If you have a question, send it to askba@baseballamerica.com. Please include your full name and hometown if you'd like your letter to be considered for use in an upcoming column. Also, please understand that we can't respond to every question.

By Jim Callis
January 8, 2008

Has it really been five weeks since the last Ask BA? I'll blame the 2008 Prospect Handbook, though the good news is that we should be getting the book back from the printer in the next couple of weeks.

That last Ask BA dealt mainly with the ramifications of trades that involved prospects, and this edition will as well. But one question I didn't get asked that I want to address is my take the two Athletics deals, which sent Dan Haren to the Diamondbacks and Nick Swisher to the White Sox.

Both Haren and Swisher are young and productive, and they're signed to easily affordable long-term contracts that lock them up for at least the next three seasons. In short, they're exactly the type of cornerstones a rebuilding club would want to rebuild around. But Oakland's farm system had fallen into such a state of disrepair that the A's decided they had to shed Haren and Swisher to bring in some minor league talent for the future.

Billy Beane has proven himself to be one of the game's best general managers, but how he escapes blame for the collapse of his farm system is beyond me. Yes, big league promotions have thinned out Oakland's store of minor league talent, but with 19 first-round or supplemental first-round picks in the last six drafts, there's no excuse. Funny, I seem to remember reading a book a few years ago about how the A's were revolutionizing the draft.

Secondly, there's no guarantee that prospects will pan out. I love prospects as much as the next guy, but unless the three best pitchers Oakland acquired (Brett Anderson from the Diamondbacks, Gio Gonzalez and Fautino de los Santos) all pan out, I don't think the trades will significantly upgrade the A's in the long run. And we all know what injuries and attrition can do to pitching prospects.

In other business, only two 2008 first-round picks will change hands as free-agent compensation, because the last remaining Type A player (Aaron Rowand) signed with a team whose first-rounder was protected (the Giants). The draft order is fairly well set, though six Type B free agents who could yield supplemental first-round choices remain on the market.

Here's how the order stands now:

First-Round Picks 1. Devil Rays 2. Pirates 3. Royals 4. Orioles 5. Giants 6. Marlins 7. Reds 8. White Sox 9. Nationals 10. Astros 11. Rangers 12. Athletics 13. Cardinals 14. Twins 15. Dodgers 16. Brewers 17. Blue Jays 18. Mets (Tom Glavine, A, to Atl) 19. Cubs 20. Mariners 21. Tigers 22. Mets 23. Padres 24. Phillies 25. Rockies 26. Diamondbacks 27. Twins (Torii Hunter, A, to LAA) 28. Yankees 29. Indians 30. Red Sox Supplemental First-Round Picks 31. Twins (Hunter) 32. Brewers (Franciso Cordero, A, to Cin) 33. Mets (Glavine) 34. Phillies (Aaron Rowand, A to SF) 35. Brewers (Scott Linebrink, A, to CWS) 36. Royals (David Riske, B, to KC) 37. Cardinals (Troy Percival, B, to TB) 38. Braves (Ron Mahay, B, to KC) 39. Cubs (Jason Kendall, B, to Mil) 40. Padres (Doug Brocail, B, to Hou) 41. Yankees (Luis Vizcaino, B, to Col) 42. Red Sox (Eric Gagne, B, to Mil) Second-Round Changes 47. Phillies (Rowand to SF) 49. Brewers (Cordero to Cin) 50. Brewers (Linebrink to CWS) 69a. Braves (for failure to sign 2007 second-rounder Joshua Fields) Third-Round Changes 84a. Red Sox (for failure to sign 2007 second-rounder Hunter Morris) Supplemental Third-Round Picks 105. Phillies (for failure to sign 2007 third-rounder Brandon Workman) 106. Astros (for failure to sign 2007 third-rounder Derek Dietrich) 107. Padres (for failure to sign 2007 third-rounder Tommy Toledo) 108. Angels (for failure to sign 2007 third-rounder Matt Harvey) Remaining Possible Compensation Free Agents Ari: Livan Hernandez (B). Hou: RHP Trever Miller (B). Oak: C Mike Piazza (B), OF Shannon Stewart (B). SD: OF Mike Cameron (B). SF: 3B Pedro Feliz (B).

Now that several of the Diamondbacks' best prospects have been traded, what would their Top 10 list look like now?

Bob Berzin
Gurnee, Ill.

To get Dan Haren from the Athletics, the Diamondbacks parted with five of their top prospects: outfielder Carlos Gonzalez (No. 1 on our list), lefthander Brett Anderson (No. 3), outfielder Aaron Cunningham (No. 7), first baseman Chris Carter (No. 8) and lefty Greg Smith (No. 13). Factor in all the talent Arizona promoted to the majors last season, and 13 of its top 15 prospects from a year ago either no longer qualify for the list or have left the organization.

A year ago, we rated the Diamondbacks system as the third-best in the game. With all the changes, it will sit somewhere around No. 20 when we release our updated rankings in the spring.

Here's what the Top 10 would look like now:

1. Jarrod Parker, rhp
Had the most electric arm in the 2007 draft.
2. Max Scherzer, rhp
Has a violent delivery, but also throws in the mid-90s.
3. Gerardo Parra, of
Won the low Class A Midwest League batting title with a .320 average.
4. Billy Buckner, rhp
Acquired from the Royals in shrewd trade for Alberto Callaspo.
5. Juan Gutierrez, rhp
Sinker/changeup pitcher was part of the Jose Valverde deal with the Astros.
6. Emilio Bonifacio, 2b/ss
Stands out for his speed, middle-infield defense.
7. Reynaldo Navarro, ss
Third-round pick last June is a slick defender.
8. Barry Enright, rhp
One of the top command pitchers in college last spring.
9. Wes Roemer, rhp
See Enright.
10. Brooks Brown, rhp
Has the body, stuff to be a workhorse starter.

With the Cubs signing Kosuke Fukudome, does he become their No. 1 prospect? And does this now make it more likely that Chicago will trade either Felix Pie or Tyler Colvin, perhaps in a multiplayer blockbuster with the Orioles?

Tim Worrall
Napoleon, Ohio

Though it's unfair to compare American minor leaguers with older imports, where would Kosuke Fukudome fit on the Cubs Top 10 and the overall Top 100 Prospects list?

Penny Simone
Bellwood, Ill.

Where does Kosuke Fukudome now rank amongst Cubs prospects? I would be inclined to rate him ahead of Josh Vitters at No. 1. And did he sign in time to make it into the 2008 Prospect Handbook? If so, who got knocked out from No. 30 to No. 31?

Navin Dore
Pasadena, Calif.

Where would Kosuke Fukudome rank on the Cubs Top 10? I assume No. 2 behind only Josh Vitters. Also, where would you rank him among all the prospects in baseball?

Rob Dorsey
Silver Spring, Md.

Lots of fans have Fukudome on their mind. It's kind of silly to consider an established Japanese big leaguer a "prospect", but our definition of a prospect closely mirrors MLB's definition of a rookie, and it is what it is.

Fukudome signed just after our transaction deadline for the Prospect Handbook, so he didn't make our Cubs list there. We did, however, including him in an appendix along with fellow Japanese signees Kaz Fukumori (Rangers) and Hiroki Kuroda (Dodgers). Here's our scouting report on the 30-year-old Fukudome:

The departures of Ichiro Suzuki and Hideki Matsui meant that Fukudome was the best all-around player remaining in Japan. While he doesn't have the same power as Matsui, he's a comparable player and has better all-around tools. The 2006 Central League MVP and two-time batting champ has a strong arm and runs well enough to play center field in a pinch, though he profiles best as a right fielder who hits for average, draws walks and occasionally drives the ball out of the park with a smooth lefthanded swing. The Cubs will play him in right and bat him near the top of the order, perhaps even in the leadoff spot.

The biggest concern about Fukudome is his durability. He missed the second half of the 2007 season with bone chips in his throwing elbow and has been bothered by other minor injuries in recent years. Fukudome played third base as a teenager on Japan's silver-medal winning 1996 Olympic team before taking his speed to the outfield. He has plenty of experience on the international stage. He also played for Japan's 2004 Olympic team and was one of the stars of Japan's World Baseball Classic squad, hitting a pinch-hit, two-run home run in the semifinals against Korea and a key two-run single against Cuba in the championship game.

Had Fukudome signed in time to make our Cubs list, I would have ranked him No. 1 ahead of Josh Vitters. I think Vitters, the third overall pick in the 2007 draft, has a higher ceiling but Fukudome has starred at the highest level of baseball outside of Major League Baseball. I think he's a near lock to be a solid regular for the Cubs, though I don't see him becoming a star, reiterating the Hideki Matsui comp from our scouting report. Combining his ceiling and his likelihood of reaching it, I'll probably put Fukudome in the 21-30 range on my personal Top 100 list.

His arrival has to make Colvin or Pie expendable, because with Fukudome and Alfonso Soriano signed for another 11 years and $167 million between them, there's only one outfield opening available. It's also possible that if Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez remain productive and in Chicago, Vitters could head to the outfield as well. Sam Fuld's stock is soaring after a strong Arizona Fall League performance, so he gives the Cubs another outfield option (though I view him as more of a fourth outfielder than a regular).

One last thing: While Fukudome didn't push anyone out of our Cubs Top 30 in the Handbook, Chicago did acquire righthanders Jose Ascanio and Tim Lahey in December. That knocked outfielder Josh Kroeger and third baseman Kyle Reynolds out of the book, though we'll present their scouting reports in our annual online look at what we call The 31st Team—all the reports that didn't quite make it into the Handbook.

Is it fair to assume that Edinson Volquez (if he still qualified as a prospect) wouldn't have been ranked among the Reds' Big Four prospects (Jay Bruce, Homer Bailey, Joey Votto, Johnny Cueto) but ahead of Drew Stubbs? Would Volquez be a viable candidate for the Top 100 Prospects list?

Erick Metzger
Columbus, Ohio

Volquez has exceeded 50 major league innings, so he's no longer a prospect in our book. He definitely wouldn't have ranked ahead of Bruce, Bailey, Votto or Cueto, arguably the best foursome of prospects in any farm system right now. He probably would have settled in at No. 5, ahead of Stubbs, though I'm not the biggest Volquez fan in the world. I wouldn't have advocated him making the Top 100.

Volquez throws hard and has a nice changeup, but he never has shown a reliable curveball in the big leagues and his control and command always have been spotty. I see him more as a classic tease, a guy who can light up radar guns but never will be the frontline starter his velocity suggests he might become.

Trading Josh Hamilton to get Volquez made sense for the Reds, however. They had the second-worst ERA in the National League last year and more outfielders than they knew what to do with. Now Cincinnati has an opening for Bruce to play in the majors and another candidate for its rotation.

Considering that the Rangers have been on a perpetual search for pitching, however, shouldn't it tell us something that they were willing to part with Volquez?

« Dec. 3 Ask BA