One bright spot at least:

[BearSox]

Gio dominate as usual. 7 IP, 3 H, 1 BB, 1 R, 8 K, and the W.

 

Charlotte won as well, 6-3. Heath got the victory I think.

 

Someone else can do the official update or whatever, I'm too lazy/tired/depressed.

[BearSox]

Great Falls won, 12-10. Most notable preformance, IMO, was Jim Gallagher. went 1-3 with a homer, 2 R, 3 RBI, and 3 BB. On the season now, he is batting about .340 with 8 HR, 40 RBI, 31 BB, 33 SO, 5 SB (3 CS), 20 2B, 1 3B, and with an OPS probably over .950 now.

 

Right now this is looking like a very solid pick to go along with Poreda. Hopefully we will see them both start next season in Winston-Salem.

[BigEdWalsh]

Phillips went 6 2/3 solid innings and Tom Collaro homered as Charlotte won 6-3.

Aardsma earned his 14th Save.

Bourgeois (.319): 3-5, R, 2B

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/st...chraaa_noraaa_1

 

Gio lead the Barons to a 4-1 win.

Mercedes: 1-4, R, HR, 2 RBI

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/st...hunaax_biraax_1

 

Warthogs were shutout 5-0 and held to 4 hits.

And get this, Javier Castillo had all 4 of them, going 4-4.

Ricky Brooks (1.93) has been very effective out of the bullpen: 1 IP, 1 H, 1 K

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/st...kinafa_wswafa_1

 

Kanny, down 3-1 going into the 9th scored 3 times and won 4-3.

Texeira (3.69) earned his 16th Save.

Lee Cruz homered with Archie Gilbert aboard to give the I's the lead.

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/st...kanafx_gboafx_1

 

Great Falls pounded out 18 hits in their 12-10 win.

Marrero, Retherford, Gallagher and Morgan all homered.

Gallagher (.335): 1-3, 2 R, HR, 3 RBI, 3 BB,

SS, Greg Paiml (.284) doesn't get talked about much. He's a slick fielder and has been hitting better and better as the season has progressed. Tonight, he went 4-5. Interesting note too on Paiml who played for the Univ. of Alabama, as a teenager he was a batboy, clubhouse assistant and worked on the maintenance crew for the Birmingham Barons.

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/st...grfrok_misrok_1

 

 

 

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Great Falls pounded out 18 hits in their 12-10 win.

Marrero, Retherford, Gallagher and Morgan all homered.

Gallagher (.335): 1-3, 2 R, HR, 3 RBI, 3 BB,

SS, Greg Paiml (.284) doesn't get talked about much. He's a slick fielder and has been hitting better and better as the season has progressed. Tonight, he went 4-5. Interesting note too on Paiml who played for the Univ. of Alabama, as a teenager he was a batboy, clubhouse assistant and worked on the maintenance crew for the Birmingham Barons.

 

Between Paiml and Miranda, it seems to me we might have two pretty good SS prospects at the lower levels. Hopefully at least one of them succeeds at higher levels of the system.

 

[RockRaines]

Gio better get a looooonnnnngggg look next spring training

[Calderon]

In case anyone hasn't yet seen the brawl in Greensboro last night between the Grasshoppers and Intimidators...

 

 

And here is the game story from MiLB.com:

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/news/ar...b&fext=.jsp

 

[Gene Honda Civic]

Between Paiml and Miranda, it seems to me we might have two pretty good SS prospects at the lower levels. Hopefully at least one of them succeeds at higher levels of the system.

Miranda's three years younger and not embarrassing himself at a higher level. I'm not about to get excited about 23 year old in Rookie ball.

[NorthSideSox72]

Miranda's three years younger and not embarrassing himself at a higher level. I'm not about to get excited about 23 year old in Rookie ball.

I have this battle all the time with various folks in here... unless he's 30, age is pretty irrelevant. What is relevant is WHY he is 23 and at the level he is at. There is a huge difference between a player who is in Rookie ball because, for example, he actually played and graduated from college, versus one who just failed elsewhere for a few years. According to what I can find, Paiml is the former - played 4 years at school.

 

Now, looking at his college numbers, nothing seems too huge. And his GF numbers aren't anything spectacular either. THAT would be the reason I'm not overexcited about him. But even just a guy can put up decent hitting, if he is a plus defender (no idea if he is), is better than much of what we are seeing in the system.

 

And I do think Miranda has very high potential.

 

[Gene Honda Civic]

I have this battle all the time with various folks in here... unless he's 30, age is pretty irrelevant. What is relevant is WHY he is 23 and at the level he is at. There is a huge difference between a player who is in Rookie ball because, for example, he actually played and graduated from college, versus one who just failed elsewhere for a few years. According to what I can find, Paiml is the former - played 4 years at school.

 

Now, looking at his college numbers, nothing seems too huge. And his GF numbers aren't anything spectacular either. THAT would be the reason I'm not overexcited about him. But even just a guy can put up decent hitting, if he is a plus defender (no idea if he is), is better than much of what we are seeing in the system.

 

And I do think Miranda has very high potential.

Well, find me some above average major league players who spent their age 23 seasons putting up mediocre numbers in rookie ball and you might have a point. Until then, age is incredibly relevant.

[CWSGuy406]

I have this battle all the time with various folks in here... unless he's 30, age is pretty irrelevant.

 

That's pretty funny. Age is pretty much the first thing I look at after the general "statistics". Age is incredibly important.

[Gregory Pratt]

I've got to concur.

[NorthSideSox72]

That's pretty funny. Age is pretty much the first thing I look at after the general "statistics". Age is incredibly important.

Well I guess I just don't see it that way. I think its very common for age to be incredibly important, as you state. I just think thats a mistake.

 

I am not saying it doesn't have some importance. Just that when you are talking about a 20 year old (like Miranda), versus a 23 year old (like Paiml), I think that age is nearly irrelevant. What is more important in this case is that Miranda is simply outperforming Paiml, and at a higher level.

 

I think that a lot of very talented players, who could be major league contributors, are lost in the shuffle due to age, and for no good reason. Ross Gload is a good example - succeeded at every level, and has been a .300 or near it hitter every year he has had any significant number of at bats in the majors (his success and obvious talent is why I was always pulling for him). Yet, beause he was stuck behind the likes of Konerko, Thomas, etc., he got a couple years too old waiting for his shot. He was then labeled as "not a prospect". If you overemphasize age, you bias yourself out of some potential talent.

 

[Gregory Pratt]

Well I guess I just don't see it that way. I think its very common for age to be incredibly important, as you state. I just think thats a mistake.

 

I am not saying it doesn't have some importance. Just that when you are talking about a 20 year old (like Miranda), versus a 23 year old (like Paiml), I think that age is nearly irrelevant. What is more important in this case is that Miranda is simply outperforming Paiml, and at a higher level.

 

I think that a lot of very talented players, who could be major league contributors, are lost in the shuffle due to age, and for no good reason. Ross Gload is a good example - succeeded at every level, and has been a .300 or near it hitter every year he has had any significant number of at bats in the majors (his success and obvious talent is why I was always pulling for him). Yet, beause he was stuck behind the likes of Konerko, Thomas, etc., he got a couple years too old waiting for his shot. He was then labeled as "not a prospect". If you overemphasize age, you bias yourself out of some potential talent.

 

Ryne Sandberg says he was told he was too old in AA to ever make the Majors.

 

Beyond him, I can't think of anyone too recent who was unfairly labeled due to his age. And it's especially true at the lower levels, and it's very consistent with what they've done in the past.

[Gene Honda Civic]

Ryne Sandberg says he was told he was too old in AA to ever make the Majors.

Sounds like revisionist history to me, considering he didn't turn 21 until after he completed his AA season batting .310/.403/.469.

 

Sorry 20-year old SS with a .400 OBP in AA, you're too old to make the majors. Nope, doesn't pass the smell test.

[Kalapse]

Ryne Sandberg was 20 years old during the 1 season he spent at AA.

[NorthSideSox72]

Ryne Sandberg says he was told he was too old in AA to ever make the Majors.

 

Beyond him, I can't think of anyone too recent who was unfairly labeled due to his age. And it's especially true at the lower levels, and it's very consistent with what they've done in the past.

Oh I know its been done that way commonly for some time. That doesn't mean its good. Again, it should be part of the picture, but not as much as it has been. When it is, you miss some guys, for no good reason. Scouts need to look more at a factor that often is ignored, amazingly - success. As players progress through the levels, I think that "tools" become a less relevant way of evaluating talent, and that actual, real success becomes more important. I'll take a guy who has kicked ass at AAA over a guy who has mediocre numbers at the same level but the scouts say has "the right tools", every day and twice on Sunday.

 

At Rookie ball, certainly, that is different. Tools and specific skills are more the emphasis, and that makes sense.

 

[Gregory Pratt]

Oh. Well, I was just going by what he'd said. I wasn't exactly sure. I've never been a big fan of his, anyway, but it's interesting.

[CWSGuy406]

I think that a lot of very talented players, who could be major league contributors, are lost in the shuffle due to age, and for no good reason. Ross Gload is a good example - succeeded at every level, and has been a .300 or near it hitter every year he has had any significant number of at bats in the majors (his success and obvious talent is why I was always pulling for him). Yet, beause he was stuck behind the likes of Konerko, Thomas, etc., he got a couple years too old waiting for his shot. He was then labeled as "not a prospect". If you overemphasize age, you bias yourself out of some potential talent.

 

Bringing up Ross Gload versus the prospects that we're talking about is, in my opinion, comparing apples and oranges. There are plenty of AAAA types who are older (mid-to-late 20s) who, for whatever reason, don't get a shot. I could also name a bunch of them -- off the top of my head, guys like Jack Cust, Chad Bradford and to a lesser extent Roberto Petagine. Guys who dominate the hell out of AAA yet aren't able to latch on (for a certain amount of years -- Cust, Bradford and Gload have all found their roles) for a couple seasons.

 

I don't think that's the similar to a 23 year old who is hitting the bejesus out of SALLY league pitching.

[Chisoxfn]

That's pretty funny. Age is pretty much the first thing I look at after the general "statistics". Age is incredibly important.

I actually disagree. Age is very relevant, however it has to be factored in with a few things (is a guy raw...ie he didn't play high school ball or he is being converted to the pitching position, etc). For 98% of prospects you can pretty much rely on age, however, you always have those guys that played college ball, get drafted as hitters fart around and than someone turns them into a pitcher (ocassionally vice versa but it usually happens this way more so than the other) to take advantage of there arm (more often the conversion actually occurrs at the college level but it still leaves the player a couple years behind).

 

Than of course there is catchers, who naturally have a longer developmental period (so its more typical for a catcher to be a bit older than most of the guys on his minor league team).

 

This means that the player is naturally going to be at lower levels at an older age, however, it also means he's more like a high school player than a typical college player (despite age) and nothing says the player won't have a successful career (however, it obviously would be on average a shorter career as he'd reach the majors at an older level).

 

s*** just look at Ryan Howard...he was an older prospect (should people have wrote him off because he was a bit older for a first time rookie or should they have considered the fact he has amazing stats and part of the reason he was old for a rookie was partially because of who he was being blocked by...Jim Thome).

[Chisoxfn]

Bringing up Ross Gload versus the prospects that we're talking about is, in my opinion, comparing apples and oranges. There are plenty of AAAA types who are older (mid-to-late 20s) who, for whatever reason, don't get a shot. I could also name a bunch of them -- off the top of my head, guys like Jack Cust, Chad Bradford and to a lesser extent Roberto Petagine. Guys who dominate the hell out of AAA yet aren't able to latch on (for a certain amount of years -- Cust, Bradford and Gload have all found their roles) for a couple seasons.

 

I don't think that's the similar to a 23 year old who is hitting the bejesus out of SALLY league pitching.

 

May I remind you that Jack Cust was once a top notch prospect. Bradford wasn't and Gload wasn't simply because he was piegon holed (first baseman without a bunch of power are naturally going to get passed up by other guys...plus he had Mark Grace/Todd Helton/Konerko all in his way). But I also know (because I talked to scouts when Gload was still in our minor league system) that he was thought of as a guy that would be able to hit major league pitching, problem was teams just had a preference to have power over average/solid defense at first.

 

But I agree there are lots of AAAA types and I bet if some of them got fair shots (a lot of them may not have quite the skill-set to succeed at the major league level while others may have just never gotten proper development and are just in need of a fair chance...see Ross Gload/Willie Harris) so I still think teams could do a good job picking up some of those type of guys and seeing what happens (especially bad teams with nothing left to loose as its typically good teams that have numerous AAAA guys stashed in there system as there isn't room for those guys on the major league roster).

[CWSGuy406]

s*** just look at Ryan Howard...he was an older prospect (should people have wrote him off because he was a bit older for a first time rookie or should they have considered the fact he has amazing stats and part of the reason he was old for a rookie was partially because of who he was being blocked by...Jim Thome).

 

Come on, man -- apples and oranges here. We're talking about a SS who's in A-ball or rookie ball versus a guy who hit the s*** (1.000 OPS) out of AAA pitching. There's no comparison there.

 

And of course you have to look at specific circumstances. But these older guys who are still in A-ball have to rake through AA before they're on my radar screen.

[Gene Honda Civic]

I actually disagree. Age is very relevant, however it has to be factored in with a few things (is a guy raw...ie he didn't play high school ball or he is being converted to the pitching position, etc). For 98% of prospects you can pretty much rely on age, however, you always have those guys that played college ball, get drafted as hitters fart around and than someone turns them into a pitcher (ocassionally vice versa but it usually happens this way more so than the other) to take advantage of there arm (more often the conversion actually occurrs at the college level but it still leaves the player a couple years behind).

 

Than of course there is catchers, who naturally have a longer developmental period (so its more typical for a catcher to be a bit older than most of the guys on his minor league team).

 

This means that the player is naturally going to be at lower levels at an older age, however, it also means he's more like a high school player than a typical college player (despite age) and nothing says the player won't have a successful career (however, it obviously would be on average a shorter career as he'd reach the majors at an older level).

 

s*** just look at Ryan Howard...he was an older prospect (should people have wrote him off because he was a bit older for a first time rookie or should they have considered the fact he has amazing stats and part of the reason he was old for a rookie was partially because of who he was being blocked by...Jim Thome).

It's funny you bring up Howard. I remember campaigning to get him in '04 (I thought we should move Konerko instead of Lee for the salary dump we could all see needed to be made)... The responses were that he was too old and struck out too much...

 

To me the complaints about Howard hold about as much weight as those against Egbert. When you're a little old for your league at AA and putting up ridiculous, highly projectable numbers, there's not much weight to the age issue unless your talking about a players HOF chances.

 

It's dumb to complain about a guy with Howard's power ceiling because he's 24 (hitting 40+ HR) in AA and AAA, or about Egbert's while he's leading the Southern League in FIP... But it's not at all comparable to writing off a 23 year old with mediocre numbers in ROOKIE ball.

 

(For the record, I never would have projected Howard to be as good as he is. I never would have thought he would have developed the batting eye he has... Nor would I have been so bold as to predict a near 60HR season.)

[Chisoxfn]

It's funny you bring up Howard. I remember campaigning to get him in '04 (I thought we should move Konerko instead of Lee for the salary dump we could all see needed to be made)... The responses were that he was too old and struck out too much...

 

To me the complaints about Howard hold about as much weight as those against Egbert. When you're a little old for your league at AA and putting up ridiculous, highly projectable numbers, there's not much weight to the age issue unless your talking about a players HOF chances.

 

It's dumb to complain about a guy with Howard's power ceiling because he's 24 (hitting 40+ HR) in AA and AAA, or about Egbert's while he's leading the Southern League in FIP... But it's not at all comparable to writing off a 23 year old with mediocre numbers in ROOKIE ball.

 

(For the record, I never would have projected Howard to be as good as he is. I never would have thought he would have developed the batting eye he has... Nor would I have been so bold as to predict a near 60HR season.)

If it matters, I'm not actually debating the whole rookie league low a thing (a guy in low A thats 25 definitely is someone I wouldn't call a prospect unless he had some crazy circumastances around him and he better be dominating the level and have crazy good tools) because I don't even give a crap about guys in rookie ball (the production there means absolutely nothing to me and the only guys I ever even watch much are highly picks that are there) because everyone else will have to succeed in A ball before they ever get on my prospect radar (unless of course they have ridiculous tool sets such as 100MPH arms).

 

I was more so making a point that there are reasons out there where age could be looked past (although for the most part age is obviously key). And I remember those Ryan Howard debates (they were pretty good if I recall) and it turns out Howard turned into a heck of a ballplayer (and as you said in 05 Howard made some adjustments, got more patient, and that helped him turn into the player he is today but geeze who would have ever expected him to be this ridiculously good).