Prospect Lists - Phillies and Overall - 2022-2026

andyb · Jan 26

Every team has "hidden gems" as you see them though. Of the 250+ players in the system (every MLB system) only 50-75 are large bonus signings. I imagine every single team has a few players in their top 30 that signed for $100K or less and probably 8-10 players like that in their top 50. It is the nature of the business.

There just is not evidence that the Phillies are particularly good at this part of the business. Fangraphs just rated 30 players in our system as FV 35+ or better. Most teams average around 40 such players. You are just not putting any sort on analytical view on whether the system is good or average or bad. We have a system that is very very very very top heavy. We have players at the back end of our top 10 that would have trouble making the top 20 in some systems. Depth at the moment is our weakest point though you seem blinded by some marginal prospects like Kemp and Anthony.

Frankly the evidence is that we probably do an inferior job of finding these hidden gems than most organizations. And our overall system ranking (which might be in the teens overall) is really riding on the one time fact of Painter maintaining eligibility for 2 extra years because he got hurt.

Austinfan · Jan 26

Outside of 2016-2018, they're still not finding players in the top ten rounds, even bench quality guys.

It's bad enough to blow 1st and 2nd rd picks (at least they got better there after Moniak et al), but you need to find those above replacement guys to build depth for both the roster and trade fodder.

2012: Milner (7th)
2013: Crawford (1st), Knapp (2nd),
2014: Nola (1st), Hoskins (5th)
2015: [Randolph], Kingery (2nd), Falter (5th)
2016: [Moniak], Romero (4th), Irwin (5th), Hall (14th)
2017: [Haseley], Howard (2nd), Maton (7th), Brogdon (10th)
2018: Bohm (1st), Vierling (5th), O'Hoppe (23rd)
2019: Stott (1st)
2020: [Abel]
2021: Painter (1st)

allentown · Jan 26

This makes zero sense and contradicts the data you present. 2016-18 gave them Bohm and Stott, but 2013 yielded Crawford, 2014 Nola and Hoskins, and 2021 gave us our current top prospect. And we got Stott in 2019.

One huge change in recent years: the Phillies have drastically reduced the assets devoted to signing amateur pitching. We were far more balanced in the past. In last year's draft, we didn't take a pitcher until the 8th round. In 2023 we didn't draft a pitcher until.round 6. We also didn't give much bonus $ to LA pitching in those years. Lots of luck with that approach and destructive insanity for an organization that has gotten far more bang for the buck signing and developing pitching.

fish · Jan 27

Which is a move that has some logic…if you’re good at developing hitters… and strange if pitching development is somewhat a strength.

Pat_Burrell · Jan 27

Law out this morning with his top 100 prospects on The Athletic which of course is subscriber based so I won’t post full list. Notables: Painter 12, Miller 13, Crawford 41, Caba 72

Austinfan · Jan 27

I think they've given up the dream of drafting big arms with poor command and fixing their mechanics, can't think of one that panned out. Which means you take pitchers early (high upside) or later (conversion to bullpen or really raw).
2024: 9th, 11th to 20th rds were pitchers.
Outside of O'Hoppe, how many hitters make it after the 8th round or so?

So it's similar to LA, add a lot of low probability pitchers later in the draft, sign a lot of low cost projects.

allentown · Jan 27

And whom did we score with? First rounders Nola and Painter! We did get Kerkering later in draft and Suarez in LA. I think your method works with relievers and 4th/5th starters.

fish · Jan 27

Panned out, and created value from them are different. They created trade capital out of Ben Brown and George Klassen (and I think Graves is the next in line for that) They developed Kierkering. Whatever Painter becomes he’s a huge trade asset if nothing else. Abel “had” big trade value, but that’s the game you play with these guys when trying to figure out who to keep and who to sell high on.

Granted, they aren’t getting much from the strategy to draft a lot of high octane raw reliever nobodies after the 10th round, but that type of guy could take like 5+ years to figure it out.

Austinfan · Jan 27

I'm thinking of McGarry, Baker, et al.
Klassen is probably the only one they got value out of. And by trading before he may crash and burn.

Graves and Brown weren't big arm/bad command, but young arms with upside.

I'm starting to think that command, like being able to see spin for hitters, is an innate quality that can't be taught.
Either you have the body control to consistently repeat your pitching motion or no amount of tweaking your mechanics will fix the problem.

andyb · Jan 27

Analytics dictate that pitching is just more risky than hitting. So teams draft hitters more often because of WAR/draft position or bonus. It is reasonable behavior. It just leaves open the question of how to get pitching. For the Phillies that questioned is largely answered by the desire to sign free agents or trade for them - not to spend draft or international resources on them.

This is not some grand Phillies plan knowing how to develop more pitching with low cost arms than anyone else. It is rather an acknowledgement that we get more WAR by developing hitters as long as we have the money to buy pitching later.

BTW that Law list has 22 pitchers and 78 position players on it. The whole industry is making these choices, not just the Phillies.

allentown · Jan 27

I like Bohm, still have hope for Rojas in CF, and think Aiden Miller will be a solid IF addition for us (although, to be completely honest, I thought more highly of Kingery). To me, that seems an inadequate yield from our emphasis on position players. We are a team whose lineup is not homegrown, suggesting that the make-your-own hitters and buy pitching is not a sustainable proposition. That is the elephant in the room when we talk about it being logical for the Phillies to de-emphasize the acquisition of solid pitching prospects. We simply haven't signed/developed a hitter who has achieved the value of Nola. With Wheeler and Nola aging, it would be good to replace them internally, as our MLB budget is strained. Painter, hopefully, replaces one of them in a few years. The home-grown Kerkering seems set to be a high-leverage reliever for us. That's another win on the pitching development side. The hitting side consumed a lot more $ and gave us Bohm and Stott, with Aiden Miller perhaps the position equivalent of Painter, although I must argue lower ceiling for Aiden. I don't think position players are lower risk FOR THE PHILLIES.

andyb · Jan 27

I think you are missing the larger picture though. The Phillies have definitely had their dumb first round position player picks like Haseley. But really other than Painter we have not hit on a high dollar pitcher since Nola. That includes arms like Gowdy in the draft and Starlyn Castillo internationally. I think our success rate (WAR pre free-agency) with high dollar picks and signings has been better on the hitting side than on the pitching side even considering Painter.

This is what the whole industry is seeing. One of our reactions has been big arms that can't throw strikes like Klassen because we know that velocity is the most important raw tool. That is just how we get big arms in less premium signings - by going for the ones without command or good secondaries.

Everyone is de-emphasizing pitching prospects. It is rational. It just is not guarantee to develop actual pitching. Trades like Chace and signing expensive free agents may be the best way to go if we can afford it.

Austinfan · Jan 27

Pitchers are more variable, which is why you go high or low, but not in between.
And the big arms without command rarely pan out, you're better off with the low cost skinny guys who fill out and add velocity.

Hitters are more predictable, which also suggests that they're not worth drafting outside of 5th rd value or so, because at that point you're looking at lower ceilings, and you can always pick up AAA+ guys on waivers or cheap trades, so growing your own should be a low priority. Whereas solid BP pieces have more value.

andyb · Jan 27

If the Phillies are so smart about their new strategy, why do they continually go for big arm without command? Once again, signing low cost arms at the back of your draft and Latin American classes is not a strategy. It is just what everyone does.

Clearly the Phillies look for big arms and often the ones they can afford are the ones with command or secondary pitch issues. That is just a fact.

Austinfan · Jan 27

They didn't do that last draft.

Matt_Winkelman · Jan 27

There are a lot of moving parts with pitching acquisition and development. A lot of it comes down to development and traits. The Phillies go big on stuff and poor command for relievers, especially small schools and places with poor development (Miami is one of them and one of the reasons why Alex McFarlane was breaking out before his arm blew out). The Phillies also mostly do not emphasize fastball traits over everything, both in the majors and minors they make up for fastball shape with multiple fastballs. They also fill in the gaps in arsenals, most of their starters and many of the relievers will throw two different breaking ball shapes with different utilities. The Phillies are also one of the teams (the Rays being the one of the others, and you can pinpoint the connection) that likes weird outliers. There are funky arm angles and pitch shapes throughout the org whether it is someone like Sanchez or Kerkering, or some of the reliever types they have brought in, they don't min/max they get funky.

To top it all off with pitching, so much of it is pro scouting and development. It is finding Jeff Hoffman, Andrew Bellatti, Jose Ruiz, Matt Strahm, etc and identifying untapped potential and bringing it out of guys.

Pitching is injury risk, but a lot of why it is valued the way it is, is because you have a tier of guys who get paid because they are "safe" and then much of the rest is betting on a collection of things that you can make better.

andyb · Jan 27

I definitely am happy that they have moved beyond the upper/mid round safe college arms. The Cal State-Fullerton pipeline of guys that throw 88-90 with command. We just don't get much bang for the buck on those $400K-$600K bonuses. I prefer the big swings at Alex McFarlane and George Klassen types. Even Kerkering is closer to that category for the mid-top 10 rounds.

When you can use pro scouting to identify guys like Hoffman or Cristopher Sanchez, the draft and international dollars are better spent on position players and flawed pitchers with stuff. It is completely rational and backed up analytics and success rates.

andyb · Jan 27

They actually still did (going for stuff over command). They just waited till the 8th and 9th round to start doing it. And then they drafted all relievers in the second 10 rounds. They decided to invest less overall in pitching this year, but the general strategy was similar. As Matt noted they started emphasizing some programs that do not develop pitchers well as maybe another way to find hidden value.

Austinfan · Jan 27

Raw stuff without command doesn't even work out the pen most of the time.
What does seem to work better are high spin rates.
That is a 4 seamer that rises at 93-95 is harder to hit than a "straight" 4 seamer at 95-97.

The 88-90 guys without upside are useless b/c except for a few outliers, no SPs are successful these days averaging under 92. But once you hit that minimum, command and secondary pitches are far more valuable than an additional 1-2 MPH.

Guys who average 95+ with 3 secondary pitches and command are rare as hen's teeth. Which is why the Phillies pay Wheeler big money and why Painter is a top 5 prospect.

Out of the pen, velocity has more value, but as Neris showed, 95-97 when his split didn't work was HR city.
You have to have a plus secondary pitch to set up your FB.

allentown · Jan 27

You may think that, but it's not true. Nola has 24 WAR pre-FA service accrual, although the Phillies bought out some of his arb time with an extension agreement. Kerkering has 1.6 WAR. On the position player side, Bohm has 3.8 WAR and, I think, 2 more years before FA. Stott.has 2.5 WAR and, ,I think one more year before FA, Hoskins has 11.2 WAR. I think that's it for draftees in this cycle, so more WAR to the pitchers and more bonus $ to the hitters. If I go back to 2013 and add the traded J.P. Crawford, that adds 18.5 WAR through his FA time. That would make it 32.2 WAR for hitters and 25.6 for pitchers. Still more $ efficient for the pitchers, I think. Please show your math.

share a link to this topic