2022-2023 Offseason Top Prospects List

[pitchcs]

Little had an excellent 2022?

 

Luke, not Brendon

 

If the question still stands then 65 homerless innings making starts with a 36% K rate and 54% GBs from a 4th round pick out of a JC could be going much worse

 

Ahhh

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

1. PCA

2. Davis

3. Alcántara

4. Mervis

5. Horton

6. Brown

7. Hernández

8. Wesneski

9. Amaya

10. Kilian

 

No Jordan Wicks in the top 10

 

BA’s Cubs top 10 podcast: https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/2023-cubs-top-10-prospects-podcast/

 

Some notes:

 

• Cade Horton was one of the most popular guys MLB scouts kept saying they should bump into their top 100. Probably will crack their top 100 really soon. Thought he’d definitely go in the next few picks if the Cubs didn’t pick him at 7 and Pontes was flummoxed Cubs fans hated the pick, even if there were more famous potential picks available (Pontes wisely should continue to avoid a majority of this fanbase).
  
• On Wesneski, think he’s a 4/5 guy which is why he didn’t get top 100 consideration (and yet Liberatore is firmly in their top 100???)
  
• Cristian Hernández still has the talent and athleticism and is very young so don’t fret on his middling complex league stats. Because BA *loves* comparing Hernández to future-HOFers, they noted Miguel Cabrera looked the part in the GCL while posting bad stats.
  
• Felt like the top 8 guys were locked in but the next 2 could easily fall off (wild that anyone thinks Kilian belongs in the top 10). Wicks, Caissie and Hodge are guys outside the top 10 who could break into the top 10 soon. Other teams asked about Hodge in trades. It continues to be funny seeing a disconnect between BA and Kiley with regards to Wicks’ stuff.
  
• Said the average team takes 4 years from teardown to make the playoffs and Glaser thinks the Cubs make the playoffs ahead of that schedule by next year, partly because this isn’t a complete teardown/rebuild and partly because 3 other teams in the division aren’t really trying.

[Bertz]

 

1. PCA

2. Davis

3. Alcántara

4. Mervis

5. Horton

6. Brown

7. Hernández

8. Wesneski

9. Amaya

10. Kilian

 

No Jordan Wicks in the top 10

 

BA’s Cubs top 10 podcast: https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/2023-cubs-top-10-prospects-podcast/

 

Some notes:

 

• Cade Horton was one of the most popular guys MLB scouts kept saying they should bump into their top 100. Probably will crack their top 100 really soon. Thought he’d definitely go in the next few picks if the Cubs didn’t pick him at 7 and Pontes was flummoxed Cubs fans hated the pick, even if there were more famous potential picks available (Pontes wisely should continue to avoid a majority of this fanbase).
  
• On Wesneski, think he’s a 4/5 guy which is why he didn’t get top 100 consideration (and yet Liberatore is firmly in their top 100???)
  
• Cristian Hernández still has the talent and athleticism and is very young so don’t fret on his middling complex league stats. Because BA *loves* comparing Hernández to future-HOFers, they noted Miguel Cabrera looked the part in the GCL while posting bad stats.
  
• Felt like the top 8 guys were locked in but the next 2 could easily fall off (wild that anyone thinks Kilian belongs in the top 10). Wicks, Caissie and Hodge are guys outside the top 10 who could break into the top 10 soon. Other teams asked about Hodge in trades. It continues to be funny seeing a disconnect between BA and Kiley with regards to Wicks’ stuff.
  
• Said the average team takes 4 years from teardown to make the playoffs and Glaser thinks the Cubs make the playoffs ahead of that schedule by next year, partly because this isn’t a complete teardown/rebuild and partly because 3 other teams in the division aren’t really trying.

 

I feel like the Wicks disconnect is mostly about data literacy. A 92 MPH fastball on its face is, even from a lefty, back of the rotation material. But Wicks' fastball is pretty stellar from a spin/shape standpoint, as evidenced by the 128 Stuff+ grade as sourced by Lance Brozdowski.

 

To your point earlier, BA's just not the home to all the best and brightest doing this like it used to be.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I may be a simpleton, but for me the guy who is better at getting Ks, and better at avoiding walks, HRs, hits, and runs while at AAA, and then was excellent in MLB in a short stint instead of horrible, might be a better prospect than the guy whose fastball maybe touches a bit faster and showed up higher in prospect rankings as an upside HS draftee before not having strong MiLB performance in the last 5 years once he left rookie ball.

[Named After Maddux]

Hard disagree that Libertore is a better prospect than Wesneski. Libertore has pedigree, sure, but are any of the underlying metrics encouraging? I'd argue no and he's not worthy of being a Top 100 prospect anymore. Libertore was 22 in AAA and that's solid, but he wasn't successful. He only put up a 15.2% K-BB% and that is not ideal. For reference, DJ Herz put up a 17% K-BB% at age 21 in HiA and AA with comparable GB%. They also shared a similar peak FB velocity of 97 and sat much lower at 93 mph.

Wesneski is older, but neither prospect fits the classic projection model that would make it likely that there are significant velocity gains.

If BA wants to lump Liberatore and Wesneski in the same boat, that's fine and I can get that argument, but there's very little about Liberatore's profile that makes me think he's a top 100 prospect.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I may be a simpleton, but for me the guy who is better at getting Ks, and better at avoiding walks, HRs, hits, and runs while at AAA, and then was excellent in MLB in a short stint instead of horrible, might be a better prospect than the guy whose fastball maybe touches a bit faster and showed up higher in prospect rankings as an upside HS draftee before not having strong MiLB performance in the last 5 years once he left rookie ball.

 

Thaaaat...does actually strike me as kind of a simple approach, yes. This off of knowing Wesneski exists for what...6 months now? Surely there's much more information available than vacuum sealed AAA and 33 inning MLB lines with no further analysis. Heck just quick glancing, Wesneski wasn't even K'ing more at the level at the TDL end of July and their respective AAA walk rates in 2022 can both be rounded to 8%. I'd also love to hear what wasn't strong about Liberatore's 2019 in A ball at 19. Is it K's? I submit that's boring, which seems obvious given he jumped 2+ levels after the pandemic, playing a level of ball Wesneski wouldn't reach until the age Liberatore will be in 2023, and increased the Ks

 

re: Liberatore's 2019, a Low-A K/9 under 9 with a BB% of nearly 10(combined which make the worst K%-BB% of his career) doesn't strike me as particularly excellent, but it's maybe more telling that the nitpick is about his performance from 4 years ago.

 

Liberatore since the pandemic year does not prevent runs, does not miss bats at a high rate, does not throw enough strikes to have a good walk rate, gives up HR at a problematic clip, and on the whole gives up a high enough BABIP that we can't infer he's much at contact management either. He didn't get better as the year went along or finish strong, didn't have better performance when shoved into relief, and generally does not show any signs that he's on the cusp of being an effective MLB pitcher. Fangraphs described him as a 'pitchability 4th starter prospect' with unremarkable FB qualities *before* he underwhelmed this year with peripherals that scream 'high level hitters rip my fastball', so there's not consensus that he's one tweak from having plus MLB stuff either. Setting the Wesneski comparison aside, he doesn't belong on a Top 100 list.

 

But to continue that comparison, Wesneski actually has succeeded at the job of a pitcher at high levels, showed some reason for belief in his future trajectory with an uptick in a new organization, including pitching excellently at the MLB level in the same sample where Liberatore failed, and doesn't have a meaningful delta in terms of stuff(e.g. we're not talking about some old-for-level 90 mph guy catching 3 weeks of good command). I don't need Wesneski to show up at a particular spot on a prospect list and understand the limitations on his ceiling, but it's more than fair to wonder where the logic is coming from that leaves him off while someone like Liberatore has their name in pen.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

Cubs are 11:

 

11. Chicago Cubs ($220.5 million)

 

Last year: 19th, 182.5 million

 

Top-100 prospects: 3

 

The Cubs seem to have turned the corner in their rebuild and are now left with the hard part: bridging the gap with the Cardinals at the top of the NL Central. Chicago has improved the big league team this winter and the farm system has notably improved over the last year.

 

Lefty Jordan Wicks and center fielder Pete Crow-Armstrong both took big steps forward and the Cubs added a couple of prospects who now rank in the top 10 of their system in first-round pick Cade Horton and Hayden Wesneski, who came over from the Yankees at the deadline. The entire top tier of the system either held serve or improved, which was crucial with so many young high-variance hitters in the low minors.

