Reader Top 30; #16

2010 Reader Top 30

Moving along. Jiwan James took the #15 spot, edging out a few other candidates. With him slotted in at #15, I thought it would be interesting to look at the breakdown of the top 15 according to you

C [1] – Valle (7th)
1B [1] – Singleton (13th)
2B, 3B, SS [0]
CF [3] – Gillies (4th), Gose (5th), James (15th)
RF [2] – Brown (1st), Santana (6th)
LF [0]
RHP [7] – May (2nd), Aumont (3rd), Ramirez (8th), Cosart (9th), Mathieson (10th), Colvin (12th), De Fratus (14tH)
LHP [1] – Bastardo (11th)

So that’s 7 position players and 8 pitchers so far. Lets move on to #16

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. Jarred Cosart, RHP
10. Scott Mathieson, RHP
11. Antonio Bastardo, LHP
12. Brody Colvin, RHP
13. Jon Singleton, 1B
14. Justin De Fratus, RHP
15. Jiwan James, OF
16.

Collier received the most write-in support, so he gets added this round

95 thoughts on “Reader Top 30; #16”

  4. went with castro here. I just have a hard time voting for non-upside pitchers even if they are higher in the system.

    Like

  6. I voted for Castro again. I like Stutes in this slot but I have Castro rated slightly higher.

    I see the Phils signed Contraras. That will cut someone’s chances of making the big club out of ST.

    Like

  9. Castro is the highest ranked player left on my board, but I may wait to place my vote. Want to see the arguments made for guys like Pettibone, Stutes and Worley. Someone may change my mind.
    I really do not know what to make of Pettibone. He has a high K/9, but his H/9 and BB/9 are terrible. Can not figure how he manages those numbers.

    Like

  10. Stutes over Galvis for me at this point. I really don’t understand the support for Rosenberg. He was great at Low A but was really too old for the level. 10 IP at Reading (which would have been age appropriate) is really not enough to judge him on. I like Schwimmer a little more between the two of them, but both would be after 20th for me.

    Like

  13. Baseball Cube rates Vance Worley’s control at 99 with a four pitch arsenal- 2 and 4 seam fastballs, curve and changeup. While his final numbers weren’t great he did work through an increase in innings pitched from 69 in 08 to 153 last year pitching at age 21. Phillies Nation readers had him ranked as high as #8 prospect at one point.
    He was regarded highly enough by Phillies scouts to have been drafted twice (in 05 20th round) and in 08 (3rd round).

    A google search brought up a game story from May 11th after a dominating performance against Altoona when he used all four pitches to keep a team he had just faced a week before off balance in recording a 2-1 victory.

    He gets high marks for his work ethic and coachability and I expect 12 to 15 wins for him next year if he stays in Reading all year.

    Between you and me, John K, we’ll get him in there soon.
    Certainly top 20.

    Like

  14. I went with Pettibone again.

    Worley was drafted with the expectation of converting to a reliever…the description at the time of drafting was a “poor man’s Scott Shields” I believe.

    Maybe they convert him this year and he helps the club at some point soon.

    Like

  15. Mike Stutes dominated Lakewood at age 22, as a STARTER.
    Vance Worley dominated Lakewood at age 21, as a STARTER.
    Rosenberg dominated Lakewood at age 23 as a reliever.
    I really can not understand how Rosenberg can be rated above those 2 pitchers.

    Like

  17. i don’t understand how rosey could be getting all this love with schwim not even being on the board and people listing several other guys they will be taking soon. I believe they are comparable relievers

    Like

  19. Haven’t commented much, just been voting but I think Collier’s upside and potential is far greater than most players left on this list. That’s why he’s getting my vote.

    Like

  20. “i don’t understand how rosey could be getting all this love with schwim not even being on the board”

    It is because all of the guys who would write Schwimer in, are busy voting for Rosenberg. Evidently, Low A numbers mean more than Advanced A numbers.

    Like

  21. Galvis. I think we can all agree that he’s never going to hit much, but defensive specialist shortstops always have a chance.

