2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    Nice response, tom... very informative.
    Thanks.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]Sometimes we need to remember how a great a one-sided trade can help a franchise such as when we sent Heathcliff Slocum to Seattle for Derrick Lowe and Jason Varitek. I suggest that Hill start a thread about that trade.
    Posted by LadyLake[/QUOTE]
    I should not take the bait, but you got me thinking about the lopsided trade of Heathcliff Slocumb for Derek Lowe and Jason Varitek.

    Varitek has produced 23.1 WAR* since the July 1997 trade while Lowe contributed 18.4 WAR to the Red Sox before leaving for free agency** following the 2004 season. Slocumb posted a WAR of 0.4 for the Seattle Mariners before becoming a free agent after the 1998 season.

    Some trades are just lopsided.

    A year earlier, the Red Sox traded Jamie Moyer to the Mariners for Darren Bragg. Moyer accumulated 32.4 WAR for the Mariners before being traded to the Phillies for two minor leaguers in August 2006. Bragg posted a WAR of 5.4 for the Sox before joining Slocumb in free agency after the 1998 season.

    The Mariners got the player with the most productive WAR in the two deals, but Boston's 41.5-to-0.4 WAR edge in the second trade was wider than Seattle's 32.4-to-5.4 WAR edge in the first trade.

    But each was lopsided.

    * Wins Above Replacement as reported at Baseball Reference

    ** the compensation picks the Red Sox got for Lowe's departure following the 2004 season were Michael Bowden and Craig Hansen, who contributed 0.0 WAR and a negative 1.5 WAR, respectively. I did not deduct those numbers from the overall WAR benefits to the Sox.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list : A year from now Ryan Lavarnway will be 25 years old. Keith Law's Top 100 prospect list this year has only one player (24-year-old Yonder Alonso) older than 23 years of age. The lower-level Red Sox prospects have a better chance of moving up to the Top 100 list than Lavarnway does. Jose Iglesias would need to reverse the direction of his stock after being on many Top 100 prospect lists a year ago.
    Posted by hill55[/QUOTE]

    I don't get too excited, since a lot of these lists are at odds with each other, but the way I figure it, Iggy, Lav, and Kalish will likely be starting for us in 2013.  And we'll still have the same 2, 3, or 4 top-100 candidates (depending on the list) that we have this year.  It'll look a whole lot better when we're looking at this in June, 2013, imho.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from michaelsjr. Show michaelsjr's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    Yahoo sports doing a pre-season summation series on each MLB team. 

    http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-passan_hot_stove_daily_boston_red_sox_valentine_021912

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list : I don't get too excited, since a lot of these lists are at odds with each other, but the way I figure it, Iggy, Lav, and Kalish will likely be starting for us in 2013.  And we'll still have the same 2, 3, or 4 top-100 candidates (depending on the list) that we have this year.  It'll look a whole lot better when we're looking at this in June, 2013, imho.
    Posted by Joebreidey[/QUOTE]

    2013 could see this...
    Papi walks, Youk to DH and 
    Middlebrooks, Aviles, cecchini and Bogaerts fight for the 3B job.
    Iggy is the starting SS.
    Kalish or other OF'ers take over for Ross & DMac.
    Lava takes over for Shoppach and DHs in games where Youk plays 1b/3B
    Lackey returns to the 4 slot.
    Doubront wins the 5th slot (Dice-K gone).
    Alex Wilson, Ranaudo or someone else rises quickly to the ML level.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list : 2013 could see this... Papi walks, Youk to DH and  Middlebrooks, Aviles, cecchini and Bogaerts fight for the 3B job. Iggy is the starting SS. Kalish or other OF'ers take over for Ross & DMac. Lava takes over for Shoppach and DHs in games where Youk plays 1b/3B Lackey returns to the 4 slot. Doubront wins the 5th slot (Dice-K gone). Alex Wilson, Ranaudo or someone else rises quickly to the ML level.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Great insight. I think that you are right.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    n Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list : 2013 could see this... Papi walks, Youk to DH and  Middlebrooks, Aviles, cecchini and Bogaerts fight for the 3B job. Iggy is the starting SS. Kalish or other OF'ers take over for Ross & DMac. Lava takes over for Shoppach and DHs in games where Youk plays 1b/3B Lackey returns to the 4 slot. Doubront wins the 5th slot (Dice-K gone). Alex Wilson, Ranaudo or someone else rises quickly to the ML level.
    Posted by moonslav59


    Great insight. I think that you are right.

    The interesting things is that none of this cost an extra cent.

    The money saved on losing Papi, Dice-K, Jenks, Ross, and Shoppach can be spent on a top pitcher or slugging RH'd bat or both.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]There was a recent study which had the Redsox as the top achievers in baseball over the past 10 years in terms of mlb WAR value. The #1 aciever in baseball over the past 10 years. Theo did just fine.
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]
    Boom, as usual, is correct:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/building-through-the-draft-best-of-the-best/
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    m
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus has 4 Sox in the top 100.  Bogaerts (#32), Brandon Jacobs (#46), Will Middlebrooks (#55), Lavarnway (#98). As well as Rizzo (#75) and Casey Kelly (#78) from the AGon trade.



     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus has 4 Sox in the top 100.  Bogaerts (#32), Brandon Jacobs (#46), Will Middlebrooks (#55), Lavarnway (#98). As well as Rizzo (#75) and Casey Kelly (#78) from the AGon trade. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=16020
    Posted by JB-3[/QUOTE]

    So, that's 6 draftees in the top 98, when the odds say he should have had about 3. This was certainly his area of most success.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    m
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from GhostofTito. Show GhostofTito's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    Actually, the three who went in the Gonzalez deal to SD, are nothing special, so far.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]Actually, the three who went in the Gonzalez deal to SD, are nothing special, so far.
    Posted by GhostofTito[/QUOTE]

    And yet 2 of them are on the top 100 prospect list, which was the main topic of this thread.  Personally, I agree with you regarding Rizzo.  He needs to close the huge hole in his swing (inner third of the plate).  I didn't think much of Fuentes at the time of the deal either.  It'd be nice to still have Kelley though, given the lack of quality pitching in the upper minors of our system.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    Rizzo is the same age as Jesus Montero, and outslugged him by 200 points at the same level of competition last year.  You want Montero in your top 5 and Rizzo off the top 100?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]Rizzo is the same age as Jesus Montero, and outslugged him by 200 points at the same level of competition last year.  You want Montero in your top 5 and Rizzo off the top 100?
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    Rizzo simply hasn't developed as many hoped he would, although he still has plenty of time to do so.  I think it may be more of a coaching problem than a talent problem.  I'd still have him top 100 and I think his ranking in the 70's is about right.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list : Rizzo simply hasn't developed as many hoped he would, although he still has plenty of time to do so.  I think it may be more of a coaching problem than a talent problem.  I'd still have him top 100 and I think his ranking in the 70's is about right.
    Posted by JB-3[/QUOTE]

    Rizzo is only 21. He's had about 3 full seaqsons in the minors.
    '09 A (503)  .297  12 66  (.368/.461/..828)
    '10 AA(602) .260  25  100 (.334/.480/.814)
    '11 AAA(413) .331  26  101  (.404/.652/1.056)

    I don't see how he "hasn't developed as many hoped he would". Maybe some expected him to be in the majors are ages 20-21, but I think he is right on track. I'm not saying he will become a great MLB 1Bman, but he certainly looks like he belongs in the top 100 or even top 50.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list : Rizzo is only 21. He's had about 3 full seaqsons in the minors. '09 A (503)  .297  12 66  (.368/.461/..828) '10 AA(602) .260  25  100 (.334/.480/.814) '11 AAA(413) .331  26  101  (.404/.652/1.056) I don't see how he "hasn't developed as many hoped he would". Maybe some expected him to be in the majors are ages 20-21, but I think he is right on track. I'm not saying he will become a great MLB 1Bman, but he certainly looks like he belongs in the top 100 or even top 50.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    I don't think it's unfair to say that many had hoped he would have already closed the huge hole in his swing.  That's really the only issue that I still see with him, but it's a key issue.  Minor league pitchers aren't able to exploit the inner third nearly as well as MLB pitchers, and it showed during his ML time last year.  I admit it's also possible he was altering his swing to adapt to Petco, which may have caused some of the problems he experienced.

    Also, his .369 BABIP in AAA goes a long way in explaining his AAA slash line, just as his .210 BABIP explains part of his .141/.281/.242 MLB line in 153 PA's.  Although his K rate also jumped up to 30.1% from 21.4% in AA and 21.5% in AAA.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    I don't think it's unfair to say that many had hoped he would have already closed the huge hole in his swing.  That's really the only issue that I still see with him, but it's a key issue.  

    I agree he has a way to go, but the guy did hit .331 in AAA last year with a 1.056 OPS. Yes, 89 Ks in 413 PAs is very high, but I still think he shows great promise and deserves to be in the top 100.


    Minor league pitchers aren't able to exploit the inner third nearly as well as MLB pitchers, and it showed during his ML time last year.  I admit it's also possible he was altering his swing to adapt to Petco, which may have caused some of the problems he experienced.

    I think you may be reading into just 64 PAs in PETCO.

    Also, his .369 BABIP in AAA goes a long way in explaining his AAA slash line, just as his .210 BABIP explains part of his .141/.281/.242 MLB line in 153 PA's.  Although his K rate also jumped up to 30.1% from 21.4% in AA and 21.5% in AAA.

    Again, the sample size is a bit small, especially considering it was his first PAs in MLB and he was only 21.

    His minor league numbers began at age 17, and yet they are pretty impressive:
    Combined minor league totals based on 650 PAs:
    .296  23  106  (.366/.514/.880)

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    One of the benefits of utilizing BABIP is that it helps remove the small sample size question mark (although certainly doesn't erase it).  By looking at BABIP, we can see what impact the small sample size had, in Rizzo's case it certainly hurt his MLB numbers, but helped his AAA numbers.  He isn't going to post a BABIP of .369 in the majors (Bill James projects a .292 BABIP).  That regression alone should shave about 42 points off of his OBP (putting the ball in play 60% of the time * the .07 drop in BABIP = .042) and about 52 points off of his average (assuming 25% K rate, which is admittedly high, resulting in 75% of PA's that would qualify for avg * .07 = .0525).

    If we go on to hyper conservatively assume that all of the lost hits would be singles, his Slg would also drop by the same .0525.  Assuming that he does as well against MLB pitching as he does against AAA pitching, which is also unlikely, his OPS would drop by a total of 147 points, down to .909.

    As I previously said, I agree with him being in the top 100, and I think that the mid 70's is about right.  He simply needs to address the hole in his swing, which he has plenty of time to do, but I thought it would have been addressed before a call up.  I don't question his talent at all, but he needs the right hitting coach to help him improve his swing.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]One of the benefits of utilizing BABIP is that it helps remove the small sample size question mark (although certainly doesn't erase it).  By looking at BABIP, we can see what impact the small sample size had, in Rizzo's case it certainly hurt his MLB numbers, but helped his AAA numbers.  He isn't going to post a BABIP of .369 in the majors (Bill James projects a .292 BABIP).  That regression alone should shave about 42 points off of his OBP (putting the ball in play 60% of the time * the .07 drop in BABIP = .042) and about 52 points off of his average (assuming 25% K rate, which is admittedly high, resulting in 75% of PA's that would qualify for avg * .07 = .0525). If we go on to hyper conservatively assume that all of the lost hits would be singles, his Slg would also drop by the same .0525.  Assuming that he does as well against MLB pitching as he does against AAA pitching, which is also unlikely, his OPS would drop by a total of 147 points, down to .909. As I previously said, I agree with him being in the top 100, and I think that the mid 70's is about right.  He simply needs to address the hole in his swing, which he has plenty of time to do, but I thought it would have been addressed before a call up.  I don't question his talent at all, but he needs the right hitting coach to help him improve his swing.
    Posted by JB-3[/QUOTE]

    Batters who make solid contact have higher BABIPs - there's nothing alarming about a .331 hitter having a .369 BABIP.  Adrian Gonzalez had a .380 BABIP - how many cheap hits did you see him get during the course of the season?

    Bill James projects some pretty meek numbers for Rizzo next year - I can only assume that's because he expects him to be playing ball in the major leagues.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list : Batters who make solid contact have higher BABIPs - there's nothing alarming about a .331 hitter having a .369 BABIP.  Adrian Gonzalez had a .380 BABIP - how many cheap hits did you see him get during the course of the season? Bill James projects some pretty meek numbers for Rizzo next year - I can only assume that's because he expects him to be playing ball in the major leagues.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    I'm assuming that Bill James used project batted ball rates for grounders, line drives, and fly balls to come up with his projected BABIP.  BABIP can be projected by breaking down those 3 batted ball types, although off hand I don't recall the formula.  Basically, liners are more likely to be hits than fly balls are, so this is taken into account.  Rizzo had a 13.4% LD rate with the Padres last year, compared to AGon's 21.2% rate.  Unfortunately, I don't have access to AAA batted ball data, so I can't properly analyze Rizzo's AAA BABIP.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    I was never high on Rizzo because of a mediocre K/W, but it's almost useless to judge him on his stats so far.  the K/W in the pros isn't that bad.  And there are only four younger players making their debut with that many PAs.

    I'd be more than happy to take him back as the Theo comp.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    I think a lot of Ks is an over-rated issue, especially for a young player. His OBP has been pretty high, and I think that compensates for the high K rate.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

    In Response to Re: 2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list:
    [QUOTE]I was never high on Rizzo because of a mediocre K/W, but it's almost useless to judge him on his stats so far.  the K/W in the pros isn't that bad.  And there are only four younger players making their debut with that many PAs. I'd be more than happy to take him back as the Theo comp.
    Posted by Joebreidey[/QUOTE]
    Are those younger players:

    Eric Hosmer DOB 10-24-89, 563 PA
    Brett Lawrie DOB 1-18-90, 171 PA
    Jose Altuve DOB 5-6-90, 234 PA
    Salvador Perez DOB 5-10-90, 158 PA?

    Anthony Rizzo DOB 8-8-89, 153 PA

    Mike Trout DOB 8-7-91 had only 135 plate appearances.

    ... and more younger players who made their MLB debuts in 2010 but exceeded 153 plate appearances in 2011:

    Jason Heyward DOB 8-9-89, 454 PA
    Freddie Freeman DOB 9-12-89, 635 PA
    Ruben Tejada DOB 10-27-89, 376 PA
    Mike Stanton DOB 11-8-89, 601 PA
    Starlin Castro DOB 3-24-90. 674 PA
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share