John Sickels releases an annual edition of “The Baseball Prospect Book” where he uses letter grades to assess 30-35 prospects from each MLB organization. He is currently in the process of providing preliminary top 20 lists for each team. Here is the Nats Top 20.
- Chris Marrero, 1B-OF, Grade B+ (2006)
- Ross Detwiler, LHP, Grade B+ (2007)
- Michael Burgess, OF, Grade B+ (2007)
- Justin Maxwell, OF, Grade B (2005)
- Jordan Zimmermann, RHP, Grade B (2007)
- Collin Balester, RHP, Grade B- (2004)
- Josh Smoker, LHP, Grade B- (2007)
- Adam Carr, RHP, Grade B- (2006)
- John Lannan, LHP, Grade B- (2005)
- Glenn Gibson, LHP, Grade C+ (2006)
- Colton Willems, RHP, Grade C+ (2006)
- Ian Desmond, SS, Grade C+ (2004)
- Jack McGeary, LHP, Grade C+ (2007)
- Jake Smolinski, OF, Grade C+ (2007)
- Jon Albaladejo, RHP, Grade C+ (added from Pittsburgh in 2007)
- Adrian Alaniz, RHP, Grade C+ (2007)
- Shairon Martis, RHP, Grade C+ (added from Giants in 2006)
- Jhonny Nunez, RHP, Grade C+ (added from Dodgers in 2006)
- Kory Casto, OF-3B, Grade C+ (2003)
- Josh Whitesell, 1B, Grade C (2003)
There are 15 other players in the book. Again, I emphasize that all these grades are preliminary, and that the Grade C+/C guys are close to interchangeable.
There is a lot of Potential pitching depth in this system, and many of those Grade C+ guys have the ability to end up as Grade B/B+ prospects a year from now, once we see them at higher levels and have more data to work with. Overall the Nats have done a good job adding more depth to the system.
Here is what the grades mean:
Grade A prospects are the elite. They have a good chance of becoming stars or superstars. Almost all Grade A prospects develop into major league regulars, if injuries or other problems don’t intervene. Note that is a major “if” in some cases.
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.
A major point to remember is that grades for pitchers do NOT correspond directly to grades for hitters. Many Grade A pitching prospects fail to develop, often due to injuries. Some Grade C pitching prospects turn out much better than expected.
Also note that there is diversity within each category. I’m a tough grader; Grade C+ is actually good praise coming from me, and some C+ prospects turn out very well indeed.
Finally, keep in mind that all grades are shorthand. You have to read the full comment in the book for my full opinion about a player, the letter grade only tells you so much. A Grade C prospect in rookie ball could end up being very impressive, while a Grade C prospect in Triple-A is likely just a future role player.
As a basis of comparison, here are a quick look at the spread of his grades for the past three season’s preliminary top 20s.
| Year | Grade | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 2006 | A (Ryan Zimmerman) | 1 |
| B- | 2 | |
| C+ | 11 | |
| C | 6 | |
| 2007 | B+ | 1 |
| B | 4 | |
| C+ | 6 | |
| C | 9 | |
| 2008 | B+ | 3 |
| B | 4 | |
| C+ | 6 | |
| C | 9 |
I think that this is a realistic and honest assessment of the Nationals currently have. He is a tough grader but is most often closer to reality than many of the experts out there. I might quibble some with his rankings of Gibson, Willems and McGeary as Cs (he does have a comment about Gibson possibly getting bumped up) but high school pitchers are so volatile developmentally that it is understandable. The only name I see missing from this list is Esmailyn Gonzalez, also one of the crop of younger more volatile prospects. Other names likely to appear in Sickels’ book are likely to be: Rog Bernadina, Stephen Englund, Garrett Mock, Yunior Novoa, Stephen King, Steven Souza, and Brad Meyers.
Fourteen of the twenty names listed above were added to the organization over the past two season. And, the Nats have moved from three top prospects (B or better) to five to nine which is a testament to the work done in organization since the Lerners took over.
Louis J. | 21-Nov-07 at 9:14 am | Permalink
Wow!!! John Sickel is a tough grader. Not one A- prospect out of the trio of Marrero, Detwiler or Burgess.
