This is a post I’ve been meaning to write for a little while now, and since I’m home for the holiday today, now seemed like a good time. When the Phillies selected Drabek 18th overall in the June draft, nearly everyone had an opinion right away. As many people know, Drabek had very detailed, and what some might say “extensive” off the field issues leading up to him being drafted. Having never seen any police reports, I have no real way to know what exactly happened or how. It’s easy to write something off as a kid “just being stupid”, but in many cases (the Cole Hamels bar fight comes to mind), there are always two sides, and sometimes many more. What we can determine, though, is pretty simple: Kyle Drabek is not your typical teenager.

As has been well publicized, Drabek is the son of former Cy Young award winner Doug Drabek. Kyle certainly isn’t the first son of a big leaguer to get drafted, but few have had the media attention surrounding them like Kyle has gone through. You normally always hear the stories about the kids who grew up in poor families, who could barely afford a glove, and who just got to where they were because someone took a chance on them…..that’s not Kyle. Having grown up the son of a Major League pitcher (and a decent one at that), he was given more opportunities, and even more importantly, had his own personal pitching coach from a young age. What sometimes gets lost, however, is that people like Kyle experience things somewhat differently than your common teenager. While I was playing with my Tonka toys out in the sand box, Kyle got to go into Major League clubhouses. When I played catch with my dad, we were just playing catch. When Kyle played catch with his dad, he was learning how to throw a spike curve and develop arm side run on his fastball. While I was really happy to be able to get a car as nice as my old Subaru when I turned 16, Kyle probably expected nothing less than the Escalade he ended up damaging in a 1 car accident.

I think what I’m trying to say there is, it’s not Kyle’s fault that he was born into the lifestyle he was. It’s not like he had control over the fact that his father was a successful major league pitcher and he could grow up in a privileged household and enjoy the benefits of a privileged lifestyle. I’ve seen people comment that this is somehow a reflection of him, and this is a flaw in his character. I tend to think the opposite, that it’s just something he’s been dealt, and at some point, he’s either going to learn from his mistakes, or he’s going to end up a zero in life all together, not just baseball-wise. The temper, the throwing bats, the punching walls, we’ve all heard those stories, but let’s be honest, he’s a teenager. This writer is only 25, and not too long ago, I can remember slamming my driver into the ground when I’d hook a drive off the 4th tee in an important high school golf match (cue chuckling), or cursing myself out during practice. Hell, I may have even kicked my golf bag a time or two. In my mind, I was just really competitive. When it came time to put the chips on the table, I was always able to get the better of my emotions. When you look at Kyle’s track record, he seems to have done the same.

In fact, before we dig into Kyle’s numbers and figure out where he’s headed, I think it’s important to take note of one thing. Some of the greatest players in recent baseball memory are noted for their fiery, sometimes over the top behavior. Remember when Roger Clemens fired the broken bat piece at Mike Piazza? Clemens wasn’t vilified, we had to hear how “he’s just such a fiery competitor”…..ok. Randy Johnson? He never met a guy (teammate or not) he didn’t like to yell at. There is the other side. There are guys like Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine who show little emotion. But the point is, it works on both sides. As a fan, I don’t really like guys who accept losing, or who don’t seem phased by losing. Now, there is a limit to what you can do, and I’m not advocating that Drabek berate every umpire he sees from now till 2015, or that he kick a water cooler once a week, but he is 18, he is still a kid, and he is a “fiery competitor”, so hey, let’s give him some time.

Now that I’ve waxed poetic, let’s get to the issue at hand. Most draft experts prior to the draft felt Drabek was a top 5 talent, but that he could slip, maybe even to the bottom of the first round, because of his off the field issues. A few days prior to the draft we learned that the Phillies had scouted him (many teams did), but unlike many, they had been doing extensive research on Drabek’s off the field issues. On draft day, it was still unsure just where he could go. He was being mentioned anywhere from the Dodgers at #7, to the Rangers at #12, to the Phillies at #18, all the way down to the Dodgers again at #26. LA took Clayton Kershaw, the best high school LHP in the draft, at #7, and the Rangers took Kasey Kiker, another high school LHP, at #12. That cleared the way for the Phillies, who went ahead and took the gamble. The reason this is called “Hero or Zero”, is because most feel Drabek will either become a star, or he’ll be out of baseball in 3 years, and most don’t see a lot of middle ground.

Based on stuff alone, his fastball/curveball combination was one of the best in the draft. He possesses a real quick arm and his mechanics are smooth. During his high school season, he regularly threw in the 93-95 range, dialing it up to 97 with some frequency. His curve is a true 12-6 spike curveball, normally in the 75-79 range. He also threw a slider, which sat more in the mid 80’s, and a rarely thrown (not needed) changeup. Here is the scouting video of Drabek, courtesy of mlb.com

Now, I’m not a pitching coach, or Sean Salisbury, but I’m going to attempt to break down the video here. If anyone else wants to add anything to my analysis of the video, please leave it in the comments. I’ll use the time on the video to make my comments

[0:00-0:17] Warm up tosses, nothing exciting
[0:18-0:22] This would be his curve ball. 76 mph, with tight downward motion.
[0:23-0:27] Four seam fastball, 94 mph, nice downward plane on the pitch.
[0:28-0:31] This looks to be his slider, 85 mph. Great late movement and tilt.
[0:32-0:35] Four seam fastball, 94 mph. Lots of movement, especially in the final 3rd of the way to the plate.
[0:36-0:39] Four seamer, this one not as much movement, but good late life.
[0:40-0:44] This looks like a 2 seam fastball, 90 mph, where he just takes a little off and gets more movement.

