Chris Ellis

[Angel Oracle]

I just hope they end up choosing accurately enough which starting pitching prospects to deal and to keep.

That will give a better idea of how this org gauges its' own prospects.

[wopphil]

I am curious as to what you guys (1) think is Ellis' trade value (what major leaguers could we get for him) and (2) prospect ranking (does he crack the 100).

[wopphil]

I am curious as to what you guys (1) think is Ellis' trade value (what major leaguers could we get for him) and (2) prospect ranking (does he crack the 100).

[Chuck]

I am curious as to what you guys (1) think is Ellis' trade value (what major leaguers could we get for him) and (2) prospect ranking (does he crack the 100).

 

 

I think we can get a big bat for him if centered around him in a package. 

[Inside Pitch]

I am curious as to what you guys (1) think is Ellis' trade value (what major leaguers could we get for him) and (2) prospect ranking (does he crack the 100).

 

I don't know that he had a track record on his own to merit a big bat -- but he's a guy that a smart team would insist on being a throw in knowing full well he may end up the best player moved in the deal -- ala Grichuk.

[tdawg87]

I am curious as to what you guys (1) think is Ellis' trade value (what major leaguers could we get for him) and (2) prospect ranking (does he crack the 100).

 

I think he will, but he'll likely be in the 75-100 range at best.

[Docwaukee]

I'd be reluctant to move Ellis at this point.  He's on the verge of being a top 100 guy and I am sure that anyone who has scouted him heavily knows that but he doesn't hold the pedigree as of yet and likely wouldn't net what other top 100 guys could.  

 

His progress, age and numbers are similar to that of Lackey

[Tyler]

Mid-rotation potential. You trade him for a controllable bat if you can.

[Second Base]

He'd be off limits if I were calling the shots. The Angels have plenty of pitching options I'd rather trade than Ellis. He shouldn't be required in a deal for the likes of Ben Revere and Adam Lind. Ellis should've been a first round pick last year, but as I said, teams thought he lacked the track record, so the Angels got a steal in the 3rd round.

As for his rankings, let's just say I've watched him more than any prospect since Trout and Richards and I am sold. He'll be every bit as good as Heaney and Skaggs at the major league level, and those two are fantastic MLB pitchers, worthy of being considered a #2/3 starter.

I don't believe he'll be ranked in the Top 100 by anyone because national ranking lists still haven't caught on to this guy and generally speaking, there's a stigma about Angels prospects. Most publications will go out of their way to avoid including Angels prospects lest they admit they made a mistake and the farm isn't as empty as they've been claiming for years. Case in point, Grichuk, once he was dealt to the Cards, his hype went through the roof. As an Angels prospect though, he was a borderline bust. It just shows how monumentally stupid those rankings are. These are the same people that ranked Harper and Moore over Trout.

Plus Ellis just doesn't fit their mold. They typically only focus on players drafted in the first round or signed for millions out of Latin America. Ellis is neither. It doesn't change the fact that he'll outperform the majority of those in the Top 100, just that he's more of the Richards/Calhoun type. Someone only Angels fans know about, then when he breaks out, everyone else is left asking where this kid came from.

[Angel Oracle]

The pitchers to use in trade should be Nibs, Tropeano, and/or Nate Smith.

Rotation by 2018?
Richards, Santiago, Heaney, Ellis, and Newcomb?

 

Edit:  I know, I forgot about Skaggs.   Four lefties is a lot for any rotation to have, though.

Edited July 10, 2015 by Angel Oracle

[Second Base]

As most of us are aware, the Angels like to operate within a 3 year scope, which means when they're planning for their future rotation without Weaver and CJ Wilson. They're also likely planning on Shoemaker being a 5th starter type moving forward, which has value but also isn't irreplaceable. That leaves a potential future rotation of Richards, Newcomb, Heaney, Skaggs, Ellis, with options including Santiago, Shoe, Tropeano, Smith, with others on the fringe like Gatto, Rhoades, Alcantara.

Typically, you'd want to hold onto likely 7 of those options. So I would shop Shoe, Smith, Rhoades, Alcantara and if necessary Gatto. If we assume that Revere can be had for Smith + Alcantara, and Lind can be had for Shoe and Rhoades, then we'd not only have acquired more offense, but also will have held onto our most important prospects.

[Inside Pitch]

Phillies pitchers not named Camels have combined for an ERA of 6.10 this year.  Wouldn't shock me if they would settle for Shoemaker straight up for Revere.

[Second Base]

I get the feeling that the Phillies are looking for a player or players they can build around for the future.  That's an organization that needs to be ripped apart and started over from scratch.  The best way to build a team as IP indicated, is pitching.  I get the feeling they'd be interested in Bedrock for sure, because he's a good RP.  But Stamets doesn't have trade value (though he is valuable to us as a future utility player.  Cowgill would hold no value for the Phillies. 

 

I know the report indicated the deal was Gott-Revere, but that just doesn't click with what I've heard and I doubt that's all the deal was.  They were looking for a decent starter in AA/AAA that could project into the middle of the rotation.  They wanted Tropeano.  The Angels clearly balked.  I think the deal was more likely Nate Smith and Trevor Gott for Revere, which the Angels wisely turned down, as Gott has become quite important to the team.  I know the Phillies turned down Nate Smith for Revere straight up because they wanted someone that projected better.  That's why I feel like if the Angels added a projectable but raw arm it'd get the deal done, which is where Alcantara comes in. 

 

I view Smith as a legitimate #4/5 starter beginning next year and I view Alcantara as a potential shut down bullpen piece in the future, if he can hone in some of his pitches. That's a heck of a lot to get in return for Revere, who is valuable but clearly has his faults like any other player not named Trout.  He'll hit for high average, steal a bunch of bases (if Scioscia lets him) and looks to me like he'd be an excellent LF.  But then again, he just doesn't reach base and won't hit for power.

 

I'm fine with the low OBP and no power as long as the Angels can get another player (like Lind) that could DH and hit for power and reach base.  Revere wouldn't do much to jump start the offense.  They'd be better, but not really as much as they need.  But when combined with a hitter like Lind that specializes in power and reaching base, suddenly the Angels offense would look good.  Not great, but certainly good enough to win a lot of games and do some things in the playoffs.

 

But back to Ellis, I just see no reason why the Angels should include him in any trade talks unless we're talking about getting a star LF or DH.  The Angels have a tremendously bright future on the mound and Ellis is a big part of that. 

[Second Base]

You're still pointing to WAR as if it means something. Cowgill is a good defensive, decent running 4th OF. There are a dozen of those that pass through waivers every year. Much like Stamets, Cowgill holds value to this team, but not in the trade market. You can't just go about trading spare parts most of the time. You have to give up something of value.

[wopphil]

Ellis seems to give up a lot of homeruns. Wonder if he will be able to improve on that going forward.

It is awesome to think that this team not only has five viable starters right now, but it also has five or six more guys who should all be at least decent major league starters in Smith, Newcomb, Heaney, Tropeano, and Ellis. And, of course, Skaggs will be coming back.

Edited July 11, 2015 by wopphil

[Second Base]

@ScottyA~

 

Well, you sure don't need to trade 2 mid rotation starting pitcher prospects for a slappy-quick-bad armed outfielder either but you guys keep going there also....

 

You consider Nate SMith and Victor Alcantara mid-rotation starters, after I just got done telling you that's a back-end starter and reliever?  That's cool.  You must know something I don't. 

[Second Base]

When I think of mid-rotation starter, I think of Skaggs, Ellis, maybe even Tropeano if things break right.  Smith, yeah he's throwing a little harder this year and has handled himself wonderfully in AA, but the ceiling just isn't there to be much more than a #4/5 starter.  He's got an average fastball, above average change up and average curve.  Basically, C.J. Wilson at this point.

 

That's not a bad thing at all.  Lefties that can give you innings, hold a reasonable ERA and play for well under their value for 6 years hold a ton of trade value.  

 

As for Alcantara, I mean he only pitches from the stretch, no wind up, yet he's being stretched as a starter.  He dialed his fastball from 98-101 down to 94-97 and he's still walking too many batters (but he is getting better).  The slider has absolutely filthy break to it, but you have to be able to throw it for a strike for it to be useful, otherwise hitters will just key in on his fastball. The change up shows flashes, but for the most part, it's been pretty nonexistent.  Alcantara's ceiling is through the roof.  Chances are, he'll move into relief and start hitting triple digits again, but what's really going to make or break him is that slider.  If he can throw that for a strike, he'll be a major leaguer.  If he spot his fastball where he needs, he'll be an elite closer.  But that's a lot of ifs. 

[Second Base]

Well, from what I have read and been told Ellis has a ways to go and may be a bottom of rotation guy (4A-5B/Long man)  if he makes it as he tends to fly open/over throw sometimes which leave his fastball straight and elevated. He also has 3 average pitches that could or could not go better than AVG.

 

fast ball 91-93 tops out at 95 once in a while.

change is decent and has the makings of a swing and miss.

curve is a power curveball and he has been known to over throw it leaving it up in the zone.

 

If he has better consistency and doesn't over throw/fly open and gets his mechanics down he could become a very good #2B - #3.

 

My scouting report says something quite different.  His mechanics have improved so much in only a year.  Keep in mind, in June of last year, Chris was pitching at Ole Miss.  Now he's in AA and looks pretty good.  There isn't anything there that can't be fixed.  I mean if we settled on AA motion, Garrett Richards never would've grown into a staff ace much less competent major leaguer.  

 

His fastball is almost never straight but he can leave it elevated at times.  He has as much movement on his 2-seamer as any pitcher in the system.  He's generally sat 93-94 this season, that kind of velocity with movement isn't an average offering, it's a plus offering.  His change up has grown from non-existent to "average" in under a year.  It may end up being a plus pitch by next year, and if not, it's still solid.  His curve ball is already a plus pitch and I've watched him embarrass AA hitters with it too many times to even consider there being much fault with it at all. 

 

That sort of repertoire puts him in line to be a petty solid #3/4 starter.  I wouldn't be surprised if he hits another level in a couple years and becomes a James Shields type. 

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

Or Ron Romanick......

[SoWhat]

Well, from what I have read and been told Ellis has a ways to go and may be a bottom of rotation guy (4A-5B/Long man) if he makes it as he tends to fly open/over throw sometimes which leave his fastball straight and elevated. He also has 3 average pitches that could or could not go better than AVG.

fast ball 91-93 tops out at 95 once in a while.

change is decent and has the makings of a swing and miss.

curve is a power curveball and he has been known to over throw it leaving it up in the zone.

If he has better consistency and doesn't over throw/fly open and gets his mechanics down he could become a very good #2B - #3.

I've seen Ellis pitch multiple times when he was in High A, and I gotta say your scouting report is off.

Ellis' flaws aren't anything major. I think he's a future #2 or 3

Edited July 12, 2015 by SoWhat