Law and Goldstein prospect chattiness

by Adam J. Morris on Jan 31, 2008 2:28 PM CST in News Comment 42 comments

Are top 100 lists not enough?

Check out Keith Law's chat session at ESPN today, and Kevin Goldstein's chat.

Some Ranger stuff in each...

0 recs | Comment 42 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Did I miss the Ranger's Stuff in Goldstein's chat?

I didn't see anything....

by Dirk Diggler on Jan 31, 2008 3:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

ergh

yeah i read that whole thing and there were more gaming questions than prospect questions...then when there were prospect questions it was bitching about a top 5 prospect.

Was disappointed he didn't mention the Rangers as a prime example of how quickly a system can go from Bottom 5 to Top 5 with a drastic shift in drafting, Int'l signing, etc. strategies. Instead he noted the Yankees...Does East Coast bias extend to De Kalb, IA?

Yeah, well at least I'm housebroken.

by HypoLuxa on Jan 31, 2008 3:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well apparently

it's still going on....

But I've read enough about RPG video games for one day.

by Dirk Diggler on Jan 31, 2008 3:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

??????????????????????

Also can someone post the info from laws chat? I refuse to pay for it.

""I love GOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLD" blueglovelefty

by NYTXFAN on Jan 31, 2008 3:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

here ya go buddy

Calvin (Hobbes, TX): Keith, You mentioned last week that the only player the Braves would miss in their trade for Teixeira would be Salty and Andrus. BP ranks Neftali Feliz as the Rangers top prospect. Where does he rank in your Rangers list, does he project as a reliever or starter and is he just too far away to say the Braves will end up missing him? Also does Beau Jones project as a starter or reliever. Thanks for your time!

Keith Law: He's way too far away and too raw. I think KG is taking a stand on a player he really likes - I do the same thing - but he wasn't a consideration for my top 5 Rangers prospects because of all the nearer-in guys they have.

Juevos Daniels: biggest stones in the business.

by tricer on Jan 31, 2008 3:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Calvin from Hobbes?

"I've learned that before I open my mouth, I should look both ways for midgets." - Denny Crain

by mtex on Jan 31, 2008 4:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

and this

Wes (Atlanta): Ultimately, do you feel Elvis Andrus will be a better overall ss than Yunel Escobar?

Keith Law: Yes, I like Andrus' bat much better.

Juevos Daniels: biggest stones in the business.

by tricer on Jan 31, 2008 3:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

couple more

Spencer (Orange County): What team comes out of obscurity first: Rangers, A's, Giants, Marlins?

Keith Law: The Marlins and Rangers are much further ahead of the Bay Area teams in their rebuilding processes.

matt (dallas, texas): gomez or hamilton who would you rather have?

Keith Law: Hamilton.

Juevos Daniels: biggest stones in the business.

by tricer on Jan 31, 2008 3:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Duran

Marc (Quincy Ma): Duran over Brignac? Duran a year older, much better hitter park(2nd in TEXAS lg) and much better hitting league. Brignac improved his BB and K%'s this season, and by all account will stay at SS. How can Duran be ranked higher?

Keith Law: That is some seriously selective arguing. Brignac improving certain indicators does not mean that he's now better than another player; it means he's better than he himself was last year.

Juevos Daniels: biggest stones in the business.

by tricer on Jan 31, 2008 3:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

it's free

"Lois, undecided voters are the biggest idiots on the planet, try giving short, simple answers."

by Longhorn on Jan 31, 2008 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

weird

it was free earlier, not now though...hmmm.

"Lois, undecided voters are the biggest idiots on the planet, try giving short, simple answers."

by Longhorn on Jan 31, 2008 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

last one

Brad (Wayne, NJ): What were the top 5 best teams farm systems? Rays, Yanks, Sox?

Keith Law: Rays, Rangers, Sox, Yanks, Reds.

Juevos Daniels: biggest stones in the business.

by tricer on Jan 31, 2008 3:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Still Going...

Lincoln (Facebook): What about Taylor Teagarden makes you think that there are 6 other players in the Rangers org who currently are better prospects? Fault of his or just the strength of the system?

Kevin Goldstein: A little bit of both, really. The Rangers system is crazy crazy deep right now. Teagarden ability, or inability to consistently play behind the plate is the concern right now, and he's just not going to hit for average down the line -- He'll be more like a Mickey Tettleton type with a tick less power.

by Topgun22 on Jan 31, 2008 3:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That's the first I've heard

of Teagarden potentially not sticking behind the plate...

by Dirk Diggler on Jan 31, 2008 3:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Teagarden..

I'd imagine that comment was brought about because of health concerns, the ability concerns come into play where Goldstein says he doesn't believe he'll hit for average. At least thats the way I read it.

by Topgun22 on Jan 31, 2008 3:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Tettleton reference

Tettleton with a little less power? I don't know about you guys but I'd take that. I saw him play while he was at UT, and he appeared to me to be a hell of a defensive catcher. Given, I'm basing that on seeing one game and he's been hurt since then.

Ctrl - V

by Dustin on Jan 31, 2008 3:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I played

against him in HS and in a couple college summer lg games. He is legit as it comes behind the plate. I would also take tettleton with less power considering that was believed to be his biggest weakness.

by crusader15 on Jan 31, 2008 5:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

St. Mike's Crusaders??

by corbsclinton on Jan 31, 2008 6:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

there's this

Lincoln (Facebook): What about Taylor Teagarden makes you think that there are 6 other players in the Rangers org who currently are better prospects? Fault of his or just the strength of the system?

Juevos Daniels: biggest stones in the business.

by tricer on Jan 31, 2008 3:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Tea

I don't have the stats here, but did Teagarden benefit from BABIP? What's Law basing the ruling about AVG on?

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Jan 31, 2008 3:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

I would guess he's basing on the fact that Teagarden is an older player in the lower minors. That said, he hit well in Frisco last year, so we'll see. That said with his defense and OBP, he doesn't have to hit for a very high average. .275/.365/.475 would be excellent from a "defensive catcher"

by Topgun22 on Jan 31, 2008 3:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It was Goldstein's comment, not Law

and yes, Teagarden had BABIP that look to be unsustainable.

.396 in Bakersfield and .418 in Frisco

I don't remember seeing those numbers before now, all the more reason to keep Salty behind the plate.

Juevos Daniels: biggest stones in the business.

by tricer on Jan 31, 2008 4:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

thanks tricer,

:) I got lazy and scrolled down as far as I could go and didn't see anything. Cool Beans.

""I love GOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLD" blueglovelefty

by NYTXFAN on Jan 31, 2008 4:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Jeez, Tricer

You mean you don't read each and every one of my comments? ;)

Seriously though, the BABIP is troubling, but if he can keep drawing walks and hitting for decent power, he should be a true asset at the major league level because of his defense.

Just perhaps not the star last season's number might lead you to believe.

The 40 (still) trumps all!!!

by thedirkatron on Jan 31, 2008 8:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Trouble

The only thing about that BABIP that troubles me, is that most fans won't look that deep, and they assume that he is going to hit that well in the majors. And that the Rangers should trade Salty and Laird because it's like, totally obvious that Teagarden is the next Pudge.

I think his defense will make him valuable even if his bat takes a dip, but he's not going to be Pudge or Bench at the plate.

Shoehorn.

by t ball on Jan 31, 2008 11:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ouch

AJM asked Law for an over-under on Ranger wins and Law hesitantly says 70.

I've been pretty critical of some of the players and Worsh being competent as manager and some of JDs moves, but 70 wins seems like an easy bet for the over.

Juevos Daniels: biggest stones in the business.

by tricer on Jan 31, 2008 3:09 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Damn

I sure hope they win more than 70...

You're hijacking the thread and being repetitive. Move forward.

by Rodney on Jan 31, 2008 3:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I truly believe

at this point in time, that 90 wins is more likely than 70 wins. I don't believe either is that likely, but if they only win 75 like last season, I will be disappointed.

I just don't see where the Rangers are worse than last year...

In the bullpen we've swapped Aki and Gagne for Guardado and Fukumori (Edge: 2007).
In the rotation, we've swapped Tejeda and Wright for Jennings and Gabbard/Mendoza (Edge: 2008).
We've swapped Teixeira and Metcalf for Broussard and Blalock (push?).
OF goes from Catalanotto/Lofton/Cruz/Byrd/Wilkerson to Byrd/Hamilton/Bradley/Murphy/Cruz (Edge: 2008).
At catcher Laird will either be better or replaced by Saltalamacchia (Edge: 2008).
If we get good Cat at DH, I think he's got the edge over Sosa (more right-handed pitchers, fewer strikeouts), but it's hard to compare quantitatively since Catalanotto won't be hitting cleanup (Edge: 2008).

Hmm... long post.

I lack the required experience to be an intern.

by TheRupeIsOnFire on Jan 31, 2008 4:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Right

not any worse..but how much better?

Still gotta think that at least someone will go down with an injury in ST that will put them out some time. It seems inevitable with this team.

But, I think you're right. If we don't win any more than 75 this year, it will be a major disappointment.

"I've learned that before I open my mouth, I should look both ways for midgets." - Denny Crain

by mtex on Jan 31, 2008 4:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed...

I don't think there is any way that this team gets off to as bad of a start this year as it did last year. I would guess that this is about a .500 team. If they are healthy and get a resurgence from guys like Millwood, Padilla, Jennings, and Blalock they could be a lot better, if not, they could be worse but I think .500 is realiistic

by Topgun22 on Jan 31, 2008 4:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Tex and Metcalf for Broussard and Blalock push?

thats not exactly right since metcalf didn't play all that much. vasquez would more appropriate but hank still got a fair amoutn of AB's.

but, I'm pretty sure the combined OPS of 1B and 3B last year will not stack up to this year

and there are a lot of other liberties you take like the rotation and the OF. you might lean the way you are leaning but it could easily go the other way.

by ab03 on Jan 31, 2008 5:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

hmm

but i guess tex didn't play that much either. i would like to see the numbers from last year by position. I forget if Scott already did that series or is going to.

by ab03 on Jan 31, 2008 5:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

2007 Rangers splits

1B: 246/334/436/770
3B: 244/296/409/705

I have to think Broussard and Blalock can beat that performance.

Glenallen Hill Secrets

by a bebop a rebop on Jan 31, 2008 8:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I figured that

the rotation and the OF required less explanation that the other positions. The only liberty I know I took was not writing a lengthy essay about those two spots. Seems obvious to me.

Why don't you think those two are dramatically improved?

I lack the required experience to be an intern.

by TheRupeIsOnFire on Jan 31, 2008 5:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Rotation, OF

Both much improved, but only if health remains good. There is lots of depth in the rotation, bodes well, not much of a dropoff potentially. I see 80 wins instead of 90, though, just because the odds of everything going well are just too slim for more than that.

Shoehorn.

by t ball on Jan 31, 2008 5:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know

We're assuming that Hank comes back strong, and even a good year by Hank is dwarfed by the good ones from Tex. Someone's already pointed out the 1B and 3B numbers from last year, but I still say 2007 beats 2008. Push is probably likely.

"When I was a pup, we got spanked by presidents 'til the cows came home! Grover Cleveland spanked me on two non-consecutive occasions!" LBrooks

by WyoRanger on Feb 1, 2008 4:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

even if we had the same players as last year

and they actually played like they're capable of playing than we'd be better than last year, but we've improved the roster and hopefully everybody will get off to a better start

by SlowHand on Jan 31, 2008 7:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep,

my optimism is gaining steam. What fun is it if you don't think you can win? And what different is this season than any other besides management saying its a rebuilding year? I have just as much hope in this team as the team they started spring training with last year. There are some wildcards in there, like always, maybe this is our year when everything falls into place.

by corbsclinton on Jan 31, 2008 7:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I too hope everything works in our favor,

Wash is an alright coach and I think that this year more of the players will buy into his beliefs. I also think we see all star caliber years from hank the tank, hammy, CJ, benoit, young, and Kinsler.

I hope the starting rotation can live up to their expectations but I wont hate myself when they dont. I just really want to see Milly, BMac, and Gabbard improve their play and be successful. Those three are the reason we might be able to acquire a big name pitcher next year like C.C.

""I love GOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLD" blueglovelefty

by NYTXFAN on Jan 31, 2008 8:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs