Minor League Games - Monday, July 24, 2017

[phillychuck]

I like the jump to 8.6 this season. I'm generally pretty skeptical about teenage pitchers in A-ball or below; too much chance of injury derailment or being exposed by older hitters later. I devalue low-level pitching prospects about 2-3 slots because of that risk, so maybe I'm just extremely risk averse.

[bigegypt0417]

My point is simply that the Phillies don't have any uber-talents in their system right now, an uber talent blows through the minors in 2-3 years out of HS and no more than 2 years out of college.
You'll know one when you see it, if Ortiz for example started next year at Lakewood and finished in Reading, odds are he's an uber-talent.

I believe you live with these standards in your head because it makes it easier to ignore the lower levels. You give reasons why young players need to adjust and then destroy your own ideas with posts like this. A 16 year LA signing will not normally blow through the minors in 2-3 years.

[bigegypt0417]

I like the jump to 8.6 this season. I'm generally pretty skeptical about teenage pitchers in A-ball or below; too much chance of injury derailment or being exposed by older hitters later. I devalue low-level pitching prospects about 2-3 slots because of that risk, so maybe I'm just extremely risk averse.

The success is incredibly risky but you have to be impressed with what you see and what the scouts have to say...the Gelb article was a fun read.

[allentown]

History tells us that at least a half of our Lakewood and below SP prospects won't make it. Still, it's a lot better to have a multiplicity of solid prospects with talent down on the farm than not. We have the starting pitching riches and that's a plus. Can't bank on most of them succeeding, but it has to be a huge plus for the farm and, more to the point, Sal just keeps on finding them. If even just one of these guys fulfills his potential, that's a big boost to the Phillies.

[Austinfan]

ELite SSs in the majors put up .850+ OPS.
The dropoff around #5 or so is Crawford's upside right now, a very good SS who's a level below the top.
Of course, all this is subject to change, Goldschmitt was an 8th rd pick in 2009, full-time starter in 2012 at age 24, then an elite player by the next season.

[Austinfan]

No but LA players usually don't get to the minors until 17-18, and if they're uber-talents, are in the majors by age 21.
If Ortiz is the "real thing," he'll start blowing it up in two years, same with Moniak, if he's not dominating AA by 21, he's unlikely to be "elite."
Which doesn't mean they won't be good players, most ML starters arrive at age 23-25 and many have solid careers. It certainly didn't hurt Utley.

[phillychuck]

Thinking about this a bit more, I'd divide our top prospects into about 3 tiers.

tier 1 -- top performance at AA or above, or excellent scouting projections supported by excellent performance in A-ball or rookie-ball plus better than average age/level placement:

Kingery
Hoskins
Crawford
Ortiz
Sanchez

tier 2--well above average age/level performance and good scouting (great scouting can offset some performance weakness and vice/versa):

Moniak
Alfaro
Haseley
Kilome
Irvin
Medina
Eshelman
Quinn (some deduction for injuries for sure..)
Randolph
Hall
Cozens
Suarez
Romero
Seranthony
Taveras

tier 3--some scouting or performance concerns mixed with other positives; also possible age/level issues

Tocci
Tromp
Walding
Eflin
Lively
Valentin
Stobbe
Grullon
Lots of A-ball pitchers
Brito
Gonzalez
Some 17 and 18-year-olds in DSL who don't have much of a track record yet
Elniery G.

I'm sure I've missed some guys, it's an off-the-top-of-the-head list.

[bigegypt0417]

ELite SSs in the majors put up .850+ OPS.
The dropoff around #5 or so is Crawford's upside right now, a very good SS who's a level below the top.
Of course, all this is subject to change, Goldschmitt was an 8th rd pick in 2009, full-time starter in 2012 at age 24, then an elite player by the next season.

There are 3 Shortstops in baseball with an OPS of 850.

So I guess a step behind in a top 5 or 6 SS?

Your benchmarks seem to shift with time.

Francisco Lindor has an OPS of .787

Galvis is 17th out of 25.

In 2016 there were 2.

[bigegypt0417]

No but LA players usually don't get to the minors until 17-18, and if they're uber-talents, are in the majors by age 21.
If Ortiz is the "real thing," he'll start blowing it up in two years, same with Moniak, if he's not dominating AA by 21, he's unlikely to be "elite."
Which doesn't mean they won't be good players, most ML starters arrive at age 23-25 and many have solid careers. It certainly didn't hurt Utley.

So you're already changing your description?

LOL

[andyb]

And defense matters a whole lot at SS too.

If Crawford becomes a 4 WAR SS (which I guess is not elite) I will still be pretty happy. And he could do that with a 750 OPS given his strong on base skills and hopefully if his defense is plus.

[allentown]

ELite SSs in the majors put up .850+ OPS.

It comes down to 'elite'. I've said I don't think we have any stars in the minors, and that includes Crawford. Perfectly good starting shortstops, like Rollins, have OPS well below .850+ in the minors. Rollins minor league OPS was .711 and his season best was .798, although that was in AAA at age 21. Derek Jeter's minor league OPS was .816, although he did have two partial-season stops where he cleared .900+, including 126 AB in AAA at age 20. THis was SSS and he was back in AAA at age 21 for about 500 AB and .816 OPS. The biggest thing which removes Crawford from elite status is age at level.

But you are arguing a silly point, as nobody thinks that Crawford is elite. He'll likely be a plus MLB starting SS, but quite far from elite. Elite is a very odd standard to set, as the Phillies have not a soul in the system, majors or minors, who is elite or looks likely to become elite.

[Austinfan]

It's not odd, it's really what should be at the top of the BA list (but not for long).
Once you get to good but not great players who need to be marinated (developed) in the minors, then it's tougher to make distinctions.
But baseball is not basketball, you don't need elite players to win, you just need lots of good players (think 2008 v 2009, 2010, 2011, or 1976-78 v 1980 and 1983).

It would be nice however to have our own "shooting star," that's why I think players like Moniak, Ortiz and Sanchez get people excited, you can hope for that kind of progression.
Once a player takes his time getting to Clearwater, that excitement dissipates, Kilome may end up a very talented SP, but he's not jumping out at you.
But sometimes players surprise, I don't think anyone expected this kind of season from Kingery.
I think Ranger Saurez is that kind of player this year, a command/control guy with mediocre stuff suddenly adds 4 MPH to his FB, and the sky is the limit (because he learned to be a polished pitcher before gaining velocity).

[andyb]

But sometimes players surprise, I don't think anyone expected this kind of season from Kingery.

The power is beyond expectations but most of us here did think Kingery was going to be very good. And a whole lot better than Jesmuel Valentin.

[allentown]

But baseball is not basketball, you don't need elite players to win, you just need lots of good players (think 2008 v 2009, 2010, 2011, or 1976-78 v 1980 and 1983).

The Phillies had elite and near-elite players in 2008: Howard, Utley, Hamels, Burrell, Werth, plus a truly elite season from Lidge.

[Austinfan]

Utley was an elite player. Wasn't a full-time starter until 26, elite player from 2005-2010
Howard had an elite season, but was a late bloomer who never matched his early production (didn't make the majors until 2005, 25 years old, full-time starter the next season), by 2008 he was an average starter.
Burrell #1 pick, made the Show at 23, best season was in 2002, never an elite player, by 2008 he was a slightly above average LF
Werth, made the majors at 25, injuries then derailed him until age 28, was a very good but not elite RF in 2008, strange career, fell off at 32-33, then bounced back with top solid seasons at 34-35.
Rollins, starter at 22, peaked from 25-29, in 2008 he had his last top season, a very good but not elite SS
Victorino, starter at 25, peaked from 26-30, a very good but not elite CF
Hamels, starter at 22, peaked from 26-30, bounce back year at 32, wasn't an elite SP in 2008
Lidge, became a ML RP at 26, two very good years at 27-28, bounce back in 2008 at age 31, a half bounce at age 33.

Thoughts:
1) Utley was the only elite player on that team, Lidge had an elite season for a closer but only as a 1 inning guy
2) Most of the key players peaked between 26-30, so were at or near their peak that season - 5 good to very good starters
3) You don't have to have great players at every spot if you have a solid core (Feliz and Ruiz were below average as starters)
4) A deep bullpen (Madsen, Durbin, Condrey, Romero) can allow you to survive a medicore starting staff (Moyers was a solid #3, Myers & Blanton were barely above replacement level - Kendrick and Eaton started 49 games and were well below replacement level).

I think the Phillies are building up a solid group of starters, though it would be nice to come up with an "Utley" who can give you five elite seasons when this group is peaking.
They're also going to have a deep starting pitcher group, now they just have to build a solid bullpen to go with it.
The difference a decade ago was the Phillies might come up with one or two young pitchers a year, and if the kid broke down, they had to scrape by with some mediocre veteran pitchers.
Klentak is building safety with numbers, when this team is competitive hopefully Lehigh will have 3-4 legitimate candidates to step up when the inevitable injuries occur.

[phillychuck]

AF, you have a very high standard for elite. I think it's easier to do season by season.

Is a 5 WAR season elite? I'd think so. Or a run of about 6 years averaging 4?

Burrell's best was 4.4, averaged about 2.5 in healthy seasons NOT ELITE
Utley's best was 8.2, averaged over 5 when healthy ELITE
Rollins best was 6.5, averaged 4 when healthy ELITE
Howard's best was 5.9, averaged about 3 for 6 years, otherwise sub-replacement NOT ELITE other than the big year
Hamels' best was 4.9, but had a 10 year run averaging above 4 ELITE
Victorino's best was 5.9 with the sox, but had a 5.7 with the Phils--he averaged over 4 for an 8-year run ELITE
Werth's had 2 5.1 seasons and another 5.0, averaged about 4 over his prime years NEAR ELITE
Ruiz's best was 5.2, otherwise averaged around 2.5 over his career NOT ELITE

[Austinfan]

Many players have elite years, however in most cases, it's a one year fluke.
Last year Fansgraph has 12 hitters and 2 pitchers with 6+ WAR. 23 hitters and 5 pitches with 5+ WAR so you could use 6 WAR for hitters and 5 WAR for pitchers.

Even with a 5 WAR standard, Rollins just barely met that level from 2004-2008, whereas Utley was clearly elite by any standard
Hamels was elite from 2010-2014 but not in 2008.

Doesn't change my point, it's less important whether X or Y will become an elite player, and more important whether we can put together a lineup with 5-6 players who are well above average (i.e. 4 WAR range).
Same with pitching, a clear #1 is less important than a trio of solid starters and the depth to avoid using below replacement level players.
And bullpen depth is probably as important as SP quality, a deep enough bullpen and your starters just have to get through 5 innings without disaster striking.

[schillingfan]

Which doesn't mean they won't be good players, most ML starters arrive at age 23-25 and many have solid careers. It certainly didn't hurt Utley.

Utley should have been up more than a year earlier. He started AAA three years in a row. First year was a jump from Clearwater and a change of position to 3B, at total waste of time. Second year he should have been promoted midseason when David Bell ?? was hurt and this was delayed a few weeks and he was as much bench guy as starter. Third year Polanco unexpected took the arbitration and Utley didn't come up until Polanco was traded for Urbina.

He was hurt by the utter stupidity of letting David Bell block him,, when Polanco should have been moved to 3rd B, what he played in St. Louis. Yeah, he had a great career, but he was robbed of at least a year in the majors.

[allentown]

Hamels was elite from 2010-2014 but not in 2008.

No, Hamels was elite in 2008. It is strange that you can refer to this year's Nola as a #1, but not 2008 Hamels. Hamels had an ERA+ of 141 and pitched 227 innings to a 3.09 ERA and a league-leading WHIP of 1.08. WAR of 4.4.

[andyb]

It just seems a silly question to argue about whether MLB teams need elite players to win. Generally they do. It is very rare to have a good team without 3 or 4 players having elite seasons. And yes the Phillies 2008 team had a bunch of elite players.

It is very rare that you see a team built from above average (2-3 WAR players) but nobody above 4. Is it possible? Sure. But it is kind of like dealing to an inside straight. Championships teams tend to have elite players because their younger players start to break out with elite performances while they are still on a relatively low salary. For the Phillies in 2008 this meant mainly that Utley, Rollins, and Hamels broke out while a bunch of other players were very good.

Who cares what a definition of elite is? Generally you can't have championships teams without elite performances unless you get really lucky.