, and two others Rondon and Alexander Perez are coming off TJ surgery.

The system is going to take a hit because of the absence of as many legit major league prospects and impact prospects in the upper levels. The system looks very strong below Double-A, yes, but we need time to sort all these recent draft picks out to see who is legit. Overall, the system is strong....but they are not as strong with near ready top shelf prospects.



I have to agree with Tony, because we have no blue c hip talent. White to me looks MOR, Kipnis as a good but not great bat, Knapp has his injury issues, and Chisenhall looks like a platoon player. I hate to go all denis, but no mater who is first this year he will have serious serious wort's
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby A.Zajac » Sat Oct 23, 2010 1:25 pm

jellis wrote:
TonyIPI wrote:The Indians minor league system lost what is viewed as their three highest impact prospects going into 2010 in Brantley, Carrasco and Santana due to eligibility, and Rondon for the year due to TJ surgery which will really hurt his prospect status in the short term. Depth guys like Sipp, Gomez, Marson and Donald who many were high on as at least major league role players also have lost their eligibility. That's 7 of their Top 23 going into 2010 are no longer eligible, and two others Rondon and Alexander Perez are coming off TJ surgery.

The system is going to take a hit because of the absence of as many legit major league prospects and impact prospects in the upper levels. The system looks very strong below Double-A, yes, but we need time to sort all these recent draft picks out to see who is legit. Overall, the system is strong....but they are not as strong with near ready top shelf prospects.



I have to agree with Tony, because we have no blue c hip talent. White to me looks MOR, Kipnis as a good but not great bat, Knapp has his injury issues, and Chisenhall looks like a platoon player. I hate to go all denis, but no mater who is first this year he will have serious serious wort's


Disagree, Jeff. While I don't think White is a #1, I think he can be a solid #2. Or 3. MOR to me is a 3 or 4. I don't see White as a 4 guy. Kipnis seems solid. Knapp finally looks healthy, he's only 20, I'm not going to knock the guy. But Chisenhall as a platoon player? Couldn't disagree more with you on that comment.

Pomeranz has the potential to be something special, IMO.
Follow me on Twitter!
@AndrewIPI
User avatar
A.Zajac
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:31 am
Location: Struthers, OH

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby MadThinker88 » Sat Oct 23, 2010 5:13 pm

I'm going to chime in on that 'platoon player' comment as well - I don't agree with it.

While Lonnie isn't a big power bat for a corner position, he has more than enough game to handle position both offensive and defensively.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1746
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby TonyIBI » Sat Oct 23, 2010 5:43 pm

Knapp is our one true blue chipper. Chisenhall is just below blue chip caliber.

I have been talking extensively to three scouts who specifically cover the Indians this year for three different orgs....some interesting stuff I will be sharing soon with lots of on record comments.

Jeff is spot on where White currently projects as a #3/4 starter, that's exactly what all three scouts labeled him as (which is not a bad thing....just he may not have true FOR stuff/command). They also are not nearly as excited about Kipnis as the Indians and we are....they aren't always right because a lot of it is feel as they see these guys 6-12 games a year so sometimes they see these guys when they are not at their best of course.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby jellis » Sat Oct 23, 2010 7:38 pm

MadThinker88 wrote:I'm going to chime in on that 'platoon player' comment as well - I don't agree with it.

While Lonnie isn't a big power bat for a corner position, he has more than enough game to handle position both offensive and defensively.


He can not on any level hit lefties, that is why hes a platoon player, nothing to do with this bat or defense pother than the fact he wont be able to hit lefties. Knapp has the injury worries, Pomeranz to me might be the number 1 guy in the system. I know everyone is bullish on white and Kipnis but both are highly over valued by fans
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby indianinkslinger » Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:02 pm

TonyIPI wrote:Knapp is our one true blue chipper. Chisenhall is just below blue chip caliber.

I have been talking extensively to three scouts who specifically cover the Indians this year for three different orgs....some interesting stuff I will be sharing soon with lots of on record comments.

Jeff is spot on where White currently projects as a #3/4 starter, that's exactly what all three scouts labeled him as (which is not a bad thing....just he may not have true FOR stuff/command). They also are not nearly as excited about Kipnis as the Indians and we are....they aren't always right because a lot of it is feel as they see these guys 6-12 games a year so sometimes they see these guys when they are not at their best of course.

Hey Tony, I am a bit confused about your position. White may well be a #3/4 but he is certainly the equal of Carrasco as a prospect who is considerably older and ranked simlarly by you last year. They may not like Kipnis but he likely is the equal offensively/defensively of Brantley unless your reports of his defensive superiority to Phelps were unfounded. In fact, we had no blue chippers last year other than Santana and he had warts defensively and a minor league split against LH pitching similar to Chisenhall. It should be noted that both Chisenhall and White are much younger and more advanced than Santana at a similar age. So are Kipnis and Phelps. Scouts are bullshitting you Tony IMO. Believe the Indians. They know their players better than any scout from another organization who likely has an agenda. The issue of the post is whether the Indians have better prospects in 2010 or 2011 and nothing you have said demonstrates any superiority in 2010, particularly at the upper levels IMO. To be candid, it appears you are trying to equivocate your prior positions on these players to make your position in this discussion. Sorry to be blunt but that is how it looks from here. :s_sad
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby indianinkslinger » Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:10 pm

jellis wrote:
MadThinker88 wrote:I'm going to chime in on that 'platoon player' comment as well - I don't agree with it.

While Lonnie isn't a big power bat for a corner position, he has more than enough game to handle position both offensive and defensively.


He can not on any level hit lefties, that is why hes a platoon player, nothing to do with this bat or defense pother than the fact he wont be able to hit lefties. Knapp has the injury worries, Pomeranz to me might be the number 1 guy in the system. I know everyone is bullish on white and Kipnis but both are highly over valued by fans

You are writing Chisenhall off at 21 as a platoon player when he is destined to play at AAA next year. By your standard, we should write off Santana and Brantley as well against LHers. I think you have gone Valdemort on us. :friends:

BTW, neither Choo or Sizemore has ever hit lefties well and were terrible at Chisenhall's age. Neither has been a platoon player.
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby MadThinker88 » Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:22 pm

Till its proven otherwise (and no amount of typing on this or another chat board this offseason will be proof - that comes from out on the field), I'm holding with the 'Fryman comparison' for Lonnie.

When you think about it, that's the type of player that would be "just below blue chip caliber" as suggested by Tony.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1746
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby OhioBaseball » Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:32 pm

TonyIPI wrote:Jeff is spot on where White currently projects as a #3/4 starter, that's exactly what all three scouts labeled him as (which is not a bad thing....just he may not have true FOR stuff/command). They also are not nearly as excited about Kipnis as the Indians and we are....they aren't always right because a lot of it is feel as they see these guys 6-12 games a year so sometimes they see these guys when they are not at their best of course.


I agree with that assessment on White. I was in a minority on this board when I said I think Pomeranz is a better pitching prospect. I'm not banging on White or anything -- I think he's a fine starting pitching prospect, but once you start comparing him to actual major league starting pitchers he looks pretty pedestrian. He's a valuable prospect, but a 3/4 starter is what he projects as. I'm not saying Pomeranz is a #1, but although I don't think it's a perfect comparison, I see him as an Andy Pettitte-type (2/3 starter). I'm pretty excited about adding Pomeranz to the system.

Regarding Kipnis, if you're a scout, you're watching him play everyday and physically, he's just not very impressive -- you're not going to walk away from the game bedazzled after watching him. He's a little guy, but he's got the hitting stroke of a 6'3", 215 lbs guy, which makes him unique. He gets good extension, clears his hips very well and drives the ball. I think 15-20 HR is certainly realistic at the major league level, and if you can get that out of a 2b you've got a valuable player.
OhioBaseball
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:00 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby indianinkslinger » Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:50 pm

MadThinker88 wrote:Till its proven otherwise (and no amount of typing on this or another chat board this offseason will be proof - that comes from out on the field), I'm holding with the 'Fryman comparison' for Lonnie.

When you think about it, that's the type of player that would be "just below blue chip caliber" as suggested by Tony.

You set a tough standard for "blue chip" MT. Fryman was a five time all star as I recall and hit 321/392/516/908 in 2000 which was his last healthy year. I think he also had a GG. But you could be right that he might be a comp for Chisenhall but his minor league numbers were not as good as Chisenhall who is about one year older at each level. I will leave that to Art, the local comp icon. :pleasantry:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby artgold » Sat Oct 23, 2010 9:08 pm

OhioBaseball wrote:Regarding Kipnis, if you're a scout, you're watching him play everyday and physically, he's just not very impressive -- you're not going to walk away from the game bedazzled after watching him. He's a little guy, but he's got the hitting stroke of a 6'3", 215 lbs guy, which makes him unique. He gets good extension, clears his hips very well and drives the ball. I think 15-20 HR is certainly realistic at the major league level, and if you can get that out of a 2b you've got a valuable player.


My observations of Brian Giles when he was still in the minors is similar to your description of Kipnis. Like Kipnis Giles wasn't too big either. I know he is listed as 5'11", but I'm only 6'1" and was a good bit taller than him when I was just a few feet away during spring training (1992).

