Straight Talkin' pt. 2
by OhioTommy on May 25, 2009 4:21 PM EDT
Email
PrintI've got opinions and I'm sharing them on select prospects that I've seen. I hate to read glowing prospect reports about every single guy in the system, when in fact, most of them have very clear deficiencies that keep them from playing in the major leagues. You're not going to get that stuff from me b/c it does nobody any good. It's time for some straight talkin'...
Carlos Santana - I saw him this weekend and he was clear and away the best prospect on the field. I don't think the Indians have had as unique of a talent in their farm system for YEARS. A very athletic catcher that could feasibly play any position on the baseball diamond. He has very quick actions and fast-twitch talents. I honestly can't think of any major league catchers that he compares favorably to (Santana is very unique). Basically, try to think of a power hitting, athletic infielder (2b/ss/3b) that plays catcher. Santana is also a major league average runner, and his arm strength is major league average. As I said before, his talents and athletic skill could allow him to play anywhere on the field. If I were a scout holding a try-out and Santana came up to me and asked where he'd like me to see him play, I'd ask him to play shortstop and see where we could go from there -- catcher wouldn't even come to mind at first glance but he plays the position well. On to his hitting...I've only seen him as a lefty, but he has a very quick bat and very good extension. He's got 24-28 HR power potential (with a good deal of doubles) at the major league level. Santana passes the eye test with flying colors, and his BB/K rates are also very strong. I thought to myself the entire night watching him, "Why in the world would the Dodgers trade him for Casey Blake?" The main thing that came to mind was durability issues at C. Santana has below ML average size for a catcher, and athletically he does not profile well to the position (as I said, he is a unique talent). I could see Santana playing 4 times a week (out of an average 6 games per week) at C, filling in at DH or maybe even popping in at 3B or a corner outfield spot to reduce the wear and tear that will come with playing catcher at the major league level. This guy is a very exciting prospect to watch. I think he's a top 15 overall prospect in all of the minor leagues, if not top 10.
Trey Haley - Not off to a great start at Lake County, but Indians fans must be patient. He is a very projectable arm that can spin off a breaking ball quite well. I say give him 2 seasons and then lets see where he is. Hopefully, he will have better K/BB ratios to demonstrate his pitchability. Projection-wise, Haley could be a 90-96 MPH fastball guy with a plus major league curveball. I've seen Clay Buchholz comparisons, and from a qualitative perspective, I think its a good parallel.
Beau Mills - I'm a believer in Mills, although I don't believe he will live up to expectations of a middle 1st round selection. The guy cannot throw the baseball well enough to play 3b, so get any of those thoughts out of your mind. You've got an athletic body build with good, strong proportions and good bat speed. His power numbers aren't there this year, but they will come. His value will be that he'll get his shot at 25 or 26, the Indians can plug him in at 1b or DH, get three years of him at a cheap price and then we'll see after that. I think he's an 85 cents on the dollar version of Joey Votto (less speed and average than Votto). I can see him doing .280, 20 HR, 40 2B at the major leage level in 3-4 years. Not a bad player if you can get that at below $1 million per year.
Lonnie Chisenhall - I've been a critic of his since he entered the system, but now I'm changing my opinion of him. Athletically and tools-wise, he is a tweener. I can see why there was some criticism of him as an "overdraft". The people that would say that, such as myself, probably didn't see a ton of him playing. He's got arm strength, is a tick or two below major league average speed, doesn't have the lower body quickness/agility that projects well in the middle infield, and he doesn't have the size or power projection that you'd like from a corner infielder. A tweener, right? Well, the way this guy is hitting as a 20-year old in Kinston (not exactly a hitters league), his "tweener" status is eroding away. John Maynard Keynes once said, "When the facts change, I change my opinions. What do you do, sir?" Perhaps Chisenhall is just riding a hot streak, but the Indians liked him for his bat and the guy has so far demonstrated in 110 or so professional games that he can hit. I once said he was overrated, but now I think he's a solid prospect. I would have been one of the guys that missed out on him come draft time last year.
Carlos Rivero - Long legs, strong body with some athleticism. I don't see a single plus tool here but his body is good. I don't see much bat speed, I don't see much quickness in the lower half. Honestly, I don't see a ton of projection in his body - not much loose athleticism. He's either an "early maturer" (meaning his body developed earlier than his peers) or a couple years older than his listed age. The good is that he's got a good, athletic physical frame and some arm strength. I see him more as a 3B, but could play some SS at the major league level. If the guy can hit, I think he's a good prospect but I'm not going to make excuses for this guy b/c of his age b/c I don't see a ton of projection with what he brings to the table.
Abner Abreu - I've liked this guy from the start and I still find him intriguing. First, though, he's got to show that he can hit breaking balls b/c all of the strike outs in low-A ball are EXTREMELY concerning. However, Abreu has a lot of loose athleticism and a swing with very good extension. The fact that he is already getting so many extra base hits with such a loose body is quite bullish long-term. Don't be fooled, though, Abreu has narrow proportions and I believe will always look thin, lanky, etc. He does have the type of loose athleticism that will allow him to add muscle w/o hurting his movements, but he's never going to be a big, strong, barrell-chested masher.
Zach Putnam - I've never believed in him as a 2nd round pick as a P (I heard that talk last year) and I do believe the Indians overpaid for him. I don't think its a fluke that he fell to the 5th round (other scouts felt the same about him as I do). Whenever I watch him, and I've seen him more than a few times, it just doesn't click for me. #1 - He has a stout, power hitter's body that is not ideal for pitchers, #2 - he has a low arm slot that does not help him offset his lack of height and arm length and #3 - he doesn't have a good breaking pitch. I said from the start that he is going to have difficulty getting strike outs above A-ball b/c there isn't much depth to his pitches (particularly his slider). The good news is that he has good arm strength and can throw a good sinker, and in his most recent showing he demonstrated a good change/splitter. I do not think the Indians are panicking by moving him into the bullpen b/c I never thought that he would make it as a SP in the major leagues (he doesn't have enough good pitches -- that slider doesn't do it for me). I've said it before, Putnam looks like the guy that walked over from 3B to the mound to give pitching a whirl. With that being said, he's done quite well for himself. This guy is not going to be a good SP at the major league level, and the move to the bullpen is entirely justified. He's got a shot at being a good middle relief guy, but don't expect much more.
Bryce Stowell - Signed as a draft eligible sophomore, I think he had a shot at being a late 1st round or 1st supplemental round guy in the '09 draft. He's got good arm strength, long loose arms and he has the potential to have a plus major league curveball. The downside is that his fastball doesn't have much horizontal movement, but he throws from a tall slot so I think he can get away with it. I'm a little surprised to see him in the pen so early, but he fits the bullpen profile more than as a SP. I've liked this guy for a while and I think he was an excellent draft and sign by the Indians last year. He could be an impactful late innings relief guy down the road if the Indians choose to go that route.
Tim Fedroff - Sorry guys, but I think the Indians could have made a lot better use of the $725k they gave this guy. That is way too much money for somebody lacking so many tools and projection. He's a short without much more projection in his body -- I don't see where the power is going to come from. He has good speed, but I see him more of a corner outfield type and he doesn't have nearly the type of offensive production potential that you'd expect for a corner OF. Even if he plays CF, I'm looking for more. I'm guessing that the Indians really loved his character and desire to succeed, b/c the tools package doesn't say $725k. It says about 25-30% of that, which still makes for a good ballplayer that could have value down the road as a 4th or 5th OF. I hate to rip on the guy b/c I love the Tar Heels baseball program, but the Indians got hosed on this deal.
*NOTE - I think the Indians should have pooled the $1.25 million they spent on Putnam and Fedroff on a guy or two or three that actually have the potential to make an impact at the major league level.*
Nick Weglarz - I've always really liked Weglarz b/c of his strength, size and surpising athleticism that should allow him to play a corner OF spot. I've been pumping him up myself b/c I believe Indians fans didn't realize the potential he had, but now I think they have overdone it. His best tool is obviously his plus power potential (1B power at a corner OF spot is a plus). The strike outs are worrisome, though. The guy struck out a lot in A-ball -- those are some pretty mediocre pitchers down there. I think he has a hole or two in his swing that are exploitable. Major league arms that have advance scouting reports on him will attack those holes (see Chris Davis of the Rangers, and Russell Branyan). He has been making strides but he is still green. I worry that he is never going to realize his power potential due to holes in his swing and he could very possibly be a .240/.330/.470 guy at the major league level -- that's a very real prospect, guys. I think Indians fans need to take a breather on pumping their fists when thinking of Weglarz b/c there is still a long way to go on him. I share your enthusiasm, but don't expect too much, too soon, if anything at all.
Eric Berger - He's got some arm strength, and I like how he throws down on the ball so well with his tall arm slot. Left handers are often coached to throw more so from the side (my personal observation), but Berger comes straight over the top. He doesn't have the cleanest delivery around and I wasn't surprised to see that he had an arm injury before (although I suppose it can happen to anybody at any time, no matter delivery). He should be back to full health now. I expect him to be an arm that goes through hot and cold streaks as a pitcher. He's a lefty with a live arm that pitches with some decent leverage, and was a senior sign for the Indians. I'm not expecting very much, if anything at all, but there are some things to like here.
Matt McBride - This guy is not a major league ball player. I hate to be closed-minded towards things (I really try to be an open minded person), but if you stand this guy next to other major league positional talents he'll stick out like a sore thumb. He's thin and lanky and no way he passes as a corner outfielder at the major league level. He's hit pretty well in the minors and has shown some doubles power, but this is NOT a guy that will turn those doubles into HR's -- he doesn't have that type of projectable body or swing. He's 24 and not shown anything above A-ball. This is a guy that will be playing AA and AAA the rest of his career, with perhaps getting a cup of coffee with a major league club at some point if he runs into the right situation.
TJ House - House is a nice arm, but doesn't have the upside potential that Haley has. I see House as the type of arm that would normally go college for 3 years to prove himself b/c scouts weren't drooling over his potential while he was in high school. That's not a knock against House; it's just how things generally work out. House has some nice stuff and a nice delivery, but nothing really pops out at you. Projecting him to the major league level, I see him as a 4-5 starter (maybe 3 at best). He is the type of prospect that is difficult to get excited about at this point in his career. I'm not trying to compare their pitching styles, but from a talent level, think of him as a guy with the potential to be the next David Huff for the Indians. At this point, I'm taking Trey Haley over him.
Hector Rondon, Jeanmar Gomez, Alexander Perez -- I am reserving comment b/c I've never seen these guys throw. I've never seen Michael Brantley play, either.
33 comments
|
8 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great post, thanks for taking the time. I wonder if you’d expand on a few things.
The main thing that came to mind was durability issues at C. Santana has below ML average size for a catcher, and athletically he does not profile well to the position (as I said, he is a unique talent).
First, is there any real evidence that suggests that size is related to durability? Outside of pro sports, most durability issues favor men with smaller frames (says the 6’4" guy) as long as they aren’t, you know, sickly. My understanding is that all men have essentially the same bone strength and durability of joints, such that larger men simply put a lot more stress on bones and joints that are no stronger than those of smaller men. Bottom line, given equal arm and leg strength, is it possible that smaller catchers aren’t such a bad idea?
Second, what are you really saying re: profiling well to a position? Are you saying that he doesn’t profile well at catcher, or that he doesn’t fit the typical catcher profile, or that he does fit the typical profile at another position, or that he profiles especially well at a position other than catcher? These are all different statements.
I’ve seen Clay Buchholz comparisons, and from a qualitative perspective, I think its a good parallel.
Meaning, he’s going to generate all kinds of hype while accomplishing nothing by his 25th birthday? I sure liked what you had to say about Haley before that point.
Sounds like you think Mills can be the guy we wish Garko was, i.e., at least good for a few years.
I respect your turnaround on Chisenhall. It is nice to know that when the Indians apparently overdraft a guy, they aren’t necessarily always wrong.
More on the other guys later … you gave us a lot of content to digest here.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
To be fair, Bucholz is tearing up AAA and should be pitching in the majors now. He almost pitched a perfect game the other night
by world dictator on May 26, 2009 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions
you know who else is tearing up AAA, Jeremy Sowers
by APV on May 26, 2009 11:36 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Cool, lets get Bucholz so he can pitch out of the pen
by world dictator on May 27, 2009 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions
What Jay and others are saying about what Buchholz has accomplished is correct, but what Mr. Straight Talker here is saying is that based on his athletic profile and his stuff, his ceiling is significantly higher than Sowers.
I understand – and I think it’s probably true that in a “everything goes according to plan” world Buchholz clearly has more exciting stuff. But at this point, neither Sowers nor Buchholz are in that world. They’ve got enough of a track record to compare actual performance against similar competition. I’d give Buchholz a slight edge simply on having a little better fastball than Sowers.
Meaning, he’s going to generate all kinds of hype while accomplishing nothing by his 25th birthday? I sure liked what you had to say about Haley before that point.
BURN
by world dictator on May 25, 2009 10:17 PM EDT reply actions
Small vs. large catchers; I was trying to communicate thoughts on why the Dodgers would be willing to trade him for an aging, mediocre 3B, so I am searching for short-comings on Santana. Many baseball people may think that his smaller body suggests that he isn’t as strong or durable as other catchers. I even tend to believe that myself. The position is the most physically demanding on the diamond. The position isn’t exactly good to the knees, which may gradually erode some of his lower body agility away in the future. I don’t have any empirical evidence to suggest that small catchers are less durable than larger bodied catchers, and I unfortunately don’t have the time to run a regression to qualify the stereotype. I do believe, however, that it is reasonable to assume that a smaller bodied athlete is likely to have a more difficult time staying on the field as a larger bodied athlete at a physically demanding position.
Do I have anything against smaller catchers? No. I was asking myself while watching him, "Why would he not be an elite catching prospect?" He has the athleticism, arm, and quickness to be effective at the position defensively. Scouts will likely discredit him some b/c he has the body of a middle infielder. Have him stand up (literally) against Wieters, and a scout will say, "Wieters looks like a catcher, and Santana looks like a middle infielder." Does this mean Santana can’t play catcher? Heck no, I think he could and can play the position quite well. He has all of the requisite tools and athleticism to succeed, but this is where I am coming from calling him a "unique" talent. Not to sound too crazy, but while watching him I was thinking, "He could be a guy that could change the way we think about the catcher position" in that the stereotype of big, strong bodies are required to play the position. Perhaps baseball people may second-guess that thought. Perhaps that is the stereotype that caused the Dodgers to move him? I think Santana is a great prospect and that he can certainly play the catcher position at the major league level, even though he’s not a cookie-cutter catching prospect. He’s a unique guy and very exciting to watch.
By not profiling well at C, I was saying that he doesn’t fit the stereotypes that baseball people typically look for at certain positions. I think an argument could be made that the Indians should consider him at another position b/c he might play less (or have a shorter career) at C if durability does indeed become a problem down the road. I am not making that argument, but some people may believe that. I’d keep him at C and ride him as long as possible.
Re: Buchholz and Haley. I take it that you’re making a joke about Buchholz regarding something else you’ve communicated in this community. From a scouting perspective, Buchholz and Haley are both slender, athletic, loose-bodied pitchers that can spin good breaking balls. I bet Buchholz looked a lot like Haley when he was 18-19 years old. If you’ve got something against young, athletic, loose-armed RHP’s that throw 90-96 MPH with good curveballs then that’s your thing, but I think they are good! I also think Buchholz is a very good pitching prospect, and if you watch the two of them they look similar, which is where I was coming from with the qualitative comparison.
I seem to recall when Sandy Alomar was around that one of the things that made him exceptional was that he was so big. Traditionally, haven’t catchers tended to be small? I’m also not sure about the big body-better durability question. Generally speaking, larger people are at greater risk for orthopedic issues because they put greater pressure on their joints (mass increases relatively greater than joint surface area – cubed vs. squared rule). This is obviously going to vary tremendously from person to person, but I would tend to think the opposite of what you said, smaller is more durable.
Regardless, I’m not sure long-term durability should be the primary question the Indians take in considering Santana’s development. The Indians have him now, and won’t necessarily have him when he’s 32. The Indians want to get maximum value out of him now, not maximum value over the entirety of his career. If he can defensively handle the position and handle a pitching staff, it is hugely advantageous for the Indians to put his bat at catcher.
I was curious, so I did a little digging to see if I could find any statistics that support your hypothesis. Using some Data from SI as of 2/25/2009, we have 55 major league catchers by height, weight and year born. After removing the players listed as inactive players, we have a sample of 34, which should be statistically significant as a whole. The major assumption is that years of service is highly correlated to a players age. If your theory is correct, the average age of the “bigger guys” should exceed that of the “smaller” guys.
For the 34 catchers:
Average Height: 6’1"
Average Weight: 214 lbs
Average Birth Date: 10/5/1979
For the 14 players taller than 6’1":
Average Height: 6’3"
Average Weight: 225 lbs
Average Birth Date: 3/5/1979
For the 15 players shorter than 6’1":
Average Height: 5’11"
Average Weight: 205 lbs
Average Birth Date: 1/28/1979
And to finish it off, the 5 players at 6’1":
Average Height: 6’1"
Average Weight: 211 lbs
Average Birth Date: 6/10/1983
While this is a small sample, and subject to survivorship bias, it suggests that size and durability are not correlated as the “small guys” stick around just as long as the “big guys” at catcher.
Additional info on the sample of 34, and a regression of Height vs. Players Age, also suggests that height is not a good predictor. I didn’t do weight because we don’t know the percentage of body fat. Results:
Regression Statistics
Multiple R: 0.24733325
R Square: 0.061173736
Adjusted R Square: 0.031835416
Standard Error: 1.811750633
Observations: 34
Thanks for running the stats, but it’s not “(my) theory” that smallish players don’t last at catcher. I merely said its ‘reasonable’ to think that smallish bodies are less durable at the catcher position, but also I praised his defensive abilities and said I would keep him at the position. As you mentioned, your conclusion could be skewed to a survivorship bias (I believe that bias is highly relevant). Additionally, listed heights and weights are not very reliable, nor do they account for body type.
People will probably list a ton of catchers that are under 6’0" and demonstrate their durability by how many games they’ve played. Many of those catchers likely had much more sturdy, wide bodies making them imperfect comparisons. Go ahead and google search "carlos santana indians pictures" and look at his body yourself. If’s more of a middle infielder’s body. Scouts and managers will likely question his durability at catcher, whether its justified or not. I think he can hold up at the position, and as another poster said, the Indians will probably only have him for another 7 or so years, so when he is 30+ it’s not really our concern. I was thinking the same thing and I agree.
Whether he has a body type that is more in-line with middle infielders or not, it doesn’t mean that he can’t play catcher and last at the position. As I said before, he could be a player that changes the way baseball thinks about the requisite talents/skills/bodies for the catcher position. We shall see. All I know is that I would be comfortable playing him at catcher, although wouldn’t hesitate to occasionally him as a DH to preserve his athleticism and health (same with Victor Martinez and other catchers, for the record).
I’ve communicated my feelings on these players and I feel as though my analysis largely speaks for itself. I made my post b/c it comes from a different point of view than generally expressed in these forums. It won’t coincide with the way a group of you think, but that’s why I communicate it. Not to be contrary, but to provide a different perspective.
I appreciate your perspective and taking the time to write it all down. In regards to wider bodies projecting better at catcher, I don’t think it’s a predictor of durability either, but don’t have any a data to support the claim. I would presume wider bodies facilitate keeping bad picthes in front of the catcher and also help them to block home plate.
In the end, I think body type will not be looked at as closely, and instead managers will scrutinize blocked balls, passed balls, % of runners thrown out, how well they can call a game, and how well they swing the bat. Like you said, as long as Santana does well in these areas, I think he projects just fine as a catcher, even if he is a runt.
Carlos Rivero – Long legs, strong body with some athleticism
Honestly, I don’t see a ton of projection in his body – not much loose athleticism.
I don’t understand these two statements. From what I’ve seen and reports I’ve read, Carlos Rivero is a more athletic and slightly larger version of Jhonny Peralta – I imagine him looking like Victor if he had never been converted to catcher. And while I agree that at some point Rivero needs to put up numbers, I don’t think age is being used as an excuse for him. One of the reasons I (and others) am high on him is because his raw numbers have seemingly masked a lot of underlying positive performance. Metric and scouting reports talk about his high rates of solid, hard contact, with high line drive rates. He has furthermore shown the ability to adjust after slow transitions to a new level. I’m going to continue to give Rivero some slack until the second half of the season – then I’ll hold him to higher performance standards.
Rivero has an athletic body build with some athletic actions, but they aren’t the type of actions that are quick, loose and free. If you look at other prospects with projectability, they’ve got those types of attributes. Rivero doesn’t. He has an athletic body build and there is some room to add to weight, but it’s not all there for me. I was hoping to see more bat speed and a better swing, but I didn’t. Rivero has some athletic actions and arm strength, but he just doesn’t have the types of tools or athletic projection that pop when you see him play. If he doesn’t have the loose, free athleticism, you’d hope to see some more "now" tools, but he doesn’t have them. Rivero isn’t a slick SS with great defensive ability, he doesn’t have loose, free, projectable actions, and as of 5/26/2009, he has not demonstrated the ability to hit (see his minor league numbers). So what exactly is there to get excited about? He has an athletic body, arm strength, so I’m certainly not writing him off as a prospect, but I’m not going to have blind faith in him b/c of his listed age.
Is Rivero more athletic than Peralta? Yes, I would say that. Rivero has a stronger, better proportioned body than Peralta, but let’s be honest, Peralta has a bit of a soft body and he was never much of an athlete to begin with. Tons of guys have better bodies and more athleticism than Peralta. The big difference between the two is that Peralta showed that he could hit when he was in Double-A, and Rivero to this point has not.
Hey, these are just my unfiltered opinions. I’m an Indians fan, but I don’t have any affiliation to the team and I’m not afraid to share my true opinions on guys. There’s no point in me regurgitating others’ analysis and already apparent information.
The excitement for Rivero comes not from his raw numbers, but from putting those numbers into (an appropriate) context. Part of that appropriate context is controlling for park and luck. There are lots of valid arguments we could get into about how to best do this, but I think the basic validity of adjusting for park and luck is an important point. A player’s stats show two things – what they have done and some indication of what their performance suggests about underlying ability. The raw numbers are fine for telling you what they have done, but they can be systematically misleading about underlying ability. Making a few adjustments allows for a better assessment of what their past performance suggests about what kind of a player they are. For example, last season Rivero hit .279/.338/.408 in Kinston – ok, but certainly not great. It turns out if you make some adjustments for league and park (using minorleaguesplits.com’s conversions) Rivero’s raw performance (balls in play, level of competition) is more suggestive of a 0.302/0.359/0.432 line…a little better, and for a 20-year old shortstop – actually very good. And I think you have to keep the age factor in discussion. Certainly not everyone ages the same and it may be that Rivero has “developed early”, meaning he has less gains still to see in terms of development, but that’s a difficult thing to get at. And I should add that while Rivero’s raw numbers aren’t great so far this season, he BB-rate has improved, his K-rate has improved, and his LD% is still very strong – all suggestive that he is getting pretty unlucky and is a good bet to turn things around.
Here’s a few catchers not taller than 6 feet: Yogi Berra, Thurman Munson, Ivan Rodriguez, Tony Pena, Manny Sanguillen. I’m sure there are others.
The best catchers are under 6 feet tall unless they are over 6 feet tall
by Roger Dorn on May 26, 2009 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Catchers who are exactly six feet tall:
- Ted Simmons
- Gene Tenace
- Jason Kendall
- Rich Gedman
- Manny Sanguillen
- Tony Pena
Gene Tenace at the plate and….WHAMMY!
by jakesinger777 on May 27, 2009 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I’m all about havin’ fun. You know, get a couple cocktails in me, start a fire in someone’s kitchen.
Maybe go to Sea World and pull my pants down.
by jakesinger777 on May 29, 2009 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions
How has no one rec’d this?
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on May 27, 2009 7:51 AM EDT up reply actions
Some more perspective on catcher size was provided on the linked article describing the Baltimore Orioles and MLB top catching prospect, Matt Wieters.
Some exceprts:
Terry Kennedy caught in the big league for 14 years, two of them with the Orioles. He was 6-3, 220 pounds and was slow behind the plate.
“When I had problem catching, they would send a catching instructor who was 5-8,” he said. “And I’d say, ‘What do you know about what I’m going through?”"
Werner, who is 6-1, said of Wieters: “It’s not about size; it is about flexibility. You can be 5-10, but if you’re not flexible, you can’t catch. Matt is flexible and quick on his feet. And he presents a big target back there. Some of the pitchers that I’ve talked to say he’s so big, they feel like they’re 50 feet away, not 60. If he makes the pitcher happy, I’m happy.”
I’m higher on Putnam than you seem to be, but no doubt I agree on Fedroff. When I saw his bonus in the annual a couple weeks ago, I was like “Whaat?”
FE WEE
The Indians seemed to put a premium on guys that can hit (see Chisenhall) in the draft, and apparently that is what they were thinking with Fedroff. He was a draft eligible sophomore, so it might have inflated his price tag but that is no reason to pay a material amount more for a prospect. There are tons of other guys out there to give money to. I think the Indians reached on Fedroff. You could possibly look at Fedroff and see a young Brian Giles, but that is being optimistic and a comparison to Brian Giles at a young age isn’t exactly a huge compliment b/c Giles was always undersized without the power and projection scouts looked for, but Giles could hit and walked as much as he struck out. Fedroff is similar. He’s going to have to prove himself the way Giles did. Giles is Fedroff’s ultimate ceiling, but there is a far better chance that he languishes around Triple-A for a while and works his way on to a major league roster as a 4th or 5th outfielder, if he makes the majors at all.
My stance has been made clear on Putnam. I don’t want to sound like the guy has no shot, but I don’t think he has much upside at the major league level. He’s got a good sinker and some velocity, so I think he could make it as a ground-ball middle relief pitcher, but he’s not a major league starter unless he significantly improves.
Real talk on the draft
Just sharing some brief opinions on some guys that I think the Indians have their eyes on in the draft…
Tanner Scheppers – Would normally be one of the most talented college pitchers in the draft if not for Strasburg. Sheppers has easy velocity, a loose arm and a plus breaking ball. Shoulder problems are an obvious concern, but this type of upside in a guy 4 years out of high school at #15 overall should not be passed up.
Tyler Matzek – Prototypical high-upside LHP that would be a terrific draft pick by the Indians. He’s got velocity, potential for a great curveball, a great body and a very good delivery. He’s a potential ace that would undoubtedly serve as at least a very valuable trading asset while in the minors. Physically, everything you look for in a young arm.
Eric Arnett – I fear this is the type of guy the Indians will draft. There is little to no projection here – a ‘what you see is what you get’ guy. He has arm strength and should be able to withstand 200 IP at the major league level w/o a problem (very good delivery), but I see him as a 4 starter in the majors. Similar to Bryan Bullington, but didn’t have the slider that Bullington did when he was in college. He has size, an athletic delivery and good velocity. Nothing really pops out at me with him; he’s certainly a talented pitcher, but I think he’s a guy that will K 7 per 9/IP above A-ball. As far as relative value goes, I like his Hoosier teammate Matt Bashore (2nd-3rd round) more.
Matt Purke – The other top HS LHP, Purke is more projection than Matzek. His body type and looseness reminds me of Rich Hill (thin, narrow proportions, very loose left arm and can spin a breaking ball well). Durability might be a concern, but he has a good delivery. Purke doesn’t have the perfect proportions that Matzek does, but he is the better pitcher at this stage in the game. I would not be disappointed in this pick.
Michael Leake – I normally don’t like these types of guys, but I think Michael Leake can flat pitch. Although undersized, Leake has a good, compact delivery and should be more durable than his body suggests. I think he has the potential to be a crafty 2 or 3 starter in the major leagues b/c of his excellent pitchability. Would very much prefer him over other polished college RHP Eric Arnett.
Rex Brothers – No thanks, he looks like a flash in the pan to me. Bad body, not a good delivery. Not a prototypical SP prospect and I think you can get guys like him later on in the draft as later-round finds. Will probably end up in middle relief. Very high bust potential here.
James Paxton – Very interesting prospect. He’s probably a love him or hate him guy. He’s got easy velocity that can sit at 90-93 MPH, but even with the easy delivery he struggles with his command. His stuff can be a little bit flat with the lower arm slot, but he’s got the type of stuff to get strike outs above the a-ball level. Personally, I question his ability to command his stuff at this point in time, but the upside is quite intriguing. He’s not a must-get at 15 overall for me, but not a terrible pick. Patience would be key, which is why I don’t think the Indians take him.
If I had to guess, I would think the Indians draft either Eric Arnett or Michael Leake b/c they are the most polished, or the closest to the major leagues. I would prefer Leake over Arnett b/c I think his pitchability far surpasses Arnett’s and Leake’s lack of size is less of a concern than most would think. Arnett is just difficult for me to get excited about, and the Indians seem to like those kind of guys.
I’d love to see the Indians nab Scheppers or Matzek, but I think both will be off the board at 15. More reasonably, I would like to see Matt Purke b/c his upside is very intriguing or Michael Leake b/c his pitchability. We’ll see if the Indians even nab any of these guys I mention at all.
*NOTE – I think Georgia LHP Alex McCree would be a tremendous upside pick in the 5th round, perhaps even 4th round. If McCree gets under the right pitching coach and develops, he’s a 1st round type talent. I’d love to see the Indians take a chance on this project.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
