Interesting. Profar #1, Olt #22. Taveras makes the jump to #3...like I've been saying. No we can't get him for Andrus.

Perez takes a nose dive.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/prospects/watch/y2013/index.jsp

OK, all well and good, but what is it going to take to get a good COF with a MOTOB?

Lenoys?

...like I've been saying. No we can't get him for Andrus.

The Rays got Meyers (#4) & Odorizzi (#44) + for Shields. I don't see Tavares as being any more untouchable (unless you think the Cards value him more than the Royals did Meyers).

The Royals "want" to win overruled any logic to that trade.

Hopefully we can all agree with that statement bc it's been explained in great detail numerous times. Don't forget the Royals also got Wade Davis in that deal. The Cardinals will have a perfect opening for him when Beltran leaves next season. The situation is almost too perfect. Then again, Furcal could throw a wrench in everything if he gets injured.

Wade Davis? Oh, well that changes everything.

Martin isnt on the list because he lost rookie eligibility. Others in the list Sardinas, Buckle, Alfaro, Perez. (In that Order)
The list was decent, but hey props to Mayo these things are hard.

So we had 6 guys, and 7 with Leyonis.

Interesting. Profar #1, Olt #22. Taveras makes the jump to #3...like I've been saying. No we can't get him for Andrus.

Perez takes a nose dive.

So you are saying if Oscar Tavares was #20 he would be attainable, but since an updated list came out and he was #3 it means he isn't?

I can guarantee you no front office puts any credence into these top-100 lists. That's why they have scouts and talent evaluators. If a player is good, he's good, and that's it. The majority of the time, when scouts universally are in love with a player (Bundy, Profar, Tavares, Myers), it means they are going to grade out pretty damn well on these prospect sheets.

The Cardinals are a smart organization. Too smart to give up 6 years of their best prospect for 2 years of a light-hitting shortstop.

No, Taveras isn't attainable no matter where he is.

I dont think that was his point eric. I think it was that Tavares had a good year developmentally and because of that rose up the prospect list. Since we dont have access to each teams scouting department lists, this is the evidence we have of that.

I dont think that was his point eric. I think it was that Tavares had a good year developmentally and because of that rose up the prospect list.

To be honest, Oscar Tavares as been legit for awhile. I don't think this last year was anything unexpected.

My point is, these rankings might change the fan's perception of these players, but it they don't change the way other organizations have scouted. Martin Perez is #95 now, as compared to being in the top-30 to top-50 over the last couple years. His fall in Mayo's prospect rankings do not mean Perez is any worse a pitcher today than he was the day before.

Also, no disrespect to the guy -- I've read his reports over the last several years -- but I have a hard time defending the validity of a top-100 list that has Cody Buckel (#87) ahead of Martin Perez (#95). Maybe if you're strictly looking at age relative to level, or off Minor League statistics, but the industry sees Buckel as more a #3-#4 starter. Not a potential TORP like Perez could, in theory, become.

I also found it odd that Buckel was rated ahead of Perez. I don't think anyone thinks Buckel has better stuff than Perez, but maybe they feel he's more consistent...therefore giving him a slight edge.

It's hard to understand how these types of lists are constructed without talking to the people who made it. Is it based on long-term projections or is based on right now? Is it based on stats or on scouting...or on some other combination? There are just too many questions that we can't answer, but the lists are fun to look at and (at least for me) help put things in perspective. Sometimes we value or under value are own players so seeing these lists can sort of give you an idea of how other people that are not as blinded by team loyalty view our prospects.

I think another thing to take away from this list and the others coming out, is that we have a bunch of young guys in the low end that all have the ability to shoot up these rankings by the time the trade deadline rolls around and/or next offseason. You could even throw Martin Perez in there as well since he's still pretty young and definitely has the stuff. Our second wave could be monsters.

Perez is what he is. A maybe #4-5 pithcher whose value has declined to half of what it was 1-2 yrs ago. A reasonable comp would be Edinson volquez. He should be the lesson we learn from hoarding rather than trading prospects.

Though most top 25 prospects crack a big league roster and contribute something to their team, you NEVER know what you're going to get. For every Buster Posey, David Price, Mike Trout, Jay Bruce, Mike Stanton, Stephen Strasburg, Ryan Braun, Troy Tulowitzki, or Evan Longoria, there's a Delmon Young, Justin Smoak, Brandon Wood, Joba Chamberlain, Fernando Martinez, Matt LaPorta or Gordon Beckham.

I believe everyone should temper their expectations with all of these Rangers prospects. If any of these guys become regular contributors in the next 1-3 years, it's fortunate. To ask all of them to be All-Stars is setting yourself up for disappointment.

I think they consider doing Elvis for Tavares straight up. Especially if it gives them an opportunity to win another title. Personally, I would do the deal in a heartbeat, because I could either flip Tavares in a deal for an ace or big bat where he is the headliner, or I could just keep him and let him be awesome at RBiA

Jurkson:
Thats why you are not a GM.

So not that eric,

You're saying you wouldn't trade Elvis for Tavares? Or you're saying you wouldn't flip him for a different piece? Or you're saying he won't be awesome at RBiA? Because all of those seem pretty plausible.

Do you know what you're saying?

So, I'm pretty sure that today, like every other day, the trolls are hungry. And by responding to them it makes them not as hungry, but still hungry.

So quit feeding them.

nomnomnom

elvis for tavares?. we now know you're not gm material.

P1 Stephen, you may be right that St. Louis would never trade Taveras for Elvis, my guess is JD might not make that trade either... they may want a more established talent...

I know you wrote off the royals trading of Myers and Odorozzi and Montgomery Leonard for two years of Shields and I think one year of Davis (who was much better as a reliever than a starter..)...

And if that trade isn't a reasonable comparison what about RA Dickey... 37 year old knuckleballer on a two year contract for the # 6 rated prospect... in T. D'arnaud and the # 29 rated prospect in Syndergard...

If St. Louis thinks they can win a championship this year and next and Furcal gets injured,a trade for elvis isn't an impossibility.. would st. louis trade taveras for him, who knows? would the rangers trade elvis for taveras? who knows? They turned down three years of Upton (a much more sure thing than taveras) for Elvis...

St. Louis had a light hitting shortstop who they prized pretty highly for a long time in Ozzie Smith.. and light hitting or not, he is Cooperstown... and at the same age that Elvis is now, Ozzie had a cumulative war of 3.0 vs. Elvis's 14.0...

Elvis, a proven top 5-10 SS for an unproven MLer? I guarantee that won't happen. That is laughable. Here's an idea-let me ne the GM. All of you just come to the games and spend your allowances on nachos.

Question the equity of an Elvis-Tavares trade all you want but don't be a stupid troll and claim the deal is heavily tilted to the Cards if you haven't even checked the 20 year old's stats (and I'm assuming you haven't).

Hint: He was 19 for the first 3 months and put up better numbers than Mike Olt (as a 24yo). At least be an educated troll.

^^^^
This.