Post-season Prospect Lists

Austinfan 2017-09-30 20:30:20 UTC #41

It's why they need to make modifications to the Reading ballpark, the guys who struggle in Allentown for the most part seem to be the ones with distorted H/A numbers (Pullin may just be a matter of adjustment). You don't want any park to be extreme, it just creates bad habits for both pitchers and hitters. The exception might be Lakewood, since it enourages hitters to focus on contact and pitchers get the courage to throw inside in their introduction to A ball.

andyb 2017-10-03 15:06:49 UTC #42

More representation than I thought on the NY-Penn list. Jhailyn Ortiz (assume he is pretty high on the list), Kyle Young, and the best right-handed pitcher in the draft Spencer Howard. Personally I might have picked Hunter Greene before Howard, but at least am happy that his stuff got noticed even through an inconsistent debut.

Missed Haseley on the hashtag list at the end. So 4 is really good.

nycphils 2017-10-03 15:30:13 UTC #43

Jhailyn is #3:

At first glance, Ortiz would appear to be a young base clogger with big power and little else. In reality, the massive Ortiz is surprisingly nimble for his size.

And while he does have some of the best power in the league (he led the league with a .258 isolated power), he also showed a discerning eye. Right now, while he can be beaten by a pitcher who nibbles and throws a good breaking ball, he's also proven he can turn on most any fastball, and he also can punish a hanging curve.

Haseley is #6, but the endorsement isn't awesome:

In the New York-Penn League, Haseley looked more like a player with a lot of average tools rather than one with many plusses. There's some conviction that he'll stick in center field, but he doesn't have the speed and jumps to be much more than average defensively. Scouts saw an average hitter with modest bat speed, but there is some thought that a rested and refreshed Haseley will show better bat speed, a better arm in the outfield and a little more speed. Scouts and managers are impressed with his makeup and feel for the game, but he'll have to show more power in 2018 and beyond.

Kyle Young is #13:

Just how good Young will end up being depends on how much of his still lofty projection he reaches. He generally pitched at 85-90 mph, but he showed he could ramp up to 91-92 mph when needed and his body is still filling out, so there could be more to come. His fastball plays up because he gets excellent extension–hitters rarely squared him up even when he was sitting 88-90. His curveball and changeup are both below-average now but project as future average pitches.

Spencer Howard is #20:

Howard's 90-94 mph fastball is hard to square as he has some natural deception thanks to a cross-fire delivery and his ability to manipulate the pitch, cutting it or running it as needed. His changeup could end up being a plus pitch while his curveball should end up being at least average. He mixes in a fringier slider as a change of pace and sometimes it ends up dissolving into a true cutter.
Howard does a good job of staying on-time in his delivery and uses his lower half well, giving him a chance to move quickly as a relatively polished back-end starter.

bigegypt0417 2017-10-03 15:42:17 UTC #44

The report on Howard was pretty good.

Sadly...he's going to be stuck with that description even if he does get to the majors.\

nycphils 2017-10-03 15:44:34 UTC #45

If he makes the majorss it could be correct!

Austinfan 2017-10-03 16:27:34 UTC #46

Give me Nola and four "relatively polished back-end starters" and I'll win 100 games a year.

Some guys with "back end stuff":
Grienke (91.0) - 5.1 WAR
Gio Gonzalez (90.5) - 3.3 WAR
Leake (91.0) - 3.1 WAR
Davies (90.2) - 2.8 WAR
Estrada (90.0) - 2.6 WAR
Chacin (91.4) - 2.3 WAR
Richard (90.7) - 2.3 WAR
Straily (90.0) - 2.0 WAR

If Howard can throw 92.0+ with command and at least one plus and two average secondary pitches, he'll be more than a back end starter.
If he only throws 91-92, he can still be a valuable contributor, like the above list.
In reality, few teams have 4th and 5th starters (and usually have to use 6th and 7th starters who are below replacement) with positive WAR.
So depth of "back end starters" that keeps you from throwing replacement level pitchers out there has real value.

andyb 2017-10-03 16:51:18 UTC #47

Of course back end starters have value. What is difficult is finding guys that throw 90-92 that are good enough to be back end starters. You seem to have this need to keep posting that there can be good starters who throw 90. Of course there are. Always have been. Always will be. The difference is that if a starter is more 93-95 (like Pivetta) a much greater percentage of them succeed.

