Fangraphs Braves Prospect Rankings

[BeanieAntics]

The depth is solid, though after Pache and Waters, there is a real dearth of potential impact players. Scads of dudes who look like they may be good, solid roleplayers may well not keep us in the top 10 among systems. But the major league team in that instance would be young and deep and buy us a couple of years to start refreshing the system.

Yeah last year's draft strategy was to get a few lower cost college guys at the top who can help us sooner, and then use the remaining money to go ham on those high risk high schools or community college kids who have 1 or 2 flashy tools that give them high upside long term. I think the hope is that Shea and Braden can help soon while we can have a top prospect or two emerge out of guys like Harris, Grissom, Backstrom, Paolini, or Tyler Owens. I wasn't a fan of the strategy at the time, but I can see the logic behind it.

[BeanieAntics]

I seriously doubt we are a top 10 after Wright Anderson Pache and Waters. Not unless a few fringe guys become potential impact the prospects. After those big four it is mostly average to above average guys with no one being a top 50 type of guy.

We would likely be in the 15-20 range if we didn't have Pache, Anderson, or Waters. Worse if we also didn't have Wright. We aren't exactly thin in the back end because we do have a plethora of young players with flashy tools and upside, but we don't have much of a track record among almost any of those guys. But I do think we'll have at least 1-2 impact prospects emerge out of that group of 35-40 FVs under the age of 22.

[Super]

We would likely be in the 15-20 range if we didn't have Pache, Anderson, or Waters. Worse if we also didn't have Wright. We aren't exactly thin in the back end because we do have a plethora of young players with flashy tools and upside, but we don't have much of a track record among almost any of those guys. But I do think we'll have at least 1-2 impact prospects emerge out of that group of 35-40 FVs under the age of 22.

yeah, the farm is in a weird spot because of that draft strategy. i think highly of Langeliers and Shewmake tho, and like you said if 1 or 2 of the lower guys emerge i think you're looking at 3-4 really solid prospects again. but i think 1 or 2 of them emerging is a pretty large "if."

[Carp]

I seriously doubt we are a top 10 after Wright Anderson Pache and Waters. Not unless a few fringe guys become potential impact the prospects. After those big four it is mostly average to above average guys with no one being a top 50 type of guy.

I'd say it's pretty likely at least one or two prospects make some major moves up prospect lists. Contreras is a 50 FV rated prospect right now, so he's likely pushing the top 100 list if he isn't already there. And probably someone among our 45 rated FV group of Muller, Shoemake, Lanageliers, and Davidson will break through as well. Remember that Wilson and Waters were no where near a top 100 prospect this time 2 years ago, then shot up lists throughout the year.

[BeanieAntics]

yeah, the farm is in a weird spot because of that draft strategy. i think highly of Langeliers and Shewmake tho, and like you said if 1 or 2 of the lower guys emerge i think you're looking at 3-4 really solid prospects again. but i think 1 or 2 of them emerging is a pretty large "if."

It is, but I think its a smaller if than it would be with your traditional high school players taken in those later rounds. Some of those guys were pretty highly thought of and required significant signing bonuses to pull in to the draft class. Guys like Makhi Backstrom, Kadon Morton, Joey Estes, Tyler Owens, and Stephen Paolini signed deals that were very high for where they were drafted. I also really like Michael Harris and think he has a chance to be the best player in our entire draft class long term.

[clvclv]

I've softened on Shewmake a bit. He has a great hit tool and excellent defensive versatility. I think there's a good chance he ends up being a guy that sees close to a starter level number of ABs without ever really having a permanent home on the diamond. Those kind of guys have excellent value in today's game. The more I've thought about the value of elite super-utility types, the more I've come to be okay with Shewmake.

I still don't see him sticking as a full time starter at short. He's 6-4 and 190. If he stays that wiry, he could stick there. But how nimble will he be if he puts on 30 pounds? His frame could easily carry 220 or even 230. It's just very difficult to be a fulltime SS at that size.

I think Shewmake adds more bulk and outgrows being a fulltime SS. Instead, I see him getting 500+ ABs a year being shoehorned in wherever he's needed. With him you could probably platoon guys who play different positions. Imagine platooning a right handed hitting second baseman and a lefthanded left fielder with Shewmake playing left against lefties and second against righthanders.

Correa - 6'4"/215
Seager - 6'4"/215
Crawford - 6'2"/227
Machado - 6'3"/215
Gregorius - 6'3"/205
Bogaerts - 6'1"/210
Story - 6'2"/214
Polanco - 5'11"/200
Torres - 6'1"/200

Doesn't mean Shewmake sticks, but the position isn't just for the little guys anymore. On top of those guys, Royce Lewis is 6'2"/200, Bobby Witt, Kieboom, and Nico Hoerner are either over 6'0" and/or 200 pounds - are they going to have to move off of the position too?

Shewmake doesn't really sound like one of those guys that's suddenly going to pack on another 30 pounds - even the BA report mentions "While he has a projectable frame one would typically project for increased power, Shewmake was lanky throughout his college career and struggled to put on weight."

Considering our situation if he hits he's going to really fit perfectly as that super-sub, but expecting he's going to need to move because of his size is a little shortsighted - I'd prefer to actually see him play first.

[cajunrevenge]

We are also likely to be losing prospects mid season in trades. Probably the ones I like such as Cruz, Ynoa, and Muller.

[striker42]

Correa - 6'4"/215
Seager - 6'4"/215
Crawford - 6'2"/227
Machado - 6'3"/215
Gregorius - 6'3"/205
Bogaerts - 6'1"/210
Story - 6'2"/214
Polanco - 5'11"/200
Torres - 6'1"/200

Doesn't mean Shewmake sticks, but the position isn't just for the little guys anymore. On top of those guys, Royce Lewis is 6'2"/200, Bobby Witt, Kieboom, and Nico Hoerner are either over 6'0" and/or 200 pounds - are they going to have to move off of the position too?

Shewmake doesn't really sound like one of those guys that's suddenly going to pack on another 30 pounds - even the BA report mentions "While he has a projectable frame one would typically project for increased power, Shewmake was lanky throughout his college career and struggled to put on weight."

Considering our situation if he hits he's going to really fit perfectly as that super-sub, but expecting he's going to need to move because of his size is a little shortsighted - I'd prefer to actually see him play first.

I think several of those guys on your list will slide over to third or move to first before long (Machado already has moved to third). A guy who is 6-4, 215 and 25 or under can usually play SS. But as they age and (usually) put on more weight they lose a step and have to move off short. It doesn't always happen, but the odds are usually against someone that big sticking at that position fulltime.

I've maintained if he stays his whip thin self, he has a better chance of sticking at short. And you might be right that he'll never bulk up. While that would let him stay at short it would also limit his power. So I'd probably rather him bulk up and lose the ability to play SS fulltime.

Ultimately, we arrive at the same point. He projects best as a super-sub. I think you lose a lot of value with him if you don't take advantage of his versatility. A guy who can play 7 positions (all except P and C) well enough to at least backup there and who has a starter quality hit tool is an extremely valuable commodity.

I could easily see the Braves platooning him with a right hander at a position like SS or LF and using Shewmake to spell other players anytime we face a lefty. It gets him starter ABs while taking advantage of his versatility.

[mqt]

I think several of those guys on your list will slide over to third or move to first before long (Machado already has moved to third). A guy who is 6-4, 215 and 25 or under can usually play SS. But as they age and (usually) put on more weight they lose a step and have to move off short. It doesn't always happen, but the odds are usually against someone that big sticking at that position fulltime.

I've maintained if he stays his whip thin self, he has a better chance of sticking at short. And you might be right that he'll never bulk up. While that would let him stay at short it would also limit his power. So I'd probably rather him bulk up and lose the ability to play SS fulltime.

Ultimately, we arrive at the same point. He projects best as a super-sub. I think you lose a lot of value with him if you don't take advantage of his versatility. A guy who can play 7 positions (all except P and C) well enough to at least backup there and who has a starter quality hit tool is an extremely valuable commodity.

I could easily see the Braves platooning him with a right hander at a position like SS or LF and using Shewmake to spell other players anytime we face a lefty. It gets him starter ABs while taking advantage of his versatility.

I think there’s a bit of “conventional wisdom” at play here. I’m not taking any position on Shewmake’s ability to stick at SS, but every year players get bigger, stronger and faster as the science behind nutrition and sports training improves. There have been similar changes in the NBA and NFL. Shewmake might not be the guy to break the mold, but I doubt the mold exists much longer.

[Metaphysicist]

Not to be too duplicative of clv, but they're plenty of tall guys who stick at SS for most of their careers (even Vizquel played a bunch of other positions in the later part of his career; that's how aging and the defensive spectrum work). I'm only including active younger guys who are reputedly solid defenders (sorry Bogaerts) and thus unlikely to be moved off any time soon. A probably non-exhaustive list.

Cal Ripken (6'4") - GG
Carlos Correa (6'4")
Corey Seager (6'4")

Troy Tulowhatizname (6'3") - GG
JETAH (6'3") - GG (lol)
A-Rod (6'3") - GG
Tony Kubek (6'3")
Ron Hansen (6'3")
Didi Gregorius (6'3")
Ian Desmond (6'3")
Andre Rogers (6'3")
Roy Smalley (6'3")
Bobby Crosby (6'3")
Virgil Stallcup (6'3")
Jordy Mercer (6'3")
Fernando Tatis, Jr. (6'3")

Davey Concepción (6'2") - GG
Simba (6'2") - GG
Yunel (6'2")
Nick Ahmed (6'2") - GG
Jhonny Peralta (6'2)
Tony Fernandez (6'2) - GG
Hanley Ramirez (6'2)
Brandon Crawford (6'2") - GG
Alexei Ramirez (6'2")
Trevor Story (6'2")
Trea Turner (6'2")
Buddy Kerr (6'2")
Marty Marion (6'2")
Gene Michael (6'2")
Darrel Chaney (6'2")
Johnny LeMaster (6'2")
Kevin Elster (6'2")
Ahmed Rosario (6'2")

Tons of 6'1" guys.

6'4" is definitely tall, but it probably above average for any position, not just SS. I think it's something of a tautology to say "but what if he gets too bulky?" You could say that about any SS prospect, regardless of their current size. What if Dansby puts on 30 pounds? If anything, Shewmake and his lanky self at least have room for some muscle. If he put on 25 pounds, he'd be at the same list weight as Corey Seager... a guy who still looks super lanky. Or the same list weight as Yunel was, but with 2 inches on him.

There is a good chance that any SS prospect moves off eventually, so I wouldn't be shocked if Shewmake does, but I don't think his size is a dispositive consideration.

[zbhargrove]

Yeah sorry, the argument that Shewmake may be too lanky/tall/big to stick at SS is ridiculous. There are frankly way too many examples currently and historically that say that's simply not true.

[Snowman]

Yeah sorry, the argument that Shewmake may be too lanky/tall/big to stick at SS is ridiculous. There are frankly way too many examples currently and historically that say that's simply not true.

Pre-Ripken, they were far more rare. The conventional wisdom just hasn't caught up to the last 40 years of history.

[clvclv]

Yeah sorry, the argument that Shewmake may be too lanky/tall/big to stick at SS is ridiculous. There are frankly way too many examples currently and historically that say that's simply not true.

Just think it's always going to be looked at on a case-by-case basis moving forward much more than it has been in the past - as mqt points out, EVERYBODY's bigger/stronger/faster than they were in the old days. Does that extra bulk honestly keep him from performing as well as he did before he added it? I'm not sold on some of the defensive metrics yet, but if the eye test signals he appears to be struggling to get to balls he did before the numbers will easily back that up.

Obviously Seager and other bigger guys don't LOOK nearly as graceful/comfortable making some of the plays, but at the end of the day I don't think anyone gives a *hit what it looks like as long as the plays are being made.

[nsacpi]

I think several of those guys on your list will slide over to third or move to first before long (Machado already has moved to third). A guy who is 6-4, 215 and 25 or under can usually play SS. But as they age and (usually) put on more weight they lose a step and have to move off short. It doesn't always happen, but the odds are usually against someone that big sticking at that position fulltime.

I've maintained if he stays his whip thin self, he has a better chance of sticking at short. And you might be right that he'll never bulk up. While that would let him stay at short it would also limit his power. So I'd probably rather him bulk up and lose the ability to play SS fulltime.

Ultimately, we arrive at the same point. He projects best as a super-sub. I think you lose a lot of value with him if you don't take advantage of his versatility. A guy who can play 7 positions (all except P and C) well enough to at least backup there and who has a starter quality hit tool is an extremely valuable commodity.

I could easily see the Braves platooning him with a right hander at a position like SS or LF and using Shewmake to spell other players anytime we face a lefty. It gets him starter ABs while taking advantage of his versatility.

If you have an infield where the starters at second, short and third are RHH, then someone like Shewmake can be very valuable as the sub at all three positions.

[BeanieAntics]

If you have an infield where the starters at second, short and third are RHH, then someone like Shewmake can be very valuable as the sub at all three positions.

This is what I could envision in the future. Let's assume that Riley pans out as a good 3rd baseman, Dansby sticks around at SS for a while, and Ozzie remains Ozzie. If Shewmake can play decent defense at all three positions while giving us an ~.800 OPS against RHP, he could be an invaluable super sub to give us platoon advantages when we need them. I would also give him a bunch of innings at corner outfield spots so he could potentially fill in there as well. I'm not sure how well he hits lefties, but if he is also effective against them as well he could be a really nice player for us. I've gotten progressively higher on him every day since the draft. Like that pick far more than the Langeliers pick.

[The Chosen One]

We need a manager who could properly utilize Shewmake's value as a super sub. Because we haven't seen him utilize Camargo or Culberson that way.

[Snowman]

We need a manager who could properly utilize Shewmake's value as a super sub. Because we haven't seen him utilize Camargo or Culberson that way.

We also need the fanbase to not fall in love with a decent sub and start constantly demanding they become a bad starter instead, a la Prado, Infante, and Camargo.

[BeanieAntics]

We also need the fanbase to not fall in love with a decent sub and start constantly demanding they become a bad starter instead, a la Prado, Infante, and Camargo.

Yep both of those things. I wish the casual fan understood just how valuable a great utility player can be when getting 200-400 plate appearances per year in optimal conditions. There are some guys whose value is solely derived from the fact that they are versatile and have a particular skillset at the plate that may not transition well to a starter role. Occasionally you'll find a guy who is starter-worthy, but is better served being used as a utility player of the bench. And then sometimes you'll get a guy like Ben Zobrist who is kind of a quasi-starter, but plays all over the field in order to maximize his utility and mask other player's deficiencies.

[Metaphysicist]

I don't think those are very good examples. Prado was a 5 WAR player in multiple seasons for us. The one year Infante started for us, he was a 3 win player.

[msstate7]

I don't think those are very good examples. Prado was a 5 WAR player in multiple seasons for us. The one year Infante started for us, he was a 3 win player.

Why did you stop there? Camargo was a 3+ win player as a starter too