Archive for Prospects

Updating Our Draft Rankings

Once again, we’ve done a refresh of all of our draft rankings. They get tweaked multiple times per week in subtle ways, but every few weeks they need a larger overhaul when there are over a dozen guys who have moved around in the key spots. That’s what happened this weekend. We reset the trend arrows a few days ago to clean things up a bit visually. Here are some notes on where we stand now:

  • There is now a level of comfort amongst scouts with the hierarchy of college pitching in this year’s draft. TCU LHP Nick Lodolo is the consensus number one, West Virginia RHP Alek Manoah is the consensus number two, and Elon RHP George Kirby is most scouts’ third choice. Some scouts have Kentucky LHP Zack Thompson third, but he’s had durability issues dating back to high school, so when his medicals come out, he could go anywhere from 10th to 40th.
  • As for high school pitching, it’s a big more muddled. I’m heading out tonight to see the guy who most feel is the best prep pitcher in the draft, Florida prep RHP Matthew Allan. Behind him, most scouts have another Florida prep RHP (whom I’ll see Friday), Brennan Malone. Illinois prep RHP Quinn Priester’s area kicks off a bit later than the Sunshine State but some scouts had him up to 97 mph in his last start, so he may jump into that top tier with Allan and Malone after another couple starts. New Jersey prep RHP (and son of Al) Jack Leiter was good in front of lots of heat last week at NHSI, and he’s probably next in the pecking order, with months of speculation that it’ll take $3 million or more to keep him from going to Vanderbilt. This, along with the varied rankings of prep pitching from team to team, likely makes him a target for an overslot bonus later in the first round by a club with multiple picks (similar to how the Cardinals landed Jack Flaherty).
  • Some preferences in the early picks are becoming clearer. It still seems like Adley Rutschman at one (Orioles) and Andrew Vaughn at two (Royals) are the two easier ones to project with what we know at this point (the full draft order and slots can be found here). Rutschman’s lead at the top spot is still significant, so it would take a major injury or an uglier-than-expected medical to make Vaughn a real option at the first pick for Baltimore. The buzz is that the White Sox are leaning heavily to college prospects for the third pick, with Nick Lodolo in the mix along with the next tier of college hitters, which can be ranked any way at this point (UNLV SS Bryson Stott, North Carolina 1B Michael Busch, Vanderbilt RF J.J. Bleday, Arizona State LF Hunter Bishop, Missouri RF Kameron Misner is the way we have them lined up right now). There’s similar buzz that Miami is also looking hard at college options and that Lodolo is in their mix. Things get a bit hazier beyond that and also depend on the picks at three and four. The general feeling is that this top 10 isn’t strong enough to make every club just take the best player available, so there’s some chatter that clubs picking outside the top five may take a money saver with the first pick and move that money to float a prep prospect to their second pick. That strategy may be more fraught than normal this year with Arizona in possession of a $16 million bonus pool and set to pick 16th, 26th, 33rd, and 34th.
  • We’re up to 271 total players in the 2019 list now and we’re adding to the 2020 and 2021 lists weekly. We also have a handful of 2022 prep names ready for when the unsigned 2019 prep players join that class as college players. I’m starting a Florida swing this week and should see all of the potential first rounders in the state along with a couple Florida State League games. Last weekend, I saw Nasim Nunez, Louisville/Clemson, UNC/Georgia Tech, UNC Wilmington/Kennesaw State, Georgia/Vanderbilt, and a Triple-A game between the Braves and Orioles affiliates. Eric is running around the Pacific Northwest and he’s always bouncing around the backfields and local amateur games back in Arizona. We’ve got new Sony high speed cameras, so stay tuned to the FanGraphs Youtube page (Mackenzie Gore or Ryan Jensen) and Instagram account (Austin Riley or Michael Busch) to see what we’ve been seeing on the pro and amateur end of things, likely at 960 frames per second.
  • Georgia has seemed like it was on the verge of being a top tier program for decades, with all kinds of built-in advantages, and now it appears to be coming together. The 2020 group is strong, headlined by the top two pitchers in the class (RHP Emerson Hancock and Cole Wilcox) along with the Saturday starter (LHP C.J. Smith), and the 2019 class also has a potential first day headliner (3B Aaron Schunk) along with solid day two depth pieces (RHPs Tony Locey and Tim Elliott, SS Cam Shepherd). The top tier SEC programs (LSU, Vanderbilt, Florida have been the top tier recently) often have more than a half dozen top 5-7 round prospects for the next two drafts, a strong freshman class, and a strong high school senior crop. Georgia is joining a number of other strong programs (Arkansas, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Ole Miss, Auburn) in challenging for an extended stay in the top tier, and some would argue a few of those already have.
  • Along those lines, Miami hasn’t broken through yet, but has a very strong 2020 class with five players (SS Freddy Zamora, 3B Raymond Gil, 1B Alex Toral, RHPs Slade Cecconi and Chris McMahon) on THE BOARD, while only being slated to lose one player who’s on the 2019 list (RHP Evan McKendry).

Top 30 Prospects: Cleveland Indians

Below is an analysis of the prospects in the farm system of the Cleveland Indians. Scouting reports are compiled with information provided by industry sources as well as from our own (both Eric Longenhagen’s and Kiley McDaniel’s) observations. 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 the merits and drawbacks of Future Value, read this.

All of the numbered prospects here also appear on The Board, a new feature at the site that offers sortable scouting information for every organization. That can be found here.

Indians Top Prospects
Rk Name Age Highest Level Position ETA FV
1 Nolan Jones 20.9 A+ 3B 2021 50
2 Triston McKenzie 21.7 AA RHP 2020 50
3 Yu Chang 23.6 AAA SS 2019 50
4 Brayan Rocchio 18.2 R SS 2022 50
5 George Valera 18.4 R LF 2021 50
6 Bo Naylor 19.1 A C 2022 45+
7 Lenny Torres 18.5 R RHP 2023 45
8 Luis Oviedo 19.9 A RHP 2022 45
9 Tyler Freeman 19.9 A SS 2022 45
10 Sam Hentges 22.7 AA LHP 2021 45
11 Carlos Vargas 19.5 R RHP 2023 45
12 Oscar Mercado 24.3 AAA CF 2019 45
13 Junior Sanquintin 17.2 R SS 2023 40+
14 Gabriel Rodriguez 17.1 R SS 2023 40+
15 Ethan Hankins 18.9 R RHP 2023 40+
16 Aaron Bracho 18.0 R SS 2023 40
17 Will Benson 20.8 A RF 2022 40
18 Richard Palacios 21.9 A 2B 2021 40
19 Jean Carlos Mejia 22.6 A+ RHP 2019 40
20 Bobby Bradley 22.9 AAA 1B 2019 40
21 Daniel Johnson 23.7 AA CF 2020 40
22 Aaron Civale 23.8 AA RHP 2020 40
23 Nick Sandlin 22.2 AA RHP 2020 40
24 Ernie Clement 23.0 AA SS 2020 40
25 Eli Morgan 22.9 A+ RHP 2021 40
26 Alexfri Planez 17.6 R RF 2024 35+
27 Quentin Holmes 19.8 A CF 2023 35+
28 Jonathan Lopez 19.7 R 3B 2023 35+
29 Jose Tena 18.0 R SS 2024 35+
30 Johnathan Rodriguez 19.4 R CF 2023 35+
Reading Options
Detail Level
Data Only
Full
Position Filter
All

50 FV Prospects

Drafted: 2nd Round, 2016 from Holy Ghost Prep HS (PA) (CLE)
Age 20.9 Height 6′ 4″ Weight 220 Bat / Thr L / R FV 50
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
20/40 55/60 55/60 30/30 40/45 60/60

Scouts’ opinions about where on the defensive spectrum Jones will end up are all over the map. He got quite big not long after he was drafted and seemed destined for first base, and while there’s still a chance he ends up there eventually, he looked leaner last year and has a better chance of staying at third for a while. Some clubs think he’ll move to right field, and the contact issues Jones has had due to his lever length are problematic if he doesn’t stay at third.

We’re intrigued by the three-true outcomes possibilities here, as Jones already has huge power and might grow into more, and he’s also had some of the higher walk rates in all of the minor leagues. Opposing pitchers are going to have to be careful with him or risk paying a 400 foot price, so we expect his on base ability to hold water at the upper levels. He could reach Double-A Akron as a 21-year-old later in the year if he performs during the spring.

Drafted: 1st Round, 2015 from Royal Palm Beach HS (FL) (CLE)
Age 21.7 Height 6′ 5″ Weight 160 Bat / Thr R / R FV 50
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Curveball Changeup Command Sits/Tops
55/60 55/60 40/45 50/60 90-93 / 95

McKenzie was a high-profile prep pitcher in south Florida before the 2015 draft, and the main question about him focused on his rail-thin 6-foot-5, 160 pound frame. If you thought he would put on a good bit of weight, then you could see him adding velocity to his 88-92 mph heater. But the question was whether he would have enough stuff and durability to start if he stayed about the same size. He’s filled out some since the Indians took him in the comp round in 2015, but it looks like he’s always going to be very thin.

His velocity has crept up a bit to 90-93, hitting 95 mph, but the life, plane, deception, extension, and command combine to make the fastball an above average pitch now. The additional arm speed has helped his breaker improve; it flashes plus at times. And he’s kept the positive attributes scouts originally noticed in his delivery and the athleticism, so the command may also end up being plus. The changeup is a 45, so his curve, pitchability, and deception are the carrying tools we think will turn him into a league average starter. McKenzie also had his first pro injury in 2018, and his strikeout rate was down in his first taste of Double-A, before he had upper back issues that have him on the shelf to start 2019. So long as his stuff in intact upon return, we think he’s a No. 4 starter with a chance to be a No. 3.

3. Yu Chang, SS
Signed: July 2nd Period, 2012 from Taiwan (CLE)
Age 23.6 Height 6′ 1″ Weight 175 Bat / Thr R / R FV 50
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
35/45 45/55 55/55 50/50 45/50 50/50

Teams have likely already studied this, but during our in-person looks at Chang, which date back to 2014, he seems to generate top spin on batted balls with more regularity than is typical for hitters. That’s not a good thing, as the same way a curveball does, it causes Chang’s fly balls to sink and die at a lesser distance than they should. We have no idea if the ability to hit balls with no spin (which is ideal) is a skill hitters have, but if it is, Chang probably isn’t one of them. He does have power though, and he’s a viable defensive third baseman who’d be capable of moonlighting at short or second base if Cleveland needed him to. We like him as a versatile, bat-first prospect who can play all over the place.

Signed: July 2nd Period, 2017 from Venezuela (CLE)
Age 18.2 Height 5′ 10″ Weight 150 Bat / Thr S / R FV 50
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
25/60 20/40 40/45 60/60 45/55 50/50

After a month and a half of DSL games, Cleveland decided to push little Brayan Rocchio to the AZL for the season’s final month, and his numbers there were almost exactly the same. He was the most naturally-gifted hitter in the AZL last year, a switch-hitter with sublime bat control and more power than one would expect a 150-pound 17-year-old to possess. He’s going to stay up the middle, either at shortstop or second base, and while he’s not an obviously desirable teenage prospect like most big-framed, 6-foot-3 types with power would be, this is exactly the kind of profile we’re seeking to identify earlier in the process. This is what several of the little middle infielders in our top 50 looked like at this age; they hit and played good defense somewhere important, but were literally overlooked because they were small.

Signed: July 2nd Period, 2017 from Dominican Republic (CLE)
Age 18.4 Height 6′ 0″ Weight 190 Bat / Thr L / L FV 50
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
25/60 20/60 45/55 50/45 40/50 40/45

Born and raised to the brink of adolescence in New York, Valera’s family moved to the Dominican Republic when he was 13. Injuries sustained in a car accident necessitated that metal rods be inserted in Valera’s father’s limbs, and the move was a way of providing him physical comfort in a warmer climate. It also meant Valera became an international prospect rather than an American high school draftee, and when he was eligible, he signed with Cleveland for $1.3 million.

He is polished for his age, not only in the batter’s box but in center field, where he’s very comfortable going back on balls. His frame is not especially projectable but Valera’s swing has natural lift and he has good feel for contact. He’s likely to get to whatever raw power he ends up growing into as he matures, and he may stay in center field for a while. A broken hamate limited his reps last year, but he may be ready for the New York-Penn League this season anyway.

45+ FV Prospects

Drafted: 1st Round, 2018 from St. Joan of Arc HS (CAN) (CLE)
Age 19.1 Height 6′ 0″ Weight 205 Bat / Thr L / R FV 45+
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
25/55 55/60 30/50 50/40 40/50 55/55

The younger brother of Padres prospect Josh Naylor, Bo is a better athlete with similar feel to hit, but less raw power. He has the necessary twitch (some teams liked him at third base pre-draft) and just enough pure arm strength to catch as long as his throws become more consistently accurate. His defense was baptized by fire in the AZL as Naylor had to catch guys with huge stuff like Lenny Torres and Carlos Vargas, among others. If his offensive ability can withstand the developmental burdens and physical grind of catching, he could be a middle-of-the-order bat, too. Even if Naylor’s in-game power manifests itself as doubles, he profiles at catcher and Cleveland’s recent, brief experimentation with Francisco Mejia at third base provides some precedent for what may happen should Naylor prove unable to catch or if Cleveland thinks moving him will get his bat to the majors more quickly.

