PDA

View Full Version : Does Stubbs Need to Hit?



Pages : 1 [2]

Spring~Fields
04-07-2010, 12:04 AM
The facts are although Dusty has a reputation for stiffing the younger players in favor of veterans, this has not proven to be the case. I've asked for specific players who should have been playing over veterans and were producing at dramatically better rates.
Votto, Bruce, Encarnacion all have seen the field and been allowed to play through slumps.

So I'd like a veteran player who was a) not producing and b) was blocking a clearly better young player.
Tell me who it was, how many games they started, and when you would have pulled the plug on them.

Pull out all the whipping boys, C-Patt, Wily, Keppinger, whomever you like. Just tell me who the great replacement was that never got a chance.

No what you did is this:

Yes who would want to let facts and actual playing time get in the way of a good rant.




Since words don't really mean anymore than spring training stats we will just have to let the results speak for themselves. ;) Something like Chicago 2005, 2006, Cincinnati 2008, 2009, 2010 should be good enough sample.

Spring~Fields
04-07-2010, 12:37 AM
Stubbs has a combination of skills and tools that is quite impressive. Great defender. Excellent power. The Mike Cameron comparisons on RedsZone from Stubbs' early years in the minors may be quite accurate.

I hope the Reds know what they have in this player. He has great ability. Doug Dirt deserves credit for his strong support of Stubbs as a prospect.

Dickerson has some of the same abilities but Stubbs' power gives him a big advantage.

As I watched the Reds yesterday, I started to think that the team would be better off just going with the young talent and fewer veterans. Some of these young players, Votto, Bruce, Stubbs, IMO Francisco, Janish defensively, Bailey, Cueto, and the AAA group are very impressive and could achieve a great deal as a team.

The more I cogitate upon your discourse here, the more that I find that I completely agree with your insights.

Will M
04-07-2010, 12:44 AM
I believe there were two main complaints about Stubbs in the minors. Complaint #1 was that he struck out a whole lot & subsequently had a low batting average. This could be lived with in a guy with blazing speed, gold glove defense & some power. the Mike Cameron comparison seems appropriate.

However, complaint #2 was his lack of power. He had 1847 PAs in the minors with only 28 home runs.

Stubbs power has appeared since he came to the show. Both last fall & the spring he has hit for power.

Question: does anyone have any theories about where the power surge came from? if it was simply that he 'filled out' his frame then why didn't he hit for power in AAA?

dougdirt
04-07-2010, 12:53 AM
I believe there were two main complaints about Stubbs in the minors. Complaint #1 was that he struck out a whole lot & subsequently had a low batting average. This could be lived with in a guy with blazing speed, gold glove defense & some power. the Mike Cameron comparison seems appropriate.

However, complaint #2 was his lack of power. He had 1847 PAs in the minors with only 28 home runs.

Stubbs power has appeared since he came to the show. Both last fall & the spring he has hit for power.

Question: does anyone have any theories about where the power surge came from? if it was simply that he 'filled out' his frame then why didn't he hit for power in AAA?

Stubbs has always been able to hit the ball 450 feet. I have seen him do it at multiple levels from Dayton to Louisville. At the same time his swing was inconsistent. A lot of people had the idea that because he was a college player from a big school he should have been ready to go, but if you looked at his draft scouting reports they pretty much said that he had very good raw power, but was incredibly raw with his swing. It just took him time to get his swing mechanics working right for him, but when his mechanics are working right, he has legit 25 HR power in his bat.

Will M
04-07-2010, 01:00 AM
Stubbs has always been able to hit the ball 450 feet. I have seen him do it at multiple levels from Dayton to Louisville. At the same time his swing was inconsistent. A lot of people had the idea that because he was a college player from a big school he should have been ready to go, but if you looked at his draft scouting reports they pretty much said that he had very good raw power, but was incredibly raw with his swing. It just took him time to get his swing mechanics working right for him, but when his mechanics are working right, he has legit 25 HR power in his bat.

so you are saying that the reason he showed such poor power in the minors was because he swung & missed so much? basically when he made contact he hit em hard but too often he didn't make contact. i can understand your logic but if this is the case then why did he show such poor power LAST YEAR in AAA? he had 3 homers in 472 PAs for Louisville last year. then once he got to the bigs he started hitting deep line drives regularilly.
this is a headscratcher for me.

dougdirt
04-07-2010, 01:12 AM
so you are saying that the reason he showed such poor power in the minors was because he swung & missed so much? basically when he made contact he hit em hard but too often he didn't make contact. i can understand your logic but if this is the case then why did he show such poor power LAST YEAR in AAA? he had 3 homers in 472 PAs for Louisville last year. then once he got to the bigs he started hitting deep line drives regularilly.
this is a headscratcher for me.

