No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

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

    No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    No Red Sox players appeared on ESPN columnist Keith Law's list of Top 50 players who have lost rookie status and who were born after July 1, 1986:

    http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story?id=7291374&_slug_=mlb-justin-upton-leads-top-50-list-mlb-players-age-25&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fmlb%2fstory%3fid%3d7291374%26_slug_%3dmlb-justin-upton-leads-top-50-list-mlb-players-age-25

    ESPN Insider access required.

    What does this mean for the Red Sox in light of the relative dearth of top prospects in the higher levels of the minor leagues?

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

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    Interesting data, but we do have some young players with MLB experience at 26 and below:

    26
    Buch
    Bard
    Salty
    (Miller)

    25
    Tazawa
    Morales

    24
    Reddick
    Weiland
    Bowden

    23
    Lavarnway
    Doubront
    Navarro
    Anderson

    (Plus, Lester, Pedey, Ells and Lowrie are just 27.)

    Our minor league strength is certainly at the lower levels, but we do have a few kids close to ready.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    How many players are there in the entire Red Sox organizaion who are under 25 and without rookie status?

    I think the entire list is Reddick and Kalish...
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    I'm not sure it's that important.

    And if it is important, it might be the opposite of what you might think.

    If you bring up a good young player, maybe he pops on the list.  Maybe he's good out of the box, or maybe he struggles a little, and you burn through control years without the proper return.  The real value of a player is in his first 6 years.  Once a player reaches a market salary, he's an average player relative to his cost.  Would you prefer 3 of those cheap years be spent when he is devloping?  It seems to me, from a value perspective, you'd like to concentrate the values around the magic age of 27, so maybe 24-30.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    excellent point, joe.

    I haven't seen the list, but I would not be surprised to see Pittsburgh has a few players on that list.  What good has it done them?  This is rather a meaningless statistic, IMO.  At least in terms of who will win the WS in 2012 and 2013.  Beyond that, it is all a crap shoot anyway.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from scorieger. Show scorieger's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    I'm with Joebr.  I don't think that matters.  Too many can't misses never make it, and just as many nobody's do.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    Go to Soxprospects.com and look at the history of their rankings. You'll see that most of the top players on their list have gone on to become MLb players, with a good percent of them becoming pretty good ones. This doesn't mean the guys on the list now will become the next Pedey's and Buchs and Bards, but I happen to think our farm system is above average when looking at it from top (near ML ready) to bottom (Far away in terms of age and development, not skill level). It is likely we have some extra poicks agin this next draft as well. I am optimistic about our future.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    excellent point, joe. I haven't seen the list, but I would not be surprised to see Pittsburgh has a few players on that list.  What good has it done them?  This is rather a meaningless statistic, IMO.  At least in terms of who will win the WS in 2012 and 2013.  Beyond that, it is all a crap shoot anyway.
    Posted by parhunter1

    Boston's near-postseason counterpart -- the Atlanta Braves -- had a nice collection of six players on the list with Jason Heyward, Freddie Freeman, Craig Kimbrel, Brandon Beachy, Tommy Hanson and Mike Minor.

    The five AL East teams combined had six players on the list. Perhaps that's because the big-money teams complete their rosters with the early-bloomers lured away from the small market teams when the players become expensive.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    Interesting data, but we do have some young players with MLB experience at 26 and below: 26 Buch Bard Salty (Miller) 25 Tazawa Morales 24 Reddick Weiland Bowden 23 Lavarnway Doubront Navarro Anderson (Plus, Lester, Pedey, Ells and Lowrie are just 27.) Our minor league strength is certainly at the lower levels, but we do have a few kids close to ready.
    Posted by moonslav59

    I understand your point, but to be precise, Clay Buchholz is 27, Michael Bowden 25, Kyle Weiland 25, Ryan Lavarnway 24, Felix Doubront 24, Lars Anderson 24 and Yamaico Navarro 24 (although Navarro was only 23 when the Red Sox traded him to the Royals on July 30).
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list : I understand your point, but to be precise, Clay Buchholz is 27, Michael Bowden 25, Kyle Weiland 25, Ryan Lavarnway 24, Felix Doubront 24, Lars Anderson 24 and Yamaico Navarro 24 (although Navarro was only 23 when the Red Sox traded him to the Royals on July 30).
    Posted by hill55

    Sorry, I went by baseball reference numbers on the 2011 rosters.

    I'd like to see a list of the top 100 prospects that have yet to reach AAA or even AA ball (or less than 50 games in AA).

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

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list : Sorry, I went by baseball reference numbers on the 2011 rosters. I'd like to see a list of the top 100 prospects that have yet to reach AAA or even AA ball (or less than 50 games in AA).
    Posted by moonslav59

    I don't have an overal answer, but I know my Seattle Mariners have 19-year-old righthander Taijuan Walker who was listed No. 30 in Keith Law's midseason rankings, No. 38 in Baseball America's midseason rankings and No. 50 in MLB.com's postseason rankings although Walker has not pitched an innning above Single A.

    The Mariners also have 19-year-old switch-hitting shortstop Nick Franklin who was listed No. 40 on Law's midseason rankings and No. 23 on MLB.com's postseason rankings despite playing only 21 games above Single A.

    The Mariners had three players -- Michael Pineda, Dustin Ackley and Justin Smoak -- on Law's list of Top 50 non-prospects age 25 or under. Felix Hernandez's long tenure on Law's annual list ended because Hernandez turns 26 on April 8.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from jackyldo. Show jackyldo's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    What a useless stat..   it would be the same for any veteran ball club  where  kids are left on the farm an extra year to be sure the are major league ready..

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

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list : Boston's near-postseason counterpart -- the Atlanta Braves -- had a nice collection of six players on the list with Jason Heyward, Freddie Freeman, Craig Kimbrel, Brandon Beachy, Tommy Hanson and Mike Minor. The five AL East teams combined had six players on the list. Perhaps that's because the big-money teams complete their rosters with the early-bloomers lured away from the small market teams when the players become expensive.
    Posted by hill55


    Hill55,
    The 2009 aquisition of Victor Martinez cost the Sox 3 top pitching prospects with Masterson last year blossoming into a legit ML stater and Hadagone is close. They then moved 3 more in the aquistion of Gonazalez last offseason with Kelly being the best prospect in that deal who is still just 21. Those two deals help to explain part "the derth" in the Sox system. Masterson and Kelly were both part of a group of players that represented the bridge that Epstein often refered to after the 2008 season and entering the 2009 season. That and we also had a couple of prospects that simply fell short of expectation with Lars Anderson being the one that fell the farthest. Make no mistake they're still feeling the effects of losing one of their best impact prospect after Ryan Westmoreland, was befeeled by his unfortunate life threateneing illness. Which unfortunately has stalled what promised to be an All Star career. The casue and effect of of which is still being felt today and may well ahve contributed to the signing of Crawford....

    So essentainly due to trades, health and underperformace of  players that showed promise reaching thier ceiling at AAA along with our top international free agents not fulfilling the promise of more. The development machine that was the Red Sox under Epsteins charge, has stalled. If you look at the current 40 man roster, since Bard's promotion to the big leagues. They haven't had another top prospect make the jump, and take a spot on the 25 man roster.

    That said, whenever I see lists of the top 50 players, whether it's this one or the BBA's top 100. The reality is that when comparing teams farm systems and the age and production of the players on their 40 man rosters, one has to factor in where that team has drafted in the last 5 years and in the case of your Seattle Mariners...after now 3 or 4 years of drafting near or at the top of the first year player draft. I would hope that they, like the Royals and Rays made the most of that advantage...
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list : Hill55, The 2009 aquisition of Victor Martinez cost the Sox 3 top pitching prospects with Masterson last year blossoming into a legit ML stater and Hadagone is close. They then moved 3 more in the aquistion of Gonazalez last offseason with Kelly being the best prospect in that deal who is still just 21. Those two deals help to explain part "the derth" in the Sox system. Masterson and Kelly were both part of a group of players that represented the bridge that Epstein often refered to after the 2008 season and entering the 2009 season. That and we also had a couple of prospects that simply fell short of expectation with Lars Anderson being the one that fell the farthest. Make no mistake they're still feeling the effects of losing one of their best impact prospect after Ryan Westmoreland, was befeeled by his unfortunate life threateneing illness. Which unfortunately has stalled what promised to be an All Star career. The casue and effect of of which is still being felt today and may well ahve contributed to the signing of Crawford.... So essentainly due to trades, health and underperformace of  players that showed promise reaching thier ceiling at AAA along with our top international free agents not fulfilling the promise of more. The development machine that was the Red Sox under Epsteins charge, has stalled. If you look at the current 40 man roster, since Bard's promotion to the big leagues. They haven't had another top prospect make the jump, and take a spot on the 25 man roster. That said, whenever I see lists of the top 50 players, whether it's this one or the BBA's top 100. The reality is that when comparing teams farm systems and the age and production of the players on their 40 man rosters, one has to factor in where that team has drafted in the last 5 years and in the case of your Seattle Mariners...after now 3 or 4 years of drafting near or at the top of the first year player draft. I would hope that they, like the Royals and Rays made the most of that advantage...
    Posted by Beantowne


    None of the players to Sox gave up for Martinez and Gonzalez are eligible for this list, either.  It's too exclusive.