Howard is a decent prospect. I am glad his stuff impressed BA (of course they don't know anything!). He would not have been my choice at that position because I thought there were higher ceiling options. That does not mean I am not rooting for him and Seabold (and Lively and Eshelman). Pivetta is the young starter outside Nola who might have the best chance to take a major step forward and a big part of that is his raw stuff including velocity.

Austinfan 2017-10-03 18:53:53 UTC #48

Problem is a lot of guys with raw stuff are like Cordero and Tirado, or blew out their arms like Watson and never regain velocity/command.
Once you get past the 1st round, odds are you're not going to land a top pitching prospect (yes, there are exceptions like DeGrom, but outliers aren't a trend).
So do you go for upside with very long odds (or he'd have been drafted higher) or higher odds of getting a solid, but not exceptional starter.

Howard and Seabold have ML FBs, both should average around 92 or so once they mature and smooth out their deliveries.
You win the prospect lottery if one gets an unexpected boost to 93+.
They also have better command of their FBs than most college pitchers.
Like with all pitchers, including Pivetta, it comes down to the secondary pitches.
Because ML hitters can hit FBs up to the upper 90s these days, just ask Garcia, who wasn't successful until he added a split finger/changeup.

andyb 2017-10-03 20:29:43 UTC #49

You just generalize far too much. Howard was a high second round pick. At that point there were definitely arms with more upside. Romero and Irvin the year before were more the point in the draft where you start making safer picks though even they have some upside as lefthanders.

I care about whether the pitchers are good and have quality major league pitches. I worry that guys like Eshelman and Seabold will have success right up until the majors - and then become home run delivery vehicles because they have pedestrian stuff and are always in the strike zone. Guys with pedestrian stuff who throw lots of strikes often get hit hard in the big leagues. Signing Howard for below slot is a sign that the Phillies agree he was more of a safe pick at that slot. And that is fine. Just wish they did not have to use that cash going overslot on Haseley which just seemed unnecessary.

Austinfan 2017-10-03 21:45:19 UTC #50

Outside of HS pitchers, and at that point in the draft we're talking long shots (HS pitchers after the first round do not have good track records), we're looking at
Griffin Canning, didn't pitch, 90-95 MPH
Corbin Martin, rookie - high rookie at 21, 91-95 MPH
Morgan Cooper, didn't pitch, 91-96 MPH

right after Howard:
Howard, 93-94 mph consistently, ranked #20 for Phillies
Caden Lemons, 6'6 HS pitcher, 90-93 mph, projectable but only pitched 3 innings, ranked #20 for Brewers
Ryan Vilade, HS, 3B, good rookie ball campaign but 5? years away - ranked #7 for Colorado
Galvin Sheets, college, 1B, ranked #15 for White Sox
Cal MItchell, HS, OF, ranked #13 for Pittsburgh
Joe Dunand, college, 3B, barely played, ranked #14 for Miami

You could make a case for Vilade, but we drafted Stobbe in the 3rd round the previous year.
Otherwise, it's hard to say anyone was a better choice than Howard.

Now if you want to be concerned with Eshelman's velocity, sure, but he still was drafted in the 2nd round, so let's wait and see.
Seabold was throwing 90-93 at the college WS, so he has sustainable velocity, needs a lot of work on his secondary pitches, but his FB has great movement
[I watched the game]

allentown 2017-10-04 03:16:01 UTC #51

This is where you are just totally inconsistent. You are the guy who is ALWAYS saying that FB velocity matters little, that almost all MLB hitters can hit a FB and that if you can throw a 92 MPH FB, that added velocity has minimal impact. You consistently say that secondary pitches and command matter far more than FB velocity. Now you have several posts strung together where you are evaluating pitchers ONLY based upon their FB velocity. And Greinke has back end of rotation stuff? Really? And you base that upon what? It appears strictly upon FB velocity, as if that's the only thing that matters. You are arguing against yourself, so you've won and you've lost.

Austinfan 2017-10-04 05:09:48 UTC #52

The scouting analysis always seems to be focused on FB velocity, my point was a number of pitchers are effective, if not dominant, with less than high velocity.
So if we have guys throwing 90-92, no reason to denigrate them, they still have the potential to be solid innings eaters.

Yes, most of the pitchers in the top 20 or so average 92+, many 93-95. Self-selection, the few that combine velocity, command and secondary pitches rise to the top.
But that's the top 20 or so, i.e., less than one pitcher per team.
You still need to find someone to pitch the other 130 games.
A solid rotation is going to need a couple pitchers who can consistently igve you good starts, even if they don't "wow" the radar gun.

There's a big range between top of the rotation guys, of which there just aren't many, and we have one in Nola if he holds up, and "back of the rotation" guys.
And some of that range is filled with solid but not great SPs, guys who put up 1-3 WAR and keep you in games and don't destroy your bullpen.
33 pitchers put up 3+ WAR, 34 from 2-3 WAR (FG), and 29 from 1-2 WAR. The rest are "back of the rotation" or worse.
Last year a back of the rotation guy was putting up close to a 5.00 ERA.
Which makes guys like Eickhoff and Lively more like #3/#4 guys. What I'd call "middle of the rotation" guys.

What we need is for Pivetta to step up, so we'd have Nola, Pivetta, Eickhoff, Lively, and one other pitcher comes on and pitches better than replacement.
Or we sign a FA for the #3 slot, moving Eickhoff and Lively down.

andyb 2017-10-04 12:33:53 UTC #53

What AF misses is that virtually every minor league pitcher throws 90. So there are hundreds of pitchers in the 90-92 range. Our organization is full of them. Some do have better secondary pitchers and command and rise to the top. They are often lower round draft picks or unheralded international signings. Nobody is suggesting the organization should stop looking for these "value" types of prospect.

But when you have high picks you look for pitchers that have higher ceilings. Because a pitcher that throws 95 has a much better chance of success than one that throws 90-92. That is why Pivetta having shown relatively good stamina as a starter and raw secondary pitches deserves every chance to succeed as a starter. Velasquez also.

We have lots of back of the rotation guys. We have few that profile as a number 3 or better. Nola is the only one pitching like it and he is closer to a number 3 than a number 1. It is reasonable to want a high second round pick to have a relatively high ceiling.

allentown 2017-10-04 14:02:25 UTC #54

My point was more that you can't evaluate a pitcher without knowing whether or not he has a great curve or change, excellent command, great deception, a lot of movement on his FB. Just the one number (FB velocity) is like judging hitters just on BA or RBIs as used to be fairly frequent. Every media person 'scouting report' I've seen on a pitcher covers all of this, in addition to FB velocity. More and more, I think % of mistake pitches is a stat I want to see.

I admit to a fascination with tall pitchers and pitchers who can throw close to 100 mph, but I also want to see the Phillies drafting guys rated with among the very best curves, changes, sliders, and command in the draft. Really, as I watch the pitchers and hitters from Reading and Allentown who are now with the Phillies, the Ks come far more frequently on the off-speed stuff than on humped up FBs. When Ryan Howard was in his prime, it was not the flame throwers but the guys with the great off-speed pitches and good control of them who could neutralize Ryan.

I don't care how much of a FB he has, I also want the Phillies to have a pitcher with a good knuckleball.

bigegypt0417 2017-10-04 14:33:53 UTC #55

This seems to be fairly consistent in all of his debates. When he cant make the case from one side he switches to the other side and argues his own points.

This string of velocity posts has been interesting being he has constantly fought the idea that increased velocity is important...

Austinfan 2017-10-04 14:44:53 UTC #56

I've never fought the idea that velocity is important.
But once you get out of the first round, a pitcher with velocity almost certainly has serious flaws, or he'd be in the top group of prospects.
We've seen with Cordero and Tirado that great velocity doesn't make you a great prospect.

So you can't just say a guy with great velocity is a better prospect, it's like saying a guy with great power who can't make contact has a lot of upside.
As Allentown points out, command, secondary pitches, deception, good mechanics, all factor in.

Nor should every pitcher be judged by the low probability (even for top prospects) of them becoming a #1 or #2 starter,
My real gripe is the term "back of the rotation" starter, used to dismiss prospects with average velocity out of hand.
A "back of the rotation" starter by definition is a marginal pitcher, at or just above replacement value.
If that's really the judgement of a prospect, why develop or protect him?

More realistically, a lot of our pitching prospects have "middle of the rotation" potential, that is, the 32 start, 180 IP, 4.00-4.50 ERA, 1-3 WAR pitcher that are the core of most good rotations. The majority won't get there, but we just need 2-3 of these guys to fill out the rotation.

allentown 2017-10-04 15:05:44 UTC #57

I'm not a scout, never played baseball above sandlot, and haven't made any study of the f/x data, so I'm not sure what is most important, but these are things I believe:

-- there is a large pool of pitchers in the minor leagues with the ability to be back of the rotation starters and middle relievers, who just need a bit more refinement of their pitches and command of them, for whom normal development is sufficient and the biggest factor in their becoming major leaguers is just staying healthy

-- the most important predictors of success for a pitcher or position player are the abilities/skills which can't be easily improved through teaching, conditioning, and just gaining muscle with maturity -- of course these have to be calibrated for how important they are. "You can't teach speed", but for many players speed is nice, but not crucial. I suspect that the 'hit' skill is strongly related to abnormally acute vision and abnormally fast processing of visual information and muscle reaction to a decision. I think part of that is what scouts call 'fast twitch' and bat speed, but goes farther. If that can't be learned than it is a very important variable in projecting prospects.

-- We've seen, especially with our LA players, that many can gain velocity as a pitcher and power as a hitter as they physically mature. To me, that says that power at this point in time is not necessarily a great predictor at a low level in the minors.

-- our minor league staff know which pitchers seem able to learn how to, throw a plus curve, changeup, slider, and gain command through the ability to consistently repeat their delivery. This isn't something we can know, apart from observing change in results year-to-year and even then what do you ascribe to increased FB velocity or increased stamina as opposed to learning to master a particular pitch or delivery. One would think that a lot of differences in young pitchers is down to how much practice and good instruction they've had prior to signing, but some of this seems to be innate ability and not teachable

-- A lot of position players have also fallen by the wayside for no reason other than health or suspension. Gillies, Dugan, Quinn are likely guys on the 25-man roster this past season if only they could stay on the field. Valentin isn't the same guy post suspension. LA players have fallen off the map after disciplinary suspensions.

zambonir 2017-10-04 18:24:18 UTC #58

Is that really true? It's not like he was a hot prospect when the Phillies got him (despite his draft position), but he's been perfectly respectable in the two seasons after his suspension, even if one of them was lost development time. He came into spring training in the same conversation as Kingery and as a potential major league bench guy, then had a great spring training. He just didn't do well for the very short period of time he was sent back to AAA before the injury, and Kingery rocketed past him.

Kelly Dugan, time sure flies. He's still playing.

allentown 2017-10-04 19:55:49 UTC #59

Really? The guy put up a .574 OPS in admittedly only about 100 ABs this year, but he definitely doesn't look like a guy I want to give a 40-man spot to. Last year he was one of the few guys considered even somewhat of a prospect to put up a lower OPS in Reading than he had in A ball. I admit he wasn't a super prospect when we got him, he wasn't even a very good prospect, but today he strikes me as just a fringe prospect. He got the double whammy: most of 2015 lost to the domestic violence suspension, then most of 2017 lost to injury. We've got Hernandez, Kingery, Galvis, and Brito coming along in A ball. To me, Valentin has turned into nothing more than an after thought.

andyb 2017-10-04 20:13:16 UTC #60

Valentin was over 700 OPS in AA and AAA the year before, so I do think 2017 was more of a small sample size aberration. It is possible that they can slip him through waivers after the injury though and if we think Canelo is equivalent in value they might try to do that. His value really depends on what they think of his defense and maybe even his SS defense. Kingery is ahead of him at 2B, but if they think Valentin is credible defensively at SS they may be comfortable having him compete with Florimon for a backup utility role. Now they may not need such a player until both Hernandez and Galvis are dealt, but they probably will need such a player and having a 700 OPS guy at AAA (which I think is closer to what Valentin is) is not the worst thing.