Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
For instance, here’s the 2017 top prospect list. We know pretty much who all these guys are at the big league level now. Looking back, we didn’t have a 100% success rate but did an overall good job. There are some hits and misses at every level but it looks like the top of the list had more success and the bottom was more sporadic. That’s expected and should help shape the view of these initial top 50 reveals.
2017 Top Prospect Voting Results
Alex Reyes 1
Luke Weaver 2
Carson Kelly 3
Delvin Perez 4
Jack Flaherty 5
Dakota Hudson 6
Harrison Bader 7
Sandy Alcantara 8
Austin Gomber 9
Junior Fernandez 10
Magnerius Sierra 11
Jake Woodford 12
Ryan Helsley 13
Paul DeJong 14
Edmundo Sosa 15
Eliezer Alvarez 16
Allen Cordoba 17
Dylan Carlson 18
Alvaro Seijas 19
Randy Arozarena 20
Tim Cooney –
Marco Gonzales 22
Nick Plummer 23
Johan Oviedo 24
Jordan Hicks 25
Bryce Denton 26
Jeremy Martinez 27
Ronnie WIlliams 28
Connor Jones 29
Derian Gonzalez 30
Jonatan Machado 31
Mike Mayers 32
Tommy Edman 33
Zac Gallen 34
Breyvic Valera 35
Ian Oxnevad 36
John Kilichowski 37
Sam Tuivailala 38
Rowan Wick 39
Matt Pearce 40
Daniel Poncedeleon 41
Andrew Knizner 42
Carlos Soto 43
Dennis Ortega 44
Andrew Morales 45
Darren Seferina 46
Luke Voit 47
Matt Fiedler 48
Jose Martinez 49
Ian McKinney 50
Chris Chinea 51
Trey Neilsen 52
Wadye Ynfante 53
Walker Robbins 54
Corey Littrell 55
Victor Garcia 56
Vince Jackson 57
Franyel Casadilla 58
Brady Whalen 59
Caleb Lopes 60
Sam Tewes 61
Bryan Dobzanski 62
Arturo Reyes 63
Francis Ventura 64
Oscar Mercado 65
Brian O’Keefe 66
Brian Sanchez 67
Jorge Rodriguez 68
Julio Rodriguez 69
Joshua Lopez 70I think most places try to strike the balance between projection and proximity. Certain prospect raters tend to be enamored with toolsy players and high ceilings, and others tend toward production.
I would say that most people use prospect peeping as a way to keep up with guys who may play on their big league team one day. As such, if the list tends toward the upper levels, they’ll be more likely to see those guys play in St Louis but potentially less likely to catch guys who make an impact 2, 3, 4 years down the road. Let’s face it, we want to know who could potentially grace the starting lineup in Busch for months or years ahead, so the “cup of Joe” guys don’t mean as much. So there’s a need to look at not only the likelihood that they make the big leagues, but also the chance that they’ll be a good big leaguer. TCN does a pretty solid job of that, IMO.
So Fangraphs has their ZiPS projections for next year up and the good news is…the Cards have the second best projection in MLB, tied with the Dodgers. They have them easily outpacing the Brewers.
Regarding catcher, I’m okay with Knizner starting off the year behind the plate.
I don’t think Knizner is the answer, defensively. What’s weird is that his bat has never showed up. I would have believed he’d be an average or better hitter, for sure.
I wouldn’t mind Narvaez and Knizner, with Herrera being groomed as a mid season call for a permanent gig. Vazquez would be a better version of Narvaez. I’m still hopeful that Herrera will be the longer term starter.
Tyler O’Neill and Adolis Garcia both had big holes in their swings in the upper minors (still do) but both have also made a significant impact in the majors, albeit inconsistently.
O’Neill consistently had K rates in the 20s during his time in the upper minors. Garcia was even lower until his big final year in Memphis, which just edged over 30%. To his credit, he’s kept the Ks a little more under control than you’d expect during his time in Texas.
Gomez from A+ up, by stop: 33.5% (A+), 38.2% (AA), 35.0% (AA) and 34.4% (AAA)
Upper 20s K rates limit you unless you’re an elite defender or have massive power. Mid 30s K rates make you a real risk and rarely a full time starter. Only one qualified batter had a 34% or worse K rate this year…Patrick Wisdom. Joey Gallo and Miguel Sano reached that mark in 2021. There were 6 at that level in 2020. In the entire decade of the 2010s, only 8 qualified batters were that undisciplined.
Point is…Gomez has a tough hill to climb. He probably has the chops to be a 4th OF type, and I agree that the Cards will give him a shot. In this range, is that enough to vote for him over guys who have a chance to be quite a bit more? It’s not for me, but some love the proximity and if you’re just looking for a guy who will probably play in St Louis at some point, he’s a safer bet than a guy like Mejia. Mejia got a 2nd round type bonus for a reason, so that’s why he got my vote despite his level.
Reyes would be smart to go to LA. In half a year he would outperform anyone in the Cards bullpen except Helsley for a team like the Dodgers.
I’ll take Varsho over Contreras, Murphy, Vasquez, all the offseason names.
I don’t know if Varsho is the better of Murphy (who I’m coming around on more…he could be a Realmuto on a contender). He does have value, to be sure. But his catching numbers are not very good, looks more like an OFer who’s just shy of a total embarrassment behind the plate. If we got him for O’Neill and a B prospect, I’d probably be ok with it. But I doubt that would be the asking price.
I think we should vote for 14 and 15. You never know how the votes will change round to round… personally, I’m not voting for Gomez for a bit.
Not surprising. Other than the fact that they won’t be contenders, the Cubs have a starting CF spot and a small field to entice lefty batters to improve their lot in. The Cards don’t really have anything besides “we will win the Central if we show up” to offer in the way of guarantees.
stlcard25…I’m not too sure I’d mention Peralta with any one of those five guys.
Me either, baseball wise. I’m simply pointing out that almost every multi year free agent deal is going to include some bad years. It doesn’t make them bad deals. The Cards most assuredly got what they expected from Peralta.
stlcard…His first two years. His second two years were horrible. That’s a 50/50 proposition.
That was baked into the deal. When you’re signing a 32 year old SS who’s not know for agility to begin with, you expect that the end of the deal is going to be ghastly. Just about everyone at the time thought of the contract that way. He made hay for two years (really one and a half) and then went off the cliff.
You’ll see the same thing with almost every “big” signing…Harper, Machado, Judge, even Goldy and Arenado. Teams are paying for the early production and holding on for the end of the contract. Anything better than that is gravy. That doesn’t make it a bad signing or even a 50/50 proposition any more than your retirement account going up and down with the market is. It’s just part of the game.
I’d say take another look at Peralta, BW. Two years at most. His last two years as a Cardinal were horrible.
The Cards got over 7 WAR out of Peralta those first two years, so I’d paint it as a success. If every deal has to include every year as a net positive, then hardly any deals would be considered good deals.
23 GS, 3.54 ERA (actual)
I don’t think that production is Q-offer worthy, especially the 114 IP, but Jack might, so I see your point.
If he hits the GS and ERA markers with 150 IP, he has reached the “much to prove” production. The IP is a key for him to re-establish.
We’re talking about a guy who wouldn’t sign a contract his pre arb years, so I feel like it’s very safe to say he won’t accept a QO unless the case is super cut and dried.
If Flaherty makes 25+ starts with a 3.5ish ERA next year, he should get a QO. If he rejects it (and he almost certainly will), we get the draft pick…sweet. If he accepts it, then he’s shown enough that we get him for one more prime year and that’s one less rotation spot to be filled (I’m already pining for Nola, although I realize that he likely won’t be in play).
Stepping back from the “why”, do folks think the results of the 2023 team will suffer from his loss? If so, why? If not, what does it matter why he left?
I believe that the switch from Maddux will be a net positive…so the reasons for him leaving don’t matter too much to me.
The most recent revelation that we are on the hook for the entire $35M to Arenado in 2023 is still stunning to me. It is a budget gut punch.
Yep, I agree. I’d say the Waino deferral being factored into this year’s budget feels the same. I get it…yet feel like it sort of misses the point of deferring the money if you’re not going to spend it elsewhere.
Basically we have about $26M extra on our budget already than we all thought…and that feels pretty crummy. Especially in light of Mo’s “payroll will rise”…that felt pretty disingenuous.
Our outfield was top 10 last season and our pitching was bottom 10. I’ll leave it at that because I’m sure I’m sounding like a broken record.
I would love to upgrade the pitching too, but it’s difficult to see it happening with the group that’s currently slotted into the rotation. If you want a fairly depressing read regarding pitching and payroll, here’s one:
https://www.vivaelbirdos.com/2022/11/23/23473853/the-low-high-point-payroll-offseason-planning
Bottom line, the rotation looks totally set, batting a shocking development. The author indicates that the Cards probably will upgrade catcher and add a lefty OF/DH type and a use the leftover to pick up a swing and miss reliever. I know you love Chafin, so he may end up being your prize of the off season.
I personally think that’s foolish, as they’re going to have a lot more money to spend after 2023 and a lot of holes to fill. They’d better hope for three of Mikolas, Monty, Libby, Hudson, Graceffo, McGreevy, or some guy out of nowhere to be rotation worthy for 2024 because signing more than one FA starter rarely goes well.
jj write…
Flaherty has much to prove to be worthy of a 1/20mil QO at the end of 2023.
GC wrote…
A qualifying offer for Flaherty seems unlikely, unless he is 2020 JF.
On the contrary, if Flaherty is decent (think 25+ starts, ERA mid 3s), I think the Cards know that he will almost assuredly bet on himself. I think in a borderline case the QO is a no brainer for us, because there’s no way he’ll accept it.
To me, it seems like the volume of options we have nearly assures us an average or better OF. What it doesn’t indicate is how much above average we’ll have. Adding a lefty impact bat to the lineup would be nice, I agree. I was warming to the idea of Rizzo as DH before he resigned with New York.
I would not even be considering Bellinger or any other potential CF acquisition if I was confident that Carlson was the answer but I am not. He has had every opportunity to make the job his and has been unsuccessful in my opinion. By the end of this past season he had deteriorated into barely a platoon player. 2023 is crucial for him. He is either going to finally seize the reins or is going to go the way of Piscotty.
I think you’re being a bit rough on Carlson. While he hasn’t become the star we hoped for, he’s been very solid in the OF. Between 2021 and 2022, his 5 fWAR ranks 26th among all OFers (that’s 90 starters and who knows how many backups). He’s just played all of 2022 at age 23. While I agree that we’d all like (and the Cards could use) him to take the next step, he’s been very solidly above average out there. At worst, he’s your cheap 4th OFer who can play all three positions and provide a passable sub for an injury, which of course we need with O’Neill a part of the OF and Nootbaar no guarantee to continue to be successful.
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.