Is Oscar Taveras Underrated?
Posted on January 26th, 2012 by azruavatar in Oscar Taveras, tags: Colby Rasmus, Oscar TaverasA .310/.373/.512 line in the Midwest League at age 19 is a great performance. A .386/.444/.584 in the Midwest League at age 19 is great enough to lead the entirety of single A baseball in offensive performance as measured by wOBA (min 200 PA).
The first line, Colby Rasmus’ performance in 2006, cemented his position as the Cardinals’ #1 prospect, which he wouldn’t relinquish until graduating to the majors. The latter performance put Oscar Taveras at #4 on the Future Redbirds top 20 and generally in the #3 or #4 spot on industry lists. Is it possible that Oscar Taveras is underrated?
Stats don’t tell the whole story of a player in A-ball but Oscar Taveras put together some impressive statistics nonetheless. He showed plate coverage that without an obvious weakness that opposition pitchers could consistently exploit leading to a modest 15% strikeout rate. He showed excellent power with an isolated slugging of .198 (on par with Rasmus’ .201 2006 ISO). If there’s a place to be concerned about Taveras it’s the unsustainable .440 BABIP. While his walk rate was still good (9%), the luck on balls in play may obscure the fact that Taveras was still quite excellent.
If you aggressively normalize Taveras’ numbers by assuming 1) that balls in play are converted to outs in A-ball nearly the same percentage of time that they are in the majors and 2) that Taveras true talent level on balls in play is no better than an average major league hitter. In that case, Taveras should have recorded approximately 30 fewer hits in 2011: 23 fewer singles, 4 fewer doubles and 1 fewer triples. (Home runs are not balls in play and thus unaffected by this.) That puts his batting line at .327/.383/.506. A .889 OPS would have tied him with 12th place in the league (not adjusting anyone else’s statistics). All this while still being one of the youngest players in the league.
What makes Taveras more compelling as a prospect is that he’s well regarded by scouts as well. With Taveras spending more time in the US this season, the reports have been better informed and more consistently positive. Some equivocate on his long term home run potential but acknowledge that he compensates by hitting the ball hard even when it is inside the park. Taveras isn’t a true centerfielder in the same mold as Colby Rasmus when Rasmus was in the minors but he’s not a lead-footed corner outfielder as well.
Taveras is up against a different set of prospects as well. There was no equivalent to Shelby Miller when Colby Rasmus sat atop the rankings. The farm system has come a long way since 2005 and is flush with blue chip, high upside prospects. But this isn’t necessarily an argument about Taveras’ position within the fiefdom of Cardinal prospects so much as it is about the general disposition towards Taveras.
It’s difficult to make the case that Taveras is a true five tool player — he’s not. His speed is average and his defense is good but not necessarily tremendous. What Taveras has displayed in 2011, however, should be a cautionary tale to doubters. Taveras hit better than any scouting report from the previous year would have suggested displaying great power, if not great home run power. Given his young age, one has to wonder — is Oscar Taveras underrated?
Entries (RSS)
Anybody have a scouting report on Taveras’ arm with an eye toward an eventual move to RF?
I have seen him live…
It is not a total cannon but it plays in RF. He a very solid player all around, when you watch him play every tool looks like it is atleast an average MLBer with his hit skills looking really legit.
Thanks for the report.
Nice job, AZ. One thing you missed, though, is that there is one other widespread concern about Taveras besides the unsustainable(?) BABIP, namely the perception on some fronts that there’s something weird about his swing. I’m not a scout, and have never seen OT in the flesh, but some writers whom I respect have expressed concern that his swing won’t work right against more advanced pitchers.
I’m suspecting that that may be holding the evaluations of him back in some quarters, notably at mlb.com where he didn’t crack the top-100 prospect list. That seems inexplicable to me; a guy that’s got that kind of pitch recognition and power to drive the ball should be able to make adjustments to the swing that would help it play at more advanced levels, one would think. But the opinion is there on some fronts.
Don’t shoot the messenger here, please. As I say, I have no informed opinion on the subject. I am merely relaying what I hear, from people whose opinions I value. (To be sure, there are plenty of other people whose opinions I value that think he’s got real star potential.)
They said something like that about Musials swing if I remember right!!
