Minor League Discussion & Boxes, 6-26-16

[Thrilho]

1 and 4 in the org is a different from 8 and below 20 in the org, one a little more dramatic than the other.

 

Onnneee last thing is that the difference between 8 and 22 is still probably not as big as a difference between 1 and 4. I'd guess that when things shake out 10 years from now the difference in career WAR between McKinney (who you ranked ahead) and Contreras will dwarf the difference in WAR between the number 8 and number 22 career WAR guys from our system.

[Thrilho]

Onnneee last thing is that the difference between 8 and 22 is still probably not as big as a difference between 1 and 4. I'd guess that when things shake out 10 years from now the difference in career WAR between McKinney (who you ranked ahead) and Contreras will dwarf the difference in WAR between the number 8 and number 22 career WAR guys from our system.

 

- Then it's a good thing I went with Gleyber at 1.

 

- The overall point (difference between 1 and 4 being wider than 8 and 22) is probably not outright true anyway.

 

- That McKinney ranking is a big ooph on my part, interesting that this is the first mention of it since it's the first legitimately wtf opinion I had on a prospect you've mentioned. No clue what happened there, but I do remember having a short stretch late in the offseason where I liked McKinney more than usual - I guess that was it and I got cute.

 

Can you believe how far away we are from actually discussing Martinez's season? In that sense, well played sir

Yeah, I'll take conversations on long tangents if someone goes along with me for a while. It was a Sunday of looking up prospect stuff, so the discussion on sample size and recent performance was more interesting to me than discussing EJM specifically. So thanks for going along with me, it was fun to type out a bunch of words that nobody is reading anymore.

 

Also, I didn't mean to impugn your reputation as a prospect evaluator, just wanted to use some other guys as examples for how drastically I can change my prospect rankings based on recent performance, and Contreras was one of those guys who had huge pop up performance. Edwards might not have fit as well. I think you've got some good insights and a lot of your guys are outperforming expectations (Happ, Caritini, Candelario, Jimenez, Kellogg, Alamo, Hanneman, many other young guys that you have the bead on before others but who I can't think of now). Also this Sepulveda cat that I had no idea who he was but who you scooped CT on. You know your horsefeathers.

 

But you know, I was bored and wanted to type out a bunch of words about how I pick out my prospects. Thanks again for the convo, looking forward to what you whip up with the graphs you've been talking about on Tim's ranking thing!