2 Red Sox prospects on Law's Top 100 list

  1. 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]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]

    If Iglesias and Lavarnway still have prospect status next year, then they probably didn't have great years.  

    You have to think the scouts have a little bit of egg on their face when it comes to Lavarnway - he didn't start hitting overnight, he's been hitting his entire career, and at levels commensurate with his age.  To dominate AAA like he did at age 23 is extremely impressive.  Even if the defense is suspect, look at how they drool over guys like Will Myers and Jesus Montero.  A year ago, you wouldn't have found Lavarnway on anybody's top 500, let alone top 100.


     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from LadyLake. Show LadyLake's posts

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

    Law's top 100 prospect list is subjective. That means that RS fans can dismiss and trolls have no right to gloat about it. The list is simply an opinion or a guess. Other columnists have their opinions. Everyone has an opinion and an az-hole.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

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

    Law's list is pretty well respected. No list is perfect.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

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

    Wastefield is still waiting for his 1 million, which is about as accurate a chance as this meaningless list from hustling opinion of drivel.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from LadyLake. Show LadyLake's posts

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

    100 prospects, 30 teams. Aver. per team = 3.3. Is 2.0 really that terrible? Why the need for this thread?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

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

    For comparison, Scouting book has:
    Middlebrooks (46)
    Barnes (48)
    Bogaerts (60)
    Iglesias (95)

    MLB.com has
    Middlebrooks (56)
    Brentz (64)
    Bogaerts (76)
    Lavarnway (93)

    Scout.com has
    Bogaerts (42)
    Ranaudo (63)
    Swihart (67)
    Middlebrooks (68)

     
  7. 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]100 prospects, 30 teams. Aver. per team = 3.3. Is 2.0 really that terrible? Why the need for this thread?
    Posted by LadyLake[/QUOTE]
    In starting the thread, I wrote nothing to suggest the Red Sox showing was "terrible."

    In fact, the opening post showed that the Sox had four of the Top 111 prospects on Keith Law's list (or above the average of 3.7 per team).
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

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

    Joe Montana was low on the top 100 NFL prospects lists.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin'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 : Well that would also assume spot #2 is the same as spot #98.  I agree that different guys have different takes but you don't see any lists where the Red Sox are popping multiple guys in the top 50-60. It is okay, we know they gave away talent, Rizzo and Kelly, to get Agone, so that somewhat depleted the system.
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    Of course, no one expects the #2 prospect and the #98 prospect to be equals.

    That would be like expecting 2003 #98 Ian Kinsler to keep up wth 2001 #2 Corey Patterson...
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

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

    Plus, Theo has drafted 6 of the top 110. The odds show he should have about 3.67.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    How many of them were overslot? 

    Swihart  $2.5m  No. 26 pick

    Middlebrooks signed for over slot bonus of $925000.

    McAdam "In the recent past, the Red Sox routinely went over the recommended slot amount for players such as Anthony Rizzo, Will Middlebrooks, Ryan Lavarnway and Ryan Kalish.

    In the future, it will be virtually impossible for the Sox to draft those same players in the same (later) rounds. Going forward, the Sox can take them in higher rounds -- or, more likely, not take them at all.

    2) A signing bonus cap on international free agents.

    As is the case in the draft, the Red Sox have been big players for international free agents who aren't subject to the draft (think: Jose Iglesias, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Che-Hsuan Lin, Junichi Tazawa, Hanley Ramirez).

    Now, the same restrictions that govern the amateur draft will also govern international free agents. A total cap system will be in place and going over that prescribed numbers will result in similar taxes on the overage as well as more stringent limits on future bonuses.
      
    http://www.necn.com/11/22/11/New-CBA-affects-Red-Sox-in-mixed-ways/landing_mobile.html?blockID=599162&feedID=3352





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

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

    I'm not sure the new CBA is going to work out as MLB is hoping - unless you can stop players from hiring agents, nobody is going to be satisfied with how much money is in a team's "pool", and that means less successful teams will have to over-spend to sign the best talent.  Which means they will lose draft picks.  Which means they will be less likely to succeed.