    Masterson is the only one without rookie status, and he is 26...
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list : None of the players to Sox gave up for Martinez and Gonzalez are eligible for this list, either.  It's too exclusive. Masterson is the only one without rookie status, and he is 26...
    Posted by notin


    Notin,

    In the end it's really irrelevent...if we were to expand the list and rate the number and the quality the Red Sox players that are currently in or just entering thier prime. I think we'd place pretty high in that group...

    That said, our lack of ready for the show impact prospects has incumbered our ability to address team needs for depth (pitching, RH Ofer etc) and also presents challenges in player aquisition to bolster the roster during the season.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    Hill55,
    The 2009 aquisition of Victor Martinez cost the Sox 3 top pitching prospects with Masterson last year blossoming into a legit ML stater


    He's actually kind of the poster boy for bringing up too soon.  He's been okay at 19-30 with about a 4.00 for CL, but now that he's come into his own, he's also going to get more expensive quickly.  It's not a huge difference, and it isn't cut and dry, but if you could've sat him down one more year, then gotten another good MLB year out of him, he's a lot more valuable.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    You know, I'm not sure there is anything even all the unusual here.  With 50 choices and 30 teams, that 1.67 players each, all things being equal.  with us in the bottom five draft each year, we shouldn't have more than one top-50.

    I'd be curious to see the distribution of the top-50 (1-10, 11-20, 21-30, int'l).

    But really, I think it is the proportion of the top 100-150 players, stratified by small market, mid-market, and big-market that is more important.  There is no chance that we'll consistently out-draft teams like KC and BA when they consistently pick 15-20 slots ahead of us.

    And from a more practical perspective, you'd have to consider the college/High school dichotemy.  Our best draft picks have been college players.  Had Bard, Ellsbury, and Buchholz been HS players, they might well qualify for the top-50.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from gr82bme. Show gr82bme's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    I'm not sure it's that important. And if it is important, it might be the opposite of what you might think. If you bring up a good young player, maybe he pops on the list.  Maybe he's good out of the box, or maybe he struggles a little, and you burn through control years without the proper return.  The real value of a player is in his first 6 years.  Once a player reaches a market salary, he's an average player relative to his cost.  Would you prefer 3 of those cheap years be spent when he is devloping?  It seems to me, from a value perspective, you'd like to concentrate the values around the magic age of 27, so maybe 24-30.
    Posted by Joebreidey


    Great stuff Joe.  I think you hit the nail squarely on the head - :).
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    Great thread guys. Lot's of interesting points and counterpoints. I'll respond to Joe's last comment...

    You know, I'm not sure there is anything even all the unusual here.  With 50 choices and 30 teams, that 1.67 players each, all things being equal.  with us in the bottom five draft each year, we shouldn't have more than one top-50.

    While this is true, there are quite a few players on the list that were not 1st round picks or high first round picks. Plus, we have had several extra picks by losing our FAs.

    Draft picks positions for first 2 rounds:

    2011:  19,,26,36,40, 81
    2010: 20, 29, 36,39,57
    2009: 28, 77
    2008: 30 (Kelly),45,77
    2007: 55 (Hagadone),62,84
    2006: 27,28(Bard) ,39,43,60(Masterson)
    2005: 23 (Ells), 26(Hansen), 42(Buch), 45(Lowrie), 47 (Bowden),57
    2004: Pedey in 2nd rd.
     
    We've had 10 picks in the top 2 rounds from 2010-2011. I think that has to boost our long term farm system. I don't think I'm being a "homer" to think that Theo's greatest skill was the draft, and that some of these kids from drafts 2009-2012 are going to be very good players. We will be getting picks for Paps and maybe Papi, as well as a B pick. 

    (Sidenote: we also traded Chiang, Federowicz, Fife, and Rodriguez for Trayvon Robinson-a very good prospect- and flipped him for Erik Bedard. We traded Navarro & Voltz for Mike Aviles. We trades 2 kids and cash for Salty, traded Richardson for Andrew Miller. While none of these guys were top 10 prospects, they did deplete our system to some extent.)

    I'd be curious to see the distribution of the top-50 (1-10, 11-20, 21-30, int'l).

    But really, I think it is the proportion of the top 100-150 players, stratified by small market, mid-market, and big-market that is more important.  There is no chance that we'll consistently out-draft teams like KC and BA when they consistently pick 15-20 slots ahead of us.

    And from a more practical perspective, you'd have to consider the college/High school dichotemy.  Our best draft picks have been college players.  Had Bard, Ellsbury, and Buchholz been HS players, they might well qualify for the top-50
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list : That said, whenever I see lists of the top 50 players, whether it's this one or the BBA's top 100. The reality is that when comparing teams farm systems and the age and production of the players on their 40 man rosters, one has to factor in where that team has drafted in the last 5 years and in the case of your Seattle Mariners...after now 3 or 4 years of drafting near or at the top of the first year player draft. I would hope that they, like the Royals and Rays made the most of that advantage...
    Posted by Beantowne

    I acknowledge that the parameters of Keith Law's list results in some inequities.

    Beantowne, as usual, makes some good points.

    One needs to factor in the quantity of high draft picks as well. Over the past five years the Red Sox have had 17 picks in the first two rounds while the Mariners have had 13. Here is where each team drafted:

    2007 -- Seattle: 11, 52, 75; Boston: 55, 62, 84
    2008 -- Seattle: 20, 60; Boston: 30, 45, 77
    2009 -- Seattle: 2, 27, 33, 51; Boston: 28, 77
    2010 -- Seattle: 43, 67; Boston: 20, 36, 39, 57
    2011 -- Seattle: 2, 62; Boston: 19, 26, 36, 40, 81

    Of the five Mariner players mentioned in my earlier post -- Michael Pineda, Dustin Ackley, Justin Smoak, Nick Franklin and Taijuan Walker -- the only player who was taken with a draft pick that was high because of the M's poor performance was Ackley, the No. 2 pick in 2009. Pineda was an international signee, Smoak was acquired via trade*, the Franklin pick was compensation for the Phillies signing of Raul Ibanez and the sandwich pick of Walker (perhaps the gem of the bunch) was compensation for the Red Sox signing of Adrian Beltre.
     
    * in all fairness, Justin Smoak was acquired in the trade of Cliff Lee, whom the Mariners had acquired for a three-player package that included Phillippe Aumont, the No. 11 pick in the 2007 draft
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list : I don't have an overal answer, but I know my Seattle Mariners have 19-year-old righthander Taijuan Walker who was listed No. 30 in Keith Law's midseason rankings, No. 38 in Baseball America's midseason rankings and No. 50 in MLB.com's postseason rankings although Walker has not pitched an innning above Single A. The Mariners also have 19-year-old switch-hitting shortstop Nick Franklin who was listed No. 40 on Law's midseason rankings and No. 23 on MLB.com's postseason rankings despite playing only 21 games above Single A. The Mariners had three players -- Michael Pineda, Dustin Ackley and Justin Smoak -- on Law's list of Top 50 non-prospects age 25 or under. Felix Hernandez's long tenure on Law's annual list ended because Hernandez turns 26 on April 8.
    Posted by hill55


    Jurickson Profar is the name I always see as the youngest top-50 prospect.  But so far, Xander Bogaerts is his equal, only 4 months older, and playing the same position in the same league, with an equally cool name.  I wouldn't be surprised to see both Bogaerts and Lavarnway on the next BA top 100 list. 


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

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    A lot has already been said about the Rays use of top 5 picks of the first round helping them become as good as they are now, but take a look at this...

    2011: 24,31,32,38,41,42,52,56,59,60,75,89 (signed all of them)
    2010: 5 picks in the top 2 rounds.

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

    Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list

    In Response to Re: No Red Sox on Top 50 under 25 list:
    A lot has already been said about the Rays use of top 5 picks of the first round helping them become as good as they are now, but take a look at this... 2011: 24,31,32,38,41,42,52,56,59,60,75,89 (signed all of them) 2010: 5 picks in the top 2 rounds.
    Posted by moonslav59


    Friedman just cleared the field with that one.  Theo kind of invented the draft comp bonanza, but Friedman perfected it.  that's 10 of the top 60.  10 in the space of 37 picks.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share