Fantasy Baseball: Prospect call-up Nick Kurtz adds another potential stud to the first base ranks

It took Wyatt Langford 44 minor-league games to prove he belongs in the majors. It’s taken Nick Kurtz only 32.

So whatever enthusiasm we had for the fourth pick in the 2023 draft when we first learned he’d get the call last year we should also have the for the fourth pick in the 2024 draft now that he’s reportedly on the way up.

After all, Kurtz steamrolled the minors just as thoroughly, slashing .336/.432/.689 with 11 home runs across those 32 games. In his 20 games at Triple-A Las Vegas this year, he slashed .321/.385/.655 with seven home runs. With the sample being so small, we should probably take whatever data we can get, and to that end, I’ll also point out that he slashed .261/.452/.522 with two home runs in 31 plate appearances this spring, walking more times (seven) than he struck out (five). Bottom line is that every test thrown at Kurtz so far, brief though they’ve been, he’s passed with flying colors.

It’ll take some creativity getting him in the lineup with Tyler Soderstrom already emerging at first base for the Athletics, but they’ve expressed a willingness to get creative, trying DH Brent Rooker in the outfield again and even floating the idea of using Soderstrom at third base on occasion.

“The beauty of the process will be that we’re adding a bat that can have an impact in the lineup,” manager Mark Kotsay recently said. “How we do that is continually being discussed. But there’s opportunity for a rotation to happen between an outfield position, a DH position, a first base position. Possibly look at third base as using something that we can do. There’s a ton of options.”

If you’re looking for a comp, Matt Olson seems like a good place to start, and not just because Kurtz is another 6-foot-5 left-handed-hitting first baseman who’ll be donning the green and gold to begin his career. His power is prodigious, the sort the plays to all fields. His understanding of the strike zone is near the top of the scales. There’s potential for batting average as well, though I imagine he’ll strike out a little more against major-league pitching given his tendency to swing and miss on pitches in the zone, a trait he also shares with Olson. Clearly, the extent of his upside and evidence of his readiness makes him must-add regardless of format.

That’s the easy part.

What’s harder is how to add Kurtz. particularly if you’re already swimming in breakout first basemen, which seems likely given that each passing week has presented us with a couple more, none of whom has eliminated himself from contention yet. Chances are they won’t all stick, but each has a compelling enough case that picking and between among them feels like the guessiest of guesswork.

I just wrote about this Monday, doing my best to rank Soderstrom, Jonathan Aranda, Ben Rice, Spencer Torkelson, Kyle Manzardo and Michael Busch (that’s the order right there) by the thinnest of criteria, and I suppose now I have to weigh in on where Kurtz fits as well.

Let’s go ahead and take Soderstrom out of the running. There’s just no scenario by which you’re dropping the major-league leader in home runs. At the other end, Kurtz probably belongs ahead of Manzardo and Busch, both of whom fall a little short in terms of raw power, having yet to hit a ball even 110 mph in the majors. Busch also has the plainest platoon concerns of the bunch, having yet to start against a left-handed pitcher. So we know Kurtz lands somewhere in the middle, but where among Aranda, Rice and Torkelson is much harder to say.

Part of me wants to put him behind all three because I think the breakout case is particularly strong for each, and their year-to-date production is such that you have to assume you’ll never have another chance at whichever one you drop. Also, the lowest of the three, Torkelson, is in some ways the most proven, having delivered a 31-homer, 94-RBI season in 2023. But it only came with a .233 batting average and didn’t exactly make him an early-round pick the following year. Kurtz has the potential to be that in a way Torkelson probably doesn’t, which is why another part of me, the more brazen part, wants to slot Kurtz ahead of Aranda, Rice and Torkelson based on the following rationale …

It’s only even a consideration in the shallowest leagues. It wouldn’t occur to you to move on from Aranda, Rice or Torkelson in a Rotisserie league, with its extra corner infield spot to fill, and the same is true if you’re competing in a Head-to-Head league against more than a dozen other teams. The sort of leagues where it’s remotely feasible use Head-to-Head lineups and have 12 teams or fewer. They’re the sort of leagues with a bountiful waiver wire and an interminable roster crunch. In such a league, you should probably sell out the hardest for upside, and Kurtz to me has the most upside of that group. It doesn’t mean he’s certain to meet it as a rookie. It doesn’t mean those others are lacking in upside. It just means that Kurtz has the most, and in a league so shallow that you could even entertain the thought of discarding Aranda, Rice or Torkelson with what they’re doing now, upside is paramount.

So would I take Kurtz over Ryan Mountcastle if it came down to it? Indeed, I would. Jake Burger? You betcha. Paul Goldschmidt? If that’s what it took, then so be it. One way or another, Kurtz needs to be rostered. The upside is simply too great to let him slip to someone else.

But I’d try like mad to avoid ditching Aranda, Rice or Torkelson. I’d toss out my worst starting pitcher or whatever instead, even if I didn’t see a way to make all the pieces fit into my lineup at the moment. Again, there’s no telling which of these emergent first basemen will actually stick, and it may not be Kurtz. The learning curve for the majors is especially high right now, and it took Langford five months to settle in last year. Given the difficult defensive fit for Kurtz, he probably won’t be given quite the same leash if he’s getting eaten up by major-league breaking balls at the first sight of them.

You know what’s far worse than having too many first basemen to choose from? Choosing the wrong one, so you’ll want to give yourself as many chances to miss as your roster can reasonably allow for.