Giants prospects

[Rog]

Here is a link to John Sickels' preliminary list of the Giants' top 20 prospects.  Catcher Andrew Susac (#3), LHP Adalberto Mejia (#4) and SS/2B Chrisian Arroyo (#5) are ranked highly. He likes relievers Heath Hembree (#8) and Derek Law (#15).  Declining opinions on Joe Panik (#13) and Gary Brown (#16).

Also rans included Ehire Adrianza, Mike Kickham, Roger Kieschnick and Angel Villalona.

bleacherreport.com/tb/dc5Cd?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=san-francisco-giants


Here are some snippets:

3) Andrew Susac, C, Grade B: I’m surprised he’s not ranking higher on other lists, but I see a guy who has tapped into his power, controls the strike zone well, and has made steady improvements on defense. His Double-A numbers were impressive for the context (power and patience gave him a wRC+ 129 despite a .256 average) and he ripped the ball in the Arizona Fall League.

4) Adalberto Mejia, LHP, Grade B: A year younger than Escobar but not far behind him, also projects as mid-rotation starter.

5) Christian Arroyo, SS, Grade B: 2013 first-round pick drew praise for polished hitting skills in rookie ball, may wind up at second base.

8) Heath Hembree, RHP, Grade B-: B- is a high grade for a relief prospect in my view. I think his command improvements are real and he should be a successful short man.

13) Joe Panik, 2B-SS, Grade C+: Seems likely to be a useful utility player to me, but there is still a chance he can be more than that. Still showing the contact hitting approach that sometimes correlates with unexpected offensive growth in late 20s.

15) Derek Law, RHP, Grade C+: Insane numbers in A-ball including 45/1 K/BB in 26 innings in High-A. Not smoke and mirrors, has impressive power sinker and breaking ball, deceptive delivery, throttles right-handed hitters.

16) Gary Brown, OF, Grade C+: Still has all those nice tools but hitting was very disappointing in Triple-A. May be just a reserve outfielder due to valuable glove, but needs to get on base and use his speed more effectively to have any hope as a regular.

The hitting side is much thinner. I like Christian Arroyo but he’s several years away. Mac Williamson’s power stands out, but will his batting average and OBP hold up against better pitching, or will contact problems do him in? Panik and Brown look like role players rather than regulars.

I obviously like Susac and I think he can be a regular big league catcher if he builds on what he did in ’13. I am not sure why he isn’t receiving more attention, but my theory is that people are still focusing on his disappointing ’12 campaign and aren’t realizing that he was very effective and took a real step forward in the Eastern League this year.

[Rog]

Sickels rates the Giants' prospects about in the middle of the pack among major league teams. While far from spectacular, this is an improvement from seasons since Buster Posey was called up for good.

Players from the farm system who are important players for the Giants include Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, Madison Bumgarner, Sergio Romo, Posey, Brandon Belt and Brandon Crawford. That's exactly half the players in the starting lineup, in the rotation, or the closer.

Ryan Vogelsong, Hector Sanchez and Heath Hembree could also be considered, depending on one's point of view.

[klaiggeb]

Rog, I saw that article, too.

Also so one that rated the Giants something like, 19th in the team power rating.

Also read an artilce that said that OTHER than pitching, the Giants farm system was pretty devoid of legit prospects, though they did like Arroyo, and to a lesser extent, Susac.


Pitching, pitching, pitching.

That's what Sabean said their plan was back about 8 or 9 years ago.

2 World seiers with that formula.

I'd say it worked out pretty well.

boly

[sfgdood]

And more importantly Boly, the top prospects are mostly at least a year away. I think that's also keeping the ranking down. Pretty much all of the guys rated above B- level haven't done it above San Jose, which as Rog and Rx tell us, means absolutely nothing.

[klaiggeb]

And more importantly Boly, the top prospects are mostly at least a year away. I think that's also keeping the ranking down. Pretty much all of the guys rated above B- level haven't done it above San Jose, which as Rog and Rx tell us, means absolutely nothing.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2160/giants-prospects#ixzz2pMLegbTp

-boly says---

Excellent point, Randy! Excellent point!

boly

[Rog]

Randy -- And more importantly Boly, the top prospects are mostly at least a year away.

