Comments on: My New Top Ten http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/ Baseball's Future in the Gateway City Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:14:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU hourly 1 By: erik http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-244 erik Sat, 24 Mar 2007 16:33:00 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-244 eh, not really feeling Erstad as a comp to Colby. He's a CF, Erstad was more of a bigger guy. Colby's has shown better power and plate discipline and speed. A comp for Colby I'm surprised no one has mentioned for Rasmus is Ray Lankford. Both have good speed, pop, discipline and good fielders. I think Rasmus could hit for a better average then Lankford. eh, not really feeling Erstad as a comp to Colby. He’s a CF, Erstad was more of a bigger guy. Colby’s has shown better power and plate discipline and speed. A comp for Colby I’m surprised no one has mentioned for Rasmus is Ray Lankford. Both have good speed, pop, discipline and good fielders. I think Rasmus could hit for a better average then Lankford.

]]> By: mateodh http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-242 mateodh Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:50:45 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-242 so, erik, I was thinking today... how would you feel about Darin Erstad for a Rasmus player comp? long-term I don't much like it(after age 26) but for his first couple years there is some similarity... no? so, erik, I was thinking today… how would you feel about Darin Erstad for a Rasmus player comp? long-term I don’t much like it(after age 26) but for his first couple years there is some similarity… no?

]]> By: brock20 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-239 brock20 Wed, 21 Mar 2007 10:51:56 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-239 Good list and I completely agree with the 1-4 slots. Perhaps because of lack of depth, but more more so because of upside, Perez and Anderson deserve those slots. I wouldn't be suprised to see Perez get a late season call up to see what he can do against stiffer competition. If I were to nitpick about anything, or try to generate discussion, I'm inclined to slot Jay at five. He's polished and has a very nice swing. His only question mark is how much power he will develop. Then again, I must confess that for some reason, I know very little about Hawksworth. In the fawning over Garcia and Rasmus and the digging for details on Jay, Perez, and Anderson, I think Hawksworth gets lost in the mix. Good list and I completely agree with the 1-4 slots. Perhaps because of lack of depth, but more more so because of upside, Perez and Anderson deserve those slots. I wouldn’t be suprised to see Perez get a late season call up to see what he can do against stiffer competition.

If I were to nitpick about anything, or try to generate discussion, I’m inclined to slot Jay at five. He’s polished and has a very nice swing. His only question mark is how much power he will develop.

Then again, I must confess that for some reason, I know very little about Hawksworth. In the fawning over Garcia and Rasmus and the digging for details on Jay, Perez, and Anderson, I think Hawksworth gets lost in the mix.

]]> By: fpslackers http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-231 fpslackers Sun, 18 Mar 2007 07:01:17 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-231 I didn't realize his walk rate was that good at High-A. I do agree he needs to be bumped up in the rankings, but I personally wouldn't put him in the top 10. I'm not really sure if the fact that Narvy hasn't pitched that much is because they view Keisler better. Maybe they just aren't giving him a shot to make the team and they don't want other teams getting too good of a look at him so they'll want to claim him on waivers. Keisler was brought in to compete for a spot so they'd obviously give him a longer look. I can sense the club isn't that high on Narvy, but this is one where I am going to have to disagree with them. We will see I guess. Hopefully we won't lose him on waivers. I didn’t realize his walk rate was that good at High-A. I do agree he needs to be bumped up in the rankings, but I personally wouldn’t put him in the top 10.

I’m not really sure if the fact that Narvy hasn’t pitched that much is because they view Keisler better. Maybe they just aren’t giving him a shot to make the team and they don’t want other teams getting too good of a look at him so they’ll want to claim him on waivers. Keisler was brought in to compete for a spot so they’d obviously give him a longer look.
I can sense the club isn’t that high on Narvy, but this is one where I am going to have to disagree with them. We will see I guess. Hopefully we won’t lose him on waivers.

]]> By: erik http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-230 erik Sun, 18 Mar 2007 01:52:57 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-230 It's not 4 innings I'm basing my judgment on, it's 51 innings at A ball where he only walked 2.28 per 9. I agree, he does need better secondary stuff but when you're bringing serious heat for only an inning at a time, you can manage. I'm high on him because of the impression he made, because of that impression he's got a chance to make an impact this season. Narveson may deserve to be close to the top 10, but he's only appeared in 3 games and currently the club thinks more of Randy Keisler then Narvie. That's either telling or they are making a poor judgment. He's out of options and won't likely clear waivers. I hope they can at least trade him for something,but so far it's pretty clear he doesn't have much of a shot to make the team and his future isn't in St. Louis. It’s not 4 innings I’m basing my judgment on, it’s 51 innings at A ball where he only walked 2.28 per 9. I agree, he does need better secondary stuff but when you’re bringing serious heat for only an inning at a time, you can manage. I’m high on him because of the impression he made, because of that impression he’s got a chance to make an impact this season.

Narveson may deserve to be close to the top 10, but he’s only appeared in 3 games and currently the club thinks more of Randy Keisler then Narvie. That’s either telling or they are making a poor judgment. He’s out of options and won’t likely clear waivers. I hope they can at least trade him for something,but so far it’s pretty clear he doesn’t have much of a shot to make the team and his future isn’t in St. Louis.

]]> By: fpslackers http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-229 fpslackers Sun, 18 Mar 2007 00:21:16 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/03/17/my-new-top-ten/#comment-229 I don't think I would put Dove that high just yet. While I am very encouraged by his good spring and the good comments Duncan has said about him, I still need more than 4.1 innings to believe that he is over his control problems. And, he is going to need a good offspeed pitch if he's going to be more than just a middle reliever and he doesn't have that yet. I agree about keeping Jay and Perez up there. Their stocks have gone up this spring. McCormick I agree with too. I don't think Narveson should be too far away from the Top 10 either. I don’t think I would put Dove that high just yet. While I am very encouraged by his good spring and the good comments Duncan has said about him, I still need more than 4.1 innings to believe that he is over his control problems. And, he is going to need a good offspeed pitch if he’s going to be more than just a middle reliever and he doesn’t have that yet.
I agree about keeping Jay and Perez up there. Their stocks have gone up this spring. McCormick I agree with too.
I don’t think Narveson should be too far away from the Top 10 either.

]]>