Click here to log in

Click here for forgotten password

Click here to subscribe

<< Previous Article

Prospectus Today: Catc... (01/28)

<< Previous Column

Future Shock: Orioles ... (01/26)

Next Column >>

Future Shock: The Best... (01/30)

Next Article >>

BP Fantasy Beat: Bashi... (01/29)

Printer-friendly

January 28, 2009

Future Shock

Red Sox Top 11 Prospects

by Kevin Goldstein

top 11 prospects

BOSTON RED SOX
Team Audit | DT Cards | PECOTA Cards | Depth Chart

Five-Star Prospects
1. Lars Anderson, 1B
2. Michael Bowden, RHP
Four-Star Prospects
3. Josh Reddick, RF
4. Daniel Bard, RHP
Three-Star Prospects
5. Ryan Westmoreland, CF
6. Casey Kelly, RHP/SS
7. Michael Almanzar, 3B
8. Nick Hagadone, LHP
9. Junichi Tazawa, RHP
10. Bryan Price, RHP
11. Ryan Kalish, CF

Just Missed: Derek Gibson, SS; Yamaico Navarro, SS; Stolmey Pimentel, RHP

Ranking Challenges: Anderson was a clear choice to top this list, and Bowden edges in behind him at second by being a touch ahead of the two four-star prospects. There are difficulties with all of the players from there on down, as they have a wide, even array of attributes and faults; youth, upside, and a lack of experience, as well as injuries to players like Westmoreland, Hagadone, and Kalish (and the last still has lingering concerns about wrist surgery he had before the '08 season). Tazawa's circumstances are unusual as well, as he's a Japanese player who is not quite ready for The Show, and has a performance record that is impossible to evaluate accurately. From the fifth spot to the last, it's all about the scouting reports, and based very little on the respective performances.

The rest of this article is restricted to Baseball Prospectus Subscribers.

Not a subscriber?

Click here for more information on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get access to the best baseball content on the web.

Already a subscriber? Click here and use the blue login bar to log in.

43 comments have been left for this article.

BP Comment Quick Links

code of conduct

DGBL

(32998)

Last year, Reddick was a 2 star guy. Guys improve all the time, but was there one thing that really stood out?

Jan 28, 2009 08:24 AM

rating: 0

Kevin Goldstein

BP staff

(27460)

He really got some strong reports. I think a lot of it was that his 2007 was a little out of nowhere so people didn't trust it enough. So he proved himself, and that's a big factor.

Jan 28, 2009 08:58 AM

TheBunk

(45937)

Eeesh, I don't know, maybe there should be a six star rating or something because the difference between prospects like Tommy Hanson and Bowden feels pretty significant.

very good third starter I can buy as a five star prospect, I think that was Carrasco? But a solid third starter, aye I don't know.

Jan 28, 2009 08:39 AM

rating: 2

TheBunk

(45937)

Actually, that came off as a little rude so i'm sorry for that.

Jan 28, 2009 08:45 AM

rating: 0

Kevin Goldstein

BP staff

(27460)

I don't take it personally. I think what we're getting into here, and what we got into with Carrasco as well as exactly WHAT a No. 3 starter means. A No. 3 starter is a damn valuable property and a very good pitcher. I'm thinking about clarifying this in an upcoming piece.

Jan 28, 2009 08:59 AM

mymrbig

(38334)

Still, Bowden and Carrasco getting the same number of stars as Price, Hanson, etc. seems a bit odd. And him getting 5 stars when there are 3 under-25 pitchers in the same organization ahead of him, all of whom have equal or higher ceilings seems a bit odd.

Jan 28, 2009 09:23 AM

rating: 0

Kevin Goldstein

BP staff

(27460)

At some point you have to cut it off. Five star is a Top 50 prospect consideration guy -- that's all. You could say the same thing about Wieters and a lot of other position player prospects. You'll get more granularity down the road with the Top 100, and if I did something silly like a 10 star system or something, I'm sure it would get pretty inconsistent quickly.

Jan 28, 2009 09:29 AM

greenday8885

(40550)

Does Lars Anderson remind you at all of Billy Butler? If so which one has the better career?

Jan 28, 2009 09:13 AM

rating: 5

Drew Miller

(22526)

I see this as a fairly good comp (note to whoever rated the comment negatively--why?). Both are predicted for big power, hit for average, with lots of walks. Both are limited defensively (though Anderson is supposed to be at least okay as a 1B man). Both are young for their leagues.

Butler has thus far disappointed in the bigs. We don't have that data on Lars yet. I hope Lars is great out of the gate, but who knows?

I'd need a scouting point of view to discern between their projections.

Jan 28, 2009 11:00 AM

rating: 1

Nick Smith

(2550)

I don't see them as similar players. Lars is 6'4" 215; Butler 6'1" 240. Butler is so bad on defense he can't really play anywhere but DH; Lars should be a decent enough first baseman. Butler has lower K and BB rates. Lars bats and throws left handed; Butler's a righty. Other than being guys whose bats will have to carry them, there's not much in common between these two.

Jan 29, 2009 08:44 AM

rating: 0

ddrezner

(38887)

Kevin, you mentioned Will Middlebrooks in passing, but it looks like he didn't come close to cracking your list. Where does he rank, and what's holding him back?

Jan 28, 2009 09:47 AM

rating: 0

Drew Miller

(22526)

"Ellsbury is more than a bit overrated—in another organization with a lower profile, he'd be a nice defensive outfielder with limited secondary skills that people wouldn't be so excited about."

I don't disagree with this idea. But, if he's really not all that, why is he still ranked 5th overall? Because he's made The Show?

Jan 28, 2009 10:07 AM

rating: 0

Kevin Goldstein

BP staff

(27460)

He's a solid big league centerfielder, and I think he's going to be better than he is, I just don't think he's a star. The guaranteed value does play into it.

Jan 28, 2009 10:18 AM

Drew Miller

(22526)

So kind of the position-player equivalent of "solid third starter".

Jan 28, 2009 10:27 AM

rating: 0

Brian Kopec

(12249)

An outfielder in hand is worth 2 in the bush leagues.

Jan 28, 2009 11:42 AM

rating: 3

ithistle

(10172)

Jed Lowrie played from May 2008 on with a broken bone in his left wrist that got worse as the season went on. His splits were relatively even in the minors -- according to minorleaguesplits.com he hit for an .832 OPS against RHP and an .816 OPS against LHP in his MiLB career. It's fairly easy to conclude his poor showing in MLB against RHP was due to the injury. It's also likely that he has more upside than most people think, as the injury wasn't reported until after the season.

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2008/10/lowrie_played_t.html

Jan 28, 2009 10:13 AM

rating: 1

Drew Miller

(22526)

I agree. I don't really think he's a good defensive shortstop, though. However, if his wrist is healed, he should provide more than enough offense there to stick and be just fine.

People on ESPN's message boards shred him. But then, that's why I'm here and not there.

Jan 28, 2009 10:34 AM

rating: 1

alskor

(39403)

The defensive metrics liked him a great deal.

I dont think he's a strength there but I see him pretty close to average - there are worse shortstops defensively and many worse offensively.

Jan 28, 2009 12:05 PM

rating: 0

Drew Miller

(22526)

I see Lowrie as a .360 OBP guy with 15 HRs. Pretty good out of your shortstop.

Jan 28, 2009 10:44 AM

rating: 0

Rowen Bell

(5629)

Westmoreland -- I'm unsure how the reader is supposed to parse the first clause of the comment. Does Kevin mean: Seen as "unsignable by any team but the Red Sox", i.e., everyone thought the Red Sox was the only team he'd sign with? Or does he mean: "Seen as unsignable by any team" but the Red Sox, i.e., the Red Sox was the only team that thought he was signable?

Jan 28, 2009 10:30 AM

rating: 0

Drew Miller

(22526)

I think it means the latter--that teams passed on Westmoreland because they didn't think he'd sign. But the Red Sox *did* think he'd sign, so they drafted him.

Jan 28, 2009 10:43 AM

rating: 0

salamander

(15530)

I believe the former.... if it was the latter the natural phrasing would have been "unsignable by EVERY team but the Red Sox". The use of "any" implies that the general opinion of people KG talked to was that the Red Sox were the only team he would have been willing to sign with.

Jan 28, 2009 11:47 AM

rating: 1

Kevin Goldstein

BP staff

(27460)

That's the correct reading. Other teams were far less confident that he's sign with them, even with the right dollar figure. It seemed like he wanted to go to Vanderbilt or the Red Sox.

Jan 28, 2009 13:22 PM

fellajsmall

(39851)

KG:
Can we get a quick and dirty scouting report on Pimental's stuff? Do you view him as a sleeper at all this year?

Jan 28, 2009 11:08 AM

rating: 0

momansf

(32045)

Kevin, could you imagine Ellsbury just becoming another Coco Crisp?

Jan 28, 2009 11:23 AM

rating: 0

Alex Canzoneri

(17682)

"would you really trade the kind of upside that Westmoreland has for a guy like Lowrie?"

Absolutely.

Jan 28, 2009 11:28 AM

rating: 0

Kevin Goldstein

BP staff

(27460)

That's you. That's not me. I don't have a problem with it -- we just disagree.

Jan 28, 2009 13:23 PM

markjstachura

(20359)

What about Oscar Tejada? Where would he rank? Are the sox still high on him?

Jan 28, 2009 13:35 PM

rating: 1

Kevin Goldstein

BP staff

(27460)

They definitely are, and there are scouts who would put him in the top 11. That said, he does have some questions about his game on both sides of the ball. Still, like so many prospects in this system, lot of upside.

Jan 28, 2009 13:41 PM

Matthew Avery

(39859)

Given Westmoreland's apparently impressive record on the mound in HS, was there any consideration of making him a pitcher?

Jan 28, 2009 14:04 PM

rating: 1

TheGoldenGreek33

(39304)

His mechanics were a mess, and pitching is the entire reason for his shoulder injury. So, not really.

Jan 28, 2009 15:47 PM

rating: -1

TheGoldenGreek33

(39304)

It'd probably also be a waste to stash an incredible athlete as Westmoreland's caliber as a pitcher. You're taking away his best tool, his speed (same 60 time as Ellsbury).

Jan 28, 2009 16:01 PM

rating: -1

Kevin Goldstein

BP staff

(27460)

Yeah, he was blowing away Rhode Island kids with upper 80s stuff. He wasn't a huge pro talent as a pitcher.

Jan 28, 2009 20:13 PM

TheGoldenGreek33

(39304)

Kevin, I was a bit surprised with the Price ranking. What do you like about him more than Weiland?

Jan 28, 2009 15:59 PM

rating: 0

TheGoldenGreek33

(39304)

Similarly, what do you like about Kalish more than Lin?

Jan 28, 2009 16:06 PM

rating: 0

Kevin Goldstein

BP staff

(27460)

Better approach, more power potential (once the wrist is 100%) -- just more of an all-around game. That said, I do like Lin, just not as much.

Jan 28, 2009 20:14 PM

mwashuc06

(47497)

I think Boston is making a mistake of putting Casey Kelly on the mound. I seen this kid play in Oneonta last year and he looked like the next Derek Jeter at the plate and the young Jeter(not the old Jeter) in the field. He showed me in that one game he could hit the ball with power to all fields in the gaps.

Jan 28, 2009 17:42 PM

rating: 1

Kevin Goldstein

BP staff

(27460)

You're in the minority. He had first-round talent both ways, but the overwhelming majority preferred his upside on the mound. You're saying how good you saw him at short, but what do you have to compare it to if you didn't see him pitch. It's like I put two plates of food in front of you and the first was so delicious you immediately ruled it as superior without trying plate number two.

Jan 28, 2009 20:16 PM

mwashuc06

(47497)

That is a good point about that. What's your opinion on Derrik Gibson?

Jan 29, 2009 02:00 AM

rating: 0

Slingerland65

(26939)

Seems to me that the ratings for these guys are a bit overrated. The five star guys profiles read like the profiles of other teams' four star guys, etc. Do scouts overhype the Red Sox and Yankees as much as commentators do?

Jan 28, 2009 18:31 PM

rating: -1

R.A.Wagman

(32721)

It might be that the Red Sox guys (and the Yanks) were more highly touted as amateurs, and were acquired at dearer costs than comparable picks of other teams. Like Anderson being an 18th rounder, or Westmoreland in the 5th - but both who would have been taken much higher if it weren't for their price tags. If you redid the 2006 draft today, with cost not being an issue, where would Anderson have been selected? In short, a lot of the hype of these Red Sox and Yankees prospects as the pedigree that is not often found in these later rounds. I think as more teams overpay signability guys, we will see the scouting hype of those guys match the commentator hype (which will remain the same) of the Yanks and Red Sox.

Jan 28, 2009 20:31 PM

rating: 0

Matt

(35980)

How did Anderson fall to 18th round in the draft?

Jan 30, 2009 11:48 AM

rating: 0

alskor

(39403)

No one thought he would sign.

Jan 31, 2009 01:39 AM

rating: 0

Sorry, fantasy subscribers cannot comment on exclusive premium content.

<< Previous Article

Prospectus Today: Catc... (01/28)

<< Previous Column

Future Shock: Orioles ... (01/26)

Next Column >>

Future Shock: The Best... (01/30)

Next Article >>

BP Fantasy Beat: Bashi... (01/29)

RECENTLY AT BASEBALL PROSPECTUS Fantasy Focus: First Base Rankings Review Early Career Splits Prospectus Q&A: Lou Marson and David Huff Future Shock: Indians Top 11 Prospectus Q&A: Brian Butterfield Prospectus Today: Infield Free Agents Review On the Beat: Weekend Update	MORE FROM JANUARY 28, 2009 Prospectus Today: Catching Up On the Beat: Roads Less Traveled Prospectus Q&A: Casey Kelly
MORE BY KEVIN GOLDSTEIN 2009-02-04 - Future Shock: Indians Top 11 Prospects 2009-02-02 - Future Shock: White Sox Top 11 Prospects 2009-01-30 - Future Shock: The Best at Being Young and an... 2009-01-28 - Future Shock: Red Sox Top 11 Prospects 2009-01-26 - Future Shock: Orioles Top 11 Prospects 2009-01-23 - Future Shock: Nationals Top 11 Prospects 2009-01-20 - Future Shock: Giants Top 11 Prospects More...	MORE FUTURE SHOCK 2009-02-04 - Future Shock: Indians Top 11 Prospects 2009-02-02 - Future Shock: White Sox Top 11 Prospects 2009-01-30 - Future Shock: The Best at Being Young and an... 2009-01-28 - Future Shock: Red Sox Top 11 Prospects 2009-01-26 - Future Shock: Orioles Top 11 Prospects 2009-01-23 - Future Shock: Nationals Top 11 Prospects 2009-01-20 - Future Shock: Giants Top 11 Prospects More...
INCOMING ARTICLE LINKS 2009-11-12 - Prospectus Q&A: Ryan Kalish 2009-08-02 - Transaction Analysis Blog: AL East Deadline ...