FanGraphs "minor review"

I don't think this was posted earlier, though it seems odd that it wasn't. The premise is that these are interesting recent prospects who probably won't make the upcoming Top 10 list. (One assumes this rule doesn't apply to the "bonus entry.")

In other words, even though they call Weglarz's meh 2009 numbers a "fluke season," they still think he fell out of the Top Ten, presumably by virtue of all the new additions.

about 2 years ago Jay 21 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I read the story differently, which is to say I read it like I read most accounts of Indians prospects from national outlets these days. Specifically, I read it as someone looking superficially at a set of numbers from Indians minor leaguers without any context. I read this when it came out but didn’t post it because I didn’t think it was worth it. Weglarz not top 10 guy?….dubious. Rondon listed as the “Bonus” guy….absurd. There are a lot of guys you could identify as risers, but TJ McFarland, interesting though he may be, is not anywhere near the top of that list. The only name they mention which I agree on their classification is Berger…I agree that he is a legitimate sleeper (albeit in the Scott Lewis sense). If you follow the commentators here, or follow the Diatribe, or follow Tony Lastoria…you know more about the Indians prospects than any of the national blogs I typically see.

by APV on Nov 14, 2009 11:41 PM EST reply actions

Completely agree with you.

As much as I love stats and applaud people for not being afraid to trust them, Fangraphs has a tendency to rely on them too much, which is especially dangerous when evaluating prospects/minor leaguers. McFarland jumps out because of his GB rates along with a decent K rate, but from a scouting point of view there are definately others in our system who better fit the bill of “risers” because they have the stuff to match. McFarland is interesting, but this was clearly a case of just looking at the numbers without any regard of the context like APV said.

by JP_Frost on Nov 15, 2009 6:25 AM EST up reply actions

I agree that Fangraphs analysis (oddly) doesn’t live up to the quality of the stats they provide, more often than not. Although Dave Cameron is more than solid.

I just don’t see this particular piece as being quite what you guys think it is. To me, they are isolating guys out who deviated the most from their expected trajectory. Weglarz “tumbled” only in relation to where we expected Weglarz to be a year ago, and the opposite is true for McFarland.

Rondon is the “bonus” guy not because he’s an also-ran, but simply because he didn’t fit into any of the pre-determined categories they wanted to write about. Rondon rose somewhat over his trajectory from a year ago, but not that much. The excitement about Rondon is that he continued on that trajectory; any extra improvement is just gravy.

by Jay on Nov 15, 2009 8:13 PM EST up reply actions

I just read it differently. Weglarz, even if we view his season as a disappointment, it was clearly an improvement on his up and down 2008.

by APV on Nov 15, 2009 10:27 PM EST up reply actions

A player with a .377 w/OBA is a tumbler? I know he’s a 1B/LF but damn

"sometimes the internet is hard for me." - ClemsonGirl

by world dictator on Nov 15, 2009 3:35 PM EST reply actions

I like articles about the Indians’ prospects from outsiders. It helps give perspective, which is important since pretty much all teams’ fans overrate their own prospects.

by Cols714 on Nov 15, 2009 6:33 PM EST reply actions

This is probably the place to put Kevin Goldstein’s tweet from an hour ago.

Wow . . . #Indians have 12 legitimate candidates for slots 8-11 on prospect list — hoping that calls clarfiy, rather than confuse.

by cheech99 on Nov 16, 2009 6:36 PM EST reply actions

I likes the sound of this

by Roger Dorn on Nov 16, 2009 8:08 PM EST up reply actions

Sounds about right to me. I count something like 13 legit prospects and that doesn’t count any of this year’s draftees or a couple key 2009 injured players like De La Cruz or Joey Mahalic.

by APV on Nov 16, 2009 9:00 PM EST up reply actions

Not sure its worth a fanshot, but some performances in the AFL to note (link on the “Fall and Winter” sidebar):

- Matt McBride: leading the AFL in OPS, with an OBP over .500 resulting from a surprisingly Weglarzian tendency to take walks, probably the main thing he needs to work on to get back on the prospect radar. He’s also catching full time again. I wouldn’t be surprised if he reprises at Akron due to Santana at Columbus, moving up when Santana gets the call.

- Carlos Rivero: one of the younger participants in the AFL (turns 22 next May), and more than holding his own at the plate (900+ OPS). His performance at Akron this year was generally viewed as a setback, but considering his youth, his solid SS play thruout the year, and the fact that he actually improved both his walk and K ratios at the AA level, (arguably more important than hitting HR’s at this stage), I’d say he hasn’t fallen too far. He’s another one that may reprise at Akron, sharing an IF with Chiz and Cord Phelps.

- Josh Judy: had some wildness early, but has been getting regular work and continuing his stellar ‘09 with a miniscule sub-1 era in a hitter’s league. Don’t see why he wouldn’t start the year in Columbus next year and be in the discussion for a major league callup at some point in ’10.

Can’t resist mentioning Jordan Brown as well, who hasn’t skipped a beat at the plate in the Caribbean. I don’t think he’s all that, but he’s at least on par as a hitter with what we’ve run out in LF the last few years, and for those that say he needs more defensive work in the OF, two words: Gar, Ko. Seriously, if he can hit and not embarass himself with the glove, why wouldn’t he be in the mix in ST?

by mcrose on Nov 16, 2009 8:40 PM EST reply actions

I think the chance he’s an improvement on Garko is slim indeed, and his upside is just as small if not smaller.

by Jay on Nov 16, 2009 9:18 PM EST up reply actions

I’ll go out on a limb and say Brown would make a better outfielder than Garko.

Like I said, the bar has been set pretty low. I don’t think Brown has a great deal of upside, and I’ve never seen him play, but I have seen the black hole in LF. Personally, I saw enuf of Laporta in left, particularly a couple very athletic plays out there, to say he’s the future LF’er, but he’s being groomed for 1B and probly won’t be available on April fool’s day anyway.

Which leaves Crowe and Brantley for opening day. Brown’s a better hitter than Crowe, and Brantley, while certainly having greater upside, isn’t a lock come April.

by mcrose on Nov 16, 2009 9:59 PM EST up reply actions

Our goal shouldn’t be to run out a slight improvement over Garko in LF

by Roger Dorn on Nov 16, 2009 10:01 PM EST up reply actions

Agreed. Alternatives?

by mcrose on Nov 16, 2009 10:04 PM EST up reply actions

Re-acquire Garko!

by afh4 on Nov 16, 2009 11:16 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Tautology.

by mcrose on Nov 16, 2009 11:19 PM EST up reply actions

Brantley. Let him learn on the fly.

by Roger Dorn on Nov 16, 2009 11:49 PM EST up reply actions

I like Brantley as a prospect too, because he’s still young, has speed and bat control, which is something we lack, but I’d like to see him post above .800 ops at AAA for at least one month before he’s handed a starting position in Cleveland.

by mcrose on Nov 17, 2009 12:27 AM EST up reply actions