Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 203

Thread: Fangraphs Top 100 Prospects

  1. #161
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Oklahomabrave View Post
    The worst thing about those drafts was the philosophy. We never would play the slot game and sign people to over slot bonuses which led us to miss out on higher end talent.
    also the philosophy of drafting low-ceiling guys in the 1st round.
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  2. #162
    Sabermetric Slut
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Your Mom's Basement
    Posts
    29,668
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,721
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,744
    Thanked in
    5,837 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Super View Post
    we've touched on this, but one of the years we didn't have a 1st round pick because he decided signing a 65 year old glavine was more valuable. so if anything that's a massive mark against him.
    Sometimes those first round picks are worth giving up when you acquire a first ballot HOF talent

  3. #163
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by thewupk View Post
    Sometimes those first round picks are worth giving up when you acquire a first ballot HOF talent
    a joke?
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  4. #164
    Sabermetric Slut
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Your Mom's Basement
    Posts
    29,668
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,721
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,744
    Thanked in
    5,837 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Super View Post
    a joke?
    ...yes...

  5. #165
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    8,025
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,951
    Thanked in
    1,360 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by thewupk View Post
    ...yes...
    tbh it's tough to tell at times with you...
    "Well, you’ll learn soon enough that this was a massive red wave landslide." - thethe on the 2020 election that trump lost bigly

    “I can’t fix my life, but I can fix the world.” - sturg

  6. #166
    Sabermetric Slut
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Your Mom's Basement
    Posts
    29,668
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,721
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,744
    Thanked in
    5,837 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Super View Post
    tbh it's tough to tell at times with you...
    I like to leave things ambiguous

    But I've always been against wasting 1st round picks on FA's except for specific situations

  7. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to thewupk For This Useful Post:

    Evad (02-12-2018), jpx7 (02-12-2018), Super (02-12-2018), Tapate50 (02-13-2018)

  8. #167
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    Well, I guess we got our answer on Pache. Kiley really does think of him that highly.
    Ivan at TC wrote a pretty excellent article demonstrating why the #37 ranking of Pache is a bit silly:

    https://www.talkingchop.com/2018/2/1...ade-indulgence

    The only nit I would pick with this research is that he didn't account for age in any way. What Pache did as an 18-year old is obviously more impressive than a 20 year old doing the same thing, but he seems to have lumped all players of all ages into that 2,751 player sample.

    The jist of the article is what we all already know: even if Pache's speed and defense are amazing, he still has to hit enough to warrant a place in a MLB lineup.

    Considering that historical players with his current power (ISO < 0.070) coupled with his other current skills (good walk rate, good speed, almost average overall offensive production as a result) only reach the MLB level approximately as frequently as any random A ball player (~25%), it makes almost no sense to conclude that Pache is anymore likely to reach the majors than any of the other countless versions of the "speedy guy who needs to learn how to hit" we see all the time in every organization.

    Ivan's money quote:

    "once your ISO is that low, perhaps your secondary skills don’t help much. That isn’t to say it’s hopeless… just that there’s no real difference between your generic A-ball player and your Pache-offense-type A-ball player in terms of outcomes."

    Pache is a good prospect, but ranking him #37 overall screams Braves homerism. Hitting is the hardest thing to do in any sport, so comments like "he just needs to learn to hit" is a fairly dumb thing to say.

  9. #168
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    Ivan at TC wrote a pretty excellent article demonstrating why the #37 ranking of Pache is a bit silly:

    https://www.talkingchop.com/2018/2/1...ade-indulgence

    The only nit I would pick with this research is that he didn't account for age in any way. What Pache did as an 18-year old is obviously more impressive than a 20 year old doing the same thing, but he seems to have lumped all players of all ages into that 2,751 player sample.

    The jist of the article is what we all already know: even if Pache's speed and defense are amazing, he still has to hit enough to warrant a place in a MLB lineup.

    Considering that historical players with his current power (ISO < 0.070) coupled with his other current skills (good walk rate, good speed, almost average overall offensive production as a result) only reach the MLB level approximately as frequently as any random A ball player (~25%), it makes almost no sense to conclude that Pache is anymore likely to reach the majors than any of the other countless versions of the "speedy guy who needs to learn how to hit" we see all the time in every organization.

    Ivan's money quote:

    "once your ISO is that low, perhaps your secondary skills don’t help much. That isn’t to say it’s hopeless… just that there’s no real difference between your generic A-ball player and your Pache-offense-type A-ball player in terms of outcomes."

    Pache is a good prospect, but ranking him #37 overall screams Braves homerism. Hitting is the hardest thing to do in any sport, so comments like "he just needs to learn to hit" is a fairly dumb thing to say.
    I don't think you're going to get much argument from anyone that 37 is probably high and at least somewhat homerish. But Keith Law also put him top 60, right? He's top 100 at least by most, so it's not absolutely insane.

    And that's a really good article. But it begins with the premise that offense alone is what gets you to the majors. There's no doubt he will have to hit at a certain level to make the majors, and certainly to start at the MLB level. But you can deal with a lower offensive profile, even in a starting role, when you have the kind of defense and arm that Pache apparently has. Yet that analysis focuses solely on offense.

    I don't have the time to look into each of those players that fell inside the study to know how many of them had defense close to Pache's level, but I think it's reasonable to say that if they don't have Pache's defensive profile, he will have an easier time making the majors than they did. So yes, he has to make the majors for his defense and arm to carry, and to do that, he will have to hit at a certain level. But it isn't offense alone that will get him to the majors in the first place. He won't have to hit as much as the next guy to get to the majors because he also brings elite defense/arm.

    Kiermaier, who they mention only to say that he fell outside the study, is probably a good comparison. Kiermaier brings elite defense. He also posted worse offensive numbers in A-ball...at age 21. Yes, his offense improved the next year as he progressed through the minors, and it certainly had to, no question. But he had an easier time getting to the majors because of his defense. The same will be true for Pache. That does not mean he definitely will get to the majors, just that you can't view solely offense even when evaluating his chance of making the majors.

    And it's obviously all about projection. Pache posted a roughly average batting line in A-ball. That's not great. But he was 18. That's certainly a lot better. And some project him to hit pretty well, based on what he currently offers. That's better still.

    That's a good article, but it doesn't really help much.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to smootness For This Useful Post:

    jpx7 (02-13-2018)

  11. #169
    It's OVER 5,000! Tapate50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    24,259
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    9,058
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,693
    Thanked in
    3,881 Posts
    I think instead of nitpicking the rankings to death, the takeaway should be way more general for an 18 yr old.

    As in “a lot of people getting paid to do this think Pache can be a very good player”. Then snuggle up with your blankie at night knowing we have a fairly highly thought of prospect
    Ivermectin Man

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Tapate50 For This Useful Post:

    clvclv (02-13-2018), Hudson2 (02-13-2018), Super (02-13-2018)

  13. #170
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    7,772
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    270
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,491
    Thanked in
    1,150 Posts
    I wouldn't put Pache any higher than 42nd.

  14. #171
    Sabermetric Slut
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Your Mom's Basement
    Posts
    29,668
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,721
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8,744
    Thanked in
    5,837 Posts
    In the end it doesn't matter and the difference is minimal but I would have Pache as a mid level 50 FV guy.

  15. #172
    It's OVER 5,000! Tapate50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    24,259
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    9,058
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,693
    Thanked in
    3,881 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Southcack77 View Post
    I wouldn't put Pache any higher than 42nd.
    44th for me, TOPS
    Ivermectin Man

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Tapate50 For This Useful Post:

    Southcack77 (02-13-2018)

  17. #173
    10 yr, $185 million Extension
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    4,760
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    981
    Thanked in
    766 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    I don't think you're going to get much argument from anyone that 37 is probably high and at least somewhat homerish. But Keith Law also put him top 60, right? He's top 100 at least by most, so it's not absolutely insane.

    And that's a really good article. But it begins with the premise that offense alone is what gets you to the majors. There's no doubt he will have to hit at a certain level to make the majors, and certainly to start at the MLB level. But you can deal with a lower offensive profile, even in a starting role, when you have the kind of defense and arm that Pache apparently has. Yet that analysis focuses solely on offense.

    I don't have the time to look into each of those players that fell inside the study to know how many of them had defense close to Pache's level, but I think it's reasonable to say that if they don't have Pache's defensive profile, he will have an easier time making the majors than they did. So yes, he has to make the majors for his defense and arm to carry, and to do that, he will have to hit at a certain level. But it isn't offense alone that will get him to the majors in the first place. He won't have to hit as much as the next guy to get to the majors because he also brings elite defense/arm.

    Kiermaier, who they mention only to say that he fell outside the study, is probably a good comparison. Kiermaier brings elite defense. He also posted worse offensive numbers in A-ball...at age 21. Yes, his offense improved the next year as he progressed through the minors, and it certainly had to, no question. But he had an easier time getting to the majors because of his defense. The same will be true for Pache. That does not mean he definitely will get to the majors, just that you can't view solely offense even when evaluating his chance of making the majors.

    And it's obviously all about projection. Pache posted a roughly average batting line in A-ball. That's not great. But he was 18. That's certainly a lot better. And some project him to hit pretty well, based on what he currently offers. That's better still.

    That's a good article, but it doesn't really help much.
    I think the projection is aggressive. But Klaw has been consistent in what he likes and what he values.

    Saying Pache needs to learn to hit is inaccurate. He can hit. He can especially hit if you account for age. What he has to do is drive the ball and hit for more power.

    The pro Pache folks think his frame will allow him to grow into power and stay an elite defender. Clearly we know power is not directly correlated to size. We also do not know if the juiced ball continues.

    What Braves fans should want to see is a Pache that starts getting more extra base hits. If he can have an avg iso then he is a top guy.

  18. #174
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    I don't think you're going to get much argument from anyone that 37 is probably high and at least somewhat homerish. But Keith Law also put him top 60, right? He's top 100 at least by most, so it's not absolutely insane.

    And that's a really good article. But it begins with the premise that offense alone is what gets you to the majors. There's no doubt he will have to hit at a certain level to make the majors, and certainly to start at the MLB level. But you can deal with a lower offensive profile, even in a starting role, when you have the kind of defense and arm that Pache apparently has. Yet that analysis focuses solely on offense.

    I don't have the time to look into each of those players that fell inside the study to know how many of them had defense close to Pache's level, but I think it's reasonable to say that if they don't have Pache's defensive profile, he will have an easier time making the majors than they did. So yes, he has to make the majors for his defense and arm to carry, and to do that, he will have to hit at a certain level. But it isn't offense alone that will get him to the majors in the first place. He won't have to hit as much as the next guy to get to the majors because he also brings elite defense/arm.

    Kiermaier, who they mention only to say that he fell outside the study, is probably a good comparison. Kiermaier brings elite defense. He also posted worse offensive numbers in A-ball...at age 21. Yes, his offense improved the next year as he progressed through the minors, and it certainly had to, no question. But he had an easier time getting to the majors because of his defense. The same will be true for Pache. That does not mean he definitely will get to the majors, just that you can't view solely offense even when evaluating his chance of making the majors.

    And it's obviously all about projection. Pache posted a roughly average batting line in A-ball. That's not great. But he was 18. That's certainly a lot better. And some project him to hit pretty well, based on what he currently offers. That's better still.

    That's a good article, but it doesn't really help much.
    In Part 2, he summarized his methodology as: "we looked at the value of Cristian Pache as a player based on his scouting grades, where we determined that he was probably going to be pretty valuable based on his speed and defense, if he were able to make the majors. We then followed that up with a cursory examination of his likelihood of making the majors by looking into hitters with similar A-ball stats and how their careers progressed."

    I agree with you that it wasn't sound logic to directly link Pache's chances of reaching the majors to that group of 2700+ AA players.

    What he should have done is say:

    1. Pache needs a 80+ wRC+ to be an average or better everyday player based on the first chart he posted.
    2. Here is the likelihood of players who hit like Pache producing a wRC+ in the majors.
    3. Accounted for age since Pache did this as an 18 year old.

    Now, it might be logical to assume from those statements that the group of A ball players who made the majors are also the same group of players who posted an 80+ wRC+...or they wouldn't have reached the majors.

    He sort of said that in the sentence transitioning from Part 1 to Part 2: "he needs to manage a very paltry wRC+ to provide decent value. But can he even get there? That’s what really prompted this whole exercise."

    So I'm pretty sure he has concluded that anyone who "made the majors" could produce an 80+ wRC+, and I would tend to agree with that assumption.
    Last edited by Enscheff; 02-13-2018 at 12:15 PM.

  19. #175
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    7,772
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    270
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,491
    Thanked in
    1,150 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Russ2dollas View Post
    I think the projection is aggressive. But Klaw has been consistent in what he likes and what he values.

    Saying Pache needs to learn to hit is inaccurate. He can hit. He can especially hit if you account for age. What he has to do is drive the ball and hit for more power.

    The pro Pache folks think his frame will allow him to grow into power and stay an elite defender. Clearly we know power is not directly correlated to size. We also do not know if the juiced ball continues.

    What Braves fans should want to see is a Pache that starts getting more extra base hits. If he can have an avg iso then he is a top guy.

    If there is a pro-Pache set of people does that mean there is an anti-Pache set?

    I think we really just have a collective agreement that Pache has to hit better in the future than he did as an 18 year old in A ball.

    I think we knew that without exploring data sets of players who were for the most part significantly older than Pache when they compiled their stats. That does matter though perhaps it doesn't matter tremendously. Hard to say.

    Perhaps the data sets of 18 years old who spent a full season at A aren't big enough to tell us much. Perhaps they are. I'm guessing it was at least difficult to isolate?

  20. #176
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Enscheff View Post
    In Part 2, he summarized his methodology as: "we looked at the value of Cristian Pache as a player based on his scouting grades, where we determined that he was probably going to be pretty valuable based on his speed and defense, if he were able to make the majors. We then followed that up with a cursory examination of his likelihood of making the majors by looking into hitters with similar A-ball stats and how their careers progressed."

    I agree with you that it wasn't sound logic to directly link Pache's chances of reaching the majors to that group of 2700+ AA players.

    What he should have done is say:

    1. Pache needs a 80+ wRC+ to be an average or better everyday player based on the first chart he posted.
    2. Here is the likelihood of players who hit like Pache producing a wRC+ in the majors.
    3. Accounted for age since Pache did this as an 18 year old.

    Now, it might be logical to assume from those statements that the group of A ball players who made the majors are also the same group of players who posted an 80+ wRC+...or they wouldn't have reached the majors.

    He sort of said that in the sentence transitioning from Part 1 to Part 2: "he needs to manage a very paltry wRC+ to provide decent value. But can he even get there? That’s what really prompted this whole exercise."

    So I'm pretty sure he has concluded that anyone who "made the majors" could produce an 80+ wRC+, and I would tend to agree with that assumption.
    That may be pretty accurate as an assumption, but it still needs to be analyzed better than that.

    Anyway, it was a good article, and I agree with those who say that 37 is probably overly aggressive, but the bottom line is that Pache is someone we should be excited about. I think he's a good 2018 away from truly being a top 30-40 prospect.

  21. #177
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by thewupk View Post
    In the end it doesn't matter and the difference is minimal but I would have Pache as a mid level 50 FV guy.
    His floor is probably Billy Hamilton with less BsR value.

    That's a no-hit premium defender who takes up the last spot on the bench as a defensive replacement for a team with Matt Kemp in LF.

  22. #178
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    6,431
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    173
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,579
    Thanked in
    1,044 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Southcack77 View Post
    If there is a pro-Pache set of people does that mean there is an anti-Pache set?

    I think we really just have a collective agreement that Pache has to hit better in the future than he did as an 18 year old in A ball.

    I think we knew that without exploring data sets of players who were for the most part significantly older than Pache when they compiled their stats. That does matter though perhaps it doesn't matter tremendously. Hard to say.

    Perhaps the data sets of 18 years old who spent a full season at A aren't big enough to tell us much. Perhaps they are. I'm guessing it was at least difficult to isolate?
    He doesn't necessarily need to hit better than he did in A-ball. I mean, he does, in the sense that skill that produces his line in A-ball needs to be improved upon. But if he can maintain roughly league-average offense, or even somewhat below, as he progresses, he'll be just fine given his other tools. The fact that he produced that at 18 is a good sign.

    No one in their analysis produced their respective offensive line at 18. They were all older, most of them much older. It's clearly not very useful at all as a comparison group.

  23. #179
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    26,261
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10,000
    Thanked in
    6,108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    That may be pretty accurate as an assumption, but it still needs to be analyzed better than that.

    Anyway, it was a good article, and I agree with those who say that 37 is probably overly aggressive, but the bottom line is that Pache is someone we should be excited about. I think he's a good 2018 away from truly being a top 30-40 prospect.
    This is accurate. I think what we are seeing is prospect writers trying to "scoop" the next fast riser so they can say they were the first to tout the guy.

    If he doesn't hit in 2018 they just quietly drop him down the list into the 75-100 range. If he does start hitting they jump him into the Top 20 and make a huge deal about it.

  24. #180
    It's OVER 5,000!
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    7,772
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    270
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,491
    Thanked in
    1,150 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    He doesn't necessarily need to hit better than he did in A-ball. I mean, he does, in the sense that skill that produces his line in A-ball needs to be improved upon. But if he can maintain roughly league-average offense, or even somewhat below, as he progresses, he'll be just fine given his other tools. The fact that he produced that at 18 is a good sign.

    No one in their analysis produced their respective offensive line at 18. They were all older, most of them much older. It's clearly not very useful at all as a comparison group.

    Well, I think we can probably conclude his walk and k rates aren't going to translate well as he advances with his current skill set. His groundball success rate would figure to decline as defenses improve up the ladder and possibly as teams scout his tendencies.

Similar Threads

  1. Fangraphs Top 29 Braves Prospects
    By CJ9 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 12-20-2018, 11:42 AM
  2. New Fangraphs Top 131 Prospects
    By CJ9 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 149
    Last Post: 06-19-2018, 11:45 AM
  3. Fangraphs Top 32 Braves Prospects
    By CJ9 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 03-06-2018, 03:31 PM
  4. Fangraphs Top 100 Prospects
    By CJ9 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 195
    Last Post: 03-17-2017, 06:55 PM
  5. Fangraphs Top 32 Braves Prospects
    By CJ9 in forum 2023: Celebrating Our 10th Year Here
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 02-25-2017, 12:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •