A week ago, I posted the Top 15 prospect list from Baseball HQ penned by Deric McKamey, and it sparked a nice discussion. Deric was kind enough to answer some questions for us, so I’ll share that here. Before I get to that, here is a bit more info on the project. The 2008 Minor League Baseball Analyst profiles over 1000 minor league prospects and includes detailed scouting reports, sabermetrics, Major League Equivalencies, organizational lists, Top 100 list, and Potential Ratings. The book can be purchased through Baseball HQ where the purchaser will also receive a free update to the lists in the book. People may also purchase the book through any of the major on-line bookstores. The Minor League Baseball Analyst is expected to arrive mid-January. Ok, now you know the system being used and where to purchase the full work if you want it, so lets get to the questions.
1. Your system of rating the ceiling and the probability of reaching that mark is interesting. I was curious if there was a type of “conversion chart”, where you could maybe determine that a 9E, for example, is likely to end up a 7C, or something along those lines. In the case of Travis Mattair, you rated him a 9E, which means a 10% chance of becoming elite. Is there a way to kind of find a secondary score for a player based on his number/letter score?
I don’t have any kind of conversion chart or thought about giving a secondary score, but there can be an assumption that a player given a 9E rating is going to rank similar to an 8D or 7C, and so on. The rating system is very similar to what Hockey’s Future uses, and I do credit them in my book. We’ve had lengthy discussions at Baseball HQ about the system, and there is always going to be a question when it comes to ranking prospects with different ratings. My response is this; use it as another tool, not as something that is absolute.
2. You rated Travis d’Arnaud as a 7E, meaning he has a lower ceiling and also a low probability. Everything I’ve read on him seems to indicate that he’s already an excellent defender at a young age. Wouldn’t that mean he should maybe have a higher probability of success, considering the value of even below average hitting catchers in the major leagues?
You certainly can make a case for him having a higher probability rating and he is an excellent defensive catcher with plus arm strength and solid receiving skills. I’m not a big believer in his bat, and that’s from looking at his scouting video and his performance in the GCL. I think he may be capable of having moderate power, but believe he’ll struggle to hit for AVG due to medium bat speed and marginal plate discipline.
3. JA Happ and Josh Outman have exactly the same rating, a 7C, but they are very different types of pitchers. Happ is more of a finesse guy, while Outman has exceptional velocity for a lefty. They both had their share of control problems in 2007, but what was it that basically made them the same type of prospect specifically?
Happ isn’t a hard-thrower (84-91 MPH), but changes speeds well, has a deceptive delivery, and has posted solid strikeout numbers in the upper minors. Command and feel are paramount for a pitcher of this type and I think he just got into a bad rut in 2007. He doesn’t have much of a curveball, and by relying predominantly on two pitches as a starting pitcher, it is hard to develop any kind of efficiency.
Outman throws very hard (88-94 MPH) for a LH pitcher, but doesn’t miss bats like his stuff would indicate, lacks deception, and can be somewhat predictable. I’ve seen Outman pitch twice and both times, he got lit-up like a Christmas tree (trying to keep with the season). I know those starts are outliers because he did lead the FSL in ERA. His fastball, while possessing good velocity, doesn’t have much movement, so when his command isn’t sharp, he can be very hittable.
For me, they both project as backend starters, with Happ getting a slight edge based on polish and a strong performance in the upper minors.
4. Mike Zagurski was rated as a 6, a platoon player, which indicates your system views him as a lefty specialist, even though he was actually better against RH batters in 2007. Do you feel this is an anomaly and he’ll be strictly a specialist going forward?
Zagurski was limited in innings pitched in 2007, but was very potent against hitters from both sides. I don’t know if I would call his success against RH batters an anomaly, as his change-up is his primary comp, but I did mention in my commentary for the Minor League Baseball Analyst, that he can be more than a situational reliever. While his stuff may be good enough to close, it is hard to project LH pitchers as closers, especially when that wasn’t their primary role in the minors. My reasoning behind the 6 rating was based on his role as a setup reliever, injury history, and age, whereas the A portion of the rating indicates that I think he’s ready for the Majors right now.
5. Both Zagurski and JA Happ had injury problems in 2007, as well as 2006 first rounder Kyle Drabek, and 2007 first rounder Joe Savery. How much does the injury history of a player impact his ceiling grade and then his probability grade? For example, would Drabek be an E if he hadn’t had Tommy John surgery? How much medical information do you have access to when trying to assign these grades?
Injury history has plenty to do with his Potential Rating. Drabek, for instance would have a D or possibly a C at the end of his rating, had he performed reasonably well and avoided the knife in 2007. Most players that have had serious arm surgeries aren’t going to get more than a D rating from me until they prove their arm and/or shoulder are sound.
Medical information is a lot more difficult to come-by with the HIPAA laws enacted. I do have access to a little more information than the mainstream media by talking with the baseball clubs/personnel, and because I work in the medical field myself (I run a heart/lung machine for open-heart surgery) and know a few orthopedic surgeons, I’m able to get first-hand knowledge about surgery and recovery times.
6. Two names were “missing” from this list from my point of view in Scott Mathieson and Brad Harman. Mathieson is another guy coming back from injury, but still has a big time arm and is still young. Did he not qualify for the list, or are you not high on him? Harman had a huge second half, and seems like he could turn into a very useful utility infielder at worst, and a good regular middle infielder at best. Thoughts on him?
Mathieson is a pitcher I really like, but barely missed the list. His recovery time from TJS lasted longer than expected and he supposedly had a minor procedure to clean-out his elbow in September. I like his body type, arm action, velocity (89-95 MPH), and ability to change speeds, though he never had a real good breaking pitch. He didn’t throw many innings in 2007 and I’m real interested to see how he performs in 2008.
Harman is a player that I am not sold on. He has decent power for a middle infielder, but I question his ability to hit for AVG. His 2005 season in Lakewood was outstanding, but has spent two years at Clearwater, which speaks loudly. He is an average runner and in my opinion, a below average defender with stiff hands and fringe-average arm strength. He can’t really play anywhere else and I just don’t see where he fits with the Philadelphia organization.
7. The Phillies lack a “Hall of Fame caliber player” on their list, but they do have four guys who received a 9 in terms of their potential. What is the average number of 9’s given out in the top 15 for all 30 teams? Using your system, where does the Phillies Top 15 rank among all MLB teams?
Most teams have three to five 9-rated players. The only difference between the Phillies and most of the other teams is the letter portion of the grade is much higher for the other teams. Three of the four players I rated with a 9 (Mattair, Drabek, and Brown) have E ratings, which puts the Phillies below averge for top-end talent. According to my rankings, the Phillies rank in the bottom third of all organizations. I gave them the following grades (Hitting C-, Pitching B-, Top End Talent C-, Overall C+).
8. What kinds of grades would Mike Costanzo and Michael Bourn have gotten if they hadn’t been traded in the Brad Lidge deal?
Costanzo received an 8D and would have ranked #8 between Outman and Carpenter on the Phillies top 15. Bourn exhausted his rookie eligibility by being on the 25-man roster all season, so I didn’t rank him but had he been eligible, I would have given him a 7B (an upgrade from the 7C he got last year) and slotted him between Mattair and Outman.
9. Adrian Cardenas checks in as our top position prospect as an 8C. Does his value increase if he is able to play 3B instead of having to move to a corner OF spot if he remains in the Phillies org and blocked by Chase Utley?
No question about it. Any time you can stay higher on the defensive spectrum, you retain more value. Cardenas’ speed and arm strength are average at best, so he’s fairly limited defensively (2B, 3B, or LF). His bat certainly won’t play-up in LF, but might at 3B. I think Cardenas has two more years before the team needs to consider whether to move him off of 2B.
Phuture Phillies 
I was a supporter of the Lidge trade and still am – it puts a legitimate closer in the bullpen and restores a bona fide number 2 starter to his place in the rotation. In theory at least, it was a good and reasonable trade. That having been said, I miss Costanzo. I know we have heard (and we’ll keep on hearing) about his deficiencies, and the criticisms are valid, but it would be very nice to have him waiting in the wings at AAA this year with a possible mid-season call-up.
I think the organization should make an effort to try to get him back. I’d give up a Quentin Berry and another reliever for Costanzo in a heart beat. There has to be something Baltimore would want that we could give up without killing the farm team.
Am I crazy here?
LikeLike
I don’t know if you’re crazy, but I wouldn’t trade to get him back, unless we’re giving up a lesser talent in an area of excess. I think Costanzo is going to end up a platoon player, and probably at 1B or LF rather than 3B. Guys like that are fairly easy to find.
LikeLike
Fair points. It’s just that third base is such a problem spot. If Greg Dobbs can merely be adequate in the field and can continue to hit it would help the problem immensely for the coming year. Given the black hole there, I am a little surprise that they didn’t take some type of calculated gamble at the position – either with a Rule 5 player or a more experienced player who could have a resurgence (someone like Morgan Ensberg). You know, people forget that a couple of years ago Mike Lowell was on the scrap heap and no one wanted him. There may be a few guys like that floating around right now and it’s a shame that none of them appear likely to get a chance in Philly, where a solid 3B is desperately needed.
LikeLike
I don’t know why you would want another LH bat in the line up. Constanzo was also a strike out machine and a defensive liability.
I share your concern of the lack of an above average fielding 3B. I am also concerned that the Phillies have no 3B prospect at the moment. As of now the Phillies DO NOT need another explosive bat in the infield. I’d love to see it but at this time I’d settle for a 7 hole hitter with excellent range.
With that said I hope they can find another Scott Rolen like player in the draft…
LikeLike
Glad you asked question #1, that was my main confusion with these rankings.
LikeLike
How much of a prospect is he if he is terrible in the field and strikes out way too much. I wouldn’t want to call on that mid season.
That is like saying you miss Juan Richardson.
You know what, our outfield prospect are not near ready, I wish we had Jorge Padilla back……
Pitching is thin, I wish we had Daniel Haigwood. What ever happened to him. Just because someone is in the minor leagues, doesn’t mean they are the answer at the major league level.
Just because we have we hole at 3B in the majors doesn’t mean the answer is in the minors. (Costanzo)
You mine as well take a shot with Dallas McPhearson…..same player.
LikeLike
Catch 22:
I think it’s like selling a stock. You may have loved the stock and been forced to sell to buy more of something that had short term gain. But when you go back to buying more of that kind of thing you don’t necessarily buy the same stock back. You look at what’s available and acquire the best of that type stock you can. You can’t fall in love with a stock or a prospect.
LikeLike
I agree with Lee Thomas above. Costanzo struck out way too much and couldnt field his position. Nice job on the Richardson comment. Players get the “prospect” label too easily …..see Eric Valent, Padilla, Richardson. Marlon Byrd had much better AA numbers than Costanzo and look how his major league numbers have played out! The lack of a 3B prospect is a huge concern, which hopefully will be addressed soon.
LikeLike
Dan Haigwood was traded to Texas for Fabio Castro. He’s currently in the Red Sox organization. He’s Rule 5 eligible in 2008-2009. If you still want him, he’ll probably be available.
Great Q&A (as usual). I like Deric’s thoughts on Happ and Zagurski. Get them health and see what they can do. They have potential.
I’m looking for the upside surprise prospect that you never see coming. Coste was one. Never really a prospect but he’s been very servicable in the Majors.
LikeLike
Hey, everyone, I agree that Costanzo has his deficiencies and they are not minor shortcomings. And I also note that he is a lefty power hitter and we need righty contact hitters. But saying he is a Juan Richardson or a Jorge Padilla is ridiculous – he’s a much better prospect than they were. So, yes, I miss Costanzo, but, no, I didn’t miss those other bums either. Costanzo has shown a remarkable ability to adjust and advance at each level.
There’s a good chance he won’t turn into a decent big league player. But there’s more than a decent chance that he’ll be a very good player at the major league level – a guy who hits for power and gets on base. I have also heard through reports on this post that his fielding is much better than the statistics would indicate. I have no idea if that’s true or not, but it’s worth noting.
The best case scenario is that one of the other guys in the minors who can field (Harman, Donald, Mattair?) will turn into a player who can man the hot corner. That having been said, would I feel better if we had Costanzo around? Yes I would, provided that what we gave up in return was not too significant.
And don’t kid yourself, good organizations re-acquire talent all the time and make good use of the second opportunity. Did anyone forget Gio Gonzalez?
LikeLike
I am also sorry we lost Costanzo, but don’t understand why you say that it is ridiculous to compare him to Richardson or Padilla. Other than batting R instead of L, I would say Richardson and Costanzo were just about clones as prospects. Both had power, struck out a ton, and had woes on D. Richardson’s career effectively ended with an injury riddled 2003 at Reading. He played only 65 games at age 24 in 2003, but hit 15 HR, .270 BA, .327 obp, .488 slg, and 69 Ks in 248 AB. In Reading at same age, Costanzo posted a .270 BA, .368 obp, .490 slg, including 27 HR and 157 K in 508 AB. So, Costanzo has more walks, more Ks and slightly lower HR rate, but pretty equal stats to my eye.
They both played the prior season at H-A ClW. Richardson had .257 BA, 18 HR, .339 obp, .430 slg, and 122Ks in 456 AB. For Costanzo .258 BA, 14 HR, .364 obp, .411 slg, 133 Ks in 504 AB. A little more power for Richardson, more walks for Costanzo, but they are remarkably similar players. Neither a stolen base threat. Costanzo 2 inches taller and about 30 pounds heavier. Barring the injury to Richardson, they play about the same, so the comparison is far from ridiculous.
Jorge Padilla was an entirely different sort of player. He was an OF with good SB potential, but not as much power as the other two and not as many Ks. He was ok defensively. Like Richardson, his development was derailed by multiple injury seasons. But he was a 3rd round draft pick and seemed a roughly Costanzo-level prospect. The biggest difference between Costanzo and Richardson/Padilla has been sustained good health.
LikeLike
Allentown, that difference in walks is really significant. There’s no way you can call two statlines “pretty equal” if one has a .368 OBP and the other has a .327 OBP. Forty points in OBP can be the difference between an all-star and a benchwarmer.
Setting that 300 pound gorilla of a fact aside, the comparison between Costanzo and Richardson is not so much ridiculous as pointless. As you said, the immediate causes of Richardson’s failure to make it to the majors were his injuries. We have no way of knowing if Richardson would have been a good player or not had he not had those injuries. Even if Costanzo was similar to Richardson (which he isn’t), that wouldn’t necessarily be a knock on Costanzo, unless you’re saying that Costanzo’s susceptibility to injury is like Richardson’s. (It’s not a compliment either. It’s just neither here nor there.)
LikeLike
I agree with Taco Pal and would add that Padilla never, ever got off the ground as a prospect. He was a player with good tools that never amounted to anything whatsoever. He was basically another Tim Moss. Now, say what you want about Costanzo, but he has turned into a legitimate prospect and has shown not only promise at every level, but a very significant ability to adjust to the level of competition and then excel. I’m not saying he’s without his weaknesses or that he’s the next great thing at third base, but he has the ability to develop into a solid regular at the major league level, if not a star. Neither Richardson nor Padilla ever made it that far (particularly Padilla, who was a total stiff), so let’s stop with those comparisons, they are not valid.
LikeLike
I agree with some of the statements above about Costanzo. He could be a productive big leage player one day. I don’t think he will be productive in 2008 or 2009. He may be in the bigs at some point in those years but I don’t think he will be the productive answer the Phillies will be looking for.
I think Costanzo could be an answer, just not the right answer at 3B. Too many K’s and to many errors.
I think people got caught up on the fact he was thier first pick a couple years and and he played a position that we need at the major league level. Would anyone miss him if he was a firstbasemen. (Wasn’t Michael Durant a 3rd round pick a couple years ago. Lot of power. What ever happened to him. Anyone miss him?)
Can Costanzo be a major league starter one day. Sure. Would he be the one you want on your team? Not sure. A lot of people are down in Inge because…he strikes out to much and can’t field. What about Dallas McPhearson. I know he is always hurt, but if healthy, he is similar to Costanzo as well, right?
Like Costanzo, Inge and McPhearson are answers. I just don’t think they are the right answers.
I wish Mike Costanzo the best of luck
LikeLike