Future Forty Update for July
(Sorry about the earlier glitch – the draft wasn’t done, but somehow got published.)
The Future Forty has undergone its monthly makeover. Asdrubal Cabrera goes away, so the system is a little more thin at the top, but the fact that Steve Uhlmansiek, Anthony Varvaro, and Brandon Morrow are all throwing in short season ball helps the lower level talent base. Overall, I’d say the system is improved from where it was a month ago, as several players have taken steps forward and the short season level talent is above average.
New faces include Travis Chick (6/6 reward/risk), Steve Uhlmansiek (7/9), and Greg Halman (7/9). Joining Asdrubal Cabrera in leaving the Future Forty were Nathanael Mateo (5/9) and TJ Bohn (5/8). I also shifted a few players from one category to another – notably, Ryan Feierabend went from a projected contributor to a projected regular, as he’s been pitching his way to the top of the team’s list of young left-handed pitchers.
Rather than rehashing what I’ve said about veterans of the Future Forty, I wanted to use this post to talk about some of the new guys. I gave a brief overview on Chick yesterday, but a little more in depth profile is probably in order. Plus, Uhlmansiek and Halman are two of the main guys to see (along with Kuo-Hui Lo) up in Everett, so, here’s some info on the newcomers to the list.
Chick’s an interesting guy. He just turned 21, but he’s now on his fourth organization, and he’s been rather up-and-down in his short professional career. Back in 2002/2003 with the Marlins, he was sitting 89-93 with his fastball but had problems with his command and hadn’t developed any secondary pitches of note. He had a breakthrough 2004 season in low-A, tightening his slider and his command and missing bats regularly for the first time. He had problems leaving the ball up in the zone, which resulted in flyball tendancies and home run problems, and the Marlins dealt him to the Padres, where he shined in the Midwest League after the trade. He was named the #4 prospect in the Padres organization in the spring of 2005 by Baseball America.
That was a bad farm system, though (Josh Barfield and Freddy Guzman 1 and 2 respectively? Yech.), and he was the number one arm in that farm system by default, really. He struggled in ’05, losing velocity and sitting 88-90 and only occassionally touching 92 or 93. Hitters at higher levels stopped chasing the slider out of the zone, and his strikeout rate went down while the walk rate went back up. After being traded to the Reds in midseason, he was terrible for Chatanooga, as his velocity waned late in the season and his command was non-existant. A lack of a knockout pitch and endurance had most scouts projecting him as a reliever.
He rebounded fairly well while repeating Double-A this year, improving the command of his fastball, but his velocity is still not where it was in 2004. He’s still sitting 88-91 and the command of his slider is still too poor for it to be a true out pitch. His change hasn’t come along, and with his current arsenal, he still projects better as a relief pitcher than a starter.
His splits tell an interesting story – lefties have hit him for a high average the past 18 months, but his GB/FB rate against LHB’s is basically even and he’s kept them in the yard. RH batters have a significantly lower batting average, but he’s been an extreme FB pitcher against RH batters, and he’s given up 18 homers vs RHB’s vs just 10 homers vs LHB’s in the past year and a half. Lefties hit him for average, righties hit him for power. It’s a little odd, honestly.
When going through the guys the M’s have had in the system in the past few years trying to find a comparison for Chick, one name stuck out the most, even though its not a perfect comp – J.J. Putz. While Putz was a college pitcher and older at age stop along the way, his pro experience matches Chick pretty well, and they’re numbers and arsenals are quite similar. Putz was 89-94 as a starter without a good outpitch and mediocre command. He missed less bats as a starter than Chick does now, in fact. Obviously, the big key for Putz has been the addition of the splitter, which has made him an ace reliever, but even with just his fastball in the pen, he was a decent cheap middle man.
Chick is now where Putz was about two years ago. A move to the pen would likely up his velocity to the 93-95 range (most pitchers gain velo when only throwing for an inning or two), where he could be effective in short stretches, even without the slider being a strikeout pitch. If it improves (he just turned 21, after all), he could be a very nice setup man. And occassionally, these guys learn a new pitch and become J.J. Putz. It’s not common, but it happens, and it’s why you like to have these guys in your system.
So, Travis Chick, nice arm to have around. He’s not the pitching equivalent of Asdrubal Cabrera, as Bavasi claimed in the press release, but he’s better than most of the arms the M’s had in the system before, and he’s got a chance to help the club in a year or two.
Moving on to the Everett guys, Uhlmansiek was a steal by the M’s in the 12th round of the 2004 draft as he was recovering from Tommy John surgery. His arm is back in throwing shape, and while he’s not rushing it up there at 94 like he was in college, he’s sitting 89-92 and showing good command. He knows how to pitch, has solid average secondary stuff, and locates his fastball well. He’s not going to have any problem with the Northwest League, and if his fastball returns to his college level, he could climb the ladder in a hurry. He’ll be fun to watch next year.
Greg Halman is an 18-year-old outfielder with plenty of juice in his bat. Like pretty much every other Mariner prospect, he swings at everything, and his plate discipline needs a lot of work. But he’s a high school kid playing in a league of college arms, and driving the ball with authority. The M’s have him playing center, though most scouts project him to a corner. He’s got a better approach at the plate than Wladmir Balentien, and if you’re looking for an impact power corner outfield bat, he’s probably the best bet in the system. He’s young, he’s raw, and he’s far away, but he’s got a chance to thump. It’s nice that the M’s finally have a kid like this.
Comments
47 Responses to “Future Forty Update for July”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I’m curious about the statement that “Chick is now where Putz was about two years ago.” Two years ago, Putz was making his MLB debut. Is Chick that close to helping at the Big League level? Or are you just referring to his pre-relief, pre-splitter days in general?
Thanks for the analysis, Dave.
Any thought about putting Tony Butler on the list? Is he pitching yet (I think he signed awhile back)?
Uh Dave? You got Sherrill’s birthdate wrong. He was actually born on April 19 1977, not
November 4 1982.
Brad Holman is still the pitching coach at AA, right? Charlton was saying yesterday that Homan had called Norm about the trade, and mentioned he’d kept an eye on Chick since about 2004…
What does Bavasi mean when he says they are aggressively pushing guys up in the system. Promoting before ready, going on potential or pushing to see where they stall? Is this a good plan or a desperate one? Does it impair development?
#4 yeah, Brad Holman is the pitching coach at Double-A San Antonio (he was with Wisconsin before this year). The weird thing is that when Charlton was on KJR yesterday, he repeatedly referred to Brad as his brother, Brian Holman. Easy mistake to make, but considering that Charlton travels and sees these guys regularly, it was kind of strange.
Dave,
Great work. Just curious, though, why is Reed’s stock listed as “holding”? Falling is more like it.
No Mike Wilson?
Former high draft pick out of HS, just turned 23, hitting the bejeebers out of the ball all year (currently at AA), massive power potential.
I would be interested in the rationale behind leaving off of a list of the M’s top FORTY prospects.
Tony Butler’s pitching at Peoria, off to a decent start there.
Nitpick: Chick just turned 22, not 21.
Darn — Do you have an archive of the Future Forty iterations? I don’t recall A-Cab’s Risk/Reward — can anyone jog my memory?
(It also might be kinda fun to see each iteration of this just for old-times sake)
I’m sure you already know this, Dave, but you’ve got Mark Lowe listed at Tacoma and he’s currently at San Antonio (unless you’ve already got the word that he’s going up to Tacoma to replace Cruceta or Jimenez 🙂
I just spoke with the Rainiers and they haven’t yet been informed who is going up (the Rainiers are flying in from Tucson, landing at SeaTac around 2:30)…
Or are you just referring to his pre-relief, pre-splitter days in general?
Right.
Any thought about putting Tony Butler on the list?
No.
What does Bavasi mean when he says they are aggressively pushing guys up in the system. Promoting before ready, going on potential or pushing to see where they stall? Is this a good plan or a desperate one? Does it impair development?
The M’s are promoting their prospects faster than any other organization in baseball right now. Bavasi believes in creating adversity for his kids so they learn how to push through bad times and become mentally stronger. I’m not the biggest fan of this philosophy.
Great work. Just curious, though, why is Reed’s stock listed as “holding� Falling is more like it.
Yea, you’re right. I should change that.
No Mike Wilson?
Nope.
Former high draft pick out of HS, just turned 23, hitting the bejeebers out of the ball all year (currently at AA), massive power potential.
Lousy approach at the plate, holes in his swing, can’t field. Too many flaws.
I would be interested in the rationale behind leaving off of a list of the M’s top FORTY prospects.
Keep in mind, I keep guys in the majors on the list, so he’s competing with Felix, Betancourt, Lopez, Sherrill, etc… too. Not just farm system guys.
I’m sure you already know this, Dave, but you’ve got Mark Lowe listed at Tacoma and he’s currently at San Antonio (unless you’ve already got the word that he’s going up to Tacoma to replace Cruceta or Jimenez
Yea, I was told last night that Lowe was coming to Tacoma.
Cool. Someone using a non-automatically-refreshing IE (when I looked at the updated list in Firefox before I posted, I didn’t see A-Cab). Thanks for the info (and hit “f5” to refresh your page to the latest version).
Little nit, the links for Clement and Morrow aren’t working.
Dave, how much of the aggressive promotion philosophy is simply Bavasi (who at least coming into the season knew he lacked long-term job security) wanting to create the appearance of an improved farm system with guys almost ready to contribute in the majors by pushing the few top prospects like Jones and Clement to the top levels?
Or how much of it is Bavasi knowing he has a 40-man roster logjam coming up this offseason, and needs to accelerate the process of separating the wheat from the chaff? Aside from a healthy Doyle, every minor leaguers on the 40-man roster is a question mark as to whether he can contribute in the majors.
Dave, how much of the aggressive promotion philosophy is simply Bavasi (who at least coming into the season knew he lacked long-term job security) wanting to create the appearance of an improved farm system with guys almost ready to contribute in the majors by pushing the few top prospects like Jones and Clement to the top levels?
None. He did this when he was the farm director for the Dodgers, too. His job wasn’t on the line then. He just believes that players need to learn how to fail, and then overcome, before they reach the majors.
It’s not Bavasi trying to make something appear to be a certain way. This is how he believes prospects should be developed.
Or how much of it is Bavasi knowing he has a 40-man roster logjam coming up this offseason, and needs to accelerate the process of separating the wheat from the chaff?
Do we actually have any worse of a logjam coming up for this offseason’s 40-man roster than most clubs? It seems to me that if all you’ve got on the current 40-man is a bunch of question marks, it’s not that hard to cut bait on the ones that are really going nowhere (Foppert, Nageotte, Bohn, what is Jeff Harris still doing on the 40-man?) to make room for next year’s crew.
Dave, do you think that Robert Rohrbaugh may be able to outperform your projection for him? I don’t know the scouting perspective on him, but he’s pitched well at Inland Empire and his three starts at San Antonio. In 75 innings he’s only given up 3 homers and 11 walks, with decent K/9. Any shot for him to become a potential 5 starter down the road?
Dave,
How does Kuo-Hui Lo measure up on your rating system?
I’d like to add that for those who might have been wondering — no, I haven’t forgotten about the Big Board. I actually had an update all ready to go about three weeks ago, completely up-to-date and with new working links and everything, when Windows died on me. I did later manage to re-install and save my documents, etc., but now am in the process of getting switched over to my new Mac. In any event, please be patient and I’ll have an update by the end of the month.
#16-17– wasn’t there a player he mentioned at the feed when talking about needing to struggle to develop? or an I confusing that with all of us filling in various names….
Are you maybe thinking of Blackley?
Dave, do you think that Robert Rohrbaugh may be able to outperform your projection for him? I don’t know the scouting perspective on him, but he’s pitched well at Inland Empire and his three starts at San Antonio. In 75 innings he’s only given up 3 homers and 11 walks, with decent K/9. Any shot for him to become a potential 5 starter down the road?
Rohrbaugh is the classic soft-tossing lefty with fringey stuff and good command. One out of every 40 makes it, and the other 39 fail. No one has figured out how to identify which one that guy is ahead of time, though.
How does Kuo-Hui Lo measure up on your rating system?
I really wanted to get Lo on this list, and he’s definitely #41. It was between him and Saunders for the last spot, and I decided to keep Saunders on there for now. Lo will make this list in the not too distant future, though.
#16-17– wasn’t there a player he mentioned at the feed when talking about needing to struggle to develop? or an I confusing that with all of us filling in various names….
Yea, that was Blackley. That was Bill’s example of a guy who came up to the majors and had no idea how to deal with failure.
Lowe is not headed for Triple A but is coming to the MLB. What do you think Dave?
18: The M’s certainly have a logjam in comparison to the last offseason when they had trouble coming up with 40 names to protect (Renee Cortez? Really, was there any need to protect him?). Plus, except for maybe Doyle and a bullpen spot or two, the M’s are unlikely to fill the few openings on next year’s active roster with minor leaguers. And that does not count the non-roster guys like Cruceta and Quiroz who will probably see some time in the majors before the end of the year.
If you look at most other organizations, the first 10 or so of the 15 spots that go to minor leaguers are usually pretty easy calls. For the M’s, however, there are few easy calls and a whole bunch of almost indistinguishable players that are hard to sort out — how do you determine which of the 10 soft-tossing lefties who don’t miss bats do you keep, and which of the 10 right-handers with only 2 established pitches and control problems do you keep?
Dave, is Asdrubral Cabrera a good illustration of why you’re not crazy about Bavasi’s strategy of pushing hard and fast? Because I’m sure not equating the guy with a Generic RH Live Arm- and it seems Cabrera’s struggles at AAA might have influenced opinions on value.
Also, Clement in 2008 with him spending time at AAA now is just bizarre.
Without trying to figure out offhand exactly who the team will need to make decisions on whether to add, I’ll grant that the M’s will have more of a logjam than last offseason, when it seemed like omitting Jeff Heaverlo was the only “tough” call. That’s only a sign that the farm system is improving from abysmal to marginally acceptable. In the context of a question about why Bavasi’s philosophy differs from other baseball executives, I figured that the circumstances of other organizations, rather than those of the same organization at a different time, was the appropriate point of comparison.
If the M’s still don’t have as many easy calls as other teams, it’s probably because the farm system improvement hasn’t yet manifested itself at the upper levels in terms of high-impact prospects. For the indistinguishable marginal prospects you’re talking about, you simply pick those you feel best about and don’t lose a lot of sleep over it. Those are the kind that aren’t going to turn into the next Johan Santana if you lose them in the Rule 5 draft anyway.
Dave, do you think that Bavasi’s preference for aggressively pushing prospects and getting them to learn how to deal with failure could result in them being undervalued as prospects? If they are performing less well than their talent because they are in over their head, does it hurt their trade value (regarless of whether it’s good for their development)?
Time for another update. Lowe as a graduate…
Lowe is not headed for Triple A but is coming to the MLB.
Also none of this 4-6 weeks stuff for Reed, since he’s moved to the 60-day DL to make room on the 40-man. The initial reports did strike me as overly optimistic, but it looks like we really shouldn’t expect to see him much the rest of the year – assuming people even want to.
Halman impressed me when I went and saw Everett play a few weeks back. Kid just looks like a player.
The thing about Reed is, if he was actually still hurting from that wrist thing and it was affecting his hitting, he might be much improved when he’s completely healthy again. Perhaps not enough to be the regular CF again, which is a problem because they won’t get much for him in a trade based on his performance this year (and just watch him go to some other team as a throw-in and blossom as a healthy hitter).
I would like to know why Brian Schweiger isn’t on the list. I have never seen him play, but he has put up pretty impressive OPS numbers at various teams in our system this year. The Rainiers web site lists him at .983, but it isactually 1.83 if you examine the stats carefully. (They have him with an on base percentage lower than his batting average.) I know this is a small sample size, but he put up a plus.900 OPS at Inland Empire. Both are small sample sizes. Is he hurt?
Similar question as to the absence of Brian La Hair, who also has good numbers at Tacoma, again in small sample sizes.
34, not sure about the specifics that got him there, but it is certainly possible to have an OBP less than your BA, especially with as small a sample as Schweiger has.
Example – a sacrifice won’t affect your BA, but does hurt your OBP.
I appreciate the detail on the Aquasoxers, Dave. I’m quite interested in Uhlmansiek, and the pitching staff there in general looks strong, a better bunch than I’ve seen from Fontaine before, although in fairness he was concentrating on position players for the Ms out of necessity. Greg Halman is a guy I’ll keep in mind, too, as I’d heard nothing of him before.
I mentioned this elsewhere, but the Everett roster has the most ethnicly and phoneticly diverse collection of names I can recall seeing. A fascinating compendium of phonemes.
Mike Wilson is relatively old, and missed development time on top of that. It’s hard to see him develop enough to succeed even in the high minors.
I know that ‘forcefeed’ is Bavasi’s development pattern, but this year even more than his last two guys are going up the minors with jet packs on their pack. They’re jumping so far, I’m actually concerned about it.
I also remember the example of Blackley, and I thought it was a poor example at the time, as there was everyreason to believe that T. Blackley’s arm had been shredding for a year prior to his call-up, and he’d been on the DL in Tacoma with a bad arm to start that year. It’s exactly examples like this that make me question Bavasi’s strategy: it’s not necessarily a bad idea, but his judgment about who’s ready, who’s failing, and why has some . . . blurry spots in it, to me. Then there were the examples of bringing upt Matt Thornton and Clint Nageotte for the first time two years ago when their control was TERRIBLE in Tacoma; again, the judgment just didn’t seem good. It worked out alright with Felix, but he’s _Felix_ and besides he was excelling in Tacoma when he came up. For the most part, though, I frankly don’t trust this crew to make the right call on promoting guys.
Reed on/off the FF: I figured he was gone for the year when I heard the injury; usually that’s a two-month minimum if they do surgery, so unless he had just a hairline thing he was gone. “My hand was numb” ain’t no hairline thing.
Reed hasn’t hit at a ML level since Sep, ’06, and his stock is dropping like a rock. He may be better than his ’06 to date, but if the Ms are going to go anywhere good this season they had to get him out of the lineup and somebody better in. Now, they have space on the 40-man.
I’ve scrapped the idea of doing a Reed, Will He or Won’t He post: I’m just going to let his bat speak for me.
35. In 12 at bats he had five hits and a walk. Doesn’t that mean his OBP should be .500? Or am I screwing up because a walk doens’t count as an at-bat?
BTW Dave, where’s Halman from, and what was his draft number?? I’ll go looking, but this one passed me by.
I would like to know why Brian Schweiger isn’t on the list. I have never seen him play, but he has put up pretty impressive OPS numbers at various teams in our system this year.
Brian Schweiger just lacks the requisite skills to play major league baseball. He has a slow bat, absolutely no power, and mediocre catch-and-throw skills. He turns 24 in two months. He’s just not a major leaguer. Any sample of less than 100 at-bats, for any player, is worthless – at the minor league level, for a guy like Schweiger, it’s less than worthless.
But if you insist on small samples, he hit .136/.292/.169 in 20 games for Everett last year, by the way. That’s short-season A ball, at age 23. He’s the epitome of an organizational player.
Similar question as to the absence of Brian La Hair, who also has good numbers at Tacoma, again in small sample sizes.
LaHair’s better than Schweiger, but same basic deal. LaHair is a decent line-drive hitter who lacks the juice in his swing to be a productive first baseman. He has holes in his swing, struggles with breaking balls, and has mediocre strike zone judgment.
Getting a bunch of singles to fall in during 67 at-bats for Tacoma doesn’t change his skillset. He’s the new Greg Dobbs.
Dave, do you think that Bavasi’s preference for aggressively pushing prospects and getting them to learn how to deal with failure could result in them being undervalued as prospects? If they are performing less well than their talent because they are in over their head, does it hurt their trade value (regarless of whether it’s good for their development)?
For the most part, teams don’t care about minor league numbers. Trades are made based on scouting reports, and the scouting reports on Asdrubal Cabrera’s skillset are going to be the same whether he’s playing at Double-A or Triple-A. Fans base their evaluations based on statistics – teams don’t.
BTW Dave, where’s Halman from, and what was his draft number?? I’ll go looking, but this one passed me by.
Halman was signed as an international free agent. He’s from the Netherlands.
Heeyyyyy! The Ms international Eye in the Sky scores another coup. Halman’s a Nederlander, then. Great.
Thanks for the explanation, Dave. And thanks for all your work on putting this together and then explaining your thinking.. It is enlightening to read your thoughts, and it enhances my interest in the organization.
38, Rick L.: 5 hits and 1 walk in 12 ABs, but (at least) 13 PA. OBP is figured from PA, so you add the walk to both sides of the equation. Also, as somebody else pointed out here, a sac (which isn’t listed on the team’s stat page) would also be counted as a PA (even though not an AB for BA purposes), so it is possible for OBP to be lower than BA, expecially in such small samples. So, if Schweiger had 5 hits and a walk (and nothing else that matters to OBP), his OBP would be .462. If he also had a couple sacrifices in there, his OBP would be 6 times on base divided by 15 plate appearances, or precisely the .400 they said it is.
Are projections of minor leaguers based on their statistics — the old Bill James ones, or the PECOTA ones — essentially worthless?
Are projections of minor leaguers based on their statistics  the old Bill James ones, or the PECOTA ones  essentially worthless?
Not worthless, no. But certainly nothing close to the total picture. Good statistical analysis can point you in the general direction, but without scouting information, you’re got an incomplete picture, and can often be misled.
With as much good information as we have available to us in this day and age, there’s no real reason to ignore either statistics or scouting information. Putting both together is the key to understanding the whole picture.
Thanks. I certainly have never intended to dismiss or discount the value of scouting. I just wondered whether scouts can have their opinions of a minor leaguer’s skillset hurt by underperformance.