Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

by DocNo on Dec 20, 2006 9:28 PM EST

Both of these players were/are considered 5-tool player-prospects. This is a summary of their achievements.

Prospect A: (age 24 in 2007)
totals from 6 yrs in minor leagues (559 games)
.277 BA, .345 OBP, .452 SLG, .797 OPS, 66 HR, 77 SB, 203/524 BB/K

Prospect B: (age 26 in 2007)
totals from 7 yrs in minor leagues (556 games)
.293 BA, .335 OBP, .401 SLG, .736 OPS, 20 HR, 64 SB, 131/299 BB/K

Best minor league season:
A (age 20, A+ level):
.282 BA, .345 OBP, . 513 SLG, .853 OPS, 20 HR, 17 SB in 110 games

B (age 22, AA level):
.352 BA, .402 OBP, .527 SLG, .923 OPS, 11 HR, 11 SB in 127 games.

Major league experience:

A (age 23, MLB):
.272 BA, .288 OBP, .360 SLG, .648 OPS, 1 HR in 43 games

B (age 23, MLB):
.286 BA, .338 OBP, .383 SLG, .721 OPS, 1 HR in 111 games
(age 24, MLB):
.262 BA, .306 OBP, .397 SLG, .703 OPS, 10 HR in 146 games
(age 25, MLB)--breakout year
.302 BA, . 349 OBP, .516 SLG, .865 OPS, 17 HR in 128 games

Any idea whom these respective players are?

If you figure it out, you will understand why I am posting it here, and why we should pause to reconsider some of our trade suggestions.

Tweet Comment 74 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Player A is Franklin Guttierez. Player B is Alex Rios.

I'm not really sure what the point is, though.

by gogiggs on Dec 20, 2006 9:44 PM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

That projections are a lot of crap?

by DixonCayne on Dec 20, 2006 10:18 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

That Gutz has never put up numbers as good as Rios?

Wait 'til next year... or something like that

by Brad D on Dec 20, 2006 11:26 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I think we're supposed to wonder if Gutierrez might break out in 2008.

by Jay on Dec 20, 2006 11:44 PM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

He would have to be on the major league roster to break out...

by Brandini on Dec 21, 2006 12:58 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I wonder a lot of things.

Wait 'til next year... or something like that

by Brad D on Dec 21, 2006 2:13 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Sorry...
The point was that discussions on this site concerning Rios ranged from trading CC to Westbrook + Carmona + Gutierrez for Rios, while by all indications Guts could be as productive as Rios given the chance. The minor league stats are similar, favoring Gut. in power and Rios in contact. Rios was promoted to the ML too early and did not breakout until his 3rd full year.
The point was only that the Tribe could well have an in-house, long-term option, but Gutierrez seems to be off everyone's radar.
I guess it seemed more interesting last night.
Feel free to ignore.

by DocNo on Dec 21, 2006 5:32 AM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Ah, I see the point, now. Sorry, I have a nasty head cold and, in my muddled and doped-up state, figuring out who the players were used all my mental capital.

So, apparently, the point is that Franklin Gutierrez had similar numbers to Rios at the same age and maybe we don't need to trade for Rios because maybe we already have a guy who could develop into the same kind of player.

It's a point, I suppose, but I would counter thusly: No matter how high the likelihood that FG develops into Rios, it's less than the 100% chance that Rios will develop into Rios. No matter how soon FG might develop into Rios, it won't be as soon as already.

I think the Indians can take the Central this year (and, yeah, I thought that last year, too, but...). I'm not interested in building for two years from now. Passing on an upgrade now because we might develop a similar player in a couple years... well, that was ok for 2002 and 2003. It's not ok for 2007.

by gogiggs on Dec 21, 2006 5:40 AM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

DocNo, no need to apologize for trying to get a discussion going. I can see now that my first post may have seemed dismissive or sarcastic. I promise you it wasn't meant that way. I just genuinely didn't see what you were getting at. Once I figured out who the two players were, I stared fuzzily at the numbers a bit, posted a reply and then returned to gorging myself on chicken soup, echinacea and Airborne.

For what it's worth, I think the idea of trading CC and/or Carmona for Rios is a very bad one. Trading Westbrook and/or Gutierrez, on the other hand, seems like a fine idea.

by gogiggs on Dec 21, 2006 5:53 AM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Rios sucks. I hate the trade. Good thing it won't happen.

by Joe. on Dec 21, 2006 8:34 AM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Well now that that's settled....

If I had a nickel for every time I heard "...and Victor Martinez grounds into a double play", i'd be rich.

by Rayman @ Let's Go Tribe! on Dec 21, 2006 9:06 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I like the idea of having a "sure thing".

I don't like the idea of adding another bat unless there is a garuntee for a new pitcher to be acquired.

I don't think the Indians have enough of what they would be willing to part with(Miller, Sowers, Carmona, Lofgren and Crowe are probably all untouchable) that the Jays would want for a guy that in my opinion you could at the very least build an outfield around, if not an entire batting order (the Indians already have that guy in Sizemore).

People have brought up Choo v. Rios and now Gutz v. Rios. I think all are reasonable comparisons and potentially accurate. Although firstinning.com has Choo as producing around an 800 OPS for the next 3 seasons and Gutierrez at around 700. In order for Rios to hit those numbers, he would have to take a significant step back from his "breakout" year. I think expecting a breakout year is impossible and innacurate.

by Brandini on Dec 21, 2006 10:28 AM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

It's a fascinating comparison.

I think it brings home the fact that sometimes we tend to be pretty critical of our own "prospects" and tend to focus on their warts (at least with Frank the Tank, I do) while thinking that other teams' players are without fault.

Obviously sometimes we overvalue our own prospects, but the notion that the "grass is always greener" applies to some of these players.

Perhaps a player like Gutz just needs everyday AB in Cleveland to "break-out".

That's what happened with Grady a few years back. But, who is this year's "pleasant surprise"?

by The DiaTriber on Dec 21, 2006 10:30 AM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I completely disagree with you and would suggest that most fans hold their prospects up much higher then "experts" or other grading meassures.

Take for example the Dany Graves threat to the right. Colorado giving him a minor league contract is laughable, but hardly anyone raised a brow when Shapiro sent him a contract.
Add in Jason Johnson...He has become the scum of the pitching earth by most accounts on this board. There were threads everytime a new team picked him up this year and how those teams were stupid (or something to that extent). However, when the same - if not worse - decision was made by Shapiro, posters on this board were content with JJ as the Tribes fifth starter.

I would suggest that for the most part, posters on this website are fair when evaluating prospects, but seemingly only those that are valuable in the GMs eyes (which is a safe ascertion). I would also suggest that the grass is rarely greener from the perspective of posters on this site, given I rarely hear anyone say anything about an "up and coming" KC team.

by Brandini on Dec 21, 2006 11:57 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

And everybody that saw the Tigers coming last year, raise your hands.

.....................

That's what I thought - nobody (me included).

Sometimes you just gotta be lucky

by mauichuck on Dec 21, 2006 12:06 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I'm trying to figure out where you are tying the Tigers in with the Indians? Infact, I think my post would say exactly what you are suggesting about the Tigers...The people on this site - me included - have Indian glasses on and have a difficult time seeing anything positive outside the organization.

That said, I bet if you went to a Tigers website, there would be atleast a handful of people who saw that coming.

by Brandini on Dec 21, 2006 2:21 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Mostly wishful thinking. The Tigers were wildly successful last year executing a plan very much like the Indians plan. My point is this: it's really hard to predict when a team is going to either "gel" ('95 Tribe, '06 Tigers) or collapse (see the '06 Indians).

As to the prescience of the Tigers fans, they like most fans have predicte 20 out of the last two WS victories.

As a wise baseball sage once said about comparing players, "The idea that either of those two is more reliably going to produce X in the next season is just a fallacy." The same is true for baseball teams.

Sometimes you just gotta be lucky

by mauichuck on Dec 21, 2006 2:37 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I think the biggest surprise in Detroit was not that the team gelled, but that a good amount of players all clicked. Monroe, Magg, Pudge, Inge, Granderson, Guillen and even the hot April of Shelton's. Then the pitching, with Rogers, Bonderman, Verlander, Robertson and Zumaya all well exceeding anyones projections.

But again, that isn't the point...The point was that posters on this board typically hold our prospects to a higher degree then they do the opponents prospects. While in a way it has been true, some of the "best" prospects in the Cleveland organization haven't ended up being the best once they made it to the big stage, but its hard to imagine anyone being anti-Miller until he is on another team.

by Brandini on Dec 21, 2006 2:43 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

That's my problem. I've been through a period when prospects were galactially successful (Belle, Ramirez, Thome, Alomar, Baerga not to mention Giles, Sexson et al) with only a few clinkers (Mark Lewis). The rate and level of success was phenomenal. Now it looks like the laws of average are catching up with us.

Sometimes you just gotta be lucky

by mauichuck on Dec 21, 2006 3:08 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

In the last 5 or so years our system has produced (sort of), Grady, Cliff, Jhonny, Vic, CC, Sowers, FCab, and Garko. How you can qualify that as anything less than phenomenal is a mystery to me.

And we've dealt prospects for Hafner and Barfield.

With no judgement on current players, it's misinformation to think we're in some sort of 'lull' prospect wise. Most of our best players made their marks as Cleveland Indians and many of those made their debut with the Indians.

And neither Alomar was ever a true "indians" prospect. I don't think either one ever played for a minor league affiliate, though Sandy might have briefly.

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 3:18 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

The Indians produced Grady just like they produced Sandy - shrewd trades. I don't see a comparable player to Rameriz on the current list I'll give you Thome vis-a-vis Hafner (another shrewd trade acquisition)and maybe Nagy for Lee (part of the Grady deal). But Belle - our system hasn't produced a comparable player - unless you want to count Hafner twice. And if Garko is as good as Sexson - I'm estatic. Same with Giles and FG. Here's what I'm saying: you'll never see another Indians outfield like Belle, Ramirez and Lofton in your lifetime - that's right I said lifetime. We were very lucky in the 90's and it's hard for that kind of lightning to strike twice.

Sometimes you just gotta be lucky

by mauichuck on Dec 21, 2006 3:34 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Well, that certainly didn't seem like what you were saying. You seem to be saying that the system is somehow returning to 'average' or somethnig worse. If all your saying is that it's not as good as the one that pumped out Belle, Ramirez, etc over a ten year span than my two responses would be: A) well duh. does that really matter? and B) wait 5 years. Sizemore looks to have the capacity to be as valuable as Belle and Hafner as valuable as Ramirez was to the Indians(not overall); there's no reason we can't find some more excellent players over the next 5.

And, it's important to me that Grady played in Buffalo. Sandy never did. And if you want to parse like that then you've got even more work to do. Baerga hardly played in the Indians minor league system and I don't believe Lofton did at all.

Also, you're disregarding CC who might be the most valuable out of the whole group.

All I'm trying to get at is that even if this system doesn't live up to your memories of the 1990s, it's still among the best in baseball and has already produced truly remarkable players. Acting like it's a disappointment isn't appropriate, regardless of how good Manny Ramirez was.

You're also mixing eras very liberally; if the "old" system gets to claim Sandy Alomar and Carlos Baerga then it's a tough sell that it also gets to claim Richie Sexson.

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 3:46 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Now that I've thought a little more about it here's what I'm getting at: Shapiro is not the riverboat gambler that Hart was. Which is understandable, Hart didn't have the same paradigm Shapiro does. It looks like Shapiro is using the same basic mid-market approach but without the "go for broke" attitude that Hart had. And admittedly Hart was offense crazy (I loved that part) while Shapiro is picking up more pitching. But Shapiro seems somehow constrained, like he has to keep the fan base engaged, not make any moves that will somehow belie the, "we will be competing for a World Series title soon" stuff. Hart didn't have that hanging over his head quite so much. As a result I think that, although considerable, we don't have the same level of talent down in the minors now as we did before "the Big Run".

Don't get me wrong, I love some of Shapiro's moves - the Barfield trade was inspired (even if I thought - think - that Kouzmanoff's gonna be a hell of a player). I just don't get the "roll the dice" feel from Shapiro. Here's hoping that my pessimism is mis-placed

Sometimes you just gotta be lucky

by mauichuck on Dec 21, 2006 4:02 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

" I just don't get the "roll the dice" feel from Shapiro."

Yeah, and that's a damn good thing, I'd say.

by Jeffrey R on Dec 21, 2006 6:17 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Sizemore in fact played a little over two years in our farm system, including his entire AA and AAA careers.

I think when all is said and done, this decade's homegrown Indians will stand up well next to the last decade's. Maybe not quite its equal, but quite well.

On a related note, when I was looking at those Top 100 prospect lists, I noticed that in 1999, the Indians had exactly one player on that list, Russ Branyan. So that's how bad it got in between.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 7:08 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

you'll never see another Indians outfield like Belle, Ramirez and Lofton in your lifetime

We're not likely to see it on another team either, though. The real streak, as I see it, was the freakish drafting and development of Belle, Thome, Ramirez and Giles over just a handful of years. I think it is more impressive than the A's "big three" pitchers, but it gets a lot less ink.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 7:06 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

STO showed the Tribe clinching the 1995 AL Central and they set the field, which was unbelievable to relive that OF.

To have those 3, entering their prime, all at the same time - with the rest of the lineup to boot is astounding.

It made me head over to the Cube and check out the 1995 team, on which both Thome and Ramirez had OPS over .900...from the 6 and 7 hole!

Suffice it to say, THAT will never be seen again. Incredible.

by The DiaTriber on Dec 21, 2006 7:15 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Yeah, I remember this bit where Hargrove is explaining how he's been trying to tell Thome that the reason he hits 8th is because that's the "second cleanup" spot.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 7:17 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

That's great. Grover must have had that lineup card on the glass in the copier and just hit "Copy" on his way to the dugout.

Did I mention that Manny and Jimmy look like they're 15? And that Eddie Murray looked exactly the same, as he has since 1983.

by The DiaTriber on Dec 21, 2006 7:27 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

The thing that still sticks in my craw is: we still didn't win the series!

I know, I know "get over it".

Sometimes you just gotta be lucky

by mauichuck on Dec 23, 2006 10:24 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

We certainly did not deal any prospects for Hafner.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 7:02 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Drese counts as "established"? I guess.

by afh4 on Dec 22, 2006 1:40 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

By that point he was no longer a prospect to be sure.

Wait 'til next year... or something like that

by Brad D on Dec 22, 2006 1:46 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Well, he was 35 games into his career. I agree he wasn't a "prospect" but his trade value was that of future potential, right?

What a joke of a trade. Drese and a backup catcher for the best hitter in baseball plus some random and terrible pitcher. I know there were mitigating factors regarding Hafner being blocked, defensive liabilities, etc, but that's got to be one of the absolute worse trades of the last decade. Easily the most lopsided since 2000 right? Geez.

by afh4 on Dec 22, 2006 1:53 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

That Pierzynski trade to the Giants would be hard to beat.

by Jay on Dec 22, 2006 9:44 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Absolutely a trade of future potential, I just meant that he was not prospect as we generally think of them. I remember when the trade first got made thinking that Drese was a real loss for us, guess not.

Wait 'til next year... or something like that

by Brad D on Dec 22, 2006 1:23 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I don't think the profile of a reader here fits the idea of "most fans".

