Community Organizational Prospect List - #3
by Zonis on Nov 25, 2008 2:24 PM PST
Email
PrintAfter 180 Votes, Trevor Cahill won the Top Prospect award for the A's with 111 (61%) votes, and we're giving #2 to Brett Anderson (54, 30%) , who was far and ahead of the competition (closest was 2%).
Candidates:
OF Aaron Cunningham, IF Chris Carter, SP Gio Gonzalez, SP Michel Inoa, IF Adrian Cardenas, 1B Sean Doolittle, OF Corey Brown, SP Vincent Mazzaro, SP James Simmons, CF Rashun Dixon, C Josh Donaldson, Jemile Weeks
Possibles:
Rashun Dixon
Nino Leyja
Matt Sulentic
Dustin Coleman
Petey Paramore
Grant Desme
Jeff Baisley
Tyson Ross
Brett Hunter
Jeremy Barfield
Jason Christian
Carlos Hernandez
Jamie Richmond
Craig Italiano
Henry Rodriguez
Travis Banwart
Matt Spencer
Jared Lansford
Andrew Carnigan
Sam Demel
Andrew Bailey
Arnold Leon
Fautino De Los Santos
Jason Fernandez
Anthony Recker
Cliff Pennington
Gregorio Petit
Justin Sellers
Danny Putnam
Ryan Webb
Michael Madsen
Eric Patterson
Kevin Melillo
Jeff Gray
84 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Gotta go with Cunningham
While his ceiling isn’t as high as say Carter’s or Cardenas’ (I still think it’s higher than scouts have been crediting him for though) gotta love that he’s already in the majors.
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's or Golden State Warriors? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's and Golden Stat Hoops
FYIi
since weeks is listed…BA ranked hicks #1 twins prospect
lets hope we dont see this list in a few years and what couldve been
smoak
weeks
wallace
hicks
I would have liked to have seen Hicks over the other three.
They could always have turned him back into a pitcher if he couldn’t hit. But it looks like he can hit.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 3:35 PM PST up reply actions
I coulda sworn Melillo was traded to the Jays...
Anyways, I voted for Carter. He has huge potential, and as one of the few 30 hr+ guys we have in the org, is very special.
'Who's that guy we had to release last year because he robbed a bank?'- Billy Beane
Gio Gonzalez is my hero.
Sold for cash, actually
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
DLS should be in the poll
I’d have him higher than a lot of those guys.
The A's colors are green and gold.
Ya, I like the bump if you don't get 5% rule. We could modify it to relegate the bottom three or something.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
Mazzaro?
Mazzaro gets my vote as #3 prospect. The poll neglects to have him as an option.
Why Mazzaro?
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's or Golden State Warriors? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's and Golden Stat Hoops
let me add that I was trying to find a way to get Mazzaro on the list
maybe removing brown or simmons i think, but I struggled to do it. But to have him at 3rd seems way too high to me.
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's or Golden State Warriors? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's and Golden Stat Hoops
Why Mazzaro?
Mazzaro has an excellent sinker that he is able to consistently get outs with in the strike zone, and he had success at AA. At this point in the rankings, 3-7 will be players that I rate as approximately equal in value as prospects, all of whom are a large step down in value from Cahill and Anderson. Mazzaro has a higher upside than Simmons and Cunningham IMO, and he is more of a sure thing than Carter and Cardenas IMO. That is why I pick him at #3.
by BlameChannel53 on Nov 25, 2008 2:59 PM PST up reply actions
Lack of Ks really pushes him down in my book
He just doesn’t project to strike out more than about 5 guys per 9 innings, which is Blanton-ish. Not that Blanton sucks; he’s just got a capped ceiling at about a #3.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
That's a fair criticism
Of course, the same criticism is fairly made against Simmons, who you think has a “lot more upside than people give him credit for.”
As I stated earlier, IMO Mazzaro, Carter, Cunningham, Simmons & Cardenas are my 3-7, but I really rank them as approximately equal.
by BlameChannel53 on Nov 25, 2008 3:26 PM PST up reply actions
Simmons/Mazzaro
They’re exactly the same age (Mazzaro is two days older) and for their minor league careers Simmons has 1 more K/9 and 1 fewer BB/9. Of course that’s not a totally fair comparison, since Mazzaro was drafted out of high school and appears to have made a big leap this year after getting knocked around in the lower minors, but I agree with PT that Simmons doesn’t seem to be getting the respect he deserves. He quietly had a pretty good year at Midland.
Thanks for tomorrow 'cause I've had enough
My agreement depends on what you mean by "respect he deserves"
If you and PT see a higher upside for Simmons than with Mazzaro I will have to disagree. If you see Simmons as a #3 and Mazzaro as a #3 with approximately equal value and think that Simmons is viewed as less than that by others I will agree that he is underrated.
As you said, the two are the same age, and their numbers at AA were a mixed bag. Simmons had 1 more k/9 and .3 lessBB/9. Mazzaro, however, allowed 3HR in 137 innings while Simmons allowed 11, Mazzaro’s ground ball ratio was much better than Simmons’, and Simmons allowed far more hits than Mazzaro did.
I see no way to reconcile an opinion that Mazzaro is no more than a #3 with an opinion that Simmons has upside beyond a #3.
IMO Simmons and Mazzaro are both good prospects, neither of whom is likely to ever be a star. I rate Mazzaro slightly higher because I have more confidence that he can be a starter, while Simmons’ inability at this point to develop a consistent offspeed pitch along with demonstrated tendencies to be a flyball pitcher make me wonder whether he can remain effective a second time through a major league lineup.
by BlameChannel53 on Nov 25, 2008 5:23 PM PST up reply actions
Simmons has a consistent offspeed pitch
viz., his changeup, which is a 55 or 60 pitch. And, as I pointed out, I’m confident he’ll find the feel for a breaking ball at some point.
The other factor in my mind is that Simmons’s numbers are dragged down by the period when he had the sleep issues. During the rest of the season, he was basically dominant, barely walking anyone and striking out basically a batter an inning. I don’t hold the insomnia against him any more than I knock Anderson for his mediocre California League ERA which he acquired b/c of the thumb injury.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Oops
I said “offspeed pitch” when I meant “breaking pitch.” Simmons does have a good change up; it is his best pitch because his fastball is underwhelming both in velocity and movement. Maybe Simmons is able to develop a breaking pitch at some point, but after three years of college and a year+ in the minors, I am unable to share your confidence that he’ll find the feel for one.
by BlameChannel53 on Nov 25, 2008 5:59 PM PST up reply actions
How long did it take J.J. Putz to find secondary stuff?
Guys learn new pitches in the majors all the time.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
How long did it take Jimmy Haynes?
We can cherrypick examples all night of people who did or didn’t develop secondary stuff, but ultimately we will just have to see whether he actually does or not. I am not going to wishcast Simmons an effective breaking pitch without some evidence that he is actually developing one.
by BlameChannel53 on Nov 25, 2008 9:58 PM PST up reply actions
We don't disagree too much
I most meant the latter, that they are rough equals (with little star potential) and that Simmons seems to get overlooked somewhat.
But I also think that Simmons has the (slightly) better chance to be an averagish major league starter. Mazzaro just doesn’t miss enough bats, and that’s likely to be a problem as he faces better competition.
Thanks for tomorrow 'cause I've had enough
yeah, he should be on there before Weeks and Brown at the very least and maybe/probably several others
The A's colors are green and gold.
Another Mazzaro vote
For his age at that level, he had a GREAT season and the k’s should come.
Mazzaro deserved a spot on this vote.
Not that I’m voting for him here.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I decided to support Aaron Cunningham but this is a real tough one
I really like Doolittle’s power/defense/average combo and Carter’s massive power is hard to ignore. Simmons has a lot more upside than people give him credit for, especially if he develops another pitch (and his plus-plus command gives a hint that his mechanics and repeatable motions will allow him to do this). My Corey Brown fetish is well known. I’m really interested to see how the next 10 spots or so shake out.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I also voted for Cunningham
I went with him over Carter because, while strikeouts don’t bother me, I can see how it’s possible that the holes in his swing and defensive issues could prevent him from becoming a good major leaguer. I need to see more from Doolittle. Was this year a fluke/is the power for real? Maybe it’s not fair to penalize a guy just because I can’t figure him out, but it’s not like I’d drop him out of the top 10. He just can’t be #3.
by thejd44 on Nov 25, 2008 2:58 PM PST up reply actions
I'm a Simmons skeptic and don't think he has much upside. I'm not aware of his "plus-plus command"
Why do you think he has Duchscherer command and how is he any more likely to develop another pitch than anyone else? I wasn’t aware of this Corey Brown fetish, and don’t believe in him either. What’s the attraction?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 3:41 PM PST up reply actions
His walk rate from college and the minors is very low.
Scouting reports when drafted all noted the plus plus command.
The A's colors are green and gold.
Simmons had a 3.75 K/BB in 2008. That's very good. Here are some others:
Carlos Hernandez — 4.71
Arnold Leon — 4.45
Brett Anderson — 4.19
Jerry Blevins — 3.73
Fautino De Los Santos (2007) — 3.56
Joey Devine — 3.50
Jared Lansford — 3.37
Do all these guys also have “plus plus command”?
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 5:00 PM PST up reply actions
K/BB is not an indicator of command
At least, not directly. Walk rate is a better indicator and his walk rates over his career have been very low. (They were microscopic in college— he walked 38 batters in 270 innings.) The only periods when he’s walked a significant number of hitters have been in his first cup of professional coffee last season and, this season, when he had the sleep difficulties.
He was graded by scouts as having the best fastball command of any pitcher in the entire 2007 draft class.
The A’s do have a lot of pitchers with plus command… but it’s not fair to compare Simmons to guys working out of the bullpen or in short-season ball. Anderson and, prior to the injury, DLS are/were elite pitching prospects precisely because they combined plus command with exceptional strikeout ability.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Why is BB/BFP a better indicator of the ability to control the strike zone than K/BB?
Isn’t that what separates Justin Duchscherer from Bob Tewksbury? Not that Simmons is as strikeout-free as Bob.
And I don’t understand why having better command than most amateurs at draft time means that he has “plus plus command” relative to professionals in the minor leagues.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 6:13 PM PST up reply actions
K/BB seems like a combination of both command and "stuff"
Whereas a low walk rate is tied to mostly just command
au contra ire
Right
Jason Motte (Cardinals reliever) has a sick, sick fastball but he doesn’t have great command. He has a huge K/BB ratio because no one can f***ing hit his fastball.
When I hear “control the strike zone,” I think of someone like Papelbon, who could pretty much throw everything right down the middle if he felt like it because no one can hit it anyway. I don’t think of a command pitcher like Simmons, or for that matter Duke, who rely on putting the pitch exactly where they want it and the hitter being unable to make solid (or ideally any) contact.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Are we talking comand or control here?
Because from my understanding command is a pitchers handle on the game and ability to throw what he wants when he wants, whereas control is his ability to place it.
by throttle mathius on Nov 25, 2008 6:47 PM PST up reply actions
I'm presuming anyone in this conversation (ie not Henry Rodriguez)
could throw 90% strikes with no hitter at the plate. The ability to strike hitters out while walking very few is what’s hard. I admit the ability to get hitters out on strikes with an overpowering pitch complicates the issue a little, but I’d give Papelbon and Motte and, for that matter, Brandon Webb credit for that, since they don’t need to throw pitches into a baseball size hole to get batters out without walking them. To me it’s more relevant because it’s more closely related to success.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 6:57 PM PST up reply actions
I've heard various inconsistent explanations for the difference between command and control
which leads me to basically ignore the putative (hi, Monkeyball!) difference and treat them as synonyms.
I agree that K/BB is an extremely important stat for pitching prospects (and hitting prospects, for that matter)… it just isn’t “command.” It’s more a predictor stat than a “tools” stat, or to rephrase, it tells you how good someone is rather than what kind of player they are.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I view "control" as the ability to throw strikes (more generally)
and “command” as the ability to throw the ball where you want it (more fine).
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I always thought that "control" was the more PC of the two
But my friend Mac prefers “command”
au contra ire
"He has good cut, but his paste sucks!"
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I also don't get it with Brown, but that's based on actually seeing him play a few times
I’m not sure if I’ll explain this properly, but I’ll try. Basically, I think his window for putting it all together will close too quickly for him to do so. As everybody here knows, prospects really only have so many years of development, and from what I’ve seen Brown just has too much work to do and even though he turns 23 tomorrow and still has time, I just don’t know if he’ll do it. That said, if the lights go off and he does manage to put it together quickly, he jumps way up on the list.
Put another way, even if Brown masters AA and AAA in one year each, he’ll still be 25 before the 2011 season with no major league experience. I think that’s a best-case scenario at this point (maybe a September call-up in 2010). 25 is not too old to make a major league debut and still be a good player, but I think the A’s have enough guys who rank above that type of guy.
by thejd44 on Nov 25, 2008 4:27 PM PST up reply actions
They do have an opening in CF though.
I don’t see Sweeney as more than a two year solution there.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 5:11 PM PST up reply actions
jermaine mitchell?
great athlete, maybe the best defensive cf in the system
unfortunately the hitting at tthis point is very robnett/hererra like
by Asfan4ever723 on Nov 25, 2008 5:13 PM PST up reply actions
Some metrics have Rajai Davis as the best defensive CF in the majors last year
by thejd44 on Nov 25, 2008 5:19 PM PST up reply actions
Do you see him starting there for the A's for more than two years?
It wouldn’t be a terrible idea for the 2009 Yankees but I think the A’s need decent offense from CF.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 5:33 PM PST up reply actions
Oops that was your point. I see now.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 5:34 PM PST up reply actions
I'm surprised... he's the kind of prospect I would think you'd like more than me
He’s not very likely to pan out. However, if he does work out, he could still be spectacularly good. He has a very steep value curve (as compared to someone like Mazzaro, who has a very shallow one).
As for what the attraction is… a 30/20 CF with good plate discipline? That’s Sizemore territory if he can solve his contact issues. Which he isn’t likely to— but that (and some makeup questions) are why he fell to the 57th pick to begin with.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
I see Mike Cameron offense with average defense as his upside.
That doesn’t strike me as a very high upside. The long way he has to go to get there makes him a B-/C+ prospect for me. Now if he could hit like Carter or defend like Cameron, I’d love the guy.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 6:16 PM PST up reply actions
I'm voting Gio.
People are quickly passing him off, IMO. He’s still a very, very good prospect.
I don’t think people realize that he was only 22 last year.
I voted for him, too.
His stuff is fantastic, his ceiling is high. It’s going to be hard for him to harness all of his stuff, but if he can (maybe not even all the way), he’ll be a very important arm in the very near future. I can’t believe we got him and Fautino and Ryan Sweeney for Nick Swisher
I realize Gio was 22 last year.
But I voted Carter. Ryan Howard is more valuable than Barry Zito. I see those as the upsides for them.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 3:43 PM PST up reply actions
I think you're vastly overestimating Carter if you think his upside is Ryan Howard.
I mean, I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think Carter is going to have 45+ homer potential.
Hitting 44 (I think) HRs in a season
as a 21-yo (!) is about as good an indication of 45 HR+ potential you could want.
The A's colors are green and gold.
They were comparing Carter to McGuire at the same age or level last year and said Carter was ahead of McGuire
I would say he has the potential just from that and from hitting 39 hrs this year.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
mac also used roids...tho i dont kno when he started...
'That's something we do...thirteen hits and not score'-Terrence Long
by DyeLongJustice on Nov 25, 2008 6:22 PM PST up reply actions
He didn't start the roids until the majors as his body changed because of them.
He also had 49 hr in his rookie year. I think Carter could be a Cust plus as he can also play 1B and maybe others if they keep moving him.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
Cust Plus?
Do they sell discounted True Outcomes there?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
He looked bad to me
Age is not going to improve his fastball much, and is unlikely to improve his command.
I would definitely trade him for Simmons, Mazzaro, or DLS, and I don’t like him any better than Outman.
The A's colors are green and gold.
I see mikev's point on Gio, but I also see yours.
There’s a whole lot of reasons to support Gio being a future top of the rotation guy, but I, too, don’t really see him as being better than Outman. Gio confuses me, and that’s why I compared him to Oliver Perez a while ago. I think he’ll end up being ok, but ultimately really frustrating.
by thejd44 on Nov 25, 2008 4:29 PM PST up reply actions
I see Gio as a #3 in the making -
flashes of brilliance, maddeningly inconsistent, good but not great. I’ll vote Cunningham, because I think he’s an overachiever who will be “very good at a lot of things” where scouts feel he can merely be “good at a lot of things”. Carter’s next on my list as potentially being one of the few “40HR threats” the A’s have had in a long time – and even if he hits .240 he’ll probably do it with a .360 OBP. Think Jack Cust at 125%.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Cust is a pretty good comp offensively, but Carter should make a better LF
just because he seems to care more about defense than Cust did in the minors and he’s played a number of positions.
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 5:03 PM PST up reply actions
Just the fact that someone even tried Carter at 3B
suggests to me that you’re right. I can’t quite imagine that with Cust.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Carter
Me likey the power
"Their batters are patient to the point that it's annoying." -Ryan Franklin
I voted for Inoa, who now shows "zero" votes.
Apparently AN3 doesn’t yet really believe how high my shame threshold is.
The meaning of life is not so much 'found,' as it is 'made.' --Opus
Oh. I see what you did there.
cue Roseanne Roseannadanna.
The meaning of life is not so much 'found,' as it is 'made.' --Opus
by The Dogfather on Nov 25, 2008 4:53 PM PST up reply actions
I just realized something
I’ll be sad when any of these guys are traded.
Especially Simmons/Mazarro (assuming Anderson/Cahill are untouchable).
It’s sad.
I know that's a pisser, baby.
Except if they're traded for better players
then its awesome
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's or Golden State Warriors? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's and Golden Stat Hoops
QOTM!
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 6:18 PM PST up reply actions
I don't "get" it.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Whereas I laughed for at least 30 seconds
It's not the results, it's how you look going about those results -- Tim McCarver
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 25, 2008 7:00 PM PST up reply actions
Both for me
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Me neither
but I’ll take it
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's or Golden State Warriors? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's and Golden Stat Hoops
Poll Closed, Chirs Carter Wins
next list
http://www.athleticsnation.com/2008/11/25/670765/community-organizational-p
facepalm.jpg
Yay Chirs!!!
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Taking things a bit fast, aren't we?
At this rate, we’ll have reached Christian Vitters by next Monday.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
"She" talks about obscure A's organizational players?
Oh, I get it, you’re dating Melissa Lockard.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
