Quote from fenn68 on September 14, 2020, 9:45 am

Now that Cronenworth appears to have "graduated" for MLBPipeline's Top 30 ... they have added at #30 ... Carlos Guarte ... 19 year old RHP from Venezuela ... pitched mainly on SD2 in AZR last year. Good stats.

Not sure if the following graduate before the end of the season (might be close and the basis of days on the active MLB roster or IL):

#6 Morejon

#10 Mateo

#19 Guerra

Quote from Brian Connelly on September 14, 2020, 2:53 pm

Not sure if the following graduate before the end of the season (might be close and the basis of days on the active MLB roster or IL):

#6 Morejon

#10 Mateo

#19 Guerra

I really don't understand "graduating" prospects on the basis of service time vs. actual playing time.  It just doesn't make sense.  On that basis, Anderson Espinoza "graduates" as an MLB prospect without throwing a pitch in MLB, or, in his unfortunately unique situation, ANY level of pro ball the last 4 years!

Using the metric of service time is "easier" (i.e. lazier - NOT aimed at you, FENN)  or more "constant" (this year being the exception, with every 1 game on roster = 2.7 of MLB service time), than playing time stats are.... but playing time is NOT that hard to measure/standardize.  I use 100AB's position players, 10 starts OR 50 IP for P's who are primarily SP, and 30 appearances OR 35 IP for primarily RP's.  Hybrid guys somewhere between 35-50 IP.  Yes, a little more subjective, but way more "accurate".

By my metrics, Mateo definitely won't graduate (another good example, spent time on IL beginning of year multiplied by 2.7 per game... so he had significant service time before his first MLB AB), Morejon MIGHT get to being "on the verge", but will still definitely be a prospect.  Guerra finished August "on the verge", meaning near certain to graduate the following month.... then he just went on IL after only 2 IP in Sept.  I was going to fudge a little on him, since he's been a Prospect for SO long, but if he's really out rest of year, I'll still have him as a prospect.

Mateo & Guerra IMO are "prospect projects" who might fit better next year on rebuilding teams where they can take some lumps without being benched; covered earlier/different thread.

Quote from fenn68 on September 14, 2020, 3:54 pm

I was wrong on the IL counting .... per MLBPipeline:

"To be eligible for a list, a player must have rookie eligibility. To qualify for rookie status, a player must not have exceeded 130 at-bats or 50 innings pitched in the Major Leagues, or accumulated more than 45 days on the active roster of a Major League club or clubs during the 25-player limit period, excluding time on the disabled list or in military service."  (note that was the 2019 criteria ... 2020?)

It may be the 45 days on the active roster that swallows up Mateo, Guerra, and Morejon. Since the season is about 60 days (plus Guerra and Morejon scored some active roster days in 2019.

Might be some unknown around the "days" component since the roster was "30" then "28" not the new "normal 26" ... then again in prior years Sept did not count with the expanded roster but no expanded rosters in 2020.

Probably another one of those unresolved minor issue between the league and the MLBPA in determining who is a rookie in 2021 and really that only is an "awards" question as far as I know.

Quote from fenn68 on September 14, 2020, 4:17 pm

Quick and dirty on the active roster time by year end (assuming they count Sep, 2020)

Guerra over (actually over already before IL unless they did a retro)

Mateo on track for the last day taking him over (if I calculated right)

Morejon would pass the 45 days very soon since he had 18 days in 2019.

All so close ... will be off the list early in 2021 ...

Quote from Brian Connelly on September 15, 2020, 10:37 am

Quote from fenn68 on September 14, 2020, 3:54 pm

I was wrong on the IL counting .... per MLBPipeline:

"To be eligible for a list, a player must have rookie eligibility. To qualify for rookie status, a player must not have exceeded 130 at-bats or 50 innings pitched in the Major Leagues, or accumulated more than 45 days on the active roster of a Major League club or clubs during the 25-player limit period, excluding time on the disabled list or in military service."  (note that was the 2019 criteria ... 2020?)

It may be the 45 days on the active roster that swallows up Mateo, Guerra, and Morejon. Since the season is about 60 days (plus Guerra and Morejon scored some active roster days in 2019.

Might be some unknown around the "days" component since the roster was "30" then "28" not the new "normal 26" ... then again in prior years Sept did not count with the expanded roster but no expanded rosters in 2020.

Probably another one of those unresolved minor issue between the league and the MLBPA in determining who is a rookie in 2021 and really that only is an "awards" question as far as I know.

Their playing time requirement "bar" is =/> mine; very reasonable.  But 45 DAYS on active MLB roster is WAY too big of a limitation... how could any P ever reach 50 IP in 45 days?  Position player COULD, but only as an everyday starter.

The semantics of being on a roster removing prospect status drives me nuts!  How can you determine if a prospect can actually play in MLB with such a tiny window of time in which to actually play?!

I prefer Baseball America; they don't use the "days active" metric, but apply a similar playing time metric.

Quote from Brian Connelly on September 15, 2020, 11:41 am

Speaking of Baseball America, using THEIR prospect rankings (not MLB.com or "consensus") Pads traded:

• #4 Taylor Trammell   (WAS consensus #4; though Campusano @ #5 had slightly higher avg MLB top 100 ranking)
• #7 Andres Munoz!!  ("80 FB to 103 mph, Avg but inconsistent slider, high effort delivery/health risk, below Avg Control")

plus pretty proven MLB hitter 3B/1B & likely MLB backup C FOR:

• 30 year old C in only 2nd MLB season.  Cheap control but age/limited playing time regression risk
• Two 28-29 yr old out of options RP.  One on IL all year.

Obviously Munoz is no longer the #7 prospect post TJ surgery, but their high rating of him does inform my opinion that this is the one trade that I'm (by far) the least certain was a good move in the long run for the Padres.

There are many "was it worth it" variables, but my order of importance is:

1. Does Trammell develop into an everyday regular OF?  (I'm a fan & thought he = Pham replacement)
2. Can Nola sustain his limited timeline of MLB performance "despite" being 30 y.o.
3. How long until Campusano "arrives" and supplants Nola?  If Nola is only the F/T C for 1.5 years (or less?) tips scales in M's favor.

But a significant part of this trade's value to me is Austin Adams contributing in 2020.  If he doesn't, could argue why exchange a young huge upside IL RP for an older guy with a similar profile?  We'll see.

Quote from fenn68 on September 15, 2020, 12:00 pm

A win now move with a major C upgrade for 2020 and 2021 (at least) in Nola and eliminating a major hole offensively at the bottom of the line-up. Made it "easier" to dump Hedges as a throw-in in the Clevinger deal (CLEVE did want him). Sort of a domino value proposition.

What we really can't tell is the Padres evaluation of Trammell and Campusano at the alternative site. At least with Campusano they must have seen enough to warrant adding him to the 40 now and calling him up ... so likely he will be ready for prime time soon. Is it possible the did not see improvement in Trammell's bat and that made dealing him easier. Even if still had projectable skills offensively ... did they see that as a few years away and enough time to find another LF alternative after Pham?

As for Munoz ... and all the RP ... just roll the dice if any will be critical in the ML. RP effectiveness / health is may be the most unreliable to project.

 

Quote from Randy Manese on September 15, 2020, 3:35 pm

Don't regret trading for Nola one bit.  How many other catchers not named Realmuto have numbers close to what Nola has - Sanchez, no; Contreras, no; Grandal, no.  Small sample size but guys that fight their way to the majors and arrive as older players seem to keep grinding away for a few more successful years - like Muncy or Yastrzemski.  Nola will be the #1 catcher until Campy is ready to take over full-time in about a year or so; I still think there is a place on the roster for Mejia as the LH hitting complement but surely not an even split with Campy.  Nola also has caught 4 shutouts in the time he has been with us and the pitchers seem to have great confidence in his pitch calling and set-up for location.  It seemed to me that when Hedges was our catcher, teams were hitting many more HRs against us than they are now - even more %-wise than when Mejia was catching.  I look for Nola to be a solid contributor for at least two more years and even a highly sought trade chip if he becomes a back-up.  Trammell has a load of potential, but we need performance now to go where we haven't been in a long long time.

Quote from LynchMob on December 30, 2020, 10:57 am

For the record ...

https://madfriars.com/2020/12/30/madfriars-top-25-prospects-for-2021/