BF.net Fan Community Top 25 Prospects - 2017 Pre-Season Edition

[82brewcrew82]

Nelson Cruz was mixed into that group, I believe he had sub .750 OPS in A ball too. Mookie Betts, Jonathan Lucroy are couple of other names that had sub .800 OPS numbers at some point and they turned out to be all stars. My guess is if you really looked, you'd find a whole bunch more.

[Manty Brewer Fan]

For me,as the season has continued I have been more dissapointed than anything else.. That is mainly because I look for the top tier prospects to produce or get better throughout the year. Especially when in A+ ball or lower. Diaz, Diplan, Erceg, Clark fall into that category.

 

I have been impressed with some lower ranked prospects that will get a big bump in their ratings in the future. Those are: Feliciano, Gatewood, Harrison, Supak, and Burnes.

 

All in all I have said this team is loaded with depth, but lacks that elite player (s), and this year is showing that to be true again. Outside the AAA team, there are not alot of guys hitting .300 or having an OPS above .800

 

I think this is the big issue when it comes to these debates about the system as a whole. There are no elite level prospects that are going to dominate with huge numbers all the way through the system. We have some guys that will be regulars, maybe even all stars, but those are the kinds of guys that have up and down development cycles. We don't have that guy that is going to OPS 850+ at every singe level. If that is what you are expecting, then you are going to be disappointed. If your expectations are more aligned with the actual talent level, then you are probably in the more optimistic camp.

 

 

Are you saying there are none, or are you saying we have none in our system? If you are saying the latter I agree. To say there are no elite level prospects who put up around .300 ba and around .850 Ops throughout all minor league systems is just wrong. Robles, Moncada, Rosario, Jimenez, Devers, Mejia, Acuna just to name a few that are top 100 prospects right now that have put up those numbers on all levels.. there are plenty of those examples of guys in the MLB too(look at Keiths Law of Top players under 26 in the MLB, they all raked throughout all of MLB). That is what makes them thought of being the elites of the minor league prospects and elites of MILB)... I agree its not all stats, but stats do tell you some info and for guys like Erceg and Diaz I expected at least their OPS to be much better.. I was hoping one or a couple guys could elevate themselves into the belief of scouts that they are the other elite prospects, but that hasn't happened. Hence why I am a little unimpressed with the minors so far, but there is another half of the season left. Def will be looking for improvements from the Carolina squad.

 

 

Find it interesting that two of the 7 elite prospects you referenced as consistently dominating have also had their elongated struggles. Both of those guys have been some of my favorite prospects in baseball and I stayed on their train while they struggled, but I would stay on the train for Diaz, etc. as well. Didn't look up the other guys and don't follow them as close as I have with weekly statistical check-ins like devers and mejia.

 

Last year at this very moment people were pushing Devers down their rankings as he has a .635 OPS in the first half of the season(not too dissimilar to what Diaz did last year and could do again this year). Mejia had a .670 OPS and in general struggled in his full-season debut at 19 in the midwest league (Hey our 18 year old catcher in Wisconsin is outperforming that).

 

To say elite players/prospects have continued dominance couldn't be further from the truth. Further, to make a call on their prospect status after 2 months is simply a bad decision.

[CheezWizHed]

1st round pick comparisons:

Braun (drafted 5th overall) : 1025, 871, 1119

Fielder's (7th): 998, 935, 839, 957

Weeks (2nd): 1052, 773, 1090

 

Clark (15th): 854, 690, 680*

Ray (5th): 678, 738*

Haniger(38th): 808, 779, 746, 883, 999

Roache(28th): 762, 697, 763, 749, 618*

Coulter(27th): 883, 714, 930, 725, 664, 739*

*2017- partial year

 

Braun, Weeks and Fielder did not have bad years. Each one one "down" year, but that "down" year was still pretty good. Very different from our current guys.

 

You'd have a hard time convincing me that anyone currently in the system would belong in the same conversation as Braun, Fielder, or Weeks as prospects. Those guys were blue chip players. I know Ray was a tip five pick but not all draft classes are created equal.

 

I think you missed my point. The lists aren't there for comparison, they are there for contrast. The point is the recent 1st round picks aren't similar to the Braun/Fielder/Weeks group.

 

And of course there are exceptions for late bloomers (Lucroy). I have no doubt (and quite a few hopes) that we have a several late bloomers in the current crop of players.

 

But still no one (maybe Brinson) categorizes as a no doubt MLB player.

[nate82]

I think Gatewood if he continues on his current path he is very comparable to Hart at about 1 year younger also.

[82brewcrew82]

1st round pick comparisons:

Braun (drafted 5th overall) : 1025, 871, 1119

Fielder's (7th): 998, 935, 839, 957

Weeks (2nd): 1052, 773, 1090

 

Clark (15th): 854, 690, 680*

Ray (5th): 678, 738*

Haniger(38th): 808, 779, 746, 883, 999

Roache(28th): 762, 697, 763, 749, 618*

Coulter(27th): 883, 714, 930, 725, 664, 739*

*2017- partial year

 

Braun, Weeks and Fielder did not have bad years. Each one one "down" year, but that "down" year was still pretty good. Very different from our current guys.

 

You'd have a hard time convincing me that anyone currently in the system would belong in the same conversation as Braun, Fielder, or Weeks as prospects. Those guys were blue chip players. I know Ray was a tip five pick but not all draft classes are created equal.

 

I think you missed my point. The lists aren't there for comparison, they are there for contrast. The point is the recent 1st round picks aren't similar to the Braun/Fielder/Weeks group.

 

And of course there are exceptions for late bloomers (Lucroy). I have no doubt (and quite a few hopes) that we have a several late bloomers in the current crop of players.

 

But still no one (maybe Brinson) categorizes as a no doubt MLB player.

 

My mistake and I do agree with your premise. Having said that, I don't think Lucroy was a late bloomer, he always had potential. It just took some time for that potential to develop. He was just a different class of prospect than a Fielder or Braun. I believe we have several prospects that fit into that category and that class of prospect sometimes has struggles and take time to develop. Doesn't we mean they won't become very good players and even all-stars.

 

If you (and this is not directed at anyone in particular) are disappointed that a non-blue chip player is not performing at a blue chip level, that is a you (again, no one in particular here) problem. Which is what this whole thing has been about, expectations.

[CheezWizHed]

I'm always disappointed when someone you think has high potential doesn't perform. But I'm also patient and understand that not everyone develops as fast as others.

 

That in a nutshell is what I've been trying to say. People are expressing disappointment by some performances this year, but not giving up on players being prospects.

 

You have the prospect like Braun/Fielder/Weeks that you expect to perform, did perform and made good or great MLB players. They left little doubt in their MiLB career that they would make the MLB level. We really don't have many of those (none we have drafted).

 

Then there are others like Lucroy that you hoped would do well. Early expectations were lower. He played ok early in his MiLB career, but came on very strong later. Late bloomer might be overstating it. I didn't mean late age wise, but MiLB career wise.

 

Given that many of our players are playing in that Ok, not great category, I expect several will come on like Lucroy. But its hard to wait for that to happen.

 

I don't see many people giving up on our prospects, just expressing frustration in the wait...

[FVBrewerFan]

We seem to debate this every year, but wouldn't it make sense to generate a new list at the MiLB break? And then one after the season ends?

[reillymcshane]

We seem to debate this every year, but wouldn't it make sense to generate a new list at the MiLB break? And then one after the season ends?

Yes, we do debate this every year.

 

The reasoning we wait until August 1 is a combination of things.

 

1. The trade deadline is probably the biggest reason we wait. People like to see what moves we make (both additions and subtractions). Last year we slotted in Brinson and Bickford and Ortiz in our mid-season poll. Those trades generated a ton of interest (we had 60+ poll submissions last summer - by far a record). Doing the poll a few weeks before the trade deadline is just a bit premature for a lot of people.

 

As an example, we did the mid-season poll in 2015 in July. Less than two weeks later Gomez was dealt, and Phillips, Houser, Hader and Santana were added to the system. So our Top 25 sat there for three months without any of those guys on it.

 

2. With poll before the trade deadline, there is always the risk of a trade happening during the vote time frame that totally screws up your voting. Example: let's say you run a vote from July 1 to July 10. On July 5, the Brewers make a big trade, acquiring several good prospects. At this point, what do you do? Do you restart the vote? Do you hope everyone comes back and updates their list? I have to admit, that isn't that likely to happen - but the threat of it is still there.

 

During the 2015 poll, I was worried that Gomez was going to get dealt during the voting - and I'd have to figure out how to deal with the situation. Thankfully, the trade didn't happen until after the poll was done.

 

3. It does give us some data from short season ball to react to. Even if it's only 6-8 weeks, people like to see that data.

 

In the end, I think the biggest thing is that the trade deadline generates a ton of interest on the boards and about the team in general. People like to weigh in on the shinny new toys.

 

I don't think either way is really that much better - but users seem to like to see how things stand after the trade deadline before making any decisions. Totally understandable.

[FVBrewerFan]

Fair enough. Most importantly, you're the one who has to do the work so whatever works best for you!

[ClosetBrewerFan]

Looking forward to the next community list. I was just looking at my list and I am having a hard time keeping it to a top 40 let alone top 25. I don't have any recent draftees past round 3 in the top 40.

 

Impressive depth in the org!

[CheezWizHed]

Maybe we should extend it to 30 or 40 this time?

[reillymcshane]

Maybe we should extend it to 30 or 40 this time?

Nope. 25 is fine. We talk about this every year as well.

 

It's actually a bit of work doing the Top 25 - and the more slots, the more work. Plus, I don't want to discourage people by making it too in depth. Knowing minor league guys is pretty geeky. I am cool with that. But the Top 25 is supposed to be for fun. And I really want as many people as possible to participate. Making it too much of a task might discourage some participation.

 

And as I said - the more slots to have - the more tabulating of votes there is involved.

 

So 25 it is.

[BrewersAA]

I didn't do one this time, been ultra busy with work, but if I were to pen a 25 today vs. 2 weeks ago Tristan Lutz would be much higher. Obviously recency is a part of that, but the kid can swing a stick! I would even have him ahead of huira due to playing better defense, better arm, better power, and matching his hit tool while being much younger with more projectability and showing out at the same levels, .