SFM's 2011 Number Three Prospect

[nny]

Yeah I'm not sure where you read he has a strong arm, it's the exact opposite. Most scouts view him as a 1b because of his horrible arm (Because of motion, I lol'd when I was watching the scouting video at MLB.com), the FO views him as a LFer because they plan to fix how he throws the ball. If they fix it, he's a LFer. If they don't, he's a 1b. But he likely won't be ++ at either position. The only ++ I saw for him was his speed/base running as a 1B if he stayed there, but the FO's plan is for him to be in LF, so that'll be negated.

And Hand

[lou]

Remember the scouting report completely backwards, n/m

But still like Hand over him.

[Erick]

Picked Hand, as well.

[Cambridge]

Hand, not much after Yelich

[nny]

Olmos baby

[Jay]

Koehler impresses me.
His walks and hits have gone down and his strike outs have gone up. He has 7 errors last year so he may need to do work in some more fielding drills.
Definitely think he provides some nice pitching depth. Not going to be a star ever but I think he could be in the back end of a rotation or a long guy in the bullpen.

It really isn't that there isn't much after Hand. It is that the players after Hand you would like to see on the later half of your top 20 not your top 10 because they don't have very high ceilings or they are very young and unproven.

[Mainge]

Koehler impresses me.
His walks and hits have gone down and his strike outs have gone up. He has 7 errors last year so he may need to do work in some more fielding drills.
Definitely think he provides some nice pitching depth. Not going to be a star ever but I think he could be in the back end of a rotation or a long guy in the bullpen.

It really isn't that there isn't much after Hand. It is that the players after Hand you would like to see on the later half of your top 20 not your top 10 because they don't have very high ceilings or they are very young and unproven.

So there isn't much after Hand?

[Jay]

So there isn't much after Hand?

That's not the case it's just not what people would like to see in the system. I think there are plenty of players that will fill a role with the big club in upcoming years but they aren't type of players you want appearing that high on your top prospect lists. You don't really look to have the majority of your list filled with guys who profile as bullpen arms or have guys in A ball who project as a middle of the rotation guy at best or position players in low a or who haven't done anything yet. It's just not talent you would rank that high.

The top 10 last year had some graduations and then the some players on it had their stock fall. Your just in a situation where you don't want to highly rank any of the players you have for various reasons.

I see the situation as this:
we have about 2 or 3 players you would rank from 3-8
but we have 20 players that you would rank from 9-20.
There is depth their its just you dont have a good range of talent and we're missing those higher ceiling prospects that are developing as they go through the system. And the players that you have performing don't project well in the majors or don't project to anything more than a role player on a good team.

[Mainge]

That's not the case it's just not what people would like to see in the system. I think there are plenty of players that will fill a role with the big club in upcoming years but they aren't type of players you want appearing that high on your top prospect lists. You don't really look to have the majority of your list filled with guys who profile as bullpen arms or have guys in A ball who project as a middle of the rotation guy at best or position players in low a or who haven't done anything yet. It's just not talent you would rank that high.

The top 10 last year had some graduations and then the some players on it had their stock fall. Your just in a situation where you don't want to highly rank any of the players you have for various reasons.

I see the situation as this:
we have about 2 or 3 players you would rank from 3-8
but we have 20 players that you would rank from 9-20.
There is depth their its just you dont have a good range of talent and we're missing those higher ceiling prospects that are developing as they go through the system. And the players that you have performing don't project well in the majors or don't project to anything more than a role player on a good team.

So there's not much after hand.

[nny]

We have more depth this year (C+ish prospects), but less star power.

The star power is what's important, but it's not like last year where after the big prospects it just fell of a ledge. Our system sucks but we do have depth in future bench guys/role players/injury replacements/possible regulars. That's what he's saying...there's basically four levels of prospect. OMG awesome, solid (dominguez/james/hand), decent enough, and shit. We basically went from Solid to Shit last year. This year we have depth in the decent enough category
--------------------
also OLMOS

[Mainge]

We have more depth this year (C+ish prospects), but less star power.

The star power is what's important, but it's not like last year where after the big prospects it just fell of a ledge. Our system sucks but we do have depth in future bench guys/role players/injury replacements/possible regulars. That's what he's saying...there's basically four levels of prospect. OMG awesome, solid (dominguez/james/hand), decent enough, and shit. We basically went from Solid to Shit last year. This year we have depth in the decent enough category
--------------------
also OLMOS

Oh I know but I believe that's exactly what everyone was saying and he was just repeating it in way more words.

[Cambridge]

Reading up, seems Hand, Olmos and James all put up similar numbers in A ball, question is whether James and Olmos can make the jump in Jupiter and improve their control a la Hand. Also no mention of Berglund, I know he had surgery (labrum?) but should be in the top 20 regardless.

Koehler has done nothing but put up good numbers everywhere, his stuff sounds decent enough. Always old relative to league is a problem but has done all that was asked of him at every stop. See how he gets on in New Orleans, think he could contribute something at the major league level even if as a swingman.

[lou]

Reading up, seems Hand, Olmos and James all put up similar numbers in A ball, question is whether James and Olmos can make the jump in Jupiter and improve their control a la Hand. Also no mention of Berglund, I know he had surgery (labrum?) but should be in the top 20 regardless.

Koehler has done nothing but put up good numbers everywhere, his stuff sounds decent enough. Always old relative to league is a problem but has done all that was asked of him at every stop. See how he gets on in New Orleans, think he could contribute something at the major league level even if as a swingman.

They've been projecting him as a swingman for a few years now, ala Kevin Gregg circa 2004-2006 statistically.

Berglund is absolutely in backend of top 20, and yes it was a labrum.