45 FV Prospects

Drafted: 1st Round, 2018 from Beacon HS (NY) (CLE)
Age 18.5 Height 6′ 2″ Weight 190 Bat / Thr R / R FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Changeup Command Sits/Tops
60/60 50/60 40/50 40/50 92-95 / 97

Torres checked a lot of amateur scouting boxes — the body, athleticism, stuff, and makeup were all lauded — and was a model-friendly prospect due to his age, so while issues with fastball command caused some clubs to project him in relief, he was still a clear top two round talent. Perhaps Torres’ control is behind because, as a cold-weather amateur prospect, he hasn’t pitched all that much. He only threw around 40 innings during his senior spring, and bad suburban high school hitters in New York couldn’t catch his fastball. As a result, Torres had little cause to use his changeup during varsity play — some national evaluators would go whole starts without seeing it — but it flashed 55 or 60 during his showcase summer and was easy to dream on.

Perhaps the most striking aspect of Torres’ post-draft performance was how regularly he located his slider down and to his glove side. He has mid-rotation components if you’re willing to dream and — based on his athleticism, age, and geographic background — we are.

8. Luis Oviedo, RHP
Signed: July 2nd Period, 2015 from Venezuela (CLE)
Age 19.9 Height 6′ 4″ Weight 200 Bat / Thr R / R FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Curveball Changeup Command Sits/Tops
50/55 45/50 50/50 45/55 45/55 90-94 / 97

Oviedo dominated the New York-Penn League, a league full of college hitters, as an 19-year-old in 2018, striking out 61 and walking just 10 in 48 innings. He’s less projectable than his age indicates because his body is already sturdy and mature, and so too is his ability to throw strikes with any of his four quality pitches. He was shut down with a lower back injury late in 2018, but was fine this spring, and will pitch at Low-A Lake County to start the year, while still 19 for several weeks. We have him projected as an innings-eating fourth starter.

Drafted: 2nd Round, 2017 from Etiwanda HS (CA) (CLE)
Age 19.9 Height 6′ 0″ Weight 170 Bat / Thr R / R FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
25/55 40/45 30/45 55/50 40/50 45/45

A young, polished, but relatively unexplosive high schooler, Freeman was a bit of a surprise second rounder in 2017 but has quickly become much more interesting thanks to a sterling 2018 season with Mahoning Valley. As a 19-year-old, he hit .352/.405/.511 for the Scrappers, torching even the loftiest of expectations set by scouts who saw him during extended spring training and mostly considered Freeman a future utility man. Fundamentally sound at short, he lacks the explosiveness and big arm strength scouts look for at the position, and we wonder if Freeman will hit for enough power to be an impact player at any other position.

His early career strikeout rate (7.5% in about 450 PA) suggests his bat-to-ball skills are even more promising than amateur scouts anticipated, though he’s also an aggressive swinger who has been hit by nearly twice as many pitches as he has walks so far. When scouts talk about a player having “feel, polish, instincts” and the like, and the player has numbers like Freeman’s contact rates, we typically round up on that guy. In Freeman’s case, we remain cautious because the eyeball scouts are so resolute in their skepticism of the power projection.

10. Sam Hentges, LHP
Drafted: 4th Round, 2014 from Mounds View HS (MN) (CLE)
Age 22.7 Height 6′ 6″ Weight 245 Bat / Thr L / L FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Curveball Changeup Command Sits/Tops
50/55 50/55 45/50 40/50 91-95 / 96

Some projection-friendly traits for pitchers include: a young age, size/frame, and a cold-weather background (they’re raw, but also fresh from limited reps). Hentges, a 6-foot-6 Minnesota high school prospect, who was 17 on his draft day, has all of these, and also missed a whole year of innings rehabbing from Tommy John. And yet, still just 22, Hentges is in Double-A and on the doorstep of the big leagues.

His size and arm slot create tough angle on his fastball and vertical depth on his curveball. One should feel free to project on the changeup and the still-lacking fastball control into Hentges’ mid-20s because of the aforementioned traits and the TJ. So while there’s a chance Hentges winds up in the bullpen (where he could be a good multi-inning option), he also has realistic No. 4 starter upside. He was into the mid-90s with his fastball this spring and has a chance to debut this year if Cleveland is competitive and think he’s one of the 12 best arms in the org.

11. Carlos Vargas, RHP
Signed: July 2nd Period, 2016 from Dominican Republic (CLE)
Age 19.5 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 180 Bat / Thr R / R FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Changeup Command Sits/Tops
60/60 55/60 40/50 30/45 94-97 / 99

Line up all the teenage arms on the planet and few of them have stuff as hellacious as Vargas’, who had moments of being a dominant force of nature in last year’s AZL. At times, Vargas would sit 93-96; at others, his fastball would crest 100 and he’d break off the occasional plus-plus breaking ball. He also has long stretches where he’s wild, erratic, and visibly flustered on the mound. There’s much to be desired from a poise/mound-presence standpoint here, but that’s okay for now considering his age. He has a deep, plunging arm action similar to that of Domingo German and Jonathan Loaisiga, who have each had injury issues (as has Vargas), and he might end up a reliever, but we currently have him evaluated the way we would a late first round arm.

Drafted: 2nd Round, 2013 from Gaither HS (FL) (STL)
Age 24.3 Height 6′ 2″ Weight 175 Bat / Thr R / R FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
50/55 45/45 35/40 55/55 50/55 50/50

One of the questions we ask ourselves as we line players up is, “Would you trade Player A for Player B?” Sometimes the answer to that question depends significantly on which team would be making the decision, and perhaps was no recent trade a better example of this than Cleveland’s acquisition of Mercado. In anticipation of a short-term need for outfielders, Cleveland traded teenage beast Jhon Torres for Mercado, a low-ceiling lock to contribute to the big league team at some point soon.

Once a prep infield prospect, Mercado moved to the outfield after a few uninspiring statistical years with St. Louis, started to hit, became a plus outfield defender, and was part of a log jammed upper-level Cardinals outfield picture. The swap made sense for both teams. Cleveland got a potential everyday center fielder (Mercado won’t hit for much power but might be a 6 glove and 55 bat, which is playable everyday in center) and St. Louis diffused some 40-man pressure in exchange for a great, long-term prospect. Cleveland’s outfield situation may change depending on performance, and Mercado may be thrust into an everyday role at some point in 2019. He’s at least a good long-term fourth outfielder, but has a chance to provide everyday value.

40+ FV Prospects

13. Junior Sanquintin, SS
Signed: July 2nd Period, 2018 from Dominican (CLE)
Age 17.2 Height 6′ 0″ Weight 180 Bat / Thr S / R FV 40+
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
25/50 45/55 25/50 55/50 40/50 55/60

Cleveland has done a remarkable job of finding international prospects with both advanced bat-to-ball skills and interesting physicality. The stocky, 6-foot-1 Sanquintin is the latest. Scouts don’t typically project bodies like this to stay at short but Sanquintin’s explosive first step allays some of those concerns. His hands are fine, he has a strong arm, and we think he has a good chance to stick at short.

Sanquintin had one of the more advanced bats in his international class and has some present pop due to his physicality, with room for a little more. He has much better feel to hit from the right side of the plate but there’s enticing lift and whip from both sides. He has the tools of a switch-hitting shortstop with power assuming the left-handed bat control improves with time.

14. Gabriel Rodriguez, SS
Signed: July 2nd Period, 2018 from Venezuela (CLE)
Age 17.1 Height 6′ 2″ Weight 175 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40+
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
25/50 45/50 20/45 50/45 40/50 50/55

He didn’t put on much of a show during MLB’s big winter showcase but as we approach extended spring, there’s palpable buzz surrounding Rodriguez, who signed for about $2 million last July. Though heavy-footed when Kiley saw him last February, Rodriguez has good infield hands and actions, and is a good bet to stay on the middle infield. He has mature feel for contact but his swing is currently pretty conservative, and Rodriguez likely won’t hit for power without an approach or mechanical adjustment. He’s a bat-first shortstop prospect and could soon be where Tyler Freeman is on this list.

15. Ethan Hankins, RHP
Drafted: 1st Round, 2018 from Forsyth Central HS (GA) (CLE)
Age 18.9 Height 6′ 6″ Weight 200 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40+
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Changeup Command Sits/Tops
50/55 45/50 45/50 40/50 92-95 / 97

Hankins was the consensus top prep arm in the class during his pre-draft summer and was a dominant part of Team USA in the fall. At that point, Hankins was commanding a lively 93-96 mph heater, a new, but already plus slider, and an at least average changeup that he didn’t need to use much. He looked a little rusty early during his senior spring, then walked off the mound with tightness in a shoulder muscle tied behind the joint. He returned over a month later and threw hard down the stretch, peaking at 97 mph in multiple open workouts for scouts after his school was eliminated from the playoffs.

He still hasn’t shown the promise from the summer, as he’s completely lost feel for his slider. He only threw the pitch in games last spring a handful of times and scouts speculated it made his arm hurt, but he threw it in some of the postseason workouts and simply had no feel for it anymore. At various points Hankins has utilized either a slider or curveball, and each looks good a few times a start but not often enough to project it as an impact pitch. He was noticeably thicker during the 2018 summer and continued having issues throwing quality breaking balls. Once a likely top 10 pick, he’s now a bounce back hopeful.

40 FV Prospects

16. Aaron Bracho, SS
Signed: July 2nd Period, 2017 from Venezuela (CLE)
Age 18.0 Height 5′ 11″ Weight 175 Bat / Thr S / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
25/55 45/50 20/45 55/50 40/45 50/50

A broken arm shelved Bracho for all of 2018, save for a sliver of extended spring training, but he has been heavily scouted since age 14, when he impressed at the 2016 PG World Showcase in the states, so scouts are well acquainted with him even though he’s never played an official pro game. The totality of his defensive abilities (his hands, actions, arm strength) all likely push him to second base, and the presence of Rocchio, Sanquintin, and Rodriguez make that future even more likely.

But several promising offensive traits — a swing with natural loft, plus bat speed, precocious barrel control that is better from the left side — excite us. He’s an up-the-middle prospect with a well-rounded offensive skillset. We’re unsure how Cleveland will resolve their lower-level logjam of middle infielders but the fact that they’re poised to have two AZL teams for the second year in a row should open up sufficient at-bats for everyone including Bracho, if they feel his lost year means he should stay in Arizona for the summer.

17. Will Benson, RF
Drafted: 1st Round, 2016 from Westminster Schools HS (GA) (CLE)
Age 20.8 Height 6′ 5″ Weight 225 Bat / Thr L / L FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
30/40 70/70 40/60 55/50 45/50 80/80

It might shock you to learn that Benson’s 2018 line of .180/.324/.370 was a hair above the average Midwest League batting line. In high school, he was your standard high risk, high reward corner power projection bat. A monstrous and athletic 6-foot-5 (there’s a rumor Coach K offered him a hoops walk-on opportunity in an effort to get him to campus), Benson drew body and swing comps to Jason Heyward.

But as he has accumulated statistics in pro ball, he looks much more unique than his profile’s bird’s eye view would indicate. He strikes out 30% of the time, which is fairly common for prospects like this. But he incredibly only slugged .370 last year while still managing to homer 22 times, and Benson’s ground ball rate is a minuscule 28%. He walked at an encouraging 16% clip last year. Still just 20, Benson remains a tooled up project with a huge red flag, but now has several underlying statistical traits of interest. He’d be higher on most other teams’ prospect lists; we just prefer the ultra-young, up-the-middle guys in this system to a profile like Benson’s, and Cleveland has lots of those.

Drafted: 3rd Round, 2018 from Towson (CLE)
Age 21.9 Height 5′ 9″ Weight 160 Bat / Thr L / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
35/55 40/40 30/40 65/65 45/50 50/50

It’s uncommon for a college hitter to have more walks than strikeouts during his career but Palacios’ ratio during his junior season at Towson was exceptional. He walked 52 times and struck out just 16 while also swiping an ultra-efficient 25 bases in 26 attempts. He’s a nearly plus-plus runner and capable middle infield defender (probably at second) with premium hand-eye coordination and bat control. There was some concern that Palacios beat up on small conference pitching his entire career and might not replicate that performance against pro pitching, but we’re buying it. Once poised to perhaps move quickly through the system, Palacios had posterior labrum surgery in late-March and will miss much of the season.

Signed: July 2nd Period, 2013 from Dominican Republic (CLE)
Age 22.6 Height 6′ 4″ Weight 240 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Changeup Command Sits/Tops
50/55 50/55 45/50 50/55 90-94 / 95

We’re mindful of the need to identify pitchers whose fastballs play like impact pitches despite mediocre velocity, and Mejia appears to be one. He only throws in the low-90s but competes for swinging strikes in the zone, we think, due to big extension and effectual plane. He also has fantastic slider command, perhaps because his front foot lands so open, enabling Mejia to clear his front side consistently and preventing him from hanging sliders in the zone. He throws a lot of strikes and keeps the ball on the ground. We’ve warmed to the upper-level viability of his stuff and think he could be up at some point this year and become a No. 4 or 5 starter long-term.

Drafted: 3rd Round, 2014 from Harrion Central HS (MS) (CLE)
Age 22.9 Height 6′ 1″ Weight 225 Bat / Thr L / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
30/35 65/60 50/55 20/20 40/45 50/50

Stung by bad BABIP luck in 2018 (.226), Bradley’s repeat tour of Double-A Akron looked discouraging on paper. He still managed to pound out 27 homers, though, and he remains a strong power/lift/plate discipline prospect who could perform at the big league level soon. Players like this sometimes have seasons in excess of 2 WAR but are generally the type who bounce around the fringes of active rosters, like C.J. Cron or Matt Adams.

Drafted: 5th Round, 2016 from New Mexico State (WAS)
Age 23.7 Height 5′ 10″ Weight 185 Bat / Thr L / L FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
40/50 55/55 35/45 70/70 40/50 80/80

So prodigious is Johnson’s laser arm that some amateur scouts wanted to see him on the mound in pro ball. He has some of the louder tertiary tools in the minors but limited bat control keeps some of them, especially his sizable raw power, from actualizing in games. Tools like this typically find their way onto a big league roster in some capacity, even if offensive issues exist. He’ll tantalize with the occasional all-world highlight à la Franchy Cordero, but Johnson realistically profiles as a platoon outfielder.

22. Aaron Civale, RHP
Drafted: 3rd Round, 2016 from Northeastern (CLE)
Age 23.8 Height 6′ 2″ Weight 215 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Curveball Changeup Cutter Command Sits/Tops
40/40 55/60 55/60 45/50 45/50 50/60 88-93 / 94

Civale does not miss many bats because he has limited fastball velocity, but he’s a high-volume strike thrower with excellent secondary stuff, including one of the best curveball spin rates in the minors. He draws from a spacious bag of tricks to get hitters out, and has now had success at the upper levels of the minors with limited velo, so we’re buying that he can make things work as a fifth starter.

23. Nick Sandlin, RHP
Drafted: 2nd Round, 2018 from Southern Mississippi (CLE)
Age 22.2 Height 5′ 11″ Weight 170 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Changeup Command Sits/Tops
45/45 55/60 45/50 45/60 90-94 / 94

Sandlin’s junior stats at Southern Miss read like he was playing MVP Baseball on the rookie difficulty setting. It was his first year as a starter and he struck out 144 hitters in 102 innings while walking just 18. He’s a side-armer with a running, low-90s fastball and above-average slider. Both pitches play up because of Sandlin’s command, and at times his stuff is so well-located that it’s unhittable. He was our favorite to be the first from the 2018 draft class to reach the big leagues but a 2019 spring forearm injury might delay his arrival.

24. Ernie Clement, SS
Drafted: 4th Round, 2017 from Virginia (CLE)
Age 23.0 Height 5′ 10″ Weight 160 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
45/55 40/40 30/35 70/70 40/45 50/50

Another in the long line of University of Virginia hitters with micro strikeout rates, Clement K’d just seven times during his entire junior season. He’s carried that contact ability into pro ball, where he struck out just 8.5% of the time at Low-A in his first full season before moving on to Hi- and Double-A late in the year.

We’re skeptical of his ability to play shortstop due to below-average hands and actions, and think he probably fits best in center field due to his speed, but Cleveland played him exclusively at short last year. The lack of power likely means he maxes out as a utility man, so it makes sense to hand Clement a ton of reps at shortstop to see if he can improve, since ideally he’d be able to play there on occasion. He spent a lot of time with the big league club during 2019 spring training and made characteristically high rates of contact. The bat and his speed should carry him to some kind of lesser major league role, with his defensive development determining if it’s of the super utility variety or a limited runner/bench bat gig.

25. Eli Morgan, RHP
Drafted: 8th Round, 2017 from Gonzaga (CLE)
Age 22.9 Height 5′ 10″ Weight 190 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Curveball Changeup Command Sits/Tops
40/40 45/45 45/50 60/70 45/55 86-91 / 92

Morgan’s velo was down a bit last year and at times his fastball sat in the mid-80s instead of the upper-80s and low-90s like it had the year before. He’s on this list because he has one of the better changeups in the minors and throws a lot of strikes, but he’ll need to exhibit a velocity bounce back this year to remain here, or else show that he has traits that make his fastball playable despite the lackluster velo.

35+ FV Prospects

Signed: July 2nd Period, 2017 from Venezuela (CLE)
Age 17.6 Height 6′ 2″ Weight 180 Bat / Thr R / R FV 35+

Planez has big time pull-side lift in his swing, already has 45 raw power at age 17, and has a fairly projectable 6-foot-2 frame that portends more. He’ll reach down and barrel balls near his shoe tops and also crush mistakes. He’s too aggressive right now and probably has to move to a corner eventually, so our early assessment of the profile is that it’s very risky. But as far as teenage power projection bats go, this is a good one.

Drafted: 2nd Round, 2016 from McClancy HS (NY) (CLE)
Age 19.8 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 175 Bat / Thr R / R FV 35+

Holmes is a high-end athlete with elite makeup and speed. He’s sushi-raw, in part because he was one of the younger hitters in his draft class and in part because he’s a bat from upstate New York, and missed reps he desperately needed in 2018 due to a hamstring injury. The bat needs to develop a lot for Holmes to be an everyday player but his speed should at least make him a bench outfielder. If you buy into the notion that athleticism and makeup drive development, then we’re low on Holmes.

Signed: July 2nd Period, 2016 from Dominican Republic (CLE)
Age 19.7 Height 6′ 2″ Weight 175 Bat / Thr S / R FV 35+

Somewhat lost in the shuffle of intriguing AZL prospects, Lopez is a switch-hitting third baseman with a good-looking swing and feel for the strike zone. He’s a little less physically projectable than is ideal, so it’s unclear how much power he’ll have at peak, but if he stays at third and ends up with a plus bat, it won’t matter.

29. Jose Tena, SS
Signed: July 2nd Period, 2017 from Dominican Republic (CLE)
Age 18.0 Height 5′ 9″ Weight 160 Bat / Thr L / R FV 35+

Tena spent 2018 in the DSL and should come stateside in 2019. Short but good-framed, he has plus hands, good infield footwork, and will probably grow into enough arm for the left side of the infield. His swing is a little long right now but he’s athletic, wings harder than is typical for a teenager this size, and has plenty of time for mechanical tweaks. He’s an interesting, long-term shortstop prospect.

Drafted: 3rd Round, 2017 from Carlos Beltran Academy HS (PR) (CLE)
Age 19.4 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 180 Bat / Thr S / R FV 35+

All sorts of traits indicate Rodriguez will need to barbecue in the lower minors for several years. He’s already spent two in rookie ball and is poised to spend early 2019 in extended spring training. He’s a long-limbed, switch-hitting outfielder who is still just 19 even though he was drafted two years ago. His early-career walk rates are promising, and so too are his fairly reasonable strikeout numbers. He’s an athletic ball of clay for player dev to mold, a quintessential high-variance prospect.

Other Prospects of Note

Grouped by type and listed in order of preference within each category.

Some More Really Young Guys
Raynel Delgado, SS
Marcos Gonzalez, SS
Korey Holland, OF

Delgado just turned 19. He’s a patient, switch-hitting infielder with some low-ball ability from the left side, though his swing can get long. Marcos Gonzalez will be 19 all year and was assigned to full-season ball. He’s a polished defender with a small but well-proportioned frame, and average bat speed, but limited bat control. Holland will also be 19 all year. He’s a plus runner with some feel to hit but came to pro ball with a poor swing foundation, so he’s a bit of a project.

Catching
Eric Haase, C
Sicnarf Loopstok, C
Logan Ice, C

Haase has power, he strikes out, and he’s not a great defender. It’s an Evan Gattis-ish profile. Eli Ben-Porat identified Loopstok as an elite receiver, something corroborated to me by an office source. He’s also performed on paper the last two years. He might factor into the 40-man catching picture soon. Ice’s numbers were bad last year but he’s still a fine defender and hits the ball in the air a ton.

Power Relief Arms
Juan Mota, RHP
James Karinchak, RHP

Mota’s fastball doesn’t have great angle, but it’s hard and moves. His slider is just average but when he locates it, it gets swings and misses. Karinchek throws in the mid-90s and has a unique, over-the-top delivery.

Upper-Level Outfielders
Oscar Gonzalez, OF
Andrew Calica, OF
Alex Call, OF
Mitch Longo, OF

Gonzalez, 21, is an old school, gloveless free-swinger who takes big hacks at everything. Calica had a great sophomore year at UCSB, then fell off as a junior. He’s fast and makes contact, and could be a fourth outfielder. Call has more power, but it’s doubles thump, and he doesn’t run quite as well as Calica. Longo seemed to be a 2018 swing changer and does a little of both.

Changeup Artists
Chih-Wei Hu, RHP
Raymond Burgos, LHP
Zach Plesac, RHP
Eli Lingos, LHP
Ben Krauth, LHP

Hu has been developed as a kitchen sink starter and is probably rotation depth for now, but ultimately, he’ll likely stick in someone’s bullpen with a more limited repertoire. Burgos has a low three-quarters slot, and sits 91-94, with the cambio. Plesac is coming off of Tommy John. He has the hardest fastball among the non-Hus in this category, but also has the worst command. Krauth throws harder than Lingos, but Lingos is a few years younger and doesn’t need to be on the 40-man for a while.

Can Spin It
Jerson Ramirez, RHP
Kyle Nelson, LHP
Kirk McCarty, LHP

Ramirez is only 20 but throws in the low-90s and averaged 2700 rpm on his curveball last year. Nelson can really pitch and carved up Low-A in 2018. He sits 88-91 but beats hitters with it anyway, and his good slider has bat-missing vertical action. McCarty’s release point clearly makes lefties uncomfortable and he has a good two-plane breaker.

System Overview

Cleveland seems to be one of the game’s more rational actors. Well aware of their competitive window, the team moved several young players in exchange for players who, while perhaps possessing less upside, are more likely to help them soon. Tahnaj Thomas for Jordan Luplow. Jhon Torres for Oscar Mercado. Gionti Turner for Chih-Wei Hu. Ignacio Feliz for Walker Lockett. These are moves designed to create depth behind the talented and competitive big league roster as other teams need to shed 40-man weight. Nash Equilibrium and all that. It’s team building on a budget, a front office making do with what ownership seems willing to spend.

We’ve talked about this here before, but Cleveland executes their draft strategy so well that it’s easy to see what it is. They almost always end up with some of the youngest high school players in the draft, and they often seem to end up with players who had strong sophomore college seasons, but down junior years, or high school players who were great during the previous summer but fell during their senior spring. It suggests they more evenly weigh multiple years of performance, perhaps consciously avoiding recency bias in places where other teams and individuals see progress.


Daily Prospect Notes: 4/8/2019

These are notes on prospects from lead prospect analyst Eric Longenhagen. Read previous installments here.

Luis Robert, CF, Chicago White Sox
Level: Hi-A   Age: 21   Org Rank: 4   FV: 55
Line: 2-for-4, HR, 2 HBP

Notes
Off to hot start, Robert has multi-hit efforts in each of his first four games and has already stolen three bases and homered three times. After watching LouBob a lot last year (first while he rehabbed multiple injuries, then in the Fall League), I grew concerned about how his bat path might limit the quality of his contact (he sometimes struggled to pull pitches he should have) or his rate of contact, which we don’t have a large-enough sample to properly assess because of his injuries. So far, the pull-side stuff hasn’t been founded, as all but two of Robert’s balls in play so far this year have been to the right side of the field, and those were both pop-ups to the second baseman. He’s one of the more physically-gifted players in pro baseball.

Darwinzon Hernandez, LHP, Boston Red Sox
Level: Double-A   Age: 22   Org Rank: 2   FV: 45
Line: 5 IP, 2 H, 4 BB, 0 R, 10 K

Notes
We do not think Hernandez is a long-term starter and instead think he’ll be an elite bullpen arm. His fastball often sits in the upper-90s when he’s starting so it should at least stay there if he’s moved to relief and, though his feel for it comes and goes, his curveball can be untouchable at times. Maybe the strong early-season performances of Matt Barnes, Brandon Workman, and Ryan Brasier has stifled some of the disquiet about the Red Sox bullpen, but in the event that they need an impact arm, I think it’s more likely to be Hernandez than a piece outside the org. Some of this is due to the quality of the farm system, but Hernandez might also just be better than a lot of the options that will eventually be on the trade market. Read the rest of this entry »


Eric Longenhagen Chat – 4/5/19

Read the rest of this entry »


An Update on How to Value Draft Picks

In November, I published the results of my research attempting to put a value on minor league prospects. It seems only natural that a similar study on draft picks should follow.

As with prospect valuations, considerable work has preceded mine in the area of valuing draft picks. Sky Andrechuk, Victor Wang, Matthew Murphy, Jeff Zimmerman, and Anthony Rescan and Martin Alonso have all done similar studies.

The work below is less a replacement of the work already done and is more of a continuation of, and addition to, the study of the subject matter. As to why we might want to know this information, creating an expected value for a draft pick helps us to understand and manage our expectations of draftees’ performance. More practically, teams regularly give up draft picks to sign free agents, receive extra draft picks when they lose free agents or reside in a smaller media market, and drop slots when they exceed the highest competitive balance tax payroll threshold, not to mention that some picks can be traded. Determining a value for these picks helps us better understand the decisions teams make regarding those picks.

