The White Sox had four prospects in Baseball America's Top 100

 

 

45 JOSH FIELDS, 3b, White Sox

This former college quarterback is working out much better for Chicago than Joe Borchard did

Opening Day Age: 24. ETA: 2007

 

55 RYAN SWEENEY, of, White Sox

Has been on the fast track since hitting .367 in big league camp as a 19-year-old

Opening Day Age: 22. ETA: 2007

^^^^^

Sweeney was also labeled as a risk factor

 

56 JOHN DANKS, lhp, White Sox

Quality young pitching is hard to acquire, yet White Sox traded for Danks and Gio Gonzalez this offseason

Opening Day Age: 21. ETA: 2007

 

72 GIO GONZALEZ, lhp, White Sox

The White Sox liked him so much they reacquired him this winter after including him in the Jim Thome deal a year earlier

Opening Day Age: 21. ETA: 2008

 

heres the link

I see Donald Veal is ranked at #52. This saddens me b/c we drafted him out of high school, but couldn't sign him, so he went to college, and now the Cubs have him... The only worse thing would have been if he landed with the Twins or Tigers, but still, it sucks knowing he could've been ours.

Sweeney wasn't labeled as a "Risk Factor." He was listed in an expanded free feature called Risk Factor that examines the best and worst case scenarios for a prospect.

 

Sweeney was compared to Garret Anderson and Sean Burroughs.

I see Chris Young is 12th

 

 

 

7 EVAN LONGORIA, 3b, Devil Rays

Backed up his reputation as the 2006 draft's best pure hitter by batting .315 with 18 homers in his pro debut

Opening Day Age: 21. ETA: 2007

 

Take away the "n" in Evan and you got a #1

I'm fairly surprised Danks is that low. He was 59th in the 2006 edition, which means he only jumped a couple spots despite moving a year closer to the big leagues. BA must have soured on him somewhat.

Edited March 1, 200719 yr by Balta1701

I'm fairly surprised Danks is that low. He was 59th in the 2006 edition, which means he only jumped a couple spots despite moving a year closer to the big leagues. BA must have soured on him somewhat.

Or the development of 55 players exceeded that of Danks.

 

Looking over his statistics, I would hardly be overwhelmed without knowledge of his age compared to pitchers within the league, or adjustments made within various level (A,AA).

 

Hopefully, our advanced scouts have absolute certaintly he'll be equal or greater than McCarthy.......

Is four out of a total of 100 very good?

Is four out of a total of 100 very good?

30 teams. Divide 100 by 30, and each team should have on average just under 4 people on that list, if they were evenly distributed. So I'd say the Sox are slightly above average in terms of total number...but given that all of the guys the Sox have on there are below rank 45, i'd say our average rank isn't very good.

Is four out of a total of 100 very good?

 

8 Rockies

7 Devil Rays

6 Diamondbacks

5 Red Sox, Yankees

4 Braves, Dodgers, Indians, Mets, Reds, Twins, White Sox

3 Angels, Astros, Athletics, Brewers, Cubs, Mariners, Marlins, Orioles, Pirates, Royals

2 Blue Jays, Cardinals, Giants, Tigers

1 Nationals, Phillies, Rangers

0 Padres

Poor Padres.

Poor Padres.

Kouzmanoff should be on there for sure and I'd take Carrillo over several of the pitchers at the bottom of their list.

I see Chris Young is 12th

I love their analysis.

White Sox fans still can't believe their club traded his 30-30 potential to get Javier Vazquez

 

Hopefully within the next several seasons someone will say this about a prospect Williams obtained over the offseason.

Or the development of 55 players exceeded that of Danks.

 

Looking over his statistics, I would hardly be overwhelmed without knowledge of his age compared to pitchers within the league, or adjustments made within various level (A,AA).

 

Hopefully, our advanced scouts have absolute certaintly he'll be equal or greater than McCarthy.......

 

So a player in Sweeney who hasn't put up staggering numbers and hasn't really hit well outside of the hitter's paradise known as Charlotte is being rated ahead of a pitcher who has adjusted to each level at an astonishing rate?

 

I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but as I recall, Danks put up a 2.50-3.00 ERA after a few starts in AA. He may never be more than Cliff Lee, but Cliff Lee is pretty damn good.

So a player in Sweeney who hasn't put up staggering numbers and hasn't really hit well outside of the hitter's paradise known as Charlotte is being rated ahead of a pitcher who has adjusted to each level at an astonishing rate?

 

I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but as I recall, Danks put up a 2.50-3.00 ERA after a few starts in AA. He may never be more than Cliff Lee, but Cliff Lee is pretty damn good.

At a certain point, there's probably a fair amount of similarities among players and they're merely plugging names into slots. Perhaps reputation and/or scouting reports, as well as statistics, factor in. Remember, how often have we heard articles which suggest scouts love his swing?

 

I don't know exactly how much time Baseball America puts into these rankings. Or how they judge the difference between #30 and #55. Even though I suggested 55 people might have shown more progress than Danks, it was more a theory than something I personally believe.

At a certain point, there's probably a fair amount of similarities among players and they're merely plugging names into slots. Perhaps reputation and/or scouting reports, as well as statistics, factor in. Remember, how often have we heard articles which suggest scouts love his swing?

 

I don't know exactly how much time Baseball America puts into these rankings. Or how they judge the difference between #30 and #55. Even though I suggested 55 people might have shown more progress than Danks, it was more a theory than something I personally believe.

 

BA is traditionally very toolsy and Danks doesn't have great stuff. Someone with a fastball that sits around 90 MPH isn't going to get rated that highly by them, I think. Also, they may be using the fact that the Sox traded for him as a strike against him (i.e. if the Sox scouts think he's good, he probably isn't )

 

Scouts still like Sweeney, and BA seems to veer more towards scouting rather than stats.

BA is traditionally very toolsy and Danks doesn't have great stuff. Someone with a fastball that sits around 90 MPH isn't going to get rated that highly by them, I think. Also, they may be using the fact that the Sox traded for him as a strike against him (i.e. if the Sox scouts think he's good, he probably isn't )

 

Scouts still like Sweeney, and BA seems to veer more towards scouting rather than stats.

Please, someone tell me Danks throws at a higher velocity than ~90mph.

Please, someone tell me Danks throws at a higher velocity than ~90mph.

 

Nope, according to his pitching coach from last year, he throws between 88 and 90 mph. I'm with you Flash, I'm with you.

Nope, according to his pitching coach from last year, he throws between 88 and 90 mph. I'm with you Flash, I'm with you.

 

 

 

Wrong....Danks has an easy stride of 89 - 93mph (hits 94 once he gets cranked up). Tell me you aren't listening what the Rangers say about pitching! LOL

Wrong....Danks has an easy stride of 89 - 93mph (hits 94 once he gets cranked up). Tell me you aren't listening what the Rangers say about pitching! LOL

 

That's a direct quote from Ed Farmer on the broadcast two days ago.

Nope, according to his pitching coach from last year, he throws between 88 and 90 mph. I'm with you Flash, I'm with you.

I know this will inevitably lead into a debate of 'velocity doesn't mean success.' Perhaps a few Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, and Mark Buehrle references thrown about.

 

Hopefully, his 90 mph fastball has actual movement; and his secondary pitches are outstanding.

 

I admit I've never seen him throw. Perhaps the newbie is right -- this is spring training, and he might not have full velocity. It's just a little shocking to me to hear his fastball is ~90mph considering the archived news stories and message board posts from Ranger fans seemed to suggest otherwise.

Edited March 2, 200719 yr by Flash Tizzle

I admit I've never seen him throw. Perhaps the newbie is right -- this is spring training, and he might not have full velocity. It's just a little shocking to me to hear his fastball is ~90mph considering the archived news stories and message board posts from Ranger fans seemed to suggest otherwise.

 

From USA Today at the time of the trade:

Danks is perhaps the Rangers finest pitching prospect since Kevin Brown and Bobby Witt. He has a 90-92 mph fastball, a dazzling curveball, and a solid changeup

And for those really wanting some pessimism this Ranger's blog didn't think Danks would be even a #3 starter in the bigs due to his fastball. But I have no sense at all how credible that blog is, so I think it's possible to chalk that one up to simple displeasure with the Rangers historical lack of pitching development.

 

Back to Danks fastball, I've never seen him pitch. But it seems to me that BA routinely takes the top speed anyone has seen a pitcher hit on a gun somewhere and reports that as his normal speed (and fans take over from there promulgating the myth). So, I feel pretty confident that Danks can't pump it up there at 94MPH. I would expect him to hit 89,90,91 on the gun routinely.

 

Has anyone here seen him pitch in person? I'd love to hear a new scouting report about how his stuff looks.

Someone at WSI said that they saw Danks pitch in Oklahoma and that that day he was at 89-92mph. Edit: I saw him pitch today, and he was between 89-93 with the fastball.

Edited March 5, 200719 yr by southsida86