Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Tim Wakefield Retires

AN Chat: John Sickels

Minor league expert John Sickels recently released his Baseball Prospect Book 2006.  It's an excellent book and the best resource available on minor league prospects.  

Sickels recently took the time to have a chat with me about the A's system and top prospects.

The following is a transcript of that chat:

Blez: The A's system seems to be a little bit of the case of the cupboard being bare, especially near the top of the system.  How do you see the A's minor league system now?

John Sickels: These things are cyclical, and due to graduations to the majors they are on the down side of the cycle right now. The one real stud right now is Barton, but there are some other guys like Melillo, Putnam, and Buck who could/should blossom this year. I haven't done formal system rankings yet but Oakland is probably middle of the pack I'd say.

Blez: How would you compare the system to some of the division rivals? Better or worse?

Sickels: Anaheim is better than Oakland. Seattle and Texas...hmm...hard to say. Angels are the top dog but the others are clustered together.

Blez: In the book, you mention Barton's position conundrum.  Where do you think he'll wind up?

Sickels: DH/1B. Splitting time between the two.

Blez: The A's went and drafted high schoolers, especially arms.  Judging from some of your grades in the book, you see Italiano as the class of the high schoolers.  What does he project out to at this point?  And yes, I know it's early.

Sickels: If he stays healthy and improves his command, he has Wood or Beckett-like potential. I wrote in the book that he could turn out like those guys. . .or that he could turn into Colt Griffin if everything falls apart. That's pretty much how I see it. . .sky is the limit in terms of potential, but lots of things can get in the way for him. High risk, high reward. The "safe" guess would be to project him at the midpoint between Wood and Griffin.

Blez: What do you think of Cliff Pennington and Travis Buck?  The early returns are very good.

Sickels: Yeah, I like both of them, Pennington in particular. At the least they should be solid major league players. The question is if they have star potential, and we don't know the answer to that yet of course. Right now I like Pennington better. As an infielder there will be less pressure on him to hit. Buck will have to show power to be a regular outfielder and he may not have a lot of raw home run juice, sort of an Andre Ethier type situation.

Blez: What do you think of the A's losing Ethier?  Is that one that fans will regret down the line?

Sickels: I think Ethier will be a fine player, but with guys like Putnam, Buck, Herrera, and Robnett still in the system, they had the depth available to deal Ethier. I wouldn't worry about it too much.

Blez: You still seem to be high on Jairo Garcia (also known now as Santiago Casilla), giving him a B+.  You cite his command as a problem, yet he only gave up 20 walks.  Is it possible that his fastball is too straight?  Or what do you see as the issue with Santiago?

Sickels: Well, now that we know his true age I'd have to downgrade him a bit from the book comment. As for his command, 20 walks in 48 innings is OK but not that great. That would be like 83 walks in 200 innings. But utlimately I still think he is one of the higher-ceiling relief prospects around.

Blez: Why is Myron Leslie one of your personal favorites?  You left us hanging there in the book.

Sickels: Sometimes you just notice guys. I noticed him when he was in college because of  his high walk rate and because his name was "Myron," which isn't exactly a common name any more. There's nothing more to it than that really...just a guy I noticed and decided to follow.

Blez: Javier Herrera had the suspension last year.  Is it tough to grade a player like that since you might feel like you haven't seen the "pure" athlete yet?

Sickels: yes, it is. Although he continued to play well even after being off the juice. But it does factor in, adding an X-factor of uncertainty about how he'll hold up at higher levels.

Blez: When I asked for players who were in the system who could surprise people, Billy Beane pointed out Shull, Ray and Madsen as particular favorites.  What are your thoughts on those guys?  You gave Ray a C+, Shull a B- and Madsen a C.

Sickels: Ray: really good arm, possible bargain in the 8th round from a small college but command is a problem. Shull doesn't throw quite as hard but is more polished and should advance more quickly...outstanding K/BB and K/IP ratios in short-season ball. Madsen throws even softer than Shull and isn't as good of a prospect. Obviously Beane knows 97.835% percent more about these guys than I do, but it isn't just propaganda on his part, they look like legitimate guys to me, especially Shull and Ray.

Blez: 97.835%?  Wow, you really are a numbers guy.

Sickels: Yeah, well that number is an obscure reference, a VERY obscure reference.

Blez: You can't just say that without explaining.

Sickels: it will make me look like a total geek if I explain it.

Blez: Come on...

Sickels: Of course, since I AM a total geek I suppose it won't harm anything to explain that it is a very obscure Star Trek Original Series reference, but I won't explain it more than that.  :-)

Blez: We're cool with that.  The A's had several key prospects suffer injuries last year, including Dan Meyer, John Rheinecker and Landon Powell.  Do you know anything about how healthy any of them are (I know how secretive the A's are about injury reports)?  And do you expect any of them to get back to form this year?

Sickels: I'm positive you would know more about that than me! :-). Seriously, I have no inside information about those injuries.

Blez: The A's signed Mark Ellis to an extension this offseason.  Do you think Pennington or Melillo will make him expendable in that time frame?

Sickels: Yes, Ellis will be expendable soon.

Blez: Who do you like better, Melillo or Pennington?

Sickels: Well, Melillo has proven himself at a higher level so I gave him a Grade B+ in the book, while Pennington has a Grade B since his pro track record is less extensive. But it's quite possible that Pennington will have a better career. I like them both. . .Pennington might be a more "balanced" player since he seems to have more defensive value.

Blez: Dallas Braden seemed to come out of nowhere last year and excel until he reached Double-A.  Is he smoke and mirrors or the real deal?

Sickels: His problems in Double-A are typical of a guy who relies on a trick pitch to breeze through lower levels. He's a Grade C prospect, a possible contributor at the major league level, but not someone who is likely to play a huge role.

Blez: Think they'll be another Lansford wearing the green and gold soon?

Sickels: Define "soon". He'll need some time, at least 3 years.

Blez: I guess that's the answer.

Blez: Give me a sleeper who could become a top prospect.  Someone out of the C grades you gave this year.

Sickels: Just from the oakland system?

Blez: Are there other systems?

Sickels: I'd have said Madsen but we already mentioned him. I liked Ryan Webb going into 2005. He didn't do what I thought he would do last year, but it is too early to give up on him and he is still a sleeper. Scott Deal had some ugly numbers in rookie ball, but the arm strength is there if he can refine it. Kevin Bunch is another high school guy like Deal and Webb who is a sleeper.

Blez: It's mandatory that in talking with anyone who knows about the minor leagues that I ask about Jeremy Brown.  Does he have a chance to be a major leaguer still or has his time passed already?

Sickels: He still has a chance. Grade C prospect...one of the obstacles he'll have to overcome is the whole "Moneyball" thing that prejudices scouts and (probably) other organizations against him. He won't be a regular but I can see him as a useful bench guy, like a lot of other Triple-A players.

Blez: Finally, which team do you see winning the AL West?

Sickels: This year? none of them are out of the question. In terms of probablity, I think I'd rate it Angels, Athletics, Rangers, Mariners in that order.

Blez: Thanks so much for your time, John.  AN really appreciates it.

Sickels: No prob. Thanks!

[EDITOR'S NOTE:  I will be running an interview with Lewis Wolff I did this morning either later tomorrow or early Wednesday. - Blez]

Comment 57 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

TINSTAPP
Knowledge is Power, Ignorance is Bliss. But I have Blissful Power, because I have a lot of knowledge, I just forgot it all!

by Zonis on Feb 13, 2006 3:14 PM PST reply actions  

I wonder what else was available...
I remember Edwin Jackson was at the center of one rumor.

One second thought though, the Mulder/Hudson trades might all even out if Barton is as good as advertised.  Guess we'll know by late 2007...

"Macha, Howe...whatever." --salb918

by BruceBochte on Feb 13, 2006 4:04 PM PST up reply actions  

The Mulder Trade...
...is a win no matter what Barton turns out to be. Haren was as good as Mulder last year, and Calero is the most reliable right-handed setup man we've had since Mecir's brief prime.

