The Official 2021 Los Angeles Angels Minor League Stats, Reports & Scouting Thread

[Inside Pitch]

1 hour ago, rafibomb said:

Ryan Smith was decent (for the PCL?) in his Triple-A Debut:

5.0 IP  6 H  4 R (all earned)  0 BB  8 SO

Just encouraging to see him continue the high strikeouts with low walks.

Once they reach the launchpad that is SLC I just try to see how well they manufacture their own outs and limit free baserunners..   I'd call his first start a big success.

[Chuck]

22 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

For me it's Daniel.  He's actually getting better as the year goes on.  10 of his 28 walks on the season came in his first 6.2 ip.  I was hopeful he'd be good but didn't expect him to be dominant.  

I think it's fair to say that Davis Daniel may have cracked the top 10 in our top 30 list and Jordyn Adams falls out. 

[Stradling]

With all of the graduations this year it’s safe to say the farm rankings will take a hit.  Obviously no one should really care if Marsh and Detmers perform along with Adell who I believe had already lost his prospect status. Without those three I’m not sure what the top 10 even looks like.  I’d assume it would be Bachman and Paris 1 and 2?  Followed by Daniel, Jackson and other arms we just drafted? 

[Angel Oracle]

First stab at a new top 10:

Detmers, CRod, Daniel, Bachman, Paris, Jackson, Vera, Ramirez, Quero, Adams with Murphy and Bush close behind

[Angelsjunky]

3 hours ago, Stradling said:

With all of the graduations this year it’s safe to say the farm rankings will take a hit.  Obviously no one should really care if Marsh and Detmers perform along with Adell who I believe had already lost his prospect status. Without those three I’m not sure what the top 10 even looks like.  I’d assume it would be Bachman and Paris 1 and 2?  Followed by Daniel, Jackson and other arms we just drafted? 

Detmers and Rodriguez are still eligible for the list because they haven't exhausted their rookie status, which is generally the criteria we use. We made an exception for Adell this year due to the unusual nature of last year, but obviously him and Marsh are no longer eligible.

 

[Angelsjunky]

2 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

First stab at a new top 10:

Detmers, CRod, Daniel, Bachman, Paris, Jackson, Vera, Ramirez, Quero, Adams with Murphy and Bush close behind

Something like that, although I'd probably go Detmers, C-Rod, Bachman, Paris, and Vera as the top 5, and Daniel, Jackson, Ramirez, Quero, and either Adams or Bush as the next 5.

It would be tempting to give Stefanic a nod and put him in the top 10, but I'm not sure I'm ready to do that. Maybe top 15.

[totdprods]

2 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Something like that, although I'd probably go Detmers, C-Rod, Bachman, Paris, and Vera as the top 5, and Daniel, Jackson, Ramirez, Quero, and either Adams or Bush as the next 5.

It would be tempting to give Stefanic a nod and put him in the top 10, but I'm not sure I'm ready to do that. Maybe top 15.

If I remember I had Stefanic just outside my Top 10 midseason...

That looks pretty close. I'm not sure I'm quite ready to put Daniel or Quero in Top 10, but Top 15ish for sure. We'll have to put some thought into how we evaluate eligibility for guys like Naughton, Warren, Wantz, Tyler, Marte, and Junk depending on how many innings they log these next few weeks too. They'll all maintain rookie eligibility for sure, but how much weight does that hold up on our internal prospect lists?

[Angelsjunky]

35 minutes ago, totdprods said:

If I remember I had Stefanic just outside my Top 10 midseason...

That looks pretty close. I'm not sure I'm quite ready to put Daniel or Quero in Top 10, but Top 15ish for sure. We'll have to put some thought into how we evaluate eligibility for guys like Naughton, Warren, Wantz, Tyler, Marte, and Junk depending on how many innings they log these next few weeks too. They'll all maintain rookie eligibility for sure, but how much weight does that hold up on our internal prospect lists?

I would suggest that the default rule is "rookie eligibility" (130 PA, 50 IP), and then certain exceptions might apply (e.g. Adell). But start with rookie as the assumption, and then adjust in special cases. But I see no reason to adjust this year.

Any other approach is too subjective.

[totdprods]

7 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

I would suggest that the default rule is "rookie eligibility" (130 PA, 50 IP), and then certain exceptions might apply (e.g. Adell). But start with rookie as the assumption, and then adjust in special cases. But I see no reason to adjust this year.

Any other approach is too subjective.

Yeah, I think it also just factors in that question of how heavily ranked should someone who's best argument is "they're an MLB-ready mid-reliever" versus someone like Werner Blakely who is a potential star-talent, just far away and yet to produce. 

But that gets to each individual's way of ranking which makes it interesting too. I personally like ranking prospects more closer to MLB-contribution over those who have barely played or are far off, like William Holmes. 

[Angelsjunky]

3 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Yeah, I think it also just factors in that question of how heavily ranked should someone who's best argument is "they're an MLB-ready mid-reliever" versus someone like Werner Blakely who is a potential star-talent, just far away and yet to produce. 

But that gets to each individual's way of ranking which makes it interesting too. I personally like ranking prospects more closer to MLB-contribution over those who have barely played or are far off, like William Holmes. 

Yes, agreed, and why it is useful to have nine of us with different approaches. Except for the traditional crazy @ettin outlier, we tend to average each other out.

I had a hard time ranking Erik Rivera, because he looked so damn good in his one start, but...it was a few innings. I'm starting to veer more towards leaving those guys as "honorable mentions," or at least as late top 30 fill-ins once the prospects with some track record have been ranked.

 

[totdprods]

35 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Yes, agreed, and why it is useful to have nine of us with different approaches. Except for the traditional crazy @ettin outlier, we tend to average each other out.

I had a hard time ranking Erik Rivera, because he looked so damn good in his one start, but...it was a few innings. I'm starting to veer more towards leaving those guys as "honorable mentions," or at least as late top 30 fill-ins once the prospects with some track record have been ranked.

 

Yeah, no matter how good a prospect could be, I take a big "what have you done for me lately" approach, especially if someone's yet to debut or stay on the field. It's why I would still give guys like D'Shawn Knowles more weight over someone like (before this year at least) Arol Vera.

[Inside Pitch]

Was watching the SLC game the other day -- Minasian was being interviewed when Stefanic's name came up.  Basically he said while they love the bat, his defense needs work -- dude was barely done saying that when Stefanic went yard.  It was funny.  Just as funny, later in the game Stefanic made an error.

On one hand, I'm glad to see Minasian seemingly values defense.  On the other, I don't think it matters if Stefanic has stone hands unless they fix the positioning issues.

[totdprods]

3 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Was watching the SLC game the other day -- Minasian was being interviewed when Stefanic's name came up.  Basically he said while they love the bat, his defense needs work -- dude was barely done saying that when Stefanic went yard.  It was funny.  Just as funny, later in the game Stefanic made an error.

On one hand, I'm glad to see Minasian seemingly values defense.  On the other, I don't think it matters if Stefanic has stone hands unless they fix the positioning issues.

Yeah, as much as I believe in Stefanic and want to see him up, it's hard to justify utilizing a bat-first UT IF when Gosselin and Mayfield are capable of providing more versatility, much better defense, and at least average offense so far. It's part of why I understand leaving him in SLC to get reps in every day...helps him get better at what he's working on, and gives the Angels more MLB-level looks at Mayfield, Rengifo, Gosselin, Wong to sort out who to prioritize keeping next year.

[mmc]

 

[Inside Pitch]

Arol Vera is at it again.   4-4 tonight, up to .367 since his call up.

[mmc]

Not a great outing for Daniel, only pitched 2.1 with 2 hits, 1 run, 2Ks, 0 BB

[mmc]

Kerry for RC today: 5 IP, 2H, 0R, 1BB, 2K.

[rafibomb]

12 minutes ago, mmc said:

Not a great outing for Daniel, only pitched 2.1 with 2 hits, 1 run, 2Ks, 0 BB

Only 1 run in 2.1 innings pitched (3.86 ERA) with no walks, 2 hits allowed, and 2 K’s. He threw 37 pitches with 27 strikes. I’m only hoping he wasn’t pulled due to injury.

[rafibomb]

33 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Arol Vera is at it again.   4-4 tonight, up to .367 since his call up.

If he were in the Yankee system he’d be a top 25 prospect in baseball. I’m only half kidding.

[rafibomb]

5 minutes ago, rafibomb said:

Only 1 run in 2.1 innings pitched (3.86 ERA) with no walks, 2 hits allowed, and 2 K’s. He threw 37 pitches with 27 strikes. I’m only hoping he wasn’t pulled due to injury.

Actually it might have been the rain delay that cut his outing short

 

[Inside Pitch]

27 minutes ago, rafibomb said:

If he were in the Yankee system he’d be a top 25 prospect in baseball. I’m only half kidding.

At the very least he would have a cool nickname. 

[rafibomb]

 

[Docwaukee]

1 hour ago, rafibomb said:

Actually it might have been the rain delay that cut his outing short

 

definitely.  didn't come back after the delay.  

[Angel Oracle]

5 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

Arol Vera is at it again.   4-4 tonight, up to .367 since his call up.

Age 18 in A ball

[Stradling]

Arol Vera or Kyren Paris?  I’d assume it’s Paris.  But is Vera good enough that if we traded Paris in a package for a legit arm (maybe from Miami) that it wouldn’t sting as much?