     
  12. 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]Plus, Theo has drafted 6 of the top 110 . The odds show he should have about 3.67. Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE] How many of them were overslot?  Swihart   $2.5m  No. 26 pick Middlebrooks signed for over slot bonus of $925000. McAdam "In the recent past, the Red Sox routinely went over the recommended slot amount for players such as Anthony Rizzo , Will Middlebrooks, Ryan Lavarnway and Ryan Kalish. In the future, it will be virtually impossible for the Sox to draft those same players in the same (later) rounds. Going forward, the Sox can take them in higher rounds -- or, more likely, not take them at all. 2) A signing bonus cap on international free agents. As is the case in the draft, the Red Sox have been big players for international free agents who aren't subject to the draft (think: Jose Iglesias , Daisuke Matsuzaka, Che-Hsuan Lin, Junichi Tazawa , Hanley Ramirez). Now, the same restrictions that govern the amateur draft will also govern international free agents. A total cap system will be in place and going over that prescribed numbers will result in similar taxes on the overage as well as more stringent limits on future bonuses.    http://www.necn.com/11/22/11/New-CBA-affects-Red-Sox-in-mixed-ways/landing_mobile.html?blockID=599162&feedID=3352
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    tom, nice post. I know the Sox were able to get some nice players lower in the draft, because they could overpay them, but that was the case with Dan D and others before as well.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

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

    Jonathan Mayo of MLB.com named Ryan Lavarnway and Will Middlebrooks to the All-AL East prospect team ... Lavarnway as a firstbaseman:

    http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120206&content_id=26587426&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Skadude22. Show Skadude22's posts

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

    3 of the top 37 picks this year, and a lot of younger prospects already in the system.  I think more and more of the Red Sox prospects will find their way onto these lists in the next few years.  They just have to focus more on drafting well because now they don't have as much of a money advantage. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

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

     I know the Sox were able to get some nice players lower in the draft, because they could overpay them, but that was the case with Dan D and others before as well.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    That is possible.  I don't know the facts, but I suspect Dan D. did not have overslot money to spend. 

    Here is a list of the successful picks:

    Dan D.

    Nomar Garciaparra (1994, 1st rd, No. 12): Five-time All-Star

    Carl Pavano (1994, 13th rd): One-time All-Star

    Justin Duchscherer (1996, 8th rd): Two-time All-Star

    Shea Hillenbrand (1996, 10th rd): Two-time All-Star

    David Eckstein (1997, 19th rd): Two-time All-Star

    Freddy Sanchez (2000, 11th rd): Three-time All-Sta

    Kevin Youkilis (2001, 8th rd): Three-time All-Star 


    Theo drafts:

    Jonathan Papelbon (2003, 4th rd): Four-time All-Star (all with Red Sox)

    Dustin Pedroia
     (2004, 2nd rd): Three-time All-Star (all with Red Sox)

    Jacoby Ellsbury (2005, 1st rd): One-time All-Star (with Red Sox)

    Clay Buchholz (2005, sandwich pick): One-time All-Star (with Red Sox)


    Theo's early draft success was not due to overslot, but his legacy will depend on his later overslot picks developing.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

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

    Luchino handled the drafts, and unfortunately ceded to much authority to InEpstein.
     
  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] I know the Sox were able to get some nice players lower in the draft, because they could overpay them, but that was the case with Dan D and others before as well. Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE] That is possible.  I don't know the facts, but I suspect Dan D. did not have overslot money to spend.  Here is a list of the successful picks: Dan D. Nomar Garciaparra   (1994, 1st rd, No. 12): Five-time All-Star Carl Pavano   (1994, 13th rd): One-time All-Star Justin Duchscherer   (1996, 8th rd): Two-time All-Star Shea Hillenbrand   (1996, 10th rd): Two-time All-Star David Eckstein   (1997, 19th rd): Two-time All-Star Freddy Sanchez   (2000, 11th rd): Three-time All-Sta Kevin Youkilis   (2001, 8th rd): Three-time All-Star   Theo drafts: Jonathan Papelbon   (2003, 4th rd): Four-time All-Star (all with Red Sox) Dustin Pedroia   (2004, 2nd rd): Three-time All-Star (all with Red Sox) Jacoby Ellsbury   (2005, 1st rd): One-time All-Star (with Red Sox) Clay Buchholz   (2005, sandwich pick): One-time All-Star (with Red Sox) Theo's early draft success was not due to overslot, but his legacy will depend on his later overslot picks developing.
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    You missed my point. Dan D had the same "overslot" situation as Theo, but rarely made good on it. This was not meant to be a slam on Dan. He made some nice moves to set Theo up. The HanRam signing, Fossum, Anibel Sanchez, and others allowed Theo to make the trades that brought us a ring.