In some ways, determining draft pick value is a little more complicated than figuring out prospect value. When determining prospect value, players are placed within the constraints of the current CBA, which provides for a minimum salary for roughly three seasons and suppressed arbitration salaries for another three years after that before a player reaches free agency. Draft picks are confined to the same system, but there is also a signing bonus to consider, not to mention slotting rules that are often manipulated in order to move money around to different picks.

Due to signing bonuses and bonus slots, to arrive at an appropriate value for a draft pick, it isn’t enough to determine the present value of players’ WAR in the majors without getting to a dollar figure. We also have to account for the present value in dollars and then subtract the expected bonus.

Before explaining the methodology for draft picks, we can look at the very similar framework used to get to the present value of minor league prospects. From my “Update to Prospect Valuation”:

To determine surplus value for players, I used WAR produced over the first nine seasons of a career, including the season in which a prospect was ranked. Why nine years? In today’s game, most players don’t hit free agency until after their seventh major-league season. By examining nine seasons, it’s possible to account for prospects who were still a couple years away from the majors when they appeared on a top-100 list — as well as late-bloomers who might have bounced up and down between the majors and minors for a full season.

Of course, not all prospects continue to develop in the minor leagues after appearing on a top-100 list. Some debut in the majors right away. Due to the methodology outlined above, such players might be in a position to receive greater credit for their first nine seasons simply because they were closer to the majors when they were ranked. To accommodate this issue, I’ve spread out a player’s WAR over the final seven seasons of the period in question, distributing 10% of it to years three and four before slightly gradually increasing that figure up to 20% by year nine. To calculate surplus value, I’ve discounted WAR by 3% in years No. 3 through 5 (to approximate the impact of the league-minimum salary) and then 15% in year six, 32% in year seven, 48% in year eight, and 72% in year nine. Spreading out the WAR in this way not only mimics a sort of generic “development curve” but also ensures that arbitration discounts aren’t too heavy.

After that, I applied an 8% discount rate for present value. For players immediately ready to play, the extra value they get from the eighth and ninth year is minimized by removing value they actually provided from the first two years and spreading into later seasons. This similarly ensures that the controllable years of players who take longer to develop or reach the majors aren’t treated the same way as those produced by players who contribute right away. A two-win season in 2019 is more valuable than a two-win season in 2021; and this method helps to strike that balance.

Draft picks aren’t as close to the majors as most minor league prospects are. To combat this problem, I used 10 years for college draftees and 11 years for those drafted out of high school, but kept the rest the same as above.

The other difficult issue for draft picks is one of sample size. When I looked at 15 years of prospect lists, it meant we were looking at hundreds of prospects at nearly every single prospect grade. If we did the same for draft picks over 15 years, we only have 15 players at every pick, which isn’t much of a sample. To compensate for this issue, I took a large percentage of the pick in question, and then a smaller percentage on a sliding scale of the next 12 picks. After all, having the third pick in the draft isn’t just an opportunity to take the third-best player; it is the opportunity to choose between a whole host of players. The Astros taking Mark Appel ahead of Kris Bryant doesn’t make the second pick in the draft better than the first. The Astros could have had Kris Bryant, and factoring in the picks that follow helps represent that challenge.

Smoothing things out a bit helps make sure a small sample doesn’t create a bias around a pick. For example, in the years I studied (1993-2007), the third overall pick often performed poorly, but Eric Hosmer, Manny Machado, and Trevor Bauer were taken with the third pick in the three of the four drafts that followed. It wasn’t bad to have the third pick from 1993-2007. It just happened that those picks didn’t work out well.

First round picks were then adjusted upwards slightly so that the actual WAR of the picks and the adjusted value using the method above matched. The values were then smoothed out to ensure the value of the picks moved downward. The smoothing stopped mattering after the second round. After finding the present-value WAR for each pick (I used $9M/WAR), I then subtracted the slot amount for each pick to come up with a current value.

This is what the first 70 picks look like:

Draft Pick Values for 2019
Pick Present Value of Pick ($/M)
1 $45.5 M
2 $41.6 M
3 $38.2 M
4 $34.8 M
5 $31.9 M
6 $29.3 M
7 $27.4 M
8 $25.9 M
9 $24.5 M
10 $23.3 M
11 $22.2 M
12 $21.1 M
13 $20.2 M
14 $19.2 M
15 $18.4 M
16 $17.6 M
17 $16.8 M
18 $16.1 M
19 $15.4 M
20 $14.8 M
21 $14.1 M
22 $13.6 M
23 $13.0 M
24 $12.5 M
25 $12.0 M
26 $11.5 M
27 $11.1 M
28 $10.7 M
29 $10.3 M
30 $10.1 M
31 $9.8 M
32 $9.5 M
33 $9.3 M
34 $9.0 M
35 $8.8 M
36 $8.5 M
37 $8.3 M
38 $8.1 M
39 $7.8 M
40 $7.6 M
41 $7.4 M
42 $7.2 M
43 $7.0 M
44 $6.9 M
45 $6.7 M
46 $6.6 M
47 $6.4 M
48 $6.3 M
49 $6.1 M
50 $5.9 M
51 $5.8 M
52 $5.7 M
53 $5.5 M
54 $5.4 M
55 $5.3 M
56 $5.2 M
57 $5.0 M
58 $4.9 M
59 $4.8 M
60 $4.7 M
61 $4.6 M
62 $4.5 M
63 $4.4 M
64 $4.3 M
65 $4.3 M
66 $4.2 M
67 $4.1 M
68 $4.0 M
69 $3.9 M
70 $3.8 M

The values at the very top of the draft are going to be context heavy. Sometimes, the top pick is a solid 55, like Casey Mize was a season ago. Other years, it might be Bryce Harper. For context, here is how the first round played out last season in terms of bonuses and slots for the pick.

2018 MLB Draft First Round
Pick 2018 Player 2018 Slot Signing Bonus Present Value of Pick
1 Casey Mize $8.1 M $7.5 M $45.5 M
2 Joey Bart $7.49 M $7.0 M $41.6 M
3 Alec Bohm $6.95 M $5.9 M $38.2 M
4 Nick Madrigal $6.41 M $6.4 M $34.8 M
5 Jonathan India $5.95 M $5.3 M $31.9 M
6 Jared Kelenic $5.53 M $4.5 M $29.3 M
7 Ryan Weathers $5.23 M $5.2 M $27.4 M
8 Carter Stewart $4.98 M NA $25.9 M
9 Kyler Murray $4.76 M $4.7 M $24.5 M
10 Travis Swaggerty $4.56 M $4.4 M $23.3 M
11 Grayson Rodriguez $4.38 M $4.3 M $22.2 M
12 Jordan Groshans $4.2 M $3.4 M $21.1 M
13 Connor Scott $4.04 M $4.0 M $20.2 M
14 Logan Gilbert $3.88 M $3.8 M $19.2 M
15 Cole Winn $3.74 M $3.2 M $18.4 M
16 Matthew Liberatore $3.6 M $3.5 M $17.6 M
17 Jordyn Adams $3.47 M $4.1 M $16.8 M
18 Brady Singer $3.35 M $4.3 M $16.1 M
19 Nolan Gorman $3.23 M $3.2 M $15.4 M
20 Trevor Larnach $3.12 M $2.6 M $14.8 M
21 Bruce Turang $3.01 M $3.4 M $14.1 M
22 Ryan Rollison $2.91 M $2.9 M $13.6 M
23 Anthony Seigler $2.82 M $2.8 M $13.0 M
24 Nico Hoerner $2.72 M $2.7 M $12.5 M
25 Matt McLain $2.64 M NA $12.0 M
26 Triston Casas $2.55 M $2.6 M $11.5 M
27 Mason Denaberg $2.47 M $3.0 M $11.1 M
28 Seth Beer $2.4 M $2.3 M $10.7 M
29 Bo Naylor $2.33 M $2.6 M $10.3 M
30 J.T. Ginn $2.28 M NA $10.1 M

The draft reveals just how important it is for teams to receive a compensation pick the following season when they fail to sign a pick in the current year. While there is certainly lost developmental time and opportunity in losing a pick for one year, losing that pick permanently would be a major loss, and provide considerably more leverage to the players when negotiating contracts.

Moving down, this is what the picks in the third round and below are worth. For the 11th round and below, the median value is used instead of the average given the potential for a few really good picks out of thousands to distort the value beyond what would be a reasonable expectation for that pick.

Draft Pick Values for 2019
Round Present Day Value
3rd $3.8 M
4th $2.8 M
5-7 $2.5 M
8-10 $1.5 M
11-20 $1.0 M
21-30 $390,000
31-40 $250,000

In practical terms, that means that for the picks in round 20 or later, you might come up with one average player every three years. For picks in rounds 11-20, a team can expect an average player every two or three seasons. The same is true for rounds three and four combined. It’s hard to find good players in the draft after the first round. There’s as much value in the first 100 picks as in the entire rest of the draft. Teams might opt to pay a third round pick a $3,000 bonus to save money and use it elsewhere. That doesn’t mean that we should expect the same performance from that pick as we would a typical third rounder, but we should expect that the slot money the team uses elsewhere will have a value somewhere close to $4 million.

When considering how teams sometimes shift money around from the second or third round to the sixth and seventh round (and vice versa) or use money to sign players above $125,000 after the 10th round, it helps to know how to properly value every dollar spent. For the first 100 picks, where the bonuses are the highest, every dollar spent generally yields five dollars in value. In rounds 4-5, every dollar should yield about six dollars in value, and in rounds 6-10, every dollar spent should yield 10 dollars in value due to the talent available and the small signing bonuses. Given this information, it appears teams might be better off paying slightly less money in the first few rounds while still getting good talent, and shifting some of that money elsewhere in the first 10 rounds. If teams are shifting money from the first 10 rounds to the back of the draft, they need to feel pretty confident in that player’s ability.

In terms of comp picks in this year’s draft, the Arizona Diamondbacks will receive a pick at the end of the first round for losing Patrick Corbin to the Nationals. That pick is worth something close to $10 million. The six small-market teams will receive picks between rounds one and two that are worth $8 million to $9 million each. The other eight small-market picks after the second round are worth around $4 million each, and the same is true for the free agent compensation picks like the one the Dodgers will receive for losing Yasmani Grandal.

Teams signing free agents who have received a qualifying offer generally lose their second pick, and that pick is worth somewhere between $4 million and $10 million depending on where in the draft the team is picking. The Red Sox’s top pick drops down 10 spots this year because they were more than $40 million over the competitive balance tax. That penalty is only worth around $2 million.

There’s further analysis to be done based on whether a player is coming out of high school or college, as well as whether he is a position player or pitcher, but that work will be left to a later date. For now, I hope this is a useful starting point for further study, and for gaining a greater understanding of draftees’ expected production and teams’ decision making.


We Analyzed the Value of International Signing Bonus Money

FanGraphs has obtained bonus figures for over 90% of all the international signings in baseball history. We have all of the most significant bonuses, every big leaguer, notable current prospects, and everything in the mid-six figure range and above, along with many years for which we have every single signing.

This provides us with a pretty complete picture of the distribution and trends of these bonuses, also allowing us to estimate how many players we’re missing. Those players are overwhelmingly names you wouldn’t recognize, guys who played for a couple of years before being released, signing as filler for a five-figure bonus.

We’ve taken out all of the major league deals (think older, high profile Japanese and Cuban players), and we have incomplete data for all of the Mexican players, as MLB notes all of them as receiving a $0 bonus (it’s an easy workaround for a convoluted system that’s mostly cleaned up now). We’ve filled in correct bonuses for players where we have it, mostly among the high profile Mexican signings, like Luis Urias and Julio Urias (no relation).

We could do a lot of things with this data — and we will, including listing it on the player pages and THE BOARD — but the thing that interests me today is combining this bonus data with our asset value research, and the dollars-per-WAR framework to get a better idea of what a dollar invested in an international amateur player returns. We’ll start with some of the meta data:

MLB International Bonuses
Signing Period Players Signed Bonuses Spent
2017 800 $148,540,500
2016 804 $210,356,500
2015 797 $174,537,500
2014 799 $158,928,470
2013 811 $93,906,900
2012 739 $80,762,800
2011 767 $96,603,000
2010 735 $71,383,100
2009 835 $78,751,751
2008 714 $67,641,750
2007 812 $54,658,250
2006 857 $45,318,750
2005 743 $29,177,600
2004 714 $22,662,000
2003 694 $20,784,200
2002 725 $22,276,250
2001 732 $27,548,750
2000 774 $29,755,999
1999 835 $33,971,565
1998 781 $22,811,650
1997 859 $15,424,512
1996 851 $18,473,491
1995 642 $9,349,750
1994 568 $5,062,300
1993 520 $4,946,250
1992 503 $2,863,899
1991 556 $2,180,710
1990 426 $1,873,550
1989 429 $1,434,350
1988 338 $1,252,800
1987 344 $974,850

2017 was the first season of hard-capped bonus pools, which explains why bonuses declined and also why they spiked the year prior. These figures don’t include the pool overage payments made to MLB from 2013 to 2016. We estimate those figures to add up to about $250 million over those four years, with about $100 million paid to MLB in 2016 alone. (The CBA says that this money was to be spent on international operations and initiatives.)

