PDA

View Full Version : Why such optimism with Dickerson?



Eric_the_Red
04-02-2009, 11:31 AM
It seems many RZ members are very optimistic about Dickerson's 2009 season, based on what he did last year. But looking at his track record (minor league stats), I'm not so sure.

Why do so many believe he will play a full season like he did in 102 at bats for the Reds last year, instead of how he played in 2202 minor league at bats?

Don't get me wrong- I'd love for him to match what he did last year in the majors over a full season, but I just don't see that happening. IDK, it seems like a lot of RZers are quick to believe in CD despite his track record, but very quick to close the door on any possibility of Taveras improving his game. (Don't forget, Taveras is only one year older than Dickerson.)

flash
04-02-2009, 11:37 AM
My reasons are simple. Smokey Garrett worked with him, got him to change his stance and it changed him as a hitter. That and maybe Dickerson decided to grow up.

dunner13
04-02-2009, 12:04 PM
I think dickerson has always been a guy who has all the physcial tools to be a superstar. The question is just when will those tools translate to success on the field. Alot of people think it could happen this year, maybe it never happens but he does have alot of potential.

Chris Sabowned
04-02-2009, 12:17 PM
I think it's his athleticism that gets most people excited. He has the potential to be a five-tool player. And did I mention that his uncle is Eric Dickerson.

BLEEDS
04-02-2009, 12:19 PM
Agree with flash and dunner, combination of getting some good coaching which may have pointed out a flaw/better approach, and the guy is at "that age" where a guy with all the tools hits his physical peak and it all just "comes together".

For some guys, it takes until 26/27 for them to get out of the minors and then they take MLB by storm - look at Chris Sabo, he toiled in the minors forever, and then when he finally "got it" he was rookie of the year.

Based on those variables, it all points to a possible breakout year.
Not many other guys on this team - outside of Bruce and Votto - have the tools and intangibles and Upside, so a lot rides on his success if we are going to be anywhere near .500.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

NastyBoy
04-02-2009, 12:26 PM
Its pretty rare that you 26 year old rookie (turning 27) finally put it all together, but he would not be the first. Remember that Chris Sabo was 26 his rookie season when he won rookie of the year.

If you have been listening to any of the radio broadcasts or hot stove league... Dickerson has been one of the biggest surprises. In part because everyone was was wondering if last year was a fluke. In spring training this year, he has continued to show that it was not a fluke. The real proof will have to be on the field.

Ghosts of 1990
04-02-2009, 12:29 PM
If you watch him play, he's a good athlete with a great build. He looks to have great upside. Weird guy though. Real quirky

schmidty622
04-02-2009, 12:30 PM
I think dickerson has always been a guy who has all the physcial tools to be a superstar. The question is just when will those tools translate to success on the field. Alot of people think it could happen this year, maybe it never happens but he does have alot of potential.


:rolleyes:

Maybe above average, but superstar? I mean - come on.

berryluther
04-02-2009, 01:01 PM
I think it's his athleticism that gets most people excited. He has the potential to be a five-tool player. And did I mention that his uncle is Eric Dickerson.


By the end of April you will see this guy is more likely a 2-3 tool player

Eric_the_Red
04-02-2009, 01:56 PM
I often wonder what it means when a player is referred to as "athletic". Either you play ball well or you don't.

Weren't Glenn Braggs, Wily Mo Pena and Brandon Larson "athletic" (or at least in shape)? I'll take the Babe Ruths, CC Sabathias and Tony Gwynns over the "athletic" guys like Gabe Kapler.

Again, I hope CD does well, but I don't expect him to reach .290 or 20 HR this year. More power to him if he does though.

REDblooded
04-02-2009, 03:51 PM
I've seen his name popping up a lot in ESPN chats too... for fantasy purposes, he was compared to a Johnny Damon.

TC81190
04-02-2009, 05:47 PM
I think a lot of it is due to his refinement in his approach last year.

I expect him to do something like .265/.340/.450 with 15-20 HR.

krm1580
04-02-2009, 07:14 PM
Part of it is he has very good athletic ability which leads to a high ceiling and people get excited over the prospect of reaching that ceiling.

The other part, in my humble opinion, is he was a 16th round draft pick and is therefore seen as somewhat of an overacheiver and a draft steal which people tend to judge in more optimistic terms as opposed to a guy like Drew Stubbs who provides pretty much the exact same skill set and gets killed because taken in the first round instead of Lincicum.

Slyder
04-02-2009, 09:49 PM
I watched the games last year and both Dickerson and Hannigan had good cups of joe. My thought was unless we were going to be serious about upgrades (which we werent) at LF, SS, catcher, and get some more help from the rotation (no I dont view Hernandez as that much of an upgrade) I felt we might as well give both a chance and see if we got viable long term options in these two guys or if they were just Chris Stynes reduex. Unfortunately the Reds went out and got expensive wastes of talents in their positions rather than filling the actual problems and now both are going to be limited in opportunities to showcase their ability.

Ghosts of 1990
04-02-2009, 09:54 PM
I often wonder what it means when a player is referred to as "athletic". Either you play ball well or you don't.

Weren't Glenn Braggs, Wily Mo Pena and Brandon Larson "athletic" (or at least in shape)? I'll take the Babe Ruths, CC Sabathias and Tony Gwynns over the "athletic" guys like Gabe Kapler.

Again, I hope CD does well, but I don't expect him to reach .290 or 20 HR this year. More power to him if he does though.

Braggs and Pena were athletic.

But no, Larson didn't show the dynamics that Dickerson probably has at the big league level and neither do the other two.

Ability to steal bases, etc.

BLEEDS
04-02-2009, 10:11 PM
I watched the games last year and both Dickerson and Hannigan had good cups of joe. My thought was unless we were going to be serious about upgrades (which we werent) at LF, SS, catcher, and get some more help from the rotation (no I dont view Hernandez as that much of an upgrade) I felt we might as well give both a chance and see if we got viable long term options in these two guys or if they were just Chris Stynes reduex. Unfortunately the Reds went out and got expensive wastes of talents in their positions rather than filling the actual problems and now both are going to be limited in opportunities to showcase their ability.

Man, just when I thought I might get a bit optimistic with the whole idea of Sheffield or another bopper in LF - I get SMACKED IN THE FACE with a cold dose of reality.

Ah well, now I don't have as far to fall anymore. Aiming for the sky and landing on the roof IS actually a harder fall than aiming for the roof and falling on the ground - when the house is a 8 ft tall trailer and the ground is soft grass.

Thank You Sir!!

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Kingspoint
04-03-2009, 07:00 PM
Because I saw it in him the day the "light turned on" with Dickerson.

He's a legitimate .750-.830 OPS guy with speed and defense for the REDS for the next two-three seasons. A legitimate 5-tool player for the next 2-3 years after he's already had 2/3rd's of a year of it.