So our top five Jay prospects are (in order) Snider, Cecil, Ahrens, Arencibia and Purcey. Who leads off the "next five"?
| Yohermyn Chavez |  20 (9.52%) |
| Buck Coats | 7 (3.33%) |
| Robinzon Diaz | 19 (9.05%) |
| Eric Eiland | 13 (6.19%) |
| Kyle Ginley | 7 (3.33%) |
| Justin Jackson | 30 (14.29%) |
| Ricky Romero | 65 (30.95%) |
| Curtis Thigpen | 22 (10.48%) |
| John Tolisano | 24 (11.43%) |
| Other (who?) | 3 (1.43%) |
Ginley steps into the candidate hole vacated by Purcey (who in my opinion should be higher than 5!) ... Who's next?
The results are starting to bunch up a little more -- I suspect we will have one more clear winner and then Quite A Mess.
Mind you, the pickings are slim after Snider and Cecil. I wonder how many B- prospects or higher among Ahrens, Arencibia, Purcey and Romero we would see. I have it at 1(Purcey).
^ ^ I think the cupboard is so bare, you've kind of got to vote for the first rounders based on nothing else other than they are first rounders, albiet most doing quite poorly. With a good year, anyone in the system can easily be slotted @ #3, which isn't a good thing. Aside from Snider/Cecil as you mentioned, no one is taking the torch and running with it, so you've kind of got a big group of "what ifs and maybes" and the best way to slot them would be according to their draft order/tools they possess.
Patterson is younger than Purcey and has performed better than him at most spots. Of those three (Purcey, Romero, Patterson), in order, I rank them Romero, Patterson, Purcey.
1) Hes old for a prospect.
2) Not a 1st round pick.
3) His recent lines look similar to Pedro Feliz (poor OBP).
I guess I implied something I didn't mean to - I'm not trying to say Patterson is a great prospect, just that he should be considered the same as Purcey and Romero (all 3 should be in the 8-12 range I think). For your points, I'm not sure if you're speaking for yourself or trying to figure out the people that have such varying opinions of Purcey and Patterson.
1) Hes old for a prospect.
He's 24 and playing in AAA (he'll be 25 when the season starts). That's not old, and is also a year younger than Purcey (whose AA numbers don't look any better than Patterson's).
2) Not a 1st round pick.
I can understand where you're coming from, but it should be what made Purcey a first round pick is what keeps him a prospect, not the fact that he was a first round prospect. In other words, a first-rounder should be expected to outperform a 3rd rounder (4th? I can't remember). A first-rounder who underperforms against a late-rounder shouldn't stay a better prospect.
3) His recent lines look similar to Pedro Feliz (poor OBP).
I agree with you there as far as Patterson not being a great prospect. I'm not certain why the same isn't applied to Purcey who only seems to do well when he's old for the level.
The differentiation between Patterson and Romero/Purcey seems to be mainly a battersbox thing (BB had Patterson 21st, Purcey 8th, and Romero 7th; BA had them Patterson 10, Purcey 9, and Romero 5); MLBA only liked Romero; Sickels had Patterson 12th, Purcey 16th, and Romero 11th.I would expect some differentiation between all the lists, but am curious why everyone here seems to have such a different view of Patterson from Purcey and Romero when the expert lists don't seem to be as extreme. I guess saying "everyone" is generalizing and probably inaccurate - but Purcey got enough votes to be top-5, Romero looks like he'll be 6, and Patterson isn't on the ballot.
Just did some looking, and you are right that 25 is old for starting AAA - I didn't realize that and stand corrected. However, 26 for a pitcher is also old.
The toolsy thing I can see - I guess that's just a statement of the quality of prospects that a 26-year old lefty who is toolsy is considered the 5th best prospect. Even the usual pitcher that most toss-out as a late bloomer was having his first all-star year at the age of 26.