Plus the money we saved allowed us to add parts this winter. If Barton turns out to be the second coming of Pujols (or, more likely, Edgar), it's a masterpiece.

The Huddy trade...well...how 'bout that Mulder trade!

by Oakland East on Feb 13, 2006 9:00 PM PST up reply actions  

The Hudson Deal
The thing that you always have to keep in mind with the Hudson deal is that it is very possible that it enabled the Mulder deal.

Beane's trade of Hudson kind of jolted other GM's into fighting over the other A's pitchers---and likely spurred Jocketty to make a better offer.

I maintain that the best way to look at the deals is:

Mulder
Hudson

for

Barton
Calero
Cruz
Thomas
Meyer
Haren

I absolutely think the A's win out.

by Alien @ Athletics Nation on Feb 14, 2006 5:11 PM PST up reply actions  

bad?
It's still too early.  Meyer is not dead!
Jim

by jarforcefatherofforce on Feb 13, 2006 9:46 PM PST up reply actions  

Does anyone think
that Meyer being at fanfest says anything about the FO's view on his health and progression?

by humdinger on Feb 14, 2006 11:37 AM PST up reply actions  

The Loaiza Signing...
tells me all I need to know about the FO's view of Meyer and his chances.  He'll certainly get a look at some point, but everybody seems so universally down on him that it's hard to foresee a huge bounceback.  

Then again, people seem to forget how spotless his track record was before the injuries.  He's one of the most interesting prospects to watch next year, anything could happen...

by Little Rickey on Feb 14, 2006 3:17 PM PST up reply actions  

ummmm
possibly a dumb question, but who or what the heck is FO?
Green eyes come from yellow flecks of fatty pigment on a dark background. Some men think a green-eyed woman is exotic. The truth is she's got fat eyes.

by Furious George on Feb 14, 2006 3:24 PM PST up reply actions  

Furious 'Orge
Are you suggesting that Joan Baez and I share a basement apartment in Milwaukee? - Poppy @('.')@

by monkeyball on Feb 14, 2006 3:46 PM PST up reply actions  

I thought
it was Feral Owens
Everybody needs a hunting pal - JF

by andeux on Feb 14, 2006 3:55 PM PST up reply actions  

<Annika sorenstam venereal disease>
Nice new sig line, too. That has added ahem "resonance" now.
Are you suggesting that Joan Baez and I share a basement apartment in Milwaukee? - Poppy @('.')@

by monkeyball on Feb 14, 2006 4:02 PM PST up reply actions  

Duuuuuuuu
If you would like me to spell it out for you, OK (okay), I will. Why would BB (Billy Beane) prance around a once highly-touted prospect whom he traded away for our best pitcher unless he had potential to pitch for the A's (Athletics).  Would it be to remind everyone what a colossal blunder the whole trade was?  The inference would then be ... probably not.

by humdinger on Feb 14, 2006 4:41 PM PST up reply actions  

He picks the Angels to win the division...
Face it, with all we've done over the off-season, there will still be many prognosticators who will pick us NOT to make the playoffs again.

Call them the "Doubting Thomases", if you will.  As they'll focus soley on our acquisition of an aging slugger and go no further.  Others will pick the Angels only because they were last years' winner.  And who knows, there might even be that Ray Ratto or Joe Morgan out there that will go out on a limb and predict we have a 100-loss season.

I hate to compare us to Rodney Dangerfield, but until we get to the World Series, we're going
to get very little respect out there.

by Rob @ Athletics Nation on Feb 13, 2006 4:04 PM PST reply actions  

Its like politics...
...the incumbent always gets the benefit of the doubt until someone kicks them out.

I'm glad media types are picking the Angels over the A's. I'd rather sneak up on them and kick 'em square right in the ass.

Having said that, I've seen some pick the A's to win the West.

by bigelephant on Feb 13, 2006 4:16 PM PST up reply actions  

97.835 answer
The explosion of an impulse engine is 97.835 megatons according to Spock.

Answer taken from this site:

http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWdoomsday.html

"Keep the juices going by jangling around gently as you move." - Satchel Paige

by McFood on Feb 13, 2006 4:06 PM PST reply actions  

I think it was closer to
98 megatRons.
"If you throw at someone's head, it's very dangerous, because in the head is the brain." -- Pudge Rodriguez

by niallmack on Feb 13, 2006 4:19 PM PST up reply actions  

nice interview
he mentioned Colt Griffin. He's a hard throwing pitcher in the KC system, defated out of HS, but he's gone nowhere.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/G/colt-griffin.shtml

Everyone should buy Sickels' book, by the way. It has nice writeups and stats about every significant prospect in the minors. It's full of good stuff.

by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 13, 2006 4:07 PM PST reply actions  

"raw home run juice"
Man, last time I tried some of that, I got the Nacho Runs real bad.
Are you suggesting that Joan Baez and I share a basement apartment in Milwaukee? - Poppy @('.')@

by monkeyball on Feb 13, 2006 4:32 PM PST reply actions  

Which is exactly what happened . . .
to me when I read your post.  For those of you scoring at home, chalk one up for monkeyball.  

by camperdog on Feb 14, 2006 12:22 PM PST up reply actions  

<dances on the Dallas star logo>
Are you suggesting that Joan Baez and I share a basement apartment in Milwaukee? - Poppy @('.')@

by monkeyball on Feb 14, 2006 12:53 PM PST up reply actions  

I think John just has a soft spot for the A's
if you look at A's rankings compared to others they are easily bottom third. It is just Johns heart pushing them up.

When I get really bored I will calculate the GPA's.

Been out of school a while is this correct:

A=4
A-3.7
B+=3.3
B=3
B-=2.7
C+
2.3
C= 2.0

Why don't they just lick their fingers? -- http://oaklandprospects.blogspot.com/

by novaoakland on Feb 13, 2006 5:08 PM PST reply actions  

well...
here's a handy gpa calculator from my institute of higer education...

http://www.cba.unl.edu/ugrad/gpa_calc.html

by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 13, 2006 5:28 PM PST up reply actions  

Calculator
Is that the same one that helped get Lawrence Phillips through the Big Red?

by Scutaro The Great on Feb 13, 2006 6:01 PM PST up reply actions  

don't bring that up...
Lawrence Phillips is at best "troubled" and at worst a scumbag.

by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 13, 2006 6:21 PM PST up reply actions  

I ran the numbers...
Here's what I came up with, using Sickel's book as a guide, and the following weights for the GPA: A = 4.00, A- = 3.67, B+ = 3.33, B = 3.00, B- = 2.67, C+ = 2.33, C = 2.00

by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 13, 2006 6:24 PM PST up reply actions  

I forgot...
"Index" is just the GPA mius two, and then multiplied by 100. It's just to achieve a greater gap between teams for the purpose of getting a general idea of where they rank.

by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 13, 2006 6:26 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't like...
...how the weighting sort of penalizes teams for having more ranked prospects than another team. I think the Dodgers and Arizona have higher scores in part because they have fewer prospects. It seems like a team ought to get points for having more of them.

by broaklyn on Feb 14, 2006 7:58 AM PST up reply actions  

i don't think so
LA and Arizona have the same number of prospects listed as the majority of other clubs. the differences in the numbers doesn't make that much difference.

I knocked off enough players from the back end of each club to make them all even, and there are no major differences except boston moving up a few spots.

