- This topic has 152 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
First, how would I know that it was a disconnect for you? I assumed you new what rules the community had set up and were willing to go along with them.
If I recall, I did not put up much of a fight this year as every year there are those that have wanted to use the rookie eligibility rules and I have fought hard in the passed to use only the ab/innings pitched criteria. My thinking had nothing to do with being hard to calculate service time. I always thought that enough performance to show what you could do removed you from being a prospect and bench time didn’t seem to advance that evaluation. My second reason was the comparison in the past to other top sites. BA had been the standard for many years but they seem to have been passed by mlb pipeline as the most cited list (I believe this is due to the BA decision to move their list behind a paywall and the false idea that many have that the mlb pipeline list has some legitimate tie to mlb). I basically capitulated in not making a argument for not using service time due to the comparison with mlb pipeline being the current standard.
I am not the least bit upset at the community decision or you or your decision. I will continue to believe not using service time is the best option but am a team player and was/am willing to go along with what the community decided.
I guess what really threw me was that on Dec 24th you asked if the site ranking had not used the normal site criteria. You asked in a manner that made it sound as if you didn’t know this when clearly by this time you did.
I cant tell you the thinking of others on which criteria should be used. I can only explain mine.
But I am cool either way. All is good in prospect land!
Looking back at the community voting thread it was basically a Nyquis command decision to use the rookie status criteria despite several objections and no one chiming in to support him except by silence. Again, I think he thought matching up with mlb pipeline was a valid concern.
Until now, I didn’t know exactly what happened and why. It is not the way I would have wanted it but it was already done. Next year, I will make it clear to our voters ahead of time that we do the rankings our way, not how BA or MLB or others do theirs. If the community voting was an independent process and was not part of the overall site ranking, the group should be able to set your own criteria as you see fit. But that is not the case. Anyway, thanks for looking into it.
Perhaps it would be worthwhile next year to post an alphabetical list of the top 75 or 80 guys from which people can choose their top 50.
There IS a list of eligible players posted every year. As I said, it is included in the very first post of the voting thread. It clearly denotes both Thomas and Helsley as eligible.
It was listed in the 2019 top 50 order and the two players in question were in the top 12, so very visible. Respectfully, I don’t see how an alpha listing would have averted this situation, but if the community sees value in it, whoever is leading the process next year can certainly add it (or I can assist if asked).
P.S. I want to be very clear that we should all appreciate the many hours 14NyquisT devoted – both in leading the voting and in the weeks afterward in summarizing your comments for the site top 50 countdown. The latter took a lot of time behind the scenes and did not conclude for him until just a few days ago. If someone does not volunteer each fall, there would be no community top 50. I have thanked 14NyquisT privately, but want to do it again publicly here.
Brian I appreciate your thanks… it means a lot to me.
I went with the MLB.com list since the Community voting begins shortly after the season ends and before other media rankings appear. It was not an arbitrary decision at all.
In case you missed it, CJeske posted. I believe Helsley, Poncedeleon, and Thomas have all “graduated.”
All three are removed from the mlb.com team prospect rankings page. Thomas is the only of the three still on fangraphs’ the board page, but I think he “graduated” since that was last updated.
I don’t have an issue including them in the vote here, I’m just not sure they will be on many other 2020 prospect lists.
For my $.02, I am not a fan of using days on the roster for our prospect ratings. Thomas is a perfect example of how someone, who is still a prospect in my eyes, gets excluded from many lists due to sitting on the major league bench. Our list is OUR list and it shouldn’t matter what other ratings are doing.
That being said, I appreciate anyone who facilitates the prospect voting process. I willing comply with whatever decision is made
I went with the MLB.com list since the Community voting begins shortly after the season ends and before other media rankings appear. It was not an arbitrary decision at all.
Ny, first of all I appreciate your efforts in spearheading this effort. You did a very good job. I would probably go with IP and AB’s to determine who is eligible but I am not going to quibble about it as long as we are all on the same page when the voting begins.
One quibble I do have is when the voting begins. You mentioned the voting began “after the season”. Of course this was the minor league season you referred to. I found it a bit difficult to concentrate and focus on minor league rankings while the Cardinals were in a heated pennant race in September. Yes I foresee comments regarding walking and chewing gum at the same time and mutli-tasking.
While there probably wouldn’t be time to start the rankings after the Cardinal season is over it would be nice if we could find a way. Maybe do groups of 10 in a 24 hour period each. That would compress things a bit. I just found it difficult to write compelling write-ups about guys like Seth Elledge and Alvaro Seijas at the exact same time as the Cardinals were having a historic sweep at Wrigley Field but maybe that is just my problem.
If I had known what was going on, we would have included Helsley and Thomas. Next year, I will make sure – if we continue the same arrangement, that is.
Which leads us to the timing question…
To make a change, the community would have to make a tradeoff. If you want to wait to begin until after St. Louis is done, rather than after the minor league season concludes (as today), then you will not be able to be a part of the site top 50. I know from years of experience that there is not enough time to get everything done in a quality manner unless community voting begins shortly after Labor Day. As I explained above, the voting is not the end of the work – it is just the first part. But all of you except 14NyquisT did not see it continuing behind the scenes.
P.S. I am not telling you all what to do. I am explaining the ramifications of a timing delay of a month or even more, depending on the playoffs. I hope the community will continue to work within the general guidelines set for the site in terms of qualification and timing.
The community in the past has dealt with the fact that eligibility can change after voting begins by simply dropping a player previously voted and whom loses their eligibility and moving everyone up a place. Not complicated.
That is a different scenario than not including a player that could or should have been included before the voting began.
OK, you already knew Dylan Carlson would be The Cardinal Nation's #stlcards no. 1 prospect for 2020. So we go deeper, looking at three comps for the OF – Oscar Taveras, Nick Markakis and (gulp) Albert Pujols – while trying to slow the hype train. (free) https://t.co/6a8m8StGuJ pic.twitter.com/H1GX04N98l
— Brian Walton (@B_Walton) December 30, 2019
The comp that always comes to mind to me for Carlson is Andrew Benintendi. I saw Benintendi play a lot in college and he is a great hitter, although has slightly underachieved at the MLB level in my opinion. They are both line drive hitters with power but can also hit for average. Carlson has a bigger frame so it wouldn’t surprise me to see him generate more power than Benintendi eventually and thus have an overall higher ceiling.
Reading these last couple of profiles has been interesting. It seems like some have soured on Gorman because he wasn’t great at Palm Beach. He’s still my #1 in the system and I’ll explain why…
Carlson and Gorman have often been compared by age throughout the system. Yet it’s not a terribly fair comparison as Carlson now has 4 years in the Cards’ minors compared to just 2 for Gorman. Nolan has advanced to Palm Beach (and likely Springfield to start 2020) at an experience level where Carlson started the season at Peoria. So Gorman is at least a level ahead of Carlson at the same time. It should also be noted that whole Carlson was extremely young for his class, Gorman is also a young player for his class, with his May birthday. Gorman has put up a better wRC+ at just about every level, which leads me to believe he will also have a very good year at Springfield next year. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him pop 25-30 HRs and see his K and BB rates improve after the initial shock of the AA pitching.
Both are good prospects who should be Cardinal starters for a long time (hopefully) but give me the potential All Star 3b over the potential All Star RF.
The highest level at which one can compare the two directly is Palm Beach. Gorman had a slightly higher wRC+, 117 to 112, but also had a MUCH higher strikeout rate (32 to 18%) and a walk rate half of Carlson’s (6 vs 12%). It will be interesting to compare their respective Double-A numbers at this time next year. Perhaps Gorman will break out in the Texas League as Carlson did, but that remains to be seen. The one who went first did it, and the other is TBD. As I wrote, I see them as different kinds of prospects.
I agree that they are different kinds of prospects. I was just surprised at how much doubt crept into the Gorman profile after he pretty much did what you’d expect a 19 year old star prospect in his first pro season in a black hole offensive league to do.
Spinning The Cardinal Nation's #stlcards Top 50 Prospect List for 2020 by position brings our annual All-Prospect Team plus a prospect depth chart by position. Honorary captain Andrew Knizner leads the way. (free) https://t.co/YhZGAk7KXL pic.twitter.com/lk6m8n9sMv
— Brian Walton (@B_Walton) January 5, 2020
The depth chart is fascinating. I like looking at it that way.
2B looks very weak to me. I don’t see any help there.
I am not as concerned about SS. I like all four players actually.
We are absolutely loaded at C and 3B.
With so much uncertainty around Mateo Gil and Delvin Perez, SS doesn’t look much better than 2B. The good news is that Sosa appears to be ready to travel north with the team in 2020.
Sosa and Gil look like sure fire MLB contributors to me. If there is any uncertainty it would be Perez and Robertson but I think both have a shot at MLB utility roles.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.