2019 Minor Leagues/Prospect Discussion Thread

dagger · Post #5121 » by **dagger** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:07 am

I'm glad Bo is get anxious. So am I. I have nothing personally against Sogard, Galvis or Drury, but just get on with it. I don't care if you give them away. Pay another team to take them. Sogard has marginal value, Galvis maybe slightly more because he's a switch hitter with a team option. But just get on with it. This isn't case of a Donaldson where you think there might be a great offer lurking. No sucker is going to give even a second tier prospect for Sogard.

Post #5122 » by **Schad** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:33 am

I mean, it's likely going to be a maximum of two weeks. He missed a bunch of time, and while he's doing fine he isn't likely to blow the doors off straightaway...he's a groundball/line drive hitter who hasn't tapped into his power. That will come, but he's probably going to be fairly average out of the gate. There is no massive rush.

And because we 100% want to keep him as a SS, Galvis is the one that'll almost definitely need to go. There's no point in keeping him as an occasional backup, as he should have some trade value.

wamco · Post #5123 » by **wamco** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:14 pm

I agree. Nothing to get worked up about. It’s 2 weeks. It’s a lost season. For some people it’s like an orgasm when a prospect gets to mlb. More often then not, they struggle when they get here

BigLeagueChew · Post #5124 » by **BigLeagueChew** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:05 pm

Two more homeruns for Bo this afternoon.

IceBelly05 · Post #5125 » by **IceBelly05** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:26 pm

Zach Jackson in his last 24 innings has 1 earned run, 8 walks and 28 strikeouts. Walks will always be a problem with him to an extent but man this kid is lights out

IceBelly05 · Post #5126 » by **IceBelly05** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:27 pm

IceBelly05 wrote:Zach Jackson in his last 24 innings has 1 earned run, 8 walks and 28 strikeouts. Walks will always be a problem with him to an extent but man this kid is lights out

Say kid but he’s 24 so a few years older than me but yeah lights out bring him up shapkins

Post #5127 » by **Schad** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:59 pm

If Giles/Hudson are on their way, Jackson's certainly a possibility. His K rate has fallen quite a bit this year, though so too has his walk rate. As he becomes Rule 5 eligible after the season, he's a logical choice for a couple month stint in the 'pen when 40-man spots are opened up.

Jackson McClelland is another possibility. Hard-thrower in AA, good chance he goes in the Rule 5 if not protected.

polo007 · Post #5128 » by **polo007** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 10:13 pm

BigLeagueChew wrote:Two more homeruns for Bo this afternoon.

Read on Twitter

gundysmullet · Post #5129 » by **gundysmullet** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 2:52 am

Schad wrote:I mean, it's likely going to be a maximum of two weeks. He missed a bunch of time, and while he's doing fine he isn't likely to blow the doors off straightaway...he's a groundball/line drive hitter who hasn't tapped into his power. That will come, but he's probably going to be fairly average out of the gate. There is no massive rush.

And because we 100% want to keep him as a SS, Galvis is the one that'll almost definitely need to go. There's no point in keeping him as an occasional backup, as he should have some trade value.

But I don't understand this logic, Glavis is actually good. Do a Gurriel and stick him in the outfield and get rid of Hernandez or Grichuk. This, "Galvis has to go cause he plays ss too" is such an antiquated and shortsighted notion.

Post #5130 » by **Schad** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:00 am

Galvis has little value played anywhere else, because providing league-average SS defense is most of his skillset. Stick him in the outfield and you have a guy providing league-average offense (at best) in a corner spot, at which point he is barely more than replacement-level.

gundysmullet · Post #5131 » by **gundysmullet** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 6:46 am

Schad wrote:Galvis has little value played anywhere else, because providing league-average SS defense is most of his skillset. Stick him in the outfield and you have a guy providing league-average offense (at best) in a corner spot, at which point he is barely more than replacement-level.

OK I’m gonna call you out a little bit and hope that you can be a little self reflective. I want you to specifically address my point not try to change it to justify yours; I specifically said to replace Grichuk or Hernandez. Now tell me how Galvis numbers match up versus Grichuks or Hernandez? I honestly don’t know so I would like you to tell me. Thanks

Post #5132 » by **Schad** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 6:54 am

He'd likely be better than Teoscar has been to date as a corner OF, and equal to or worse than Grichuk. But that's not really much of a bar given that both are underperforming, and Galvis as a corner OF isn't really worth his $5.5m option for next season. He's also vastly overperforming his career numbers at the plate, at age 29, and if he regresses to career norms (until this season, Galvis was a very bad hitter) as an OF he becomes a massive liability. And as his OPS after his first hot three weeks is more like the Galvis of years past, that regression seems likely.

So in the end, we'd be keeping him in order to have an extra mediocre outfielder on a really bad team, with the likely outcome of paying him $1m at season's end to buy out his option. Or we could trade him somewhere that'd value him based on playing his natural position. That choice seems more rational to me.

wamco · Post #5133 » by **wamco** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:34 pm

Cmon schad. look within yourself. Open up a bit. What are you running from?

gundysmullet · Post #5134 » by **gundysmullet** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:29 pm

Schad wrote:He'd likely be better than Teoscar has been to date as a corner OF, and equal to or worse than Grichuk. But that's not really much of a bar given that both are underperforming, and Galvis as a corner OF isn't really worth his $5.5m option for next season. He's also vastly overperforming his career numbers at the plate, at age 29, and if he regresses to career norms (until this season, Galvis was a very bad hitter) as an OF he becomes a massive liability. And as his OPS after his first hot three weeks is more like the Galvis of years past, that regression seems likely.

So in the end, we'd be keeping him in order to have an extra mediocre outfielder on a really bad team, with the likely outcome of paying him $1m at season's end to buy out his option. Or we could trade him somewhere that'd value him based on playing his natural position. That choice seems more rational to me.

Soooooo...he's better than Teoscar and the same as Grichuk who the Jays could flip to a contender and shed his salary at the same time? And...if he regresses, so what, the team sucks, and they dumped Grichuks salary and if he doesn't regress, so what, the team sucks, and they dumped Grichuks salary.

dagger · Post #5135 » by **dagger** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:45 pm

gundysmullet wrote:
Schad wrote:He'd likely be better than Teoscar has been to date as a corner OF, and equal to or worse than Grichuk. But that's not really much of a bar given that both are underperforming, and Galvis as a corner OF isn't really worth his $5.5m option for next season. He's also vastly overperforming his career numbers at the plate, at age 29, and if he regresses to career norms (until this season, Galvis was a very bad hitter) as an OF he becomes a massive liability. And as his OPS after his first hot three weeks is more like the Galvis of years past, that regression seems likely.

So in the end, we'd be keeping him in order to have an extra mediocre outfielder on a really bad team, with the likely outcome of paying him $1m at season's end to buy out his option. Or we could trade him somewhere that'd value him based on playing his natural position. That choice seems more rational to me.

Soooooo...he's better than Teoscar and the same as Grichuk who the Jays could flip to a contender and shed his salary at the same time? And...if he regresses, so what, the team sucks, and they dumped Grichuks salary and if he doesn't regress, so what, the team sucks, and they dumped Grichuks salary.

Ther is no point keeping Galvis around if you are not going to play him most days. When Bo comes up, he has to play SS most days. Biggio has to play 2B most days. Galvis in the outfield is a pointless exercise if you can get something for him, even a modest hail Mary type prospect. There isn't a compelling case for keeping him.

Post #5136 » by **Schad** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 6:39 pm

Soooooo...he's better than Teoscar and the same as Grichuk who the Jays could flip to a contender and shed his salary at the same time? And...if he regresses, so what, the team sucks, and they dumped Grichuks salary and if he doesn't regress, so what, the team sucks, and they dumped Grichuks salary.

There is zero chance of flipping Grichuk to a contender at this moment. Or to a non-contender. He will need to bounce back to be movable.

gundysmullet · Post #5137 » by **gundysmullet** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 7:30 pm

Schad wrote:
Soooooo...he's better than Teoscar and the same as Grichuk who the Jays could flip to a contender and shed his salary at the same time? And...if he regresses, so what, the team sucks, and they dumped Grichuks salary and if he doesn't regress, so what, the team sucks, and they dumped Grichuks salary.

There is zero chance of flipping Grichuk to a contender at this moment. Or to a non-contender. He will need to bounce back to be movable.

Fair enough. What about Hernandez?

gundysmullet · Post #5138 » by **gundysmullet** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 7:33 pm

dagger wrote:
gundysmullet wrote:
Schad wrote:He'd likely be better than Teoscar has been to date as a corner OF, and equal to or worse than Grichuk. But that's not really much of a bar given that both are underperforming, and Galvis as a corner OF isn't really worth his $5.5m option for next season. He's also vastly overperforming his career numbers at the plate, at age 29, and if he regresses to career norms (until this season, Galvis was a very bad hitter) as an OF he becomes a massive liability. And as his OPS after his first hot three weeks is more like the Galvis of years past, that regression seems likely.

So in the end, we'd be keeping him in order to have an extra mediocre outfielder on a really bad team, with the likely outcome of paying him $1m at season's end to buy out his option. Or we could trade him somewhere that'd value him based on playing his natural position. That choice seems more rational to me.

Soooooo...he's better than Teoscar and the same as Grichuk who the Jays could flip to a contender and shed his salary at the same time? And...if he regresses, so what, the team sucks, and they dumped Grichuks salary and if he doesn't regress, so what, the team sucks, and they dumped Grichuks salary.

Ther is no point keeping Galvis around if you are not going to play him most days. When Bo comes up, he has to play SS most days. Biggio has to play 2B most days. Galvis in the outfield is a pointless exercise if you can get something for him, even a modest hail Mary type prospect. There isn't a compelling case for keeping him.

I thought I made a “compelling” case; he’s better than Grichuk and much cheaper. The bottom line is that the team stinks but Galvis is better than Grichuk or Hernandez and if you can do the same thing with him that you did with Guriel, i.e stick them in the outfield, then do it. Because as I stated earlier, the team is going to suck either way. But shad makes a point that Grichuk is untradable at his contract and lack of performance. Good job Shartkins

Post #5139 » by **Schad** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 7:33 pm

gundysmullet wrote:Fair enough. What about Hernandez?

Hernandez could be, if desired, replaced by just about anyone. As could Galvis, if he was made an outfielder. But Galvis would cost 10x as much next season, and has no real upside.

To give you an idea of why Galvis in the outfield is a bad idea, as a hitter he has been worth -82.9 runs versus an average hitter for his career. That's not good; in fact, out of 779 players with 500+ plate appearances over the past ten years, only six have been worth fewer runs relative to league-average.

Which is a testament to his poor offensive contribution, but it's also a testament to his defense at shortstop: if he played a position other than SS or C, his career would have been over years ago.

polo007 · Post #5140 » by **polo007** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 7:42 pm

Read on Twitter