Regarding Chiz, he kind of reminds me of a Fryman type physically, but I'm not sure he is going to be quite that power and BA combo. I think he may end up being more of a Richie Hebner or Buddy Bell type of batter, going around .280 with a .330-.340 OBA and 17-20 HRs.
artgold
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:00 am

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby MadThinker88 » Sat Oct 23, 2010 9:09 pm

indianinkslinger wrote:
MadThinker88 wrote:Till its proven otherwise (and no amount of typing on this or another chat board this offseason will be proof - that comes from out on the field), I'm holding with the 'Fryman comparison' for Lonnie.

When you think about it, that's the type of player that would be "just below blue chip caliber" as suggested by Tony.

You set a tough standard for "blue chip" MT. Fryman was a seven time all star as I recall and hit 321/392/516/908 in 2000 which was his last healthy year. I think he also had five GGs. But you could be right that he might be a comp for Chisenhall. I will leave that to Art, the local comp icon. :pleasantry:


I can't take credit for the Fryman comparison, that came from someone else on this board (can't recall who).

As for Fryman's record, I recall a couple of All star games and 1 gold glove (which was why I believed Fryman was a good match - solid workman with a few highlights). If Fryman had more in each category then your right, its a real tough standard for 'blue chip' (perhaps Derek Jeter would be the proper poster child for the blue chip category :s_biggrin )
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1746
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby TonyIBI » Sat Oct 23, 2010 10:31 pm

Inker, I think that overall, the Indians minor league system is stronger going into this year. Won't get an argument from me on that at all considering the influx of some impressive draft and international talent in the last year. The strength of the system this year was the upper levels, and the lower levels were abyssmal. That's gonna kind of be flip-flopped next year IMO. Not quite the same level of talent in the upper levels as there was this year. We had 12 players lose rookie status in a season this past year....that's a lot: Carlos Santana, Carlos Carrasco, Michael Brantley, Tony Sipp, Lou Marson, Jason Donald, Jeanmar Gomez, Josh Tomlin, Hector Ambriz, Mitch Talbot, Josh Tomlin, Chris Gimenez.

I'll say that in hindsight I completely missed it on Carrasco. Shoulda had him as #2 or #3 last year. I had serious issues with his problems with the game speeding up on him, and I was not alone on that as a lot of people here and in the game felt that too. The perception of him really changed by the end of this season. He's the only pitcher at High-A or higher who has true FOR stuff, and the Indians and all three scouts from the other teams I spoke to believe that in unison.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby indianinkslinger » Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:56 am

TonyIPI wrote:Inker, I think that overall, the Indians minor league system is stronger going into this year. Won't get an argument from me on that at all considering the influx of some impressive draft and international talent in the last year. The strength of the system this year was the upper levels, and the lower levels were abyssmal. That's gonna kind of be flip-flopped next year IMO. Not quite the same level of talent in the upper levels as there was this year. We had 12 players lose rookie status in a season this past year....that's a lot: Carlos Santana, Carlos Carrasco, Michael Brantley, Tony Sipp, Lou Marson, Jason Donald, Jeanmar Gomez, Josh Tomlin, Hector Ambriz, Mitch Talbot, Josh Tomlin, Chris Gimenez.

I'll say that in hindsight I completely missed it on Carrasco. Shoulda had him as #2 or #3 last year. I had serious issues with his problems with the game speeding up on him, and I was not alone on that as a lot of people here and in the game felt that too. The perception of him really changed by the end of this season. He's the only pitcher at High-A or higher who has true FOR stuff, and the Indians and all three scouts from the other teams I spoke to believe that in unison.

OK Tony, now I understand. Remember, I ranked Carrasco even lower than you and was blown away when I saw him pitch live in Anaheim. Felt incredibly stupid about ranking him 12th. However, I still do not consider him to be the best FOR candidate at upper levels. As long as they keep him as a starter, that title belongs to Hagadone. In 2011, he will have recovered completely from surgery and is far more likely to be a true #3 prospect than he was in 2010. I was even cautious about my #8 rank in 2010. It may not be in vogue but I currently have him ranked higher than White or Pomeranz.

I question the inclusion of Brantley with Carrasco and Santana. Until he proves he can hit LH pitcing more successfully, I am going with Weglarz as the better corner OF prospect. Unless Brantley beats out Sizemore in CF i stand by my appraisal last year which had Wegz ranked higher. Other than those three and my differing view of Gomez, I consider the rest to be replaceable parts. Being LH might be Sipp's saving grace and Marson is a great backup catcher but the others may not even reach 2012 with the Indians IMO. White, Kluber and McAlistair all have more going for them than Tomlin or Talbot IMO. Donald will be trade bait and who cares about the others. Just like Brown, getting to the show does not make them ML players. :friends:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby gotribe31 » Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:24 pm

MadThinker88 wrote:
indianinkslinger wrote:
MadThinker88 wrote:Till its proven otherwise (and no amount of typing on this or another chat board this offseason will be proof - that comes from out on the field), I'm holding with the 'Fryman comparison' for Lonnie.

When you think about it, that's the type of player that would be "just below blue chip caliber" as suggested by Tony.

You set a tough standard for "blue chip" MT. Fryman was a seven time all star as I recall and hit 321/392/516/908 in 2000 which was his last healthy year. I think he also had five GGs. But you could be right that he might be a comp for Chisenhall. I will leave that to Art, the local comp icon. :pleasantry:


I can't take credit for the Fryman comparison, that came from someone else on this board (can't recall who).

As for Fryman's record, I recall a couple of All star games and 1 gold glove (which was why I believed Fryman was a good match - solid workman with a few highlights). If Fryman had more in each category then your right, its a real tough standard for 'blue chip' (perhaps Derek Jeter would be the proper poster child for the blue chip category :s_biggrin )


I've been saying for a while now that I think he's Fryman without the Gold Gloves. I can see him averaging between .280-.300 with 17-25 HR a year. And I don't buy that he "can't" hit lefties just yet. He had a .703 OPS against them in just 154 AB's last year. Let's give him some time to learn how to hit left-handed pitching before we write him off as a "platoon" player.
gotribe31
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Fairfax, VA

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby jellis » Mon Oct 25, 2010 10:10 pm

Just feel we are really over valuing as fans, Chisenhall and others really didnt take a step forward. We have a deep system, but no studs. I mean KC's 5th best spec might be 1st in our system. I know their top 4 are better, I hope to be proven wrong. I just see a lot of good guys, but not the Santana, Sizemore, Martinez types
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby TitoFrancona » Tue Oct 26, 2010 1:02 pm

jellis wrote:Just feel we are really over valuing as fans, Chisenhall and others really didnt take a step forward. We have a deep system, but no studs. I mean KC's 5th best spec might be 1st in our system. I know their top 4 are better, I hope to be proven wrong. I just see a lot of good guys, but not the Santana, Sizemore, Martinez types


Others? As in Kipnis, Phelps, White etc.?

I think you're looking strictly at Chisenhall's numbers and not looking at the overall picture. As I recall, Tony has said that Chiz was dealing with some injury problems early last season. Once he was healthy, he put up solid numbers. He had an abysmal May but after the all star break his OPS was .870.

I think one mistake people are making on Chisenhall is that he's going to be this guy who carries an OPS over 900 and was going to be a star. I never saw that in Lonnie. I think he's a guy who's going to be a solid hitter. 18 - 25 HRs per with a BA somewhere around .280 or so. If he does that, then that's great.
TitoFrancona
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 6:18 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby A.Zajac » Tue Oct 26, 2010 2:02 pm

TitoFrancona wrote:
jellis wrote:Just feel we are really over valuing as fans, Chisenhall and others really didnt take a step forward. We have a deep system, but no studs. I mean KC's 5th best spec might be 1st in our system. I know their top 4 are better, I hope to be proven wrong. I just see a lot of good guys, but not the Santana, Sizemore, Martinez types


Others? As in Kipnis, Phelps, White etc.?

I think you're looking strictly at Chisenhall's numbers and not looking at the overall picture. As I recall, Tony has said that Chiz was dealing with some injury problems early last season. Once he was healthy, he put up solid numbers. He had an abysmal May but after the all star break his OPS was .870.

I think one mistake people are making on Chisenhall is that he's going to be this guy who carries an OPS over 900 and was going to be a star. I never saw that in Lonnie. I think he's a guy who's going to be a solid hitter. 18 - 25 HRs per with a BA somewhere around .280 or so. If he does that, then that's great.


Great post, Tito. Couldn't agree more with you. Well said.
Follow me on Twitter!
@AndrewIPI
User avatar
A.Zajac
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:31 am
Location: Struthers, OH

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby jellis » Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:54 pm

A.Zajac wrote:
TitoFrancona wrote:
jellis wrote:Just feel we are really over valuing as fans, Chisenhall and others really didnt take a step forward. We have a deep system, but no studs. I mean KC's 5th best spec might be 1st in our system. I know their top 4 are better, I hope to be proven wrong. I just see a lot of good guys, but not the Santana, Sizemore, Martinez types


Others? As in Kipnis, Phelps, White etc.?

I think you're looking strictly at Chisenhall's numbers and not looking at the overall picture. As I recall, Tony has said that Chiz was dealing with some injury problems early last season. Once he was healthy, he put up solid numbers. He had an abysmal May but after the all star break his OPS was .870.

I think one mistake people are making on Chisenhall is that he's going to be this guy who carries an OPS over 900 and was going to be a star. I never saw that in Lonnie. I think he's a guy who's going to be a solid hitter. 18 - 25 HRs per with a BA somewhere around .280 or so. If he does that, then that's great.


Great post, Tito. Couldn't agree more with you. Well said.



Kipnis, Phelps, Gardner all stepped up, but to me White is exactly what I expected. He looks like a number 3 to me, I just hoped some other guys in the top ten would make a leap forward and was disappointed that they did not. We have amazing depth, but you can't win with out a few all stars and I just dont see that blue chip level players in minors. That's my view. Still might be the deepest minors in baseball, but would like more top shelf guys
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:48 am

If I were to use the Goldstein method of awarding stars based on expected ML ability (5 star is All Star, 4 star is good player, 3 star is role player, 2 star is bit player and 1 star is non prospect), I'd say we have a ton of 3 and 4 star guys in our Top 50 (respective to their roles), but the only 5 star guy at the moment to me may be Knapp.

There is some potential with the recent draft guys, but I am not sure any are viewed as 5-star guys at the moment, though to me Washington certainly has the skill set and ability to be one, as does Pomeranz, but I will wait and see how they perform over a full season first.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby toledobuck » Wed Oct 27, 2010 3:00 pm

I am not sure why everybody all of a sudden is lowering their views of Alex White. Comparing starting prospects in this year's draft to White, everybody including the Tribe management stated that White would be ranked ahead of everybody including Pomeranz. Now after a very successful year pitching in Kinston and Akron everybody is now stating that White is likely no better than a 3/4 starter. Is it correct to assume that this past draft did not have anybody initially ranking any better than a 3/4/5 starter? It is not to say that others will not turn out to be TOR starters. I am just a little perplexed at the seeming reduced prospect ranking for White after a very successful first year of minor league ball. White looked like one of the best pitchers in the minors and I still expect him to ascend up our system to become one of our better starting pitchers we have seen for some time which translates more to a #2/3 starter at worst.
toledobuck
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:07 am

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby jellis » Wed Oct 27, 2010 3:05 pm

TonyIPI wrote:If I were to use the Goldstein method of awarding stars based on expected ML ability (5 star is All Star, 4 star is good player, 3 star is role player, 2 star is bit player and 1 star is non prospect), I'd say we have a ton of 3 and 4 star guys in our Top 50 (respective to their roles), but the only 5 star guy at the moment to me may be Knapp.

There is some potential with the recent draft guys, but I am not sure any are viewed as 5-star guys at the moment, though to me Washington certainly has the skill set and ability to be one, as does Pomeranz, but I will wait and see how they perform over a full season first.



This is my concern, because look back to when we last made the play offs and we had 4 or 5 all star level guys and to me we have 2 guys in the system I might give 5 stars to Pom and Knapp. White I liked but he has always been a three to me, the stuff is solid but not great and he has had control issues. I don't think I ever read anywhere where White would be rated higher than Pom or any other top guy this year.
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Oct 27, 2010 3:20 pm

toledobuck wrote:Now after a very successful year pitching in Kinston and Akron everybody is now stating that White is likely no better than a 3/4 starter. Is it correct to assume that this past draft did not have anybody initially ranking any better than a 3/4/5 starter?


As a college pitcher? Probably not. Though there were several prep arms with FOR ability.

No one is saying that White (or Pomz) will never be a FOR pitcher. The view right now is that both are MOR guys. It's the safest projection based on their abilities. That said, both could obviously become 1/2s just as easily as they could wash out to a 5th or 4A starter. Also, there are VERY few true FOR prospects in baseball. It's not a slap in the face to a White/Pomz to be considered a 3/4 guy right now as many in the past have inflated that projection to become 1/2s. I mean, Cliff Lee was once viewed that way.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby martyinnewyork » Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:41 pm

By 2014, we could have several all-star calibre guys. Choo, Santana, maybe ACab, maybe Chris Perez, and possibly a couple from amongst Chiz, Kipnis, Knapp, Pomeranz. Levi Washington, Hagadone. Then we can watch them go to the Yankees, one by one...
martyinnewyork
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby TitoFrancona » Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:52 am

martyinnewyork wrote:By 2014, we could have several all-star calibre guys. Choo, Santana, maybe ACab, maybe Chris Perez, and possibly a couple from amongst Chiz, Kipnis, Knapp, Pomeranz. Levi Washington, Hagadone. Then we can watch them go to the Yankees, one by one...


Can't imaginie Choo being here in 2014. Ditto Chris Perez. I don't see allstar in ACab's future. Chiz looks to me like a solid player but I think he will fall just short of all star caliber. The rest is a crapshoot. Pomeranz imo has the highest likelyhood of that happening. Hagadone took a step back this season and he did very poorly as a reliever. Kipnis is also a guy I see who could be a solid all around player but will fall short of all star caliber. But that's not a bad thing.
TitoFrancona
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 6:18 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Thu Oct 28, 2010 12:11 pm

TitoFrancona wrote:
martyinnewyork wrote:By 2014, we could have several all-star calibre guys. Choo, Santana, maybe ACab, maybe Chris Perez, and possibly a couple from amongst Chiz, Kipnis, Knapp, Pomeranz. Levi Washington, Hagadone. Then we can watch them go to the Yankees, one by one...


Can't imaginie Choo being here in 2014. Ditto Chris Perez. I don't see allstar in ACab's future. Chiz looks to me like a solid player but I think he will fall just short of all star caliber. The rest is a crapshoot. Pomeranz imo has the highest likelyhood of that happening. Hagadone took a step back this season and he did very poorly as a reliever. Kipnis is also a guy I see who could be a solid all around player but will fall short of all star caliber. But that's not a bad thing.


Isn't Perez under team control through the 2014 season?
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby martyinnewyork » Thu Oct 28, 2010 2:20 pm

Yes, we control Chris Perez through 2014. And, in response to Jellis saying that we had 4 or 5 all-stars the last time we made the playoffs, which would be 2007, we also had Cliff Lee then. Coming off his 2007, who would have called him an "all-star" at that point? So, although we can't "count" on Chiz or Kipnis or Hagadone being stars, one or two might be just that. We also control Carmona through 2014 (if we exercise options and keep him) and he's possibly an all-star guy. I'm not saying all these guys will be stars. But it's not beyond the realm of possibility that our 2014 team could have several well above average players.
martyinnewyork
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby OhioBaseball » Thu Oct 28, 2010 9:29 pm

artgold wrote:
OhioBaseball wrote:Regarding Kipnis, if you're a scout, you're watching him play everyday and physically, he's just not very impressive -- you're not going to walk away from the game bedazzled after watching him. He's a little guy, but he's got the hitting stroke of a 6'3", 215 lbs guy, which makes him unique. He gets good extension, clears his hips very well and drives the ball. I think 15-20 HR is certainly realistic at the major league level, and if you can get that out of a 2b you've got a valuable player.


My observations of Brian Giles when he was still in the minors is similar to your description of Kipnis. Like Kipnis Giles wasn't too big either. I know he is listed as 5'11", but I'm only 6'1" and was a good bit taller than him when I was just a few feet away during spring training (1992).

Regarding Chiz, he kind of reminds me of a Fryman type physically, but I'm not sure he is going to be quite that power and BA combo. I think he may end up being more of a Richie Hebner or Buddy Bell type of batter, going around .280 with a .330-.340 OBA and 17-20 HRs.


You absolutely read my mind. I actually wrote something about Giles in that post comparing him to Kipnis, but deleted it b/c I was accusing Giles of steroid use and didn't want to get into all of that. Basically what I said was Kipnis is a non-juiced up version of Giles with lower walk rates, but at 2b. I loved Giles as a player, but the guy was busting out of his shirt he was so jacked up.
OhioBaseball
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:00 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby artgold » Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:18 pm

Can't argue about Giles, he certainly was a "thick" guy by the time he hit the mid point of his career. I met his grandfather, who used to track around with him during spring training, a really dedicated guy.

Back on the prospects, I think that the Indians fans, like fans of most teams, may be guilty of overrating much of the minor league players in terms of potential. However, when your major league roster is as thin as ours, it is difficult not to be hopeful that tomorrow's guys are going to be saviors.

When you take a look at the San Francisco Giants lineup it should give us hope. If you look at their offensive performance position by position few stand out as great contributors. Yet, they were able to score enough to get to the World Series. Obviously their starting pitching is really what carried them, and the Indians won't be a strong club until we have three "plus" starting pitchers, and two competent ones. Fortunately, there are some possibilities that could get us to that point, though personally I think we really are evolving into being more of a consistent middle of the pack squad.

But, guys like Chiz and Kipnis may join Santana in giving us a competent lineup. Obviously it would really help if LaPorta became a .280 guy with 25 HRs, but we'll see how this evolves.
artgold
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:00 am

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby toledobuck » Fri Oct 29, 2010 11:06 am

artgold wrote:Can't argue about Giles, he certainly was a "thick" guy by the time he hit the mid point of his career. I met his grandfather, who used to track around with him during spring training, a really dedicated guy.

Back on the prospects, I think that the Indians fans, like fans of most teams, may be guilty of overrating much of the minor league players in terms of potential. However, when your major league roster is as thin as ours, it is difficult not to be hopeful that tomorrow's guys are going to be saviors.

When you take a look at the San Francisco Giants lineup it should give us hope. If you look at their offensive performance position by position few stand out as great contributors. Yet, they were able to score enough to get to the World Series. Obviously their starting pitching is really what carried them, and the Indians won't be a strong club until we have three "plus" starting pitchers, and two competent ones. Fortunately, there are some possibilities that could get us to that point, though personally I think we really are evolving into being more of a consistent middle of the pack squad.

