412 replies to this topic

[Cisc-O's]

Promoted to AA Bowie per Steve Melewski and Roch

 

Roch Kubatko ‏@masnRoch  10m10 minutes ago

C Chance Sisco moves up from Class A Frederick to AA Bowie. #orioles love his bat

[JordanKough]

I know it's 17 PA's but 7 hits, 1 BB and 1 2b. If he can grow into a bit more power as well as improve his defense. He's going to be good.

 

If he hits over 800 OPS through the end of the AA season, for guys that know more about the rankings, where is he going to end up in the top 100? I of course assume he will 100% be in. 

[Mackus]

Back end of the top-100 would be my guess.  80-100.

 

Wish I had a better idea of how likely he is to stick at C.  Seems to be the major question mark, because the bat looks like it will play great at C but maybe not as well if he has to switch to 1B or RF or someplace that typically requires a bit more pop.  A strong finish at Bowie as a 20 y/o would put him in position to be thinking about a callup by late next season if things keep going well.  His hit tool combined with showing an ability to take a walk at such young ages is very encouraging.  Just need to see him continue to do it.

[JordanKough]

So if his C defense has improved what's his upside from a ranking perspective. Wasn't he right around 100 on a few guys list last year? I would have thought we'd see a bit more of a rise than 80 as the upside. But...then again...these lists are relatively meaningless, self fulfilling and arbitrary at times it seems to me. 

[Mackus]

101 from Baseball Prospectus before the year, that's the only list I've seen him on.

 

He's been considered a catcher all along, so continuing to be a catcher wouldn't really be a boost for him.  Similar to if you had a SP prospect who many think may ultimately end up in the bullpen in the majors, but he's still starting for the time being. 

 

He's been hitting nicely at A+ as a 20 y/o, if he keeps that up at Bowie over the final month that will help.

 

Think of these lists as a bell curve, or a pyramid.  There may be a very big difference in talent and likelihood to produce between the 10th best prospect and the 30th best prospect, but the difference between the 60th best prospect and the 100th best prospect may be much smaller.  The difference between the 125th best prospect and the 250th best prospect may be next to nothing.  The tiers get much wider as they go down.

[SportsGuy]

The one thing the Orioles are starting to deserve a benefit of the doubt about is how they bring along guys defensively.

[Mackus]

The one thing the Orioles are starting to deserve a benefit of the doubt about is how they bring along guys defensively.

 

Agree completely.  If Sisco can't stay at C, it won't be because he had poor instruction.

[JordanKough]

Think of these lists as a bell curve, or a pyramid.  There may be a very big difference in talent and likelihood to produce between the 10th best prospect and the 30th best prospect, but the difference between the 60th best prospect and the 100th best prospect may be much smaller.  The difference between the 125th best prospect and the 250th best prospect may be next to nothing.  The tiers get much wider as they go down.

 

Makes sense. So is defense/position the only thing that makes you think Sisco is more 80-100 than 60-80. Or if he can stay and play catcher at a high level does that allow him to really make the next big jump. 

[Mackus]

Makes sense. So is defense/position the only thing that makes you think Sisco is more 80-100 than 60-80. Or if he can stay and play catcher at a high level does that allow him to really make the next big jump. 

 

I think he'll be ranked at the back end because he's a guy who was just on the outside of the list or an "honorable mention" type and he's continued to produce as he's climbed in level.  I think as he gets closer to the majors, if his play continues at this level, he'll climb higher and higher.  If his play gets even better than it has been to this point or he starts showing more skills (such as power), then he'll rise even moreso in the rankings.

 

I don't know nearly enough about any of the other guys being ranked to know if he's actually better / more promising than all but 100 other minor leaguers or all but 25 of them or whatever.  I don't have any real idea of where he actually should be ranked.  I'm saying where I expect to see him ranked after the year based on where he was ranked to begin the year and then on how good of a year he's had.  If I considered my general opinion of what it roughly means to be a top-20, top-50, top-100 type guy (sort of like saying a guy is an MVP-type, All-Star type, solid regular, etc), I think I'd put Sisco a little higher than the consensus will be after this season, based on his offensive numbers, his age, and my hopes that the team can get him where he needs to be defensively to last a C (which makes the bat a much bigger asset).

[JordanKough]

957 OPS through 45 PA's in AA. 6/8 BB/SO. His 154 ISO is up from his 114 in Frederick. Also, 43% caught stealing on 14 attempts through 10 games. 

 

For a 20 year old in AA who missed some time at the beginning of the year, that's a pretty nice end to the year so far. 

[Mackus]

Jason Kendall is the comp that comes to mind looking at the stats.  If he can stay at C, he should be a big asset.  Not much pop, but if he can hit for high average and draw a good amount of walks that will be quite good production from C.  Bat should still play at 2B or LF if he needs to move.  Hopefully he can hack it defensively, I trust the O's development team to get it out of him if it's in there.

[Coker]

Hopefully he can hack it defensively, I trust the O's development team to get it out of him if it's in there.

One of the knocks on him has been his inability to control the running game. At the end of last season, Brian Graham said it wasn't arm strength but moreso mechanics that Sisco needs to work on.

Well, since the move to Bowie, Cisco has thrown out 6 of 14 attempted basestealers. The 43% (over 8 games- SSS alert) is a huge upgrade over the 20% he's been sportin' the past two seasons. 

[Matt_P]

Jason Kendall is the comp that comes to mind looking at the stats. 

 

Here's the problem with the stats.

 

Players don't advance beyond the majors by definition. Which means that realistically, bad MLB players are representative of players that a guy will face in the future.

 

But playing in AA isn't the final goal, and players that make it to AA won't necessarily advance beyond AA. While bad MLB players are relevant to a players future performance, bad players in AA really aren't (unless the player is going to stick in AA).

 

Which could very well mean that a .957 OPS has little relevance. What would have relevance is whether or not that player with a .957 OPS was able to put up good numbers against pitchers that are good or at least likely to receive a promotion. AA players would presumably do worse against those players... but those are the guys they'll need to compete against in order to succeed at the next level. Now of course, there's a correlation between having a .957 OPS and being successful against those players but it's not causation.

 

Which means that having a .700 OPS may be better then having a .900 OPS depending on performance against top pitching. Beating the hell out of a 29 year old who will never make it to AAA is nice but mostly irrelevant for performance in AAA or MLB.

[Coker]

Here's the problem with the stats.

 

Players don't advance beyond the majors by definition. Which means that realistically, bad MLB players are representative of players that a guy will face in the future.

 

But playing in AA isn't the final goal, and players that make it to AA won't necessarily advance beyond AA. While bad MLB players are relevant to a players future performance, bad players in AA really aren't (unless the player is going to stick in AA).

 

Which could very well mean that a .957 OPS has little relevance. What would have relevance is whether or not that player with a .957 OPS was able to put up good numbers against pitchers that are good or at least likely to receive a promotion. AA players would presumably do worse against those players... but those are the guys they'll need to compete against in order to succeed at the next level. Now of course, there's a correlation between having a .957 OPS and being successful against those players but it's not causation.

 

Which means that having a .700 OPS may be better then having a .900 OPS depending on performance against top pitching. Beating the hell out of a 29 year old who will never make it to AAA is nice but mostly irrelevant for performance in AAA or MLB.

Here you go:

[Mackus]

You can also get splits against older or younger players.

Agree with the premise that more info could be gleaned from the stats with more details, big part of why scouting is so much more important than numbers at the minor league level.

But success at young ages relative to your level is a really big positive. Hitting well at AA as a 20 y/o is quite encouraging no matter who it is against.

[SportsGuy]

You can also get splits against older or younger players.

Agree with the premise that more info could be gleaned from the stats with more details, big part of why scouting is so much more important than numbers at the minor league level.

But success at young ages relative to your level is a really big positive. Hitting well at AA as a 20 y/o is quite encouraging no matter who it is against.

Exactly.

 

Age is the biggest key here.

[Matt_P]

Here you go:
 

 

Where did you find that?

 

That's a start. Problem is that it doesn't seem to split between levels. Either that or way too many players are ranked in the top twenty.

 

But success at young ages relative to your level is a really big positive. Hitting well at AA as a 20 y/o is quite encouraging no matter who it is against.

 

That's a hypothesis. It would be interesting if we had the data to tell for sure. Maybe beating up on a guy that's terrible isn't encouraging at all.

[Mackus]

That's a start. Problem is that it doesn't seem to split between levels. Either that or way too many players are ranked in the top twenty.

 

I imagine that's top-20 organizationally.  So like 600 guys split across the minors.

[Matt_P]

I imagine that's top-20 organizationally.  So like 600 guys split across the minors.

 

No, no, no.

 

Sisco has 49 PAs in AA this year, 300 in Frederick and 204 PAs in that chart. Obviously, he doesn't have 204 PAs against top twenty prospects when in AA. He could have 204 PAs against top 20 prospects this year but then that would mean he only has 120 PAs against players not in the top twenty.

 

If so, I'd like a better filter. If, however, he has 204 PAs against top 20 prospects in his career (out of 950 PAs) then that works. But then I'd want to see his results in AA, HiA, etc etc.

[Mackus]

No, no, no.

 

Sisco has 49 PAs in AA this year, 300 in Frederick and 204 PAs in that chart. Obviously, he doesn't have 204 PAs against top twenty prospects when in AA. He could have 204 PAs against top 20 prospects this year but then that would mean he only has 120 PAs against players not in the top twenty.

 

If so, I'd like a better filter. If, however, he has 204 PAs against top 20 prospects in his career (out of 950 PAs) then that works. But then I'd want to see his results in AA, HiA, etc etc.

 

?

 

I said I think that stat is likely counting his numbers against players in an organizational top-20 chart.  Didn't say anything else about it.