Royals 2012 Top 15 Prospects & Discussion
Jeff Reese and I took a look at the Royals system over at Bullpen Banter. Still looking great despite the graduations, injuries and some sideways seasons.
6 months ago
alskor
31 comments
0 recs |
Comments
Odorizzi looks a little high
How much of a prospect is he?
BFIB
by tiquanunderwear on Dec 12, 2011 2:15 PM EST reply actions
He's a pretty good prospect.
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.
Might want to correct the rankings to show Montgomery is a LHP
by WURoyal on Dec 12, 2011 3:09 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Perhaps some of Montgomery's inconsistency is caused by a change in preparation.
He has resumed his long-toss program. I think that happened in August, but cannot be sure exactly.
He had restarted long-toss earlier in the season IIRC.
I believe he’d been long-tossing as early as June, but I may be mistaken.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at both Royals Review and Royalscentricity, pop culture at Inconsiderate Prick, SVU at Munch My Benson and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Dec 12, 2011 7:08 PM EST up reply actions
I touched on this in the article.
I think its a big factor. I know a number of the Royals pitching prospects weren’t thrilled with the old program and are delighted about the new one.
whered you get your info on the new pitching programs?
the long toss thing has been much discussed around these parts but i hadnt really seen that there was going to be too much of a change with regards to long tossing
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Dec 12, 2011 10:13 PM EST up reply actions
Heard a number of things.
Had a nice conversation with Greg Schaum, who runs the excellent pinetarpress.com, about it – he could probably tell you more than I could, but following it up I like what I’m hearing. I’m a big proponent of long toss.
LT has to be implemented.
Eiland is a LT guy from what I’ve read and Knapp is a whatever you think works for you type of guy from what I’ve read. But it’s not really a secret the teams that are consistently the top teams in their division are LT guys. Yanks, Sox, Rays, Cardinals, Rangers, Angels, to name a few. Teams that aren’t include Mets, KC, Astros… (selective picking there) but you get the idea.
Interesting.
Based on the top 15 according to them, we’re pretty stacked with corner outfielders and pitching. No catchers or first basemen in the top 15 (not that it matters much), and only two middle infielders, but they disagree on which one. Considering one is falling out of favor and the other is 16, the Royals need help.
Question:
Dwyer was healthy, but too often his command failed him. The stuff is still very impressive though – an overpowering fastball and a sharp 2-8 curve ball – and when the command is on, he’s tough to hit.
Because Dwyer throws with his left arm, do you mean a 10-4 curve ball?
Thought it was more of a true 12-6. Can’t we at least agree on 11-5!?!?!
by WURoyal on Dec 12, 2011 6:48 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
There is no need to change the value on the clock.
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.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure Jeff was doing the TV angle thing
Haha… Its not the first time (not that I “wil” complain!)
The list seems awfully bullish on some of this year's amateur signings.
alskor, What is the justification for such high rankings on Elier and especially Mondesi, since it seems as though these rankings especially are based almost entirely on projection from scouting reports with little to no game play from which to evaluate them?
Sporadically musing on the Royals at both Royals Review and Royalscentricity, pop culture at Inconsiderate Prick, SVU at Munch My Benson and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
Yeah, and Mondesi looks small for his frame, a bit runtish.
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.
He's barely 16.
That might actually be sooner than we can expect.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at both Royals Review and Royalscentricity, pop culture at Inconsiderate Prick, SVU at Munch My Benson and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Dec 12, 2011 9:08 PM EST up reply actions
Well, yes, its largely based off conversations I've had with scouts/people in baseball.
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.
I don't doubt that Elier Hernandez would impress more from a tools standpoint.
I actually wasn’t as surprised by his ranking as I was by Adalberto Mondesi’s. Obviously, everyone here wants him to be great. It’s just that there is so little to go on with the LA FAs, and the characterizations I keep hearing about the conditions that they’re being scouted in are so rough and projection is based on such raw information that many seem to err on the side of caution when making such lists.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at both Royals Review and Royalscentricity, pop culture at Inconsiderate Prick, SVU at Munch My Benson and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Dec 13, 2011 12:08 AM EST up reply actions
Obviously, this just seems to be an ideological/philosophical difference.
Which is fine. Upside versus likelihood of reaching the ceiling.
Sporadically musing on the Royals at both Royals Review and Royalscentricity, pop culture at Inconsiderate Prick, SVU at Munch My Benson and on Twitter at Old Man Duggan
by Old Man Duggan on Dec 13, 2011 12:09 AM EST up reply actions



