Rest of the video shows him from the side, not much to add there, except that he looks in control of all of his movements and doesn’t seem to waste any effort or have any extraneous movements/hitches that could cause mechanical problems.

Now that you know his story, now that you’ve seen him throw a few pitches and have a general idea of what he brings, it’s time to figure out what he’s going to become. That’s a trick statement, really, because it’s nearly impossible to figure out what ANY prospect will become, because they are just that, prospects, and we know that “prospect” basically means “could be in the future”. Drabek, based on his talent, COULD be a #1 pitcher some day, or, based on his previous off the field issues and temper, could be the next Chris Enochs. Who? Exactly. His arm is strong enough to carry him, but it’s going to come down to what’s in between the ears. I’m a believer, some aren’t, but time will tell. What I want to do is quickly look at some of the best pitching prospects/young pitchers in the game who were drafted out of high school and see how they progressed in their first full season. That will give us a benchmark and show us what Kyle needs to shoot for if he wants to put himself into the upper echelon of pitching prospects. Here is a short list I’ve compiled, along with their first season after being drafted

Chad Billingsley, 2004 (19, A+/AA): 133.1 IP, 2.57 ERA, 6.76 H/9, 4.80 BB/9, 10.68 K/9, 0.47 HR/9
Matt Cain, 2003 (18, A-): 74 IP, 2.55 ERA, 6.93 H/9, 2.92 BB/9, 10.95 K/9, 0.61 HR/9
Jon Lester, 2003 (19, A-): 106 IP, 3.65 ERA, 8.66 H/9, 3.74 BB/9, 6.03 K/9, 0.59 HR/9
Scott Olsen, 2003 (19, A-): 128.1 IP, 2.81 ERA, 7.08 H/9, 4.14 BB/9, 9.05 K/9, 0.28 HR/9
Joel Zumaya, 2003 (18, A-): 90.1 IP, 2.79 ERA, 6.87 H/9, 3.79 BB/9, 12.55K/9, 0.30 HR/9
Homer Bailey, 2005 (19, A-): 103.2 IP, 4.43 ERA, 7.73 H/9, 5.38 BB/9, 10.85K/9, 0.43 HR/9
Philip Hughes, 2005 (19, A-/A+): 86.1 IP, 2.20 ERA, 5.64 H/9, 2.09 BB/9, 9.72 K/9, 0.10 HR/9
Scott Elbert, 2005 (20, A-): 115 IP, 2.66 ERA, 6.50 H/9, 4.46 BB/9, 10.02 K/9, 0.63 HR/9

All of these pitchers above were ranked in the Top 80 overall prospects in baseball by Baseball America before the 2006 season started. All are still considered elite talent now, though in different respects. Billingsley, Olsen, Zumaya, Cain, and Lester all made it to the majors in 2006 and all of them will be in the majors in 2007. Bailey and Hughes are considered the two best RHP prospects in the minors, and Elbert is considered by many to be the best LHP prospect in the minors. So, I’d say we have a pretty good idea what it takes to be considered an elite prospect, and at this point, that’s what we’re hoping Drabek turns into over the next season, right? By all accounts, if Drabek has a good spring, and “good” basically means he doesn’t get into any trouble off the field, he doesn’t beat up a coach, and he doesn’t injure himself, he’ll be assigned to full season Lakewood. That seems to be the trend for those on the list above, as they were all assigned to low A in their first season after being drafted, with the exception of Billingsley, who was sent to high A to start his first full year.

Lakewood is a moderate pitcher’s park, based on the 3 year weighted park factors list compiled at Baseball Think Factory, suppressing runs (0.86, with 1.00 being “average”), and especially home runs, at only 0.51. When you look at the numbers for the elite high school pitchers above, you’ll notice that in almost every case (except Lester) strikeouts are prevalent, and home run suppression is at a premium. This tells you that these pitchers are generating swings and misses, and when batters do make contact, they aren’t hitting the ball very hard. The one area that you will see a great fluctuation is walks per 9. Control (not to be confused with command) can give you an idea how quickly a guy will move through the minors, but it’s not absolute. Homer Bailey really struggled with his control in 2005, but greatly improved in 2006 at High A, cutting his walk rate in half. Sometimes it’s a small adjustment here or there. However, a pitcher with superb control at a young age, like Philip Hughes, lends to much better projections and predictions down the road.

So what should we expect from Drabek? Well, I don’t really know. You can take his GCL numbers from the summer and basically toss them out the window. He threw a lot of innings in high school and signed a little later (July), so he probably wasn’t quite sharp when he reported, and he was probably dealing with a tired arm. His starts were either good or awful, and he wasn’t consistent. He reportedly was taking well to instruction during the Florida Instructional League, which is a good sign, and he should report to spring training with a fresh arm, ready to go. The Phillies would like to be aggressive in starting him in full season ball, but he will probably stay in Lakewood all season, unless he either flat out dominates or he completely bombs out….kind of back to this hero or zero theme again. If he puts up a 1.95 ERA in his first three months, he might see a promotion to Clearwater for July and August, and similarly, if he puts up a 9.65 ERA in his first three months, he might head to Williamsport for the final two months, but in all likelihood, he’ll be a fixture at Lakewood for the duration of 2007. The Phillies will more than likely be cautious with his pitch counts, and because of that, he might only pitch 120-135 innings this year. You can’t really fault them for it, it’s just the way the game has progressed (or regressed, depending how you feel), and because he’s only 19, it won’t hurt his development if he doesn’t log 160 innings this year.

The SAL league generally favors pitching slightly, so Drabek should have a chance to shine. Everyone will be watching, and he knows it. One bad season won’t break him, and it won’t make him a non-prospect, but it will increase the vitriol already being thrown in his direction. If his head is in the game, if he wants to be the best and wants to work for it, you might just see a special season from him. The last time the Phillies took a gamble on a pitcher who slid in the draft, they found themselves with Cole Hamels at #17 in 2002…..let’s hope in 5 years we say “the last time we gambled on a pitcher, we stole Kyle Drabek at #18 in 2006.” Good luck this year Kyle.

(Pat Overholt)

I’ve gotten some great feedback on the site so far, and I’m really appreciative for all the people who come here to read my ramblings every day, and even more thankful for those who leave comments and take the time to send an email. When I know what you’re thinking, or what you’re interested in, it really helps me figure out where to go next, and what things to talk about. A few people have asked me about guys to watch that might be flying under the radar a bit, and I felt like that might be a good topic for a post. I covered my top 15 list already, so I won’t include any of those names. Here are 5 underrated arms to watch in 2007.

Jarrod Freeman, RHP. Freeman was drafted as a high school senior in the 11th round in 2006 and signed shortly after, a good start to the middle portion of the first 20 rounds for the Phillies. He fits the mold of what the Phillies like in terms of right handed pitchers, as he’s already 6’3, 187 lbs, and the Phillies envision him growing a few more inches. He threw in the mid 80’s in high school, with an average changeup and good curveball, a rare combo for a pitcher so young. However, in the last year his velocity has climbed into the high 80’s/low 90’s, and he can be expected to add a few more mph, possibly topping out around 93-95 consistently. He has a fluid motion and smooth mechanics, which bode well for future projection. He started in the GCL and pitched well: 45.1 IP, 3.38 ERA, 47 H, 5 BB, 37 K and only 3 HR allowed. One of the things that I like most about him, he posted a stellar 2.6 groundball to fly ball ratio, and he was a tad unlucky (.342 BABIP) against right handed batters, so he should see an improvement on his ERA if his peripherals remain solid. He didn’t come from a baseball hotbed (Utah), so we’ll have to wait and see how he pitches against advanced competition. He turned 19 in November, so that’s the age he’ll pitch at for all of 2007. I expect he’ll be assigned to short season Williamsport and spend most of the season there, possibly getting bumped to Lakewood for 1 start at the end of the year. If all goes well, he’ll open 2008 at Lakewood at age 20, and be right on track.

Darren Byrd, RHP. The Phillies took Byrd in the 18th round of the 2005 draft, and he had already signed a letter of intent to go to Junior College, but after mulling it over for a few days, he decided to pass on junior college all together and sign right away. That immediately speaks to his aptitude and commitment, and it gave him some extra development time. He again fits the “Phillies mold”, which I think I should trademark, for right handed pitchers, 6’3, 170 lbs, wiry, long loose arm action. His velocity was in the high 80’s, but again, the Phillies felt that as he grew a little bit, his velocity would jump. They started him in the GCL in 2005, and he was pretty solid, posting a 2.66 ERA in 44 innings, allowing 36 H, 10 BB and 1 HR, while striking out 24. He pitched 2006 at age 19, and again the Phillies handled him gently, starting him back at the GCL, where he again pitched well: 36.1 IP, 3.22 ERA, 33 H, 15 BB, 1 HR, 27 K. Upon promotion to Batavia, he didn’t disappoint, allowing only 4 ER in 15 innings. He struck out 14 but also walked 11 in his first exposure to short season ball. If he continues to add velocity and depth to his secondary offerings, he has the makings of a middle of the rotation starter or a 7th inning reliever. Lefties had a potentially fluky .386 BABIP against him, and if that levels out, his overall numbers should improve. Like Freeman, he also has strong groundball tendencies. He’s still a long way away, but he shows good promise at this point. The Phillies will more than likely open him up at short season Williamsport, and he could see a promotion to Lakewood at some point.

