Fangraphs Top 100 Prospects

[OmarComing25]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2017-top-100-prospects/

 

Moncada is at #1, the only one given a 70 FV.

 

#19 Giolito

#21 Kopech

#28 Lopez

#94 Collins

#98 Fulmer

 

And Burdi was on his "under consideration" list.

[bmags]

Awesome. I really like Longenhagen, I think he does a great job of breaking down swings. Tough to always pick up after popular writers leave.

[Quin]

In before someone else mentions Tatis at #78

[Chicago White Sox]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2017-top-100-prospects/

 

Moncada is at #1, the only one given a 70 FV.

 

#19 Giolito

#21 Kopech

#28 Lopez

#94 Collins

#98 Fulmer

 

And Burdi was on his "under consideration" list.

I'll keep shouting this, but it's an absolute sin that Burdi doesn't make the cut on these lists IMO. I'll give Fangraphs credit for having him in the "under consideration", but the dude is going to be a high leverage reliever in the majors. If we saw how teams valued those type of relievers at the trade deadline, I think it's time we finally reassess how treat them in minor league rankings.

[Y2Jimmy0]

I'll keep shouting this, but it's an absolute sin that Burdi doesn't make the cut on these lists IMO. I'll give Fangraphs credit for having him in the "under consideration", but the dude is going to be a high leverage reliever in the majors. If we saw how teams valued those type of relievers at the trade deadline, I think it's time we finally reassess how treat them in minor league rankings.

 

 

I don't. Guys with 60-70 IP per year just aren't as valuable as starters and position players.

[Chicago White Sox]

I don't. Guys with 60-70 IP per year just aren't as valuable as starters and position players.

That's not what GMs said at the deadline based on the prices they paid for elite relievers. Front offices are starting to realize these guys provide much more value their volume-based WAR would suggest. Not all runs/outs are created equal and high leverage ones should be valued accordingly. And pointing out that these guys only get 60 -70 innings a year is completely ignoring their potential use as weapons in the post-season.

 

I feel pretty confident in saying that with even one dominant major league season, Burdi would be able to net a haul that included at least two top 100 pieces. If such a player isn't considered a back-end top 100 prospect, then something is wrong with the ranking process IMO.

Edited March 13, 2017 by Chicago White Sox

[Y2Jimmy0]

That's not what GMs said at the deadline based on the prices they paid for elite relievers. Front offices are starting to realize these guys provide much more value their volume-based WAR would suggest. Not all runs/outs are created equal and high leverage ones should be valued accordingly. And pointing out that these guys only get 60 -70 innings a year is completely ignoring their potential use as weapons in the post-season.

 

I feel pretty confident in saying that with even one dominant major league season, Burdi would be able to net a haul that included at least two top 100 pieces. If such a player isn't considered a back-end top 100 prospect, then something is wrong with the ranking process IMO.

 

 

What you're describing is exactly why I value relievers the way I do. Create relievers that are failed starters. Let them thrive. Trade them for prospects. Rinse and repeat process. They are valuable but definite relievers will never be on top 100 lists, regardless of how they're used in playoff series'.

[steveno89]

That's not what GMs said at the deadline based on the prices they paid for elite relievers. Front offices are starting to realize these guys provide much more value their volume-based WAR would suggest. Not all runs/outs are created equal and high leverage ones should be valued accordingly. And pointing out that these guys only get 60 -70 innings a year is completely ignoring their potential use as weapons in the post-season.

 

I feel pretty confident in saying that with even one dominant major league season, Burdi would be able to net a haul that included at least two top 100 pieces. If such a player isn't considered a back-end top 100 prospect, then something is wrong with the ranking process IMO.

 

The potential for a mid rotation or better starting pitcher or above average mlb starting position player will always be seen as more valuable than a really good relief prospect. Burdi is a top 150 prospect that can become a high leverage setup man or closer, but those prospects just aren't going to show up often in top 100 rankings

[witesoxfan]

That's not what GMs said at the deadline based on the prices they paid for elite relievers. Front offices are starting to realize these guys provide much more value their volume-based WAR would suggest. Not all runs/outs are created equal and high leverage ones should be valued accordingly. And pointing out that these guys only get 60 -70 innings a year is completely ignoring their potential use as weapons in the post-season.

 

I feel pretty confident in saying that with even one dominant major league season, Burdi would be able to net a haul that included at least two top 100 pieces. If such a player isn't considered a back-end top 100 prospect, then something is wrong with the ranking process IMO.

 

I understand what you're saying, and excellent relievers have extraordinary trade value, but what are the odds that Burdi really gets there? Even if he's Joba Chamberlain and absolutely filthy for a few years, but falls off, how valuable is that in the long run?

 

Ceiling wise, Burdi is one of the best relievers in the game, but if he doesn't get there, we're talking about a guy who has limited value on the trade market.

[steveno89]

In before someone else mentions Tatis at #78

 

If Tatis is really that legit then the Shields trade is a disaster, but it's still really early to tell

 

This is a solid write up overall. I feel like Collins will have a better hit tool than 30 present/40 future grade though, especially due to his plate discipline. I'd go 40 current/55 future hit tool

[steveno89]

I understand what you're saying, and excellent relievers have extraordinary trade value, but what are the odds that Burdi really gets there? Even if he's Joba Chamberlain and absolutely filthy for a few years, but falls off, how valuable is that in the long run?

 

Ceiling wise, Burdi is one of the best relievers in the game, but if he doesn't get there, we're talking about a guy who has limited value on the trade market.

 

Elite, top 5 mlb relievers like Chapman, Jansen, Miller, etc. have tons of value, especially come high leverage playoff time...but unless a prospect is the next Mariano Rivera I do not think these players warrant a top 100 ranking

 

If the Sox decided to give Burdi a shot at starting, it might be a different story

[southsider2k5]

Elite, top 5 mlb relievers like Chapman, Jansen, Miller, etc. have tons of value, especially come high leverage playoff time...but unless a prospect is the next Mariano Rivera I do not think these players warrant a top 100 ranking

 

If the Sox decided to give Burdi a shot at starting, it might be a different story

 

I am so disappointed that they aren't even giving it a chance.

[steveno89]

I am so disappointed that they aren't even giving it a chance.

 

Well he currently throws from the stretch, which is not all that common for a starting pitcher

 

I'm not sure why they do not stretch him out and give him a chance to start while we are rebuilding for the next few seasons? If that does not work out he can always relieve

 

More than likely, Sox scouts feel much better about getting him to the majors in relief rather than screwing around trying to get him to be a starter. He was a reliever in college, so they might not want to mess with a good thing?

[ChiSoxFanMike]

Well he currently throws from the stretch, which is not all that common for a starting pitcher

 

I'm not sure why they do not stretch him out and give him a chance to start while we are rebuilding for the next few seasons? If that does not work out he can always relieve

 

More than likely, Sox scouts feel much better about getting him to the majors in relief rather than screwing around trying to get him to be a starter. He was a reliever in college, so they might not want to mess with a good thing?

That's what I would assume. It's also possible that Burdi and his agent want to get his MLB service time started ASAP and being a reliever is the fastest way to do that.

[witesoxfan]

I think there could be fear, whether warranted or not, that stretching a reliever into a starter does not mean he will come back and be as good if he does not work as a starter. Joba Chamberlain was a "starter" coming up, but in 17 games and 14 games started coming up through the minors, he averaged right around 5 innings per appearance, so he was never really stretched out properly. He was electric out of the pen, was still really good the next year in a mix between starting and relieving, but then was a full time starter in 2009 and was not very good. He never was the same after that.

 

To me, it seems like the best bet just to use him where he is comfortable.

[southsider2k5]

Well he currently throws from the stretch, which is not all that common for a starting pitcher

I'm not sure why they do not stretch him out and give him a chance to start while we are rebuilding for the next few seasons? If that does not work out he can always relieve

 

More than likely, Sox scouts feel much better about getting him to the majors in relief rather than screwing around trying to get him to be a starter. He was a reliever in college, so they might not want to mess with a good thing?

 

The Sox have used this path in the past, and it has worked out just fine.

[steveno89]

The Sox have used this path in the past, and it has worked out just fine.

 

I do not care how much pressure exists to get our prized prospects to the mlb level this season so that fans can see these guys on a regular basis, I'd much rather we keep Moncada/Giolito/Kopech/Lopez/Burdi/Fulmer/etc. in the minors the entire season to develop

 

Why rush these guys when we are not going to contend?

 

Why waste service time when we are not going anywhere this year?

 

I'd rather bring these guys up in 2018 when they can ideally hit the mlb club fully ready to contribute to getting this team back on track

 

Giolito, Moncada, Burdi, Lopez, Fulmer have all barely spent time at the AAA level, and a full year down their will do wonders for them

 

[chitownsportsfan]

I think there could be fear, whether warranted or not, that stretching a reliever into a starter does not mean he will come back and be as good if he does not work as a starter. Joba Chamberlain was a "starter" coming up, but in 17 games and 14 games started coming up through the minors, he averaged right around 5 innings per appearance, so he was never really stretched out properly. He was electric out of the pen, was still really good the next year in a mix between starting and relieving, but then was a full time starter in 2009 and was not very good. He never was the same after that.

 

To me, it seems like the best bet just to use him where he is comfortable.

 

Personally don't think it was that as much as Joba's substance abuse issues that derailed his career -- but the Yankees really didn't do him many favors his 2nd year jerking him around.

 

Nice to see Yoan on top.

[ptatc]

Personally don't think it was that as much as Joba's substance abuse issues that derailed his career -- but the Yankees really didn't do him many favors his 2nd year jerking him around.

 

Nice to see Yoan on top.

No doubt. That's tough on a young player. I also agree that his lack of care of the body was probably the primary reason.