Prospect Rankings - Page 2

GoldGlove · January 31st, 2007, 06:04 PM

Glad to see us get such a high ranking again. Not to be nitpicky, but Iannetta at 8? Come on...he should be at the very least three spots higher.

sg8335aa · January 31st, 2007, 08:44 PM

The writeup on Christensen is about as expected....long on tools and long on projection. Overly aggressive.....needs to mature......needs to make swing more compact.

The two major positivies that it mentions are his "tremendous bat speed" and "power to all fields".......

We'll see what happens. Certainly looks shaddy so far. Either we'll see a completely different Christensen this year in Tri-City after working on his swing in Extended Spring Training......or that "wasted draft pick" tag is going to stick.

As for the "low' Ianetta ranking......I could go either way. BA knocked him a bit on his potential I think. I looks like the guy is a pretty safe bet to be a solid major league catcher for years to come.......however, noone is claiming we have a "star" in the making. I dunno. Personally, I would have been happy seeing him ranked anywhere from #4 to #10 so I can't complain.

As for Shane Lindsay.....he would have been Top 10 (or close) if not for hte injury. We'll see how he recovers from labrum surgery.

Bottom line: The Rockies system is DEEP. Guys like Cole Garner, Phillip Cuadrado, Helder Velasquez, Daniel Mayora, Keith Weiser, Brandon Durden, Josh Sullivan, Esmil Rogers, Yul Silano........would have definitely ranked in the Top 30 of at least 20-25 organizations. Enjoy the influx. It is going to be a lot of fun to see how these guys develop.

Roxpert · January 31st, 2007, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sg8335aa

Enjoy the influx. It is going to be a lot of fun to see how these guys develop.

I dunno, SG. This team usually give me acid reflux, not influx. But I hear what you're saying.

Actually, don't you think this minor league org. is just a bit TOO deep? In other words, why do we NEVER package any of our prospects in trades in order to help the major-league club? Now that we have such talent up and down the organization, there is no better time for the Rockies to make trades for better talent, or better fitting talent, than the present.

Which brings me back to the "influx" comment of your's. Usually, a major league team doesn't have enough openings or playing time available for more than a handful of prospects coming up. So, I don't see how having a deep org. would result in any more "influx" than a thinner minor league system. There are only so many job openings to go around.

We need to start trading prospect quantity for QUALITY.

sg8335aa · February 1st, 2007, 05:05 AM

I do agree with you there Roxpert. However, what a DEEP minor league organization DOES allow.....is for the ability to absorb flame-outs by prospects. Clint Barmes proves he's not an MLB player? No worries, we have Tulo ready right behind him who should be even better!

A shallow organization, won't have the waves of talent ready to replace players that burn out or can't make it in the majors. Unsure if Brad Hawpe is going to cut it as our everyday RFer? No need to lose sleep because we have Jeff Baker (and Ian Stewart) waiting in line to get a shot. Worried we "lost" a 1st round pick because Chris Nelson is struggling?.....no worries because the organizational depth absorbs it and we're still the 2nd best minor league organization.

However, where I do agree with you is that our depth should be used to pick up players that help fit the puzzle. Its been done on a lesser degree (Rodrigo Lopez and Ryan Shealy trades)......however both were more involving players that were blocked or starting to fail as prospects (Jim Miller).

I do agree that the Rockies should be more aggressive.....and I think that they will once they start winning (ie...over .500) and use it to get those last couple pieces for a playoff run. Should they do it before then?.....probably.......but there's not much we can debate about this until Spring Training (and more likely the July Trading Deadline). Guys like Joe Koshansky could be packaged with another prospect to brng back a CFer.

Looking at the organization.....the players with the most value, I can understand why they haven't traded yet (other than Koshansky)......Seth Smith they want to hold onto in case they can't resign Holliday.....same goes for Ian Stewart (who should have a lot more value after getting to hit in AAA for a year). I don't think you can trade pitching right now (espeically with just Cook/Francis in the rotation)......holding onto Morales, Jiminez and Hirsh make sense. I think we may see more action on the trade from in 2008 when we could have 5 Homegrown players plus Jason Hirsh vying for 6 spots in the rotation (Cook, Francis, Jimenez, Morales, Reynolds.....plus Hirsh).

I think we'll see more trades once a few contract and prospect battles play themselves out. We're gonna get 1 2nd basemen out of these 4 players (Corey Wimberly, EY Jr., Chris Nelson, Jonathan Herrera)......we'll get 1 CFer out of these two players (Chris Nelson, Dexter Fowler).......I think we'll see more "prospect related trades" in the future as those guys get closer to the bigs.

Our minor league decisions aren't perfect (Hello David Christensen........and the Longoria/Reynolds situation)......however overall they've done a great job. Remember when our only internationally developed prospect was Juan Uribe? Now we have 12 International players in our Top 30. Gone are the days when our only hope of a homegrown offensive player was Derrick Gibson or Edgard Clemente. It was just a few years ago where we heard "Todd Helton is the only homegrown offensive player that the Rockies have ever developed"........quite a lot has changed since then.

All we can hope for is that they try to keep these guys together and/or make the correct decisions when it comes to trading players (ie....the upcoming Matt Holliday situation).

RMF · February 1st, 2007, 02:40 PM

I wouldn't mind seeing Michael Burgess's name added to our list.

I think the draft is going to see some dynamic change. We are going to see $$$ spent all over. Of note there are approximately 32 supplemental picks between the first and second round this year.

madness · February 18th, 2007, 03:11 PM

I would LOVE Burgess to fall to the Rockies (and the Rockies be smart enough to pay him if he does).

RMF · February 23rd, 2007, 01:22 PM

BP's top 100 is out. Evan Longoria is no. 10 Greg Reynolds is ... right... anways. If Longoria moves positions it's going to be to 2B.

We could have a future IF of Helton, Iannetta, Longoria, Tulowitzki and Atkins. We might have had that infield as early as 08. Please lets all bow to the Rockies for their great decision making.

The Rockies should be required to select a SP with their second round pick or supplemental pick every year,

Rockies were all over Longoria watching him for 2 years. They see Reynolds a couple of times and decide to make thim the 2nd pick in the draft.

This is not a mistake they should have made.

Below C-Level · February 24th, 2007, 01:42 AM

First of all, none of the first 10 pitchers taken in the '06 draft have more than 50 pro innings under their belt- Tim Lincecum included. It's not exactly time to throw in the towel on Greg Reynolds, considering he allowed exactly 1 HR in 48.1 innings while posting a 3.37 ERA and a 1.35 WHIP.

BP employs a performance driven metric, which is why 12 of their top 15 prospects have at least 2 years of pro ball under them. Recall that BA has Reynolds ranked #7 in its 2nd ranked organization ahead of Chris Iannetta.

Evan Longoria still might develop into a hell of a player; he might even be a far superior pro to Greg Reynolds. But he tore through 167 plate appearances in A ball before posting a rather pedestrian .752 OPS in his 109 plate appearances in AA. Forgive me if I'm not ready to anoint him the next David Wright or dub Reynolds a failure based on either sample size.

It's a prospect list based upon short season A ball in both cases. Saying that the Rockies made a mistake with Reynolds on the basis of one ranking is literally like opening the Farmer's Almanac tomorrow and saying that May 8, 2008 is a bad day for a picnic because the forecast calls for rain...

Roxpert · February 24th, 2007, 10:31 AM

I'd take the following guy 10 times out of 10, instead of someone scouts project as having #3 or #4 starter upside.

Quote:

Evan Longoria, ss Born: Oct. 7, 1985 • B-T: R-R • Ht: 6-2 • Wt: 213
Drafted: Long Beach State, 2006 (1st round) • Signed by: Fred Repke
Background: The Devil Rays planned on taking a pitcher with the third overall pick in the June draft, but changed their plans when Longoria unexpectedly fell to them. The 2005 Cape Cod League MVP signed for $3 million on draft day after batting .353/.468/.602 as a junior at Long Beach State. Known for his bat, he hit even more than expected in his pro debut, whacking 21 homers (counting the playoffs) and reaching Double-A Montgomery.

Strengths: Longoria had no problem adjusting to wood bats in pro ball. His quick hands generate plenty of bat speed, allowing him to hit for average and power. He projects as a .300 hitter with 30 or more homers annually. He played some shortstop in college and shows soft hands and a solid arm at third base. His competitiveness and makeup are considered major pluses.

Weaknesses: Longoria has no glaring shortcomings. He just needs to be more consistent in all phases of his game, something that should come easily with experience. His worst tool is his speed but even that is average.

The Future: Easily the most advanced hitter in the 2006 draft, Longoria may reach Tampa Bay sooner than initially expected. He could push for a big league job in mid-2007 and has the talent to become an all-star at third base.

Newman · February 24th, 2007, 11:42 AM

What's the problem with Ian Stewart?

I'm not an expert on Prospects, like most that write in this thread. I only recall that Ian was supposed to be the real deal, the next sure thing. I read in Friday's Rocky that Ian Stewart is rated at #70 in Baseball Prsopectus rankings. Doesn't that mean he's falling, that he might not make it?

What is his flaw? Injury problems? Can't hit a curveball? What?

Below C-Level · February 24th, 2007, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roxpert

I'd take the following guy 10 times out of 10, instead of someone scouts project as having #3 or #4 starter upside.

And you might be right 10 out of 10 times. You also might be wrong 10 out of 10 times. There's absolutely no way to say at this point which it is, though.

Whose scouts project Reynolds' upside as a #3 or #4 starter, just out of curiosity?

Heltonfan · February 24th, 2007, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Whose scouts project Reynolds' upside as a #3 or #4 starter, just out of curiosity?

Ours. On draft day, they had Bill Schmidt (I think - might have been Geivett, though) in the booth during the game, and he described Reynolds as a future #3. Which makes it all the more frustrating.

Roxpert · February 24th, 2007, 01:17 PM

Imagine what could have been. We could have had a "Dirt Dog Keystone Combo" for the next 5 years once Longoria made it up as a 2nd baseman. He's playing 3rd now, but would have been shifted to 2nd base in our system (having played shortstop in college, it shouldn't have been a tough conversion).

Tulo and Longoria would have been a natural for us. Instead, we are going with stopgaps at 2nd base such as Matsui, Carrol, perhaps Barmes. Our farm prospects include Macri, Nix, and who else? Not much, which is also why passing on Longoria is so frustrating.

Below C-Level · February 24th, 2007, 02:21 PM

This is dated as of this morning, but it doesn't sound as though they think he's got the ceiling of a #3 or #4 starter.

The Official Site of The Colorado Rockies: News: Colorado Rockies News

The Rockies rate Reynolds' fastball, curve and changeup as being of Major League quality. "He brings front-of-the-rotation starter stuff to the table," Rockies player development director Marc Gustafson said.

Roxpert · February 24th, 2007, 06:25 PM

I heard what Heltonfan heard, and read the same thing. Reynolds doesn't "miss bats", and is regarded as a #3/#4 type starting pitcher prospect.

Baseball America's mock draft had him going 15th in the draft last year. He was NOT considered one of the top picks, and was a real reach at #2 overall.

I think Reynolds will do better for us than Jason Young (another Stanford alum who was a bust for us), but he's no "Mark Prior" though may stay healthier. You don't use a rare #2 overall pick for such a low ceiling pitcher. You just don't. Unless you're the Rockies, that is.

