11-20-2009, 11:01 AM
<!--quoteo(post=69727:date=Nov 20 2009, 08:53 AM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Nov 20 2009, 08:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69622:date=Nov 19 2009, 04:30 PM:name=Dirk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dirk @ Nov 19 2009, 04:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=69617:date=Nov 19 2009, 03:43 PM:name=Coach)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Coach @ Nov 19 2009, 03:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--QuoteBegin-"Jayson Stark"+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE ("Jayson Stark")<!--QuoteEBegin-->One scout's review of the best player he saw in the Arizona Fall League -- 19-year-old Cubs middle-infield stud Starlin Castro: "A young Hanley Ramirez."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know some people have scoffed at the Hanley Ramirez comparisons because of Castro's lack of power, but Ramirez hit a grand total of 29 hrs in about 400 minor league games. Just sayin.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I will say this - Castro's minor league numbers, so far, compare pretty favorably to Ramirez's at the same age.
I am not anti-Castro. I'd probably put him as the one or two prospect in the system, too. I just don't want us to fall victim to the same old problem we've had with prospects whom other teams might salivate over. Statistically, most stud prospects do not pan out.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Statistically as in, there's no mathematical evidence per se, you just kind of made it up? More like, you've seen the Cubs get burned by a few guys who didn't pan out and now it seems like no hyped prospect is ever going to pan out? The Cubs should be able to evaluate every minor leaguer independently. If you're going to take the stance that it is statistically unlikely that a 'stud' prospect is going to amount to much then why not make it an organizational policy that the second any guy has relative minor league success and receives any kind of media attention, it's time to trade him right away. (just make sure you get more than Curtis Granderson in return)
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know some people have scoffed at the Hanley Ramirez comparisons because of Castro's lack of power, but Ramirez hit a grand total of 29 hrs in about 400 minor league games. Just sayin.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I will say this - Castro's minor league numbers, so far, compare pretty favorably to Ramirez's at the same age.
I am not anti-Castro. I'd probably put him as the one or two prospect in the system, too. I just don't want us to fall victim to the same old problem we've had with prospects whom other teams might salivate over. Statistically, most stud prospects do not pan out.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Statistically as in, there's no mathematical evidence per se, you just kind of made it up? More like, you've seen the Cubs get burned by a few guys who didn't pan out and now it seems like no hyped prospect is ever going to pan out? The Cubs should be able to evaluate every minor leaguer independently. If you're going to take the stance that it is statistically unlikely that a 'stud' prospect is going to amount to much then why not make it an organizational policy that the second any guy has relative minor league success and receives any kind of media attention, it's time to trade him right away. (just make sure you get more than Curtis Granderson in return)