Since the international market changes and matures so rapidly, it makes sense to start with the early 2000s signing classes as a baseline for a similar era to today. Most of the players who signed 15 years ago are now in their early 30s and have either played out their entire careers or are into their seventh year of major league service time. We can grab the dollar-per-WAR figures from the years that spanned their controlled years and turn that historical WAR into a dollar amount of value created. I used seven seasons since we don’t have comprehensive service time data, which, from some spot-checking, appears to do the trick. We have the FV of the most recent signings that are current prospect on THE BOARD, which maps to an asset value.

The most interesting players to analyze signed in the last 5-10 years, are in the big leagues, and are in the middle of their control years, so I had to do some work to peg their value. I quantified what they’ve already produced the same way I did with the older players, then estimated or figured out by hand their current service time situation. I then used our various projections to fill in what those players are expected to produce in the rest of their controlled years.

In short, it’s not perfect, but as with filling in the holes in the bonus data, it’s fairly accurate and any mistakes appear to cancel each other out in the aggregate. There’s some noise in the data year-to-year, but it appears that right around 2004, the market improved its output and has held mostly steady to today. Here’s the production (a combination of produced WAR, projected WAR, and minor league asset values) over this period:

MLB International Bonuses & Value
Signing Period Bonuses Spent Value Created
2017 $148,540,500 $332,700,000
2016 $210,356,500 $471,000,000
2015 $174,537,500 $1,050,844,096
2014 $158,928,470 $973,478,546
2013 $93,906,900 $996,100,634
2012 $80,762,800 $726,692,526
2011 $96,603,000 $1,522,760,170
2010 $71,383,100 $993,880,384
2009 $78,751,751 $1,788,125,002
2008 $67,641,750 $1,071,117,094
2007 $54,658,250 $1,098,835,664
2006 $45,318,750 $1,397,277,617
2005 $29,177,600 $761,251,602
2004 $22,662,000 $1,100,746,973

I included up to the 2017 class, but it would appear that we need three full seasons in the system — with players having signed on July 2, 2015, and played in 2016, 2017, 2018 — before the class as a whole has developed enough to reveal how much value it could create. As such, a dozen years (2004-2015) appears to be our usable sample.

We could use the above figures to create a simple return on investment calculation, but a true ROI would compute what a team is making on the average dollar spent, so we also have to consider the expense to operate the department that signs the players. Building or renting an academy, feeding and housing the players, running a DSL team, paying coaches, trainers, scouts, and administration and travel expenses are all facets of an international operation that are essential to signing and developing these players, so they have to be considered alongside the bonus expenditures. After consulting with some international directors, I’ve estimated those costs for all 30 teams combined and added that to the bonuses, before arriving at an ROI figure that represents something close to what MLB clubs can expect a bonus pool dollar to return. I used a rolling figure to smooth out any noise in the yearly results.

ROI on International Spending
Period Bonuses Overages Expenses Value Rolling ROI
2015 $174,537,500 $60,000,000 $77,581,720 $1,050,844,096 307%
2014 $158,928,470 $65,000,000 $73,702,634 $973,478,546 328%
2013 $93,906,900 $15,000,000 $70,017,503 $996,100,634 433%
2012 $80,762,800 $66,516,627 $726,692,526 517%
2011 $96,603,000 $63,190,796 $1,522,760,170 715%
2010 $71,383,100 $60,031,256 $993,880,384 780%
2009 $78,751,751 $57,029,693 $1,788,125,002 888%
2008 $67,641,750 $54,178,209 $1,071,117,094 994%
2007 $54,658,250 $51,469,298 $1,098,835,664 1044%
2006 $45,318,750 $48,895,833 $1,397,277,617 1110%
2005 $29,177,600 $46,451,042 $761,251,602 1193%
2004 $22,662,000 $44,128,490 $1,100,746,973 1279%

This gives us an idea of what a club’s accounting department would say their ROI was running an international operation in these years. There are a couple of other ways to look at this data. Going forward, we know that overages won’t exist. We also know the maximum that can be spent with hard caps in place. If we were to take the historic spending of 2016 and keep those signing rules, while also imagining that the talent of 2018 demanded the same outlay in bonuses and overages as the group in 2016, we could compare the two realities owners were considering in the most recent completed CBA negotiations:

Alternate Reality 2018 vs. Actual 2018
Period Bonuses Overages Expenses Value ROI
Projected Actual ’18 $150,000,000 $0 $90,487,500 $1,125,000,000 368%
’16 Rules/Talent in ’18 $210,000,000 $105,000,000 $90,487,500 $1,125,000,000 177%

You can see that there’s still a solid positive return even with historic spending levels, but owners negotiated to add a hard bonus cap to the international market, essentially doubling their ROI. The 2016 class was unique in that clubs were motivated to spend wildly in anticipation of the caps and because of that, a great class of Cuban players that couldn’t be duplicated today (four of our top 132 prospects are Cuban players from this class) drove much of that spending. That roughly $315 million expenditure may be the closest figure we’ll get to what clubs think the true value of a historically-talented class is in an open market with multiple motivated bidders. The market is now capped at half that figure.

We can also answer the question of what an international pool dollar is worth going forward. If we assume that the overhead of running a department is fixed, how should clubs think about the value of each additional dollar added to their bonus pool? We could take the table just above this one and use the projected actual 2018 row to figure out the ROI from $150 million in bonuses and the estimated $1.125 billion in value that will be created by the signees. The result is a staggering 650%. It appears that it takes about three years for the an investment in the international market to mostly mature in terms of trade value, though there’s a way to read this data where there’s further value gained in a 5-7 year horizon for full maturity.

This sort of analysis can get too close to quantifying the worth of humans in purely dollar terms, although going through the exercise in this way also helps to define what a fair market price is for someone’s service. 650% is a pretty abstract number to consider, so let’s compare it to an standard investment for wealthy individuals such as baseball club owners: investing in the stock market. An owner can invest roughly $5 million into international market each year and expect a median return of 650% after three years, while a strong 10% yearly compounded return in the stock market over that period would return a 35% return. That sort of return makes clear both the appeal for ownership of signing international players, and capping their bonuses. It also points to how wide a gap exists between the value these players generate for their clubs and their compensation relative to that value.

In the next part of this series, I’ll take a look at some of the best and worst signing classes, if we were to grade out every club’s international signing class over the last 30 years using the framework rolled out today.


2019 MLB Draft Signing Bonus Pool and Pick Values

We got a hold of the bonus slot values and, it follows, each team’s total pool amount for the upcoming 2019 MLB Draft. The PDF we acquired from an industry source was missing Washington’s comp pick for Bryce Harper at 138 overall, so we added that and manually recalculated each team’s pool total (which were incorrect on the PDF because of this missing pick).

(Update: After receiving additional clarification, it appears that Washington will not receive a comp pick for Harper; the pick that would have received as Harper compensation became the pick they gave up to sign Patrick Corbin.)

What follows is, first, the total draft bonus pool amounts for all thirty teams, followed by the individual slot values for each pick in the first ten rounds of the draft. Picks labeled “COMP” are compensatory selections for players lost via free agency or from last year’s unsigned draft picks. Picks labeled “CBA” or “CBB” are competitive balance picks (rounds A and B) allocated to teams in the spirit of parity. These can be traded, and several have been. In both the compensatory and traded competitive balance picks, we note the players for which the picks were received. The tables here will be updated if competitive balance picks change hands or if teams receive comp for a yet-to-sign free agent who received a qualifying offer, like Dallas Keuchel or Craig Kimbrel.

2019 Draft Bonus Pools
Team Aggregate Bonus Pool
ARI $16,093,700
BAL $13,821,300
KC $13,108,000
MIA $13,045,000
CWS $11,565,500
ATL $11,532,200
TEX $11,023,100
SD $10,758,900
DET $10,402,500
TB $10,333,800
PIT $9,944,000
MIN $9,905,800
CIN $9,528,600
SF $8,714,500
TOR $8,463,300
NYM $8,224,600
LAD $8,069,100
LAA $7,608,700
SEA $7,559,000
NYY $7,455,300
COL $7,092,300
STL $6,903,500
PHI $6,475,800
CLE $6,148,100
WSH $5,979,600
CHI $5,826,900
OAK $5,605,900
HOU $5,355,100
MIL $5,148,200
BOS $4,788,100

2019 Draft Signing Bonus Slot Values
Overall Pick Round Team Slot Amount
1 1 BAL $8,415,300
2 1 KC $7,789,900
3 1 CWS $7,221,200
4 1 MIA $6,664,000
5 1 DET $6,180,700
6 1 SD $5,742,900
7 1 CIN $5,432,400
8 1 TEX $5,176,900
9 COMP (Carter Stewart) ATL $4,949,100
10 1 SF $4,739,900
11 1 TOR $4,547,500
12 1 NYM $4,366,400
13 1 MIN $4,197,300
14 1 PHI $4,036,800
15 1 LAA $3,885,800
16 1 ARI $3,745,500
17 1 WSH $3,609,700
18 1 PIT $3,481,300
19 1 STL $3,359,000
20 1 SEA $3,242,900
21 1 ATL $3,132,300
22 1 TB $3,027,000
23 1 COL $2,926,800
24 1 CLE $2,831,300
25 1 LAD $2,740,300
26 COMP (Matt McLain) ARI $2,653,400
27 1 CHI $2,570,100
28 1 MIL $2,493,900
29 1 OAK $2,424,600
30 1 NYY $2,365,500
31 COMP (J.T. Ginn) LAD $2,312,000
32 1 HOU $2,257,300
33 COMP (Patrick Corbin) ARI $2,202,200
34 COMP (A.J. Pollock) ARI $2,148,100
35 CBA MIA $2,095,800
36 CBA TB $2,045,400
37 COMP (Gunnar Hoglund) PIT $1,999,300
38 CBA (via CIN, Sonny Gray trade) NYY $1,952,300
39 CBA MIN $1,906,800
40 CBA (via OAK, Jurikson Profar trade) TB $1,856,700
41 CBA (via MIL, Alex Claudio trade) TEX $1,813,500
42 2 BAL $1,771,100
43 1 (tax threshold penalty) BOS $1,729,800
44 2 KC $1,689,500
45 2 CWS $1,650,200
46 2 MIA $1,617,400
47 2 DET $1,580,200
48 2 SD $1,543,600
49 2 CIN $1,507,600
50 2 TEX $1,469,900
51 2 SF $1,436,900
52 2 TOR $1,403,200
53 2 NYM $1,370,400
54 2 MIN $1,338,500
55 2 LAA $1,307,000
56 2 ARI $1,276,400
57 2 PIT $1,243,600
58 2 STL $1,214,300
59 2 SEA $1,185,500
60 2 ATL $1,157,400
61 2 TB $1,129,700
62 2 COL $1,102,700
63 2 CLE $1,076,300
64 2 CHI $1,050,300
65 2 MIL $1,025,100
66 2 OAK $1,003,300
67 2 NYY $976,700
68 2 HOU $953,100
69 2 BOS $929,800
70 CBB KC $906,800
71 CBB BAL $884,200
72 CBB PIT $870,700
73 CBB SD $857,400
74 CBB ARI $844,200
75 CBB (via STL, Paul Goldschmidt trade) ARI $831,100
76 CBB (via CLE, Carlos Santana trade) SEA $818,200
77 CBB COL $805,600
78 COMP (Yasmani Grandal) LAD $793,000
79 3 BAL $780,400
80 3 KC $767,800
81 3 CWS $755,300
82 3 MIA $744,200
83 3 DET $733,100
84 3 SD $721,900
85 3 CIN $710,700
86 3 TEX $699,700
87 3 SF $689,300
88 3 TOR $678,600
89 3 NYM $667,900
90 3 MIN $657,600
91 3 PHI $647,300
92 3 LAA $637,600
93 3 ARI $627,900
94 3 WSH $618,200
95 3 PIT $610,800
96 3 STL $604,800
97 3 SEA $599,100
98 3 ATL $593,100
99 3 TB $587,400
100 3 COL $581,600
101 3 CLE $577,000
102 3 LAD $571,400
103 3 CHI $565,600
104 3 OAK $560,000
105 3 NYY $554,300
106 3 HOU $549,000
107 3 BOS $543,500
108 4 BAL $538,200
109 4 KC $533,000
110 4 CWS $527,800
111 4 MIA $522,600
112 4 DET $517,400
113 4 SD $512,400
114 4 CIN $507,400
115 4 TEX $502,300
116 4 SF $497,500
117 4 TOR $492,700
118 4 NYM $487,900
119 4 MIN $483,000
120 4 PHI $478,300
121 4 LAA $473,700
122 4 ARI $469,000
123 4 WSH $464,500
124 4 PIT $460,000
125 4 STL $455,600
126 4 SEA $451,800
127 4 ATL $447,400
128 4 TB $442,900
129 4 COL $438,700
130 4 CLE $434,300
131 4 LAD $430,800
132 4 CHI $426,600
133 4 MIL $422,300
134 4 OAK $418,200
135 4 NYY $414,000
136 4 HOU $410,100
137 4 BOS $406,000
138 5 BAL $402,000
139 5 KC $398,000
140 5 CWS $394,300
141 5 MIA $390,400
142 5 DET $386,600
143 5 SD $382,700
144 5 CIN $379,000
145 5 TEX $375,200
146 5 SF $371,600
147 5 TOR $367,900
148 5 NYM $364,400
149 5 MIN $360,800
150 5 PHI $357,100
151 5 LAA $353,700
152 5 ARI $350,300
153 5 WSH $346,800
154 5 PIT $343,400
155 5 STL $340,000
156 5 SEA $336,600
157 5 ATL $333,300
158 5 TB $330,100
159 5 COL $327,200
160 5 CLE $324,100
161 5 LAD $321,100
162 5 CHI $318,200
163 5 MIL $315,400
164 5 OAK $312,400
165 5 NYY $309,500
166 5 HOU $306,800
167 5 BOS $304,200
168 6 BAL $301,600
169 6 KC $299,000
170 6 CWS $296,400
171 6 MIA $293,800
172 6 DET $291,400
173 6 SD $289,000
174 6 CIN $286,500
175 6 TEX $284,200
176 6 SF $281,800
177 6 TOR $279,500
178 6 NYM $277,100
179 6 MIN $274,800
180 6 PHI $272,500
181 6 LAA $270,300
182 6 ARI $268,200
183 6 WSH $266,000
184 6 PIT $263,700
185 6 STL $261,600
186 6 SEA $259,400
187 6 ATL $257,400
188 6 TB $255,300
189 6 COL $253,300
190 6 CLE $251,100
191 6 LAD $249,000
192 6 CHI $247,000
193 6 MIL $244,900
194 6 OAK $243,000
195 6 NYY $241,000
196 6 HOU $239,000
197 6 BOS $237,000
198 7 BAL $235,100
199 7 KC $233,000
200 7 CWS $231,100
201 7 MIA $229,700
202 7 DET $227,700
203 7 SD $225,800
204 7 CIN $224,000
205 7 TEX $222,100
206 7 SF $220,200
207 7 TOR $218,500
208 7 NYM $216,600
209 7 MIN $214,900
210 7 PHI $213,300
211 7 LAA $211,500
212 7 ARI $209,800
213 7 WSH $208,200
214 7 PIT $206,500
215 7 STL $204,800
216 7 SEA $203,400
217 7 ATL $201,600
218 7 TB $200,100
219 7 COL $198,500
220 7 CLE $197,300
221 7 LAD $195,700
222 7 CHI $194,400
223 7 MIL $192,900
224 7 OAK $191,500
225 7 NYY $190,100
226 7 HOU $188,900
227 7 BOS $187,700
228 8 BAL $186,300
229 8 KC $184,700
230 8 CWS $183,700
231 8 MIA $182,300
232 8 DET $181,200
233 8 SD $179,800
234 8 CIN $178,600
235 8 TEX $177,400
236 8 SF $176,300
237 8 TOR $175,000
238 8 NYM $174,000
239 8 MIN $173,000
240 8 PHI $172,100
241 8 LAA $171,200
242 8 ARI $170,300
243 8 WSH $169,500
244 8 PIT $168,500
245 8 STL $167,800
246 8 SEA $167,000
247 8 ATL $166,100
248 8 TB $165,400
249 8 COL $164,700
250 8 CLE $163,900
251 8 LAD $163,400
252 8 CHI $162,700
253 8 MIL $162,000
254 8 OAK $161,400
255 8 NYY $160,800
256 8 HOU $160,300
257 8 BOS $159,700
258 9 BAL $159,200
259 9 KC $158,600
260 9 CWS $158,100
261 9 MIA $157,600
262 9 DET $157,200
263 9 SD $156,600
264 9 CIN $156,100
265 9 TEX $155,800
266 9 SF $155,300
267 9 TOR $154,900
268 9 NYM $154,600
269 9 MIN $154,100
270 9 PHI $153,600
271 9 LAA $153,300
272 9 ARI $152,900
273 9 WSH $152,600
274 9 PIT $152,300
275 9 STL $152,000
276 9 SEA $151,600
277 9 ATL $151,300
278 9 TB $150,800
279 9 COL $150,500
280 9 CLE $150,300
281 9 LAD $150,100
282 9 CHI $149,800
283 9 MIL $149,500
284 9 OAK $149,300
285 9 NYY $148,900
286 9 HOU $148,400
287 9 BOS $148,200
288 10 BAL $147,900
289 10 KC $147,700
290 10 CWS $147,400
291 10 MIA $147,200
292 10 DET $147,000
293 10 SD $146,800
294 10 CIN $146,300
295 10 TEX $146,100
296 10 SF $145,700
297 10 TOR $145,500
298 10 NYM $145,300
299 10 MIN $145,000
300 10 PHI $144,800
301 10 LAA $144,600
302 10 ARI $144,400
303 10 WSH $144,100
304 10 PIT $143,900
305 10 STL $143,600
306 10 SEA $143,500
307 10 ATL $143,200
308 10 TB $143,000
309 10 COL $142,700
310 10 CLE $142,500
311 10 LAD $142,300
312 10 CHI $142,200
313 10 MIL $142,200
314 10 OAK $142,200
315 10 NYY $142,200
316 10 HOU $142,200
317 10 BOS $142,200

Kiley McDaniel Chat – 4/3/19

12:12

Kiley McDaniel: Hello from ATL! I’ll be heading out soon to see prep SS Nasim Nunez and keeping my attention on the early returns from NHSI, which wasn’t loaded enough (all the relevant colleges for 2019 draft talent around Cary are out of town) for me to make my yearly pilgrimage.

12:13

Kiley McDaniel: We’ve got a newly-alive FG instagram page @fangraphs, featuring all of our fancy high speed video

12:13

Kiley McDaniel: And I’ve got a couple big features I’ve been working on, with one that’s internationally-focused coming possibly as soon as tomorrow. And we’re finishing up the lists.

12:14

Joe: Are any of the Cuban players from the list you tweeted 25/6yr guys that the Braves could possibly target since they can’t spend this July 2?

12:14

TJ: Is Miami in on any of these Cuban guys?

12:15

Kiley McDaniel: And some questions about what I reported last night, in a thread here:

 

Kiley McDaniel
@kileymcd

 

Sources: MLB sent clubs a memo today w/a list of Cuban players eligible to be signed in the 2019 int’l bonus pools. MLB is working on creating events for clubs to scout the players, who would be signed in a posting system where the Cuban gov’t gets a cut: pelotacubanablog.com/2019/04/02/fed…
3 Apr 2019

Read the rest of this entry »


Top 30 Prospects: Chicago White Sox

Below is an analysis of the prospects in the farm system of the Chicago White Sox. Scouting reports are compiled with information provided by industry sources as well as from our own (both Eric Longenhagen’s and Kiley McDaniel’s) observations. 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 the merits and drawbacks of Future Value, read this.

All of the numbered prospects here also appear on The Board, a new feature at the site that offers sortable scouting information for every organization. That can be found here.

White Sox Top Prospects
Rk Name Age Highest Level Position ETA FV
1 Eloy Jimenez 22.3 MLB RF 2019 60
2 Michael Kopech 22.9 MLB RHP 2019 55
3 Nick Madrigal 22.0 A+ 2B 2020 55
4 Luis Robert 21.7 A+ CF 2020 55
5 Dylan Cease 23.3 AA RHP 2019 50
6 Dane Dunning 24.3 AA RHP 2021 50
7 Micker Adolfo 22.6 A+ RF 2021 45
8 Luis Alexander Basabe 22.6 AA CF 2019 45
9 Blake Rutherford 21.9 A+ LF 2020 45
10 Luis Gonzalez 23.6 A+ RF 2020 45
11 Zack Collins 24.2 AA 1B 2019 45
12 Jake Burger 23.0 A 3B 2021 40+
13 Steele Walker 22.7 A LF 2022 40+
14 Jimmy Lambert 24.4 AA RHP 2020 40
15 Seby Zavala 25.6 AAA C 2019 40
16 Tyler Johnson 23.6 A+ RHP 2020 40
17 Gavin Sheets 22.9 A+ 1B 2020 40
18 Jordan Stephens 26.6 AAA RHP 2019 40
19 Konnor Pilkington 21.6 R LHP 2021 40
20 Alec Hansen 24.5 AA RHP 2020 40
21 Zack Burdi 24.1 AAA RHP 2019 40
22 Luis Mieses 18.8 R CF 2022 40
23 Codi Heuer 22.7 R RHP 2021 40
24 Zach Thompson 25.4 AA RHP 2020 35+
25 Bernardo Flores 23.6 AA LHP 2020 35+
26 Danny Mendick 25.5 AAA SS 2019 35+
27 Bryce Bush 19.3 R RF 2022 35+
28 Lenyn Sosa 19.2 R SS 2022 35+
29 Ryan Burr 24.8 MLB RHP 2019 35+
30 Ian Hamilton 23.8 MLB RHP 2019 35+
Reading Options
Detail Level
Data Only
Full
Position Filter
All

60 FV Prospects

Signed: July 2nd Period, 2013 from Dominican Republic (CHC)
Age 22.3 Height 6′ 4″ Weight 225 Bat / Thr R / R FV 60
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
50/55 70/80 60/70 40/40 45/50 60/60

Even before the White Sox acquired Jimenez from the Cubs in the Jose Quintana trade, he had dealt with a multitude of injuries. Hamstring and shoulder issues plagued him while he was still with the Cubs, and limited him to DH duty, or forced him to sit out for a few days at a time, or altogether kept rehabbing him on the Mesa backfields. He has continued to have various issues since the South Siders acquired him. In 2018 alone, Jimenez dealt with patella tendinitis during the early part of spring training, then was left back in extended due to a strained pec. He suffered a strained left adductor in July, and finally a quad strain this winter, which ended his Dominican Winter League season.

But while Eloy has missed considerable time with injuries and sometimes played through them, he has mashed like few other players in the minors. He split 2018 between Double-A Birmingham and Triple-A Charlotte, slashing .337/.384/.577, his strikeout rate plummeting to 13% at the latter stop. Despite his limited speed and at-bats, he somehow managed to net 53 extra-base hits and seemed ready for a big league cup of coffee in September. The White Sox refused to brew him one, and Eloy’s agent threatened to file a grievance against the club, an issue that was resolved during 2019 spring training with a record contract extension. He’ll likely be up all year, and while we think there’s a chance injury or a lack of mobility limit Eloy’s ceiling the way flaws have similarly limited some of Chicago’s other recent prospect graduates, we still think he’ll hit enough to be a star.

55 FV Prospects

Drafted: 1st Round, 2014 from Mt. Pleasant HS (TX) (BOS)
Age 22.9 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 195 Bat / Thr R / R FV 55
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Changeup Command Sits/Tops
70/70 50/60 45/55 40/45 94-98 / 101

Just as Kopech seemed to be harnessing his hellacious stuff, he blew out. In the seven minor league starts before his big league debut, Kopech walked just four batters, and he was similarly efficient in his first few big league outings. His velocity was down and the Tigers shelled him in his final start, and an MRI revealed Kopech would need Tommy John. The timing was particularly cruel, not just because things had started to click, but also because late-season TJs usually cost the pitcher all of the next year; Kopech isn’t expected to be back until 2020.

His stuff is great, headlined by a mid-90s fastball that often crests 100 mph. The command inroads Kopech made late in 2018 are especially important for his ability to deal with lefties, because his changeup feel is not very good. He’ll need to mix his two breaking balls together to deal with them, and his slider feel is way ahead of the curveball. So long as Kopech’s stuff returns, he has No. 3 starter ceiling if the command comes with it, and high-leverage relief ability if the latter does not.

Drafted: 1st Round, 2018 from Oregon State (CHW)
Age 22.0 Height 5′ 7″ Weight 160 Bat / Thr R / R FV 55
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
40/70 45/45 40/45 70/70 55/60 50/50

When Madrigal fractured his wrist during Oregon State’s second series of the year, he was hitting .560 (14-for-25) with two doubles, two homers, and three steals in three attempts. For two long weekends in Arizona, he did everything. He crushed balls in all parts of the strike zone, ran plus-plus times to first base, and made several highlight reel defensive plays at second base. The wrist fracture kept him out for the rest of February, all of March, and most of April. When he returned, Madrigal kept hitting, but not for power, which is consistent with what plagues hitters for several months after they’ve had a break in the hand/wrist area.

That trend continued through his first pro summer, which was interrupted by a hamstring issue, as Madrigal struggled to pull and/or lift the ball at all. He had a downward, slashing swing instead of the dynamic and athletic cut he’d had early in the year, when he could scoop and lift stuff at the bottom of the zone. But he kept making contact. It was a month before a pro pitcher was able to strike Madrigal, who only K’d in 3% of his pro plate appearances last year, out.

It’s fair to make a distinction between prospects who are small, and ones who are just short. Jose Altuve is short, but is built like a little tank. Madrigal is small, a diminutive 5-foot-7, 165 pounds, and this, combined with his total lack of post-draft power, has the pro side of scouting very concerned. He looked tired and sluggish during instructional league, though it wasn’t as if he’d played a whole year and was an obvious candidate to be run down, furthering concerns that his size will be an issue. We’re inclined to believe there’s a substantial bounce-back on the horizon. He was the best draft-eligible hitter we saw last year, a complete player with few, if any, flaws.

Signed: July 2nd Period, 2017 from Cuba (CHW)
Age 21.7 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 185 Bat / Thr R / R FV 55
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
30/45 65/65 30/55 60/60 50/55 60/60

More than a full year removed from all that intrigue and we still know relatively little about Luis Robert, largely due to a thumb ligament sprain LouBob dealt with throughout 2018. His signing with Chicago marked the end of a more lucrative era for young international players who are now subject to more tight-fisted rules capping bonus amounts. Despite a limited market due to the timing of his deal, Robert signed for $26 million thanks to his all-world physical gifts. The raw power and top-end speed were obvious in workouts, but unless teams scouted him in Series Nacional or during the Cuban National team’s annual CanAm League tour, little was known about his ability to hit big league-quality pitching, or what his instincts were like in center field.

Because his thumb cost him April, May, and July (he re-aggravated it), it was hard to get extended looks during 2018 until Robert’s six-week stint in the Arizona Fall League (which was also interrupted by a hamstring issue). LouBob’s AFL stats were fine, but his swing path left him vulnerable to velocity on the inner half, and he too often expanded the zone. There’s doubt that he’ll get to all of his raw power in games, both due to the swing path and lack of plate discipline, but it isn’t as if he’s had time to make proper adjustments yet, and the pitching he saw in Arizona was the best he’s seen in his life. The ceiling is the same as it was purported to be before he signed: power, speed, offensive performance similar to Carlos Gomez’s best years. There’s just more risk that Robert doesn’t get there.

50 FV Prospects

5. Dylan Cease, RHP
Drafted: 6th Round, 2014 from Milton HS (GA) (CHC)
Age 23.3 Height 6′ 2″ Weight 190 Bat / Thr R / R FV 50
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Curveball Changeup Command Sits/Tops
70/70 55/60 45/50 40/45 95-98 / 101

Cease burst onto the scouting scene in 2013 when, as a junior in high school, he hit 96 mph and flashed an above average curveball at the heavily-scouted NHSI tournament in Cary, NC. He mostly held serve in his senior year, occasionally touching a tick or two higher or flashing 60 with his curveball, but was still a stuff over command type. The Cubs went well overslot to get Cease in the sixth round with a $1 million bonus, below what his talent was worth, but appropriate since clubs knew he needed Tommy John surgery right after he signed.

He’s slowly made progress in terms of starter traits during his pro career, while his velocity has increased to where he sits 95-98 mph now. In 2018, he took the biggest step forward, dominating High-A and Double-A at age 22, and some scouts are now projecting him as a No. 2 or 3 starter. We still aren’t completely convinced, as Cease is still control over command, and may fit best in a multi-inning relief role, or as a starter who doesn’t face any hitters a third time.

6. Dane Dunning, RHP
Drafted: 1st Round, 2016 from Florida (WAS)
Age 24.3 Height 6′ 4″ Weight 200 Bat / Thr R / R FV 50
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Changeup Command Sits/Tops
45/45 55/60 50/55 50/55 90-93 / 94

Dunning was an intriguing projection arm in high school who flashed average stuff and had some athleticism. Then he took a big step forward in his freshman year at Florida. At his best, Dunning has three pitches that flash plus at times and starter command, but most often has above average stuff and good control, consistent with a No. 4 starter look. The Nationals took him in the late first round in 2016 despite him being the bullpen/midweek/spot starting utility knife on a loaded staff. He was in the Adam Eaton deal in 2018 and missed the second half of 2018 with an elbow strain, before tearing his UCL and having Tommy John during 2019 spring training. He’ll be back midway through 2020 and is likely to be pushed quickly to the big leagues if his stuff is back.

45 FV Prospects

Signed: July 2nd Period, 2013 from Dominican Republic (CHW)
Age 22.6 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 200 Bat / Thr R / R FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
30/40 65/65 40/55 50/45 40/40 50/50

When Micker Adolfo (often referred to by scouts as Micker Zapata while he was an amateur) was 14 years old, he moved from the Virgin Islands to the Dominican Republic to train for his future baseball career. Mostly due to his huge raw power, he signed for what was then a franchise IFA-record $1.6 million, a mark that has since been shattered by Luis Robert. Adolfo’s early career was mired in strikeouts and injury. He struck out at a 43% clip in his first season, missed most of 2015 due to a gruesome leg fracture, and then broke his hamate a month into 2016 and hit for no power after he returned.

While he continues to strike out at a somewhat troubling rate (30% combined over the last two seasons), Adolfo has performed each of the last two years despite playing through an elbow injury that required Tommy John in 2018. He’s grown into the power expected of him as an amateur and has slugged just shy of .460 as an age-appropriate regular at Low- and Hi-A. Back from Tommy John during the Spring of 2019, Adolfo looked buff, but stiff. The power is still there, but so too is the risk he ends up as a DH. One has to wonder if, through no fault of his own, the large swaths of inactivity throughout his career have led to an early tumble down the defensive spectrum. We still really like that power potential and are encouraged by the last two years of output. At this point, Adolfo’s tools probably are what they are (though perhaps some arm comes back further removed from surgery) and his statistical performance will drive his stock.

Signed: July 2nd Period, 2012 from Venezuela (BOS)
Age 22.6 Height 6′ 0″ Weight 170 Bat / Thr S / R FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
30/40 50/50 45/50 60/60 40/45 60/60

Basabe shredded the Carolina League for the first two and a half months of 2018 — hitting .266/.370/.502 — then had one of the year’s most impressive feats of strength when he turned around a 102 mph Hunter Greene fastball at the Futures Game, and deposited it 10 rows deep to right-center field. His second half with Double-A Birmingham was less successful, and just as Basabe appeared to be adjusting to the better pitching in August, he would again struggle in the Arizona Fall League. Perhaps the most notable takeaway from the AFL is that Basabe’s instincts in center field are not great, and he may be better suited for a corner despite his speed. If that’s the case (it’d be fair to assume Basabe was gassed during the AFL and to just exclude that look from consideration) then the swing and miss aspect of the profile (27% K% last year) becomes a little scary. But Basabe has a potent collection of physical tools, he’s walked at an above-average clip, his modest power plays in games because he lifts the ball, and all of that should enable him to be a second division regular.

Drafted: 1st Round, 2016 from Chaminade Prep HS (CA) (NYY)
Age 21.9 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 195 Bat / Thr L / R FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
30/50 50/50 30/45 50/45 40/50 45/45

Famous since his days as a high school underclassman, Rutherford was a likely over-slot target of teams picking early in round two of the 2016 draft, but the Yankees took him 18th overall and signed him for about $800,000 over slot. He had a strong track record of performance in high school, but concerns about his power projection arose during Rutherford’s first full season, when he slugged just .348. One could point to his age (Rutherford was as old as a junior college prospect on draft day) as an indicator that should have been tempered our expectations of his power growth in the first place. But really, Rutherford’s swing, while picturesque, is just geared for all-fields doubles. He has some low-ball, home run power to his pull side, but otherwise does damage peppering the gaps and third baseline. Half of his 2018 doubles were struck to left of center field. It’s not an ideal profile for a corner outfielder, but Rutherford is a likely big leaguer. We have him projected as a low-end regular.

Drafted: 3rd Round, 2017 from New Mexico (CHW)
Age 23.6 Height 6′ 1″ Weight 185 Bat / Thr L / L FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
35/55 50/50 30/45 50/50 45/50 50/50

The quick-batted Gonzalez had a breakout 2018, with a 140 wRC+ during half seasons at Low- and Hi-A. He stands way off the dish, which creates some quality-of-contact limitations on pitches away from him in exchange for an ability to open up and turn on inside pitches with authority. It’s an approach that’s typically shiftable, but Gonzalez is also a good bunter and runs well to combat this. Like Rutherford ahead of him, it’s tough to project corner outfielders with middling power as average or better regulars. Rutherford is younger and perhaps has a better shot to grow into more, while Gonzalez has the superior feel for contact and might end up a 6 bat who doesn’t need to hit for power to profile. The two are pretty interchangeable depending on your preference.

Drafted: 1st Round, 2016 from Miami (CHW)
Age 24.2 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 220 Bat / Thr L / R FV 45
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
30/40 70/70 45/50 20/20 40/40 50/50

We suppose Collins could catch on occasion, but he probably shouldn’t be back there every day due to issues with receiving and mobility. Despite only fitting at 1B/DH, Collins’ combination of power and on base ability make it likely that he finds his way into regular big league at-bats somewhere, especially if the DH is instituted in the National League. His 19% walk rate was among the best in the minors last year, and just 33% of Collins’ balls in play are on the ground. He’s a pretty good three true outcomes prospect, a bat-only 1-2 WAR player à la Josh Bell or Justin Bour, who we’ll likely see in the big leagues by 2020.

40+ FV Prospects

12. Jake Burger, 3B
Drafted: 1st Round, 2017 from Missouri State (CHW)
Age 23.0 Height 6′ 2″ Weight 210 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40+
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
35/50 60/60 40/55 45/30 40/45 60/60

Thick and tightly wound, Burger was already a tenuous bet to stay at third base for very long before he twice ruptured his Achilles tendon, once during a spring training game and again while rehabbing in late May. The 12 month timetable for return from Achilles tears was reset, and puts Burger on track to come back sometime in June. While there are questions about his defense, Burger was one of the top college bats in the 2017 class. He has quick, explosive hands that generate big bat speed, and he has unusual bat control for someone who swings as hard as he does. He has sizable ceiling, especially if he can find a way to stay at third base, but we just won’t know what kind of toll the injuries have taken until Burger starts playing games again. He’s a good bet to see time in the 2019 Arizona Fall League.

Drafted: 2nd Round, 2018 from Oklahoma (CHW)
Age 22.7 Height 5′ 11″ Weight 190 Bat / Thr L / L FV 40+
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
30/40 60/60 30/50 50/45 45/50 45/45

It’s rare for there to be a college hitter with this kind of scintillating, violent bat speed, let alone one who’s overshadowed by an even toolsier teammate the way Walker was by Kyler Murray. Perhaps it was concerns about strikeouts, or the vague and mysterious injury bug that bit Walker during the Big 12 tournament, that caused him to fall out of the first round despite hitting .352/.441/.606 in a large conference. He’s an athletic swinger with a natural uppercut swing that seemed likely to help him lift the ball regularly, and the little bit of batted ball data we have from after Walker signed suggests that notion is correct. We’re doubtful that he stays in center field long term, but it’s hard to say that definitively because Walker lost reps there to Murray in college, and may yet develop better feel. He’s likely a big league regular if he can either stay in center or avoid perilously high strikeout rates, a star if he does both, and a corner platoon bat if he does neither.

40 FV Prospects

14. Jimmy Lambert, RHP
Drafted: 5th Round, 2016 from Fresno State (CHW)
Age 24.4 Height 6′ 2″ Weight 170 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Curveball Changeup Command Sits/Tops
45/50 50/55 50/55 50/55 45/50 91-94 / 95

Lambert’s strikeout rate exploded from 16% in 2017 to nearly 29% in 2018. The cause? A slight uptick in velocity paired with an arm slot change that has Lambert coming straight over the top, creating more life on his heater. It also creates more vertical action on his breaking stuff. This delivery appears tough to maintain, as Lambert has to contort his body to get to that slot, but he hasn’t been wild since making the change. His well-rounded collection of stuff plays much better like this, and Lambert now projects as a No. 4 or 5 starter.

Drafted: 12th Round, 2015 from San Diego State (CHW)
Age 25.6 Height 6′ 0″ Weight 215 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
35/40 60/60 40/45 30/30 45/45 50/50

Likely a long-time bat first, backup catcher, Zavala has some power, an average arm, and has worked hard to become a viable defensive catcher. Lauded for his makeup, Zavala got big and strong after he was drafted but appeared more lean and lithe this spring. He could get his first taste of the majors in 2019.

16. Tyler Johnson, RHP
Drafted: 5th Round, 2017 from South Carolina (CHW)
Age 23.6 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 205 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Changeup Command Sits/Tops
60/60 50/55 40/45 45/50 93-95 / 97

Yet another South Carolina Gamecock having success in pro ball, Johnson is a physical beast with big velocity. He struck out nearly 40% of opposing hitters in 2018 by relying heavily on the heater. Both his slider and changeup are serviceable, and Johnson projects in a middle relief role.

17. Gavin Sheets, 1B
Drafted: 2nd Round, 2017 from Wake Forest (CHW)
Age 22.9 Height 6′ 4″ Weight 230 Bat / Thr L / L FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
30/50 70/70 40/50 30/30 40/50 50/50

Likely in need of a swing change to profile at first, Sheets’ cut too often slices down at the baseball, and he can only get to his considerable raw power in certain parts of the strike zone. He has good bat control and makes mid-flight adjustments to breaking balls, which he has the raw strength to punish even if the timing of his lower half has been compromised. He’s a good hitter, just one we’re skeptical will clear the offensive bar at first base without trading some contact for power. Sheets is also another example of why we should be skeptical of hitters’ power numbers at Wake Forest.

