Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

Baseball America’s 2005 Prospect Handbook has just been published and to coincide with its publication Jim Callis, Baseball America’s Executive Editor, agreed to step into Da Box for some prospect chat. Baseball America’s Prospect Handbook ranks the top 30 prospects for each major league team, 900 players in total, and is a “must-have” book for minor league fans. Subscribers to BA’s web site have been able to read scouting reports on the Blue Jays top ten prospects but you have to buy the book to read about numbers eleven through thirty.

The Prospect Handbook ranks minor league farm systems from one through thirty and in 2004 the Blue Jays were ranked at number eight. This year the Jays have dropped to number fifteen. The Handbook describes how organizations are ranked based on impact players and prospect depth. Most top prospect lists don’t have any Blue Jay prospects in the top 50 which supports the “lack of impact players” argument. On the other hand the depth of the Jays system appears to be very good, eight of the Jays top ten prospects are playing at AAA or AA. In addition the Jays number eleven prospect, Gabe Gross, is arguably better than many other teams sixth, seventh or eighth prospects.

The first question to Jim then was why number fifteen? Jim had the answer. “I don’t look at it being an equal balance between depth and impact because, ultimately, when you are talking about winning in the big leagues you win with impact players. Depth is nice to have and is important for filling in holes or using in trades. That is why the Blue Jays rank fifteenth. I agree their depth would rank higher than fifteenth and they have a nice group of solid type players but when you think of Carlos Delgado, who could hit 40 home runs a year, or Roy Halladay, they don’t have those high impact players. That is not a knock at their system, fifteenth is still good and to be honest the difference between fifteen and eight is not a huge wide gulf, but what the system lacks now is the true impact players that were a trademark of the Blue Jays system in the past.”

Baseball America is currently revealing their top one hundred prospects for 2005 and the Jays have three players ranked in the top 100: Aaron Hill is at number 64; Brandon League at number 69; and Guillermo Quiroz at number 79. Three Blue Jay prospects in the upper half of the list, and none in the top 60, supports BA’s organizational ranking. Although Jim did not say so, impact players are usually in the top 3 to 5 prospects for a team, so the organization rankings are based in the most part, on the quality of a teams top 3 to 5 prospects.

The Blue Jays feature many pitchers among their top prospects, and with pitchers progress being more unpredictable could this have lowered the Blue Jays rating? “Not so much”, Jim replied, “you just have to look at the pitchers on a case by case basis.”

Jim then ran through a snapshot of the Jays top prospects to support his case.

Brandon League, maybe he is a closer, I like him, I see a guy with a great arm but he hasn’t blown away minor league hitters.

Francisco Rosario, I like him too, he has a good arm but has been hurt a lot.

David Purcey, like his arm too, but he has been very inconsistent in his college career.

Dustin McGowan has injury issues.

You don’t discount guys because they are pitchers but you go down the list and it’s hard to say there is a slam dunk number one or number two starter.”

Jim then turned to the hitters.

“I like Aaron Hill, good solid all-round player, I am not sure he is a guy you build your club around.

Guillermo Quiroz, good arm, some power in his bat, also not the best batting average or on-base guy.

Russ Adams, I like him, I see a solid major league player, more of a second base than a shortstop, but is he an all-star? But if you are looking for a guy to build your championship club around I am not sure if any of those guys fit the bill.”

Jim has given us a very clear explanation of the approach BA takes to prospect lists and rankings. Most Blue Jay fans would acknowledge that the Jays have few minor league stars in their organization, but the Jays make up for it in quantity. As Jim points out, quality is much more important than quantity to BA.

In 2005 the Jays had four minor league teams make the playoffs and, with the exception of Syracuse, all teams were strong. Some of the strength at the lower levels can probably be attributed to the Jays drafting of college players but organizational strength is not a valuable metric for BA’s rankings. “ For talent rankings we don’t look at it that much, when you draft a lot of college players you have a lot of 22 and 23 year old players, I don’t have numbers in front of me but I have to think that at low A, and High A the Jays had some of the older teams,” he said.

Drafts, JP and Development

The Blue Jays have had three drafts under the Ricciardi leadership, and the system appears to be deeper now, how does BA think the scouts have done? “They have brought good talent in and we did rank their 2002 draft as the best in baseball,” said Jim, “David Bush and Russ Adams have already made the big leagues, but you have to wait two or three years to really evaluate a draft.”

Jim went on to draw some historical parallels. “I did a draft study for BA for our college versus high school story, where I looked at the first ten rounds of the draft from 1990 to 1997, and the Blue Jays had brought in more talent than any other team. I think that’s a tough standard to live up to. Under Pat Gillick and Gord Ash they drafted high impact, high school players such as Halladay, Delgado, Stewart and Rios. The biggest difference is the new regime looks exclusively at college players and they are safer picks, and you have a better chance of getting some return on your investment, and you get a quicker return on your investment, but you lose the upside. You have a solid system but it’s more apt to plug holes than to generate stars that carry the team. I am not going to rip the new regime, and I like their system, but I think that is the big weakness right now.”

How does Jim evaluate the job JP has done so far? “I think it is very tough for JP to come in like he did and be told he has to slash payroll. I think in the next couple of years he has more financial freedom and he has more depth of prospects, and if he wants to he can trade two or three prospects for a big ticket guy some team is trying to unload. I will be honest when he first came in and made some trades and traded Billy Koch and made those other moves I thought the moves made sense, and even last year his moves made some sense and although I didn’t think the Jays were going to overtake the Red Sox and Yankees but I thought on paper the team looked pretty good. I don’t think it’s fair to second guess someone when I agreed with the moves in the first place, it’s not like he gave a $12 million contract to some guy who stunk.”

“I thought Hentgen was cheap, and I thought Phelps would be better and I though Batista would pitch better and I wasn’t alone, the Jays were a dark horse team this time last year. I don’t think they are any contracts handcuffing them on the roster now.” Jim continued to be supportive, with a touch of humour. “He has had tough decisions to make and he made them, and I know he will rest easy knowing I agree with him.”

Drafts have been evaluated in BA and in Batters Box, but player development between the draft and the major leagues is a black hole and do organizations differ in their success after the players have been drafted? Jim believes that all organizations are not created equally but the results are very difficult to measure. “I know people credit the A’s because of Mulder, Zito and Hudson but they have had their share of arm injuries. Yes it does make a difference, the Braves have been successful in developing young high school arms but other organizations haven’t. Look at Carlos Delgado or Vernon Wells. How much of that talent was there when they were signed or how much credit do you give to player development? It used to be the Red Sox had a bad reputation but they developed Clemens and Boggs during that time. On the other hand there are probably some players whose careers were ruined because they could not help them grow or their arm were blown out.”

Jim knows of one team that tried to understand this better. “I know the Red Sox did a study of minor league coaches and how players improved under their watch for the year. No one knows what they found but it is hard to reach a conclusion.”

Jim mentioned a funny angle. “When an organization goes bad, and they have a bad farm system, and you ask the scouting side, they say we brought in good players, they just screwed them up in development. Then the coaching staff will say we’ve done our best, we can’t do anything with these guys.”

Blue Jay Prospects

Jim provided some Baseball America perspective on several Blue Jay prospects.

“The hardest guys for me to evaluate are players such as Brandon League, great stuff, tremendous velocity, good movement, but he has never struck out more than a hitter an inning. If you look at his stuff you say he could be a closer but it bothers me when guys don’t blow away hitters in the minor leagues. But pitchers can always change so you can never be sure.”

Gustavo Chacin has better hit rate than League but looking at his stuff you would never guess it. His best pitch is his cutter that doesn’t blow guys away, it just gets them to hit ground balls. Chacin, given that it was his fourth year of AA, and given the lack of a true out pitch, could be more of a reliever than a starter.”

“We have Jamie Vermilyea at number 21, wondering realistically what his role is, great strikeout to walk ratio, not the hardest guy to hit, sinker, slider, curveball, cutter. His movement and control are his best attributes, doesn’t have a true out pitch, and because of that he won’t be a closer, or a starter.”

Gabe Gross was ranked number eleven, it was a case where there were other guys we liked more. It is not an exact science, you could take him over Chacin or Banks and some would. The issue is whether he will show the power the Jays expected. He has a habit of getting ahead in the count and it almost looked like he was looking to walk, he has to show more power.”

Jason Arnold did not make the list.“

John Ford Griffin was close to the bottom. When Griffin was drafted by the Yankees it looked like a great pick for them. He realistically will be a left fielder at best, more likely a DH, and has not hit well enough, although last year he hit for more power but struck out a lot. He is an interesting guy, when he was drafted stats guys liked him but tools guys weren’t as convinced, and looks like tools guys won that one.”

John Hattig is also down towards the bottom of our list and I have evaluated the Red Sox (for the Prospect Book) for a number of years and I am familiar with him. I don’t see him as a third baseman, he is probably not as good as Hinske at third, but when you put him at first you need more hitting from him. I see him as a bench player, might not hit enough to play every day, but considering they got him for Terry Adams it was a good pickup. “

“We had Yuber Rodriguez at number twelve, he is tough to rank because if you look at pure ceiling he might be the best power, speed guy in the system but he is the farthest away.”

Vito Chiarravalloti, Ron Davenport, Raul Tablado, Miguel Negron, I am not sure if any of those guys are big league regulars. I know the FSL has big parks but for Vito to hit fourteen homers at age 23 in High A, you have to do better than that for a first baseman. Davenport did well but you have to repeat it. Negron might have had the best year of his career but would have to do more than that to keep going up. Tablado did have a nice year, K/BB ratio was not great, you wonder if it could be exploited at higher levels. All those guys need to get better, some guys you say they need to maintain their performance but these guys need to get better.”

The ranking of Yuber Rodriguez at number twelve, right behind Gabe Gross, shows how the BA lists are put together. As Jim stated Yuber has a big upside, but Yuber played in rookie ball as a 20 year old this year and is ranked just behind a player who had 129 at-bats in the big leagues. As Jim stated it all comes back to potential.

The Baseball America Top Prospect List

The BA list has Michael Levesque’s name on it, but how much of a role does Michael have compared to the rest of the editorial staff at BA? “Michael does the leg work, he will talk to people in the system, scouts and others outside the system. Some organizations will tell you their internal rankings others won’t, I am not sure how much direction the Jays people gave Michael. Michael puts together his list then John Manuel and I review it and give feedback to Michael. We could say “what about this guy over that guy”, or “I like this guy better than that guy”. Michael does most of the work and we make suggestions.”

As was noted at the top the Prospect Handbook is now shipping. If you order the book directly from BA the book should be shipped right away. If you want to order from Amazon you can reduce your shipping cost (free if you buy another book to bring your order to $39) but the book will take longer to get to you. The book will also be available soon in major bookstores.

A huge Batters Box thank you to Jim Callis. His explanations provided excellent insight into how Baseball America puts together their top prospect lists and how they approach ranking the Blue Jay’s system. Don’t forget to buy the book!

Finally remember that top prospect lists cannot foretell how a prospect will perform once he faces major league opposition. The Blue Jays and their fans hope that the Blue Jays depth of prospects develop into impact players at the major league level.

An Interview with Baseball America's Jim Callis | 21 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Mike Green - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 11:52 AM EST (#104176) #
Thank you to Jim Callis for his thoughtful comments.

My well-thumbed 1998 Stats Inc. Scoreboard book contains numerous fine analytical pieces by him. He also published home/road stats for Quiroz and Rios in 2003, which were not widely available. All of which is to say that the line between "pure tools" analysis and "pure performance" analysis is indeed blurred. One can see it in his balanced assessment of League.

I would like to hear what he thinks of Banks and Marcum, but I guess I'll just have to buy the book. That seems fair!
Mylegacy - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 11:55 AM EST (#104177) #
I live for this stuff. Good interview.

BA is the BIBLE, IMO. What they really look for is the level the guy is at and his performance vs. his age at that level. I've subscribed to BA since the 80's and they are mostly interested in the Yuber's of the world.

JP's approach is not their cup of tea. It will remain to be seen over the next three years as his drafties come up if he's our cup of tea.

Personally, I like JP's program and like Callis I agreed with most of JP's decisions. Who'da thunk that Adams, Lightenberg and Speier would yield so little given their records.

Can't wait for my BA Prospects guide to arrive. Living on Vancouver Island it seems to me I'm always the last person in the world to get theirs.
Mick Doherty - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 02:54 PM EST (#104205) #
I'd love to ask a followup question to "Jason Arnold did not make the list."

Why not?

And I don't mean that flippantly, I mean it genuinely. Why not?
Ryan B. - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 03:05 PM EST (#104209) #
I've never read a BA book, but this seems like an interesting one to consider. Can someone tell me who the top ranked prospect in all of baseball is?
Jordan - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 03:16 PM EST (#104212) #
Jason Arnold wouldn't make my list right now either. He'll turn 26 in May and has done nothing to impress anyone above Double-A (his K/9 in limited Syracuse time last year was a ghastly 3.7). His work ethic has been implictly questioned from within his own organization (cf. our most recent interviww with Dick Scott). He's a nice guy and all, but I no longer expect him to contribute to the organization at the major-league level.
Mick Doherty - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 03:27 PM EST (#104214) #
Jordan, yeah, that's about what I would've expected from BA, too. But I guess my question wasn't so much about Arnold specifically, but him as an example of "walk us through why someone doesn't make the list."

We get lots of generalities and assumpions when lists are made, but I think it's instructive to hear specifics on why a certain guy *didn't* make it, providing further context around those who did.

The rest is just our speculation.
Andrew K - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 06:22 PM EST (#104234) #
Very interesting to read this, not least because it parallels my own (thoroughly inexpert) fears about the Jays system. I've been trying to figure out how many prospects a team actually *needs* (i.e. how many can reasonably help the parent club), but my thinking is only half-assed at the moment. But the conclusion, I expect, will be that depth is over-rated.

Sure, you might be able to trade two or three mid-level prospects for a star prospect, or for a highly-paid major leaguer from a team looking to dump salary. But the former seems unlikely, because other teams know that star prospects are so valuable (certain GMs notwithstanding). And the latter requires payroll; while we feel flush with cash at the moment, it will quickly be used up if the core of the team isn't cheap.

It's very hard to see our prospects in an unbiased light; the tendency to overvalue your own (and undervalue other teams') is extremely hard to avoid. Realistically, where are the all-stars coming from?

To put it unfairly and brutally: who cares if we can find a dozen marginal major leaguers, bench-warmers, middle relievers, and number 4 & 5 starters? Even solid-but-not-great regulars and some number 3 starters?

I'm not sure that I believe that The Program is on track. I haven't for some time, ever since I started to look at other teams' farm systems. I confess my heresy. And I would be delighted to be wrong.

(BTW I wouldn't want to confuse this issue with the college/high school issue, which may be entirely separate and is certainly not the root of it.)
R Billie - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 07:14 PM EST (#104237) #
I wouldn't be surprised by Arnold not making the list but perhaps mildly surprised at him not making the Top 30 at all. I guess this speaks well of the Jays' depth. I became concerned for Arnold in his first AAA exposure when it became clear his command wasn't as good as what I had assumed it to be and while he started 2004 better his performance overall was still not what one would expect from a guy expected to help the major league club.

From a certain standpoint I understand Baseball America's valuation of quality over quantity. At the same time it's very hard to project just how well that 20 year who today looks like a future all-star outfielder or ace pitcher will actually do in the major leagues.

Brett Myers for instance was one of the highest rated righthanders in the minors. While he's still relatively young we have not yet seen performance out of him after a couple of big league seasons that would merit that label. Which doesn't mean he couldn't break out at any time but he could also become the next Kris Benson.

David Bush in the meantime was conservatively ranked on prospect lists all the way and flew through the system and made an immediate positive impact in his first go around despite the supposed lack of a true out pitch.

The reality is that no-one knows for sure on any one prospect what the future holds. Russ Adams may not be an All-Star but if he provides Catalanatto's bat from shortstop for very low dollars over the next four to six years the Blue Jays will be thrilled with him.

Where I do agree with Jim is that impact and star level players must exist somewhere on the roster for a team to really compete. And if this isn't coming from the farm it had better come from trades and free agency. And this is one area where the Jays have to start producing more from which will be made easier with the increased budget.
R Billie - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 07:33 PM EST (#104238) #
I'm going to pull another example out of my cap. I'm not really wearing one but I will pretend that I am.

I remember just a couple of years ago the San Francisco farm system was much ballyhooed because of the depth of impact pitchers they had. Jesse Foppert, Jerome Williams, Kurt Ainsworth, Boof Bonser, Francisco Liriano, among others in the upper levels of the farm system. This alone was enough to give them star marks.

Two years later what have these players produced? Two have been traded for players that briefly contributed to the team and are no longer there while one is in the rotation but still has a lot of maturing to do while perhaps the "surest" of the three has been hurt and has yet to be productive in any role.

For those who say who cares whether we produce solid players or #3 starters on a consistent basis, I offer you that it can be just as good to get something decent for a low price more often as it is to get something better for a low price less often. If Adams is a "solid" player then that's $3 to $5 million the Jays won't have to spend on a "solid" veteran shortstop. If David Bush is a #3 pitcher then that's $6 to $8 million the Jays won't have to spend on the free agent market for a #3 pitcher as so many other teams have done just this year.

That doesn't seem like an I don't care scenario to me. That seems like a scenario that gives you a significant advantage in putting together a ballclub. Obviously anyone sane would like their minor league system to be full of impact players. But if your scouting and signing budget is fixed year to year then you adopt a system which helps you do the most with what you have.

It's ridiculously early to make any estimates about the drafting system. None of the 2002 draft players have even played a full year in the majors yet. But it DOES look like they have arrived at the majors ready to play in make an impact in short order and that is worth something to a major league team. It will have been 5 or 6 years since Rios' draft date before the Jays see above average performance out of him. I'm not saying that's a bad thing; but I'm saying there's a tradeoff.
greenfrog - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 07:34 PM EST (#104239) #
The Jays' ranking was undoubtedly affected by all the injuries (and subpar performances) in the minors last year. Before 2004, commentators couldn't say enough good things about the Jays' system--that is, until at least three top prospects were hit by injuries (or slow recoveries from injuries): McGowan, Quiroz, Rosario.

If even one of these had been healthy and posted strong numbers in 2004, the Jays would probably rank a few places higher. Let's say one of these three had excelled in 2004. That would mean that between last year and this year, the major league club would have added Rios, Adams, and Bush (2004), along with League, McGowan/Quiroz/Rosario, and possibly Hill/Gross/Chacin (2005).
Mylegacy - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 09:09 PM EST (#104242) #
To R Billie & Greenfrog; right on bro's!

Assuming you're both of the male persuasion. Gotta make sure I'm PC.
sweat - Wednesday, March 02 2005 @ 09:31 PM EST (#104243) #
I'm actually getting sick of some of the one dimensional analysis of pitching prospects. While I have no doubt that strikeout rate is a good indicater for a lot of pitchers, it doesnt always tell the story. Low walks + low strikeouts + many many groundballs can also be a very good thing.
jmoney - Thursday, March 03 2005 @ 03:10 PM EST (#104288) #
Just to add. (As my first post)

I recall J.P. admitting he liked some of the high ceiling prospects when he took over the team but admitted the depth of talent in AAA, and in overall pitching talent in the minors was lacking.

So he's spent the last few drafts trying to get improve the overall depth of the system and I think he has. (I mean New Hampshire won the championship basically on the backs of actual prospects)

Now this draft will be interesting for me. We are drafting high and it will be interesting to see if J.P. goes for the guy with the most talent even if he is a high schooler.

If BA thinks this organization lacks a high impact prospect then I think the first round pick of this upcoming draft is the time to get one.
Mike Green - Thursday, March 03 2005 @ 03:39 PM EST (#104291) #
Andrew K, pitching prospects are very different from position prospects. The success rate for a Grade A pitching prospect is much lower than for a Grade A hitting prospect, whereas the opposite is true for Grade D. Dave Bush would properly have been a Grade B after 2003, as Shaun Marcum or Josh Banks would be after 2004. Bob Gibson was a Grade B when he was in double A.

Having Banks, Rosario, McGowan, Gaudin, Marcum, Ismael Ramirez, Vermilyea and Chacin (all of whom are arguably Grade B prospects) fairly close to the majors is a very good strategy for developing a pitching staff. The odds that all of them will be fine pitchers is very low, but 2 or 3 would be about par.

It's a completely different story for the hitters. Having 2 Grade A hitting prospects and one Grade B is probably a better position to be in for a team than to have 10 Grade Cs. Quiroz and Hill are not Grade A prospects, but probably Grade Bs (though subjectively I like Hill quite a bit). We'll see how they do this year.
Jordan - Thursday, March 03 2005 @ 03:39 PM EST (#104292) #
I think that the upcoming first-round pick can't help but be a high-ceiling prospect -- it's near-impossible to pick 6th and not get someone who can be a star. That's not to say it'll be someone who will be a star, of course -- as our previous articles have shown, the list of #6 overall picks is littered with never-weres and coulda-beens. But the Jays should have their choice of players with impact potential, and the signing bonus ought not to be a major factor.

What would be ideal, of course, would be to draft an impact college prospect -- someone who can be a star and who could arrive in the majors within a couple of years at the most. Someone like Alex Gordon (who may not be available, or who may not even be all that by the time the draft rolls around) would be a good example. The Jays can use the subsequent rounds to continue adding to their organizational depth and maybe pick up some promising high-school hitters later on.

HOOPLA - Thursday, March 03 2005 @ 03:47 PM EST (#104294) #
I just heard that Mike Galloway was released? Is this true?
Andrew K - Thursday, March 03 2005 @ 04:00 PM EST (#104299) #
Mike Green, I take your point about hitting vs pitching and prospect grades. I was thinking of something along those lines after I posted. I agree that it's quite healthy to have a good number of grade B/B- pitching prospects, some of whom are getting near the majors now. And I don't disagree that 2/3 of them will turn out as fine pitchers. But I wonder whether any will turn out as really good/great/ace pitchers. Far too many prospect reports seem to say "might be better in relief" of too many of our prospects (that's a subjective non-quantitative view).

It's hitting that I'm more worried about. I know you can buy it in, but not at 9 positions. Probably, with our payroll, only at 2/3. I don't believe, though I would be so delighted to be wrong, that either Quiroz or Hill (or Adams) will be above average major league regular hitters, although they have a good chance to be solid (probably one of them will, by law of averages). And beyond them, it looks thin.
Gerry - Thursday, March 03 2005 @ 04:12 PM EST (#104303) #
This years draft could be very interesting. It looks like Weaver, Townsend and Drew could go back into the draft. The Jays, with the sixth pick, get the benefit of looking at one of these guys, or, having another years #4 pick drop to them at #6. It should be a good pick, better than a typical #6.
Mike Green - Thursday, March 03 2005 @ 04:15 PM EST (#104305) #
Andrew K, I expect Aaron Hill to be an above average hitter. It wouldn't surprise me if one of the other two is, as well.

It's true that there are no Carlos Delgados in the system right now, but they don't come along every day.
R Billie - Thursday, March 03 2005 @ 05:23 PM EST (#104314) #
If we're talking about guys who will be above average for their <i>positions</i> then I think Hill, Adams, and Quiroz will be while Rios will probably be at least solid for his position. Even if Hill moves to third base down the line I can see him providing more power than he's shown so far and being a fine all-around hitter. Some scouts have compared him to Blalock and he's never going to be a 35-40 homer guy like Blalock appears to be but he could be a 20 homer, loads of doubles guy with better contact hitting. Something like a lesser version of Paul Molitor.

The only question I have about Adams is whether he will get his throwing game straightened out at shortstop. As a hitter I already have him penciled in as above average for the major leagues. We're not talking about a first tier guy who will challenge Tejada, Garciaparra, or Jeter. But we are talking about a guy who will be better than all of the middle of the road to poor shortstops out there.

As for Quiroz, once again you're not going to compare him to the stars like Posada, Rodriguez, Varitek, and Martinez. We're talking about some potential Hall of Fame players there. But in terms of a major league catcher who actually plays defence he still grades as a pretty good hitter with above average power and a touch of patience.

It will be interesting to see how Thigpen and Lind do this year as both of them appear to be solid players with Thigpen being above average if he continues to catch and Lind being "solid" for first base or the outfield. I suspect the Jays will get a pretty good hitter at #6 this year though it's a shame they don't have their 2nd round pick with the amount of depth apparently in this draft.
KNEEDEEP678 - Thursday, March 03 2005 @ 08:31 PM EST (#104323) #
I just read online that released Canadian LHP James Pidutti was recently claimed by powerhouse Rimini of the Italian Premier League Pro Circuit in Division Series A/1 in Italy. This is the best league outside of the Major Leagues and Japan. It's the best foreign league and Pidutti should have his hands full as his will compete against top notch players. I wonder if he can make his way back to affilated ball.
An Interview with Baseball America's Jim Callis | 21 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.