BP Top 100 Out
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 31, 2008 9:46 AM PST
27 comments
Kevin Goldstein has released his Top 100 at baseballprospectus.com. Seven A's are included on the list as follows: Barton (22), Carlos Gonzalez (26), de los Santos (46), Anderson (50), Gio Gonzalez (56), Cahill (98), Carter (99). Five of the seven in the Top 100 came from the Swisher and Haren trades, and six of the seven in the Top 100 came from other organizations. Billy does know how to trade for prospects, doesn't he?
0 recs |
27 comments
Email
Print
Comments
very strong presence in the bottom three
by Cutthemullet on Jan 31, 2008 9:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
QOTC
by Ozzz on Jan 31, 2008 10:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
could've gone QOTM
and then specified "millennium". I think I'd like that even more
by Cutthemullet on Jan 31, 2008 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Other AL west teams
Angels:
- Nick Adenhart, rhp, Angels
- Brandon Wood, 3b/ss, Angels
- Jordan Walden, rhp, Angels
- Hank Conger, c, Angels
Mariners:
- Jeff Clement, c, Mariners
- Chris Tillman, rhp, Mariners
- Carlos Triunfel, ss, Mariners
- Wladimir Balentien, of, Mariners
Rangers:
- Neftali Feliz, rhp, Rangers
- Eric Hurley, rhp, Rangers
- Elvis Andrus, ss, Rangers
- Engel Beltre, of, Rangers
- Michael Main, rhp, Rangers
- Chris Davis, 3b, Rangers
- Taylor Teagarden, c, Rangers
Santana bounty:
- Carlos Gomez, of, Twins
- Deolis Guerra, rhp, Twins
Some players A's fans have been eyeing:
- Andy LaRoche, 3b, Dodgers
- Chin-Lung Hu, ss, Dodgers
- Brent Lillibridge, ss, Braves
by rfloh on Jan 31, 2008 10:26 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I think it's safe to say that BP thinks the A's
have the best system in the division.
If the Dodgers want to swap LaRoche and Hu for Blanton ... I'd do the deal ... Eric Chavez could be our second baseman of the future ... imagine the team that we'd have in 2010 ...
by devo on Jan 31, 2008 10:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Eric Chavez?
Second baseman?
Please don't say these frightening words. His range would be worse than Ronnie Belliard's.
In any event, there wouldn't be any need to resort to that. The team currently has a hole in left field, and LaRoche's bat would certainly be sufficient there.
Wouldn't the Dodgers want Chavez back if they traded LaRoche? Surely even Colletti can't think Nomar is an acceptable answer there anymore.
by PaulThomas on Jan 31, 2008 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Using a strict definition of prospect, yeah.
This is what he said about Adam Jones in his ongoing chat:
Easy Top 10 for me. I'm a HUGE fan. He's a very rare kind of player, and that he's taken a major step forward for three straight years. That's very difficult to find.
by rfloh on Jan 31, 2008 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You are correct.
Rangers 7 prospects in Top100
Average Rank = 60.43
Athletics 7 Prospects in Top100
Average Rank = 56.72
by Colorado Fan on Jan 31, 2008 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If the Bedard trade goes through
the M's system will be thinned out.
by Zonis on Jan 31, 2008 10:53 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
so BP likes the a's prospects over the rangers?
by xbhaskarx on Jan 31, 2008 11:04 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Not by a huge margin
310 Borda Count points (100 for 1st, 99 for 2nd, etc.) to 274.
by PaulThomas on Jan 31, 2008 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
has BA done their top 100 yet?
i know sickels has...
by xbhaskarx on Jan 31, 2008 11:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Borda count
probably isn't the best thing to use, as the talent distribution isn't going to be evenly spaced over the top 100 - there's likely to be a much bigger difference between spots at the top than at the bottom. That works in the A's favor here, as we have many more prospects close to the top of the list (though still none in the top 20). Of the 14 prospects (7 each) these two teams have, the A's have numbers 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 13 and 14
by andeux on Jan 31, 2008 11:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder
Would Chris Carter be in the Top100 if he were still w/in the Diamonbacks Organization? Or, did it help that he was highlighted this offseason w/ Beane acquiring/targeting him? Would that help the other prospects rankings, too? I wonder.
by Colorado Fan on Jan 31, 2008 12:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
He was traded twice
The D-Backs got him for Carlos Quentin.
by PaulThomas on Jan 31, 2008 12:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is what Goldstein said in his current chat
here.
The list for consideration was about 130-140 long -- and none of those three were on it. There are a handful of 3 star guys at the end. Basically, I wanted five-star to represent Top 50 candidates, and four-star to represent Top 100 candidates, but it didn't really turn out that way because the talent is down.
by rfloh on Jan 31, 2008 12:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Keith Law's top 100
A's:
38 Daric Barton
42 Carlos Gonzalez
57 Fautino de los Santos
94 Trevor Cahill
Angels:
23 Nick Adenhart
34 Brandon Wood
79 Jordan Walden
87 Hank Conger
Mariners:
18 Carlos Triunfel
44 Jeff Clement
95 Wladimir Balentien
Rangers:
31 Elvis Andrus
40 Taylor Teagarden
46 Michael Main
48 German Duran 2B/3B
60 Eric Hurley
69 Chris Davis 3B
98 Engel Beltre RF
by rfloh on Jan 31, 2008 12:34 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Wow
No Gio or Anderson, thats pretty surprising. Guys over at Sickels blog seem to be a lot higher on KGs rankings than Laws.