Drafted: 5th Round, 2015 from Rice (CHW)
Age 26.6 Height 6′ 1″ Weight 185 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Curveball Changeup Cutter Command Sits/Tops
45/50 55/60 40/45 50/55 45/50 89-93 / 95

In a starter/reliever grey area, Stephens doesn’t have the changeup quality typically desired from a starter, but he can back foot his breaking balls and work cut in on the hands of lefties, so the lack of change may not matter. His curveball, typically in the upper-70s, has premium raw spin; that pitch should alone carry him to a role on a big league staff. He spent 2018 with Triple-A Charlotte and is a strong multi-inning relief candidate.

Drafted: 3rd Round, 2018 from Mississippi State (CHW)
Age 21.6 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 228 Bat / Thr L / L FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Curveball Changeup Command Sits/Tops
45/45 50/50 45/50 45/55 87-91 / 92

Pilkington missed an SEC bat per inning during his stay at Mississippi State, and seemed like a potentially quick-moving, low-variance backend starter prospect when the White Sox made him their third round pick last year. Physically mature and wielding vanilla stuff, Pilkington’s upside is limited, and most of his draft value was in perceived certainty. His stuff was sometimes down in the mid-80s during the 2019 spring, though. Ideally, he’ll move to the upper levels pretty quickly, assuming his velocity rebounds.

20. Alec Hansen, RHP
Drafted: 2nd Round, 2016 from Oklahoma (CHW)
Age 24.5 Height 6′ 7″ Weight 240 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Curveball Changeup Command Sits/Tops
60/60 45/50 60/60 40/45 40/40 90-95 / 97

What a roller coaster of a career it has already been for Hansen, who looked like a possible top three pick as a college sophomore, faltered as a junior, appeared reborn once free of seemingly poor college instruction, then collapsed again in 2018 when he was hurt for a time (forearm) and had more walks than innings pitched.

At his best, Hansen will sit 94-97 early in starts and both his breaking balls will be plus. Last year his velo was down, sometimes into the upper-80s. Hansen is built like an Andean Condor, and it’s fair to anticipate mechanical consistency arriving late for an athlete built like that. But he turns 25 this year and even if his stuff bounces back, we think he’ll just end up in a relief role.

21. Zack Burdi, RHP
Drafted: 1st Round, 2016 from Louisville (CHW)
Age 24.1 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 210 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Changeup Command Sits/Tops
50/55 45/45 50/50 40/45 92-96 / 101

Burdi’s stuff was way down when he returned from Tommy John last year. He was 97-101 with a plus slider and changeup prior to his injury and at his ranking peak, was one of the few relief-only prospects who we considered a 50 FV prospect. During his AZL rehab outings and in the AFL, Burdi was often throwing just 92-94 and his slider’s spin rate dropped to 2200 rpm after spiraling in at 2700 rpm when he was healthy. He had to be shut down during the spring of 2019 spring and while we’re hopeful for an eventual bounce-back, Burdi’s future is murky.

22. Luis Mieses, CF
Signed: July 2nd Period, 2016 from Dominican Republic (CHW)
Age 18.8 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 180 Bat / Thr L / L FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Hit Raw Power Game Power Run Fielding Throw
25/55 50/50 20/50 45/40 45/45 45/45

An 18-year-old leviathan, Mieses is much more physical than his listed 180 pounds, and it’s shocking to watch him use his instincts and first step to close on balls in center field, even though he likely won’t play there for very long. He has exceptional hand-eye coordination and finds all sorts of ways to put the bat head on the ball but too often, he offers at pitcher’s pitches and settles for sub-optimal contact. He has a gorgeous, low-ball left-handed swing that could produce power if Miesis learned to attack the right pitches. The near bottom-of-the-scale walk rates each of his first two years are certainly a red flag, but Mieses’ size and hitting ability make him an intriguing, high-ceiling flier.

23. Codi Heuer, RHP
Drafted: 6th Round, 2018 from Wichita State (CHW)
Age 22.7 Height 6′ 5″ Weight 195 Bat / Thr R / R FV 40
Tool Grades (Present/Future)
Fastball Slider Changeup Cutter Command Sits/Tops
55/55 40/45 50/55 50/55 45/55 92-95 / 96

Heuer spent his first two college seasons in the Wichita State bullpen but was frequently seen by draft room decision makers as a junior because they were in to see Alec Bohm and Greyson Jenista. His arm slot and spotty college fastball command made a bullpen projection popular, but because Heuer is a big-framed, cold weather (Colorado) high schooler who threw limited innings for two years in college, we’re a little more optimistic about him improving. He had a strong fall instructional league during which his mid-90s sinker worked as an effective precursor for a good changeup. He doesn’t have great breaking ball spin but at times his fastballs cut on him, and there might be a viable third pitch here that simply isn’t a traditional breaking ball. He’s likely a two-pitch reliever but in our estimation, there’s room for growth because of the background. He could be a workhorse backend starter.

35+ FV Prospects

24. Zach Thompson, RHP
Drafted: 5th Round, 2014 from Texas-Arlington (CHW)
Age 25.4 Height 6′ 7″ Weight 230 Bat / Thr R / R FV 35+

You could argue Thompson belongs up with Jordan Stephens on this list, especially because Thompson doesn’t yet need to occupy a 40-man spot the way Stephens does, but even though they’re each likely to end up in the bullpen, Thompson is the one who has already moved. He sits 92-95 and has an above-average curveball, a pretty standard two-pitch middle relief mix.

Drafted: 7th Round, 2016 from USC (CHW)
Age 23.6 Height 6′ 3″ Weight 170 Bat / Thr L / L FV 35+

It seems that, after his velocity yo-yo’d throughout college (probably due to inconsistent usage) and early as a pro, Flores’ fastball has settled in 89-92 range. It just means he’ll have to pitch off of his secondaries more, the best of which is a tilting, 2-to-7 curveball that spins in at about 2750 rpm. Flores will throw the curve in the zone for strikes or bounce it in the dirt to his glove side. He can also create good angle in on righties with what looks like a cutter. He’s at least strong rotation depth, if not just a good No. 5 starter.

Drafted: 22th Round, 2015 from UMass Lowell (CHW)
Age 25.5 Height 5′ 10″ Weight 190 Bat / Thr R / R FV 35+

There’s warranted age-based skepticism of Mendick’s numbers at Hi- and Double-A each of the last two years, but it’s encouraging that he had such a strong 2018 after a bad month and a half at Birmingham the year prior. He was similarly excellent during 2019 spring training, though most of his at-bats came against late-inning reserve arms. But as a versatile infielder with terrific control of the strike zone, Mendick is a very rosterable big leaguer who should give you good at-bats off the bench. His career peripherals are strong and may be an indication that we’re sleeping on him a bit because of his age.

27. Bryce Bush, RF
Drafted: 33th Round, 2018 from De La Salle Collegiate HS (MI) (CHW)
Age 19.3 Height 6′ 0″ Weight 200 Bat / Thr R / R FV 35+

A late-round, cold-weather high school flier who signed for $290,000, Bush played in some of the big prep showcases during his final amateur summer, and was clearly overmatched against the better pitching. But he put on an absolute show during batting practice and has one of the best raw power projections among potential future Sox. He had a strong pro debut on paper and continued to look good with the bat during the spring of 2019. The general scouting consensus is that Bush will not stay at his current third base and will have to move to an outfield corner or first, which immediately makes Bush’s high school whiffs troublesome. He’s a high-risk, long-term developmental prospect with some of the louder offensive tools in the system.

28. Lenyn Sosa, SS
Signed: July 2nd Period, 2016 from Venezuela (CHW)
Age 19.2 Height 6′ 0″ Weight 180 Bat / Thr R / R FV 35+

While initial impressions of Sosa were that he had a shot to hit his way to an everyday gig at second base, continued evaluations indicate he may have sufficient instincts and footwork to remain at short despite limited straight-line speed. The bat control required for him to clear the middle infield offensive bar is there, but he’s not physically projectable, and needs to be more selective at the dish.

29. Ryan Burr, RHP
Drafted: 5th Round, 2015 from Arizona State (ARI)
Age 24.8 Height 6′ 4″ Weight 225 Bat / Thr R / R FV 35+

Burr is Arizona State’s all-time saves leader. He was 93-96 with an above-average slider almost every time out as a Sun Devil, but began experiencing wild fluctuations in velocity during his early time in pro ball. But in 2017, his stuff returned to its collegiate form; the Dbacks traded him for International bonus space, and Burr sped to the majors. He profiles as a standard, two-pitch reliever, but the velo fluctuation and 2016 injury dilute his FV a tad.

30. Ian Hamilton, RHP
Drafted: 11th Round, 2016 from Washington State (CHW)
Age 23.8 Height 6′ 0″ Weight 200 Bat / Thr R / R FV 35+

Hamilton has thrown very hard dating back to college and has maintained that kind of velo despite having one of the longer arm actions in baseball. His upper-80s slider is a gravity ball that spins at just 1600 rpm. It seems to work as long as Hamilton locates it, but his delivery is pretty hard to repeat. He profiles in middle relief as long as that weird slider plays against big league hitters.

Other Prospects of Note

Grouped by type and listed in order of preference within each category.

Youth with Some Helium
Amado Nunez, 2B
Cabera Weaver, OF
Anderson Comas, OF
Lency Delgado, 3B
Josue Guerrero, OF

This is the most important group of the Others because any of them might be on the main section of the list by mid-season. Nunez can hit but will be limited to second base and his body is maxed out. He’ll need to develop a 6 bat, but he has a shot to get there. Weaver is a skinny 19-year-old with speed. He needs to get stronger. Comas has a big frame, and good hand-eye and bat control, but his swing is disconcertingly long. Delgado is built like a fullback and has some pop and a shot to stay at third base. Guerrero’s body has gone backwards since his amateur days but he’s still very young and was an interesting $1 million power projection signee not long ago.

A Carrying Tool
Laz Rivera, SS
Jameson Fisher, 1B/LF
Corey Zangari, 1B

Some teams like Rivera at shortstop and he can really swing it, but he’s too aggressive and probably maxes out as a utility guy. Fisher has great feel to hit but the college injury that contributed to his moving out from behind the plate turned out to be significant. Zangari has huge power but hasn’t played much in two years due to Tommy John.

Just a Bunch of Pitchers
Kodi Medeiros, LHP
A.J. Puckett, RHP
Luis Ledo, RHP
Jason Bilous, RHP
Lincoln Henzman, RHP

Medeiros is a low slot lefty with a good slider. That may not be enough once new pitcher usage rules are implemented next year. Puckett has backend stuff but is 24 and had TJ this spring. Ledo has been into the mid-90s and flashes a plus split. Bilous would do that in college but has been more 90-92 as a pro. Henzman could have a 55 slider at maturity and pitch in a bullpen.

System Overview

This system has dealt with an unusual number of severe injuries — with several TJs, including two to positions players, plus Burger’s Achilles and Luis Robert’s thumb injuries — but it’s hard not to note that most of the name prospects the Sox have acquired have fallen a little short of expectations. Most of them are still very young, but Moncada’s contact issues are concerning, Lucas Giolito’s stuff has been all over the place, Reynaldo Lopez has been erratic, and several of the pitchers are throwing a little less hard now than they were in prior years.

That reads like finger pointing at player dev, but Chris Getz has only been running that department since the fall of 2016 and if we don’t count the guys who have been hurt badly during his tenure, there are more stock up players during that span (Lambert for sure, plus Zavala, and we’d say Gonzalez though it seems like he was in some teams’ late first round mix and it’s possible we were just light on him as an amateur) than there are instances of frustration (Sheets would ideally have more lift, and spring looks at Pilkington indicate he may have backed up). With that in mind, the players to watch are the 2017 July 2 signees and the 2018 high schoolers (Mieses, Bush, Delgado, Cabrera, Comas), since it’s the first talent Getz and Co. will get to mold from such an age, as Chicago has been college-heavy in recent drafts.

This system is top-heavy, with potential stars leading the way and very little in the way of depth beyond those few names, though the group of recent high school selections in the 35+ FV tier and Others of Note should yield a gem or two. The third overall pick in the draft will help replace some of the clout lost when Eloy graduates, and it’s possible that some of the veterans on expiring deals (Jose Abreu, Ivan Nova, Yonder Alonso, Welington Castillo) could net something at the trade deadline.


FanGraphs Audio Presents: The Untitled McDongenhagen Project, Ep. 12

UMP: The Untitled McDongenhagen Project, Episode 12

This is the 12th episode of a mostly weekly program co-hosted by Eric Longenhagen and Kiley McDaniel about player evaluation in all its forms. The show, which is available through the normal FanGraphs Audio feed, has a working name but barely. The show is not all prospect stuff, but there is plenty of that, as the hosts are Prospect Men.

This week we have a one topic show featuring special guest Meg Rowley of this very website. In honor of March Madness, we held a draft of active baseball players on major league 40-man rosters for a round robin basketball tournament. Listen to the episode to hear our logic and then use this poll to vote on who has the best squad. Warning: the poll contains a recap of our rosters, so don’t click on the link before listening if you don’t want those spoiled!

Don’t hesitate to direct pod-related correspondence to @kileymcd or @longenhagen on Twitter or at prospects@fangraphs.com.

You can subscribe to the podcast via iTunes or other feeder things.

Audio after the jump. (Approximately 32 min play time.)

Read the rest of this entry »