Top 100 Countdown: Number 64 Logan Verrett (Baylor)

Athletics mugs - head shots - 09/02/2008. Baseball  – Logan Verrett The CBB continues our countdown for the 2010 College Baseball season by checking in on the Top 100 Players in the country. We will be providing one player per day until we reach number 1.

We continue the list today with number 64 in our countdown with Baylor sophomore RHP Logan Verrett. He is from Corpus Christi, Texas where he attended Calallen High School where he played under Steve Chapman.

He led the team to a 2008 Texas Class 4A state title and a number nine national ranking in the final Collegiate Baseball/Easton Sports rankings. His senior season of high school saw him dominate the competition with a record of 18-0 with a 0.67 ERA, 167 strikeouts, 12 complete game and three shutouts. He was also good at the plate with a .455 average with seven home runs, 33 RBI and 46 runs scored. He received several awards including 2008 MaxPreps All-American, 2008 EA Sports All-American,  2008 Texas Sports Writers Association Class 4A Player of the Year and first-team all-state pitcher selection while also earning second-team TSWA all-state honors at third base. He wasn’t selected out of high school as his commitment to Baylor was so strong.

Verrett appeared in 20 games (five starts) as he was primarily used out of the bullpen. He finished the season with a 7-1 record including three saves and a 5.13 ERA LoganVerrettBaylor during 54.1 innings of work. His biggest issue last season was the fact that opponents hit at a .329 average. He was solid at striking out batters with 64 for an average of 1.18 per inning pitched. Verrett had a solid summer where he played for the Chatham Anglers of the Cape Cod Baseball League. He went a perfect 2-0 with a 3.09 ERA in five appearances (four starts). He struggled with his control this summer as he walked 16 in 23.1 innings but ended up striking out 32 batters. Baseball America rated him the 22nd best pro prospect in the league.

If Verrett can become a more polished pitcher and get more consistent in throwing strikes, he can challenge Gerrit Cole for the top spot in the 2011 MLB Draft. We believe that Verrett will be able to find his game this season and become a solid starter in the Baylor rotation.

Here is some video of Verrett from his start against Houston on February 22nd 2009. The video is courtesy of Texas Leaguers.

You can check out the rest of our Top 100 by clicking here.

  • waltgreenberg

    Brian, this selection says it all. You’re ranking a guy the 64th best COLLEGE player based on a very mediocre Freshman campaign (and that’s being kind in one’s evaluation) and a solid, but far from great four starts in The Cape this past Summer? PLEASE! Does he have the tools and potential to be a Top 3 rounds draft pick in two years? Yeah, I suppose….but how in the world does a guy like this crack your Top 65 college players list?

  • Scott

    Walt, Lets be easy, it isn’t like we are talking top 20 here. Logan was a top prospect out of high school and did well in a top summer league (which you have to admit the Cape is one of the top leagues). If we were saying that he was number 25, your outrage might be warranted. But really, can you provide the exact name of who you think might be the 65th player in the country. These are discussion points, so talk about Logan and your thoughts on him as a player and don’t worry so much about the list as numbers.

  • waltgreenberg

    Scott, pick any number? Based on what Verrett has done so far in COLLEGE, I’m hard pressed to understand why/how he’d be on a Top 200 listing. Seriously. And while he had a quality ERA at the Cape this Summer, he average a walk an IP, which does not cut it at any level. Again, if Brian want to call this a Top 100 prospect listing, then fine…but he insists on calling it a Top 100 listing of current college players…and Verrett has done absolutely nothing in his college career to warrant serious consideration for placement anywhere on such a listing.

  • Scott

    Walt, you have to understand the landscape, though. This is college. You are never going to have a long track record of players, because they have 4 years max. Strasburg was 1-3 after his freshman year, but he started to make his way onto some top player lists because of what he showed and how he did in the summer. You have to go a little on potential, or else you won’t truly know who to look at. Don’t you think that Gerrit Cole should be somewhere on this list? Well, he went 4-8 with a 3.48. But you can’t tell me that he shouldn’t be somewhere on this list. The idea is that he will improve. Sometimes we will get it right, sometimes it will be wrong. That is half the fun. But if you are only worried about what they have done so far, we are probably going to miss a lot of players that people should have their eyes on and be talking about them after they have been drafted, which is kind of antithetical to a COLLEGE baseball blog.

  • waltgreenberg

    You’re now comparing Gerrit Cole’s Freshman year at UCLA with Verrett’s year at Baylor? PLEASE! Of course, Cole deserves to be on the list– based on BOTH potential and performance. How many Freshman pitchers are weekend starters from the get-go for Top 50 caliber programs and post ERAs below 3.50 (or 4.00, for that matter). Let’s see — last year you had the guy from UVA, the guy from CSF, Taylor Wall (Rice) and the two Bruins. There may be a couple others, but those are the ones that pop out top of my head.

    Again, if this was a listing of top PRO prospects, I could fully understand Brian’s ranking system. However, when he calls it a Top 100 countdown of COLLEGE players, he should not be giving greater weight to one’s high school career and potential draft status than to one’s D-I college results to date. I’m not saying it is not appropriate to factor in draft potential and Summer League performance, but these should not be trumping actual college performance.

    Again, Verrett’s Freshman stats were run of the mill– no better than average– for a college pitcher– and that’s true when looking across the board at all pitching stats…and despite his 3-0 record in the pitching-friendly Cape Cod League, he did not have an exceptional Summer; not with his very signficant control issues. Based on this, why would anyone think he’s suddenly going to blossom into a Top 100 caliber college pitcher this season; especially with Coach Smith’s woeful recent track record for developing elite high school players?

  • Scott

    Walt, take the pill man. I didn’t compare Cole and Verrtt’s season. I said that Cole, based solely on performance would not be high on the list, but the potential he showed in high school and what he showed last year would definitely make him top 20. For Verrett, I think the potential he showed in his freshman year, when he came on strong towards the end, and in high school would merit his inclusion at this point in the list. Your argument for Cole actually strengthens mine on Verrett’s inclusion. Yes, Verrett’s overall numbers were run of the mill, but his improvement over the year showed that he was acclimating well to the College game. If you actually watched him in a game, you could see he was getting it. He made some hitters look absolutely silly at times last year, and then he also had so moments where he blew up (Texas in the Big 12 tourney, but that could be said about a lot of pitchers). Remember, this is relative. We are talking about number 65. If Verrett moves into the weekend rotation as expected this year, gets 10 wins, I think this is a good landing point. If he doesn’t, you get to come back and tell Brian how crazy he was. But don’t fault Brian for making a list.

  • waltgreenberg

    See, Scott, that’s where we disagree. If Verrett starts, as expected, and gets 7+ wins, he deserves to be on NEXT year’s Top 100 countdown list; not this year’s version. Going into the 2010 season, he is nowhere near one of the Top 100 players. Not even close. That does not mean if doesn’t have the potential to be a top college player…but if this list is going to be based on potential alone, then call it something else.

    I’ll make a bet with you and Brian right now– Taylor Wall will compile better across the board stats in his Sophomore season than Verrett does, and I’m betting Wall got absolutely no consideration by Brian for his Top 100 countdown (since he’s not viewed as a Top 3 round pro prospect)?

  • Scott

    Walt,
    I can’t speak for Brian, but I wouldn’t see Wall and Verrett as being that far apart. In fact, I would probably say that they are equal coming out of the college season last year, and so summer numbers would be the tie-breaker. In this case, I would probably put Wall slightly ahead of Verrett based on how productive he has been at different levels. At the same time, pure stuff-wise, I think Verrett has the edge. So in a list like this, how is the decision made? Taylor Jungmann had comparable numbers to Mike Leake last year. If Leake were coming back, who would you rank ahead of the other? I would put Jungmann ahead because his stuff seems to indicate that he will develop into a better pitcher, though Leake’s production is solid and he has great stuff. We have to remember the number of hairs we are splitting when we are talking about rating the top 100 out of thousands of players. Do I think that Verrett is top 100 at the end of last year? No. At the end of the summer, after kids have decided to come and go and seeing some kids develop? Possibly.

  • waltgreenberg

    Scott, that’s the rub I have with Brian. I have no problem with taking tools and potential into consideration of such a listing, but Brian appears to put 75+% of the weight in his rankings on potential and pro projectability, and no more than 25% on actual college performance to date.

    Regarding your comments on Verrett vs. Wall, I would say Verrett has a significant edge in terms of projectability and pro potential, largely due to his low-to-mid 90s heater. The scouting community loves that. Wall tops out only in the high 80s on his fastball, though he does have good movement and location with it, with his “out” pitch being his very deceptive changeup, which is one of the best in college ball at the moment. However, as with most Rice pitchers, Wall is a pitcher’s pitcher much more than simply a thrower– he excels at keeping batters off-balance by changing speeds and moving the ball to both sides of the plate. Consequently, he’s never going to amass the lofty strikeout totals, but he is a very effective college pitcher, and if his final 5 starts of last season are any indication, he’s only going to get better. (Given the injuries to Berry and Ojala last year, Wall was actually forced to pitch through the middle third of the season with a sore arm.)

    But, again, you may consider Varrett and Wall on par going into this season, but my guess is that Brian doesn’t have Wall in his Top 100….and that’s the crux of my issue with his listing; not that Wall is not there (I doubt I’d have Taylor in my Top 100 listing), but that Verrett IS there and ranked relatively highly based purely on potential, without having proven himself in the slightest yet at the D-I level.

  • Toby Ziegler

    I believe Walt has a valid point here. A lot of players on this list so far may have the tools to be great, but haven’t actually put it all together yet. To me, that’s disconcerting.

    IMO, this list should mostly be composed of players who are established and proven, not players who have yet to realize their potential because the fact of the matter is they may never realize their potential.

    One trend I’ve noticed is that a lot of players on this list were drafted out of high school only to go on and be quite ordinary at the D-I level.

    There’s really no good reason to have anyone on this list who can’t hit above .300 and yet there are a handful. I recall one or two guys who weren’t too far from the Mendoza Line. That’s really pushing it.

