Talking Chop

Me and yondaime4 were the only ones to vote for Matt Young. Represent.

Still think we’re all ranking Minor WAY too high.

PWHjort - December 14, 2009 reply

Agreed

Top Ten? Sure

Top 5? Eh… I like for a guy in the top 5 to have a bit higher ceiling than “Back end of the rotation starter.” I feel like he needs to be back behind Delgado and Spruill, despite having gone to the AFL.

Jurrjens had that same supposed ceiling...

with Minor, let’s wait until he gets some time under his belt before putting a limit on his level.

Mr. Sanchez - December 14, 2009 reply

tells you the state of our minor leagues if you think Minor is too high.

I think he’s a bit high, but a lefty who knows how to pitch (not just throw) and projects to gain 3-4 mph on his fastball in the comings years is a pretty good commodity in any organization.

he could be Pettite or he could be Washburn. Either way, Minor is nothing to scoff at.

Yet, #4 IS high.

since when does he project to gain 3-4 mph on his fastball

that would make him a top of the rotation pitcher if he did that.. and i dont think thats actually projected

If he did, he’d have a fastball touching 95-96 on the gun. That would give him a better fastball than anyone in the rotation right now. Vazquez is at the point where he seldom hits 95 on the gun anymore. Hanson probably can, but as a starter, he doesn’t throw that hard.

So, that’s crazy.

this is what Im saying…no one has said he stands to gain that much on his fastball… and many say he wont add anything

agreed

i read somewhere

that he is only around 190 lbs now at 6’4" (this from the Vandy site http://vucommodores.cstv.com/sports/m-basebl/mtt/minor_mike00.html This is old but he hasn’t put on THAT much weight). The projection is based on the fact that, in all likelihood, he will put 15-20 lbs on that frame in the next 5 years. Doing so would, most likely, add SOME velocity to his fastball. When he was signing, the Braves’ scouts said that it COULD be 3-4 but most likely 2-3.

ps-

Corey Rasmus is going to be a player. He just needs to get healthy.

I agree, but we have to see him healthy first.

gondeee - December 14, 2009 reply

I agree. I had him on my top 10 RH starters list. But still, need to see him healthy.

If he could only get healthy, he could be a good one.

BravesWin - December 14, 2009 reply

Maybe if he gets healthy. I don’t think anyone thought of that yet.

yondaime4 - December 14, 2009 reply

“Pitching dominated the list, including 9 left-handed starting pitchers (10 if you count Osuna).”

Yeah, good grief there is a ton of pitching on the list: 19 arms to 6 bats.

bbxxj - December 14, 2009 reply

Except one of them is more of a “glove” than a “bat”.

PWHjort - December 14, 2009 reply

Wow, no love for Thomas Palica.

He had similar numbers to Gearrin, and was a year younger at the same levels. Is there some scouting report that I’m missing or something?

blindsided789 - December 14, 2009 reply

Lefty with so so stuff. Gearrin is more impressive because of his stuff and delivery.

That would explain it. He had some good K #‘s though. I still think he’s someone to keep an eye on.

blindsided789 - December 14, 2009 reply

Gondee, how does this compare to our mid-season list?

I think it would be interesting to see the two side by side, but I don’t think the mid-season list was ever published. I could be way off on that though…

i could never find it.

Unshun?

damnit

Yeah, the ball got dropped on that one. I never got around to the mid-season list. You’re welcome to go back and total it all up, though.

gondeee - December 14, 2009 reply

Haha…no gracias!

who is this Heyward guy?

when i searched him on Google, it said:

No results were found. Did you mean: Jesus Christ?

Scott Coleman - December 14, 2009 via mobile reply

+1

woah! not cool. Someone’s going to have your head for blasphemy
Exhibit A:

(sorry if I took the picture w/o asking… i can’t stand for this blasphemy)

GoBravesNY - December 14, 2009 reply

that says Tommy Hanson...

and I use that google thing all the time.

im really, really, uber sorry to whoever made that picture. i hope I didnt upset you

Scott Coleman - December 14, 2009 reply

you clearly don’t get what I mean…
Tommy’s going to have your head for blasphemy… lame attempt at a joke

GoBravesNY - December 15, 2009 reply

I wish I knew enough about the prospects to make my own list, but I would just be bullshittin’. Maybe next year.

someguy917 - December 14, 2009 reply

Haha, same here.

Mark Lempke - December 14, 2009 reply

Stick around this website for awhile and you’ll be an expert. Maybe I shouldn’t go that far, but TC offers top notch year round prospect coverage.

bwellnjonesco - December 14, 2009 reply

I think our top 5 is very strong, BUT imo

there is a huge letdown afterwards when you consider the lack of quality depth we have in position players.

SmithnCompany - December 14, 2009 reply

ur absolutely right, but most teams would be happy to have our pitching depth and our top 5… this is clearly a top 10 system (with a rough guess, Id put us at about 5-6th

It's kind of a staple of the Schuerholz farm system

Having a surplus of good pitching prospects gives you a lot of trade commodities. With the fact that pitchers are generally more injury prone than position players, the demand for pitching increases over the course of the season. And in terms of drafting, first round position players tend to be more sure things than first round pitchers. So when trading prospects at low levels, it’s generally nice to trade pitchers for position players just because pitchers have a lower chance of panning out as expected. It will be interesting to see how this bears out during the season, considering the extra pitching we have at the major league level-I’d like to see if some prospects get turned over in trades.

