So whats the prize for the contest?;). Its great to see our farm system so deep and highly regarded while the Red Sox and Yankees systems seemingly lack depth and quality. This bodes very well for the Blue Jays future and I am interested on who from the last 2 drafts does BA think has the most potential or upside in their estimations besides the obvious.

You have to love this quote from BA, " Magowan has better stuff than Roy Halladay". It would be nice if Dustin can continue to develope and possibly come up mid year. Halladay, Magowan and Batista would be a nice top 3 for 2005.

I doubt I'll have a chance to ask John questions in the chat, but here's one I'd like to hear:

What precedents (specific players) make you confident in ranking Rosario so highly? I know some players have come back from Tommy John surgery very successfully, but besides that Francisco has yet to pitch above A-ball.

I don't think we'll see McGowan this year...Maybe as a September call. I think before McGowan you'll see Chulk, Arnold or some other hired henchman. Considering the comparison with Roy Halladay I think they'll be extra cautious with him and try to give him every opportunity to succeed rather than take a chance of him getting battered around and having him lose his confidence like Roy did a few years back. Just my opinion...

This is from the free article about Rios:

"His offensive profile looks a lot like that of Vernon Wells, which is good, but Rios isn’t as good a center fielder as Wells."

BA might overvalue certain tools and rate players different than we might but I've always found their evaluations regarding defense to be pretty bang on. Who the future Blue Jay CF will be has been discussed a lot in this forum lately and from the fingertips of John Manuel is one answer: Wells.

The question now becomes, if they both blossom into what we think they might, who plays RF...Gross or Rios?

Figures. I have a training session today that I can't get out of, starting at 2:00 and ending at 3:00. It just figures.

I think that overall, the BA list is very good. They have the most important prospects and they have them in more or less the right order (they're dead-on with their 1-through-4 rankings). With only a couple of exceptions, I fully agree with their rankings; you can't ask for more than a sound list supported by a strong underlying philosophy, and there's little to complain about here. Good job.

As they've shown in the past, BA will include high-potential prospects on their list whose on-field track record doesn't yet justify a high placement. That's a reasonable approach and it's paid dividends for them in the past, so I won't dispute it too much. Accordingly, Perkins and League are justifiable at 8 and 10, respectively, because of their raw talent, though based on League's youth and Perkins' consistent control difficulties, I might have switched them. Neither of these guys made my own top ten, as it happens, largely because A-Ball pitchers are close to a complete crapshoot, and because League has no breaking ball and Perkins has little command. But as I say, a high rating based on pure stuff alone is a legitimate course.

Bush, Adams and Hill are justifiably in the Top Ten, though I would have placed the first two (especially Bush) higher and dropped Hill to the tenth spot at most (100 ABs at full-season ball is hardly enough to get a handle on a player's ability). But it's splitting hairs to argue placement on a ten-point list, so this is OK too.

I have really only two major problems with this top ten. The first is the appearance of Francisco Rosario on the list, at #5 no less. Granted, Rosario had lights-out stuff before his injury, a snapping mid-90s fastball and two killer changeups, and according to Josh Boyd, Rosario's post-surgery arm appears to be close to full strength. But it's also a fact that Rosario hasn't thrown a pitch in competition in 15 months, and that TJ surgery usually requires a year of medical recovery and six months to return to pitching form. Blue Jays fans shouldn't expect Rosario to resemble his old self before June or July at the earliest. There are also legitimate concerns that Rosario's frame (6'0", 160 lbs at last report) can't handle the stresses of his powerful repertoire, and that another injury is inevitable unless Rosario shifts to the bullpen. None of this is cause to give up on him, of course, and he may yet become a serious major-league arm. But when it hasn't been demonstrated that Rosario's stuff has emerged from surgery intact, or that his ceiling is still as high as it appeared two Octobers ago, I can't see the justification for placing him so high on the list. At a certain point, all the potential in the world has to give way to actual circumstances, and I think Rosario's circumstances require a lower positioning.