    Normally, I wouldn’t put so much emphasis on BA, but if you can’t hit for a decent average WITH A METAL BAT at the collegiate level, I don’t care how much speed or raw power you may have. You will not be successful at the next level.

  • http://thecollegebaseballblog.com Brian Foley

    Yet, Daniel Bard who everyone here would consider a solid MLB pitcher had these numbers in his college career. Far from OUTSTANDING!

    Freshman: 8-4 record 3.88 ERA
    Sophomore: 7-5 record 4.55 ERA
    Junior: 8-3 record 3.47 ERA

    Here are the honors Bard had heading into his Junior campaign.

    • 2006 Baseball America Preseason All-America
    • 2006 Collegiate Baseball Preseason All-America
    • 2006 Baseball America Preseason All-ACC
    • 2006 SEBaseball.com Preseason All-ACC
    • 2006 Roger Clemens Award Watch List
    • No. 4 Junior Prospect (Baseball America)

    Was he really worth those accolades before the season? Did he live up to them? You decide

    That is just one example of a pitcher who wasn’t the greatest thing since sliced bread in college and is on the way to being a MLB closer if the Red Sox or another team trades for him give him a chance to do it.

  • waltgreenberg

    Thank you, Brian, for reinforcing my point and confirming my suspicions all along. Daniel Bard was a very good college pitcher on an elite team– far superior to many of the guys you have included on your list (including Verrett)…but your argument above is that he’s well on his way to being a solid MLB pitcher….and that, somehow, justifies them making such a list. Sorry, but that’s wrong. Whether or not a player develops into a quality MLB player has absolutely no bearing on how good he was in college. Hey, this is your list, but if you’re going to base it on potential and pro projectability far more than proven college talent, then you really should be calling it your Top 100 prospect list; NOT your Top 100 count down of COLLEGE players. They are two very, VERY different things.

  • BKMHOXX (Aman Reaka)

    Verrett is a stud and I would expect him to have a very good year this year.

  • Adam

    Despite Walt’s (or should I call him “the father of some kid Verrett struck out in high school”) criticism, Verrett was solid his freshman year and will end up being a top pro prospect going into next season. #64 is right about where I would put him right now, and I expect him to crack the top 10 at this point next season.

  • http://www.eiupanthers.com/news/2009/12/1/BSB_1201092718.aspx?path=baseball Toby Ziegler

    In what world is a .329 BAA solid? This kid got rocked.

    • http://thecollegebaseballblog.com Brian Foley

      And he still had a 5.13 ERA after being rocked a couple of times. His stats were very inflated with a couple of bad outings while being outstanding in some. He just needs to be more consistent.

  • waltgreenberg

    And, Brian, you can say that about some 200 college pitchers…and I’m not exaggerating. One doesn’t pitch to a season-long .329 BAA simply because he was “rocked a couple times”. Who are you kidding? Yes, he might have pitched “a couple” outstanding outings, but with that ERA, BAA and WHIP, the bad significantly outnumbered the good. To rank him as a Top 64 college pitcher is a joke; let alone Top 100 college player. And, again, this has absolutely nothing to do with whether he will be viewed by the scouting community as a “top prospect”. A Top 100 COLLEGE player should reflect what the player had done to date at the college level.

  • BKMHOXX (Aman Reaka)

    Ok so an incoming freshmen should never make a top 500 list then?
    So i guess Bryce Harper sucks. Too bad. I thought he was good.

    I personally think a list should be a mixture of what you HAVVE DONE and what the person making the list thinks this person WILL DO THIS COMING YEAR or in the future.

    Verrett is going to be a very good pitcher barring injury.

  • waltgreenberg

    Aman, a Top 100 listing of college players should be based on a combination of what a player had done at the D-I level to date and what one expects him to do this coming season based on potential, natural player development/progression, Summer League play and other considerations…and the weighing system should be distributed evenly between the two. Pro projectability and how you think the player will do 2 – 3 years in the future should be given absolutely no consideration in such a listing. The problem I have with Brian’s ranking is that he gives almost no consideration to actual D-I performance and track record (his proven ability at the college level), and instead has based his ranking almost entirely on potential, tools, scouting community perception and pro projectability. That’s a prospect listing; not a listing of top COLLEGE players…and the two are very, VERY different lists.

    Taking nothing away from Verrett’s potential– and we all know the scouting community loves him because he throws a mid-to-upper 90s fastball– but that does not necessarily translate to a top college career. And the reality is that Verrett had a pedestrian Freshman season, and lagged considerably behind a number of other fellow Freshman pitchers (based on across-the-board stats) who clearly are not going to make Brian’s list. Yes, Verrett has potential, but it’s not as if Baylor and Coach Smith have a stellar reputation for pitcher/player development and getting the most out of his players.

    Perhaps next year, after a strong Sophomore season, Verrett will warrant inclusion in a Top 100 college player countdown….but based on his Freshman season, he does not; especially when one considers all the superior college pitchers (to date) that Brian will not be including in his list.