baseball america TOP 100

[Sour Masher]

I think it's your last sentence that I'm focusing on and from a fantasy perspective that is very important.

Ian Anderson probably has the most upside. He could be a #2.

[Roy Hobbs]

Ian Anderson probably has the most upside. He could be a #2.

As a Braves fan and fantasy player it's kind of disheartening to think none could be an ace. The only Braves pitchers I have are Toussaint and Gohara.

[Sour Masher]

As a Braves fan and fantasy player it's kind of disheartening to think none could be an ace. The only Braves pitchers I have are Toussaint and Gohara.

Touki looked great last year. Gohara just last year was seen as having $2 upside himself. But he is a chubster and didn't show well last year.

And I think a lot of teams would love to have 5 2/3s on their staff. That is pretty great.

[Roy Hobbs]

Touki looked great last year. Gohara just last year was seen as having $2 upside himself. But he is a chubster and didn't show well last year.

And I think a lot of teams would love to have 5 2/3s on their staff. That is pretty great.

Gohara had personal family issues and may have contributed to his weight gain and overall bad year. I hear he's lost weight and is working hard.....we'll see. Having 5 2/3s on their staff is great for the Braves, but not as much for fantasy.

[rhd]

Did the Nats version of Luis Garcia also make the top 100? Has there ever been 2 guys with the same name make the cut?

Nats' version is #61. Phils' version is #88. Have no idea whether it's happened before.

[Davros]

Not only rare but unprecedented. Only 1 team ever put 9 guys on their list before, the 2011 Royals. I also cant remember 3 teams being completely shut out before (Yanks, BoSox and Cubs).

I felt a need to check out the names of those nine 2011 Royals prospects for context of how to treat the Rays situation. If think it is safe to say that six of those guys turned out to be at least useful major leaguers, which is a decent ratio IMHO.

8. Eric Hosmer (career BR WAR 15.6)
9. Mike Moustakas (career BR WAR 13.9)
10. Wil Myers (career BR WAR 10.1)
18. John Lamb (career BR WAR -1.7)
19. Mike Montgomery (career BR WAR 6.1)
51. Christian Colon (career BR WAR 1.8)
68. Danny Duffy (career BR WAR 14.1)
69. Jake Odorizzi (career BR WAR 9.5)
83. Chris Dwyer (career BR WAR 0.1)

[cavebird]

I think that is a natural reaction to the volume of arms they have. It is a reminder of how many pitching prospects fail. Obviously, not all of these guys will pan out. But I think they are all good. I also think none of them are true aces, though.

This doesn't bother me like it does some people. There are plenty of them with good enough stuff to theoretically become aces (Wright, Sorotka, Anderson, and Gohara (who obviously could be a Sabathia in his prime style ace) come to mind; on the other hand, Allard doesn't really have the stuff). None have such stuff that they are at the top likelihood of becoming aces, but if you stockpile enough B pitching prospects, some will breakout. That was definitely the plan---not putting all the eggs in the smaller basket of A pitching prospects and accumulate tons of B's, and see what shakes out; maybe an ace, a two or two, some back end starters, and likely some good bullpen arms.

[Kevin Seitzer]

This doesn't bother me like it does some people. There are plenty of them with good enough stuff to theoretically become aces (Wright, Sorotka, Anderson, and Gohara (who obviously could be a Sabathia in his prime style ace) come to mind; on the other hand, Allard doesn't really have the stuff). None have such stuff that they are at the top likelihood of becoming aces, but if you stockpile enough B pitching prospects, some will breakout. That was definitely the plan---not putting all the eggs in the smaller basket of A pitching prospects and accumulate tons of B's, and see what shakes out; maybe an ace, a two or two, some back end starters, and likely some good bullpen arms.

TINSTAAPP isn't really a thing any more. It's true that pitchers get hurt more often and more catastrophically than hitters do right now (hopefully we figure out how to stop that over the next 5-10 years), but other than that, we actually know better how to develop pitchers these days than we do hitters. That's not to claim that all the Braves prospect pitchers are going to be studs, of course.

[Roy Hobbs]

TINSTAAPP isn't really a thing any more. It's true that pitchers get hurt more often and more catastrophically than hitters do right now (hopefully we figure out how to stop that over the next 5-10 years), but other than that, we actually know better how to develop pitchers these days than we do hitters. That's not to claim that all the Braves prospect pitchers are going to be studs, of course.

I believe pitchers are pampered too much. It seems to me pitchers were more durable back in the 50s, 60s and 70s than they are right now, and that was mostly before Tommy John surgery (1974) While it is true that if a pitcher had ligament issues with their elbow back then it was a career ending injury, so thanks Dr. Frank Jobe, but that doesn't mean pitchers are more durable now, far from it.

[Ken]

That's not to claim that all the Braves prospect pitchers are going to be studs, of course.

/humblebrag

[cavebird]

TINSTAAPP isn't really a thing any more. It's true that pitchers get hurt more often and more catastrophically than hitters do right now (hopefully we figure out how to stop that over the next 5-10 years), but other than that, we actually know better how to develop pitchers these days than we do hitters. That's not to claim that all the Braves prospect pitchers are going to be studs, of course.

Well, I think Trevor Bauer had a theory about that and subsequently did a quiet one-inning trolling based upon it.

[cavebird]

I believe pitchers are pampered too much. It seems to me pitchers were more durable back in the 50s, 60s and 70s than they are right now, and that was mostly before Tommy John surgery (1974) While it is true that if a pitcher had ligament issues with their elbow back then it was a career ending injury, so thanks Dr. Frank Jobe, but that doesn't mean pitchers are more durable now, far from it.

I think this is completely incorrect. Pitchers throw much harder now, on average, than they did back then. There have always been the freaks of nature who had arms that could handle it, but pampering helps avoid injuries, not the opposite. If you went back to the methods from those days, you would end up with more pitchers who could throw 300 innings a year, but they wouldn't be as effective, and you would destroy tons of arms that could have been effective with a lesser workload. Given the money involved and the creativity of the actors involved, if anyone thought that would work (going back to old school methods), they'd try it; hell, they are trying all kinds of new stamina and conditioning stuff for pitchers. I think the best way to have more and better pitchers would be sort of the opposite---to avoid coaches at the high school level and below from killing young arms through over-work.

[heyelander]

Yeah, it is a real log jam. Good problem to have, but it makes it hard to know how it will sort out for those of us targeting their arms.

Well, you know that however it works out, Seitzer will make sure that it screws over Mith.

[madducks]

I believe pitchers are pampered too much. It seems to me pitchers were more durable back in the 50s, 60s and 70s than they are right now, and that was mostly before Tommy John surgery (1974) While it is true that if a pitcher had ligament issues with their elbow back then it was a career ending injury, so thanks Dr. Frank Jobe, but that doesn't mean pitchers are more durable now, far from it.

I don't think pitchers are less durable today. I just think they are more likely to weight train and as a result have stronger arms. Most elbow ligaments are overmatched by the strength in today's pitcher forearms, biceps, and shoulders. For most fireballing young pitchers it is just a matter of time before the dreaded TJ surgery. It used to be that you had maybe one guy per team that could throw 95mph. Now, usually more than half of the staff throws that hard. More fireballers equals more TJ surgeries. Years ago, weight training was practically forbidden for pitchers. But $100-200 million contracts for the top strikeout pitchers and $50 million contracts for the top relievers has changed that mindset.

[Kevin Seitzer]

I don't think pitchers are less durable today. I just think they are more likely to weight train and as a result have stronger arms. Most elbow ligaments are overmatched by the strength in today's pitcher forearms, biceps, and shoulders. For most fireballing young pitchers it is just a matter of time before the dreaded TJ surgery. It used to be that you had maybe one guy per team that could throw 95mph. Now, usually more than half of the staff throws that hard. More fireballers equals more TJ surgeries. Years ago, weight training was practically forbidden for pitchers. But $100-200 million contracts for the top strikeout pitchers and $50 million contracts for the top relievers has changed that mindset.

I think half of what you are saying is true. There is more incentive/requirement to throw harder these days, that's for sure, and all else equal, throwing harder puts more strain on your UCL. However, weight training tends to be a plus for injury prevention. The flexor-pronator muscle group can take a fair amount of the load off the UCL, so strengthening that muscle group should protect the elbow, at least in theory. We haven't seen a lot of emphasis on that yet in the game. Along similar lines, baseball has gotten much better at strengthening the shoulder through weight training to reduce labrum and rotator cuff injuries.