    Like

  22. Pettibone. Bonus Baby who hasn’t had a chance to prove or disprove much. Had a good k rate, and good scouting reports, against older competition in what little innings he’s gotten. The only high-ceiling guy left who hasn’t gotten any strikes against him (ala, Collier/Hewitt).

    Like

  23. I’ll keep on with Freddy Galvis. I think most of the endlessly recycled criticism is based upon assumptions made from height and weight stats which I believe were carried over from the blurb announcing his signing as a 16 y.o. And from a end of season review of overall BA and such.
    He has hit well at spurts at all levels even AA. All he has to do is extend those spurts. And the value of above average defense in the Middle Infield can trump what many Middle Relievers and Outfielders bring. Just like I said when I first nominated him.

    Like the Jiwan James pick-good athlete.

    Rosenberg v. Stutes and Worley- could be that Stutes and Worley are well regarded by the same types with a difference between them on an age/performance basis.
    Therefore the Stutes and Worley votes are split , enabling Rosenberg to take the lead. Rosenberg looks good for the next spot as I see it now. If Stutes and Worley keep splitting the ticket , maybe they both wind up further down the list than they should be.

    Like

  25. Mike 77, if that is the only thing you are comparing them by then Mike Cisco should be rated way ahead of Stutes and Worley based on his performance STARTING at Lakewood. I don’t really see what the big deal is that Rosenberg is a 23 year old dominant reliever. It seems like a lot of people had no problem voting for Mathieson, who is a soon to be 26 year old reliever, at number 10.

    Also, for everyone that is so in love with Schwimer, could you please take your eyes off his blog posts and either watch a game or just simply look at the numbers. I don’t know if it’s just me, but I wouldn’t be as intimidated standing in the box looking at a guy who is 6’7″ barely touching 92 with a herky jerky motion, as I would a guy who is 6’3″ sitting 92-95 touching 96/97. I understand that High A is a level higher than Low A but give me a break. It’s not THAT big of jump. Especially not to validate Schwimer’s 2.85 ERA vs. Rosey’s 0.89 ERA. I’m not even taking into consideration the 7.71 that Schwim put in at AA vs. the 2.53 Rosey put up. Also, as someone else has mentioned on here, Rosey was selected to play for Team USA (which by the way, the only reason Schwimer was promoted to Reading was to take Rosey’s place when he left). Not only is this a tremendous honor, but he was chosen from every organization’s non 25 man roster.

    I can’t believe I’m the ONLY one giving this kid some love.

    Like

  26. Please.
    Rosenberg pitched 10 innings at Reading for that 2.53 ERA. Do you remember what Worley and Stutes did their first 10 innings in AA. Again, at a Younger age.

    Like

  27. Going with like Galvis again. If defensive statistics were as popular as stolen bases, I suspect Galvis would stand out as a defender as much as Gose stands out as a base stealer. But short stop defense is far more important than base stealing. I’m hoping that Galvis will learn something about bunting and how to get on-base without having a lot of power by being on the same team as Gillies.

    Like

  28. Since you wanted to know, I found it for you…

    Worley- First 10.2 IP 8H 6R 3ER 5BB 12K (2.53 ERA)
    Stutes- First 11IP 9H 3R 3ER 3BB 10K (2.45 ERA)

    Hmmm…seems pretty close to Rosenberg’s 2.53 I mentioned earlier doesn’t it?

    I never discredited Worley or Stutes. I think they are great pitchers and will definitely help us in the future. My point was that Cisco did considerably better than them in Lakewood as a STARTER. I just think people should be giving a little credit where credit is due.

    Like

  29. philsphan, you made my point. Stutes and Worley are better prospects than Rosenberg because because they did everything that Rosenberg did at YOUNGER ages and as STARTERS.
    For some perspective:
    Vance Worley is 22 years old with over 150 AA innings.
    Mike Stutes is 23 year old with over 145 AA innings.
    Rosenberg is 24 years old has all of 10 AA innings under his belt.
    You’re fixated on his 2.53 era in 10 innings as a reliever? Again, they have done everything he has done, at an earlier age and as starters.

    Like

  30. I’m not fixated on his 2.53 ERA in Reading, that’s what YOU decided to pull out of my first post. You could definitely argue that starters are more valuable than relievers. I could argue that the 7th, 8th, and 9th innings are the most important innings of a game. Here’s what I AM fixated on: Rosenberg’s career numbers, 10 wins, 1.11 ERA, 32 saves, 97IP, 73H, 29BB, 125K, and a big league spring training invite in a season and a half.

    Like

  31. Rick Wise Guy, I like Worley a lot too — I’ll be voting for him as soon as Galvis is chosen — and I regularly look at the Baseball Cube too. But let’s relate his stats right. For some reason you are using last year’s stats for Worley. His walk rate increased this past season, so his average career walk rate percentile for his league is 82 rather than 99. Note that I am also trying to explain what the “scouting” report scores of the Baseball Cube are, based on my understanding of the web site. They are career average percentiles given the league. Worley had 2 years in the minor leagues with a 99th %ile in walks/9 in 2008 mostly in Lakewood and I assume a 65%ile in walks/9 in 2009 in Reading for a 82%ile career average (assuming the average is unweighted, which is unclear).

    Like

  32. A spring training invite? What does that mean? Domonic Brown and Michael Taylor were not invited to big league camp last year. Jason Ellison was. Does that mean that the Phillies thought more of Ellison than them or that he was the better player or that he had more potential?

    Like

  33. Going into the 2010 Spring Training, Rosenberg reminds me of Bisenius in 2007, a tall high strikeout pitcher who pitched mostly at A-ball the previous year and who got some press because the Phillies said in the off season he had a chance to make the team in spring training. Except Rosenberg is a year older than Bisenius was and pitched mostly in Lakewood and 11 innings at Reading as opposed to Clearwater and 23 innings at Reading. I like Rosenberg a bit, and have him 22nd on my Phillies prospect list, but I cannot be too sure about such an old prospect with only 11 innings above middle A-ball.

    Like

  34. Voted Flande again, had him since twelve. Agree with some of the “Others”, add Savery to the list, should be in the top 20. Still like Savery, and think he can have a big year this year and push further up the list.

    Like

  35. I voted Stutes again. I keep looking at the list and, man, things are really getting thinned out. I’m hoping we have a big surprise coming this year, like Michael Taylor in 2008.

    I like Rosenberg too, but I’m not sure he’s really better than Schwim. As for Galvis, I won’t add more ink to that battle, but I think the likelihood that he becomes more than a utility player is low whereas I think there’s a pretty good chance that Stutes becomes a starter or, at worst, becomes another Chad Durbin which, to me, makes him a better prospect.

    As for Worley, I don’t think he’s going to become anything. I doubt he’ll make it to the majors. His best chance, I think, is to be converted to a reliever and, perhaps, pick up a few MPH.

    Like

  37. I love to talk about prospect , the thing that gets me is how anyone based on what he has done could mention Savery,as a legimate prospect,

    Like

  38. marfis

    Every word said about Galvis was said about Bowa. And of all the position players he has to be the MIP for 2010 . Most important because he is the only virgin player with even a small chance of seeing any time .

    Like

  39. phillysmith
    You have a point Way wasn’t challenged even a little. If the season was longer he would of hit Clearwater and thing would of been ,well, clearer.(Couldn’t resist the pun). Given his last two years in college and living in Alaska, one has to wonder
    how steep his learning curve will be with more innings and instruction. Very good phillysmith

    Like

  40. Interesting the way the vote has been going since #13. There are 4 guys who have basically received the same support for 2 straight rounds. The De Fratus voters seem to split between Galvis and James for the #15 vote.
    I wonder where those voters are going this round.

    Like

  41. Anthony Hewitt. how are all these guys like leandro castro being looked at as more valuable than hewitt, he’s only 19 and the transition to OF should be beneficial to him

    Like

  43. Biesienus was a good prospect that has dropped off. Rosenberg could be the same. I didn’t vote for him. I went with Stutes as a possible 5th starter/reliever for the Phils possibly in 2011. Somebody talked about Way. I would like to see how he does this year. Had a pretty good year last year.

    Like

  44. I’m surprised by no shreve, way or savery not on the voting list yet, but they hav been mentioned. One guy I haven’t heard a peep about is N. Hernandez who in his age 20 season last year went 8-1 2.70 and 67 K’s in 80 IP in NY Penn LG. Anybody got some love for him?

    Like

  46. I have to agree w/ you Alan, i don’t know much about him but his #’s look pretty good. I’m excited to see how he continues to develop this year in Lakewood?

    Like

  47. Galvis. Because I think Rollins will be gone bu 2012 and somebody cheap may be needed and Galvis has gold glove level fielding ability.
    I would add Savery.

    Like

  48. Voted Galvis because of his position and the knowledge that he has one ML ready skill, defense.

    But frankly it seems like you could pick any of a half-a-dozen names out of a hat and have an equal chance of ranking them appropriately. It’s not that their isn’t talent its just that they’re all far enough away and/or have big enough issues that it’s almost impossible to distinguish between the handful of guys in this group.

    Like

  49. Here’s how I have my next five prospects ranked.

    1. Michael Stutes
    2. Yohan Flande
    3. Vance Worley
    4. Jesus Sanchez
    5. Leandro Castro

    A few people have advocated for Flande, Worley and Castro. I haven’t voted for them, not because I do not think they are good prospects, but simply because I think Stutes is a little bit better.

    Like

  51. My problem with Shreve is that in his two years with the Phillies, he has yet to throw a pitch in a game. That seems long if his surgery had gone well. So, I don’t know if he is still a high-ceiling guy or just another promising HS pitcher who blew out his arm. He’s also lost a lot of development time.

    Like

  52. Alan,

    I like your five prospects. Sanchez made a nice transition from a no hitting catcher to a pitcher. Whether he would be a better reliever or a starter is the question.

    Like

  53. My next 5:

    1. Stutes
    2. Rosenberg
    3. Sanchez
    4. Galvis
    5. Savery

    On Savery – I think we’re all giving up on him way too soon. He could still be in the process of recovering and re-building arm strength. When I think about us giving up on him, I think back to how utterly terrible Gavin Floyd appeared for a long stretch of time, both in the minors and majors. But he had the underlying ability and ended up becoming a solid pitcher. Before we relegate him to the dustbin of history, let’s give Joe Savery one more chance. He’s athletic, he’s lefty and he still may be gaining arm strength and velocity. He still has a chance of becoming a solid pitcher – someone like Joe Magrane. If you ask me, I like him a hell of a lot better than I like either Worley or Carpenter (although I think Carpenter might also surprise us and become a lot like Joe Blanton).

    Like

  54. Galvis, then Stutes. Worley is intriguing.

    I think Galvis was hurt last year, and it killed him vs. LH pitching. He had previously been a good RH hitter, nearly posting an 800 OPS at Lakewood from the right side, but his RH OPS declined by 300 points last season. His defense was also worse last season, at least by the numbers at minorleaguesplits. I remember him being our with a broken wrist or somesuchthing. Maybe it killed his RH swing.

    Like

  55. Probably being stubborn doing this, but I’m not giving up on Worley yet.

    His 2009 wasn’t very good even if you remove the bad luck (4.39 FIP, just 5.87 K/9), but I think there are a couple of mitigating factors at play. First, he was much younger than most college players, so he pitched all of last year in Double-A at age 21 (whereas Stutes was 23). Second, I think the double jump was a tad overaggressive. Third, Worley obviously got fatigued as the season wore on — he only threw 54.1 innings in 2007, then 172.1 innings in 2008, a massive jump that pretty clearly affected his 2009. Still, he was very good his first two months, posting ground ball numbers north of 50%, solid control, and better K rates than the season’s second half.

    I like him better than Stutes and Flande because he has age on his side, and I think he can really have success repeating Reading this year. A strike throwing #4 starter is still a realistic outcome, so I’ll go out on a limb with Worley at this point.

    Like

  56. Stutes and worley are almost exactly a year appart: sept 1986, and sept 1987. 1 year older w/ far better results imho.

    Like

  57. Whoops, you’re right, GTU: Stutes is 23 now, but was 22 last year. Still, though, I’m not seeing “far better results” from Stutes…

    Stutes’ 2009: 145.2 IP — 6.73 K/9 — 3.58 BB/9 — 0.93 HR/9 — 38.6% GB — 4.40 FIP
    Worley’s 2009: 153.1 IP — 5.87 K/9 — 2.88 BB/9 — 1.00 HR/9 — 41.2% GB — 4.39 FIP

    And if you look at their splits, Stutes really struggled against left-handed hitters (.315 BAA, 5.42 K/9, 4.46 BB/9), whereas Worley showed a pretty insignificant platoon split (.288 BAA, 6.41 K/9, 2.97 BB/9 against left-handed hitters).

    When it comes down to it, I think Stutes is a reliever, and I like guys like Schwimer and Rosenberg a touch better in that capacity. Worley I still believe in as a starter, and while I may be going out on a limb there, I’m really expecting a bounce back year from him.

    Like

  58. I like Stutes better than Worley.
    But I do not disagree that Stutes may have to become a reliever. I think Worley may have too also.

    Stutes is rated as having the best Slider in the system. With him and Worley having similar Fastballs, that gives Stutes the edge. I have not heard that Worley has 2 plus pitches.

    Like

  59. Rosenberg is leading right now, and I’m really pretty surprised. I have at least 4 of the guys on the list as quite a bit better, and Schwimer, too.

    Like

  60. I’m feeling better about the system because at this point we still have Pettibone, Shreve and Castro who all have big upsides…maybe we should have picked them earlier, at least Castro and Pettibone?

    Like

  63. A write-in for Schwimer – his turn won’t come for a few days (I’m predicting around 22-24), but it’s about time he started getting some votes.

    – Jeff

    Like

  64. I voted for Pettibone again, but his other followers seem to be losing steam. I’m a big believer in K/9 as a future predictor of success for a pitcher, and this guy has it. He obviously has a lot to learn based upon the high BB/9, but he is still young (won’t turn 20 until July), and was a high draft-pick/bonus baby type, so obviously he has potential.

    Some other positives about Jon:

    He has yet to allow a homerun in professional ball. He has a BABIP of .349, so he has been a bit unlucky. His FIP is only 3.07. In limited innings against left-handed batters, they post a .190/.320/.214 against him with a 11.25 K/9. With RISP, his batting average against drops to .228.

    The potential is definitely there. I really believe this kid is going to be a stud this year.

    Like

  66. Stutes shows more stamina than Worley, so I’m not sure why anyone would consider the former a reliever and the latter a starter.

    Is Matthew Way just considered too old for his level of competition? Seems to be a common thread among these college players, especially pitchers. It seems like some people (moneyball’s undying influence) advocate drafting college players, before immediately dismissing their superior production due to age. How can you argue for the selection of college players, then vote for younger players drafted out of high school, with inferior numbers?

    Just look at this list of Phillies/former Phils late bloomers: Chase Utley, Ryan Howard, Shane Victorino, Michael Taylor, JA Happ, Jamie Moyer, Ryan Madson, Raul Ibanez, Gavin Floyd, Jason Werth, Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee…maybe some patience is required in evaluating these prospects. College draft picks are usually 3 to 5 years older than their high school counterparts, dominate them in the lower levels, and reach the major leagues sooner. Even if they’re a little older, you have to allow players a few years to develop. None of these guys are old and they’d all like nothing more than to reach the majors asap.

    One can believe in drafting college players and deduct points for their age, but they shouldn’t forget their original rationale for drafting older players, especially when they perform well in the minors.

    Like

  67. Baxter – I understand what you’re saying, I don’t think that most people here are arguing for or prefer younger players per se or are somehow penalizing older players for dominating at lower levels. Figure out which minor leaguers will develop into the best players is an inexact science at best. With younger players, they are in such early stages of development, that you have to rely on the scouting reports to a large degree. With older players, particularly pitchers, you just have to put the statistics in context until the players reach higher levels. It’s like having an 18-year old in a 16-year old league. If he strikes out 15 batters a game, it’s still impressive, but he’s beating up on less experienced and less developed competition and you have to take this into account in figuring out how good the player is going to become. That’s all that we’re saying.

    Like

  68. Matthew Way had a scouting video when he was drafted that showed him throwing high 80s. I think a lot of us dismissed him based on that. But the only pitchers in the organization who had a higher K/9 ratio in 75+ IP were Jason Knapp, Trevor May and Felix Cespedes. Given that Way is left handed, that kind of strikeout rate is a great sign.

    Ultimately though, there is only so much value I can put in the NY-Penn stats. Baseball-Reference lists the leaders with 25+ IP. Way is 20th in K/9 (Pettibone is 43rd). 29 pitchers had a K/9 ratio in double digits in the NYP League. I do have Way in the top 30 though.

    Like

  69. As Catch 22 notes, Way falls apart based on scouting reports. There are more then just numbers. Most of us live in the real world and don’t have the ability to travel up and down the east coast and see all of these guys but when you read a guy tops out at 90 and is dominating younger competition you just assume he’s outsmarting everyone. The problem with that is as he moves up the system he’ll be facing smarter, older batters.

    Like

  70. Stutes again for me. I still think he has a very good arm and could have success down the road. I just got back from Phillies Phantasy Camp (anyone else?). Great time. Fyi – Halladay works out at Bright House every day and is joined by several of the kids (Aumont, Zagurski, Cosart, etc) already there. I hear that he’s been great with the kids and is just one of the guys with them. The young pitchers I talked to are very high on Gose and James as go get the ball centerfielders. They were very clear that Gose was faster but that James was the better athlete and they really expect him to break out this year. That Lakewood outfield could really be crowded with talent (James, Collier, Hewitt, Castro). Where will Hudson and Dugan play? Someone will have to get bumped up to Clearwater.

    Like

  71. I like projecting for next season and the outfield assignments will be tough in some cases. I think they’ll have Santana, Hudson, and Altherr at W’sport if one of them can play CF; Hewitt, James, Collier, and Castro at L’wood; Myers (who hit at the end of the season), Gose and Dugan (doublebumped) at C’water; Susdorf, Gilles and Brown plus some of Kennelly at Reading; and Mayberry, Berry, and maybe Wise at LHV (pretty big drop off). Am I missing anyone?

    Like

  72. I thought Way struck out batters with his off-speed stuff. If he changes speeds effectively, 90mph is fine. He needs more time to be better evaluated, but the numbers were certainly encouraging.

    Like

  75. Kelly Dugan at Clearwater would be a triple jump. I can’t see that happening. I think it’s possible that a Javis Diaz stays in Clearwater.

    Like

  76. Murray, thanks for the feedback from your trip. Glad to hear that Cosart and Aumont are down there working already! Thanks also for more appetite-whetting on James.

    Regarding OFs, Hudson is a CF, and I believe Altherr can play there too. You mention Hewitt as an OF – has it been announced that he’s officially giving up 3B? I know I’ve heard others say the same thing, I just missed it. Also, there is no way that Dugan will be at Clearwater – that’s more like a triplebump from the GCL. I bet he’ll be in W’port with the other three you mentioned.

    Finally, a while ago AFein mentioned that Hewitt is 19…he actually turns 21 at the end of April, so 2010 will be his age 21 season.

    Like

  77. I agree murray, love projecting where guys will play. Dugan was @ GCL last year so for him to go to clearwater would be a triple jump and disastrous i think. I think they’ll have to have 4 of prospects at several levels it appears, using the dh to get everyone pt. I like alther,santana,dugan, hudson @NY Penn-like hewitt, castro, collier, james- @ lakewood-gump, gose, warren, d myes,quiroz @ clearwater-i like brown. susdorf, gillies, kennelly and @ lhv i tink they will have mayberry, berry, wise

    Like

  78. Castro may get moved up to Clearwater, he got some time in at Lakewood already. James CF, Collier RF and Hewitt LF, should be the Lakewood outfield.

