Reader Top 30; #9

2010 Reader Top 30

JC Ramirez comfortably took the #8 spot, grabbing 39% of the vote, ahead of Scott Mathieson and Antonio Bastardo. We’re getting close to rounding out the top 10, and with that, just a simple reminder. I’m no longer going to add new names to the new ballot, for fear that I might “influence” the results or somehow taint the voting. I’m purposely not publishing my own personal Top 30 until this is done, and its been brought to my attention that adding Jiwan James to the last poll could have somehow upset the flow of this whole thing. So from here on out, the only way new guys will be added is if they are write-in votes or if someone suggests names they want added. So, check below the fold for #9 and keep that in mind going forward, especially if you vote OTHER…

01. Domonic Brown, OF
02. Trevor May, RHP
03. Phillippe Aumont, RHP
04. Tyson Gillies, OF
05. Anthony Gose, OF
06. Domingo Santana, OF
07. Sebastian Valle, C
08. JC Ramirez, RHP
09.

125 thoughts on “Reader Top 30; #9”

  4. Jon Singleton.
    Suprised he has not received much attention in the voting. His numbers compare favorably with Santana and he was 17 years old. Should be getting as much attention as Cosart and should be ranked higher than Brodie Colvin.

    Like

  7. Cosart for the past few times. With guys like Cosart and Colvin that have so much upside, I can’t vote for guaranteed bullpen guys like Mathieson and Bastardo. Singleton should be getting more love too. Hopefully Jarred pulls out #9.

    Like

  9. I went with Cosart. Had to go with high upside vs average relievers. I like Bastardp and Matheison, just a few spots lower.

    Like

  10. I took Cosart with my pick. Strong scouting reports coupled with promising initial results.

    DeFratus and Rosenberg I have near the back of my own top 30, with Yohan Flande somewhere in the teens.

    Like

  11. I went Bastardo again. Cosart has upside, but probably has thrown only about 25 IP since being drafted in 2008. Too small an FIL sample size, despite excellent numbers. I’m putting him around #11.

    Like

  12. Already made this argument in previous posts, but a healthy Scott Mathieson will have the same impact in the Phillies bullpen in 2010 as Joba Chamberlain had when he first came up with the Yankees. He will be a dominant seventh- or eighth-inning guy who deserves a spot in this Top 10.
    He showed he’s over the bum elbow last season when he was durable and downright overpowering. He’s still 25, with plenty of upside.

    Like

  13. Gotta go with Bastardo here. In the Dominican Winter League playoffs so far he has struck out 8 over 3.2 innings of work in 3 games of middle relief. Nice to have a lefty in the system this season coming out of the pen with a fastball sitting at 95 with an improving change and slider.

    Like

  14. Correct the previous post. Bastardo has struck out 10 in 5.1 innings in 4 relief appearances in the playoffs.

    Like

  15. colvin. i’m really surprised that he isn’t getting more votes considering he is a starter WITHOUT injury history (unlike Cosart), and he created such a huge buzz when we signed him.

    Like

  16. Bastardo for me. He looks ticketed for the bullpen at this point, but as long as he stays healthy, he should prove to be a quality reliever for a long time. At this point, I’ll take that certainty over Colvin (who’s thrown 2 pro innings) and Cosart (who’s thrown 24.1 pro innings in 2 years).

    Like

  19. I vote for Colvin, ahead of Cosart who had some injuries and really not that many professional innings.
    Player to maybe add Michael Stutes.

    Like

  20. After Cosart we need to start talking about Colvin and Singleton. The top 10 isn’t the place for relievers.

    Like

  21. I voted for Bastardo. If he hadn’t been slowed by mysterious arm injuries, he’d be in the top 5 or 6. He’s got excellent stuff and, if he develops another pitch or two, could end up being an excellent major leaguer who, at the very least, could develop into a shut down type set-up guy – an extremely useful player. The Phillies are not chasing more bullpen guys because I think they’ve got a pretty idea of what they’ve got in Bastardo and Mathieson.

    Like

  22. Also went with Cosart for the reason that I value potential starters over guaranteed 7th-8th inning relievers. Mathieson/Bastardo are more of a sure thing but their ceiling has mostly been established. Both are valuable to the organization but don’t warrant top-10 rankings.

    Like

  23. Bastardo, could be a dominating lefty in the pen, and they’ve already shown confidence in him by placing him on the playoff roster. Has potential to be a starter, though that is probably a longshot.

    Like

  24. Here’s a little tidbit – Charlie really likes Bastardo. They are going to bring him along slowly, but if he’s healthy, the odds are extremely high he begins the season in the bullpen. Whether he ever starts is a mystery. I think he could develop the pitches to become a very good starter, but durability is always the key with him. He’s broken down two years in a row (maybe three???) and they are well aware of this fact.

    Like

  25. PhillyFriar and Catch 22 have it right. Guys who have proven they can get MLB hitters out are so much more valuable than high upside guys in low A. Minor league relievers do not belong in the top ten, but major league relievers do. Just because we have more certainty about what Bastardo can do does not mean he is less of a prospect than some guys in low A. He has less upside, but much less risk of not reaching that upside (which I think is as a set-up man).

    Like

  26. What Charlie says about pitching and what Charlie does are two different things. I think Bastardo should be strictly relief
    this year and used wisely. Next year he will be mature and ready for whatever. A lightsout lefty is needed here in light of the Lidge drama/

    Like

  28. I went with Colvin over Cosart. They have similar make-up/stuff in my mind, but Cosart seems to have had a hard time staying on the mound and getting innings (although when he does throw, holy crap is it impressive!)

    Like

  29. Would love to see Pettibone and/or Shreve added to the list of possible vote getters, as they are coming up shortly on my list.

    Like

  30. I agree that back of the bullpen relievers and potential closers are valuable, so that is not why I downgrade Bastardo and Mathieson, despite their good numbers and potential. I downgrade them because of their histories of arm injuries. Mathieson has had elbow problems and 2 TJ surgeries. Generally elbows are a lot easier to fix than shoulders because they don’t move in so many directions, so it wouldn’t surprise me to see him stay healthy finally, but is still needs to work on controlling his big fastball and he is already 25. Bastardo on the other hand has been injured the last 3 consecutive seasons and at least the last 2 were due to shoulder problems. While he has the stuff and ability to be a starter or reliever, we don’t have reason to expect his shoulder to ever hold up for a full season at a time.

    Like

  32. “Singelton= D’Arby Myers” – OUCH!!!

    There’s no statistical support for this conclusion. Geez, give the guy a chance.

    Like

  33. Just curious–if starting out well makes Singleton=D’arby Myers, would a lousy start make him Michael Taylor 🙂

    Like

  34. “PhillyFriar and Catch 22 have it right. Guys who have proven they can get MLB hitters out are so much more valuable than high upside guys in low A.”

    Not sure this makes much sense. First of all, neither Bastardo or Mathieson have proven they can get ML hitters out yet. Both have fairly successful cups-of-coffee but haven’t proven anything yet. but by this criteria, Kyle Kendrick is easily the Phillies top pitching prospect since he had a season where he proved he could get ML hitters out much more that all of the other Philly prospects combined. I haven’t seen anyone clamoring to rate him in the top-10.

    I have no problem with using ML proximity as a component for rating prospects but simply stating that a guy who has reaching the majors already is more valuable that a low-a guy is simply incorrect.

    Like

  35. As an example to my point, in 2003 Cole Hamels was a low-a starter at Lakewood while 25 year-old rookie Eric Junge was proving the ability to get ML hitters out during his cup-of-coffee with the Phillies.

    For a more recent example, in 2007 Kyle Drabek was also a low-a pitcher while the afformentioned Kyle Kendrick was getting big league hitters out…

    In the end, which players have proved to be more valuable?

    Like

  36. I went with Bastardo. He has had tons of success in the minor leagues over a few seasons and his stuff is definitely eighth-inning ML bullpen caliber with a chance to play as a starter. I like Cosart but questions about his work-ethic and the lack of a sample size statistically lead me to choose Bastardo at this point. My hope is that Cosart spends the year at Lakewood and emerges towards the top 2 or 3 on this list next year (he has the talent) but he has not shown enough to surpass a guy with good stuff and ridiculous minor league stats.

    Like

  37. I agree. Could we have subsituted Bastardo and Mathieson for Drabek in the Halladay deal? That offer would be laughed at – the value isn’t there.

    PLEASE LET’S NOT DREDGE THE DEAL UP AGAIN – IT JUST MADE FOR A GOOD EXAMPLE.

    Like

  38. 3up3kkk, Kendrick was pretty lucky when he was getting ML hitters out, whereas Bastardo and Mathieson have the stuff that should allow them to repeat their results over time. Kendrick has also since proven that he was pretty lucky the first time and more recently had trouble getting ML hitters out. But I concede I may have been overstating the case when I said Bastardo and Mathieson are proven.

    I’m not arguing that *any* player who is in the majors is more valuable than a low-A guy, but I am arguing that the present value for a player in the majors is *almost always* much greater. It depends on the discount rate you use on the low-A guy’s expected future value, but often times that discount rate is too low for young prospects. Methinks you cherry-picked a bit with your examples of Hamels and Drabek. Besides, the discount rate was probably appropriately low on those two at those specific times.

    I also cede the point that Bastardo and Mathieson have had recurring arm trouble, but if memory serves (which is not always the case), Colvin is the only pitcher on the current list without any history of arm trouble.

    Like

  39. This is going to be really interesting. It seems to me a huge part of the discussion is whether really young high upside guys that are years away from the majors (Colvin, Cosart, Singelton) are “better” prospects then older guys that in all likelihood could help the club this year but do not have as much upside (Mathieson, Bastardo).

    This could be more a philosophical decision then I statistic based decision. I think I lean towards the older guys that look like they will contribute at least something.

    Like

  40. Boston Phan,

    I agree that Kendrick’s early success was more lucky than good and I generally agree that the PRESENT value of a player in the majors is greater but for me, rating prospects is more about FUTURE value.

    As for my examples, I used Hamels/Drabek simply because they are the last 2 prospects who advanced through the system specifically identified as starters.

    In the end, I think we just have a different philosophy on how we value prospects but I do thank you for the calm and rational response…

    Like

  41. I’m not sure why Bastardo and Mathieson would be severely downgrade for injury, but Cosart and Shreve would not be. At this point in their careers, they are the poster children for arm injuries. They have the talent and prior poster child Hamels turned out very well.

    Like

  42. Its Bastardo for me again. He has a terrific live arm and will have a nice career ahead of him if he can stay healthy. I think Kendrick has the team made and will either be the long man or the 5th starter. I’m not as convinced that Eyre won’t be back because both sides are posturing now. That decision will obviously effect Bastardo. I had had the thought that Bastardo could pick up a few starts as #5 to start the year but if he’s pitching exclusively in relief in winter ball, he’ll probably just stay in the pen. I can’t believe that Matheson would start with the big club because I don’t know whether he can pitch back to back days and that would effect the decision.

    Like

  43. I went Singleton, although I can’t argue vociferously with any number of other picks. But here are my thoughts in case you care. Bastardo just can’t stay healthy, which makes me worried that his small frame will always make him injury-prone. Mathieson is a nice story, but TWO TJ surgeries is a big red flag. I hope he stays healthy, but I can’t imagine the odds are good. Cosart is far away and has his own injury issues to consider. And Colvin just hasn’t done enough to warrant comment one way or the other. So I’m left with Singleton, who had a very good debut and promising scouting reports.

    Like

  44. Given the limits of the Phillies’ major league budget, the current construction of the major league team, and the thinness of prospects in the high minors, a player who can contribute to the Phillies next year gains value. (Which is why I voted Mathieson this time around.)

    As I read them, the unstated undercurrent to many of the discussions/arguments on this site have to do with what the poster believes the function of the minor league system is.

