Mets Prospect-us

[Frayed Knot]

Baseball America's annual list of Top-10 prospects within the organization:

1) Fernando Martinez, of
2) Deolis Guerra, rhp
3) Carlos Gomez, of
4) Kevin Mulvey, rhp
5) Eddie Kunz, rhp
6) Brant Rustich, rhp
7) Philip Humber, rhp
8) Jon Niese, lhp
9) Nathan Vineyard, lhp
10) Robert Parnell, rhp


I'm going to have to do some checking to find out who and where some of these guys (6 & 9) even are.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Rustich was their 2nd pick in the most recent draft, out of UCLA. I thought he was a reliever.

Vineyard was a high schooler with a high ceiling also from last summer's draft. I understand they hired some goons to keep him from attending college.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Vineyard is pure potential. He was a first-round pick--- 47th overall --- in the draft, so he kind of gets a bye into the top ten. He's a tall athletic high school lefty, but he did dick with the Gulf Coast Mets, going 0-3, 5.79.

He also smiles too much like Brett Myers to make me comfortable.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Here's Brant Rustich

[smg58]

Guerra's a riser, Humber's a faller. As is Mike Carp, who looked a lot better in spring training than he played at Binghamton. Nobody really had a big breakthrough season, and a few people disappointed. Everybody expects the power to come for Martinez, but it hasn't happened yet.

Ironically I might be inclined to keep Humber simply because I think he's undervalued at this point. He showed some flashes, he's close to ML ready, and for a first full year back from surgery it could have been worse. But there's nobody on the list I'd consider untouchable.

[smg58]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Here's Brant Rustich

Extremely small sample, but the K/BBs look good.

[Guest attgig]

smg58 wrote: Ironically I might be inclined to keep Humber simply because I think he's undervalued at this point. He showed some flashes, he's close to ML ready, and for a first full year back from surgery it could have been worse.

completely agree.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Pretty scary, actually, that the Nos. 5 and 6 prospects are college relievers with 22 innings or less in low A ball.

Note BA imagining F-Mart as a future first baseman (he better be a hell of a hitter), and this system is just completely bereft beyond what might become of Gomez or Guerra. We have to stop losing draft picks or start getting more aggressive to sign above slot as Omar threatens.

I can't believe Pelfrey AND Humber last the winter in NY; Humber prolly goes.

[metirish]

No catchers on the list, I guess Pena is the Mets prospect at catcher but what about Mike Nickeas, any good, waste of time or what?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Hot wife

[Frayed Knot]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Note BA imagining F-Mart as a future first baseman (he better be a hell of a hitter), and this system is just completely bereft beyond what might become of Gomez or Guerra.

That section they do each year about projecting the ML lineup 4-5 years out is a waste of space. I don't think they really project him at 1st and most likely stuffed him there simply because they had 4 OFers and no other obvious choice to fill out the dance card.
I did read something this past summer about one scout trashing Martinez's OF instincts but I doubt that had anything to do with their "choice".

]We have to stop losing draft picks or start getting more aggressive to sign above slot as Omar threatens.

I had a brief e-mail exchange with one of BA's guys a few months back about this topic after some reader had written in trashing the Mets about "cheaping out" on the draft again - implying that there was a player or players that they had passed on. The writer admitted that he had no specific names on who they should have picked or signed (other than the Pedro Beato "D&F" pick from 2 drafts back and I brought that one up) only a general sense that they were more eager than most big-market squads to play nice with Bud's bonus "recommendations". Part of the reasoning is that the Wilpons have always been considered Bud-friendly and that Omar owes his first job to Selig.

]I can't believe Pelfrey AND Humber last the winter in NY; Humber prolly goes.

If either or both of these guys fail to pan out as at least decent pitchers after being picked at #3 & #9 overall it will not only be a huge disappointment but also makes all those games we intentionally lost during the '03-'04 seasons a waste of good sucking.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I'm going with Edgy's razor: never ascribe to conspiracy what can adequately be attributed to inadequate scouting.

The Mets aggressiveness in the international market has pretty well demonstrated their willingess to invest in amateur talent.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Yabbut, that's only recent. Humber was part of what shoulda been a great draft for us (3 of the top 74 picks is about as good as it's ever gonna get for us) and hasn't been. Our best guy from that draft, Gaby Hernandez, was traded the Fish for Paul LoDuca.

I think the diff between Omar's Mets and the Duke-Phillips Mets is better scouting

[Fman99]

Aw my adopted prospect Dylan Owen didn't make the list.

[Guest Edgy DC]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Yabbut, that's only recent.

I'm responding to the apparently recent "cheaping out again" accusation.

[Frayed Knot]

Turns out that the guy who wrote this year's Top-10 piece, John Manual, is the same one I was swapping emails with back in August - so whether or not he's correct about the Met's draft strategy he's at least been consistent on the topic.

Specifically on the 2007 draft he said;
"... that the organization generally didn't go after any "tough signs" or players who they might have taken later, such as Chad Jones (playing football at LSU now) or other guys we had them linked with.
You can look at this in one way, which is the Mets properly identified players they liked who were signable; or you can say, the Mets didn't aim very high and that was probably done to stay in the commissioner's office's good graces. The latter is what we have been told throughout the industry, that the Mets just chose a conservative route.

and later when I asked about specific player passed over ...

"There may have been [some], but none that I know of directly. I don't think that's the point though really; this isn't speculation or a guess. The scouts/scouting directors that we have talked to all say the Mets played it conservative the last two years at the direction of the commissioner's office. Don't forget who gave Omar Minaya his biggest break by making him a GM--Bud Selig. You think Omar's going to forget that, or not respect that?"

[Guest Edgy DC]

What he's talking about is collusion. Not that I think they can get in trouble for it because it's colluding against amateurs. Nonetheless, if he's so certain it's going on, I wish he'd print something like evidence, rather than "this isn't speculation or a guess." It may be informed speculation, but unless he's coming to us with some facts, that's all it is.

[Frayed Knot]

Well of course one could make the case that the entire draft system is based on collusion but that's a larger argument.


Maybe part of this is a case of scout's revenge againt the 'moneyball' set; a kind of plea for a return to "gut" athletic (and probably HS) picks in lieu of collegiate 'stats' players with less dreamy ceilings? Wouldn't be the first time someone accused BA of being 'tools-happy'.

The part about the conservative drafting philosophy makes we wonder if this label isn't at least partially an after-the-fact rationization made by analysts when picks don't pan out and then gets treated as accepted 'fact' by the circular reasoning of being oft-repeated. iow, 'we know it's true cuz everyone says and that everyone says so means it must be true'.
The Yanx were accused of the same thing for much of the last decade - not the part about adhereing to MLB-dictated bonuses neccessarily but that they not only rarely had good picks (on account of their high finishes and losing picks to frequent FA signings) and then went real conservative in making those picks rather than shoot for high risk/reward types. Did their philosophy change resulting in Hughes (HS) & Chambelain (Coll) or just their skill/luck?


Anyway, just this morning I read one of the NYPost's columnists tossing off the 'don't go for it' line about recent Met drafts without bothering to cite any backing as if it's something that's simply unquestioned fact at this point.
Maybe it's true and maybe it's not. I'd just like to hear about maybe one example of someone who was passed over who was jumped on soon afterward.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Frayed Knot wrote: Well of course one could make the case that the entire draft system is based on collusion but that's a larger argument.

Certainly.

Frayed Knot wrote: I'd just like to hear about maybe one example of someone who was passed over who was jumped on soon afterward.

Yup.

[A Boy Named Seo]

I can't think of an example where the Mets under Omar passed on a guy perceived to be tougher to sign. Pelfrey was a Scott Boras guy that other teams passed on and Omar jumped on. In '06 their first pick wasn't until #62 (Mulvey) and in '07, #42 (Kunz). Probably not a lot of slam dunk guys teams can go cheap on still hanging around in the sandwich and second rounds.

And the Mets caught plenty of crap for giving Fernando Martinez his deal in '05.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Hawaii update in: http://mets.scout.com/2/700536.html

[smg58]

Rustich's control suddenly doesn't look so good...

[Frayed Knot]

="A Boy Named Seo"]I can't think of an example where the Mets under Omar passed on a guy perceived to be tougher to sign ... In '06 their first pick wasn't until #62 (Mulvey) and in '07, #42 (Kunz). Probably not a lot of slam dunk guys teams can go cheap on still hanging around in the sandwich and second rounds.

I don't think the folks doing the complaining are saying there are slam-dunks out there, but rather are advocating taking a shot at some raw "toolsy" high school kid who just might catch fire some day even though there's a decent chance he'll either take a scholarship or else flame out along the way. Instead, the Mets have used those picks lately for college relievers like Smith & Kunz who, virtually by definition, have lower ceilings even though are better bets to get to the bigs and get there more quickly.

My only problem is that if you're going to complain that they're doing this you should at least have a name or two of guys they might have taken in their place. Instead we're getting; 'I don't know who they're missing out on but, trust us, they're missing out on someone'

]And the Mets caught plenty of crap for giving Fernando Martinez his deal in '05.

To which they're saying that the Mets should be as agressive in the draft as they are in the Int'l market.
Of course you can't simply choose to "target and go after" who you want via the draft.

[Guest Edgy DC]

There's something to be said for signing younger higher-ceiling longshots and older lower-ceiling safe bets.

[Frayed Knot]

Minor league guru John Sickels chimes in on the current state of the Met farm system:

Fernando Martinez, OF, Grade B+
Deolis Guerra, RHP, Grade B+

Carlos Gomez, OF, Grade B (may raise to B+)
Kevin Mulvey, RHP, Grade B (may raise to B+)
Jon Niese, LHP, Grade B
Eddie Kunz, RHP, Grade B

Phil Humber, RHP, Grade B-
Brant Rustich, RHP, Grade B-
Joe Smith, RHP, Grade B-

Nick Evans, 1B, Grade C+
Stephen Clyne, RHP, Grade C+
Scott Moviel, RHP, Grade C+
Brahiam Maldonado, OF, Grade C+ (deserves more respect)

Nate Vinyard, LHP, Grade C (although I like him)
Robert Parnell, RHP, Grade C
Mike Carp, 1B, Grade C
Hector Pellot, 2B, Grade C
Dan Murphy, 3B, Grade C
Ezequiel Carrera, OF, Grade C
Greg Veloz, 2B, Grade C
-- There are 15 other Grade C prospects in the book who are interchangeable with these other guys. There are some toolsy players like Francisco Pena and Juan Lagares with dismal performance records that I cannot rate highly at this point, no matter how much the Mets talk about them. There is some nice pitching in this system but depth in position players is very weak. Overall the system is better than it looks at first, but lack of hitting depth is a problem, and I hate the way they rush some of their prospects


A synopsis of his grading system:

Grade A are the elite prospects. They have a good chance of becoming stars or superstars and almost all will develop into major league regulars, if injuries or other problems don't intervene.

Grade B prospects have a good chance to enjoy successful careers. Some will develop into stars, some will not. Most end up spending several years in the majors, at the very least in a marginal role.

Grade C prospects are the most common type. These are guys who have something positive going for them, but who may have a question mark or three, or who are just too far away from the majors to get an accurate feel for. A few Grade C guys, especially at the lower levels, do develop into stars. Many end up as role players or bench guys. Some don't make it at all.


He also tacks on an essay about Gomez, one which throws some cold water on those who got over-heated last summer and were mentally tossing aside Milledge thinking that his replacement/superior had already arrived.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Why does he hate the rush? I'm just asking so Bret doesn't have to.

Funny that he ranks the primary two rushed guys on top

Scout.com put up their top 50. I'll just put the list up here without their comments, because they're not keen on content reposting.

1. Carlos Gomez, of, New Orleans, New York
2. Fernando Martinez, of, Binghamton
3. Philip Humber, sp(rh), New Orleans, New York
4. Brant Rustich, rp(rh), Kingsport, Brooklyn
5. Deolis Guerra, sp(rh), St. Lucie

6. Kevin Mulvey, sp(rh), Binghamton, New Orleans
7. Mike Carp, 1b, Binghamton
8. Jonathan Niese, sp(lh), St. Lucie
9. Nick Evans, 1b, St. Lucie
10. Bobby Parnell, sp(rh), St. Lucie, Binghamton

11. Eddie Kunz, rp(rh), Brooklyn
12. Matt Bouchard, ss, Brooklyn
13. Nick Carr, sp(rh), Brooklyn
14. Nathan Vineyard, sp(lh), Gulf Coast
15. Eric Niesen, sp(lh), Brooklyn

16. Tobi Stoner, sp(rh), Savannah, St. Lucie
17. Jose De La Torre, rp(rh), St. Lucie
18. Scott Moviel, sp(rh), Gulf Coast, 6'11"!
19. Sean McCraw, c, Savannah, St. Lucie
20. Dan Murphy, 3b, St. Lucie

21. Dylan Owen, sp(rh), Brooklyn
22. Hector Pellot, 2b, Savannah, St. Lucie
23. Francisco Pe�a, c, Savannah
24. Anderson Hernandez, ss, 2b, New Orleans, New York
25. Ruben Tejada, ss, Gulf Coast

26. Raul Reyes, cf, Brooklyn
27. Stephen Clyne, rp(rh), Brooklyn
28. Ezequiel Carrera, of, Gulf Coast, Brooklyn
29. Jose Coronado, ss, Binghamton
30. Brett Harper, 1b, of, Binghamton

31. Emmanuel Garcia, if, St. Lucie
32. Eric Brown, sp(rh), St. Lucie
33. Lucas Duda, 1b, Brooklyn
34. Willie Collazo, rp(lh), New Orleans, New York
35. Robert Paulk, rp(rh), Binghamton, New Orleans

36. Daniel Stegall, of, Kingsport, Savannah
37. Phillips Orta, sp(rh), Kingsport, Savannah
38. Carlos Muniz, rp(rh), Binghamton, New Orleans, New York
39. Brandon Nall, rp(rh), St. Lucie, Binghamton
40. Ambiorix Concepcion, of, St. Lucie

41. Guillaume Leduc, sp(lh), Gulf Coast
42. Michael Olmsted, sp (rh), Gulf Coast, Kingsport, Brooklyn
43. Corey Coles, of, St. Lucie, Binghamton, New Orleans
44. Julio Polanco, sp(lh), Savannah
45. Brahiam Maldonado, of, Savannah

46. Richard Lucas, 3b, Gulf Coast
47. Elvin Ramirez, sp(rh), Kingsport
48. Michael Devaney, sp(rh), Binghamton
49. Darren Clark, of, Kingsport, Savannah
50. Josh Stinson, sp(rh), Savannah

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Authors of the last list were the same dopes who named Shawn Bowman the No. 1 prospect a few years back, no? No wonder they don;lt want their stuff getting around.

[Benjamin Grimm]

My biggest concern with the Mets farm system is the lack of any strong catching prospects. It would be nice if they could get a catcher by Rule 5ing somebody, like the Nationals did with Jesus Flores. But the Mets don't really have the luxury of carrying a little-used third-string catcher on their roster.