Community Prospect Rankings: #13
by Slyde on Jan 17, 2009 8:00 AM EST
in Community Prospect Rankings
52 comments
Danny Dorn comes in at number 12. Moving on to lucky number 13 there are some interesting choices still out there. Who you got, and why?
Ramon Ramirez, RHSP:John Sickels rank: 11
Redsminorleagues rank: 17
Age: 26
Draft/Acquisition Details: Signed out of Venezuela
Highest Level Played: MLB
2008 Statistics:
Chattanooga (AA): 11 G, 46.0 IP, 41 H, 15 BB, 52 SO, 4.70 ERA, 1.22 WHIP
Louisville (AAA): 19 G, 99.1 IP, 76 H, 42 BB, 93 SO, 3.08 ERA, 1.19 WHIP
Cincinnati (MLB): 5 G, 27.0 IP, 17 H, 11 BB, 21 SO, 2.67 ERA, 1.04 WHIP
Zach Stewart, RHRP:
John Sickels rank: 7
Redsminorleagues rank: 8
Age: 22
Draft/Acquisition Details: 3rd round (pick 84), Reds, 2008
Last Level Played: A+ (Sarasota)
2008 Statistics:
Texas (College): 20 G, 3 GS, 47 IP, 48 H, 21 BB, 43 SO, 4.98 ERA, 1.47 WHIP
Dayton (A): 11 G, 16.1 IP, 10 H, 3 BB, 13 SO, 0.55 ERA, 0.80 WHIP
Sarasota (A+): 13 G, 16.2 IP, 16H, 11BB, 23 SO, 1.62 ERA, 1.62 WHIP
Carlos Fisher, RHRP:
John Sickels rank: 19
Redsminorleagues rank: 13
Age: 25
Draft/Acquisition Details: 15th round (pick 450), Padres, 2001
Last Level Played: AAA (Louisville)
2008 Statistics:
Chattanooga (AA): 36 G, 50.2 IP, 52 H, 20 BB, 46 SO, 3.73 ERA, 1.42 WHIP
Louisville (AAA): 14 G, 17.1 IP, 14H, 9BB, 21 SO, 1.04 ERA, 1.33 WHIP
Matt Maloney, LHSP:
John Sickels rank: 13
Redsminorleagues rank: 29
Age: 24
Draft/Acquisition Details: 3rd round (pick 97), Phillies, 2005. Acquired in trade for Kyle Lohse.
Last Level Played: AAA (Louisville)
2008 Statistics:
GCL Reds (Rk): 1 G, 5.2 IP, 1 H, 0 BB, 9 SO, 0.00 ERA, 0.18 WHIP
Louisville (AAA): 25 G, 25 GS, 140.1 IP, 143 H, 39 BB, 132 SO, 4.68 ERA, 1.30 WHIP
Robert Manuel, RHRP:
John Sickels rank: 18
Redsminorleagues rank: 26
Age: 25
Draft/Acquisition Details: Signed as undrafted FA, Mets, 2005. Acquired in trade for Dave Williams.
Last Level Played: AAA (Louisville)
2008 Statistics:
Sarasota (A+): 4 G, 7.2 IP, 5 H, 3 BB, 11 SO, 0.00 ERA, 1.04 WHIP
Chattanooga (AA): 47 G, 77 IP, 47 H, 15 BB, 92 SO, 1.40 ERA, 0.81 WHIP
Louisville (AAA): 1 G, 2 IP, 2 H, 0 BB, 0 SO, 0.00 ERA, 1.00 WHIP
Dallas Buck, RHSP:
John Sickels rank: 17
Redsminorleagues rank: 33
Age: 24
Draft/Acquisition Details: Drafted 3rd round (pick 86), Diamondbacks, 2006. Acquired in trade for Adam Dunn.
Last Level Played: A+ (Sarasota/Visalia)
2008 Statistics:
South Bend (A-): 9 G, 45.2 IP, 44 H, 10 BB, 24 SO, 3.94 ERA, 1.18 WHIP
Visalia (A+): 1 G, 5 IP, 3 H, 1 BB, 4 SO, 0.00 ERA, 0.80 WHIP
Sarasota (A+): 3 G, 13 IP, 9 H, 4 BB, 9 SO, 4.15 ERA, 1.00 WHIP
Zach Cozart, SS:
John Sickels rank: NR
Redsminorleagues rank: 15
Age: 23
Draft/Acquisition Details: Drafted 2nd round (pick 79), Reds, 2007
Last Level Played: A- (Dayton)
2008 Statistics:
Dayton (A-): 109 G, 418 AB, .280/.330/.457
Juan Duran, OF:
John Sickels rank: 21
Redsminorleagues rank: 11
Age: 17
Draft/Acquisition Details: Signed out of D.R.
Last Level Played: Dominican Summer League
2008 Statistics:
DSL Reds (DSL): 41 G, 135 AB, .215/.340/.319
Yorman Rodriguez, OF:
John Sickels rank: 20
Redsminorleagues rank: 16
Age: 16
Draft/Acquisition Details: Signed out of D.R.
Last Level Played: NA
2008 Statistics:
None
Chris Heisey, OF:
John Sickels rank: 14
Redsminorleagues rank: 23
Age: 24
Draft/Acquisition Details: Drafted 17th round (pick 504), Reds, 2006
Last Level Played: AA (Chattanooga)
2008 Statistics:
Sarasota (A+): 117 G, 436 AB, .287/.381/.438
Chattanooga (AA): 19 G, 79 AB, .316/.341/.494
Sean Henry, OF:
John Sickels rank: 15
Redsminorleagues rank: 38
Age: 23
Draft/Acquisition Details: Drafted 20th round (pick 584), Mets, 2004. Acquired in trade for Jeff Conine.
Last Level Played: AA (Chattanooga)
2008 Statistics:
Sarasota (A+): 10 G, 41 AB, .293/.370/.415
Chattanooga (AA): 113 G, 396 AB, .285/.361/.455
0 recs |
52 comments
Email
Print
Comments
it's Stewart's time
after this, it’ll get really interesting.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Jan 17, 2009 9:45 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
ha ha
how many will we go to? can we pick the top 100 reds prospects?
that would leave only a handful of players left in the organization, and we’ve gotten rid of a lot of the garbage (majewski, belisle, and coffey come to mind). which makes me think, hey, walt has the broom out and he really does know what he’s doing. yay!
by Daedalus on Jan 17, 2009 8:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I went Maloney
I should say that I’m against calling relievers prospects.
by Brian B on Jan 17, 2009 10:16 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
i see your point
but I’d argue a closer is a lot more valuable than a 4th/5th starter. I like judging prospects on their ceilings. also i think good pens are underrated overall, but thats just my opinion.
by sharks on Jan 17, 2009 8:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i agree that a closer is more valuable than a 4th/5th starter
good pens make or break a season. 1990? the Reds would have been nothing without The Nasty Boys.
by Daedalus on Jan 17, 2009 9:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
great bullpens can make a mediocre starting rotation look good
if you have 5 average to above average starters, with three shut down relievers, and some depth beyond that, require starting pitcher to only need to pitch 6 innings.
Plus they can bail starting pitchers out of jams in the late innings.
"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions!"- Dr. Stephen T. Colbert DFA.
by justin007000 on Jan 17, 2009 9:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
said it first
will eclipse any other prospect in the reds system in 3 yrs
by SadbutTrue on Jan 17, 2009 11:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i think the "X"-Rod nickname is a little tired
but if we are gonna do it, i think it has to be Yo-Rod. just sayin.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Jan 17, 2009 8:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
haven't we gotten to the point where we say X-Rod just to mock the X-Rod name?
by Daedalus on Jan 17, 2009 9:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah probably
but if we’re gonna play that game, then i think Yo-Rod is the way to go. sounds like a funky late 80’s DJ!
by Charlie Scrabbles on Jan 17, 2009 11:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i went yo rod first
but got no comments
by SadbutTrue on Jan 18, 2009 9:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's sad.
but true.
...because there's already someone posing as Jacob Brumfield
by Cy Schourek on Jan 18, 2009 12:23 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
stewart
i dont care how hungry ive been i can always throw down applesauce
by obc2 on Jan 17, 2009 11:14 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
stewart, then duran and rodriguez
then on to the second tier
What do you mean, "blank slate"?
by boobs on Jan 17, 2009 1:26 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
what was said about WAR for relief pitchers really got me thinking
~4 wins is pretty much the max for a reliever, but position players can mean a lot more. So I finally went for youth this time and selected Duran. I’m hungry to see what he can do. And to make 80’s puns.
...because there's already someone posing as Jacob Brumfield
by Cy Schourek on Jan 17, 2009 2:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
i stand by that argument
but conversely, you must also take into account that Duran and Rodriguez are too young to vote. Stewart has a relatively low ceiling because he’s a reliever, but at this point we dont really know anything at all about these two kids. Stewart has an established track record at a Big 12 school and success as high as A+ ball, and could be in the bigs next season. but Duran and Rodriguez are at least 4 years from the bigs. i have to go with the Devil You Know on this one.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Jan 17, 2009 6:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
um, Duran and Rodriguez are too not-US-citizeny to vote
We’’re in process of trying to a guy with a trade record of working with pitches
by Slyde on Jan 17, 2009 6:34 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
i was over at bleedcubbie blue
the Cubs won one more game last season than the Reds did in 1999. That makes me really sad for some reason.
"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions!"- Dr. Stephen T. Colbert DFA.
by justin007000 on Jan 17, 2009 11:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but the '08 Cubbies had the distinct advantage of playing against CoPat a lot
A lot.
At least he hustled…right? Ugh.
I have discovered in 20 years of moving around a ballpark, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats. - Bill Veeck
by PeteyHendrix on Jan 18, 2009 10:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Opponent OBP is critical, yes?
I touched on this last time, but if we generally agree that getting on base is one of, if not the most important thing a batter can do, then it seems that a pitcher in our system who suppresses base-runners specifically at a phenomenal level would be brought up in discussion here more.
Why is there no discussion of Robert Manuel? He’s a little older, and a RHRP, but if Slyde wasn’t listing him in this thread series, he wouldn’t even be on my radar.
Walks few. Fans many. Rarely wild. Seldom gives up the long ball. 13.2 innings in the Arizona Fall League with a 13:1 K:BB and 1.98 ERA. He’ll start 2009 at Triple-A Louisville.
That seems like plenty to love…maybe he’s just a solid nickname away. Care to take up the challenge, peanut gallery?
I have discovered in 20 years of moving around a ballpark, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats. - Bill Veeck
by PeteyHendrix on Jan 18, 2009 12:50 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
3 reasons
1. He is a little old. Not outrageously, but if he was 20 and putting up those numbers in Double-A, it would draw more attention.
2. He’s a reliever. I really don’t get too excited by relievers until they do it in Triple-A or…
3. He’s only done it one year. If he had consistently been putting up those numbers every year, he’d be hard to ignore. If he comes out and puts up those same numbers in Triple-A this season, believe me, he’ll get A LOT of attention.
I’m definitely interested in him, but I think the scouting reports are more positive for Stewart than for Manuel. From what I’ve seen, Manuel is more likely to be a middle reliever or setup guy. Stewart’s projecting to be a closer.
FWIW, Todd Coffey put up similar numbers to Manuel in 2004 in Chattanooga as a 23-year old. This is not indicative of anything, just trying to emphasize the unpredictability of relief pitching.
We’’re in process of trying to a guy with a trade record of working with pitches
by Slyde on Jan 18, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
3 reasons is a horrible nickname
That said, his WHIP and HR rates have been stellar at each level and one could make a case that he’s been on fire for two straight years rather than one:
From rotowire 7/25/2007:
He has not given up a home run in 66 innings…He had mixed results in 2006. His K:BB was 40:6 but his BAA was .297. His Low-A home run rate was five in 48 innings; when he moved up to Sarasota, he gave up three in eight innings. This year, he started very slowly; his April ERA was 11.57. However, he has improved dramatically since then and should be on your radar. No home runs for 66 innings at any level is noteworthy.
Since that crappy April ‘07, he’s torn it up in a decent size sample that’s consistent across multiple levels. He was 2008 MiLBY for Best Double-A Relief Pitcher. Add in the electrifying AFL numbers, and you could say that’s two straight seasons (although I really wouldn’t).
A few more stats of note: At no point during the season did his ERA rise above 1.91. He walked just 15 batters — six intentionally — with the Lookouts. He yielded two home runs all season and allowed only 10 inherited runners to score.
Though closers generally get the headlines, Manuel’s strength is longer relief. And 23 of his 47 Lookouts’ appearances consisted of two or more innings.
He has three pitches, and a fastball that hits 90.
He’s pretty old.
He needs to show some more success at AAA.
He’s just a reliever.
But the “projects to be a middle reliever, not a closer” concept makes me suspicious on a few fronts:
1. I am not convinced that a good closer is more important than a good setup man, especially the way staffs are currently used. I cringe to think that with the game on the line in the 7th, not a single MLB manager gives serious thought to bringing in his best arm, assuming that it’s the closer. Also, was Rob Dibble more valuable to the 1990 Reds than Randy Myers? I think you could make a solid argument that Dibs was more important, or a better value, or more valuable, or more successful.
2. Scouts are telling us whom project to what role – I perceive such reports to be based on stuff with results being a major factor as opposed to based on results with stuff being noteworthy. If my perception is valid, then I lean more toward sabermetrics than scoutametrics, and say that results indicate future results more validly than anything else, including what scouts write down as stuff. If Manuel’s numbers are better than player X, I don’t care much that player X has a nastier breaking ball.
Am I too suspicious of scouts, assuming too much “old school” mentality in their ranks?
I’m not sure that he’s even got my vote this week, but I thought that someone should make the case for him, since we’ve heard so little.
Nickname-wise…maybe Middle Manual?
He looks a bit like Harland Williams here, so maybe that might spur something:
I have discovered in 20 years of moving around a ballpark, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats. - Bill Veeck
by PeteyHendrix on Jan 18, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
huh
i dont know why, but i assumed he was Latino.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Jan 18, 2009 3:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Robert screams Latino...
"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions!"- Dr. Stephen T. Colbert DFA.
by justin007000 on Jan 18, 2009 3:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And if you're last name is Manuel,
there’s no way you could ever be a Pentecostal redneck, right Charlie?
I have discovered in 20 years of moving around a ballpark, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats. - Bill Veeck
by PeteyHendrix on Jan 18, 2009 11:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's racist!
Full Name: Robert Mehmet Manuel
Born: 07/09/1983
Birthplace: Houston, TX
Assume Mexican ethnicity if you feel it’s necessary. He looks a little less WASPy in this picture:
I have discovered in 20 years of moving around a ballpark, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats. - Bill Veeck
by PeteyHendrix on Jan 18, 2009 3:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I totally missed the boat
his middle name had me thinking he was of Eskimo descent. (yeah, yeah, yeah….that’s racist!)
i dont care how hungry ive been i can always throw down applesauce
by obc2 on Jan 18, 2009 4:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Mehmet? Is he Turkish? (That's a version of Mohammed in Turkish).
by Daedalus on Jan 18, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, Manuel is a Hebrew name. Maybe he's a Turkish Jew?
by Daedalus on Jan 18, 2009 6:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Now I'm recalling Robert Manuel the Haitain politician
He was behind a bunch of crackdowns on pro-Aristide people. I think his name was Manuel, anyway.
by Daedalus on Jan 18, 2009 6:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I always thought he was Latino as well
though you’re right, I can’t think of a single Manuel who is Hispanic now that I think of it.
The “Mehmet” is really interesting. Any chance that he was just created with an EA Sports random draft name machine? The ones that give you white dudes named LaRon Torrealba?
...because there's already someone posing as Jacob Brumfield
by Cy Schourek on Jan 19, 2009 4:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I used to be all sabermetrics on this stuff
and then Calvin Meldock and Carlos Guevara made me question that.
So, I remain suspicious of minor league relievers who scouts like but don’t perform and who perform well but scouts don’t like them. Starters have a harder time hiding their flaws in the minors, so that’s why it takes a lot for a reliever to impress me.
Honestly, I think what Maloney has done in the minors is a lot more interesting than Manuel – sabermetrically at least.
As for the closer vs. middle reliever comp. I tend to agree, but my point of making the comp was more to say that he doesn’t appear to have top of the line stuff. That doesn’t mean he can’t be successful, just that it will be harder for him to do so.
We’’re in process of trying to a guy with a trade record of working with pitches
by Slyde on Jan 18, 2009 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
slyde doesn't always hate baseball
who knew?
"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions!"- Dr. Stephen T. Colbert DFA.
by justin007000 on Jan 18, 2009 8:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I remain suspicious of minor league relievers who scouts like but don’t perform and who perform well but scouts don’t like them.
I like this corroborative measure.
I have discovered in 20 years of moving around a ballpark, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats. - Bill Veeck
by PeteyHendrix on Jan 19, 2009 2:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
somewhere,
Sergio Valenzuela and Chris Booker are sharing a room comiserating.
...because there's already someone posing as Jacob Brumfield
by Cy Schourek on Jan 19, 2009 4:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Manuel
Here is the scouting report I have on him from this past season:
89-93 MPH fastball with tons of movement that he can spot extremely well.
Throws a cutter and an above average change up as well.
Mixes his pitches very well to set hitters up.
Not closer stuff, but could probably make a good reliever still.
by dougdirt on Jan 19, 2009 3:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't mean to imply that he won't be good
Just that if he doesn’t have “closer stuff” then I’m a little less interested. To me, that means that he’s got the stuff to be very good, but not great. A guy that has “closer stuff” may never end up being a closer, but he might still be a great reliever. That’s the categorization that I’m trying to use.
We’’re in process of trying to a guy with a trade record of working with pitches
by Slyde on Jan 19, 2009 3:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ravens - Steelers
I had the subday ticket all year, and I swear there were more players carted off the field because of “legal” head-to-head hits by the Steelers secondary than in any other game. And each time, the broadcasters were extremely complimentary of the Steelers because the hits were “legal.”
My point is here, of course, the Steelers are a dirty, dirty bunch.
by Brian B on Jan 18, 2009 10:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
that hit was gross
they showed the slo-mo replay and you can clearly see when Clark’s helmet smashed into McGahee’s. if that hit is legal, they might just as well allow defensive backs to carry billy clubs and tasers.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Jan 19, 2009 9:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he was leading with his helmet though
I think he was trying to land the shoulder, but when McGahee dipped his head down it went helmet to helmet. I think the play happened so quickly that neither player was really prepared for the impact.
We’’re in process of trying to a guy with a trade record of working with pitches
by Slyde on Jan 19, 2009 10:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
whether Clark was leading with the helmet or shoulder
he was still going for McGahee’s head. a good legal hit would have been to the mid-section. Clark was aiming high, and even if he didnt intend to hit him helmet-to-helmet, he knew damn well it was a distinct possibility.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Jan 19, 2009 10:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It's hard to say that the hit was "illegal"
but it was definitely a dirty hit, especially after the game had already been decided. I’m sick of hearing how the Steelers play “smashmouth” football and how they’re so intense and they play hard, there was no reason to put that kind of hit on McGahee there.
"You are not my ass." - Reynard
by BK on Jan 19, 2009 10:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
my point exactly
“legal” is too malleable a term in the NFL, so we’ll call it dirty.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Jan 19, 2009 11:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
hey i feel the same way you guys do
but i was a afraid to post it because I didn’t wanna be labeled as whiny…
The Steeler play dirty and have for years. Hopefully Hines Ward won’t be able to play in the super bowl.
Made from 100% recycled awesome,
by chandrathan on Jan 19, 2009 11:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didnt think
the hit was dirty, I think it was an accident. you gotta remember these guys are all running around as fast as they can, are all hyped up on adrenaline being a conference championship game, and are taught and encouraged by almost every coach/fan to lay out these big hits. This kind of stuff is going to happen accidentally once in awhile, its the NFL, I bet clark paid a visit to mcgahee later on that night.
was the hit “legal”……..uh, no. why the refs didn’t flag clark was a mystery to me.
and ya aint whiny if you think a hit was dirty/cheap, only pansy football fans would think crap like that.
by sharks on Jan 20, 2009 4:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Limas Sweed's block on Corey Ivy?
I could watch that on an endless loop and never get tired of it.
by Brendanukkah on Jan 19, 2009 12:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
