craig

Longenhagens has Hartshorn with "average" power. That's the hinge evaluation. Premise of average power for a corner/1B guy, it's not logical for Longenhagen to rank him high. How highly he will be ranked by others, and how good he will eventually be, that all hinges on the power. Some of the recent HR's, they seem like above average power to my amateur eye. Guessing some other scouts will evaluate the power more favorably, and Longenhagen may boost his power score in due time.

I don't know anything. But my sense is that Hartshorn has a better chance of being an every-day RF than Rojas has of being an every-day SS. Two very good prospects. Keep hitting, both of you!

9 days ago Ayers was hitting .196. Man, he's been hot. In 8 June games, prior to game 2, he's got 7 doubles, 3 HR, 5 walks, 17 hits. Hot!

Rojas also tripled. OPS up to .843.

Terrific to have Rojas bouncing back. Hope he can extend the hot streak for a while, and keep stacking, before he cools off.

At the moment, I'm glad he wasn't promoted. He's had hots and colds at South Bend, and we can see it's the guy, not the level. *IF* we had hypothetically promoted him when he touched up over .300 and over .900 OPS for a day or two, and then he'd had the same slump in AA that he's had at South Bend, I'd have been falsely saying "Oh, he can't handle AA, he was just an A-ball fraud." But now instead I can more clearly see that his freeze is a slump, it's him, not the level.

Blue team was 3 for 7 in stolen base attempts. Kinda crazy, I'd think DSL pitchers would have no moved, DSL catchers would be raw, and slender 17-year-old guys would be fast and quick.

The DSL teams, they seem to have revised a lot. All five of those starting pitchers in previous post, they are all short (and cheap). Think all five are in the 5'10"-6'0" range, $10K or unlisted. I know at least one was listed as an OF when he signed. We've already seen with the position signings, they spread the $$ around more on those. Ciriaco and Geraldo at 6'1" are the only ones over 6'0", and most a bit shorter, so looking for length is no longer a priority. (I may be forgetting somebody.). The DSL teams, they are mostly going with young, inexperienced guys. In recent past, I thought they often had guys in the 19-21 range playing, sometimes in their 3rd year in DSL. This year most of the guys starting, both position and pitching, seem to be DSL rookies. Plus it seems most of the starting pitchers have been going right out and giving 3-inning starts, I thought last year they'd often not start even that long. That could be a pattern, or maybe they just have some guys who can throw strikes, so can get 3 innings in under their pitch counts, beats me. But yeah, just seems shorter, younger, more rookie-oriented this year.

F Cruz with a 4K day, just to make sure I don't get confused with some hopes up.

Cal, appreciate listing the money guys and the young guys. Helps to be able process a box score. Having signed a lot of dollar guys but without really big tickets, it's hard to remember who was more likely to be interesting. So yeah, really nice for you to include the bonus and the young guys. I'm kinda used to our dollar guys being K-kinds and struggling in DSL. Fun to see the interesting guys get off to quick starts.

So, we've got 3 pitching prospects in AZ? Yander Maria, 6'4", was a $200K signee, 19. 93-96. Used always as a starter in 2024 and effective (if wild). Missed 2025, but back. Walks have been a challenge, but last 6 innings not. Jubrayker Salaya, 6'2", 19. Averaged 94.6, good stuff, has touched 95.9 yesterday and 97 on another occassion. Normally super wild, walks have been a challenge, but had a 0-walk outing yesterday. Emilio Ramos, 6'2", 20, was good in 2024 but missed 25. Averaging 93.1, but touched 95.6. Not a wildman. Recognized by BA. Average mlb velocity for big-leaguer RHP is 94-95, so these guys already sound average or close, and might be young enough to add a little more. Would be so fun to actually produce some big-league pitching through the international path. We've had some velocity guys who were hopelessly wild and never did anything. But man would it be fun to actually have some real-stuff real-prospect guys.

Missed last year, do we know why? Lists 6'4". Was $200K signing back in the F Cruz year, so not small for a pitcher.

Thanks, Cal! Had forgotten that Ramos is interesting! 20K/3BB in AZ is pretty unusual, very fun. He had a sub-2 ERA two years ago, in DSL. Do you know what happened to him last year? TJ, or something less, maybe? Even with the missed season, he's still 20, so there may be some projection still left ahead? salaya getting through two innings without a walk, that's also encouraging. Fernando "K" Cruz, last 7 Gms: 12-36, 4 BB, 7 K. When a guy can't hit, he usually never can. But it would be fun if he somehow learned to hit enough to become somewhat interesting?

Long is down into the .600's OPS. Not a good season for him. Lovich with another HR, 3 hits thus far. Got his average up into .230's.

0-5, 4K debut.

Lovich's K-rate is as bad as last year (very bad), and his average as low. But his slug is way up. Would love to see him show a bunch more progress over the remaining couple of months.

The article about the complex league was interesting. In younger days, I recall when Latin players listed super young when they hit the majors. Still variably true: Moises and Pedro are both 22. But maybe the age-curve for Latin players isn't as extreme, without bogus birthdays and with few actual baseball games played in Latin countries for teenagers. Cubs seem to be one of the teams that prioritizes teaching and intrasquad for Mesa guys. Different, yes; not sure it's bad, though, or worse for development? The urgency for velocity over control, that's the game. When we get buzz reports on Jabrayker Salaya, it's not because he's been a good pitcher. 12.15 ERA, 6 walks in 6.2 innings, 2.1 WHIP. It's because he's got velocity and wildman stuff that he can't control yet. That's the modern prospect game, that's not going to change. *IF* they want to recapture complex league of past, sure they could expand the rosters and allow an extra 10 undrafted college pitchers to throw more strikes. That could be helpful, I'd be fine with that. I don't imagine the costs for adding an extra five bedrooms to the complex dorms and feeding 10 extra college pitchers would be any big deal cost-wise. Can do that for .2% of a Bregman, or whatever. With all the pitch-lab opties for college pitchers, I don't have much problem with American kids largely going to college. I suspect that a lot of human development and growing up can happen in college, perhaps as well or better than in a complex dorm? Most HS players aren't going to become major leaguers, do college may better prepare them for a non-big-league life. There are HS guys who go pro, Hartshorn, Wing, Franklin, Ronny Southisene, Cruz, Lovich, Rosario, Hope. Not sure the volume is that much lower than a few years back. Perhaps for some pitchers, college is as good a developmental route? In college, development is valued big-time, but so too is winning. Maybe the value of throwing a strike is developed as well or better in college than in the complex?

Maria without walks could be very interesting.

Kepley up to .313/.494/.443/.937, with 23/24 SB. BABIP at ~.370.

3 more SB for Kepley through 6. 22/1 SB/CS, that's a useful ratio.

Thanks for that McGwire clip. That was was very impressive, lots of varying movement. Wasn't just overpowering guys.

On Kepley, I think the BABIP will be really important. BABIP, like all hitting numbers, is lower with 2 strikes than with none or one. As a line-drive contact guy with speed, one might think he could support a good BABIP. As a guy facing an inordinate ratio of 2-strike counts, his BABIP could be relatively low. Likewise the K-rate will be really important. He can be a nice contact guy, but putting yourself into 2-strike counts, better pitchers should K him more and more. Just to play with some numbers. BABIP .300; K 20% of AB (for my math, I'm doing it relative to AB, not PA); 0 HR => BA .240. Supposed 75 BB/HBP vs 500AB => .339 OBP. BABIP .300; K 15% of AB; 0 HR => BA .255. BABIP .280; K 20% of AB; 0 HR => BA .224. BABIP .320, K 15% of AB; 5 HR (in 500 AB) => .282 BA. Suppose 75 BB/HBP vs 500AB => .376 OBP. I'm just tinkering around for my own fun. But it's a reminder that stats can swing a LOT on BABIP, K-rate, and even a few HRs.

It's kinda funny having Mathis and Kepley both getting referenced. I haven't tracked that discussion, I guess, so don't know where you guys are going with that. Such contrasting guys, a big DH/1B HR-slugger and a short speed/defense no-HR guy, they don't seem in the same world. Both share 2nd-round. I guess the commonality between Mathis, Kepley, and Hartshorn is the deep-count, take-strikes, walk-oriented approach. So I guess some of the same questions, both developmental and strategic, apply. Strategically, do the extra walks and the selective hitting outweigh the consequences of facing more 2-strike counts? Developmentally, is swinging at pitches I like best developmentally, or should I practice hitting strikes I don't like, because that's what big-league pitchers will mostly try to throw?

Bertz, I'm not sure about the "too passive" stuff, think your points are VERY well taken. Couple thoughts: Passive: If "passive" is just an approach pejorative, I agree that's meaningless. Guy has barely 200 A-ball AB's, the easiest developmental adjustment in the game is to swing more, swing earlier. "I'll plan to swing at the first pitch if it's a strike today" is the simplest adjustment in the game, *if* doing so would actually be to his advantage. "Passive" = holes? For Longenhagen, "passive" may be code for "holes in strike zone?" The scouting concern isn't the swing frequency, it's the concern that he takes so many strikes because there are too many sectors that he can't handle. It's that his existing swing can't effectively hit enough of the strike zone; so he's taking lots of strikes because he doesn't have the ability to hit those strikes. The scouting/projection concerns may be the perceived holes in his strike zone which cause so many takes? Developmental: Maybe if he was more aggressive, he'd get better developmental practice hitting pitches that aren't in his best sectors? Which could hypothetically pay off at higher levels, such as the National League? *IF* he's got too many holes, perhaps developmentally he'd be well served to still practice hitting those and covering those, even if for now that may not help his stats? 2-strike hitting: Not many guys have great slug on 2-strike pitches. As excellent as are his current hitting numbers, might they be even better if he was smashing more first-pitch strikes? Maybe not taking so many strikes, would result in: decline in walks and K's; increase in BABIP, BA, HR's, and slug? As good as slug is, might it get even higher? Guess-hitting: Most big-league sluggers do some guess-hitting, and sometimes guess wrong. Maybe doing more intelligent guess-hitting might boost HR even if it came at the expense of a higher swing-strike %? I'm not arguing so, I have no idea. Just trying to think and process thoughts! :):)