Hello, hello.  This is my second time doing a Top 100 list, with the first coming just about 9 months ago.  As I said multiple times in that post, I do these primarily for my own personal use (I'm in a dynasty league just like all of you), but I also like to get criticisms and suggestions from the community.  So, I'm posting my list here, with rationales, and letting you pick it apart.  Don't feel obligated to be gentle; I've been through this before, and it won't help either of us to go easy on me.

This edition of the list is going to be broken down into quarters.  This is not to say that there is a huge dip in performance between #25 and #26, #50 and #51, or #75 and #76...  It's just to make the list easier to digest.  In fact, as many people have said many times, the actual difference between spots on these lists is minimal.  So keep that in mind!

Couple other things.  First off, if I mention what a guy profiles as, or what a guy compares to, I'm only talking about statistical comparisons.  I have not check body types, handedness, pitch arsenals, swings, deliveries, etc., unless otherwise noted.  Also, I have purposely not included any 2009 Draftees, regardless of whether or not they've signed.  I realize that this limits the usefulness of the list, but it makes this a whole lot easier, and the lack of pro data makes me weary of draftees, anyway.  All I would be going off of is a mashup of professional analysts' opinions.  (That being said... yes, Strasburg would be #1 ;-) )

Now, before I get to the rankings, I'd just like to explain how I came to this list.  First off, I got a pool of names that were considered.  These were from past prospect lists, midseason lists this year, and current minor league leaderboards.  Next, I arranged them by position (C/1B/2B/3B/SS/OF/P).  I ranked them within their positions, and then I combined all the non-pitcher positions into a hitters' list.  I accomplished this by taking one player at a time from the six players at the top of the positional lists at any given time.  Finally, I combined the hitters and pitchers in a similar fashion, asking myself which of the top players on a list I preferred systematically.  After I arrived at a Top 100 list, I just tinkered with it every couple days if I saw something quirky.  I'm finding this sort of confusing to explain, so I hope it's alright to understand- if you have any questions, ask, and I'll be happy to elaborate.

Anyway, without further ado, let's get to the list, after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

After talking last time about Yankees pitcher D.J. Mitchell, I've decided to continue this series with a profile on Angels righty Tommy Mendoza.

Mendoza's Background

The Angels drafted Mendoza in the 4th round in 2005, and Baseball America rated him as the #10 prospect in the system prior to both 2006 and 2007.  Sickels, meanwhile, rated him 7th and 9th in the system, with grades B and C+, respectively.  This was all a response to the great success he had since being drafted, with an 8.67 K/9 and a 1.74 BB/9 over the two seasons.  However, Mendoza took major steps back in 2007, as he was hit far more often, and saw a steep decline in his strikeouts.  He dropped almost completely off the radar, not making John's 2008 Angels' list.  And, last season, there were even more setbacks for the pitcher, with a Noah Lowry-esque 50/39 K/BB in 110 innings.  Still, though, Mendoza had just completed a season at one of the toughest parks in baseball (high-A Rancho Cucamonga), and was still just 21 going into 2009.

Typecasting Mendoza

Before we talk about Mendoza's 2009 line, let's look at the type of pitcher that he is.  He primarily throws three pitches: an 89-94 MPH fastball, an average- if inconsistent- curveball, and a changeup.  He has multiple different looks to his fastball- Baseball America said in multiple reports that Mendoza knows when to add and remove velocity from it, and could also cut it or throw a two-seamer when needed.  Lastly, Mendoza tends to be a fairly extreme fly ball pitcher, but has for the most part done a good job of keeping the ball in the park.  I usually tend to take interest in strike-throwing ground ball pitchers, but Mendoza may be even more interesting as a fly ball pitcher with very good control.

I've thought for a good amount of time about a comparison for Mendoza, and I think he profiles as a righty version of Jarrod Washburn.  Washburn has similar fastball velocity, a similar secondary arsenal (slider/change), and has a diverse arsenal of fastballs, like Mendoza.  He's also a flyball pitcher that struggles to get K's (but has good control), and is even the same height/weight as our young Angels prospect.  I think Washburn is an excellent best-case scenario here, and at the age of 21, Mendoza has plenty of time to reach that potential if LA decides that he needs to repeat AA or AAA.

The Mendoza Line in 2009

If I had to pick one prospect that has really, truly impressed and surprised me this season, it would be Mendoza.  His 2009 has been exceptional...  The Angels aggressively started him at AA (even though he had struggled somewhat at high-A), and he has more than answered the call.  Although his K/9 is still unspectacular (6.0), Mendoza has further refined his control, and his H/9 has dropped to its lowest level since 2006.  With good surface stats (3.47 ERA, 1.27 WHIP), it's hard to explain why he's not getting attention this season, even if his ceiling is only that of a back-end starter.

What to Expect Going Forward

Mendoza is not a shiny prospect.  He's been around forever, but is still just 21 years old.  He's gotten attention before, and he's gone way downhill after receiving it.  However, he looks like as good a bet as any right now, and has been consistently good at AA through the season.  I can't see the Angels pushing him to AAA this season, but he should start there next year.  If he continues to put up these types of numbers, the Angels may need him sometime in 2010.  It doesn't seem like LA will have a tough rotation to crack, and an injury or two could force their hand with Mendoza.

Matt Wieters has been an impressive player.  He was pretty much the uncontested top prospect before the season (and deservedly so).  Much of that had to do with his asskicking at AA (.365/.460/.625, 38/29 BB/K).  He was pretty good, in other words, and the consensus was that he was going to be a very very good major league player for a very very long time.

Now, this is not a panic post (nor should it be, as Wieters is doing fine in the majors right now), but I'd like to look into his stats at the advanced levels a little more.  First, his jump up to AAA this year worries me a bit.  He saw opposite (and negative) changes in both BB% and K%, as both moved to career extremes.  It wasn't really a problem, though, since his overall line at AAA was still .305/.387/.504, and the discipline could be written off as SSS.  It should be noted that his other peripheral stats (such as LD%) improved at AAA, so again... This is not a panic post.

Here's the thing, though.  The discipline stats took another big hit after being promoted to the majors.  He's striking out nearly once a game, at a career-high 22.8% clip.  He's stopped taking walks, too, with a career-low 7.3% rate.  And, this time, his line seems to be affected, currently at .267/.321/.416.  Wieters' luck stats seem to be normal, with a BABIP of exactly .320 and good GB/FB/LD splits.

My question is this: Since Wieters has been bothered by high strikeout totals at all levels except for AA, is it possible that the lack of strikeouts at AA was a fluke, and what we're seeing now is a result of a lack of plate discipline?  I should again emphasize that I am not worried about Wieters long term; I still think he will be an effective major league catcher.  But is the declining plate discipline something we should keep an eye on, and if so, how will it affect his long-term development?

I did a couple of these a while back, and they were fun, so I figured I'd do it again.  The point of these pieces is to expose those prospects that do not get much mainstream exposure, but deserve it.  Today we're going to talk about Yankees pitcher D.J. Mitchell, currently with high-A Tampa.

Mitchell was largely unranked before this season, his first as a professional.  However, drafted in the 10th round by the Yankees, and signed for well above slot at $450,000, Mitchell came with a good amount of fanfare last June.  He is actually fairly new to pitching, having been recruited by Clemson as a position player.  In 31 appearances for the Tigers (21 starts), Mitchell was 11-5 with a 3.40 ERA and 155/56 K/BB in 151 innings.  Baseball America had the following to say about him when they ranked him #155 on their 2008 Draft Top 200 (link is subscriber-only):

Recruited as an outfielder, Mitchell didn't pitch at all his freshman year at Clemson. A career .241 hitter in college, he split time between hitting and pitching last season and found more success on the mound, tallying a 5-0, 3.27 record in 15 appearances. Following his sophomore season, he led the Cape Cod League with 58 strikeouts, including one 15-strikeout performance, and had a 1.47 ERA in eight starts. He has been Clemson's Friday night starter this spring, providing stability on a young staff. Athletic on the mound, Mitchell has long, wiry arms and legs. His fastball comes in between 89-91 mph, but with above-average movement. He creates natural sink and tail from his loose three-quarters arm slot. He complements his fastball with a sweeping slider and changeup. Mitchell is 6-feet, 170 pounds and has room to add more weight. Due to his size, durability is a question mark, but his live body and limited pitching experience intrigue scouts. He'll likely end up in the bullpen at the professional level.

If this scouting report sounds familiar, it's because it's a lot like the one BA wrote up for Jess Todd prior to the 2007 draft.  Mitchell draws a lot of comparisons to him.  Both were college pitchers with predominantly a fastball-slider combo (though Todd's fastball is slightly faster), and both have been knocked for their size.  And, there's always the fact that both pitchers had awesome debuts.

Before I continue talking about Mitchell's 2009, and making some more comparisons, I'd first like to mention that Mitchell did get some love from BA before the season.  They ranked him 24th in the Yankees system, saying that he's incredibly athletic, and that he "could struggle initially in pro ball, but his potential is obvious".  BA also said that he could have three solid-to-plus pitches when all is said and done, and that his changeup (potentially a plus) is the key to remaining a starter.  John and other sources (such as Deric McKaney) left Mitchell out of Yankee top prospect lists, though he was an honorable mention for John.

Anyway, while Todd reached AAA in his first full professional season, the Yankees are taking a (slightly) more patient role with Mitchell.  Starting the season at single-A Charleston, Mitchell got off to a crazy-good start, racking up a 29.0% K/PA, 4.1% BB/PA, and a 2.07 FIP.  It didn't hurt that he was also prompting grounders at a cool 60% rate.  The Yankees promoted him aggressively to high-A Tampa after his 6th start with Charleston.  While his ERA has taken a hit in the promotion, his peripherals are sparkling.  Mitchell's still maintaining a 24.8% K/PA to go along with a 9.7% BB/PA, and he's actually increased his groundball ratio, to 63%.  Based just on his pure numbers, he's really bringing fellow Yankees prospect Zach McAllister to mind for me, as a GB-minded pitcher with very good strikeout rates and good control.  Also like McAllister, I think Mitchell is criminally underrated.

So, with all this in mind, what do we think about Mitchell?  Does his size have him destined for the Yankees bullpen?  Is it all dependent on his changeup?  Does he deserve more attention, and if so, why isn't he receiving it?  To me, he's got to be a top-5 prospect for the Yankees right now, even counting new draftees Slade Heathcott and J.R. Murphy.  There's no way Brackman's ahead of him at this point, and he's definitely in the conversation with Betances and Romine, IMO.

Once upon a time, the Chicago Cubs drafted a powerful first baseman, with a 2nd round draft pick, who promptly went to single-A Lansing and had a crazy-good season.  The first baseman was lauded from every direction for his efforts, and was named the best prospect in Chicago's system, as well as the 21st best prospect in baseball, by one of the most reputable sources around.

It was what happened next, though, that was the most surprising twist of them all: Brian Dopirak fell off a figurative cliff.  He posted an OPS of .670 at high-A in 2005, and fell victim to injuries in 2006 and 2007.  By the time Dopirak would post another healthy season, it would be 2008, in his second organization, at the age of 24, and yet only in high-A.

Of course, most of you probably already knew all of this, so where am I going with it?  Well, Dopirak is now 25, and has finally made the all-important jump to AA (which he is mastering quickly).  With a .946 OPS, and 16 home runs, he's definitely begging for a promotion to AAA.  My question is this: Does it matter?  At what point does age relative to league actually mean something? 

Obviously, his power is slightly less impressive, because he's 25, but it's pretty clear that Dopirak does have real power, regardless of the age discrepancy.  He's also walking a decent amount, in the 9-10% range (despite still striking out too much).  Plus, it's not like this is him repeating the league- he only had about 300 scattered at-bats at AA before this season.  I really think, if they challenged him, the Blue Jays could find themselves pleasantly surprised here.  It's not like they really have much in the way at 1B, anyway (both at the MLB level and in the minors, aside from David Cooper).

What do you think?  Can Dopirak still power himself into a major league lineup, or are we merely witnessing a one-time prospect's last stand?

With one of the busier drafts today (7 picks), I think I did very well with the Angels.  I'm very pleased by how the overall picture turned out.  Let's break down each pick here.

Pick #24: James Paxton, LHP, Kentucky

I've been looking into Paxton all along.  Some are higher on him than others, as Keith Law had him at #3 on his old top 100 (and at #8 on his new one), while BA has him at #37.  I don't put much stock into Paxton's ERA (5.86).  He has excellent command (115/20 K/BB).  Law rated his fastball (55/60) and curveball (60/60) very highly, and I trust that.  The signability concerns are definitely deserved, as Paxton is a Boras client, but I don't think he's got that much leverage because of his lack of production.

Pick #25: Matt Davidson, 3B, Yucaipa (Calif.) HS

I really believe in Davidson's bat, and the Angels could use a homegrown positional player that will actually hit.  Once again, Law was higher on Davidson than BA.  Law really likes Davidson's hit (45/60), power (40/55), and plate discipline (40/55) tools, and called him "about as high-probability a prep bat as you'll find".  It's okay if he has to move off of third base, too- the Angels could play him at first just as easily.  He was rated #15 overall by Law, and #42 by BA.

Pick #40: Alex Wilson, RHP, Texas A&M

Of all my picks, this is the one I was least pleased with.  I didn't realize I was on the clock, and rushed to select Wilson.  That being said, I do believe in him...  He has had great control at for the Aggies (105/18 K/BB), and the fact that he did that in his first season back from TJS is awesome.  I'm very interested to see what he does as he further recovers.  He needs to add a third pitch to prevent ending up as a reliever, but I guess the Angels could use him either way.

Pick #42: Madison Younginer, RHP, Mauldin (S.C.) HS

Younginer really fit for me here.  While he was used only as a closer in high school, I believe that his ceiling is that of a #1 starter.  Because I had taken Paxton, Davidson, and Wilson with my first three picks, I was looking for a relatively more signable pitcher here.  While Younginer is still a prep pitcher, the fact that he was only used as a closer means that he has limited leverage.  The ceiling here is extremely high, as long as he can keep his velocity in at least the mid-90s, and make good on the reports of a developing changeup.

Pick #48: Josh Phegley, C, Indiana

I really love this pick.  Phegley could be this draft's Jaff Decker- a hitter with extremely advanced plate discipline, and good power to boot.  BA says he only really profiles as a catcher, so he'll have to improve (they also call him a "below-average receiver") there.  But, I'm a big fan of his bat, even if he has to move out from behind the plate.

Pick #80: Brooks Raley, LHP, Texas A&M

This pick made a lot of sense given the rest of my draft.  I drafted his teammate (Wilson) in the 1-S round, and I really like Raley as a future mid-rotation starter.  While he lacks a good fastball (maxing out at 91 MPH), he brings excellent movement, great control, a plus curveball, and a strong changeup to the table.  All that adds up to someone with first-round talent...  But, with some slight signability concerns as a draft-eligible sophomore, I am absolutely fine that he lasted here.  I don't think we will need to break the bank to bring him in.

Pick #110: J.R. Murphy, C, Pendleton School, Bradenton, Fla.

I don't know how realistic this pick is, given the rest of my draft.  Murphy will likely be expensive, and I had already taken a catcher with Phegley.  That being said, he fits perfectly in the rest of my draft's M.O., with a strong, advanced bat.  I think his bat could play well, even at first base.  I also considered SS Chris Owings.  More realistic picks would have been SS Ryan Jackson of Miami U, and Matt den Dekker of Florida.

So, what do you think?  Like I said, I'm pretty pleased with these 7 picks.  I managed to really, really fortify our system's pitching depth, getting a couple top-of-the-rotation talents, and some nice complementary pitching in Wilson and Raley.  Plus, I managed to get a few offensive-minded positional players in Davidson, Phegley, and Murphy.  The only problem I think I had was keeping budget in mind, as most of my picks will be somewhat expensive.

First thing first: I need a deputy.  There's a decent chance I won't be available for the back-end of the draft, and I really would like to have someone to proxy for me.  If anybody is interested, do not hesitate to ask (via a comment here, a PM, an AIM at TheRedSoxJunkie, or an email at antiyankee@cox.net).  Thanks!

Second order of business: Today, I'd like to focus on our back-end picks.  We've fleshed out some good ideas about our first two picks, and I don't think it's all that productive to talk about them more until we get closer to the draft.  We have two picks that could be classified as "back-end".  They are #80 and #110.

Pick #80: Let's look at some potential targets here.  First off, I brought up Keith Law's Draft Top 100.  The #80 guy on that list is Joe Gardner, a RHP out of UC Santa Barbara.  He's someone I admittedly am not familiar with, so I have no idea if he'd be someone I'm interested in.  However, the #79 guy on that list, Scott Bittle, is someone I'm very familiar with.  Obviously, Bittle made some news last year by not signing with the Yankees.  I think we might be at a spot now, where this is our 5th pick in the draft already, and we can afford to take a high upside reliever like Bittle.  He's even gotten a few starts in this year...  Despite not really doing anything to hurt his stock, he's seemingly fallen out of the 2nd round, where he was drafted last year.  Might be a good and realistic target for us.

Pick #110: I don't really have an idea of a potential target here, but one guy I am interested in is prep pitcher Tanner Bashue.  He's very raw, with the potential for two plus pitches, but he doesn't throw real hard.  He could potentially add a few MPH to his fastball, but there's some injury risk here.  But, for a raw pitcher with a high ceiling, he's extremely signable.  He might be a good target if he falls to us, although there is a huge chance he goes in the 2nd or early 3rd rounds.

Anybody else have any other suggestions, targets, or ideas for these two picks?  Please refrain from commenting on the first four picks, as we will revisit those in the coming week in MOD #4.  And, again, don't forget about my deputy request.  Thanks for reading!

Hello again, today I'm going to further flesh out my expectations for those magical first two picks of ours, #24 and #25.

I am still looking for a prep pitcher to fall to the slot, but I think we're getting a better idea of possible names.  I know a lot of people are high on Tyler Skaggs, but I think there might be better pitchers available at this point.

My top three "These guys won't make it past us" picks are:

1. Chad James, LHP
2. Rex Brothers, LHP
3. James Paxton, LHP

I love James' potential for two plus pitches with his FB and curve, and I have confidence in his control, as well.  As far as potential 4-pitch starters go in this draft, the fact that none of James' pitches appear to be significantly weak is a huge asset.

Brothers is obviously a riskier pick, since he really only has one developed pitch after his fastball (his already plus slider).  The lack of another pitch scares me, as do the numerous people saying he could wind up as a reliever.  Still, with all of the Angels' picks, I can see them taking a gamble on a guy with a ceiling as high as Brothers'.

Paxton is interesting.  If he's still on the board here, it's obviously because of signability concerns.  He has Boras as an agent, and that's scaring a lot of teams off.  But he's a really advanced pitcher already, and has as much pure stuff as any non-Strasburg pitcher in the draft.

My top three "These guys should be available, and I don't hate them" picks are:

1. Jared Mitchell, OF
2. Wil Myers, C/3B
3. Rich Poythress, 1B

I think the Angels have made mistakes in recent years by signing so many high-cost, aging outfielders, and they're realizing that now.  With Mitchell, my new regime would take a step to correct that by taking a toolsy outfielder that has a higher ceiling than current toolsy outfield prospect Peter Bourjos.  Mitchell will probably fit right around this spot anyway...  His stock has fallen quite a bit, and I'd be happy to get him here.

Myers would be a perfect fit here.  I love him as a catcher, but if he can't stick there, we could use a 3B prospect all the same.  He's a little raw, but I have faith in his bat, and he has a cannon for an arm.

It might not make absolute perfect sense, but I think Poythress could be a nice fit on the Angels.  I like his bat more than Trumbo's, and he's already an advanced hitter.  I could see us taking Poythress, and looking at Trumbo as more of a DH down the road.

So, there you have it.  6 names for 2 spots.  Let's discuss what else could be available, what you think of my analysis of our system, and whether you agree or disagree that these players should be taken by the Angels.  Any and all opinions are welcome!

Los Angeles Angels' picks:

#24, #25, #40, #42, #48, #80, #110

Draft Strategies: #24/#25

Today, I'm going to focus on our first two picks.  While we do have 5 picks in the first 50, it makes sense that these first two will be the two players with the highest ceilings.  Unforunately, due to all of our picks, we won't have the budget to take big names with all five of the first five.  This is ok, because we could probably use a couple safer players, anyway.

Now, looking at the Angel system, I'm not sure what to think.  There is a real lack of high-upside arms (Walden/Reckling/Smith is about it for the system, and they all project to middle of the rotation guys), and part of me thinks that we should capitalize on that because of the real wealth of pitching in this year's draft.  There is a pretty good chance that at least one pitcher falls down to us at #24, and shouldn't be there.

That being said, most of our current positional prospects are majorly flawed.  Bourjos, Conger, Trumbo, Sweeney, Fuller... Don't get me wrong, they're good prospects, but I don't see any of them having relatively high ceilings, aside from maybe Conger.  Now, there is a real lack of current prospects at C, 2B, and SS (which is mainly because younger guys like Kendrick, Abreu, and Wood have graduated, but none of those guys are irreplaceably good in the long-run anyway).  This draft seems to be very deep for MIF, and the first catcher prospect off the board (Max Stassi, it seems) will likely be drafted right around 24.  This seems, to me, like another opportunity to capitalize on a draft surplus.

So, while I think it's a good idea to go with the best player available, I think we should really look for two things to happen.  First, for a major upside pitcher to fall.  Guys like Matt Purke, Zach Wheeler, Rex Brothers.  I'd rather not have a "safer" pitcher at this point, so I'm currently interested in our options as far as guys with front-of-the-rotation potential go.  Second, for Grant Green, Jiovanni Mier, Max Stassi, Wil Myers, or Tommy Joseph to slip to us.

Note that, for these first two picks, I'm not really concerned about signability.  The 2010 draft will likely be deeper than this one, and our 5 top-50 picks this year mean that if one were to get bumped to next year, it wouldn't really mean anything.

What do you guys think?  Should we have our eyes on anyone in particular?

With 45% of the vote, UNC's Dustin Ackley is the #2 pick in our community mock draft.  USC's Grant Green was the clear-cut runner-up, garnering 26% of the vote.  With the Padres on the board now, however, there's a pretty good chance that the #3 pick will be a pitcher.  Let's see what sort of reasoning we can come up with for them.

ON THE CLOCK: San Diego Padres (#1-3)

DRAFT RECAP- Round 1:

1-1 (Washington Nationals): Stephen Strasburg, RHP, SDSU

1-2 (Seattle Mariners): Dustin Ackley, 1B/CF, UNC

1-3 (San Diego Padres): ON THE CLOCK

1-4 (Pittsburgh Pirates):

1-5 (Baltimore Orioles):

1-6 (San Francisco Giants):

1-7 (Atlanta Braves):

1-8 (Cincinnati Reds):

1-9 (Detroit Tigers):

1-10 (Washington Nationals):

1-11 (Colorado Rockies):

1-12 (Kansas City Royals):

1-13 (Oakland Athletics):

1-14 (Texas Rangers):

1-15 (Cleveland Indians):

1-16 (Arizona Diamondbacks):

1-17 (Arizona Diamondbacks):

1-18 (Florida Marlins):

1-19 (St. Louis Cardinals):

1-20 (Toronto Blue Jays):

1-21 (Houston Astros):

1-22 (Minnesota Twins):

1-23 (Chicago White Sox):

1-24 (Los Angeles Angels):

1-25 (Los Angeles Angels):

1-26 (Milwaukee Brewers):

1-27 (Seattle Mariners):

1-28 (New York Yankees):

1-29 (Boston Red Sox):

1-30 (Tampa Bay Rays):

1-31 (New York Yankees):

1-32 (Chicago Cubs):

1-33 (Colorado Rockies):

As always, I'd like for this to be with realism in mind. So, take into account, if you will, what a team might need, how a team might draft, what a team might spend, etc.  Each poll will consist of 10 players and will last 48 hours.  Players will be listed alphabetically by last name.  I'm basing the listed players off of multiple other mock drafts, but feel free to suggest someone to be added/removed.

Let's try to have a little more conversation in the threads.  Just as important as WHO you vote for is WHY you vote for them.  :-)

Thanks, and have fun!