    I think a minor league system should strive to have an
    at least above average prospect at every position and a deep pool of above average pitching prospects somewhere in the system and an at least serviceable replacement for anybody on the 25 man roster sitting in AAA or AA. The Phillies have been lucky to have avoided major injuries over the last two years because AAA has been woefully thin on such players at several positions.

    Like

  45. Dean Street-

    nobody has that kind of minor league system. nobody. that is what everybody want, but its mipossible to get.

    Like

  46. Without Taylor and Drabek, I’m not sure that there is anyone that is going to start at Lehigh Valley that is worth paying to see. I am not complaining about the Lee trade, just pointing out the AAA cupboard is bare.

    Like

  47. Agree that that is quite a tall order.

    Actually, determining a good system depends on where the major league team fits on the salary scale.

    For large-market teams like the Phillies who should be in regular playoff contention and therefore regularly draft near the bottom of the draft and don’t trade players for prospects, a good minor league system should be able to produce a major league regular every couple of years, an all-star caliber player every 4-5 years, and have enough talent available to allow the big club to make deals to fill holes on the roster as needed.

    For small market teams who operate based on “windows of opportunity” every few years until their players hit arbitration, their systems need to produce talent classes that become ready around the same time followed by periods of restocking. The Marlins do a pretty good job of following this model.

    Like

  48. At some point in 2010 Lehigh Valley should feature Brown, Mayberry, Berry, Carpenter, Savery, Worley, Stutes, Rosenberg, possibly Schwimer and Flande.

    Like

  49. Ken,

    I expect Brown will get to AAA at some point in the season but you’re correct that the IronPigs roster this year will be a collection of career minor leaguers and fringe AAAA players.

    Conversely, Reading could have in interesting collection of players by Summer time.

    Like

  50. Went with mathieson. He and bastardo are definitely top 10 caliber prospects because of their proximity AND the fact they profile as impact, back-end bullpen pieces. Those guys are hugely valuable from a baseball standpoint and a market-rate standpoint.

    Like

  51. Fortunately, I live approximately 25 minutes from Coca-Cola Park and Reading. Looks like Reading will get my money the first half of the season and LHV will get some the second half.

    Like

  52. I like to know how you say mathieson isnt the top pitching prospect they have now. Dynamite stuff, had a injury, but he is healthy and ready,

    Like

  53. Mathieson seems like a great guy who has worked very hard to recover from surgery. I think we will see him as a contributor on the Phillies this season, but I don’t think he is our top pitching prospect. He is one of my favorite players, but i didn’t vote for him this round and still have two others on my board before him.

    Like

  54. My “Singelton=D’Arby Myers” comment is based on the fact that people tend to way overemphasize GCL or Williamsport stats. Frankly, it is a philosophical discussion but I dont think any of these GCL guys should be on the board yet–our prospects are closer to the majors. For example, I watched Pettibone all year(when he pitched) and to say he is higher than Stutes, Schwimmer or Worley is just wrong.

    Like

  55. Further Myers/Singelton comparision

    Myers GCL 31 games 128 abs .313 11 sb
    Singelton GCL 31 games 100 abs .290 1 sb

    How is Jon even in the discussion right now?

    Like

  57. I vote Bastardo. I think he has potential to grow into, ML experience, and less of a major injury history than others. Oh and he’s a lefty, and likely will contribute this year.

    Like

  58. Bastardo again. Wasn’t he compared to Johan Santana when he first came up? I hope he’s as underrated as Santana was when he was exposed in the rule 5 draft.

    I thought he showed a consistent major league fastball but his changeup was inconsistent. If he works on that pitch he can be effective in either a starting or late relief role.

    Like

  60. I like your thinking, Philsfarm. Joba is a good comp for Mathieson’s potential. Healthy, he might be that good in a year or two, and could enter into discussions about a rotation spot, much like Chamberlain.

    I expect him to be mostly pretty good in 2010, at times shaky when his 2nd and 3rd pitches aren’t working, and at times dominant.

    I disagree with others’ statements that Mathieson has achieved his upside–huh???? He hasn’t had a chance and his minor league record indicates dominance and impact potential. Health is one issue and may be behind him. The other two are auxiliary pitches and command. Before and after the injuries, he has been closing in on solving those.

    Like

  61. 3up3kkk – I don’t think your examples are particularly relevant. Bastardo and Mathieson have way more upside than Kendrick has or had (and certainly more than Eric Junge – you’ve got to find a better example than that) and the players we are talking about in the low minors have shown nothing yet, nothing at all (not their fault, they just haven’t played enough at this point) so it’s anyone’s wild guess, really, if they’ll turn out to be any good.

    Like

  62. 3up and others: I voted Mathieson mainly becuase of Joba-like upside and proximity helps too.

    Also, I think your arguments about future value are reasonable. But here is the problem I have. I, like many others on this board am not a minor-league guru and constant researcher, using paid subscriptions, etc. I read a few scouting reports from links on this and a few other sites at draft time, listen to what more serious guys say, form opinions and take positions. I am mainly a Phils fan and do not follow amateur players in general or other teams’ systems closely, unless I see it here or other quality sites. I learn a lot from the serious prospect hobbyists guys.

    Without access to solid, detailed, multiple reports on guys like Cosart, Colvin, etc., I don’t have a lot to go on that I have high confidence in. My mindset is: “Nice generic praise from scout X, but how is this guy not the next Julian Sampson?” And “Who really knows until you see some consistent pro performance?”

    So your points are well taken, but for those reasons, I can’t get too excited until I see very good performance in full season. Don’t want to speak for others, but I would guess there are a lot of people like me and given the vagueness of the the praise for the Cosart’s etc., it’s reasonable opinion for a lot of people who need to vote based on clear, long-term impressions of prospect performance, the kind of track record that builds confidence.

    Would like to see more summaries of hard scouting reports in these threads. Something like “Cosart throws 94-96 consistently with movement and good command for his age with two other potential plus pitches. He dominated 4 good hitters in FIL. Etc.”

    I have seen some of this at draft time but do not have the time to go back and re-read for this voting.

    Just providing some background on mindset of some of us who like to see more performance track record.

    Like

  63. “Mathieson has had elbow problems and 2 TJ surgeries”

    There is ONE problem here. Elbow problems= TJ surgery
    and because some doctor screwed it up ,why is that on Mathieson. One problem not three.

    For the Phillies sake I hope he is ready, good and ready. They also need Happ to pick up some of the late innings
    that they lost.
    Mathieson/Bastardo or bust I am not impressed with
    anyone they picked up for the BP so far.

    Like

  64. “How is Jon even in the dicussion?”
    Instead of checking his Batting avg and stolen bases, check his OPS, BB%, and age. He has done more than Cosart or Colvin, imo.

    Like

  65. Didn’t see this posted anywhere, but Ruben was on the radio today and said that they’re looking at Aumont as a starter going into the season.

    Like

  66. I’ll echo what DiamondDerby said, but I came to a different conclusion.

    Like you all, I have seen Mathieson and Bastardo. I like them both. But, Mathieson doesn’t have “Joba-esque” upside in my opinion. He’s not going to start again. Even if he’s not injury prone, and it was just one problem. In Bastardo’s case, he is injury prone.

    I have no reason to vote for Cosart. I don’t remember reading anything about him, other than the “where is he” posts. I voted Colvin. I guess the draft hype is still fresh in my head. That influenced my opinion.

    Like

  67. Scott Mathieson ??? Why is everyone scared of his 2 Tommy john surgeries? I myself has has 1 done age 30 while playing ball, it is the best thing i ever done too my arm. Rothman Institute doctors (AKA Phillies doctors) do an excellent job. Mathieson should go north with the Club, I’m just not sold on Bastardo, not enough time too watch him, Remember the first time the league see’s a new arm they usually struggle cause there advanced scouts have not had a chance too break him down yet. RosenBerg should get a long look , at 1 point he and Mathieson where going toe too toe. And i don’t want too hear he was at Single A. Putting up those numbers/ age . Flande went too AA also mid season and put up aweful numbers, but u all think he is worthy, he has been with the phillies a while, Made pro debut with Guanuma Phillies , his age is 1/27/86 makes him 24next year in AA. International kid signed by Sal in 2004. My pick is Mathieson goes North, while Rosenberg is my dark hourse too surprise everyone .

    Like

  68. I think both Worley and Stutes will be stronger this year and project both as solid additions to major league pens in 2011. Worley may even be up this season.

    Like

  69. ****Why is everyone scared of his 2 Tommy john surgeries?****

    Because statistically, he has a 30% of ever playing in the Majors after 2 TJs…not to mention a 3rd surgery on the same arm in that time. Granted, things look good for him right now.

    Its nothing against his ability, the odds are just heavily against him.

    Like

  70. i get the strong impression alot of people are rating the 3 seattle guys high so that the lee deal is not srrn as ridicuusly bad as it was. i”ll say it again liddi and noriega would have made the deal almost palitable. if this list is the phils minors it’s a joke.

    Like

  71. I agree with Catch and DD. Proven upside potential is my main criteria so I would give much more benefit to players with success in AA or higher.

    Bastardo still has possible upside as a starter but likely not this year because of bullpen needs. Plus with his arm issues they may want to limit his longer outings and have Moyer talk with him. If he pitches well then maybe he auditions for the rotation in 2011. I agree if he stays in relief his value as a prospect is diminished but I still think his UPSIDE is a #2 or a good #3 starter.
    So I again vote for Bastardo’s upside. If, like the high school guys, he recovers from injury in the next year or two, he has the possibility of lights out stuff for a lefty.

    Mathieson will not return to a starter role. His upside is probably Ryan Madson (which is pretty darn good) but maybe he could actually close out some games. The high upside prospects over A ball are already ranked in the top 8 so I am okay with Mathieson in the Top 15.

    Like

  73. Am a big Mathieson fan. In 2005 he dominated AA and was called up. I spoke with a player who thought Mathieson was probably injured in one of his early starts and it got worse in 2006 towards the end of the season. This year he was healthy, high 90s, a very good changeup he developed and his slider showed flashes of being nasty. I go with a healthy Mathieson over all of them.

    Like

  74. Voted for Mathieson but the comps to Joba are pretty comical. The guy has thrown 40 innings in 3 years.

    Like

  77. As far as I know, Cosart had a groin pull, not arm problems. I am unaware of Cosart ever having arm problems, otherwise I would not have picked him here and at #8. I make distinctions between health concerns for pitchers; Aumont’s hip and Cosart’s groin, don’t concern me, but Mathieson’s elbow and anybody’s shoulder do. I don’t know much about Cosart except that he is young, athletic, throws a mid-nineties fastball, and that Baseball America named him the #1 pitching prospect in the GCL.

    I like Singleton’s batting potential, but he’s a first baseman, which is the hardest and most competitive MLB position to get (just ask Ryan Howard.)

    3up3kkk wrote “…Hamels/Drabek simply because they are the last 2 prospects who advanced through the system specifically identified as starters.” What about Kyle Kendrick, JA Happ, Gavin Floyd, Carlos Carrasco, and Josh Outman, not to mention the pre-surgery Scott Mathieson? By the way, although I probably would rank Kendrick #2 behind Brown as a Phillies prospect, he is not eligible for this voting because of his 2 major league seasons. This is for rookies only.

    Like

  79. The comparison to Joba, by the way, is only to style. Much like Chamberlain, a healthy Mathieson (who we followed closely last year through the Gulf Coast League to Clearwater, Reading and, eventually, to the AFL in Scottsdale) is a hard-throwing, go-right-at-you type of relief pitcher.
    Nowhere have I heard anyone in scouting or the organization mention Mathieson as a future starter. His career will be in the pen, probably the same place Chamberlain’s should be. Joba was a gas-blowing set-up guy for Mariano and I envision Mathieson in that role — and soon.

    Like

  80. First this is not a slam just human nature. This poll was slanted the moment PP voiced his views on the new prospects. We all respect his view and some too closely.
    Personally I feel (and others) that the poll has been, without the posters meaning, a way to feel better about things.
    How can you not consider the importance of mlb ready relievers when Condrey was signed, Park and Eyre probably not. Making Aumont a starter is very iffy and seems more public relations work by Ruben than anything. Gillies I like but I am willing to be Gose passes him this season. The small edge Gose has in speed is like the difference between real power and warning track power
    and will out.

    Like

  81. Ken45,

    Outman wasn’t considered a starter by the phillies seeing as how they had already moved him to the pen before trading him to Oak and Gavin Floyd was prior to both Hamels/Drabek. I already discussed Kendrick who you obviously value much more that I do…

    I did miss Happ/Carrasco but I think that they also prove my point about rating the value of low-A guys vs. lower ceiling guy who are at a higher level at that same time.

    Who would you have rather have today,

    Happ who in 2005 was in the Sally league or Aquilino Lopez/Amaury Telemaco who were both getting hitters out with the Phillies that year.

    or maybe Carlos Carrasco, who in 2006 was in the Sally league or Fabio Castro who was getting hitters out during his 2006 cup-of-coffee with the Phillies?

    Like

  82. Not sure how you come to that conclusion NoWheels. PP was very critical of Aumont who still managed to come in third.

    Just because you don’t agree with the results of the poll doesn’t automatically make it slanted.

    Could just possibably be that a majority of posters on this site just don’t agree with your assessment of prospects?

    Like

  83. Catch 22 f/k/a H Man said

    “3up3kkk – I don’t think your examples are particularly relevant. Bastardo and Mathieson have way more upside than Kendrick has or had (and certainly more than Eric Junge – you’ve got to find a better example than that) and the players we are talking about in the low minors have shown nothing yet, nothing at all (not their fault, they just haven’t played enough at this point) so it’s anyone’s wild guess, really, if they’ll turn out to be any good.”

    I agree that Mathieson/Bastardo have more upside that either Kendrick/Junge but then I was responding to the statement “PhillyFriar and Catch 22 have it right. Guys who have proven they can get MLB hitters out are so much more valuable than high upside guys in low A.”

    When rating prospects, I value riskier players with higher ceilings over safe players with lower ceilings and using examples those examples to prove my point.

    Both Mathieson and Bastardo are very valuable prospects in that they should be able to help in the Phillies pen in 2010 but I’ll take a potentially (and less guaranteed) good middle of the rotation starter over a potentially great bullpen reliever anyday.

    Guys like Blanton cost a team $7-$10 million per season while the best set-up guys in the game cost $3-$5. As an organization, the Phillies can bring in 2-3 very good relievers for the same price it would cost to go get a Blanton/Garland type of starter in the FA market…

    Like

  84. I have asked repeatedly why anyone likes Ramirez. I just don’t see it . I wish someone would inform me. Just explain it to me.
    Gose stole twice the number of bases as Gillies with the same
    CS. I just wanna see Gillies do it again before he gets an exalted position. I am wrong sometimes lol

    Like

  85. Mathison… 3 reasons…

    1. Has the potential to be a very good setup guy/average closer. (you can value a position on the major league level based on how much that player gets paid.)… so think 8-10m for a closer 4-6m for setup.

    2. Is still only 25 and considering 2 significant injuries, still probably has further projection.

    3. Is likely going to be at the MLB level this year.

    ….. the downside is really 2 things.

    1. He isn’t a starter like everyone here seems to love… though, i’ll say 1 thing. I’d rather a great setup man for the next 3 years then a No. 5 starter for the next 3 years. THINK ABOUT THAT!

    2. Has an injury history that may end his career.

    With the above 5 points, he still grades higher then anyone remaining on this list IMHO.

    Like

  86. NoWheels,

    I rate Gillies ahead of Gose because his K/BB ratio is much better and his OBP is significantly higher. He is also considered the better defensive OF at this point. Both have plus-plus speed so difference SB success rate can be improved with proper instruction.

    I’m not as high on Ramirez as others but he does have a quality arm and has shown the ability to miss bats as a starting pitcher..

    Somehow, I expect you’re take on these prospects to more related to you opinion of the Lee trade vs. a fair evaluation of them as prospects

    Like

  87. Why isn’t Yohan Flande on the list? Although he wouldn’t have gotten my vote this time, he showed a lot last year.

    Like

  88. I think the talk about the poll being slanted is humorous. How cares? Of course this exercise isn’t scientific and the results are irrelevant. It is designed to be fun and allow everyone to express their opinions. Especially when it comes to prospects, that’s all they are – opinions. There are no right and wrong answers so let’s just have fun with it. If your list is different than the consensus, you can compare to lists at the end of the year and evaluate who did better – it will be another fun exercise. Let’s not get too critical of the process or people’s motivation. Let’s just enjoy the website/poll for what it is – entertainment. Thanks PP, this is my favorite site.

    Like

  91. At least Mathieson’s votes are getting backed up in the comments, unlike Saunderson’s mysterious landslide.

    I was just thinking, since we can expect Rube to trade 70% of our top 10 by next year, maybe we should vote accordingly. 🙂

    Like

  92. I don’t think Cosart “slide” has anything to do with his ability or his voters being unable to explain why people voted for him. IMO he is starting to fall behind for one main reason: the people currently voting have waited several days to vote and are less likely to be as “obsessed” with the website. The less knowledgable fans have heard almost nothing about Cosart, but Mathieson and Bastardo are names they are familiar with and are getting their votes. I know this is a generalization, but I think it has some creadence. I also belive Bastardo will win the next round (assuming Mathieson wins this round) because the mathieson voters will shift to Bastardo based on the familiarity arguement. This post is not to critisize anyone or their vote, just an observation and a prediction.

    Like

  93. Forgive me if this has been mentioned as I simply can’t remember: Has the FO made any comments on how Mathieson will be used if he doesn’t make the MLB roster? Will they have him starting in Lehigh or is he strictly a short reliever now?

    Like

  95. As implied by DiamondDerby above, since we are voting on prospects that have either come in from another organization or are very young it is hard to evaluate them or to compare them to each other. As a result, I find myself abstaining from the voting-I don’t have any strong opinions, primarily due to lack of knowledge. However, it is fun and instructive to read the comments!

