If you're having problems logging in or staying logged in, please clear/delete your cookies/cache.
We are monitoring and fixing issues in this thread.
Thanks for your patience.
The upgrade is complete, but you've probably noticed the forums are only showing posts up to about April 8. Posts made after that are still in the process of being moved over, and that should take another week or two. Feel free to start a new thread.
The site might feel a little slow while work continues. Engineers are staying on it through the night to get things moving faster again. Thanks for your patience.
Figured I'd start this since others are for their teams. I'll try to get some research done tomorrow on the Yankees as they have had a busy off-season.
I've worked on this in the past. I'll have Baseball America's Prospect Handbook in the next month or so, so I can help with that too, if you guys want help.
Thought it might be a good time to start some discussions. I'm attaching a spreadsheet I'm making to track players. The first tab is the 40-man roster and the second tab is more focused on minor league rosters. Don't pay too much attention to the potential column right now, those are really just placeholders for now. Maybe we can start putting together an idea of who needs to be created and what their ratings/potential should look like.
Just as an FYI, I updated the sheet listed in the prior post. The Minor Leagues tab is updated so we can track progress once we really begin this project. I also updated the Position Player and Pitcher tabs with basic information and repertoires. Once we get a consensus on potentials maybe we can begin the ratings process.
Not sure if we want to start discussing roles. I'm not so hot at faces, but I'm comfortable doing info/ratings and don't mind helping out as much as I can on faces and stances/motions.
I don't have a BA or BP subscription, but I wouldn't mind doing a month subscription if it would help. I do have a Scout subscription. Obviously I can't share any info behind the pay wall but the info there is good and is certainly playing a role in my rankings here.
So without further ado, here are my preliminary rankings (only possible A/B for now) for OSFM. Hopefully we can all have some good discussion and adjust as necessary.
SP Luis Severino (A-/B+) (89)
I know Law doesn't like his stride but a number of other sources disagree. Obviously he isn't a finished product, but the stuff is there and so far the production is as well.
OF Aaron Judge (B+) (88)
One of the higher ceiling prospects in the system, heโs looking to be more of a hitter than โjustโ a slugger. The tools are there, heโs reaching the upper minors, and if he can keep progressing he looks like a possible All-Star RF with 30+ HR potential.
1B Greg Bird (B+/B) (86)
Limited athletically/defensively, heโs a polished hitter with patience and power. So far it looks like his advanced approach and above average power will carry him to the majors (at least if he can stay healthy).
RP Jacob Lindgren (B+/B) (87)
The recent draftee soared quickly through the system and has closer upside. The potential rating for OSFM doesnโt need any sort of positional adjustment like other rankings, so I could see him being a high B.
2B Rob Refsnyder (B) (83)
The bat has played, no doubt about it. Heโs put up good numbers at the highest level of the minors and (offensively at least) looks like he could compete for a spot this spring. The big question is the defense. Reportedly heโs making strides, he just needs to keep improving so heโs at least average at 2B.
C Gary Sanchez (B) (82)
Some are souring on Sanchez, but he did just put up a .270/.338/.406 line with 13 HRs while catching as a 21 year old in AA. Heโs got the arm to stay at catcher and more athleticism than Montero, but there are a number of question marks. The potential is still there, it just depends what he makes of it.
SS Jorge Mateo (B/B-) (82)
He certainly has a high ceiling, but heโs pretty far away and hasnโt started playing in full season leagues yet. May want to go with a B- due to the uncertainty.
C Luis Torrens (B-) (80)
Much more advanced defensively, he has a solid offensive ceiling as well. Maybe a safer bet to stay at C than Sanchez, but certainly doesnโt have the same power potential.
SP Ian Clarkin (B-/C+) (80)
A polished lefty with three solid pitchers, he could end up being a really decent mid-rotation starter.
3B Eric Jagielo (B-/C+) (78)
Injuries and defensive questions have lowered his stock a bit, but he has nice power from the left side and is supposed to be fairly polished offensively.
3B Miguel Andujar (B-/C+) (77)
Another younger guy, he supposedly profiles better at 3B defensively than Jagielo. He finished last year strong offensively, could be a good overall third baseman.
OF Tyler Austin (B-/C+) (78)
He hit very well in the second half of last year as he moved farther away from his wrist injury. If he can keep that going he probably goes back to one of the better prospects in the system and could even compete for a position in the majors next year.
I'd suggest we stick with the lower grades. SeanJeezy explained it well here:
Remember that potential can always change so its better to err on the side of caution. For example, we were discussing Spencer Adams earlier in the thread - his ultimate upside is probably #2 starter (high 80's) but his realistic upside is #3 or even #4 and he is rated as such. That way he can still hit his ultimate upside, hit his realistic upside, or even fail to reach that. Set him too high and the range of outcomes changes.
Severino is your best prospect and only FV60 guy but he is still thought of as a potential #3, for instance.
I'd suggest we stick with the lower grades. SeanJeezy explained it well here:
Remember that potential can always change so its better to err on the side of caution. For example, we were discussing Spencer Adams earlier in the thread - his ultimate upside is probably #2 starter (high 80's) but his realistic upside is #3 or even #4 and he is rated as such. That way he can still hit his ultimate upside, hit his realistic upside, or even fail to reach that. Set him too high and the range of outcomes changes.
Severino is your best prospect and only FV60 guy but he is still thought of as a potential #3, for instance.
Yeah, I think I have a similar thought process. It's a delicate balance, as potential can decrease as well as increase.
I updated the post with initial numbers for their potential in red. All subject to change, of course.
I'm not actively promoting lower grades, all I'm saying is physically input the projections and cross check those against whatever potential you come up with
Too many times we throw around numbers and letters when we already have a tool to confirm if the numbers and letters are accurate.
Believe me, I was shocked when Alex Jackson came in around a 85-86 but that's what I'm gonna roll with. There's a chance he ends up better or he ends up worse, but I'll let the game decide that.
I'm not actively promoting lower grades, all I'm saying is physically input the projections and cross check those against whatever potential you come up with
Too many times we throw around numbers and letters when we already have a tool to confirm if the numbers and letters are accurate.
Believe me, I was shocked when Alex Jackson came in around a 85-86 but that's what I'm gonna roll with. There's a chance he ends up better or he ends up worse, but I'll let the game decide that.
Oh yeah, I certainly agree with that. There have been a number of times I've tried putting in some numbers and have been very surprised at the OVR rating that leads to.
I just long for the day we can have a rating for the ceiling and some kind of editable risk factor. And non-linear progression. Some day . . .
I'm not actively promoting lower grades, all I'm saying is physically input the projections and cross check those against whatever potential you come up with
I didn't intend to imply that you were. I just meant that he had them listed as Player Name A-/B+ and that I felt going with the lower grade, the B+ would be better in my opinion.
Alright, the spreadsheet is updated with some very preliminary ratings. All of them will change, especially as the actual player creation begins. I'll spend the next four weeks or so reviewing each player and hopefully we can have some dialogue here that will generate some good consensus.
We should probably also talk about roles. I'm comfortable with info and ratings (although of course help is always appreciated) and can probably copy over existing faces from '14. However, I'm absolutely useless at equipment and could definitely use help with stances/motions and faces. If you have any interest please let me know!
Alright, the spreadsheet is updated with some very preliminary ratings. All of them will change, especially as the actual player creation begins. I'll spend the next four weeks or so reviewing each player and hopefully we can have some dialogue here that will generate some good consensus.
We should probably also talk about roles. I'm comfortable with info and ratings (although of course help is always appreciated) and can probably copy over existing faces from '14. However, I'm absolutely useless at equipment and could definitely use help with stances/motions and faces. If you have any interest please let me know!
Good job with the ratings and stuff. Would it make a different if Aaron Judge's potential was an A- or A? He's a monster of a man and hitter.
Good job with the ratings and stuff. Would it make a different if Aaron Judge's potential was an A- or A? He's a monster of a man and hitter.
Thanks. I think the entire OSFM/Hybrid set is going to be very conservative on handing out 'A' potentials (although there's nothing to stop you from increasing it yourself once the roster drops ). Probably the best route will be to put in the ratings for a realistic outcome for him and then make that his potential. Even if it's only mid-80's, that's a very good MLB player. But this will be a good thing to discuss when we're working on the roster.
Comment