Week 02/22 - 03/7: Ask And Ye Shall Maybe Receive vol. IV

[Jacksonian]

All minors questions welcome.

[jaklewein]

Have you heard any news on Paulino?  I'd heard that he'd had some medical problems....either shoulder or elbow.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
Have you heard any news on Paulino?  I'd heard that he'd had some medical problems....either shoulder or elbow.

One of our sources who saw him at the instructional league said Paulino was throwing very hard but had major control problems.  He was also in 10 games in the Venezuelan winter league and was quite erratic.  He may have recovered from the injury, but it'll take a while for him to get back into form.

[FL31bum]

Any word on Jamie Merchant?  Is he going to be a starter or is he coming out of the bullpen.  How about his "weight" issues?

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
Any word on Jamie Merchant?  Is he going to be a starter or is he coming out of the bullpen.  How about his "weight" issues?

All of this is really unknown at least until spring training though likely after that.  If I were to guess based on what I've heard, he'll start for the meantime.  His weight "issues" have been addressed and again we'll have to wait for spring training to know if there is any more to it.  If he's been working out he should be fine.  Personally I'm not worried about it.

[Matt]

Was there ever an insider report on the Nolan Ryan camp posted?  I remember reading about something like that coming up.  Did I just miss it?

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Was there ever an insider report on the Nolan Ryan camp posted?  I remember reading about something like that coming up.  Did I just miss it?

We got some information about Camp Ryan 2005.  Most of it was about what they focused on.  Three things were apparent:

1. Most of the rookies and prospects were there to show how they were progressing and spend time with the big league coaches and manager.  One source said most prospects were told by Phil Garner: "When you see the guys who are in the majors working on their stuff in the pen, you're going to see that they don't have that much better stuff than what you have.  The difference is that they can pitch more consistently than you right now."  Many prospects appreciated Garner's words.

2. Nolan Ryan liked working with the pitchers and was eager to share any knowledge he could with just about anyone.

3. Tim Redding is full of himself.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
3. Tim Redding is full of himself.

With respect.  My interpretation was that Redding has an inferiority complex the size of Milwaukee and used an opportunity to try to intimidate the younger pitchers, oddly enough, verbally.

[jasonact]

Quote:
and used an opportunity to try to intimidate the younger pitchers, oddly enough, verbally.

Can you give any specifics about what he did/said at Camp Ryan?

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
and used an opportunity to try to intimidate the younger pitchers, oddly enough, verbally.

Can you give any specifics about what he did/said at Camp Ryan?

No.  But it didn't work.

[Duman]

I have just spent a few minutes with the "Minor Opinions" section of the forum.  That is some great info.  Is there a plan to report on the 2004 season in the same way?

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
I have just spent a few minutes with the "Minor Opinions" section of the forum.  That is some great info.  Is there a plan to report on the 2004 season in the same way?

There is a column currently under editorial review.  There is at least one other that is in the fact gathering stage.  There will of course be a 2005 draft review.  Beyond that the staff will take up issues that present themselves as large enough to warrant a Minor Opinions column.  You'll see more frequent, shorter postings in this forum.

Thanks for your interest.

Minor Opinions/Report Staff.

[BALUA]

 http://www.minorleagueball.com/story/2005/2/27/124440/977

the list  rank by John Sickels in his blog

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
http://www.minorleagueball.com/story/2005/2/27/124440/977

the list  rank by John Sickels in his blog

An ok list, I suppose.  I disagree with the order and many of the comments.

As far as top 10 lists or 20 lists or whatever go, I generally don't like them.  I think they set up unrealistic expectations for fans.  Watch how many of these lists change, even radically, from year to year.  I prefer an unordered list of players to watch.  However, I realize many people like and want the ordered lists.  We may take a stab at a top something list here.

[Rebel Jew]

I heard Sickels on KTRH a week or so ago as I was driving to H-Town from Austin and he, among other things, echoed the sentiments of much recent prospect analysis that Willy Taveras projects as a reserve outfielder/pinch runner at best.  The big flaw I get from him and others is that Taveras doesn't show power (which is why Sickels, at least in his radio interview, rated Josh Anderson the better prospect-- though not by much because, surprise surprise, he doesn't think Anderson has shown much power either), and will be a "Juan Pierre type" at best.  It seems ridiculous to me that these analysts can so easily ignore the fact that Taveras led the Texas league in batting average, and has a decent K/BB rate to go with it.  His plate discipline coupled with his world-class speed and baserunning would seem to make him a potential threat in the same way that Ichiro or Vince Coleman are/were threats.  Who needs him to hit for power if he's consistently getting on and stealing bases?

It also seems dumb to me the way that these minor league people drool over guys who have even a small chance of projecting as a perfect five-tool player or 300 strikeout guy over guys that have a much more likely projection as a solid MLB contributor.  Brooks Conrad is rated much lower than Mitch Einerston because Einerston has that small chance of becoming a superstar while Conrad has a better chance of becoming        *only* a good major league second baseman.  It doesn't matter that Conrad has a far greater chance than Einerston of even making it to the big leagues, or that Conrad has a more consistent track record at higher levels of competition.

[Kent's Moustache]

Real, Joey.

Regarding Taveras, I'm as baffled as you with respect to the complaints about his slugging.  Taveras is a legit threat to turn every single into a double or triple with his base-stealing abilities.  Commentators like Sickel don't seem to understand that a CF like Carlos Beltran is the exception, not the rule.  Also, I find the pejorative reference to Juan Pierre ("at best") highly amusing.

I will agree, however, that Taveras needs to work on his K/BB and OBP to maximize his leadoff performance.

Regarding players like Conrad vs. players like Einertson, your point is also well-taken.  The funniest part is, the commentators at BA and other rags make the same mistakes every season, by over-hyping youngsters who put up big numbers at lower levelas and under-rating older players who perform well at higher levels.

A great example of this phenomenon is the Lexington Legends OF trio of 2001.  Topolski, Hill, and Rosamond all put up tremendous numbers at Low-A Lexington that season.  Subsequently, the commentators and scouts and what-not went wild over them.  Unfortunately for those guys and the Astros, however, none of the three has ever been able to sustain that kind of success at AA or higher.  In '04, Topolski was a back-up in Round Rock, Hill bounced between Round Rock and New Orleans (without much success at either), and Rosamond (a former 1st Rounder) was released outright, first by Houston and later by the Rockies, too.  I'm not knocking any of these guys personally, as I know at least a couple of them to be really good guys.  However, the point remains that performance at lower levels does not necessarily project to performamce at higher levels or the Majors.

Conversely, and perversely, the Astros seem unwilling to afford opportunities to guys who HAVE performed well at higher levels, e.g., Burke, Huffman, Conrad, Self, Whiteman, etc.  Perhaps they rely too much on the opinions of commentators like Sickel and the BA bunch, or the "projections" of scouts, in this respect.

[Rebel Jew]

Quote:


Conversely, and perversely, the Astros seem unwilling to afford opportunities to guys who HAVE performed well at higher levels, e.g., Burke, Huffman, Conrad, Self, Whiteman, etc.  Perhaps they rely too much on the opinions of commentators like Sickel and the BA bunch, or the "projections" of scouts, in this respect.

I think you're a little off here, as you were when you implied this earlier about Burke.  As Jim R and others around here have often reiterated, the Astros know way more about these guys than any of us, and thus can project with far greater certainty whether these guys should get an opportunity.  Regarding the five you named, none are so outstanding that they demand a spot on what is a pennant-contending team.  When Oswalt was coming up, the team was not shy about promoting him.  Same goes for Berkman, Everett, and Carlos Hernandez (and maybe with Astacio this coming year).  Nobody was shy about promoting Mike Gallo or Brandon Puffer.  Jeriome Robertson had a major league starting job handed to him after one good season in AAA that, numbers-wise, was similar to seasons by guys like Doug Sessions and DJ Houlton.  Eric Bruntlett made the team out of spring training last year (and probably will this year) even though his minor league numbers pale in comparison to your big five.

If Chris Burke was so good then we wouldn't even be discussing this, and you definitely wouldn't hear his name pop up in trade rumors.  To imply that Chris Burke starting at 2B will be anything but a hole on this pennant-contending team is wishful thinking at best.  Kent at 2B is almost certain to drive in around 100 runs, while Biggio at 2B is almost certain to get on base 35% of the time leading off.  If Chris Burke puts up either of these numbers this season, it would be in the top 1/2 of 1% of all rookie seasons in the history of baseball.

Sure, we all want to be proven wrong and see Burke and Whiteman anchor the Astro infield for the next ten years, but we have SEEN these guys play on numerous occasions and those experiences tell us otherwise.  By the same token, we have, unlike John Sickels, SEEN Willy Taveras play on numerous occasions, and it is no coincidence that he is already being considered for a limited run with the big club (or that he was called up at the end of last year).

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
However, the point remains that performance at lower levels does not necessarily project to performamce at higher levels or the Majors.

David Rawnsley, former ubber scout for the Houston Astros and a founder of TeamOne Baseball (LINK:  TeamOne Baseball) before they were bought by RIVALS, once wrote an excellent article on the difference between stats-based evaluation and observation/talent evaluation.  It broke down the flaws of using stats in the lower minor leagues.  Pretty much as you've pointed out and then some.  Stats are very misleading and an awful way to evaluate prospects in the lower minor leagues.  Rating guys like Einerston so high at this point in his career shows the obvious flaw in BA and Sickles evaluation prowess, so readers should take his opinions based on the context provided.  Basically, Sickles and his crew are not scouts, eschew talent evaluation, offer no context to performance in the lower minor leagues and use stats almost exclusively to make their judgements.  So if you want to follow BA for evaluation, it is better to use them for upper minor league evaluations and stay clear of anything they say of lower minor league talent, good or bad.

They are not scouts nor affliated with scouts nor are they shoe-leather guys when it comes to going out and looking at prospects.  Upper minor leagues, BA gives you good analysis, lower minor leagues, they basically suck and I would put no trust what they have to say about a kid in the A Ball ranks.

Quote:
Conversely, and perversely, the Astros seem unwilling to afford opportunities to guys who HAVE performed well at higher levels, e.g., Burke, Huffman, Conrad, Self, Whiteman, etc.  Perhaps they rely too much on the opinions of commentators like Sickel and the BA bunch, or the "projections" of scouts, in this respect.

You've made a big reach with your statement about the Astros.  Upper minor league guys who perform well also have other things that prevent them from being given a chance beyond just strict reluctance to give them a chance.  If anything, the opportunities afforded Lance Berkman, Colin Porter, Barry Wesson, Jason Lane, Eric Bruntlett, Jason Alfaro, Alan Zinter, Morgan Ensberg, Carlos Hernandez, Roy Oswalt, Tim Redding, Adam Everett, Richard Hidalgo, Daryle Ward and Mitch Melusky shows that the Astros are not reluctant to give kids a chance to play.  But realistically speaking, if a Jeff Bagwell is entrenched at first base, there is not much a Royce Huffman can do to pry the opportunity loose, except what he's trying now (a switch to another position).  Same with Whiteman, who is a shortstop, but Adam Everett has that job locked up.  And so on.  As far as Mike Hill is concerned, his unfortunate ability to get hurt at the wrong time has hindered him the most.  Conrad and Self still need to provide one or two more years to get noticed.  Which leaves us with Chris Burke.

Not much to say there except he's being given his shot now and he needs to make the best of it.

[Duman]

Quote:

Quote:

They are not scouts nor affliated with scouts nor are they shoe-leather guys when it comes to going out and looking at prospects.  Upper minor leagues, BA gives you good analysis, lower minor leagues, they basically suck and I would put no trust what they have to say about a kid in the A Ball ranks.

Quote:


So what is a good source for low minors eval?  (Besides here of course).  I live in Greeneville and go to several games but I am not an evaluator just a fan.  I would like to see how my eyes match up with others.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

They are not scouts nor affliated with scouts nor are they shoe-leather guys when it comes to going out and looking at prospects.  Upper minor leagues, BA gives you good analysis, lower minor leagues, they basically suck and I would put no trust what they have to say about a kid in the A Ball ranks.

Quote:
So what is a good source for low minors eval?  (Besides here of course).  I live in Greeneville and go to several games but I am not an evaluator just a fan.  I would like to see how my eyes match up with others.

That is a very good question.  TeamOne Baseball used to have great low minor league information because they used to tap into scouts from every organization and also go see as many as they could.  But since being bought by Rivals, they've migrated to college and high school recruiting more than actual major league prospect reporting.

There is always Minor League Baseball main site (LINK:  Minor League Baseball), but it is more an administrative site and hodgepodge of all information surrounding the minors.  There is a move afoot by the MLB to start contolling the minor league websites from now on.  Basically they would do what they did with the major league sites and make them more thier own.  That could be good news or bad news depending on your perspective.  My personal attitude is to wait and see how that sort of reporting will flesh out.

I think for the sake of each and every organization, it would be good to see the clubs invest on giving information to a site of some sort to give to those interested in keeping up with the kids.  That may mean they kick off the minor league centralized sites for each club and give out information that way.  Until then, you just have to search out information.  You're right though, we're trying to develop all our resources better to give you as much information as we can for as long as we can.  Some will come via scouts, some via development people, some from organizational men and some from players themselves.  It is not a mature channel of information by any stretch, but we're excited about the future prospect of developing this more for all OWA readers of MO and MR.

[jaklewein]

Just my two cents...but I think it's pretty much a lost cause to rate any prospect playing below AA, as one of the top prospects within the organization...at least in terms of a player's chances of one day contributing on the major league roster.  

There's so much that can derail a prospect's rise, no matter how much ability he has to hit, throw or field a baseball.  Good health, maturity (both in mind and body), drive, intellect and of course a continued ability to play the game successfully (good old fashion natural talent) are all needed to make it to the big leagues.  In most cases it takes years for a college athlete, let alone a high-schooler to acquire enough pieces in their personal collection of these characteristics, to make the big league club.  Between here and yon...all it takes is a major deficiency in one of these areas...or maybe just a significant deficiency in a couple of these areas...for a prospect's star to quickly burn right out.

While I will keep guys like Patton and Einerston on my "Prospect Radar" if you will, I will also temper my excitment...the percentage that either will make it to the big leagues is just simply too low.  In fact, as an example I think Jacksonian's already been told by some of his sources to temper any expectations on Einerston...that it's doubtful by performances in the Instructional League, that he'll repeat 2004's numbers, or something close to them.

[Kent's Moustache]

Quote:
To imply that Chris Burke starting at 2B will be anything but a hole on this pennant-contending team is wishful thinking at best. Kent at 2B is almost certain to drive in around 100 runs, while Biggio at 2B is almost certain to get on base 35% of the time leading off. If Chris Burke puts up either of these numbers this season, it would be in the top 1/2 of 1% of all rookie seasons in the history of baseball.

My first response, here, is that calling the '05 Astros a "pennant-contending team" may also be "wishful thinking at best."  Apparently, you and I differ in our opinion of how the loss of Beltran, Kent, and Miller will affect the '05 team.

Second, Burke's OBP at AAA New Orleans last season was nearly .400, and his career OPB is, I believe, well over the .350 threshold you cite.  While I certainly agree that his minor league numbers do not necessarily translate to the Bigs, they are, nonetheless, the best predictor available.  I find it somewhat puzzling that some posters would value their own amateur observations of a player, regarding a relatively limited sample, over the entirety of that player's career.

Third, your post seems to indicate a reluctance to play a rookie at 2B (e.g., "top 1/2 of 1% of all rookie seasons in baseball history").  Why, then, are teams like the Twins unafraid to throw rookies like Lew Ford, Justin Morneau, Terry Tiffee, Joe Mauer, etc. into the lineup during their own pennant-chase seasons?  And, frankly, the Twins know a lot more about pennants in recent seasons than do the Astros, with a fraction of the payroll.

[Kent's Moustache]

Quote:
You've made a big reach with your statement about the Astros. Upper minor league guys who perform well also have other things that prevent them from being given a chance beyond just strict reluctance to give them a chance. If anything, the opportunities afforded Lance Berkman, Colin Porter, Barry Wesson, Jason Lane, Eric Bruntlett, Jason Alfaro, Alan Zinter, Morgan Ensberg, Carlos Hernandez, Roy Oswalt, Tim Redding, Adam Everett, Richard Hidalgo, Daryle Ward and Mitch Melusky shows that the Astros are not reluctant to give kids a chance to play.

I'm not sure that some of your examples do not support my argument, Noe, instead of yours.  Porter and Alfaro signed with other teams in the past few seasons because they could not break through, for one reason or another, with the Astros.  Wesson only recently returned to the Astros from such an adventure.  And, Lane is a sad example of what happens when a front office will not play or trade a dynamic young player.

Quote:
But realistically speaking, if a Jeff Bagwell is entrenched at first base, there is not much a Royce Huffman can do to pry the opportunity loose, except what he's trying now (a switch to another position). Same with Whiteman, who is a shortstop, but Adam Everett has that job locked up. And so on.

I can't argue with you here.  The rub, as far as I'm concerned, on this point is, when do you cut bait with an aging starter (e.g., Bagwell) or an under-performing starter so that you can fish with a talented youngster?

[jaklewein]

 Third, your post seems to indicate a reluctance to play a rookie at 2B (e.g., "top 1/2 of 1% of all rookie seasons in baseball history"). Why, then, are teams like the Twins unafraid to throw rookies like Lew Ford, Justin Morneau, Terry Tiffee, Joe Mauer, etc. into the lineup during their own pennant-chase seasons? And, frankly, the Twins know a lot more about pennants in recent seasons than do the Astros, with a fraction of the payroll.

Because the Twins bascially have no choice but fill most of thier postions with younger players, due to the low payroll that the team must run on.

How do the Twins know more about pennants than the Astros?  Please explain further, as I must be missing something.

[jaklewein]

 I can't argue with you here. The rub, as far as I'm concerned, on this point is, when do you cut bait with an aging starter (e.g., Bagwell) or an under-performing starter so that you can fish with a talented youngster?

And sometimes it isn't as simple as cutting bait with an aging vet to clear that spot for a younger player.  For at least a year, maybe two....Hidalgo and his untradable contract, along with the club's loyalty to Biggio, blocked Jason Lane's spot in the starting lineup.  Another example would be Bagwell.  Let's say you wanted to move Bagwell and his $30M+ contract to free up such a spot.  Who in the hell is going to take him and that contract on?

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I'm not sure that some of your examples do not support my argument, Noe, instead of yours.  Porter and Alfaro signed with other teams in the past few seasons because they could not break through, for one reason or another, with the Astros.  Wesson only recently returned to the Astros from such an adventure.  And, Lane is a sad example of what happens when a front office will not play or trade a dynamic young player.

Had any of those players shown from the get go that they were like Lance Berkman, they would be given a job.  But in their chance (which is the point), they proved to a man they needed more time to prove themselves.  Time is afforded to a young player when you're in a rebuild mode (see: Indians, Cleveland), which Houston is not in right now or has been in the last decade.  Porter, Alfaro and even Lane needed to really break out to displace a starter and they just did not do it.  But they got their chance and that is all a team can be asked to do.

Quote:
I can't argue with you here.  The rub, as far as I'm concerned, on this point is, when do you cut bait with an aging starter (e.g., Bagwell) or an under-performing starter so that you can fish with a talented youngster?

You mean like when Houston shipped out Carl Everett and gave Richard Hidalgo and then Lance Berkman a chance to play?  The fans went crazy over the Astros shipping out a guy who was arguably the best player on the 1999 team.  Also how teammates when nuts when the Astros shipped out Brad Ausmus to give Mitch Melusky a chance to play?  Or Mike Hampton to allow Wade Miller a chance?  You have the luxury of saying what you want about the organization's decision making prowess because we can all second guess.  That is our luxury.  But we're never consistent as fans or even media with those arguments.  I remember how media members personally told me that GM Gerry Hunsicker getting rid of veterans and letting young kids play was eventually going to catch up with him because no team that is serious about contending would do that.  Funny how both camps seem to have a problem with the Astros.  It would be better for both to get together and make up their minds on this team that is going into *this* season giving at least four kids a legitimate shot to play for them: Astacio, Lane, Burke and Tavares.  That to go with the youngsters like Everett, Ensberg, Qualls, Lidge, Harville and Redding.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

They are not scouts nor affliated with scouts nor are they shoe-leather guys when it comes to going out and looking at prospects.  Upper minor leagues, BA gives you good analysis, lower minor leagues, they basically suck and I would put no trust what they have to say about a kid in the A Ball ranks.

Quote:


So what is a good source for low minors eval?  (Besides here of course).  I live in Greeneville and go to several games but I am not an evaluator just a fan.  I would like to see how my eyes match up with others.

Look for the guys with the radar guns and ask them.

[EasTexAstro]

Quote:

Quote:
To imply that Chris Burke starting at 2B will be anything but a hole on this pennant-contending team is wishful thinking at best.

My first response, here, is that calling the '05 Astros a "pennant-contending team" may also be "wishful thinking at best."

If the Astros are going to be a pennant-contending team, it probably will take some above-the-curve play from, if not Burke, some of the young guys. If not, they will have to at least play well enough to be an attractive trade option for finding the players the Astros do need to contend.

I'm not sure the key to the team is Burke, though. It would be great if he overperformed, but the main thing is contribution from Lane and Ensberg on offense while Bagwell and Biggio hold up for another year. If the rest of the team falters, then yeah, Burke could be another glaring hole on the team, but if they can hold on or improve, then I don't think Burke would be as noticable.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
Just my two cents...but I think it's pretty much a lost cause to rate any prospect playing below AA, as one of the top prospects within the organization...at least in terms of a player's chances of one day contributing on the major league roster.

I don't know about a lost cause but it is certainly difficult.  It depends a lot on who a team has in AAA and AA.

Quote:
There's so much that can derail a prospect's rise, no matter how much ability he has to hit, throw or field a baseball.  Good health, maturity (both in mind and body), drive, intellect and of course a continued ability to play the game successfully (good old fashion natural talent) are all needed to make it to the big leagues.  In most cases it takes years for a college athlete, let alone a high-schooler to acquire enough pieces in their personal collection of these characteristics, to make the big league club.  Between here and yon...all it takes is a major deficiency in one of these areas...or maybe just a significant deficiency in a couple of these areas...for a prospect's star to quickly burn right out.

See Timmah.

Quote:
While I will keep guys like Patton and Einerston on my "Prospect Radar" if you will, I will also temper my excitment...the percentage that either will make it to the big leagues is just simply too low.  In fact, as an example I think Jacksonian's already been told by some of his sources to temper any expectations on Einerston...that it's doubtful by performances in the Instructional League, that he'll repeat 2004's numbers, or something close to them.

You've been reading.  Thank you.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I'm not sure the key to the team is Burke, though. It would be great if he overperformed, but the main thing is contribution from Lane and Ensberg on offense while Bagwell and Biggio hold up for another year. If the rest of the team falters, then yeah, Burke could be another glaring hole on the team, but if they can hold on or improve, then I don't think Burke would be as noticable.

Hear! Hear!

Well said.  It is an over indulgence and not fair to put so much on Burke, who has all of 17 major league at bats so far.  Lane?  Yes.  Ensberg? Yes.  Everett? Yes.  But not Burke.  And Biggio being a second baseman also adds to the equation that the Astros have options to maximize their lineup needs right now.  Burke has options and could possibly go back to AAA to wait his turn.  Annointing him a starter was more media and fan wishful thinking.  The Astros have not shown any indication, beyond saying they like Burke and think he'll be a good major leaguer, that he's tabbed to be a starter and would be counted on heavily. Far from it.  Just because BA and Sickles has him at #1 prospect on thier list and make all sorts of pronouncements and projections means nothing.  It's what the Astros think and right now it is about Lane and Ensberg in the middle of the lineup and the dire need for a legit centerfielder.  Burke is well below those needs on the list.

[Kent's Moustache]

Quote:
Because the Twins bascially have no choice but fill most of thier postions with younger players, due to the low payroll that the team must run on.

Right.  So, they lack the money to make big-time moves like re-signing Carlos Beltran, Jeff Kent, or Wade Miller.

Quote:
How do the Twins know more about pennants than the Astros? Please explain further, as I must be missing something.

I suppose, in the interest of syntactic correctness, that I should have used the phrase "division crowns" instead of "pennants."

From 2002-2004, the Twins have won the AL Central division crown every season, thus made the playoffs every season, and advanced to the ALCS once.

During that same span, the Astros have never won the NL Central, made the playoffs as a wild-card team once, and advanced to the NLCS once.

Why is is that teams like Minnesota, Oakland, and, most recently, the resurging Indians CAN be competitive while also keeping their payroll down by playing capable and inexpensive youngsters?  Because they're not afraid to try.

[jaklewein]

 Because they're not afraid to try.

No, because they have no choice but to try.  While the Astros aren't the Yankees or Redsox in terms of payroll...they aren't the Twins or Indians either.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
From 2002-2004, the Twins have won the AL Central division crown every season, thus made the playoffs every season, and advanced to the ALCS once.

The AL Central is not a very strong division.  Most of those teams would be in the middle to lower part of the division in the AL East or West.  Minnesota plays the most sound baseball in the AL Central and because of that they come out on top more often than not.  But if you compare division crowns with other divisions, including the NL Central, you're comparing apples with grapefruits and it is a straw man argument at best.

