Brewers Top 10 Prospects -- Latest: Sickels Re-Visists His Pre-Season Top 20

[ramssuperbowl99]

TheCrew07 wrote:

Best case scenario Thornburg's ceiling is similar to Jungmann's, and I'd argue that Thornburg is actually a better athlete. It would seem that you are making this about right and wrong... the pundits agree with me so I'm right type thing... I like the gurus just fine, and I enjoy reading their opinions, especially those that come out of BA. However, some of those same guys that are now championing a Peralta for example, once said that he was nothing more than a reliever. The same argument that was made against Thornburg, so I take their opinions for what they are and nothing more.

 

I was under the impression that BA was independently scouting and impartially making their lists. The reality of a beat writers submitting lists when they've never seen at least 90% of the players on the list play suggests that they are just asking the organization and going with what they tell him, and then in turn submitting it to BA.

 

These are fan top 10 prospect lists, no one here is getting paid to do this except for Colby and he didn't offer a list, I say let people make their lists however they want. The fun is discussing the prospects, not nitpicking how lists are created. I don't see how you could leave Khris Davis completely off of your 50 player list and then bag on how someone chooses to create their top 10. People asked about it, you responded, and the issue was dropped, why not do the same here?

As for Thornburg vs. Jungmann's ceiling - what? Jungmann's fastball gives him a #2 type ceiling, especially given his frame and the fact that his mechanics offer promise for more velocity. How many pitchers right now in the top 30-40 in ERA year in and year out are 5'11"? It just doesn't happen often, and this is coming from a guy who likes Thornburg.

 

The major guy who is championing Peralta is Keith Law, and he always liked him. Not sure where else you're getting that from.

And BA makes their list by contacting scouts. They design their list to mimic the industry consensus, which is a good thing, because I know that industry scouts who do this professionally know alot more about this than either of us. As for the "right and wrong" debate - sure it's all relative. But I bet they are right alot more than people who look at performance. I could be mean and dig up some old Aumary Rivas quotes from this board to accent the point, but it would be a waste of everyone's time.

I didn't "knitpick at how his list was created". All I said was that having a blanket philosophy that you need to show dominance in the minors before being considered a top prospect is silly. And I still maintain that. In fact, I never even quoted his list specifically, then said that the actual list doesn't bother me at all compared to the absolute philosophy of how refuses to rank any non-signed prospect in the top 10.

And Khris Davis still isn't an impact MLB bat. If I re-did the list, he'd probably be around the Austin Ross area. The dude is 23 and performed well in High A - that's not overwhelming. His swing is long, he doesn't have tremendous bat speed, and he's stuck at two positions where he would need to absolutely rake to be a valuable player. I don't see it. If he rakes at AA, he'd move up my list a fair bit.

[Never Outhustled]

And Khris Davis still isn't an impact MLB bat.

That may be true, but by not putting him in your top 50, your suggesting that it's because theree are 50 impact bats or arms in the system. That of course is not true, there's hopefully 5, maybe none. Your top 50 list is loaded with guys who won't see AA. I'm not high on Davis, but he's a willing worker with a decent bat, he has earned a spot in everyone's top 15.

[gregmag]

Evidence of performance is relative. Newly drafted guys haven't "proved nothing"; they've performed in high school or college ball. Conversely, as some folks here emphasize IMHO to a fault, a guy at AAA has "proved nothing" at the MLB level. All you can do is evaluate a player's ability based on the available evidence. I don't like the idea that a player has to "earn" his prospect rating. Does a gathering snowstorm have to "earn" its designation as a blizzard? We're talking about predictions of future performance based on available information, nothing more.

[CheezWizHed]

I don't like the idea that a player has to "earn" his prospect rating.

 

I won't try to answer for Geezy, but I've said something similar myself, mainly on draft picks. My reasoning is that often a scouting report of someone in college or HS doesn't always translate well into the minors. That guy hitting 96-97 suddenly is throwing 91-92 (for control or longer season, or whatever), so suddenly his ceiling isn't so high. Arnett is only one example of many where the tools in college/HS don't translate into the minors.

 

Now, if a guys comes into rookie ball and is throwing 95+, but with a 5.00+ ERA, his performance isn't going to bother me. But he as to perform somewhere. No one with a 100/0 rating (And That's scale) is ever promoted to the MLB. That zero has to become something before anyone calls him up.

[TooLiveBrew]

Does a gathering snowstorm have to "earn" its designation as a blizzard?

 

Awesome

[CheezWizHed]

Does a gathering snowstorm have to "earn" its designation as a blizzard?

 

Actually yes. How often does a weather man call for 12" of snow and we get 1"? (Twice last winter) Or vice versa?

 

On Oct 31, 1991, northern WI got 39" of snow. Weather forecasts called for 3-4". The baseball equivalent of that is Mike Piazza. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Oxy]

My top 10:

 

1. Stosh Wawrzasek

2. Scooter Gennett

3. Maverick Lasker

4. Zelous Wheeler

5. Michael Fiers

6. Kyle Heckathorn

7. Jesus Sanchez

8. Brock Kjeldegaard

9. Tommy Toledo

10. Josh Prince

 

 

Bottom 10:

 

116. Alan Williams

117. Mike Roberts

118. Jim Henderson

119. Greg Davis

120. Jim Nelson

121. Steve Peterson

122. Mark Rogers

123. Matt Miller

124. Jason Rogers

125. Ron Johnson

 

 

Also, since I've never seen any of these guys actually play (Mark Rogers excepted) I just ranked them based on the coolest names. Ron Johnson bringing up the rear is PURELY coincidental, no need to send this thread off to the political board.

[Tedaldtada]

Now that was pretty good. Well done, Oxy. I was fooled for a moment there.

[greeg35]

How is Goforth not in your top ten!?!?!

[Tedaldtada]

How is Goforth not in your top ten!?!?!

Haha, another classic.

 

Yeah! Maxwell Walla was overlooked in my book.

[Mass Haas]

John Sickels re-visits his pre-season Brewers' top 20

[Bernman23]

1. Mat Gamel - Generates a lot of power without much of a swing ala Rickie Weeks

2. Taylor Green - Always has hit when healthy, patient at the plate, smart hitter, smooth stroke

3. Wily Peralta - good stuff, consistently under 4.00 ERA since rookie ball, reported age standard for leagues, although I question his age

4. Cody Scarpetta - powerful frame, successful from the beginning, somewhat of an adjustment period to AA but has been decent

5. Tyler Thornburg - excellent since becoming a pro, decent stuff, but the college #'s are alarming

6. Kentrail Davis - ate entrails in low A, bad for a prospect in high A, but they've kept him in a league too long where many struggle

7. Kyle Heckathorn - Good frame and fastball, has been productive since A-ball, the peripherals could be better though

8. Mark Rogers - great last year, and already proved a little at the major league level, it's just a matter of whether he can withstand another arm injury

9. Yadiel Rivera - the fact he was in A ball at 18 says a lot about how they view him, producing defensively and offensively at rookie ball, but the plate discipline is a concern

10. (tie) Khris Davis - productive since going pro and good tools, but old for leagues, and in college wasn't that great

Caleb Gindl - adjusted to every promotion pretty well, young for leagues, but limited potential it seems

[mrpackersfan1]

Amuary Rivas is really having an off year. Wish the best of luck to him to get back on track