John Sickels's top 20 Brewers prospects for 2012

[TooLiveBrew]

For example there is simply no way that all pitching coaches are equal, if that were true then Lee Tunnel wouldn't have had the impact he's had on the Brewer system.

 

Obviously there are better & worse coaches. What I'm wondering, though, is how much bigger an impact one team's 7-10 or so MiLB pitching coaches could realistically have over any other team's coaching staff. The gap in talent produced by a team like ATL or Tampa over Milwaukee has been so great, there just has to be a lot more to it.

 

 

Our MiLB teams have a 1 manager, 1 pitching coach, and 1 hitting coach, it's as barebones as it can get.

 

Right, but there's also at least one roving instructor (more?). I just wonder how big a difference - across entire farm systems - there could possibly be from team to team. I think pretty much all MiLB teams have the 1-1-1 coaching staff, at least stateside, in the minors.

 

 

I don't understand why a smart small market team hasn't taken this tact, pumping more cash into their system in the hopes of saving significant money on the back end, 2 more coaches at every level could have a significant impact, that wouldn't even cost the team $500,000 dollars to make happen.

 

I ask honestly - are there MLB rules against having more than three officially assigned coaches per stateside level? And as I asked a bit earlier, how many roving instructors do teams use? Because I agree with you that it would seem to be very cost-effective to add even just one more guy per level & call him 'bullpen coach'. So for whatever his salary is, you just doubled your available face-to-face coaching time. Seems too simple.

[dunder]

I do not know how often the other organisastions 'adjust' their new pitchers' mechanics. But I am so frightened every time the Crew drafts a guy with good/great velocity and stuff - and then says 'we are going to adjust him'.

 

I am of the school where if a guy is so extremely talented that he is drafted, the last thing you do is say 'well, it was good luck you were so good as an amateur; but we are the pros here so we need to change you.' And I think the results over 10+ years show the Crew's coaches reworking mechanics has not been successful.

 

The other point is our scouts just did not seem to care much about pitching. I mean they draft a guy who MAY turn out OK, but for every pitcher they drafted who MAY be OK, they drafted many more high end batters (and not fielders... ha ha). I would love our team to draft a LOT of high school pitchers in the mid, later rounds. And throw over slot or college promises at them. I can guess there are a lot of high school seniors that throw 87 - 88 mph and maybe they will GROW into 93-94 mph guys. If they do not grow... oh well. The organisation has paid a small gamble for a chance at a great pitcher (somewhere, they will snag one). And the guys themselves have proven, with say 2 or 3 years in the organisation, that they are not going to make it. And back to college they go. And they are happy they had their chance AND they get their college supported.

 

That is just an idea. But the way we have done (badly) there sure needs to be some changes.

[TooLiveBrew]

The other point is our scouts just did not seem to care much about pitching.

 

This is a bit of a tricky point, as there's been a pretty decent amount of turnover in the Brewers' FO staff & scouting staff in the past 5 or so seasons. Under Jack Z as scouting director, the scouting department definitely didn't do very well in terms of pitching. But I think there's a difference between not being good at something & not caring about something.

 

 

I would love our team to draft a LOT of high school pitchers in the mid, later rounds. And throw over slot or college promises at them.

 

The new CBA put a pretty large wrench in the plans of organizations who want to continue with over-slot drafting practices. Iirc the amount a team can spend on the draft was limited. So you can keep drafting over-slot guys in the middle rounds, but you might have to take signability picks with your higher draft slots in order to facilitate/fund it.

 

 

I can guess there are a lot of high school seniors that throw 87 - 88 mph and maybe they will GROW into 93-94 mph guys. If they do not grow... oh well.

 

I don't really understand what you're getting at here as being different from what teams already do in drafting. I'm also unfamiliar about whether or not MLB teams can promise college tuition to draftees out of H.S. (at least that's what I think you meant with "college promises").

 

 

That is just an idea. But the way we have done (badly) there sure needs to be some changes.

 

I agree that the approach the Brewers used up until Jack Z left for Seattle should've been changed, and from all appearances of the scouting dept. under Seid so far, it has been. I think the results of said change in approach will start to become more & more apparent over the next few years, and in some ways they already have. But you're right, the Brewers definitely still have a looong way to go in making drafting & developing pitchers a strength of the organization.