But, guys like Chiz and Kipnis may join Santana in giving us a competent lineup. Obviously it would really help if LaPorta became a .280 guy with 25 HRs, but we'll see how this evolves.


Don't sleep on Weglarz packing a nice punch in the Tribe lineup some day if he can put his injury bugs behind him.
toledobuck
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:07 am

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby GeronimoSon » Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:23 pm

While the "definition of who is & who isn't a prospect may be a bit skewed.. these are the top ten at the end of the 2011 season.. I'll go back and find my top 10 for the ending of the 2009 season..

1. Carlos Santana | C | Age – 24: Was more than the hype before being injured blocking the plate for the Indians. Should be good to go as the Indian's starting catcher in 2011.

2. Carlos Carrasco | RHSP | Age – 23: Maturing before our eyes. Four MLB starts, all quality. His live arm and growing confidence as a starting pitcher are easy to see.

3. Jason Kipnis | OF/2b | Age – 23: Progressed through the minor leagues like being shot out of a cannon. Has the ability to contribute both offensively and defensively.

4. Cord Phelps |2b | Age - 23: Clone to Kipnis as both could be considered top five prospects as middle infielders. Hits and hits and hits. A real gamer.

5. Lonnie Chissenhall | 3b | Age – 21: Good work ethic at a premium/need position. Is smooth in the field and has a perfectly honed swing with excellent bat to ball skills.

6. Alex White | RHP | Age – 21: Projects as a middle of the rotation to front of the rotation starter or could be moved to the pen to hasten his ascent to MLB. Is very strong and committed to his craft.

7. Jason Knapp | RHP | Age – 19: Has come all the way back from shoulder surgery. He will move rapidly up the Indians system over the next year to two years.

8. Jeanmar Gomez | RHP | Age – 21: Even at the ripe old age of 21, he's had success at the big league level. This is not a mirage. He's a strike thrower with a sinking/tailing fastball. His secondary offerings are middling MLB ready. He projects to a middle of the order SP.

9. Drew Pomeranz | LHP | Age - 21: Recent (2010) first round draft choice who has yet to throw a single pitch as a professional. The talent is there.. now comes the hard work.

10. Josh Tomlin | RHP | Age - 26: Getting a bit long in the tooth as a prospect but has shown the ability to throw quality strikes with a cut fastball, change up and slow curve. He projects as a back of the rotation starting pitcher
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby TonyIBI » Sun Oct 31, 2010 10:43 pm

Phelps is vastly over-rated in this listing, but I can't argue with anything else.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby GeronimoSon » Mon Nov 01, 2010 7:49 am

...Phelps is vastly over-rated in this listing....
I'm probably more of a R Cord Phelps fan than most.. for no other reason than during one of several games I attended while with the Aeros.. he always seemed to be on base..or getting a key hit/walk/rally started.. He made no particularly outstanding plays (Josh Rodriguez made one that I'm still amazed at) but he did make all the routine plays in the field.. and..oh, yes..signed a baseball.. shrugs... surprisingly, he's a lot bigger than the typical 2B...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby indianinkslinger » Mon Nov 01, 2010 1:34 pm

TonyIPI wrote:Phelps is vastly over-rated in this listing, but I can't argue with anything else.

I like the list although I am not sure i understand the criteria. Not sure I would use the word "vastly" as Tony does with regard to Phelps and I am really surprised he would agree to your characterization of Gomez which is a big change. If they are list eligible, I would likely include Brantley and Weglarz on the list from the position players. Even Washington might deserve inclusion among the position players if upside is the main consideration. Not sure why Tomlin is on the list with as little upside as he has but he is a great story. :pleasantry:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby GeronimoSon » Mon Nov 01, 2010 1:50 pm

...although I am not sure i understand the criteria...
Sometimes.. as this list is intended, a "lack" of definition opens the thought process thereby eliminating the need to argue/discuss "rules & restrictions".. which can muddle the subject to the extent of making the thread less entertaining..

Now that said.. "vastly" as stated above.. does sort of present a "fly in the ointment" reaction?.. I'm sure it's Tony's way of responding with more intimate knowledge of the thoughts/evaluations being discussed by his sources within the Indians organization.

It certainly wouldn't be him just 'opining'.. :s_rofl
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby jellis » Mon Nov 01, 2010 2:56 pm

I know I have phelps in my top ten also
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby A.Zajac » Mon Nov 01, 2010 3:34 pm

jellis wrote:I know I have phelps in my top ten also


Not me.
Follow me on Twitter!
@AndrewIPI
User avatar
A.Zajac
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:31 am
Location: Struthers, OH

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby indianinkslinger » Mon Nov 01, 2010 6:22 pm

A.Zajac wrote:
jellis wrote:I know I have phelps in my top ten also


Not me.