Carlos Monasterios, RHP. Monasterios’ name should sound familiar, he was one of the pieces that came to the Phillies in the Bobby Abreu trade at the deadline. He was signed by the Yankees as a free agent out of Venezuela in 2004, but didn’t make it stateside (as far as I can tell) until 2006. He’s 6’2, 175 lbs and only 20 years old, so there is still some room for him to fill out and possibly add velocity. That’s good news, because his fastball already sits in the 91-93 range and tops out at 95, with great downward movement. His curveball and changeup are lagging behind his fastball, but show signs of at least being a tick or two above average in the future. His numbers were better for the Yankees, but he still finished with an overall line of 45 IP, 3.20 ERA, 41 H, 6 BB, 35 K, and only 3 HR allowed. Monasterios generates his share of ground balls (79, to 43 FB) and he kept the ball in the park, another good sign. He will be 21 at the start of 2007, but he’s still somewhat raw. He’ll likely start at Williamsport and pitch most of the season there. If his secondary pitches catch up to his fastball, he could possibly reach Clearwater sometime in 2008, and possibly the Phillies bullpen in 2009. So yes, a long way away, but a very promising arm.

Patrick Overholt, RHP. In 3 years, when we look back at the 2005 draft, Overholt might be one of the names we instantly think of, even though he’s flown under the radar to this point. The Phillies took a flier on him in the 22nd round, as he was a red shirt junior with 2 years of eligibility left at Santa Clara University. Overholt was one of the better closers in the country in 2003 but missed all of 2004 with Tommy John surgery. The Phillies gamble looks well met now, as he’d have surely climbed draft boards in 2006, and it looks like he’s finding his groove slowly coming back from surgery. He’s only 6′ 200 lbs, but throws a low 90’s fastball and a hard slider with excellent bite. Many in the Phillies org feel he has “the closer persona”, and as mentioned, has previous experience in that role. While I never jump to consider pitchers who are reliever-exclusive as prospects, college closers are a bit different. Performance wise, Overholt has been pretty solid. In 2005, he was good at Batavia, with a 2.65 ERA in 34 innings and an impressive 51 strikeouts. He started 2006 in Lakewood, posting a solid 3.15 ERA in 42 innings, with an impressive 52 K’s and only 37 hits allowed. He was promoted to Clearwater, and while his ERA jumped a bit (4.10), his peripherals were strong, allowing 20 hits and 10 walks while striking out 41 in only 26 innings. Overholt’s career K/9 in the minors is an eye popping 12.23. While he needs to harness his command to become a successful reliever, his ability to generate swings and misses looks very promising. He’s likely to start 2007, his age 23 season at Reading. He’ll be part of a solid pitching staff, and should get plenty of save chances if given the closers role. With a strong 2007, he could be a bullpen candidate in Spring Training 2008, or midseason ’08 at the latest.

Andrew Cruse, RHP. Cruse, the Phillies 9th round pick in 2006, is an interesting guy. He was a red shirt sophomore at South Carolina, despite being 22 years old. He was thought of in the spring as a first 5 rounds guy but was inconsistent the last two months of the season and fell to the Phillies in the 9th round. While not that big (6’1, 190 lbs), he has a good strong arm and could add a tick of velocity, especially if used in relief. Cruse stated his desire to get his career moving since he was already 22 as his main reason for leaving USC. He was used as a starter, a swing man, a middle reliever and a closer in college, and his arm proved quite resilient in bouncing back. The Phillies decided to try him out as a starter at Batavia, both to see how he’d handle the role, and also to give him more of a chance to develop his secondary pitches. His fastball sits in the 92-93 range, and he was throwing a slurvy type breaking ball, which the Phillies will probably try to turn into a slower conventional curve or a power slider with tighter break. In 66 innings at Batavia, Cruse allowed 60 hits and 19 walks, while striking out 48 and allowing only 2 home runs. Cruse was very strong against LH batters, holding them to a .584 OPS, and had very strong groundball tendencies, inducing 98 ground balls to only 50 flyballs. At this point, it’s unclear what the Phillies view in terms of his role going forward. Since he did well as a starter, he may get a shot to start in 2007, which will be his age 23 season. However, because of his age, the Phillies will probably try and move him quickly. The Lakewood rotation already looks crowded, so he seems to slot in as possibly a bullpen arm, or they could get ambitious and start him at Clearwater in a starting role, where only Carlos Carrasco is currently penciled in. Looking long term, Cruse might turn into a setup man or a swing man. His success against LH batters in 2006 speaks to his improving changeup, and if he can pick a breaking ball and command it, he’s got a chance to be a back of the rotation starter. If that doesn’t work out, he should be a useful swing man, or possibly a setup guy.

