BaseBallstotheWall

Philadelphia Phillies outfielder Jiwan James is one of the toolsiest, riskiest and most interesting prospects in minor league baseball today. Let’s take a look at his career line:

2009 A (SS) 134 PA .264/.336/.372 11 BB 22 K 8 XBH 7 SB 4 CS .319 BABIP
2010 Lo-A 505 PA .278/.325/.372 28 BB 103 K 32 XBH 28 SB 17 CS .355 BABIP

These are admittedly unremarkable numbers, and there is a decline between 2009 and 2010 walk rate, and a pretty unimpressive stolen base ratio. James is a clear case of tools over performance but he’s caught my attention because of his backstory, which is essentially that he wasn’t a full time hitter until the 2009 season, instead being drafted as a pitcher. He signed for an overslot bonus of $150,000 in 2007, but flopped as a pitcher due to command issues and arm troubles. He debuted in late 2009 in the New York Penn League and wowed scouts with his raw toolset. Indeed, when considering his lack of hitting experience, his 7.8% walk rate and 16.6% strikeout rate in 2009 was nothing short of very impressive.

As I mentioned, his 2010 ratios have taken a bit of a dip on that front, as his current walk rate is slightly below 6% (5.8%) and his strikeout rate is slightly over 20% (20.5%). Still, neither of these numbers are unacceptable and we can likely expect James to gain a better understanding of the strike zone as he matures as a hitter. According to BP’s Kevin Goldstein, James speed is a 70 on the 20-80 scale, and he projects to have at least average power, with some projecting it to be a plus. He’s a strong defender with a super arm, which can obviously be traced back to his days on the mound. He also projects to hit for average as he matures, which is obviously something we’re starting to see already.

There are very few minor league players that can sniff James upside, and if you look deep at his 2009 and 2010 numbers, it’s easy to see that 2011 is a strong breakout possibility for him. We’re not talking top 100 prospect level for James, we’re talking about top 5 or 10 prospect level if he hits his ceiling, which is massive.

Steven Johnson is far from the best prospect in the Baltimore Orioles system, as he’s well behind folks like Jake Arrieta, Zach Britton and Josh Bell, but it’s still clear to me that he’s a prospect worth talking about and someone I’ve had my eye on for more than a year. In all honesty, he reminds me (primarily statistically) of current Orioles starter David Hernandez, who did a great job of missing bats in the minor leagues but got very little attention until he made the majors. Granted, he hasn’t done very well in his major league opportunity, but he was a guy who deserved to get there. I see Johnson very similarly.

Johnson was the less heralded player the Orioles acquired in the swap with the Dodgers for LHP George Sherrill, as he was overshadowed often by the aforementioned Josh Bell. He was so overshadowed, in fact, that the Orioles did not even include him on their 40-man roster to protect him from the Rule V draft. The Giants swooped in and took him, and then thought so highly of him that they opted to offer him back to the Orioles instead of giving him a roster spot, storing him on the DL or attempting to obtain his rights.

The distinction to be made is that while Johnson is not a top prospect by any means, he does enough things well where I find it perplexing that neither team thought he was worth at least protecting somewhere on their roster, particularly given his reasonable track record of success statistically, particularly as it concerns missing bats. Since the start of the 2008 season, between ages 20 and 22, Johnson has recorded the following strikeout percentages: 19.2%, 23.1%, 24.6%, 33.3%, 23.7% and 22%. In a situation where his level has been age appropriate, it’s surprising that there hasn’t been more interest in this player. Now, admittedly, there are questions about command (only one of those six percentages came with a walk percentage of less than 8.4%) and flyball tendencies (only once above 34% in that span), but I think it’s more of a “take what you can get” mentality with non-elite prospects than anything else.

In 2010, through 43 innings at AA Bowie for the Orioles, Johnson has allowed 35 hits while recording 40 strikeouts to only 17 walks (22.9% and 9.9%, respectively). There are some definite warning signs (.270 BABIP, 31% GB Rate, 4.39 FIP compared to a 3.35 ERA), so again, he’s not as good as those numbers suggest. The last time he had a significant sample size (96 innings in Hi-A in 2009 as a 21 year-old), Johnson posted very similar numbers (10.1% walk rate, 24.1% strikeout rate, 5.03 FIP, 3.82 ERA, 24% GB Rate), so I think we have enough data where we can safely assume Johnson is basically what he is. He’ll struggle with his command from time-to-time, he’ll miss a fair amount of bats (though we can safely expect that number to drop as he moves up) and he’ll allow some home runs because of the low ground ball rate. If he wants to avoid being David Hernandez two, he’ll have to make sure that his strikeout rate is closer to the 22% than the 14% that Hernandez currently possesses, but at the very least there’s a chance that MIGHT happen, and I remain very surprised that the Orioles weren’t willing to protect a guy so close to the majors who might give them some useful innings for cheap, particularly since they are currently using players like Jason Berken.

There is terribly little scouting information on Johnson available, but the general understanding I have is that he has a low 90’s fastball with a good curveball and a developing change-up. If anyone can add to that I’d love to hear it.

As per a reader request, let’s take a look at the Washington Nationals system. I’m not going to spend any time talking about Stephen Strasburg, because, frankly, I’m tired of talking and reading about him. I will say that Project Prospect offers an interesting discussion about his mechanics, essentially claiming that they expect him to get injured in his first few years as a professional. I share their belief about his poor mechanics but won’t make that kind of claim given how uncertain analyzing mechanics really is.

5 Nationals to Watch:

1. CA Derek Norris – Norris has everything you could want in a hitter, with a .286/.413/.513 line in Lo-A at 20. He has injured his hamate bone so you shouldn’t see much in terms of power production going forward next season, but it should return as he returns to full health. He draws walks (nearly 17%), avoids strikeouts for such a youngster (21.5% K) and makes solid contact (20% LD) with a corresponding BABIP (.342). His IsoP was .227, showing remarkably developed power for someone his age. So why isn’t Derek Norris a top 25 prospect? Well, he’s just not likely to stick at C long-term. That said, his bat should play just about anywhere.

2. RP Drew Storen –It’s never really a great sign when a RP is this high in your system, particularly one getting more hype than he ultimately deserves at this point in his career. The 10th overall pick in the 2009 Draft out of Stanford, Storen signed quickly for slot money and shot through the minor leagues. He has a power repertoire though there are some that thought a change-up existed enough for Storen to give starting a shot, though the Nationals ultimately did not agree and would like the immediate impact of a reliever. Storen’s K numbers look great, but the majority of his success happened at Lo-A, when he struckout 44% of the batters he faced. In Hi-A and AA, Storen struckout just 1 more batter than inning pitched, which is nice, but far from dominant. He’s not Daniel Bard out there, so the Nationals shouldn’t be expecting him to light up radar guns or completely shut down opposing lineups with missing bats. Still a very nice prospect, but there’s reason to think he’s much closer to the next Chad Cordero than the next Jonathan Papelbon. Not enough data on Storen to suggest much else, but where are the grounders? He never eclipsed 38% at any of the three levels he pitched at, and across those three levels probably gives us enough of a sample to include he may never do so. That could make him prone to the long ball in tight situations in the bigs, something I’d rather avoid if I could.

3. Chris Marrero –To be completely honest, Chris Marrero may just be my favorite hitter in the Nationals system. He’s had some health problems in the past and plays a position where he really needs to be elite to justify elite prospect rankings, but he’s got a strong pedigree and was highly regarded coming out of the draft. He walked in 9% of his plate appearances at Hi-A, and struckout in just 20% of them. He posted a .177 IsoP and reached base 36% of the time. He did have a bloated .348 BABIP considering his 15% LD. You’d like to see that go up a bit. I’ve read some information that Marrero is seeing some time in the outfield which will help his cause. I really like how calm his approach is at the plate, and I’ve seen multiple videos of him going the other way with power. He’s actually a little bit small in stature so his fit looks like it would work in the outfield. His swing is level and his bat spends a lot of time in the zone. You can see in this video a bit more about his approach.

4. Danny Espinosa –Espinosa is a SS prospect that’s gotten a lot of helium of late because of a solid set of tools combined with solid performance. He should stick in the middle infield, and he posted a 13% BB rate with a 22% K Rate at Hi-A last season as a 22-year old. He sported a .196 IsoP with a .326 BABIP. He also stole 29 bases. What don’t I like? You can start with the 13% Line Drive Rate and the near 50% GB Rate. He’s just not going to project for much power as he advances in the upper minors with that percentage, though he’ll still have use in the middle infield if he can keep up this line with less power. Color me pleased that he’s left-handed, though. He’s got a really quick bat, but I’m not sure it stays in the heart of the zone for as long as I’d like. I will be interested to see how his groundball rates look going forward, because that will either hold him back or catapult him forward.

5. Michael Burgess –Burgess has really fallen from the prospect radar but there’s nothing not to like from a tools perspective with Burgess, and you’re not completely betting on a wildcard with him since he’s proven it in the past. Burgess draws walks (10% last season, impressive coming from a raw highschooler with power) and controlled the strikezone reasonably well compared to the past (24% K rate, down from 30% in 2008). He sported a .175 IsoP, down from last year’s .221 but still showing plenty of promise. He hit just .235 but sported just a .288 BABIP with a 14% LD. Now the BABIP is low but he’ll need to work on making solid contact if he wants to get his average up to even .260 or so. I just think there is more here than bad numbers, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s back on prospect radars next year. If he hits .260 next season, I think you could be looking at a .260/.350/.500 type line from him. The power is definitely there and he has quite a way of extending himself. He’s short and stocky and extremely powerful, but it’s easy to see a long and loopy swing holding back the contact he needs to make to have success at higher levels. If he can get that in order the potential is there. Think Matt Lawton with less contact skills and more power as Burgess’ peak.

Sleepers: Aaron Thompson and Destin Hood. Thompson was acquired from the Marlins for Nick Johnson last year, and he’s an intriguing lefty who misses some bats and gets grounders. I think he stands a better than average chance of being a useful rotation option in the near future. For Hood, an athletic outfielder drafted out of high school in Alabama with a football build, he’s shown a lot of rawness but some skills in recognizing pitches and he’s a legit five-tooler who is a long, long way away.

——

Bonus Roster for Nationals in Two Years:
CA Jesus Flores
1B Derek Norris
2B Danny Espinosa
SS Ian Desmond
3B Ryan Zimmerman
LF Chris Marrero
CF Nyjer Morgan (elite defender with some offensive skills)
RF Elijah Dukes

Don’t think the Nats will sign Willingham long-term, and I do like Dukes skillset.

SP Stephen Strasburg
SP Jordan Zimmerman
SP Ross Detwiler
SP Garrett Mock
SP Aaron Thompson

Like Mock a lot, think Strasburg and Zimmerman could be an interesting 1-2 punch.

Arguably one of the more controversial prospects in baseball today, Dodgers shortstop Devaris Strange-Gordon (yes, related to Tom Gordon) has seen his stock range anywhere from top 40 to outside the top 125 altogether. Let’s first take a look at his 2009 statistical profile:

2009 Performance (Lo-A):
601 PA .301/.358/.394 43 BB 90 K 73 SB 7.2% BB 15% K .357 BABIP 12% LD .093 IsoP

What’s odd about this statistical profile is that the ranking camps are looking at these things two different ways. To start, Strange-Gordon is extremely raw, having played little organized baseball as well as being the physical equivalent of an early teenager in terms of body type. Those folks considering his rawness suggest that his .301 average, 7% walk rate, 15% strikeout rate and 73 stolen bases represent a player that hasn’t tapped into his potential. Those arguing that rawness is an excuse for a lack of physical projection will suggest that for a player with speed as his main asset, his stolen base rate was not great, he’s not making enough contact for someone that lives with speed, and it’s very unlikely that he’ll fill out enough to hit even 10-15 homers. There are also rumblings about him that he may eventually move off of shortstop.

For the record, I’m firmly in the first camp, and am largely impressed with Strange-Gordon’s 2009 campaign. I’m not one to terribly dwell on bloodlines like some publications tend to, but a player who can put up a luck-neutral .300 average with a respectable on-base average is someone that’s going to garner my attention. I’m not at all concerned about his age (21) considering his rawness, and I’m not really worried if he doesn’t fill out. I think we can expect his understanding of the strike-zone to improve with time, which should lead to even more walks and less strikeouts. One would also expect his understanding of stealing bases to improve as he, well, steals more bases. Power’s the last thing to come in most players, but frankly, I don’t see it happening with Gordon. His frame is not conducive to weight gain. I just don’t personally think he has to have it to be quite an asset.

For a couple video links, check here. That is some ridiculous speed. For some video of his swing, check here. He looks a lot like Orlando Hudson in his swinging video, and I think that might be a pretty good comparison. They have similar body types and they both seem to have short and compact swings. He’s lunging a bit in the video that I’ve provided but the swing is level and compact, and for someone as raw as he is, shows considerable upside.

Michael Saunders is one of my favorite players in the minors, and frankly, one of the more underappreciated ones as well. Let’s take a look at his statistical profile from last season for the start of our analysis, courtesy of first inning:

2009 Performance:
AAA 281 PA .310/.374/.544 25 BB 48 K .234 IsoP .342 BABIP 8.9% BB 17.1% K 15% LD
MLB 129 PA .221/.256/.279 06 BB 40 K .058 IsoP .329 BABIP 4.7% BB 31.0% K 15% LD

There are a couple immediate things we can glean from his overall profile that you won’t see reflected in the statistics above, so let’s start with those. Cutting his strikeout rate to 17.1% at AAA was a significant move, as his next lowest number over his career was 22.1%, and that was in his 2008 exposure to AA, though most of his strikeout totals are inflated by small sample size at lower levels. He looked to be comfortably between about 22.5 and 25 percent at the levels where we had significant data, which is still a bit high. He also saw his walk rate dip into the single digits (was between 10 and 11% for most of his minor league career) which may or may not be a bad thing. A cursory glance at his profile suggests as much that he was simply less willing to swing at pitches as any kind of lack of patience. The new-found aggressiveness also resulted in the highest IsoP of his career at AAA, suggesting that the pitches he was swinging at were pitches he could drive.

Interestingly, however, the thing Saunders was lacking at AAA was the ability to make strong, solid line-drive contact. 15% is not a very impressive line drive percentage for a corner outfielder. Indeed, for his minor league career, Saunders was predictably between 14-17% for line drives. That’s something he’ll definitely need to work on as he sees more time in the pros, but there’s not much else to not like (takes walks, avoids strikeouts, has power, brings some speed to the table, etc.). So why is everyone so down on someone that I think is a top 65 prospect at this point? 129 PA at the MLB level, of course. 129 plate appearances isn’t a lot to base anything on, though his low walk rate and high strikeout rate might hint at the aggressiveness shown in AAA not working at the big league level. There was also a spike in ground ball rate and a slight decline in BABIP to a more normalized level. I just don’t think it’s likely that a reliably consistent threat in the lower minors has completely lost it at the major league level. He needs more time. He certainly has age (now just 23) on his side.

From a scouting perspective, Saunders isn’t an elite CF prospect but a passable one; however, where he would really be an asset is in a corner, likely left, for the Mariners. He has a good corner arm and great range for a corner, as well. He’s got enough speed to be a threat on the bases, and he’s really got every tool you could want with a good deal of development to boot. He doesn’t have elite plus power, so he may not be a typical corner outfielder, but he should be useful in some capacity, and soon. For the folks enamored with the distant players, turning out as Saunders has would be a huge win for any of them, and I’m not sure why he doesn’t get more respect for that very reason.

I’m not in love with Saunders swing, as you’ll see here but I am in love with the fact that he’s left-handed. It should definitely help him at least be the strong half of the platoon, which, let’s be honest, is where a player separates himself from the replacement level drek he is competing with. Saunders has a smooth stroke but he has a lot of unnecessary movement before a pitch which I’m never really a fan of. I’m not really in love with his balance or toe-tap, either, and I’m not sure he’s really getting as much weight behind a pitch as he can. He kind of reminds me of Lyle Overbay at the plate, and that may not be a bad comparison, though you’ll add wins for his defense at a premium position and his speed. He does not keep the head of his bat in the zone as often as you’d like to see from a guy that has that level of potential.

Saunders is the type of prospect I flock to, for whatever reason. A legitimate five-tooler with some refinement and coaching who is overlooked for some reason (in this case, his performance in a 129 PA stint in the majors.) I would trade any five-tooler in the low minors for a player like Saunders, who is far from reaching his potential and yet is a much safer bet at this point.

As some of you may know, in addition to watching video from Prospect Tube, the two places I’m mostly likely to consult for scouting information are Project Prospect and Baseball Prospectus. Oddly enough, it would be difficult to find more conflicting philosophies, with a very general statement suggesting that Project Prospect favors floor and Baseball Prospectus favors shooting for the moon. That said, if you wanted to determine what either site prefers, well…I gave you the link for a reason.

The point of contention for me arises from evaluating pitchers versus hitters. I was struck particularly by some information I read this morning from Adam Foster in his chat here, which is essentially that “all pitchers have a low floor.” I think this shines a light on a very good point: upside, in my evaluation, is far more important as it pertains to pitchers than to hitters. A pitcher who is just good at some things (throwing strikes, getting rounders, missing bats, having a strong history of health) is literally just another guy. Hitters are another story: they have value if they’re just a good defender, if they’re just good at drawing walks and reaching base, or if they just have plus power, you can generally find a fit for them. I’m not focusing tremendously on platoon play because if you read this site you know my preference for right-handed pitchers and left-handed hitters, but I don’t think that is really a unique enough trait to weight in this exercise.

I disagree with the notion that hitters are more valuable than pitchers for almost exactly the same reason that the folks over at Project Prospect seem to be ranking hitters over pitchers, and that’s because the pitchers who can potentially do “everything” have so much more value to me than hitters who can do “everything,” largely because of scarcity. If you draft or rank a 5-tool prospect in the low minors and he winds up not developing the plate discipline necessary to capitalize on massive raw power and elite fielding skills, he still has raw power and fielding skills to potentially making him a positive asset. The reward, however, is that all 5-tools develop and he turns into an elite asset. By contrast, you can find any old pitcher to throw strikes and sport an ERA around 5, and there is a rash abundance of them. There are very few pitchers who can miss bats, control the strikezone and win games, and those are the most important assets in baseball.

If I’m being unclear, let’s take some an opportunity to illustrate my point. Ryan Sweeney, drafted in the second round of the 2003 draft, was drafted as a legitimate 5-tool center-field prospect. He was expected to develop power while playing plus defense, hitting for high average and having strong speed. The power simply has not come, however, and while he’s only 25, it seems pretty unlikely at this point that it’s going to come. It appears that his defensive ability also plays up far better in a corner (he’s played nearly 50% more in RF than CF in his time with the Athletics) and his UZR has been stronger in RF (though should be noted that it’s also VERY good in CF). That means, despite the power, we still have a 4 win player with plus strike-zone control and elite defense. So why shouldn’t we rank him as highly as a pitcher with a similar skillset? Because it’s FAR, FAR more rare that a pitcher can have this level of development, and so believing in one means seeing them with more value.

Perhaps this is a turn from conventional wisdom, but I’m a strong believer in drafting and ranking assets that are more difficult to accumulate. For pitchers, if their strikeout rate declines, their walk rate rises, or their command or stuff worsen, they’re really not unlike every other #4 or #5 starter. They don’t have the uniqueness of elite defense, strong contact skills, massive power, etc. They’re just like everyone else. So you might say, why favor the riskier bet?

It’s simple. The difference between a flawed pitcher and an elite pitcher is so much greater than a flawed 5-tool prospect and a complete 5-tool player. I’d want to hedge my bets.

No matter which prospect list you look at, Desmond Jennings is a virtually unanimous choice inside the Top 10. Indeed, in Project Prospect’s very interesting Digital Prospect Guide, the only official Top 10 publication currently out there, Jennings is on it (as Adam has noted, he is actually 2nd on Project Prospect’s top 10 list). So why is he not in my top 10? Well, let’s take a look at the statistics first:

Desmond Jennings
2009 OBP LD% BABIP BB% K% IsoP SB
AA .393 17% .347 14% 11% .170 37
AAA .419 16% .354 11% 11.8% .166 15

From a statistical perspective, it’s hard to have much of a beef with Desmond’s numbers. He generally walks more than he strikes out, he’s had a luck neutral performance, as his stolen bases should illustrate, he has a respectable Isolated Power for someone who bases much of his all-around game around speed, and he looks like a quintessential lead-off hitter. It should be clear by that LD% that he is not, by any means, a slap hitter.

This is an interesting case of actually preferring ceiling to floor a bit, as I’m not a huge believer in Jennings developing 25-30 HR power as he gets a bit older, though I think a lot of people might. If he doesn’t, I question how much better he is than players like Tyson Gillies and Michael Brantley, who clearly will not develop any power (unlike Jennings, who might), but I’ve felt it necessary to include that caveat in my ranking. I also don’t think he is near the natural hitter of Dustin Ackley, who may also play 2B.

Jennings is a gold-glove caliber CF if healthy, though I am understandably concerned with his long list of injury history. This was Jennings first healthy year, well, ever. He may very well break down. I will admit that it is likely that Jennings is a much safer bet to have a good, solid career than Michael Stanton, Domonic Brown and Martin Perez, who are the three people I can see sliding behind Jennings to move him into the top 10, but I think their chances for upside are so much better than Jennings that I’m trying to be aggressive with their rankings. I think if Jennings had a clean bill of health, I may run a different course and put him as high as ninth, but I think it’s a mistake to ignore it considering how close these folks are.

Jennings has an easy swing and his bat spends a lot of time in the zone, so it’s not impossible to see some power coming along. As you’ll see here, there is no doubt that Jennings is capable of generating power but he hasn’t, yet, at least at the level of Stanton. You’re putting a lot of pressure on his other tools if he cannot do that. I’m taking a “show me” approach with that power, and perhaps I’m unfairly hurting him because he becomes similar to other minimal power CF types than some of the other prospects around him. It’s worth noting that his .170 IsoP is far more than what Gillies and Brantley have ever done, so there is certainly a difference. How much difference will it ultimately be, though?

In light of the fairly glaring omissions I believe I had from my first effort at the top 100, I’d like to offer a revised version, one that, you know, actually includes one of the better prospects in baseball (Neftali Feliz) and also one that includes Aroldis Chapman.

1. Jason Heyward
2. Stephen Strasburg
3. Brian Matusz
4. Neftali Feliz
5. Buster Posey
6. Carlos Santana
7. Justin Smoak
8. Michael Stanton
9. Jesus Montero
10. Martin Perez
11. Domonic Brown
12. Dustin Ackley
13. Desmond Jennings
14. Pedro Alvarez
15. Kyle Drabek
16. Logan Morrison
17. Madison Bumgarner
18. Matt Moore
19. Michael Taylor
20. Christian Friedrich
21. Brett Wallace
22. Jeremy Hellickson
23. Ryan Westmoreland
24. Aroldis Chapman
25. Chris Carter
26. Mike Montgomery
27. Aaron Hicks
28. Chris Withrow
29. Casey Kelly
30. Wade Davis
31. Alcides Escobar
32. Simon Castro
33. Tanner Scheppers
34. Josh Bell
35. Jarrod Parker
36. Devaris Strange-Gordon
37. Tim Beckham
38. Casey Crosby
39. Yonder Alonso
40. Daniel Hudson
41. Matt Dominguez
42. Mike Moustakas
43. Lonnie Chisenhall
44. Fernando Martinez
45. Eric Hosmer
46. Jacob Turner
47. Jenrry Mejia
48. Josh Reddick
49. Brett Lawrie
50. Starlin Castro
51. Julio Teheran
52. Michel Ynoa
53. Jaff Decker
54. Nick Weglarz
55. Hector Rondon
56. Freddie Freeman
57. Jhoulys Chacin
58. Thomas Neal
59. Arodys Vizcaino
60. Zach Britton
61. Jake Arrieta
62. Jordan Lyles
63. Hank Conger
64. Derek Norris
65. Scott Elbert
66. Todd Frazier
67. Aaron Crow
68. Trevor Reckling
69. Zach Stewart
70. Donavan Tate
71. Carlos Carrasco
72. Ethan Martin
73. Joshua Vitters
74. Reid Brignac
75. Hak-Ju Lee
76. Tyler Matzek
77. Ryan Kalish
78. Jon Niese
79. Michael Saunders
80. Jay Jackson
81. Tim Melville
82. Brad Lincoln
83. Alexander Colome
84. Fabio Martinez-Mesa
85. Phillippe Aumont
86. Mike Leake
87. Mike Trout
88. Mat Gamel
89. Ike Davis
90. Tyler Flowers
91. Alex Avila
92. Josa Tabata
93. Tony Sanchez
94. Brett Jackson
95. Travis D’Arnaud
96. Danny Duffy
97. Jemile Weeks
98. Wil Myers
99. Randall Delgado
100. Jurickson Profar

Say “Hello!” to a hopefully new series at BBTTW. While I found top 10 prospects a little problematic for a number of reasons (the rankings take more than time allows, the research was excessive and the definition was a little bit difficult and overdone), I feel like highlighting five players I’m interested in for a variety of reasons might be worth mentioning.

3B Kevin Ahrens – DOB 4/26/89, Bats Both, Projected Level: Hi-A
I briefly delved into Ahrens in my last post but he’s a guy who I think could really emerge for a few reasons. For one, he was a first rounder in 2007 and a justified one, so he had the talent to be selected there. For his age and experience level, he’s very solid in walk and strikeout levels (9 and 18%, respectively), not to mention he was unlucky last year with a .263 BABIP. Even adjusted his line was not anything to write home (a really poor 13% LD Rate was largely the culprit) but his swing looks like it is there. In a still pretty thin system, it’s probably a mistake to sleep on his potential. It helps that he’s more than capable of fielding his position.

SS Justin Jackson – DOB 12/11/88, Bats Right, Projected Level: Hi-A
Jackson was a supplemental first round selection in 2007, and largely gets grouped with Ahrens and John Tolisano as busts from the 2007 draft, though it’s a bit early to write him off. Jackson epitomizes toolsyness, and he’s easily the most toolsy player in the limited Jays system. He has what it takes to field SS, he has good speed, he’s got a strong arm and he has the makings of a good hitter. The problem? Jackson can’t make contact. His strikeout rate for the last two years has been nearly 30%, so he’s a much bigger concern for me from Ahrens, though I think the potential return is actually greater, considering his position. Despite the strikeout rate, Jackson still reached based 32% of the time based largely on his very solid 13% walk rate. His Isolated Power was well under .100, but I’m willing to wait a little longer on someone who has shown the ability to walk. I might argue that he needs to be a bit more aggressive if he’s going to make enough contact to be useful.

CA J.P. Arencibia – DOB 1/5/86, Bats Right, Projected Level: AAA
Arencibia isn’t quite ready for the majors but he’s closer than his 2009 line would appear, and he’s gone from over to underrated in the prospect community nearly overnight. He was never a five-star prospect, but it didn’t stop Kevin Goldstein from rating him as such after 2008. That said, he has tremendous raw power in general, nevermind for a C. He also has a strong arm and is developing his defensive game. What he lacks in spades is on-base ability. He walked in just 2.5% of his plate appearances in 2008 at AA. On the bright side, he walked 5.2% of his plate appearances in 2009, which is a significant upgrade. Still lower than I’d like but it shows he’s working and that it is an organizational focus. His average and OBP looked poor last year (.236 and .284, respectively) but it was compounded by an unusually low .269 BABIP. Normalization make his numbers look solid, and he still posted an IsoP of over .200. I think he stands a very strong likelihood of being average or above with that power alone, and if his other skills continue to develop I think he could really emerge has a nice value player.

LHP Henderson Alvarez – DOB 4/18/90, Throws Left, Projected Level: Hi-A
Alvarez might just be the most interesting prospect in the Blue Jays system. He has a marginal fastball which will perpetually hold back his upside, but he has two strong secondary offerings and he’s left-handed. He’s also fantastically young for his level (he’ll be 20 at the start of the 2010 season in Hi-A, no small feat) and he has a track record of success which is rare to say on someone his age. He avoids walks (3.7%) and he gets grounders (53% GB) while effectively performing at a luck neutral level. Unfortunately, Alvarez doesn’t have elite potential because he lacks a dominant fastball and an out pitch. He struck out just 17.3% of the batters he faced last season, and his previous year numbers match up with this as well. He should move fast, however, with his combination of pitchability and command. Keep him in mind as a potential back-end top 100 prospect for a few years, but like a lot of the pitchers the Jays have developed, he should have some success slotting into the back of the rotation. You never know if he’ll pick up some velocity as he fills out, either.

1B David Cooper – DOB 2/12/87 Bats Left Projected Level: AAA
Cooper, selected in the first round in the 2008 draft, was a boring selection. He was a 1B without elite power but the Jays, like myself, greatly valued his approach and floor and expected him to move fast. Indeed, Cooper’s potential is as an above-average defensive first baseman who makes solid contact, takes a walk and can hit for extra bases (at an average but not above-average level adjusted for position). It’s hard to say exactly what went wrong for Cooper, however. He walked 11% of his plate appearances, fanned 17%, posted a normal LD% and BABIP and yet hit just .258 with an IsoP of .131. Both numbers are causes for concerns for me: his minor league data in 2008 was generated by virtue of a very, very high BABIP (never below .362) and even then his power wasn’t very strong. There’s no room in baseball for a .392 SLG% at 1B, and as much as I like his approach, he either needs to be over .300 or hitting for more power. There are nothing in his statistics that explain the low average, so there is cause for concern, but lets give him another year before we call him a bust.

Extra Tidbit: Having done a fair amount of research on OF Jake Marisnick, I can tell you that he has more potential and upside than anyone on this list. In a draft where the Jays failed to sign James Paxton, Jake Eliopoulos and Jake Barrett, Marisnick is the face of this draft, along with RHP Chad Jenkins. Marisnick is a legit five-tool athlete with good power potential and a strong understanding of baseball, though I have read that his swing may need to be overhauled. He’s drawing Rocco Baldelli comps which is concerning considering Baldelli’s unwillingness to walk, but the upside is certainly there. He’s in a system that should preach the need to understand the strikezone (see the developments with Ahrens and Jackson for evidence of that) and he has more natural toolsiness than at least Ahrens and possibly Jackson, too. I don’t expect much from next year but he’s a player to watch a few years from now.

Having read a number of interesting baseball books (Moneyball, The Book, The Book on the Book), I feel it necessary to discuss the value of an out as it pertains to evaluating minor league prospects. All of these books discuss and weigh the various parts of the game that cost an offense outs, including strictly managerial tendencies like sacrifice bunts and intentional walks.

Let’s take a look at the virtually universally accepted runs per outcome chart, this one taken directly from The Book (Tango, Lichtman and Dolphin, page 28).

Home Run 1.397
Triple 1.070
Double .776
Error .508
Single .475
Interference .392
HBP .352
Non-Intentional Walk .323
Passed Ball .269
Wild Pitch .266
Balk .264
Intentional Walk .179
Stolen Base .175
Defensive Indifference .120
Bunt .042
Sac Bunt -.096
Pickoff -.281
Out -.299
Strikeout -.301
Caught Stealing -.467

Now, this graph is a tad bit superfluous for the information I want to illustrate, but you’ll see quite plainly that an out is worth essentially -.3 runs. Every time a batter makes an out they are costing a team that many runs, with caveats for some specific outs made (strikeouts, caught stealing, pickoff, etc.). You’ll see the lack of value in the sac bunt, intentional walk and caught stealing in this metric, as well, which is a good thing to realize for you folks advocating small ball. There are a number of interesting books on this topic that I would suggest taking a look at if this topic interests you in any way.

I think you can use this information to determine exactly what you want in a prospect, and the single most paramount of those things should be the ability to avoid an out, with the second most important being to create an out. This should be fairly obvious, but I think often times folks are shooting for the upper end of this spectrum (power) and ignoring the more attainable part of the spectrum (outs gained and outs lost). I like to consider power in a prospect a bonus and in fact, often look at prospects in the lower minors who are already doing well at avoiding and creating outs, hoping that their power will come but realizing that if it doesn’t, they are good enough at avoiding and creating outs that they still should have value to my organization.

I essentially bring this up because I’ve been reviewing a recent acquisition of my own, Toronto 3B Kevin Ahrens. As a former first round pick, Ahrens has done nothing terribly impressive to avoid a bust label after two and a half years in the minor leagues. But what I see is someone that manages the strikezone well (9% BB Rate, 18% K Rate) and can handle his position very well (good reports on defense, former SS in high school). He’s also primed to take advantage of platoon rates (I’ll have an upcoming article on this and my preference for left-handers) as a switch hitter, as well. His IsoP is below .100 but he’s also just 20 in Hi-A, so he has time. The LD% is low, also, and may ultimately be his undoing (13%) but I think there’s a lot more going for him than a cursory statistical analysis will tell you.

In the end, it’s all about preference. If you want to shoot for the moon you can ignore the ability to create and avoid outs and hope for the homerun, but if you get a homerun hitter who costs you outs in the field and at the plate (not walking, not putting the ball in play, etc.), you’re likely losing out to someone who can efficiently avoid and create outs while still having the upside to gain the other attributes you want so badly in the first player.