Minor League Games - Tuesday, August 7, 2018

[andyb]

but I started discounting Crawford because he was taking too long to develop.

In Crawford's age 20 season he was putting up better stats in Reading than Moniak is at Clearwater. And playing SS. While being a 16th overall pick rather than a 1st overall pick where expectations and average outcomes are worse.

Later on he had a bad half season at AAA but he still was in the majors in his age 22 season. Do you really think Moniak has a good chance to be in the majors for a significant part of the 2020 season? He has a chance of course, but I would not call it a good chance.

You tend to cherry-pick small sample sizes and disregard age versus performance data when it does not fit your narrative. Part of the reason is you discount scouting reports while others use them as part of an overall evaluation as a player. It is why you think of Austin Listi as a prospect when most would not put him in the Phillies top 30 (or most likely even in the top 50).

[zambonir]

And in turns of projection he clearly is not showing much power and even speed at this point (very disappointing SB totals for a supposedly fast kid). So what does he project to if he succeeds? Maybe a .300 hitter who draws 30-40 walks a year with 10-15 HR power and modest speed. That is not a good projection and that is the "best" projection. .280 hitter with 10 HR and 10 SB who is a tweener between a true CF and a corner OF is a more likely projection.

It does seem early to know how he will actually project, but my recollection is, his biggest comp at the time they drafted him was Steve Finley, a career .271 hitter whose thirtysomething power surge probably can't be taken at face value (not saying he did anything wrong - though some have certainly wondered - just that it was a particular high-power era). So the player you describe sounds about what was promised - if he can play CF.

[julio]

But is it wrong to evaluate the quality of the draft pick to get to this point? Seems we can do both. I think it is completely relevant that the Phillies misread his hit tool.

Not wrong at all - it's completely relevant to discuss the success, or failure, of the Phillies' scouting and/or development staff. I guess I would like to see that characterized as disappointment with Klentak, or Almaraz, or Jordan - not as disappointment with Moniak, Randolph, or Haseley. Maybe it's too subtle a distinction for this medium...

I'd also encourage patience. It wasn't long ago (a couple of months) that at least some here were characterizing the last three first-round picks as "failures" or "busts." Premature, IMHO - Haseley in particular had very little professional time at that point.

[allentown]

Just finishing the year as he's been playing recently certainly puts him in the top 10 in my book, maybe as high as 7-8.

[Austinfan]

Actually, I think Listi is a prospect right now, the same way I consider Meneses a prospect.
I may list 100 guys, but I put them in tiers, aware that players can move drastically up or down in a year.

1st Tier - players with exceptional promise, usually a handful
2nd Tier - solid prospects, 5-30 or so
3rd Tier - maybes, 31-75 or so, where I park most DSL and rookie league players until proven
Suspects & Long-Shots, last 25-30, guys who are either unknown LA prospects, later round picks or older players who have stalled and seem to be going nowhere.

Suspects and Long-shots have made the Show
Joseph and Leiter the last couple years

I had A Davis around 60th the last two years, who'd have thought?
I had Pujols (2 awful years) and Bossart (old and meh A+ campaign) as long-shots

[andyb]

I had A Davis around 60th the last two years, who'd have thought?
I had Pujols (2 awful years) and Bossart (old and meh A+ campaign) as long-shots

This is why you need to consider tools more. Pujols always had tools (and age) on his side. Things that a Listi does not. Davis has consistently been in the 94-95 range with solid control from the left side. So while his ceiling as a non-closing stuff reliever limits his value somewhat, he should always have been in our top 50 even if at the back end. Bossart has never really been a prospect. Old for his level and valuable as an organization player but not really a rankable prospect even if he gets a cup of coffee in the big leagues like a Tuffy Gosewich did.

[Austinfan]

Bossart is a plus defensive catcher with top leadership skills, there's always a spot as a backup catcher if he can hit at an acceptable (i.e. above the Mendoza line) level - problem was his hit tool was suspect until this season.

Davis had a fall off in velocity and struggled with his control, he had arm problems in 2016 and only threw 32 innings, had a hot start in Clearwater in 2017 but was already 24 years old, then walked 20 in 47 IP in Reading and a 1.38 WHIP. Nope, he has never been considered a top 30 prospect by MILB. This year he quickly moved up to Lehigh where he dominated and earned a promotion.

Pujols wasn't in the top 30 this year or last year, #25 in 2016.
Grullon was in the top 30 for a while, #11 in 2014, #27 in 2015, #28 in 2016 but not the last two years.

[andyb]

Bossart is a plus defensive catcher with top leadership skills

Are you sure you are not just referencing the management-speak that you hear in the press from interviews where nothing critical is ever said. Add in the Ivy league local connection and personable individual and suddenly he becomes a great leader? If the Phillies thought he was a prospect don't you think they would have played him more? His career high is 55 games. If he beats that this year it would just be barely. And Grullon is clearly enough of a prospect where they might keep one of the catcher bats in the lineup at DH or 1B.

The Phillies themselves are telling us that Bossart and Listi are not considered prospects simply by whom they allocate playing time to. Baseball is a tough game. Bossart and Listi are nice stories that can be helpful to minor league teams. But they really have not shown they are serious prospects yet. Bossart is already 25 and Listi will be shortly. They are still fringe prospects most likely because the Phillies think they have better ones but also because their tools really do not translate to the majors.

[Austinfan]

Players determine their fate, Listi has played in four levels in two years, 53 games his college year, 102 games this year, so where do you get they would have played him more? More than what? If they didn't see him as a prospect, they wouldn't have promoted him so fast, they would have given him the Tomscha treatment - drafted in 2014, didn't get to Reading until 2017..

Bossart wasn't expected to be more than another Logan Moore type, mediocre hit tool, good shepherd of young pitchers, then he hit this year at Reading. Given that Grullon has emerged at 22 (he'll be in their top 20 in the winter rankings), Bossart won't get to start unless he stays at Reading next year, but with the young catchers coming up they won't want him blocking them - but they'll find ways to get him PA so they can judge whether he is a potential ML backup catcher down the road.

With every prospect, things are fluid, a pitcher add 3 MPH or a secondary pitch, a hitter gets stronger and learns how to generate power or improve his plate discipline. All a high pick/big bonus does is maybe buy an extra year before he's ejected, but once you've been in the minors 3-4 years, no one cares where you were drafted or how much you cost to sign.

[phillychuck]

Hey, guys, Moniak is 2/3 again on Friday through the 6th inning for CLW.

[andyb]

If Bossart were a prospect he would have started more than 55 times in a season. Plain and simple the Phillies are telling us he is not a prospect. And look at Listi. He is only starting 3 or 4 times a week of late. He has started 7 of the last 13 Reading games.

You can opine all you want that everybody is a prospect, but they have never treated Bossart as a prospect and they are treating Listi as behind Haseley, Randolph, and Hernandez and on a par with Tromp when they were on the same roster. Basically on a par with Sandberg when he was there. The 4th OF or a DH.

It is nice to keep saying everybody has a chance, but the reality is that Bossart and Listi are not considered good prospects by anybody, including the Phillies. Bossart has had 3 years to get playing time. Listi was an older player that naturally would move quickly. They have skills that will help their minor league team and a tiny chance of making the majors. But none of that makes them good prospects. Listi has a 621 road OPS at Reading. He'll probably improve some with experience, but he really is not that good for a 24 year old playing a hitting position at Reading. You just got fooled by him piling up stats against younger players.

[phillychuck]

Hey, guys, Moniak is 2/3 again on Friday through the 6th inning for CLW.

Finished 3/4.

[allentown]

I don't see Listi as a prospect, but I wouldn't write off any young catcher, who is good defensively and half-way decent with a bat. Catchers often reach the majors at a later age -- they have so much more to learn than any other position player and spend much more time playing dinged up -- plus they just can't play as many games per season. I'd not be at all surprised to see Bossart as an MLB backup catcher. I saw him play on the farm multiple seasons and never would have predicted Tuffy Gosewich to be a serious prospect, let alone an MLB starting catcher, but he was with Arizona, albeit for an extremely brief time. Still he logged 400 MLB AB, even though he couldn't quite achieve a .500 OPS. Tuffy is a great name for a catcher and there always is a job for a good defensive catcher, because there always are injured catchers.

