Who is the better prospect?

Other Stuff

Considering all things, who is the better prospect; Quintin Berry or Greg Golson? State your case below.

34 thoughts on “Who is the better prospect?”

  1. Golson is actually younger that Berry and has more experience in the higher levels, which gives him a temporary lead. But Berry is coming on strong and may surpass Golson by this time next year. Golson is stronger than Berry, too, but the knock on Golson is that he strikes out WAY too much and doesn’t take walks. If Golson were a 30 home run guy, then you could live with the low On Base Percentage, but Golson may never reach 30 home runs. Berry, on the other hand, has an excellent On Base Percentage and does not strikeout nearly as much. If Berry can continue that trend in the higher minors while running wild on the bases, it won’t be long before he’s wearing a Major League jersey. Bottom line, I’d rather see Golson traded than Berry.

    Like

  2. Oooooo…. This one is interesting.

    My approach is going to be thus: I’m not going to worry about upside, tools, etc etc, and judge this solely on this criterion: Which player would I rather have on my team?

    I have to go with Berry. First, he’s only a year older than Golson. GG certainly has an edge in the power department – Golson has 40 extra base hits in 400 ABs, and Berry has 16 in 335 at bats. I think that is the only area where Golson would be more enticing.

    Berry has more than twice the amount of walks and only about 40% of GG’s strikeouts though. His batting average is also 30 points higher, which leads to a meaty OBP of just under .400. He also has around 15 more steals (again, in 70 less at bats).

    Berry’s number look like the quintessential leadoff hitter numbers. Golson looks like a speedy guy with some pop in his bat that might bat sixth in a lineup.

    Going solely by the numbers, it would be Berry.

    – Jeff

    Like

  3. Golson ceiling looks to be a Juan Encarnacion type player. In other words a guy who has a lot of physical tools, hits for some power, but doesn’t get on base enough to be a true difference maker in your lineup. However, it should be added that the Phillies have had players who have improved their plate discipline at the major league level, Shane Victorino jumps to mind as he’s already surpassed his walk total from last year.

    I’m not sure who Quentin Berry’s ceiling is, is he a Michael Bourn clone without the top end speed? In looking at the Phillies system, they already have Bourn at the ML level and Jovan Moran at AA.

    Change my username to Golson’s biggest fan, because I’d take him instead of Quentin Berry who is a nice player but I feel his skillsets are already duplicated within the system by Bourn and Moran

    Like

  4. I think Encarnacion is a good ML parallel. The Phillies could
    do a lot worse than a guy like that in their OF. And don’t
    forget Golson’s defensive skills. Strong arm and he covers
    ground. It’s a good question, but I will go with Golson (by
    a nose) if he continues his (gradual) improvement. But it’s
    nice to have both of them around.

    Like

  5. I’m going with Berry, just simply because Golson still has very negligible plate discipline at this point. From everything I’ve seen/read Golson is the better defensive prospect along with possessing some power, but that doesn’t make up for the very high k-rate and his inability to consistently get on base. However, like was mentioned before, some players develop discipline later on. Golson does seem to be that sort of player, but I just really don’t know how much so. Berry for now, but Golson is VERY close behind.

    Like

  6. Yeah, for me it was a tough choice. If you figure that Golson could be a .270 hitter with 20HR and 40 steals, most teams would love a guy like that. I just feel that Berry’s numbers – .300 BA, .400 OBP and around 50 steals – translate into a “difference maker” type of guy, especially if he is adept at working counts (I’m guessing that is the case due to the fact that his strikeout and walk totals are almost the same).

    – Jeff

    Like

  7. Golson. Subpar plate discipline generally makes you an overrated player. It doesn’t necessarily make you a bad player.

    Like

  8. I don’t think you can discount that Golson is a year younger and playing a level higher. His lack of walks is worrisome, but his developing power is a big plus. He also is a plus CF and likely will be a plus basestealer, although his efficiency could be higher. From what they have done so far and their level/age I am not sure either translates into an above average major league starter. Berry’s numbers do not spell difference maker to me at this point, although he may continue to develop. His SB efficiency also needs to improve. It is a stretch to see him growing from a .376 obp in the low minors to .400 obp in the majors, especially since he is a bit old for his league and doesn’t show much power.

    I think difference maker OF prospects have OPS of over .800 in the low minors, unless the OPS shortfall is due to power that will develop over time.

    Berry is not at Bourn levels yet. Bourn was at Lakewood at same age as Berry, but had an obp of .433 and a slg of .470. A .900 OPS says difference maker a lot more than the numbers put up this season by Golson and Berry. And Bourn has not been an offensive juggernaut in the majors, at least thus far.

    In picking Golson over Berry, the discouraging thing is Golson is doing a little worse at CLW this year than he did in second half of last season.

    Like

  9. I don’t think either are really good prospects. I think if things go well for them they might make useful big league players.

    Berry didn’t lok like much at all prior to this season and he didn’t start out very well in 2007. But he did get hot shortly after the season started and he’s pretty much stayed there. The fact that he made such a dramatic leap forward this season is the biggest factor in his favor in my view. But he really looks a lot like Bourn except he’s not as good. And bourn is far from a sure thing.

    Golson has made some improvements as he’s developed but he really isn’t Good at a lot of things. He’s fast and he’s supposed to be a very fined defensive OFer with a good arm. He has power but not a LOT of power and he hits for an OK average but not a great average. And he doesn’t walk and he strikes out a ton. I think an awful lot of things need to go right for him in order to be more than a spare part as he advances.

    Both of these guys could make one more big leap froward and become hot prospects. But I think both have a long way to go.

    I think Berry’s remarkable improvement this season gives him a slight edge as a prospect at this point.

    Like

  10. I think Golson’s the better prospect, and it’s probably not all that close. He might be Juan Encarnacion, but he also could be Carl Crawford–who’s been a pretty useful pro despite not yet developing any plate discipline. The speed, power and defense all seem to be there.

    (Here are Crawford’s minor-league stats: http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/Carl-Crawford.shtml. He was a little ahead of Golson developmentally, but the numbers are pretty close.)

    Berry’s certainly having a nice year and is a guy to keep an eye on, but he seems to have as little or less power than Bourn–16 extra-base hits. Will he keep drawing walks as he moves up? It seems unlikely to me unless he starts doing more damage, and playing next year at 23 I don’t know how much more he’s likely to fill out physically.

    Like

  11. Pingback: Top Posts « WordPress.com

  12. I don’t think either is a can’t-miss prospect at this point in their minor league careers.

    Both are relatively flawed – Berry is old for his league and doesn’t have much pop, and it remains to be seen if he can hold his near-.400 OBP up for a full season. I’d like to see the Phils challenge him next year by moving him up and seeing how he does against better competition.

    Golson strikes out too much, doesn’t take a walk, and isn’t very efficient at swiping bags. His lack of plate discipline is the most glaring area of deficiency. I’m not sure how I feel about him, to be honest.

    Berry wasn’t even really on the prospect radar until his hot start. I want to see his numbers become more consistent over a full season.

    I don’t think either will be superstar outfielders. Golson might be a Brad Hawpe type (great arm, decent pop, useful player) with some speed. I’m not sure Berry would compare favorably to Victorino or Bourn. We haven’t seen any of them perform over a full season, and might not get an idea of how good Bourn is until next season if Aaron Rowand departs in free agency.

    I’d have to take Golson if he becomes anything like Brad Hawpe. He won’t be a super-star, but he’ll help the club in a possible platoon.

    Like

  14. I think you’ve got to rate Golson the better prospect at this point. His plate discipline isn’t great, but he’s a year younger than Berry, is a level above him and he seems to have pretty good tools. His “splits” also show that he appears to be adjusting to the league and will be ready for AA next year – if he does well at AA, he will probably end up being a major leaguer, but how good he’ll be is really anyone’s guess. You can project a myriad of scenarios for his career at this point.

    As for Berry, to my mind, at this juncture, if all goes well, he’ll be another Michael Bourn. We’ve got a Michael Bourn and we’ve got Victorino. If Berry progresses, perhaps his best use is as fodder in a future trade.

    Two other items.

    First, I think I was right about who to promote and who to leave be. Carrasco needs time to continue the adjustment process at AA. If he can put together 4 or 5 more solid starts, I would be okay with a late August call-up if the organization feels he’s ready. As for Donald and Outman, I’m no scout, but it seems to me they are now wasting time at Clearwater – move them up and get them going at Reading – the sooner the better.

    Finally, what to do with Donald and Costanzo. There’s no need to move either of them now, but, ultimately, it seems to me that Donald should probably be moved to third if he has enough arm – the big league team is set at first, second and short for, like, the next 8 years or so (I’m exaggerating, but only slightly).

    I think Costanzo is not getting the attention he deserves. Starting in the AZ fall league (he should be playing there), I would rotate Costanzo between third and left field, so he can play both positions. Right now, he’s far too error prone to be a major league third baseman and the team will have an opening in left in 2009. We overlook this guy a bit. If his batting average were 25 points higher, we’d be raving about him. Although he’s not doing exactly what you would like and his progress seems slow at times, on the whole, he is starting to become a dangerous hitter and he is learning the strike zone. Apparently, he is also a very hard worker. In the end, he may be a wash out, but he may also become a nice long-term replacement for Burrell in left field. The guy has serious power and he gets on base. He’ll likely get a full year at AAA to show he can make regular contact. He should remain on everyone’s radar screen.

    Like

  15. Costanzo’s errors are a frequent subject of unwarranted hysteria. It’s very common for minor league infielders to make a lot of errors. This happens for a variety of reasons. Costanzo made 22 errors last year, which is pretty normal. His error total is unusually high this year, but a huge chunk of those errors occurred in what was clearly an anomalous stretch at the beginning of the season. Since May 15, he’s committed 12 errors, which projects out to 26 over a full season – also a normal total for a minor league infielder.

    Like

  16. I also think Costanzo will be fine at 3B. I don’t see the benefit of working him in LF. He likely lacks the bat for LF anyway. The biggest concern with Costanzo is to continue to improve against LHP and off-speed pitches. He should be allowed to focus on his hitting without having to learn another position. LF is a lot easier to fill than 3B, which is our clear position of need.

    Like

  17. Heh. How’d this turn into a Costanzo debate? Oh well, I’ll throw in my .02. Barring a trade or signing, I say that Costanzo will be given the 3B job at some point, although I foresee him being rested against lefties if he struggles against them. That will possibly reduce his K’s. As for his defense, I thought I read somewhere that he didn’t play much 3b before being drafted because his arm was being saved for when he pitched. So, technically, he is learning on the job.

    I’ve heard conflicting reports about his work ethic though.Some places (probably the Delco Times, who have Fawning Adulation for any athlete from Delaware County. They compared him to Utley and Howard at the start of the season.) have praised his habits, while I read somewhere else (I forget where – maybe it was even here) that he has tendencies to sulk.

    – Jeff

    Like

  18. Costanzo is going to be a solid player at 3B in the future, the Phillies just have to break him in a little slowly. When Chase Utley first came up he was more of a platoon player who grew into playing every day. I think Costanzo will be fine getting the majority of his ABs against right handers and he will benefit from receiving major league instruction on both fielding and hitting. He’s got the tools to be a successful player and should come in batting 7th in the order with minimal pressure on him.

    Like

  19. Golson is the better prospect and it isn’t even close. If you removed his strike-outs, there wouldn’t be a debate and I think that he would be one of the top 100 prospects in baseball. The rest of his numbers are 5-tool’ish. Now add back the Ks and his status deminishes. But this IS an area he can improve. Here is an interesting stat, Ryan Howard had a worse K rate in Clearwater at 23 (vs. Golson at 21). And we all know how Howard’s eye has improved. He still has a high K rate, but hits for great power, average and walks a lot. With Golson, you have to remember that he is young and is a very hard critic on himself. Which means that he is probably just trying too hard. He will learn to let the game come to him and he will become more patient at the plate. It will all come with maturity. And when it does, everyone will focus on his power, speed, defense and very good average. I think that he is right were he should be at 21.

    Like

  20. I agree Golson is the better prospect for many of the reasons you say, but it is a lot harder and less likely than you are making it sound for Golson to improve plate discipline to increase walks and reduce Ks. Howard is more the exception than the rule and that seems to have as much to do with his truly stunning power causing pitchers to be extremely careful with his as it does with improvements in his plate discipline, although he certainly has eliminated some holes in his swing from A days. Golson doesn’t have and isn’t likely to develop power anywhere approaching Howard’s, so on a team with guys like Utley and Howard, pitchers just aren’t going to pitch as carefully to Golson. As he moves up levels he will face pitchers who are less wild and who throw more quality strikes, so his K/BB ratio is as likely to get worse as it is to improve.

    The biggest problem with Golson is that he is at the same level that he played at during the second half of 2006 and his stats have not improved.

    Like

  21. allentown I agree with everything you said up untill that last part. while it is dissapointing that Golson hasn’t moved up a level yet this year, he has been putting up better numbers.

    LAST YEAR- .233AVG, 13HR, 45XBH, 48RBI, 30 SB, .651OPS

    THIS YEAR-286AVG, 12HR, 42XBH, 53RBI, 25SB, .776 OPS
    (in 135 less At bats)

    I’d say those are vastly improved numbers that he has put up.

    Like

  22. Allentown, why do you say it’s unlikely that Golson will ever reduce his K rate and improve his walk numbers? 2/3 of our starting outfield has done just that this year, both Rowand and Victorino are having career offensive years, and it seems to coincide with an increased walk rate for both of them. Rowand already has 31 walks on the year, his career high is 32, Victorino has 32 walks on the year, last year he drew 24. Isn’t it possible that guys can still improve once they hit the major league level, it seems that the team of Thompson and Manuel may be pretty good hitting coaches.

    Like

  23. I look for Golson to have a big year at Reading in ’08,
    assuming he maintains the trajectory he’s on now.

    Like

  25. I think that there is also the possibility of a batter becoming more patient once he gets to the majors. As one Dominican shortstop (I forget who) said in the mid-80s, “You don’t get off the island by walking.” I imagine the same holds true for minor leaguers. Drawing 80 walks might not get you a trip to the Bigs. You will get noticed more if you hack away and hit 25 homers. (I should mention that my logic is probably flawed in the Moneyball era, because a lot more attention is paid to things like OBP now). I don’t know if that will be the case with Golson, but I’m sure that possibility exists

    – Jeff

    Like

  26. Anonymous —
    I was not comparing whole year numbers. What I said was a comparison of second half of 2006 while he was at CLW and this season to date, at CLW. I admit, I was looking at stats a few days old, so they did not include his last few big games. But his CLW stats from 2006 are a lot better than the full year stats you report, which include the first half of season at Lakewood.

    Anyway, 2006 at CLW:

    159 AB .264 BA .324 obp 6 HR .472SLG 7SB .796 OPS

    Harrisburg Husker —
    I wasn’t talking about improving walk rate from first year in majors to more established in majors as is case with ictorino. Rowand’s improvement still strikes me as good, but atypical for pros with his level of experience. I was talking about expects obp to increase significantly by taking more walks as a guy goes up levels in minors and to pros. It happens, but I don’t think it is typical. Bourn was a .400+ obp guy as he moved up in minors through A ball. Less in upper minors and big leagues. I think this is natural progression for a non-power hitter who starts to encounter a higher percentage of pitchers who throw strikes and quality strikes.

    Like

  27. Allentown, I agree, it is rare for players to dramatically improve their walk rate at the big league level, it just isn’t without precedent. I just have a soft spot in my heart for players like Golson.

    In related news, check out Reggie Taylor, he’s lighting up the Mexican league. I’m not sure what the Mexican league would equate to, but in 368 ABs he’s putting up a .428 .576 1.004 line with 49 walks and 55 Ks. Where is this performance coming from??!!

    Like

  28. Maybe he was just a really slow learner. I think Mexican league in general is no better than EL.

    Like

  29. Speaking of who is the best prospect, who is the best prospect, Freddy Galvas, ss for williamsport or Cardenas.ss Lakewood? I heard the announcer for the williamsport game say that Galvas was the best infielder in the phillies farm system.

    Like

  30. It’s really silly to compare Golson’s current season against only his Clearwater stats from last year. He only had 159 AB at Clearwater.

    Golson played most of last season at Lakewood, where he struggled mightily. Then he was inexplicably promoted, and then even more inexplicably he got ultra-hot at Clearwater. He cooled off a bit at the very end of the season, but his final Clearwater stats were pretty decent. His final combined stats for the entire year, however, were still pretty bad.

    This past offseason, the anti-Golson argument was that his Clearwater numbers shouldn’t be looked at in isolation, because his stats for the entire year were still lousy. Now, apparently, the anti-Golson argument has become that his Clearwater numbers should be looked at in isolation, because that proves he’s actually gotten worse this year instead of better. That’s just dumb.

    The truth is that Golson really was bad last year. Just because he went on a hot streak after his bad stats were artificially cordoned off doesn’t change the fact that he only had one late-season hot streak in a year full of struggles. But he’s doing OK this year, which means he’s improved a lot, which isn’t a complete surprise given that he was only 20 during his bad year last year. He’s still bad at drawing walks but his overall offensive trendlines are good, and if he continues to develop he wouldn’t be the first good player to be bad at drawing walks. Guys who rarely walk are generally overrated, but if they’re excellent at other phases of the game they can still be useful.

    Like

  31. Golson was just promoted to Reading. Does that say anything about what the organization thinks of him as a prospect? He’s still 21 until Sept and will be in AA. He has a chance to make something out of himself.

    Like

  32. who is the better infielder Lakewoods Cardenas or Williamsport Freddy Galvis. I heard the game announcer say Galvis is the best infielder in the phillies system.

    Like

  33. who is the better infielder, Lakewoods Cardenas or Williamsport Freddy Galvis? I heard the game announcer say that Galvis is the phillies best infielder.

    Like

Comments are closed.