    Like

  79. w’sport-alther,dugan,santana, hudson,
    lakewood-hewitt,collier, james, castro,
    clearwater-gump, gose, warren, d myers
    reading- gillies, susdorf brown, kennelly, j. diaz
    LHV-mayberry, berry, wise, ?

    Like

  84. Re: Bobo’s link. Four Phillies prospects in the top 50, and that’s not including Trevor May. That’s a good sign for our farm system.

    Like

  85. We’re obviously rating Trevor May higher than the national guys do. Ok, I agree that Dugan shouldn’t be triple bumped to C’water but I don’t recall any college guys being started at W’sport in their first full season. I also realize that Castro and Collier played at L’wood last year but neither played well and would benefit from succeeding there before going to C’water so I’m not sure whose spot there that Dugan would take. Several of you mentioned TJ Warren. Wasn’t he released? As far as Hewitt, yes he is an outfielder and yes he is 21 which means they need to push him to L’wood this year. Yes, Rich Thompson could probably start over Wise also. I expect that Quiroz or Diaz will be released. There’s just not enough spots and they’re not likely major leaguers. By the way, some young pitchers I talked to were very impressed by Aumont. They said he’s huge, throws very hard and is a real nice guy. Also, its no surprise but the system guys are all very excited by the chance Matheson has to make the big club. Everyone is rooting for him and likes him.

    Like

  86. Murray. Gump would be the one you are thinking of. He started in GCL and worked his way up to lakewood for playoffs and played pretty well. I think he could start in clearwater for sure.

    Like

  87. Murray —
    Dugan is a HS guy and will play all next season at age 19.

    I would like to see Santana start the year at Lakewood to get real-world AB.

    The CLW OF listed by GTU looks awfully weak. It would not surprise me if one of the guys he lists for Lakewood moves up, possibly Collier.

    Like

  89. Hey Murray, I think there is one national guy that rates May as high as we do for what its worth. I can’t find the link now, but I thought John Sickels rated him 2nd in the organization too. Just like us fans!

    Like

  90. OF notes: I have T.J. Warren as released. Javis Diaz became a 6 year minor league free agent at the end of the season and they signed him back, so what would they want to release him now for? Quiroz should be around as a 4th OF at AA, because they appear to lack #’s at that level, by my projections.

    my guesses for upcoming season::

    GCL- Jorge Castillo, Nevri Jimenez, Louis Beltre, Luis Unda (1B also) There may be some disagreement there, we’ll see.
    WPT- Aaron Altherr, Kyrell Hudson, Domingo Santana, Miguel Alvarez (also Winder Torres for 30 man roster, Kelly Dugan to 1B)
    LKW- Zach Collier, Anthony Hewitt, Jiwan James, Leandro Castro
    CLW- Brian Gump, Anthony Gose, D’Arby Myers, Javis Diaz
    RDG- Steve Susdorf, Tyson Gillies, Domonic Brown, Derrick Mitchelll ( I put Kennelly at 3B)
    LVIP- John Mayberry Jr., Quinon Berry, Dewayne Wise, Chris Duffy (also got Rich Thompson who can be worked in to back up Andy Tracy at 1B).

    Like

  92. The idea that’s been unexpressed thus far is that the relative strength of this year’s Top 15 is significantly lower than the Top 15 of this time last year. Amaro has shamefully packaged too many of the organizations best prospects and left the minor league system with future gaps.
    The most obvious examples of this are that there is now only one catcher in the top prospects list, whereas one or two years ago there was an abundence of talent at that position. Other weaknesses include: No infielders other than a first baseman and only one lefthanded pitcher rank in the farm system’s Top15.

    Like

  94. Wow, the list of the top 100 prospects really makes me feel bad for the Indians. We managed to get two top 50 prospects for a year of Lee and they couldn’t even get a top 100 prospect for Francisco and 1.5 years of Lee? Admittedly, all the prospects we traded them are undervalued right now, especially Knapp, but it really does bring the point home.
    Have to say, I feel better about losing Drabek and Taylor now that I know that Aumont and Gilles are top 50 prospects.

    Like

Comments are closed.