According to this nugget in Baseball America, the Phillies have signed Landon Jacobsen to a minor league contract. No mention of it on Phillies.com yet, to my knowledge. Jacobsen appears to be filler for the Ottawa rotation. He’s 28, so he isn’t a prospect, and his numbers aren’t very impressive overall. He’s experienced fluctuating strikeout rates, but his numbers have dipped in that category at higher levels. He doesn’t walk a ton of batters, but gives up about one hit per inning, though he does keep the ball in the park. He could be this year’s Brian Mazone, pitch well, and position himself to come up in an emergency situation. Or, they plan to give him a chance at a bullpen spot. His numbers were nearly identical against lefties and righties last season, .699 OPS against LHB, .689 OPS against RHB, and he has extreme groundball tendencies, inducing 263 groundballs to 166 flyballs.

Ok, not really. We’ve had some issues here at the apartment with a busted drain pipe, no new post today, but I hope to crank out Part 4 of the 2002 Draft Report Card tomorrow, and a few other ideas I’ve been pondering.

I figured I’d do something like this just to post any random things I come across while reading, maybe mentions of players here or there, or possibly other blogs. For those of you curious about our division rivals and what they have cooking on the farm, check out

Baby Braves
Mets Minor League Report
Marlins Minors
Nationals Farm Authority

I also wanted to quickly add (in a moment of pride), that my Alma Mater is ranked #44 in the country by Baseball America in their pre-season top 50. Considering we were Division II athletics up until a few years ago, I consider this quite an accomplishment. We were consistently in the 20-30 range last year near the end of the season, and with a strong start, we’ll be right back there again this year. Congrats fellas!

The folks over at Project Prospect rolled out their Top 100 in the minors list today, and the Phillies lone representative was Carlos Carrasco, coming in at #67. Carrasco is one of the younger members of the list, and realistically is probably the only Phillie who really deserves to be there at this point. Most of the guys on the list were taken pre 2006, so that would preclude Cardenas and Drabek, but with strong seasons, all three have a shot to make the list in 2007. Project Prospect is a cool site for general prospect info, including position breakdowns….check’em out.

Baseball America has resumed their top 10 lists with the Atlanta Braves today, and the Phillies are scheduled for January 10th. If you’re reading this site, you are clearly interested in the minor leagues and prospects, so I’m sure you already know plenty about Baseball America. For those who don’t, basically, they rely on the reports of scouting directors, individual area scouts, crosscheckers and other talent evaluators. They gather all of their info, look at the numbers, then rank their prospects based on all of that information. For people like you and me, it’s obviously one of the best resources available, because most people don’t have the time to go out and see hundreds of minor league games every year. However, when looking at players at the minor league level (and even the major league level), there are two sharply divided schools of thought: Tools (old school) vs Numbers (new school), and I’m not here to tell you which is right (both are right) and which is wrong (both are wrong), I’m just going to try to explain where I’m coming from with my analysis (ramblings) and thoughts.

When you get into this game, and by game I mean following minor leaguers, you have to understand what you’re looking at, and how others look at things. “Moneyball”, the book by Michael Lewis, really is about the economics involved with baseball, especially front office decisions, but it also introduced some casual fans to the work of Bill James, and along the same lines, it introduced (or at least rekindled) the debate of “tools” vs “production on the field”, which is especially important to minor league players.

Generally (and more closely related to position players), there are 5 conventional tools:

• Hitting for average
• Hitting for power
• Running
• Arm Strength
• Fielding

If a player is excellent in all of those areas, he’s labeled a “5 tool player” by talent evaluators. If he’s good at 4 areas, he’s a 4 tool player, etc etc. Now, of those tools, some are more “skill oriented” and some are more physical trait oriented. For example, if you’re 5’10 and weigh 215 pounds, with a thick muscular build, chances are you aren’t going to be considered a speed demon. If you don’t have 30 stolen base potential, you lose one of your “tools” when you’re evaluated by scouts. If you don’t have a cannon arm, you’re not looked at as a right field candidate, and you lose another tool from your arsenal. Scouts use a scale to rate every tool, with a 20 being terrible (think Sal Fasano rounding second base), and 80 (think Ryan Howard’s power) being the best.

Ok, so what does that mean? When a scout watches a player, he immediately looks at those five areas. He makes notes about a player’s build and his “tools”, and this is important in the next area, projection. Projection is another scout buzz word, and it basically means “what can he become?”, and believe it or not, this is almost as important as what a player can actually do at the present time. This is much much more important when looking at high school players, because they are generally years, (2 or 3 at least, normally 4-6) away from making it to the majors when they are finishing high school. If you have two pitchers with identical numbers in high school, what generally separates them is their projection. For example, a kid who is 6’4, 180 pounds is much more projectable than a kid who is maybe 5’9, 150 pounds. On the pitching mound, they could have identical pitches, and put up identical statistics, but the scouts will favor the taller kid 95/100 times because of his projection. They look at the taller, skinnier kid and picture him growing 3 more inches and adding 50 pounds of muscle to his frame, and that means more potential velocity, a better downward plane on his pitches, and better durability.

Scouts rate players based on what they could become, also taking into account what they’ve done in high school, but again, more on what they can become. While you can definitely see the merit of this approach, it also helps explain why guys like James Happ, who I’ve discussed in my previous article, flies under the radar. He has good size, but he hasn’t added much velocity, and probably won’t in the future. Because he has lesser “stuff”, you can’t project him out to be a top of the rotation starter, despite his incredible consistency and otherwise solid numbers as a pro.

Back to my opening line regarding Baseball America’s Phillies list. Baseball America is driven by scouting reports of players. Scouts take notice of a guy’s numbers, but the old school approach is still very prevalent in the scouting world. To use a Phillies example, just look at Greg Golson. There’s a decent chance Golson will be ranked in the Phillies Top 10 list at Baseball America, and there’s an even better chance he ends up in the Top 15. If you look at his numbers, they really aren’t good. He was taken in the first round of the 2004 draft ahead of Phillip Hughes, now one of the top pitching prospects in baseball, because he was regarded as the best athlete in the draft. The general view of him was “incredible athlete, but raw baseball skills”, and boy were they right. Golson is fast, he has good raw power, he has a strong arm, but he really isn’t all that good at baseball. Lots of people can run really fast, but you don’t see many Olympic sprinters in the NFL, because it still requires skill and technical ability.

The old cliche “the hardest thing to do is hit a baseball” really does have some merit. Can you teach someone to have good plate discipline? Maybe. But it seems like the guys who “make it” at the big league level always had the skills, even if they didn’t have the “tools” that scouts obsess over. A scout would probably argue, on the other hand, that you can’t “teach a guy to run a 3.9 second 40 yard dash, but you can teach him to hit a curveball”….and well, they are probably right. Remember when I said that both sides were right and both were wrong? Here’s why. Scouts are correct when they say you can’t teach a guy to be a good athlete. And let’s face it, to play a sport like baseball at the highest level, you have to be at least a good athlete, and I’m convinced that guys like David Wells were once good athletes, even if they look like reserves on your Beer League softball team now. On the other hand, the more results oriented people point to guys like Greg Golson and say “if he can’t recognize a curveball, he’s never going to hit”, and if you believe Golson’s numbers represent his ability, they are right too. But because of guys like Greg Maddux (he’s short, he never threw 97 mph), we’ve learned there are always exceptions to every rule. The really smart people (or lucky I suppose) are the guys who can spot the Tom Gordon’s (short righthanders are frowned upon in the scouting world) and realize the skills are there, even if the tools aren’t.

The moral of the story? It’s quite simple, despite that long-winded diatribe above. If a player doesn’t have a good set of baseball skills, the odds of him making the big leagues, let alone being a good player, are pretty slim. If a guy doesn’t have at least one above average tool, the chances of him making the big leagues, let alone being a good player, are slim. So how can you tell? Well, that’s the thing, you really can’t. Baseball America, John Sickels, and just about every other talent evaluator out there has been wrong tons of times. Hey, I loved the Kyle Drabek pick in June, I think he could be the next big thing, but he could be out of baseball in 2 years.

Sometimes we don’t realize it, but to make it to the big leagues is a great accomplishment for any player, and at some point in your baseball life, you had to impress someone (more than likely a ton of people) to even get a shot, and even then, only the cream of the crop stick at the highest level. Every year, teams draft 50 guys or so in June. They take a few more (sometimes) in the Rule 5 draft, they sign 16 year old kids from the Dominican Republic, or they spend 51 million dollars to negotiate with guys from Japan. Some guys turn into superstars, a bigger group turn into good players, a bigger group turn into fringe guys who bounce between the majors and the minors, and the biggest group of them all never make it to the Show. When looking at any minor league player, whether it’s Felix Hernandez or Junior Felix, you have to remember that in reality, we’re all just projecting, we’re all just hoping, and we’re all just guessing. If you look at everything out there, including scouting reports and a player’s complete playing history, you can make a guess as to what he’s going to become. However, you also have to prepare yourself for the letdown of that player never making it and washing out of baseball.

You’ll have to forgive me, going back and re-reading what I wrote, I feel like I was channeling Bill Conlin, and I ended up straying off topic and getting lost in my own thoughts. I hope it was somewhat readable and you maybe got something out of it. Ah, who am I kidding, no one is reading this. Anyway, my original goal of this column was to predict what the Baseball America top 10 will look like, compared to my list. So, here’s my guess, in order. We’ll know next week how far off I was.

Carlos Carrasco
Kyle Drabek
Adrian Carenas
Michael Bourn
Josh Outman
Greg Golson
James Happ
Edgar Garcia
Jesus Sanchez
Matt Maloney

Last minute addition/thought. I think BA might go ahead and put Jaramillo on this list, based on his tools and his good showing the Arizona Fall League. He had a pretty modest 2006 regular season, but he’s always had a strong defensive reputation, and he hit well in Arizona, so he might have elevated his prospect status.

Happy New Year everyone, this post will be kind of short, but it’s something I figured I’d comment on in the infant stages of this blog. One of the biggest things for me, as a big fan of minor league baseball, is understanding the context of a player’s numbers, and using said context to understand just what the numbers mean. Let me give you a quick example. Here are two theoretical pitching lines from two different minor leaguers. Which one would you choose?

Pitcher A: 130 IP, 3.78 ERA, 1.30 WHIP, 125 K, 45 BB

Pitcher B: 140 IP, 3.45 ERA, 1.28 WHIP, 130 K, 40 BB

At first glance, you’d probably take Pitcher B, right? What if I were to tell you that Pitcher B was 23 years old and pitching in the Sally League, low A ball, and Pitcher A was 19 years old, pitching in the double A Eastern League? Surely you’d take Pitcher A. A player’s statistics are the outside layer of the onion, so to speak, but you have to look a bit deeper to truly understand just what his numbers mean. It’s far more impressive for an 18 year old to hit .300 in Low A than it is for a 5 year minor league veteran to do the same. This is kind of one of those things where you say “yeah, duh”, but it’s something I often see people misunderstand when talking about prospects. By no means is this a definitive rule, but this is my “Prospect Rule” when it comes to age:

17-18 years old = Rookie Ball

18-19 years old = Short Season/Low A

19-20 years old = Low A

21-22 years old = AA

22-24 years old = AAA

25 or older = MLB

That’s a general guideline, but there are clear exceptions. Major League Baseball has placed limits on visas for foreign players, which forces teams to keep certain players out of the US, even though those players are in their system abroad. So, a 20 year old from the Dominican Republic, at a team’s academy, might have to wait to come to the US for two years, and teams are cautious with inital assignments, and may send him to Rookie Ball. That doesn’t mean that player isn’t a prospect, it means he’s a victim of circumstance or the numbers game. Another example, which is actually more common, is for a college drafted player to be sent to the lowest level of the minors after being drafted. Many college players, especially pitchers, deal with heavy workloads in college, and upon being drafted, teams tend to play things slowly at first, often times restricting pitch counts and assigning players to rookie ball or short season ball. So, a college senior, many times 22 years old, may find himself in the rookie level Gulf Coast League. That doesn’t mean he’s not a prospect, it means his team is probably being cautious.

The final thing to consider when looking at a player’s stat line is the league he plays in. All 20 HR hitters aren’t quite equal, as some leagues are more known for being offensive heavy (the PCL) while others are known more to favor pitching (the FSL), and so on. Just for reference, check out the league offensive averages for all the domestic MLB affiliated leagues:

• Gulf Coast League (RK): .247/.323/.342
• Arizona League (RK): .265/.355/.373
• Appalachian League (RK): .255/.334/.369
• Pioneer League (RK): .265/.348/.391
• New York Penn League (SS): .242/.313/.334
• Northwest League (SS): .251/.325/.366
• Midwest League (A-): .254/.325/.366
• South Atlantic League (A-): .255/.331/.376
• California League (A+): .276/.350/.414
• Carolina League (A+): .257/.336/.384
• Florida State League (A+): .255/.327/.376
• Eastern League (AA): .252/.323/.381
• Southern League (AA): .250/.323/.368
• Texas League (AA): .269/.344/.418
• International League (AAA): .259/.326/.390
• Pacific Coast League (AAA): .271/.342/.416

Just a quick guide, as I will be using these abbreviations in the future, RK stands for Rookie League, SS stands for Short Season, and the “-” and “+” represent low and high, respectively. As you can see from this list, the Texas League, the Pacific Coast League, and the California League are hitters leagues, with an average slugging % over .400. Conversely, the Southern League and Florida State League are not as hitter friendly. When looking at a player’s stats, it’s important to know where he stands in terms of his peers, as well as considering the factors previously mentioned.

So remember, when looking at a player’s numbers, consider his age and his league first, and that will give you a good jumping off point.

The “Make or Break” series is something I’m going to try out, taking a look at guys who are entering a season which, in my opinion, will help determine their future (or lack there of) with the Phillies organization. As some of you may have noticed, with the new Collective Bargaining Agreement, the rules for minor league roster management/40 man roster management have changed, and the changes are significant. Under the old agreement, players signed at age 19 or older were required to be placed on the 40 man roster after their third season of pro ball, while players signed at age 18 or younger were required to be added to the 40 man after their fourth season of pro ball. If players weren’t protected, they were eligible for the Rule 5 draft. With the new change, each classification was given an extra year, so the 19+ signing group now has 4 years of eligibility, and the 18 and under group 5 years. This change is significant in that it gives organizations an extra year of time to figure out what to do in terms of player assignments. Raw, toolsy guys who might need additional time now have that extra year before they need to be placed on the 40 man roster, while guys who are close, but maybe not ready yet, can be kept in the minors an additional year without using a 40 man spot. From a player’s perspective, this hurts them a bit, in that they are kept under control of their drafting/signing org for an extra year. It would seem to also hurt the Phillies a bit, mainly because Pat Gillick is one of the more prominent Rule 5 GM’s, however, the new configuration didn’t slow him down in the 2006 draft. So, the “Make or break” column will highlight guys entering their last “freeroll” season, meaning they don’t have to be protected. At the end of their 2007 season, they will either have to be added to the 40 man roster or be left unprotected, and thus eligible for the Rule 5 draft.