[Kent's Moustache]

Quote:
The AL Central is not a very strong division. Most of those teams would be in the middle to lower part of the division in the AL East or West. Minnesota plays the most sound baseball in the AL Central and because of that they come out on top more often than not. But if you compare division crowns with other divisions, including the NL Central, you're comparing apples with grapefruits and it is a straw man argument at best.

Tap the brakes there, Noe.  The NL Central is not the rampaging beast that you make it out to be.

Before the Cards were swept 4-0 by the BoSox last fall, the last NL Central team to even play in the World Series was the 1990 Reds.  During that same span, the AL Central put three teams in the Series (Indians twice, Twins once).

Doesn't look like a "straw man" to me...

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
The AL Central is not a very strong division. Most of those teams would be in the middle to lower part of the division in the AL East or West. Minnesota plays the most sound baseball in the AL Central and because of that they come out on top more often than not. But if you compare division crowns with other divisions, including the NL Central, you're comparing apples with grapefruits and it is a straw man argument at best.

Tap the brakes there, Noe.  The NL Central is not the rampaging beast that you make it out to be.

Before the Cards were swept 4-0 by the BoSox last fall, the last NL Central team to even play in the World Series was the 1990 Reds.  During that same span, the AL Central put three teams in the Series (Indians twice, Twins once).

Doesn't look like a "straw man" to me...

You're kidding, right?  The NL Central is very strong, and it is much stronger than the AL Central.  You're basis for saying it isn't is the World Series?  And you mentioned the Twins recently.  If you want to go back ten years, then let's go back twenty, then let's go back thirty to make more straw man arguments.  The point remains, the Twins of today have a better chance to win a division crown because of a weaker division than any other team in any other division, both AL and NL.  Pointing to the Twins division crowns of recent history and saying that the lack of the same for the Houston Astros is dissengenous unless both teams played in the same division.  It is a straw man argument.

[Jacksonian]

I appreciate the banter but would prefer that if you're going to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the AL Central and NL Central at the big league level you do it in the TZ where that kind of discussion is best made.

If you think I'm being overbearing, well, sorry.  We're all still new to this setup and still trying to get a handle on the acceptable limits.  If you wish to move this part of the thread back to minors talk even as it relates to guys breaking into the majors, as above, then feel free to do so.  Just do it post haste.  Thanks.

Minor Reports Staff

[Rebel Jew]

Quote:

Quote:


My first response, here, is that calling the '05 Astros a "pennant-contending team" may also be "wishful thinking at best."  Apparently, you and I differ in our opinion of how the loss of Beltran, Kent, and Miller will affect the '05 team.

Second, Burke's OBP at AAA New Orleans last season was nearly .400, and his career OPB is, I believe, well over the .350 threshold you cite.  While I certainly agree that his minor league numbers do not necessarily translate to the Bigs, they are, nonetheless, the best predictor available.  I find it somewhat puzzling that some posters would value their own amateur observations of a player, regarding a relatively limited sample, over the entirety of that player's career.

 

The Astros consider themselves a contending team, whether they actually do so is another question.

Burke has put up good numbers against minor league pitching, but he has done absolutely nothing against major league pitching.  I know that he's never really had the chance, but we do know that Biggio and Kent have had over 30 years of chances between them and they have reliably put up solid numbers.  To assume that his minor league numbers will translate to the majors is also assuming that he will buck the trend of 99 and a half percent of all major league rookies.  We can't know for sure, which is why the smart move is to bring a guy up slowly unless you're sure you've got a special player on your hands (as with Berkman, Everett, Oswalt etc.).

And as for "amateur observations...", is there a better way of forming a personal opinion about a player?  I know that I saw Burke over parts of two seasons at RR, just as I know that I saw Taveras for part of one season at RR.  My amateur observations from watching how these guys play (i.e. how they go about putting up their stats) tell me that Taveras could be a great player, whereas Burke doesn't seem as likely.  I've also seen Keith Ginter and Brooks Conrad at RR and, since they play the same position as Burke, they make a fair comparison, stats or no stats.

[Kent's Moustache]

Don't get your panties in a wad, Joey, about the "amateur observations" comment, as I certainly did not mean anything pejorative or personal about you by the comment.  Your observations--just like mine and all the other posters on this Board--are "amateur" because we are neither professional baseball scouts, nor professional baseball players.

And, I also did not mean to imply that your opinions, derived from your personal observations at Round Rock games, are meritless.  My point was that an "amateur's" observations at a relatively limited number of games, ABs, etc., is less indicative of a player's abilities than his proven track record over a number of ABs, games, seasons, etc.

For example, at a Round Rock game, you might have seen Charlton Jimerson drive a titanic blast over the Dodge sign in left field and believe that you were looking at te next Carlos Beltran.  However, if you attended a number of Round Rock games, you would also discern that he strikes out about once every three ABs, and approximately five times more than he walks.

Nevertheless, as I posed to Jim R on the TZ Board, I am very interested in hearing your comparisons, from attending several seasons of Round Rock games, of various prospects, such as Ginter vs. Burke vs. Conrad at 2B.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Your observations--just like mine and all the other posters on this Board--are "amateur" because we are neither professional baseball scouts, nor professional baseball players.

I can tell you what one professional ex-GM of the Houston Astros said about Chris Burke in a very candid manner.  He said that Burke is your classic "overachiever".  Basically (paraphrasing Hunsicker) "when you look at him play, you're not that impressed, but he works hard and overachieves at playing this game."  Burke is not blessed with great talent, other than speed, his range is okay, his instincts around second are a bit slow, his power is suspect, his ability to hit for high average is good but he hits to right field a lot (think Tony Euseio like) and his arm strength isn't that great.

But the guy works and works and works and earns everything he's gotten so far.  But to call him gifted and talented for his upcoming major league career is a bit of a stretch.  He will work hard to make himself a good major leaguer, but my guess is he'll never achieve the type of notice that some fans and media are projecting for him right now.  He will carve out a nice career, because he refuses to let his lack of pure talent keep him down.  He is a grinder, but eventually he'll settle into a career that may be low ceiling Candele-like or high ceiling Doran-ish (He won't be the next Biggio).  He has no one convinced of greatness so far, not anyone who has watched him play for an extended period of time.

And I hope I'm wrong about him, but his limitations are what they are in terms of pure baseball talent.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:

Quote:
Your observations--just like mine and all the other posters on this Board--are "amateur" because we are neither professional baseball scouts, nor professional baseball players.

I can tell you what one professional ex-GM of the Houston Astros said about Chris Burke in a very candid manner.  He said that Burke is your classic "overachiever".  Basically (paraphrasing Hunsicker) "when you look at him play, you're not that impressed, but he works hard and overachieves at playing this game."  Burke is not blessed with great talent, other than speed, his range is okay, his instincts around second are a bit slow, his power is suspect, his ability to hit for high average is good but he hits to right field a lot (think Tony Euseio like) and his arm strength isn't that great.

But the guy works and works and works and earns everything he's gotten so far.  But to call him gifted and talented for his upcoming major league career is a bit of a stretch.  He will work hard to make himself a good major leaguer, but my guess is he'll never achieve the type of notice that some fans and media are projecting for him right now.  He will carve out a nice career, because he refuses to let his lack of pure talent keep him down.  He is a grinder, but eventually he'll settle into a career that may be low ceiling Candele-like or high ceiling Doran-ish (He won't be the next Biggio).  He has no one convinced of greatness so far, not anyone who has watched him play for an extended period of time.

And I hope I'm wrong about him, but his limitations are what they are in terms of pure baseball talent.

I've seen this name pop up in more than one place as a comparison for Burke: Mark Loretta.

The Astros have an issue as far as long-term solutions for 2b within the organization.  They've got Burke then Conrad, then ?  And, both those guys are questionable as far as major league ability is concerned.  However, I've a gut feeling (and as such have just screwed him) about a certain player in the Astros org.  Edwin Maysonet.  He went to instructs after a fair year at Lexington where his biggest problem offensively was a .261 average.  He hit for a lot of power and got on base at a good clip.  He committed 20 errors but split time between 2b and ss.  I would guess he'll start at second at Salem this year opposite Zobrist.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Your observations--just like mine and all the other posters on this Board--are "amateur" because we are neither professional baseball scouts, nor professional baseball players.

I can tell you what one professional ex-GM of the Houston Astros said about Chris Burke in a very candid manner.  He said that Burke is your classic "overachiever".  Basically (paraphrasing Hunsicker) "when you look at him play, you're not that impressed, but he works hard and overachieves at playing this game."  Burke is not blessed with great talent, other than speed, his range is okay, his instincts around second are a bit slow, his power is suspect, his ability to hit for high average is good but he hits to right field a lot (think Tony Euseio like) and his arm strength isn't that great.

But the guy works and works and works and earns everything he's gotten so far.  But to call him gifted and talented for his upcoming major league career is a bit of a stretch.  He will work hard to make himself a good major leaguer, but my guess is he'll never achieve the type of notice that some fans and media are projecting for him right now.  He will carve out a nice career, because he refuses to let his lack of pure talent keep him down.  He is a grinder, but eventually he'll settle into a career that may be low ceiling Candele-like or high ceiling Doran-ish (He won't be the next Biggio).  He has no one convinced of greatness so far, not anyone who has watched him play for an extended period of time.

And I hope I'm wrong about him, but his limitations are what they are in terms of pure baseball talent.

I've seen this name pop up in more than one place as a comparison for Burke: Mark Loretta.

The Astros have an issue as far as long-term solutions for 2b within the organization.  They've got Burke then Conrad, then ?  And, both those guys are questionable as far as major league ability is concerned.  However, I've a gut feeling (and as such have just screwed him) about a certain player in the Astros org.  Edwin Maysonet.  He went to instructs after a fair year at Lexington where his biggest problem offensively was a .261 average.  He hit for a lot of power and got on base at a good clip.  He committed 20 errors but split time between 2b and ss.  I would guess he'll start at second at Salem this year opposite Zobrist.

Loretta has more power and a better arm, but as far as being a good hitter for average, that is not a bad comparison.  Loretta just knows how to hit a baseball.  Burke may develop that ability to be as good as Loretta and perhaps the power will come soon after that.  Loretta also made a name for himself early in his career as a versatile player, moving from short to third to second and all around.  In fact, some said he would eventually become a full time third baseman in Milwaukee.  His inability to put a strangle hold on any position in Milwaukee eventually landed him on the bench there.  Houston salvaged his career and he went to third and second for Houston for awhile and only until he went to San Diego did he become a full time second sacker.

[EasTexAstro]

OK, I've been known to make a few odd comments about Burke, to be sure. After reading some of this, maybe I was never too far off, though.

I was just hopjng for a contributer that wouldn't be a big letdown - someone able to hold down a solid 2nd base.

A possible Doran type player? At worst, a Casey clone? Comparisson with Lorretta if given a year or so?

That was the best I had ever hoped for from Burke. I dodn't think anyone had him pasted in for the next star, but maybe a hard working contributor where other needs could be addressed with the big bucks.

After reading some comments on here, I started getting the feeling that was a big overestimation of his abillities, but Doran/Lorretta is more than I would have thought. I'm sorry if I am being dense again, but is the expectation from the people in the know is that he will flop, or just that he will be no more than a Lugo?

[stubbyc]

Classic overachiever eh? I believe Marcus Giles was called the same thing. Their AAA #'s are pretty similar as well.

It seems to me that this organization has something against any of our position prospects that don't put up ridiculous Berkman like numbers in the minor leagues.

I don't think Burke will be a star, but I think he'll be an above average 2b in the mold of Mark Loretta or Marcus Giles. He probably won't be quite as good, but he'll be similar.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I'm sorry if I am being dense again, but is the expectation from the people in the know is that he will flop, or just that he will be no more than a Lugo?

Nobody on the Astros believes he will "flop".  But I believe the fan and media hype for this kid is incredible and it will be dissapointing to them when the Astros take a good route for the kid to make his way into the major leagues.  No different than Jason Lane or any other good major leaguer to be.  "Flops", no, not necessarily.  But budding superstar in the making that needs to play?  No, not that either.  Maybe in time if he continues his good pace at developing his game.  Give the Astros and Burke a chance everyone, stop annointing this kid the minor league Messiah.

For now, expect Biggio to play second base and Burke to either learn some of the ropes from him or be back down in AAA seasoning some more.  If he shows some ability to play left field, he may stick on the team as a super sub, but again, overall, he's not going to get a starters role just because.

And I hope he does prove everyone else right to annoint him the Messiah, because it will mean great things for the team if he does.  But I wouldn't hold my breath about it.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Classic overachiever eh? I believe Marcus Giles was called the same thing. Their AAA #'s are pretty similar as well.

Understood and the hope is there for Burke as well.  Being called an overachiever is not a disparging thing.  It is what it is in terms of talent evaluation.  And besides, Marcus Giles is still developing his game and no one is calling him the next great second baseman like most are annointing on Burke right now.

Quote:
It seems to me that this organization has something against any of our position prospects that don't put up ridiculous Berkman like numbers in the minor leagues.

Well, yeah!  If minor leaguers put up Berkman numbers, they would get the same consideration Berkman got.  But the truth is no one has come along yet to match Berkman's prowess as a minor leaguer on into a major leaguer.  The Astros don't have something *against* their prospects.  They want them to succeed!  Hence why they are taking the prudent route with some players.  Unless everyone is so dead sure the Astros are a bunch of dummies who don't know how to run a development system for players, I think just looking at stats and annointing a player the next great thing won't work in real life professional baseball.

Quote:
I don't think Burke will be a star, but I think he'll be an above average 2b in the mold of Mark Loretta or Marcus Giles. He probably won't be quite as good, but he'll be similar.

Marcus Giles is still developing his game and he is nowhere near a refined product.  He swings from his heels and hits homeruns.  You will not see Burke hitting the same way.  Loretta has power as well, but Burke is not a power hitting second baseman.  He has a slight hitcch in his swing that slows his bat down in the zone and causes him to push everything to right field.

You know what, I'm not going to talk about Burke any more.  I'm just going to allow everyone to observe for themselves what game Burke has and what he does well and what he needs to improve upon.  It is useless to talk about a guy no one has really seen play in the major leagues yet.  Get back to me with your impressions on Burke when spring training is over.

[EasTexAstro]

Quote:

Quote:
I'm sorry if I am being dense again, but is the expectation from the people in the know is that he will flop, or just that he will be no more than a Lugo?

Nobody on the Astros believes he will "flop".  But I believe the fan and media hype for this kid is incredible and it will be dissapointing to them when the Astros take a good route for the kid to make his way into the major leagues.  No different than Jason Lane or any other good major leaguer to be.  "Flops", no, not necessarily.  But budding superstar in the making that needs to play?  No, not that either.  Maybe in time if he continues his good pace at developing his game.  Give the Astros and Burke a chance everyone, stop annointing this kid the minor league Messiah.

For now, expect Biggio to play second base and Burke to either learn some of the ropes from him or be back down in AAA seasoning some more.  If he shows some ability to play left field, he may stick on the team as a super sub, but again, overall, he's not going to get a starters role just because.

And I hope he does prove everyone else right to annoint him the Messiah, because it will mean great things for the team if he does.  But I wouldn't hold my breath about it.

Thanks, Noe. I am not trying to apply for his sainthood, and I really didn't mean to imply that.....again.

OK. This is what I mean: Not many teams can have A-Rod as their shortstop, but they can still be successful with a no-name guy playing SS if they can use their resources filling other positions,

If Burke can be anything other than a flop, I don't see where there should be a problem with him...necessarily. Like I said before, there are other positions the Astros should be able to fill with run producers and stars. If they can put a star there, GREAT!, but I am not suggesting it is Burke. Actually, if they can get a good outfielder and Biggio moves back to 2nd, I think that would be quite exciting.

I don't have faith in Burke, but hope isn't so bad, is it? I'm not even hopeful for a star, just not a complete embarrassment. From your latest comments, I was thinking that maybe that was a ligit thought.

[EasTexAstro]

Quote:
You know what, I'm not going to talk about Burke any more.  I'm just going to allow everyone to observe for themselves what game Burke has and what he does well and what he needs to improve upon.  It is useless to talk about a guy no one has really seen play in the major leagues yet.  Get back to me with your impressions on Burke when spring training is over.

Nevermind. Sorry, I am a slow typer. Please disregaurd my last post. I hadn't seen this one yet.

[Duman]

Alot of the post draft talk for HS guys will say, if negotiations fall through, he will play at XYZ University or JC.  Do these negotiations include an agent?  If so, how is this different from the NCAA rule that says if a player signs with an agent they are ineligable?  I know this is true in Basketball and Football. Please enlighten me.

[Duman]

Quote:
Until then, you just have to search out information.  You're right though, we're trying to develop all our resources better to give you as much information as we can for as long as we can.  Some will come via scouts, some via development people, some from organizational men and some from players themselves.  It is not a mature channel of information by any stretch, but we're excited about the future prospect of developing this more for all OWA readers of MO and MR.

I will be glad to add my "amaturish" opinion on what I see at the games.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
Until then, you just have to search out information.  You're right though, we're trying to develop all our resources better to give you as much information as we can for as long as we can.  Some will come via scouts, some via development people, some from organizational men and some from players themselves.  It is not a mature channel of information by any stretch, but we're excited about the future prospect of developing this more for all OWA readers of MO and MR.

I will be glad to add my "amaturish" opinion on what I see at the games.

Actually, it is information from folks like you who attend the actual games that has more insight than most of the online sources, sans the organization and players themselves.

Thanks for the contributions, it is very welcome here.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I'm sorry if I am being dense again, but is the expectation from the people in the know is that he will flop, or just that he will be no more than a Lugo?

Nobody on the Astros believes he will "flop".  But I believe the fan and media hype for this kid is incredible and it will be dissapointing to them when the Astros take a good route for the kid to make his way into the major leagues.  No different than Jason Lane or any other good major leaguer to be.  "Flops", no, not necessarily.  But budding superstar in the making that needs to play?  No, not that either.  Maybe in time if he continues his good pace at developing his game.  Give the Astros and Burke a chance everyone, stop annointing this kid the minor league Messiah.

For now, expect Biggio to play second base and Burke to either learn some of the ropes from him or be back down in AAA seasoning some more.  If he shows some ability to play left field, he may stick on the team as a super sub, but again, overall, he's not going to get a starters role just because.

And I hope he does prove everyone else right to annoint him the Messiah, because it will mean great things for the team if he does.  But I wouldn't hold my breath about it.

Thanks, Noe. I am not trying to apply for his sainthood, and I really didn't mean to imply that.....again.

OK. This is what I mean: Not many teams can have A-Rod as their shortstop, but they can still be successful with a no-name guy playing SS if they can use their resources filling other positions,

If Burke can be anything other than a flop, I don't see where there should be a problem with him...necessarily. Like I said before, there are other positions the Astros should be able to fill with run producers and stars. If they can put a star there, GREAT!, but I am not suggesting it is Burke. Actually, if they can get a good outfielder and Biggio moves back to 2nd, I think that would be quite exciting.

I don't have faith in Burke, but hope isn't so bad, is it? I'm not even hopeful for a star, just not a complete embarrassment. From your latest comments, I was thinking that maybe that was a ligit thought.

Cool.  I think enough of Burke to keep my expectations in check as it were.  I cringe at projections of ROY status for the kid when he has some flaws in his game that may keep him from even being a starter for now.  We all have to wait and see at this point.  The Astros have a grasp of what they know about this kid for now and the work he puts in and the development of his game will tell them more as the spring progresses.

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
Alot of the post draft talk for HS guys will say, if negotiations fall through, he will play at XYZ University or JC.  Do these negotiations include an agent?  If so, how is this different from the NCAA rule that says if a player signs with an agent they are ineligable?  I know this is true in Basketball and Football. Please enlighten me.

Basically, for all sports if a student-athlete has a verbal or written agreement with an agent then the student-athlete becomes immediately ineligible.  However, there are ways around it built into the NCAA By-laws here are a couple of examples:

From Article 12, section 2 regarding involvement with professional teams:
 12.2.4.3 Negotiations.  ...Further, the individual, his or her legal guardians or the institution?s professional sports counseling panel may enter into negotiations with a professional sports organization without the loss of the individual?s amateur status. An individual who retains an agent shall lose amateur status. (Adopted: 1/10/92)

Also From article 12, section 3 regarding use of agents:
12.3.2 Legal Counsel. Securing advice from a lawyer concerning a proposed professional sports con-tract shall not be considered contracting for representation by an agent under this rule, unless the lawyer also represents the individual in negotiations for such a contract.
12.3.2.1 Presence of a Lawyer at Negotiations. A lawyer may not be present during discussions of a contract offer with a professional organization or have any direct contact (i.e., in person, by telephone or by mail) with a professional sports organization on behalf of the individual. A lawyer?s presence during such discussions is considered representation by an agent.

[jasonact]

Quote:
I cringe at projections of ROY status for the kid when he has some flaws in his game that may keep him from even being a starter for now.  We all have to wait and see at this point.  The Astros have a grasp of what they know about this kid for now and the work he puts in and the development of his game will tell them more as the spring progresses.

I think all of the talk of Burke for ROY says more about the potential lackluster rookie class this year than anything else. From what I've heard, the next wave of potential superstuds is mostly at least a year away.

Nevertheless, I am still hopeful that he'll prove people wrong and turn into a very good regular-- someone who doesn't have the job only because the Astros can't find anyone better. Maybe not a perenial all-star, but good.

[HOB]

I just posed this over in the TZ but it probably belongs over here.  Does anyone know where Willy Taveras is at in regards to becoming a Switch hitter?  Did he actually bat from the left side last year at AA?  Just curious and I didn't see it discussed before so please excuse the question if it's redundant.

On the topic of prospects, what's the organizational view of Tommy Whiteman?  I know he was lumped in between Conrand and Burke in the infield prospect group a couple years ago.  However, I haven't seen near the discussion about Whiteman as I have Conrad.  Appreciate any replies....

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I just posed this over in the TZ but it probably belongs over here.  Does anyone know where Willy Taveras is at in regards to becoming a Switch hitter?  Did he actually bat from the left side last year at AA?  Just curious and I didn't see it discussed before so please excuse the question if it's redundant.

No, he did not switch hit during his AA season in 2004.

Quote:
On the topic of prospects, what's the organizational view of Tommy Whiteman?  I know he was lumped in between Conrand and Burke in the infield prospect group a couple years ago.  However, I haven't seen near the discussion about Whiteman as I have Conrad.  Appreciate any replies....

Whiteman is a favorite of GM Tim Purpura.  He has a lightning quick bat and can really get around on a fastball.  He hits the ball hard and can really send it a very long way.  His problem has been identification of breaking pitches and the ability to lay off those pitches.  He has to improve his K/BB ratio to move up even more.  But he is a solid prospect that will get a look this spring.  Best projection is a AAA stint at Round Rock for Whiteman with possibility for a major league call up if one presents itself during the 2005 campaign.

[HOB]

Thanks for answering the Taveras question twice.  

Of the two games I have seen Whiteman, he was at SS one game and 3B the next.  Are they locking him into one position or will he continue to receive work at both spots?

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Thanks for answering the Taveras question twice.

You're welcome.  

Quote:
Of the two games I have seen Whiteman, he was at SS one game and 3B the next.  Are they locking him into one position or will he continue to receive work at both spots?

Whiteman is tall and lanky and has some footwork awkwardness at shortstop.  But he has a very strong arm.  His sometime erratic throws to first are due to his footwork.  Many strong armed shortstops have switched over to third successfully (Vinny Castilla, Billy Spiers, etc.).  He has quickness to handle the third base bag if necessary.  So it makes sense to discover his ability at third.  Purpura loves his range and ability at short stop, but he also likes Adam Everett's ability there as well.  I expect the lion share of Whiteman's time at AAA will be short stop but he'll mix in some third base as well.

[Duman]

I know (thanks to your Did you know post) that Pitchers report on Monday.  Do they have camps for differnt levels or do they just have one big minors camp?  If they do have different level camps, when do they do the breaking down?

[Duman]

Here are some quotes from a local news story about Russ Nixon's first visit to the ballpark and meeting the media.

Nixon noted. ?This area is just fabulous. And the ball park...I tell you what, it?s very impressive. It?s a (class) AA or possibly AAA park, except for the seating capacity.?

?We had an excellent draft last year,? Nixon said of the Astros. ?We filled two good clubs. Greeneville won its league, and Tri-City almost won their league. We?ve got a talent base. Lexington (Class A) ought to be loaded this year. And that makes everybody else better in the next four or five years.?


Full Story
The Link

[Jacksonian]

Quote:
I know (thanks to your Did you know post) that Pitchers report on Monday.  Do they have camps for differnt levels or do they just have one big minors camp?  If they do have different level camps, when do they do the breaking down?

Pitchers and catchers are working through different stations getting the work in they need to get ready for the season.  After the position players report, the coaches will break down all the players into groups based on where they believe each player will end up.  CC group, Salem group...  Players may change groups as decisions are made.  We will try to keep readers apprised of pertinent info but the Astros are quite busy and may not have time to give out a lot of info.