I am kinda 50/50 on this one. As i wrote earlier, I would be inclined to include Brantley and Weglarz and, if pressed, probably drop Tomlin and Phelps. However, in my tentative list prepared using standard prospect criteria, Phelps is included in the bottom half of the top 10 as is Washington. As GS intended, his list required some original thought. I am not sure what I do with Hagadone since i have him in my top 10 and still feel his ceiling is higher than White or Pomeranz although less likely he reaches it. Still an upside guy I am afraid, even with the Rivero embarrassment. :friends:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby TonyIBI » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:25 pm

I am pretty sure Phelps won't be in my Top 10. May slip in at 9-10, but I don't see it. I think somewhere in the 11-15 range is more likely. We'll see though...still gathering info.

Definitely an intereting year with rankings. Should be several surprises in the Top 20.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby GeronimoSon » Tue Nov 02, 2010 9:20 am

... Should be several surprises in the Top 20...
What?.. are you trying to be John Sickels now?... :tease:
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby MadThinker88 » Tue Nov 02, 2010 10:48 am

TonyIPI wrote:Definitely an intereting year with rankings. Should be several surprises in the Top 20.


I'm still planning on the yearly project where I gather up opinions and rankings of fans and various other sources.

'The Gallery' thread will likely be started/ posted later this week.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1746
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby A.Zajac » Tue Nov 02, 2010 11:26 am

MadThinker88 wrote:
TonyIPI wrote:Definitely an intereting year with rankings. Should be several surprises in the Top 20.


I'm still planning on the yearly project where I gather up opinions and rankings of fans and various other sources.

'The Gallery' thread will likely be started/ posted later this week.


Should be interesting and can't wait. Usually BA comes out with their top ten in every system again in middle-late November, and then they do it again before the season starts, if I'm remembering correctly.

I know I won't attempt at making my top 20-25 until first week of December. I have a good idea who I want in certain areas of my list, but I haven't really started putting together where they actually belong yet.
Follow me on Twitter!
@AndrewIPI
User avatar
A.Zajac
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:31 am
Location: Struthers, OH

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby jellis » Tue Nov 02, 2010 12:23 pm

I have started it, and I think I will have a very different list as I am not as high on people as others. Phelps is like 9-12 to me same range as Washington. I expect most guys to have wolters higher than washington which I disagree with strongly
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Nov 02, 2010 12:45 pm

jellis wrote:I have started it, and I think I will have a very different list as I am not as high on people as others. Phelps is like 9-12 to me same range as Washington. I expect most guys to have wolters higher than washington which I disagree with strongly


I'd expect the opposite....or at least hope. I know there are a ton of Wolters fans on here but Washington has the ability to be very special. Guess it depends on how high people rate potential...and if they take into account the injury.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby TonyIBI » Tue Nov 02, 2010 6:14 pm

jellis wrote:I have started it, and I think I will have a very different list as I am not as high on people as others. Phelps is like 9-12 to me same range as Washington. I expect most guys to have wolters higher than washington which I disagree with strongly


No offense to Phelps, but Washington blows him away as a "prospect".
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby jellis » Tue Nov 02, 2010 8:00 pm

TonyIPI wrote:
jellis wrote:I have started it, and I think I will have a very different list as I am not as high on people as others. Phelps is like 9-12 to me same range as Washington. I expect most guys to have wolters higher than washington which I disagree with strongly


No offense to Phelps, but Washington blows him away as a "prospect".


I think Washington might be the 2nd or 3rd best bat in system, but I think Phelps is really under rated. I see the defense, eye, and doubles pop make him a legit second basebman, I would prefer him to Pedoria before Kipnis who stikes me more of a jeff kent lite
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2010 prospects vs 2011 prospects

Postby indianinkslinger » Wed Nov 03, 2010 5:00 am

jellis wrote:
TonyIPI wrote:
jellis wrote:I have started it, and I think I will have a very different list as I am not as high on people as others. Phelps is like 9-12 to me same range as Washington. I expect most guys to have wolters higher than washington which I disagree with strongly


No offense to Phelps, but Washington blows him away as a "prospect".


I think Washington might be the 2nd or 3rd best bat in system, but I think Phelps is really under rated. I see the defense, eye, and doubles pop make him a legit second basebman, I would prefer him to Pedoria before Kipnis who stikes me more of a jeff kent lite

When it comes to "tools", you have to give the nod to Washington, not only against Phelps but probably every other prospect in the organization. Time will tell whether he is a better prospect IMO. Phelps is not a gifted athlete but he playes the game very intelligently. He learns his lessons well because he is coachable. Players like Phelps often exceed their "tools" shortcomings because they have more sense of how to play the game. I am a big "tools" fan but i admire a player like Phelps whose understanding of the game might be special. Wolters reminds me of Phelps in many respects but has better tools IMO. :pleasantry:
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm


Return to Indians Prospect Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest