Prospect writers Kevin Goldstein and Eric Longenhagen will sometimes have enough player notes to compile a scouting post. This is one of those dispatches, a collection of thoughts after another weekend of college baseball and week of spring training. Remember, prospect rankings can be found on The Board.

Kevin’s Notes

Sam Bachman, RHP, Miami (Ohio): 3 IP, 0 H, 0 R, 0 BB, 9 K

Bachman has cross-checkers around the country Googling where the hell Oxford, Ohio is (it’s in the southwest part of the state; fly into Cincinnati and it’s about an hour drive north from there). He’s been getting into triple digits most weekends and touched 101 on Saturday against a sub-par Northern Illinois squad; his outing featured nine up, nine down, and nine strikeouts on 41 pitches. Bachman is being treated with kid gloves as a starter due to some early-season shoulder soreness, but most teams see him as a pure reliever due to an awkward, unathletic delivery. At 6-foot-1 and somewhere in the neighborhood of 235 pounds, he’s built like a linebacker, and he seems to throw like one as well. The scary thing about him is that his 96-100 mph fastball might not even be his best pitch. Of the 41 offerings on Saturday, he threw 24 sliders, and it’s a 70-grade pitch that features massive velocity and equally impressive break; in the end, it generated eight of his nine whiffs. Despite the concerns about his delivery and ultimate role, this is some of the best pure stuff in the draft and Bachman is starting to generate some mid-first-round buzz.

Jacob Campbell, C, Illinois: 4-for-7, 2B, HR, BB, K

I was talking to a front office person the other day when he suddenly stated, “Catching around the league is so awful.” It’s baseball’s most difficult position, and takes a physical toll that greatly limits backstops’ ability to perform at the plate. There are 30 everyday catching jobs, but there aren’t 30 everyday catchers. That forces teams to move catchers up on their draft boards, and Campbell could end up a beneficiary of that strategy. A 36th-round pick by the Cubs in 2018 out of a Wisconsin high school, he hit just .197 in his first two years at Illinois, but scouts remained optimistic because of his athleticism and power, though there was concern about the latter following offseason hamate surgery. He’s come out strong so far this spring, going 12-for-27 with three bombs, and he’s suddenly being talking about in the third round, give or take 30 picks. Campbell moves well behind the plate and has a plus arm, and while there’s some swing-and-miss in his game, he has a solid approach to go with sneaky pop. Catching around the league is awful and players like Campbell are in a good position to take advantage of that come July. Read the rest of this entry »

Below is an analysis of the prospects in the farm system of the Atlanta Braves. Scouting reports were compiled with information provided by industry sources as well as our own observations. As there was no minor league season in 2020, there are some instances where no new information was gleaned about a player. Players whose write-ups have not been meaningfully altered begin by telling you so. Each blurb ends with an indication of where the player played in 2020, which in turn likely informed the changes to their report if there were any. As always, we’ve leaned more heavily on sources from outside of a given org than those within for reasons of objectivity. Because outside scouts were not allowed at the alternate sites, we’ve primarily focused on data from there, and the context of that data, in our opinion, reduces how meaningful it is. Lastly, in an effort to more clearly indicate relievers’ anticipated roles, you’ll see two reliever designations, both on team lists and on The Board: MIRP, or multi-inning relief pitcher, and SIRP, or single-inning relief pitcher.

For more information on the 20-80 scouting scale by which all of our prospect content is governed, you can click here. For further explanation of Future Value’s merits and drawbacks, read Future Value.

All of the numbered prospects here also appear on The Board, a resource the site offers featuring sortable scouting information for every organization. It can be found here.

Below is an analysis of the prospects in the farm system of the Detroit Tigers. Scouting reports were compiled with information provided by industry sources as well as our own observations. As there was no minor league season in 2020, there are some instances where no new information was gleaned about a player. Players whose write-ups have not been meaningfully altered begin by telling you so. Each blurb ends with an indication of where the player played in 2020, which in turn likely informed the changes to their report if there were any. As always, we’ve leaned more heavily on sources from outside of a given org than those within for reasons of objectivity. Because outside scouts were not allowed at the alternate sites, we’ve primarily focused on data from there, and the context of that data, in our opinion, reduces how meaningful it is. Lastly, in an effort to more clearly indicate relievers’ anticipated roles, you’ll see two reliever designations, both on team lists and on The Board: MIRP, or multi-inning relief pitcher, and SIRP, or single-inning relief pitcher.

For more information on the 20-80 scouting scale by which all of our prospect content is governed, you can click here. For further explanation of Future Value’s merits and drawbacks, read Future Value.

All of the numbered prospects here also appear on The Board, a resource the site offers featuring sortable scouting information for every organization. It can be found here.

Prospect writers Kevin Goldstein and Eric Longenhagen will sometimes have enough player notes to compile a scouting post. This is one of those dispatches, a collection of thoughts after another weekend of college baseball and week of spring training. Remember, prospect rankings can be found on The Board.

Eric’s Notes

Marcos Castanon, 2B, UC Santa Barbara: 4-for-12, 2B, HR, 5 BB, 5 K

Entering the year, Castanon had played in more games during a dour freshman season (42 games, .214/.278/.321) than he had in two good ones (.308/.357/.488, 38 games) interrupted by a hamstring injury and the pandemic. He’s out of the gate really hot in 2020 (.358/.500/.642) and now has eight home runs in his last 30 games. Castanon doesn’t have huge raw power but he does good pull-side pop for a second baseman and can barrel velocity. He’ll make some slick plays at second, some of which help enable a lack of bend and flexibility, and overall he’s an average second baseman with a below-average arm. Though his swing doesn’t have playability all over the zone (he’s vulnerable up and in), I think the performance and near average hit/power combo put him in the early Day Two mix.

Cade Doughty, 3B, LSU (2022 eligible): 5-for-14, 4 HR, 3 BB, 3 K

Doughty was the star of a roller coaster three-game set against UT-San Antonio, during which he hit several dramatic home runs, and he already has six on the year. Doughty indeed has plus pull power and is getting to it in games when he get extended and clubs pitch on the outer half. He appears to track pitches well and has squared up a mix of fastballs and breaking balls. Let’s see how he fares in conference play. Doughty likes to swing, and SEC pitching has the best chance to expose what have been some early struggles against fastballs in on his hands. Read the rest of this entry »

Prospect writers Kevin Goldstein and Eric Longenhagen will sometimes have enough player notes to compile a scouting post. This is one of those dispatches, a collection of college baseball and spring training thoughts from this past weekend. Remember, prospect rankings can be found on The Board.

Kevin’s Notes

Will The College Hitters Please Come Forward?

Eric and I have talked about this subject in this space and elsewhere, but the college hitter group for the 2021 draft is developing into an especially challenging one for scouting departments. Much of that is because with both an exceptionally short 2020 season and no Cape Cod League, it was hard to line up boards heading into the year. Some of the best freshmen from 2019 became the best draft-eligible bats heading into the year almost by default, and many have disappointed. Take a look at this quartet, all of whom entered the season as potential top-half of the first round picks. Read the rest of this entry »

Prospect writers Kevin Goldstein and Eric Longenhagen will sometimes have enough player notes to compile a scouting post. This is one of those dispatches, a collection of thoughts after the second weekend of college baseball and first two days of spring training. Remember, prospect rankings can be found on The Board.

Eric’s Notes

Justice Thompson, CF, North Carolina: 6-for-10, 2 2B, HR, 2 BB, 1 K

There are going to be an inordinate number of pop-up college guys this year and Thompson appears to be one. He was seen by a ton of scouts early in 2020 during Northwest Florida State’s clash with San Jacinto (two prominent junior colleges), so teams knew who he was entering this season, but had he looked in ’20 like he looks now, he’d probably already be in pro ball rather than at Chapel Hill. This is a freaky frame/power/speed prospect, the kind not typically seen on college campuses at all, the sort of athlete who often signs out of high school. After the first couple weekends of Division-I ball, Thompson is slugging .920. Even at a lanky 6-foot-4, he’s shown an ability to pull his hands in to put the barrel on inside pitches, and drive them with power. I don’t know exactly where to put this guy on The Board just yet, but he has first round physical tools, and the typical issues that plague long-levered hitters don’t appear to be a problem here. Thompson had his 6-for-10 weekend against Virginia’s pitching staff, not some non-conference cupcake.

Elijah Green, CF, IMG Academy (FL) – 2022 eligible

Green is the first high schooler to sit atop a future draft board since I’ve been at FanGraphs, as he’s currently the top 2022 prospect. I talked with several scouts and directors who were in Florida throughout February (mostly to source JUCO dope) and the way they talk about Green (who is being seen a lot because he’s on a team with 2021 prospects at IMG) has a different vibe. Only the underclass excitement for Hunter Greene has really come close to this since I’ve been covering the draft. I’m wary of hyping high school underclassmen for any number of reasons (their athletic and personal development haven’t even come close to concluding, and I don’t want to help turn anyone into baseball’s Corey Feldman), but Green hit a curveball out of Globe Life Field over the weekend, which is not normal. He has big physical tools and is laying a really strong statistical performance foundation by hitting as much as he has as an underclassman. Read the rest of this entry »

Prospect writers Kevin Goldstein and Eric Longenhagen will sometimes have enough player notes to compile a scouting post. This is one of those dispatches, a collection of thoughts after the first weekend of college baseball. Remember, draft rankings can be found on The Board.

Kevin’s Notes

Jud Fabian, OF, Florida: 3G, 1-for-13, 7 K

The 2021 draft class doesn’t exactly shine when it comes to college position players, but much of that is due to the situation everyone is in, as players heading into the season don’t have much of a 2020 showing to build on; an even larger contributing factor is last year’s cancellation of the Cape Cod League, which is where most players establish their initial spot on teams’ draft boards. Fabian has been well-known to scouts since his high school days in Ocala, Florida, and after opting into college early, he put up a .232/.353/.411 line as an everyday player while just an 18-year-old freshman. The stat line says it all. There were some hitting issues, but the approach and power were there. Last season was looking like a breakout sophomore campaign, with a 1.010 OPS in 17 games before the shutdown, and he entered this year ranked eighth on The Board. But during the opening weekend against Miami, Fabian looked rusty and overmatched, and questions about his ability to make consistent contact have the potential to persist all spring.

Jaden Hill, RHP, LSU: 4 IP, 3 H, 0 R, 0 BB, 5 K

When you’re seen as a sure-fire single-digit pick entering the spring, there’s not much room to move up. While it will take more than four innings against a team better than Air Force to cement that view, Hill certainly impressed in his season debut. He’s a physical beast at 6-foot-4 and 235 pounds, with monstrous stuff highlighted by a fastball that frequently got into the upper 90s, a low 80s power breaking ball and a more refined changeup than had been seen in the past. Between a shoulder issue in 2019 and the pandemic last spring, Hill entered the season with fewer than 25 innings under his belt. Scouts want get past the questions about his command, but if he continues to throw strikes the way he did on Saturday, he will move up on boards despite there being little room to.

Tommy Mace, RHP, Florida: 5 IP, 3 H, 1 R, 2 BB, 8 K

In a normal world (whatever that means anymore), Mace would be getting ready for his first professional spring training, but a five-round draft and some aggressive posturing led to a fourth year in Florida in 2021. He’s expected to land anywhere from the comp round to the late-second in July, a range that lines up well with his current No. 62 ranking on The Board. Mace is more of a pure pitcher than someone who is going to blow away scouts with raw stuff, but in a rare opening weekend series against Miami that wasn’t a mismatch on paper, he showed an improved arsenal, led by a low-to-mid 90s fastball and a much improved breaking ball. His curve is still a bit light in terms of velo when graded against professional breakers, but he threw some real yakkers to keep the Hurricanes off balance. It will be tough for him to work his way into the first round, but the safety in the floor could get him comfortably into the seven-figure bonus range.

Matt McLain, SS, UCLA, 3 G, 5-for-11, 2 2B, 1 HR, 1 K

UCLA commits are the toughest of signs in any draft, as the Diamondbacks learned in 2018 when the 25th overall pick in the draft eschewed pro ball for the Bruins. Always seen as a player for whom the hit tool would lead the way, McLain struggled as a freshman in 2019, posting a paltry .203/.276/.355 line. But a solid showing in the Cape Cod League followed by an explosive (.397/.422/.621) if brief 13-game sophomore campaign had him entering the year as one of, if not the, top position players in the draft, including a number three ranking on The Board. While UCLA had an opening weekend to forget, dropping two of three to the San Francisco Dons, but you can’t blame McLain, who got off to a quick start at the plate. He’s on the small side, and the debate over his ability to stay at shortstop rages on, but he sure can rake. Read the rest of this entry »

As we discussed at the site last week, the effects of COVID-19 are still being felt in the world of amateur scouting. And while the structure of this year’s draft will look a bit more like what we’re used to, last year’s shortened draft, truncated college season, and the ongoing challenges of scouting during the pandemic mean teams will have to adapt their approach to seeing players and building their boards. What follows is a conversation that we hope helps make sense of some of those dynamics.

Eric Longenhagen: I assume our readers know there’s a pandemic on, and that most of last year’s college baseball season was cancelled as a result. This year’s season will be messy and complex both from an NCAA perspective and for scouting. So, what’s missing at this point in time? At the start of a college season, how clearly defined is a team’s board? How clear was it at this time when you were in Houston?

Kevin Goldstein: Going into 2020?

EL: Yeah, if we’re about to start a new calendar year, how specific does a team’s draft board look at this point? The scouts I talk to have “groups.” They’ll put a sophomore in “Group 1,” or “Group A,” or different “follow buckets” to indicate priority to their cross-checker or director for the following year.

KG: A year ago, college baseball had started and the pandemic was seen more as something going on “over there,” as in Asia and Europe. Teams were ready to go. Most have draft meetings somewhere in the late November to early January timeframe to do just what you said: create groupings and talk about coverage. Some players need fewer looks because they are at a big school and there is going to be tons of video/data for them. Others are at schools with none of that, and of course, you need to see high school dudes. I think this year is different. Yes, there was some fall ball, and yes, there were some showcase events, but at the same time, there were way fewer of those. Teams lean on the Cape Cod League, but there wasn’t one in 2020. Plus, there is the larger issue — and we should get to it later — of just the sheer number of players to see because of last year’s shortened, five-round draft, which pissed off every team’s front office.

EL: Right, the Cape is weighed more heavily for some players than the following spring leading up to the draft. I think the single month of 2020 that we had was enough to uncover some college players for 2021’s draft, but there’s certainly a large swath of them (mostly hitters) whose names we don’t even know yet who are going to come out of the gates really hot and be tough to evaluate in the same way Andrew Benintendi was. Readers might remember that Benintendi was a draft-eligible sophomore who had a poor freshman year at Arkansas and then exploded as a sophomore. Track record is important for college hitters and in 2021 there will be lots of talented players with almost none to speak of because of the 2020 cancellations. So how long is long enough to know a college hitter is good? If we look to 2020 for some indication, maybe it is just a month? I’m thinking of Anthony Servideo specifically.

KG: You say that, but look at Zach Daniels, the Astros’ fourth-round pick last year. He does absolutely nothing as a freshman or sophomore, comes out of the gate wild, and you still don’t know. More conference games would have helped. I think for a guy like Benintendi, he starts hot, you say “Who’s this?”, and then he keeps it up in baseball’s best conference and you feel better about it. It’s tougher when they’re at a smaller school or program. Read the rest of this entry »

It’s common for our readers to want to know which of the players who aren’t on this year’s Top 100 might grace next year’s. Who has a chance to really break out? This is the piece for those readers, our “Picks to Click,” the gut-feel guys we think can be on the 2022 Top 100.

This is the fourth year we’ve conducted this exercise at FanGraphs, and there are some rules. First, none of the players you see below will have ever been a 50 FV or better in any of our write-ups or rankings. Second, we can’t pick players who we’ve picked in prior years. The two of us have decided to make this somewhat competitive to see which of us will end up being right about the most players. Here’s a brief rundown of how the site’s writers have done since this piece became a part of Prospects Week. You can click the year to go to that year’s list.

We’re altering the “one-time selection” rule so that it applies only to each of us individually. So, even though Eric still thinks Blake Walston will be on next year’s list, he can’t re-mention him here (though he just did), but Kevin can (he doesn’t) if he wants. Our initials appear in parentheses after our players. Players we both nominated have an asterisk next to their name.

At the end of the piece, we have a list of potential high-leverage relievers who might move through the minors quickly, because readers seem to dig that category. On past Picks to Click, these were not part of the 50+ FV forecasting (and thus are not part of the historical data above), but based on how we think pitching is starting to be valued, it should now be looked at more like the other categories. Read the rest of this entry »