PDA

View Full Version : BA's Untouchable Prospects



Benihana
07-22-2009, 05:49 PM
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/prospect-bulletin/2009/268579.html

No Carlos Santana. No Alcides Escobar. No Reid Brignac. No Dee Gordon. No Michael Taylor.

All guys I think would be worth pursuing. The first three are blocked by All-Stars at the major league level. The other two have been mentioned in possible deadline deals.

The Dodgers, Brewers and Phillies want veteran pitching (Harang, Arroyo, etc.)

The Indians probably want impact prospects at positions other than catcher, assuming they keep VMart (Alonso? Stewart? Wood?)

I'm not sure exactly what the Devil Rays would want, but between Bartlett, Zobrist, and Beckham, I don't think there is much room for Brignac. I'm also not sure if Brignac would be a significant upgrade over Zach Cozart, although the Reds might feel differently. He is closer to the majors than Cozart.

dougdirt
07-22-2009, 06:01 PM
Dee Gordon is someone you want to target? A 145 pound shortstop (regardless of what he is listed at, if he weighs more than 150 pounds I would be incredibly surprised) with no power, power projection and at 21 years old is OPSing .740 in Low A is really someone we want to target? What separates him from a guy like Miguel Rojas other than the steals?

GIDP
07-22-2009, 06:04 PM
doesnt Brignac have some D troubles?

dougdirt
07-22-2009, 06:06 PM
doesnt Brignac have some D troubles?

No, he doesn't. When he was drafted his scouting report was basically 'can hit, will he be good enough defensively to stick at SS'.... now it basically reads 'can field, will he hit enough to stick in the majors as a starter'.

Benihana
07-22-2009, 06:06 PM
Dee Gordon is someone you want to target? A 145 pound shortstop (regardless of what he is listed at, if he weighs more than 150 pounds I would be incredibly surprised) with no power, power projection and at 21 years old is OPSing .740 in Low A is really someone we want to target? What separates him from a guy like Miguel Rojas other than the steals?

A career OPS that is 200 points higher.

Rojas has looked good in the last six weeks but was anemic before that. Either way, why not stockpile a couple of guys like that and see if one of them can turn into a Jose Reyes-lite type?

I would love to see an Arroyo/Weathers deal for Gordon/E.Martin. Sure it doesn't help much for the big club in the next year or two, but it does lighten the purse load to pursue a Matt Holliday signing. Meanwhile, Arroyo and Weathers are replaceable by guys like Bailey and Roenicke, and you're restocking the farm system with some guys with promise.

dougdirt
07-22-2009, 06:11 PM
A career OPS that is 200 points higher. Career OPS based on half a season of rookie ball and then 3/4 of a season in the Midwest League? Regadless of that, who cares about their OPS. Look at their skillsets. What makes one better than the other? Rojas looks like he has a better idea at the plate. Gordon has better speed and is a better base stealer.



I like Rojas too. Why not stockpile a couple of guys like that and see if one of them can turn into a Jose Reyes-lite type? Well because we have to trade talent to get a guy who profiles pretty similarly to a guy we already have at the same exact spot in their careers. Doesn't make a ton of sense to me to stockpile 'clones' at the same level in the hopes that one of them turns into a super star unless that player is already performing at a super star level and neither of those guys are.



I would love to see an Arroyo/Weathers deal for Gordon/E.Martin, even if the Reds forked over a little bit of cash. Sure it doesn't help much for the big club in the next year or two, but it does lighten the purse load to pursue a Matt Holliday signing. Meanwhile, you're restocking the farm system with some guys with promise.
Ethan Martin isn't being traded unless its for a stud Major Leaguer. Got that from a guy who works in scouting for the Dodgers. I would be ok with Gordon as a throw in to a deal, but Ethan Martin isn't going to be the main guy the Reds or just about anyone else are getting back.

Benihana
07-22-2009, 06:22 PM
Career OPS based on half a season of rookie ball and then 3/4 of a season in the Midwest League? Regadless of that, who cares about their OPS. Look at their skillsets. What makes one better than the other? Rojas looks like he has a better idea at the plate. Gordon has better speed and is a better base stealer.

Doug, you love to use stats when you need 'em but talk of "skillsets" when the stats don't support your arguments. What happened to Adam Rosales being the Reds' 1B of the future?


