they released 10 a day and I really enjoyed following this. I missed Friday, Saturday and Sunday so glad they organized this into one spot. Outside the slide show aspect of this, it really is a nice prospective of our depth and talent. Very 'homerism' but that is very much like myself, so I enjoyed it.
http://tomahawktake.com/2016/10/21/a...cts-full-list/
Last edited by bravesfanMatt; 10-24-2016 at 02:59 PM.
JohnAdcox (10-24-2016), Preacher (10-25-2016), UNCBlue012 (10-24-2016)
I bow before the time and patience Ben Chase took to this. Very little to argue here except for Minter being far too low.
Yeah, there are some things you could take issue with (like Whalen being 10th), but as I've said before, I respect the heck out of anyone willing to analyze and rank 100 prospects in one organization.Originally Posted by rico43
Whalen, Meneses, Tanner Murphy, and a few others are awfully high for my liking - but that's really just nit-picking (which will happen to everybody's list).
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
I love talking to Ben over on Talking Chop. I definitely don't agree with some of his opinions, but he has a very well thought out perspective and he's appreciably increased the amount of knowledge I have about our minors system.
Preacher (10-25-2016)
that was my take. For someone to take the time to write up that much on 100 different prospects was an incredible read. I don't care if you agree with the order, no one will agree with a top 100... but kudos for the effort and entertaining read!!
Preacher (10-25-2016)
Kudos to the guy who put this together, but I'm curious how he ranks these players.
Is this essentially a compiliation of public data mixed with his personal opinion?
I generally view prospect lists as an extension of scouting. If this guy actually has a scouting reach on all of these players then I'm really impressed.
He lives in Ohio, but worked with John Sickels and has contacts in the Braves scouting ranks, and among scouts in general. Watches a lot of tape as well. So the guys in the lower levels where there isn't as much video are probably gonna be graded more suspectly, which is to be expected.
Preacher (10-25-2016)
I'm glad you answered before me. He's not 100% in, but he's pretty darn close -- at least with a lot of these guys. Ben is awesome. I do question some of these rankings, but I love the aggressive view on Acuna. Not everyone sees him as highly as I do.
Preacher (10-25-2016)
I value his lists. There always seem to be a few head scratchers, but given that he's ranking 1-100, that's to be expected.
Preacher (10-25-2016)
I think by mid season the top 5 turns all position players.
Dansby, Ozzie, Maitan, Acuna, Riley, Peterson are about to bubble up to the top followed by Demerritte, Pache, and a couple others.
Dansby and maybe Ozzie will graduate.
Camargo at #75?
Doesen't Dansby lose prospect status by mid season? I can see all those guys shooting up the lists but as long as Allard is healthy he will make our top 5.
I believe so -- and unless he gets injured, I 100% agree on Allard. He'll be right there. If Matian proves himself and dominates, he'll be 1-3.
Yeah, I mean Dansby should have already graduated off prospect lists, honestly. And Albies almost certainly will. I could easily see Maitan, Acuna, and Riley up there, but I can't imagine they're all going to pass all of our pitching prospects, and I can't imagine Peterson will, either.
I mean, there is no definition of what a prospect is. Someone could create a prospect list and still have Kyle Schwarber on there if they really wanted to. But for the most part, it seems that the most popular rankings (BA, BP, etc.) take guys off once they're called up to stay. So again, Dansby should probably already be taken off lists.
While I agree with you that some will consider any young player with room to grow a prospect, I think the industry pretty generally agrees on using rookie eligibility as the cutoff.
Yah I get the argument for taking Swanson off, but I don't think you can if he's still considered a rookie.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote