Cubs outfielder Chris Coghlan believes there’s too much pressure on prospects today, Toni Ginnetti of the Chicago Sun-Times reports. “People didn’t even know who was in Triple-A 10 years ago,” says the 2009 NL Rookie of the Year winner. “People didn’t know your name. Now ’prospects’ are at an all-time high. … I feel bad for the young kids now because people are putting so much pressure on them.” Ten years ago, there was comparatively little information available about prospects, and all but the highest-profile of them were left to learn their craft in peace. The newfound scrutiny prospects face — partially, obviously, from websites like this one — is surely now a factor in their development, and it’s led to waves of hype for the big-league debuts of top talents like Javier Baez. Here’s more from around baseball.
- Contrary to an earlier report, there weren’t any directives preventing the Rays from trading David Price to the Yankees, Marc Topkin of the Tampa Bay Times writes. “We don’t have a no-fly list,” says Rays president Matt Silverman. “We have 29 potential trading partners, and we have explored trades with each and every one of them.” Topkin adds that the remaining Rays don’t believe Price’s departure from their clubhouse is a factor in how they’ve performed since he left. After winning their last three games, the Rays are now 4-4 since the deal.
- Teams from overseas have offered the Twins $1MM-$1.5MM to purchase the contract of pitcher Kris Johnson, but the Twins have declined, 1500ESPN.com’s Darren Wolfson tweets. Johnson has made just three big-league starts this season, instead spending most of the season with Triple-A Rochester, where he’s posted a 3.12 ERA with 7.5 K/9 and 3.6 BB/9 in 109 2/3 innings.
- ESPN’s Keith Law (audio link) spoke this afternoon to Hoffman & Sandler on ESPN 103.3 FM in Dallas about various Rangers topics. Law says that the Rangers aren’t likely to get more than a fringe prospect in return for Alex Rios (which seems reasonable, as Rios has already cleared waivers), although they might do better if they package him with another player, the way the Mets did last August when they sent Marlon Byrd and John Buck to the Pirates for Dilson Herrera and Vic Black. (Rios suffered an ankle injury today, which might render any trade talk moot if it turns out to be serious.) Law also says that although Joey Gallo is a top talent, promoting him to the big leagues right now would be “a horrendous idea,” and that Gallo would strike out about 45% of the time if he were in the big leagues today.
I believe the trade did have some mental effect on the Rays.
I believe the problem with the rays is Longo and Loney having .700 ops and myers flopping and then getting injured. That is 3,4,5, in your line-up, no team can overcome that.
Prospects are hyped more than ever before, but I can remember Ron and Pat reporting on every single one of Mark Prior’s starts in the minor leagues. You knew exactly what he was doing every single game if you were a cubs fan. Its much more to the extreme now but not new.
That is true, but Prior was a bit of an exception since he was the #2 overall draft pick. Which is about the same as a Kris Bryant update today. The big difference is that it used to be just Mark Prior, now it is Bryant AND everyone else.
Nowadays if you’re a top-20 organization prospect there’s about a dozen websites tracking all your games, your stats, what the scouts are saying, etc etc
I still find it hard to believe that was the best offer they could get for Price.
Armchair GMs are just going to have to accept that their assumptions just aren’t reality.
So its being an “armchair GM” to be surprised that no one offered a better deal than the Tigers? Okay.
Yes, the “A-GMs” severely overvalued many players this deadline, cementing their places behind the computer screen. A couple of prospects for Tommy Milone? Nope, you get Sam Fuld. Four top prospects for David Price? Nope, you get Smyly, Franklin and Adames. Lower the expectations.
So I guess using recent comparisons, such as, let’s say, the return they got for Shields, is just silly? Obviously we should never base our expectations off of past events and blindly accept that the way things happen is the only and best way. Give me a break.
I’m going to assume that Andrew Friedman tried to get as much as he could for David Price, so it’s not “hard to believe” this was the best offer he could get for Price. That’s how it goes. Sorry to disappoint.
Why are you assuming that I have a problem with the trade? If that is the best the Rays could get, then they had to do it. But when the talk is that the Rays were expecting to top the Wil Myers/Shields trade (even if it was an overpay on the Royals part) but instead they got the package they did for Price, then people have the right to be surprised. That doesn’t equate to being an “armchair GM”.
I find ironic you are bashing “armchair GMs”. All you have to do is look at your comments in the past to verify that you are one as well. Does suggesting Profar for Tallion and another SP ring any bells? How about Profar for Trevor Ploffe and another player? Or Brian Dozier for Julio Teheran? Or maybe you have revoked your status as an “armchair GM” since the 2 years you have made a post on this community?
Everyone involved in a baseball community is an “armchair GM”. We have all suggested trades and made proposals about getting players. If people are surprised that the Rays couldn’t the trade they thought that they would, then so be it.
Pitchers looking to earn 30 mil a year are turning into negatives, as far as, trade values go. I like Price, but you’re basically trading him for 1 1/2 years, since he didn’t sign an extension. Don’t know what happened, but you have to surmise that Price wouldn’t agree before-hand to a Detroit scherzer-like offer.
I agree with Coghlan. I think it also the current obsession with prospects takes a bit of fun of the present. The Cubs are in last place and have been for several years, but some people here think they are a year or two away from a World Series title. Well I guess for Cubs fans that does take the sting out of the present, but I’d still prefer to focus on the current season ahead of the “fantasy future.” In some ways it really hurts me to say that because I am a Rockies fan and there is probably no team in the league (even the Cubs) with a more muddled present than my team.
I appreciate your comment. I think my Twins would qualify for a muddled present. Sure, the Twins have some great prospects coming up but until they do, they are just prospects. If they come up and bat .290 and hit 20 dingers, it would be a disappointment given the expectation level. Or it could be like Jose Fernandez and they get injured right away. Either way, I need to live in the present and the truth is, the Twins season is over each June.
They may not have had a “no fly list”, but you’d have to think it was going to take a lot more to trade one of these guys in the division.
Hmm, I didn’t realize coughlan was the 2009-rookie of the year- had actually been wondering where he came from after he burst onto the scene w/ the Cubs this year. Glad he’s got some history of success- maybe this isn’t another flash in the pan. If that’s the case, he’s another solid buy-low pick-up for the Cubs, and possibly part of the future contending team
History of success?
It wasn’t so much a history of success as an incredibly weak NL rookie crop that year. Well Andrew McCutchen isn’t weak of course, but he didn’t have a good rookie year.
Hi Charlie W. Like we say here in Spain “Enhorabuena” which means in Spanish congratulations. Haven’t heard in years on any of the most popular baseball websites that I have read, such a wise observation from a writer along with Chris Coghlan’s comment about the pressures that are causing today’s prospects by people in baseball. This can be definitely seen, for example, when you compare Mike Trout with Bryce Harper, two highly touted prospects at the time that have gone so far in completely in different directions. Here we have the case of Trout who is only a year older than Harper being much more matured and established as a professional at his age than the majority of the other well known 5 tool prospects in his generation. In conclusion, not everyone can be a Mike Trout, but still the rest of the highly talented players like Harper have to be treated more at a low profile until their talents have been properly developed to be the future all-stars in the game.
Cochlan’s comments are a bit extreme as far as no one knowing who was in AAA 10 years ago. Heck, I can remember hype surrounding Angels prospects as far back as the early 1990’s, when I really started watching them on a regular basis. Fans were furious when they traded Dante Bichette for an over the hill Dave Parker. We couldn’t wait to see Darin Erstad make his debut. Same with Jim Edmonds, JT Snow, Garrett Anderson, Todd Greene, and Troy Glaus. By about 10 years ago, I had a pretty good idea of who was at AAA for the Angels as well as other teams. I think the big difference today is that you have fans talking more about the idea of keeping a top prospect over his 6 years through arbitration rather than trading him away to help that team win now. That part I think that gets overemphasized. And I think there are a lot of examples this season about what happens when relying too much on prospects. But it is true that with outlets like MLB Network, prospects do get much more exposure in the media.
I saw Gallo play on Friday night, and I have to agree that he’s not ready for the bigs yet. He did hit a 440-ish moonshot to center (left of dead center) which showed him sitting back a little on a pitch, but he is too much feast or fathom and MLB pitchers would probably eat his lunch to the point of him losing confidence.
I think a lot of this hype Coghlan is speaking of is because he is now in Chicago, which has been like that as long as I can remember. As a Cub fan, I can remember many over-hyped prospects. Kerry Wood, Mark Prior and Corey Patterson come to mind. Shoot how about Shawon Dunston? That was the mid-80s. I have always wondered if the hype leads to their failure.