December 1, 2012

“Gleeman and The Geek” #70: Denard Span for Alex Meyer

Topics for this week's episode of "Gleeman and The Geek" included the trade sending Denard Span to the Nationals for pitching prospect Alex Meyer, what the deal means for Chris Parmelee, how Span went from prospect bust to underrated big leaguer, why letter grades for prospects can lead to arguments, dropping Deolis Guerra from the 40-man roster, adding Jeff Clement for Triple-A depth, and why Hulkamania will never die.

Gleeman and The Geek: Episode 70

In addition to the direct download link above you can also subscribe to the podcast via iTunes.

  • adam

    BREAKING: Bonnes’ goes for devil’s advocate, looks stupid. Three week streak intact!

  • goliath

    Michael Levi appreciates your efforts not to screw up Alex Meyers name.

  • http://www.mog.com/funoka funoka

    Thankful that you guys can drop everything in your lives to cover this!

  • http://thefobl.com BGrant

    I enjoyed the podcast – for the next one you guys should argue about which ocean is the best (Pacific obviously)!

    FWIW, John Sickels says: “I rate him [Meyer] as a Grade B+ prospect, and he’s likely the best pitching prospect in the Twins minor league system now. He has a higher ceiling than Kyle Gibson, and more polish than Jose Berrios, his two main competitors.” (http://www.minorleagueball.com/2012/11/29/3708564/minnesota-twins-trade-denard-span-washington-nationals-alex-meyer)

  • http://thefobl.com BGrant

    Dola… and to defend TwinsGeek a bit here Sickels also rates Eddie Rosario a grade B prospect.

  • David Rasmussen

    Aaron,
    Here is how John Sickles would answer the question that you botched:

    QUICK PRIMER ON GRADE MEANINGS:
    Grade A prospects are the elite. They have a reasonable chance of becoming stars or superstars. Almost all Grade A prospects develop into major league regulars, if injuries or other problems don’t intervene. Note that is a major “if” in some cases.
    Grade B prospects have a good chance to enjoy successful careers. Some will develop into stars, some will not. Most end up spending several years in the majors, at the very least in a marginal role.
    Grade C prospects are the most common type. These are guys who have something positive going for them, but who may have a question mark or three, or who are just too far away from the majors to get an accurate feel for. A few Grade C guys, especially at the lower levels, do develop into stars. Some end up as role players or bench guys. Many don’t make it at all.
    Also note that there is diversity within each category. I’m a tough grader; Grade C+ is actually good praise, and some C+ prospects (especially at lower levels) turn out very well indeed.
    Finally, keep in mind that all grades are shorthand. You have to read the full comment in the book for my full opinion about a player, the letter grade only tells you so much. A Grade C prospect in rookie ball could end up being very impressive, while a Grade C prospect in Triple-A is likely just a future role player.

    Aaron, you are quite entertaining, sometimes. This episode, you were mostly oafish. Next time, take a nap before you tape.

  • John

    This is one of my favorite podcasts, and I listen every week. But I have to say, the bit about grading systems and your constant appeal to folks who “do this for a living” was pretty jarring, and as a reader of your site and your work for almost a decade it seems to me a low point of your career. I appreciate your insistence on thoroughness, but the DIY attitude of the Twins blogosphere is really what makes it terrific, and I suspect there were more analytical ways to make your point than simply name-dropping professionals in front of John’s amateurism. Oi.

  • Chamoman

    Agreed with the above couple of posters: I appreciate your knowledge and the podcast, but the grading system argument WAS a low point. It made you both sound a unprepared and unprofessional.

    I think you can make the podcast even better by changing the confrontational nature of your arguments and being a little more circumspect in your attacks. Or at least remember to take your nap.

    Sorry for the bummer of a post.

  • robbiefuntime
  • David

    I view John as the perfect host– laughs at the lame jokes, not defensive even when most would be, asks good questions, doesn’t make the co-host look bad, never embarrassing to listen to, progresses the conversation without dead air.

    Aaron is the higher upside guy, a good sense of humor, good analysis. But, Robbie Inkmicowski could still teach a few things.