82brewcrew82

I think this is the big issue when it comes to these debates about the system as a whole. There are no elite level prospects that are going to dominate with huge numbers all the way through the system. We have some guys that will be regulars, maybe even all stars, but those are the kinds of guys that have up and down development cycles. We don't have that guy that is going to OPS 850+ at every singe level. If that is what you are expecting, then you are going to be disappointed. If your expectations are more aligned with the actual talent level, then you are probably in the more optimistic camp. Are you saying there are none, or are you saying we have none in our system? If you are saying the latter I agree. To say there are no elite level prospects who put up around .300 ba and around .850 Ops throughout all minor league systems is just wrong. Robles, Moncada, Rosario, Jimenez, Devers, Mejia, Acuna just to name a few that are top 100 prospects right now that have put up those numbers on all levels.. there are plenty of those examples of guys in the MLB too(look at Keiths Law of Top players under 26 in the MLB, they all raked throughout all of MLB). That is what makes them thought of being the elites of the minor league prospects and elites of MILB)... I agree its not all stats, but stats do tell you some info and for guys like Erceg and Diaz I expected at least their OPS to be much better.. I was hoping one or a couple guys could elevate themselves into the belief of scouts that they are the other elite prospects, but that hasn't happened. Hence why I am a little unimpressed with the minors so far, but there is another half of the season left. Def will be looking for improvements from the Carolina squad. Of course elite level talent exists in the minors and more was added today. I think my post pretty clearly states that this talent does not exist in the Brewers system right now.

No, but the top systems do and the Brewers were supposed to be one of them. Even back the system wasn't great they had Fielder, Weeks, Hardy, Hart, Yo, Braun at the same time. But yea, nothing we can do about that but wait and hope some of these guys do develop into elite players. When were the Brewers supposed to be one of them. I think the knock on this system for the last two or three years has been the lack of elite level talent. The system gets high grades because of it's depth. Not it's high end talent. I'm pretty sure that when Fielder, Hart, Cruz, Hardy, and Weeks were coming through, the system was very highly regarded for high end talent. There were other players in that group that never did pan out.

Also, I think Devers is a Red Sox prospect and I don't think the elite pitching the Nationals traded away is really considered all that elite any more.

The best minor league systems do though.. The Dodgers the last 2 years have produced some ridiculous elite level talent that have been brought to the majors (Seager, Bellinger, Urias) The Nationals have had a couple (Turner, Devers, AND the elite pitchers they traded away). The Cubs are self Explanatory. The Astros as well. The Braves have a couple elite pitchers it looks like as well as just having Dansby called up and waiting on Albies. I was hoping at least one player could make that jump this year and None have. Gatewood has maybe made the jump to get close to being in the top 100, but no player has jumped into the elite discussion. That is why I have been disappointed so far. That's my point. What we are missing is that "elite" prospect. We don't have one and there isn't a single player in the system that I would have classified as "elite" when drafted. Sure, a few teams have multiple studs in their system, but the vast majority do not. If your expecting non-elite prospects to reach elite levels, you are bound to be disappointed.

Enlow and Heatherly come into mind. I'd add Allen, Skoug, and Beck to that list.

I didn't ask as a means of comparison. I just thought maybe some of those guys would still be available and along with Enlow and Stephens, it looks like Heatherly, Beck, and Scherff are still available at least. Maybe one to two of those picks make it through the first eight picks tomorrow?

Well when you draft college age hitters with great HS pitchers available and wait til 3rd pick to get the upside. Tall, lanky pitchers flame out the most for starting. Id be better off with the pick if another SP were selected before him. This being potentially the best arm you draft in potential is less pleasing. In case anyone hadnt noticed, developing wild pitchers to better control isn't the minors strong suit. Nevermind he needs a 3rd/4th pitch to learn. To Homer, yes every pitcher is a bust potential. Im commenting regarding to height. 6'6 and above bust more often than shorter pitchers due to mechanics and repeating delivery at such size. I've not seen anything that says he doesn't/can't repeat his mechanics. We do have a report saying he already has two decent secondary offerings....in case you hadn't noticed.

While still allowing him to pitch? I've heard he's toolsy.

Which ones were you considering? Are any still left on the board. It seems Lemons has considerable upside. Non of us knows what he becomes but he certainly has the upside.

Not difficult to be worried about someone who can never/ever repeat a delivery. Do you have something that indicates he can't never/ever repeat a delivery?

Good grief. We complain about high upside pitching and then complain when they go after it.

I still feel like they need a toolsy outfielder here.

I'd think one could easily make the argument for the dearth of true power threats in the system. In the end, I'll trust that the org. has more information than I do and that they made the best decision possible.

You shouldn't be having Max Walla flashbacks.

Why? MLB Pipeline has him ranked #34 - right about where we picked him. Is there some reason we would have to go over slot? He probably has the second highest signability issue besides Baz for the top 50 guys. His Texas commit is very, very strong. Its gonna take some coin to sign him. They are not picking him here without taking that into consideration and/or having a plan in place to sign him.

I'm OK with Ramos going. I agree with the sentiment that they should try and go pitching with the next two picks.

Not many teams are going to have 3-4 studs in their system at one time. With more marginal talent, you are going to have to deal with a much less linear development than you will with a blue chip prospect. In other words, struggles and rough stretches will be more common. You really have to take the long view and see where things stand at the end of the year.

I think this is the big issue when it comes to these debates about the system as a whole. There are no elite level prospects that are going to dominate with huge numbers all the way through the system. We have some guys that will be regulars, maybe even all stars, but those are the kinds of guys that have up and down development cycles. We don't have that guy that is going to OPS 850+ at every singe level. If that is what you are expecting, then you are going to be disappointed. If your expectations are more aligned with the actual talent level, then you are probably in the more optimistic camp.

I don't know if you know something or not but if that is the case then no way do the go OF at 9.

I hear you. But the 9th best talent is still going to be better than he 20th best talent or whoever you take. I realize if you go 9 and pay him slot then you can't necessarily reach higher with 34. But honestly with the depth we have in our system I'd rather go 9 and 34 then, say, 20 and 22. I think we need the elite type player and while I realize anyone could turn into the elite type player I think the odds are more likely that the more talented guy will. As far as our pick goes I am convinced we are taking Adell but I still have hopes for either Baz, Faedo or Bukauskas. As Oxy pointed out in the subsequent post, this is not necessarily true. IIRC, both Gatewood and Harrison were considered to have higher ceiings than Medeiros. I don't really care how much depth the Brewers are perceived to have, they are going to need more.

That would be a pretty amazing haul right there.

For me it really depends on what's available. The 9th best talent is not necessarily the same type of talent from draft to draft. It looks like this one, outside of the top handful, there is a decent drop off. In that case, If I can get payer A with B+ level talent, payer B with C+ talent and palyer C with C level talent or I can get players D, E and F with B- level talent, I might go with the second option there.

Cordell certainly rakes at Colorado Springs to the tune of 1.046 OPS. .732 OPS on the road though. Compare that to a guy like Garrett Cooper who goes 1.058 at home and .919 on the road.

I don't know about that. It was always my understanding that a tenant of the modern metrics movement was that there is no singular perfect statistic and that one should use multiple statistics to evaluate a player. I would think, to a very large degree, that most folks on this board wold adhere to that tenet. Just because someone uses a particular stat to refute a point does not mean they only took that one stat into account. Likewise, Colbyjack just confirmed a long held belief of mine that actual, professional, talent evaluators use different metrics (and probably in a much different way) than any of us armchair analysts even understand. If it was as simple as collecting stats and running them through a couple of formulas, 90% of the folks on this site would have a different profession. I also think in-person scouting gets discounted way too much. I can have all the stats in the world on a player but I still crave all of the in-person reports I can find (and no, I don't think watching video is the equivalent of actually watching a game). The case of Mr. Nottingham is interesting. Is the real Nottingham the one of the first 60 AB's or the one of the last 90 AB's? Someone mentioned an inflated OBP for Nottingham due to a high number of HBP's. Things is, 60% of those abnormally high HBP's came during the first 60 AB's when his numbers were horrific. His statistical surge over his last 90 AB's is in no way inflated by a fluky HBP number. I'm not advocating for or against Mr. Nottingham. What I am saying is that context does matter but even then we really are just guessing. Sure, we can make pretty accurate judgements on players whose statistics fall to the extremes. The problem is the vast majority of players fall somewhere in the middle. How do we know that organizations haven't developed strong correlations that suggest a players exit velocity at AA is a better indicator of future success than a players K% at AA. The answer is that we don't and as Colbyjack suggested, they just may have data along that line.

Did they run out of special Cardinals sprinkle dust?