Community 2023 Top 50 Prospect Voting

Home The Cardinal Nation Forums Open Forum Community 2023 Top 50 Prospect Voting

Viewing 25 posts - 176 through 200 (of 502 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #207343
    LACardFan
    Participant

    Free

    Yes, based on the vote tally is should be McGreevy at 8 and Thompson at 9.

    #207345
    Cardinals27
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    10) Hjerpe, I am excited to se him pitch next season. If he can add velocity, it would add to his prospect status. The unusual slot he throws from is interesting as well.
    11) Paniaugua, pitched great at Palm Beach, but struggled a bit at Peoria. He is also eligible for the Rule 5 draft. But I don’t expect him to be drafted. He is still 2 or 3 years away. I would like to see him pitch again, as his control looked good, low 90s fastball, with a good change up.

    #207346
    Cardinals27
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    I am matching the community picks for the first 9. The order is off a little, but I think this is the first time I’ve done this. I wish this was a $1 million lottery, lol.

    #207347
    slidinlefty
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    BERNAL
    HJERPE

    #207348
    LACardFan
    Participant

    Free

    This is where I will board Bob Reed’s hype train for Bernal.

    10 – Bernal
    11 – Hjerpe

    #207349
    stlcard25
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    I’m going to have to make a call on this. Thompson got one more vote for 8th place, but McGreevey got 4 more votes for the combined rounds. Therefore, I’m going to call this
    as McGreevey at #8 and Thompson at #9.

    Bc, you’re welcome to handle it how you’d like, but here’s how I handled it for the multiple vote groups. The first choice would get 2 points and the second choice 1, in a weighted system. So here’s how it would look in this round:

    McGreevy 19
    Thompson 16
    Hjerpe 10
    Bernal 7
    Paniagua 1
    Mejia 1

    #207350
    Jnevel
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    10 – Bernal
    11 – Hjerpe

    I had Thompson at #14. Still shocked we voted him to #9. It will be interesting to see where Brian and Blake put him in their new list.

    #207351
    bccran
    Participant

    Thanks for the help, 25.

    So, after 9 rounds the rankings are –

    1.) Walker
    2.) Winn
    3.) Graceffo
    4.) Hence
    5.) Burleson
    6.) Herrera
    7.) Liberatore
    8.) McGreevey
    9.) Thompson

    Please continue the voting for #10 and #11.

    #207353
    blingboy
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    10. Paniagua
    11. Hjerpe

    #207354
    cardsfan64
    Participant

    Free

    #10 – Cooper Hjerpe
    #11 – Joshua Baez – – Really came on when promoted to Palm Beach. Ended with .286 avg and an OPS of .958. If that translates as he moves up the ladder, he will turn heads as he predicted when he was drafted.

    #207355
    LACardFan
    Participant

    Free

    #11 – Joshua Baez – – Really came on when promoted to Palm Beach. Ended with .286 avg and an OPS of .958. If that translates as he moves up the ladder, he will turn heads as he predicted when he was drafted.

    Yeah, but that 36% K rate…

    #207356
    lrcardinal
    Participant

    Paid - Three Months

    #10 – Cooper Hjerpe
    #11 – Joshua Baez

    #207363
    blingboy
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Its the .484 BABiP that has me questioning how to project Baez’s results at Palm Beach. That and the K rate make ranking him like throwing a dart at the board in the dark. But at least we do have some game action to go by, unlike some. It will be fun to see how it goes with him next season.

    #207366
    stlcard25
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    10. Cooper Hjerpe

    11. Jonathan Mejia

    #207375
    Bob Reed
    Participant

    Free

    Leonardo Bernal at #10, for me.
    And Jonathan Mejia at #11, please.

    Mejia has been described as a “high-probability long term shortstop” at Fangraphs. And although Fangraphs is provably, grotesquely and comically terrible at evaluating Cardinal position player prospects, they have been terrible in pretty much one direction only. They UNDERestimate.

    Moreover, they specifically have radically underestimated the defensive abilities of numerous St. Louis farmhands over the past half decade. Bader and O’Neill in the outfield; DeJong, Sosa, Edman, and apparently Donovan on the infield. Not to mention Masyn Winn, who rates a 65 grade for speed at MLB.com and a 60 for fielding, but only gets a 50 fielding grade at Fangraphs, and 60 for speed.

    So what I’m building up to in my long-winded way, is that if Fangraphs of all people says a 17-year-old Cardinal shortstop is very likely to remain at shortstop, that ironically means more to me than if someone much, much smarter were to say it.

    —————————————

    And then there’s Mejia’s bat. He posted an excellent 145 OPS+ in the Dominican Summer League, and was better and better as the 3-month season progressed.

    June .638 OPS
    July .918
    August 1.217 with a solid 9/11 BB/K ratio

    I’ve been torn between him and Hjerpe for the last two rounds of voting — but the four-year age difference just barely outweighs the fact the Hjerpe has conspicuously succeeded roughly 1 1/2 to 2 levels higher. (The competition of college ball is equivalent to the now-extinct short-season A-Ball level.)

    #207376
    flood21
    Participant

    Paid - Three Months

    10 Hjerpe

    11. Paniagua

    #207378
    slidinlefty
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    “#11 – Joshua Baez – – Really came on when promoted to Palm Beach. Ended with .286 avg and an OPS of .958. If that translates as he moves up the ladder, he will turn heads as he predicted when he was drafted.

    Yeah, but that 36% K rate…”

    I wouldn’t have a problem with another Bobby Bonds. I think his K rate will go down as he gets at bats and stays healthy. TONS of talent here. Power Speed and an absolute Gun from the outfield. Another player fun to project.

    #207379
    stlcard25
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    (The competition of college ball is equivalent to the now-extinct short-season A-Ball level.)

    Bob, I’m curious about this statement. I would have thought that high level college ball (SEC, ACC, Pac 12) is a bit higher than that, more on the level between low A and high A. I say that because we often see mid round (4-10) college pitchers cut through low A like a hot knife through butter in their opening season.

    Anyway, is the short season A assessment something you’ve read elsewhere or just your own general ballpark?

    #207386
    blingboy
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    We do not know if Baez’s K rate will go down. He will gain experience and refine his skills, but so will the pitching he faces. So far it has only gone up.

    We do know he will not sustain the .484 BABiP he had at Palm Beach. Earlier in 2022, in Complex League play his BABiP was closer to normal at .348 and he hit .237 with a 32.6 K%. In 2021 in Complex League play his BABiP was below average at .208 and he hit .158 with a 29.5 K%.

    To any who are better versed in stats and analytics, especially pertaining to prospect level players, what can be drawn from all that?

    I wonder about this because of the gross inconsistency with which these and other stats are cited, or not, by various people who profess some understanding. For example, Parsons’ .200 BABiP against will be cited as evidence that his results are smoke and mirrors, since a BABiP that far from the mean of about .300 is not sustainable, while Helsley’s .185 BABiP against is never even mentioned in the context of whether we might expect him to repeat his 2022 dominance (.125 ERA). This even though his 2021 BABiP against was a closer to the mean at .281 and his ERA was 4.56. The argument goes that guys like Parsons will see their BABiP regress toward the mean, so their good results are not likely to be sustained. But no mention is made of Helsley’s BABiP regressing to the mean, and the associated effect on results that should theoretically also be expected. Somebody tell me what is going on here?

    #207389
    desmetlax12
    Participant

    Free

    #10 – Baez – Small samples size but he played most of 2022 at Palm Beach and slashed .286/.418/.540/.958 there. The 19 year old is 6′ 4″ with great exit velocity and a big outfield arm that’s currently in CF. Probably the best young power hitter we have left to rank.

    #11 – Hjerpe

    #207390
    Jnevel
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    BABiP is a good stat when looking at a single hitter or pitcher and comparing how it affected them from one season to another assuming they didn’t really change how they were throwing or pitching. But that’s really the only great use of this stat. It loses value when you try to compare one hitter to another hitter or one pitcher to another pitcher. That doesn’t mean it’s worthless. It’s just not worth as much. That’s because one pitcher might get lots of weak contact through good pitch movement which in general leads to a low BABiP (Helsley). And another pitcher might give up a lot more fly balls that just happen to not quite go over the fence or line drives that more often than average get caught (Parsons). The latter probably just got a little lucky and the former was good. But it’s hard to use this stat to compare the two.

    #207392
    14NyquisT
    Participant

    #10 HoJo
    #11 Paniagua

    #207393
    14NyquisT
    Participant

    bcc…. I noticed that you have stopped voting. I’m sure that everyone here would want to know your selections and I know that you love this process. There is no good reason for you abstaining…. at least I can’t think of any.

    I voted while I was managing the list.

    #207394
    LACardFan
    Participant

    Free

    @stlcard25 – I have read many times that scouts consider SEC equivalent to AA ball. Three of the other Power 5 conferences are just behind the SEC, so they would probably be equivalent to High A.

    It is also easier to scout pitchers than hitters, because a pitcher will touch the ball 80-100 times per game, whereas a hitter will only bat 3-4 times per game, and may have 0 balls hit their way during a game.

    So, those are some factors/mental adjustments that go into scouting traditionally.

    I think the equivalencies were developed a long time ago, and have to be updated due to showcase circuits/video, but all that probably explains why you can put a college pitcher in A or A+ and feel confident they will succeed at that level.

    #207396
    stlcard25
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    To add to jnevel’s excellent comments, BABIP for both hitters and pitchers, at least at the lower levels, can be an indicator of dominance. Many hitters who are simply too good for a level run extremely high BABIPs because they’re hitting lasers all over the field. Jordan Walker has partial year numbers of .419, .382 and .365 in A, A+ and AA. You’ll notice that it drops as he advances and defenses get stronger, pitchers make fewer mistakes, there’s more late movement, etc. This is pretty typical. Higher BABIPs are possible at the MLB level, typically by high exit velocity, fast or guys who have great bat control. So…stars and superstars. Nonetheless, Baez will not run that high a BABIP for his career, or even within 100 points.

    Now when it comes to Parsons, he’s generally been around or above .300 in his career, so this year’s .200 sure looks like an outlier. It doesn’t mean he’s a nothing burger prospect, but only that at AAA, we can cast some doubt whether he has an actual BABIP suppression skill or if it was a fortunate year.

    Fwiw, it would be a bit surprising if Helsley was as low next year too…but with a well above average K rate compared to Parsons having an average or below K rate, Helsley has a lot more room for error.

Viewing 25 posts - 176 through 200 (of 502 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.