February 1st, 2007, 05:05 AM	#19 (permalink)
sg8335aa Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 118	I do agree with you there Roxpert. However, what a DEEP minor league organization DOES allow.....is for the ability to absorb flame-outs by prospects. Clint Barmes proves he's not an MLB player? No worries, we have Tulo ready right behind him who should be even better! A shallow organization, won't have the waves of talent ready to replace players that burn out or can't make it in the majors. Unsure if Brad Hawpe is going to cut it as our everyday RFer? No need to lose sleep because we have Jeff Baker (and Ian Stewart) waiting in line to get a shot. Worried we "lost" a 1st round pick because Chris Nelson is struggling?.....no worries because the organizational depth absorbs it and we're still the 2nd best minor league organization. However, where I do agree with you is that our depth should be used to pick up players that help fit the puzzle. Its been done on a lesser degree (Rodrigo Lopez and Ryan Shealy trades)......however both were more involving players that were blocked or starting to fail as prospects (Jim Miller). I do agree that the Rockies should be more aggressive.....and I think that they will once they start winning (ie...over .500) and use it to get those last couple pieces for a playoff run. Should they do it before then?.....probably.......but there's not much we can debate about this until Spring Training (and more likely the July Trading Deadline). Guys like Joe Koshansky could be packaged with another prospect to brng back a CFer. Looking at the organization.....the players with the most value, I can understand why they haven't traded yet (other than Koshansky)......Seth Smith they want to hold onto in case they can't resign Holliday.....same goes for Ian Stewart (who should have a lot more value after getting to hit in AAA for a year). I don't think you can trade pitching right now (espeically with just Cook/Francis in the rotation)......holding onto Morales, Jiminez and Hirsh make sense. I think we may see more action on the trade from in 2008 when we could have 5 Homegrown players plus Jason Hirsh vying for 6 spots in the rotation (Cook, Francis, Jimenez, Morales, Reynolds.....plus Hirsh). I think we'll see more trades once a few contract and prospect battles play themselves out. We're gonna get 1 2nd basemen out of these 4 players (Corey Wimberly, EY Jr., Chris Nelson, Jonathan Herrera)......we'll get 1 CFer out of these two players (Chris Nelson, Dexter Fowler).......I think we'll see more "prospect related trades" in the future as those guys get closer to the bigs. Our minor league decisions aren't perfect (Hello David Christensen........and the Longoria/Reynolds situation)......however overall they've done a great job. Remember when our only internationally developed prospect was Juan Uribe? Now we have 12 International players in our Top 30. Gone are the days when our only hope of a homegrown offensive player was Derrick Gibson or Edgard Clemente. It was just a few years ago where we heard "Todd Helton is the only homegrown offensive player that the Rockies have ever developed"........quite a lot has changed since then. All we can hope for is that they try to keep these guys together and/or make the correct decisions when it comes to trading players (ie....the upcoming Matt Holliday situation). Last edited by sg8335aa; February 1st, 2007 at 05:11 AM.

February 1st, 2007, 02:40 PM	#20 (permalink)
RMF Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 206	How the draft will change I wouldn't mind seeing Michael Burgess's name added to our list. I think the draft is going to see some dynamic change. We are going to see $$$ spent all over. Of note there are approximately 32 supplemental picks between the first and second round this year.

February 24th, 2007, 01:42 AM	#23 (permalink)
Below C-Level Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 55	First of all, none of the first 10 pitchers taken in the '06 draft have more than 50 pro innings under their belt- Tim Lincecum included. It's not exactly time to throw in the towel on Greg Reynolds, considering he allowed exactly 1 HR in 48.1 innings while posting a 3.37 ERA and a 1.35 WHIP. BP employs a performance driven metric, which is why 12 of their top 15 prospects have at least 2 years of pro ball under them. Recall that BA has Reynolds ranked #7 in its 2nd ranked organization ahead of Chris Iannetta. Evan Longoria still might develop into a hell of a player; he might even be a far superior pro to Greg Reynolds. But he tore through 167 plate appearances in A ball before posting a rather pedestrian .752 OPS in his 109 plate appearances in AA. Forgive me if I'm not ready to anoint him the next David Wright or dub Reynolds a failure based on either sample size. It's a prospect list based upon short season A ball in both cases. Saying that the Rockies made a mistake with Reynolds on the basis of one ranking is literally like opening the Farmer's Almanac tomorrow and saying that May 8, 2008 is a bad day for a picnic because the forecast calls for rain... Last edited by Below C-Level; February 24th, 2007 at 01:46 AM.

January 31st, 2007, 06:04 PM	#16 (permalink)
GoldGlove Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Kansas City Posts: 38	Glad to see us get such a high ranking again. Not to be nitpicky, but Iannetta at 8? Come on...he should be at the very least three spots higher.

January 31st, 2007, 08:44 PM	#17 (permalink)
sg8335aa Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 118	The writeup on Christensen is about as expected....long on tools and long on projection. Overly aggressive.....needs to mature......needs to make swing more compact. The two major positivies that it mentions are his "tremendous bat speed" and "power to all fields"....... We'll see what happens. Certainly looks shaddy so far. Either we'll see a completely different Christensen this year in Tri-City after working on his swing in Extended Spring Training......or that "wasted draft pick" tag is going to stick. As for the "low' Ianetta ranking......I could go either way. BA knocked him a bit on his potential I think. I looks like the guy is a pretty safe bet to be a solid major league catcher for years to come.......however, noone is claiming we have a "star" in the making. I dunno. Personally, I would have been happy seeing him ranked anywhere from #4 to #10 so I can't complain. As for Shane Lindsay.....he would have been Top 10 (or close) if not for hte injury. We'll see how he recovers from labrum surgery. Bottom line: The Rockies system is DEEP. Guys like Cole Garner, Phillip Cuadrado, Helder Velasquez, Daniel Mayora, Keith Weiser, Brandon Durden, Josh Sullivan, Esmil Rogers, Yul Silano........would have definitely ranked in the Top 30 of at least 20-25 organizations. Enjoy the influx. It is going to be a lot of fun to see how these guys develop.

February 18th, 2007, 03:11 PM	#21 (permalink)
madness Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 21	I would LOVE Burgess to fall to the Rockies (and the Rockies be smart enough to pay him if he does).

February 23rd, 2007, 01:22 PM	#22 (permalink)
RMF Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 206	BP's top 100 is out. Evan Longoria is no. 10 Greg Reynolds is ... right... anways. If Longoria moves positions it's going to be to 2B. We could have a future IF of Helton, Iannetta, Longoria, Tulowitzki and Atkins. We might have had that infield as early as 08. Please lets all bow to the Rockies for their great decision making. The Rockies should be required to select a SP with their second round pick or supplemental pick every year, Rockies were all over Longoria watching him for 2 years. They see Reynolds a couple of times and decide to make thim the 2nd pick in the draft. This is not a mistake they should have made.

February 24th, 2007, 11:42 AM	#25 (permalink)
Newman Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Aurora Posts: 566	What's the problem with Ian Stewart? I'm not an expert on Prospects, like most that write in this thread. I only recall that Ian was supposed to be the real deal, the next sure thing. I read in Friday's Rocky that Ian Stewart is rated at #70 in Baseball Prsopectus rankings. Doesn't that mean he's falling, that he might not make it? What is his flaw? Injury problems? Can't hit a curveball? What?

February 24th, 2007, 01:17 PM	#28 (permalink)
Roxpert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver Posts: 1,082	Imagine what could have been. We could have had a "Dirt Dog Keystone Combo" for the next 5 years once Longoria made it up as a 2nd baseman. He's playing 3rd now, but would have been shifted to 2nd base in our system (having played shortstop in college, it shouldn't have been a tough conversion). Tulo and Longoria would have been a natural for us. Instead, we are going with stopgaps at 2nd base such as Matsui, Carrol, perhaps Barmes. Our farm prospects include Macri, Nix, and who else? Not much, which is also why passing on Longoria is so frustrating.

February 24th, 2007, 02:21 PM	#29 (permalink)
Below C-Level Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 55	This is dated as of this morning, but it doesn't sound as though they think he's got the ceiling of a #3 or #4 starter. The Official Site of The Colorado Rockies: News: Colorado Rockies News The Rockies rate Reynolds' fastball, curve and changeup as being of Major League quality. "He brings front-of-the-rotation starter stuff to the table," Rockies player development director Marc Gustafson said.

February 24th, 2007, 06:25 PM	#30 (permalink)
Roxpert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver Posts: 1,082	I heard what Heltonfan heard, and read the same thing. Reynolds doesn't "miss bats", and is regarded as a #3/#4 type starting pitcher prospect. Baseball America's mock draft had him going 15th in the draft last year. He was NOT considered one of the top picks, and was a real reach at #2 overall. I think Reynolds will do better for us than Jason Young (another Stanford alum who was a bust for us), but he's no "Mark Prior" though may stay healthier. You don't use a rare #2 overall pick for such a low ceiling pitcher. You just don't. Unless you're the Rockies, that is.