Community Prospect List:
#1: Jarrod Parker, RHP
#2: Michael Choice, CF
#3: AJ Cole, SP
There are about 11 or so weeks until Opening Day, so we will be doing one voting thread per week until the season starts. So get ready, set and VOTE!
The Poll Option won the vote last week, so we will be going with that from now on. Please no ballot stuffing, though ;)
Please add suggestions below for players to be added to next week's poll. If you agree with a suggestion, please comment and rec it to make it more visible.
Happy voting!
4 recs | 91 comments
Gotta be Peacock or Gray, and I think they could end up being roughly the same player, but Peacock
has a slight size advantage and a much larger track record, and those trump Gray’s draft pedigree for me.
NateHST - February 12, 2012
Taking Gray.
The hammer curve, the competitiveness, the draft stock (Keith Law had him top 5 until a few weeks before the draft). He’s either a #2 starter or an excellent closer in the making. Very excited about him. Peacock is intriguing but in 70 IP above AA his walk rate is a little bit high for my tastes, and his overall numbers were pretty mediocre until 2011.
I’m saying Gray 4, Green 5, Norris 6, Peacock 7, and Milone 8.
BWH - February 12, 2012
There's a HUGE difference between a #2 starter and a reliever, even if they're closing.
If there’s any doubt in your mind whatsoever that Grey won’t start, it has to be Peacock.
NateHST - February 12, 2012
The A's are evidently convinced Gray's a starter, so that's good enough for me.
And Peacock is another guy who possibly has relief status in his future, according to scouting reports. Neither Peacock nor Gray are 100% to be SP’s, although I’d bet they both will be, so I view that as a wash. Gray has more talent, IMO.
BWH - February 12, 2012
They were also convinced early in his career that
Andrew Bailey was a starter, as was Fautino. Just because Gray has been successful and healthy for a fraction of a professional season thus far, doesn’t mean that’s the way it’s going to end up, especially with multiple scouts and analysts suggesting that he might be better suited for the pen. I agree with NateHST – Peacock is far more proven and is a sure bet to reach the majors as a starter – you have to take him over Gray. Gray’s only advantage appears to be his draft pedigree, but I don’t think that’s enough to push him above Peacock at this point.
I would even rank Milone slightly above Gray at this point. That could all change if Gray blows everyone away in Midland and Sacramento this year and earns a September call up as a starter!
oakballnack - February 16, 2012
You're missing it
Sonny Gray’s floor is great reliever, his ceiling is number 2 starter. Peacock’s floor is 6th starter and his ceiling is solid number 3.
sourstuff - February 16, 2012
Why would Gray's floor be great reliever instead of "middle reliever"
and why would Peacock’s ceiling not be “#2 starter”? They’re both reputed to have “#2 stuff” and in need of refining their “3rd pitch” in order to thrive as a SP.
Nico - February 16, 2012
I'm not saying the difference is large
A solid number three is still very good. People seem to get hung up on those numbers, I don’t know why. But Gray is a year younger, more advanced already in his career, better pedigree, and just has more room to get better. I used to live in DC, so I have seen Peacock, a lot. And he’s good, but there is no way anyway who has seen both can say he’s got a the same ceiling as Gray.
What I should have just said is Gray has a higher floor and a higher ceiling. It’s simple as that.
sourstuff - February 16, 2012
Hmmm, I'm not a big projector or prospector or comparison guy...
… but as far as I can tell, the logic of the situation dictates that they have basically the same floor: to suck eggs. Which is great is you’re an egg and all, but lousy for those of us that want to listen to A’s baseball.
paris7 - February 16, 2012
gray also gets grounders
there’s a ton of sink on his fastball, especially when he dials down the velo. he knows how to use it, too, running it across both corners down in the zone (maddux style) and burying it on the feet of RHHs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93oL5E_YaI4&feature=related
peacock, on the other hand, has a straight fastball and pitches up in the zone with it. not surprisingly, he’s an extreme flyball pitcher.
http://mlb.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=502748
i think both prospects’ secondary pitches are underrated, with the primary issue for each being command, not “stuff”.