Rog -- A very good point, although I suspect one or two will fool us and get at least some time in the show. (And Hembree should be there all season long.)

Randy -- I think that's also keeping the ranking down.

Rog -- Another very good point. A player's ranking is based on his ceiling, his floor, and his chances of winding up at various points on the spectrum. The higher up the chain a player gets, the easier it is to predict all those things.

Randy -- Pretty much all of the guys rated above B- level haven't done it above San Jose, which as Rog and Rx tell us, means absolutely nothing.

Rog -- Just tell the truth, Randy. Please show us where either Mark or I said performance at the San Jose level or below means nothing. Otherwise, it would likely benefit you to simply stop making yourself look foolish, untruthful and of poor judgment.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2160/giants-prospects#ixzz2pRsxfRR4

[rxmeister]

Dood is just hung up over the awful season Gary Brown had at Fresno. For some reason he can't understand why everyone just doesn't ignore it and continue to sing his praises.

[sfgdood]

I never denied Brown had a bad year. But that shouldnt erase what he did before. If you guys want to write him off as a bust, feel free. Doesn't bother me a bit. Just don't pretend to care in the future what players do in San Jose because we all know you don't.

[Rog]

Randy -- I never denied Brown had a bad year. But that shouldnt erase what he did before.

Rog -- And it doesn't. Puts a bit of a pall on it, but the past two poor seasons by Brown certainly don't erase his 2011 season at San Jose.

Randy -- If you guys want to write him off as a bust, feel free.

Rog -- We don't.

Randy -- Doesn't bother me a bit.

Rog -- You are certainly acting as if it does.

Randy -- Just don't pretend to care in the future what players do in San Jose because we all know you don't.

Rog -- Please show us where either of us said that, Randy, or just let it go. Mark and I have never been so dumb on this topic as when you talk for us.

Unfortunately I don't have Sickels' book after the 2011 season, but I do have it after the 2010 season. He rated Gary as a B prospect, which means John felt he had a very good chance to have a good career and would most likely play quite a few years at the least. Sickels said there were lots of reasons to see why the scouts were high on Brown and mentioned in the negative only that Brown needed to show more patience to be successful as a leadoff hitter.

After the fine season Brown had in 2011, it's hard to imagine Sickels' not giving him at least a B grade, and my guess is that he raised Gary up to a B+, which is a higher grade than John gave to any Giants prospects this year except Kyle Krick and Edwin Escobar, whome the Giants are very high on.

Now Sickels says it is quite possible Brown will be only a reserve, that he needs to gain plate discipline and learn how to use his speed if he wishes to be a starter. Has Sickels given up on Gary? Heck no. He wouldn't have mentioned him in the top 20 if he had done so.

Does John think Gary has less of a chance than he felt two years ago? Clearly he does. But that doesn't mean he's given up on Gary. Nor have Mark or I. I'm not sure how you believe that we have. Perhaps you should have asked us before making such a foolish statement.

Incidentally, Sickels is the guy I emailed (good grief, it is now) seven years ago, giving him a plethora of reasons I felt he should rank Tim ahead of his top two pitching prospects, Phil Hughes and Homer Bailey. I didn't have any luck, but John was at least nice enough to return my e-mail and acknowledge that I had made some good points.

Incidentally, Randy, if all I look at is stats, just how was it that I could intelligently communicate with a guy who puts out an annual prospect book that sells enough to pay his income? Remember now, we're talking about a pitcher who at that point had only college stats and 39 innings of organized ball, none of those innings above San Jose. At that point though, I had seen Tim pitch both in San Jose and in Stockton, and I likely knew more about him than most scouts.

Oh, and if nothing in San Jose or below matters to me, how is it I was so high on Tim?

There is no logic behind your saying that Mark and I don't care about what a player accomplishes before AA ball. What we would ask, Randy, is that instead of putting words in our mouths, you simply ask us. We'll answer you honestly.

