The Orwellian Process Of Prospect Advancement

Today a friend with whom I correspond regarding Mets baseball quoted an article in which the author purported that minor league numbers are definitively not indicative of a player’s worth.  I must admit that it got me to thinking about that question.  How exactly does a player prove himself worthy of getting to the majors and staying there except via performance?  Are there other factors at play here?

For example, is a player a high level draft pick?  They seem preordained to make it, have the club’s money and scouting reputation on the line, and the excuse-makers at the ready when they fail to deliver to expectations?  Gavin Cecchini is one whose minor league career has thus far topped out at 784 ABs across four levels with just 5 HRs, 72 RBIs, 16 SBs and a .249 average, yet he’s often in the conversation as a “solution” to the shortstop problem.  The RBIs are somewhat encouraging compared to the incumbent in Queens, but only marginally so.  

Then there are the players acquired via trade for conspicuous talent departing the parent club.  There are times when you dealt away a star like an R.A. Dickey or Carlos Beltran or Marlon Byrd or even Ike Davis…those players similarly get put under the microscope to a greater extent and get extended some of the same benefits as the high draft pick players do.  Noah Syndergaard, for example, is posting some butt ugly numbers in AAA yet there are people advocating him being on the Mets right now.

There are some AAAA superstars, players who consistently post good numbers but never seem to get the call (or when they do, they only experience the game from the bench as the 25^th (or in September, the 40^th) man on the roster.  Valentino Pascucci and Mike Hessman would be examples of this type of player.

What of the rest?  Surely there are players who make it up the chain despite not having the fanfare or draft pedigree of the others.  On the current club Juan Lagares and Jacob de Grom are both examples of people no one expected would ascend to the majors, let alone play at an above average level.  The best example was probably Mike Piazza who was a 62^nd round draft pick by the Dodgers and then only as a favor to his father, a friend of Tommy Lasorda. 

So back we come to the question of how do you evaluate talent?  If you take Piazza as an example, it was pretty clear from his third year in pro ball that he was posting numbers that forced him up through the system and eventually onto the Dodgers roster.  Now if an unheralded 62^nd round pick can make a team take notice, then who in the Mets system is in a similar spot?  Why have they not gotten the call?  

An argument can be made that Wilmer Flores in this very same situation right now.  He's had plenty of development time in the minors and for the second year in a row is killing the ball in AAA, yet there appears to be no plan to promote him.  In less than 200 ABs he has a .325 average, 12 HRs and 53 RBIs.  That extrapolates to Miguel Cabrera type numbers.  Stories are now circulating in the media that the Mets are possibly going to extend Daniel Murphy and try to trade Flores.  Maybe it's just me, but with Matt Reynolds, Dilson Herrera, and others as backup plans (as well as the $8-$10 million per year Murphy's new contract would require), I think it would be imprudent to keep him when the return in trade would likely be significantly higher than it would be for Wilmer Flores.  Perhaps his future is as a DH, but until he plays regularly at the ML level it's unlikely anyone will believe he's for real.  Maybe isolating the performance to the 6 non-high altitude teams would give everyone a better idea about what Flores is capable of doing at sea level.  

Are there any others you feel are forcing themselves into the conversation who were late picks or otherwise not necessarily expected to perform well enough to advance to Queens?