My first write-in vote…Deryk Hooker. He will start the year at Low-A Quad Cities as a 19yr old. He doesn’t turn 20 until late June. Splitting last year between Johnson City and Quad Cities (he skipped Batavia), Hooker put up the following line:

1-2, 3.11 ERA, 64.3 innings, 58 hits, 73 K’s, 20 walks (3.65k/bb)

He also struck out 27% of the batters he faced while walking only 7.5%. Scouting report says he has good to great command of a low 90’s fastball, good 12-6 curveball and a really good changeup. Furthermore, at 6′4″ he will probably gain some fastball velocity as he fills out.

Thus Deryk Hooker gets my vote for #21. I think he will be pitching in AA by the end of the year.

Here are a couple of links on Hooker for those who want to know more:

http://firstinning.com/players/James-Hooker-a/

http://stlcardinals.scout.com/2/822491.html

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/H/Deryk-Hooker.shtml

If de la Cruz produces at all, this ranking will look low. I voted for him two spots ago, and mentioned him in the comments last time. I voted for him again - would someone explain how this Pina/de la Cruz thing works?

Hooker is a good pick, too. He’s all upside. I think he belongs somewhere below Herron. Herron is the better bet to stick as a starter. We don’t know if Hooker will ultimately start or relieve yet because he’s at such a low level. Almost everyone starts down there. I like his age, but we’ll have to see how he holds up. I don’t know that he projects to have three above average major league pitches.

- DG,

- With all the talk of these promising first round picks (which I love, bye the way) can someone on the site (Bernie, Strauss, yourself) please mention that signing Fuentes as a Type A Free Agent will cost the Birds next years’ first round pick? I feel that this fact has gone largely unnoticed as a potential downgrade to the signing of the “lefty-hammer.” Thanks for your continous coverage of the club!

Articles like this are incredibly inspiring! While the middle class disappears and the country slips in to a depression, we’re still able to keep our focus on celebrity gossip and pandering to jocks.

(Edited for sophomoric language, while retaining general sentiment.)

Almost all work on the value of draft picks places late 1st round picks with a minimum value of several million dollars just for the pick. Some, like Nate Silver at Baseball Prospectus place that value at near $8 million. In any case, you have to get almost into the 3rd round before the economic value of the pick plus the slot bonus aren’t worth what we paid De La Cruz. In other words, you can’t compare the value of players based on their bonuses unless you also consider the value of the pick used to draft the player. In the case of De La Cruz we didn’t have to use a draft pick so he is not worth near as much as a player with a similar bonus who also required the use of a draft pick. On a pure economic argument such as is made in this blog post, Shane Peterson (2nd round pick) should be ranked ahead of De La Cruz.

Nothing wrong with ranking De La Cruz here on a talent basis but the economic argument being made is not sound.

Cario -

I think DG is just saying that it adds insight into what the team thinks of Pina/de la Cruz. He’s not saying that it reflects his actual value…I’m not sure what argument you’re trying to make.

Plus, I’m familiar with the Silver’s assessment. He has more recently backed off the 8 million figure and valued a first round pick at closer to 3 million. Keep in mind that the Cards will have their own methods of valuing picks that we aren’t privy to.

Carioca’s economic argument is right.

The Cards paid $1.2 million for De La Cruz.

They paid $938K *and the opportunity cost of no longer having the draft pick* for Lance Lynn.

So…if the Cards were thinking right and markets were working efficiently, then the Cards spent considerably more for Lynn than De La Cruz because of the opportunity cost.

De La Cruz is a good addition to the list, but I’m gonna stick with my man Castillo. I, too, have Herron ahead of Hooker, though I like both.

Mr. Handshear,

It has been mentioned several times about Fuentes costing a first-round pick because Colorado offered him arbitration. I’ve written it. I’ve read it in our coverage. It will be mentioned again. But it’s like Chris Carpenter’s health, the steroid issue and so many other things — can’t beat the same drum in every article. There is a lot of content produced on a daily basis, and we do a disservice to the readers when everything sounds the same, includes the same info and so on and so on.

Fuentes will cost the Cardinals a first-round pick.

That has to be a factor when considering his “cost”, if not his “price.”

There, that covers us for a few days. When/if the Cardinals sign the lefty closer then we’ll be sure to mention it again. You, however, are welcome to continue to make it a big part of the comments here, because it is important that people remember signing Fuentes costs a pick.

dg
-30-

First of all, I’m “on the fence” on the Fuentes signing. My feeling is priority should be (in no particular order) 1) An innings-eating starter (starters must take some of the stress off the bullpen) 2)another lefty specialist for the pen 3)A righty power bat. I believe the closer could be handled by Perez-Motte-a vet (Kinney).

HOWEVER, IF Cards sign Fuentes for two years, he’ll (most probably) still be a “type A”– so they’ll get back their lost first rounder– when he walks in two years.

DG, terrific work once again. I had been meaning to inquire on Robert Pina (or… de la Cruz). There were not any stats to go on, and generally, there wasn’t a lot of information on this guy. Thank you for posting a scouting report and some info on him. It was mentioned in the last post by another commenter that the lack of knowledge about Pina/de la Cruz was really hurting his ranking in this poll. When we look at these rankings again next year, I agree, his ranking could look very low. He got my vote.

Honestly, I believe that Robinson is likely a 4th/5th OF’er. The thing that jumps out to me about Robinson is that in 151 PA he walked only 5 times at AAA Memphis this season, and in 271 PAs at Springfield he walked only 17 times. It would appear that he has strong range and a solid arm, but still I don’t see him as more than a 4th or 5th OF. Any thoughts about Robinson and his potential?

Allen,

True . . . that is, IF the Cards were to offer Fuentes arbitration at the end of those two years. Not sure how likely that would be.

Impossible to say, of course, since he hasn’t even signed with us yet and we have no way of knowing what his performance would be over those hypothetical two years.

EMC,

I think 4th/5th outfielder is a safe bet. There’s a blend of Skip Schumaker (Robinson is righthander, more speed), Scott Podsednik (again Robinson is righthanded, better average) and Shane Victorino (Robinson has less power, doesn’t switch hit) in Robinson. He’s a 4th outfielder, until he he’s hitting .330 and turning singles in doubles with his speed and then he’s a starter. He has to first do that at Triple-A.

Closest vote yet among the top three contenders here. We’ll see how it finishes by Monday morning …

dg
-30-

Michael: Of course you are correct about the two variables. I am assuming his “Busch” numbers would exceed his “Coors numbers” & that he would be offered “Arbi”– which of course he has the option of accepting. Several other factors: the economy will affect MLB salaries if the recession holds for several years and teams realize lower revenue… the other factor would be whether he would accept arbitration. It’s all a gamble….
Worth it? I’m still on the fence– given the number of other team needs….

- DG,

- Thanks for the clarification, and I’m glad to see that it sparked some lively debate! I, seemingly along with everyone else, am “on the fence” about a Fuentes signing. I guess I’m in accord with Mo’s line of thinking to this point. I would be happy with a two-year connection in the reported 16-18 million dollar range, but hesitant to lock into a 3-year or 10 million dollar commitment.

- If the Cardinals and Fuentes don’t reach agreement, where is your money placed for the Opening Day closer? It seems that Perez, Motte, Kinney, Lyon, Saito, and even Carpenter have to be considered options at this point. Thoughts? Thanks in advance for your response.

No one has taken a crack at the “Pina’ vs. “de la Cruz” question, so I will. I am no expert on latino culture, but it is my understanding that, at least in some Latino cultures, a person’s formal name includes both the father’s family name and the mother’s family name, and that traditionally the maternal family name comes last. Therefore, Jose Cruz Pena would signify that Pena is the mother’s family name but the person might actually be known as Jose Cruz.

In the case of Mr. de la Cruz, I would surmise that is how he is commonly known. Some scout, however, may have reported on him under the name Pina. I think there have also been cases of a player using the maternal family name in an attempt to deceive a scout regarding his age, or in the case of some Cuban players, to aid the player in defecting.

I am not accusing de la Cruz of masquerading;In translating the name for an American audience, it may be customary to use the paternal family name. If I am incorrect in any of my hunches, I hope someone will enlighten me.

I’d vote for CF Freddy Parejo before De La Cruz. Parejo is little more than one year older, and has already been an All-Star in short-season A-ball (a notch [or two] above where DLC will play next year.)

Using bonuses as a proxy for talent level has a certain limited validity, but as I glance at the careers of Chad Hutchinson and Albert Pujols, it’s hard for me to take bonus $$ too seriously when ranking prospects.

I voted for Castillo–and am enthusiastically awaiting a full writeup on the kid, DG.

(Don’t forget the part about how Castillo negates the running game, and how he somehow held batters to a .167 slugging percentage with RISP in the Midwest League.)

C Tony Cruz