Will almost certainly be in the top 50 on my top 100 list.

He knows how to pitch and has a low 90’s FB with some life and a sharp power CB (though he can lose command of both pitches at times). The CU has improved since he was in Milwaukee. The big negatives are the unrefined CU, wavering command and his flyball tendencies (he works up in the zone a bit)… but you’re probably looking at a 3 starter at least, with perhaps a chance to be better. I think he would be even more impressive if you saw him in person and the negatives are subtle things that aren’t hurting him now as much as they will in the bigs.

It was a difficult choice between Odorizzi and Montgomery for me (and they won’t rank far apart on my top 100), but Montgomery’s inconsistency this year and some mechanical issues (doesn’t repeat mechanics that well nor finish his delivery well and his release point drifts) left me favoring Odorizzi slightly.

I got it right in the article, at least!

Thanks, fixed now.

We are thin on the IF corners. We are thin on the catching side of things.

And are you looking at the pitch from behind or are you watching it come in? If you’re watching it come in it’s 2-8 or slurvy…. if you’re behind it’s 10-4 good buddy.

Isn’t he not expected to sniff the bigs for 5-6 years?

Actually, I’m glad to have a list to peruse. Early Christmas holiday present.

My approach to rankings is that of the style “which player/prospect would I rather have.” The tools of Hernandez and Mondesi are exciting enough for me to take them over “safer” players – the idea that any prospects are “safe” is a fallacy IMHO, anyway. It hard enough to predict the performances of major league players 3 years out… 22 year olds don’t suddenly reach a level where a light goes on and we can suddenly be confident projecting them. I’m also not big on the idea players need to “prove” themselves in the minors. People increasingly seem to act as if prospects should be ranked on their minor league performance – as if we were grading their results and not very much worried about their process. Following/judging prospects is about projecting what they will become as MLB players, not about who had the best batting line at AA. Further, what players do as amateurs is relevant. I see a good amount of amateur ball and I can tell you its the same game. Draftees/signees aren’t blank slates when they enter a MLB org. Scouts have seen these players and have a good concept of what they are and ideas about what they will become. So… to sum up this rambling mess of a paragraph (sorry), yes, the rankings of these IFAs are based largely on projections/scouting reports BUT I think it’s entirely appropriate to do so!

Another justification is that I think if you saw Elier Hernandez and Christian Colon play on a field together you’d comfortably come away more impressed with Hernandez. Or at least, trained/professional talent evaluators would, if not the average fan. Elier got really good reviews from people I’ve talked to. He’s a very talented ballplayer. I understand the Mondesi ranking would surprise some people but a couple people I talked to were very impressed with him and I really like what I’m hearing. He’s interchangeable with some of the guys who just missed the list too, and I wouldn’t frown upon taking someone like Lough, Robinson or Arguelles over him… That’s not crazy, but Mondesi would be my preference.

He didn’t play many games in KS HS baseball.