Well because we have to trade talent to get a guy who profiles pretty similarly to a guy we already have at the same exact spot in their careers. Doesn't make a ton of sense to me to stockpile 'clones' at the same level in the hopes that one of them turns into a super star unless that player is already performing at a super star level and neither of those guys are.


Depends on what you'd have to give up. The Dodgers strike me as a team willing to trade off most of their minor leaguers for win-now pieces. Look at last year's Carlos Santana trade as an example. I never said I'd give up a major piece for Gordon, but I would consider moving a veteran role player with no role on the current, non-contending Reds.

GIDP
07-22-2009, 06:28 PM
No, he doesn't. When he was drafted his scouting report was basically 'can hit, will he be good enough defensively to stick at SS'.... now it basically reads 'can field, will he hit enough to stick in the majors as a starter'.

oh word?

dougdirt
07-22-2009, 06:32 PM
Doug, you love to use stats when you need 'em but talk of "skillsets" when the stats don't support your arguments. What happened to Adam Rosales being the Reds' 1B of the future?
Stats can often dictate skillsets. Outside of April, Rojas has hit every bit as well as Gordon has this year in the Midwest League. They have a pretty similar skillset.

As for Rosales, should I really go through and dig up every instance you were wrong about something? What does Rosales have to do with either Miguel Rojas or Dee Gordon other than you wanting to suggest I am wrong?

GIDP
07-22-2009, 06:34 PM
for the record I still think Rosales could be a pretty good major leaguer.

Benihana
07-22-2009, 06:36 PM
Stats can often dictate skillsets.

Are you sure it's not the other way around?


Outside of April, Rojas has hit every bit as well as Gordon has this year in the Midwest League. They have a pretty similar skillset.

Here we go with the month-by-month cherrypicking again.


As for Rosales, should I really go through and dig up every instance you were wrong about something?

You can't- I'm never wrong. ;)


What does Rosales have to do with either Miguel Rojas or Dee Gordon other than you wanting to suggest I am wrong?

It was an example of you using "stats" to back up your arguments when they are convenient, yet say "who cares about stats" when they are not. This thread and your defense of Mesoraco are the latest examples of the latter.

Benihana
07-22-2009, 06:37 PM
for the record I still think Rosales could be a pretty good major leaguer.

He's a utility guy at best. No way should he be a long term solution at any major league position.

GIDP
07-22-2009, 06:49 PM
He's a utility guy at best. No way should he be a long term solution at any major league position.

His AA year I could easily see someone thinking he had a good shot at being a major league regular. He has shows some good flashes.

He could probably still develop into a regular infielder somewhere but hes certainly not going to be a long term one.

dougdirt
07-22-2009, 06:52 PM
Are you sure it's not the other way around?
Either way you want to slice it, the two guys have very similar skillsets.




Here we go with the month-by-month cherrypicking again.

Yeah, because the first month of the season in Low A ball isn't nearly as valuable as looking at the more recent ones, especially when the skillsets and stats suggest a major change (particularly with the plate discipline went from 9/1 K to BB in April to 21/23 in May-now). I could care less about what happened in April because his skillset has certainly changed.



It was an illustration of you using "stats" to back up your arguments when they are convenient, yet say "who cares about stats" when they are not. This thread and your defense of Mesoraco are the latest examples of the latter.
The stats dictated and still do, that Rosales has a chance to be a regular in the majors. And I also recall saying that Rosales had a chance to be guy the Reds could use at 1B or 3B, not that he would be an All Star of some sort. As for Mesoraco, I stand by what I say. The fact that you disagree doesn't make me right or wrong, it simply means I disagree with you.

DTCromer
07-22-2009, 08:56 PM
for the record I still think Rosales could be a pretty good major leaguer.

What the hell GIDP? Why do I agree with you again? I think he could be decent, just not long term. I see him as a super utility guy that all clubs need. I want him on the Reds as the 5th IF.

Benihana
07-30-2009, 03:05 PM
Dee Gordon is someone you want to target? A 145 pound shortstop (regardless of what he is listed at, if he weighs more than 150 pounds I would be incredibly surprised) with no power, power projection and at 21 years old is OPSing .740 in Low A is really someone we want to target? What separates him from a guy like Miguel Rojas other than the steals?


Looks like some of the actual professionals tend to agree with me

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/9871032/MLB-trade-deadline-buzz:-Thursday%27s-edition

Source: Dodgers offer could tempt Jays 1:52 p.m.