And that will help you speak honestly about us, rather than simply pull stuff out of your wallet.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2160/giants-prospects#ixzz2pY0GhsRe

[sfgdood]

Randy -- Just don't pretend to care in the future what players do in San Jose because we all know you don't.

Rog -- Please show us where either of us said that, Randy, or just let it go. Mark and I have never been so dumb on this topic as when you talk for us.

Dood - both of you strongly implied you believe Gary Brown to be a bust, even agreeing with other stats geeks that say he projects to no more than a 4th outfielder. As I said before...you didnt utter the Brady Bunch exact words but that doesn't matter one bit. We all know what you meant, you're just trying to weasel out now.

[rxmeister]

I'm very excited by our players that do well at San Jose, particularly our pitching prospects, because it's historically a hitter's league. However I reserve the right to change my mind if they move on to higher levels and fail. I'm hoping that Kyle Crick, for example, continues his dominance at AA ball next year. However if he does poorly the next couple of years, I'll probably sour on him too. Crick, however, is far younger than Brown at similar times of their development, so I'll probably be less concerned about him than I am about Brown. And let's not forget that Brown only hit .279 at AA Richmond in 2012 as well, with an OPS of .731. That's not a good season either. So basically you're asking us to ignore poor performances at AA and AAA because he had one good year in A ball. That's really asking us to ignore too much.

[Rog]

Rog -- Please show us where either of us said that, Randy, or just let it go. Mark and I have never been so dumb on this topic as when you talk for us.

Dood - both of you strongly implied you believe Gary Brown to be a bust, even agreeing with other stats geeks that say he projects to no more than a 4th outfielder. As I said before...you didnt utter the Brady Bunch exact words but that doesn't matter one bit. We all know what you meant, you're just trying to weasel out now.

Rog -- Stop and think about this, Randy. You say you know what we "strongly implied," but in reality, it is what you inferred that you are talking about. If we didn't say it but implied it, why didn't you ask us to be precise?

Neither of us think Gary is a bust, let alone having implied it.

Here may be one of the areas in which you get things wrong, Randy. Just because I post a quote or scouting report here doesn't mean I believe in it. From winter to winter, this has been more or less my progression regarding Brown:

After 2011, I said that I didn't think Gary would become the star you believed he would be. I pointed primarily to his lack of plate control, something I had read in at least one scouting report and had seen somewhat confirmed by his K/BB ratio. You want your leadoff man to put the ball in play or take a walk -- not strike out as frequently as Gary has.

After 2012, I pointed to a scouting report that said he could wind up being anywhere from a star (or at least a first division starter) to a 4th outfielder. I think I thought he was unlikely to become more than a second division starter.

Now I still believe he could (and likely will at some point) become a second division starter. I don't think he will be successful when given a chance to start and will play most of his career as a reserve.

With prospects there is almost always the possiblity they will become better or worse than they appear to us (or even many of the scouts). It is hard to project the development of a player with certainty.

I have mentioned that the guy I was probably most wrong about has been Pablo Sandoval. I thought Buster Posey would hit with more power than he has. On the road, he has done so, but at home he hasn't. Brandon Belt hasn't developed as quickly as I thought, and his ceiling may not be quite as high as I felt.

I'm sure I have missed on other players as well, but those are the ones who come to mind. Oh, and Tim Lincecum has become a very fine pitcher, but not the superstar I thought he would be.

Anyway, Randy, don't try to put words in Mark's or my mouth. And don't say I'm trying to weasel out of something when that's not something I would do.

I'm even flexible, Randy. After the 2011 season I eventually raised my opinion of Brown a bit based on your glowing reports. I didn't become as excited about him as you were, but I did go part way toward your position. That's more changing than I can remember your doing.

And don't give me this "stats geek who doesn't understand anything beyond stats" garbage. I haven't seen a lot of San Jose games, but I didn't give glowing reports of the 2009 team, either. When the Little Giants had a starting lineup of Posey, Villalona, Noonan, Crawford, Gillaspie, Neal, Ford and Kieschnick in 2009, I said that I believed only Posey would become a good hitter.

