Team Dynasty

MLB Pipeline Top 100 Prospects

Recommended Posts

I'm a big Brujan fan. I've seen him ranked a few other places, and everything I've read on him indicates he should be in the 75-125 range. I can't wait to see what he does in the upper minors.

I'm not sure any IFA that hasn't played full-season ball should be ranked #13, or anywhere in the top-25 for that matter. They're so far away when they sign and so much can happen between short-season leagues and full-season leagues. Track record-wise, IFAs are so highly volatile to project until they reach full-season ball. I love Wander Franco - but I'd feel more comfortable seeing him in the 26-50 range.

On that note, I think Robinson's omission is justifiable. I know, he tore up rookie ball. But the ~30% K rate is still enough of a red flag that I'm good with him missing the top-100. He very well could be that rare talent that can overcome that at the major league level - but no matter how we slice it, it's still a very small sample size in the grand scheme of things. Certainly enough to get excited, though.

The big miss, for me, is Trevor Larnach. I get it, he doesn't have plus tools across the board but he's got a high floor with 4 above-average tools. He's been widely praised for having an advanced approach, and being a college bat, has a good shot of advancing quickly - something that feels weird saying about a Twins prospect.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good call on the Larnach miss. I somewhat agree with you on Franco. I get the “He hasn’t proven anything yet”. A lot of sites have him ranked higher purely on potential.

 

Whats your thoughts on Jazz Chisholm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, txrngr34 said:

 

I'm not sure any IFA that hasn't played full-season ball should be ranked #13, or anywhere in the top-25 for that matter. They're so far away when they sign and so much can happen between short-season leagues and full-season leagues. Track record-wise, IFAs are so highly volatile to project until they reach full-season ball. I love Wander Franco - but I'd feel more comfortable seeing him in the 26-50 range.

.

 

I think that 16 year old J2 players should not be ranked before coming stateside.  See Kevin Maitan.  However, it was really unprecedented how good Franco was in the Appalachian League at 17, which is a big difference from the DSL.

 

Franco is two years younger than Vlad and was 351/418/1,004.  Two years ago Vlad was 271/359/808 in the Appy League.  Franco also could stick at SS.  I expect Franco to be the number one prospect next year and would be shocked if he was outside of the top three. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bigbossman said:

No Nate Lowe?? 

 

He had one if the best seasons ever as player 23yr old or younger last year! 

 

https://www.pitcherlist.com/going-deep-the-lowe-down-on-the-rays-next-great-slugger/

He's a 1B, takes a special hitter to be a top prospect at 1b, he's already 23 years old.  Will turn 24 in July...has some power but not top of the line power..so he could be a Brandon Belt, Yonder Alonso type guy.

 

2017 he was horrible against lefties, 2018 he was good.  Small sample sizes but he could need to platoon.

Edited by murraygd13
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2019 at 12:22 AM, txrngr34 said:

I'm a big Brujan fan. I've seen him ranked a few other places, and everything I've read on him indicates he should be in the 75-125 range. I can't wait to see what he does in the upper minors.

I'm not sure any IFA that hasn't played full-season ball should be ranked #13, or anywhere in the top-25 for that matter. They're so far away when they sign and so much can happen between short-season leagues and full-season leagues. Track record-wise, IFAs are so highly volatile to project until they reach full-season ball. I love Wander Franco - but I'd feel more comfortable seeing him in the 26-50 range.

On that note, I think Robinson's omission is justifiable. I know, he tore up rookie ball. But the ~30% K rate is still enough of a red flag that I'm good with him missing the top-100. He very well could be that rare talent that can overcome that at the major league level - but no matter how we slice it, it's still a very small sample size in the grand scheme of things. Certainly enough to get excited, though.

The big miss, for me, is Trevor Larnach. I get it, he doesn't have plus tools across the board but he's got a high floor with 4 above-average tools. He's been widely praised for having an advanced approach, and being a college bat, has a good shot of advancing quickly - something that feels weird saying about a Twins prospect.

I got the pleasure of watching Brujan play.  He is a great player. 

Edited by cdd10
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good list, mostly safe placements...

All these lists are a fun snapshot, but they all get that homogenized feel too, being group agg lists...

To me nothing tops the Klaw list that will drop tomorrow.

Though I love the individual write-ups and stats that pipeline provides...really allows you to draw a lot of your own conclusions on guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2019 at 8:19 PM, Team Dynasty said:

Thought Wander Franco was a little low.

 

yeah, i noticed a couple days ago that wander was actually lower in MLB's top 10 shortstop prospects list (#5) than he was in BA's overall top 100 (#4)

 

but he's in a place where there's gonna be a fairly wide range on the ranks, because he's been seen stateside enough to where some scouts will say "this is the guy" and run him way up, while it's still happened so fast that others want to see a little more and play it cool

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2019 at 11:57 PM, Team Dynasty said:

Whats your thoughts on Jazz Chisholm?

Personally, I have a really hard time buying into his power given his mediocre hit tool and penchant for swinging and missing. I feel like his absolute ceiling is Dan Uggla - and even that might be a stretch. More realistically, for fantasy purposes, I see him as useful as Hechavarria but with some power potential - but not defensively, therefore making it unlikely he has as long a career. But hey, the kid's got a cool name.

Might sound harsh for a kid that's gotten a lot of love lately, but a moderate ceiling with low floor and high risk is not a fantasy gamble I plan to make.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎01‎/‎30‎/‎2019 at 12:31 AM, txrngr34 said:

More realistically, for fantasy purposes, I see him as useful as Hechavarria but with some power potential - but not defensively, therefore making it unlikely he has as long a career.

Might sound harsh for a kid that's gotten a lot of love lately, but a moderate ceiling with low floor and high risk is not a fantasy gamble I plan to make.

 

Jazz has 55 grade tools across the board, with the exception of hit tool of 50 right now.  Yes the K's are there, but remember Acuna had a 31% K-rate when he was in Class A+ and has thrived with 25% in MLB. If you aren't willing to gamble guys like Jazz, then who are you going to gamble on?  This sounds like a good gamble to me.  But to each his own

 

Arizona Fall League 2018

Jazz was on fire coming into the AFL, hitting .346 with six homers and 21 RBIs over the last 25 games of the season. As only a part-time player in the AFL, he hit .442/.489/.767 hitting three homers and stealing seven bases in 43 at-bats. By the way, he only struck out eight times, showing that improvement in plate discipline we were hoping for. Compare this to Peter Alonso who led the league in homers – Jazz paced for more home runs than Alonso who struck out 28.6% of the time. Keston Hiura was named the MVP of the AFL and, with a 70-grade hit tool, he hit .323 with five homers, seven steals, and 33 RBIs across 96 at-bats. Keston struck out 29.2% of the time. Jazz Chisholm only struck out 18.6% of the time this fall. If you extrapolate Chisholm’s stats (essentially double them) to a full-time player, he’s the MVP of the league and it’s not even close. He’d be joining the likes of the previous two MVPs, Gleyber Torres in 2016 and Ronald Acuna in 2017.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheTruth024 said:

 

Jazz has 55 grade tools across the board, with the exception of hit tool of 50 right now.  Yes the K's are there, but remember Acuna had a 31% K-rate when he was in Class A+ and has thrived with 25% in MLB. If you aren't willing to gamble guys like Jazz, then who are you going to gamble on?  This sounds like a good gamble to me.  But to each his own

 

Arizona Fall League 2018

Jazz was on fire coming into the AFL, hitting .346 with six homers and 21 RBIs over the last 25 games of the season. As only a part-time player in the AFL, he hit .442/.489/.767 hitting three homers and stealing seven bases in 43 at-bats. By the way, he only struck out eight times, showing that improvement in plate discipline we were hoping for. Compare this to Peter Alonso who led the league in homers – Jazz paced for more home runs than Alonso who struck out 28.6% of the time. Keston Hiura was named the MVP of the AFL and, with a 70-grade hit tool, he hit .323 with five homers, seven steals, and 33 RBIs across 96 at-bats. Keston struck out 29.2% of the time. Jazz Chisholm only struck out 18.6% of the time this fall. If you extrapolate Chisholm’s stats (essentially double them) to a full-time player, he’s the MVP of the league and it’s not even close. He’d be joining the likes of the previous two MVPs, Gleyber Torres in 2016 and Ronald Acuna in 2017.

 

Good stuff there.

The lack of consensus on his scouting grades is scary. For example, fangraphs has him with a FV 40 Hit and FV 55 Power while MLBpipeline has those at 50 and 40 respectively - of course after last year's showing I'd expect those to change somewhat. I'm not sure who has him with four 55-grade tools but, if so, wow that seems mighty generous.

The lack of pedigree and consistency, coupled with his suspect defense just doesn't scream top-100 to me, that's all. Is he worth a gamble? Sure - depending on your situation. My situations don't warrant it though. I think if you picked him up prior to 2018 for nothing, that's a good investment - but I did that in 1 league and as soon as he started getting some hype I used him as piece to push a trade through.

Somebody asked my thoughts on him, so I shared. I'm not trying to bang on the kid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, txrngr34 said:

I'm not sure who has him with four 55-grade tools but, if so, wow that seems mighty generous.

 

MLB.com in their recent top 100 rankings (Jazz #60)

Scouting grades: Hit: 50 | Power: 55 | Run: 55 | Arm: 55 | Field: 55 | Overall: 55

 

Its all good though, not ripping on your opinion.  Im just giving the other side.  The K's are an issue no doubt.  Hopefully for the people who own him he brings that rate down a bit.  Otherwise the above average tools he does have will be almost useless.  The AFL small sample size gives hope

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BA has Jazz with 50 Hit, 60 Power, 55 Speed, 55 Defense, 55 Arm.  KL had him as a 25 homer 25 steal guy with a high avg and meh OBP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, TheTruth024 said:

 

MLB.com in their recent top 100 rankings (Jazz #60)

Scouting grades: Hit: 50 | Power: 55 | Run: 55 | Arm: 55 | Field: 55 | Overall: 55

 

Its all good though, not ripping on your opinion.  Im just giving the other side.  The K's are an issue no doubt.  Hopefully for the people who own him he brings that rate down a bit.  Otherwise the above average tools he does have will be almost useless.  The AFL small sample size gives hope

Hit tool is the hardest tool elevators can judge properly. I would need to know WHY he has that hit tool grade as its a very complex thing.

 

Edit: Not sure why you puzzled its a fact the Hit tool is hard to judge. Because a lot factors are not really agreed upon as to things can be taught, vs things that are inherit.

Edited by Slatykamora
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2019 at 9:22 PM, txrngr34 said:

I'm a big Brujan fan. I've seen him ranked a few other places, and everything I've read on him indicates he should be in the 75-125 range. I can't wait to see what he does in the upper minors.

I'm not sure any IFA that hasn't played full-season ball should be ranked #13, or anywhere in the top-25 for that matter. They're so far away when they sign and so much can happen between short-season leagues and full-season leagues. Track record-wise, IFAs are so highly volatile to project until they reach full-season ball. I love Wander Franco - but I'd feel more comfortable seeing him in the 26-50 range.

On that note, I think Robinson's omission is justifiable. I know, he tore up rookie ball. But the ~30% K rate is still enough of a red flag that I'm good with him missing the top-100. He very well could be that rare talent that can overcome that at the major league level - but no matter how we slice it, it's still a very small sample size in the grand scheme of things. Certainly enough to get excited, though.

The big miss, for me, is Trevor Larnach. I get it, he doesn't have plus tools across the board but he's got a high floor with 4 above-average tools. He's been widely praised for having an advanced approach, and being a college bat, has a good shot of advancing quickly - something that feels weird saying about a Twins prospect.

 

Larnach has to be one of the first included after one of the present graduates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Slatykamora said:

Hit tool is the hardest tool elevators can judge properly. I would need to know WHY he has that hit tool grade as its a very complex thing.

 

Edit: Not sure why you puzzled its a fact the Hit tool is hard to judge. Because a lot factors are not really agreed upon as to things can be taught, vs things that are inherit.

 

I just dont understand what you are getting at.  Why do you need to know why?  If you dont like the scouts 50 rating, then dont invest in the player.  Its a very complex thing, but so are all prospect rankings.  If one 50 hit rating is different from another 50 hit rating, then by all means stay away.  The truth is,  No one will know how good a player will be until they actually reach the majors.  Most of us in here dont know anything about these players except what the scouting reports say and what we read online, or see a couple of video clips on twitter.  If you follow around the player and can give a specific details about a 50 grade hit tool better than BA or MLB, then I will listen.  To draw it out and say you need to know a specific kind of 50 grade hit tool just seems confusing to me.  The dude is 21.  The type of hit tool will play itself out in the next year or 2 as he climbs into the upper levels of the minors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, TheTruth024 said:

 

I just dont understand what you are getting at.  Why do you need to know why?  If you dont like the scouts 50 rating, then dont invest in the player.  Its a very complex thing, but so are all prospect rankings.  If one 50 hit rating is different from another 50 hit rating, then by all means stay away.  The truth is,  No one will know how good a player will be until they actually reach the majors.  Most of us in here dont know anything about these players except what the scouting reports say and what we read online, or see a couple of video clips on twitter.  If you follow around the player and can give a specific details about a 50 grade hit tool better than BA or MLB, then I will listen.  To draw it out and say you need to know a specific kind of 50 grade hit tool just seems confusing to me.  The dude is 21.  The type of hit tool will play itself out in the next year or 2 as he climbs into the upper levels of the minors. 

Scouting reports are pretty common, no? They highlight what a player does. Bat speed, swing path, barrel control, Pitch recongtion, plate coverage, etc etc.

 

Reading an actual scouting report is more useful then a single composite number. The tool grades are just the simplification of what they see. 

Edited by Slatykamora

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.