The Rank column is how they ranked previously.

by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 14, 2006 12:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Fair Enough
The differences are nominal, you're right. I just think that some of the clubs with 5 or 6 more prospects than the average number should get a little bit of bonus consideration. After all, any baseball team in the world can only expect to utilize 9 or 10 players at the top level on an everyday basis. 5 or 6 sounds like a big number in that context. It's helpful to see how the teams stack up with the bottom removed, though. Thanks.

by broaklyn on Feb 14, 2006 11:13 PM PST up reply actions  

Nice chart
I wish there was an easy way to gather all of the BA's/ERA's/OPS/WHIP and other essential stats to be able to place next to each team's GPA for their prospects.  Even though minor league stats are not always the best way to evaluate a prospect.  It might help back an argument as to why the Mets are at the bottom while the Dodgers are at the top of this chart, etc.

by Scutaro The Great on Feb 13, 2006 6:37 PM PST up reply actions  

well
I can tell you why the Mets are at the bottom. Omar Minaya traded away most of his top prospects this winter. The Dodgers just seem to draft well. That's a question Sickels or even Ohad could answer a lot better than I could.

by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 13, 2006 6:49 PM PST up reply actions  

Who are the A's (prospects)?
I'm guessing that it's Upton (AZ), Hermida (FLA), Liriano (MIN), Wood (LAA), Lester (BOS), Gordon (or Butler;KC), Verlander (or Zumaya?;DET), and Zimmerman?

and the first A-'s are Billingsley, Broxton (LAD), Jackson, Quentin, Young, and Drew (AZ)?

If anyone could verify it would be much appreciated.  I know I should just buy the book but I have little money (student) and I'm mostly curious about this upper tier.  Thanks, everybody!

"A nickel ain't worth a dime anymore." - Yogi Berra

by vignette17 on Feb 13, 2006 7:33 PM PST up reply actions  

thanks
Why don't they just lick their fingers? -- http://oaklandprospects.blogspot.com/

by novaoakland on Feb 13, 2006 8:48 PM PST up reply actions  

off top of head
Tampa Bay is wrong.

Delmon Young is an A

Why don't they just lick their fingers? -- http://oaklandprospects.blogspot.com/

by novaoakland on Feb 13, 2006 11:14 PM PST up reply actions  

good call
my mistake. i'll get that fixed

by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 14, 2006 12:13 PM PST up reply actions  

Well done ...
may I make a suggestion?

Cap the number of prospects considered for each team at their top 30. Who really cares how many grade C prospects a team has?

That Dodgers would still lead with a score of 2.67, for instance, but the Marlins would top Arizona, 2.63 to 2.59. The Mets would fall to 2.14, after being credited with a C- prospect to get them to 30.

by devo on Feb 14, 2006 9:34 AM PST up reply actions  

done
i capped it at 29, since that is all the mets had. see above. there were no major changes, except boston moving up a few spots, and florida gaining the #2 spot. all of the other transpositions were by a slim margin.

by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 14, 2006 12:08 PM PST up reply actions  

re
I kind of agree, but on the other hand, I don't really have an argument with damn near any of the grades.

shrug

by 31Boots on Feb 13, 2006 7:23 PM PST up reply actions  

Just wondering:
If people stop buying his books, will that be considered Sickels Sell Anemia?

by Nico on Feb 13, 2006 7:08 PM PST reply actions  

not bad
but i liked your performance after brokeback mountain better. A little regression is normal but it does affect your trajectory though not necesarilly your ceilling. Due to age i'm downgrading you to B-. Your cheese is still top notch but you tend to K alot. More patience is desired for a raise in stock.

by NYC on Feb 14, 2006 6:25 AM PST up reply actions  

Hey, I just got done
reading Sickels' book, and boy are my eyes gay.

<awkward silence>

Um, so, ahem, anyway...

<downgrades self to a C>

by Nico on Feb 14, 2006 8:36 AM PST up reply actions  

oh man
The crickets were going wild for that one!

by NYC on Feb 14, 2006 8:56 AM PST up reply actions  

Agree
But I am not a fan of teams being graded against each other.  There are too many variables to be considered such as stats, age of prospects and the competition that prospects face compared to competition that other prospects face.  As an example how much better is Minnesota's farm system this year compared to Tampa's and not taking into consideration past success or failure?  It's great to look at it from a general fan's perspective when cheering for your teambut I have a hard time making a rational argument based on a team receiving a B compared to a C+.

by Scutaro The Great on Feb 13, 2006 7:12 PM PST reply actions  

re
Great get Blez!  Sickels is the man.  Hopefully we can get mid and post season interviews with him as well.

And for XM subscribers, Sickels will be hosting the midday fantasy show on Fridays starting this month (talking minors a lot more than fantasy, I assume).

by 31Boots on Feb 13, 2006 7:21 PM PST reply actions  

I hated seeing
The Angels rated above the A's. That's just wrong ! I hate the numbers !

by IM4Oakgal on Feb 13, 2006 7:28 PM PST reply actions  

nice interview
I like how he has the Angels finishing first

(JINX PEOPLE)

by OaklandSi on Feb 13, 2006 8:17 PM PST reply actions  

You are wrong though.
LOL
Why don't they just lick their fingers? -- http://oaklandprospects.blogspot.com/

by novaoakland on Feb 13, 2006 11:09 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't understand all the fuss
about John Sickels. he doesn't seem to have much special insight about A's prospects.

by kvn on Feb 14, 2006 8:31 AM PST reply actions  

well
he's done the research and written an overview on something like 1000 minor leaguers each year. he knows what he's talking about. go read minor league ball sometime and you'll see.

by Ryan Armbrust on Feb 14, 2006 12:07 PM PST up reply actions  

Not only that
but he actually travels throughout the year to see many of these guys in person.  He also talks to scouts, front office types, etc. in formulating his grades.

He's one of the smartest, most well-researched minor league experts on the planet.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Feb 14, 2006 12:20 PM PST up reply actions  

I know I know
I think he's great for getting a general sense of the talent that's coming up throughout the league.

It's clear JS does everything necessary to create the best possible analysis of minor league talent, but I do have my doubts after reading his Dan Meyer "Down on the Farm" column last year.  

by kvn on Feb 14, 2006 4:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Meyer had a shoulder issue
all year long.  I'm not sure that you can judge Sickels based on someone who had a persistent injury problem all year long.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Feb 15, 2006 10:45 AM PST up reply actions  

Sickels on Braden
His problems in Double-A are typical of a guy who relies on a trick pitch to breeze through lower levels.

I think this shows that, while Sickels still knows more about prospects than anybody here, he really can't keep up with the ESPN-funded Baseball America "Evil Empire". You can't compare Sickels' inside info access to that of guys like Kevin Goldstein. I heard from multiple sources that said Dallas Braden hardly ever used his scroogie in A-ball, and that his hiccup in AA had more to do with fatigue (plus of course the higher level of hitting) than him not getting anybody out with the screwball.

by OaktownTribesman on Feb 15, 2006 5:27 AM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Oakland Athletics.

Community Guidelines ANcillary Terms

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Aperture_logo_small
Community Prospect List #4

Recent FanPosts

Small
Comcast needs two Hotstove shows!
Small
Moneyball Part II: Billy Beane Shocks the World. Again.
Hahaha_small
Let's Make Some Nicknames!
Fubarcloud_small
Wolf being told to spend money
Small
The wRC+ Challenge
Pumpkin_small
Maybe this is a stupid stats question
Small
A's reportedly sign Cespedes
Unknown_small
Is It Really Worth It: Three Veterans Who May Be Playing Oakland Next Year, But Shouldn't Be
Small
Manny's Contract

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Front Page Writers

Maya_papi_small Tyler Bleszinski

08-_the_author_small 67MARQUEZ

Josefav2_small danmerqury

Baseball_small baseballgirl

Poochini-butt_in_box_2_small Nico

Img_0653_small dwishinsky

Front Page Writers

Smiley_face_small gigglingone

Venasfans_small OaklandSi

60-minutes-clock_small cuppingmaster

Patpicturebucky2_small YonYonson

Img_3830_small David Fung

Moderators

Photofunia-5c770b_small coffee roaster

Denver_small Colorado Fan

Ls_logo100_small LoneStranger

Thumbs_up_small LongTimeFan

Marty_profile_in_green_small mrod

Img_1877_small Billy Frijoles

Babycomputergeek_small paris7

Img_0115_small Tutu-late