I came to that opinion even though Crawford hit .371 with an OPS over 1.000 and though Kieschnick put up a .876 OPS. I did point out the strength of the San Jose lineup and that Neal moved up from #9 in the lineup to #4 within a month. Neal was the one guy I did get a little overly excited about, in part because Don was playing him up quite a bit. I thought Neal would become a 4th or 5th outfielder and might even become a 2nd division starter. Instead, the best he could manage was a cup of coffee in the bigs.

You say I'm all about stats, Randy, yet to the best of my knowledge, I saw more of Lincecum's minor league career than any layman. I charted his pitches to the point where his dad asked me to share what I saw.

I'm not trying to say I'm anything great. What I am saying is that I understand a lot more than stats. I have spent more of my baseball-watching career NOT knowing much of anything about analytics. I developed enough non-statistical knowledge that I could talk with several players. Heck, Giants reliever Jerry Johnson even said when I mentioned his change up that "I should probably use that more." (I did gulp when he later threw one to Hank Aaron, and Hank promptly disposed of it over the fence.)

So, Randy, just get off this "doesn't understand anything but stats" garbage, and don't try to put words in Mark's or my mouth. Don't simply infer what we are saying; ASK us.

You were direct in asking whether I thought it was more likely that Gary would become a bust of a star. I replied that it depended on how one defined the terms, especially in the case of "bust." Here are two things I DON'T expect from Brown:

. I don't expect him NOT to make the major leagues.

. I don't expect him to become an All-Star level player.

I DO expect Gary to become something between a backup outfielder (perhaps even a platoon starter) and a 2nd division starter. If Gary were to become a 1st division starting player, I would be DELIGHTED.

My very best guess would be that he will go back and forth between the bench and doing some starting and that he will wind up at the level of a 4th outfielder.

He could still become a star; he could still become a bust. I think the odds of either happening aren't good. But if he's going to become a starting outfielder we are proud of, he's going to need to improve his plate control considerably.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2160/giants-prospects#ixzz2pdIQqU3B

[sfgdood]

Now I still believe he could (and likely will at some point) become a second division starter. I don't think he will be successful when given a chance to start and will play most of his career as a reserve.

Dood - for a 20th round pick, this is a success story. For a 1st rounder, this is called being a bust.

[sfgdood]

I'm very excited by our players that do well at San Jose, particularly our pitching prospects, because it's historically a hitter's league. However I reserve the right to change my mind if they move on to higher levels and fail. I'm hoping that Kyle Crick, for example, continues his dominance at AA ball next year. However if he does poorly the next couple of years, I'll probably sour on him too. Crick, however, is far younger than Brown at similar times of their development, so I'll probably be less concerned about him than I am about Brown. And let's not forget that Brown only hit .279 at AA Richmond in 2012 as well, with an OPS of .731. That's not a good season either. So basically you're asking us to ignore poor performances at AA and AAA because he had one good year in A ball. That's really asking us to ignore too much.

Dood - fair enough...but when you give pitchers a pass for playing in the offensive CAL league, it would be right to also give hitters some leeway for playing in the pitcher friendly Eastern League. My thing is this. You're placing all your trust in stats, and that's fine. But if I were to give a report that might disagree with stats, I'm going to be ridiculed by you and Rog. I'm getting kind of sick of that.

[Rog]

Randy -- it would be right to also give hitters some leeway for playing in the pitcher friendly Eastern League.

Rog -- You're right about that. And in that context, Brown certainly didn't have an awful year there in 2012. But even after making an adjustment, he declined noticeably from San Jose. And last season he did have an awful season at hitter-friendly Fresno.

Randy -- My thing is this. You're placing all your trust in stats, and that's fine. But if I were to give a report that might disagree with stats, I'm going to be ridiculed by you and Rog. I'm getting kind of sick of that.

Rog -- I think we both would be OK with that if you gave us a reason beyond what you saw at San Jose. Because of his lack of plate control and inability top take a walk (which I had seen in at least one scouting report and was backed up by his stats), I wasn't as high on him after 2011 as you were. But I was higher on him than I am today. Hopefully, a year from now I'll be higher once again.

One thing I have pointed out that Brown does well is get hit by pitches. That may not show the plate control that a walk does, but it gets the batter to first base just as well. I'm guessing that he crowds the plate, and I believe that somewhere I read he has trouble with outside pitches. I'm not certain about that last comment though. Perhaps he's getting jammed.

Anyway, Randy, just as I think it was fair for me to take an opinion that was counter to most after Brown's 2011 season, it would indeed be appropriate for you to take a counter opinion to the decline most see in his prospect potential. But please give us some new facts to back it up.

What you saw at San Jose certainly isn't meaningless. In fact, it may have given us a sample of what he will ultimately approach as a big leaguer. I'd much rather he played so well in San Jose as to have played poorly there. If that were the case, I WOULD say he would be approaching bust status.

But as Mark and I have pointed out, his performance in AA and AAA likely has more meaning than what he accomplished in San Jose. If Gary had roared through AA and AAA and already become the Giants' center fielder and was doing well, my prognosis for him would be looking kind of silly.

I do hope to be wrong, and there is still the possibility that I will be. But I know of no one else who shares your opinion right now, even though your opinion was the clear majority opinion two years ago.

I mean this sincerely when I say it. Please give us some reason besides what he did in San Jose not to downgrade Gary as a prospect. When I went counter to the majority opinion after 2011, I had an analytical reason for doing so. I hope you can give us something current that helps us upgrade our evaluation.

What he did in 2011 DOES have some meaning. But 2012 was iffy for him, and 2013 was downright poor. Is there something he has lost since San Jose and might regain, or is it simply that he wasn't (and might not be) prepared for higher-level pitching. There are many prospects such as Brandon Crawford who hit great in A Ball but then declined as they moved up the chain.

Is there something you know about Gary other than how good he looked at San Jose that leads you to believe he will recover? I'm just not seeing good scouting reports on him now that are at all good.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2160/giants-prospects#ixzz2peWEhnsz

[sfgdood]

Look I'm not going to fight what your stats say on this because even if I had seen him as often as I did in 2011, there is little I could say to pretty up such a poor season as Gary had in 2013. You don't believe in what people see unless the stats back them up, that much is clear...which kind of makes my reports unneccesary doesn't it? You know where you can find your facts so just go on and do that. I'll keep my observations to myself from now on.

[Rog]

Randy -- Look I'm not going to fight what your stats say on this because even if I had seen him as often as I did in 2011, there is little I could say to pretty up such a poor season as Gary had in 2013. You don't believe in what people see unless the stats back them up, that much is clear...which kind of makes my reports unneccesary doesn't it? You know where you can find your facts so just go on and do that. I'll keep my observations to myself from now on.

Rog -- It seems to me that you simply don't want to back down from someone once you say it -- especially if I am the one who disagrees.

You are right about being able to do little to "pretty up" (good term, by the way) Gary's really tough last season. But I was honestly hoping that you had read something somewhere or had a friend who saw Fresno games or something who could "freshen up" Gary's year a bit.

As for my not believing in what people say unless the stats agree, wouldn't you say that Gary's stats were pretty darn good in 2011? Yet I said I didn't think he would be as good as most thought. I DIDN'T agree with what you and many other people were saying -- even though his overall stats made him appear to be a huge star.

As for your reports, I not only enjoy them but have encouraged them. You likely see San Jose play far more often than the rest of us put together. I do see some scouting reports here and there on those players, but your input would be much appreciated. I disagree with you on Brown, but I don't think you're a bad "scout."

There are things to be learned at minor league games, and pitchers can be studied particularly well. One can get seats right behind the plate in San Jose in the very first few rows. IIRC there's a little box section there where the guy with the speed gun sits, and one can get a great look at a pitcher's stuff.

Sometimes he can gain other insight too, as I did when I talked to the "gun guy" about Tim Alderson's speed and he told me he didn't think (the other) Tim had broken 92 all season. That doesn't mean Alderson couldn't have been effective, but it did put a small pall on the situation.

Alderson was 13-4 with a 2.79 ERA at San Jose in 2008. I'm pretty sure he pitched well and won the 2008 playoff opener I saw. But ultimately his lack of speed got him (at least so far).

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2160/giants-prospects#ixzz2pix1KBYQ