How many Top 100 Prospects will be acquired by the Brewers this deadline?

[billymac]

Brewers have 5 in the updated top 100 in MLB Pipeline

 

http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2016?list=prospects

 

13 - Arcia

37 - Corey Ray

45 - Hader

76 - Clark

78 - Phillips

 

How many more do you predict will be added by August 2nd?

 

I am guessing 3, 2 from Lucroy Trade, 1 from a Reliever.

[And That]

Given Stearns' early proclivity to acquire younger pre-emergent talent, I wouldn't be surprised to see only one or two top 100 guys.

 

Also difficult to believe it is still 4+ days until the deadline. Seems like it's been almost the trade deadline for a few weeks now.

[adambr2]

I was hoping to see Isan Diaz Crack the top 100. Maybe in the winter.

[fondybrewfan]

No one is going to graduate from the list this year. I will say between now and Spring Training they will pick up 3 and one more Brewer will sneak on the list (Couple possibilities maybe an Erceg or Woodruff). So the Brewers will have 9 guys on the Top 100 next April assuming none of these guys fall off.

[Point Beer Is Best]

I'm guessing just one or two, but that will be because he's able to land guys like McKenzie who aren't on list.

 

I will take a stab that of the prospects acquired at the deadline, 4 or 5 will be Top 100 guys at some point. Maybe more if they really do their due diligence and get a bit lucky with the young guys.

[splitterpfj]

I'll say one, and it won't surprise me if it's zero.

 

There will be deals, and they will produce good talent, but a lot of it will be very young.

[Austin Tatious]

I agree with the notion of 2. It might be interesting to know how many someday end up on the list. That figure could be higher.

 

Diaz's bat has some juice to it and he's soaring. I don't know if they will give him top 100 but I agree he's on his way.

 

Another issue is who stays on. Lopez gone in the blink of an eye. I'd guess Phillips is coming off. Ray is ranked rather high on blind pedigree. Whether he stays up at 37 is questionable. I think that's based on the success of college bats from the year before in Benintendi, Swanson, Bregman and Ian Happ. Wouldn't it be great if Ray was on par with those guys? I saw him at Louisville. He's going to have to learn the strike zone and plate discipline. He's a nice kid and can run. We can always dream.

[Noche]

I agree with the notion of 2. It might be interesting to know how many someday end up on the list. That figure could be higher.

 

Diaz's bat has some juice to it and he's soaring. I don't know if they will give him top 100 but I agree he's on his way.

 

Another issue is who stays on. Lopez gone in the blink of an eye. I'd guess Phillips is coming off. Ray is ranked rather high on blind pedigree. Whether he stays up at 37 is questionable. I think that's based on the success of college bats from the year before in Benintendi, Swanson, Bregman and Ian Happ. Wouldn't it be great if Ray was on par with those guys? I saw him at Louisville. He's going to have to learn the strike zone and plate discipline. He's a nice kid and can a bit. We can always dream.

 

Can you please explain what "blind pedigree" is exactly?

[JosephC]

I'd guess two. Both from the Lucroy trade. If Braun is dealt that would add another one and maybe a second to the total, but Braun probably won't be moved.

[Jose Cardenal1]

Not to hijack or change the subject but a better question maybe how many new players will be added to the recently updated top 30 list.

 

As for the top 100 I will say Vegas would put the line at 1.5. 1 is a given and two is likely but not assured. I will go with 2.

 

As for the Brewers top 30, I will say that by August 2nd we will have 5 new players on the list.

[Austin Tatious]

I agree with the notion of 2. It might be interesting to know how many someday end up on the list. That figure could be higher.

 

Diaz's bat has some juice to it and he's soaring. I don't know if they will give him top 100 but I agree he's on his way.

 

Another issue is who stays on. Lopez gone in the blink of an eye. I'd guess Phillips is coming off. Ray is ranked rather high on blind pedigree. Whether he stays up at 37 is questionable. I think that's based on the success of college bats from the year before in Benintendi, Swanson, Bregman and Ian Happ. Wouldn't it be great if Ray were on par with those guys? I saw him at Louisville. He's going to have to learn the strike zone and plate discipline. He's a nice kid and can a bit. We can always dream.

 

Can you please explain what "blind pedigree" is exactly?

 

He was drafted fifth overall so he's being given the benefit of the doubt and tracking similar progression of other advanced bats taken high in the draft the year before. You see how the four guys I mentioned cranked their first year and a half, and based on where Ray was drafted, and as an advanced college bat, the media is expecting similar progression.

 

When you take an advanced college bat, it's a totally different expectation than, say, a high school arm. Everyone realizes there's more risk in the high school arm. Arm problems, lack of maturity, makeup, lack of command etc, could all be problems. It's one thing to miss on a "swing for the fences" high school arm. But, taking an advanced bat high brings an expectation from that pedigree. Missing on an advanced college bat fifth overall would be catastrophic because of the missed opportunity to get a good pitcher, yet you're ironically saddled with the downside you were worried about when you didn't take the pitcher.

 

I saw Ray in college. Bad strike zone discipline. He will chase pitches. Doesn't get a good beat on the ball chasing in center field. Arm is nothing special. Let's all hope he turns that plate discipline around and has the ability to cover center. Montgomery is a professional. He should know what to expect from a safe pick in Ray.

[And That]

I just don't know if I see more than one top 100 guy (as currently ranked) coming back in the Lucroy trade. Maybe?

 

Just going with the teams Crasnick listed yesterday:

With the Indians that means 2 of these guys: Frazier, Zimmer, Aiken, Bradley, Sheffield

With the Rangers that means 2 of these guys: Gallo, Brinson, Ortiz, Mendez

With the Astros that means 2 of these guys: Bregman, Reed, Martes, Tucker, Paulino, Musgrove

With the Mets that means both of: Rosario, Smith

With the Red Sox that means 2 of these guys: Moncada, Benintendi, Devers, Kopech

 

The Astros seem like the likeliest of the bunch to give up 2, but to me may be the unlikeliest to be interested in Lucroy.

[JohnBriggs12]

You guys pay way too much attention to those lists. Only value I see in them is who's rising year to year. May I remind you Lucroy was never on one and neither were many everyday players and most guys on those lists never have any impact in the major leagues? Khris Davis has 85 home runs in his first 1381 major league at bats (1 HR every 16.2 ABs) and never appeared on a top 100 list either.

 

Is a guy at 80 any better than a guy who would be at 120? Probably not.

[And That]

You guys pay way too much attention to those lists.

That's fair, but irrelevant in this case. The question was specifically about top 100 prospects.

[Austin Tatious]

You guys pay way too much attention to those lists. Only value I see in them is who's rising year to year. May I remind you Lucroy was never on one and neither were many everyday players and most guys on those lists never have any impact in the major leagues? Khris Davis has 85 home runs in his first 1381 major league at bats (1 HR every 16.2 ABs) and never appeared on a top 100 list either.

 

Is a guy at 80 any better than a guy who would be at 120? Probably not.

 

I'd agree with this. It reminds me of the top 150 list in college recruiting. Is the number 76 player really better than the number 131 player? Can you really figure out upside?

 

So much is unknown about prospects by fans and media. What is a kid's coachability, makeup, aptitude, drive, competitiveness, and ability to develop. We can't see these things. The lists also seem skewed against guys in low levels like rookie ball. There may be less of a reasonable expectation of success because of too many unknowns and variables.

 

But the lists have some use in the sense that they identify vague ideas of industry ideas on which prospects are interesting. The media talks to GMs and scouts. It's not so much if Hader is 37 or 61, but more the idea that industry folks have tagged him as a guy to keep an eye on.

[MilwaukeesBest]

You guys pay way too much attention to those lists. Only value I see in them is who's rising year to year. May I remind you Lucroy was never on one and neither were many everyday players and most guys on those lists never have any impact in the major leagues? Khris Davis has 85 home runs in his first 1381 major league at bats (1 HR every 16.2 ABs) and never appeared on a top 100 list either.

 

Is a guy at 80 any better than a guy who would be at 120? Probably not.

 

Really one of your only posts that I've agreed with, but in this aspect I couldn't agree more. I think we all become victim to our own ways of "scouting" players and a lot of that comes back to MLBPipeline's assessment of players. While that may truly not be incorrect, it's only one perspective of what a player can become.

 

It's the same argument when fan bases get upset over their 37th ranked prospect moving down 3 spots. Is there really a difference between 34 and 37?

 

While there's definitely value in having a mass amount of guys in the top 100, it really all depends on if those players can have it translate to the major league field. So many excellent players have never appeared on the list. To really speed up the rebuild, that's exactly what smaller market teams consistently need to do. Teams like St. Louis and San Fransisco aren't necessarily praised via prospect lists but consistently churn out quality major league players each year that few have heard of.

[jjfanec]

Yes top 100 lists can be overrated. There isnt usually a huge difference between prospect 75 and 150. However since almost everyone here knows very little about other team's prospect and has done almost nothing to scout these players top 100 lists give at least some context for who is being talked about. It is similar to college recruiting or the NFL draft even. Fans are not scouts but instead of just assuming the team always got the player they wanted or should have lists give fodder for debate and some insight into players we dont regularly see

[Boomer5]

If it's less than two I'd be shocked. We have some of the best trade chips avaiable in a sellers market.

[reillymcshane]

I'll guess one.

 

I think Stearns will trade for value, and he'll find greater value at the lower levels - guys like Isan Diaz, for example.

 

Top 100 guys are often more advanced (not always, but often), and thus clubs are often (again, not always, but often), reluctant to part with players they see helping them in the near future.

 

Thus, I think Stearns and company will end up shopping more in the lower levels - because that's where they will get the most value. I'm hedging my bets by saying one because with the number of players we could potentially deal, there are still good odds one ends up in the Top 100.

 

Again, all guesses.

[brewerfan82]

Does anyone have a list of top 100 prospects (at the time) that were traded last year? Technically Phillips was the only one we got for Gomez/Fiers right? Santana was fringe and had graduated off the list already and Hader wasn't there yet, correct?

 

I have a feeling it's pretty rare to actually get multiple guys in the top 100 (most teams max out at only having 5 available to give to start with), but I'd be interested in seeing how often it happens and for who it's happened.

[Madhawk23]

Does anyone have a list of top 100 prospects (at the time) that were traded last year? Technically Phillips was the only one we got for Gomez/Fiers right? Santana was fringe and had graduated off the list already and Hader wasn't there yet, correct?

 

I have a feeling it's pretty rare to actually get multiple guys in the top 100 (most teams max out at only having 5 available to give to start with), but I'd be interested in seeing how often it happens and for who it's happened.

 

 

If I recall, Phillips was ranked in the 40-50 range at the time of the trade last year, and Santana was still in the rankings (hadn't quite graduated yet) in the 80 range - but he obviously graduated from the rankings during the 2nd half of last year. So, we did get two Top 100 guys at the time of that trade last year for Gomez/Fiers. Hader was the high upside guy that hadn't quite reached that level yet.

[billymac]

Does anyone have a list of top 100 prospects (at the time) that were traded last year? Technically Phillips was the only one we got for Gomez/Fiers right? Santana was fringe and had graduated off the list already and Hader wasn't there yet, correct?

 

I have a feeling it's pretty rare to actually get multiple guys in the top 100 (most teams max out at only having 5 available to give to start with), but I'd be interested in seeing how often it happens and for who it's happened.

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/majors/ranking-prospects-traded-deadline/#P7BLsMiPbKpbXZSS.97

[And That]

Going off of MLB.com's final 2015 top 100:

 

10)Dansby Swanson (in December)

11)Trea Turner (in June, though he was infamously a PTBNL earlier)

19)Sean Newcomb (in November)

24)Jose Peraza (in December)

25)Manuel Margot (in November)

32)Brett Phillips (in July)

43)Mark Appel (in December)

49)Jeff Hoffman (in July)

51)Jake Thompson (in July)

54)Frankie Montas (in December)

55)Nick Williams (in July)

59)Jorge Alfaro (in July)

61)Aaron Blair (in December)

69)Touki Toussaint (in June)

74)Rob Kaminsky (in July)

76)Javier Guerra (in November)

79)Daniel Robertson (in January)

94)Keury Mella (in July)

98)Michael Fulmer (in July)

 

So by my count, that's eight top 100 guys traded around the deadline last year.

[brewerfan82]

Does anyone have a list of top 100 prospects (at the time) that were traded last year? Technically Phillips was the only one we got for Gomez/Fiers right? Santana was fringe and had graduated off the list already and Hader wasn't there yet, correct?

 

I have a feeling it's pretty rare to actually get multiple guys in the top 100 (most teams max out at only having 5 available to give to start with), but I'd be interested in seeing how often it happens and for who it's happened.

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/majors/ranking-prospects-traded-deadline/#P7BLsMiPbKpbXZSS.97

 

Perfect! Great find. So the Phillies got 3 back for 3.5 years of Hamels and no one else was traded for more than 1 top 100 prospect. So getting a couple for arguably this year's most valuable trade chip should be within reach.

 

The other top prospects to move were for guys like Cueto, Price, and Tulowitzky, so I'm not sure that netting one for any of our relievers is in the cards, but we'll see!

[pacopete4]

I'm going to say 4. Just to be different.