Sickels's Giants top 20 prospects
MadBum = A; Posey = A-; Tim II = B+; AnVil = B
I'm surprised that Fairly and Kieschnick didn't make the top 20.
11 months ago
shikantaza
54 comments
5 recs |
Comments
Yes! Jesus makes the top 20!!!!!
How does this list compare to our community list? (In other words, where did sickels get it wrong?)
My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman
by Goofus on Dec 24, 2008 6:59 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
OK, I just did a quick comparison...
Our top 4 match his.
5, 6 & 7 are the same guys but in a different order
Waldis Joaquin at #9 on the Sickels list is the biggest variation; we don’t have him in the top 21. Same with Jose Casilla at #11.
We’ve got Keischnick, Pucetas and Fairley in the top 15 and none of them made Sickels’ list.
My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman
by Goofus on Dec 24, 2008 9:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
also posted this in the #22 community prospect thread...

¿Julio is tourist in San Francisco? Harper's Bizarre!
by hairball on Dec 24, 2008 9:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
BTW, anyone know what the deal is with Romo? You’d think that if he qualified, he would have been on our own list, potentially quite a bit higher than Sickels put him.
Also, looks like I may need to learn more about Casilla.
¿Julio is tourist in San Francisco? Harper's Bizarre!
by hairball on Dec 24, 2008 9:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think The Surge is a big hit with the scouty types, and Sickels specifically said he sees some BABIP regression in store for him, which is quite reasonable.
Personally I’m a believer. You don’t put put up a 6:1 K/BB ratio in the minors without doing something right. (His San Jose numbers are simply awesome). I’d rate him higher than Pucetas, at least.
by oldjacket on Dec 24, 2008 9:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Romo is under the IP limit that technifies a rookie, but not the days on the roster limit.
The Basil Fawlty Moderating Strategy:
"We could run a nice blog here if we didn't have all these members getting in the way."
by WalrusMan on Dec 24, 2008 5:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Sickels is crazy in his Joaquin placement. Though to be fair, his system basically sees 8-19 as equals.
by oldjacket on Dec 24, 2008 9:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That, and putting Casilla at 11 make me wonder a bit about this list
Wall-E for Best Picture 2008
by Useful_Idiot on Dec 30, 2008 5:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
MCC is the AP poll, Sickles is the coaches poll. LOL
No seriously I was really impressed to see that he thinks highly of TI. I’m still not drinking the eHire Kool Aid, but I’m also happy that someone else has doubts about Fairley.
PS JOEY MARTINEZ YEAH WHAT
"While conservatives tell you 'leave things alone and no one will lose,' and liberals tell you 'interfere a lot and no one will lose,' baseball says 'someone will lose.' Not only says it - but insists upon it! ... Democracy is lovely, but baseball's more mature." BVCE supports SF Dugout and Manny Burriss.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 24, 2008 9:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think he’s weighting bullpen guys a little heavy. I would have worked Fairley in somewhere before Casilla, Pichardo, and Perdomo.
/deer head
Bay City Ball
by xanthan on Dec 24, 2008 7:05 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Hinshaw?
He didn’t even make the “others” section.
by nelson95 on Dec 24, 2008 8:17 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Did he lose his prospect status with too many days on the roster? I’m not sure how long he was with the big club.
Less arm, more talk. Raisingcain is a GAMER.
Adopted Giant: Henry Sosa
by raisingcain on Dec 24, 2008 9:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think he did lose his prospect status because he was with the club for so long, plus I’d think he and Romo are in the plans for the 2009 bullpen. That makes both of them no longer prospects in my eyes, but all grown up major leaguers and stuff.
"While conservatives tell you 'leave things alone and no one will lose,' and liberals tell you 'interfere a lot and no one will lose,' baseball says 'someone will lose.' Not only says it - but insists upon it! ... Democracy is lovely, but baseball's more mature." BVCE supports SF Dugout and Manny Burriss.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 24, 2008 9:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTPxEwfNTJc
My adopted Giant: "Raptor Jesus" Guzman
by Goofus on Dec 24, 2008 10:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
GREAT movie btw
"While conservatives tell you 'leave things alone and no one will lose,' and liberals tell you 'interfere a lot and no one will lose,' baseball says 'someone will lose.' Not only says it - but insists upon it! ... Democracy is lovely, but baseball's more mature." BVCE supports SF Dugout and Manny Burriss.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 24, 2008 7:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
NO
It’s at the top of my list of movie that people like and I will never know why.
..so allow me to present Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain as two sweet, sweet bottles of warming hooch.
by Cookyman on Dec 25, 2008 3:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Forrest
Gump
Mischievously implosive purple pitching staff.
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on Dec 27, 2008 10:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Have to agree
I’d add Napoleon Dynamite, but I’ve never met someone who actually liked it.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
by Bhaakon on Dec 30, 2008 4:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought Napoleon Dynamite was rather depressing.
And Forrest Gump is entertaining enough, but I still hate it only because it beat Shawshank Redemption for Best Picture…
Wall-E for Best Picture 2008
by Useful_Idiot on Dec 30, 2008 5:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If he did...
Romo should have as well.
The Basil Fawlty Moderating Strategy:
"We could run a nice blog here if we didn't have all these members getting in the way."
by WalrusMan on Dec 24, 2008 5:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I actually like his rating of Ishikawa better than ours.
I don’t really get why he’s so high on relief prospects, who have to outperform other relief prospects AND converted starters.
by oldjacket on Dec 24, 2008 8:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
ishikawa
Sickels said he “should be a solid player.” If he means a solid starter, that’s good to hear. Going into last season, he was a big longshot, so I’d be happy with any kind of big league production.
Less arm, more talk. Raisingcain is a GAMER.
Adopted Giant: Henry Sosa
by raisingcain on Dec 24, 2008 9:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If we become the kind of team that develops solid starters and acquires stars, we’ll have a happy fan base.
by oldjacket on Dec 24, 2008 9:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
MadBum
I think that it’s high time that we have a Madison Bumgarner themed MadMen silhouette to be given its rightful place among the McPhotoshop images. You know, glove or ball replacing the Don Draper cig, a Giants cap…use your imagination.

by biff pocoroba on Dec 24, 2008 9:19 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
yes
"While conservatives tell you 'leave things alone and no one will lose,' and liberals tell you 'interfere a lot and no one will lose,' baseball says 'someone will lose.' Not only says it - but insists upon it! ... Democracy is lovely, but baseball's more mature." BVCE supports SF Dugout and Manny Burriss.
by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Dec 24, 2008 6:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Awesome as Usual Natto !
So what is the over/under on we you get to use it ?
My adopted sons Matt Downs and Ben Copeland . Still not ranked in the McC prospect list.
by nvsfg on Dec 24, 2008 10:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
FABULOUS!
t-shirt???
Idolizing Robb Nen since 2002...
by Smoke on the Water on Dec 27, 2008 2:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Seconded.
SFDugout.com is BACK! See the Top 50 Giants Prospects!
by BruteSentiment on Jan 1, 2009 9:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Great, but...
I think the baseball should be white, analogous to the cigarette in the original, but maybe that’s just me.
by Tamdrik on Jan 4, 2009 10:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was scanning the page
Read that as “I think baseball should be white”, and kind of freaked out for half a second.
..so allow me to present Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain as two sweet, sweet bottles of warming hooch.
by Cookyman on Jan 6, 2009 11:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Kind of surprised Kieschnick didn’t even make the top 20. Perhaps I was pushing for him too hard…
Matt Cain: He'll save children, but not the Dodger children.
PABLO SANDOVAL AM STEAL DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS.
by jponry on Dec 24, 2008 11:00 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
No Pucetas?
You probably know it as MYANMAR, but it will always be BURMA to me!
by NuschlerFace on Dec 24, 2008 1:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Glad someone else likes T.I. Don’t like how he pretty much hates Pucetas, Fairley and Kiesch. Though Sickels usually seems to be low on guys with lots of tools but with big holes in their game.
by Hobbes2d on Dec 24, 2008 4:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Interesting
Only two A’s and Villalona assigned a B.
by wilriv21 on Dec 25, 2008 9:20 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
John is a tough grader
John Sickels is a tough grader, and I think his grades are actually pretty accurate here. As illustration of his difficult grading requirements, keep in mind that he gave Tim Lincecum only an A- two winter ago. Also keep in mind that he gave no grade above a B+ to any Yankee prospect in the latest team he ranked.
I was impressed that the Giants had 19 players with a C+ or higher. Any player who receives a C+ or higher, John considers to be a real prospect.
You probably didn’t like the B+ for Timmy Two, but if Timmy One was only an A-, isn’t a B+ plenty high for Alderson? Tim isn’t considered to be too far away from the majors, but with a fastball that rarely exceeds 92 mph, he isn’t considered to have a particularly high ceiling, either. I see his ceiling as being somewhere close to that of Matt Cain, while I think Madison Bumgarner’s ceiling isn’t all that much lower than Tim Lincecum’s, although I am more worried about Mad Bum’s arm than Lincecum’s.
As for Villalona’s B, that is actually a high mark from John for a player who hasn’t played above Low A. And if one looks at AnVil’s horrid K/BB ratio last season, I don’t see how he justifies a higher ranking. In fact, with AnVil being ranked as high as #17 overall in one poll I saw and pretty consistently in the top 50, I think he may actually be one of the more overrated prospects in baseball.
Yes, AnVil is only 18, and he more than held his own in Low A ball, but at just over a year older, Mad Bum dominated the league, perhaps as no one before.
John’s grades may not look all that high, but given his strict standards and the question marks that surround most of the Giants prospects (as well as those of other teams), I think the Giants fared quite well — as they should have.
by sharksrog on Dec 28, 2008 12:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Lincecum at an A- wasn't accurate though...
I’m happy about all the anti-Link propaganda—otherwise he wouldn’t have fallen to the Giants in the draft—but the “experts” were clearly wrong on him.
Psycho killer, qu'est-ce que c'est?
by shikantaza on Dec 28, 2008 10:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Depends on which “experts” you’re listening to. BA in their 2006 Draft Preview had Lincecum listed as Best Fastball, Best Breaking Ball and Closest to the Majors - and BA’s stuff is heavily based on conversations they’re having with scouts and coaches. And really, it’s not like being taken 10th in the draft is some kind of insult, nor is being assigned an A, in a system that consciously limits A’s as much as possible, in the knowledge that there are very few future stars in the minors at any one time.
Get the hell out the way Bengie, Pablito's hit the show!
by Roger on Dec 28, 2008 11:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
huh, not sure what happened there.
Get the hell out the way Bengie, Pablito's hit the show!
by Roger on Dec 28, 2008 11:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A- not bad
The poster is right that an A- from John Sickels is a very high grade. Tim’s A- was easily the highest Giants grade going into the 2007 season. The A- was given not before the draft, but after Tim had pitched his first partial season at Salem-Keizer and San Jose.
But John missed his chance to make Tim his #1 pitching prospect. He ranked Phil Hughes and Homer Bailey — both two years younger than Tim and in fact the same age now as Tim was two years ago — ahead of Tim. While I understood his logic — more with Hughes than with Bailey, since a pitcher should NOT be named Homer — I was convinced that Tim should be #1 and gave him some very good reasons why.
Unfortunately I was unable to change his position, which meant that so far at least, I have been far more right than he. To be frank, when John made his evaluation of Lincecum, I likely knew more about Tim than he did. I don’t mean that as a put down. John has one or two more prospects to grade than I do.
But I gave John his chance to make a positive change. I gave him valid reasons. He chose other reasons not to change his stance. My guess is that if he could change his evaluation retroactively, he would most definitely do so.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.
by sharksrog on Dec 31, 2008 3:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Body size was the reason Tim Lincycum was available at #10 in the draft.
by wilriv21 on Dec 28, 2008 12:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've never understood that
Using injury potential as a factor in scouting a player doesn’t make much sense to me. Look at Mark Prior for instance- the man looks like the exact opposite of Lincecum on the mound (those massive calves…) and look how he fared.
Wall-E for Best Picture 2008
by Useful_Idiot on Dec 30, 2008 5:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Scouts love size
If Lincycum was 6’2" he would have been the first pick in the draft. Thank god for Filipino genes.
by wilriv21 on Dec 30, 2008 6:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Scouts are good for a lot of stuff, but I think they have a lot of prejudices especially about body type.
We don't really have that much pitching depth. We don't really have that much pitching depth. FOR GOD SAKE, VERUCA, DON'T GO FAKE TRADING JONATHAN SANCHEZ. We don't really have that much pitching depth
by oldjacket on Dec 30, 2008 7:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
As Do Certain Members Of The McCoven When It Comes To Evalating Pablo's Defensive Potential At 3B
by giantsrainman on Dec 30, 2008 11:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Good defense at the hot corner
I have heard that Pablo pretty much swallows everything up at the hot plate, er hot corner.
by sharksrog on Dec 31, 2008 3:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Build
Tim is built almost exactly like his father — short and slim. Fortunately, Tim is pretty ripped and has worked on the strength and flexibility of his core for most of his life. I think Tim has more risk of injury with his core than his arm. But that risk is mitigated to a great degree by the work he has done, particularly his flexibility, which is excellent.
by sharksrog on Dec 31, 2008 3:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I DO understand using injury potential
I DO understand using injury potential in evaluating a player. In fact, I think it is an important consideration. But it depends on who is doing the evaluation.
Lee Mazonne or whatever his name is gave a negative report on Prior, believing him to be at serious injury risk. Most other observers felt Prior was of minimal injury risk.
I had scarcely heard of Tim prior (no pun) to the Giants’ drafting him. But when they did so, I did my research. Almost everything I learned pointed to his being a LOW injury risk. The final piece of the puzzle — which I mentioned to Sickels — was that even though Tim had yet to throw a pitch at this time two years ago, Will Carroll (author of the book Saving the Pitcher and a daily writer for Baseball Prospectus and other media) picked Tim as his franchise pitcher for the next 10 years.
For Carroll to pick a guy who hadn’t pitched above Class A seems pretty strong evidence that he, who knows a lot more about baseball injury than I, wasn’t worried about Tim’s risk of injury. I can understand Sickels’ not listening to me, whom he didn’t know from Adam. But he really should have paid attention to Will. John’s biggest worry was the heavy workload Tim shouldered in college.
Using injury potential in scouting a player appears quite important to me. But it is all in who is doing the evaluating, just as in the other facets of evaluation.
I felt and feel that Madison Bumgarner has an above-average risk of injury and apparently the Giants agreed. They changed his mechanics, and he used them early last season. But he wasn’t comfortable with them, changed back and became REALLY effective. That is my primary concern with Mad Bum, who I feel may have a VERY high ceiling.
Tim Alderson is likely a better injury risk and is the more polished of the two pitchers. But his ceiling is likely closer to Matt Cain, while Mad Bum’s might be closer to Lincecum. If Timmy Two develops his change up, he could be ready for the bigs in a hurry IMO. Mad Bum will likely take longer. But if Mad Bum remains healthy, he very likely will be the better of the two pitchers IMO. Mad Bum needs better command of his secondary pitches, but they’re better than I expected.
If my scouts told me that Lincecum was at more risk of injury than the average pitcher, I might consider looking for another scout. That said, according to John Scheurholtz in his book, scouts USUALLY differ in their opinions. John believes it is the job of the GM to sort out those opinions, analyze them, evaluate them and make a final decision.
Fortunately for the Giants, they made a great one regarding Lincecum, while some other teams fanned on a fine opportunity.
by sharksrog on Dec 31, 2008 3:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs



















