White Sox Interactive Forums
Minor Observations

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Minor Observations
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-28-2005, 09:59 AM
California Sox California Sox is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,440
Post Sox have 5 in BA's Top 100

Baseball America has started revealing its Top 100 today. They've started with the final quarter, 76-100, and the Sox have two players in theat group, Josh Fields and Iguchi. With Anderson, McCarthy, and Sweeney locks for the Top 100, that means the Sox will have five of the Top 100. I think that's a pretty good showing.

Here's the link. http://www.baseballamerica.com/today...28top1001.html
__________________
Witness to the agony ('76 Sox season tix) and the ecstasy (2005 World Champions!)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-28-2005, 10:09 AM
Dadawg_77 Dadawg_77 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: North Side of Chicago
Posts: 8,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by California Sox
Baseball America has started revealing its Top 100 today. They've started with the final quarter, 76-100, and the Sox have two players in theat group, Josh Fields and Iguchi. With Anderson, McCarthy, and Sweeney locks for the Top 100, that means the Sox will have five of the Top 100. I think that's a pretty good showing.

Here's the link. http://www.baseballamerica.com/today...28top1001.html
Well it is slighty above average on teams percentage of top 100, 5% vs 3.33%. Also, would a wieghted system giving more credit for higher place prospects be better method of rating teams?
__________________
"You'll get one good pitch to hit. One good pitch. That's all. Don't count on more. So you better know the strike zone. And when you get that one good pitch you better hit it and hit it hard. Remember, just one good pitch"

-Ted Williams as told in The Teamates.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-28-2005, 11:19 AM
Flight #24 Flight #24 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,475
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadawg_77
Well it is slighty above average on teams percentage of top 100, 5% vs 3.33%. Also, would a wieghted system giving more credit for higher place prospects be better method of rating teams?
You could look at is as "slightly higher" in terms of it being 1.67% higher, or you could say that if the average team has 3.33%, the Sox have 50% more than the average team by having 5%.

The best way to do this is to rank how many each team has and see where the Sox come out. Higher scores for higher rank would be good, but that's obviously a somewhat difficult thing to do and appropriately balance one top-10 guy v. a number of lower ranked (2d 50) guys - which is better for an organization?

For the record, in the 76-100 range, the Sox are tied with the Angels, Rangers, Indians, Dodgers, & Braves for the lead with 2 prospects.
__________________
"You don't quit. You don't go home before it's time. You don't come out of a game, even if you are in pain and feel as if you can't go one more step"
"Never give up, Never, never, never give up."
- Luther Head after Elite 8 win v. Arizona
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-01-2005, 02:36 PM
maurice maurice is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bridgeport, Chicago, IL
Posts: 7,714
Default

According to a poster at soxtalk, the Sox have 3 of the Top 50. Only one team (Brewers) had more guys in the Top 50, and only 3 teams had more in the Top 100 (Dodgers, Angels, Braves).
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-01-2005, 03:52 PM
PAPChiSox729 PAPChiSox729 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,883
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by maurice
According to a poster at soxtalk, the Sox have 3 of the Top 50. Only one team (Brewers) had more guys in the Top 50, and only 3 teams had more in the Top 100 (Dodgers, Angels, Braves).
It will be awesome when Anderson, Sweeney, and McCarthy sweep the top 3 places.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-01-2005, 07:02 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 5,243
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadawg_77
Also, would a wieghted system giving more credit for higher place prospects be better method of rating teams?
Is any weight given to what Class the prospect was last year or is projected to play in this year?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemaster Fred
This is the major leagues so get it how you live and letís fight tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-02-2005, 08:54 AM
Dadawg_77 Dadawg_77 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: North Side of Chicago
Posts: 8,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maurice
According to a poster at soxtalk, the Sox have 3 of the Top 50. Only one team (Brewers) had more guys in the Top 50, and only 3 teams had more in the Top 100 (Dodgers, Angels, Braves).
They haven't posted in 1-25 but the Sox top prospect so far is #37 Brian Anderson, Sweeney is 42, and McCarthy is 49. I can't think of anyone else being ranked so no one in the top 25. Thus it looks like the Sox have depth but no real star in the minors from these rankings. This brings up the question, would you rather have a player like Fielder then Anderson, Sweeney and McCarthy.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-02-2005, 09:48 AM
Ol' No. 2's Avatar
Ol' No. 2 Ol' No. 2 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bullpen Sports Bar
Posts: 11,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadawg_77
They haven't posted in 1-25 but the Sox top prospect so far is #37 Brian Anderson, Sweeney is 42, and McCarthy is 49. I can't think of anyone else being ranked so no one in the top 25. Thus it looks like the Sox have depth but no real star in the minors from these rankings. This brings up the question, would you rather have a player like Fielder then Anderson, Sweeney and McCarthy.
Wasn't Joe Borchard in the top 25 at one time?
__________________

19 seasons, 9232 AB, 216 SO
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-02-2005, 11:03 AM
California Sox California Sox is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,440
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadawg_77
They haven't posted in 1-25 but the Sox top prospect so far is #37 Brian Anderson, Sweeney is 42, and McCarthy is 49. I can't think of anyone else being ranked so no one in the top 25. Thus it looks like the Sox have depth but no real star in the minors from these rankings. This brings up the question, would you rather have a player like Fielder then Anderson, Sweeney and McCarthy.
Players like Frank and Maggs were not in the top 25, meanwhile I think Rauch, Baldwin, Garland, and Borchard were. It's an inexact science.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-02-2005, 12:01 PM
Flight #24 Flight #24 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,475
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadawg_77
They haven't posted in 1-25 but the Sox top prospect so far is #37 Brian Anderson, Sweeney is 42, and McCarthy is 49. I can't think of anyone else being ranked so no one in the top 25. Thus it looks like the Sox have depth but no real star in the minors from these rankings. This brings up the question, would you rather have a player like Fielder then Anderson, Sweeney and McCarthy.
Honestly, while I'd take 1 top 10 guy over maybe 2 "2d 50" guys, I would take 3 guys ranked 40-45 over the 1 top 10. The # of top,"cant-miss" prospects who actually do miss makes me like the chances of having at least 1 of the 3 top 50 guys make it over the chance of the 1 top 10.

Just IMO, I'm sure someone has some stats somewhere on the success rate of BA top 10 ranked players.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-02-2005, 01:46 PM
maurice maurice is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bridgeport, Chicago, IL
Posts: 7,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flight #24
I would take 3 guys ranked 40-45 over the 1 top 10. The # of top,"cant-miss" prospects who actually do miss makes me like the chances of having at least 1 of the 3 top 50 guys make it over the chance of the 1 top 10.
Agreed. The bust-rate for even highly rated prospects favors strength in numbers. I'm glad that all of our chickens are not in one basket.

Depth also maximizes the possibility of multiple trades -- e.g., trading Reed for Garcia, while retaining 3 Top 50 prospects (plus Fields, Young, Tracey, a bunch of lefties, etc.) for future "use."

You also should consider that Anderson and Sweeney haven't been pros for very long, and McCarthy just hit the "radar" this year. Another solid season could move one or more of them into the Top 25 (and perhaps move Fields into the Top 50).

Last edited by maurice; 03-02-2005 at 01:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-02-2005, 09:41 PM
Dadawg_77 Dadawg_77 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: North Side of Chicago
Posts: 8,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by California Sox
Players like Frank and Maggs were not in the top 25, meanwhile I think Rauch, Baldwin, Garland, and Borchard were. It's an inexact science.
Borchard was more hype then production in the minors. Pitchers get hurt and careers are destroyed, so its hard to say much about pitchers. In my example, Prince Fielder has super star written all over him while Anderson looks to become a quality player. With` Sweeney, his lack of power doesn't look good right now, hopefully he was too young but a .379 slg. Thus I would think the super star player has lot more potential to help your team's chances of winning then two solid players.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-02-2005, 09:50 PM
OEO Magglio OEO Magglio is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadawg_77
Borchard was more hype then production in the minors. Pitchers get hurt and careers are destroyed, so its hard to say much about pitchers. In my example, Prince Fielder has super star written all over him while Anderson looks to become a quality player. With` Sweeney, his lack of power doesn't look good right now, hopefully he was too young but a .379 slg. Thus I would think the super star player has lot more potential to help your team's chances of winning then two solid players.
What about Bmac, if the projections were just by production don't you think he'd be much higher?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-02-2005, 11:01 PM
Randar68 Randar68 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadawg_77
Borchard was more hype then production in the minors. Pitchers get hurt and careers are destroyed, so its hard to say much about pitchers. In my example, Prince Fielder has super star written all over him while Anderson looks to become a quality player. With` Sweeney, his lack of power doesn't look good right now, hopefully he was too young but a .379 slg. Thus I would think the super star player has lot more potential to help your team's chances of winning then two solid players.
Ahhh, number crunching a kid who basically went straight to High A out of Iowa HS...

Nothing like a good stat-head evaluating 19 year olds in High A...
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-02-2005, 11:03 PM
Randar68 Randar68 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OEO Magglio
What about Bmac, if the projections were just by production don't you think he'd be much higher?
BA has been hesitant to move him up all along. They don't see the 95 mph electric arm, etc that makes them jump around. He ascended so quickly, as well...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:11 AM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.