[andyb]

There is some nuance in my post. I never have said that it is impossible for Bossart to make it as a ML backup. There are good defensive catchers like Gosewich who make it all the time, especially since catchers have more turnover than other positions (shorter careers, more injuries).

There are levels of prospect though and Bossart is a fringe prospect. Compare the way they treated him versus Gosewich for instance.

Bossart has played 37, 48, 55, and now 45 games in 75% of a season. In Gosewich's first 4 years he played 10 (injury?), 95, 92, then 102 games. They even bumped him down from Clearwater to Lakewood in successive years to make sure he had steady playing time. Maybe the system has more depth now, but if they considered Bossart any sort of prospect they would find a way to get him in more than one third of the games. He is closer to someone like Jose Antequera as a prospect than a real prospect (an organizational player who plays good defense and is likely good in the clubhouse) than anything else.

Most likely the Phillies think Bossart is only OK on defense being stronger on the intangible side rather than the skills side. And I am pretty sure they don't think his offense translates. He is 25 at Reading and we have seen that story before. He'd be DHing some if they liked his offense more.

It has almost always been true that the Phillies pattern of use of a prospect really shows how they feel about him. If they think someone is a potential major leaguer they will find him playing time.

[phillychuck]

Andy is completely right--if you want to know how an organization feels about a prospect, track usage and lineup position. Of course, an organization changes its belief about prospects as evidence of performance emerges, or as coaches work closely with them and spot flaws or improve approach. When Listi, for example, was playing with Reading early this season he was playing every day and batting 2nd, 3rd, and 4th in the order. I believe, watching his recent usage, that the organization is less bullish on him than they were earlier this season (for whatever reason). They also seem to have soured on Tomscha after he struggled in his brief AAA performance.

That's something pretty interesting about Pujols. Pujols has been pretty much playing every day and batting in the middle of the order, mostly cleanup. The Phils may be higher on him than we are.

[Austinfan]

I think Listi is playing less for a simple reason, it's crowded with Hall, Hernandez, Randolph, Haseley and Pujols. They want to look at everyone, then some will go to winter ball and/or Arizona, and in the spring they'll decide who repeats Reading and who jumps to Lehigh.

[phillychuck]

But when Listi is playing he's batting 6th, 7th, or even 8th lately. I think they've lost some confidence in him.

[andyb]

It was proper to get Listi to AA quickly because he was hitting in Clearwater and below that. That promotion would be done even if the scouts thought he wasn't a great prospect because the performance justified it. But we have all seen overage players perform well in lower leagues. IMO those players should be rewarded for their performance and put at levels where we can see if the player can still do well.

But once they get to a level the priority is that the better prospects should play. Sandberg retiring created a chance for Listi. They also had lots of opportunities to move Randolph down to Clearwater when he was struggling. After the promotion though (and after a hot first couple of weeks) it was probably apparent to them that their assessment of Listi not being a great prospect was correct. They promoted Pujols because he has actual major league tools (defense, arm, power) even if he is still developing his strike zone discipline and other aspects of his game.

Listi would definitely get more chances in a less deep organization. That wouldn't make him a great prospect though. His scouting report of having decent power, limited defensive value, and a below average hit tool (i.e. batspeed) is what it is. While it is true that some players like Listi do make it, it is only a small percentage. At some point you need to rate and rank prospects.

Even Hall is not a great prospect as we are seeing. He clearly has legit power and has made some improvements that have raised his assessment. But he has never been super young for a level and had trouble with LHP. He is kind of Dylan Cozens who is a bit older relative to level and has less power and defensive value. Hall is a prospect. Just not one with a great chance of a good major league career.

[Squire]

Does anyone recall whether when Klentak took over we substantially overhauled who our minor league instructors were? Especially on the hitting side.

[phillychuck]

I don't recall...but the minor league coaching staff turns over quite frequently in normal years. I'd expect we have a lot of new guys, and they are teaching the "optimal launch angle" stuff throughout the system.