My comments would be that Adam Carr is in the top 20 but not #9 and I would reduce his grade to C+. I would have dropped Casto & Whitesell from the top 20 (they have out grown their “prospect” status) and replace them with Smiley Gonzalez (C) & Stephen King (C). This is the last year for Ian Demond in the top 20 (his age still gives him one more year on the list). And, isn’t Albaladejo to old to be a “prospect” (7 years in minors)?Two young players that I would have liked to see on the list are Steve Englund and Brad Meyers BUT I don’t know where to put them. And Zech Zinicola, who had a terrible 2007 season at Harrisburg and lackluster 2007 AFL and Garret Mock who has had two injury DL years, Hassan Pena, Yunior Novoa, Aaron Seuss, Derek Norris, Michael Daniel, Rog Bernadina & Edgardo Baez should be on the Sickels’ “Others to Watch” list.
But, at least we now have some prospects to discuss !!!!
Brian Oliver | 21-Nov-07 at 9:29 am | Permalink
we now have some prospects to discuss
Exactly. Most of the omissions (Zinicola, et al) seem likely to be grade C guys. I’d imagine there is quite a bit of fluidity to #15 to 35. It really comes down to personal preference.
As for the lack of Grade A guys, Sickels holds those for the elite guys. The guys that have few if any questions surrounding them. Marrero has questions about what position he is going to play. Detwiler’s slight build raises durability issues. Burgess still has some holes in his swing.
VladiHondo | 21-Nov-07 at 9:52 am | Permalink
Good to see only-21 yr old Ian Desmond on the rise again (C in book last spring), I hope he continues it this year. Also good to see steady progress on number of B and above prospects, from 3 in 2k5 to 7 now.
I like Sickels since he combines scouting reports, with statistical analysis and his own eyeballs to make his judgments. One caveat is: due to family etc. he hasn’t been making as many scouting trips he has in the last year so has been relying less on his own scout trips to make evaluations. Hope he has time to do more this year.
Basil | 21-Nov-07 at 10:33 am | Permalink
Not one A- prospect out of the trio of Marrero, Detwiler or Burgess
I don’t think that’s particularly tough, actually. Detwiler and Burgess don’t have much of a professional track record yet, so it’s understandable to err on the side of caution. And Marrero, while a very projectable hitting prospect, already has some defensive concerns, meaning it’s more than likely he’ll have to develop to a high range of his potential as a hitter.
Sickels defines Grade A as “elite.” I don’t think any of those three really qualifies at the moment. B+ strikes me as a fair grade.
Basil | 21-Nov-07 at 10:35 am | Permalink
(FWIW, I’m guessing the gap between B+ and A- is probably more significant than the gap between, say, B and B+.)
bob | 21-Nov-07 at 11:47 am | Permalink
Everyone seems to have lost sight of King. After a rough start in Hagerstown, where it seemed his “temper” got the most of him, his play in the Gulf League had him leading the league in Home Runs when he was re-assigned to Vermont late in the Summer. He only hit about .250, but has demonstrated the ability to play all three infield positions, and I had the opportunity to see many of the games for myself. He only got about 7 games in in Vermont before tweaking a “hammy”, but batted .333 with a couple of doubles and a flawless week of “D” at 2B. He has shown all five tools throughout the season, and stayed healthy until the very end, which was the big question mark on him. He is flying under the radar, but look for a “breakout” season from him in ‘08.
Brian Oliver | 21-Nov-07 at 12:01 pm | Permalink
Bob - I believe that King is still worthy of attention. Sickels was not high on him prior to this season and I think his initial struggles led to his exclusion at this point. In the Nats organization, there are a dearth of viable middle infield prospects at the higher levels (aside from Ian Desmond). King seems to have every opportunity to make a name for himself in 2008. Ideally some of the nicks and dings he had this season won’t linger.
Tofu Dog | 21-Nov-07 at 12:13 pm | Permalink
I would not rate Justin Maxwell higher than eighth on this list. I don’t see the production against younger players justifying the bump until he proves it this year at AA and AAA. I thought Adam Carr belonged on BA’s list, but they lean very hard on their own original evaluations w/o recourse to stats until they leap off the page. Hopefully Carr like Maxwell will do that this season. What is going on with Mike O’Connor? I heard from a reliable source that he is working his way back from surgery and might jump back up this year. This does not relate to the list, just a tangential question.
Steve | 21-Nov-07 at 12:38 pm | Permalink
What about Boomer Whiting? After a slow start (probably the change from aluminum to wood bat thing) he finished at .250 at Vermont and I do believe he led the league in SB’s at 37.
Brian Oliver | 21-Nov-07 at 12:40 pm | Permalink
Whiting is likely in the C range. Not sure he’ll make Sickels book though.
bob | 21-Nov-07 at 1:28 pm | Permalink
Brian - does Sickels actually watch these guys play? If Sickels “wasn’t high on” King prior to the season then he must not have stopped by the minor league Spring Training Facilities. I got over to Vierra, and other facilities, at least 12 to 15 days, and watched King have an OUTSTANDING Spring - after all, that is what earned him a spot in Hagerstown in the first place. There was nothing not to like about his performance all Spring, and this was his first live baseball since injuring his leg in late April of his Senior year in High School, which means that he had not competed in some 10 months when Spring Training began in late February. He simply did not handle (emotionally) his “failures” in Hagerstown, which is quite the norm for High School guys. It just makes me wonder what these guys actually do to make these evaluations, and whether or not they just rely on information flowing out (from whom?)of the organization, and whether or not people actually believe that an organization would be willing to tell everyone what they really feel about their own personnel. After all, this is a business like any other business, and I don’t think any organization is going to sit there and share their honest evaluations of personnel with everyone else. Insightful evaluation of personnel is usually what separates one organization from another, and allows some organizations to prosper, and others to fail. We love to read and discuss this stuff, but must consider the source and the motivation.
Brian Oliver | 21-Nov-07 at 1:58 pm | Permalink
I know that typically John tries to get out to see as much of the minor leaguers as one guy can but this season several family issues precluded that (see his website for details).
I agree that it often takes eyes on to get a true read. I was fortunate enough to see quite a few guys come through Potomac and I can assure you that my opinion of players was changed both positively and negatively based upon actually watching them play. And I know even then, I’m only getting a small sample size. I believe Sickels does the best he can given the abilities of one guy (and the people he talks to on a regular basis).
King is definitely an intriguing guy, given his current position (2B) and the tools he brings there. As a high schooler, he still is worth paying attention to and the fact the Nats still moved him up to Vermont after dropping him down to the GCL from Hagerstown is telling in that they have not given up on him by any stretch. I’d hope he get a take two in Hagerstown in 2008.
Dick | 21-Nov-07 at 3:23 pm | Permalink
Having read Sickles’ book last year, I don’t recall him giving A- or higher to more than 15 or 20 players. I’ll try counting them tonight.
Mark | 21-Nov-07 at 4:09 pm | Permalink
I wonder if Smiley was left off the list because it seems the emphasis was rating draft picks and Smiley was a free agent signing??
Scott | 21-Nov-07 at 4:42 pm | Permalink
Even though Flores does not qualify for this list, he still is somewhat of a prospect. He probably would have played at AA level if not for the Rule 5.
Chico also was moved up due to the lack of pitching.
The Nats are accumulating some young depth.
Louis J. | 21-Nov-07 at 10:10 pm | Permalink
Good comments from everybody. Damm it’s good to be discussing quality Nats prospects. The future is starting to look better but time will tell if our hopeful expectations are correct.
hartmanbirge | 22-Nov-07 at 2:15 am | Permalink
I don’t think he had enough to go on for Smoker and McGeary other than reputation and reputation shouldn’t count for much. I was also a bit shocked to see Alaniz ahead of Martis - scratching my head on that one. Martis is intriguing but has a small frame so not sure quite how he projects at higher levels. And I agree on Maxwell - if I were forced to choose I’d put all of those pitchers ahead of him (Gibson, Zimmerman, McGeary, Smoker). Garrett Mock belongs in the top 20. Would I rather have Casto and Whitsell over Mock? No way. I think he has Ballister about where he belongs. And Zenicola should be in the top 20 too - bad season or not….Don’t look now, but Nats after Jamie Dukes? I can see Kearns playing CF….Pena in Left….Dukes in right - and a lot of long home runs flying out of the new stadium….
Dick | 22-Nov-07 at 1:06 pm | Permalink
Last year, I counted 27 players Sickles rated A- or better. Tulowitzki and Braun were both A-. Dustin Pedroia was a B.
Louis J. | 23-Nov-07 at 1:16 pm | Permalink
hartmanbirge
Elijah Dukes played CF for Tampa and has a boat-load of talent if he can keep his anger (with teammates, management, girlfriends and authority figures) under control. That’s a BIG IF!! An outfield of Pena, Dukes and Kearns with Church (L) as the other OF would be a good combination. However, any trade for him better involve a serious discussion with Manny who has to “handle” this guy every day. Will he help the team or will he destroy team chemistry? What happens if the Nats trade away Dmitri Young? Tampa is not an easy team with whom to trade, what do the Nats have to give up for him?
Ryan Sullivan | 23-Nov-07 at 4:12 pm | Permalink
I think Jason Bergmann and Shairon Martis might be a fair offer for Dukes-
Louis J. | 23-Nov-07 at 11:37 pm | Permalink
Ryan Sullivan
Too much to offer for a problem player like Dukes. Tampa hasn’t been able to handle him for 4 years and they don’t know what to do with him. They already have a crowded outfield and they want to trade him now before the next incident makes him totally unwanted. He doesn’t want to go back to the minors and no one else is willing to trade for him. Bowden will try to wait them out like he did with Boston for Wily Mo or he’ll move on to next deal.
hartmanbirge | 24-Nov-07 at 10:03 am | Permalink
I didn’t say Jamie Dukes did I? Sorry!! How stupid. I’d trade Martis for him straight up…. but not Bergmann too. And even better would be bullpen arms instead… If Bowden can pull that off then kudos to Jimbo!! If we had Pena and Dukes in the lineup it would be scary…. (hopefully not for us!!).
Louis J. | 24-Nov-07 at 11:40 am | Permalink
Ryan Sullivan
Now you have something. A relief pitcher would be more appropriate for Tampa then a young starter of which Tampa has plenty. Would Tampa take back Jesus Colome or do we have to trade Saul Rivera?
Ryan Sullivan | 24-Nov-07 at 3:00 pm | Permalink
Louis J-
My thoughts on the proposal was that Bergmann could be TB’s 5th starter innings-eater type for this season, and once their SP prospects starting arriving later this season or in 2009, they could shift him to their bullpen- I see Bergmann as a mediocre 5th starter/long reliever, so I would assume TB would want a little sweetener, which became Martis.
While some have said we would be overpaying with this offer, I think it would be an absolute steal for the Nats.
Any thoughts?
Louis J. | 25-Nov-07 at 12:29 am | Permalink
Ryan Sullivan
Elijah Dukes is more than a high risk-reward player. While he has great potential, his personal behavior may prevent him from playing or it could easily become a team distraction. That’s the gamble with Dukes and as a good business/baseball person, you have to anticapate the worst and discount your offer accordingly. The worst is that after a trade for Dukes, his behavior prevents him from playing and the Nats would have given away Bergmann & Martis for nothing.
Also, the Nats showed an interest in Rocco Baldelli (CF) of Tampa. He’s another high risk-reward player. He too has great tools but he’s a gamble for different reasons: health and $$$$. He has a bad history of injuries whereby he has only played 52% of his games in the past 4 years AND he is a free agent after 2008 with a club option($6M) for 2009 WHICH HAS TO BE PICKED UP PRIOR TO THE START OF THE 2008 SEASON and a 2010 club option ($8M) & a 2011 club option ($9M). If you trade for Baldelli, the Nats would have to pick up his 2009 option BEFORE they really know if he can stay healthy. Because of these concern, your offer to Tampa must be discounted accordingly (Baldelli won’t offer any concessins). Since the talk with Tampa has now turned to Dukes, I assume that the Nats/Tampa can not agree on Baldelli’s current value and future injury potential.
Finally, according to “those inside baseball sources”, Tampa is a very difficult trading partner. Whatever the Nats offer, the Rays will demand more. The insiders indicate that the Rays are looking for help in the bullpen, at 2B or SS and future catching prospect. They are loaded with young pitchers.
Dick | 25-Nov-07 at 10:42 am | Permalink
Louis J:
Sounds like FLop should be in the mix!
Louis J. | 25-Nov-07 at 7:05 pm | Permalink
Dick
Do you think Tampa will take Lopez and his $4M salary (may get more in salary arbitration). Tampa is CHEAP! They would take him only if the Nats gave them $2-3M in “cash considerations”.
Dick | 25-Nov-07 at 9:10 pm | Permalink
Louis J: I have no way of knowing what TB might do, don’t follow them. I guess we can non-tender FLop and walk away from him, right? So, technically, his money is not an issue to us if we so choose.
I tell you what, though, it would be tempting to tender FLop, sign him for $5M or so, trade him for Dukes and eat some salary. JimBow would be all for that, I bet. Hard to know what the Lerners think. I know other owners in DC who wouldn’t touch Dukes if TB gave US $2-3 million given his ‘make-up’ problems.
Actually, you hit the nail on the head earlier when you said JimBow would ‘Wily Mo’ the Rays until Dukes had absolutely no value. That is why I agree you wouldn’t give up Bergmann or even Martis. FLop has no long-term value to Nats. Don’t know yet what some other guys l-t value will be.
Wouldn’t touch Baldelli with a 10-foot pole. And at that money, whew! He seems more like the Aussie from Seattle (we hardly knew ye) or even, my favorite, Escobar than someone who who can come all the way back. TB will DFA him before they pick up all that option money, unless he is Lazarus himself this year. Damaged goods, man!
Dukes is an interesting conundrum! GREAT fodder for the Hot Stove league. BTW, how fast could Saul get to TB on the next plane if that is all it takes.
From all of your posting, I can’t tell what YOU would do! You put me on the spot, now it is your turn. And, to be specific, I would offer Rivera or probably anyone else in the bullpen not named Cordero or Rauch. Probably any RELIEVER on the farm, too. Hopefully, only one of the above but would sleep on it if asked for two.
Suns Fan | 26-Nov-07 at 1:24 am | Permalink
King showed flashes in Hagerstown. He hit a couple home runs, and made a few good plays in the field (then at short). But everybody knows that the situation in Hagerstown wasn’t great for anyone this year. It’s good that the Nationals pulled King from Hagerstown before things totally went south.
It appears that things in Hagerstown will be much better next year. But I suppose all fans say that in late November–especially after major changes are made.
Louis J. | 26-Nov-07 at 10:28 am | Permalink
Dick
I guess it’s my turn to play GM.
Remembering that the Rays are CHEAP. They will not DFA Baldelli and not get anything. They also will not pick up his 2008 option and will use him as a DH in 2008. Come the July 30th trading deadline, they will entertain offers similiar to Soriano; however, since they will not get draft picks for him because they would have to offer arbitration to him to qualify for the draft picks and fear he might accept arbitration and Tampa would be struck with him with an already crowded outfield. As a GM, I would not be interested in a trading deadline deal for Baldelli becuase of the free agency issue but I may be interested in him as a free agent if he is healthy and Maxwell has not developed and I didn’t get Dukes.
With respect to Dukes, time is on my side as a GM. Because of the Rays current team roster, Dukes will open in AAA to prove himself. The Marlins were interested in Dukes and have not been able to make a deal and have dropped out of the discussions. I have Maxwell moving to AA and if continues his hiiting, I have a very good candidate for CF and will not need to “gamble” on Dukes. Therefore, at this time, I will not be offering a valuable prospect for him. I would make one offer of a relief pitcher for Dukes. My initial offer would be Jon Albaladeja and keep that as an open offer until I evaluate Maxwell’s improvement in AA. Saul Rivera is an option later depending on whether I get a great offer (starting pitcher) for Chad Cordero and whether Luis Ayala is healthy for 2008. If I were to lose either Cordero or Ayala, I would not offer Rivera. If I have kept Cordero and Ayala; if Maxwell has not developed; if Dukes has played reasonably well in AAA and if the Rays bullpen has continued its poor performance, I would offer Rivera.
Then I would hang up my GM shoes and go back to being a consumer/fan.
Dick | 26-Nov-07 at 3:23 pm | Permalink
Louis J:
Agree with everything you say except your last statement. Being a consumer/fan means having to wear GM shoes once in a while, doesn’t it. It just goes with the territory! Being a GM means you have to be patient and wait out the other side from time to time. Another point not universally understood!
I suppose you would be cheap, too, if you were Rays GM playing to 10-15,000 penny-pinching retirees each game! Thank goodness the Yanks and Red Sox come to town from time to time with all of their fans!
Also, I would hate to lose Ayala and would consider adding him to my Cordero, Rauch list of yesterday EXCEPT for health issues. I suspect they would make Rivera more appealing to TB or anyone else.
I was hoping Brian would confirm/correct my assertions/assumptions regarding FLop and tendering. Does anyone know the deadline for tendering contracts for arbitration purposes?
Louis J. | 26-Nov-07 at 4:07 pm | Permalink
Dick
We are fans because its not our $$$ we’re spending or we’re not responsible if the “deals” don’t work out. We just provide a fan’s opinion without knowing all the other factors involved. But as fans, we have the right to complaint when the team doesn’t win and say, “I told you so”.
Bowden signed Belliard to a 2-yr extension for “insurance”. He plays a very good 2B (turns the double play throw as well as anybody) and is a very good No. 2 hitter with some pop. I believe that Bowden would like to get Lopez back on track and sign him to a 2yr extension with an option year. BUT, he’s concern whether he will turn it around or will he revert to his past history of inconsistent play & moodiness. Belliard gives him the flexibility to trade Lopez if things don’t work out.
Clubs must offer contracts to unsigned salary arbitration eligible players by Dec. 12, 2007. If said players do not agree to said contract offers, they can file for salary arbitration between Jan. 1st-15th, 2008 afterwhich the club/player exchange salary figures by Jan. 18, 2008. Arbitration hearing are held between Feb. 1st-21st, 2008. Of course, the player & club can come to terms at ant time prior to the hearing. The Nats players (10) eligible for salary arbitration are: Ayala, Colome, Cordero, Lopez, Patterson, Wily Mo, Rauch, Wagner, Redding & Langerhans.
Louis J. | 26-Nov-07 at 5:29 pm | Permalink
Dick
Also, players not offered a contract by Dec. 12, 2007 are considered “non-tendered” players and become free agents. To qualify as a contract offer, it can not be for 20% less than their current salary so they have to offer Lopez a minimum of $3.12M to quality as a contract offer. The Nationals will be keeping an eye on the current non-tendered list this year for an bargains.
Dick | 26-Nov-07 at 8:06 pm | Permalink
Louis J:
Stop it! You know ALL the other factors involved. Me, too.
Thanks for the December 12 date. That is when the hot stove gets turned up full blast!
A thought on FLop. Many said he had personal issues last year but I never really heard what they were. Did he an Jen split?
Louis J. | 26-Nov-07 at 11:06 pm | Permalink
Dick
Maybe he has the wrong JLo on his mind!! I believe he has had his issues since he came up with Tronoto but Bowden thinks he can cure everybody’s problems.
Just read that the Rays were asking for a “top level pitching prospects” !!! for Dukes and the Nationals ” were not offering anything of significance”. Also, it appears that the Nationals are the only team currently interested in Dukes. However, as of now, the two teams have stopped talking. Tampa has Dukes on the Inactive List which means he’s not getting paid and he’s not on their 40 man roster. He’s parked in limbo for now. Things will heat up if and when Tampa decides to activate him and find room for him on their 40 man roster.
P.S. Some website was reporting that Tampa wanted Balester for Dukes?
No wonder why the Nats/Rays have stopped talking. I wonder how
mant teams have been able to trade with Tampa over the past years?
Dick | 27-Nov-07 at 12:21 pm | Permalink
After what happened to Sean Taylor, I’m rethinking my position on Dukes. And Dukes made Taylor look like a choirboy!
With patience, the price will come down. Presumably, the Rays can’t salt the guy away forever on the inactive list. You know the rules there?
I’m not that high on Balester but it is far too high a price to pay at this point!
Louis J. | 28-Nov-07 at 12:03 am | Permalink
Dick
Don’t give up on Balester. He has too much stuff. He’s young, a surfer dude from California, maturing and learning how to pitch. He could take another year OR he could put it all together next year. Keep the faith.
Dick | 28-Nov-07 at 3:15 pm | Permalink
Louis J:
Haven’t given up on him, just don’t like his stats. More importantly, have never seen him pitch. On the other hand, having seen Marrero a half dozen times gives me goosebumps! Also, seeing Gibson pitch his last game before he got Mono gave me goosebumps! Every pitch knee-high on the black!
I didn’t care for Desmond but he turned things around towards the end of the season and made me more patient. Now if he learns to handle a slow roller right at him!
How long til Spring Training? I am suffering withdrawal! That is why everyone was so testy last week when this posting got started, no doubt.
Louis J. | 28-Nov-07 at 7:01 pm | Permalink
Dick
Can’t wait to see Gibson and the other “young guns” come thru Hagerstown and Potomac. I like what I saw from Marerro. He hits balls very hard, has a great attitude and work ethic and is very personable. I root for Desmond & Maxwell to make it. Their both nice kids. Very personable. Have a boat-load of talent. The fans will love him if he makes it to Washington. The sleeper is Mike Daniel(OF)(L/L).
Dick | 28-Nov-07 at 9:37 pm | Permalink
Louis:
If Daniel, Marrero, Maxwell and Van Allen make the big leagues, the autographed ball I bought at the P-Nats fan club auction will be valuable, right?
I didn’t think much of Maxwell until he came on at the end of the year. I saw him hit some ropes in Hagerstown but thought they were just lucky hits until he got healthy in Potomac at the end of the season. Daniel looked equal or better at the time. Seeing more of Maxwell made it clear that he is the best prospect of the two. He is either the real deal or Alex Escobar.
To quote JimBow, ‘you just never know’.
Dick | 28-Nov-07 at 9:37 pm | Permalink
Louis,
Try to get to bed before midnight tonight.