The analytical and exhaustive nature of people here tend to take a comprehensive look at the Tribe's prospects, often exposing shortcomings that "most fans" aren't even aware of.

by The DiaTriber on Dec 21, 2006 12:18 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Grady got it done in the minors, at every level. Gutierrez has had disappointing numbers and terrible peripherals pretty consistently for three years.

Nobody was surprised that Grady broke out, only that he did it so quickly.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 12:04 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

There's something missing from these arguments, and that is, simply, time.

Maybe Gutierrez 2008 = Rios 2006. But it's 2007 right now.

Time value of money.

We need that player already arrived, not eventually to arrive.

As in, now.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 10:43 AM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Well, I kind of see the point. But there are a lot of players with stats like that in the minors and very, very few of them turn into Rios. I guess that's probably self-evident but I think people sometime overlook the fact that players with similar minor league track records aren't necessarily on the same path.

The ones who become really great, which Rios may have (depending on this season), are the exceptions, not the rule. The rule is that FGutz will turn into a fourth outfielder. I hope he's an exception but, well, I hope so.

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 10:46 AM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Yes.

To say nothing of the fact that when one player strikes out 75 percent more often than the other, you can hardly say they're on the same path.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 10:51 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I was trying to play along. There's also the fact that I don't think scouts have ever regarded Franklin as nearly as gifted as Rios, even if some might describe them both as "5-tool."

Rios was the top prospect in the Jays system for at least 18 months; Gutierrez has never really gotten close to that honor for Cleveland and I don't think that's completely a product of the strength of our system.

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 11:10 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I just realized I'm probably coming down a little too hard on Franklin.

I guess my original point stands but I don't know if my take on the players' respective stocks as minor leaguers is really that accurate. I'm letting my disappointment in Gutz year this past season creep in.

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 11:13 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Maybe I should have said that LGT posters tend to undervalue our prospects, because I do the same thing - come down hard on guys like Gutierrez or Snyder for really falling off of the map after being highly-thought-of in the low minors.

Sure, the casual fan dreams of an outfield of Snyder, Sizemore, and Gutz in 2008; but that's only because they don't know any better. Most fans (not associated with this forum or like forums) could tell you about Brian Barton.

Gutz could turn into a Rios, but I hope that the growing pains of his evolution aren't done at the Jake because this team is past that point.

by The DiaTriber on Dec 21, 2006 12:17 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Oh, no, Gutierrez was pretty drooled-over. He was the Dodgers' #3 prospect when we acquired him, behind two guys who were both Top Ten in baseball -- he himself was ranked #31 in 2004.

"Gutierrez is a legitimate five-tool outfielder. His power is his most obvious skill, but he also can hit for average, steal bases, cover enough ground to play center field and throw well enough to play right."

In 2005, after an off-year, he was ranked #54 -- three spots behind Choo, incidentally. (Which should belie any notion that Choo was never considered a top prospect.)

Notables from the 2004 Top 100:

Mauer
Rios
Sizemore
Marte
Morneau
Barfield
David Wright
Choo
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Jason Bay
Carmona
Aubrey

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 12:20 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I understand that-that's what I meant by the second post. But still, #31 is not quite #6. In many years, I don't know about 2004 particularly, I think it's fair to say that the very top players are far more consensus as great prospects than players hanging out past 20 or so. Maybe that's not really true and just my perception but it seems to be the case oftentimes.

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 12:47 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

You're right that #31 is just not #6. But there is pretty strong consensus around guys deep into the Top 100, if not on their exact profile, then at least that they belong somewhere near the top. I think #31 is far more significant than #80, and my guess is that a statistical study would bear that out.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 1:41 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

That would be an interesting study. Not interesting enough for me to do, but interesting enough. Also a study that correlated success int he majors to placement within top 10, 10-20, 20-30, etc. There's got to be a strong correlation to top 10 and then a huge falloff, right?

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 1:44 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

On a similar note, there have been studies that have looked at the long term success of different draft slot positions. If I recall, there are differences between the top few picks(particularly pick #1), high round picks, and later round picks. Draft position follows along some of the same lines as scouting top prospects lists.

by APV on Dec 21, 2006 1:46 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Yeah, but while there is a lot of "noise" in prospect lists, draft lists are almost completely noise. That's why I find the draft almost pointless to cover, and nobody fresh off the draft can even qualify for the EPS list based on the rules. You could ignore everyone below Akron and not miss much.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 1:51 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

yeah, I'd meant to ask. What list is this? What's the EPS? Is it free?

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 1:53 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

EPS is my own mostly objective system, the "Exciting Prospect Standard", still in its infancy, for determining which prospects actually have a significant chance of making a significant contribution to the big-league club. It has a strong econometric flavor, to nobody's surprise. You can read about it in the sidebar, "Jay's Exciting Prospects list". It's kind of an experiment, we won't know for a few years how well it really works, but it's had some early success.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 2:26 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

oh. I know what that is, Jay. I meant where are you getting this top 100 list, where Rios was 6, Gutz 31, etc.

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 2:34 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Baseball America.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/26983.html

And I realize now that I kind of got the 2004 and 2005 lists mixed up together.

Oh, well.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 2:37 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Enjoying the part where you're more familiar with the EPS than the BA rankings.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 2:38 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Well, I knew BA did lists. I just didn't know if that's what you were referring to. Is that considered the most authoritative one, as opposed to like BP? Or even THT?

And I love the EPS. It's Indians only, how can I resist?

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 2:42 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I was not suggesting that Gutierrez was sure-fire to any extent. In fact, my post was prompted by Jay's "Exciting Prospect List" from mid-season 2006(I was bored and had a look at it). I as well had pretty much written off Gut., and was happy to package him up and send him off, until I read how highly regarded he seemed to be (used to be). And despite the fact that he has not figured out the contact-thing yet, I was really wondering whether he was a diamond in the rough--lets face it, Rios did not turn anyone's head in nearly 2 full seasons in the majors.

by DocNo on Dec 21, 2006 12:14 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I can see that. Gutierez is probably not a natural talent quite on Rios' level, but he may yet be a diamond in the rough. And you're right, I went out of my way to make that point in that article.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 12:21 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

I guess what I'm ultimately driving at is that we could produce countless prospects with numbers/tools as comparable to Rios as Gutierrez-i.e. sort of comparable with some significant differences.

And, obviously, that doesn't mean we should anticipate any of them being as good as Rios was last year even once in their careers. I think these sorts of comparison's are a sort of fool's gold-the jump to being a highly, highly productive major leaguer happens for only a few out of the many who look sort of similar on paper.

Sure, if Gutz turns out to be awesome after the Indians cut bait, then you can say all day that we should've seen it coming. But it's that sort of mentality that's led to the stockpiling of prospects that many people see as Shapiro's biggest blind spot as a GM.

Rios is a proven commodity, or a nearly proven one. I just don't think the comparison to Gutz is any more valid than someone saying Brian Anderson or Jeremy Reed "compares" to Grady (Anderson actually posted a better OPS in AAA). Well, yeah. They kind of do. But they're not Grady and history tells us they will probably never be even close to the player he is.

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 12:44 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Can you say "Chris Shelton"?

Sometimes you just gotta be lucky

by mauichuck on Dec 21, 2006 1:11 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Well, okay, but it's unfair to say Gutierrez is no more comparable than Anderson. Anderson was a very good prospect, but I don't think anyone was confusing him for a blue-chipper.

by Jay on Dec 21, 2006 1:49 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Hawk Harrelson was. But yeah, point taken.

I guess I'm just sort of blowing smoke about the old 20 prospects for every one major leaguer line.

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 1:51 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

You shouldn't have linked me to the BA lists...