    Good point on Theo's early vs later overslot picks. The Sox lost many of their first picks due to FA signings. Theo was mostly cold to luke warm choices on his first and second picks (David Murphy, Matt Murton, Craig Hansen, Jed Lowrie, Michael Bowden, Jonathan Egan, Jason Place, Kris Johnson, Caleb Clay, N. Hagadone, Ryan Dent, H Morris, C Kelly, B Price, D Gibson, R Fuentes, & A Wilson, but did have some nice ones: Pedey (04), Ellsbury (05), Buch (05), Bard (06), Masterson (06). Also, several of these players, while not allstars, have been good role players.



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

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

    3 of the top 37 picks this year, and a lot of younger prospects already in the system.  I think more and more of the Red Sox prospects will find their way onto these lists in the next few years.  They just have to focus more on drafting well because now they don't have as much of a money advantage.

    Exactly! 

    Plus, 4 of the top 57 in 2010 and 4 of the top 40 last year.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

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

    I think one thing that hurts the Sox on these lists is their preference to draft college players.  It's a moneyball philosophy that there is more data against more normalized competition, to draw conclusions, but college players always enter professional baseball a few years older, and that lessens their 'potential'.  You take a guy like Bryce Brentz - he hits 30 HRs in his first season of professional ball, and he is largely ignored when it comes to the prospects lists because he is older than his competition.  But when he was Bryce Harper's age, he was slugging .930 at Middle Tennessee State.  If he had entered the draft out of high-school, he probably would be top 50 right now.  

    The other thing about these lists is scouts don't like to be wrong - so once you have an 18 or 19 year old in the top 20, it takes a long time for him to drop off the list, even with poor performances.  
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from LadyLake. Show LadyLake's posts

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

    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.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

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

    You missed my point. Dan D had the same "overslot" situation as Theo, but rarely made good on it.

    Mr Moon I got your point, although I admit I have not looked up all the facts I am just not sure I agree.    I doubt the owners were willng to pay over-slot pre-Henry. I'd be interested to see examples, but I know they are hard to find.

    Of course, the NYY and Sox have not drafted early in a long time.  So they both took advantage of resources to lure two-sport athletes and high schoolers with the leverage to make it known they wanted the big bonus.  I see the logic behind it but it detracts from the notion that Theo did better than the average GM in the draft IMO. MLB have tried to adjust the system to stop it, which says it all.

    Ryan Westmoreland. Drafted in the 5th round of the 2008 amateur draft as an over-slot pick out of Portsmouth High School in Rhode Island, the athletic Westmoreland is looking like an amazing steal.
     
  22. 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]You missed my point. Dan D had the same "overslot" situation as Theo, but rarely made good on it. Mr Moon I got your point, I am just not sure I agree.  Although I admit I have not looked up all the facts.  I doubt the owners were willng to pay over-slot pre-Henry. I'd be interested to see examples, but I know it is hard to find. Of course, the NYY and Sox have not drafted early in a long time.  So they both took advantage of resources to lure two-sport athletes and high schoolers with the leverage to make it known they wanted the big bonus.  I see the logic behind it but it detracts from the notion that Theo did better than the average GM in the draft IMO. MLB have tried to adjust the system to stop it, which says it all. Ryan Westmoreland . Drafted in the 5th round of the 2008 amateur draft as an over-slot pick out of Portsmouth High School in Rhode Island, the athletic Westmoreland is looking like an amazing steal.
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    I think this is a bit of a mis-conception.  The small market teams have been more likely to overpay prospects, because even a healthy signing bonus pales in comparison to the cost of a decent free agent.  The Pirates have spent by far the most money in bonuses in recent years, and the slot above Swihart in the 2011 draft went to Joe Ross and the Padres for $250,000 more than the Sox paid Swihart.  

    You don't hear anybody suggesting that the Padres' deep pockets are corrupting the system - they took a gamble that they could sign the guy they wanted and it paid off.  Ross or Swihart could have decided to go to college and leave the money on the table - that's what Beede did.  I'm sure the Jays offered Beede a ton of money to join the organization - not all of these gambles pay off. 


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

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

    I see the logic behind it but it detracts from the notion that Theo did better than the average GM in the draft IMO.

    I see your point, and I guess I'm factoring in the moves (and non-moves) that allowed Theo to stockpile compensatory picks as part of the whole GM draft rating method.

    It's a bit too early to judge but we will find out just how well it works out years from now when we judge all these recent picks:
    2011
    19 Barnes
    26 Swihart HS
    36 Owens  HS
    40 Bradley Jr.
    81 Jerez  HS
    111Weems  HS

    2010
    20 Vitek
    36 Brentz
    39 Ranaudo
    57 Workman
    110 Coyle  HS
    4th rd Cecchini  HS

    2009
    28 Fuentes HS (traded)
    77 A Wilson
    107 Renfroe HS
    4th rd Hazelbaker
    10th rd B Jacobs HS

    Not so recent picks...

    2008
    30 Kelly  HS (traded)
    108 Weiland (traded)
    5th rd Westmoreland
    6th rd Lavarnway

    2007
    55 Hagadone (traded)
    5th rd Middlebrooks HS
     
  24. 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 have discussed the Heathcliff Slocumb trade on this forum in the past, but the 1997 trade lacks the newsworthiness of a thread-starter such as Keith Law's recently released prospect list.

    I suggest that you look up the spelling of the name of each player you mention.

    PS: LadyLake, you probably don't want to bring up the Mariners in this thread.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk'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 think this is a bit of a mis-conception.  The small market teams have been more likely to overpay prospects, because even a healthy signing bonus pales in comparison to the cost of a decent free agent.  The Pirates have spent by far the most money in bonuses in recent years, and the slot above Swihart in the 2011 draft went to Joe Ross and the Padres for $250,000 more than the Sox paid Swihart.   You don't hear anybody suggesting that the Padres' deep pockets are corrupting the system - they took a gamble that they could sign the guy they wanted and it paid off.  Ross or Swihart could have decided to go to college and leave the money on the table - that's what Beede did.  I'm sure the Jays offered Beede a ton of money to join the organization - not all of these gambles pay off. 
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    Hi Slo

    Excuse me for going off-topic a bit.  The Padres may or may not have corrupted the system, but the folks in Atlanta may feel the Pirates did.


    http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/10571/mlbs-new-cba-is-no-help-to-small-market-clubs

    In this article, Keri says;

    The few teams that have traditionally avoided spending over slot in the draft will get an added benefit, with rivals becoming more reluctant to outspend them. The Braves, for instance, have long stuck to MLB's slot recommendations. They haven't suffered any major consequences in loss of talent, because more often than not, they simply outscout the rest of baseball. It's no coincidence that Braves president and former GM John Schuerholz was one of the driving forces in hammering out the new draft arrangement.

    Yes it is true that the Pirates went nuts the last two years, and they will be forced to calm the draft and IFA spending.  If I go back to the topic of the credit a GM deserves, I would argue the Braves had a better GM plus staff.  The Pirates GM, like Theo just threw money at the process.  The Pirates are an interesting case:

    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11327/1191941-63-0.stm

         "The Pirates devoted a lot of money to the draft in recent years: $52 million in draft bonuses in the past five, the most among major league teams, according to Baseball America. "

    Pirates president Frank Coonelly said.

    "I think it does take a serious step forward in terms of trying to bring the original purpose back into the draft, and that is putting teams into a position where they can make their selections on terms of talent as opposed to signability,"

    Which coincides with my belief that the big market over-slotting forced his hand. Plus the previous regime in Pitts did this:

         "Nine years ago, the then-cheapskate Pirates passed on top prospect B.J. Upton in favor of thriftier choice Bryan Bullington, proudly proclaiming Bullington's future as a potential no. 3 starter in the big leagues — as if getting a mid-rotation starter with the no. 1 overall pick was a good thing."






     
     

Share