Castro's Spray Chart wrote:
Marco Hernandez. He's the guy that has a chance to be considered a top shelf prospect (that is, a potential top 50 type prospect down the line if there's positive development). Before people jump on me and point out that I've been bigger on Marco than most, ask yourself this - how big is the difference between Jurickson Profar's ceiling and Marco Hernandez's ceiling (again, only talking about ceiling, not anything to do with how developed they are). The difference in ceiling between Lindor and Hernandez is minimal as well, and while Hak-ju Lee's defense is superior to Marco's, his offensive ceiling isn't (again ... ceiling is the only thing I'm discussing here). Shortstops with some power potential, solid defensive ability, and bat speed to potentially hit for average aren't exactly everywhere. Yes, the approach is a concern, but he showed development in that regards at both stops. Considering age and level, that's enough to hope on the tools.
This post makes WSR's love for Golden look justified.
Really? How so? That's sort of a ridiculous and insulting comment, IMO. I really have no [expletive] idea how to respond to this. If you made the argument that craig made, fine. But no where in there did I say that he would
be a top 50 prospect. Heck, you are saying that WSR arguing for Golden, a guy almost no one is putting in the top 20 right now, is the same as me advocating for Marco at 18 on this list, a guy almost everyone has top 20, and many have top 15. Golden isn't a guy that is considered a top 20 prospect by most, people, whereas Marco is. I didn't advocate for Marco in the top 10 - only around 12/13 (too lazy to check right now). If you wanted to argue that Profar's age being younger makes that comment ridiculous, fine. But Profar finished last year in A ball (with minor splits issues, IIRC ... albeit not like Marco's but that's an interesting side note ... his splits, IIRC, were actually pretty horrendous in the NWL), so development happened within a year. What did I say at the end? Enough to hope on tools? How is anything I said anywhere remotely as ridiculous as comparing my arguing for Marco at 18 to WSR arguing for Golden in the [expletive] top 20? I really don't [expletive] get jackass comments like that. If you made a legitimate argument, I could get that, but there's nothing legitimate ... it's just a bunch of [expletive] drivel. Craig's comment and argument I get (again, people forget how awful Profar's splits were in the NWL, so it's not like development can't occur). Heck, if craig is willing to share (and if I'm breaking confidences, I apologize), I would ask him to show the comment that he got on Marco Hernandez from his source as it pertains to Marco's potential.
What I simply argued is that, if all goes well with both players, Marco Hernandez has the higher ceiling than Amaya. I imagine you are reacting this way because of my comment on comparing Marco's ceiling to some of the top shortstops and the top 50 comment. If that top 50 comment is some sort of issue, then I don't know what to say [expletive] say because I said that is, a potential top 50 type prospect down the line if there's positive development
. How is that a ridiculous comment, unless you don't think he has the tools?
Go compare reports of Profar/Lindor/Lee's ceiling to Hernandez and tell me how I'm wrong in a discussion on ceiling
. I imagine, particularly, that the comparison to Profar is what's standing out. People act like Profar is going to be some ridiculous offensive stud. I think people forget that Profar's offensive ability being viewed as excellent is in the context of position. He's not likely to be Miguel Cabrera. He's going to be a very good offensive player overall, but an excellent offensive player for his position. Profar also doesn't have superb top of the line tools, but rather, very good tools and a lot of polish. Don't forget that there's legitimate debate on how much power Profar will have. He has average speed, maybe a tick above, but good range and lateral movement, along with instincts. So again, I ask, where I am wrong in saying where is the major difference between Marco's ceiling
and Profar's ceiling
? Where am I wrong in saying Marco is a shortstop that has some potential power, solid defensively ability, and bat speed. I can actually find public comments that note all three. No where in there am I discussing the probability yet of Marco to reach said ceiling, as I simply noted that's enough to hope on the tools.
And yes, I am sort of pissed at this type of ridiculous [expletive] comment.