Possibly goes top 10 but is a big, physical SP with ace potential. Moore and co. will be all over him if he slips a bit and could offer top 10 money at No. 16
OF Jarred Kelenic, Waukasha West HS, WI
Spoiler!
Kelenic is the top prep bat, toolsy OF. Royals would be ecstatic to have shot at him.
1B Triston Casas, American Heritage HS (FL).
Spoiler!
Tremendous raw power, best in HS bats. Royals typically like HS arms or HS bats with "special" tools. He qualifies.
RHP Carter Stewart, Eau de Gallie HS (Ga).
Spoiler!
Another big, physical specimen with huge upside. More likely to be available mid-first than Rocker.
ANY Any, Any (Any). Any current top projected pick who slides for injury concerns. Includes current top prospect prospect SP Brady Singer, U of Florida.
Current Prospects to Watch:
OF Seuly Matias - Huge tools. Hit 2 HR in Lexington (A) season opener.
1B Nick Pratto - Top pick in 17 has advanced approach and good glove; needs to start tapping into power in first full year in minors. Also at Lexington.
OF Michael Gigliotti - Good defender in CF, good OBP skills, plus baserunner. Next mainstay in CF for KC, IMO. Advanced college bat also starting at Lexington.
OF Khalil Lee - Probably has highest upside in Royals' system. Could hit 30 HR in majors, could steal 30 bases. Plus defensive ability in RF. Nice test at Wilmington this year.
3B Emmanuel Rivera - Really nice approach and good contact skills. Power is still developing. Also getting a good test at Wilmington.
SP Foster Griffin - Made nice strides in 2017. Needs to continue to progress in 2018. Could be a lefty version of Jakob Junis (good breaking ball that he can really manipulate, OK fastball, good command).
1B Samir Duenez - Duenez still is intriguing, hoping for a step forward in his power production this year at Northwest Arkansas, which would turn him into a legit prospect.
Others to keep an eye on:
SP Gerson Garabito (Wilmington), OF Marten Gasparini (Lexington), C MJ Melendez (Lexington), RP Tyler Zuber (lexington), RP Richard Lovelady (Omaha), SP Dan Tillo (Lexington), SS Nicky Lopez (NWA), SP Scott Blewett (NWA), OF Brewer Hicklen (Idaho Falls),
In general, Lexington and Wilmington are the most interesting spots to watch. Nice depth and a lot of interesting pieces at both. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy:
Anybody still want to bitch about the Soler trade?
I mean I don't want to because I think Soler will be a great player, if he can stay healthy, but we may have made the playoffs and we'd probably still have Matt Strahm if we didn't trade Davis. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dlphg9:
I mean I don't want to because I think Soler will be a great player, if he can stay healthy, but we may have made the playoffs and we'd probably still have Matt Strahm if we didn't trade Davis.
I won’t throw stones. But I do wonder what they would have done with another comp pick and extra dollars associated with it. [Reply]
So is Glass trying to fast-track the rebuild? God, I hope so. Not sure I'll even follow if we have 5+ years of this to look forward to. It's not as if there's a wave of exciting young talent about to hit the scene.
Rather than trade every halfway decent player for a mediocre return (or single A crapshoots) and slice payroll to Marlins level for 5 years, I'd much rather see them spend a bit on short contracts to try to be somewhat competitive over the next few years, while sprinkling in rookies to see what sticks. Then when the core guys like Mondesi, Soler, Bonifacio, Phillips etc are reaching their prime and the star prospects are appearing on the scene (and Gordon is off the payroll), they can fill in the gaps.
Sure, it's "ideal" to go all the way and build through the draft and trades, but this organization isn't known for being extremely adept at drafting and developing. There's no guarantee that 5 years of suckage and prospect collecting will even lead to .500 baseball again, much less another World Series run. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
So is Glass trying to fast-track the rebuild? God, I hope so. Not sure I'll even follow if we have 5+ years of this to look forward to. It's not as if there's a wave of exciting young talent about to hit the scene.
Rather than trade every halfway decent player for a mediocre return (or single A crapshoots) and slice payroll to Marlins level for 5 years, I'd much rather see them spend a bit on short contracts to try to be somewhat competitive over the next few years, while sprinkling in rookies to see what sticks. Then when the core guys like Mondesi, Soler, Bonifacio, Phillips etc are reaching their prime and the star prospects are appearing on the scene (and Gordon is off the payroll), they can fill in the gaps.
Sure, it's "ideal" to go all the way and build through the draft and trades, but this organization isn't known for being extremely adept at drafting and developing. There's no guarantee that 5 years of suckage and prospect collecting will even lead to .500 baseball again, much less another World Series run.
With a bit better luck than we've had in recent years regarding finding young pitching talent, we should be able to produce a pitching staff that doesn't suck total fucking AIDS like it does now.
Unless we get balls lucky, I don't think we're ever going to find a headline #1 starting pitcher in our group of guys, but as the Royals of the past showed, you can get the job done with multiple 2s and 3s throughout the staff.
Whether or not our young guys turn into those kinds of pitchers is a different matter. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RealSNR:
With a bit better luck than we've had in recent years regarding finding young pitching talent, we should be able to produce a pitching staff that doesn't suck total ****ing AIDS like it does now.
Unless we get balls lucky, I don't think we're ever going to find a headline #1 starting pitcher in our group of guys, but as the Royals of the past showed, you can get the job done with multiple 2s and 3s throughout the staff.
Whether or not our young guys turn into those kinds of pitchers is a different matter.
Multiples 2s and 3s with a lights out pen seems to be the recipe for success for the Royals.
I've been watching the Royals for almost 15 years now, and I don't know that I'd ever say they had a true #1.
Grienke was probably the closest. Duffy had a time when he was pitching like a true 1, but he was never consistent enough. I had high hopes for Ventura, but.... :-)
Fun fact: Paul Byrd is the first pitcher I remember liking growing up as a kid. I thought his wind up was the coolest thing ever. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
Multiples 2s and 3s with a lights out pen seems to be the recipe for success for the Royals.
I've been watching the Royals for almost 15 years now, and I don't know that I'd ever say they had a true #1.
Grienke was probably the closest. Duffy had a time when he was pitching like a true 1, but he was never consistent enough. I had high hopes for Ventura, but.... :-)
Fun fact: Paul Byrd is the first pitcher I remember liking growing up as a kid. I thought his wind up was the coolest thing ever.
Greinke was a true #1 in the second half of 08 and throughout 09.
His issue is our rotation went from a #1 to four #5’s. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kysirsoze:
lol Yeah when Greinke won the Cy Young I'd say he was a "true #1".
He had one really good season for the Royals. And the next year he was mediocre. Overall he was not a #1. He's right. The Royals haven't had one in recent memory. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
He had one really good season for the Royals. And the next year he was mediocre. Overall he was not a #1. He's right. The Royals haven't had one in recent memory.
Duffy just gave up a grand slam in the second inning to the Twins, but in all fairness he did get ‘royally’ fucked on 2 non-strike calls right before that pitch that would have ended the inning with the based loaded and no runs across. And this ump had a huge strike zone in the first inning. Apparently, he just suddenly decided he was being too generous.
Sucks for Duffy, though. Just not our year . . . . or his. [Reply]
Not sure why that's funny. There are a lot of guys who put together one good season and then can't back it up. They aren't #1s. He's had some great years since, but not with the Royals.
If you wan to split hairs and say the Royals had a #1 starter for a year, fine. Whoop dee do. [Reply]
I guess it's the definition of a #1. I would say a #1 would be a top of the rotation pitcher on most teams. He would have been on any team in the American League if not all of baseball. I can't think of another rational definition. No one said Greinke was a Royals HoFer or anything. No one said he was Justin Verlander. Just a number 1. He absolutely was and there is simply no reasonable argument that he isn't. This is a weird conversation to be having. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
Not sure why that's funny. There are a lot of guys who put together one good season and then can't back it up. They aren't #1s. He's had some great years since, but not with the Royals.
If you wan to split hairs and say the Royals had a #1 starter for a year, fine. Whoop dee do.
That's not splitting hairs! That's literally the claim that was made!
And he didn't "put together one good season". He had the best season in the AL! (Possibly NL too, but I'm don't recall and I'm not going to dig for this) [Reply]
