Updated Future Forty
A few days later than I had hoped, but the Future Forty has been updated for the month of May. I’ve made a few minor template adjustments to help the overall look of the page.
Not too many drastic changes on the player evaluation side. In general, one month of competition isn’t going to change many opinions, especially when a player has several years of established track record. Some of the notable changes include the removal of Rett Johnson (released), Jesus Guzman (steroids), and Hunter Brown (exposed against Triple-A pitching), plus the addition of TJ Bohn to the list. I’ve dropped two more players than I’ve added, getting the list back down to 40 players instead of the 42 I had during the last update.
I’ve adjusted several of the risk/reward ratings as well, but none drastically. Asdrubal Cabrera and Matt Tuiasasopo each got their risk rating lowered by a point as they’re both pounding Midwest League pitching, while Yuniesky Betancourt went the wrong way in the reward category as he’s been completely overmatched at the plate in the Texas League.
And, as always, this is a great thread for random minor league questions, and I’ll try to answer as many as humanly possible.
Comments
68 Responses to “Updated Future Forty”
Re 42: I second that. I would even assist with the setup of a Paypal account if it meant I could give these guys money.
I’m pretty sure that we could handle a Paypal account setup.
Very good point. Didn’t mean to insult your intelligence.
how about a small tax on comments – call it the “Corcoran Tax.”
I’d pay it, willingly. If you were to charge 5-10cents a comment, sure, I’d do it, and I wouldn’t even cut down on the number of comments.
Dave, other than Madritsch and Blackley (who is out for the year), I have not heard any recent progress reports on the injured prospects. Have you heard anything lately?
Dave..Is the idea Adam Jones would best be positioned as a pitcher changed?
The table below shows the top 12 first baseman in 2004, based on VORP, plus Giambi, Helton, Bagwell, Klesko, Thomas, and McGwire. (I added the others to kind of round out the list> The data shown are the position at which they were drafted and the round in which they were drafted. (Data taken from the Baseball Cube.) I’m not sure what tags are allowed in comments, so I hope the table comes out ok.
Player ……. Position…Round
===================================
M Teixeira ….. 3b ……. 1
P Konerko ……. C ……. 1
C Delgado ……. C ….. undrafted
K Millar ……. 3B ….. undrafted
S Hatteberg …. OF ……. 1
B Broussard …. OF ……. 2
T Martinez ….. 1B ……. 1
D Erstad ……. OF ……. 1
M Sweeney ……. C ……. 10
R Palmeiro ….. OF ……. 1
F Thomas ……. 1B ……. 1
C Pena ……… 1B ……. 1
J Morneau …… 1B ……. 3
J Giambi ……. 3B ……. 2
T Helton …… 1B-P …… 1
J Thome …….. SS ……. 13
J Bagwell …… 3B ……. 4
R Klesko …… 1B-P …… 5
M McGwire …… 1B ……. 1
I struck me that there are a lot of first round picks in that list, and I think most of those guys were drafted for their bat. Quite a few of them also shifted position.
#40 – thanks, Paul. That’s precisely what I was trying to say. The data I posted in #58 are to that point.
I, too, (really) miss the player-specific comments, they gave a great feel for the month-to-month evolution of the farm system “ecosystem” (although on balance I find that the additional richness of the new system even better.) But I could see how they’d be a pain to write for 40+ individuals who don’t necessarily show dramatic changes in 30 days.
Maybe adding a brief entry in a “Notes” column only to explain rationale only for prospects with _changes_ to the holding/rising/falling ratings would help add some of the old flavor with much less effort. (And might pre-emptively answer some inevitable followup questions…)
Man, I don’t usually post on here, but I have to say, this information is dreamy! Nice work Dave.
If you can answer it, I’m curious what the organization’s thinking is behind their artificially-projected surplus at SS.
It’s not just the M’s. There’s a long held belief in baseball that you don’t move a player from a premium position until you have to. Almost every organization does it. Miguel Cabrera played exactly one game in the outfield in the minor leagues before the Marlins called him up. The Fish knew he wasn’t going to play shortstop at the major league level, but they left him there until he got to high-A, and then shifted him to third. It’s standard operating procedure.
I don’t agree with it, personally, but it’s one of many long held philosophies that I don’t agree with.
Is (your positive impression of Morse’s defense in Tacoma) hard work, a fluke, or something folks have drilled into him?
I haven’t seen Morse this year, so I can’t speak to what you’ve witnessed personally, but the reports on him are as poor as always. He was probably the worst defensive shortstop I’ve ever seen when I watched him up close and personal in the Carolina League, and the consensus from scouts is agreement that he just doesn’t have the physical skills necessary to be a useful defensive player.
Dave, other than Madritsch and Blackley (who is out for the year), I have not heard any recent progress reports on the injured prospects. Have you heard anything lately?
Bucky’s out until July. Nageotte’s out until June 15th, and potentially the year. Baek’s out through May. Lopez should be back in a few weeks.
Is the idea Adam Jones would best be positioned as a pitcher changed?
That’s more my personal feeling that he’s not going to hit enough or field shortstop well enough to stick in the majors as a regular, so I’d like to see what he can do on the mound. He wants to hit, though, and the organization isn’t even tinkering with the thought of putting him on the mound.
I struck me that there are a lot of first round picks in that list, and I think most of those guys were drafted for their bat. Quite a few of them also shifted position.
If the question is one of draft theory, I’d agree, draft hitters over toolsy run-and-throw guys. But the assertion that hitting is an easier skill to project simply because more hitters make the majors than tools fiends is a leap I’m not willing to make, and one I don’t agree with. It’s drawing an incorrect conclusion from the evidence.
But the assertion that hitting is an easier skill to project simply because more hitters make the majors than tools fiends is a leap I’m not willing to make, and one I don’t agree with. It’s drawing an incorrect conclusion from the evidence.
So what, in your judgment, would be the correct conclusion?
“So what, in your judgement, would be the correct conclusion?”
I realize you’re not asking me, but I think the only conclusion you can really make is that it’s a list of the top 1B in 2004, with a few others thrown in to round it out. What else could you conclude from that?
I like the new format, Dave, but it doesn’t work in firefox.
Also would like to point out that there are some good draft studies on Sons of Sam Horn. Here is one of them: http://p086.ezboard.com/fsonsofsamhornfrm56.showMessage?topicID=18.topic
RE #65. I’m using firefox and the Future Forty format looks fine. Version 1.0.3 if that makes a difference.
Great info as always, Dave.
Re #64: the list wasn’t the point.
Out of the 4 soft tossing lefties talked about above which one of has the highest potential? They all show pretty much the same on the chart. Do any of them have a solid out pitch? And last but not lest whos got the best velocity? I was told nottingham has a good two seamer but I didn’t get to see him during spring training , I did see oflaherty pitch intersquad though and he hit 93 on the players behind the backstop’s gun , it was a stalker pro I’m pretty sure.