My other problem with the list is the absence of Jason Arnold. A lot of the fanfare surrounding Arnold has dissipated since his promotion to and struggles at Triple-A; but it was only last summer that Arnold was dominating the Eastern League as he had done throughout his minor-league career. Arnold's stuff is not overpowering; he relies on pitch selection, location and intelligence more than a McGowan or even a Bush. His struggles at AAA seemed to stem from a newfound susceptibility to the long ball (16 HRs in 120 Syracuse innings, compared to just 10 in the 320 innings before that), but his walk rate remained consistent with his previous ratios and his strikeouts declined only slightly more than you'd expect with a level jump. I believe Arnold is going to turn it around this summer at Syracuse and find himself in Toronto before the end of the year; he didn't have all his previous success by accident. With a stronger team behind him and better rotation mates, he's poised to make a breakthrough. That isn't enough to justify a #5 ranking on the list, but his performance thus far should merit him a place in the second tier of the Top Ten.

A final word on the introduction to this piece. The writer's views of the Ricciardi regime can be fairly deduced by reading between the lines of comments about how the Jays always draft low-ceiling college players, have replaced experienced scouts with greenhorns, and owe their current major-league success to high-school and free-agent draftees. BA's fondness for youth, tools and potential, as well as its attachment to veteran scouts, are well-known, and they underscore a lot of comments they make about organizations like Oakland and Toronto. That's fine; everyone has their opinion. But BA ought to be aware -- and I'm sure they are, but they haven't made it explicit -- that the type of players an organization drafts is often as much a matter of context and circumstance as it is of philosophy.

When Ricciardi arrived in Toronto, the minor-league cupboard was thinly populated. Yes, there were high-ceiling projects like Quiroz and Rios, but they were outweighed by toolsy busts like Felipe Lopez, Pasqual Coco, Joe Lawrence, Brian Cardwell, Miguel Negron and many other gambles that didn't pan out. The farm teams played poorly, few prospects made it to the majors, and the whole system was stagnant. So for necessity's sake alone, Ricciardi needed to get players into the minors who were closer to prime time, which meant taking collegians and bypassing the four years of organizational expense required to bring high schoolers up to speed. But even beyond that, the Jays were also in a position where they couldn't afford to keep losing all those gambles. Their budget was well below average and their margin of error was narrower than, say, a Yankee organization that could afford to blow millions of dollars on a Drew Henson or an Adrian Hernandez. Risk management became a key consideration, and one of the ways you manage risk is to select players with some track record of higher-level performance. Maybe their potential isn't as high, but the best of them will become fine major-leaguers, and the rest will make solid contributions to farm teams that need all the help they can get drawing fans to the park.

A year from now, if all goes well, the Jays minor-league system will be close to restocked. Last year's New Haven Ravens will be in Syracuse or Toronto; last year's Dunedin Jays will be in Manchester; last year's Doubledays will be in Dunedin and Charleston, and a new wave of prospects will be in Auburn. By the time the 2005 draft rolls around, with a serious contender in Toronto and a farm system humming along nicely, the demand for low-risk, lower-cost selections will have eased, and the Jays might well be inclined to grab a handful of high-school prospects in the hope that one of them becomes a McGowan or a Halladay. In all the criticism of the Blue Jays' drafting philosophy, I rarely see sufficient attention paid to the fact that not only does this organization prefer collegians on philosophical grounds, it also prefers them on practical, fundamental, economic grounds. It would be nice to see this acknowledged now and again.

Figures. I have a training session today that I can't get out of, starting at 2:00 and ending at 3:00. It just figures.

Well, you'll be able to read it after the fact - the only downside is that you can't ask questions.

However, if you put your questions in here I'd gladly pass them on.

the Red Sox and Yankees systems seemingly lack depth and quality.

In The New World Order, the Yankee/Red Sox/Dodger/Met/Mariner farm systems are Cuba and Japan.

Not saying it'll work, but it strikes me that a deep farm system matters far less now than it ever has. I would guess that the major league success of players coming over from foreign major leagues way, way, way outstrips both the percentage of success of North American minor league players and the cost of developing them.

Sure, there's the occasional Andy Morales, but even the moderate successes of Hideki Irabu and Tsuyoshi Shinjo, for example, are -pluses on the side of "major league contributions by players signed from foreign major leagues."

Nice piece Jordan. The chat times been moved back an hour to 3pm ET.

Ehhhhh-xcellent -- thanks!

Spicol, John Manuel's view of Rios' defensive abilities in centerfield is not uniformly shared in the scouting community. Dickie Scott was a bit cagey when asked about the Rios/Wells conundrum by Spencer Fordin in an interview.

If it turns out that Wells is in fact the centerfielder of the next 3-4 years, which is certainly possible, Rios should be moved to left field. Gross has the better arm, and would be kept in position. Rios would be an overqualified defensive leftfielder, but there are worse things.

I'd like to add to Jordan's comments regarding the implied criticism of the recent Jays' drafting approach. There are significant differences between BA's approach in evaluating "long-term worth" and the needs of an organization such as the Jays.

What a prospect is likely to be able to do in the very long-term is of marginal relevance to the Jays. Alex Rios has a good chance to be a great player in his 30s, and have a top-drawer major league career. David Bush's chance of being great in his 30s is much, much smaller because he is a pitcher, and because he is not overpowering although he does strike out enough to succeed. But, for finanical reasons, the important years for the Jays are age 25-30, and during those years, the differences between the potential of Rios and Bush are nowhere near as great. Whereas, for BA in evaluating "long-term worth", the entire career is of signficance.

As discussed in earlier threads, there is a need to achieve some balance in the long-term. Risks must be taken in order to obtain the superstars who are in limited supply. What BA did not mention is that with the core of talent that was here (Delgado, Halladay, Wells, Phelps), it was perfectly reasonable for the Jays to adopt the drafting strategy that they used in 2002 and 2003. Personally, depending on the available talent, I'd be inclined to take a risk or two in the early rounds of the 2004 draft, and perhaps a little more in 2005, but that is certainly a debatable view.

If it turns out that Wells is in fact the centerfielder of the next 3-4 years, which is certainly possible, Rios should be moved to left field. Gross has the better arm, and would be kept in position. Rios would be an overqualified defensive leftfielder, but there are worse things.

In general, are more balls hit to LF or RF? I'd guess LF since there's more RH batters out there.

If that's the case having Rios in LF might actually be better than RF.

I liked your post Jordan, as usual. But i do not find in Manuel's article the lack of understanding of Ricciardi's economically oriented decision's. I think you are somehow over reacting as if there were an attack to church Moneyball...
Gerry, our system may not be necesarily on the top five, but it is close. I remember that in a chat Jim Callis did say that the BJ were number five, just to remember right away he was leaving the Cubs out of his short list. It is safe to say that it is around number five and in the top ten for sure...
Regarding the centerfield comment and recalling all what i've heard about him, it may be related to concentration lapses as with his baserunning. In any case, an outfield of Gross, Wells and Rios will be above average in about everything and will have an extraordinarily good left field.

2004 will be an interesting draft for the Jays though perhaps moreso 2005 when there will hopefully be better depth in position players. The standout in the 2004 class that I see is Stephen Drew who is a legitimate shortstop who can hit...I don't see him lasting until the Jays pick at 16 though.

As such the Jays may be forced yet again to go with a pitching heavy draft and take risks on position players in the mid to late rounds. Though chances are they'll take the best available bat again in the first round and simply pick an extra pitcher who slid with their supplemental pick.

They're going to run out of places to put all these arms sooner or later though so I think 2005 we might see them pick more bats, maybe even a prep bat or two, in the upper rounds instead of college pitchers just to balance out the system a bit more. A guy like Rios was considered a 2nd to 4th round pick in his draft year so maybe the Jays can find a similar talent or two in that area.

Dickie Scott was a bit cagey when asked about the Rios/Wells conundrum by Spencer Fordin in an interview.

Probably because he didn't want to say anything to denigrate any Jay players. Certainly you want to keep Rios' value as high as possible whether it's for trade or just to excite the fans. I wouldn't read anything into that.

It will be most interesting to see Baseball America's 11-30 rankings for the Blue Jays prospects. Each year they publish a complete minor league prospect report.

As always, I am looking forward to seeing the entire list. 1 thru 10 wets my palate for the rest.

Five weeks till pitchers and catchers report!

When is the 11 thru 30 list due? Will it be a conflict to list it here for non-suscribers?

"When Ricciardi arrived in Toronto, the minor-league cupboard was thinly populated. Yes, there were high-ceiling projects like Quiroz and Rios, but they were outweighed by toolsy busts like Felipe Lopez, Pasqual Coco, Joe Lawrence, Brian Cardwell, Miguel Negron and many other gambles that didn't pan out."

I beg to differ, Jordan. When J.P. arrived, Phelps was half a year away from the majors. F-LOP'ez, far from a bust, was regarded as one of the top prospects in baseball, and had the minor league numbers to back it up. There was excellent depth in the middle infield, with Hudson, Izturis, Woodward and Rouse there. Vernon Wells had not yet had a full season in the majors.

But it is true that there wasn't much pitching ready, other than the newly reconstructed Roy Halladay.

When is the 11 thru 30 list due? Will it be a conflict to list it here for non-suscribers?

If you want the rest of the list, you'll have to buy the book from Chapters or Amazon.

Or directly from Baseball America, I suppose.

Robert, you're right that there were individual gems, especially in the infield, but there weren't nearly enough of the solid, decent players that you need to actually fill out a roster and win some minor-league ballgames (especially in the lower minors). I think this was the direct result of a dice-rolling draft strategy: some A's and B+'s, not enough B's and C+'s, way too many Cs and Ds.

While we're on the subject, does anyone know of any source (online or text) that lists the complete Blue Jays draft lists for the 1990s? Many sources provide all the Jays' first-round picks, Sports-wired provides a few picks from each year, but not even the team's Website or media guide has this information. A detailed study of the organization's last ten drafts would be fascinating.

Again, can we have and disscuss the List Order without their commentaries and data in this blog ?

Jordan,
BA had those list complete and fully available before the suscribers only era. I just assume they still have them but restricted.
If there is not a direct link and you are a suscriber, mail them to let you know how to reach them.
i guees it is a good sugestion for the team Website to have more info available...

There was excellent depth in the middle infield, with Hudson, Izturis, Woodward and Rouse there. Vernon Wells had not yet had a full season in the majors.

Not that this is this threads arguement, but it wasn't like Gordo was in any hurry to clear a path and get Wells into the line-up. I would agree to the "depth", but I don't see the "excelent" quotient. You had Lopez and Hudson, but the rest is just platoon guys or utility infielders, to me (the Dodgers sick idea of a 'quality' shortstop aside). To me these guys were/are of little more worth than Ryan Freel was, and none worthy of building a MLB club around.

Thanks, Jabonso!

Izturis isn't the worst shortstop in the majors. Chavez Ravine dampens his numbers.

http://www.sunspot.net/sports/baseball/bal-ponson0114,0,6267348.story?coll=bal-sports-headlines
Hijack - Sidney Ponson to return to Baltimore - 3 yrs/$22.5M - COMN or cut-and-paste http://www.sunspot.net/sports/baseball/bal-ponson0114,0,6267348.story?coll=bal-sports-headlines

the Jays minors two years ago were in a very particular moment. They were ripe for a solid harvest: Wells, Phelps, Hudson. Had some promising position players Cash, Rouse ( we have to admit that our overall assessment of him was not accurate, he would be first in SS depth chart today, ahead of Sequea, Adams and Hill )Gross and Rios ( Quiroz being out of most radars signals).
Pitching was in disarray mainly due to Mr Stewart messing it all approach. McGowan and League survived but M Smith, M Ford and many others were upping levels in fast mood...

Would Chavez Ravine really dampen Izturis' numbers? I would think that a pitcher's park would have less of an effect on a player who can't hit a ball out of a little league park. It's not like Izturis hits towering fly balls in LA that would be home runs elsewhere.

The BA chat is starting. You can submit questions now.

Is it snowing ridiculously all across Toronto or just for me in the East End?

Jabonoso's right about Michael Rouse. And let's not forget Mike Young, who is a pretty decent second baseman. We got a Cy Young-quality pitcher from Texas for him ;)

As far as I can tell, the Ash-Wilken administration didn't have much success with pitchers from the lower rounds. I think they did a very good job drafting hitters, and their first-round pitching selections were pretty good too. But I agree with Jordan that the system badly needed an infusion of pitching depth in 2002. Remember that BA called Toronto's 2002 draft the best in baseball and rated their 2003 draft as one of the five best; considering that BA's approach is heavily tools-based and both of these drafts were heavy on college players (particularly in the high rounds), that's a very strong endorsement.

Regarding Rouse, I was not implying he is a better prospect than Hill, if i mentioned a depth chart i am assuming it has to do a lot with when they will be ready to play in the majors. Rouse SS playing with team USA was highly regarded by most experts.

How the heck did that happen? It looks a portion of my post was submitted as my name.

Ryan01, it may have been a server hiccup, but I deleted that comment, because it might have messed up the archives. Here's what you said:

I was actually somewhat dissappointed in Rouse's season this year. Sure he raised his average but he was repeating the level. He showed only a mild improvement in plate discipline and a large decrease in power. Maybe the power drop had something to do with the park he played in this year, I'm not sure. But I think you have to be very careful when looking at a players numbers when repeating a level. The reports of his defense that I've seen are mixed. Some say he's steady enough to handle SS, others suggest his future is at 2nd. (So pretty much the same thing as Sequea, Adams and Hill). Personally I'd rank Rouse slightly ahead of Sequea but somewhat behind Adams and definitely behind Hill.

O's sign Ponson, 3 years, $22.5M...

See ESPN.com. Not sure how to do the COMN thing.

Thanks Coach. It actually deleted my first few sentences as well but c'est la vie, I suppose.

Jabonoso, I misinterpreted what you meant by depth chart, my apologies. Nitpicking I suppose, but I think Sequea would still be above Rouse because of his half season at AAA compared to Rouse's 2 games at that level.

Manuel, from the chat, on Adam Peterson:

Closer, and his future could be now. His 97 mph fastball could have made him closer if not for the Speier trade (very astute). If Kerry Ligtenberg doesn't get it done as a setup man, then Peterson could jump into a setup role in '04.

J.P. isn't the only one high on this guy. I hope Adam closes in AAA and can make the jump to the Show if he's needed this year because of an injury to one of the bullpen righties, or their ineffectiveness.

I hope Peterson gets a shot if he performs as well but with their acquisitions they no longer have to rush him. I'm still not crazy about giving a guy like him a "closer role" in AAA when it might be more in his interest to pitch more innings and face more batters. I guess you have to get him used to reliever patterns and back to back days but with such limited innings so far he really isn't all that experienced as a professional. If Baseball America thinks he might be ready though then he may well have enough command to get by in relief.

Would Chavez Ravine really dampen Izturis' numbers?

Yes, a bit. In 2003 he had a home OPS of 565 and an away OPS 624. That said, even an OPS of 624 is utterly horrid.

Izturis is said to be a whizz with the glove, but with the bat, there's no getting away from the fact that he's just *afwul*. Check out his
park adjusted hitting stats.
He's right near the bottom, though unbelievably he is not the worst hitting shortstop in the majors and it's not even close...

He was certainly considered a good prospects by many scouts though I do remember John Sickel's scratching his head about why he was so highly rated.

At one point the jays farm system was filled with a slew of decent if not great infield prospects, though only Felipe Lopez could have ever been considered high ceiling. I don't think he got enough time in the minors to be quite honest. I am not sure I would have predicted Michael Young as the best of the bunch so far though he doesn't hit too well away from Texas.

Ryan,
John manuel has just described Sequea as an utility AAAA guy.In this winter he did not have the glove or the bat to move Infante from SS. he looks more and more like a second baseman and for the Jays like a younger Berg.

One ought to point out that Izturis is still very young. Obviously he wasn't a first tier prospect because of his weak bat, which is why I listed him as depth.

Robert, you're right that Izturis is still young, but without checking, I don't think he has ever shown offensive ability at any level, making it highly unlikely he will ever hit. I don't see him ever being even a moderately productive hitter.

Fabulous chat by John Manuel. I'm even willing to overlook the fact that none of my four questions saw the light of day. :-)

Agreed, I was blown away by how well he seems to know every player. He basically answered my question about Rosario through 3 or 4 other answers.

I agree too.
Can this chat be linked to BB for reference?
Wouldn't it be nice to ask JM to answer all questions at his leisure and mail them to BBox for our delight?
I think he took his time to answer most representative questions and actually covered everything, but still there may be precious nuggets missing to be discovered by his avid readers...

Hijack: Jays sign Lilly. 2 years for 5 million

http://www.tsn.ca/mlb/news_story.asp?id=68038

Wow! Great level of questions,honest and succinct answers. I really enjoyed this chat. Here's what stood out for me:

1.)Rosario being # 1 if not for his injury

2.)Direct answer regarding Arnold and Cheng.

