When They Were Prospects

Over the last several years, the Yankees have garnered a reputation for taking on reclamation projects; however, that may not be quite accurate. What began with retreads like Bartolo Colon and Freddy Garcia has evolved into a more youth-based approach, with Didi Gregorius, Dustin Ackley, Aaron Hicks, and Starlin Castro being the most recent beneficiaries. A more accurate term may be ‘post-hype sleeper,’ which you are likely familiar with if you play fantasy sports. All four showed potential that pushed them into our consciousness before reached the show, and all four petered out at some point (for various reasons). And now? They’re all Yankees.

We have a full-season of Gregorius in pinstripes to ruminate on, so there’s no real need to revisit his history. Ackley, however, had all of 57 PA with the team last season and, exciting though they may be, is still a relative newcomer. And Hicks and Castro were the key acquisitions of the off-season (despite the awesomeness of Aroldis Chapman – though, there is more on him to come). An interesting pattern is revealed when you look at Ackley, Hicks, and Castro; and it becomes even more impressive when you include Chapman. Let’s take a quick look back at the 2010 pre-season prospect rankings, shall we?

This quartet represented elite prospect talent half a dozen years ago. To be fair, this is not wholly shocking; in fact, this was discussed multiple times when the Yankees acquired each player. What has been a bit lost in the shuffle, however, is just how good folk thought these players could be.

The Reds moved Chapman to the bullpen in his first professional season, but a couple of months earlier Kevin Goldstein (currently of the Astros, formerly with BP) felt that “if he throws more strikes and develops even just a usable changeup, he’s an ace in the making.” Most every source from the time believed that Chapman’s ability to hold his velocity deep into games would allow him to start long-term, and the term ‘ace’ was thrown around with gusto. There was skepticism, to be sure – but the talent was truly special. As of this writing, Chapman has started a grand total of 19 games; we never really did get a chance to see him as a starter … though it is tough to imagine him being anything other than a light’s out closer at this point.

Finding a defensive home for Ackley was always based on a bit of faith, but few questioned his offensive prowess. Sticking with Goldstein, “scouts are universal in seeing Ackley as a player who could compete for both batting and on-base percentage titles … he’s a lean, wiry, toolsy athlete with plus-plus speed, and he earns high praise for his makeup and baseball intelligence.” The Baseball America staff went a bit further, stating that he had “the best pure swing and pure bat in the ’09 draft class, and maybe the best this decade.” Were it not for the existence of Stephen Strasburg, Ackley may well have been the consensus top prospect in that draft.

The resume of Hicks wasn’t quite so lofty as Ackley’s, but some were throwing around comparisons to Curtis Granderson at the time (this, on the heels of Granderson batting .249/.327/.453 with 30 HR and 20 SB). Our old friend Mr. Goldstein wrote that “Hicks has the potential to be a five-tool monster. His athletic build shows plenty of raw power, he’s a plus runner who covers a ton of ground in center field, and he features one of the minor leagues’ best arms … he has a keen understanding of the strike zone and knows how to get himself into hitter’s counts.” Goldstein went on to say that he had 30/30 potential at his absolute best. Keith Law believed that “Hicks’ ceiling is one of the highest of any player in the low minors.”

And, finally, there’s Mr. Castro. Within a few months of these rankings being release, Castro was the starting shortstop for the Cubs; he’d finish his rookie season batting .300/.347/.408 in 506 PA. That batting average was right in-line with Goldstein’s scouting report, wherein he said “Castro certainly can hit. He has an instinctive knack for contact and rockets balls from line to line with regularity, projecting as a .300 hitter in the majors.” His hit tool has never really been in question; it’s always been a matter of approach. Interestingly, Goldstein also praised his defensive fundamentals, as well as his “smooth actions, soft hands, a quick transfer, and a plus arm.”

So what went wrong? If I knew the answer to that, I would probably be following in the footsteps of folk like Kevin Goldstein and Jason Parks.

I’m limited to informed guesswork, at best. Chapman struggled a bit as a starter in 2010, particularly with his control (4.11 ERA, 5.5 BB/9), and the Reds brought him up as a reliever to manage his innings … and never saw a reason to look back. Ackley was Marinered (the team’s track record with hitting prospects is dodgy at best, and Safeco Field doesn’t help). Hicks was always a raw talent, and he was rushed to the Majors (he initially skipped over Triple-A entirely). And Castro was too reliant on his natural hitting skills, and could not adjust to the adjustments made by pitchers; he never quite figured out a proper approach at the plate.

Is this a rosy way to look at this players? Probably. And yet that optimism is exactly why the Yankees took these chances (to be fair, including Chapman at this juncture is a bit unfair – he’s always been a stud reliever). Ackley, Hicks, and Castro are all still at least two years shy of their 30th birthday, and all have shown flashes at the big league level.

It is naive to expect greatness – but there’s a foundation here for something more than competence. And that alone is a reason for optimism.

Lead photo: Jerome Miron / USA TODAY Sports