Anderson was 37 in 2005. How is that substantially different from Gutz? It's almost totally analogous, right?

by afh4 on Dec 21, 2006 2:50 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

37?

by Jay on Dec 22, 2006 9:46 AM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

i.e. 37th on the BA list. Like Fgutz was 31st.

by afh4 on Dec 22, 2006 12:44 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

You're right. I shouldn't have linked you to those lists. It's too much power for one man to have.

by Jay on Dec 22, 2006 4:37 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

One thing that would make this comparison to Rios difficult for the Indians is the fact that the Blue Jays essentially gave Rios (almost) two full seasons in right field before he developed. That's two seasons of an OPS in the low 700s from a corner outfielder. With the Indians' window of opportunity being what it is, that can't be a viable option.

That said, I'm a big proponent of Gutierrez after watching him a little in Buffalo. I like the idea of him getting at least a RHP platoon shot in 2008 (if not sooner, Mr. Michaels), hand-cuffed to Dellucci or Choo. But I don't think the Indians can afford to develop Gutierrez in the same way the Blue Jays did Rios. Just my two cents...

by peyton46 @ Let's Go Tribe! on Dec 21, 2006 3:19 PM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

agree

Wait 'til next year... or something like that

by Brad D on Dec 21, 2006 4:08 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

The "hand-cuffed to Delucci or Choo" comment gave me a really funny picture of FG and Choo out in the field actually handcuffed together trying to go after a fly ball. That would be really fun to watch a game of people all handcuffed together...batting, running the bases, playing the field. Anyway....just wanted to share this completely off-topic vision I have.

On a related note.....if we signed siamese twins as a RF or LF platoon....would they take up one roster spot....or two?

by Pronkta Clause on Dec 21, 2006 4:23 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Just to keep this completely off-topic thread going - the Discovery Channel had a piece on two mid-torso conjoined twin girls on the other night and it showed them playing baseball. It seems that the one twin controlled the left arm and leg and the other the right. Watching them catch and throw a baseball was somehow very, very sad.

Sometimes you just gotta be lucky

by mauichuck on Dec 21, 2006 4:32 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Looking at the prospect list Jay posted http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/26983.html
you just gotta believe that Marte is going to break out in a big way very soon. I'm sure one could find prospects consistently in the top 20 at a young age who did not, but with Marte being ranked by the baseball community as (from 2003-6) #40-11-9-14(MLB), and given that it usually takes these top guys a couple years to put it all together, I think we are going to be very happy very soon.

by DocNo on Dec 22, 2006 5:20 AM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Wonderful post. I think shapiro has a tendency to hold back his minor league prospects because he has a effenity for cheap veterans. Howry, Millwood, Michaels, David Dellucci, Casey Blake, Todd Hollandsworth, Aaron Boone, Paul Byrd, Jason Johnson, Guillermo Mota, Scott Sauerbeck and the list goes on and on. I think we should give Franklin Guttierez a good shot at the right field positon this year and trade Casey "I don't know why he is still around" Blake and let Garko handle first. Given that last year was a disappointment we should regroup and let the young guys give it a try instead of paying wasted millions on veteran role players. I am not suggesting we shouldn't have any veterans but we should have less and shouldn't sign a guy like Keith "Burger King" Foulke.

Swing and a big miss

by 5tribetipies on Dec 22, 2006 2:03 PM EST reply actions

Re: Interesting comparison-thinkaboutit

Casey Blake is still around because he plays solid defense, hits passingly well, is very versatile, hustles and is generally slightly above average as a player.

In general Blake is simply better at this point than Gutz is. He generated nearly twice as many RC/G than Gutz and posted an OPS+ of 117. That is certainly serviceable. While Gutz may eventually grow into a better player, right now Blake is handling the position just fine.

I got my stats from Baseball-reference.com. Does anyone know if that is a completely reliable source?

Wait 'til next year... or something like that

by Brad D on Dec 22, 2006 4:27 PM EST up reply actions