The International Olympic committee rejected a bid to reinstate baseball to
the 2012 London Olympics yesterday by a 46-42 vote. Though disappointed,
baseball officials have expressed hope that their sport can make it back in
2016. But the creation of the World Baseball Classic, even if it winds up
being nothing more than a glorified exhibition, makes Olympic baseball and
its lack of major leaguers even less relevant. I wonder if that will make it
more difficult to get baseball back into the Olympics.




         I was looking over the Diamondbacks Top 10 list again and really
         questioned why Conor Jackson was rated ahead of Carlos Quentin.
         When you look at the stats, Quentin wins in all of them except for
         batting average. I also read that Quentin is a good fielder and has
         an excellent work ethic. I know that Jackson has great pitch
         selection, but Quentin's is pretty good too. I'm not trying to take
         anything away from Jackson because he's a great player, but why was
         he rated ahead of Quentin?

         Rick Blenk
         Freeport, Maine


When I did our Triple-A Pacific Coast League Top 20 in the fall, I also put
Jackson ahead of Quentin. To quibble with Rick for a second, Quentin doesn't
best him in all the stats. Though Jackson hit just eight homers at Tucson,
his strikeout-walk ratio is clearly superior (69-32 to 72-71), a lot more
doubles (39 in 93 games versus 29 in 136) and, despite hitting just eight
homers, similar isolated power (.199 to .219). But statistics aren't the
reason I made that decision.

There's both an art and a science to prospect ranking, and in truth, in a lot
of cases, there's no single correct answer. Rick likes Quentin more than
Jackson and that's easily defensible. Quentin has a track record of hitting
throughout the minors, more established home run power at this point and more
defensive ability. Quentin should be a solid right fielder and may be an
adequate center fielder, while Jackson is just a first baseman.

But I think we'll ultimately judge both players on what they do at the plate,
and I think Jackson will be the more productive hitter of the two after
talking to several PCL managers and scouts. Jackson has an innate gift for
identifying the type and quality of a pitch seemingly as it leaves a
pitcher's hand, and I think he'll turn a lot of his doubles into homers as he
gets comfortable in the major leagues. One scout told me, "You get the
feeling he's going to get a hit every time up. There's not a pitch he can't
hit. He has great hand-eye coordination and great feel for the barrel of the
bat. He must have Superman vision or something."

Kevin Goldstein did our Arizona Top 10, and I asked him why he went with
Jackson over Quentin. Kevin said:

"When talking to scouts about them, more (but not an overwhelming majority)
preferred Jackson's bat. They thought both would be above-average major
leaguers at their position, but I found more people who saw Jackson as a
potential star."

And just to clarify, because this comes up from time to time, BA's prospect
lists reflect more than just the opinion of the writer (or of the team). John
Manuel and I go over the lists carefully and usually tinker with them.




         Last year in the Jered Weaver negotiations, the Angels called Scott
         Boras' bluff by refusing to meet his excessive demands. In the end,
         I believe that Boras realized that Weaver, just like Matt Harrington,
         wouldn't command the same signing bonus after sitting out a whole
         year, so they took the money. Do you get the sense that this is the
         Dodgers' thinking in the Luke Hochevar negotiations, or were they
         really put off by his backing out of the deal they reached on Labor
         Day? From Hochevar's perspective, does he or Boras believe that if
         they go back into the draft, they can get more than the $2.98 million
         that they left on the table?

         Gerardo Ruvalcaba
         Los Angeles


         You mentioned in the Jan. 26 Ask BA that you thought it unlikely
         that Luke Hochevar will sign with the Dodgers. Given the acrimony,
         I can't disagree. Assuming Hochevar doesn't sign, how much will
         that history taint his status in the 2006 draft? Will he still be
         considered at the top of the draft? If so, given what would appear
         to be minimal leverage (lest he reprise Matt Harrington's "career"),
         do you foresee him being a difficult sign?

         Tod Northman
         Portland, Ore.



I don't think the Dodgers are trying to call any bluff here. After Hochevar
switched agents to Matt Sosnick, he agreed to sign for $2.98 million on Labor
Day weekend, which would have been the fifth-highest bonus among 2005
draftees. Then Hochevar abruptly returned to Boras, reneged on the deal and
claimed that the Dodgers and scouting director Logan White were trying to
take advantage of him. At this point, Los Angeles has serious questions about
Hochevar's makeup, no desire to pay him more than $2.98 million (the club
left the offer on the table for a couple of weeks) and little desire to pay
him close to that amount.

I can't believe that Hochevar or Boras could think they're going to get more
than $2.98 million at this point. But even if they wanted to take the money
now (not that the Dodgers are offering it), it would be a sticky situation
for Boras. Sosnick almost certainly would file a grievance saying that he
negotiated the deal and should be entitled to the commission.

I also can't envision a scenario in which Hochevar will get the same money in
the 2006 draft. After not pitching in a meaningful game since June, he's
going to have to get on the mound in independent ball to show teams that the
layoff hasn't affected him. Indy ball may not have a lot of future major
league stars, but the caliber of hitting in a good league is roughly
equivalent to Double-A or Triple-A. There's no guarantee that Hochevar will
pitch well, and several clubs cooled on him right before the 2005 draft
because they thought his stuff was tailing off a bit. His dealings with the
Dodgers also have other teams wondering about his makeup.

It's too early to say where Hochevar will go in the 2006 draft with any
precision. Tod is correct in assuming that Hochevar would have minimal
leverage, though that didn't stop Boras from advising Harrington to turn down
a seven-figure big league contract from the Padres the year after his
negotiations with the Rockies went sour. Hochevar's draft status will depend
on how he fares against indy hitters and his signability. If he doesn't
perform well and/or is vague about his demands or still seeks a big league
contract, he could go lower than he did in 2005 (40th overall), when he was
considered the second-best starting pitcher available.

Even if Hochevar immediately regains his 2005 form, I can't see teams taking
him ahead of North Carolina's Andrew Miller or Daniel Bard, Missouri's Max
Scherzer or Southern California's Ian Kennedy unless he wants to cut a
below-slot deal, like Wade Townsend did as the No. 8 overall pick last June.




         How would you rank the following young third basemen: Miguel Cabrera,
         Edwin Encarnacion, Alex Gordon, Andy LaRoche, Andy Marte, Ian Stewart,
         David Wright, Ryan Zimmerman. Would you agree that third base could
         experience a golden age over the next 10 years that shortstop did in
         the late 1990s and early 2000s?

         Richard Newman
         Boston


This is also a flashback to the Jan. 26 Ask BA, when I was given my pick and
chose Wright over Zimmerman. There are a lot of impressive young third
basemen in the majors and minors these days, and third base may be the
strongest position (relative to its normal level of talent) on the diamond
right now.

Based on big league career value, I'd rate those players in this order:
Wright, Cabrera (headed back to the hot corner after spending most of 2005 in
left field), Gordon, Stewart, Marte, LaRoche, Zimmerman and Encarnacion. Just
to give you an indication of how strong that group is, I see Encarnacion as a
.280/20-homer hitter in the majors, and he comes in last. Gordon, Stewart,
Marte, LaRoche and Zimmerman all made my personal Top 50 Prospects list in
the 2006 Prospect Handbook, as did another third baseman, Brewers 2005
first-round pick Ryan Braun. Also watch out for the Dodgers' Blake DeWitt,
who should make a LaRoche-like leap in 2006.