#OSFM 17 Red Sox

[Bard]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

In my opinion, for what it is worth, I see the following: ( | indicates a break between high/med/low

A - Devers/Groome
B - Travis/Dalbec | Raudes
C - Chatham/Ockimey | Chavis/Longhi | Shawaryn/Cosart/Shaun Anderson

The rest of the players, in system, are high D's, low C's. Our depth has been hit hard, and outside of a few high potential guys in the DSL and stuff (guys in the Raudes mold), I think the large majority of our system is pretty much "meh" system filler.

It's worth noting that I believe Dalbec and Raudes have a good chance to become A level players with a strong year, whereas I think anyone with a C arguably has a case as a B with a similar strong year.

Exactly this. This will likely be how our system looks for the opening OSFM roster set. Devers and Groome will both be A's. Travis, Dalbec, and Raudes will be B's and then need to figure out all the C's and D's.

[legacyme3]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

Not sure if we've accounted for him, but the new Mexican pitcher, Hector Velazquez made his debut today.

He has a high 80's, low 90's fastball, and an ok split change, slider, and cutter. I wish more information was known about him, since it seems he's going to be at either AAA or AA, which puts him in line with what the OSFM roster sets expect of us.

Strengths - struck guys out in Mexico, without having overpowering stuff, kind of strikes me as a Jamie Moyer type, but with more strikeout upside, possibly.

Weaknesses - Other than a lack of being tested at the major league level, and being 28 NOW, I'm a little concerned about his ability to actually be a starter, professionally. Averaged less than 6 innings per start in 2016, which was a "breakout" year of sorts. Might be more useful as a long man out of the pen, since his stuff might play up more there.

So his Stamina should be pretty low, as should his pitch ratings in terms of velocity (has good command on all of them though, and it seems his cutter and slider have decent enough bite for a AA/AAA guy). I'd say his potential is very clearly in that mid-C level, as he probably fits in the back end of our top 20 as of this moment. Good news is we'll have plenty of time to learn more before the game even ships, and even more time before OSFM is 100% finalized this year if we want to include him (we probably should, given his advanced age and relative proximity to the majors). As for who we remove, if we have to, one of Kent/Pimentel/Glorious seems like the safest bet. If we have too many starters, then Kent, but if too many relievers, one of Pimentel/Glorious. (would suck to lose Glorious though, love his talent haha)

[Bard]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

Yeah I was just thinking of who to drop in favor of him (don't really want to haha), but I think Pimentel would be the safest bet out of anyone. Kent and Glorious I would like to keep on the roster for the time being!

He definitely strikes me as a long reliever/swing-man that could be decent in the bigs...however he is 28 like you said, and isn't getting any younger with our already full MLB staff.

[legacyme3]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

Yeah, I'm going to put in a vote for Pimentel, myself. I like Kent, since he's seemingly going to start, and I'm also a fan of Glorious (think he has the best shot to actually stick in the majors of the three).

Velazquez's age might make it tricky, what are we thinking, ratings-wise, right now? Should we treat him as if he pitched last year between AA and AAA (as he pitched in a league that BRef compares with AAA), and thus, give him depth ratings that you'd give to a 6th/7th SP in line type?

Additionally, it seems one of his lesser known strengths is preventing HRs, so if we need something to boost the OVR, that could help. Also has gotten pretty good at not walking guys.

[Wbcfan]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

In my opinion, for what it is worth, I see the following: ( | indicates a break between high/med/low

A - Devers/Groome
B - Travis/Dalbec | Raudes
C - Chatham/Ockimey | Chavis/Longhi | Shawaryn/Cosart/Shaun Anderson

The rest of the players, in system, are high D's, low C's. Our depth has been hit hard, and outside of a few high potential guys in the DSL and stuff (guys in the Raudes mold), I think the large majority of our system is pretty much "meh" system filler.

It's worth noting that I believe Dalbec and Raudes have a good chance to become A level players with a strong year, whereas I think anyone with a C arguably has a case as a B with a similar strong year.

No way is raudes an A potential. High C tops. Devers is a high B since he's all offense and no defense. groome is the only A left ina depleted farm system.

[redsoxfan31]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

No way is raudes an A potential. High C tops. Devers is a high B since he's all offense and no defense. groome is the only A left ina depleted farm system.

He said that Raudes could become an A with a strong year, not that he was an A. And Devers has looked just fine defensively in big league camp and he's #18 on BA's top 100

[legacyme3]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

He said that Raudes could become an A with a strong year, not that he was an A. And Devers has looked just fine defensively in big league camp and he's #18 on BA's top 100

Yeah, I still think Raudes is somewhere between our 4th-8th best prospect right now, so he's clearly not an A level player yet.

But if he can bring the peripherals he's shown so far to high A, then I think you can make a case for him as soon as next year. Not saying it is likely, but I just wanted to point out that we do have a bit of a rising stud in him potentially. Most teams have a player or two like this, where he could end up being an A next year, or a low C. I just want us to monitor him in particular, since I think he's going to be one of the players that changes the most between this year's OSFM and next year's.

On Devers, whether his defense is good or bad shouldn't preclude him from having a specific potential. I think his defense will be ok enough (not great or anything), it should be based on his overall body of work. You wouldn't give Miggy a B in potential because he's not great in the field, would you? I'm not saying Devers is Miggy, but I think Devers is certainly our top prospect outside of Benintendi (who will lose that eligibility after this season).

Our farm is depleted, but it's still very top heavy, with five legitimate high level prospects and basically nothing behind them. Benintendi/Devers/Groome/Travis/Dalbec are excellent. But you also have guys like Nick Longhi in our top 10, and he's barely a C level player, I might even be high on him saying he's a C.

2017 Red Sox OSFM will still leave the Red Sox as a viable option, of course, but it is nowhere near the bevy of talent we had last year to work with.

[Bard]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

Raudes is a C+ very borderline B- I think at the moment. A solid year will raise him a click for those. B+ very borderline A- in my opinion.

We all need to figure out ratings for the prospects in our system. We are so thin, and not sure if we have so many D's or if I'm being a hard ***.

[legacyme3]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

Raudes is a C+ very borderline B- I think at the moment. A solid year will raise him a click for those. B+ very borderline A- in my opinion.

We all need to figure out ratings for the prospects in our system. We are so thin, and not sure if we have so many D's or if I'm being a hard ***.

I think we are a farm system that has a ton of high level talents (you have as many as five guys who could be top 100 prospects), but has basically no real depth.

Once you get past the top 15-20 or so, I think you are solidly into "low C, high D" territory.

If there's a player in specific you are having trouble placing, let me know, and I'll see if I can give you a perspective on the player you might not be thinking about (I watch these guys year round, and pay about as much attention to them as I do the big league guys these days).

Alternatively, you can shoot me a PM, and I can respond in depth there, as well.

[legacyme3]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

Just wanted to post in here: I picked up the BA Prospect Handbook for 2017, if we want to get a different take on any of our top 30 prospects, there's some good information in there that we might be overlooking because we're fans of the team.

I'll be panning over it a ton in the coming weeks.

[TNKNGM]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

Hey guys - thanks for doing this

I've done the Sox for OSFM for years now but my job and kid (with another on the way) have had me way too busy to be thinking about this until the past few days

I always used this as a guide and suggest you guys use this site for any info you need

http://www.soxprospects.com/

http://www.soxprospects.com/2017.htm

[legacyme3]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

Hey guys - thanks for doing this

I've done the Sox for OSFM for years now but my job and kid (with another on the way) have had me way too busy to be thinking about this until the past few days

I always used this as a guide and suggest you guys use this site for any info you need

http://www.soxprospects.com/

http://www.soxprospects.com/2017.htm

Yeah, I've followed OS for a long time, and your work with the Red Sox with years past is really inspiring.

I'm not sure if I'll be able to bring much to the table, since I'm not exactly great with faces (I might have to learn though, with how great the creation tool is), but I hope we do ok with this year's set. Don't want to let down our forefathers as it were.

I don't know if Bard got an early copy of the game, or has done any pre-work besides the roster we have set, but I'm excited to see what OSFM comes up with in 2017.

[Bard]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

I got the game a few hours ago! I can help out, not sure how much is needed and whatnot but anything you need I can do!

[legacyme3]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

Alright, so what do we need in 2017 Red Sox OSFM?

Ratings
Faces
Roster

The roster seems to be checked off, Bard, we both seemed to agree on a general set for the 2017 team. Since you have your copy (I won't get mine until tomorrow afternoon methinks), could you get started on potentially importing over players from last year to see which we can use this year, so we know who to focus on?

When I get the game tomorrow, I'll try to see if I'm at all capable of doing a face (I'm hoping so, otherwise we might be in a bit of trouble, I forget if you said you were good with faces or not).

I know we have a general idea of what we want the players potentials to be, but do we have any idea how to properly do the ratings? (I think there's a spreadsheet that makes it easy to input a rating)

This is the link I'm talking about

Honestly, feeling a little scared haha. Can't rely on the TNKNGM crutch this time.

TNKNGM - If you are in the thread still, if nothing else, if you have some insight that could help us out, it would be greatly appreciated. I've seen the process from the community side, but never from the perspective of a contributor, and I want to make sure we do this right. Anything you could add as advice, be it for ratings, face construction, or general OSFM advice would be greatly appreciated. I believe Bard feels the same way I do on this topic.

[RidinDwnKingsley]

Re: #OSFM 17 Red Sox

Alright, so what do we need in 2017 Red Sox OSFM?



Ratings

Faces

Roster



The roster seems to be checked off, Bard, we both seemed to agree on a general set for the 2017 team. Since you have your copy (I won't get mine until tomorrow afternoon methinks), could you get started on potentially importing over players from last year to see which we can use this year, so we know who to focus on?



When I get the game tomorrow, I'll try to see if I'm at all capable of doing a face (I'm hoping so, otherwise we might be in a bit of trouble, I forget if you said you were good with faces or not).



I know we have a general idea of what we want the players potentials to be, but do we have any idea how to properly do the ratings? (I think there's a spreadsheet that makes it easy to input a rating)



This is the link I'm talking about



Honestly, feeling a little scared haha. Can't rely on the TNKNGM crutch this time.



TNKNGM - If you are in the thread still, if nothing else, if you have some insight that could help us out, it would be greatly appreciated. I've seen the process from the community side, but never from the perspective of a contributor, and I want to make sure we do this right. Anything you could add as advice, be it for ratings, face construction, or general OSFM advice would be greatly appreciated. I believe Bard feels the same way I do on this topic.

Guys we have all teams done... if you have a suggestion let us know.... osfm has been in progress for months


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports