Oakland Athletics Top 43 Prospects
Below is an analysis of the prospects in the farm system of the Oakland Athletics. Scouting reports were compiled with information provided by industry sources as well as our own observations. This is the second year we’re delineating between two anticipated relief roles, the abbreviations for which you’ll see in the “position” column below: MIRP for multi-inning relief pitchers, and SIRP for single-inning relief pitchers.
A quick overview of what FV (Future Value) means can be found here. A much deeper overview can be found here.
All of the numbered prospects below also appear on The Board, a resource the site offers featuring sortable scouting information for every organization. It has more details than this article and integrates every team’s list so readers can compare prospects across farm systems. It can be found here.
Editor’s Note: J.T. Ginn and Adam Oller were added to this list following their acquisition from the New York Mets as part of the Chris Bassitt trade.
Shea Langeliers, Cristian Pache, Ryan Cusick, and Joey Estes were added to this list following their acquisition from the Atlanta Braves as part of the Matt Olson trade.
Gunnar Hoglund, Zach Logue, Kevin Smith, and Kirby Snead were added to this list following their acquisition from the Toronto Blue Jays as part of the Matt Chapman trade.
| Rk | Name | Age | Highest Level | Position | ETA | FV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tyler Soderstrom | 20.3 | A | 1B | 2025 | 50 |
| 2 | Shea Langeliers | 24.3 | AAA | C | 2022 | 50 |
| 3 | Cristian Pache | 23.3 | MLB | CF | 2022 | 50 |
| 4 | Zack Gelof | 21.7 | AAA | 3B | 2025 | 45+ |
| 5 | Pedro Pineda | 18.5 | R | CF | 2025 | 45+ |
| 6 | Gunnar Hoglund | 21.6 | R | SP | 2024 | 45 |
| 7 | Daulton Jefferies | 26.6 | MLB | SP | 2022 | 45 |
| 8 | Nick Allen | 23.4 | AAA | SS | 2022 | 45 |
| 9 | Ryan Cusick | 21.7 | A | SIRP | 2025 | 45 |
| 10 | J.T. Ginn | 22.8 | A+ | SP | 2024 | 45 |
| 11 | Brayan Buelvas | 19.8 | A | CF | 2024 | 45 |
| 12 | Max Muncy | 18.9 | R | SS | 2026 | 40+ |
| 13 | Jorge Juan | 23.0 | A+ | SP | 2023 | 40+ |
| 14 | Colin Peluse | 23.8 | AA | MIRP | 2023 | 40+ |
| 15 | Jeff Criswell | 23.0 | A+ | MIRP | 2023 | 40+ |
| 16 | Mason Miller | 23.6 | R | SIRP | 2025 | 40+ |
| 17 | Lawrence Butler | 21.7 | A+ | 1B | 2024 | 40+ |
| 18 | Adam Oller | 27.4 | AAA | SP | 2022 | 40 |
| 19 | Zach Logue | 25.9 | AAA | SP | 2022 | 40 |
| 20 | Denzel Clarke | 21.2 | R | CF | 2025 | 40 |
| 21 | Joey Estes | 19.8 | A | SP | 2024 | 40 |
| 22 | A.J. Puk | 26.9 | MLB | SIRP | 2022 | 40 |
| 23 | Kevin Smith | 25.7 | MLB | SS | 2022 | 40 |
| 24 | Garrett Acton | 23.8 | A+ | SIRP | 2023 | 40 |
| 25 | Robert Puason | 19.5 | A | SS | 2025 | 40 |
| 26 | Jonah Bride | 26.2 | AA | C | 2022 | 40 |
| 27 | Jordan Diaz | 21.6 | A+ | 1B | 2022 | 40 |
| 28 | Brent Honeywell Jr. | 27.0 | MLB | SP | 2022 | 40 |
| 29 | Cody Thomas | 27.4 | AAA | RF | 2022 | 40 |
| 30 | Jack Weisenburger | 24.4 | AA | SIRP | 2023 | 40 |
| 31 | Luis Barrera | 26.3 | MLB | CF | 2022 | 40 |
| 32 | Michael Guldberg | 22.7 | A+ | CF | 2024 | 40 |
| 33 | Logan Davidson | 24.3 | AA | SS | 2023 | 40 |
| 34 | Brian Howard | 26.9 | AAA | SP | 2022 | 40 |
| 35 | Angel Arevalo | 18.5 | R | 2B | 2026 | 35+ |
| 36 | Kirby Snead | 27.4 | MLB | SIRP | 2022 | 35+ |
| 37 | Grant Holmes | 26.0 | AAA | SIRP | 2022 | 35+ |
| 38 | Junior Perez | 20.7 | A | RF | 2022 | 35+ |
| 39 | Eduardo Rivera | 18.1 | R | SIRP | 2026 | 35+ |
| 40 | Dany Jiménez | 26.2 | MLB | SIRP | 2022 | 35+ |
| 41 | Wandisson Charles | 25.5 | AA | SIRP | 2022 | 35+ |
| 42 | Aiden McIntyre | 26.6 | AAA | SIRP | 2022 | 35+ |
| 43 | Stevie Emanuels | 23.1 | A+ | SP | 2024 | 35+ |
Other Prospects of Note
Grouped by type and listed in order of preference within each category.
Catcher Depth
Carlos Franco, C
CJ Rodriguez, C
Shane McGuire, C
Franco, one of the younger players at instructs, is a very advanced defender for his age and has decent feel for contact. He and Rodriguez, who was the steady man in the mask for the Vanderbilt Commodores during three high-profile seasons, are low-variance backup types right now. McGuire split time behind the dish with Padres minor leaguer Adam Kerner while in college at San Diego. He’s a bat-first senior sign who performed on paper despite needing a swing change to tap into more power.
Long-term Injury Crew
Brady Basso, LHP
Chase Cohen, RHP
Jose Dicochea, RHP
Parker Dunshee, RHP
Basso and Dicochea both had Tommy John in July, per sources. Basso was sitting 94 and throwing a hard, upper-80s cutter before he was shut down. We have previous notes that include a curveball for him, but nothing about a curve from 2021, so he may have scrapped it. He’s struck out more than a batter per inning as a pro. Dicochea was a prep pitching prospect drafted out of Tucson. He was sitting 93-95 early in outings before backing into the low-90s during Eric’s spring looks at him, and his breaking balls have good shape and bite. He’s a decent relief prospect when healthy. Cohen was sitting 94-95 and touching 98 as part of a decent four-pitch mix before he went on the 60-day IL in July, though we don’t know the specifics of his injury. Dunshee had Thoracic Outlet surgery. He projected as a junk-balling backend starter pre-injury.
Sleeper Arms We’re Watching
Wander Guante, RHP
Gerald Garcia, LHP
Grant Holman, RHP
Moises Hernandez, RHP
David Leal, LHP
Aaron Brown, LHP
Guante is just 21 and has a low-minors bat-missing track record. He sits about 93 and has an average low-80s slider. Garcia has a good changeup and breaking ball but only sits about 90 and is physically maxed out at age 20. His peripherals are outstanding and he’ll be an interesting 2022 40-man case if he keeps performing like this. Holman, a two-way guy at Cal, and Hernandez, still 17 at time of publication, are arm strength fliers right now. The hope is Holman can add movement to his fastball. Hernandez is big for his age and sits about 93, but his arm action is very long and it hurts his command and breaking ball consistency. Go check out Leal’s numbers. He’s doing that while sitting 84! He has one hell of a changeup. Brown was a two-way player at Pepperdine and was drafted by Philadelphia as an outfielder. He’s back to pitching and will top out in the mid-90s.
A Carrying Tool/Trait
Buddy Reed, CF
Max Schuemann, UTIL
Jhoan Paulino, 3B
Dermis Garcia, DH
Jeremy Eierman, SS
Kyle McCann, 1B
Reed can really go get it in center field. Schuemann’s tools don’t stand out but he’s quietly been an average offensive performer at every level and he plays all over the place. Paulino is hanging around because of his size and power projection, but he’s also trending dangerously away from SS/3B and to 1B/3B. Garcia was once a famous Yankees prospect and hit 30 bombs last year, but he and the rest of the names here don’t have the hit tools to support a big league eval.
System Overview
Let’s be frank here: this isn’t a very good system. While we’ve yet to really put much time into full organizational rankings, it’s fair to say that Oakland will place somewhere in the 20s, and even that might be generous. The good news is that by the time we actually do compile our org rankings, their placement will likely have improved dramatically provided the lockout ends before then.