I’ve decided to start with Tim Moss, for no real reason other than he’s a guy I’ve kind of watched closely since he was drafted. Moss, as of this writing, is not on the 40 man roster and is entering his 4th season of pro ball, having been drafted out of the University of Texas in 2003. Baseball America ranked Moss the 22nd best prospect in the Phillies system at the conclusion of the 2003 season, and still considered him rather raw for a college player, especially one coming from a prominent division I program. In only 160 AB at Batavia in 2003, he put up a miserable .445 OPS. 2004 didn’t prove to be much better, as he was given the assignment of starting 2B at Lakewood and responded by posting a .683 OPS in 273 AB. He drew a mediocre amount of walks (24), but struck out a ton (75) in only 273 AB, and his .342 OB% was largely inflated by his 12 HBP. He showed almost zero power, posting an anemic .341 slugging % with just 15 doubles and 2 HR. He subsequently dropped out of the Phillies top 30 prospects, which says something considering the lack of depth in the system.

Nevertheless, the Phillies decided to promote Moss to Clearwater to begin 2005, his age 23 season. Moss responded by having a vastly better season (thanks partly to a hot start), posting an .811 OPS and showing a large improvement in the power department,, smacking 17 HR in 469 AB. Will Kimmey of Baseball America bumped Moss all the way up to the 8th best prospect in the system at the conclusion of 2005, but gave this caveat

The Future:
It remains to be seen whether Moss’ breakout was a fluke. He’ll move to Double-A in 2006 and try to show that a smallish second baseman can keep punishing baseballs.

Well, it looks like 2005 was a fluke. In his age 24 season, Moss bombed at Reading, putting up a .606 OPS in 206 AB. He was sent back to Clearwater, where he “rebounded” with a .796 OPS in 264 AB. His walk rate hasn’t improved, his strikeout rate is still waaaaay too high for a guy with little power. One of his biggest strengths since being drafted was his athletic ability and speed, (69/98 in SB in his pro career), but if he can’t hit as a 2B, his bat will certainly have a tough time playing at any other position.

So, what will happen with Moss? He turns 25 in January, and will probably start at Reading. If he flouders, he may find his way back to Clearwater, and barring some sort of miracle, will be left unprotected next December. Then again, if he hits in 2007 like he did in 2006, will anyone waste the $25,000 on him (he’ll go in the minor league portion if he gets picked at all) or just pass him over? He will always have the distinction of being the first Phillie selected in the 2003 draft, in the third round, because of a number of free agent signings during the 2002 offseason. Unfortunately, it looks like he will never crack the big leagues, unless he somehow re-invents his entire game.

Prediction: Break. Left unprotected in the Rule 5 draft, 50/50 chance he’s taken by someone in the minor league phase.

I figured if anyone actually read this, they’d ask why I omitted player “x” or “y”, etc etc. I’m sure the two that will come up first are Michael Bourn and Carlos Ruiz. So, I’ll tackle them one at a time.

Michael Bourn, OF. To me, Bourn didn’t deserve to be on this list, and here’s why. He has very limited upside. I’m sure people will question this, but here’s my line of thinking. He is now 24, and 2006 was his age 23 season. He posted a .715 OPS in 318 AB at Reading, and upon being promoted to Scranton, posted a .796 OPS in 152 AB before he was brought to Philadelphia to ride the pine. Bourn played 3 years of college ball at Houston, and over that span, his single best season was an .827 OPS in 244 AB, which was his sophomore year. He followed that with an .818 OPS in 182 AB his junior year, and was then drafted by the Phillies in the 4th round. Bourn had only 23 extra base hits in 644 career college AB’s. In college, he posted on base percentages of .431, .446, and .411, and obviously drew a ton of walks, which set up his speed (90 SB/119 attempts) well. Upon his entrance to pro ball, his plate discipline remained at both Batavia and Lakewood, posting an OB% of .404 and .433 respectively. However, the last two seasons Bourn has seen his OB% dive to .348 at Reading in 2005, and then .350 and .368 at Reading and Scranton in 2006. If you take that by itself, a .368 OB% is solid, but when you factor in that he has almost zero power (60 extra base hits in 1,014 AB’s in 2005 and 2006), he’s reduced to being a one tool (speed) player. You don’t see many teams carry a guy that can’t hit or get on base, but can steal bases. Bourn is an impressive 163/191 in stolen bases in the minors, but his future (it would seem) is as a 5th outfielder, where he will be a defensive replacement/pinch runner for guys like Pat Burrell, and to me, that doesn’t warrant his placement in this prospect list. He could surprise me, or he could turn into a guy that bounces from AAA to the bigs his entire career.

Carlos Ruiz, C. Simply put, he’s too old for these lists. He’ll be 27 on opening day, and in only the rarest cases do I consider guys over the age of 25 “prospects”. That said, I think Ruiz can be a decent regular if given the chance. His defense is what people raved about, but I don’t know that we know enough about his game calling ability based on his limited exposure last season. We’ll see.