Remember this from last year? We do. That’s why we decided to do it again.
Here’s the intro from the 2014 round of U25 rankings:
For this exercise, we're each going to rank our top 30 U25 fantasy players by division before we collaborate on a top-150 list once this portion of the project is complete. For each division, we'll give you our individual rankings and then discuss any major discrepancies in our rankings, talk about some sleepers we wanted to rank higher and take cheap shots at each other along the way. It will be like the TINO podcast, but for your eyes, complete with an imaginary Bret Sayre breaking up our fights.
You get the idea, then. Players have to be born after April 1st, 1989 to qualify. We’ll link to last year’s divisional rankings in each piece so you can compare for yourself: 2014 AL East U25 Dynasty Ranking.
Ben's Rankings |
Craig's Rankings |
1. Xander Bogaerts, SS, BOS |
1. Xander Bogaerts, SS, BOS |
2. Manny Machado, 3B, BAL |
2. Mookie Betts, OF, BOS |
3. Mookie Betts, OF, BOS |
3. Manny Machado, 3B, BAL |
4. Yoan Moncada, INF, BOS |
4. Yoan Moncada, INF, BOS |
5. Matt Moore, SP, TB |
5. Drew Smyly, SP, TB |
6. Marcus Stroman, SP, TOR |
6. Jake Odorizzi, SP, TB |
7. Dylan Bundy, SP, BAL |
7. Dalton Pompey, CF, TOR |
8. Kevin Gausman, SP, BAL |
8. Blake Swihart, C, BOS |
9. Jake Odorizzi, SP, TB |
9. Matt Moore, SP, TB |
10. Blake Swihart, C, BOS |
10. Kevin Gausman, SP, BAL |
11. Aaron Sanchez, P, TOR |
11. Daniel Norris, SP, TOR |
12. Dalton Pompey, OF, TOR |
12. Aaron Judge, OF, NYY |
13. Drew Smyly, SP, TB |
13. Dylan Bundy, SP, BAL |
14. Aaron Judge, OF, NYY |
14. Steven Souza, Jr., OF, TB |
15. Daniel Norris, SP, TOR |
15. Aaron Sanchez, SP, TOR |
16. Drew Hutchison, SP, TOR |
16. Marcus Stroman, SP, TOR |
17. Hunter Harvey, SP, BAL |
17. Eduardo Rodriguez, SP, BOS |
18. Henry Owens, SP, BOS |
18. Hunter Harvey, SP, BAL |
19. Eduardo Rodriguez, SP, BOS |
19. Devon Travis, 2B, TOR |
20. Steven Souza, OF, TB |
20. Henry Owens, SP, BOS |
21. Jeff Hoffman, SP, TOR |
21. Jeff Hoffman, SP, TOR |
22. Rafael Devers, 3B, BOS |
22. Manuel Margot, CF, BOS |
23. Manuel Margot, OF, BOS |
23. Jonathan Schoop, 2B, BAL |
24. Jonathan Schoop, 2B, BAL |
24. Drew Hutchison, SP, TOR |
25. Nathan Eovaldi, SP, NYY |
25. Luis Severino, P, NYY |
26. Nick Franklin, UT, TB |
26. Brent Honeywell, SP, TB |
27. Luis Severino, P, NYY |
27. Rafael Devers, 3B, BOS |
28. Daniel Robertson, INF, TB |
28. Nick Franklin, 2B/SS, TB |
29. Garin Cecchini, 3B/OF, BOS |
29. Blake Snell, SP, TB |
30. Chance Sisco, C, BAL |
30. Taylor Guerrieri, SP, TB |
Disagreement One: Devon Travis
Ben: Travis was great in Double-A last year, has been great in the majors so far this year and has hit at every level. He also plays second base for a good team in a great park, so I get it. He would’ve been somewhere in my next five players listed. But Travis doesn’t project to do anything particularly well from a fantasy perspective. Yes, he already has six homers, but it’d be surprising to see him surpass, say, 12-15 on a regular basis. He’s not a speedster, and while he’s received some praise for his bat-to-ball skills, he’s never profiled as a true plus hitter, either. Maybe the sum of the parts is greater than the whole here, especially playing in Toronto, but I have a hard time placing a guy I see as a borderline starter in a 20-team league ahead of prospects like Hoffman, Margot, Severino and Devers, who could all be impact guys even if they’re not here now.
Craig: I guess I wonder what a guy who hits 12-15 homers, steals 10-plus bases, and hits say .260 or so is worth? I’m not necessarily tied to my rankings, as our offline discussions recognize that these rankings fall apart rather quickly, and while there is some depth in the teens and beyond, it’s hard to separate what goes where. The guy is contributing at the major-league level right now, and to your point, he’s hit everywhere he’s been. I don’t even consider myself a Travis believer (the band is okay, though) but I can’t argue with present value, and even substantial regression to the levels mentioned would represent somewhat significant value in leagues that care about this type of player.
Ben: Well, that’s the thing. Neither of us has ever been big Travis believers, and it seems like you’re letting a hot start really factor in heavily here. Would you have ranked Travis ahead of the prospects I mentioned six weeks ago? I guess you can argue that you would’ve, but I don’t buy it. I think .260 with 12-15 homers and 10-plus bases is the best case for Travis in each category (maybe the average can be a bit higher), and I’m not super optimistic that all comes together on a regular basis. I’d certainly rather have him than Anthony Gose, at least, so maybe AA is a ninja again.
Craig: No, I wouldn’t have, but I also wouldn’t have thought he’d break with the team and earn significant playing time either, as he’d only played a partial season at Double-A. I think it’s less the numbers that are affecting me than what I’ve seen from him, and that’s a guy who can legitimately hit. I’m not talking about a .300 hitter by any means, but I don’t think .260 is too high a threshold to hit. I do think you’re underselling the speed. He’s not a burner and his minor league stolen base totals are highly misleading, but low-end double-digit totals are within reach. Even Mark Anderson’s scouting report, which only gave him a 45 for his speed recognized that his instincts help that play up into the 10-15 stolen base range. Again, I think we agree that there’s nothing special here, but it might just be a different valuation on what a guy like Travis is worth. Also, let’s not forget my boy Gose is OPSing over 800 right now.
Imaginary Bret: [Blows whistle]. I’m calling a Devon Travel because this conversation has carried on long enough. Basketball.
Disagreement Two: Nate Eovaldi
Craig: Basically, I just don’t think he’s all that good. I had some high hopes for him as a Dodgers draftee/prospect thanks to a huge fastball that he could hold deep into games. The problem is he’s mostly that same guy. He’s developed the slider a bit, and will mix in a curveball but he has no weapon against left-handed hitters and his fastball, as big as it is, remains far too hittable. You don’t lead the league in hits given up by accident, and putting the dude in Yankee Stadium isn’t doing him any favors.
Ben: I also don’t think he’s very good. Like, at all. Even when I thought he’d be in pitcher-friendly Marlins Park, I viewed him as a marginally rosterable starter in 14-team leagues. That’s gone down with his move to the AL and to Yankee Stadium. But—and this is really the central point to my argument—he’s pitching in the majors. The bottom of this list is really weak, and Eovaldi at least has a *chance* to perform closer to his FIP from last year, which was down at 3.37 and is at 3.27 currently. I certainly don’t think he’s going to post a sub-3.50 ERA, but it’s not crazy to think he could hover a bit below 4.00 while striking out, like, 150 batters. That’s really boring and eminently replaceable, but at a certain point we need to weigh present value. Plus, given CC’s demise and Tanaka’s arm, Eovaldi could be the Yankees’ ace shortly. An ace, Craig.
Craig: Damning with faint praise there. I don’t disagree with the stat line, but a 4.00 ERA these days is almost radioactive. The strikeouts are fine but you’re better off streaming the position than plugging a likely 4.00 ERA guy in. Eminently replaceable is 100 percent right, and if that’s the case, I don’t see any cause to value him over guys who could contribute down the line. If he’s waiver wire material, than he’s not on the list, as far as I’m concerned.
Ben: He’s still a safer bet to provide some fantasy value than guys like Honeywell, Snell and Guerrieri. Sure, you could twist that logic into “never take the prospect,” but these are inherently subjective rankings and at a certain point you have to decide that average MLBers are worth more than guys who might someday be No. 3/4 starters. I guess this is really where league size matters, too. If we’re ranking for a 10-team league, sure, fire Eovaldi into the sun. In a 20-team league, give me Eovaldi over SP prospects who are on the outside looking in of most top-100 lists. I really hate you for making me defend Eovaldi.
Imaginary Bret: More like Eo-fail-di at this point. Dad humor ftw.
Ben’s One Player He Wanted to Rank Higher: Luis Severino
The stuff is so, so good. Yes, he’s a Yankee, but he’d be super fun to watch if he could stay in the rotation with his 70 fastball and promising secondaries. But I just can’t buy that body and delivery as a long-term starter right now, even with the success of other short starters across the league. I hope I’m wrong, because he’d be a potential no. 3 fantasy starter even in Yankee Stadium. But I don’t think I’m wrong, and with Andrew Miller and Dellin Betances ahead of him in the ‘pen, it would be tough for him to see many saves anytime soon if he does have to relieve. I’m looking for and willing to buy into any positive signs, though.
Craig’s One Player He Wanted to Rank Higher: Chance Sisco
My love for catchers who can hit is no secret, so this should come as no surprise. I love Sisco’s hit tool and he’s athletic enough to play a more palatable position than first base should he not stick behind the plate. Still, I’m working on becoming more wary of catchers’ timetable to contribution moreso than just their timetable to the majors. Catchers seem to take more time for their bats to come around at the major league level, and given his presence in the lower minors, it just didn’t make sense to rank him over some closer-to-the-majors options.
Ben, say something nice about Craig: He’s good at getting people to say he’s not good at things. Moscow Mules are decent.
Craig, say something nice about Ben: People say the eyes are the window to the soul, and in Ben’s case that means beautiful but empty on both counts.
Thank you for reading
This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.
Subscribe now
The question to me is whether you should pay more attention to your "eyes" or to numbers. BP has gone all-in on the eyes half of that story lately with minor league players, which is ironic because BP is famous in the first place for pointing out to us that numbers could show where our eyes were mistaken with major league players for some time now. Remember how many people believed that Jose Altuve was not a major league second baseman? They were believing their eyes rather than the numbers.
Eyes can fail. Numbers can fail. Opinions may differ. But I'll take the over on that .260 and 12 HR's projection if it were a friendly bet.
Saying Travis was the fourth-best 2B prospect in the Tigers system two years ago doesn't mean anyone ignored the stats. It just means at the time, we thought three 2B prospects were better. Maybe they even *were* better back then, and Travis has just taken steps forward. Prospects change. If they didn't, this would be no fun.
Altuve is a fine cherry-picked example, but I'm willing to bet I can find one or two minor leaguers with great stat lines who scouts didn't like who didn't pan out.
You can't just waltz in here holding up a printout of Devon Travis' minor league numbers and say "you should have known!" I linked to Mark Anderson's scouting report on him and it didn't trash him. He's an interesting player who can continue to grow and develop. You might take the over on the projection and that's fine. I think he'll absolutely hit over those figures in some years, but we're talking a baseline. It's great that you'll take the over on those figures, but you're not really supporting that notion for any other reason than "stats."
I by no means intend to say that scouting is the be all and end all. Statistics should absolutely be married with what we see, but at the minor league level, because of the reasons listed above, stats shouldn't be taken at face value.
I do think hitters are different than pitchers in this way. If a pitcher is killing the minors with an 86-mph fastball, maybe trust your eyes.
Now, are stats a fallible reason? Yes. So is scouting. But his stats have been extraordinary, and should have been given more weight.
"stats" can't be a reason. It's too broad with little application.
Which is to say that you can't dismiss a factor because people who have that factor sometimes or even usually fail. Prospects of every stripe usually fail.
No one is dismissing a factor. You're say "they should be weighted differently" but providing no reason as to why, except to point at a small sample size example, which is begging the question. You can't just say Devon Travis is the reason. Is there something that differentiated him from the other guys who tear up minor leagues but fail?
A tautology is when you assert something of itself, like John Lennon's "There's nothing you can do that can't be done." (I teach logic for a living - I'm a philosophy professor.) Maybe I did that, but I don't see it.
in my opinion you're saying "devon travis proves stats should be factored in more, and pressed for why you seem to be saying 'devon travis.'" Perhaps not a tautology but circular logic to say the least. You've answered very few of my questions on specifics or why things should be weighted differently. If we weight stats more, we're just undervaluing other players while perhaps catching a few more Devon Travis' (which assumes that scouts were wrong on him, which isn't *necessarily* the case). Why is that better?
To fill out an argument, you're right that I'd need more than scattered examples. I'd need a huge data set, probably, and a comparative analysis of groups. I'm not about to do that. I just suspect a trend, in part because BP said as much under Parks.
You're right - mentioning his stats is vague. But we both know what they are/were, so it seemed unnecessary.
He's due for a promotion, but I could see him moving up the prospect lists soon.
Larry Rothschild has had great success in his career improving K rates for his pitchers. The Yankees as a team lately have been prioritizing big tall power pitchers. Eovaldi fits the mold to a T, and so far (SSS, of course) his K/9 has improved. We'll see where he sits at the end of a bigger sample, but I'm bullish.