Thanks to Richard B. Wade for the heads-up in Monday’s comments that Baseball America‘s Padres Top 10 prospects list is now available. I’m preparing a lengthy post for Wednesday morning that has nothing to do with this, so I can’t comment much other than to say these names look a lot better than what we’ve seen in a while.
Here’s the list:
- Cesar Carrillo, rhp
- George Kottaras, c
- Josh Barfield, 2b
- Ben Johnson, of
- Chase Headley, 3b
- Clay Hensley, rhp
- Jared Wells, rhp
- Paul McAnulty, 1b/of
- Nick Hundley, c
- Freddy Guzman, of
Interesting that Rule V draftee Steve Andrade has the best slider. Anyway, head on over and check out BA’s coverage. Kevin Goldstein will be doing a live chat at 11 a.m. PT Wednesday. I may not be able to participate, so go represent.
Here’s a comment from BA that matches what I’ve been feeling …
Beyond that, the system is bordering on barren. The Padres’ four full-season affiliates combined to place just three players on Baseball America’s league Top 20 Prospects lists, none in the Top 10.
… whew, ugly! And I also noticed that Mark Phillips is now “Out of baseball” … a reminder that trades of guys you know aren’t going to pan out are a good thing …
anyone else interested also might want to check out madfriars.com, we are running the same thing for the next few days
LM, sounds like what BA has been saying about our system for the past few years now. Oh well, I expect Fuson to make an impact on that in short order.
Fascinating top 10 list for a couple of reasons: first, to see Carrillo above Hensley after what I saw from Hensley last year is very exciting; second, to see Stauffer nowhere in the top 10 is very disappointing. I was hoping he would bounce back after his demotion last year, but it looks like BA thinks he is not going to recover from his poor AAA performance after being sent back down.
Stauffer had too many innings, +50, to qualify for BA’s list
Surprised Morton isn’t on Baseball America’s list. I’d take him over Hundley or Guzman.
Quasi-catcher Mike Jacobs never cracked the Mets’ top ten list until this season because of his shoddy defense. Jacobs was packaged to land Carlos Delgado after his Kevin Maas-esque September.
I am not saying Colt Morton is Jacobs, but if he continues to hit as he moves up the ladder, he’s going to be harder to ignore.
I agree with not putting Morton in the top ten, but Kevin Goldstein felt he would barely crack the top 30 in the book!
Jacobs didn’t really hit until 2003 in AA. Then he got hurt, didn’t hit in AAA, and destroyed AA pitching his second time around. His defense might be shoddy, but he wasn’t showing much with the bat either.
If Goldstein wouldn’t put Morton in our Top 30, he’s a tool. He did spend a lot of time defending the Matt Bush pick last year, which supports the tool label.
you said tool… huh huh huh
John, thanks for the insight on Stauffer. I guess Hensley got lucky and squeaked in under 50 IP.
Hensley just barely made it. 1 more start and we might have seen Bush at #10. Shudder.
When Bush was drafted, it was “shortstop who might hit in the middle of the order.” In last year’s BA chat, it was “shortstop who might hit 6th or 7th.” In today’s BA chat he “could develop into a Royce Clayton type.” Has any player fallen faster and still been, you know, alive?
Hey, is Bush playing winter ball anywhere? I heard Tye Waller last year talking about how Matt was progressing nicely. He even compared his first year to Derek Jeter’s first year. I guess that’s why he’s been reassigned in the org. By the way, Tom said “tool”. Too funny.
I think it is way too early to give up on Bush. Remember he was a consensus top five or ten pick that year, not just a signability pick. The interesting thing is that only Bush and Weaver had larger signing bonuses than Bush so they obviously thought that he was the 3rd best player in the draft.
Speaking of prospects, the Padres sent pitcher Clayton Hamilton to the Pirates today to complete the trade for Bobby Hill.
Thanks, Chris, for the update on the Hill trade.
Tom, that’s somewhat specious reasoning. The #1 pick typically gets a bump just from being picked #1.
It’s also not exactly true. Niemann signed a 5.2 million contract that included a signing bonus of 3.2 million. Humber signed a 5+ million major league deal with a 3 million bonus, 4.2M being guaranteed. Verlander got a major league deal worth at least 4.5M, 3.12 in a signing bonus. So you had players getting not only more or almost the same bonus as Bush, they also got major league contracts and a guarantee of at least 1M more.
Now even one of Bush’s strongest backers, Kevin Goldstein, says he “could” turn into Royce Clayton. Clayton’s actually managed a season with zero offensive win shares. Yay.
Sorry TW, but Tom is right. Bush was a top 10 pick (everyone had him around 7-9). He WAS a signability pick, but its not like he wasn’t an early 1st rounder for someone…
While Bush WAS a wasted pick, let’s not throw the kid under the bus. A Royce Clayton-type would be a great utility infielder. Also, don’t forget how bad Ben Johnson looked for years before starting to put it together in ’04 and really breaking out in ’05.
Furthermore, while KG is right, the system is in NO WAY deep, I love Carillo, Barfield, & Headley…
Sorry, Peter, but running a blog doesn’t make you the expert on Padre prospects.
Royce Clayton would be an absolute waste as a utility infielder. A bad player who sees limited time is still a bad player. Come in to play defense 3 innings a week. Yeah, that’s important. Can’t hit for average, won’t walk, can’t hit for power, that’s a waste of a 25 man spot.
Bush being a Top 10 pick is an indictment of the draft class. It also shows that other teams can make bad decisions. Plenty of observers blasted the pick when it happened. People didn’t wait until he struggled to criticize it. BA now finds themselves struggling to rationalize their ranking.
Ben Johnson was always considered to have the ability to hit and hit with power. Whereas Bush, well, everybody talked about his arm and his glove and sort of papered over his bat, which is only where a player derives most of his value.
Bush is ours for the next two years before we have to decide if he’s worth a 40 man roster spot. I hope he turns things around by then, but I don’t expect him to. If he doesn’t, will the organization have the cojones to expose him to the Rule 5, and more interestingly, will anybody take a chance on him?
Meanwhile, Justin Verlander posted a 136/26 strikeout to walk ratio in 118 minor league innings. Jeremy Sowers went through 3 levels in a year with a 149/29 ratio.
“Peter, but running a blog doesn’t make you the expert on Padre prospects.”
I NEVER claimed to be THE expert… I would say I know Padres prospects more than most (though a lot of you posters on here are easily my equal).
What is interesting, is that what I’ve said in NO WAY contradicts what you just posted.
“Plenty of observers blasted the pick when it happened.” Including me. I said we should have taken Verlander, Neiman, (I’m blanking, the GA SS who is now in the Rockies system), I liked Phillips (the NYY pitcher) and Homer Baily all more – and said so then.
“Ben Johnson was always considered to have the ability to hit and hit with power.” People ALWAYS called Bush a five-tooler. He just hasn’t translated ability into results.
“Bush is ours for the next two years before we have to decide if he’s worth a 40 man roster spot. I hope he turns things around by then, but I don’t expect him to.”
I COMPLETELY agree…
Peter: The Rox shortstop you’re thinking of is Chris Nelson.
I have never read anyone call Bush a 5 tooler and mean it. Before the draft he was being called a 260-270 hitter with 10-15 HR power and somewhat-better-than-average speed. So 3 of his 5 tools are the same ones almost every other prospect has. The MadFriar people tried to link him with Ben Johnson, too. Just doesn’t wash. Bush isn’t in the same class athletically and nobody projected them to have the same upside offensively.
Chris Nelson is the SS you’re thinking of. He was hurt a lot this year.
I’ve been bitter in this thread because almost any other strategy in the 2004 draft would have been better. Draft for high upside and pay for it? Verlander, Drew, etc. Draft for medium upside, high reliability, and pay for it? Weaver. Draft for medium upside and reliability and don’t pay for it? Sowers, etc. We drafted for medium upside, low reliability, and we paid for it.
TW, trust me, I don’t see the 2004 draft as anything but a collosal F-Up. But seeing it that way and looking at how things are don’t have to be silimarly depressing. The best in the business, Baseball America, thinks we had an amazing 2005 draft. Furthermore, with Grady Fuson having MORE control (than just the influence he had last year) and Towers’ control superceded by Alderson’s, I can’t think that the future of our Padres is anything but bright.