Fangraphs' Angels Prospect List (Top 41)

[floplag]

5 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Imo these lists are pretty useless when seeing how good or bad a system is. Do you think these guys scouted 41 prospects in the Angels system? They may look closer at teams like the Dodgers and Yankees but I highly doubt they took a serious look at more than 7-8 guys. It would be nearly impossible otherwise.

I dont know how they do it, or how many people helped compile this, but these are the supposed "experts", make of it what you will. 

[rageous]

54 minutes ago, floplag said:

The thing i find most frustrating about this, is not the current status as we have graduated some very good players, but for years all the talk was about a sustainable farm and all that, and yet after these graduations its looking bleak.  I expected the opposite.  Thats disheartening that we were so average for so long making no moves, to end up more or less back where we started. 

This is the result of failure of 2018 and 2019 draft and everyone from those two years underachieving.

[Angelsjunky]

Kind of depressing. I guess we have to hope that FG is wrong about a bunch of guys, but there's always the specter of fan bias, which all of us are vulnerable to.

To me the big surprise is Paris - I would have thought they'd be higher on him.

As for Bachman, while I hope they're wrong, I suspect they're right. That said, imagine a late 2022/23 bullpen that includes Iglesias, Loup, Bachman, and C-Rod. 

[rageous]

6 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Kind of depressing. I guess we have to hope that FG is wrong about a bunch of guys, but there's always the specter of fan bias, which all of us are vulnerable to.

To me the big surprise is Paris - I would have thought they'd be higher on him.

As for Bachman, while I hope they're wrong, I suspect they're right. That said, imagine a late 2022/23 bullpen that includes Iglesias, Loup, Bachman, and C-Rod. 

Hard to rate someone high that has only played 50 games in 3 years.

[Inside Pitch]

12 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Kind of depressing. I guess we have to hope that FG is wrong about a bunch of guys, but there's always the specter of fan bias, which all of us are vulnerable to.

To me the big surprise is Paris - I would have thought they'd be higher on him.

As for Bachman, while I hope they're wrong, I suspect they're right. That said, imagine a late 2022/23 bullpen that includes Iglesias, Loup, Bachman, and C-Rod. 

Meh..  The farm had a pretty crappy year, it's just that simple. 

If it rebounds this coming season then you'll see the opinions flip the other way.

If people here liked guys based on a certain skill set before today, they should probably still like them after today.  If people's opinions are based on what others say about the farm system then yep, it's a bad day.  But mostly, the farm had a bad season.

[Inside Pitch]

20 minutes ago, rageous said:

Hard to rate someone high that has only played 50 games in 3 years.

Yep...  You can't scout a guy that hasn't played and if you look at the numbers ... well, the numbers last year were pretty muted across the board.

[rafibomb]

2 hours ago, floplag said:

Nota single C on the list for 5 years... oof.

Idk if you meant there hasn’t been a single C on the list for 5 years including this year but Edgar Quero is ranked 12th this year.

[Inside Pitch]

The other thing anyone sweating this should probably consider.  The guys who wrote this article went on record as having undersold both Sandoval and Walsh....  They didn't see Sandoval as anything other than a middle RP either..

 

[Blarg]

1 hour ago, Inside Pitch said:

Meh..  The farm had a pretty crappy year, it's just that simple. 

After the Covid layoff I expected a lot of slow starts at all levels but I expected it league wide. The Angels farm was particularly bad at bouncing back and notably in Low A.

But in triple A I can attribute it to siphoning off talent to the MLB club throughout the season and too much of the Salt Lake shuttle bus in use. They would lose a starter for their next scheduled start then returned needing rest. Adell was called up then broken. Marsh was called up after just returning to action. Ward was on the MLB roster for half a season. Rojas and Rengifo bounced back and forth. Every relief pitcher that could pick up a baseball all the way back to the Trash Pandas got an inning or two.

It was a messy year for the Angels minors but excuses aside the growth of valued prospects in the lower levels didn't seem to present itself. Some coaching changes have already happened and I think more may come about or at least some additional personnel added. It needs to be improved because the raw talent is there.

[Warfarin]

While it can be depressing to see a mediocre-at-best review, I do think context matters.

As IP said above, the farm had a poor year overall.  

I think with a new PD team aboard for the 2021 season, players were probably presented with a lot of new/different concepts and perhaps encouraged to make different adjustments that they had not been previously presented with.  It would not surprise me to see an organizational shift in PD philosophy with new directors in place, which could in turn lead to expected growing pains as players adjust to the philosophy.

Some take to it right away and show improvement, others take longer.  I'm very eager to see how our minor leaguers look next year, after a complete offseason to practice after receiving guidance from the PD team.

[floplag]

1 hour ago, rafibomb said:

Idk if you meant there hasn’t been a single C on the list for 5 years including this year but Edgar Quero is ranked 12th this year.

Correct, and his ETA is '26, thus the 5 year comment.  As in no help coming at the position from the farm for that long.

[ettin]

I must be oozing with positivity this week. Yes the bartender took a knife and scraped the cream (Adell, Marsh) off the top of the Angels beer, but I think in 2-3 years we will be praising the development of guys like Vera, Bachman, Jackson, Paris, Quero, Guzman, Placencia, Seminaris, et al, I agree with Blarg that there is a lot of raw talent here and when you consider the Major League team has a more settled roster for the next couple of seasons, they will have that time to continue and/or finish developing to provide additional depth to the Major League club.

[Vlad27Trout27]

I do think that these Reports are a but bullish! We have some good talent in the system, a lot of it is in the lower levels and or just drafted!

1. Paris is a top 5 prospect in the system, could even say top3. Guys with similar skill set, and similar numbers to Paris are in MLb top 100 (I know, there too different scouting system, but something to consider)

2. Bachman, Is similar to Crochet of the White sox. Similar that they have two plus-plus pitches, and both have relief risk, well Crochet is mostly being used as a Releiver. Crochet is viewed more of a 50 FV propesct, which is where I beleive Bachman should be! 

3. There is alot of young talents in the lower levels, now we just to need hope they start breaking out.

[Docwaukee]

1 hour ago, ettin said:

I must be oozing with positivity this week. Yes the bartender took a knife and scraped the cream (Adell, Marsh) off the top of the Angels beer, but I think in 2-3 years we will be praising the development of guys like Vera, Bachman, Jackson, Paris, Quero, Guzman, Placencia, Seminaris, et al, I agree with Blarg that there is a lot of raw talent here and when you consider the Major League team has a more settled roster for the next couple of seasons, they will have that time to continue and/or finish developing to provide additional depth to the Major League club.

I think we'll be praising the fact that the system has depth.  More on the pitching side than on the position player side.  If we continue on the current path the big difference between whether we're ranked middle vs. upper will be the top 2-3 guys in the system.  

sometimes you need some street cred to get the benefit of the doubt.  We haven't produced a legit latin american prospect in like a million years.  Barria and Suarez might end up solid but outside of that we've been horrible.  

my point is that until the recent classes of what's considered to be solid from that market actually produce something then no one is going to believe it.  A team that consistently produces talent from the Latin countries probably gets a little more leeway on their 16-20 yo prospects.  

[Hubs]

18 hours ago, floplag said:

Correct, and his ETA is '26, thus the 5 year comment.  As in no help coming at the position from the farm for that long.

That is why they were receptive to letting Thaiss Catch. Also, If in the 2022 Draft, they use their first round pick on a college Catcher, like Daniel Susac if he slips, or Kevin Parada this will solve itself. Angels pick 13th.

https://www.prospectslive.com/prospects-live/2021/11/1/2022-mlb-draft-top-200-prospects

5. Daniel Susac

Catcher, Arizona

A big, tall, switch-hitting catcher, Susac immediately brings back visions of Matt Wieters at Georgia Tech. Susac has a very good arm behind the plate, and more explosiveness and lateral mobility than most catchers his size do. But this guy will make his money with the bat. A potential plus hitter with plus power, Susac projects a middle-of-the-order impact bat, a run producer and an impact player up the middle of the field. Susac's batted-ball data surpasses that of Henry Davis from 2021. The kid can bang.

13. Kevin Parada

Catcher, Georgia Tech

Parada was one of the more quietly heralded catchers in the 2020 draft class pre-draft. His bonus demands ultimately pushed him to Georgia Tech. It's legit plus raw power that he's shown he can get to in-game. He’s got extremely strong hands that help him manipulate the barrel, and punish balls deep in the zone with authority. Parada has a picturesque swing that uses all fields and doesn’t sell out for power. It’s organic strength and loft that comes naturally. Behind the plate, it’s a plus arm with better athleticism than you’ll find in most guys his size. Playing at Georgia Tech, Parada may get the opportunity to call his own games in 2022, a luxury not afforded to most college catchers these days. That advanced skillset, both mentally and physically, should help his draft stock. Parada’s profile is carried by the plus bat, but he’s an advanced defensive catcher who figures to stay behind the plate as he transitions into professional baseball. He may be the next great backstop to come out of Georgia Tech following Jason Varitek, Matt Wieters and Joey Bart.

[Hubs]

4 minutes ago, Hubs said:

That is why they were receptive to letting Thaiss Catch. Also, If in the 2022 Draft, they use their first round pick on a college Catcher, like Daniel Susac if he slips, or Kevin Parada this will solve itself. Angels pick 13th.

https://www.prospectslive.com/prospects-live/2021/11/1/2022-mlb-draft-top-200-prospects

5. Daniel Susac

Catcher, Arizona

A big, tall, switch-hitting catcher, Susac immediately brings back visions of Matt Wieters at Georgia Tech. Susac has a very good arm behind the plate, and more explosiveness and lateral mobility than most catchers his size do. But this guy will make his money with the bat. A potential plus hitter with plus power, Susac projects a middle-of-the-order impact bat, a run producer and an impact player up the middle of the field. Susac's batted-ball data surpasses that of Henry Davis from 2021. The kid can bang.

13. Kevin Parada

Catcher, Georgia Tech

Parada was one of the more quietly heralded catchers in the 2020 draft class pre-draft. His bonus demands ultimately pushed him to Georgia Tech. It's legit plus raw power that he's shown he can get to in-game. He’s got extremely strong hands that help him manipulate the barrel, and punish balls deep in the zone with authority. Parada has a picturesque swing that uses all fields and doesn’t sell out for power. It’s organic strength and loft that comes naturally. Behind the plate, it’s a plus arm with better athleticism than you’ll find in most guys his size. Playing at Georgia Tech, Parada may get the opportunity to call his own games in 2022, a luxury not afforded to most college catchers these days. That advanced skillset, both mentally and physically, should help his draft stock. Parada’s profile is carried by the plus bat, but he’s an advanced defensive catcher who figures to stay behind the plate as he transitions into professional baseball. He may be the next great backstop to come out of Georgia Tech following Jason Varitek, Matt Wieters and Joey Bart.

This Early Mock Draft highlights another Catcher in this group and says this draft is "Stacked with Catchers"

https://throughthefencebaseball.com/2022-mlb-mock-draft-2-0-brooks-lee-elijah-green/

8. Minnesota Twins: Kevin Parada, C, Georgia Tech

This year’s draft is stacked with catchers. Parada, Arizona’s Susac and Mississippi’s Hayden Dunhurst, right now, are the very best this class has to offer. From the get, his plus raw power stands out. His swing is electric and should be the model for any young ball player trying to improve their hitting. Behind the plate, he calls a solid game and his mental mindset is the best we’ve seen in the past two drafts.

10. Colorado Rockies: Daniel Susac, C, Arizona

Susac as raw power and a hit tool that’ll lure more teams to his games next season. Much like Harry Ford was for the 2021 draft, I expect Susac to garner the same hype.

12. Detroit Tigers: Hayden Dunhurst, C, Mississippi

In 2021, Dunhurst hit .280 with 43 RBIs and a .385 OBP. If you ask him, he won’t settle for this. Expect big things from Dunhurst in 2022. He’s got amazing work ethic and well-rounded skills that make him hard to forget about. His arm strength is elite and he has refined his hit tool, so I’m excited to see when he enters the 2022 season as one of three best catching prospects how he will perform. On the flip side of that, if he maintains and not improves his hit tool, he could see a drop as there will be an influx of high school catchers that will join this list once prep seasons begin.

Of course, since we're perceived as pitching bare, even though we're middle of the pack, he has us picking a High School RHP

13. Los Angeles Angels: Brock Porter, RHP, Orchard Lake St. Mary’s HS (MI)

I gotta show some love for my fellow Michigander, who also happens to be one of, if not thee, top high school pitcher coming into the 2022 draft at the moment. Porter’s fastball has been clocked at 99 mph, but usually rides in the mid-90s for most of the game. He’s got a plus-change up to go along with a decent curve. His slider needs some work, though. If he can keep his command in check and perfect his breaking stuff, he’ll headlining all pitchers in this class.

[Angelsjunky]

21 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

Meh..  The farm had a pretty crappy year, it's just that simple. 

If it rebounds this coming season then you'll see the opinions flip the other way.

If people here liked guys based on a certain skill set before today, they should probably still like them after today.  If people's opinions are based on what others say about the farm system then yep, it's a bad day.  But mostly, the farm had a bad season.

Maybe. But I question the notion of the farm, collectively, having a bad year. The farm is comprised of multiple teams and players, all basically disparate. 

Another possible explanation is that there's a big gap between collective fan wisdom and outside analysis. 

On the other hand, I'm guessing that no analyst will look as closely at the Angels farm as, say, the Prospect Posse collectively does. Meaning, it isn't simply that we're all biased and they're right. Maybe the "truth" is somewhere in the middle.

Now I didn't read the whole thing, but I didn't see much many of the Angels having lots of young guys with upside, which is something or group likes to emphasize. So where Fangraphs see guys like Vera, Paris, Placencia, Blakely, Ramirez, Guzman, and Quero as being fringy prospects who could turn out to be utility guys or mediocre regulars, we seem to see them as young guys with high upside. 

I guess what I'm saying is that I worry about that discrepancy a bit. Maybe we're seeing what we want to see.

 

Edited December 9, 2021 by Angelsjunky

[Inside Pitch]

25 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Maybe. But I question the notion of the farm, collectively, having a bad year. The farm is comprised of multiple teams and players, all basically disparate. 

Another possible explanation is that there's a big gap between collective fan wisdom and outside analysis. 

Not sure what there is to question, there was pretty much an organization wide mediocre performance offensively.   

I think the reason I'm not as down as some or perplexed by what happened is I expected it. I made mention MANY times when people would bring up CRod's lost time that where losing a season as a hitter is hugely impactful, pitching will always be about guys being able to get guys out.  I've pointed to Jurickson Profar and his lost two seasons as being (IMO), the biggest factor for why he failed to become Trout/Harper light.  So what happened??? A bunch of raw/young guys who didn't see live pitching faced up against a bunch of pitchers that had a season's worth of strength training and working on command, with what I believe was predictably results.  Then just for shits and giggles some of our guys got dinged up early on and fell behind.  

It's not like I was using this as an excuse for our young hitters, I remember early on when people were going apeshit over pitchers putting up insane K totals in A ball, I pointed to the same reality -- hitters havent seen live pitching in over a year.

I have my theories why so many of our young hitters tanked, but I'd be popping off without any real proof.  But, given how Arte tends to cheap out when it comes to minor league stuff I wonder how much attention/info instruction was given to our guys not at the alternate camp last season (2021).  I know other teams held camps in the DR and in AZ.  Some did in FL too.  

31 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

On the other hand, I'm guessing that no analyst will look as closely at the Angels farm as, say, the Prospect Posse collectively does. Meaning, it isn't simply that we're all biased and they're right. Maybe the "truth" is somewhere in the middle.

I don't so much believe it's anyone looking at it more closely or even biases although I do believe everyone who spends any time paying attention to the developmental side of baseball have preferences they look for that could be perceived as bias.  I see a pitcher with GB rates and a plus FB and I pay attention.  I see hitters that can tell balls from strikes/can fly and again, I pay attention.  But biased because they play in the Angels system?  Nah..  I think my very loud opinion of Brandon Wood when he was Angel's fans golden boy speaks my objectivity there -- I was very right about that kid.. Yeah we have some homers that overrate some of our guys but honestly I think the bigger issue at times is people paying too much attention to the numbers and not enough attention to WHY they are what they are.  Park effects, age to league, league/hitter tendencies..  Those things tend to be much more impactful at the minor league level in part because they can at times be more easily exploited- there is also a ton of volatility in those areas not just year to year but month to month.

43 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Now I didn't read the whole thing, but I didn't see much many of the Angels having lots of young guys with upside, which is something or group likes to emphasize. So where Fangraphs see guys like Vera, Paris, Placencia, Blakely, Ramirez, Guzman, and Quero as being fringy prospects who could turn out to be utility guys or mediocre regulars, we seem to see them as young guys with high upside. 

And yet Keith Law and Baseball America have waxed poetically about how athletic and how much possible upside there is in the system.   I believe Law said going into 2021 that if prospect rankings were based on possible upside the Angels system would be in the top 10.   

And honestly there's the rub. The guys currently doing the prospect stuff at FG are more data driven that tools savvy -- Baseball Prospectus is as well although they actually do employ guys who used to work as MLB scouts..  And since the topic of bias has come up. The FG crew have shown a serious bias across all their prospect rankings when it comes to guys coming off injuries -- again, likely due to FG being more data driven and injuries only up the chances of attrition.  The one thing I know, the hardest guys to really project are guys 20 and under.  Angel fans need no other example of this than Kevin Maitan or at the other extreme -- Mike Trout and his projected 15 HR power.

51 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

I guess what I'm saying is that I worry about that discrepancy a bit. Maybe we're seeing what we want to see.

Sure, it's also a case of looking for what we look for.  Some of us were talking up Sandoval last year, specifically pointing to the success he had with his two pitch mix.  We were looking for him to improve his ancillary stuff enough so that those two plus pitches could become weapons.  The FG guys saw the same guys and the same data and instantly went "he's a two pitch guy -- so, a RP."   The either ignored or assumed the velo spike he experienced was a mirage or because of their limited experience projecting the physical end of the prospect game failed to consider that guys can actually get strong even when they aren't 6'6" and built like Roger Clemens.  Likewise,@Dochalospent the better part of two years telling anyone that would listen that Walsh could be a guy..  Whatever he was looking for, he was right.

As I said previously, if any of the fans here liked a player because of a particular skillset, they should still like them. 

I think people have a tendency to overthink things...  Maybe I'm guilty of not giving it enough though, I dunno..  but for me.. it was just a bad year -- we have seen it happen before.  At the end of 2019 everyone was bemoaning how the pitching in the system had seemingly taken a massive step backwards, then 2021 happens suddenly it was.. OMG SOOO MUCH PITCHING!!!!

If we see more of the same again this year, shit starts getting serious.

[tdawg87]

[Angelsjunky]

57 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Not sure what there is to question, there was pretty much an organization wide mediocre performance offensively.   

I'm saying that "organization wide mediocre performance offensively" may not mean that it was a down year for everyone, which you imply, but rather that the organization is just mediocre. I hope you're right; I honestly have no idea, but I'm just a bit leery that the second option could be closer to the truth.

The rest of what you say is why I'm not writing Jordyn Adams off yet. Sometimes a series of factors leads to what seems like a wasted year, but it shouldn't be taken as definitive of where a player's at. This is especially so with 2020 being almost completely lost (although some players still showed positive development in camp, like C Rod). I will go on record and say that Adams will turn some heads next year, at least among those that wrote him off after this year.

But yeah, I agree that FG leans too far into the "stats" side of things. I think when you look at the guys I mentioned--Vera, Paris, Placencia, Blakely, Quero, Ramirez, Guzman, even Calabrese and Bonilla, and we'll throw in Jackson and Adams--the baseline for their future, as a group, might be utility/fringe regular, but several of them will be more than that, and one or two might even be very good players. 

What I see FG doing is, "We just don't know enough yet, so we'll make a conservative assumption." That said, the fact that Paris seems to have gone down in their estimation from last year is rather odd, especially when he showed advanced plate discipline, something those guys love.

I do agree that minor league numbers are secondary, or at least you have to consider other factors like age, level, ball park, etc, as well as progression within a season. And I think the Angels realize this, which is why they'll advance a guy after a few good starts, even if their overall numbers at a certain level aren't so great. 

Baseball exemplifies a dynamic of advancement, that it rarely occurs in a linear, step by step fashion. Rather, what seems to happen is that if you look at the surface (stats), no advancement takes place and then, bam, a player takes a big step forward. This is what happened with Adell last year: he was all or nothing for the first part of the year and no matter how many dingers he launched, the Angels didn't budge. Then he started slowingly down a bit and working on other things, a bit better plate discipline and contact, and after doing that for awhile and improving, the Angels called him up. 

 

[Angelsjunky]

23 hours ago, rageous said:

Hard to rate someone high that has only played 50 games in 3 years.

What about a 19 year old who, in his first real exposure to professional pitching, hits .274/.434/.491 in 29 games, and then is promoted to A+? That's worth taking note of. 

I'm not saying they should be ga-ga, but it seems strange they've made a prediction as to his outcome. Meaning, if the reason they don't rate him higher is because he's only played 50 games, they should also hold off on an assessment of his developmental outcome.

[Inside Pitch]

1 hour ago, Angelsjunky said:

But yeah, I agree that FG leans too far into the "stats" side of things. I think when you look at the guys I mentioned--Vera, Paris, Placencia, Blakely, Quero, Ramirez, Guzman, even Calabrese and Bonilla, and we'll throw in Jackson and Adams--the baseline for their future, as a group, might be utility/fringe regular, but several of them will be more than that, and one or two might even be very good players. 

I have always liked how FG melded the stats to the tools, I just think they have had a talent drain among the tools guys and the guy who's best at it currently tends to be pigheaded on certain things -- namely injuries and positional viability.

I'm not talking about how we all wonder if Stefanic can play ANY position..  I'm referring to instances where they have essentially shit on a guy because they don't believe they can stay at SS, or CF etc etc..  And I'm not talking Angels guys, they have been doing it to a lot of guys..  Putting a premium on defense is something I can get behind, but dismissing a guy completely because you think he's a tweener to be a bit much...   

This write up is the first time I have found myself disagreeing with them more often than agreeing with them.  They have seemingly decided some guys simply won't improve or cant refine the parts of their game that are lacking.  Personally, I think they are just playing it safe and weighing it more towards actual production last year, which is fine.  But it reads like they just would rather not be wrong on guys than try to project.

1 hour ago, Angelsjunky said:

Baseball exemplifies a dynamic of advancement, that it rarely occurs in a linear, step by step fashion. Rather, what seems to happen is that if you look at the surface (stats), no advancement takes place and then, bam, a player takes a big step forward. This is what happened with Adell last year: he was all or nothing for the first part of the year and no matter how many dingers he launched, the Angels didn't budge. Then he started slowingly down a bit and working on other things, a bit better plate discipline and contact, and after doing that for awhile and improving, the Angels called him up. 

Adell is a guy they didn't punt on completely but someone they went from being super high on to being really suspect on -- and it never made sense because he was the same super tooled up physical specimen he had always been.   

[Docwaukee]

2 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

I have always liked how FG melded the stats to the tools, I just think they have had a talent drain among the tools guys and the guy who's best at it currently tends to be pigheaded on certain things -- namely injuries and positional viability.

I'm not talking about how we all wonder if Stefanic can play ANY position..  I'm referring to instances where they have essentially shit on a guy because they don't believe they can stay at SS, or CF etc etc..  And I'm not talking Angels guys, they have been doing it to a lot of guys..  Putting a premium on defense is something I can get behind, but dismissing a guy completely because you think he's a tweener to be a bit much...   

This write up is the first time I have found myself disagreeing with them more often than agreeing with them.  They have seemingly decided some guys simply won't improve or cant refine the parts of their game that are lacking.  Personally, I think they are just playing it safe and weighing it more towards actual production last year, which is fine.  But it reads like they just would rather not be wrong on guys than try to project.

Adell is a guy they didn't punt on completely but someone they went from being super high on to being really suspect on -- and it never made sense because he was the same super tooled up physical specimen he had always been.   

I, too, have always appreciated the FG model more that most prospect compilations.  Yet the last few things I've read from that site seem phone in and content for the sake of content.  This list came off as some of the other less researched ones that deserve criticism.  Not something I would normally expect of them.  While I don't know for sure it seems like they were intent on forming their normal conclusions yet based on less information.  

With that, the system had a tough go in 2021 for position players and while the pitching made some strides it was mostly in the middle.  Injuries, age and the lost season had a lot to do with that.  As you've mentioned, a lot year of development is a lot different for a guy in rookie ball than one in AA.  

I think that some of the expectation was that guys like Adams and Jackson would perform well enough to replace guys like Adell and Marsh at the top of our list.  

The silver lining is that it's not like a 23 yo guy who was ranked 50th overall suddenly hit AA/AAA and failed.  

For now, there isn't a legit bust anywhere that I can see.  I have my concerns about adams but it's not like he's 24.  

Our system is very hard to read right now.  There's a ton of potential that could end up a ton of nothing.  

And the other important thing is that while the Angels always need the farm system to perform well.  Or at least want it to, they can get away with being less productive to some degree.  A few position players here and there with the occasional star.  And a shit ton of arms that can end up in the pen as needed.  They need to have the occasional front line pitcher materialize and I think we'll start to see that under Minasian now.  

Personally, I don't think it's unreasonable that the pundits are down on our system.  The current crop of 17-20 year olds is gonna have to show some stuff to change people's mind.  I think they will but I totally understand why there'd be a conservative approach that in my opinion is from a lack of research.  But we'll see.  

[Angelsjunky]

4 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

I have always liked how FG melded the stats to the tools, I just think they have had a talent drain among the tools guys and the guy who's best at it currently tends to be pigheaded on certain things -- namely injuries and positional viability.

I'm not talking about how we all wonder if Stefanic can play ANY position..  I'm referring to instances where they have essentially shit on a guy because they don't believe they can stay at SS, or CF etc etc..  And I'm not talking Angels guys, they have been doing it to a lot of guys..  Putting a premium on defense is something I can get behind, but dismissing a guy completely because you think he's a tweener to be a bit much...   

This write up is the first time I have found myself disagreeing with them more often than agreeing with them.  They have seemingly decided some guys simply won't improve or cant refine the parts of their game that are lacking.  Personally, I think they are just playing it safe and weighing it more towards actual production last year, which is fine.  But it reads like they just would rather not be wrong on guys than try to project.

Adell is a guy they didn't punt on completely but someone they went from being super high on to being really suspect on -- and it never made sense because he was the same super tooled up physical specimen he had always been.   

I agree with this take - it seems they're overly focused, even unable to see the forest (a player's overall package) for the trees (specific skills and qualities). It also seems that they've become very conservative and only gush over guys that are sure-fire stars, like Wander Franco.

[tdawg87]

1 hour ago, Angelsjunky said:

the forest (a player's overall package)

Gross.