Friday Astros Minor Thoughts
Yesterday was the day of prospect lists, as MLB.com rolled out its list on MLBTV Wednesday night, Keith Law released his Top 100 list, The Hardball Times released its Top 10 Houston prospects and Baseball America released the Prospect Handbook.
So, of course, we have to talk about prospects on this fine Friday. After the jump, I'll have extended thoughts, building on the comments in DQ's FanShot yesterday and more notes on the minor leagues.
Jason Castro was the only Astros prospect on the MLB.com list, clocking in at No. 31. His writeup and video can be found here. The money quote from the scouting report:
A solid to above-average every day catcher in the big leagues who makes those around him better with his leadership skills.
Those intangible skills will be important for the Astros once Oswalt and Berkman step down. That leadership is something Houston has really lacked since Bagwell and Biggio left. Miguel Tejada provided some of this as did Berkman and Oswalt, but I don't get the impression that either lead overtly very much. As McTaggart said in his interview, the clubhouse is still pretty laid back. Maybe the Astros need a kick in the pants from a kid like Castro.
On Law's list were Jordan Lyles and Jiovanni Mier. On THT's list, they are both ahead of Castro. Still, as clack noted in the comments, none of them are thought of as top-notch, future superstar talents. I'd argue that while Castro may turn into a perrenial All-Star, Mier has a chance to be special. His defense has the potential to be outstanding. If his bat holds up as an above average contact guy who's got some speed, he has the chance to be a reverse-Jeter, right? With his defense better than his bat? A great defender at short who can hit over .300? That's a star to me.
Of course, there's the problem. Mier's bat is still very projectable with little tangible results. Until he converts some of that potential into production, he'll be downgraded. With high school draftees, that's often the case, but it also explains why people may underrate him. Going back to the MLBTV special, I was struck with how similar Mier's scouting reports have been to a couple of the prospects they did include, Starlin Castro and Jose Iglesias. Both are international signees, but they are also defense-first guys who have questions around the bat. From what I've heard, there's not much difference between Mier's defense and theirs, so the difference is really just exposure, right? If not, it at least raised the question in my mind.
I was surprised to see Gaston on the list, since he still needs a solid season under his belt at Corpus. I would have much rather seen Collin DeLome, who has a similar profile to Gaston. I didn't see enough out of Tanner Bushue to rank him this highly, but that's quibbling at this point. My list would look a little different and I might have to actually write it up sometime soon. Does that sound like something you'd be interested in?
This article on Minor League Ball breaks down John Sickel's prospect rankings by monetary value and ranks the teams based on this. Are you surprised that the Astros came in at 24th? I wasn't really shocked by that. In fact, it confirmed my thought that the national experts are lagging a little behind on Houston's farm system. While the team doesn't have a deep system, the prospects at the top are both valuable and at key positions. I have used the numbers Victor Wang came up with, which the author used for this piece. These values show that hitters mean more to a team than pitchers. That's an opinion at odds with many national experts (or is at odds with their lists, at least). One thing that Bobby Heck has done well is add position players as well as pitchers with upside. If you're looking for what the Astros might do in this draft, don't bet against at least one position player being picked in the first round.
One guy who's been intriguing is one who was once considered the consensus top overall prospect in the 2010 draft, Bryce Harper. With some questions about his swing coming out and (probable) concerns over signability, could you see him dropping to No. 8? Would the Astros be able to pass him by at that spot?
Um, is anyone else shocked and/or amazed that BRANDON DUCKWORTH is the one who may pitch a deciding Game 9 in the Dominican League finals? On three days rest? Since Francisco Liriano is starting opposite Duckworth, could you think of a bigger mismatch? Then you see stories like this one from Jorge Arangue of ESPNDeportes, who says Liriano had to fight to start the game instead of appearing at the team's Fan Fest. Hmm...Fan Fest? Championship game? Fan Fest? Championship game? These winter leagues must be fun to cover.