    Like

  96. Ken, you stole my thunder!
    I started to post that same prediction yesterday. Whoever loses between Bastardo and Mathieson, will win the next round. The same logic for voting, will be used and the loser will double their vote total for #10.

    Like

  97. What if Cosart wins #9 (currently 2 votes behind). Do his supporters go to Bastardo or Mathieson for #10?

    Like

  98. junior mine doesnt. While i normally lean heavily on proximity to the majors in judging a prospect, i also dont think tagged relievers belong in the top 10. I voted for Cosart at 9 and will probably move to Jiwan next round if he wins. Bastardo and Maietheson are both between 10-15 for me with Bastardo being just a bit higher due to the fact taht he still might be able to start.

    Like

  99. I get a kick out of reading comments that imply people here know more about the Seattle prospects that the Phillies scouts, many of whom worked for Seattle recently. What mistake has Ruben made other than signing Moyer to two years? Name one if you can because I can’t. I’m willing to believe that the three players they got have significant value. That doesn’t mean they’ll become major league stars but they have value today. How can anyone here look at Gose’s 259 average at A level and not think Gilles’ 340 avg at High A makes him a better prospect today? They are both very fast and I look forward to see them run together in spring training to see who is faster. Of course, James could be faster than both. Last time I checked though, you can’t steal first base and James and gose haven’t yet showed enough bat control to show that they’re major league bound. I believe the Phils got Gilles because they believe he’ll be starting in their outfield in 2012 and probably 2011. What happens with Werth will determine whether its in RF or CF because we all know Victorino and Werth won’t both be here in 2012. My guess is they sign Werth to an extension and trade Victorino after 2010.

    Like

  100. I don’t think you can accurately predict if Cosart voters will go to Mathieson or Bastardo. I voted for Cosart this round and will continue to do so until he is selected but Bastardo, Mathieson, and James are my next three in that order.

    Like

  101. Gillies would have to make a huge leap in 2010 for him to start in 2011. I agree that he could take over CF in 2012, but I doubt it’ll happen before then.

    Like

  102. “What mistake has Ruben made other than signing Moyer to two years?”

    1) Offering Blanton arbitration – had he not done that, he could have kept Lee and either traded him midseason if we fell out of contention or let him walk and gotten two first round picks. The two picks would have been worth much more than the B grade prospects we got from Seattle. Don’t believe me? Check out what Keith Law, Jim Callis and John Manual think about the guys we got.

    2) Signing Ibanez for 3 years and $33MM – he played well the first half of his first season, but this contract is off market. Bobby Abreu signed with the Angles last year for $5MM on a one year deal and he didn’t cost them a first round pick. He also played better than Ibanez did for half the price. Johnny Damon, a better player is struggling to get $7MM on a two year deal this year. The Ibanez signing was terrible. There is no reasonable way to defend it.

    3) Not offering Moyer & Burrell arbitration last year. Either we would have had Burrell back on a one year deal or we would have gotten two first round picks. Either way, we were better off than $33MM to Ibanez. Same goes for Moyer. A one year deal would have been ideal if you wanted to bring him back.

    4) Exercising Rollin’s option a year before he had to. What is the benefit of exercising an option prior to maturity? There is none. If Rollins gets hurt next year or continues to deteriorate this will look even worse. And don’t give me the “this makes JRoll feel good” line – if he plays well his salary for 2011 is below market which can’t make him happy.

    5) Not making the Halladay trade in July when it could have helped us win a world series. If we were willing to part with Drabek & Taylor for Halladay, why not do it last July and have both Halladay and Lee for the World Series? It makes no sense to make the two trades, but to spread them out such that you can’t have them both for a playoff run.

    6) I also disagree with not offering Scott Eyre a major league contract, albeit at around $1MM. But this is just my opinion.

    Like

  103. Monty are you nuts?
    1.The move was financially based it was to restock our farm system. The three prospects we got back are in our top 10 according to us.
    2. As for ibanez, he was injured the second half of the year, he will bounce back. And the abreu deal was done at the end of free agency. The fans here would have gone nuts if we didnt have a left fielder until mid february. Also Abreu is a right fielder and johnny damons numbers were inflated due to his knack to hit to rf and the new yankee stadium.
    3. If we offered arb to each they would be phillies, they both would have accepted due to the economy’s affect on the market. Burrell didnt sign till late anyway for a cheap contract he could have gotten up to 16 mil thru arb.
    4. The reason they exercised the option was because rollins is still an everyday ss he has good uzr ratings and to avoid the lame duck effect.
    5. Ill give you five but we also got back some better prospects than what we gave up for lee.
    6. Scott Eyre was a good pitcher for us, and i wish he was back, but do to his injury im not sur he would be 100 percent.

    Like

  105. ****6) I also disagree with not offering Scott Eyre a major league contract, albeit at around $1MM. But this is just my opinion.****

    Not to make this an MLB thread but you get on people for bashing the SEA prospects because the Phillies FO/scouts know far more than they could but turn around and criticize the same FO for not offering Eyre a MLB contract despite them having a first-hand look inside his elbow during his recent surgery. A bit contradictory.

    Like

  107. “The move was financially based it was to restock our farm system. The three prospects we got back are in our top 10 according to us.”

    I’m assuming you meant to write “wasn’t”. Name me one other contender that you can think of in the past 30 years that has traded its best pitcher, in the prime of his career (or even its 2nd best pitcher), to restock its farm system. That is a b.s. excuse and you know it. Seriously. But even if you are right, why offer Blanton arbitration? We can’t give him away right now because his arbitration figure is going to be too high relative to his market value. Why not non-tender him and then resign him at market? Or sign an equivalent guy if he walks? There are plenty out there.

    Ibanez’s numbers were inflated by our park as well. Look at OPS+; Ibanez comes out slightly ahead of Damon and Abreu. Then factor in Damon and Abreu’s stolen bases (30 in Abreu’s case) and the fact that they are better defensively. It doesn’t matter that Abreu plays right field. Werth would be awesome in left field or Abreu could play there equally as well as Ibanez at half the cost. Who were we bidding against that we had to go three years for Ibanez? And don’t give me the “fans needed a LF excuse”. We had just won a world series. If Ruben wanted to wait and see who fell to him in February he could have done that.

    I’m not sure what your point is on Moyer. He would have been a phillie for one year if he accepted arbitration. Instead we owe him $8MM this year even if he doesn’t pitch. “Anytime you can sign a 45 year-old crafty left hander for $15MM over two years, you have to jump at the opportunity.” I don’t think Burrell would have won more than $10MM in arbitration based on his comps. But I would have paid him for the flexibility of a one year deal and the chance to get compensation if he decided he wanted the security of a longer-term deal somewhere else.

    What is the lame duck effect? If this was Rollins last year, wouldn’t he playing for a big free agent pay day? Are you suggesting that we would sulk, play poorly and then somehow expect to cash in via free agency? If anything, exercising the options ensures that Rollins will be underpaid for yet another year assuming he rebounds and plays like he has in years past. I’m sure he feels great about that.

    Like

  108. Mathison – best scenario – Ryan Madson
    Bastardo – best scenario 2008 J C Romero
    Cosart – best scenario #2 starter

    I think a #2 starter (3 above average pitches) is more valuable AS A PROSPECT than the other two scenarios.

    I would add Galvis to the list of possible applicants in the top 15, has gold glove caliber fielding ability which a team with a lot of bats could afford to carry.

    Like

  109. “Not to make this an MLB thread but you get on people for bashing the SEA prospects because the Phillies FO/scouts know far more than they could but turn around and criticize the same FO for not offering Eyre a MLB contract despite them having a first-hand look inside his elbow during his recent surgery. A bit contradictory.”

    What in God’s name are you talking about? The previous poster challenged someone to mention decisions of Ruben’s that were wrong. I responded.

    In case you are confused, I am very critical of the Lee trade. Both the reasoning for it and the poor return we got for one of the best 10 pitchers in the game. So to be clear, I’m critical of the front office for both trading Lee and, to a much much lesser extent, not offering Eyre a major league deal.

    And answer me this, if Eyre is so damaged, why was he pitching so many critical innings for us in the playoffs and world series last fall?

    Like

  110. 1) No Halliday deal without trading Lee… you know the owners said this. As to seeing what else would be out there and hold on to Lee, can you imagine the pressure this town would put on to hold on to Lee? They had to make the move concurrently. The Phillies have said they can’t afford it, and frankly, I take them at their word. They knew Seattle’s farm system the best, so they took three guys they had high opinions of (and did not worry about Keith Hater Law or Jim Callis). And arbitration with Blanton is good because you are only on the hook for 1 year. Let’s see if he can do more than be a #3 pitcher first before we long term him. But we need to give him the opportunity to do so. Long term I think they regard Gillies to be on a par with Taylor, and Aumont the same way with Drabek.
    2) Are you serious? Abreu got a gold glove only by applying voodoo. He wouldn’t sacrifice his body for anything. Ibanez is a great team player who played with a torn muscle last year. He can also hit lefties better than johnny Damon who would need a hot dog cannon to get a ball from left field to home plate. The reason Ibanez got the contract was that others would have given him the same. Did you see what the Cubs gave Milton Bradley?
    3) If they offered arbitration to Burrell and Moyer they would have been on the hook to Burrell for at least 13 million dollars (the Horror!) and Moyer for 10 million. Doing what they did made financial sense. Remember, it is a business not a public trust.
    4) 2 words… cost certainty. And they are making a statement to JRoll, a) stay on track, b) see that Galvis fellow over there?
    5) We made it to the World Series… why would you expect anything more, because the World Series is a crap shoot over who gets hot when. And once again, they do have a budget figure and they are businessmen.
    6) Eyre probably won’t hold up for long. The price they offered him was fair. It’s Business, it’s not personal. If Eyre wants to he can do a deal heavy on incentives and with an opt out clause if he doesn’t make the club. That deal is still there for him.

    Like

  112. 3) If they offered arbitration to Burrell and Moyer they would have been on the hook to Burrell for at least 13 million dollars (the Horror!) and Moyer for 10 million. Doing what they did made financial sense. Remember, it is a business not a public trust.

    We are on the same page with #3, actually. $23MM for one year of Burrell & Moyer is preferable to me over $48MM for three years of Ibanez, two years of Moyer and the loss of a first round draft pick. Public trust? Please, you are the one that brought the public in to this. I’m taking business.

    Want to talk about Horror? $8MM for Moyer this year, $22MM for Ibanez for the next two. Or how about this one…having to trade one of the best pitchers in baseball who was grossly underpaid, for financial reasons because of the these contracts. That, my friend, is my definition of horror.

    At a MINIMUM, Abreu and Ibanez are comparable players. I feel strongly that Abreu is superior, but I acknowledge that it is debatable. Giving Ibanez $28MM more (apples to apples for the contact Abreu signed last year) was insanity, pure and simple.

    Like

  113. It wasn’t me as I voted for Cosart, but Flande would certainly be a reasonable next add, but so would Stutes, Rosenberg, Schwimer, Worley, Savery, Collier, Hewitt, Shreve, De Fratus, etc. It gets very subjective as you move further down the list.

    Like

  114. And how does cost certainty enter in to the equation? You do not lose cost certainty by waiting to exercise an option. You already have cost certainty by virtue of the fact that you can force him to play for you for $8.5MM whenever you want to exercise. But you give up downside protection by exercising early.

    Like

  115. Monty,
    I belive this is MiLB related and is fair here, I won’t comment on the other assertions made because they don’t belong on this sight, go to beerleaguer to talk about Ruben and major league players.

    The notion that getting two draft picks from Lee leaving as a Type A is greater than the value from the 3 Seattle prospects is popycock. It makes me almost angry because that type of thinking is very weak minded.

    First off, there is so much less certainty in selecting kids in the draft versus seeing players with real life minor league experience and stats to review. Second, the kids with a year or two of MiLB experience are closer to possibly playing in the majors. Third, MiLB players with 1 yr of experience can be traded again, i.e. they have value as trade chips immediatly, future draft picks can not be traded, plus drafted players need to wait 1 full year before they can be traded. This is my opinion, by itself trumps the 2 future draft picks becaue those picks are so far out in the future.

    Fourth, there is no guarantee the Phils would receive draft picks as high as everyone assumes, as an example, what was the draft pick compensation for the Brewers losing Sabathia to the Yankees? Was it a first second or third? The Yanks signed 3 Type A that year, someone got their 1st, someone else got the 2nd and some poor team got the weakest sandwich pick and a third. I acknowldege this last one doesn’t happen very often but it sure did last year and really pissed off some MLB GM…

    Like

  116. Bobo,

    If you have a problem with commentary on this site related Amaro’s decisions as GM, than I think you should address your complaint to the person who asked for examples of poor decisions that Amaro has made. As for what belongs or doesn’t belong on this site, I will respect your right to your opinion and I hope that you will respect my right to consider it irrelevant.

    Your logic is flawed and your analysis incomplete. A fair comparision is as follows:

    A) one year of major league service by Cliff Lee @ $9MM + one first round draft pick (Lee will be rated extremely highly in the A pool) + one compensation pick

    vs.

    B) Aumont, Gillies, Ramirez

    I think a better example of weak minded would be someone who tries to evaluate a trade by only looking at two of the three main components (Lee, the Seattle prospects and the potential draft picks being the three). You can’t compare just the picks and the prospects. An analysis that attempts to do so is embarrasingly lacking at best.

    Let me make this simple for you and attempt to put it in $ terms. Do you have any idea what 200 innings of Cliff Lee is worth? Market value says $20MM. You were only going to have to pay him $9MM to get those innings. That means that you gave up $11MM in value when you traded him to Seattle. You think he is only worth $15MM? Fine, then you gave up $6MM in value.

    I wouldn’t give up $6MM for Aumont, Gillies and Ramirez; yet alone Cliff Lee.

    Let me ask you a question. And please be honest. If Aumont, Gillies and Ramirez were eligible for the draft today, where do you think they would be taken? If you think any of those guys would be taken in the first round, you are crazy.

    Like

  117. MonteyBurns
    If you think Abreu = Ibanez then there is no sense in arguing anything else.
    Abreu doesn’t carry the club through the first half.

    Like

  118. Monty,

    Believe it not I agree with most of your points in that above note, i.e, when factoring in Lee’s performance it completely sways the discussion. However, what i was specifically responding to was this one sentence that you wrote:
    and I quote you directly:

    “The two picks would have been worth much more than the B grade prospects we got from Seattle. ”

    If you now want to pull back that statement fine. If you want to add qualifiers fine. But I’ve seen others say the same exact thing almost word for word and I disagree with it. You said it not me, if you had written out “two picks plus a year of Lee”, you would not have heard a peep from me, but you did not not not not write that before, and I took what you said literally. I did not try to infer any other meaning except what was written.

    And I absolutely believe with complete conviction that without any type of doubt that both Aumont and Ramirez would be 1st round picks, I have no idea about Gillies. Big projectable pitchers that throw hard = first round picks.

    The purpose of this site is for MiLB discussion. It’s the internet (god bless it) we can all do what we want, wild west, etc etc, but try and keep it to MiLB around here, its a simple rule and it keeps the site focused like a laser beam. It is what makes this site great.

    Like

  119. “If you think Abreu = Ibanez then there is no sense in arguing anything else.
    Abreu doesn’t carry the club through the first half.”

    How you can evaluate a three year, $33MM contract in terms of a half year is beyond me.

    How about this, sign Abreu for $5MM. Take the rest of the money you saved by signing Ibanez and sign a legitimate starter. You do that, and I think we would have been just fine last year. And since when does a half year matter? That is ridiculous. We would have won more games in the 2nd half of the year with Abreu hitting the way he did vs. how Ibanez performed in the 2nd half (he was below average after the all star break). Why cherry pick and not look at the full year?

    Bobo – fair response. But you did pick up only on one sentence when I’ve said several times that I disagreed with the trade for several reasons, the biggest being that we gave up Lee at $9MM per year which is crazy. But I now understand where you are coming from. Reasonable people can disagree on where Aumont and Ramirez would go today if draft eligible. But I’d trade them in a second for first round picks if I could.

    Like

  120. montyburns130

    The empty hole in the rotation refutes all your many words. Not to even bring up the stress Lee took off the bullpen.

    BTW Insults do nothing for your post.

    Like

  121. nowheels, I’m happy to discuss whatever you like, but I have no idea what you are referring to in your post. What specifically refutes all of the other words in my post?

    Not that I care, but I find it ironic that you criticize me for insults while referring to an “empty hole” in my post. How is that any different than the sort of comments that I made to Bobo, who by the way, called me weak minded?

    Like

  122. As far as one can go with insults on message boards I’d say this was almost a civil conversation, you’d certainly hear much worse at a bar. And Monty anyone that reads all the above would agree that it is not an insult if proven correct, which I was by your capitulation to my superior logic against your poorly worded arguement.

    Like

  123. Bobo, I’m happy for you. I really am. You’re like a little kid holding on to something that he heard an adult say while not understanding the context.

    I think that we got a little crossed as sometimes happens over the internet and were arguing different things. I now understand where you stand on the trade and I get the impression that you like Aumont and Ramirez. Let me be crystal clear so there is no doubt on where I come out: 1) the Lee trade was a disaster for all of the reasons that I mention above; 2) I value two first round picks much more than the guys we got from the Mariners. I acknowledge that reasonable people can disagree with my opinion on future picks vs. these prospects, but that is how I feel.

    Like

  124. monty 130 excellant posting, reminds me of my last 2 years. btw i would imagine nw is ageeing with you.

    Like

  125. My god “EMPTY HOLE” refers to the loss of Lee in the rotation nothing more. Hamels would of been the fourth starter. With Happ going further into games less stress on the BP, more chance to bring in younger pitchers.
    Monty calm down please. It is supposed to be fun.

    Like

Comments are closed.