PDA

View Full Version : Lincecum opens up eyes at Giants camp



Pages : [1] 2

jmcclain19
02-17-2007, 07:44 PM
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/sports/baseball/mlb/san_francisco_giants/16721504.htm


First-round pick Lincecum makes impression on Cain
By Andrew Baggarly
MEDIANEWS STAFF

Giants notebook

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. - It wasn't Matt Cain's day to throw, but he walked out to the bullpen anyway. There was somebody he wanted to see.

"Pure fuel," a smiling Cain said after watching Tim Lincecum's first mound session of spring training Friday.

It's easy to think of Cain and Barry Zito as the present and future 1-2 punch in the Giants rotation. But it's probably wise to save a place near the top for Lincecum, the club's first-round draft pick last June.

If Lincecum dominates hitters during Cactus League play the way he has on every other level, the Giants will be tempted to stick him on the Opening-Day roster -- and manager Bruce Bochy didn't sound as though he would try hard to resist.

"Maybe a little bit, but you've got to be open-minded and know you've got a special talent with this kid," Bochy said. "It comes out of his hand awfully easy. He has a great presence."

The Giants plan to prepare Lincecum as a starter, but they could make an about-face if the closer situation remains in flux.

Zito's new mechanics might have startled Giants officials Thursday, but he's got nothing on Lincecum -- a 5-foot-10, 160-pounder who makes up for his lack of size by using an unorthodox, highly leveraged delivery. It's the creation of his father, Chris, a former semipro player who drew inspiration from studying film of Sandy Koufax and Bob Feller.

"It works well with my body, it's kept me from getting hurt and it helps me get as much as possible from my slender frame," Lincecum said. "(Coaches) always shied away from trying to help me because of how unorthodox it is or they say it is. They really haven't tried to change me at all, anywhere."

The Giants won't start. By decree of Giants vice president Dick Tidrow, coaches are forbidden from tinkering with Lincecum's mechanics.

Those mechanics allow Lincecum to generate power. His fastball hit 98 mph in a playoff start for Class A San Jose, and some scouts say he has the best curveball of any drafted player since Kerry Wood.

Other scouts say they believe he is an injury risk because of his size -- a view the Giants don't share.

Lincecum concedes he could be confused for the batboy. He looks barely old enough to attend junior prom, but he turned 22 in June and is 31/2 months older than Cain.

Apparently, this hasn't dawned on Cain, who snickered when he saw Lincecum airing it out while playing catch.

"I heard him say, 'He won't do that all spring,'" pitching coach Dave Righetti said with a laugh.

Superdude
02-17-2007, 10:37 PM
So what... I bet all of Florida is lining up to see Drew Stubbs! :cry:

NC Reds
02-17-2007, 10:48 PM
:( Lincecum is to Stubbs as Kazmir is to Gruler? I hope not.

dougdirt
02-17-2007, 11:27 PM
Someone is going to look at it that way NC Reds, but I dont think it will be the Reds. A lot of teams passed on Lincecum. I think its funny that a lot of people are already annointing him in the same light as Scott Kazmir and the likes. He has yet to throw more than 40 innings in the minor leagues. Does the kid have talent? Yes, he does. Lots of it. That said, he is a small guy and he is a pitcher. That doesnt bode well for him if history tells us much. There are exceptions, but just becuase the guy dominated for 31.2 innings in the minors last year doesnt really translate to being compared to Kazmir, who has posted an ERA under 3.80 the last two seasons in the AL as a 21 and 22 year old.

KoryMac5
02-17-2007, 11:28 PM
:( Lincecum is to Stubbs as Kazmir is to Gruler? I hope not.

It was a bad move by the Reds not to take Linecum, Some say that the Reds wanted more position players after drafting pitching the last few years. My theory you can never have enough pitching.

Falls City Beer
02-17-2007, 11:34 PM
We can joke about this and everything, but it's high time the people involved in voting to take Stubbs over Lincecum either get the axe or get severely ostracized; and if Krivsky cast the deciding vote for Stubbs, he should consider taking a year or two off from the draft and appointing someone who knows what the hell he's doing. What a trainwreck of a decision--but one this organization makes again and again and again and again....

Falls City Beer
02-17-2007, 11:36 PM
Someone is going to look at it that way NC Reds, but I dont think it will be the Reds. A lot of teams passed on Lincecum. I think its funny that a lot of people are already annointing him in the same light as Scott Kazmir and the likes. He has yet to throw more than 40 innings in the minor leagues. Does the kid have talent? Yes, he does. Lots of it. That said, he is a small guy and he is a pitcher. That doesnt bode well for him if history tells us much. There are exceptions, but just becuase the guy dominated for 31.2 innings in the minors last year doesnt really translate to being compared to Kazmir, who has posted an ERA under 3.80 the last two seasons in the AL as a 21 and 22 year old.

With Deno around and Bruce on the way, the Reds needed Stubbs like a raging case of pinworms.

It's that age-old idiocy of "take the best athlete."

Aronchis
02-17-2007, 11:38 PM
We can joke about this and everything, but it's high time the people involved in voting to take Stubbs over Lincecum either get the axe or get severely ostracized; and if Krivsky cast the deciding vote for Stubbs, he should consider taking a year or two off from the draft and appointing someone who knows what the hell he's doing. What a trainwreck of a decision--but one this organization makes again and again and again and again....

Will we joke when Lincecum is under the knife to repair his damaged shoulder. Dude has awfull mechanics. It caught up with Liriano, it will so with Lincecum.

This piece is nothing that we haven't seen with Bailey.

Aronchis
02-17-2007, 11:40 PM
With Deno around and Bruce on the way, the Reds needed Stubbs like a raging case of pinworms.

It's that age-old idiocy of "take the best athlete."

This I can agree with, but they should have passed on Stubbs and Lincecum.

Falls City Beer
02-17-2007, 11:42 PM
Will we joke when Lincecum is under the knife to repair his damaged shoulder. Dude has awfull mechanics. It caught up with Liriano, it will so with Lincecum.

This piece is nothing that we haven't seen with Bailey.

But you still take Lincecum in the chance he can stay healthy--if healthy Lincecum gives the Reds what simply doesn't exist in the entirety of their minors outside of Bailey--a high-quality, hard-throwing arm. Stubbs is not only a bad ballplayer, but a total redundancy; in other words, useless.

Aronchis
02-17-2007, 11:55 PM
But you still take Lincecum in the chance he can stay healthy--if healthy Lincecum gives the Reds what simply doesn't exist in the entirety of their minors outside of Bailey--a high-quality, hard-throwing arm. Stubbs is not only a bad ballplayer, but a total redundancy; in other words, useless.

Or the chance Stubbs hits. "Hard throwing" isn't always necessary and doesn't always constitute "power numbers"(something I think M2 has harped on).

The fact is, the Stubbs pick was a wild ego driven pick. They pretty much flipped Deno off even though Deno has shown 10 times the hitting ability of Stubbs. If Deno becomes a quality starting CF, it was a bad pick. Something they should have waited another year on to find out.

But Lincecum dropped for a reason. If Krivsky and Buckley wanted to flash the crowd, they could have at least gone a different direction, totally.

dougdirt
02-18-2007, 12:05 AM
But you still take Lincecum in the chance he can stay healthy--if healthy Lincecum gives the Reds what simply doesn't exist in the entirety of their minors outside of Bailey--a high-quality, hard-throwing arm. Stubbs is not only a bad ballplayer, but a total redundancy; in other words, useless.

I would have gone with Billy Rowell myself. His bat is special. Lincecum has as many questions as he does answers. His stuff is electric, no doubt about it. But he is ridiculously small (5-11, 155lbs). His mechanics are pretty out there as well. As far as Stubbs being useless, I disagree completely. Useless would be Adam Dunn in the field mixed with Alex Gonzalez at the plate. Stubbs, has some upside at the plate, and on the defensive side of the ball, he is about as good as it comes....not quite useless. Would nearly everyone have drafted someone else? Yeah, probably. Hindsight is 20/20, but I dont think Lincecum is the answer long term..... sure he looks good now. He only has 31.2 innings on that arm as a pro.... give him some time.

dougdirt
02-18-2007, 12:07 AM
And does anyone else find it strange that the owner of the team mandated that the COACHES dont try to work on Lincecums mechanics?

RedsManRick
02-18-2007, 02:34 AM
How many guys like Stubbs, who struggle to make contact in the low minors, ever overcome that and turn in to good major leaguers. You can develop power. You can develop plate discipline. Contact doesn't seem to be something you develop -- especially when you already have the plate discipline.

Cedric
02-18-2007, 04:12 AM
How many guys like Stubbs, who struggle to make contact in the low minors, ever overcome that and turn in to good major leaguers. You can develop power. You can develop plate discipline. Contact doesn't seem to be something you develop -- especially when you already have the plate discipline.

I don't honestly care if he hits .240 with his plate discipline, defense, and speed.

OnBaseMachine
02-18-2007, 10:28 AM
I'm not as down on Stubbs as some, but he would have been my third or fourth option of the players still available at #8 last June. Tim Lincecum, Daniel Bard, and Billy Rowell in that order would have been my top three. Lincecum may be short but his stuff is incredible...think another Oswalt, albeit Lincecum doesn't quite have the control of Oswalt. I really think the Reds missed the boat on Lincecum.

Homer Bailey
Aaron Harang
Bronson Arroyo
Tim Lincecum
Johnny Cueto

That would have been an incredible rotation for the next five or six years.

Falls City Beer
02-18-2007, 11:08 AM
I don't honestly care if he hits .240 with his plate discipline, defense, and speed.

Dunn, not exactly a beast in terms of making contact, is practically Tony Gwynn, Wade Boggs, and Brett Butler rolled into one compared to Stubbs. The Reds might as well have drafted a college basketball player if they were looking for an "athlete" minus the baseball skill set. How much longer odds do you want in a draft pick?

dougdirt
02-18-2007, 11:14 AM
Dunn, not exactly a beast in terms of making contact, is practically Tony Gwynn, Wade Boggs, and Brett Butler rolled into one compared to Stubbs. The Reds might as well have drafted a college basketball player if they were looking for an "athlete" minus the baseball skill set. How much longer odds do you want in a draft pick?

Baseball skills Drew Stubbs has:
Great Defense
Good Power
Good Plate Discipline
Good Speed and Ability to steal bases

Baseball Skills Drew Stubbs may not have:
Ability to hit for a high batting average.

Maybe I missed a thing or two, but he surely has more to him than "athlete"....

Falls City Beer
02-18-2007, 11:16 AM
Baseball skills Drew Stubbs has:
Great Defense
Good Power
Good Plate Discipline
Good Speed and Ability to steal bases

Baseball Skills Drew Stubbs may not have:
Ability to hit for a high batting average.

Maybe I missed a thing or two, but he surely has more to him than "athlete"....

Decent power.
He takes a bunch of pitches (not the same thing as good plate discipline)
Speed? What's that old saw about stealing first base?

dougdirt
02-18-2007, 11:22 AM
Decent power.
He takes a bunch of pitches (not the same thing as good plate discipline)
Speed? What's that old saw about stealing first base?

Yet he got on base 37% of the time last year. When your isolated discipline is .116, I would say its a little more than taking a bunch of pitches.

Falls City Beer
02-18-2007, 11:29 AM
Yet he got on base 37% of the time last year. When your isolated discipline is .116, I would say its a little more than taking a bunch of pitches.

In the low minors? Come on. A .370 OBP with no contact threat is just taking pitches. That's all that is. There's no brilliant discrimination going on there on the part of Stubbs.

dougdirt
02-18-2007, 11:35 AM
We will see soon enough FCB.... but his discipline in college was pretty good as well.

Cedric
02-18-2007, 01:34 PM
Dunn, not exactly a beast in terms of making contact, is practically Tony Gwynn, Wade Boggs, and Brett Butler rolled into one compared to Stubbs. The Reds might as well have drafted a college basketball player if they were looking for an "athlete" minus the baseball skill set. How much longer odds do you want in a draft pick?

Have you ever seen the guy play? He's got plenty of baseball skills. How he doesn't have a baseball skill set to you is beyond me.

The guy is already a major league player with his defense and speed. His patience has been there his whole career also. If the guy manages to hit even .240 and get on base at a .350 clip and slg in the .400 we got something.

Red Heeler
02-18-2007, 01:46 PM
The guy is already a major league player with his defense and speed. His patience has been there his whole career also. If the guy manages to hit even .240 and get on base at a .350 clip and slg in the .400 we got something.

Chris Denorfria???

I think that most would like more out of an upper half first rounder, though I would be pleased if Stubbs can put up those numbers in the majors in 2009.

Cedric
02-18-2007, 01:55 PM
Chris Denorfria???

I think that most would like more out of an upper half first rounder, though I would be pleased if Stubbs can put up those numbers in the majors in 2009.

Weak draft.
Of course I'm not sold on Stubbs getting in the mid 800 ops range. If he does you got a great player at his position.

I probably wouldn't have drafted Stubbs, but I don't see why it's a terrible pick.

dougdirt
02-18-2007, 01:57 PM
Weakest draft ever maybe....2000 may have something to argue, but last years draft was one of the weakest drafts in history.

NC Reds
02-18-2007, 08:20 PM
I was advocating Lincecum on draft day. His size is a concern, but every assessment I heard was that he had filthy stuff. A risk worth taking to me.

Topcat
02-18-2007, 10:16 PM
How many guys like Stubbs, who struggle to make contact in the low minors, ever overcome that and turn in to good major leaguers. You can develop power. You can develop plate discipline. Contact doesn't seem to be something you develop -- especially when you already have the plate discipline.


Carlton Fisk say's hi ;)

Topcat
02-18-2007, 10:17 PM
I'm not as down on Stubbs as some, but he would have been my third or fourth option of the players still available at #8 last June. Tim Lincecum, Daniel Bard, and Billy Rowell in that order would have been my top three. Lincecum may be short but his stuff is incredible...think another Oswalt, albeit Lincecum doesn't quite have the control of Oswalt. I really think the Reds missed the boat on Lincecum.

Homer Bailey
Aaron Harang
Bronson Arroyo
Tim Lincecum
Johnny Cueto

That would have been an incredible rotation for the next five or six years.

I liked that Bard kid also ;)

edabbs44
02-18-2007, 10:26 PM
We can joke about this and everything, but it's high time the people involved in voting to take Stubbs over Lincecum either get the axe or get severely ostracized; and if Krivsky cast the deciding vote for Stubbs, he should consider taking a year or two off from the draft and appointing someone who knows what the hell he's doing. What a trainwreck of a decision--but one this organization makes again and again and again and again....

The Stubbs pick has WK's fingerprints all over it. He will be Wayne's own personal Torii Hunter (with the potential of being a much worse hitter), patrolling CF in Cincy within a few years.

The guy preaches defense and pitching. The irony of it all is Junior will probably be in CF this season.

RedsManRick
02-18-2007, 11:21 PM
I don't honestly care if he hits .240 with his plate discipline, defense, and speed.

I'm worried about Stubbs hitting .240 in A ball. Dunn hit .304 throughout his minor league career.

I could be wrong, but when patience is already your calling card and you have trouble making regular contact, it seems unlikely you're going to suddenly develop better hand/eye coordination. When Stubbs has to face guys who can locate those pitches with movement, then what?

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 12:24 AM
Well the thing with Stubbs is, there are coaches in the minor leagues. Hopefully somewhere along the way someone can identify something in his swing that if changed, will help him out. He is still probably 2 years away at best.... that is a lot of time for someone to work with him on his approach.

lollipopcurve
02-19-2007, 09:31 AM
I'm worried about Stubbs hitting .240 in A ball. Dunn hit .304 throughout his minor league career.

And Chris Denorfia hit .236 in full-time play at high A in 2003, at the age of 23. He had 106 Ks vs 54 BBs.
With all the talk about how Denorfia should play center because of his decent OPS projection and plus defense, you'd think there would be a better appreciation of Stubbs' strengths as a CF prospect.

Anybody can draw this-player-here vs that-player-there comparisons to make their point -- just like you can look back at just about every draftee ever and find players who were selected later who end up with better careers (that's the baseball draft, folks). But, in some important respect, every player is unique and will forge a path that no other has taken, certainly augmented by his particular style of play. That's kind of what I get focused on once a player enters the Reds system, and Stubbs remains for me a very interesting prospect based on his plus power, plus speed and plus defense, combined with solid plate discipline. My take all along is that he was a safe pick, with the only downside risk being that his offense could tank precipitously and affect his whole game. Hasn't happened yet, in my book.

TRF
02-19-2007, 09:58 AM
Have you ever seen the guy play? He's got plenty of baseball skills. How he doesn't have a baseball skill set to you is beyond me.

The guy is already a major league player with his defense and speed. His patience has been there his whole career also. If the guy manages to hit even .240 and get on base at a .350 clip and slg in the .400 we got something.

He wasn't even close to being the best hitter on his own team, much less considered to be anything spectacular in the Pioneer League. Dorn, Parker, Turner and Valaika all out hit him by a WIDE margin. Billy Rojo had only 6 fewer BB's with an identical SLG. And yes, I know defense matters, but is his defense THAT spectacular? It had better be considering his OPS was around 200 points lower than 5 other guys. FCB nailed it on his power. Stubbs had 6HR's last year, three behind Parker, the team leader, and 2 behind Dorn and Valaika. While that isn't a huge gap, look at the number of doubles for those three guys:

Valaika 22
Dorn 17
Turner 16
Parker 12
Stubbs 7

No gap power for Stubbs, meaning without a true hit chart to go by, I'm thinking most of his HR's are severe pull jobs. His lack of doubles is even more alarming when you see he led the team in SB's with 19. I'd say his power is less than moderate.

Considering just how many times this team has screwed up the first pick, whether that screw up was over-working the pick (Howington, 141 IP in his first professional season), punting a better pick due to supposed signability issues (Kazmir) for a lesser pitcher (Gruler) or just punting it altogether (Sowers) you'd think that Linecum would have been a serious no-brainer.

I like everyone on here hopes Homer Bailey lives up to his incredible potential, but had the Reds, going back to JimBo's days in charge had drafted and signed Kazmir, Sowers and Jared Weaver, They'd have arguably the best young rotation in all of baseball. Yeah, big if, but all of those picks seemed like no-brainers to almost everyone on this board at the time.

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 10:46 AM
He wasn't even close to being the best hitter on his own team, much less considered to be anything spectacular in the Pioneer League. Dorn, Parker, Turner and Valaika all out hit him by a WIDE margin. Billy Rojo had only 6 fewer BB's with an identical SLG. And yes, I know defense matters, but is his defense THAT spectacular? It had better be considering his OPS was around 200 points lower than 5 other guys. FCB nailed it on his power. Stubbs had 6HR's last year, three behind Parker, the team leader, and 2 behind Dorn and Valaika. While that isn't a huge gap, look at the number of doubles for those three guys:

Valaika 22
Dorn 17
Turner 16
Parker 12
Stubbs 7

No gap power for Stubbs, meaning without a true hit chart to go by, I'm thinking most of his HR's are severe pull jobs. His lack of doubles is even more alarming when you see he led the team in SB's with 19. I'd say his power is less than moderate.

Considering just how many times this team has screwed up the first pick, whether that screw up was over-working the pick (Howington, 141 IP in his first professional season), punting a better pick due to supposed signability issues (Kazmir) for a lesser pitcher (Gruler) or just punting it altogether (Sowers) you'd think that Linecum would have been a serious no-brainer.

I like everyone on here hopes Homer Bailey lives up to his incredible potential, but had the Reds, going back to JimBo's days in charge had drafted and signed Kazmir, Sowers and Jared Weaver, They'd have arguably the best young rotation in all of baseball. Yeah, big if, but all of those picks seemed like no-brainers to almost everyone on this board at the time.

Yet Weaver is already having arm issues.


"The way I throw, it's going to be an issue.....I've had it since high school. It sticks around for a long time and it's a matter of knocking it out. With my mechanics and different arm slot, I put a little more stress on my shoulder."

"We can make some subtle changes. He has a pronounced turn toward the plate and the deception in his delivery could put a strain on his shoulder or elbow. It's something he's lived with for a long time, and something he'll have to battle to keep his strength where it needs to be so he can pitch with those mechanics. It it take two weeks, it takes two weeks. I don't think it's to a point where he will miss any apppreciable amount of time."

Hindsight is very clear, but if Lincecum was such a slam dunk, he wouldnt have made it to #10. 9 teams passed on him. Last years draft class was very weak, easily one of the weakest draft classes ever. Is Lincecum the guy everyone in the top 10 will look back and think "what if" about? It very well could happen, but seriously, the hype this guy has gotten for 31 innings in the minor leagues is unreal, and honestly, its unwarranted. Hitters have had no adjustment period to what he throws, as he split his 31 innings between 2 leagues. He is ridiculously small, weighing in at 160 pounds as a 22 year old. Let the guy get his feet wet in a full season before making a full judgement on him, and that goes for both Lincecum and Stubbs.

Cedric
02-19-2007, 11:07 AM
He wasn't even close to being the best hitter on his own team, much less considered to be anything spectacular in the Pioneer League. Dorn, Parker, Turner and Valaika all out hit him by a WIDE margin. Billy Rojo had only 6 fewer BB's with an identical SLG. And yes, I know defense matters, but is his defense THAT spectacular? It had better be considering his OPS was around 200 points lower than 5 other guys. FCB nailed it on his power. Stubbs had 6HR's last year, three behind Parker, the team leader, and 2 behind Dorn and Valaika. While that isn't a huge gap, look at the number of doubles for those three guys:

Valaika 22
Dorn 17
Turner 16
Parker 12
Stubbs 7

No gap power for Stubbs, meaning without a true hit chart to go by, I'm thinking most of his HR's are severe pull jobs. His lack of doubles is even more alarming when you see he led the team in SB's with 19. I'd say his power is less than moderate.

Considering just how many times this team has screwed up the first pick, whether that screw up was over-working the pick (Howington, 141 IP in his first professional season), punting a better pick due to supposed signability issues (Kazmir) for a lesser pitcher (Gruler) or just punting it altogether (Sowers) you'd think that Linecum would have been a serious no-brainer.

I like everyone on here hopes Homer Bailey lives up to his incredible potential, but had the Reds, going back to JimBo's days in charge had drafted and signed Kazmir, Sowers and Jared Weaver, They'd have arguably the best young rotation in all of baseball. Yeah, big if, but all of those picks seemed like no-brainers to almost everyone on this board at the time.

You do realize that was like 250 at bats? In the guys first ever attempt at pro baseball.

I know it's the in thing to judge signings the day after they are signed, but it's not realistic.
He's a college bat and he doesn't have all the time in the world, but he isn't done.

lollipopcurve
02-19-2007, 11:55 AM
I'd say his power is less than moderate.

He hit 2 more home runs in the first-round series they lost in the playoffs.

You can run down his power all you want, but the scouting on him says otherwise. He's got years of development ahead of him and the kind of frame that should add strength well.

TRF
02-19-2007, 12:08 PM
You do realize that was like 250 at bats? In the guys first ever attempt at pro baseball.

I know it's the in thing to judge signings the day after they are signed, but it's not realistic.
He's a college bat and he doesn't have all the time in the world, but he isn't done.

You also realize that Turner, Dorn, Valaika and Parker made their professional debuts in 2006 right? None had the so called pedigree of being a first round pick, and all of them out hit Stubbs, by a WIDE margin.

I never said he was done. What I implied was he wasn't worthy of a first round pick, especially to an organization as pitching starved as Cincinnati's.

TRF
02-19-2007, 12:10 PM
He hit 2 more home runs in the first-round series they lost in the playoffs.

You can run down his power all you want, but the scouting on him says otherwise. He's got years of development ahead of him and the kind of frame that should add strength well.

No gap power. I mean none. 7 doubles in 250 AB's? that's pretty weak by any standards. That isn't me running down his power, it's him not displaying it.

TRF
02-19-2007, 12:12 PM
Yet Weaver is already having arm issues.
Hindsight is very clear, but if Lincecum was such a slam dunk, he wouldnt have made it to #10. 9 teams passed on him. Last years draft class was very weak, easily one of the weakest draft classes ever. Is Lincecum the guy everyone in the top 10 will look back and think "what if" about? It very well could happen, but seriously, the hype this guy has gotten for 31 innings in the minor leagues is unreal, and honestly, its unwarranted. Hitters have had no adjustment period to what he throws, as he split his 31 innings between 2 leagues. He is ridiculously small, weighing in at 160 pounds as a 22 year old. Let the guy get his feet wet in a full season before making a full judgement on him, and that goes for both Lincecum and Stubbs.

Yeah, And I thought Weaver was rushed. Kazmir dropped pretty far too, and I thought he was rushed. And yes, Kazmir was a slam dunk. He was the best HS pitcher available, and probably the best overall LH pitcher available too.

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 12:19 PM
Not saying Kazmir wasnt a slam dunk.... although I was a little younger then and didn't follow the draft like I do now. Lincecum however was not a slam dunk pick at the time.

TRF
02-19-2007, 12:26 PM
compared to Stubbs he was.

lollipopcurve
02-19-2007, 12:36 PM
No gap power. I mean none. 7 doubles in 250 AB's? that's pretty weak by any standards. That isn't me running down his power, it's him not displaying it.

Soo.. did you understand that in my post I made the distinction between current power and projected power?

Since you're big into the counting stats here, keep in mind that Valaika, Parker and Turner all had more PAs than Stubbs -- in the cases of Parker and Valaika, significantly more. Also, as a footnote, beyond the 2 HRs Stubbs had in the 2-3 postseason games they played, he also 3 triples, which narrows the EBH rate gap a little between him and the guys you're claiming have better power.

For your consideration:
Reds 2006, doubles
Clayton -- 30
Aurilia -- 25
Hatteberg -- 28
Phillips -- 28
Dunn -- 24

Does this mean Dunn has less gap power than these guys?

Stubbs may very well have some of that all-or-nothing performance in his swing, like Dunn, but is that a fatal flaw?

In your haste to bury Stubbs your argument ignores the essentials of scouting and develoment. He's got plenty of time to refine his legitimate tools, unless, as appears to be the case, you believe he's a finished product at the age of 21. He's not as polished as some of his Billings teammates -- but that shouldn't surprise anyone who knew what he was coming out of Texas. The art of scouting is in projection -- and that's where Stubbs is considered to have more room to make gains than the others do.

TRF
02-19-2007, 12:59 PM
Soo.. did you understand that in my post I made the distinction between current power and projected power?

Since you're big into the counting stats here, keep in mind that Valaika, Parker and Turner all had more PAs than Stubbs -- in the cases of Parker and Valaika, significantly more. Also, as a footnote, beyond the 2 HRs Stubbs had in the 2-3 postseason games they played, he also 3 triples, which narrows the EBH rate gap a little between him and the guys you're claiming have better power.

For your consideration:
Reds 2006, doubles
Clayton -- 30
Aurilia -- 25
Hatteberg -- 28
Phillips -- 28
Dunn -- 24

Does this mean Dunn has less gap power than these guys?

Stubbs may very well have some of that all-or-nothing performance in his swing, like Dunn, but is that a fatal flaw?

In your haste to bury Stubbs your argument ignores the essentials of scouting and develoment. He's got plenty of time to refine his legitimate tools, unless, as appears to be the case, you believe he's a finished product at the age of 21. He's not as polished as some of his Billings teammates -- but that shouldn't surprise anyone who knew what he was coming out of Texas. The art of scouting is in projection -- and that's where Stubbs is considered to have more room to make gains than the others do.

Most scouts doubted his bat. Most scouts thought his bat wouldn't translate professional ball. Most scouts thought the Reds were reaching with this pick.

His 3 3B's do not narrow the gap as 3 of the four guys mentioned had at least 3 triples, with Valaika having 4. Dorn had 2.

And significantly more PA's? Stubbs did get a concussion in August, though I don't know how much time he missed. But he had about exactly the same number of PA's as Danny Dorn. But he projects to be a better hitter right? but he didn't out hit Dorn though they had about exactly the same amount of experience?

Yeah, right now I see Stubbs as somewhat of a bust, and I see Linecum getting a look at the rotation or at least a bullpen spot with the Giants in '07. I think that is rushing him, but he's on the cusp of making his major league debut. I doubt we see Stubbs in a MLB uniform before 2009 if at all.

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 01:19 PM
compared to Stubbs he was.

Well no crap. Stubbs comes from possibly the weakest draft class ever (2000 was equally as bad probably). There was no slam dunk last year. I dont see the point you are trying to make.

Patrick Bateman
02-19-2007, 01:19 PM
But he projects to be a better hitter right? but he didn't out hit Dorn though they had about exactly the same amount of experience?



Just because can Dorn outhit Stubbs at this point has little to do with future projections. Stubbs was supposed to be a raw college player when he came out, so it shouldn't be a shock that he's behind many of his teammates right now.

Stubbs is going to be a guy that will move along quite slowly (which is one of the reasons that I would have rather have seen Lincecum drafted), but he also has the talent to improve much more than some of the more polished guys right now. Many of the guys you listed that currently outhit Stubbs, don't have half the talent that he possesses. He's likely to improve at a faster rate than his peers, as he is quite raw and has the talent to play at a top level in the big leagues.

Like a few others, I did not want to see Stubbs drafted by the Reds at that position. However, I still saw Stubbs as a solid prospect that does have a chance to be something special, even if it's going to take a long time for it to happen. I rarely have a huge problem drafting guys who have top end talent while the ability to play a skill position at a high level. Stubbs has a long way to go, but the fact that he has struggled to date in his first season of pro ball is a poor indicator to use to judge the rate and potential of his improvement.

TRF
02-19-2007, 01:24 PM
Well no crap. Stubbs comes from possibly the weakest draft class ever (2000 was equally as bad probably). There was no slam dunk last year. I dont see the point you are trying to make.

I think comparatively speaking, weak class or not, Linecum was a slam dunk compared to Stubbs, especially in a pitching thin organization like the Reds.

That was my point.


Just because can Dorn outhit Stubbs at this point has little to do with future projections. Stubbs was supposed to be a raw college player when he came out, so it shouldn't be a shock that he's behind many of his teammates right now.

Stubbs is going to be a guy that will move along quite slowly (which is one of the reasons that I would have rather have seen Lincecum drafted), but he also has the talent to improve much more than some of the more polished guys right now. Many of the guys you listed that currently outhit Stubbs, don't have half the talent that he possesses. He's likely to improve at a faster rate than his peers, as he is quite raw and has the talent to play at a top level in the big leagues.

Like a few others, I did not want to see Stubbs drafted by the Reds at that position. However, I still saw Stubbs as a solid prospect that does have a chance to be something special, even if it's going to take a long time for it to happen. I rarely have a huge problem drafting guys who have top end talent while the ability to play a skill position at a high level. Stubbs has a long way to go, but the fact that he has struggled to date in his first season of pro ball is a poor indicator to use to judge the rate and potential of his improvement.

I'm asking this because I really want an answer. Why is Stubbs considered a raw college prospect, and the others are not? Why does Stubbs have the projections of being a power hitter and the others either do not have said projections, or we never hear about them because of their position in the draft? Why is it we are not looking at the results of the 2006 season when it comes to those projections, and more importantly, why aren't those projections revised somewhat because of those results?

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 01:33 PM
Yeah, right now I see Stubbs as somewhat of a bust, and I see Linecum getting a look at the rotation or at least a bullpen spot with the Giants in '07. I think that is rushing him, but he's on the cusp of making his major league debut. I doubt we see Stubbs in a MLB uniform before 2009 if at all.

You can feel free to view someone as a bust after 202 at bats.... its your opinion. I just think it is a VERY bad one. I mean Adam Dunn had this line over his last 184 at bats of 2006, .184/.299/.348 for a whopping OPS of .647. Does that mean it says a darn thing about his future or that he just had a poor third of a season?

As for Lincecum..... listed at 5'11, 160 pounds....he is probably about 5'9 or 5'10 and 150-155. I dont know about you, but there are maybe a handful of pitchers who have been that small who were able to succeed in the pros. Even guys like Pedro weigh in at 180 (although probably slightly less). If in 2009 Stubbs is on the cusp of the majors and Lincecum is on the DL with another arm injury, what will be said then?

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 01:45 PM
I think comparatively speaking, weak class or not, Linecum was a slam dunk compared to Stubbs, especially in a pitching thin organization like the Reds.

That was my point.

Yet the Reds have more highly regarded pitchers than hitters in the system. Votto, Bruce and then who? Those are the hitters the Reds have in their system. Bailey, Wood, Cueto are all good prospects, and there are several others who have good prospects with them still (Fisher, Lecure, Ravin, Watson etc).

Patrick Bateman
02-19-2007, 02:03 PM
I'm asking this because I really want an answer. Why is Stubbs considered a raw college prospect, and the others are not? Why does Stubbs have the projections of being a power hitter and the others either do not have said projections, or we never hear about them because of their position in the draft? Why is it we are not looking at the results of the 2006 season when it comes to those projections, and more importantly, why aren't those projections revised somewhat because of those results?

Scouting. The same type of prospect reports that we use to find make our judgements about these prospects. The same reports that told all of us that Lincecum had nasty stuff. I doubt you have seen Lincecum play very often, so I'm guessing you get most of your information about the guy from what you read about him rather than your own scouting.

Outside of a few exceptions, none of us have seen these players play, so like me, I'm guessing just about everyone here relies on prospect reports from places like baseball america.

Projections cannot simply be seen from statistics. There is a lot that can be seen by just watching the players, and that is a better way of determining upside than a couple hundred at-bats in rookie ball. Everything I have read on Stubbs basically writes the same strory:


Great Fielder
Decent patience
Good power potential
Poor contact skills
Top end speed
Very raw


It's clear to everyone that Stubbs is a long ways away from contributing in the majors. It's the potential we all disagree on. Now I'm not going to proclaim myself an expert in regards to Stubbs (or any Reds prospect for that matter) as I haven't seen any of them play. However, I do understand that players develop at different rates, and for the most part scouting reports give a better indication of determining a player's upside than a player's first jump into rookie ball. Potential can be easily scouted. Looking at a player's build, athleticism can lead to the conclusion that things like power and contact can be developed even if those skills have not been translated onto the baseball field yet.

lollipopcurve
02-19-2007, 02:15 PM
Why is it we are not looking at the results of the 2006 season when it comes to those projections, and more importantly, why aren't those projections revised somewhat because of those results?

I think because Stubbs performed pretty much according to what the scouting reports said. Keep in mind that he had the concussion and also battled turf toe for a significant part of the season.

Triples
02-19-2007, 02:53 PM
Scouting. The same type of prospect reports that we use to find make our judgements about these prospects. The same reports that told all of us that Lincecum had nasty stuff. I doubt you have seen Lincecum play very often, so I'm guessing you get most of your information about the guy from what you read about him rather than your own scouting.

Outside of a few exceptions, none of us have seen these players play, so like me, I'm guessing just about everyone here relies on prospect reports from places like baseball america.

Projections cannot simply be seen from statistics. There is a lot that can be seen by just watching the players, and that is a better way of determining upside than a couple hundred at-bats in rookie ball. Everything I have read on Stubbs basically writes the same strory:


Great Fielder
Decent patience
Good power potential
Poor contact skills
Top end speed
Very raw


It's clear to everyone that Stubbs is a long ways away from contributing in the majors. It's the potential we all disagree on. Now I'm not going to proclaim myself an expert in regards to Stubbs (or any Reds prospect for that matter) as I haven't seen any of them play. However, I do understand that players develop at different rates, and for the most part scouting reports give a better indication of determining a player's upside than a player's first jump into rookie ball. Potential can be easily scouted. Looking at a player's build, athleticism can lead to the conclusion that things like power and contact can be developed even if those skills have not been translated onto the baseball field yet.

Seems like we hearing the same things about BJ Symanski that we're hearing about Drew Stubbs. I sure hope the Reds get more for the $2.3 mil investment in Stubbs.

TRF
02-19-2007, 03:28 PM
It's easier to find good hitting than good pitching. You never have enough good pitching. Some of the Reds pitching prospects are highly regarded. Ok a few of them are. Ok 3. In order, Bailey, Cueto and Wood. the rest... not so much.

2 of those guys were at Dayton when Stubbs was drafted. That doesn't scream top prospect status to me. It's really no different than jumping on the Pauly/Gardner bandwagon a few years ago. Guys at High A are suspects, not prospects. In other words, I want to see it again, but at a higher level.

As I type this, understand that I am a huge Cueto and LeCure fan. I think both have big futures. but those futures are a couple of years away. 2009 at least likely for both players.

Linecum was an advanced college pitcher. Is he a typical player? Nope not even remotely. That doesn't mean he will fall apart on the mound.

Stubbs, from what I am reading, is built for baseball. doesn't mean he can hit a lick either.

And please don't compare him to Dunn. Adam Dunn has a track record in the major leagues. His service time is what seperates him from guys like Stubbs and even Bruce. Now can Adam learn from last year's collapse? I hop he can, but we are talking about a guy that if he stays healthy his entire career will hit over 600 HR's.

Drew Stubbs needs to hit one in the bigs before we start comparing him to Adam Dunn.

lollipopcurve
02-19-2007, 03:39 PM
And please don't compare him to Dunn. Adam Dunn has a track record in the major leagues. His service time is what seperates him from guys like Stubbs and even Bruce. Now can Adam learn from last year's collapse? I hop he can, but we are talking about a guy that if he stays healthy his entire career will hit over 600 HR's.

Drew Stubbs needs to hit one in the bigs before we start comparing him to Adam Dunn.

The comparison to Dunn is not a "who's better" comparison. It's a comparison that says "these players both have good power - but don't hit a lot of doubles -- and they walk and strike out a lot." Mike Cameron, a common best-case comp for Stubbs since he is a good defensive player, too, shares these offensive traits to an extent. The purpose of the comparison is to show that Stubbs' offensive profile can be seen in above-average players at the major league level.

TRF
02-19-2007, 03:52 PM
Adam Dunn had a poor 2006. well he had a poor August and September of 2006. but he's a year removed from a season in which he had 77 XBH's, and 2 years removed from an 80 XBH season.

So are we saying Stubbs compares well to a guy that has done that? That he compares well to a guy that was destroying the Midwest league at age 20, and at age 21, the same age Stubbs is now, hit 51 HR's at three levels including 19 with the Reds. He also had a combined 40 doubles that year too.

Adam Dunn will give the Reds somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 doubles. sometimes more, sometimes less. He'll give the Reds 40+ HR's.

Are you saying Drew Stubbs projects to be that kind of player?

cuz I'm not seeing that. at least not yet.

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 03:56 PM
It's easier to find good hitting than good pitching. You never have enough good pitching. Some of the Reds pitching prospects are highly regarded. Ok a few of them are. Ok 3. In order, Bailey, Cueto and Wood. the rest... not so much.

2 of those guys were at Dayton when Stubbs was drafted. That doesn't scream top prospect status to me. It's really no different than jumping on the Pauly/Gardner bandwagon a few years ago. Guys at High A are suspects, not prospects. In other words, I want to see it again, but at a higher level.

As I type this, understand that I am a huge Cueto and LeCure fan. I think both have big futures. but those futures are a couple of years away. 2009 at least likely for both players.

Linecum was an advanced college pitcher. Is he a typical player? Nope not even remotely. That doesn't mean he will fall apart on the mound.

Stubbs, from what I am reading, is built for baseball. doesn't mean he can hit a lick either.

And please don't compare him to Dunn. Adam Dunn has a track record in the major leagues. His service time is what seperates him from guys like Stubbs and even Bruce. Now can Adam learn from last year's collapse? I hop he can, but we are talking about a guy that if he stays healthy his entire career will hit over 600 HR's.

Drew Stubbs needs to hit one in the bigs before we start comparing him to Adam Dunn.

Well then by your own accounts, Lincecum is a suspect and not a prospect. Johnny Cueto has 50 more innings above Low-A than does Lincecum.
As far as the comparison to Dunn, it was more of a "when you look at a small sample size" thing. Stubbs had been playing baseball since February. I also am curious as to why you see Cueto in 2009 at least? He will start in AA in 2007. If her performs, he probably gets promoted to AAA sometime in the season. That puts him right on the doorstep for 2008. Maybe we wont need him, but maybe we will.
I am glad you brought up Bruce though, you know what his line was in Billings? .257/.358/.457. Sure Jay was just 18 at the time, but like Drew, he was adjusting to his first season of pro baseball. In his first full season though, Jay went nuts. Do I expect the same thing from Stubbs, no, I dont. But what changed from 2005 to 2006 for Jay? Coaching. Knowing what to expect and how to deal with being a professional. Probably some other things as well. I expect Drew to rebound from his poor showing in Billings next year and put up better numbers across the board.

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 04:01 PM
Adam Dunn had a poor 2006. well he had a poor August and September of 2006. but he's a year removed from a season in which he had 77 XBH's, and 2 years removed from an 80 XBH season.

So are we saying Stubbs compares well to a guy that has done that? That he compares well to a guy that was destroying the Midwest league at age 20, and at age 21, the same age Stubbs is now, hit 51 HR's at three levels including 19 with the Reds. He also had a combined 40 doubles that year too.

Adam Dunn will give the Reds somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 doubles. sometimes more, sometimes less. He'll give the Reds 40+ HR's.

Are you saying Drew Stubbs projects to be that kind of player?

cuz I'm not seeing that. at least not yet.

I am not sure you get what the word projection means. Someone doesnt have to perform at a certain level right away to have a projection to do something. Much less in a 200 at bat sample. Like I stated before, Adam Dunn had a horrible 200 at bat stretch to end the season. If thats all we look at, then we would think Dunn is going to be absolutely atrocious next season. Instead, we take what we know about Dunn (wont ever hit for a decent average, walks a lot, hits for lots of power, cant play defense if his life depended on it) and go ok, .250/.380/.520 is not out of the realm of possibilty for Dunn at all. Do the same thing with Stubbs (probably wont ever hit for a high average, walks quite a bit, has great speed, can steal you bases, plays great defense, has good power) and he projects to be a solid player. 200 at bats in his first season as a pro dont change what he brings to the table.

lollipopcurve
02-19-2007, 04:01 PM
Adam Dunn will give the Reds somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 doubles. sometimes more, sometimes less. He'll give the Reds 40+ HR's.

Are you saying Drew Stubbs projects to be that kind of player?

cuz I'm not seeing that. at least not yet.

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying Stubbs projects to have some strengths and weaknesses that are similar to Dunn's strengths and weaknesses. IN looking at the details, Dunn has more power (he has more power than almost any player on the planet) and I'd be surprised if Stubbs' OBP can be as good as Dunn's. But you have to remember that Stubbs' assets include good defense in the middle of the diamond -- a major plus. Any evaluation of Stubbs that ignores that is a major miscalculation of his worth as a prospect.

TRF
02-19-2007, 04:06 PM
I think HS position players are a different animal. But more on that in a minute.

Yep. I regard Linecum as a suspect. I'd have regarded Weaver that way too. But both are suspects in an area the Reds are hopelessly bankrupt in. Both were college pitchers. Both close to contributing. I see Cueto in AA this year too, but I am not sure that isn't rushing him. He started last year at Dayton. If he gets jumped to AAA, well Low A to AAA in less than 18 months is some speedy promotions for a pitcher of his age and background.

Which brings me to the HS players being a different animal. And you touched on it yourself: Coaching.

Drew Stubbs had the benefit of three years of coaching at a Big 12 school. Bruce's line of .257/.358/.457 was still better than what Stubbs did, even though Stubbs had the benefit of better coaching and facilities for three years prior to his professional debut.

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 04:12 PM
I think HS position players are a different animal. But more on that in a minute.

Yep. I regard Linecum as a suspect. I'd have regarded Weaver that way too. But both are suspects in an area the Reds are hopelessly bankrupt in. Both were college pitchers. Both close to contributing. I see Cueto in AA this year too, but I am not sure that isn't rushing him. He started last year at Dayton. If he gets jumped to AAA, well Low A to AAA in less than 18 months is some speedy promotions for a pitcher of his age and background.

Which brings me to the HS players being a different animal. And you touched on it yourself: Coaching.

Drew Stubbs had the benefit of three years of coaching at a Big 12 school. Bruce's line of .257/.358/.457 was still better than what Stubbs did, even though Stubbs had the benefit of better coaching and facilities for three years prior to his professional debut.
And now he is going to get even better coaching either in Dayton or Sarasota. I think you are just putting way to much stress on 200 at bats for Stubbs. The minor leagues are all about learning and growing as a player. That is what they are there for. Sure, Lincecum is closer than Stubbs. It doesnt mean he will have the staying power Stubbs does though. With his mechanics and size, I wouldnt doubt it if Stubbs has a much longer and more productive major league career than Lincecum does. I also dont get the whole "closer to contributing" thing. Isnt the idea to get the guy who contributes the best in the end? If that is a Homer Bailey (comparing to Weaver) or a Drew Stubbs (comparing to Lincecum) then I dont care when they get to the Reds, as long as they produce when they do get there.

TRF
02-19-2007, 04:23 PM
You mean if they get there. Right now, only Weaver has pitched in the major leagues. Maybe long term Bailey will be better. And maybe his arm falls off this year. Weaver has produced, Bailey might.

Same goes for Stubbs vs Linecum. Linecum barring injury will likely be in a Giants uni this year. Stubbs will likely be a Dayton Dragon. Maybe he goes all Jay Bruce on the Midwest League. Or maybe he turns in a BJ Szymanski performance.

So far, Stubbs has put up numbers inferior to Jay Bruce, even though he should be more advanced than Bruce.

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 04:29 PM
Weaver is having serious arm questions right now as well, Bailey seems to be healthy as can be, and is the #1 pitching prospect in baseball. Weaver did very well last season, but this season things are starting off badly and he seems to think he needs to "pitch tendonitis out of his arm". For some reason that sounds like a very bad idea, and apparently its been something that has been lingering with him since High School. I will take my chances with Bailey.

As for Bruce putting up better numbers than Stubbs, I expect that. If Stubbs came out in the 2005 draft, he would have been a late first round/early second round pick. There arent many players with the talent that Jay has. With that said, that doesnt mean Stubbs should be written off as bust because he has been outperformed by one of the best prospects in baseball.

TRF
02-19-2007, 04:42 PM
He wasn't just outperformed by Jay Bruce.

He was out performed by half the starters on his team. All with the same experience. Not out performed a little either. These guys dominated the Pioneer League. So if coaching is a key component, and I agree that it is, then What has Stubbs shown that says he will take that coaching and leapfrog 4 guys that had monster seasons compared to Stubbs?

I think projections are important. I do, but I prefer results mixed in. There were a lot of scouts that had serious questions about Stubbs' bat. He didn't do a thing to quiet those concerns. Meanwhile, after having a "meh" first year as a professional, Stubbs makes top 10 lists for the Reds all over the place while most of the four guys that out hit him in every single category go largely unnoticed.

edabbs44
02-19-2007, 04:47 PM
Bottom line, Stubbs looked horrific last season. He's got talent and athletic ability. He could turn it around. He could also pull a Szymanski.

I'm hoping he doesn't go the way of BJ, but I wish Cincy wasn't in this position. I wish they drafted a pitcher. Whether it be Lincecum, Bard, Scherzer, Kiker or someone else, this team did not need an outfielder, plain and simple.

And for the record, the Watson pick might look worse than Stubbs when it's all said and done. I wasn't really excited about these two guys in the first 2 rounds.

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 04:50 PM
And for the record, the Watson pick might look worse than Stubbs. I wasn't really excited about these two guys in the first 2 rounds.

I am with you that at the time, I hated the first 2 round picks..... HATED them. But, both players have lots of potential, we just need the organization to groom them.

TRF
02-19-2007, 04:55 PM
I am with you that at the time, I hated the first 2 round picks..... HATED them. But, both players have lots of potential, we just need the organization to groom them.

But you can say that about every player.

Truth: Scouts had doubts about Stubbs bat.
Truth:Good pitching is harder to find than good hitting.
Truth: At the start of 2006, the Reds best pitchers were at High A or lower, and the offense for the next 5-6 years seemed pretty set.

Stubbs was a bad pick, and he hasn't done much to distinguish himself. Now I hope he turns it on this year, but I'm not seeing it. I really do hope I am wrong since Krivsky has done his best to decimate the Reds offense.

Handofdeath
02-19-2007, 04:58 PM
I think HS position players are a different animal. But more on that in a minute.

Yep. I regard Linecum as a suspect. I'd have regarded Weaver that way too. But both are suspects in an area the Reds are hopelessly bankrupt in. Both were college pitchers. Both close to contributing. I see Cueto in AA this year too, but I am not sure that isn't rushing him. He started last year at Dayton. If he gets jumped to AAA, well Low A to AAA in less than 18 months is some speedy promotions for a pitcher of his age and background.

Which brings me to the HS players being a different animal. And you touched on it yourself: Coaching.

Drew Stubbs had the benefit of three years of coaching at a Big 12 school. Bruce's line of .257/.358/.457 was still better than what Stubbs did, even though Stubbs had the benefit of better coaching and facilities for three years prior to his professional debut.

Some guys just take longer to develop and it's not fair to pick and choose who's worthy of being patient with and who isn't. The same rules should apply to everybody. I know of a player who played in parts of 6 minor league seasons. His career minor league numbers are worse than Stubbs one season.

Stubbs .257/.358/.457
Player B .251/.312/.412 in in 998 Minor League AB's

We'll go back to Player B in a moment. This much I know. Coming out of college Stubbs was ranked by Baseball America as
1. Best college athlete in the draft
2. 3rd best power hitter coming out of college
3. 2nd fastest baserunner
4. 3rd strongest collegiate arm
5. Best defensive player coming out of college

Seems to me Stubbs has more than enough talent that he deserves a little patience. Player B didn't have his numbers TRF but you have stated on more than one occasion that if Player B just received a decent opportunity he would be great. Drew Stubbs was a heck of a player in college and deserves the same patience that you have shown for a former Reds player by the name of Wily Mo Pena.

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 04:59 PM
But you can say that about every player.

Truth: Scouts had doubts about Stubbs bat.
Truth:Good pitching is harder to find than good hitting.
Truth: At the start of 2006, the Reds best pitchers were at High A or lower, and the offense for the next 5-6 years seemed pretty set.

Stubbs was a bad pick, and he hasn't done much to distinguish himself. Now I hope he turns it on this year, but I'm not seeing it. I really do hope I am wrong since Krivsky has done his best to decimate the Reds offense.

Dont get me wrong, I still am not happy with the Stubbs pick. If I could redo it, I wouldnt take him and that isnt based on his performance in Billings. However, if the Reds truly thought he was the best play available, then I dont fault them for taking him. You cant draft based on what you have, you have to draft based on talent and who you think is the best guy.

TRF
02-19-2007, 05:16 PM
Some guys just take longer to develop and it's not fair to pick and choose who's worthy of being patient with and who isn't. The same rules should apply to everybody. I know of a player who played in parts of 6 minor league seasons. His career minor league numbers are worse than Stubbs one season.

Stubbs .257/.358/.457
Player B .251/.312/.412 in in 998 Minor League AB's

We'll go back to Player B in a moment. This much I know. Coming out of college Stubbs was ranked by Baseball America as
1. Best college athlete in the draft
2. 3rd best power hitter coming out of college
3. 2nd fastest baserunner
4. 3rd strongest collegiate arm
5. Best defensive player coming out of college

Seems to me Stubbs has more than enough talent that he deserves a little patience. Player B didn't have his numbers TRF but you have stated on more than one occasion that if Player B just received a decent opportunity he would be great. Drew Stubbs was a heck of a player in college and deserves the same patience that you have shown for a former Reds player by the name of Wily Mo Pena.

Stubbs doesn't have half the Talent of WMP. Also Pena had to overcome a ridiculous major league contract and made his professional debut at age 17.

not a fair comparison.


Dont get me wrong, I still am not happy with the Stubbs pick. If I could redo it, I wouldnt take him and that isnt based on his performance in Billings. However, if the Reds truly thought he was the best play available, then I dont fault them for taking him. You cant draft based on what you have, you have to draft based on talent and who you think is the best guy.

ding ding. this is what I was waiting for, and it's an issue that I have argued for about for most of last year.

These are the same guys that helped form opinions that Joe Freaking Mays had something left to offer. And Yan and Franklin and Majewski. Say what you want about DanO, but his drafts combined with the talent acquired in the international talent pool under his watch were far superior to what came before and after his tenure. Krivsky's talent evaluators picked Stubbs. That much I agree with you on. I just doubt their ability to judge talent.

dougdirt
02-19-2007, 05:23 PM
TRF, I am a big supporter of Dano. I think he was dealt a horrible set of cards and he was overruled on several trades that would have drastically improved our club and overridden on the Eric Milton deal that he did not want to sign becuase Carl Lindner was worried about bad PR of losing Paul Wilson after 2004 and not spending any money so he had to get that big name that was left. Do I doubt the ability to scout from Krivskys guy? Not yet. I didnt like the Stubbs or Watson picks, especially where they were taken when other players I wanted were available.... but I liked the Valaika pick and the Ravin pick. Time will tell how they did.

TRF
02-19-2007, 05:43 PM
Oh, don't get me wrong... IMO DanO was an awful GM. But he did have two pretty good drafts, and injuries to pitchers were down under his watch. Krivsky has expanded and modified the pitch counts, got rid of the silly take the first pitch, but his promotions were... odd. Cueto was promoted while Wood was not. Ward should have gone to Sarasota ahead or Cueto. Pelland was sent to AA even though he should have repeated High A. But DanO overpromoted Pelland too.

Is Krivsky a better GM than DanO was? probably. but that ain't saying that much. DanO was better at eyeing young talent. Krivsky is better at LTC's. Krivsky made some good trades, and some bad ones. Dano had horrible FA signings, but had to deal with Lindner and Allen.

Betterread
02-19-2007, 06:03 PM
I think any comparison of a pitcher and an centerfielder is flawed. They have such different roles on the baseball field. I think the proper comparison for Stubbs would be - was he the best centerfielder in the 2006 draft? I would give this year's draft 3-4 years, any sooner and you risk having your analysis be superficial.

Handofdeath
02-19-2007, 06:14 PM
Stubbs doesn't have half the Talent of WMP. Also Pena had to overcome a ridiculous major league contract and made his professional debut at age 17.

not a fair comparison.

The only talent WMP has is hitting homers. Doesn't walk, can't steal bases, can't play defense and Boston is already talking about trading him. And his being 17 years old when he made his debut makes him about a year younger than the average Rookie League player. So I don't have much sympathy. I would also point out that WMP being 17 was in Dominican years. Stubbs was a very good college baseball player for at least 2 seasons.

TRF
02-19-2007, 07:04 PM
The only talent WMP has is hitting homers. Doesn't walk, can't steal bases, can't play defense and Boston is already talking about trading him. And his being 17 years old when he made his debut makes him about a year younger than the average Rookie League player. So I don't have much sympathy. I would also point out that WMP being 17 was in Dominican years. Stubbs was a very good college baseball player for at least 2 seasons.

He was actually first signed at 15, had the deal voided by MLB and his agent took advantage of the kid and got him signed to a MLB contract. He never got the chance to develop properly. That said last year at age 24 his BA was .301, OBP .349 and a .489 SLG. For the first time in his career, he dominated RH pitching. He's a lousy RF, but an average to above average CF. go figure.

The real difference though is his contract. He never had time to develop in the minors. he lost a season when he was in AA with Dunn and Kearns due to an injury. I doubt Boston is seriously considering trading him considering Drew failed his physical.

And as for WMP's "Dominican" age it has been more than confirmed that he was actually younger than first reported.

Handofdeath
02-20-2007, 08:52 PM
He was actually first signed at 15, had the deal voided by MLB and his agent took advantage of the kid and got him signed to a MLB contract. He never got the chance to develop properly. That said last year at age 24 his BA was .301, OBP .349 and a .489 SLG. For the first time in his career, he dominated RH pitching. He's a lousy RF, but an average to above average CF. go figure.

The real difference though is his contract. He never had time to develop in the minors. he lost a season when he was in AA with Dunn and Kearns due to an injury. I doubt Boston is seriously considering trading him considering Drew failed his physical.

And as for WMP's "Dominican" age it has been more than confirmed that he was actually younger than first reported.

I was kidding about his age but any Dominican player must have his age questioned. You're right in that he never got the chance to to develop properly with the Reds in the minors but he has had plenty of time to learn on the job in the majors. He had great numbers last year, but for only half a season. He still hasn't done it over a full season and what's more his OPS the last two months of 2006 was under .800. Do your research and you'll find that Pena was on the block all winter. The Sox tried to get Chad Codero for him and also talked with the Astros about one of their relievers. You'll also find that he'll be platooning once more this season. He'll be starting according to MLB.com against Lefties and playing against some righties. Pena has monumental power but you overrate him. He has few other skills. To say that Stubbs doesn't have half the talent of WMP is willfully ignoring facts. Make any excuse you want but Pena has never been successful at any level for any extended length of time. Stubbs was a Grade A All American college baseball player who played in the toughest college baseball conference in the country and he was damn good there. Just because his first pro season didn't go well doesn't mean he'll never be worth a damn as a major leaguer. I would also mention that he played at Billings right after a full season of college baseball. He played 118 total games last season. The most he ever played before was 72. Perhaps playing at Billings he was tired. Being the Big 12 Co-MVP of the year and having a 1.019 OPS that season and stealing those 26 bases for Texas can wear a guy out. Did I mention that Stubbs was also a member of UT's NCAA championship team in 2005 as well? .311/.384/.527/.911 with 32 SB's in 38 attempts that season. And played an outstanding CF to boot. Stubbs has more overall talent than Pena will ever have, no matter how far WMP can hit a baseball. Stubbs deserves more than the benefit of the doubt.

TRF
02-21-2007, 10:16 AM
For all the accomplishments you point out about Stubbs, I'll counter with the following:

He was out hit, SIGNIFICANTLY by four other guys on his team that also made their professional debut in 2006. Scouts had serious questions about his bat and thought the pick was a reach by the Reds.

WMP had 26 HR's in 336 AB's in 2004. At age 22. Wanna see the list of guys in MLB history that have done that? If I were running the show in Boston, I'd start him in CF over Crisp. Yes you'd lose a little defensively, Crisp is a good CF, but the gain offensively would be huge. Crips has 43 HR's. Lifetime. Pena could hit 43 this year if he got 500 AB's.

As for learning on the job, it can take years. I wasn't good at my current job until 3 year ago. This is my seventh year here. There was a big learning curve from my previous career to my current one, and very little training.

The main reason I don't give Stubbs the benefit of the doubt is that he never should have been selected in the first place. I hope he proves me wrong though.

bucksfan2
02-21-2007, 11:10 AM
What do you guys expect out of draft pick? Assume Stubbs makes it to the majors and hits around .260. Wouldn't that make him a very effective player? You also have to realize that he played a full college season that I think is starting as we speak and then went right into minor league ball. What does the drain on your body do to your over all game? I think you have to give him a pass on last years season and let him prove himself this season.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 11:16 AM
TRF, so after all of this you basically admit that you have no faith in him becuase you didnt like the draft pick?

BRM
02-21-2007, 11:20 AM
What do you guys expect out of draft pick? Assume Stubbs makes it to the majors and hits around .260. Wouldn't that make him a very effective player? You also have to realize that he played a full college season that I think is starting as we speak and then went right into minor league ball. What does the drain on your body do to your over all game? I think you have to give him a pass on last years season and let him prove himself this season.

I think most on here would be happy if Stubbs makes it to the majors and hits .260 while playing great defense. If he can add an OBP in the .330-.340 range, folks will be happy. I think quite a few have serius doubts that he'll get that far though.

As far as fatigue, the four players who outhit him in Billings all played a full college season as well. It didn't seem to affect their ability to hit well in rookie ball. That said, I'm willing to give him a pass simply because I really want to see him play well and rise through the system. I hope he "breaks out" and rakes in A ball this season.

edabbs44
02-21-2007, 12:11 PM
I think most on here would be happy if Stubbs makes it to the majors and hits .260 while playing great defense. If he can add an OBP in the .330-.340 range, folks will be happy. I think quite a few have serius doubts that he'll get that far though.

As far as fatigue, the four players who outhit him in Billings all played a full college season as well. It didn't seem to affect their ability to hit well in rookie ball. That said, I'm willing to give him a pass simply because I really want to see him play well and rise through the system. I hope he "breaks out" and rakes in A ball this season.

I'm hoping he proves me wrong, but last year was a huge disappointment. Going from the Big 12 to rookie ball is pretty much a step down.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 12:36 PM
I'm hoping he proves me wrong, but last year was a huge disappointment. Going from the Big 12 to rookie ball is pretty much a step down.

Yeah, and he played nearly the entire season with an injury that no one wants to be able to see as a reason for him struggling.

edabbs44
02-21-2007, 01:11 PM
Yeah, and he played nearly the entire season with an injury that no one wants to be able to see as a reason for him struggling.

His concussion?

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 01:19 PM
Midway through the year, he got nicked a little bit, had a couple of injuries he had to deal with, then he had more of a major injury toward the end of the year that he had to deal with.


That is from the Mustangs GM Gary Roller, thanks to Redlegnation who did an interview with him last week.

edabbs44
02-21-2007, 01:41 PM
That is from the Mustangs GM Gary Roller, thanks to Redlegnation who did an interview with him last week.

He might be right, but I hate when people come up with injuries after the fact.

TRF
02-21-2007, 01:44 PM
TRF, so after all of this you basically admit that you have no faith in him becuase you didnt like the draft pick?

sue me... I'm human.

One of the reasons I didn't like the pick was that scouts had doubts about him transitioning to the pro game.

Another reason was I did prefer Linecum.

Another reason is the Reds talent evaluators have kind of a well crappy track record in 2006.

I didn't like the pick when it was made, and I don't like it in hindsight as well. I hope I am wrong though. It's crow I'd gladly eat.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 01:53 PM
sue me... I'm human.

One of the reasons I didn't like the pick was that scouts had doubts about him transitioning to the pro game.

Another reason was I did prefer Linecum.

Another reason is the Reds talent evaluators have kind of a well crappy track record in 2006.

I didn't like the pick when it was made, and I don't like it in hindsight as well. I hope I am wrong though. It's crow I'd gladly eat.

I would have rather had Billy Rowell myself, but that doesnt mean I think Drew Stubbs is a failure for it, becuase it has nothing to do with him.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 01:54 PM
He might be right, but I hate when people come up with injuries after the fact.

Stubbs never came out and said it.... the GM of his team said it. I could see your point as using it as an excuse had Stubbs said it, but the GM said it, and he really has no affiliation with the Reds staff, coaches or management. He just gets to do the Billings Mustangs stuff, he has no say over players or anything like that.

TRF
02-21-2007, 02:01 PM
I would have rather had Billy Rowell myself, but that doesnt mean I think Drew Stubbs is a failure for it, becuase it has nothing to do with him.

It does in a way. Something about Stubbs made the Reds talent evaluators say sign this guy. Something that most scouts didn't see. Something that most publications didn't see either.

Now considering this is the same organization that signed Juan Castro to a two year deal as a player, (ugh) I wonder where Krivsky is getting this keen insight from.

Let me say this. If Stubbs is in Dayton all year and posts another .760 OPS will you still be in his corner? And since he was a 1st round pick, he'll get multiple chances to prove he was worth his signing bonus.

Again... I hope he does. I just don't think he will.

edabbs44
02-21-2007, 02:20 PM
Stubbs never came out and said it.... the GM of his team said it. I could see your point as using it as an excuse had Stubbs said it, but the GM said it, and he really has no affiliation with the Reds staff, coaches or management. He just gets to do the Billings Mustangs stuff, he has no say over players or anything like that.

You never know. But if he had a really "serious" injury, I don't think this would be the first we'd be hearing about it.

He was all over the place in that answer...saying that they knew he would struggle off the bat and then bringing the injuries up.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 02:22 PM
It does in a way. Something about Stubbs made the Reds talent evaluators say sign this guy. Something that most scouts didn't see. Something that most publications didn't see either.

Now considering this is the same organization that signed Juan Castro to a two year deal as a player, (ugh) I wonder where Krivsky is getting this keen insight from.

Let me say this. If Stubbs is in Dayton all year and posts another .760 OPS will you still be in his corner? And since he was a 1st round pick, he'll get multiple chances to prove he was worth his signing bonus.

Again... I hope he does. I just don't think he will.
Do I agree with some of the teams scouts? not at all. If next season Stubbs posts a .760 OPS in the MWL, no, I will not be in his corner. But if he posts an OPS of .800 of better, I will take that out of someone who plays the defense he does in CF. Will he get more chances than most to succeed becuase of where he was drafted, sure.
As for his draft positioning, if the Reds didnt take him, he still was going to go in the top 15. I dont know where you read otherwise, but I would be interested in seeing it if you could find it again becuase nothing I saw suggested otherwise. The only thing any scouts had to say bad about his game that I read was his inibility to make contact may be a problem as a pro. Thats it. Everything else rated above average except his arm, which rated at average.

edabbs44
02-21-2007, 02:31 PM
It does in a way. Something about Stubbs made the Reds talent evaluators say sign this guy. Something that most scouts didn't see. Something that most publications didn't see either.

Most scouts did see the talent and most publications did as well. But they also saw the risk.

Everyone knew the risk was his bat.

Remember in fantasy football a couple of years ago when Priest Holmes was the man? And towards the end of his career, no one wanted to take him b/c you knew he would get hurt and LJ would finally take over? But someone had to take him, b/c if he panned out he would carry your team? So he would always go after the sure things (LT and Alexander), like at #3 or #4?

That's what I felt like with this draft pick. The Reds were the first team who thought that there was no one worth taking over Stubbs and the associated risks.

If he learns to hit, he will be awesome. If he doesn't, he might be ok.

That's not the kind of risk I think you should be taking with your top 10 pick.

lollipopcurve
02-21-2007, 02:36 PM
That's not the kind of risk I think you should be taking with your top 10 pick.

Some would say Lincecum's small stature and unorthodox delivery make him a high risk for injury. Risk is in the eyes of the beholder.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 02:36 PM
Most scouts did see the talent and most publications did as well. But they also saw the risk.

Everyone knew the risk was his bat.

Remember in fantasy football a couple of years ago when Priest Holmes was the man? And towards the end of his career, no one wanted to take him b/c you knew he would get hurt and LJ would finally take over? But someone had to take him, b/c if he panned out he would carry your team? So he would always go after the sure things (LT and Alexander), like at #3 or #4?

That's what I felt like with this draft pick. The Reds were the first team who thought that there was no one worth taking over Stubbs and the associated risks.

If he learns to hit, he will be awesome. If he doesn't, he might be ok.

That's not the kind of risk I think you should be taking with your top 10 pick.

Very good post. With that said I agree with you that you dont make that type of pick 90% of the time. But with last years draft being so bad, that might be the year you take that pick.

TRF
02-21-2007, 02:38 PM
Teams like the Reds, or rather teams in the same situation the Reds were in during the '06 season can't afford to take those risks.

Phillips wasn't a risk. he was more of a flyer. low risk, high reward. Same with Ross.

But a 1st round pick going to a position player with questions about his bat? For a pitching starved organization that's a real head scratcher.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 02:39 PM
TRF, you keep saying the Reds are pitching starved.... they arent. The Reds have much better pitching in the system than they do hitting... especially going into last years draft.

edabbs44
02-21-2007, 02:51 PM
TRF, you keep saying the Reds are pitching starved.... they arent. The Reds have much better pitching in the system than they do hitting... especially going into last years draft.

The Reds have Bailey. Wood and Cueto are good prospects, but not ones you would really bet money on.

Smaller mkt teams will always be pitching starved, especially since the Meches of the world are commanding 8 figure salaries.

Bats are easier to come by...Cincy should follow the Marlins and build up their pitching.

TRF
02-21-2007, 02:54 PM
TRF, you keep saying the Reds are pitching starved.... they arent. The Reds have much better pitching in the system than they do hitting... especially going into last years draft.

at the beginning of 2006, the Reds best pitching prospects were all at Sarasota or Dayton. All were at High A or lower.

Yes, that is pitching starved. It's better this year as there were once again no major injury catastrophes hitting the pitchers. The top pitching prospect will likely start in AAA. The next best pitching prospect is Cueto, who might start in AA, or he might repeat High A. Wood will likely be in Sarasota.

Linecum could have been starting this year alongside Bailey at AAA. Milton's contract is up at the end of the year, and the Reds can let Lohse walk as well. The 2008 rotation could look like this:

Harang
Arroyo
Bailey
Linecum
and a fifth guy like EZ.

Now that could be some rotation.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 03:11 PM
The Reds have Bailey. Wood and Cueto are good prospects, but not ones you would really bet money on.

Smaller mkt teams will always be pitching starved, especially since the Meches of the world are commanding 8 figure salaries.

Bats are easier to come by...Cincy should follow the Marlins and build up their pitching.

To follow the Marlins plan, the Reds need to trade Griffey, Dunn, Arroyo, Harang and probably a few other guys.

As for Wood and Cueto, they are two of the more talented guys in the organization. What I was getting at is my top 5 prospects include Wood, Cueto, Bruce, Bailey and Votto. Not in that order. But after that there are a lot of questions about everyone left. I think after that the Reds have more promise on the ptiching side than a the hitting side. Sure you dont want to bet on prospects, but if you want to do that, you never put your money on any pitching prospect.

flyer85
02-21-2007, 03:13 PM
BTW, in Goldstein's(BP) top 100 prospects Lincecum is #6.

Bailey is #4 and Bruce #10.

Might've been nice to have 3 in the top 10 and two likely ready to contribute in 2007.

Stubbs was just outside the top 100.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 03:13 PM
at the beginning of 2006, the Reds best pitching prospects were all at Sarasota or Dayton. All were at High A or lower.

Yes, that is pitching starved. It's better this year as there were once again no major injury catastrophes hitting the pitchers. The top pitching prospect will likely start in AAA. The next best pitching prospect is Cueto, who might start in AA, or he might repeat High A. Wood will likely be in Sarasota.

Linecum could have been starting this year alongside Bailey at AAA. Milton's contract is up at the end of the year, and the Reds can let Lohse walk as well. The 2008 rotation could look like this:

Harang
Arroyo
Bailey
Linecum
and a fifth guy like EZ.

Now that could be some rotation.

Sure, but fast forward to July 2007 and you could have Bailey in the majors, Cueto in AA and Wood could also be on his way to joining him there if he performs well. Sure Lincecum looks good right now, but I can not stress this enough.... he has thrown 31.2 professional innings. Thats it. They were VERY good innings for sure. But he has a ridiculously small sample size, and a ridiculously small frame to work with. There are a lot of people worried about him holding up.... a lot.

flyer85
02-21-2007, 03:15 PM
If he learns to hit, he will be awesome. If he doesn't, he might be ok.
if he doesn't he may spend his life in perpetual A ball with BJ.

bucksfan2
02-21-2007, 03:23 PM
Has anyone seen Stubbs play? Im wondering if his inability to hit is because of some flaw in his swing. For example if he had a flaw in his swing a college coach would more than likely Stubbs be Stubbs because he would have a better chance of winning. Whereas when he gets to Billings, the manager there probably could care less about winning and more about the development of his players. When you aren't overwhelmed by winning you can do more tinkering with a player than whey you are trying to win a title. You've seen examples of college coaches throwing out their ace pitcher with a tired arm on short rest to hopefully close a game. They really have no regard for anything else than winning.

Do you really think that the reds, an organization that has been so hurt by pitcher injuries, could risk taking a guy with a questionable makeup and delivery.

flyer85
02-21-2007, 03:31 PM
I read an article by some supposed "hitting guru" who made the point that his hands and body are disconnected during his swing and it was one of the worst he had seen. Made same statement about only getting by because of exceptional ability. Predicted that he doesn't get it fixed his hitting will get progressively worse as he moves up the minors.

In the end he will be defined by performance, not predictions.

edabbs44
02-21-2007, 03:33 PM
To follow the Marlins plan, the Reds need to trade Griffey, Dunn, Arroyo, Harang and probably a few other guys.

As for Wood and Cueto, they are two of the more talented guys in the organization. What I was getting at is my top 5 prospects include Wood, Cueto, Bruce, Bailey and Votto. Not in that order. But after that there are a lot of questions about everyone left. I think after that the Reds have more promise on the ptiching side than a the hitting side. Sure you dont want to bet on prospects, but if you want to do that, you never put your money on any pitching prospect.

Griffey could go and I wouldn't bat an eye.

Dunn would be the Cincy version of Cabrera.

Arroyo could go and probably get good value for him. I would like to see that. With Lohse, Milton and Saarloos behind the top 2, I think Arroyo's value will be wasted with the Reds over the next few years. With Arroyo, they'll go 74-88. Without him they'll go 67-93.

Harang would play the role of Willis.

To say the Reds have more pitching in the minors than hitting is like saying the homeless guy in front of Saks Fifth Avenue is living better than the homeless guy in front of Blimpie's.

I'd rather be pitching rich in the minors. The Reds are not that, so keep building the pitching.

Handofdeath
02-21-2007, 04:19 PM
It does in a way. Something about Stubbs made the Reds talent evaluators say sign this guy. Something that most scouts didn't see. Something that most publications didn't see either.

You act as if they signed the guy off some sandlot in Amarillo. The Astros drafted the guy out of high school in the 3rd round. Baseball America also reported right before the Reds drafted Stubbs that if Dayton Moore were already calling the shots for the Royals draft-wise he would advocate taking Stubbs #1 overall in the draft. They also went on to project Stubbs as going to the Reds at #8 and said that Baltimore would take him at #9 if he were available. If the Reds didn't take him, Stubbs absolutely was going to be drafted in the Top 15. If you don't like the pick or don't think much of his potential, that's one thing. But to make the above statements? You're better than that.

TRF
02-21-2007, 04:21 PM
There are reasons the Royal suck. That same GM just handed Gil freaking Meche 55 million to be... Gil Meche.

Not a ringing endorsement.

And you're just bitter that we didn't stick around that sandlot long enough to take BP. :)

lollipopcurve
02-21-2007, 04:23 PM
To say the Reds have more pitching in the minors than hitting is like saying the homeless guy in front of Saks Fifth Avenue is living better than the homeless guy in front of Blimpie's.

Baseball Prospectus has the Reds' system ranked 10th -- top third of all systems. Why this hyperbolic trashing of the system continues is beyond me.

TRF
02-21-2007, 04:30 PM
Baseball Prospectus has the Reds' system ranked 10th -- top third of all systems. Why this hyperbolic trashing of the system continues is beyond me.

Gardner
Pauly
Howington
Gruler
Aramboles
Basham
Hall
Gilman (sp?)

That's why. When all your best pitching prospects are at High A and below, which was the case at the beginning of 2006, and when all your best pitching prospects in the 6 years prior ALL got injured, it's easy to be jaded.

lollipopcurve
02-21-2007, 04:58 PM
Gardner
Pauly
Howington
Gruler
Aramboles
Basham
Hall
Gilman (sp?)

That's why. When all your best pitching prospects are at High A and below, which was the case at the beginning of 2006, and when all your best pitching prospects in the 6 years prior ALL got injured, it's easy to be jaded.

Yeah, I guess, but it's 07 now.

That same jaded perspective had people howling when the Reds took Homer in 2004 -- and he's turned out quite well so far. Things have started to turn around, as they have a way of doing.
________________

M2
02-21-2007, 05:09 PM
Baseball Prospectus has the Reds' system ranked 10th -- top third of all systems. Why this hyperbolic trashing of the system continues is beyond me.

Frankly, I thought the BP ranking wasn't worth the electrons on which it was printed.

The Reds are a brutally thin organization and I simply don't see how they merit an organizational ranking in the top half (no matter how much you might like Bailey, Bruce and Votto).

My guess is BA will put them 20-22 range, which would more reasonably match the progress made over the past year. They didn't go from bottom five to top ten in one fell swoop while only adding the guys from the recent draft.

TRF
02-21-2007, 05:19 PM
Yeah, I guess, but it's 07 now.

That same jaded perspective had people howling when the Reds took Homer in 2004 -- and he's turned out quite well so far. Things have started to turn around, as they have a way of doing.

Started to turn around is right. And it has been a pretty decent start, with injuries down significantly. But it's going to take more. The reds need to bring in a ton of pitching. They had a shot at one of the better ranked pitchers in the minors last year. Instead they brought possibly another Szymanski.


Frankly, I thought the BP ranking wasn't worth the electrons on which it was printed.

The Reds are a brutally thin organization and I simply don't see how they merit an organizational ranking in the top half (no matter how much you might like Bailey, Bruce and Votto).

My guess is BA will put them in the low 20s, which would more reasonably match the progress made over the past year. They didn't go from bottom five to top ten in one fell swoop while only adding the guys from the recent draft.

BA is tools over performance, BP the opposite. I'm thinking the truth lies somewhere in the middle. There has been improvement, but the plan to build an organization through the minor leagues should be pretty clear to read. Reading Krivsky's plan is like chimps deciphering Chinese.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 05:22 PM
To say the Reds have more pitching in the minors than hitting is like saying the homeless guy in front of Saks Fifth Avenue is living better than the homeless guy in front of Blimpie's.

I'd rather be pitching rich in the minors. The Reds are not that, so keep building the pitching.

Not really at all. There are a handful of Reds hitting prospects that even show life of something outside of Votto and Bruce. There are quite a bit more live arms in the Reds system with some projection past Bailey, Cueto and Wood.


There are reasons the Royal suck. That same GM just handed Gil freaking Meche 55 million to be... Gil Meche.

Not a ringing endorsement.

And you're just bitter that we didn't stick around that sandlot long enough to take BP. :)
The Royals also have one of the best systems in all of baseball.


Gardner
Pauly
Howington
Gruler
Aramboles
Basham
Hall
Gilman (sp?)

That's why. When all your best pitching prospects are at High A and below, which was the case at the beginning of 2006, and when all your best pitching prospects in the 6 years prior ALL got injured, it's easy to be jaded.

And how long ago was the last one of those guys hurt, 3 years ago? Its been a while since any of those guys were hurt.


Frankly, I thought the BP ranking wasn't worth the electrons on which it was printed.

The Reds are a brutally thin organization and I simply don't see how they merit an organizational ranking in the top half (no matter how much you might like Bailey, Bruce and Votto).

My guess is BA will put them in the low 20s, which would more reasonably match the progress made over the past year. They didn't go from bottom five to top ten in one fell swoop while only adding the guys from the recent draft.
The Reds system isnt nearly as thin as you percieve it. I would be very surprised if the Reds are any lower than say 17th when BA comes out with their rankings. The Reds have 2, legit top 10 prospects in all of baseball. That carries a TON of weight, as those guys are much more likely to pan out than any of the 5 B- type prospects that "add depth". While the Reds system is a little thin, it isnt like they have 5 guys, then no one. Sure they didnt go from 25-10 in one season becuase of the 2006 draft, but it sure helped that Votto, Bailey and Bruce all had GREAT seasons to back up what their scouting reports say about them. Johnny Cueto coming out of nowhere surely helped as well. Say what you want about the Reds system, but it is doing a fine job right now.

Oh, BP also just came out with its Top 100 prospects.
#4 - Homer Bailey
#9 - Jay Bruce
#53 - Joey Votto
#101-110 - Drew Stubbs

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 05:23 PM
Started to turn around is right. And it has been a pretty decent start, with injuries down significantly. But it's going to take more. The reds need to bring in a ton of pitching. They had a shot at one of the better ranked pitchers in the minors last year. Instead they brought possibly another Szymanski.


I prefer to look at it as they possibly brought in another Mike Cameron.

BRM
02-21-2007, 05:27 PM
And how long ago was the last one of those guys hurt, 3 years ago? Its been a while since any of those guys were hurt.


I thought Gardner and Pauly got hurt in 2005?

TRF
02-21-2007, 05:28 PM
The Royals also have one of the best systems in all of baseball.

Since 1990 they have been above .500 for a season 4 times.

With that many high 1st round picks even they could get one or two right.

The Royals flat out suck as an organization. But they are charitable.

They donated 55 million dollars to the "Keep Gil Meche from being poor Foundation."

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 05:29 PM
I thought Gardner and Pauly got hurt in 2005?

True.... he didnt list Gardner and for some reason I was thinking Pauley was '04.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 05:30 PM
Since 1990 they have been above .500 for a season 4 times.

With that many high 1st round picks even they could get one or two right.

The Royals flat out suck as an organization. But they are charitable.

They donated 55 million dollars to the "Keep Gil Meche from being poor Foundation."

And not an ounce of that has anything to do with their Farm System being good.

BRM
02-21-2007, 05:31 PM
True.... he didnt list Gardner and for some reason I was thinking Pauley was '04.

Gardner is on his list. Either way, injuries seem to be way down. Let's hope that trend continues. :)

TRF
02-21-2007, 05:33 PM
And not an ounce of that has anything to do with their Farm System being good.

What?

Having a top 5 pick almost every year? that doesn't help? And that farm has produced what? consecutive 100 loss seasons at the major league level.

Color me unimpressed.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 05:39 PM
Gardner is on his list. Either way, injuries seem to be way down. Let's hope that trend continues. :)

Maybe I just cant read! Wow.... seriously, I need to slow down and be sure to completely read things....

TRF, You cant completely build a team from your system. You have to land some free agents every now and again. But losing guys like Johnny Damon and Carlos Beltran sure didnt help them in the long run. Billy Butler, Alex Gordon and Luke Hochever will be there soon enough, and surely it wont be enough to win them the division, they are all solid players and will help the team.

edabbs44
02-21-2007, 05:42 PM
Not really at all. There are a handful of Reds hitting prospects that even show life of something outside of Votto and Bruce. There are quite a bit more live arms in the Reds system with some projection past Bailey, Cueto and Wood.

The Cincy farm system is extremely top heavy. There are 2 bats that you can say have a very good shot at making an impact in the majors. There is one arm. Cueto and Wood look good, but they are single A guys. And I know you have a sick man crush on Ravin, but he is still extremely young.

I don't think Cincy is so pitching rich that they can focus on hitting. Pitching tends to flame out more than hitting, so you need a greater population.

BRM
02-21-2007, 05:43 PM
Losing Beltran and Damon wouldn't have been so bad if they had gotten quality returns. They essentially got nothing for Damon and Teahen was the only decent player they got for Beltran.

TRF
02-21-2007, 05:45 PM
in 17 years their farm has done squat for them.

I did find something interesting though. In 1997, in the second round, the Kansas City Royals selected...

Dane Sardinha.

They are a monument to incompetence. Their failure is staggering. 4 years with a record above .500 out of the last 17. Even the Reds were better than that.

M2
02-21-2007, 05:46 PM
The Reds system isnt nearly as thin as you percieve it. I would be very surprised if the Reds are any lower than say 17th when BA comes out with their rankings. The Reds have 2, legit top 10 prospects in all of baseball. That carries a TON of weight, as those guys are much more likely to pan out than any of the 5 B- type prospects that "add depth". While the Reds system is a little thin, it isnt like they have 5 guys, then no one. Sure they didnt go from 25-10 in one season becuase of the 2006 draft, but it sure helped that Votto, Bailey and Bruce all had GREAT seasons to back up what their scouting reports say about them. Johnny Cueto coming out of nowhere surely helped as well. Say what you want about the Reds system, but it is doing a fine job right now.

Oh, BP also just came out with its Top 100 prospects.
#4 - Homer Bailey
#9 - Jay Bruce
#53 - Joey Votto
#101-110 - Drew Stubbs

IMO, it's absurd to base an organizational ranking on three guys, which is what BP did. BP probably ranks Stubbs somewhere in the teens among 2006 draftees. I don't have a negative thing to say about Cueto and Wood, but plenty of other organizations have arms like them and then there's a sizable drop to #4, either Lecure or Ravin (neither of whom is a well-regarded prospect).

Most of the Reds' second-tier prospects were in the rookie leagues in 2006. Get into guys who played full season ball (outside the org's top guys) and there's some bullpen depth in the high minors, defenders with serious bat questions like Chris Dickerson and Paul Janish, Lecure and who? It's not a pretty sight.

A small bit of injury and ineffectiveness from the organization's top six and the threadbare state of the supporting cast will be exposed. To me, a top 10 organization has got 15-20 B- or better prospects and depth in the high minors. The Reds don't. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. BP's just allowed a handful of bright lights to obscure the darkness behind them.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 05:47 PM
TRF, I still dont see what that has anything to do with what is currently in their farm system. It has no relevence whatsoever to it.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 05:55 PM
IMO, it's absurd to base an organizational ranking on three guys, which is what BP did. BP probably ranks Stubbs somewhere in the teens among 2006 draftees. I don't have a negative thing to say about Cueto and Wood, but plenty of other organizations have arms like them and then there's a sizable drop to #4, either Lecure or Ravin (neither of whom is a well-regarded prospect).

Most of the Reds' second-tier prospects were in the rookie leagues in 2006. Get into guys who played full season ball (outside the org's top guys) and there's some bullpen depth in the high minors, defenders with serious bat questions like Chris Dickerson and Paul Janish, Lecure and who? It's not a pretty sight.

A small bit of injury and ineffectiveness from the organization's top six and the threadbare state of the supporting cast will be exposed. To me, a top 10 organization has got 15-20 B- or better prospects and depth in the high minors. The Reds don't. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. BP's just allowed a handful of bright lights to obscure the darkness behind them.

We have completely different views on what a system should produce then. I could care less about a bunch of spare parts (B- prospects in the upper minors) who probably will get a cup of coffee one day. The Reds on the other hand have some top end talent with Bruce, Bailey and Votto. Do the Reds not have depth like some other teams? Surely they dont. But do most of those teams have anything resembling Bailey, Bruce and Votto, who is arguably the top trio of prospects in ALL of baseball? No, they dont. As for where the rank Stubbs among 2006 picks, I dont really know. I dont want to count through the Top 100, but I could really care less where he ranks among 2006 draft picks. He is a Red now, and that is all that I am overly worried about.
As for most of the Reds second tier guys being in Rookie ball, this is true, but most of them will be in A or A+ next year and on a slightly fast track, becuase outside of Loo, Ravin and Francisco, they were all college guys. I have never understood the whole "closer the better" with prospects. Yeah, there are bumps in the road that guys hit and some guys never get over them.... but in the end, its all about what will you do for me when you get to the bigs, and in that respect, I dont care a whole lot if some guy is in AA or in Billings. Who projects to be a better player when they get to the bigs? If its the guy in Billings, then it matters absolutely none to me that the other guy is "closer".

TRF
02-21-2007, 05:55 PM
Of course it does.

You yourself say that Hochevar will be there soon enough. Really? the 1st pick in last years draft? the guy with 15 professional innings under his belt?

The Royals maintain an awfulness about them. Maybe Luke Hochevar is all that, but 15 innings ain't the same measuring stick as 200 AB's

Which brings me back to Stubbs. Why is any list of Reds top prospects showing him higher than the four guys from his own team that out hit him?

Is his defense Mays-like?

Do the other four guys have iron gloves?

cuz right now, the bats aren't even close and Stubbs looks to be 3-4 years away.

dougdirt
02-21-2007, 05:59 PM
Which brings me back to Stubbs. Why is any list of Reds top prospects showing him higher than the four guys from his own team that out hit him?

Is his defense Mays-like?

Do the other four guys have iron gloves?

cuz right now, the bats aren't even close and Stubbs looks to be 3-4 years away.
Baseball is a lot more than just your bat. Lets look at this here.

Drew Stubbs plays a premuim position on the field, and he plays it better thaan 90% of the guys out there. He has lots of tools that the other guys dont project to have. None of those guys project to have the power he does, nor the speed that he carries with him. Valaika probably wont stick at SS, and when he moves, his bat becomes a lot less impressive. Logan Parker is an advanced college hitter. He doesnt project to grow much more. He obviously could do so, and I hope for one that he does. The fact is, a major league CF OPS is averaging about .750. If Drew Stubbs projects to do that in the majors in 2 or 3 years, and still plays the defense he does now, he is going to be a VERY good player for this team.

M2
02-21-2007, 07:08 PM
We have completely different views on what a system should produce then. I could care less about a bunch of spare parts (B- prospects in the upper minors) who probably will get a cup of coffee one day.

Today's B- is tomorrow's top 100 prospect. Case in point, Joey Votto. It's amazing how fast a second tier prospect can get hot with a big season in the high minors. The Reds simply don't have enough guys like that to offset any trouble with their top prospects. It's what cut the organization off at the knees year after year earlier in the decade. Cueto and Wood help, a lot. It means the Reds don't have to put all their eggs in Bailey's basket. It was Andy Pettitte, not the more highly rated Brien Taylor or Matt Drews, who broke through for the Yankees. Supposedly Wilfredo Rodriguez was a better prospect than Roy Oswalt. Once upon a time Dontrelle Willis was ranked well behind Juan Cruz and Ben Christensen in the Cubs organization. Wasn't Tom Glavine supposedly inferior to Pete Smith and Tommy Greene back when they were in the minors?


I have never understood the whole "closer the better" with prospects. Yeah, there are bumps in the road that guys hit and some guys never get over them.... but in the end, its all about what will you do for me when you get to the bigs, and in that respect, I dont care a whole lot if some guy is in AA or in Billings. Who projects to be a better player when they get to the bigs? If its the guy in Billings, then it matters absolutely none to me that the other guy is "closer".

It's not so much "closer the better," as it is "most low minors phenoms amount to nothing." Obviously the idea is to be good every year, but there's a certain amount of truth to the notion that it doesn't mean much until you do it in AA. That's great news for Bailey and Votto. There's little doubt in my mind that Bruce will put a hurt on AA when he gets there in 2007 or 2008, but if I'm being honest, that's partially me not allowing the notion of him struggling to enter my mind.

I'll go a little Nick Hornby here. Some new, fresh prospect always seems more alluring than the more advanced prospect you know, but it's not real. The new kids have just as much trouble in their futures in most cases as the AA and AAA kids have had in their recent past. It's just that you haven't had to see those flaws yet so you can pretend that they aren't there. The game of baseball eternally pretend kids at lower levels have higher ceilings than the almost-men in the high minors.

And when those kids become almost-men there will be a new batch of kids who have higher ceilings than they do. It's the circle of life.

What actually churns players out? Branch Rickey figured that one out when he created the minors and the answer has never changed -- depth. You may think you've found the next big thing. You may even be morally convinced of it. Yet you better have more than a next big thing or two. You better have a lot of guys who might be something. You better stack them like cord wood because pretty much every major leaguer has a story about some guy who was better back in the minors, but didn't make it. You better have a Barry Larkin on hand for when your Kurt Stillwell doesn't pan out.

Part of the genius of Branch Rickey was that he knew what he didn't know. He didn't pretend to know exactly what kids would materialize. He collected piles of them and let them sort themselves out, never taking it for granted that a kid would make it before he actually made it. That's why I care about depth, particularly at levels where performance really means something in terms of projectibility. It's what's made every great system in the history of baseball.

Betterread
02-21-2007, 11:23 PM
Depth costs money - the 2007 draft may be as good an opportunity in recent history for the Reds organization to add depth, but they'll need to have a draft budget close to 5 million - a big jump from recent years. I hope there is this draft displays a commitment to player development.

dougdirt
02-22-2007, 01:09 AM
Depth costs money - the 2007 draft may be as good an opportunity in recent history for the Reds organization to add depth, but they'll need to have a draft budget close to 5 million - a big jump from recent years. I hope there is this draft displays a commitment to player development.

I am with you on that one. The Reds really need to take the best players available at every step along the way this year. This years draft is supposed to be quite deep, and with so many picks in the first 150, we really need to make a splash on the talent while its still there for the picking.

flyer85
02-22-2007, 09:56 AM
None of those guys project to have the power he does, nor the speed that he carries with him. Valaika probably wont stick at SS, and when he moves, his bat becomes a lot less impressive. Logan Parker is an advanced college hitter. He doesnt project to grow much more. He obviously could do so, and I hope for one that he does. The fact is, a major league CF OPS is averaging about .750. If Drew Stubbs projects to do that in the majors in 2 or 3 years, and still plays the defense he does now, he is going to be a VERY good player for this team.which is why it wasn't a very good draft. The top two picks were reaches based on tools over performance and the other picks were mostly guys with good performance but limited projection.

Stubbs really needs a banner year that sees him being in Sarasota by June.

The Reds chances in 2007/08 might look a little different if they had spent the cash for Markakis and bit the bullet and paid Kazmir.

TRF
02-22-2007, 11:38 AM
I am with you on that one. The Reds really need to take the best players available at every step along the way this year. This years draft is supposed to be quite deep, and with so many picks in the first 150, we really need to make a splash on the talent while its still there for the picking.

Problem is I doubt the sensibilities of the guys making the decisions on who is the best player available. It really goes to the crux of our disagreement.

bucksfan2
02-22-2007, 02:04 PM
What do you guys feel determine a successful draft. I mean this past draft if a say Valakia and Loo turn into productive mlb players but stubbs and watson dont, is it considered a good class? Homer Bailey could become a great pitcher but if everyone else in his draft class fails, is it a good draft?

dougdirt
02-22-2007, 02:32 PM
What do you guys feel determine a successful draft. I mean this past draft if a say Valakia and Loo turn into productive mlb players but stubbs and watson dont, is it considered a good class? Homer Bailey could become a great pitcher but if everyone else in his draft class fails, is it a good draft?

Loo was actually a 2005 Draft pick. He was a draft and follow, and the Reds signed him prior to him re-entering the 2006 draft. As for a drafts success, I guess it all depends on who you ask. If a draft only produces 1 MLB player, he better be a star.... although I have a little more hope for some 2004 guys past Bailey than most. Lets say Valaika and Ravin turn into productive pros but Stubbs and Watson burn out around AA, then I would say it was a productive draft, but not all will see it that way.

M2
02-22-2007, 03:32 PM
What do you guys feel determine a successful draft. I mean this past draft if a say Valakia and Loo turn into productive mlb players but stubbs and watson dont, is it considered a good class? Homer Bailey could become a great pitcher but if everyone else in his draft class fails, is it a good draft?

I think Doug set a reasonable bar for what you want if your draft only produces one guy.

Though let me build on something I mentioned above. Since no one's issued an infallible crystal ball with which to pick players, what I most want from a draft is momentum. I want a pile of players who can play well in the minors for a few years in a row. Attrition will take a heavy toll along the way, but if you're able to get a good chunk of your draftees up to AA with some reasonable prospect status still attached to them, then the world opens up for you. During their 15-year run, the Braves weren't massively prodcutive in terms of churning out major leaguers. They did come up with some good to great players, but in terms of sheer numbers, they weren't overly impressive. Yet what they did as well as anyone was deliver prospects to AA. It gave John Schuerholz tremendous resources in terms of acquiring talent. It became a de facto assumption that the Braves could out-bid pretty much anyone else in a prospects deal.

If a draft gives my organization three years of momentum and a half dozen-plus kids who attain some reasonable prospect status over that time, then I don't mind if ultimately none of them pan out as quality major leaguers. Obviously I'd prefer that not be the case, but a large number of desirables probably has enabled the team to make a trade or two. Even failing that, if a draft class can create some sustained momentum for the organization then it adds luster to everyone else in the organization.

What's left of the 2004 draft class if Bailey goes off the rails? Janish and Strait for the most part and neither of those two merits a whole lot of excitment. The 2003 draft, which started out like gangbusters and then completely unraveled, is now pretty much down to Carlos Guevara and Chris Dickerson. The 2005 draft looks to be more successful with Bruce, Wood, Lecure, Loo, Carlos Fisher, Adam Rosales (needs to be healthy and rebound) and Jake Long. If that crew can have another good year then you've got a rising tide effect. Also, it should be mentioned that two 2005 draftees (Zach Ward and Brandon Roberts) were cashed in for major leaguers (of dubious quality, but still major leaguers).

Ideally what you want is 20+ guys from your last four draft classes making your affiliates must-see teams for scouts. You want a strong brand. So my measurement for the 2006 draft will be if two years from now I can point to a number of players who've made solid progress up the ladder, raising the profile of the organization along the way.

Red Heeler
02-22-2007, 05:10 PM
Ideally what you want is 20+ guys from your last four draft classes making your affiliates must-see teams for scouts. You want a strong brand. So my measurement for the 2006 draft will be if two years from now I can point to a number of players who've made solid progress up the ladder, raising the profile of the organization along the way.

A good concept you have there. This is one of the reasons that I think the Reds need to focus on drafting players with refined skills over raw tools in the early rounds of the draft. Stubbs, for instance, has plenty of tools, but his ETA was always going to be a long ways off. Watson is in the same boat. If the Reds were going to draft a college hitter in the first round, it needed to be someone who could start out higher than rookie ball. Ditto a second round college pitcher.

dougdirt
02-22-2007, 05:41 PM
A good concept you have there. This is one of the reasons that I think the Reds need to focus on drafting players with refined skills over raw tools in the early rounds of the draft. Stubbs, for instance, has plenty of tools, but his ETA was always going to be a long ways off. Watson is in the same boat. If the Reds were going to draft a college hitter in the first round, it needed to be someone who could start out higher than rookie ball. Ditto a second round college pitcher.
I think no matter who they took he was going to start off in rookie ball. The Reds seem to start off their players in rookie ball. I think that the Reds just need to be aggressive when they begin promoting their college players drafted. One of the things that really bothered me last season was that Zach Ward was not promoted to Sarasota after completely destroying the Midwest League. It was his first season in the minor leagues, but the numbers he put up definately warranted a promotion. In the end I guess they had other plans for him and shipped him off for Lohse. Its one thing to not promote a HS player in their first full season of pro ball, but I dont think it will hurt a college player who is clearly dominating the current level they are at.

Betterread
02-22-2007, 08:04 PM
I think no matter who they took he was going to start off in rookie ball. The Reds seem to start off their players in rookie ball. I think that the Reds just need to be aggressive when they begin promoting their college players drafted. One of the things that really bothered me last season was that Zach Ward was not promoted to Sarasota after completely destroying the Midwest League. It was his first season in the minor leagues, but the numbers he put up definately warranted a promotion. In the end I guess they had other plans for him and shipped him off for Lohse. Its one thing to not promote a HS player in their first full season of pro ball, but I dont think it will hurt a college player who is clearly dominating the current level they are at.

Although I agree with you about Ward, overall I think the Reds are too agressive. I often think that they are sifting through their minor league players, rather than taking time to try to develop skills that are rough but perceptible.

Red Heeler
02-22-2007, 09:37 PM
I think no matter who they took he was going to start off in rookie ball. The Reds seem to start off their players in rookie ball. I think that the Reds just need to be aggressive when they begin promoting their college players drafted. One of the things that really bothered me last season was that Zach Ward was not promoted to Sarasota after completely destroying the Midwest League. It was his first season in the minor leagues, but the numbers he put up definately warranted a promotion. In the end I guess they had other plans for him and shipped him off for Lohse. Its one thing to not promote a HS player in their first full season of pro ball, but I dont think it will hurt a college player who is clearly dominating the current level they are at.

Even if the Reds were determined to put their draftees into rookie ball, Stubbs certainly did nothing to prove that he didn't belong there. To be fair to Watson, he did blast his way out of rookie ball last year. I would like to see the Reds draft players whom they were not compelled to start in Billings.

As for Zach Ward, I think that management was grooming him for trade bait. In that case, there is nothing wrong with letting a prospect put up some gaudy numbers. For pitchers in general, I think it is a good idea to allow them to dominate a level longer to help build confidence.

edabbs44
02-22-2007, 09:46 PM
As for Zach Ward, I think that management was grooming him for trade bait. In that case, there is nothing wrong with letting a prospect put up some gaudy numbers. For pitchers in general, I think it is a good idea to allow them to dominate a level longer to help build confidence.

Agreed here, but the return was not good.

Lohse spent some of the 2006 season in the minors due to performance.
His ERA for the Twins was over 7.
His salary was $3.95 million in 2006.

This guy should have been a pure salary dump. But WK gave up value without getting any money in return for Lohse's salary.

That's the part that blows my mind. Ward might not have been a huge prospect, but he had some value. If the Reds gave them Machado or someone like him, then I see no money coming over. But Ward was worth something.

Not to get money with Lohse was an abomination.

dougdirt
02-22-2007, 09:51 PM
Even if the Reds were determined to put their draftees into rookie ball, Stubbs certainly did nothing to prove that he didn't belong there. To be fair to Watson, he did blast his way out of rookie ball last year. I would like to see the Reds draft players whom they were not compelled to start in Billings.

As for Zach Ward, I think that management was grooming him for trade bait. In that case, there is nothing wrong with letting a prospect put up some gaudy numbers. For pitchers in general, I think it is a good idea to allow them to dominate a level longer to help build confidence.

Well while Stubbs did nothing to promote a promotion, Chris Valaika did for example. I dont really think its that the Reds draft players they dont think couldnt play in say Dayton or Sarasota right away....I think they just feel its better for them to start in Billings for whatever reason (of the GCL for HS kids).

edabbs44
02-22-2007, 10:00 PM
The Reds chances in 2007/08 might look a little different if they had spent the cash for Markakis and bit the bullet and paid Kazmir.

Don't forget the Sowers debacle.

Guess who the next HS pitcher taken was after Sowers?
















Bonderman.

Awesome.

Red Heeler
02-22-2007, 10:31 PM
Well while Stubbs did nothing to promote a promotion, Chris Valaika did for example. I dont really think its that the Reds draft players they dont think couldnt play in say Dayton or Sarasota right away....I think they just feel its better for them to start in Billings for whatever reason (of the GCL for HS kids).

I don't disagree with you about the Reds philosophy. I disagree with the philosophy itself. I want the Reds drafting with the idea that the players taken in the first 3 rounds or so SHOULD be ready to be competetive at Dayton or Sarasota and start them appropriately.

Aronchis
02-23-2007, 12:58 AM
Agreed here, but the return was not good.

Lohse spent some of the 2006 season in the minors due to performance.
His ERA for the Twins was over 7.
His salary was $3.95 million in 2006.

This guy should have been a pure salary dump. But WK gave up value without getting any money in return for Lohse's salary.

That's the part that blows my mind. Ward might not have been a huge prospect, but he had some value. If the Reds gave them Machado or someone like him, then I see no money coming over. But Ward was worth something.

Not to get money with Lohse was an abomination.

Then Lohse goes out and has a career year. I would watch my words.

Aronchis
02-23-2007, 01:12 AM
Every farm system is thin. That is a cardinal rule. Some are better than others, but you always want it a little deeper. The Reds system isn't overflowing with alot of depth, but most systems don't. The key is the prospects you actually have and what they mean to your franchise's future. If players like Votto,Bailey and Bruce pan out, you could say the Reds system is in decent shape right now. But like economic recessions, we evaluate backward. So we won't know how good the system is right now for another few years.

Crying over the Bowden era flubs isn't worth it. The group was awfull and were pretty much league bottom in ability reaching the nadir during the Kazmir debacle mainly for the Grulerites loud yelling(Not money like the lay crowd thinks, Kazmir wasn't going to college like Sowers and Bowden loved taking these kinds of risks).

Another thing that sickens me about Kazmir is, under O'brien, Kazmir wouldn't have touched the league to 2005 at the earliest and had a more steady rise in his workload. The fact now is Kazmir is a question mark.

edabbs44
02-23-2007, 08:20 AM
Then Lohse goes out and has a career year. I would watch my words.

When? You're predicting that Lohse has a career year in 2007?

mth123
02-23-2007, 08:21 AM
When? You're predicting that Lohse has a career year in 2007?

I think his career "year" was August of 2006.

edabbs44
02-23-2007, 08:51 AM
I think his career "year" was August of 2006.

And the Reds were 1-4 in his 5 starts in August. Beautiful. Well worth it.

mth123
02-23-2007, 09:25 AM
And the Reds were 1-4 in his 5 starts in August. Beautiful. Well worth it.

I'm not a Lohse fan but I'm not sure that Ward would have brought much more back. I agree that the Reds should have got him for nothing if they were paying the salary.

edabbs44
02-23-2007, 10:54 AM
I'm not a Lohse fan but I'm not sure that Ward would have brought much more back. I agree that the Reds should have got him for nothing if they were paying the salary.

Agreed. My view of Ward was that his inclusion deserved a little money coming back. He was still young and had success in his limited minor-league career. A complete no-namer should have sufficed in this instance, where the Reds take on more money.

flyer85
02-23-2007, 12:14 PM
Don't forget the Sowers debacle.

I didn't but that was not a good draft.

Aronchis
02-23-2007, 02:08 PM
I didn't but that was not a good draft.

Besides, Sowers was drafted to be punted. The fact is the Reds didn't see anybody in there price range was absurd. Of course there was(Bonderman as ebbs brought up).

The worst mistake was Kazmir by far. I can forgive Markakis being how he blew up. Sort of like not being able to draft Weaver(only the Big markets could afford him and he cost the combined cost of Bailey/Bruce). The Reds decided to throw their money into the 2003 draft rather than Nick who was being a punk in negotations. They made the wrong choice again.

Bad decisions, crust over bad decisions.

fargo55
03-07-2007, 07:26 PM
Looking at Lincecum's WHIP of .82 with a BAA of .137 are compelling numbers. Stubbs offense with a .252 batting average and .368 OBP are good, combine that with his strengths defensively, you have something to build on. I'd like to see his 30% strike-out rate drop a little and I think it will. It probably comes down to people's perception that Lincecum is close to being ready for the jump to the Majors, and Stubbs has some work to do. As to making an impact, Stubbs will play 9 innings every day when he arrives.

TRF
04-17-2007, 10:09 AM
Bringing this back for the discussion within about Stubbs. I've been reading the updates, preparing to eat crow, but I've noticed that although he is starting to hit, he's still behind a number of his teammates from last year. It's early, I do get that, but for the top 8 guys on the Dayton squad in terms of AB's, he's got the 7th best OPS.

So for you guys that have seen him in Dayton, what am I missing? Is it his defense? Is he really a tremendous defender? Is he starting to sho something at the plate. Is it just that he's been affected by the weather?

dougdirt
04-17-2007, 12:21 PM
Bringing this back for the discussion within about Stubbs. I've been reading the updates, preparing to eat crow, but I've noticed that although he is starting to hit, he's still behind a number of his teammates from last year. It's early, I do get that, but for the top 8 guys on the Dayton squad in terms of AB's, he's got the 7th best OPS.

So for you guys that have seen him in Dayton, what am I missing? Is it his defense? Is he really a tremendous defender? Is he starting to sho something at the plate. Is it just that he's been affected by the weather?

TRF, he is battling some major turf toe. He might actually have to get surgery after the season. His power hasnt shown up yet like we would have thought it would have, but I do wonder how many times he would have had doubles on singles because of the turf toe. I have not seen him play yet, so I can't comment really on how he has looked. He does play the 4th lightest hitting position on the field though behind just catcher, 2B and SS.

fargo55
04-17-2007, 12:39 PM
And does anyone else find it strange that the owner of the team mandated that the COACHES dont try to work on Lincecums mechanics?

When Lincecum was a High-Schooler, he pitched on the same team as my son for The Perfect Game group. These games were essentially scouting showcases. The scouts thought that his "violent lunge to the plate", ending in a "catapulting of the ball", would result in a quick exit from baseball. It is interesting to watch and I liked the pure fuel comment. Despite this he went on to lead the nation in strike-outs for U of Washington. Made the Cape look like it was his own birthday party every time he pitched. Now he has thrown very well in the minors. Meeting his Dad might have been what made me a believer. Same build and delivery. The guy is 50+ and throws in the high 80's. I'm not sure after seeing him and his Dad's delivery that there is a coach who would be able to give him productive advice, given his unique style, except maybe his Dad.

dougdirt
04-17-2007, 12:47 PM
When Lincecum was a High-Schooler, he pitched on the same team as my son for The Perfect Game group. These games were essentially scouting showcases. The scouts thought that his "violent lunge to the plate", ending in a "catapulting of the ball", would result in a quick exit from baseball. It is interesting to watch and I liked the pure fuel comment. Despite this he went on to lead the nation in strike-outs for U of Washington. Made the Cape look like it was his own birthday party every time he pitched. Now he has thrown very well in the minors. Meeting his Dad might have been what made me a believer. Same build and delivery. The guy is 50+ and throws in the high 80's. I'm not sure after seeing him and his Dad's delivery that there is a coach who would be able to give him productive advice, given his unique style, except maybe his Dad.

Sounds like Griffey Jr and his dad....

OesterPoster
04-17-2007, 12:52 PM
Good stuff Fargo. :thumbup:

RedsManRick
04-17-2007, 12:54 PM
Will Carroll has stated that though Lincecum's delivery is certainly unusual, there is nothing about it which should cause concern in terms of injury.

That is
- his elbow is in the right place relative to his shoulder
- he doesn't fall off to one side
- he's not flying open early
- he's getting good extension and kick from his leading foot
- etc.

It's funny to hear generic criticisms because something is different but not have those be specific enough to actually identify a problem. I've yet to hear any specific reason why Lincecum would break down other than "high effort".

dougdirt
04-17-2007, 01:03 PM
I've yet to hear any specific reason why Lincecum would break down other than "high effort".

5'10 right hander who weighs 160 pounds?

I hope he stays healthy his entire career. 1, he isnt in our division so we wouldnt see him much. 2, I love great pitching.

But short right handers that weigh less than me have serious issues staying healthy in baseball.

fargo55
04-17-2007, 01:41 PM
5'10 right hander who weighs 160 pounds?

I hope he stays healthy his entire career. 1, he isnt in our division so we wouldnt see him much. 2, I love great pitching.

But short right handers that weigh less than me have serious issues staying healthy in baseball.

It just occurred to me that Ron Guidry, I know he is a Lefty, was about the same size (5'11" 162 lbs.). He also had the delivery that most reminded me of Lincecum's. Known as the Louisiana Lightning, he had the full effort delivery that made him look like he was coming out of his spikes on every pitch. It was a mirror image of Lincecum's and "Gator" as Guidry was also known, played 14 years for the Yankees, winning the Cy Young in 1978 and now in the HOF. I am not saying that Lincecum is on track to do the same thing, only that there are some strong similarities (and differences).

15fan
04-17-2007, 03:19 PM
Drew Stubbs sounds like a faster Dane Sardinha.

dougdirt
04-17-2007, 03:21 PM
Drew Stubbs sounds like a faster Dane Sardinha.

On what basis do you come to that conclusion? I am curious.

15fan
04-17-2007, 03:29 PM
Based on the little I've read (and I'll admit it's not a whole lot), the scouting report on Stubbs seems to be:

He could play defensively in the majors right now.

The only question is whether he'll being able to make enough regular contact with the bat.

That's pretty much the bill that we were sold when Sardinha was tabbed in round 2 of the 2000 draft.

dougdirt
04-17-2007, 03:40 PM
Sardinha also had a poor understanding of how to take a walk. His career Minor League ISO discipline is 42 points. Stubbs posted a 116 last year.

NC Reds
04-18-2007, 11:05 AM
Lincecum is now 2-0 with a 0.00 ERA and 17 Ks in 12 IP; this is in AAA.

I hope Stubbs works out, but I feel the same way I did on draft day. Lincecum would have been my pick.

M2
04-18-2007, 11:17 AM
Lincecum is now up to 28 Ks in 18.2 IP with 0.75 WHIP to go with a 0.00 ERA. I thought the PCL was supposed to be a hitter's league.

lollipopcurve
04-18-2007, 11:27 AM
Lincecum is now up to 28 Ks in 18.2 IP with 0.75 WHIP to go with a 0.00 ERA. I thought the PCL was supposed to be a hitter's league.

Certainly looking like one who got away, isn't he? I don't mind the Stubbs pick, I feel it was reasonable and typical of how Buckley has drafted (solid college position players in the middle of the diamond), but at the moment I can't help but feel a little jealous of the Giants. There are Lincecum's dominant numbers, sure, but combine that with his odd delivery and slight physique and I think you've got a pitcher who'd be tremendous to watch.

dougdirt
04-18-2007, 12:08 PM
Lincecum is now up to 28 Ks in 18.2 IP with 0.75 WHIP to go with a 0.00 ERA. I thought the PCL was supposed to be a hitter's league.

Well, guys have to be hitting the ball for it to be a hitters paradise right? The guy is sick.

BRM
04-18-2007, 12:23 PM
Lincecum is now up to 28 Ks in 18.2 IP with 0.75 WHIP to go with a 0.00 ERA. I thought the PCL was supposed to be a hitter's league.

Sure would be nice to Lincecum and Bailey in Louisville right now, wouldn't it?

dougdirt
04-18-2007, 12:46 PM
Sure would be nice to Lincecum and Bailey in Louisville right now, wouldn't it?

It would, but I have no complains with what Drew Stubbs is doing.

membengal
04-18-2007, 01:26 PM
More from last night's outing on Lincecum:

Tuesday’s best performance was turned in by Fresno starter Tim Lincecum. Lincecum struck out 11, walked no one and allowed only three hits in 6 2/3 innings. As Ryan Divish writes, Lincecum showed a 93-96 mph fastball that touched 99 and an 85 mph curveball that left hitters helpless.

“When you can only throw one pitch for a strike, guys go up there thinking, ‘I’m not going to swing at his curveball and make him throw a fastball in the zone,’ ” Lincecum said. “But I’ve gotten to the point where I can throw my curveball for a strike on any count.”

After the game Tacoma manager Dan Rohn compared Lincecum’s stuff to Felix Hernandez’, who he coached a couple of years ago.

Sigh.

klw
04-18-2007, 01:46 PM
When Lincecum was a High-Schooler, he pitched on the same team as my son for The Perfect Game group. These games were essentially scouting showcases. The scouts thought that his "violent lunge to the plate", ending in a "catapulting of the ball", would result in a quick exit from baseball. It is interesting to watch and I liked the pure fuel comment. Despite this he went on to lead the nation in strike-outs for U of Washington. Made the Cape look like it was his own birthday party every time he pitched. Now he has thrown very well in the minors. Meeting his Dad might have been what made me a believer. Same build and delivery. The guy is 50+ and throws in the high 80's. I'm not sure after seeing him and his Dad's delivery that there is a coach who would be able to give him productive advice, given his unique style, except maybe his Dad.

Can the Reds sign his dad?

dougdirt
04-18-2007, 01:50 PM
More from last night's outing on Lincecum:

Tuesday’s best performance was turned in by Fresno starter Tim Lincecum. Lincecum struck out 11, walked no one and allowed only three hits in 6 2/3 innings. As Ryan Divish writes, Lincecum showed a 93-96 mph fastball that touched 99 and an 85 mph curveball that left hitters helpless.

“When you can only throw one pitch for a strike, guys go up there thinking, ‘I’m not going to swing at his curveball and make him throw a fastball in the zone,’ ” Lincecum said. “But I’ve gotten to the point where I can throw my curveball for a strike on any count.”

After the game Tacoma manager Dan Rohn compared Lincecum’s stuff to Felix Hernandez’, who he coached a couple of years ago.

Sigh.

Hindsight.

M2
04-18-2007, 03:40 PM
Hindsight.

Hey, a bunch of folks cyberdrafted the guy. BA rated him as having the best fastball and breaking ball of the last draft class on top of being closest to the majors. What he did in the PAC-10 last year was surreal. So his stuff and quick advancement are hardly surprises.

IMO, he's a classic case of teams talking themselves out of a good thing. When a guy has the best fastball and breaking pitch in the draft with good command, you take him.

dougdirt
04-18-2007, 03:46 PM
Hey, a bunch of folks cyberdrafted the guy. BA rated him as having the best fastball and breaking ball of the last draft class on top of being closest to the majors. What he did in the PAC-10 last year was surreal. So his stuff and quick advancement are hardly surprises.

IMO, he's a classic case of teams talking themselves out of a good thing. When a guy has the best fastball and breaking pitch in the draft with good command, you take him.

No one ever doubted his stuff. A lot of people doubt his 5'10 160 pound frame. He has been unbelievable so far in his 48 minor league innings, but its still just 48 minor league innings, and no one has seen him more than 1 time in any league he has been in. I think that coupled with his delivery that I doubt any of the players have really seen contribute to his success. His stuff is great and surely that contributes as well, but no one has seen his stuff and delivery more than once anywhere he has pitched, and that sure helps the pitcher out. I still would have taken Bill Rowell even with the knowledge of Lincecum, because I just dont trust guys who weigh 160 pounds who pitch to stay healthy.

Also, I wouldnt say he has good command. In college his BEST walks/9 was over 4.

M2
04-18-2007, 04:02 PM
No one ever doubted his stuff. A lot of people doubt his 5'10 160 pound frame. He has been unbelievable so far in his 48 minor league innings, but its still just 48 minor league innings, and no one has seen him more than 1 time in any league he has been in. I think that coupled with his delivery that I doubt any of the players have really seen contribute to his success. His stuff is great and surely that contributes as well, but no one has seen his stuff and delivery more than once anywhere he has pitched, and that sure helps the pitcher out. I still would have taken Bill Rowell even with the knowledge of Lincecum, because I just dont trust guys who weigh 160 pounds who pitch to stay healthy.

Also, I wouldnt say he has good command. In college his BEST walks/9 was over 4.

Fair point on the command, though there was some talk that umps weren't giving him strikes because his pitches would intersect the strike zone at odd angles.

I watched too much Pedro to worry about his size. He'll probably never be a 240-IP Roy Halladay type of horse, but his stuff reeks of awesomeness. Oddly it's Rowell who's injured at the moment, not Lincecum. That could change in a heartbeat. My take is injuries could ruin any player, but if Lincecum stays healthy then he's not going to be all right, he's not going to be good, he's going to be great, maybe even stellar.

dougdirt
04-18-2007, 04:07 PM
Fair point on the command, though there was some talk that umps weren't giving him strikes because his pitches would intersect the strike zone at odd angles.

I watched too much Pedro to worry about his size. He'll probably never be a 240-IP Roy Halladay type of horse, but his stuff reeks of awesomeness. Oddly it's Rowell who's injured at the moment, not Lincecum. That could change in a heartbeat. My take is injuries could ruin any player, but if Lincecum stays healthy then he's not going to be all right, he's not going to be good, he's going to be great, maybe even stellar.

Definately, although pitchers dont come back from injuries a lot more often than positional guys, but I completely agree with what you said. Pedro is a freak of nature, both in his size and ability to stay healthy and how good he actually was, being that I think he was the best pitcher ever to take the mound.

Rowell has an oblique strain, nothing serious though. Lincecum is special and will be for as long as he can stay healthy. A lot of teams passed on him though (ok actually I think 9 teams did) and without question he has been the most impressive of any of the 2006 draftees.

M2
04-18-2007, 04:30 PM
without question he has been the most impressive of any of the 2006 draftees.

He and Joe Smith, who looks like he might be the first guy from the draft to stick in the majors (Brandon Morrow needs more seasoning).

dougdirt
04-18-2007, 04:36 PM
He and Joe Smith, who looks like he might be the first guy from the draft to stick in the majors (Brandon Morrow needs more seasoning).

Smith is a reliever though... and while Lincecum is in AAA, he has been unreal. Luke Hochevar has been fairly impressive as well outside of the 7 walks.

RedsManRick
04-18-2007, 04:48 PM
I've always been high on Lincecum and advocated drafting him. That said, Mark Prior was once held up as the perfect pitching prospect. Great repertoire, perfect mechanics, etc. That ARod of pitching prospects who did everything right and was guaranteed a spot in the Hall before a single inning of major league ball. Heck, prior even dominated in the majors briefly. But things change, especially for pitchers, in their first 4-5 professional years.

I won't feel too bad about missing out until he's thrown 500 major league innings and still warrants the attention he's getting now.

M2
04-18-2007, 05:01 PM
Smith is a reliever though

I just like him because he was a fairly anonymous reliever with a totally anonymous name. Plus, I took him in the Redszone 2006 mock draft, so I root for him.

edabbs44
04-30-2007, 12:22 PM
Top prospect Tim Linecum struck out 14 batters in six innings to lead Triple-A Fresno to a 3-0 victory on Sunday.

Linecum is 4-0 with an 0.29 ERA, allowing 12 hits with 46 strikeouts in 31 innings for Fresno. "We're keeping track of what's going on down there," manager Bruce Bochy said. "We know how well he's throwing, but our pitching has been fine."

Dom Heffner
04-30-2007, 01:26 PM
Every pitcher only has so many tosses in his arm, and Lincecum's are starting to go to waste.

He is no longer a minor league pitcher.

I have a link to his delivery I'll try and post later.

flyer85
04-30-2007, 01:34 PM
Top prospect Tim Linecum struck out 14 batters in six innings to lead Triple-A Fresno to a 3-0 victory on Sunday.

Linecum is 4-0 with an 0.29 ERA, allowing 12 hits with 46 strikeouts in 31 innings for Fresno. "We're keeping track of what's going on down there," manager Bruce Bochy said. "We know how well he's throwing, but our pitching has been fine."I saw that yesterday and intentionally didn't post it. As much as I wanted the Reds to draft Lincecum and what a help he could be right now, I decided not to stir the pot. As a Reds fan I just hope Stubbs turns out to be a solid major league player.

His stats at the AAA are jaw dropping, I honestly can't wait to see him pitch in the majors.

flyer85
04-30-2007, 01:38 PM
Every pitcher only has so many tosses in his arm, and Lincecum's are starting to go to waste.

He is no longer a minor league pitcher.

I have a link to his delivery I'll try and post later.Even if they don't want to put him in the rotation they could stick him in the pen for awhile. He would obviously be a lights out setup man or closer. At draft time last year I read that a lot of scouts thought he profiled as a reliever.

TRF
04-30-2007, 02:24 PM
I'm really glad Stubbs is starting to hit like he did at Texas. I imagine he'd have even more power if he weren't battling a turf toe problem that will likely require surgery at the end of the season.

That said, he is nowhere near the prospect Linecum is, and he wasn't at the time of the draft. Stubbs isn't a wasted pick, but he represents a missed opportunity.

Right now Louisvilles rotation could feature Linecum, Bailey, Livingston and Dumatrait who is pitching very well.

sigh.

dougdirt
04-30-2007, 02:26 PM
I'm really glad Stubbs is starting to hit like he did at Texas. I imagine he'd have even more power if he weren't battling a turf toe problem that will likely require surgery at the end of the season.

That said, he is nowhere near the prospect Linecum is, and he wasn't at the time of the draft. Stubbs isn't a wasted pick, but he represents a missed opportunity.

Right now Louisvilles rotation could feature Linecum, Bailey, Livingston and Dumatrait who is pitching very well.

sigh.

I beg to differ. If Lincecum were a better prospect at draft time, it would have been reflected that way. Instead, Lincecum went past 9 other teams before being drafted. Teams don't just pass on pitching for no good reason.

TeamSelig
04-30-2007, 02:43 PM
I also remember wanting to get Lincecum.

Harang-Arroyo-Lincecum-Bailey-Belisle

Gotta love hindsight

flyer85
04-30-2007, 02:44 PM
Teams don't just pass on pitching for no good reason.That's because they were biased against both his unorthodix delivery and his shorter stature(5'11"). If it was based on college production it was a no-brainer. Lincecum should have been the first player picked and wasn't because he didn't fit the mold. The fact he lasted to the Giants at 10 just proved how inbred baseball scouting still is and shows a dearth of thinking outside the box.

Aronchis
04-30-2007, 02:51 PM
Lincecum was passed by so many with that kind of arm. Because each time he throws the ball, he is one step closer to the end of his career. He was by far the most polished arm in that draft, but with some bad downsides. Little surprised he fell.

flyer85
04-30-2007, 02:54 PM
but with some bad downsidesactually no one really knows that. His delivery may be an upside, people categorized it as a downside just because it is unique. Pitchers with "normal" delivieries get injured all the time.

dougdirt
04-30-2007, 03:18 PM
Aronchis I dont think Lincecum was close to polished. The guy had a career best 4.00+ walk per 9 his senior year. Guys that are posting their best numbers and still walking over 4 guys per 9 innings arent polished at age 22.

As for scouting.... color me unsurprised that 9 teams passed on a right handed who is 5'10 and 160 pounds. I wouldn't have taken a chance on such a small pitcher either.

flyer85
04-30-2007, 03:24 PM
I wouldn't have taken a chance on such a small pitcher either.like I said, no thinking outside the box. His K rate was completely off the charts and he was considered to have both the best fastball and best breaking ball in the draft(extreme rarity).

He was a high risk(small, unorthodox delivery)/high reward pick, whereas Stubbs was a high risk(very questionable bat)/med reward pick. Personally, all pitchers early in the draft are high risk simply because they all stand a decent chance of injuries before they ever get to the majors.

dougdirt
04-30-2007, 03:45 PM
like I said, no thinking outside the box. His K rate was completely off the charts and he was considered to have both the best fastball and best breaking ball in the draft(extreme rarity).

He was a high risk(small, unorthodox delivery)/high reward pick, whereas Stubbs was a high risk(very questionable bat)/med reward pick. Personally, all pitchers early in the draft are high risk simply because they all stand a decent chance of injuries before they ever get to the majors.

It has nothing to do with thinking outside the box.... it has to do with how soon until the kids arm blows up?

And how is Drew Stubbs a med reward pick? If he pans out he can be a .280/.400/.500 type guy who plays gold glove defense. If thats a medium reward then there is no such thing as a high reward guy.

flyer85
04-30-2007, 03:54 PM
It has nothing to do with thinking outside the box.... it has to do with how soon until the kids arm blows up?that can be said of almost every pitcher.


And how is Drew Stubbs a med reward pick? If he pans out he can be a .280/.400/.500 type guy who plays gold glove defense. If thats a medium reward then there is no such thing as a high reward guy.I haven't seen any reason to believe that Stubbs is anywhere close to a 900 OPS player(that 768 OPS in the extreme offensive environment of the Pioneer League was anything but impressive). Most scouts were questioning his ability to hit enough to be a regular in CF even with his supposed "gold glove" defense in CF. His ability to hit is a much bigger question mark than Lincecum losing his effectiveness due to arm injuries(and lots of pitchers recover from arm injurues to pitch at their former level).

What we do know at the moment is that Lincecum has the ability to succeed at the major league level, whether Stubbs ever gets anywhere near that level is a huge question mark.

dougdirt
04-30-2007, 04:17 PM
that can be said of almost every pitcher.

Come on now, we both know that the chances of a guy Lincecums size bring on a lot more concerns than a guy who is say, Aaron Harangs size.



I haven't seen any reason to believe that Stubbs is anywhere close to a 900 OPS player(that 768 OPS in the extreme offensive environment of the Pioneer League was anything but impressive). Most scouts were questioning his ability to hit enough to be a regular in CF even with his supposed "gold glove" defense in CF. His ability to hit is a much bigger question mark than Lincecum losing his effectiveness due to arm injuries(and lots of pitchers recover from arm injurues to pitch at their former level).

What we do know at the moment is that Lincecum has the ability to succeed at the major league level, whether Stubbs ever gets anywhere near that level is a huge question mark.

Few things about this.... Stubbs upside is that of a .370-400 OBP and a guy who can hit you 30 doubles and 25-30 HR while playing Gold Glove defense at maybe the most important position on the field outside of catcher. We also have no clue whether Lincecum has the ability to succeed at the major league level. He has never pitched there and the only time he faced MLB hitters was in ST and he didn't exactly fair so well. Is Tim a better prospect right now? Without a doubt. That changes nothing about what went on in June 2006.

LoganBuck
04-30-2007, 04:22 PM
If we only had Jeremy Sowers, and Scott Kazmir.........

Seriously why the continued focus on this guy?


Because I felt compelled.
Here's to you Mr. We could have drafted this guy-Guy.

You ask the BA chat guru all the questions?

What his BA RISP?

Then you spend the rest of his career wishing you had drafted everyone else's players.

Heres to you Mr. We could have drafted this guy-Guy!

dougdirt
04-30-2007, 04:24 PM
If we only had Jeremy Sowers, and Scott Kazmir.........

Seriously why the continued focus on this guy?


Because I felt compelled.
Here's to you Mr. We could have drafted this guy-Guy.

You ask the BA chat guru all the questions?

What his BA RISP?

Then you spend the rest of his career wishing you had drafted everyone else's players.

Heres to you Mr. We could have drafted this guy-Guy!

:thumbup:

tomred
04-30-2007, 04:39 PM
I think someone here should invent a time machine to go 5 years ahead and come back so the Reds will know who to draft also give me the winning lotto numbers

flyer85
04-30-2007, 04:46 PM
We also have no clue whether Lincecum has the ability to succeed at the major league level.And while we have "no clue" whether Lincecum will succeed in the majors because he hasn't done it we do have a pretty good clue from Stubbs performance in the Pioneer League that how he will likely struggle to hit as "old player" in the Midwest League.

Does it mean he will struggle? No, but the clock is ticking on a guy like Stubbs and he really needs to have a very good year. Even just a good year in the Pioneer League for a 22 year old doesn't project all that well moving forward.

dougdirt
04-30-2007, 05:38 PM
And while we have "no clue" whether Lincecum will succeed in the majors because he hasn't done it we do have a pretty good clue from Stubbs performance in the Pioneer League that how he will likely struggle to hit as "old player" in the Midwest League.

Does it mean he will struggle? No, but the clock is ticking on a guy like Stubbs and he really needs to have a very good year. Even just a good year in the Pioneer League for a 22 year old doesn't project all that well moving forward.

I dont get how Drew Stubbs is an old player in the MWL. Someone said that about Sean Watson in the last gamethread where he started, so I looked aand 7 of the 10 batters he faced in that game were college kids.

I also dont get why Drew Stubbs needs to have some great year this year. Is it going to get him any further? No. Is it going to do anything for his development? Nope. He just needs ton continue progressing. Stubbs was also 21 last year in the Pioneer League. He was born in October 1984, which makes him 6 months younger than me, and I turned 22 last April which means he would have turned 22 last October, after the baseball season.

flyer85
04-30-2007, 11:47 PM
I dont get how Drew Stubbs is an old player in the MWL. 21 is considered the norma age for Low A ball which is why when 19 or 20 year olds do well it stands out. Doing well as a 22 year is expected if what to be considered any kind of a prospect.

Longoria(3) is a 21 year old in AA.
Colvin(14) is a 21 year old in high A.
Antonelli(17) is in high A

4 college position players were drafted in the first round. Stubbs picked 8th is the only one starting below High A ball. I would think this is more than coincidence. It's because he did nothing to eleviate the concerns of those wondering if he would ever hit enough to be a major league starter.

BTW, Stubbs now has a sub 700 OPS for the season.

dougdirt
05-01-2007, 01:09 AM
21 is considered the norma age for Low A ball which is why when 19 or 20 year olds do well it stands out. Doing well as a 22 year is expected if what to be considered any kind of a prospect.

Longoria(3) is a 21 year old in AA.
Colvin(14) is a 21 year old in high A.
Antonelli(17) is in high A

4 college position players were drafted in the first round. Stubbs picked 8th is the only one starting below High A ball. I would think this is more than coincidence. It's because he did nothing to eleviate the concerns of those wondering if he would ever hit enough to be a major league starter.

BTW, Stubbs now has a sub 700 OPS for the season.

If the other guys were in the Reds system, only Longoria would be any higher of them all. For whatever reason the Reds seem very content to move their college guys just like their HS guys. I am pretty sure that through the first 3 rounds, just 4 guys are in A ball that were College kids and the Reds boast 2 of them. Chris Valaika has done nothing short of destroy the baseball and he still sits in Dayton. Stubbs is in a slump right now, and like any early season slump its going to have a big impact on his numbers. If July rolls around and he is still sub .700 OPS, I will start worrying then. Getting to the majors isnt a race.

jmcclain19
05-01-2007, 03:34 AM
I think it's a stretch to call Stubbs old for the MWL.

I read a story today talking about the Blue Jays HS bat 1st rounder from last year who is playing in the MWL in 2007 - and that story talked about his maturity for his young age - then quoted a number that stated that the average age in the MWL is 22. Take that for what it's worth.

That would make him average. However, your 1st round pick should not be average for the money you spent.

TRF
05-01-2007, 09:06 AM
I beg to differ. If Lincecum were a better prospect at draft time, it would have been reflected that way. Instead, Lincecum went past 9 other teams before being drafted. Teams don't just pass on pitching for no good reason.

And where was Kazmir drafted? Do you really think Gruler went in the correct slot?

Prior, the CONCENSUS #1 was drafted at #2 because the Twins didn't think they could sign him.

Talent and upside are not the only determining factors. If it were, the Reds would have had Garciaparra, Jeter and Berkman in the system.

TRF
05-01-2007, 09:22 AM
BTW, Stubbs now has a sub 700 OPS for the season.

Which brings us back to what I stated earlier in this thread: Stubbs was out hit by at least 4 other guys on his own team last year. Not by a little, by a lot. He's being out hit again, by 5 guys. He's also being out hit by the two guys doing the catching for Dayton, so in essence 6 positions on the field are wielding a better stick.

He's got no power. His SB% stinks (5 SB's, 3 CS) IF this is all due to the turf toe, and I suspect that is only part of it, he should shut it down and deal with it. What I suspect is he's a Juan Pierre type. decent to good OBP. no power. tons of SB's. He's probably never going to OPS .800+ in his major league career. I can say that, because he can't seem to do it in the minors.

Juan Pierre types have a use. Leading off. But he'll need a better SB%.

Linecum was the better pick at the time. No amount of wishing otherwise or harping on his height will change that. Even if the Giants get only 5 years out of him he's going to be worth it.

ugh.

dougdirt
05-01-2007, 10:25 AM
And where was Kazmir drafted? Do you really think Gruler went in the correct slot?

Prior, the CONCENSUS #1 was drafted at #2 because the Twins didn't think they could sign him.

Talent and upside are not the only determining factors. If it were, the Reds would have had Garciaparra, Jeter and Berkman in the system.

Kazmir dropped for signing concerns. Lincecum did not have those same soncerns.
Jeter did not have any signing questions either, the Reds just made a stupid decision. They called Jeter the day before the draft and told him that they were picking him. Low and behold, they didnt.

dougdirt
05-01-2007, 10:40 AM
Which brings us back to what I stated earlier in this thread: Stubbs was out hit by at least 4 other guys on his own team last year. Not by a little, by a lot. He's being out hit again, by 5 guys. He's also being out hit by the two guys doing the catching for Dayton, so in essence 6 positions on the field are wielding a better stick.

He's got no power. His SB% stinks (5 SB's, 3 CS) IF this is all due to the turf toe, and I suspect that is only part of it, he should shut it down and deal with it. What I suspect is he's a Juan Pierre type. decent to good OBP. no power. tons of SB's. He's probably never going to OPS .800+ in his major league career. I can say that, because he can't seem to do it in the minors.

Juan Pierre types have a use. Leading off. But he'll need a better SB%.

Linecum was the better pick at the time. No amount of wishing otherwise or harping on his height will change that. Even if the Giants get only 5 years out of him he's going to be worth it.

ugh.

All a matter of opinion and 9 other teams disagreed with you. If the Giants get 5 years out of him, I will be surprised.

I also get a pretty good kick out of the fact that you can say that he wont OPS over .800 in the Majors because he cant seem to do it in the minors. Grady Sizemore showed absolutely no power in the minor leagues. He topped out at 13 HR, does that suggest that he was never going to hit more than 13 HRs in the Majors?
As for him being outhit....you know, nearly everyone on Louisvilles roster is outhitting Joey Votto right now. You know what Votto and Stubbs have in common right now? They are both in the middle of slumps. It is May 1st. A slump makes your look bad, just like a hot streak makes you look good.

But since I love this 'lets go back and look at who we should have taken' game maybe I should start a topic about wanting CC Sabathia, Brian Roberts, Adam Wainwright, Jeremy Bonderman or David Wright, Cole Hamels, Chad Billingsley, Jared Weaver or Stephen Drew.

Those guys are all doing fairly well for themselves arent there? Should I start up a topic about each of these guys on how well they are doing? Should I blast the guys that we took instead of those guys?
I wish the Mods would close this topic, I really do.

TRF
05-01-2007, 10:41 AM
So teams make dumb decisions based on their what? experience? scouting? stats?

Yes they do. You seem to want to defend this regime when it comes to their draft decisions, when it seems the previous regime (DanO) did as well if not better. The only saving grace for the 2006 draft is that four guys picked after Stubbs are playing so much better than him. Off the charts better in some cases (Valaika).

I'm not ready to call Stubbs a bust, but he was a bad pick in the Gruler sense. There was a better option on the board, and it filled a position of need to boot.

dougdirt
05-01-2007, 10:48 AM
So teams make dumb decisions based on their what? experience? scouting? stats?

Yes they do. You seem to want to defend this regime when it comes to their draft decisions, when it seems the previous regime (DanO) did as well if not better. The only saving grace for the 2006 draft is that four guys picked after Stubbs are playing so much better than him. Off the charts better in some cases (Valaika).

I'm not ready to call Stubbs a bust, but he was a bad pick in the Gruler sense. There was a better option on the board, and it filled a position of need to boot.

Teams make dumb decisions in hindsight. At the time, they didn't look like dumb decisions to the guys making them, or they obviously wouldn't have taken them. I think its just ridiculous that based off of Stubbs last 24 at bats he is playing poorly. Prior to those at bats he was hitting just fine. He is in a slump and its showing in his numbers. The Reds didn't draft a guy who was ready for the big leagues and they surely have the time to let him grow and learn as a player in the minor leagues. Sure we can all play the 'what if' game, but its just silly to do so before either has ever played in the majors and before either has even played a full season worth of baseball, much less the fact that both guys are about to play their first professional game in May.
There also is no such thing as a 'position of need' in the minors. Every position is a position of need in the minor leagues because you have no clue whats going to happen tomorrow.

TRF
05-01-2007, 11:04 AM
All a matter of opinion and 9 other teams disagreed with you. If the Giants get 5 years out of him, I will be surprised.

I also get a pretty good kick out of the fact that you can say that he wont OPS over .800 in the Majors because he cant seem to do it in the minors. Grady Sizemore showed absolutely no power in the minor leagues. He topped out at 13 HR, does that suggest that he was never going to hit more than 13 HRs in the Majors?
As for him being outhit....you know, nearly everyone on Louisvilles roster is outhitting Joey Votto right now. You know what Votto and Stubbs have in common right now? They are both in the middle of slumps. It is May 1st. A slump makes your look bad, just like a hot streak makes you look good.

But since I love this 'lets go back and look at who we should have taken' game maybe I should start a topic about wanting CC Sabathia, Brian Roberts, Adam Wainwright, Jeremy Bonderman or David Wright, Cole Hamels, Chad Billingsley, Jared Weaver or Stephen Drew.

Those guys are all doing fairly well for themselves arent there? Should I start up a topic about each of these guys on how well they are doing? Should I blast the guys that we took instead of those guys?
I wish the Mods would close this topic, I really do.

whatever. you don't like the discussion don't post. it's valid as long as the two players being discussed continue to play.

In the first place, In the Redszone draft, I cyberdrafted Linecum with the first pick. I was on board with him from the beginning. Second, Stubbs was outhit by four guys for all of last year in the Pioneer league. A hitters league. He didn't OPS over .800 in rookie ball. It's been stated he had an injury last year. 2 years, 2 injuries.

For every Sizemore you pull out, we can pull out 10 Juan Pierres. Or more. Sizemore is the exception certainly not the rule.

Yeah, I would have preferred Weaver to Bailey. I said so at the time. But Bailey is at least at AAA on the cusp of the major leagues. At the rate Stubbs is hitting, he won't see Cincinnati in a Reds uni for years.

And Sabathia isn't a good comp and you know it. He was a HS pitcher that happened to rise fast. He wasn't even the first HS pitcher taken in the draft, though he was the best.

Linecum was graded as having 2 pitches that were the best in the draft. Stubbs has shown nothing to date that he was worthy of being drafted that high. Defend the pick all you want, but he is quickly turning into BJ Szymanski. But with stellar gold glove defense, I guess.

dougdirt
05-01-2007, 11:14 AM
whatever. you don't like the discussion don't post. it's valid as long as the two players being discussed continue to play.

In the first place, In the Redszone draft, I cyberdrafted Linecum with the first pick. I was on board with him from the beginning. Second, Stubbs was outhit by four guys for all of last year in the Pioneer league. A hitters league. He didn't OPS over .800 in rookie ball. It's been stated he had an injury last year. 2 years, 2 injuries.

For every Sizemore you pull out, we can pull out 10 Juan Pierres. Or more. Sizemore is the exception certainly not the rule.

Yeah, I would have preferred Weaver to Bailey. I said so at the time. But Bailey is at least at AAA on the cusp of the major leagues. At the rate Stubbs is hitting, he won't see Cincinnati in a Reds uni for years.

And Sabathia isn't a good comp and you know it. He was a HS pitcher that happened to rise fast. He wasn't even the first HS pitcher taken in the draft, though he was the best.

Linecum was graded as having 2 pitches that were the best in the draft. Stubbs has shown nothing to date that he was worthy of being drafted that high. Defend the pick all you want, but he is quickly turning into BJ Szymanski. But with stellar gold glove defense, I guess.

Stubbs > Szymanski and its not really close. That is quite a bad comparison.

As for Sabathia, I went with him because he was drafted after the Reds picked, just like everyone else I named.

And what does it matter if we dont see Stubbs in a Reds uniform for years? What matters is how he performs when he puts one on, not how fast he puts one on.

dougdirt
05-01-2007, 11:15 AM
And you are right, I dont like the discussion because all it has turned into is a 'We should have taken so and so. Drew Stubbs sucks.' and that kind of stuff drives me nuts, especially since these guys have not even been around long enough to gather 300 at bats or 60 innings pitched.

M2
05-01-2007, 11:38 AM
And you are right, I dont like the discussion because all it has turned into is a 'We should have taken so and so. Drew Stubbs sucks.' and that kind of stuff drives me nuts, especially since these guys have not even been around long enough to gather 300 at bats or 60 innings pitched.

True, the difference doesn't need to be that stark. I think what's happening is that a good number of people wanted the Reds to go after an arm with Lincecum's supreme stuff and it's frustrating to see a kid who can be spectacular slip past the organization.

Stubbs could turn out to be a fine player. My guess is he's going to spend a good amount of time as a toolsy work in progress. If that's the case, there's going to be a good amount of consternation if Lincecum continues going the way he is.

BRM
05-01-2007, 03:14 PM
From BA.



2. Tim Lincecum, rhp, Giants (Triple-A Fresno)

Last week's No. 1 moves down a spot, though you could go either way. After walking six on April 23, Lincecum bounced back to whiff 14 over six innings on Sunday. He's allowed just one earned run in 31 innings. If Brian Sabean doesn't have Lincecum's cell number on speed-dial, he should now.

flyer85
05-02-2007, 10:20 AM
All I did was point out that 1) leading in to the draft most questioned Stubbs ability to hit. 2) Since being drafted Stubbs has only added to those concerns.

Without a doubt Stubbs is not a fast track to the majors. Being a high bonus pick he will get the benefit of the doubt and every opportunity to succeed. It still could end up being an very good draft even if Stubbs is a bust.

jmcclain19
05-04-2007, 04:46 AM
Lincecum is now scheduled for his first major league start on Sunday night for the Giants

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070503&content_id=1944924&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Stewie
05-04-2007, 08:48 AM
Lincecum is now scheduled for his first major league start on Sunday night for the Giants

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070503&content_id=1944924&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Should be an entertaining game for ESPN, as he'll be matched up against Cole Hamels.

texasdave
05-08-2007, 01:25 PM
Bump. In his first start Lincecum received a rather rude welcome by the Phillies.
In 4 1/3 innings he gave up five hits, five walks five runs, five earned runs and two bombs. On the bright side he did strike out five batters.

lollipopcurve
05-08-2007, 02:43 PM
Bump. In his first start Lincecum received a rather rude welcome by the Phillies.
In 4 1/3 innings he gave up five hits, five walks five runs, five earned runs and two bombs. On the bright side he did strike out five batters.

I have a feeling that if Bailey debuts like Lincecum did half of Redszone will be screeching about him not being ready. Lincecum's stuff looked good, as advertised, but he's got to get his fastball down or he's going to be very inefficient out there. We'll see if he can have a better 2nd outing, like Phil Hughes did.

jmcclain19
05-10-2007, 05:22 AM
I think from here on out, to be "fair & balanced" when lamenting the Reds non-draft of Lincecum, I'm going to reference the other player I was quite upset the Reds passed over for Stubbs along with Lincecum- UNC's Daniel Bard

Bard is getting his brains beat in the high octane Cal League - with some ugly crooked numbers including a 22BB/9K ratio going on.

GoReds
05-10-2007, 09:25 PM
I think from here on out, to be "fair & balanced" when lamenting the Reds non-draft of Lincecum, I'm going to reference the other player I was quite upset the Reds passed over for Stubbs along with Lincecum- UNC's Daniel Bard

Bard is getting his brains beat in the high octane Cal League - with some ugly crooked numbers including a 22BB/9K ratio going on.

Ouch. I really liked Bard coming out of UNC. Didn't he slip a bit in the draft that year?

Topcat
05-11-2007, 02:15 AM
whatever. you don't like the discussion don't post. it's valid as long as the two players being discussed continue to play.

In the first place, In the Redszone draft, I cyberdrafted Linecum with the first pick. I was on board with him from the beginning. Second, Stubbs was outhit by four guys for all of last year in the Pioneer league. A hitters league. He didn't OPS over .800 in rookie ball. It's been stated he had an injury last year. 2 years, 2 injuries.

For every Sizemore you pull out, we can pull out 10 Juan Pierres. Or more. Sizemore is the exception certainly not the rule.

Yeah, I would have preferred Weaver to Bailey. I said so at the time. But Bailey is at least at AAA on the cusp of the major leagues. At the rate Stubbs is hitting, he won't see Cincinnati in a Reds uni for years.

And Sabathia isn't a good comp and you know it. He was a HS pitcher that happened to rise fast. He wasn't even the first HS pitcher taken in the draft, though he was the best.

Linecum was graded as having 2 pitches that were the best in the draft. Stubbs has shown nothing to date that he was worthy of being drafted that high. Defend the pick all you want, but he is quickly turning into BJ Szymanski. But with stellar gold glove defense, I guess.


I wanted Licecum also but I am wise enough to research and realize his violent delivery was a major red flag for many teams. With the Red's past history are you the genius that was going to step up and take that risk? Just another question directed just at you ok? What was your thoughts on the selection of Homer Bailey ?

jmcclain19
05-11-2007, 03:32 AM
Ouch. I really liked Bard coming out of UNC. Didn't he slip a bit in the draft that year?

The rumor was it was a signing issue - no one wanted to shell out the cash. But maybe some clubs really did see something in him. I know a few around here thought he was a strawman.

TRF
05-11-2007, 12:03 PM
I wanted Licecum also but I am wise enough to research and realize his violent delivery was a major red flag for many teams. With the Red's past history are you the genius that was going to step up and take that risk? Just another question directed just at you ok? What was your thoughts on the selection of Homer Bailey ?

Honestly? I wanted Jared Weaver. I was sour on HS arms that had flamed out or just not signed (Howington, Gruler, Sowers)

TRF
05-11-2007, 12:09 PM
BTW, I am happy to start my meal of crow if Stubbs continues to hit like he has this month. That is if Lincecum does poorly in his second outing. :)

BucksandReds
05-11-2007, 05:35 PM
We'll see alot tonight about Lincecum. I understand the reasons to not take a kid that throws so strangely due to injuries. Stubbs is still a top 100 prospect by about every pub which means most in the know think that he will be a solid contributor. You couldn't have predicted Josh Hamilton at this time last year so I get the pick. It looks like we could possibly have one guy in the out field with 4 tools and 2 guys in the outfield with 5 tools in 2-3 years. How can you argue with that? I can live w/o a high batting average if his OPS is good. Dunn is a part of alot of runs and will never hit for average.

DntKnw
05-12-2007, 08:21 AM
Lincecum gets his first ML win in Colorado . . .

His line is 7IP 3R (2ER) 1BB 6K 112P (75K/37BB)

Good start in a tough pitcher's park.

CTA513
05-12-2007, 12:40 PM
Lincecum gave up his 3rd homerun last night.

edabbs44
05-17-2007, 09:50 PM
Lincecum tonight so far vs Houston: 7 IP, 2 hits, 1 run, 1 BB, 10 Ks.

Nice.

Xavier Redleg
05-17-2007, 10:40 PM
Newsflash: Tim Lincecum is not on the Reds. Stop bringing up this stupid thread everytime he pitches.

RedsMan3203
05-17-2007, 10:52 PM
Newsflash: Tim Lincecum is not on the Reds. Stop bringing up this stupid thread everytime he pitches.

Really - Even though he isn't on the Reds... some people enjoy watching rookies come out of their shell and welcome their self to the big leagues... So far he is looking good... Never know who is going to be the next Maddux, Glavin, Clemens...

Xavier Redleg
05-17-2007, 11:04 PM
Really - Even though he isn't on the Reds... some people enjoy watching rookies come out of their shell and welcome their self to the big leagues... So far he is looking good... Never know who is going to be the next Maddux, Glavin, Clemens...

That's fine if you like watching young players - so do I. I love it when new young stars emerge. It makes for a much more interesting league. Plus that might get more people watching baseball again. But that's not how some of the people on this board look at Lincecum. Some people use his success to bash Stubbs and the Reds front office. I don't know how other people on this board feel about that, but it pisses me off a little bit.

RedsMan3203
05-17-2007, 11:36 PM
That's fine if you like watching young players - so do I. I love it when new young stars emerge. It makes for a much more interesting league. Plus that might get more people watching baseball again. But that's not how some of the people on this board look at Lincecum. Some people use his success to bash Stubbs and the Reds front office. I don't know how other people on this board feel about that, but it pisses me off a little bit.

It happens in every major sport.... Lets enjoy his starts... and thank god we only have to face him at the max 2 times a year. :D

larks
05-17-2007, 11:47 PM
I agree that the Lincecum v. Stubbs debate gets played out on this board a lot. Yeah I would like Lincecum in this organization but I understand why the Reds passed on him. As good as Lincecum could be there will always be the looming threat of injury. His delivery is the definition of "violent motion." I hope that doesnt happen cause I like watching him pitch (and he's on my fantasy team) but I wont hold it against the Reds or Krivsky if he turns out to be a better big leaguer than stubbs. That doesnt upset me. If Brendan Harris keeps up his year now that upsets me.

edabbs44
05-18-2007, 05:45 AM
That's fine if you like watching young players - so do I. I love it when new young stars emerge. It makes for a much more interesting league. Plus that might get more people watching baseball again. But that's not how some of the people on this board look at Lincecum. Some people use his success to bash Stubbs and the Reds front office. I don't know how other people on this board feel about that, but it pisses me off a little bit.

Sorry Drew.;)

You've only been on the board for a month and you are this salty already? I can't wait to see you in a few more months.

TRF
05-18-2007, 09:12 AM
Newsflash: Tim Lincecum is not on the Reds. Stop bringing up this stupid thread everytime he pitches.

Anything else you want to tell us to post. Any rules or guidelines you've come up with would be helpful. The fact is, the Reds had a shot at Lincecum, and for an organization that has been historically deficient in developing pitching, to see them pass on a guy like him irks some of us. Meanwhile Stubbs is FINALLY starting to hit. He finally has his OPS over .800. BUT this is his scond year in the org. that he's battling some kind of injury. And this one will require surgery in the offseason. He's a far cry offensively from the previous year's #1 pick (Jay Bruce). Bruce could be up with the Reds next year. Stubbs timetable at this point is uncertain. And Lincecum just K'd 10 Astros.

Ugh.

NJReds
05-18-2007, 09:35 AM
Lincecum gets his first ML win in Colorado . . .

His line is 7IP 3R (2ER) 1BB 6K 112P (75K/37BB)

Good start in a tough pitcher's park.

If he was on the Reds and Narron let him throw that many pitches, there would be an angry mob storming GABP.

Aronchis
05-18-2007, 10:19 AM
Anything else you want to tell us to post. Any rules or guidelines you've come up with would be helpful. been historically deficient in developing pitching, to see them pass on a guy like him irks some of us. Meanwhile Stubbs is FINALLY starting to hit. He finally has his OPS over .800. BUT this is his scond year in the org. that he's battling some kind of injury. And this one will require surgery in the offseason. He's a far cry offensively from the previous year's #1 pick (Jay Bruce). Bruce could be up with the Reds next year. Stubbs timetable at this point is uncertain. And Lincecum just K'd 10 Astros.

Ugh.

The fact is, the Reds had a shot at Lincecum..............as did many other teams. They all passed most likely for similiar reasons

The real fact is, Lincecum's career may look good now, but how about 3 seasons from now? 1 season from now? You never are going to get EVERYBODY. Considering your building strategy in the minors, you may miss a obvious risk that pans out............or not. The problem with flops is when they continue year after year. Even Dean Taylor has had some decent picks with the Brewers.

The draft is a crapshoot my friends. The better recruiters will hit more often, but the misses still will come as well.

bucksfan2
05-18-2007, 11:41 AM
The thing is the draft is a crap shoot. I am sick of people mentioning how the reds passed on Derrik Jeter to select someone else. If you knew the future of every draft pick then the draft wouldn't be the way it is now. Heck 30 teams passed on Mike Piazza 30+ times. Fact of the matter is Linceum isn't a red and probably wont be a red. He may have a great career or he may blow out after a year or two. Still no one knows right now. All I know right now is that Drew Stubbs is a red. Some people may not like it but no one knows what that guy is going to do.

lollipopcurve
05-18-2007, 11:47 AM
Anyone who has followed the draft long enough will recognize that he doesn't know more about who should be picked than the scouting directors and GMs do. People who think otherwise are fooling themselves.

edabbs44
05-18-2007, 11:59 AM
Heear-ye, hear-ye. A moratorium has been announced on comparing Lincecum and Stubbs. Please refrain from mentioning other things on this site, such as:

Narron's lineups: He was hired by the FO, so we must now deal with the consequences.

Krivsky's unquenchable desire for veterans: Bob has made him the GM...so deal with it.

Eric Milton: Again, he was signed and is a Red. Please root for him until he is not a Red. He may end up pitching well.

Mike Stanton: Same as above. So what that he sucks now. He might be good later.


See how ridiculous that sounds? That is the same as what is being proposed about Stubbs/Lincecum. The Reds haven't had good pitching for years and they passed this one up for a toolsy outfielder with questions about his bat. I think this will be an applicable argument for years. Wayne signed off on Stubbs for whatever reason, he must deal with the comparisons.

I've seen many Kazmir/Gruler comparisons...there is no difference.

M2
05-18-2007, 12:06 PM
Anyone who has followed the draft long enough will recognize that he doesn't know more about who should be picked than the scouting directors and GMs do. People who think otherwise are fooling themselves.

I beg to differ. There's a lot of awful scouting directors out there. The good ones surely are worth their weight in gold, but there's others who go years without turning up a major league regular. Theoretically you could put names on a board and throw darts and do better.

Buckley's first Reds draft is looking fairly good despite not taking Lincecum (and at this point I think it's fair to say he should have - even if you don't think Lincecum will hold up, right now he's worth three Drew Stubbses), so I'm not lumping him into the inept pile.

texasdave
05-18-2007, 12:49 PM
I watched this game down here on FOX SW and would just like to say that although Lincecum's delivery is unorthodox, it is at the same time effortless. Or seemed effortless to me. Jim Deshaies likened his delivery to Orel Hershiser. He also recanted a story claiming that Lincecum's father patterned his son's delivery after Sandy Koufax.

PS I love me some Drew Stubbs. :)

lollipopcurve
05-18-2007, 01:02 PM
I watched some of the game too, and I thought the comparison to Hershiser was on target. Apparently, the father had some informed health reasons in mind when he helped his kid develop the delivery he now has.

Just dominating stuff. All the better that he slicing and dicing the Stros.

I tired a long time ago of the Lincecum/Stubbs talk, but I can't help but regret the Reds not having this kid. Small solace -- I scooped him for one of my fantasy teams a few days before he was called up.

REDblooded
05-18-2007, 01:35 PM
I gotta admit that this one leaves me extremely saddened every time i see this guys line.........The Reds needed another OF'r in the system about as much as Brittney Spears needs another short skirt. Lincecum, at the time of the draft, was widely considered a guy who could come in and be an outstanding closer..............and a rather quick contributor. Instead, Wayne was feeling rather comfortable at the time of the draft with the idea that was slowly brewing in his head......."if i combined Felipe, and Kearns, I could cut payroll AND get Majewski, Bray, and maybe, just maybe, if i persuade him with a nice new pair of pants, old Bowden will toss in Royce Clayton!". And with that, history was made. It can't be changed, but we sure as heck can question it.

For all the blind reds strokers on this board, and there are many, meet me on the southbound side of the Brent Spence bridge tonight. I'll be wearing a red shirt that says "KRIVSKY" on the back of it. I'll take a running leap over the side, and I'm pretty sure you'll all follow me into the chilly night sky. Because that's what you do. Follow blindly into the night.

Triples
05-18-2007, 01:46 PM
Personally, I find the last paragraph of this post to be offensive. While I don't consider myself a "blind reds stroker" I do believe that being a loyal reds fan and seeing the glass as half full rather than half empty are admirable traits. Likewise, there are folks on this board who humbly admitt that maybe....just maybe, a guy who as spent the last 30 years making a living in the game might know more than they do. My question to you Redblood is, who died and made you the all knowing, omnipotent source of all baseball knowlege that would allow you to be so critical of others opinions?




For all the blind reds strokers on this board, and there are many, meet me on the southbound side of the Brent Spence bridge tonight. I'll be wearing a red shirt that says "KRIVSKY" on the back of it. I'll take a running leap over the side, and I'm pretty sure you'll all follow me into the chilly night sky. Because that's what you do. Follow blindly into the night.

REDblooded
05-18-2007, 02:28 PM
When almost every critical viewpoint on this board is met with criticism, I'd say I have a pretty strong case. You find it offensive for me to state an opinion, fine, I find it more alarming that every and all questions on this board are met with a load of Mr Roger's happy rubbish. I didn't open this thread wanting to gripe, but once again, I was left shaking my head when everybody who questioned the selection of Stubbs over Lincecum was in turn attacked personally, for having an opinion. And THAT, I find offensive.

If you don't want to question management or ownership, then you must live in a world where you believe all things are equal, every team tries just as hard and finishes with a .500 record, and the World Series is decided by a coin flip, because, after all, every team is run by guys with loads of baseball experience, correct? That would mean that there are no right or wrong decisions, just lucky bounces and breaks. It's a grand approach, for a slug, but if you don't mind, I'll continue to have a spine and form my own opinions without considering myself a baseball god, or even an expert for that matter.