The implications a story like this has aren't necessarily far-reaching, since MLB doesn't step in with every team like this. But, it does bring up the fact that a slotting system either needs to be collectively bargained or thrown away. Either way, the MLBPA is falling down on its job a bit with the draft.
Finally, this is getting a little ridiculous. First, Zach Levine follows my Chia-jen Lo story with one of his own. Then, Kirk Bohls of the Austin American-Statesman gets "quotes" and "confirmation" of my opinion that the Round Rock franchise may change affiliations to the Rangers after the season (h/t to clack on both stories). Then, Bernardo Fallas has a post on Thursday about the Astros watching Noah Lowery pitch a day after my Wednesday story covering the same subject.
Please, print media, you're making me blush. I didn't realize how much of a trendsetter I was till this week. I just wish they would give TCB some credit here. Without this website, they'd obviously have NO ideas for stories. You're welcome, guys, you're welcome...
0 recs |
20 comments
|
Comments
I think a significant difference between Delome and Gaston, in terms of rankings, is Gaston’s good walk rate. Gaston had similar walk rates at both Lancaster and Tri-City, which means it probably isn’t a function of the Lancaster launching pad. Delome has a consistent and fairly weak walk rate. Both guys hit for power and have a high K rate, but Gaston’s walk rate gives him a better future (assuming his power continues at CC), IMO.
While Gaston’s walk rate may give him the edge in hitting ability, DeLome has a pretty sizeable advantage in defensive value. By all account, DeLome is athletic enough to play all three outfield positions and settled into left in Corpus because of Josh Flores and Mitch Einertson. Gaston has been characterized as being limited to left and his defense is average at best.
by David Coleman on Jan 29, 2010 8:33 AM CST up reply actions
Good point. DeLome is also a year ahead of Gaston. That said, with Bourn and Pence settled in at our two most demanding outfield spots, offensive production may be more desirable out of our minor league outfielders. There’s got to be a point of diminishing returns with the cramped left field at MMP.
I voted for Mier
Simply because he’s already being rated as a top 100 prospect as a kid fresh out of HS with very little (and very low-level) pro experience under his belt. That’s a sure sign of a ton of projectability and upside. Lyles has a reasonably high ceiling, too, but most scouts seems to rank him similarly to Mier when he’s older and proven more—that suggests to me slightly lower upside.
Jay Austin is also spoken of as a very high-upside guy—still considered a good prospect despite being very young and never having shown anything so far.
A dark horse guy might be our new international signee, Edgar Ferreira. He hasn’t thrown a professional pitch yet, to my knowledge, but he’s reportedly 17 years old, left-handed, and can touch 94mph with his fastball. Ed Wade says he has “easy velocity”. If you assume that he has projection left in his frame—which he should, if he’s really 17 years old—he could have Chapman-like velocity in a few years, hopefully nearly MLB ready by then and with more polish.
I’m not surprised that we’re ranked 24 on Sickel’s list, by the way. Pleased, but not surprised. I had figured Baseball America would rank us somewhere around the mid-20s this season and was surprised when they did not.
I voted for Mier as well for mostly the same points as OremLK. Project Prospect who hasn’t been high on very many Astro prospects actually loves Mier after just a short season league. They put him with guys like Starlin Castro who doesn’t have Miers defensive ability but has more pop and could be similar contact rates
Remember, this poll is asking who has the most upside, not who is the best prospect overall. There are really two overall things that go into assessing a prospect’s value, and that’s how safe of a bet he is, and how high his ceiling is as a player. This poll is only asking about the latter.
So yes, Lyles is a safer bet right now because he’s played more, and played at a higher level, but that doesn’t really have much to do with his upside as compared to Mier.
Basically, you’re asking “Which one is more likely to become a superstar?” as opposed to “Which one is more likely to make the big leagues?”
Not saying that you’re wrong, by the way… I can see the argument for both players. Just pointing out that the amount of time they’ve played in the minor leagues doesn’t have that much to do with their respective ceilings as players.
OremLK may not share my opinion, but when evaluating prospects, upside only counts when you have very little information i.e. recent draftees, int’l signings. As they develop a track record in the minors, they convert potential to production. So, if Mier has a bad year in his first full season in the minors, it does dampen his upside but not as much as if he had two consecutive down seasons. Does that make sense?
by David Coleman on Jan 29, 2010 2:44 PM CST up reply actions
yup
Makes sense.
I know people want to compare him to a Jeter type, which isn’t a bad comparison, but if Jeter were on team not in the north east he wouldn’t have as much fan fare and super star status he has. That being said I still think Lyles has the better upside, and is more likely to turn some heads.
Jay Austin has had two bad seasons, although it appears his second season is an improvement. However, his upside still remains considerable. The upside has a lot to do with the rawness of talents and his tools. So, I think it is possible that a player’s upside can remain the same or similar after a bad year. Think of it this way: the upside probability can remain the same, while the crash and burn probability starts increasing. So, I could see this question portrayed as a probability distribution graph from Hall of Fame superstar on one end to wash out on the other end. For example, Sickels views Castro as a player with little upside, but a high liklihood of becoming a starter for many years in the majors. So, I would visualize that graph with all the probabilities grouped in the middle and sloping very abruptly to minimal probabilities on the superstar and wash out sides of the graph.
by clack on Jan 29, 2010 3:10 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
That’s a great explanation. Couldn’t have said/visualized it better myself. I think part of the issue is when you start trying to project tools despite statistical evidence against, or vice versa. I’m not the biggest Austin fan, even though he had some great stretches last season. Those stretches probably combined with his athleticism to get him ranked so highly. But, in my mind, his situation is very much like last year’s third round pick Telvin Nash, who wasn’t mentioned anywhere. Nash doesn’t have as much experience as Austin, nor the tools to play center field, but he’s probably got more power potential. Which is why it’s really, really hard to scout and project players.
by David Coleman on Jan 29, 2010 3:21 PM CST up reply actions
That’s a better way of putting it, clack.
Here’s a visual analogy of what I was talking about if it helps a little bit more.

Jordan Lyles has higher current value, but his potential value is lower. That’s my interpretation, anyway; like I said, I do think you could make the opposite argument.
by OremLK on Jan 29, 2010 3:29 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
A way that many people talk about it is ceiling and floor. Ceiling is their max potential and floor is their least potential or whats the worst they’ll end up as. Lower levels is very much like guess work and there is a wide range between the ceiling and floor. As they get up in levels that gap narrows whether it be from raising floor or decreasing ceiling.
I went with Seaton
I think he’s kind of the definition of upside.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by Stephen Higdon on Jan 29, 2010 11:12 AM CST reply actions
I liked Seaton coming into this season and expected more from him. His K-rate is concerning which could be attributed a lot to him trying to work specific pitches and develop them. He also switched at some point in the season from his slurve pitch into two distinct pitches with the curve and slider. I beleive it was the slider that turned out to be pretty good. I looked up his monthly splits at minorleaguesplits.com and K/9 of 5.70 and 3.04 in April and May respectively hurt. They got higher after that, but still you’d like to see something higher that K/9 in the 6’s. Many people have raised questions about his delivery as well, calling it an awkward and unnatural catapult like motion.
I picked Lyles
I chose Lyles because I think the scale between ceilings for SP compared to SS aren’t equal.
If a players ceiling was on a scale from 1-100 (100 being highest) I would prefer a 80 SP against a 85 SS. IMO
Besides that, a players ceiling is really just a collection of opinions. Some based on physical evidence, some are based on glorified hunches. Until Mier can show me that his proposed high ceiling is more than a glorified hunch, I think Lyles’ ceiling is higher.

by 


