 

I don't think the Cubs will return to the playoffs in 2023, but I see a path to the farm system helping create a postseason contender in 2024.

 

1. Baltimore

2. Arizona

3. Cleveland

4. NY Yankees

5. Cincinnati (who Keith Law had as the worst in the NLC)

6. LA Dodgers

7. Tampa

8. Texas

9. Pittsburgh

10. St. Louis

11. Cubs

15. Milwaukee

[Bertz]

http://pitchingapp.pitchingbot.com/

 

Wesneski right this second has three plus pitches including a plus plus slider. He also has plus command, and in a small sample at MLB absolutely DOMINATED. He's among the very safest bets in current prospectdom to be a good mid-rotation starter

 

The arguments against him are his fairly middling numbers pre-trade (so the projections haven't bought in yet), and that his fastball kind of sucks (ironically its a reverse Wicks situation where its good velo belies crummy other characteristics). So like he's going to be better than several guys who are making these Top 100 lists, but I do get why writers are hesitant to anoint a guy that can't really lean on his four seamer for success.

[Named After Maddux]

Hard disagree that Libertore is a better prospect than Wesneski. Libertore has pedigree, sure, but are any of the underlying metrics encouraging? I'd argue no and he's not worthy of being a Top 100 prospect anymore. Libertore was 22 in AAA and that's solid, but he wasn't successful. He only put up a 15.2% K-BB% and that is not ideal. For reference, DJ Herz put up a 17% K-BB% at age 21 in HiA and AA with comparable GB%. They also shared a similar peak FB velocity of 97 and sat much lower at 93 mph.

Wesneski is older, but neither prospect fits the classic projection model that would make it likely that there are significant velocity gains.

If BA wants to lump Liberatore and Wesneski in the same boat, that's fine and I can get that argument, but there's very little about Liberatore's profile that makes me think he's a top 100 prospect.

 

- Velo and spin are very relevant to success, so yes, and that's just his pitches. The velo’s a little less than ideal but not by much and there’s projection

- To be a stickler: 21 and 22 in AAA with no experience above A ball (didn't check to see if he was on the 2020 60)

- 15.2% in a league with a 13% K-BB, ideal or not well above league average

- DJ Herz put up a 6% K-BB at the AA level. At the same age, Liberatore posted a 17% K-BB in AAA over 124.2 IP

- Similar velocity on an arm two years younger seems like advantage Liberatore again. Notably, despite the nominally similar avg and peak velo, Statcast has Wesneski's velo as 25th percentile and Liberatore 48th

- Agreed on the projection models, take it a step further and say a 23 YO with more experience against the same levels of competition is more likely to improve than the 25 YO using pretty much any projection system ever (does anyone here buy Wesneski's 5% BB rate at the ML level? Facing 1100+ MiLB hitters while often being older than the competition it was 2% higher)

- It's probably easiest to argue neither is a top 100 but the one with more top 100 characteristics and traits - all around - is easily Liberatore

 

Worth noting that Liberatore’s velocity and spin don’t stand out. He gets above-average spin on the curve but it’s below average on the fastball. Basically my issue with Liberatore is his fastball sucks (Stuff+ ~88-91) and it is hard to succeed longterm as a starter with a bad fastball. Both his 4s FB and SI are below average. And we have confirmation that they were below average in the minor leagues and the majors. It’s a bad movement pattern with no ride. Also in reports, he’s been asked about this and says he has no interest in changing it. Liberatore’s curve can be a banger. We’ve always known how good that is and the stuff+ models back that up.

If he wants to succeed he can do a few things.

First he could change his movement pattern on the fastball by trying to pronate the ball more on release to get more backspin. But he’s already running a 94% active spin percentage so asking him to increase that more to get more ride on the ball isn’t a simple fix.

He could just throw the ball harder and that gets to your projection point, but until he does that it’s an unknown.

And finally he can jack up the breaking ball usage and drop his fastball to like 20%. That’s his best bet in my opinion.

But all that gets to the fact that we have a 23 year old LHP with below average run in AAA and MLB who throws two below average fastballs. That’s not a Top 100 guy on my opinion.

 

 

If comparing to Wesneski isn’t your flavor, then how about Jordan Wicks?

Wicks in his age 22 season pitched in HiA and AA, but let’s just look at AA. Wicks threw three above average pitches based on velo/movement with his 4s FB (Stuff+ ~120), SL (Stuff+ > 150!), and CH (Stuff + 101). Also I’ve heard there isn’t enough of a sample on this but folks liked his CT as well. That may end up as four above-average pitches, possibly 3 plus pitches. He generated higher K numbers than Liberatore has ever put up at any stage outside of a 27 2/3 inning stint in Rookie ball in 2018. And Wicks has pedigree as a first rounder so it’s not like he’s an unknown. Yet we’ve only seen one Top 100 list rank Wicks despite better stuff. Personally that feels like an omission about Wicks, but it makes BA’s discussion on Liberatore and Wicks lack consistency.

 

So that’s my issue with Liberatore. He’s a guy riding on pedigree who needs location and focusing on his breaking balls to thrive. He has a ton of work to do on his fastball and until he does that it’s hard to see him succeed.

 

Will Wesneski replicate the end of his 2022 season? I don’t think he reaches those heights, but we have MLB data throwing three plus pitches with his SI, SL, and CT. Until Liberatore makes changes I don’t feel confident he can succeed at the MLB level and he’s not a Top 100 guy for me (regardless of what organization he pitches for).

[Tim]

Law put out a Cubs top 20 list: https://theathletic.com/4144343/2023/02/08/cubs-top-20-prospect-farm-system-ranked/

 

It's...full of inaccuracies in the descriptions and weird takes. I honestly thought it was written by Bowden at first even though it says "Keith Law" in the title of the article.

[mul21]

Law put out a Cubs top 20 list: https://theathletic.com/4144343/2023/02/08/cubs-top-20-prospect-farm-system-ranked/

 

It's...full of inaccuracies in the descriptions and weird takes. I honestly thought it was written by Bowden at first even though it says "Keith Law" in the title of the article.

 

The Mervis take is something all right.

[JeffH]

Law put out a Cubs top 20 list: https://theathletic.com/4144343/2023/02/08/cubs-top-20-prospect-farm-system-ranked/

 

It's...full of inaccuracies in the descriptions and weird takes. I honestly thought it was written by Bowden at first even though it says "Keith Law" in the title of the article.

 

That was certainly not up to the usual standards of The Athletic.

[Bertz]

Law put out a Cubs top 20 list: https://theathletic.com/4144343/2023/02/08/cubs-top-20-prospect-farm-system-ranked/

 

It's...full of inaccuracies in the descriptions and weird takes. I honestly thought it was written by Bowden at first even though it says "Keith Law" in the title of the article.

 

I like Keith Law as a dude but it just feels like this isn't his lane anymore. He doesn't have the absurd number of contacts to be an opinion aggregator like Jim Callis, he doesn't have the data savvy of some of the guys like Kiley McDaniel, and doesn't hit the road enough to bring as much 1P perspective on as many guys as someone like Eric Longenhagen.

 

Feels like he should drop the draft and just focus on pro scouting IMO.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Law put out a Cubs top 20 list: https://theathletic.com/4144343/2023/02/08/cubs-top-20-prospect-farm-system-ranked/

 

It's...full of inaccuracies in the descriptions and weird takes. I honestly thought it was written by Bowden at first even though it says "Keith Law" in the title of the article.

 

But hey, Law got everyone worked up on this board and on Cubs Twitter last week when he laughably had the Dodgers as the best farm system in baseball.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

Kiley has 9 Cubs prospects in his top 150:

 

Chicago Cubs

 

11th overall

4th in quality depth (prospects better than 40 FV)

$221 million total value

53 players

 

1. Pete Crow-Armstrong, CF, 55 FV (36th on the Top 100)

2. Jordan Wicks, LHP, 50 FV (51)

3. Kevin Alcantara, CF, 50 FV (77)

4. Cristian Hernandez, SS, 50 FV (113)

5. Hayden Wesneski, RHP, 50 FV (116)

6. Owen Caissie, RF, 50 FV (118)

7. James Triantos, 3B, 50 FV (125)

8. Brennen Davis, CF, 45+ FV (133)

9. Alexander Canario, RF, 45+ FV (146)

10. Cade Horton, RHP, 45 FV

11. Ben Brown, RHP, 45 FV

12. Caleb Kilian, RHP, 45 FV

13. D.J. Herz, LHP, 45 FV

14. Jackson Ferris, LHP, 45 FV

15. Matt Mervis, 1B, 40+ FV

16. Moises Ballesteros, C, 40+ FV

17. Daniel Palencia, RHP, 40+ FV

18. Miguel Amaya, C, 40+ FV

[Bertz]

 

Kiley has 9 Cubs prospects in his top 150:

 

Chicago Cubs

 

11th overall

4th in quality depth (prospects better than 40 FV)

$221 million total value

53 players

 

1. Pete Crow-Armstrong, CF, 55 FV (36th on the Top 100)

2. Jordan Wicks, LHP, 50 FV (51)

3. Kevin Alcantara, CF, 50 FV (77)

4. Cristian Hernandez, SS, 50 FV (113)

5. Hayden Wesneski, RHP, 50 FV (116)

6. Owen Caissie, RF, 50 FV (118)

7. James Triantos, 3B, 50 FV (125)

8. Brennen Davis, CF, 45+ FV (133)

9. Alexander Canario, RF, 45+ FV (146)

10. Cade Horton, RHP, 45 FV

11. Ben Brown, RHP, 45 FV

12. Caleb Kilian, RHP, 45 FV

13. D.J. Herz, LHP, 45 FV

14. Jackson Ferris, LHP, 45 FV

15. Matt Mervis, 1B, 40+ FV

16. Moises Ballesteros, C, 40+ FV

17. Daniel Palencia, RHP, 40+ FV

18. Miguel Amaya, C, 40+ FV

 

Really good list. Even the stuff I'd disagree on (e.g. I'd move Horton/Mervis up a grade and Triantos/Kilian/Herz each down a grade) is imminently reasonable. I feel like there's just far more logical consistency here than Law's or BA's rankings.

[Tryptamine]

 

Kiley has 9 Cubs prospects in his top 150:

 

Chicago Cubs

 

11th overall

4th in quality depth (prospects better than 40 FV)

$221 million total value

53 players

 

1. Pete Crow-Armstrong, CF, 55 FV (36th on the Top 100)

2. Jordan Wicks, LHP, 50 FV (51)

3. Kevin Alcantara, CF, 50 FV (77)

4. Cristian Hernandez, SS, 50 FV (113)

5. Hayden Wesneski, RHP, 50 FV (116)

6. Owen Caissie, RF, 50 FV (118)

7. James Triantos, 3B, 50 FV (125)

8. Brennen Davis, CF, 45+ FV (133)

9. Alexander Canario, RF, 45+ FV (146)

10. Cade Horton, RHP, 45 FV

11. Ben Brown, RHP, 45 FV

12. Caleb Kilian, RHP, 45 FV

13. D.J. Herz, LHP, 45 FV

14. Jackson Ferris, LHP, 45 FV

15. Matt Mervis, 1B, 40+ FV

16. Moises Ballesteros, C, 40+ FV

17. Daniel Palencia, RHP, 40+ FV

18. Miguel Amaya, C, 40+ FV

 

Really good list. Even the stuff I'd disagree on (e.g. I'd move Horton/Mervis up a grade and Triantos/Kilian/Herz each down a grade) is imminently reasonable. I feel like there's just far more logical consistency here than Law's or BA's rankings.

 

As someone who was super high on Triantos going into 2022, I don't see a reasonable way to put him at 50FV and a top125 prospect. The defense is worse than I thought and the bat wasn't quite as advanced as I thought. I just don't see any world in which Davis is a lower ranked prospect than Triantos.

[sneakypower]

yeah consider me bearish on bat-first .400 SLG guys in general, i probably wouldn't try to find a place for someone like that in a top 150

[Transmogrified Tiger]

yeah consider me bearish on bat-first .400 SLG guys in general, i probably wouldn't try to find a place for someone like that in a top 150

 

Different dynamic but I continue to be a little confused by Caissie's helium too. I get the age relative to level comparison, but it seems like no one is really arguing he's an MLB 1B/DH and his bat hasn't looked close to that part yet. Seems like it's way more likely that Davis and/or Canario's injuries didn't actually ruin their careers and they're still strong prospects and should rate higher than the speculative guys like Triantos/Caissie.

[Bertz]

As someone who was super high on Triantos going into 2022, I don't see a reasonable way to put him at 50FV and a top125 prospect. The defense is worse than I thought and the bat wasn't quite as advanced as I thought. I just don't see any world in which Davis is a lower ranked prospect than Triantos.

 

Yeah, I think the arguments for Triantos are age, the fact that hit over power is seen as more likely to blossom than power over hit, and that MB's home park is more pitcher-friendly than FG's wRC+ numbers fully capture. But even acknowledging all of those I feel like he should be at the back of the 45 FV tier.

[craig]

For those not familiar with my/FG's approach, we use [highlight=yellow]empirical[/highlight] prospect values, then add them up and that's your farm system value, in dollars. It's as [highlight=yellow]objective[/highlight] as I could imagine doing this quite subjective thing.

 

I love Kiley's stuff and how detailed and thorough he is. And that he sees good value in a lot of Cubs prospects. But when I see "empirical", I read that to be scientific, measurable, quantifiable, objective, perhaps reproducible. Putting "empirical" in implies data and indisputable evidence. I don't think ANY of that stuff applies to Kiley's lists. If his list comes out different from Longenhagens or whomever, it's not because his is "empirical". Do I trust his judgement and information better than Law, of course. But "empirical" is not really the word for it. It's still subjective scouting-evaluation.

 

Another hesitation I have is that the scouting metric is so tight. Cub-prospects 2-14 are all 50 or 45, all within one grading step. I kinda feel like there should maybe more discrimination and nuance? I get it, I have no idea and neither does Kiley which of guys 2-14 are going to fail and which are going to become productive. So throwing them all into the 50/45 bushels is understandable. But I kinda feel like a wider grading range would be helpful.

[craig]

One surprise to me is how Ballesteros has been appearing in the top-20 in many of these lists. I'd gotten the impression that nobody thinks he can catch, and that he's strictly a DH-type. Maybe his defensive potential is better than I perceive, or the ranking people think that? *IF* they do figure he's going to be a DH, it really speaks to how well they like his swing to keep a DH-wannabe on their top-20's.

 

I love having the DH.

[CubinNY]

One surprise to me is how Ballesteros has been appearing in the top-20 in many of these lists. I'd gotten the impression that nobody thinks he can catch, and that he's strictly a DH-type. Maybe his defensive potential is better than I perceive, or the ranking people think that? *IF* they do figure he's going to be a DH, it really speaks to how well they like his swing to keep a DH-wannabe on their top-20's.

 

I love having the DH.

He has to get his body in better shape or he’s going to be Pablo Sandavol’s size by the time he’s in his mid 20s. Maybe he’s a good enough athlete, but the chances aren’t good. I’m hoping if he stays in Arizona a few off-season they can help him reshape his body.

[Bertz]

One surprise to me is how Ballesteros has been appearing in the top-20 in many of these lists. I'd gotten the impression that nobody thinks he can catch, and that he's strictly a DH-type. Maybe his defensive potential is better than I perceive, or the ranking people think that? *IF* they do figure he's going to be a DH, it really speaks to how well they like his swing to keep a DH-wannabe on their top-20's.

 

I love having the DH.

 

Guys who hit as 18 year olds are just a really big deal. I just pulled a leaderboard from FG, and it looks like since 2011 therer are 52 guys who have had 120+ PAs in a season at Low A with a wRC+ north of 100. Of those 52:

 

- 10 turned into legit stars

- 10 more turned into good players, e.g. Ozzie Albies. A couple of these guys, like Wander Franco, still have a chance to jump up a grade

- 4 ended up as low end MLBers/bench types

- 11 outright busted

- 17 it's still too early to say. Of these, 4 are currently on Top 100 lists

 

So that's something like a 50% hit rate on getting a 1st division player or better? I have Moises at #13 on my personal list, and I'm frankly more worried about having him too low than too high. He's definitely not gonna catch but he's probably gonna mash.

[craig]

Bertz, thanks for that input. I just wonder of those 52 guys you pulled, how many of them were pure DH-only prospects at that age? Certainly Ozzie Albies and Wander Franco were not.

 

Ballesteros is really unique in being so quickly and obviously DH-only. I can't imagine there are many comps for 18-year-old DH-only prospects getting significant prospect love. Obviously if he hits like David Ortiz or Manny Ramirez, he can DH like Ortiz or field badly likely Ramirez. But that remains a somewhat unlikely hitting-quality outcome.