One source with knowledge of the Blue Jays' thinking predicted that the Dodgers could "catch their attention" with an offer that included third baseman Josh Bell, shortstop Devaris Gordon and hard-throwing pitching prospects from among the group of Josh Lindblom, Ethan Martin and Nathan Eovaldi.

Bell, 22, and Gordon, 21, are considered premium everyday players at positions where the Blue Jays don't have clear starters for the future.

M2
07-30-2009, 03:15 PM
Here we go with the month-by-month cherrypicking again.

The methodology that has brought such hits as "Homer Bailey Is Ready" and "Drew Stubbs Has Figured Out How to Hit" and "Miguel Perez Is the Reds' Catcher of the Future."

TRF
07-30-2009, 03:50 PM
Yeah, because the first month of the season in Low A ball isn't nearly as valuable as looking at the more recent ones, especially when the skillsets and stats suggest a major change (particularly with the plate discipline went from 9/1 K to BB in April to 21/23 in May-now). I could care less about what happened in April because his skillset has certainly changed.

You never used this argument regarding Stubbs. And no I don't want to rehash our million page Stubbs debate.

I think the point is, you use stats when it fits your argument/philosophy. You'll use contradictory stats to prop up players you like, and dismiss them when it's a player you aren't as fond of. Yeah, you have been right many times, but frankly I'd say your record on prospects, as far as projecting them is about .500. I see you say things like "yeah but have you seen him play" a lot, often in regards to players I know for most of us it's impossible to see play. Guys at Billings or in the GCL. I think you have garnered such an inside track that you way over value Reds' prospects, especially one acquired via the draft in round #1. Your constant over valuing of Bailey over Cueto comes to mind. I think you have over-valued Alonso too.

I get why your mindset works this way, but you pass off your opinions like they are fact, and well, they ain't. I'd still kill to have a tenth of the access you have. Geography doesn't allow me to see any major or minor league games in person. I'm limited to the independent Central Baseball League. Not much in the way of futures for those guys.

Benihana
07-30-2009, 04:18 PM
You never used this argument regarding Stubbs. And no I don't want to rehash our million page Stubbs debate.

I think the point is, you use stats when it fits your argument/philosophy. You'll use contradictory stats to prop up players you like, and dismiss them when it's a player you aren't as fond of. Yeah, you have been right many times, but frankly I'd say your record on prospects, as far as projecting them is about .500. I see you say things like "yeah but have you seen him play" a lot, often in regards to players I know for most of us it's impossible to see play. Guys at Billings or in the GCL. I think you have garnered such an inside track that you way over value Reds' prospects, especially one acquired via the draft in round #1. Your constant over valuing of Bailey over Cueto comes to mind. I think you have over-valued Alonso too.

I get why your mindset works this way, but you pass off your opinions like they are fact, and well, they ain't. I'd still kill to have a tenth of the access you have. Geography doesn't allow me to see any major or minor league games in person. I'm limited to the independent Central Baseball League. Not much in the way of futures for those guys.

Well said :clap:

dougdirt
07-30-2009, 05:08 PM
Looks like some of the actual professionals tend to agree with me

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/9871032/MLB-trade-deadline-buzz:-Thursday%27s-edition

Those professionals can talk up guys all they want. I have talked to Dodgers scouts and have seen the guy in person. He looks like he is trapped in a 14 year olds body, except unlike the 14 year old, he isn't going to grow out of it. If it were 1980, he could probably be a solid MLB SS. Its not though. Weighing in at 145 pounds isn't going to cut it in the major leagues.

Benihana
07-30-2009, 05:19 PM
Those professionals can talk up guys all they want. I have talked to Dodgers scouts and have seen the guy in person. He looks like he is trapped in a 14 year olds body, except unlike the 14 year old, he isn't going to grow out of it. If it were 1980, he could probably be a solid MLB SS. Its not though. Weighing in at 145 pounds isn't going to cut it in the major leagues.

Why would Blue Jays officials be talking up Dodgers prospects? And why would Dodgers scouts talk down their own prospects? That sure makes sense.

dougdirt
07-30-2009, 05:20 PM
You never used this argument regarding Stubbs. And no I don't want to rehash our million page Stubbs debate.

Well if you are going to try and call me out on it, then we are going to rehash it. Stubbs in Low A went .702, .846, .469, .925 and .907 in OPS by month. The next year he went 944, 611, 664, 855, 861 by month. This year he has gone 673, 870, 599, 749.... Every year with Stubbs (this year included, although to a lesser extent) he has been a roller coaster from outstanding to Willy Taveras. It would be tough to use an argument saying he has gotten better along the way so lets not pay attention to his first month when the guy is all over the place from month to month.



I think the point is, you use stats when it fits your argument/philosophy. You'll use contradictory stats to prop up players you like, and dismiss them when it's a player you aren't as fond of. Yeah, you have been right many times, but frankly I'd say your record on prospects, as far as projecting them is about .500. I see you say things like "yeah but have you seen him play" a lot, often in regards to players I know for most of us it's impossible to see play. Guys at Billings or in the GCL. I think you have garnered such an inside track that you way over value Reds' prospects, especially one acquired via the draft in round #1. Your constant over valuing of Bailey over Cueto comes to mind. I think you have over-valued Alonso too.
I use stats all the time, especially when the jive with the scouting reports. I would love to see where I have dismissed stats for a player I 'am not fond of', which of course is silly because I don't dislike any single player in the system. As for Bailey/Cueto... I STILL think he will have a better CAREER than Cueto will and for that same reason is why I thought he was a better prospect when both were still prospects (FTR, so did EVERY major publication out there). As for me and overvaluing Alonso... BA rated him as the 15th best prospect in baseball. I rated him the 13th best. Did we both overrate him? Where do you think he should be rated? Who is ahead of him and who are the next 15 guys behind him?



I get why your mindset works this way, but you pass off your opinions like they are fact, and well, they ain't. I'd still kill to have a tenth of the access you have. Geography doesn't allow me to see any major or minor league games in person. I'm limited to the independent Central Baseball League. Not much in the way of futures for those guys.
I pass off my opinions like they are my opinions. I happen to believe pretty strongly in my opinions though. Sorry if that rubs you the wrong way, but I put a whole lot of time into player evaluation and because of that I get a pretty strong belief of why I think X player is whatever he is.

dougdirt
07-30-2009, 05:22 PM
Why would Blue Jays officials be talking up Dodgers prospects? And why would Dodgers scouts talk down their own prospects? That sure makes sense.

The Dodgers scouts didn't talk him down or up, they just have an opinion on him. They don't expect his bat to be much either. Defensively, the kid can glove it. Offensively, I would be surprised if he was much more than what Elvis Andrus is right now. To me, a weak hitting shortstop who profiles as a #7/8 hitter with a strong glove isn't someone who should be untouchable.

dougdirt
07-30-2009, 05:26 PM
The methodology that has brought such hits as "Homer Bailey Is Ready" and "Drew Stubbs Has Figured Out How to Hit" and "Miguel Perez Is the Reds' Catcher of the Future."

Ah, yeah, Miguel Perez. Way to burn me by going back 4 years. I will be back in a few after I go grab some aloe vera to cool off these burns.

Orenda
07-30-2009, 05:35 PM
Those professionals can talk up guys all they want. I have talked to Dodgers scouts and have seen the guy in person. He looks like he is trapped in a 14 year olds body, except unlike the 14 year old, he isn't going to grow out of it. If it were 1980, he could probably be a solid MLB SS. Its not though. Weighing in at 145 pounds isn't going to cut it in the major leagues.


IF he adds 10 lbs of lean muscle a year over the next 2-3 seasons he's now at 165-175 lbs. That is not an impossible feat to accomplish, especially for a pro athlete with access to trainers and maybe a nutritionist (plus he's in a good farm system who might hire people who have some knowledge about these things). He's not going to ever be a big guy and probably wouldn't have much power but I think that statement is pretty laughable.

Benihana
07-30-2009, 05:46 PM
The Dodgers scouts didn't talk him down or up, they just have an opinion on him. They don't expect his bat to be much either. Defensively, the kid can glove it. Offensively, I would be surprised if he was much more than what Elvis Andrus is right now. To me, a weak hitting shortstop who profiles as a #7/8 hitter with a strong glove isn't someone who should be untouchable.

No one said he should be untouchable Doug. In fact, the subject of this thread is "Untouchables" and my first post demonstrates that he is not listed as one. Nor did anyone ever claim that he should be.

You are doing your usual sliding retreat, where you (I'm assuming unknowingly) change your arguments to defend something that wasn't even being debated.

TRF
07-30-2009, 05:52 PM
I don't dislike any single player in the system.

You should, there is plenty to dislike. Castro leaps to mind for me. Stubbs too. :)

I know you use stats. My issue is you'll point to a stat like LD% like it's the end all. You used it numerous times with Stubbs and Mes to show they are doing well, when they weren't. Results matter. LD% with no context of what constitutes a LD (scored by official scorers) is not very valuable.

As for Alonso, classic case of over valuing. IMO no prospect should be ranked before his first season, whether that's a full or short season league. And he hadn't hit for crap in AA prior to breaking his hand. His development is likely set back a year. Maybe he's got the talent to start in AA next season with a promotion to AAA at the break. But unless he starts hitting LH pitching, he's Danny Dorn but with no position with the Reds available. That's going to decrease is value to the Reds assuming a best case scenario of Votto staying healthy. I was sure the Reds were going after Beckham in 2008. A completely inexplicable pick to my mind, but that's just my opinion.

But to answer your question, I wouldn't have ranked Alonso at the beginning of 2009. Not enough sample. Now once 2010 rolls around, there is no way I have Alonso ranked higher Yorman Rodriguez. Y is playing at a higher level and at a younger age than Alonso ever did, and so far playing very well. I thought the Alonso #1 ranking for the Reds was silly. Why is he #1 over Frazier, a comp pick that has out played him at every level so far. pheh.

LoganBuck
07-30-2009, 05:59 PM
Can't you guys sword fight somewhere else? Seriously this has gotten stupid.

dougdirt
07-30-2009, 06:00 PM
But to answer your question, I wouldn't have ranked Alonso at the beginning of 2009. Not enough sample. Now once 2010 rolls around, there is no way I have Alonso ranked higher Yorman Rodriguez. Y is playing at a higher level and at a younger age than Alonso ever did, and so far playing very well. I thought the Alonso #1 ranking for the Reds was silly. Why is he #1 over Frazier, a comp pick that has out played him at every level so far. pheh.

Projection and the likelihood of reaching that projection is why he was #1 over Frazier. He projects to be a better major leaguer. Numbers only tell us so much. Even still, I like Alonso's numbers more than Fraziers. Much better plate discipline and the power has been about the same (.193 isoP in AA for Frazier this year at age 23 and a .183 in the FSL and SL for Alonso at age 22). Combine the two and Alonso looks to be like a guy who will be a better overall hitter and the positional downgrade is minimum.

TRF
07-30-2009, 06:09 PM
Can't you guys sword fight somewhere else? Seriously this has gotten stupid.

I disagree. Once you look past our disagreements on the players themselves, when doug and i argue, usually a lot of info/opinions get floated.

besides, its fun.

TRF
07-30-2009, 06:12 PM
Projection and the likelihood of reaching that projection is why he was #1 over Frazier. He projects to be a better major leaguer. Numbers only tell us so much. Even still, I like Alonso's numbers more than Fraziers. Much better plate discipline and the power has been about the same (.193 isoP in AA for Frazier this year at age 23 and a .183 in the FSL and SL for Alonso at age 22). Combine the two and Alonso looks to be like a guy who will be a better overall hitter and the positional downgrade is minimum.

Your agument doesn't mesh with the results, and the results say Alonso doesn't hit LH pitching, hasn't produced any real power after leaving the league that suppresses said power, remember, like you said with Stubbs? We were supposed to see this spike in his power once he left the FSL. Never happened.

Right now I see Alonso as having a Pete Incagvilia feel to him. Lots of hype, not so much in the results.

BRM
07-30-2009, 06:14 PM
Right now I see Alonso as having a Pete Incagvilia feel to him.

Oh my. You're really stirring the pot now.

LoganBuck
07-30-2009, 06:16 PM
I disagree. Once you look past our disagreements on the players themselves, when doug and i argue, usually a lot of info/opinions get floated.

besides, its fun.

I love to read a good debate, what has been going on recently though hasn't been debate, it has been:
I told you so
I am so smart
You don't know what you are talking about
You are wrong

These recent posts have been more about trying to call out and belittle certain posters, than they are about discussing players. Reading through that slop is off putting to say the least.

TRF, I am not really looking at you.

dougdirt
07-30-2009, 06:27 PM
Your agument doesn't mesh with the results, and the results say Alonso doesn't hit LH pitching, hasn't produced any real power after leaving the league that suppresses said power, remember, like you said with Stubbs? We were supposed to see this spike in his power once he left the FSL. Never happened.

Right now I see Alonso as having a Pete Incagvilia feel to him. Lots of hype, not so much in the results.

Results don't matter until the majors. And my argument does mesh with the results. Alonso has 33 walks and 40 strikeouts in 286 PA (11.5% and 13.9%) with an isoP almost the same as Frazier on this season despite playing most of it in the FSL. Frazier has 32 walks and 51 strikeouts in 408 PA this year (7.8% and 12.5%) and wasn't close to that in 2008 (10.3% and 20.7%).

As for the lefties.... Alonso had no problem with them in college (.329/.469/.678 with 14 HR, 38 BB and 28K over his soph/jun years). As for his pro career, he has 51 at bats against lefties, 6 walks and 10 strikeouts. He hasn't shown that he can hit lefties as a pro yet, but I certainly don't have any issues with what he has done against them so far either in an incredibly small sample size.

And are you really calling me out on Alonso's power spiking after a total of 61 at bats in AA? Where if he were to hit a HR in his next AB his isoP would just 36 points?

M2
07-30-2009, 06:37 PM
"I don't dislike any player in the system."

Did I read that right? Forget the specifics of who, discernment is a critical part of evaluation.

dougdirt
07-30-2009, 06:37 PM
IF he adds 10 lbs of lean muscle a year over the next 2-3 seasons he's now at 165-175 lbs. That is not an impossible feat to accomplish, especially for a pro athlete with access to trainers and maybe a nutritionist (plus he's in a good farm system who might hire people who have some knowledge about these things). He's not going to ever be a big guy and probably wouldn't have much power but I think that statement is pretty laughable.

Have you seen him before? I really don't think he has room to get to 165. He has the frame of a 14 year old, but at 21, he isn't likely to get larger.

Here are some photo's I took of him in late April this year.
http://www.redsminorleagues.com/images/gordon.jpg

Here is a video I also took of him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyaWfMOLYHc

Benihana
07-30-2009, 06:44 PM
Have you seen him before? I really don't think he has room to get to 165. He has the frame of a 14 year old, but at 21, he isn't likely to get larger.

Here are some photo's I took of him in late April this year.
http://www.redsminorleagues.com/images/gordon.jpg

Here is a video I also took of him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyaWfMOLYHc

I weighed 145 at 19.
I weighed 165 at 22.
I weighed 185 at 25.

without growing an inch. And I've never been close to overweight.

It's ridiculous to suggest a 21 year old as underdeveloped as Brown is can't add 20 lbs. It's possible, trust me.

dougdirt
07-30-2009, 06:45 PM
I weighed 145 at 19.
I weighed 165 at 22.
I weighed 185 at 25.

without growing an inch. And I've never been close to overweight.

It's ridiculous to suggest a 21 year old as underdeveloped as Brown is can't add 20 lbs. It's possible, trust me.

I bet your frame looked a little bit different than his does too. I assume you meant Gordon when you said Brown. I just don't see him having the frame to put on 15-20 pounds without getting fat. Could be wrong, but I just don't see it.

GIDP
07-30-2009, 06:46 PM
Your agument doesn't mesh with the results, and the results say Alonso doesn't hit LH pitching, hasn't produced any real power after leaving the league that suppresses said power, remember, like you said with Stubbs? We were supposed to see this spike in his power once he left the FSL. Never happened.

Right now I see Alonso as having a Pete Incagvilia feel to him. Lots of hype, not so much in the results.
Are you serious? Do you even look at stats before you make these statements? Bronson Arroy has a .900+ OPS against the Padres, does that mean we should use him as a pinch hitter when we play them?

Orenda
07-30-2009, 07:38 PM
Have you seen him before? I really don't think he has room to get to 165. He has the frame of a 14 year old, but at 21, he isn't likely to get larger.

Here are some photo's I took of him in late April this year.
http://www.redsminorleagues.com/images/gordon.jpg

Here is a video I also took of him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyaWfMOLYHc

No I've never seen him but looking at the picture i am going to have to disagree with you there Doug. He looks like a skinny guy to me, not at all like a guy who has maxed out his frame, he also looks like he gets around the bases nicely. I think your assessment that he isn't going to have much power is probably likely but your wrong about him not being able to add weight. At 21, it might take some patience before he is ready (if the weightgain is done properly) so I could see a team not wanting to wait around for him to fill out (no pun intended).

TRF
07-31-2009, 10:04 AM
Are you serious? Do you even look at stats before you make these statements? Bronson Arroy has a .900+ OPS against the Padres, does that mean we should use him as a pinch hitter when we play them?

Yeah, that's a great comp. :rolleyes:

TRF
07-31-2009, 10:26 AM
Results don't matter until the majors. And my argument does mesh with the results. Alonso has 33 walks and 40 strikeouts in 286 PA (11.5% and 13.9%) with an isoP almost the same as Frazier on this season despite playing most of it in the FSL. Frazier has 32 walks and 51 strikeouts in 408 PA this year (7.8% and 12.5%) and wasn't close to that in 2008 (10.3% and 20.7%).


Horse Hockey.

Results + Age + development track. That's what matters, and It's probably why both Bruce and Homer have struggled. Neither got the development they needed. Bruce really needed all of 2008 in the minors. He really did. Homer needed to never even sniff the Reds roster as he never dominated a single level. Cueto probably should have spent 2008 with Louisville, but he kicked the door down in 2007, something Homer was unable to do. Bruce didn't stomp through the minors like Dunn did. It's really ok to wait, to have a little patience with the younger guys. I know you advocate that to an extent.

But when a guy clearly shows he cannot handle the level he is in, if he is a #1 pick you defend him like a mother bear cub. It's really ok for you to criticize the Reds development department. They have done a piss poor job of handling Homer, Stubbs, even Bruce. Todd Frazier is likely the Reds best hitting prospect, and he doesn't have a position. For as many things as they do get right, like limiting Stewarts innings, they get twice as many wrong.



As for the lefties.... Alonso had no problem with them in college (.329/.469/.678 with 14 HR, 38 BB and 28K over his soph/jun years). As for his pro career, he has 51 at bats against lefties, 6 walks and 10 strikeouts. He hasn't shown that he can hit lefties as a pro yet, but I certainly don't have any issues with what he has done against them so far either in an incredibly small sample size.

And are you really calling me out on Alonso's power spiking after a total of 61 at bats in AA? Where if he were to hit a HR in his next AB his isoP would just 36 points?

You mean he had power in college with metal bats? That almost never happens. Just like it almost never happens that a college power hitter has trouble adjusting to wood bats, or better pitching. You can say all he needed was just 1 HR to make his power numbers spike. Well, he didn't hit that 1 HR. He got hurt. So there is no way to say he'd have hit that HR the next day or a week after.

And don't flatter yourself. I don't call you out. I call them out... the player and the organization. They owe us far better than we have been given.

GIDP
07-31-2009, 01:30 PM
double post

GIDP
07-31-2009, 01:30 PM
Yeah, that's a great comp. :rolleyes:

Instead of seeing that Arroyo isnt a good hitter its obvious those 25 ABs against the padres mean something more than the other ones!

Thats exactly what you are doing here, but instead you are using the small amount bad numbers to drag down the larger amount of good ones.

GIDP
07-31-2009, 01:33 PM
Jay Bruce didnt hit a homer for 40 ABs at the major league level and got hurt. Its obvious his power was sapped also. Probably will never hit another one either.

TRF
07-31-2009, 01:46 PM
Jay Bruce didnt hit a homer for 40 ABs at the major league level and got hurt. Its obvious his power was sapped also. Probably will never hit another one either.

Brandon Larson hit a lot of HR's in College. He was the next Babe Ruth.

GIDP
07-31-2009, 01:56 PM
Brandon Larson hit a lot of HR's in College. He was the next Babe Ruth.
Yonder Alonso isnt 25 years old either, or even the same type of hitter Larson was.

I do see your point though, 60 at bats normally means a lot more than the others.

dougdirt
07-31-2009, 02:42 PM
You mean he had power in college with metal bats? That almost never happens. Just like it almost never happens that a college power hitter has trouble adjusting to wood bats, or better pitching. You can say all he needed was just 1 HR to make his power numbers spike. Well, he didn't hit that 1 HR. He got hurt. So there is no way to say he'd have hit that HR the next day or a week after.

And don't flatter yourself. I don't call you out. I call them out... the player and the organization. They owe us far better than we have been given.

The guy is slugging .470 this year after spending 90% of it in the Florida State League (where he slugged .503 BTW). How many Reds prospects, or prospects in general have gone through the FSL and slugged .500? Its not a really long list. You are making BIG assumptions based on an extremely small sample size with Alonso's power and yeah, you did call me out on it. When you say

the results say Alonso doesn't hit LH pitching, hasn't produced any real power after leaving the league that suppresses said power, remember, like you said with Stubbs? We were supposed to see this spike in his power once he left the FSL. Never happened.
That is calling me out. And sure, we will never know what would have happened because of the injury, but the sample is so small that 1 simple at bat has the potential to swing a guys Isolated Power over 30 points. So to suggest it 'never happened' based on less than 1 months worth of at bats is not a good argument.

Kingspoint
07-31-2009, 09:48 PM
Apparently there aren't any untouchables any more as any REDS' prospect can be had for an over-the-hill veteran.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-01-2009, 01:56 AM
Apparently there aren't any untouchables any more as any REDS' prospect can be had for an over-the-hill veteran.

LOL.

So true.

The twitterers and bloggers almost had me with Alonso. It thought, "man, only the Reds could be this stupid."

Then, I was relieved to find out that Alonso was not part of the deal. Then I hear Stewart and I'm thinking, this could be possible too, because "man, only the Reds could be this stupid."

Sure enough, the Reds did not disappoint.

They are stupid.

GIDP
08-01-2009, 02:24 AM
Anyone wanna start guessing where our other untouchables are going to be traded and who for?

GIDP
08-01-2009, 02:32 AM
It makes me wonder about our guys so much more now.

Todd Frazier is probably not a future Red now that hes probably going to be blocked by Rolen. I like Frazier a lot as a 3rd baseman. LF not really so much.

If we were looking to trade Harang and Arroyo what were the Reds back up plans? They surely didnt expect to go into next year with a rotation of Volquez (coming off who knows what type of injury) Cueto, and Bailey. Its clear Stewart was all but gone so I guess they think Maloney and Wood are options. They would have had to at least sign one starter.

What does this mean for Stubbs. Its pretty likely he wont be seeing the majors any time soon given the big time love for Taveras they currently are showing. Same with Heisey.

It certainly makes you wonder if we thought this farm was growing into a nice little factory or if they are going to continue to just toss out prospects like its candy when it comes to trades.

Prf15
08-01-2009, 02:37 AM
Holy crap, Dee Gordon can fly! I didn't realize he has 59 SB this year in only 101 games.

DTCromer
08-01-2009, 11:01 AM
It makes me wonder about our guys so much more now.

Todd Frazier is probably not a future Red now that hes probably going to be blocked by Rolen. I like Frazier a lot as a 3rd baseman. LF not really so much.



How many games has Frazier played at 3rd in Carolina?

GIDP
08-01-2009, 01:13 PM
How many games has Frazier played at 3rd in Carolina?

Does it matter?

dougdirt
08-01-2009, 02:47 PM
Does it matter?

No, it doesn't. We thought it did, but Walt Jocketty said a few weeks ago that they know Todd can play 3B.

GIDP
08-01-2009, 03:37 PM
No, it doesn't. We thought it did, but Walt Jocketty said a few weeks ago that they know Todd can play 3B.

Exactly. I view him as a 3rd base prospect until they call him up and dont play him there.

HokieRed
08-01-2009, 03:54 PM
I'm not sure about the conclusions suggested above about Frazier and/or Stubbs or Heisey. One prime candidate for the LF spot was moved in the trade--EE, so that moves Todd Frazier up the list of possible LFers. People in the FO may, for all we know, rate him more highly than some here; he may be opening day's LFer next year. I also read the trade as Jocketty's just coming to the end of his willingness to deal with certain players, and he may very well come to the same point with Taveras, who still looks suspiciously to me a lot more like a Dusty Baker than a Walt Jocketty style player. I look for Taveras to be next year's 5th outfielder, if he makes the roster. And if, as I suspect, Stubbs is right now beginning to make his final minor league push, he'll be opening day CF in Cinti.

GIDP
08-01-2009, 03:57 PM
If they dont find a taker for Taveras then Stubbs wont see the ML roster. Of course they probably will bring him up and play him in LF because you cant have Taveras out of the line up ever.

GIDP
08-01-2009, 07:16 PM
How much do you guys trust Cozart continuing his walk rate?

dougdirt
08-01-2009, 07:17 PM
How much do you guys trust Cozart continuing his walk rate?

What suggests that he won't? Until I see evidence to the other side of it, it seems good to me.

GIDP
08-01-2009, 07:22 PM
What suggests that he won't? Until I see evidence to the other side of it, it seems good to me.

I really dont know much about him outside of what the general stats say. Has he changed something or has he just learned to lay off? I was just asking in general what peoples view on his BB rate is. Doubling it over 1 season just makes me wonder.