Also, in my opinion, it’s much more valuable to have cost controlled pitchers than hitters. When you’re making market value for pitchers, they carry a higher risk, and have a more marginal team impact. Hitters play every day, and starters every 5th day. I know someone has run the numbers before, but I’m too lazy to look it up right now. But when paying free agents, you often get more bang for your buck with hitters.

10-12

That’s where I am guessing we fall this year.

Disclaimer: I have not actually looked at the other systems to know I would rank that many better than ours.

parish - December 14, 2009 reply

i havent look either so who knows

I’d said late top 10 probably. I haven’t been blown away by most of the systems I have seen so far, but I FL and Phil will rank ahead of us along with Tex, Oakland (maybe they thinned out a bit), Washington and maybe Baltimore. Thats just off the top of my head.

yondaime4 - December 14, 2009 reply

Washington’s system isn’t very good and if it’s ahead of the Braves it’s only because of Strasburg and after graduating so many guys this year Baltimore’s isn’t that great either.

You think Philly will still be up there after today?

it's like their own...

Tex deal!

Mr. Sanchez - December 14, 2009 reply

depends on what they finally gave up.

yondaime4 - December 14, 2009 reply

I think the Pirates should be in the top 10 by now…

they should be ya… but they arent

and fine ur unshunned

You can’t quit me.

interesting that Scott Diamond is #22 for 2d year in a row. didn’t have a great year, but no slipage.
IMO, could have an outside shot at an appearance in the Atlanta sometime in ’10.

If the list was being updated now, where would Brent Clevlen be? Top 10?

I don’t really know much about him, but he seems more in the mold of a Reid Gorecki kind of player with more upside. I think he’s a lot better than Gorecki, but I don’t think he’s better than anyone in the top 10. Except maybe Johnson.

Bent Clevelen would be right where he is. Nowhere near the list. He’s a 26 year old who doesn’t have any projection left. He’s a nice minor league free agent signing but he’s not a prospect.

I guess I don’t understand the operative definition.

To me, a prospect is a minor league player who if in the major leagues, would be a rookie; and has potential to very likely contribute or have impact in the future, sooner or later.

So, projection aside, after 3 full years in AAA ball, Clevelan is a near ready player (or not) and if given the opportunity, could very likely contribute or have impact (or not) very soon (like as of game 1 of the ’10 season).

Now, if his power numbers were transferable to 25 HR power in 500 major league ABs and he could maintain a .270ish BA and give us plus defense, then that would seem to me damn worthy of the list.

If Clevlen could do those kind of things he’d already have been given a chance in the Majors. In over 1400 AAA at bats he has a .259 average and has never hit 25 homers in a season, at any level. Nothing in his career to this point suggests he could produce at the levels you’re thinking he could.

Even several years ago at his peak he was a mid teens prospect for the Tigers, and their farm systems were worse than the Braves, both then and now.

What makes a prospect a prospect is the amount of projectability he has; can you see this guy being good over the long haul, moving up and having good value over a fair amount of time. 26 year olds who haven’t dominated AAA and haven’t fared very well in their 3 chances at AAA, who weren’t even considered worthy of a callup in their last season with their old team, who are allowed to become minor league free agents in the first place, aren’t prospects.

maybe, except in 955 AB the last 2 years at AAA, playing as a 24 & 25 year old, he put up an aggregate .272 batting average and .468 slugging percentage with an average of 24.5 2B, 6 3B and 19 HR per season, which compare very favorably with his earlier production. so, it looks like he is continuing to progress and could have more upside than you’re recognizing.

It could. I think he’s a good ballplayer and I’m very happy that he’s a part of the organization. But still, not a prospect.

cb--forget the linguistics....

…I agree with you here. He’s a nice piece, but not a prospect.

cavebird - December 14, 2009 reply

holy shit, batmen

the Red Sox signed Lackey to 5/85 million

the Phillies/Blue Jays/M’s seem to be having a deal that will send Halladay to Philly, Lee to Seattle and prospects to Toronto.

WOW.

I think Wren might need to push Liberty for a little more $ to sign a bit OF bat.

wow

OF Michael Saunders, P Phillip Aumont and P Brandon Morrow to Toronto along with Philadelphia sending P J.A. Happ and OF Dominic Brown to Toronto.

now Toronto is going to be good for a VERY long time. i love this deal for them.

Smoltz's Beard - December 14, 2009 reply

Holy shit...

…where did you find all that? That’s quite a haul.

so Philly traded Lee, Saunders, Happ, and Brown for Halladay?

bwellnjonesco - December 14, 2009 reply

Sounds like an Omar Minaya move!

I love it!

Saunders

is from Seattle

eaheckman10 - December 15, 2009 reply

My bad…

bwellnjonesco - December 15, 2009 reply

That’s an amazing deal for them. Wonder if they could’ve gotten Drabek instead of Happ? I remember over the summer they wanted Happ over Drabek which was pretty dumb

Good gracious! All for 1 year of Halladay?

Yakker - December 14, 2009 reply

From SI.com:

The Phillies are giving up prospects to Toronto to get Halladay, but it isn’t known yet which players are in the deal. Philadelphia, which would also get prospects from Seattle, is trying to keep its payroll at around $140 million.