3.)The discussion about"turf" infielders. I assume he likes guys who have good lateral movement in this regard.I'd appreciate other Bauxites insight on this issue.

4.)He still likes Goodwin(+++ tools guy)

Cesar Izturis hit .308/.335/.422 in the FSL at age 19 in 1999. I find it hard to see why anyone would take Russ Adams or Aaron Hill v.2003 over Cesar Izturis v.1999.

Izturis played all of 2000 with Syracuse. His doubles and triples power disappeared and his batting average fell all the way to .218. He has never regained any kind of a power stroke, and he has never learned to take a walk.

Nevertheless, as Robert points out, it's too early to assume that he's a total bust. Izturis is only six months older than Russ Adams.

Incidentally, Manuel has this to say regarding Sequea:

Some speculation is out there that he's a lot older than he says he is.

I had one of those great "oh wow, remember THAT guy" moments when Manuel compared Simon Pond to Dan Pasqua and another when I saw that Pasqua's Most Similar Player was Nick Esasky.

Fabulous chat by John Manuel. I'm even willing to overlook the fact that none of my four questions saw the light of day. :-)

I got through on a Rosario question. My Quiroz question didn't make it.

Is Kris the same as Kristian? He got through a lot.

Cesar Izturis hit .308/.335/.422 in the FSL at age 19 in 1999.

I stand corrected. Thanks, John.

That was a great chat today and yes Kris is Kristian. Its exciting to see so much promise in our minor league system. Not sure if this info is already posted so if it is I apologize, here is the Best Tools sections of the BA Blue Jays:

Best Hitter Average, Power, Best Defensive Outfielder Alex Rios
Fastest Baserunner, Best Athlete Tyrell Goodwin
Best Fastball Dustin Magowan
Best Curveball Justin Maureau
Best Slider Shaun Marcum
Best Changeup Fransisco Rosario
Best Control David Bush
Best Defensive Catcher Guillermo Quiroz
Best Defensive Infielder Emmanuel Sena
Best Infield Arm Aaron Hill
Best Outfield Arm Gabe Gross

Hi. I've been reading & enjoying BB for a long time, but this is the first time I've posted here. Seeing the BA Top 10 list made me remember I'd saved a few old BA lists. They make interesting historical reading:

1988
1 Sil "best prospect in the minors" Campusano
2 Jr Felix
3 David Wells
4 Francisco Cabrera
5 Alex Sanchez
6 T. Stottlemyre
7 Steve Cummings
8 Kevin Batiste
9 Greg Myers [whatever became of him??]
10 Mark Whiten

1991
1 Whiten
2 Eddie Zosky
3 Steve Karsay
4 Mike Timlin
5 Ed Sprague
6 Carlos Delgado
7 Marcus Moore
8 William Suero
9 Denis Boucher
10 Pat Hentgen

1993
1 Delgado
2 Alex Gonzalez
3 Shawn Green
4 Steve Karsay
5 Jose Pett
6 Howard Battle
7 Paul Spoljaric
8 Aaron Small
9 Brent Bower
10 Rob Butler

1994
1 Gonzalez
2 Delgado
3 Jose Silva
4 Green
5 DJ Boston
6 Spoljaric
7 Angel Martinez
8 Adam Meinershagen
9 Shannon Stewart
10 Lee Daniels
* Gonzalez passes Delgado. The cover photo is of "Blue Jays Phenom Alex Gonzalez". Inside, in his profile under "weaknesses": "Finding holes in Gonzalez's game is like trying to find pimples on Miss America". [no comment]

1995
1 Green
2 Gonzalez
3 Silva
4 Stewart
5 Chris Carpenter
6 Jose Pett
7 A Martinez
8 Edwin Hurtado
9 Chris Stynes
10 Tom Evans

1998
1 Roy Halladay
2 Vernon Wells
3 Kevin Witt
4 T Evans
5 Anthony Sanders
6 Andy Thompson
7 Bill Koch
8 Brent Abernathy
9 Gary Glover
10 Joe Lawrence

Interesting to see those lists. The lists show that between three and five of the top ten make it as major league regulars. The Jays hope they are in a fruitful period right now, but history shows that #1 and #2 have an excellent chance, and below #2 a 20% chance of making it.

Does anyone out there have a link to Sil Campusano's minor league stats? I'm curious about the guy; I wasn't a baseball fan back in the day.

Stephen Tomlinson's 1988 Blue Jays abstract has his Syracuse stats from that year (.264/.330/.451), and sports-wired has his major league stats. I'd love to see his full minor league record.

The lists show that between three and five of the top ten make it as major league regulars.

They also show that BA has a pretty consistent and lousy track record of overrating hard throwers and tools goofs. I mean, Jose Pett???

Under Gillick and his successor, Gord Ash, the Jays were a large-revenue team that wasn’t afraid to gamble on young talent that was long on tools and short on experience. That approach provided stars in the past as well as the best current Jays—Cy Young Award winner Roy Halladay, major league RBIs leader Carlos Delgado and big league hits leader Vernon Wells. All were high school drafts or international signings as teenagers. Four of the team’s top five prospects, all signed by the previous administration, have similar backgrounds.

i would like to give some props to tim wilken and gord ash. although we all disagree with a lot of things that they did, (ie free agent signing busts) they did give jp with some talent to work with in the minor league system

i would like to give some props to tim wilken and gord ash. although we all disagree with a lot of things that they did, (ie free agent signing busts) they did give jp with some talent to work with in the minor league system

Let's not mar a good name. Tim Wilken would have had nothing to do with free agent signings.

My reactions to the chat (from a post elsewhwere):

Hmmm...random thoughts...

Peterson ready to close now? Yikes! Give him that role at AAA and let him get in a grove in case one or more of our acquisitions fail...

Arnold is a 4A guy? maybe we should see what we can get for him (or as a hrow in on some mid-season deal) before the shine wears off completely...

J-FG is like Jeremy Giambi? Uh...suppose we can deal him too?

Rios: "His top-end potential, though, is so high . . . it's hard to avoid putting a Winfield tag on him."

Hanson has better stuff than Bush? Just a shade behind McGowan? Double Yikes!

Still hope for Godwin? Nice to hear...

Really impressive set of questions, kudos to all who participated....

Why is ST so far away?

It would be nice to fast forward a couple years to see how everything shakes out in regards to our rotation.

Btw, good questions to all who got through!

John Neary
I probably have a Blue Jays official guide from that period and it should have Campusano's stats. I won't be able to get to it before tonight so I'll post them then unless someone else comes through in the meantime. I do remember him having a very odd swing.

I hope this helps ...

Silvestre (Sil) Campusano, born in Mano Guayabo, Dominican Republic, December 31st, "1966"

Year League (level) ...... AB XBH W   K avg  obp  slg age
'84 Gulf Coast (R) ...... 236 19 20  40 .267 .331 .356  17.2
'85 SouthAtlantic(A) .... 348 47 58  84 .313 .412 .537  18.2
'85 Southern (AA) ....... 178 15 14  32 .303 .352 .455  18.2
'86 Southern (AA) ....... 493 52 61 110 .256 .342 .430  19.2
'87 International (AAA) . 481 44 47 110 .264 .333 .435  20.2
'88 AL/Int (M/AAA) ...... 204 17 11  53 .216 .268 .328  21.2
'89 International (AAA) . 356 29 44  81 .242 .325 .368  22.2

Sil hit a wall in 1988 and never recovered. His 1989 in Syracuse was worse than his 1987. One has to wonder if his date of birth was accurate.

Here's my recollection of Campusano in 1988. The Jays decided that George Bell couldn't play left and that Moseby couldn't play centre, so they announce in Spring Training that Bell would DH, Moseby would move to left and Campusano and Ducey would play centre. Bell goes nuts, Moseby complains and Jimy is left with the mess to deal with

Then Cito, who was the batting coach says that Campusano has fundamental defect in his swing and that his swing has to be entirely rebuilt. In spring training, with all of this controversy going on, no less. Cito never liked Ducey either, which added to the problems

The whole thing is a complete disaster and Campusano never recovers. Maybe Cito was right--he probably was, but Campusano had been in the organization for a long time. Was the defect just discovered after the announcement that Campusano was taking over in centre?

It's one of those nuggets from Jays history that I have never understood

Does anyone else remember the events differently?

Great stuff, Robert! That '85 was quite a year especially given the lower run environment. Hard not to be excited about a 19-year old (supposedly) who hits .313.412.537 in A-ball and then .303.352.455 in AA.
Anyone have any other insights on what happened to Campusano? That dropoff between '87 and '88 is bizarre - must be a story there.

What I enjoyed the most in this chat is John Manuel deep college baseball experience. He has seen all the kids from kindergarden!
He actually managed to talk about everybody in the best tool section posted by Kristian with the exception of Sena ( whom I never heard of before ! ) So it was very complete and well rounded session.
Thanks John L for the listing, i was sure Karsay was the guy in 91 ( maybe in 92 though ). They show a tendency of high quality prospects blended with filler max. Depth is a new luxury. And as John M stated we still need some lefties, a couple of good range SS and some corner IF with pop. The rest have been taken care of.

http://www.cdl.ootp-leagues.com/files/p377.html
COMN for some Sil Campusano Minor League stats.

Doh!

Everything I see lists Campusano as born in "1965", not "1966".

That '85 was quite a year especially given the lower run environment.

It may have been a lower run environment in the Majors but a lot of Blue Jay farmhands went through Florence in the mid-80's and did well. Being 19 at the time is impressive but I think Robert is right to question his age given his steep decline. His great season is likely a combination of being old for the league and flukiness and maybe some park effect thrown in.

As far as I can tell, Campusano played in Taiwan for a bit in the late 90s and was last seen playing in Nicaragua of all places in 2000. He would have been "35" then but as we've seen with Julio Franco, he may have been well into his 40s and still playing.

Um, Benum, those stats are from Out of the Park Baseball. It's a very good game mind you, but not even close to reality. ;)

I never hear anything about the Pulaski team. Do any of those guys have a legitimate chance at making a Long season team this year based on ability??

I'm not sure if its been mentioned yet but I thought I'd add my two cents. Syracuse finished dead last. With the promotion of guys like Quiroz, Rios, Bush, McGowan etc... this team looks to be one hell of a lineup. I'm sure the pitching staff will have a much better year this year due to the fact that they'll be able to score some runs.

Jason Arnold had to be perfect (or close too it) last year because if he made a mistake (too often being the long-ball) it would cost him the game.

If Arnold was giving a full year at Syracuse this year especially with the new offence, I'd expect a 12-13 win season. But if he's pitching that well, then he'd probably get a shot at the bigs by then. Syracuse plays about 150 games if I'm not mistaken.

I truly think that if the bats were at all decent last year, it would have helped out its pitchers a lot.

I never hear anything about the Pulaski team. Do any of those guys have a legitimate chance at making a Long season team this year based on ability??

There are three players who have a very good shot at making the Charleston team. Robinson Diaz was mentioned in the chat. He is a young catcher who had a very good year last year. Jayce Tingler (CF) was a late season promotion to Dunedin last year. He should start at Charleston or Dunedin. Finally Jeremy Acey was the joint all-star at 2B. He also could start at Charleston.

Choosing Campusano as the "best prospect in baseball" in 1988 after his 1987 and 1986 seasons was indeed strange, whether he was 21 or 23. His numbers spoke clearly: he needed to spend another year in triple A.

The sources at the time ('88 Baseball Guide, '88&'89 Blue Jays guide) listed 1966 as his birth year. Total Baseball 7 has it as 1965, as well as listing birthplace as Santo Domingo.

http://www.battersbox.ca/archives/00001101.shtml
Mark, Jordan's farm report (click on my name) has the information you need. Nick Thomas, 1B, and Amos Day, RP, in addition to the names in Gerry's post, are likely to be in Charleston this year.

Manuel identified a lack of left handers in the system. However, I note that the Jays took a bunch of them as draft and follows. I am certainly not an expert on DFE's but as far as I can tell the following were selected (all left handers):

Round 29 Chris Nieto
37 Aric Van Gaalen from the fine city of Edmonton (second time they drafted him)
40 Jimmy Coker
43 Ryan Gordon
47 Jeff Walker
48 Brian Hansen

Anyone know if these guys are still on the radar screen? Are any of them any good? If they signed a few of them this might add some depth to the system from the left side.