[TheCrew07]

I don't understand why a smart small market team hasn't taken this tact, pumping more cash into their system in the hopes of saving significant money on the back end, 2 more coaches at every level could have a significant impact, that wouldn't even cost the team $500,000 dollars to make happen.

 

I ask honestly - are there MLB rules against having more than three officially assigned coaches per stateside level? And as I asked a bit earlier, how many roving instructors do teams use? Because I agree with you that it would seem to be very cost-effective to add even just one more guy per level & call him 'bullpen coach'. So for whatever his salary is, you just doubled your available face-to-face coaching time. Seems too simple.

Interesting question, it had never occurred to me that there were actually rules how many coaches you could have. I know the Brewers basically have 3 roving instructors, catching, fielding, and pitching. I figured it was just baseball's way of being cheap with the minors, like the food allowances and terrible pay, as every organization is pretty much the same in that regard. If there are arbitrary MiLB coaching restrictions put in place by MLB that would explain quite a bit, it could be spun as competitive balance issue, the better off teams could afford to more coaches than the poorer teams, even though we're only talking about the value of a minimum MLB contract.

 

As far development goes, an organization to keep an eye on is Texas, they've always been progressive tracking and analyzing injuries, but they've taken a much different tact than other teams with their pitching development. No one else is doing mandatory extreme long toss and having starting pitchers throw batting practice on their off days.

[Mass Haas]

I know the Brewers basically have 3 roving instructors, catching, fielding, and pitching.

SCOUTING & PLAYER DEVELOPMENT

• 
  

  Minor League Coordinators

  
  

  Field Coordinator & Catching Instructor

  Charlie Greene

  Field Coordinator

  Bob Miscik

  Hitting Coordinator

  Darnell Coles

  Roving Pitching Coordinator

  Lee Tunnell

  Athletic Training Coordinator

  Frank Neville

  Roving Outfield & Baserunning Coordinator

  Reggie Williams

No specific infield coordinator, it seems. And the whole specifics of a "Field Coordinator's" are probably in an archived video interview with Charlie Greene here, but it's pretty obscure.

 

[TooLiveBrew]

If there are arbitrary MiLB coaching restrictions put in place by MLB that would explain quite a bit, it could be spun as competitive balance issue, the better off teams could afford to more coaches than the poorer teams, even though we're only talking about the value of a minimum MLB contract.

The 'competitive balance' angle is precisely what I was wondering about when typing that part of my earlier post.

[igor67]

Maybe they could directly hire a large number of 'hotdog vendors' for their minor league teams then?

[dunder]

I can guess there are a lot of high school seniors that throw 87 - 88 mph and maybe they will GROW into 93-94 mph guys. If they do not grow... oh well.

 

I don't really understand what you're getting at here as being different from what teams already do in drafting. I'm also unfamiliar about whether or not MLB teams can promise college tuition to draftees out of H.S. (at least that's what I think you meant with "college promises").

My point was we seem to have a bundle of older guys who throw 89 mph in our minors. I mean we draft college guys that 'touch low 90s', but in reality are the 88-89 mph guys. Being college guys they dont have much room for developing extra velocity. So I would rather have 10 18 years olds throwing 87 rather than 10 21 year olds throwing 89. Now given my comment was a bit from a 'feeling' over years, I decided to go to that linked stats page on the top of the forum here. And lo after a bit of googling, I can find we have even 17 year old guys throwing above 90 and putting up good stats in Rookie ball. So, I am just wrong for not checking fully. Or maybe we have not been signing the central / south American guys before.

 

So, just going down the list of minor league stats from 2011 (I always sort by WHIP then look for big Ks and/or good K/BB ratio) I find guys I never heard of:

 

Jorge Ortega 18 yrs 74 ip 1.095 whip 5.4 k/9 ip 3.75 K/BB (I cannot find what velocity he throws, it cant be hard with only 5 k per 9 ip)

 

Joel Dicent 18 yrs 60 ip 1.100 whip 8.1 k/9ip 2.45 K/BB (From Bernies Crew Blog: "The organization was raving about the young man last year, lauding his 91-95 MPH fastball and developing offspeed stuff")

 

Gian Rizzo 17 yrs 64 ip 1.150 whip 9.37 k/9ip 4.79 K/BB (I cannot find velocity, but he must be 'up there' with more than a K an inning)

 

Jorge Lopez 18 yrs is the 2nd rounder from this year, 91-93 mph fastball (well, I have heard of him!)

 

Milton Gomez 17 yrs ... from Baseball America Aug 2010: "The Milwaukee Brewers have signed Dominican right-handed pitcher Milton Gomez for $350,000... The 16-year-old is from Santiago, with an average fastball that has been clocked at 92 mph and has shown a feel for a curveball"

 

From a poster here ramssuperbowl99: Eliezer Montano is 6’7â€

[TooLiveBrew]

Glad to see you did some digging & found a few answers. But don't feel too badly about not knowing prior -- the Brewers have absolutely upped their presence in terms of DR or Latin American signings in the past... maybe 4 or 5 seasons?

 

I'd recommend checking out the User Driven Power 50 thread, or even the P50 currently posted on BF.net itself (not a current version, but it has better descriptions than the user-driven version). Gian Rizzo & [Joel Dicent]* both made their way onto the user-driven list, along with fellow 2011 DSL arm Osmel Perez.

 

Another good BF.net resource is the Draft/International Talent forum. A thread I always go back to quite a bit is the Official Draft Pick Selection/Signing thread -- not only useful at a quick glance, each player's name in the lead post links to a specific post about the player, including scouting reports (for many, but not all) & newspaper/online articles about them and/or their draft day experience.

 

And just in general, keep visiting the MiLB forums. I've learned far more here about Brewers prospects & prospect-watching in general than I have anywhere else. It's a great resource with excellent discussion.

EDIT: and to get back a little more to your concerns about velocity in the system, or lack thereof, definitely get excited about guys like Thornburg, Peralta (was hitting the upper 90s with his FB in '11), Bradley, Jungmann, Lopez. Santo Manzanillo is a reliever with a huge FB, & probably the best pure arm strength/velocity in the system. Apologies if these are all guys you're already familiar with, but the Brewers actually do have some guys who can really let it fly, and some aren't even all that far away from the bigs.

[Joel Dicent]* - whoops, he only made it on my user-driven P50 list, not the final cut

[jmeks23]

Well Roger Clemen's didn't touch 90 until college. So it's an inexact science when it comes to 'stuff'. And also, you see a lot of '17-19' year olds from the Dominican throwing 90+. That whole area is just shady IMO. These guys almost never pan out to anything, and as we're seeing more and more lately, they're getting exposed for fake ages, fake names, etc.

[TooLiveBrew]

I don't think it's fair to say DR guys hardly ever pan out, the success rate on DR/LA prospects has to be pretty close to what it is for US prospects. Prospects in general have very long odds to succeed, but I'd be willing to bet the Brewers were very glad to have Alcides Escobar, for one. While not all homegrown, 9 of the current Brewers on the 40-man roster are products of Latin America: Ramirez, K-Rod, Manzanillo, Peralta, De La Cruz, Rivas, Veras, Maldonado, & Gonzalez.

 

And yes there are concerns about player age, but that's been the case for years & probably will continue to be an issue in the future. It's not like MLB has a whole lot of control over whether or not people are going to try to lie & game the system. I'd imagine they've been fighting to try & stay ahead of the curve on this issue for almost two decades now.

[jmeks23]

Well Latin America and the Dominican Republic are two very different things in terms of size. I was specifically referring the Dominican.

[TooLiveBrew]

Even so, the DR specifically seems to have (overall in MLB) a pretty good success rate. Maybe that's just confirmation bias on my part, I really haven't looked into much deeper than "seems like..."

[MNBrew]

Having just read Sickels' piece, I'm encouraged that he's generally complimentary & has very positive things to say about everyone at least through #10 (Peralta, Thornburg, Jungmann, Bradley, Green, Lopez, Gennett, Scarpetta, Fiers, Schafer) if not #12 (Manzanillo, Gindl). No guarantees, of course, and he notes the lack of Grade A guys and the relative wealth of Grade C types. But still, while the cupboard's not exceedingly full, it's still a long way from being bare.

[HiAndTight]

The problem is that the Brewers scouting org hasn't seen the importance of pitching up until recently. In the last draft they finally had some understanding of the importance of pitching, but drafting for upside rather than polish and work-horseness would be even better. I do like how they drafted Lopez, as it shows that they're finally willing to draft raw players, but getting Jungmann while leaving out Barnes and Guerrieri really made little sense. I felt that the Brewers drafted Jungmann just because he's 6'6 and he's gonna be able to chew up tons of innings, rather than because he had great stuff (while both Guerrieri and Barnes had better stuff than him).

Jungman has consistently been absolutely dominant through his college career, throws in the mid 90's, and has the potential for two average to above average secondary pitches. They also drafted Bradley, a guy with considerable upside and Lopez a guy who might trump the first two.

 

But it seems as though this board has just convinced itself that Jungman's relegated to Suppan like duty as an inning eating #5.

[TheCrew07]

But it seems as though this board has just convinced itself that Jungman's relegated to Suppan like duty as an inning eating #5.

Yep because that's been posted nowhere on this forum, no one has compared Jungmann to Suppan. Perhaps you are confusing the draft day discussion about Nelson being a harder throwing Suppan from the other thread that I alluded to.

 

The pitcher I keep going back to in my mind and can't seem to get myself away from even though their deliveries are completely different is Niemann. Niemann had a better repertoire coming out of college, his slider was considered the best in the draft and his curve was considered above average to plus as well. I'm not sure why my mind keeps drawing that comparison, maybe it's the tall RHP pitcher deal, or someone who was drafted high who was ultimately a mid rotation guy.

 

At any rate I'd be thrilled if Jungmann put up similar career numbers to Niemann, and as I've said many times, I've never seen Taylor pitch in person and only saw him pitch in this year's College World Series and he just didn't have a single pitch with any wow factor for me personally. I'm certain I saw him pitch in 3 of his worst games in college, and I only watched 2 with any level of scrutiny so yes I'm keenly aware of the small sample. However, the only scout who posted anything positive about his secondary stuff was Mayo, and in watching I understand why people weren't impressed. He could certainly improve, he needs to improve, but I don't think he's nearly as polished as he's been billed.

 

I've talked quite a bit about WOW factor, but haven't elaborated on it. What I mean by that is when I watch a guy pitch and I say to myself, "wow that was a great pitch". A FB has to be pretty special to get me excited, like Jeffress and Manzanillo level hard, but usually the secondary stuff does it for me. Take Peralta for example, there were times when his slider looked absolutely filthy, I felt similarly about Scarpetta's curve, every once in a while he'd flash one that would blow me away. Here's a link to the

I shot, no one else on that staff really did anything for me. Meadows was amazingly consistent and got outs, but he didn't stand out in any way. In 2010 it was Manzanillo's arm (Wendt had foreshadowed his velocity well) and Odorizzi's relative polish, a guy like Bucci walked the world and weaseled out of jams when I was there so I didn't come away impressed with him. Heckathorn didn't blow me away, Arnett and the rest... well you were just hoping for improvement. Last year the only guy I wanted to see pitch was Thorny and circumstance didn't allow me to get down to a game and see him pitch.

 

Watching the T-Rats bat speed like Lawrie's stood out, no one else had that kind of punch. D'Vo is another, but it was his general athleticism that stood out. A guy who I really liked and still follow was Chris Dennis, nothing he did really stood out, he just seemed to have a good approach and perform well when I was there and his career really hasn't taken off. Gennett is another guy who didn't really wow you with any one thing, just performed very well for his age at the plate, 2B was a different matter entirely. Sometimes the opposing players stand out, like a Mike Trout, he's the most glaring example, you only needed to see him play once to know he was special.

 

I'm not saying that if a guy doesn't stand out he can't be a productive MLB player, however if he doesn't stand out I do think there is little chance he'll be an impact player. Maybe I'll buy a new camera and do some more videos this season, but I doubt I'll see Jungmann or Bradley, unless they struggle mightily in A+ and get demoted.

[HiAndTight]

Having just read Sickels' piece, I'm encouraged that he's generally complimentary & has very positive things to say about everyone at least through #10 (Peralta, Thornburg, Jungmann, Bradley, Green, Lopez, Gennett, Scarpetta, Fiers, Schafer) if not #12 (Manzanillo, Gindl). No guarantees, of course, and he notes the lack of Grade A guys and the relative wealth of Grade C types. But still, while the cupboard's not exceedingly full, it's still a long way from being bare.

 

That's because....without sounding too simplistic, it is a very positive system. I think, while obviously having those elite top 20 prospects would be great, for the way our team is built right now, speculation about our demise is very premature. We have 20 million in additional TV revenue coming in next year, and we have a very nice core of players locked up for the next couple years. So our prospects that are maturing are very good fits for us as they may not be, as i said, Harper types, but they're very solid #4 OF'ers, potential starters in Gindl/Schafer, and then several promising pitchers who look like they could easily be ready by 2013 when we're set to lose one of the two in Marcum or Greinke(I can't believe we'd allow Greinke to get away after what we gave up).

 

 

Honestly, we're one more good draft with 3 first round picks, including a supplemental 1st, and another step up from our prospects coming in now and we could easily be looking at a top 10 farm system.

[TooLiveBrew]

So our prospects that are maturing are very good fits for us as they may not be, as i said, Harper types, but they're very solid #4 OF'ers, potential starters in Gindl/Schafer, and then several promising pitchers who look like they could easily be ready by 2013 when we're set to lose one of the two in Marcum or Greinke(I can't believe we'd allow Greinke to get away after what we gave up).

 

As you say, with the core of star players the Brewers have already developed, these inexpensive role players are exactly the guys they need the farm system to churn out, in the short-term. The only remaining roadblock would be whether or not DM the GM will actually let them serve as MLB role players, & not keep blocking them behind vets.

[HiAndTight]

But it seems as though this board has just convinced itself that Jungman's relegated to Suppan like duty as an inning eating #5.

Yep because that's been posted nowhere on this forum, no one has compared Jungmann to Suppan. Perhaps you are confusing the draft day discussion about Nelson being a harder throwing Suppan from the other thread that I alluded to.

 

The pitcher I keep going back to in my mind and can't seem to get myself away from even though their deliveries are completely different is Niemann. Niemann had a better repertoire coming out of college, his slider was considered the best in the draft and his curve was considered above average to plus as well. I'm not sure why my mind keeps drawing that comparison, maybe it's the tall RHP pitcher deal, or someone who was drafted high who was ultimately a mid rotation guy.

 

At any rate I'd be thrilled if Jungmann put up similar career numbers to Niemann, and as I've said many times, I've never seen Taylor pitch in person and only saw him pitch in this year's College World Series and he just didn't have a single pitch with any wow factor for me personally. I'm certain I saw him pitch in 3 of his worst games in college, and I only watched 2 with any level of scrutiny so yes I'm keenly aware of the small sample. However, the only scout who posted anything positive about his secondary stuff was Mayo, and in watching I understand why people weren't impressed. He could certainly improve, he needs to improve, but I don't think he's nearly as polished as he's been billed.

 

I've talked quite a bit about WOW factor, but haven't elaborated on it. What I mean by that is when I watch a guy pitch and I say to myself, "wow that was a great pitch". A FB has to be pretty special to get me excited, like Jeffress and Manzanillo level hard, but usually the secondary stuff does it for me. Take Peralta for example, there were times when his slider looked absolutely filthy, I felt similarly about Scarpetta's curve, every once in a while he'd flash one that would blow me away. Here's a link to the

I shot, no one else on that staff really did anything for me. Meadows was amazingly consistent and got outs, but he didn't stand out in any way. In 2010 it was Manzanillo's arm (Wendt had foreshadowed his velocity well) and Odorizzi's relative polish, a guy like Bucci walked the world and weaseled out of jams when I was there so I didn't come away impressed with him. Heckathorn didn't blow me away, Arnett and the rest... well you were just hoping for improvement. Last year the only guy I wanted to see pitch was Thorny and circumstance didn't allow me to get down to a game and see him pitch.

 

Watching the T-Rats bat speed like Lawrie's stood out, no one else had that kind of punch. D'Vo is another, but it was his general athleticism that stood out. A guy who I really liked and still follow was Chris Dennis, nothing he did really stood out, he just seemed to have a good approach and perform well when I was there and his career really hasn't taken off. Gennett is another guy who didn't really wow you with any one thing, just performed very well for his age at the plate, 2B was a different matter entirely. Sometimes the opposing players stand out, like a Mike Trout, he's the most glaring example, you only needed to see him play once to know he was special.

 

I'm not saying that if a guy doesn't stand out he can't be a productive MLB player, however if he doesn't stand out I do think there is little chance he'll be an impact player. Maybe I'll buy a new camera and do some more videos this season, but I doubt I'll see Jungmann or Bradley, unless they struggle mightily in A+ and get demoted.

 

Reading comprehension is a VERY important thing on these message boards, and my post was not very difficult to sift through. I not ONCE said anyone said he was Jeff Suppan. And I'm not confusing your blasting of yet another Brewers draft pick.

 

I'm talking about the recurring theme that Jungman is a low ceiling innings eater.

 

Which is EXACTLY what I meant when I said, "relagated to Suppan LIKE duty as a #5 innings eater."

 

And I'm curious, are you a professional scout, or just another one of us who follows the farm system very closely, played and has taken in some minor league games here and there that seem to help you form opinions that cannot be questioned? I only ask because if you are in fact, a regional scout, or if you scout in any actual capacity other than a fan, the condecension in your post is easier to stomach. If not, and you're just a fan like the rest of us, I don't need to know that you're looking for elite tools in young players, ie, bat speed. It didn't take me many games watching Lawrie's awkwardness around 2nd, but good range and solid hands to see that he could be a good 3rd basemen as I've been saying for years, and obviously and elite talent offensively.

 

 

I also could not possibly disagree more about Jungman only getting rave reviews from Mayo. I don't even know where to begin on that, but many have been very high on Jungman, and many of which have him as a #2 type innings eater. Certainly different from your opinion and what SEEMS to be the opinion of a large pct of this board.

[Eye Black]

Sickels released his Milwaukee Brewers Top 20 2012 PRE-SEASON Prospects in Review with updated mid-season stats and comments.

[brettac1]

Man, is that depressing.

[igor67]

I thought it was about right, Sickels is a tough grader. At best the top 20 prospects in baseball earn A grades. C+ are still guys who can start if everything goes well. He touched on a couple of guys that could appear on the new top 20, but didn't necessarily cover everybody who could rise to replace some of the more disappointing players.

[TooLiveBrew]

Wow, I always really enjoy reading Sickels's stuff. Thanks for linking that, Eye Black.

 

Overall, I thought it was a reasonable assessment of the players he reviewed. That last paragraph is pretty good -- Magnifico's "772 MPH fastball"

 

I'm really looking forward to the pre-2013 system assessments from the various prospect trackers. I don't think the Brewers will be regarded as being in the top tier (they still really lack any real mammoth bat), but I do think they'll be safely in the second tier of org.'s, or at least comfortably in the middle of the pack. It's kind of depressing that I'm hoping for 'middle of the pack', but the situation is what it is. Baby steps.

[logan82]

Ignore the backtocali posts in the comments. He got kicked off of the BrewCrewBall forms for being an ass. He isn't really even a Brewers fan. He just likes to bag on them. The meme over there for any prospect pitcher is they lack a third pitch.

[paul253]

I think if the Brewers can get one or two of those elite prospects the system will look a lot better. They have done a really good job building up depth over the past few years but they still seem to prefer to lower ceiling, higher floor guys. It may have been a financial decision but picking Mitch Haniger over Joey Gallo is exactly what I am talking about. They look like they'll have a top 10 pick in next season's draft so hopefully they get that all star caliber position player or #1 caliber pitcher in the draft. Overall though if Jed Bradley can figure things out and Taylor Jungmann, Hiram Burgos, Jimmy Nelson, and Drew Gagnon can continue to progress, and if Victor Roache can come back healthy and hit for power I think Milwaukee's system continues to trend upward next season.