Tweet
Bold positions make for good forums. I think Monte Harrison will be better than Tucker, Soto and Brinson too. Why? He's just getting started after playing three sports in high school followed by a couple years of injuries. His performance in the fall league had everyone talking. Should Brinson's higher rating suggest he'll be the better pro? I can't see it.
-
Last edited by Lee Stone; 02-16-2018, 05:44 PM. -
What research? And I'm not saying this to give you a hard, time, I'm actually curious how much insight you have into these guys. If you've put the time in I would absolutely value your opinion. If not, I'm not sure how you could make a claim like that with any confidence, though. You don't have to go by the prospect rankings if you are going off of actually seeing them play extensively, or their numbers. These rankings from the good sites are experienced guys that watch these prospects, though. Of course they're not going to get them all right, that's how prospects work in all sports. It's hard for me to believe that a guy seen by most in the scouting community as someone with upside, but far from any kind of great prospect is given a higher value than a couple of prospects that much of the scouting community seems to be extremely high on.Originally posted by Lee Stone View PostComment
-
A lot of Milwaukee fans feel that way with Brinson/Harrison, so that one passes the smell test more than the others. Guess we'll see.Originally posted by Lee Stone View Post
All I think is, I feel they have the future OF already. They have real upside and numbers with what they got.Comment
-
I think Brinson is the safer prospect (even though i dont think he's a sure thing by any stretch of the imagination) but i think Harrison has an unreal ceiling. I do agree they have their future OF set though. But if you could get Soto/Tucker you do it and figure out the rest later.Comment
-
What OF is that? Brinson and who? We've got 3-tool Sierra - no power or plate discipline. 4-tool Braxton Lee (18 assists from CF in AA last season!) would be a decent fourth OF. If we're building a truly great team, we want three OF that can do it all. Harrison and my aforementioned Daniel Johnson would do that. Tucker would work too.
P.S. My research is in the form of reading everything (old retired guys have time for that). I favor prospects that actually perform at a high level in the minor leagues. Soto, for example, hasn't even played A ball - he's barely played. I shake my head at Sandy Alcantara being rated so highly. He's shown no ability to throw enough strikes or miss enough bats.Last edited by Lee Stone; 02-16-2018, 06:42 PM.Comment
-
Brinson, Sierra, Harrison, Lee, Miller. You can try, but youre likely not gonna get 3 5 tool OF's.Originally posted by Lee Stone View PostComment
-
Yeah, can you even imagine what an OF with 3 5 tool OF's would look like?Comment
-
-
-
Originally posted by fish16 View Post
Someone call Hugg and tell him the Post Of The Year was locked up 2 months in to 2018.Comment
-
-
-
are you familiar with the 5 tools? because if you were you wouldnt be arguing that.Originally posted by ¿NICK? View PostComment
-
For one thing the 5 tools designation is outdated by about 30 years, and super subjective, so I don't know why you brought it up, but if there was any outfield in the major leagues last year that you wanted to make an argument for having 3 5-tool outfielders than it would be by far the Marlins. The only tool for any of the 3 guys that I don't think you'd have an argument for is Yelich's arm.Originally posted by fish16 View PostComment
-
Very true. Speed didn't translate into extra bases or steals for Ozuna or Stanton, but it was a well-rounded OF.Comment
Comment