A comments discussion in one of Sickles’ blog posts about Cardinals prospects included quotes from two scouts on Taveras’ swing. If my recollection is correct, they both said the swing was “violent” and isn’t the kind of swing that would be substainable in higher levels. They also said that Taveras hand-eye coordination is superb and could negate that concern.
I’ll have to find it later to make sure, but my impression is that the scouts presented his swing as a possible concern (as in, “if there was anything I could criticize), not something that should hold him back in rankings.
For prosperty (both from chats)….
Jason Grey:
I’ve seen a couple of games of his thus far. He takes ferocious hacks at the ball, but his hand-eye coordination allows him to get away with that.
Keith Law:
It’s an unusual swing, and I’m not sure I could name a big leaguer, present or in the recent past, who had a swing like this. Max effort swings like this don’t often work out, but so far his hand-eye coordination has been more than enough to overcome it, and if he has a hole at all it may not be exposed until the upper levels or the majors.
I think any “underratedness” is primarily a function of him not being a IFA bonus baby or a 1st-2nd Rd draft pick. There is a certain prospect inertia in the scouting community, which includes the internet scouting community, that Taveras must overcome to be considered a consensus top 50 (or higher) prospect (I say “consensus” because some lists have rated him highly, including in the top 50 overall).
It’s real simple – Tavares is young and missed a lot of time. If he steps it up in 2012, he should be our number 2 prospect behind Miller
Why should we give any creedence to what a writer thinks of someones swing? They are hired by someone because of their ability to write, not because they have more technical knowledge than the rest of us. I have seen Taveras play and he can flat out hit. As for the comparison, point you missed is that Rasmus only spent a half season ar QC in 06. If he had stayed there all year he would have been 20 before the end of the season. Taveras was younger.
True for some writers, less true than others. If Keith Law says there’s an issue with a prospect (OT’s swing or anything else), it is something to take seriously, because not only does he talk to tons of baseball people, he’s a pretty decent judge of fundamentals himself. Same with Kevin Goldstein. I don’t know about the people who dissed OT at mlb.com.
Many writers who cover prospects as their job or part of it either have been scouts (such as Keith Law) or have access to scouts (such as Derrick Goold). We should give credence to them because they have access to scouting information we do not or they have actually scouted the player, which we have not (watching the player from the point of view as a fan does not count).
Taveras had better stats in the mwl at 19 than Puhols had at age 20. If there had been a top 100 list in 2001, would Albert have been on it? maybe there was, does anyone know?
Don’t know about a MLB.com prospect list, but Albert was #42 on BA’s top 100 (probably the most well-known list then, and maybe now). Albert was just ahead of Aubrey Huff and a few spots back from Jack Cust…and Bud Smith.
Yes….just yes
I’m not sure where I read this but if I recall, one scout compared Taveras to Tony Oliva. Hell I’ll take that! As for Mayo, I question his expertise on our farm system to be nothing more then a casual fan. As for Keith Law, he was part of the Blue Jay management team that let Chris Carpenter walk for nothing. To drive home his distain for Carp, he was one of only 2 writers who didn’t vote for him in the top 3 for Cy Young a couple years back. Remember! Add to that, his top ten prospects last year included Audry Perez. Anyone have him on their tip 50 list?!
Very nice!!!!
Audry Perez wasn’t in Keith Law’s top 10.
Yes he did last year, he even eluded to that again, him being high on Perez that is, in a recent ESPN insider article
Thanks for the backup Drew. KJG needs to check his facts before he makes embarrassing mistakes like that.
im looking at his top 100 prospects right now and Audry Perez’s name is no where to be found…
And for that matter he is not in the royals top 10…Kansas City Royals
2010
1. Eric Hosmer, 1B
2. Mike Moustakas, 3B
3. Mike Montgomery, LHP
4. Aaron Crow, RHP
5. Danny Duffy, LHP
6. Wil Myers, C
7. Noel Arguelles, LHP
8. Tim Melville, RHP
9. John Lamb, LHP
10. Tyler Sample, RHP
2011
1. Eric Hosmer, 1B (5)
2. Wil Myers, C/RF (8)
3. Mike Moustakas, 3B (23)
4. Mike Montgomery, LHP (28)
5. John Lamb, LHP (41)
6. Danny Duffy, LHP (98)
7. Chris Dwyer, LHP
8. Jake Odorizzi, RHP
9. Christian Colon, SS
10. Yordano Ventura, RHP
OH My mistake im thinking of the audry perez from the royals system
Wow. None of that is really true at all.
Let Chris Carpenter walk for nothing?
Carp missed most of 2002 with a sholder injury. He was given a “kiss of death” diagnosis iwth a torn labrum. He had sholder surgery that year. The best comeback scenario would be a mid season return at best, but most likely would never come back at all. I am not sure what you know about shoulder injuries, but no teams are not willing to trade for a pitcher in throws of a labrum surgery.
I also don’t understand why so many cardinal fans get so uppity about Chris Carpenter and the CYA voting that year.
So which is it?, should Carp have won the CY Young award in 09? Because if you say yes, then where are your complaints when Carp stole the award from Clemens in ’05. Why is it some cardinal fans think that innings don’t count in ’09, but should count in ’05.
Keith?….Is that you?
What part isn’t true? The Blue Jays let him go for nothing. He did not get a “kiss of death” diagnosis. The Jays were cutting back payroll and so they didn’t want to resign a player who might not play that year. Jocketty knew that Carp was a top-flight prospect and took a flyer on him. Toronto got nothing but embarrassment when Chris won the Cy Young. In spite of that the fact is they let him walk for NOTHING!
Clemens was so hopped up on steriods his numbers were totally inflated. Carpenter stole nothing from the ego-manical cheater.
I will say this in Keith Law’s defense. Him and I went toe-to-toe on this subject a couple years back and he firmly denies having anything to do with releasing Carp. He claims it was totally Riccardi’s decision. I find it hard to believe that Riccardi would not have consulted his top people before making the call.
>>>”He did not get a “kiss of death” diagnosis. The Jays were cutting back payroll and so they didn’t want to resign a player who might not play that year. Jocketty knew that Carp was a top-flight prospect and took a flyer on him. Toronto got nothing but embarrassment when Chris won the Cy Young. In spite of that the fact is they let him walk for NOTHING!”
Missed this…The Blue Jays cut Carpenter loose because he had a torn ladum in his shoulder, which can cut a pitcher’s career short, and even if he returns to pitch, that pitcher loses velocity, control, and stamina (which is why a vast majority of pitchers who return after ladum surgery don’t pitch more than two or three seasons). In his last season with Toronto, Carpenter spent the majority of it on the disabled list, missing most of April, all of May through late June, and from August until the end of the season. Carp had shoulder surgery in September, and wound up missing the entirety of the 2003 season. You say the Blue Jays let him go “for nothing.” Well, duh…the man was damanged goods and had absolutely no trade value. What did you expect?
Also not true–Carpenter was no prospect; he was a 27-year-old veteran with 135 starts and about 869 innings pitched over 6 mostly injury-plagued seasons. He was cut loose because the Blue Jays did not want to commit a roster spot and a guaranteed salary to a guy who may or may not be toast (they offered him an incentive-laced, minor league deal). Letting Carpenter go had nothing to do with his talent or money; it had everything to do with committing a guaranteed major league deal to a pitcher who hadn’t proved he had recovered from an injury that could radically change his ability to pitch, if he returned from it at all.
When the Cardinals gave him his contract, they were gambling, and they actually lost part of that gamble–they were banking on the idea that Carpenter would be able to return by mid-season, which he didn’t. That contract was regarded as a huge risk at the time, and it only looks good now because it mostly has worked out. Unlike the Mark Mulder contract, which the Cardinals commited two years and a chunk of the payroll to a guy who startered a grand total of 3 games.
Blaming the Blue Jays for not taking the same risk doesn’t seem like a valid criticism to me.
How huge a risk could it have been to have bet 300K on 2003? That was a contract betting on nothing but rehab. The 2004 contract afforded a 200K buyout if they didn’t think he was gonna recover. That contract was hardly a huge risk. But, what it did accomplish was endear Chris Carpenter to the Card’s organization. Toronto had first dibs.
For some reason, I thought that Carpenter was signed for more than that (it actually was 300,000 with incentives and an option year). After he missed the 2003 season (which the Cardinals did not expect), St. Louis did not pick up Carpenter’s option, instead resigning him to a similar deal.
And while I was incorrect about how big of a risk it was, the point remains…Toronto knew how bad Carpenter’s shoulder was (some gave him a 25 percent chance of returning) and had already experienced several injury-related seasons from a starting pitcher who was no longer a prospect. The idea that Toronto was stupid to release Carpenter doesn’t hold much water for me. Only in retrospect does it seem like a bad idea.
Im not sure how a 19 year old that put up those numbers in the midwest league is left off any top 100 list. Imagine if Taveras had been a first round pick. Something tells me he would be a consensus top 30 prospect.
Top 30 is probably being very conservative. After Mike trout, a former first round pick, tore up the Low A as a teen ager he was a consenus top 10 prospect.
Thats was also because Trout was a definte centerfielder, with a ton of stolen bases, 2 things Taveras does not really do.
Heh. I like Taveras but a Trout comparison is a healthy bit further than I’d ever be willing to go.
Was not necessarily trying to compare Taveras to trout. The main point i was trying to get across is that had Taveras been a first round pick he would be getting a lot more attention. Trout i guess wasnt the best name to through out there. But would he have been ranked so high if he came out of nowhere?
Honestly, I think it’s more that talent evaluators are wary of pumping up a prospect who has come out of nowhere based on one and a half seasons of play in Single A and short season ball. Azru alluded to this in his post: “With Taveras spending more time in the US this season, the reports have been better informed and more consistently positive.” Prospects picked in draft are scouted for years before they start their pro career, so there’s a load of background on development to evaluate how the skills will translate at higher levels. Traveras went from an underwhelming season in the Dominican Summer League (.257/.338/.392 in slightly more games than his Appy league debut referenced in Azru’s post) to an MVP season in short-season ball the next year. Hundreds of prospects who tore up Single A vaporized when they jumped a level. That, more than anything else, is what is working against Traveras. It’s not that he wasn’t drafted and thus doesn’t have the “cache” with talent evaluators (explain why they love non-drafted Carlos Martinez); it’s that there’s a lack of historical scouting evidence to convince them that Traveras’ is completely for real.
Of course we believe he is; we’re Cardinals fans. We’re a wee bit biased.
Nope he isn’t as polished a player as Trout. He doesn’t have the raw speed. Probably never plays center as well. But he outhit Trout in the MWL by more than just a little.
I think he gets some discredit because outfielders were about the only prospects in the Midwest league this year that I thought looked any good. I didnt get a chance to see Wong, but none of the other infield prospects outside of couple of the guys playing third impressed me. I missed Martinez but caught the kid from the Mariners org, they were the legit pitchers.
I am curious abouts OTs 1st to 2nd half splits. I know he was injured for the first half, but I generally think the 2nd half of the year is harder for younger hitters because of the influx of college pitchability guys into the league from the draft.
I think Taveras’ absences left him under-observed. Plain and simple. His numbers were so off the charts for a 19 year old that folks just don’t know what to do with them. If he rips up AA this year, which I’m betting he does, the consensus is going to be forced into a day of reckoning.
Should have already begun. Mayo’s rear end is showing.
I wonder if OT’s unimpressive AFL hurt him in the eyes of the MLB scouts and others. Really, he should have drawn at least one walk …
If it did, then they need to re-evaluate theire standards.
Taveras AFL numbers .312 obp/.413 slg/.307 avg
Trout AFL numbers .279 obp/.321 slg/.245 avg
Not trying to compare the 2, but Trout’s AFL numbers don’t seem to have hurt his prospect status. Trout is a year younger I believe.
Taveras is a year younger than Trout, I think you probly meant that. I think the consensus was that Trout was burnt out by the time he made it to the AFL, so people don’t really mention his performance.
I say yes, he is underrated, and for a simple reason: his numbers are too good. That may not sound very logical, but I think it’s exactly what’s happening here.
Look at that line for Rasmus above. Those are great numbers. You put up those numbers, at that age, and people say, “Boy, this kid’s really got some talent. Look how well he played this year.” And the player goes to the head of the class.
Now you look at Taveras’s line, and it isn’t just really good. It’s SO good that the immediate response isn’t, “Holy crap, look at that kid. What an amazing talent!” Instead, the response is, “Dude, there’s no way those numbers are for real. Something weird must be going on. No way that guy is that good.” When a player laps the field the way he did it’s just hard to believe there isn’t something flukey happening.
The truth is probably somewhere in between, of course; there are some definite concerns to have about Taveras, but he really is just an unbelievable talent. But until he proves it on bigger stages and higher levels, I think he’s going to continue to be looked at as some sort of optical illusion rather than an emerging young hitter of potentially epic proportions.
The other guy who is under rated is Anthony Garcia. Better stats in the Appy league than Taveras (though a year older). Was slightly young for his league in 2010 and 2011 but among the league OPS leaders both years. Excellent plate discipline.
you guys are talking about Taveras not being in the top 100, this guy didn’t even make the BA top 31 for the organization. Tell me that makes sense.
yeah its pretty amazing people looked past Garcia’s 308/407/527 line. He had 21 walks to 36 strikeouts. His OPS is comparable to Sano’s with half the strikeouts, but of course he is a year older corner outfielder with a lot less homers, but you would think that would merit at like top 31 position.
Just as Taverez might be underhyped given the amount of talent in the systerm right now, could it be that Rasmus was overhyped?
No, because the talent is real and he’s still developing as a player.
Agree to part 1 of your response, but is he still developing? Or is he at a stage where he “should be” developing … but he isn’t?
@Grunt–He just turned 25 in August…different players develop at different rates, not matter the talent. And let’s face it, Rasmus has some personal issues that can hinder his growth as a player, and he also developed a rough relationship with his manager in St. Louis, which isn’t going to help with overcoming those issues. He’s had only three seasons in the majors–his first year, adjusting to the major league game; his second good year in 2010; and his third bad season. When J.D. Drew was traded at age 28, they were still talking about his potential and the possibility of a break-through season. Like Drew, Rasmus may never reach his full potential, but like Drew, he still can improve. That’s why Toronto was willing to give up three major league pitchers for essentially Rasmus.
Forsh,
I agree.
But my point was (like the origninal post) that Rasmus didn’t have other bright prospects to share the spotlight. He got additional exposure and additional pressure that Taverez won’t experience.
Actually, Arzu’s point was the general perception of Traveras nationally: “The farm system has come a long way since 2005 and is flush with blue chip, high upside prospects. But this isn’t necessarily an argument about Taveras’ position within the fiefdom of Cardinal prospects so much as it is about the general disposition towards Taveras.”
Rasmus was highly ranked in the national lists as well (after Rasmus had his great Single A season, Baseball America ranked him No. 29 overall). Rasmus was being compared favorably to prospects in other systems, not just where he stood among the Cardinals’ farm system. The hype about Rasmus was local, coming from the St. Louis media, because he was the first blue chip prospect to come along in a while. If Traveras continues his success at higher levels, the national publications will take notice and he’ll find his way onto the top 100 lists, just as Carlos Martinez has (currently No. 30 at the MLB.com list, and was no. 18 in Baseball America’s mid-season top 50 list).
If Oscar had signed for a million dollar bonus, he would be more touted. The publicity machine likes high bonus babies.
I’m a little torn on this question. First off Taveras did put up insane numbers while having a few injuries (hammy issues if I recall correctly). Many players take a little bit to knock the rust off when coming back from injuries but not Taveras…its like he just picked up where he left off. Here are a few of my thoughts:
1) As mentioned by others above could it be that since he wasn’t a bonus baby he isn’t getting the love? Well let me turn it back around and say aren’t many bonus babies/1st Rd draft picks overhyped? So it could be that Taveras is adequately hyped but so many others are overhyped that it impacts his rankings. Just a different way to look at it.
2) Taveras does have incredible ability to square of the ball that is pitched anywhere and hit to all fields. To a lesser extent kind of reminds me of a Vlade type of hitting style (not trying to compare talent but approach).
3) His stance and swing should at least be a small concern as he faces more advanced pitching. I personally believe his impeccable hand-eye coordination outweighs is slightly awkward swing. But I can see the point that he might need to make swing adjustments in the upper minors.
4) I personally think his speed is slightly underrated. He had a few hammy issues in 2011 so he wasn’t 100% from a speed perspective. I wouldn’t say he has blazing speed but I’ve always thought he had above avg speed which will only enhance his ability to play RF assuming he moves…though I am one of the few people that thinks he has a chance to stick in CF.
Overall I would say Taveras might be slightly underrated by the masses but its not extreme. I will say to leave him out of a Top 100 prospect list is baffling to me though. He wouldn’t be in a Top 50 for me but he would certainly be in that 60-75 range.