Baseball America's Prospect Hot Sheet

[DHonks]

wibadgers, there's this myth that he's had two trials in Milwaukee. The reality is that he didn't have one fair shake. This Spring he was supposed to compete for the 3b job, but who in their right mind actually believed they'd play him rather than McGehee (who had deserved first crack).

[HiAndTight]

wibadgers, there's this myth that he's had two trials in Milwaukee. The reality is that he didn't have one fair shake. This Spring he was supposed to compete for the 3b job, but who in their right mind actually believed they'd play him rather than McGehee (who had deserved first crack).

I can't believe how many people have their minds made up on Mat Gamel last year despite the fact that as a whole, he ended up putting up solid, though unspectacular numbers last year, and his numbers shoot way up when you look at the games he started at 3rd. Now both are small samplings, but at worst he had a sorta "blah" debut in Milwaukee(excluding the '08 cup-o-coffee).

 

And yet, so many are willing to let him go and are content to stick with Casey at 3rd. I'd be willing to bet that Gamel out produces McGehee over the next 4 years by a significant margin.

 

Here's to hoping the Brewers can finally buy into the whole "buy low, sell high" concept. He's the best candidate within our organization to do so.

[logan82]

Around the Baseball America

offices, we call it "prospect fatigue," and Gamel offers a textbook

case. He has not established himself in Milwaukee in two trials, and now

this year he takes part in his second full season at Triple-A. In

Gamel's case, putting up solid numbers often isn't enough to keep him in

the spotlight.

It should read "one sort of chance in Milwaukee and has just over one full year worth of PA in AAA."

[trwi7]

If they want to say he didn't establish himself in his first try, fine. I don't agree with it, but whatever. But how is he supposed to establish himself a second time when he gets 15 at bats in 25 games and how is he supposed to establish himself in spring training when he has a tear in his shoulder?

[uwisfan]

listen, I love Gamel and I really hope he gets the job at third in a year or two.. really, I do.

 

But big picture, you have 2 issues: the Brewers arent going anywhere this year and they need to gather their trading chips to go after pitching. What does this have to do with Gamel & McGehee?

 

In McGehee, the Brewers have a solid, cheap MLB third baseman under their control for several years. What do I mean by solid? After an amazing rookie campaign, he is currently 7th in OPS this year amongst third basemen. He lacks range, but has a strong arm and can make tough throws to a very limited first baseman in Prince Fielder. Brewers cant throw a "below market value" chip like that away, and bringing up Gamel would hurt McGehee's trade value. Certainly McGehee is not hurting this team, especially at his price tag.

 

On the flipside, you have Gamel, who is equally cheap and under the organization's control for a long time as well. He could be a nice trading chip or a mainstay with that bat. His value couldnt really be much lower as a trading chip, aside from earlier in the year. The org cant bring him up without hurting McGehee's value. He is still unproven at third, and has a terrible rap at that position, ultimately damaging his trade value again. His injuries and reported work ethic have hurt his value. If you trade McGehee, you are taking a big chance on him sticking at third. If he diversifies his defensive options, then the Crew could have him replace Fielder or McGehee, and they also will have more trade options.

 

I would love for Gamel to be the future 3B of the org, but the org is kind of in a pickle..

 

EDIT: Just want to point out that Gamel has a .878 OPS and .919 Fielding % this year in AAA compared to Casey's .820 OPS and .959 FP% in MLB. I dont know how Gamel's remaining contract compares to Casey's.

[logan82]

I dont know how Gamel's remaining contract compares to Casey's.

 

Gamel has one year of service time. After this year McGehee will have 2. We would have control of Gamel for one more year than McGehee. Gamel has upside. McGehee doesn't.

[homer]

McGehee is a proven big league hitter. Gamel isn't.

[logan82]

McGehee is a proven big league hitter. Gamel isn't.

So we should stick with a middling guy when we have a potential above average guy? No, thanks.

[homer]

Corey Patterson had upside.

 

My point is, the grass is not always greener.

[logan82]

Corey Patterson had upside.

 

My point is, the grass is not always greener.

Not sure why you would compare Gamel to Patterson. Gamel has never had a sub .700 OPS in the minors in any year. Gamel has shown talent to hit at every level. If you disagree fine try to make a case for McGehee. He is average with little chance to improve. Gamel has shown better MiLB numbers than McGehee and held his own last year while getting sporadic playing time. This isn't change just for change.

[homer]

McGehee is probably a top ten offensive third baseman in baseball. If it's not just change for change I don't know what it is.

[filthyfrog]

When Corey Hart signed his extension, I thought it became abundantly obvious that Mat Gamel just became Prince Fielder's future replacement. Let's face it, the Brewers will try to trade Fielder this offseason and if they fail, they'll try again before the deadline, and if they fail again, they'll lose him to free agency. Gamel's second half resurgence and Hart's extension make it pretty obvious what the plan is. I don't know who will play where defensively, but McGehee, Hart, and Gamel will be on the diamond at the same time very soon. So I don't think there's much point debating Gamel vs. McGehee.

[colbyjack]

So I don't think there's much point debating Gamel vs. McGehee.

 

I agree 100%, and I don't know why the argument comes up almost every single time either player is mentioned. I agree with homer as well, as McGehee is a proven and productive MLB hitter, even if his defense does stink. Gamel isn't, yet, and I say that because I believe in his improvement along the way and think he's going to make the necessary adjustments as long as he's given a chance.

 

As for defense, keep in mind that McGehee was considered a strong defensive third baseman when the Brewers picked him up. Saying that Gamel is going to be better than McGehee at the hot corner, if he's even given a chance, is speculation, and not a fact.

 

Finally, I'm surprised that so many people are quick to jump on McGehee. I know the numbers suggest that he's not a very good third baseman, but he was a very shrewd pickup by Melvin and a very productive offensive player.

[wibadgers23]

When Corey Hart signed his extension, I thought it became abundantly obvious that Mat Gamel just became Prince Fielder's future replacement. Let's face it, the Brewers will try to trade Fielder this offseason and if they fail, they'll try again before the deadline, and if they fail again, they'll lose him to free agency. Gamel's second half resurgence and Hart's extension make it pretty obvious what the plan is. I don't know who will play where defensively, but McGehee, Hart, and Gamel will be on the diamond at the same time very soon. So I don't think there's much point debating Gamel vs. McGehee.

Couldn't agree more filthyfrog. I have a gut feeling we'll see Gamel in RF, Hart at 1b, and Casey at third when Prince is traded this offseason.

 

[homer]

Couldn't agree more filthyfrog. I have a gut feeling we'll see Gamel in RF, Hart at 1b, and Casey at third when Prince is traded this offseason.

That makes sense to me.

[DHonks]

Colby, I don't get the numbers' poor reflection of McGehee. He has well below average range, but everything that he gets to is an out. Plus he throws to 2nd as well as any 3b we've had not named Cirillo. I wonder if his poor defensive metrics are a result of our pitching staff in some way.

[colbyjack]

DHonks, I agree with your overall assessment, as Craig Counsell is another player that comes to mind that makes consistently accurate and strong throws to 2b. I don't even try to understand defensive metrics, as it seems to me that there's a stat out there to prove just about anything wrong http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif.

[Mass Haas]

A Timber Rattler "in the team photo" this week -- feel free to discuss.

[colbyjack]

sheetskout wrote:

---

Hooray! Comments?

 

http://www.baseballameric...-sheet/2010/2610581.html

 

Some of my peers didn't think he deserved this considering his last start and some other performances this week.

 

***

 

I know sheetskout already provided a link to this, but since we have this running thread I figured I would add the pictures of this week's #1 player, currently gracing BA's homepage, here:

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/images/jodorizzi10428309bm.jpg

 

 

[paul253]

During the hot sheet chat the moderator was asked about Odorizzi and whether or not this finally cements his status as a top 100 prospect. The moderator, Conor Glassey, answered "One

outing is never going to cement a guy's status on the Top 100. He'll get

considered, but I think he's a borderline Top 100 guy." In the latest power 50, Odorizzi is listed as number 2. Is our system really so bad that our 2nd best prospect is considered a "border line" top 100 prospect? Obviously it's just one man's opinion and I personally would have a hard time not seeing him in the top 100 list. Is this the general opinion of Odorizzi, or do most people view him as a better prospect than Glassey does?

[battlekow]

During the hot sheet chat the moderator was asked about Odorizzi and whether or not this finally cements his status as a top 100 prospect. The moderator, Conor Glassey, answered "One

outing is never going to cement a guy's status on the Top 100. He'll get

considered, but I think he's a borderline Top 100 guy."

In the latest power 50, Odorizzi is listed as number 2. Is our system really so bad that our 2nd best prospect is considered a "border line" top 100 prospect? Obviously it's just one man's opinion and I personally would have a hard time not seeing him in the top 100 list. Is this the general opinion of Odorizzi, or do most people view him as a better prospect than Glassey does?

That seems like a decently accurate assessment of Odorizzi. It's hard to completely put aside the fanboy goggles, but Odorizzi feels like a #75-type guy to me. It's easy to be excited about him, and several other pitchers in the system, but I don't think any of them profile as future aces, and of course Odorizzi is just at A-ball, which also plays a role in his ranking. That may be an indictment of the star talent in the system, but it doesn't mean the system is "so bad"; rather, it may be lacking in future All-Stars but has a surprising amount of depth, particularly--and thankfully--in the pitching department.

[paul253]

I think the A ball point is a good one. If he put up similar numbers at Huntsville I'd be willing to guess that he'd be talked about a little more. Either way, I'm excited to follow him and I hope he can someday be a Yovani Gallardo #1/#2 type starter. It seems like the only pitcher in our system who could legitimately be consider a real future #1 is Jeffress, and I'm not so sure he'll ever be a starter again.

[colbyjack]

I want to ask a legitimate question: What's the difference between Jake Odorizzi and Casey Kelly, especially where Kelly was a year ago at this time? Odorizzi has been brought along more slowly, but he too was not only a two-way impact performer in high school, but also excelled in football as well. He may not have been a high profile QB recruit (Odorizzi played WR, and committed to play baseball for Louisville), but the profile as a pitcher is almost exactly the same. Both have good, not great size, athletic, fluid deliveries and pitch mostly in the 88-92 range with the ability to touch a few ticks higher than that. Based on Kelly's report from last year's BA handbook, Odorizzi's curve is probably ahead of Kelly's, at least at this time last year, while Kelly's changeup was a step ahead.

 

Kelly was ranked 21, 21 and 14 overall by Jim Callis, Will Lingo and John Manuel in their individual top 50 prospect lists. Odorizzi was drafted two slots lower than Kelly (signing for $2M less), and has been brought along a little more patiently, but really, what's the difference between the two? Is the difference great enough for Odorizzi to be considered a fringe top 100 prospect while Kelly is (or at least was) considered one of the top pitching prospects in all of baseball?

 

I'm not trying to be too big of a homer, but Odorizzi should be a legit top 100 prospect, and off the top of my head should fit somewhere in the 50-65 range. If he were a Red Sox farmhand, or some other more prominent nationally recognized team, he wouldn't be classified as "borderline" anything.

[TooLiveBrew]

Kelly was ranked 21, 21 and 14 overall by Jim Callis, Will Lingo and John Manuel in their individual top 50 prospect lists. Odorizzi was drafted two slots lower than Kelly (signing for $2M less), and has been brought along a little more patiently, but really, what's the difference between the two?

 

You nailed it perfectly -- the organizations they play for.

 

 

If he were a Red Sox farmhand, or some other more prominent nationally recognized team, he wouldn't be classified as "borderline anything.

 

And we'd probably hear about how reluctant the Red Sox would be to part with such a vaunted pitching prospect in numerous trade rumors. "The Red Sox really like [Player X], but can't justify giving up the #20 rated prospect in the entire league."

[battlekow]

I think Kelly is substantially overrated, but I don't think that necessarily means Glassey is significantly underrating Odorizzi.