27 minutes ago, Rolle Tide said:

How is it outdated? It was the fall rankings and the spring games haven’t started yet. I’m not a professional scout or service and neither is anyone here.

Because it’s from early August…do I need you to provide the article that Jonathan Mayo wrote up when the list was published?

7 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I have thought of this, but I think his profile is more likely hold a bit longer than one based on defense / range / speed.

IMO Kjerstad ends up a bat first COF, 1B, or DH. He’s rated at 45 speed by MLB and didn’t look overly impressive in limited. Since we are talking prospects discussed here, Cowser didn’t look great in the OF and I think he has 0 chance to play CF regularly in the bigs.

27 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

@Rolle Tide - You just “laughed” at the managing editor of our Future Sox prospect website, who is basically the equivalent of Tony over at the Hangout.  To mock a post where he’s simply sharing his opinion is absolutely obnoxious.

He’s clearly biased to the White Sox….I don’t know your posters here so if I’ve hurt anyone’s ego that wasn’t my intent. I’m not even saying that Schulz won’t be a better prospect or even MLB player. He just isn’t now ….. He’s a 20 years old kid in A ball. So theres much risk …injuries, falling short of expectations….s%*# happens. Ortiz is ready and there is a pretty high floor. Is there risk? Sure but not nearly as much.

Updated packages I would be willing to accept:

• NYY: Domínguez (OF), Hampton (RHP), Lombard (SS)
• NYM: Williams (SS), Clifford (OF), Tidwell (RHP)
• BAL: Mayo (3B/OF), Kjerstad (OF), McDermott (RHP) 

9 minutes ago, Rolle Tide said:

He’s clearly biased to the White Sox….I don’t know your posters here so if I’ve hurt anyone’s ego that wasn’t my intent. I’m not even saying that Schulz won’t be a better prospect or even MLB player. He just isn’t now ….. He’s a 20 years old kid in A ball. So theres much risk …injuries, falling short of expectations….s%*# happens. Ortiz is ready and there is a pretty high floor. Is there risk? Sure but not nearly as much.

Basallo barely had a cup of coffee in AA so he’s clearly riskier than the much more seasoned Ortiz. With that in mind, how about we make him the second piece in the Orioles trade package instead of Ortiz?

I understand it’s bleacher report, but check out where Ortiz, Quero, and Shultz are ranked

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/10103552-updated-top-100-mlb-prospects-at-the-start-of-2024.amp.html

23 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Schultz is literally ranked 61…but please keep the digs coming!

Well, that does support the view that Ortiz > Schultz, though there’s not a big difference between 50 and 61:   It’s kind of an apples and oranges comparison anyway and if WS fans would rather have Schultz than Ortiz I’m not going to argue with them, given the needs of the franchise.  The statement a few pages back that all 30 GMs would take Schultz over Ortiz is highly debatable though.  

A site I like, justbaseball.com, has Ortiz 45 and Schultz 49 (Montgomery is 14 BTW).   https://www.justbaseball.com/prospects/mlb-top-100-prospects-2023/  That’s a postseason list.  

17 minutes ago, Rolle Tide said:

He’s clearly biased to the White Sox….I don’t know your posters here so if I’ve hurt anyone’s ego that wasn’t my intent. I’m not even saying that Schulz won’t be a better prospect or even MLB player. He just isn’t now ….. He’s a 20 years old kid in A ball. So theres much risk …injuries, falling short of expectations….s%*# happens. Ortiz is ready and there is a pretty high floor. Is there risk? Sure but not nearly as much.

This has nothing to do with “ego”.  I’m sure James could give two shits that you laughed at his post.  It’s more that it’s absolutely clownish you called a guy who runs a website & podcast centered around minor league baseball and the draft “biased” because he doesn’t agree with your simplistic take anchored to one set of outdated prospect rankings.  And your obsession to published rankings that you still can’t explain how the underlying logic works is wild to me.  Don’t get me wrong, they are a great reference point to understand directional value but without any context it’s straight dumb to say one 50 FV prospect is better than another 50 FV prospect.  Everyone has different risk-reward tolerances, so yeah some people would value the still developing 21 year old catcher with room for growth over the soon to be 26 year old physically maxed out SS prospect.

11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Well, that does support the view that Ortiz > Schultz, though there’s not a big difference between 50 and 61:   It’s kind of an apples and oranges comparison anyway and if WS fans would rather have Schultz than Ortiz I’m not going to argue with them, given the needs of the franchise.  The statement a few pages back that all 30 GMs would take Schultz over Ortiz is highly debatable though.  

A site I like, justbaseball.com, has Ortiz 45 and Schultz 49 (Montgomery is 14 BTW).   https://www.justbaseball.com/prospects/mlb-top-100-prospects-2023/  That’s a postseason list.  

Yeah, every GM in baseball would take the 20 year old LHP with TOR potential over the 25 year old middle infielder prospect.  

Just now, fathom said:

Yeah, every GM in baseball would take the 20 year old LHP with TOR potential over the 25 year old middle infielder prospect.  

But can the LHP perform on a cold, rainy night in Norfolk?

1 hour ago, Rolle Tide said:

Just another worthless biased post

Thank goodness we have your objective evaluations ?

13 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

This has nothing to do with “ego”.  I’m sure James could give two shits that you laughed at his post.  It’s more that it’s absolutely clownish you called a guy who runs a website & podcast centered around minor league baseball and the draft “biased” because he doesn’t agree with your simplistic take anchored to one set of outdated prospect rankings.  And your obsession to published rankings that you still can’t explain how the underlying logic works is wild to me.  Don’t get me wrong, they are a great reference point to understand directional value but without any context it’s straight dumb to say one 50 FV prospect is better than another 50 FV prospect.  Everyone has different risk-reward tolerances, so yeah some people would value the still developing 21 year old catcher with room for growth over the soon to be 26 year old physically maxed out SS prospect.

You don’t really need to go this deep into it.
 

Bottom line is a bunch of O’s posters felt the need to sign up here, do whatever it is they were motivated to do, and report back and snicker about it on their board. 
 

But that isn’t going both ways. 
 

Honestly, I think that’s all that needs to be said. 

Edited January 6, 20242 yr by Sox72

4 minutes ago, SkokieSox said:

Thank goodness we have your objective evaluations ?

skokieSox, i may actually have to go to skokie today. i have a ripped pair of jeans i need to replace

53 minutes ago, Rolle Tide said:

Ok the White Sox land is great …. Great team talent …Great Farm….Great Leadership. Our farm system is ranked #1 just about everywhere. That’s after graduating Westburg, Rutschman, Henderson, Bradish, Kremer, Hall….should I keep going? 

You can’t possibly think that’s how any of us feel, right? No one hates the Sox more than Sox fans.

49 minutes ago, Rolle Tide said:

He’s clearly biased to the White Sox….I don’t know your posters here so if I’ve hurt anyone’s ego that wasn’t my intent. I’m not even saying that Schulz won’t be a better prospect or even MLB player. He just isn’t now ….. He’s a 20 years old kid in A ball. So theres much risk …injuries, falling short of expectations….s%*# happens. Ortiz is ready and there is a pretty high floor. Is there risk? Sure but not nearly as much.

You’re not hurting anyone’s feelings. It’s just that lack of self awareness is a sign of narcissism. This gets further demonstrated by suggesting other opinions are ridiculous and that your opinions are fact. 

Edited January 6, 20242 yr by SkokieSox

1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

He was 5th overall in Stuff+ amongst qualified starters last year and 13th out of 127 pitchers with at least 100 innings.  His fastball still ranked as the 8th best in Stuff+ despite the “massive” velocity drop.

It was really just the decline in his slider that hurt him.  And what’s fascinating is the spin rate on his slider (including the active rate) were very consistent year over year.  It’s simply the shape of it that changed, which could be explained by mechanical issues impacting his release point.  But the key here is this isn’t a Lucas Giolito situation where access to the sticky stuff goes away and the spin rates plummet…this 100% feels mechanical to me.  Regardless, the slider was still very effective last year (hence the league leading swords) despite a less impactful shape to it.  I think modern front offices are salivating to get their hands on him and get back to legit TOR form

You don’t read this and think that the thing they’re salivating about is getting their own Gerrit Cole to the Astros deal, getting a starter they can unlock without paying a big prospect price?

28 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Well, that does support the view that Ortiz > Schultz, though there’s not a big difference between 50 and 61:   It’s kind of an apples and oranges comparison anyway and if WS fans would rather have Schultz than Ortiz I’m not going to argue with them, given the needs of the franchise.  The statement a few pages back that all 30 GMs would take Schultz over Ortiz is highly debatable though.  

A site I like, justbaseball.com, has Ortiz 45 and Schultz 49 (Montgomery is 14 BTW).   https://www.justbaseball.com/prospects/mlb-top-100-prospects-2023/  That’s a postseason list.  

This also comes down to opinion. Ortiz is more ready to contribute with a higher floor. Schultz has higher risk, but far greater value if he hits. Dealers choice. 

9 minutes ago, Fielder Jones said:

skokieSox, i may actually have to go to skokie today. i have a ripped pair of jeans i need to replace

And they can only be replaced in Skokie? They must be some pair of jeans!

10 minutes ago, Fielder Jones said:

skokieSox, i may actually have to go to skokie today. i have a ripped pair of jeans i need to replace

Old Orchard mall, good luck ? 

Has anyone even watched highlights of Ortiz?  I couldn’t be more out on him, as he gives me terrifying Madrigal flashbacks.

 

1 hour ago, Rolle Tide said:

Ok the White Sox land is great …. Great team talent …Great Farm….Great Leadership. Our farm system is ranked #1 just about everywhere. That’s after graduating Westburg, Rutschman, Henderson, Bradish, Kremer, Hall….should I keep going? 

And all they have to show for it at this point is a cocky fanbase, a first round sweep exit in the playoffs and a current rotation that will have them middle of the pack at best in the east. Congrats!  

50 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Updated packages I would be willing to accept:

• NYY: Domínguez (OF), Hampton (RHP), Lombard (SS)
• NYM: Williams (SS), Clifford (OF), Tidwell (RHP)
• BAL: Mayo (3B/OF), Kjerstad (OF), McDermott (RHP) 

Mets seems far worse than the other two

44 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Well, that does support the view that Ortiz > Schultz, though there’s not a big difference between 50 and 61:   It’s kind of an apples and oranges comparison anyway and if WS fans would rather have Schultz than Ortiz I’m not going to argue with them, given the needs of the franchise.  The statement a few pages back that all 30 GMs would take Schultz over Ortiz is highly debatable though.  

A site I like, justbaseball.com, has Ortiz 45 and Schultz 49 (Montgomery is 14 BTW).   https://www.justbaseball.com/prospects/mlb-top-100-prospects-2023/  That’s a postseason list.  

It’s an outdated list. When they update it Schultz will be higher

4 minutes ago, fathom said:

Has anyone even watched highlights of Ortiz?  I couldn’t be more out on him, as he gives me terrifying Madrigal flashbacks.

Which illustrates a fundamental difference as we argue over the value of some of these prospects.

We’re scarred by poor development and failed prospects, while O’s fans are wearing rose colored glasses with their Adley and Gunnar jerseys.

I get the thinking on both sides.

38 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

This has nothing to do with “ego”.  I’m sure James could give two shits that you laughed at his post.  It’s more that it’s absolutely clownish you called a guy who runs a website & podcast centered around minor league baseball and the draft “biased” because he doesn’t agree with your simplistic take anchored to one set of outdated prospect rankings.  And your obsession to published rankings that you still can’t explain how the underlying logic works is wild to me.  Don’t get me wrong, they are a great reference point to understand directional value but without any context it’s straight dumb to say one 50 FV prospect is better than another 50 FV prospect.  Everyone has different risk-reward tolerances, so yeah some people would value the still developing 21 year old catcher with room for growth over the soon to be 26 year old physically maxed out SS prospect.

There great until their take doesn’t match your position….got it . Don’t care about websites or podcasts. Anyone with a little money, computer knowledge, and time can have either/both. And they aren’t outdated until a new one is published. If they publish a new one before games are played I’d are you that the current one is more accurate. If no baseball is being played why would they need to update it ….. except for internet clicks ….and people wouldn’t be happy if the updated list is a dupe. 
 

that said Ortiz only loses value if he is in the minors come April or not given a chance to prove himself. The value of his prospect status likely can only go down.