The bad news is that significant improvement will only come at the cost of a serious downturn in the quality of the major league roster. It’s no secret that Oakland is looking to move some big names that are reaching the expensive (at least according to the A’s definition of the word) portion of their arbitration years. That list is headlined by Matt Olson, the second-best first baseman in the game by WAR in 2021, who is projected for a perfectly reasonable salary somewhere around $12 million in 2022 and still has another year of control after that. Sources have indicated that Oakland is looking for two top-100 types to headline a package for Olson and they are likely to get it in the end.
Such a deal would transform the Oakland system by itself, but they’ll hardly be done. Sean Manaea is a well above-average starting pitcher entering his final year of control and could net players who considerably improve the system; the same could be said for Chris Bassitt. Frankie Montas is in that group as well, and could net an ever greater return, as he doesn’t become a free agent until after the 2023 season. Somewhere between two and four of those players will likely be dealt for prospects before Opening Day, and the team is also listening on Gold Glove third baseman Matt Chapman, though rather than sell low now, Oakland might wait until July to move him in hopes of an offensive bounce-back.
The A’s system isn’t good, but it’s likely about to get significantly better — just not for the best of reasons.
When I see a 50 run, 50 field, 40 throw at third base the first thing I think is “how would he do at second?” Because it’s not all that clear that third base is an “easier” position than second, but it does require a skillset that is more range / less arm.
It’s interesting because Soderstrom should also probably switch from catcher, and be at first or third (depending on his arm and range). You can see the makings of a solid infield with Soderstrom and Gelof.
I have some questions about both Muncy’s and Allen’s bats, although Allen is close enough to the bigs he might be able to run a 90 wRC+, which would make him a solid enough shortstop. The system is pretty blah after the top 2 guys, Allen, Denzel Clarke, and Jorge Juan. Lots and lots of players with sky high ceilings and major K issues that may or may not resolve; guys like Buelvas and Pineda are like two years away from evaluators knowing what they can or can’t do.
Gelof’s placement really surprises me – yes, he had a good run at A ball but that was heavily boosted by a .366 BABIP. It also seems like a well-polished college player should do well at A ball. If he’s not a sure-fire 3B as the write-up says, I’m not sure I see the bat carrying him to nearly being a T100 guy at this point.
The fact that someone like you describe is #2 is a statement on the low quality of the system more than any praise for Zelof
I would caution against overinterpreting minor league babip, particularly low minors. Many MLB level talents put up very high babip’s coming up through the minors. It should be expected as a higher end talent is often facing well below MLB level talent in most games.
I understand your point about there being a wider BABIP spread in the minors but its just hard for me to trust .366 over 145 PAs as being representative of his true skill. And that’s an issue for Gelof because (imo) you really have to dream on the batted ball quality (both BABIP and power) to see him as a difference maker.
I am guessing they have exit velo data that backs up the BABIP
Maybe, it isn’t on The Board if so.
A .366 BABIP isn’t all that high for A-Ball. Of players with 140 ABs, he ranks 80th on the list and in the 78th percentile. For someone that hits the ball hard on a regular basis, he’s likely earned that mark.
I’m pretty sure Eric’s assessment of Gelof’s hit tool is based on scouting his swing and approach and taking into account the metrics, not scouting the statline.
My prior was that it’s Soderstrom and a bunch of long shots with only the potential to be sort of ok. I don’t see anything to dissuade me from that. Even the quantity is small compared to say the Angels. They have a serious shot at bottom 1-3. That and the current squad being an 86 win team with most things going well is a good enough reason to trade everyone except pre-arbs. The other option would have been to sign Carlos Correa and Starling Marte but that’s silly to mention.
A slight tangent: I would love to see an update to the 20-80 scale for hit tool and game power. Kiley had something in 2014 but it was written at a time when power was down across the league and uses batting average which probably doesn’t capture all of what we think of with hit tool (which involves taking walks and avoiding K’s, too). The update in 2018 didn’t really address tool grades.
I think I could probably back my way into based on the writeup in 2018, which put a 50 as a major league average and each full grade being a standard deviation away from it. So I downloaded the 2021 numbers and here’s what I got for some of the interesting numbers (some which are relevant to tool grades, some of which are not). This is for qualified hitters only.
HR: Mean 23, Std. Dev 10.5
BB: 9.2, Std Dev ~3
K: 20.8, Std Dev ~5.5
ISO: .19, Std Dev ~0.57
OBP: .34, Std Dev, ~0.03
Right off the bat I think it’s pretty clear that we have a problem, since 23 homers seems kind of high for a 50. I think by limiting it to qualified hitters we’re truncating the bottom end of the scale a bit. You can probably lower the threshold for rate stats but not for homers, since that will introduce different problems.
Second issue–the standard deviation for OBP is super tiny. This, again, might be a function of only considering players who played regularly. I don’t think we want to be handing out 80 tool grades for hit based on a .355 OBP. Sounds a bit excessive.
What we might need is to take everyone with, say, a minimum of 300 PAs and prorate them out to 600. So I did that too. These numbers make a little more sense, but not quite:
HR: 17.8, StDev about 10.3
BB: 9, StDev about 3
K: About 22, Standard Deviation about 5.7
ISO: 0.18, Standard deviation about 0.06
OBP: 0.33, St Dev about 0.034
That might have solved the homer problem, but OBP is still a total mess. If you plot the OBP, virtually every single person is between 0.3 and 0.35, with 80 tool grades starting in around .350. Not cool.
Maybe we could work backwards. In the fangraphs new scouting primer, Eric and Kiley call an 80 a Top 5 player, and a 70 a top 10 player. Can we do the same for OBP? A top 5 OBP would give you about a .400. The distance between .40 and 0.34 is 0.6. If we take 0.2 instead of a standard deviation, you’d get:
70: .380 to .400
65: .370 to .380
60: .360 to .370
55: .350 to .360
50: 0.340 to .350
45: 0.330 to 0.340
40: 0.320 to 0.330
35: 0.310 to 0.320
30: 0.300 to 0.310
20: Below 0.300.
This doesn’t quite work because the bottom of the range for 50 is the mean, but I think it’s in the right direction? For some reason I always thought of a 35 as being below .300 OBP, so maybe the categories get a bit wider? I think Eric has a ton to do right now so I’m not all that confident he’d get to this in the middle of prospect coverage, but if someone else on staff is looking for something to write about I would think that some analysis of this would be worth looking at.
Oh, also, the whole reason I did this was because I wondered what a 60 hit, 55 game power first baseman (Soderstrom) would be like and whether that would play. An OBP in the 0.360 to 0.370 range with 25 homers would definitely play. That’s something like a 130 wRC+? Even if we adjust the OBP downward a bit, 0.350 to 0.360 will play too, that’s like a 123 or something like that.
They could make plate coverage, plate discipline and contact skills separate categories. As a side note I don’t understand the importance of “raw power”. Does that actually translate to “game power” any more than gaining strength and learning to pull fly balls?
To me, raw power shows how much game power upside a player has. If he has 50 game power but 65 raw power, that tells me he’s got a lot more upside them someone with 50 game power and 50 raw power. It’s just a matter if he will ever get to it or not but all other things being equal, I’ll take the guy with more raw power.
Ok so how is raw power more useful than present vs future game power? Logan Davidson is 55/55 Raw Power and 30/40 Game Power. What is the 55 telling us that the 40 isn’t?
It tells us that in theory, it might be possible to coax more out of him if you’re willing to do a swing change or something like that. It’s just that the current evaluator doesn’t see him on a trajectory to doing it.
Raw power is essentially max exit velo, maybe Top 5 max exit velos. Game power is home runs. The former is relevant, for example, if you’ve got a guy who is just mashing balls straight into the ground.
Present vs. future power is power you’re expected to mature into as you age/develop simply because you’re going to get stronger as you get to your mid-late 20s, regardless of whether you actually improve as a hitter.
Raw power is indeed more pie in the sky. You *could* get there, if you figured it all out. Logan Davidson for example might conk the occasional 450 HR in BP, something a guy with present 40/future 40 power is never going to do. It’s physically in Davidson to crush a baseball, but he doesn’t do so often because he lacks the hand eye or pitch recognition or whatever. Your 40/40 guy is never going to go 450, even if he has those other skills.
I agree it’s the least useful of all the grades.
A lot of guys with big raw power/game power discrepancies usually have flashy BP, high exit velos, but hit too many grounders.
So if the A’s firesale off the Matts and Montas, this crummy system wouldn’t look so bad. But I hope they don’t.
Are we just getting the depressing farm systems out of the way first?
If you think this was bad, wait until you see the White Sox. They may not have a 45 in the entire system.
This is where the farm system rankings get a little shaky. The White Sox farm system may look crappy, but that’s because they’ve recently graduated a ton of studs into the majors. If the measure was “Young Studs in the System” rather than “Players Who Have Not Yet Exceeded Their Rookie Eligibility”, there wouldn’t be a ton of teams you’d pick over the White Sox.
I think around 2017 or so — the Beck draft — the A’s shifted towards emphasizing size, athleticism and other ‘raw’ skills. I can’t say it seems to have worked out well, but I would be really interested in an FG analysis of whether a) this shift was real, b) how it has worked out, and c) how it ties in to trends leaguewide in player eval & development. My impression is that it’s possible the A’s are drafting fine but just aren’t that good at player development, but I would learn to love more from folks with one foot in analytics and one foot in scouting & development.
They seem to have made that shift in the first round. As it turns out, the guys in later rounds have worked out better.
From watching some of these guys who get paid to develop players in the offseason, and their analysis of swings, its interesting how little overall athleticism is connected to having a baseball swing that works. We have seen it over and over and over again… fat dumpy guys who can hit the snot out of the ball, and gazelles who cannot hit at all. Yet, we keep thinking that because Austin Beck can run and throw, that he will be able to hit. It just doesn’t work like a lot of people think it will work. To answer, I don’t think they are “drafting fine” when they take this approach.
Hitting a baseball is a very tough thing to do. I would say athleticism helps, but it is far less important than it is in any other sport, or any other part of baseball. Hitters hit. Athletes…not so much.
There’s a huge distinction between fine motor control and overall athleticism. Baseball proves that over and over (and over) again, if nothing else.
At least Soderstrom isn’t in that mold. Neither is Logan Davidson and he’s a bust anyway.
Force the clown to sell the team.
I think anyone would have trouble getting a stadium built in Oakland. It just doesn’t fit with what the residents want. It doesn’t improve job prospects for locals, but does promote gentrification. The locals would prefer a bunch of Amazon warehouses. Their options are to stay and Moneyball it or move. The only markets MLB are allowing, and that actually want them, are few and unappealing. I’m not sure which owner can increase revenues to the point where they would want to raise the payroll.
This is really it. Alameda County and a part of Contra Costa County just isn’t really a huge market. The Giants have the Bay sewn up, and their advantage is increasing all the time. I’m not sure what anyone owning the A’s could do without running huge losses.
Five years on & the top of the 2016 draft is shaping up pretty ugly with Moniak (1st) Senzel (2nd) Pint (4th) Ray (5th) & Puk (6th) all looking busty…& not like Morganna The Kissing Bandit.
Best players out of that draft are Shane Bieber and Corbin Burnes, each taken in the fourth round. Between Zac Gallen, Sean Murphy, Bryan Reynolds, Pete Alonso, and Bo Bichette (none of whom were taken in the first round), it is entirely possible that there won’t be a single first round pick among the Top 5 players in the draft. I had high hopes for Matt Manning to join that group but the one most likely to challenge them is Will Smith (the catcher) taken in the comp round (if that even counts? He was taken #32, so not one of the Top 30 picks).
I think it is really too early to tell. Several other first rounders from 2016 like Gavin Lux, Dylan Carlson, Ian Anderson, and Alex Kirilloff, could still have great careers.
And let’s not forget about 2016 late 1st rounder Will Craig who’s sure to come back from the KBO with a vengeance.
Ahhhh Ian Anderson I missed him. Him and Will Smith are the two best shots to supplant one of Burnes, Bieber, Reynolds, Bichette, and Alonso (who are probably the best at this point). Smith might even already be there.
Lux and Kirilloff could also be good, but probably not that good.
I’m not sure I feel comfortable betting Lux for anything. Carlson and Anderson seem good, I’d like to think Kiriloff will put it together.
Kind of like the Kyler Murray draft
My Braves were thought to reach for Anderson at #3 at the time. I, for one, am very happy with this decision
How about the Pirates and A’s switch development teams to see what Oakland’s FO would do with the Pirates prospects? Oh who am I kidding, they’ll still get more out of this crop than the Bucs will out of theirs.
Looks underwhelming, and yet the A’s will still pull a 6-WAR position player and a handful of 3 WAR pitchers out of it.
Then trade them three years later.