NRC - February 17, 2012
Agreed
Peacock’s straight fastball concerns me. Gray has Tim Hudson written all over him.
BWH - February 17, 2012
How do you figure?
Peacock had better numbers (higher K/9, lower BB/9; the only thing Gray did better was post a flukily low HR/9 (0.0), but it was in only 20 IP) at the same level over a much larger sample size. He’s taller, too. I don’t know where you’re pulling these ceilings and floors from, but they don’t make a lot of sense.
NateHST - February 17, 2012
you just mentioned the flaw
of small sample size. There is no real point in comparing their numbers yet. It’s all about projectablity and just watching them both pitch with your eye.
sourstuff - February 17, 2012
Oh goddammit.
So you’re saying we should take Peacock’s 98.2 innings of 1.87 FIP at AA and set it aside because “it’s all about projectability and watching them both pitch with your eye.” No, I refuse to accept that. Numbers mean things.
NateHST - February 17, 2012
No, I think he was saying
Gray’s 20 innings last year mean nothing and that, as he said, “there is no real point in COMPARING their numbers yet” (emphasis mine)
BWH - February 17, 2012
Fautino and Bailey both had their careers changed after Tommy John Surgery
for the record.
BWH - February 17, 2012
Or I guess Green, in your case, since you have Peacock at 7.
NateHST - February 12, 2012
id add the electric movement on the fastball
and the ability to use that movement over both sides of the plate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93oL5E_YaI4&feature=related
NRC - February 13, 2012
how about 4A and 4B
peacock and gray are pretty even it seems
guessatomo - February 12, 2012
Voted for Peacock
I think Peacock and Gray are very similar pitchers and I was tempted to choose Gray because I like his curve a little better and I kind of have a gut feeling he’ll be the better pitcher when all is said and done. But Peacock has a more consistent third pitch at this point and I think he is less of an injury risk.
I think both pitchers have similar potential but Peacock has the better track record so he wins this round for me by a hair.
OkayJay81 - February 12, 2012
It's Gray, easily
evidently Grant Green has seven relatives on this site.
sourstuff - February 12, 2012
Cindi voted for Green over Gray,
but only because she thinks it’s more of a winning color.
Nico - February 12, 2012
Gray can be a bit depressing
I picked Sonny because it’s more of a badass name the Peacock.
Ovale Fan - February 12, 2012
Peacock's a bit full of himself.
But Green’s a little inexperienced.
Nico - February 12, 2012
My next three are most likely
Gray, Peacock, Milone.
I just don’t see Green being an impressive prospect in the OF.
winchester5 - February 12, 2012
Green should play 2B
I know we have Weeks there, but it just seems to be the most obvious position for him to succeed at.
sourstuff - February 12, 2012
I've said this a hundred times.
Weeks blows Green out of the water in terms of pure speed, but doesn’t really have great hands at 2B. Green’s major fault was his throwing arm, and moving him thirty feet closer to first base would have been a pretty obvious solution. I understand that Ellis was on the way out and Weeks was closer than Green, but if I was in charge, I would have never signed Crisp, moved Weeks to CF and Green back to 2B, and let Sogard or Rosales play for a half season until Green is ready.
NateHST - February 13, 2012
That actually is probably a pretty good idea
jdr - February 14, 2012
I'd have been fine
with them both playing 2b. You never know what is gonna happen to any given player (injuries). I believe in putting a player in the best position to succeed. Green probably could have been a successful trade bait with Colorado as a 2B. I think our whole developmental system has been fubar for a while, and this is just one gripe.
sourstuff - February 15, 2012
agreed
You can’t alter someone’s development because you have another player at that position.
DDroney - February 18, 2012
Over/under on his PAs from the outfield at the major league level...
350?
ChrisCEIT - February 18, 2012
I went Green for some reason.
Was stuck between Gray and Green, and just took the position player. I like Green anyway.
I really, really, really like Gray though. He was my favorite player in last year’s draft. I wish it was a lock he is a SP, but it’s not.
SenorGato - February 12, 2012
Who is the "other"?
robertmelvin - February 12, 2012
It's whoever you want it to be.
NateHST - February 12, 2012
sourstuff - February 12, 2012
well played
JamesS - February 12, 2012
time to redo the list?
a’s to sign cespedes
http://twitter.com/susanslusser
NRC - February 13, 2012
I don't think we need to start over.
There could be a poll with the options being where we think Cespedes should be on the list. I don’t think any other part of the order would be different from the current order.
WheatBread - February 13, 2012
It amuses me that the first two names on the list
are both characters in the game “Clue”.
iglew - February 13, 2012
Too bad we don't have Colonel Mustard...
Zonis - February 13, 2012
Yes, I know that all the real experts
don’t like Milone as much as we do here on AN. But I don’t care. I’m here on the Milone bandwagon, cheering on AN contrarianism.
iglew - February 13, 2012
Sonny!
I’ve gotten to see him play multiple college games for Vanderbilt (I’m a student here) and he’s absolutely electric.
vandy-razorback - February 13, 2012
Sonny Gray
did he come straight out of Donnie Brasco movie or what?
closetasfan - February 13, 2012
I'd vote Colin Cowgill for next guy on the list
Good defensive outfielder, strong arm, great plate discipline. I think Cowgill is going to be a better player than Green and has a higher floor. Still a couple rounds away from voting for him but I have him rated higher than any of the prospects not in the poll.
OkayJay81 - February 15, 2012
I agree about Cowgill.
I like him a lot. But I’m currently voting Tom Milone, and realistically Milone is not going to make the list until #6 at the soonest, so it’ll be at least #7 before I get to vote for Cowgill.
iglew - February 15, 2012
I agree; I think Cowgill is a bit underrated
Besides possibly having the “x factor” of overachieving, he seems like he could be a “Sweeney with 10 HR power.” And what we always said about Sweeney was, “If only he just had 10 HR power…”
Nico - February 15, 2012
I think he probably is a tad underrated, but he's still a few spots away for me.
I don’t think his plate discipline is as great as you think it is. Great for me is Youkilis, Bautista, Swisher, Votto—those guys who post BB% of 15% or higher. Cowgill’s best walk rate was 12.9%, and that was in 2008. In the majors, considering he isn’t a huge power threat, I’d expect his plate discipline to be slightly above average.
Another problem I have with your assessment is that he’s a good defensive outfielder. He has good defense in a corner, but he’s probably fringe average in center. Best case scenario, I think he becomes a right handed version of David DeJesus. More likely is that he turns into Chris Denorfia and makes a very long career out of being a good 4th outfielder, which is perfectly fine.
NateHST - February 16, 2012
Seems like a good defensive outfielder to me
I never said he was a good centerfielder. He should have plus range in the corner and has the possibility to be decent in center, also he has a plus arm. Defense should be an asset for him going forward. I guess you could argue that only centerfielders can be considered good defensive outfielders but that seems like an unnecessarily narrow definition to me.
As far as plate discipline, I agree that Cowgill is merely above average at drawing walks but I like that he combines that with above average contact rates. Over the last two years in AA and AAA he’s managed a K/BB ratio of 1.26, I guess “great” is kind of a generic term but I think he has controlled the zone pretty darn well during his time in the minors.
I agree that David DeJesus is a pretty good comp if he handles the transition to the majors well, but I think with his stronger arm his defense will play better in right and center than DeJesus’ does.
OkayJay81 - February 16, 2012
Cespedes is hands down #1, correct?
So is everyone going to be pushed a spot down in the rankings? Parker at 2, Choice 3, and Cole 4? That seems to make sense to me.
oakballnack - February 16, 2012
Special poll.
Here’s what I would suggest: After the #4 vote is closed and that spot is filled, we then have a special Cespedes poll. The question is “Where does Yoenis Cespedes rank in our prospects so far?” Possible answers are: #1 ahead of Parker, #2 below Parker but above Choice, #3 below Choice but above Cole, #4 below Cole but above [whoever wins 4], or #5 below [whoever wins 4].
If the last option wins, Cespedes is on the ballot for #5. Otherwise, he takes his place according to the special poll and we proceed with polling for #6.
(Alternatively, we can just omit Cespedes altogether and put an asterisk on our final rankings saying it was tabulated before Cespedes signed.)
iglew - February 16, 2012
I like this idea.
Billy Frijoles - February 16, 2012
this seems like the logical step
But, realistically, is there anyone who thinks he isn’t the #1 prospect? If so, then it’s because they are applying some puritan definition of “prospect”.
Yet, the democratic process must prevail, lest the supreme military council rule otherwise.
oakballnack - February 16, 2012
I'm not sure yet if he is #1 for me
So the poll seems like a good idea. But its up Zonis. The result will probably be Cespedes at 1 no matter what.
Rio - February 16, 2012
Why wouldn't he be?
I like Parker a lot, but he was far from dominant last season and he already has one major arm surgery to his credit. Choice still has questions about his ability to make consistent contact and will need to prove himself outside of the California League.
Goldstein said about Cespedes, “In fact, no player in the organization is more likely to be a star.” I think his ranking at twentieth overall is fair, which puts him quite a bit higher than anybody else in the A’s system.
NateHST - February 16, 2012
sorta depends on what your flavor is
Parker has a higher floor, but yeah Cespedes has a higher ceiling. I think it’s closer than perhaps KG thinks.
sourstuff - February 16, 2012
Seriously, where are you getting these ceilings and floors from?
Again, Parker had a 3.70 FIP last season in AA and is one year removed from TJS. His floor, like every other pitcher, is to literally never pitch again because his arm falls off.
NateHST - February 17, 2012
That's not much of a point
Yes, Parker could blow his arm out and bust, but Cespedes is a 26 year old who has only reached a high A level of competition. The floor on Cespedes is much lower, it’s clear that he has much more risk than Parker.
As far as ceiling, it’s a tough decision. If everything breaks right Parker could be an ace, I think his ceiling is pretty close to Cespedes.
I think I might prefer Parker to Cespedes.
OkayJay81 - February 17, 2012
High A?
Cespedes is a major league ready outfielder, who by most accounts can play at least an average center field. Unless he is Corey Patterson with the bat, he should be able to put up something like 1.5 WAR—and that’s if he’s still really bad offensively.
Look at Crisp’s season last year: league average with the bat, below average defensively, and he still managed to post 2.2 fWAR. If Cespedes has a floor besides never hitting a ball, it’s something close to an average major league outfielder.
I would take Cespdes over Parker one hundred times out of one hundred opportunities, and like I said, I really do like Parker.
NateHST - February 17, 2012
I think the point about high A
refers to the quality of competition in the Cuban league. Cespedes was dominating in Cuba, but he still hasn’t actually had to face competition better than that for an extended period.
If the slegnA left Mike Trout in Visalia for 4 years while he tore the cover off the ball, people would still wonder whether he’d be ready to jump to the Majors. Comparing Cuba to high-A is obviously a really rough guesstimate, but if it’s somewhat accurate it is likely that Cespedes will spend some time getting put in his place by a vastly better quality of pitching than he’s ever faced day in and day out. And there is some chance that he won’t figure it out completely.
Nick - February 17, 2012
I have heard anything from A to AAA for Cuban league comparisons
However the consensus seems to be that it is very top heavy and the top 20-40 players could play in MLB.
Billy Frijoles - February 17, 2012
There are concerns about his contact ability and defensive position
The contact problems could pull his offense down quite a bit. And some see him as a corner in the future. Even with plus defense in RF he has to hit around average to be an 2 WAR borderline starter. These are still questions that are in the air.
I think scouts can project MiLB players better because they have seen many of them become MLB players. They have a feel for how a prospect should play against the level of competition. That is different for Cuban players. Let Sweeney play in Stockton and you will have a hard time projecting his performance there to the big leagues.
Rio - February 18, 2012
I think you're getting hung up on semantics
Yes, everyone’s floor is dying of a lethal raccoon bite. But floor is more a blanket term for most likely worst case scenario. “Most likely” being the key phrase.
sourstuff - February 17, 2012
No, a floor is the worst a player could be. A ceiling is the best.
I don’t have a problem with making player comps (I know some people do), but I don’t understand projecting ceilings and floors on people that haven’t ever played in the MLB. I was guilty of this a few years ago when everybody said Aaron Cunningham’s floor was like 15 HR per year and good defense in LF. And that didn’t happen.
NateHST - February 17, 2012
That's because
who ever said that was not smart. Again, ceilings and floors, and number 1, 2, 3 starters have been mucked up by everyone and their mom misusing the terms. Even though I don’t think this site should rely on Sickels as much as we do, even he repeatedly cautions misuse of the terms. I probably shouldn’t use the term because it’s gonna misinterpreted by people like you. But I can’t blame you, the misuse of the term is so saturated in sports blogs these days it’s inevitable.
sourstuff - February 17, 2012
So by "floor," you mean something other than "the worst this player is going to be"?
This makes no sense to me. Rather, if you said, “Cespedes could be a star, but I think realistically he turns into something like Hunter Pence,” that makes a lot more sense. But saying his ceiling is only marginally higher than Parker’s, and his floor is much lower—it doesn’t make sense and it isn’t useful.
Not to mention you’re comparing “floors” and “ceilings” between a 23-year old SP to a 26-year old toolsy outfielder.
NateHST - February 17, 2012
first of all
why do all your replies seem hostile in nature?
Secondly, the worst scenario is always gonna be bust. I don’t know why you feel the need to argue the point when I didn’t invent the term and how it was originally used by scouts.
Thirdly, yes, that’s how comparisons work.
sourstuff - February 17, 2012
They're not hostile. I'm just trying to figure out why you're sure that Parker has a higher floor.
When I say something doesn’t make sense to me, I’m not being hostile—it’s just true. It doesn’t make sense to me. I’d also like to know where you read that Cuba is akin to Class A Advanced. Again, I’m not baiting you; I want a link or something.
To the last point, do you not see a problem with comparing two players who are so vastly different?
NateHST - February 17, 2012
i didn't write that Class A thing
btw.
To answer your last question: I see it being an impediment, but no, I think comparing the value of 2 players to a team is fairly normal.
The reason I think Parker has a higher floor is mainly because of his success stateside. And of course that isn’t Cespedes fault. But you know, there just feels like a higher bust factor for international talent. Like Ynoa (although I guess he isn’t a bust just yet). And that’s mainly because you don’t know they’re talent will actually translate.
sourstuff - February 17, 2012
My bad about the high-A thing.
And okay, that’s fair enough.
Although, I will point out that we know almost nothing about Ynoa’s actual talent level. He hasn’t failed so far because he was from the DR, he failed because he had a serious arm injury.
NateHST - February 17, 2012
yeah totally
I know it’s only been like 2-3 years, but it feels like fucking forever.
sourstuff - February 18, 2012
A better example of unexpected bust of international talent would be Leslie Anderson
Rio - February 18, 2012
Some scouts think Cespedes might only be an average player.
And that seems to be comparable to Parker. Pretty good chance to be at least average (2-3 WAR) with a chance for stardom.
I don’t know how you could be sure when Cespedes has only faced Cuban league competition.
Rio - February 18, 2012
am I out of line for thinking we should omit Cespedes?
I agree he would be #1, but he comes from a totally different context than minor league players and may never play in the minors at all!
DDroney - February 18, 2012
That doesn't mean he isn't a prospect.
Yes, he’s older and he may go straight to the majors, but he still meets all the requirements for prospect status. I’d also like to have a poll just because I think it would be interesting.
NateHST - February 18, 2012
I agree with you only indirectly.
I think we should follow some standard definition, and the most obvious one is the standard used by MLB to determine who would qualify for the Rookie of the Year award. And that currently includes Cespedes.
Now, do I think MLB should change their rookie definition to exclude people like Cespedes and Darvish (or Ichiro in 2001, etc)? Yes, absolutely.
iglew - February 19, 2012
The definition that I have always gone with is the definition for Rookie of the Year, less the active roster requirement
Zonis - February 19, 2012
I'm bothered by how many people
are voting for Grant Green.
sourstuff - February 19, 2012
I'm a little surprised by that as well
I guess he’s carried over a lot of the hype from when he was drafted, but with the position change and poor showing in AA you’d think he would have lost a lot of that luster.
OkayJay81 - February 19, 2012
I think anyone who gets talked about a lot will get some votes just from name recognition
DDroney - February 19, 2012
Does it actually bother you?
Or do you just disagree with them?
I disagree with the Grant votes, but if a bunch of other fans erroneously believe that he’s any good, I don’t see why that’s a bad thing.
iglew - February 19, 2012
More bounty, so to speak!
paris7 - February 19, 2012
I guess I'm bothered
by how many people clearly aren’t in tune with our minor league organization.
sourstuff - February 19, 2012
It keeps me up at night.
Nico - February 19, 2012
that and the jabbering hobo who hates thai food
that sleeps next to my building
sourstuff - February 19, 2012
That is SO upsetting to hear.
That someone doesn’t like Thai food.
Nico - February 19, 2012
I didn't vote for him but he was #1 last year
I think a lot of people think letting him drop 3-4 spots is far enough. I wouldn’t put him any higher than 6th but it also wouldn’t surprise me if he hit .300 this year with 20 hrs and good CF defense.
I am worried about the plate discipline though… He needs to take some walks.
DrDoom - February 19, 2012
That would surprise the shit out of me.
NateHST - February 19, 2012
why?
Green is very capable of putting up a high batting average. Even in his down year last season, he still hit .291, and he’s moving to the hitter-friendly PCL this year.
His power took a dive, but it remains to be seen if he’s more 2010 or 2011. I’m hoping/leaning that he’s more 2010 because he had back and wrist issues last year that could have sapped his power a bit. Green’s problem is strikeouts and plate discipline. I would be surprised if Green didn’t hit .300, or slug at least .450. I would also be surprised if his K-rate dipped under 18%, and his BB-Rate jumped over 8%.
My prediction for Green this year is something like .320/.360/.500 with above average CF defense. The real test is whether or not he can cut down on his strikeouts and increase his walks, which I think is unlikely because his K-rate and BB-Rate at A and AA and the AFL have all been nearly identical.
BWH - February 19, 2012
You really think he'll slug .500?
I’d also be surprised if his OBP was only .040 points higher than his BA, especially if he’s established as a dangerous hitter you can’t just lob strikes to. Maybe more like .300/.360/.450, with slightly below average CF defense (because he’s still learning it)? That seems more realistic to me.
Nico - February 19, 2012
He slugged over .500 two years ago
when he was fully healthy, and he’s moving to the PCL. My prediction is that he’ll pretty much re-create his 2010 numbers. The question on him is whether he can make enough contact and show enough patience to become a top flight prospect again.
BWH - February 19, 2012
Hope you're right.
I’ll be surprised if he slugs .500, but very pleasantly so!
Nico - February 19, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Athletics Nation to post a comment.