Now availableHardball Times Baseball Annual 2013, with 300 pages of great content. It's also available on Amazon and Kindle. Read more about it here.
And here's the full roster.
Most Recent Comments
How to deal with a rabble-rouser like Ron Shandler (17)
The daily grind: 5-21-13 (11)
Fantasy Waiver Wire: Week 8, Vol. 1 (2)
Diamonds in the rough: starting pitchers (4)
The Verdict: keep your trade secrets to yourself (1)
All content on this site (including text, graphs, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
THT's Fantasy Archives
Thursday, January 14, 2010
1. Starlin Castro: Castro has a full tool shed to work with, including quick wrists that aren't hitting for much power now but should support average power as his body fills out. At just 19 years old, his plate discipline is a long way off, but he's slick and consistent with his glove already and projects as a defensive asset at shortstop.
2. Josh Vitters: It's tough to know what to make of Vitters at this point. His plate discipline has been hugely disappointing and his overall performance the definition of inconsistent. But he's just 20 years old and a good defender, and you could make the argument that his all-around bat projects a plus asset, including more home run power than I originally thought.
3. Brett Jackson: I was not a believer in Jackson's upside heading into the 2009 draft, but the initial numbers show more power and sneakier speed than I was expecting.
4. Jay Jackson: Jackson's fastball/slider combination is above average but not overwhelming. A third pitch would be a nice touch, but his stellar endurance will make sure that whatever repertoire he settles on will be put to use as a member of the starting rotation.
5. Hak-Ju Lee: The $1.15 million dollar signing bonus Chicago gave Lee in 2008 is looking like a strong investment in the early going. Lee has the ability to be great defensively, his speed is elite, and his bat looks fairly advanced for a 19-year-old.
6. Kyler Burke: Burke has a solid mix of skills, and he put everything together to tear up the Class-A Midwest League in 2009. He has a lot more to prove, as he was a bit on the old side for A-ball, but his career is off to a nice start.
7.Andrew Cashner: Cashner has a slick fastball/slider combination, but it seems better suited out of the bullpen at this point. Giving the bullpen idea further legs, his command comes and goes and his endurance is questionable to say the least. If I were a betting man, I would say his future lies as Chicago's setup man.
8. Chris Archer: Archer's control needs work, but he has a potent fastball/curveball combination and has produced a successful Midwest League season.
9. Chris Carpenter: I was a big fan of Carpenter heading into the 2008 draft, but his post-draft numbers were a turn-off. 2009 was an uneven but successful season, raising his stock as a potential back-of-the-rotation starter.
10. Ryan Flaherty: Considering that Flaherty turned 23 years old halfway through 2009, his Single-A season didn't do much for me. He showed more power than expected, which I want to see more evidence of against better competition, but the rest of his offense was ho-hum.
St. Louis Cardinals
1. Shelby Miller: Miller was a steal at No. 19 overall in the 2009 draft. His fastball has projection, his curveball could quickly turn into a plus offering, his mechanics are top-notch for a high schooler, his frame is athletic, and his endurance is enviable. It's hard to find faults.
2. Lance Lynn: Lynn has an intimidating presence on the mound, but he's not a big swing-and-miss kind of guy. He has a strong four-pitch mix and solid sinking action in everything he throws. He has a good chance to be a mid-rotation starter.
3. Jaime Garcia: The Tommy John surgery appears to have been a success, and Garcia hasn't missed a beat. He never had an overpowering fastball to begin with, but the sinking action remains. His groundball rate and plus curveball could turn him into a mid-rotation mainstay.
4. David Freese: Freese appears to be in line for St. Louis' starting gig at third base in 2010. The organization's confidence in him raises his stock. He won't be anything special, but with his average plate discipline and potentially above-average power, his bat should play at third base.
5. Allen Craig: Craig's position may have finally been settled as left field, and he has a strong enough bat to stick there. With his poor plate discipline I have to question his overall upside, but a .270 batting average with 20-25 home runs seems plausible.
6. Robert Stock: I think Stock has a future behind the plate. His defense will develop, and his arm is as good as it gets. On offense, there is a lot to question, but his raw power is for real, as evidenced by his Appy League debut.
7. Anthony Ferrara: Ferrara joined the Cardinals organization with an injury history, but it appears to be behind him. He has a nice three-pitch mix and has good projected endurance. There is a lot to like in his live left arm, but a lot to prove.
8. Daryl Jones: Jones is an athletic outfielder with average contact skills and plate discipline. I've been a big supporter of his for a while, but his power has yet to develop. Without power he doesn't have a major league future.
9. Pete Kozma: It may be impossible for some to comprehend, but I think we have reached a point where Kozma is actually underrated. He provides a solid glove at shortstop, some workable plate discipline and contact skills, and some sneaky instincts on the base paths. He's not a star in the making and will never live up to the first-round expectations, but a long career as a serviceable shortstop or utility infielder could be in his future.
10. Eduardo Sanchez: Sanchez's stuff is good, but it does get a bit overrated. What separates him from the other relief prospects is his at times sharp, but inconsistent, command. Yet, at just 20 years old, his control will get even better.
Posted by Matt Hagen at 6:00am
Today I have a "can do" energy. Earlier in the off-season, I ranted about how often fantasy gurus use "if" and "but" to give a politician's non-answer answer to a difficult question. These answers appear to be informative, but upon closer inspection end up meaningless. In this article, I'm going to rant about the opposite: how often gurus vastly overstate the likelihood of many events.
As we get closer and closer to fantasy draft season, the popular type of discussion will be "is Player X a first-round draft pick?" Obviously, to be first-round-worthy, a player must be one of the very best baseball players in the world. So, superlatives come naturally when describing these men.
When making our case for, say, Jose Reyes to be a first-round pick, it seems important to not only discuss what is likely to happen according to some projection or forecast that we have, but also to talk about what MAY happen. "He's projected to steal 40 bases, but we know he could easily steal 70 or 80 this season (especially if he is healthy)."
I heard one expert on a podcast say that he felt Justin Upton was a first-rounder, adding that he probably had a 20 percent chance of being the NL MVP next year. 20 percent! There is only one player in baseball that warrants that kind of percentage, and he plays first base for the Cardinals. If every first-rounder had an equal chance at the MVP and no other players had a shot, that still means that each first-rounder has less than a 20 percent chance (12 players, two awards). Never mind that as often as not the MVP is won by the lowly Joe Mauers of the world. (By the way, I often pick on folks from this podcast, not because I dislike it. On the contrary, it is one of the few that I enjoy listening to.)
Don't get me wrong—what a player CAN do is important. What a player is EXPECTED to do—which is a function not only of what he can do, but how LIKELY he is to do it—is the most important. But, since in fantasy a player's upside is also important (but, particularly in the case of potential first-rounders, not nearly as important as his expected or projected forecasts), we care also about what he can do.
The problem and the danger is CAN can mean anything. If you've ever had the pleasure of chatting with someone who just had his/her first quantum physics class, he/she will often tell you that "there's a chance that we are both really in Siberia right now." This is technically somewhat true, only extremely unlikely—like one in a chugillion (made up number that is impossibly large). The same on a slightly less cosmic scale holds for fantasy advice. "He could steal 70 bases" can mean one in 20 or one in five.
There are lots of theories about why people tend to think rare events are far more likely to occur than they actual are—Prospect theory, Robust Control, etc. In the case of the fantasy gurus and even our general selves, I have a simple theory:
When we think to ourselves or attempt to justify our valuations to others, we naturally talk about what a player can do—as we should. But it seems small to say that the reason why we think Upton is worth the seventh pick overall is because he has a 4 or 5 percent chance to put in an MVP-type season. No one thinks they should get out of bed for that. So instead we start throwing around big numbers like 20 percent.
Posted by Jonathan Halket at 6:20am
This is Page 1 of 1 THT Fantasy Focus pages