by SuperBean on Jan 31, 2008 1:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The more I've talked to Law
The more I don't understand his philosophy. He likes guys that I would never expect him to like and vice versa. Honestly, I've been putting less and less stock into his work the more I read.
by thejd44 on Feb 4, 2008 4:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
balentien
seems low
by flipgatey3 on Jan 31, 2008 1:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hate to rain on your parade but...
we had to trade our two best players to just get 5 of these guys. Instead of bragging about how many players we have, and how our avg is 59.6566516 vs the Rangers 61.54684621, let's get some perspective.
Our minor league "system" SUCKS and we had to gut our big league team just to make it respectable. We may have a few good prospects now, but unless we start drafting smarter and signing more foreign players, it will continue to suck once our current prospects hit the majors. Look at the Angels, arguably the most talented team in the league and definitely the best team in the West. They have FOUR top 100 players and they didn't have to trade their veterans to get them.
I'm sorry, but the A's high rankings are hallow. We should have the unequivocal, absolute best group of prospects, after ditching all our talent. But we don't. Boston, Atl, and bunch of other teams have great farm systems and a terrific big league clubs.
by EatMoreChicken on Jan 31, 2008 8:34 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Not raining on my parade
Does Billy deserve credit for having the sack to rebuild when most GMs -- and 80% of fans apparently -- would have made a couple of small free agent signings and pretended that the A's were contenders? Yes. Does Billy deserve credit for making good trades once he decided to rebuild? Yes. Does Billy deserve blame for the fact that the team was in the position to rebuild? Of course. Billy can't be praised for being a genius for competing on a law payroll while avoiding blame when "his shit doesn't work" in the regular season either.
I have been a vocal critic of the A's refusal to spend more money on acquiring amateur talent, long before the AN community as a whole finally decided to acknowledge that the A's farm system was in a state of serious disrepair. I also think the A's front office is playing very fast and loose with the facts when it comes their rationalizations of refusing to spend more money on amateur talent. I think that you are being unfair, however. Expecting the A's to go from one of the worst systems to the "unequivocal, absolute best group of prospects" based on trading two players is simply too much to ask.
It is also unfair to suggest that the A's farm system will suck after the current crop of prospects advances to the majors. There are many causes of the decline of the A's farm system: low draft position due to winning teams, refusal to invest money in amateur talent, and overconservative drafting in middle to late rounds to name a few. The A's appear to be committed to fix these past errors, however, and the next couple of drafts will give the A's the chance to pick up high end talent due to poor MLB records.
I agree with you that the A's have no chance to be a consistently competitive team without quality drafting and smart investments in international amateurs. Notwithstanding you criticism, the current strength of the farm system is not "hollow," and we may yet get our chance to "hallow" Billy in the future.
by BlameChannel53 on Jan 31, 2008 9:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is simply not correct
The way to get the "unequivocal, absolute best group of prospects" is to draft them. It is literally impossible to acquire them in trade. No one-- I mean NO one-- trades top 10 prospects anymore.
And the best way to draft them is, surprise surprise, to lose a hell of a lot of games. The D-Rays have 3 "A" prospects in John Sickles's ranking schema-- by far the best system in baseball. 2 of those 3 guys were top 5 overall picks-- a level of crappiness the A's haven't even approached in over 10 years.
by PaulThomas on Jan 31, 2008 11:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, apparently the Mariners do
The top-100 list makers seem to concur that Adam Jones would be in the top 10 if he were still eligible (and he's only 9 AB's over the cutoff). Of course, for some reason the Mariners themselves don't seem to recognize him as a top 10 guy.
Still, while "no one-- I mean NO one" is a bit hyperbolic, I agree with your basic point. For practical purposes, those guys are almost completely off the table, and you can't let your rebuilding strategy depend on trying to pry one of them loose. People thinking we could have somehow held out for Justin Upton in the Haren trade, for example, are kidding themselves.
by Faust on Feb 1, 2008 5:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Alright, fair point
So if you're trading the AL leader in strikeout percentage to a known idiot, you MIGHT be able to get a top 10 prospect. With a "degenerative hip condition."
by PaulThomas on Feb 1, 2008 8:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You need perspective too
The Rangers also gutted their big league team to get their minor league system.
Secondly, the A's recent draft record before the trade was not great, no. Relative to every other team in the league, it is actually around average.
The "problem" actually are the Harden / Crosby drafts. Both Harden and Crosby have busted and been crap, and have basically returned nothing.
Also, teams actually value prospects nowadays. Look at the returns on Johan Santana. The Twins ditched the best pitcher in baseball. The 2 guys who qualify for the prospects lists couldn't even crack the top 50 in Goldstein's list.
Or look at the Mark Teixeira trade. The package that the Rangers got for him is not better than the package that A's got for Haren.
by rfloh on Feb 1, 2008 3:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Harden was a 19th round pick
He's already provided vastly more value than an average 19th rounder.
by PaulThomas on Feb 1, 2008 8:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