No. I am saying he was working on fine tuning his swing for a long time because he kind of had to rebuild it from the ground up from the day he was drafted. When he had things working right, he hit the ball very well. When he didn't have it working right, he wasn't hitting it much at all. If you just go month to month in his minor league career by OPS its just a huge up and down chart. When he was consistent, he was hitting extremely well.

While in the minors he hit line drives regularly, but sometimes it just takes the right thing to make it click and then guys find their power. Look at Chris Heisey for example. He made a very small adjustment last spring that his coaches had been telling him about for a while, but he just couldn't get it down. Last season he got it and his power exploded. With guys who have tools, sometimes things just click and they make that one small adjustment and its the difference between flashing tools and flashing skills.

WVRedsFan
04-07-2010, 01:33 AM
Subbs' record last season and this spring speaks for itself. This kid has real, real speed. He plays gold glove defense. He hits. Compare him with the lovefest here for Dickerson. Yes, he is talented, but what has he done compared to Stubbs at the MLB level? I watched him yesterday and then watched Stubbs when he came in. No comparison even if was a minute, every mintue sample size. For crying out loud, leave Stubbs in center and play Dickerson when he can play. That's all I can ask. Dusty (and most managers) do things that drive me crazy.

Ron Madden
04-07-2010, 03:19 AM
Subbs' record last season and this spring speaks for itself. This kid has real, real speed. He plays gold glove defense. He hits. Compare him with the lovefest here for Dickerson. Yes, he is talented, but what has he done compared to Stubbs at the MLB level? I watched him yesterday and then watched Stubbs when he came in. No comparison even if was a minute, every mintue sample size. For crying out loud, leave Stubbs in center and play Dickerson when he can play. That's all I can ask. Dusty (and most managers) do things that drive me crazy.

The question ask in the very first post of this thread was does Stubbs need to hit to be the everyday starter in CF? I believe the answer is yes. This offense needs all the help it can muster.

I believe Stubbs can and will hit, but if he turns into Willy or Cory I say no, he has to hit.

I just don't understand why some have to attack Dickerson & Bruce in defense of Stubbs.

KronoRed
04-07-2010, 04:51 AM
Compare him with the lovefest here for Dickerson. Yes, he is talented, but what has he done compared to Stubbs at the MLB level?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/dickech01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/stubbdr01.shtml

He's done more.

But yeah he's junk, he's also 28 (over the hill) so we should dump him for pop corn ;)

KronoRed
04-07-2010, 04:52 AM
I just don't understand why some have to attack Dickerson & Bruce in defense of Stubbs.

Reds fans eat their own :D

fearofpopvol1
04-09-2010, 09:49 PM
If Drew Stubbs hits the way he did tonight for the rest of the season, he's going to be the best CF in the league! A triple and a grand slam (that was in CF). And I will say, he made that grand slam look pretty easy. I didn't think he even hit it as hard as he could. The power is legit.

reds44
04-09-2010, 09:50 PM
Mr. Stubbs is quickly becoming my favorite player.

OnBaseMachine
04-09-2010, 09:53 PM
It's very early in the season, but this dates back to last season: Drew Stubbs looks like a budding star. He crushed the ball four times tonight, he could have very easily hit for the cycle. He tripled off the right field wall in his first atbat. Second AB he hit a rocket down the 3B line that Aramis Ramirez made a diving catch on. Next atbat he grounded out sharply to 3B, and then of course the grand slam, which was an absolute bomb to center field. He's been the Reds best player since the start of spring training.

nate
04-09-2010, 09:53 PM
If Drew Stubbs hits the way he did tonight for the rest of the season, he's going to be the best CF in the league! A triple and a grand slam (that was in CF). And I will say, he made that grand slam look pretty easy. I didn't think he even hit it as hard as he could. The power is legit.

Not a lot more one can do to raise the ol' SLG.

Topcat
04-09-2010, 09:59 PM
But........ But...... but.... He isn't Tim Lincecum who i wanted them to select but I did this crazy thing and supported Stubbs and I believe he will be a damn decent CF'er for the Red's.

Brutus
04-09-2010, 10:01 PM
It's very early in the season, but this dates back to last season: Drew Stubbs looks like a budding star. He crushed the ball four times tonight, he could have very easily hit for the cycle. He tripled off the right field wall in his first atbat. Second AB he hit a rocket down the 3B line that Aramis Ramirez made a diving catch on. Next atbat he grounded out sharply to 3B, and then of course the grand slam, which was an absolute bomb to center field. He's been the Reds best player since the start of spring training.


In addition to the power (which regardless of what he did in the minors, looks absolutely legit at this point), he's delivering some very good plate appearances so far this season. I think you're right - he looks like a budding star. I would not at all be surprised if we're talking about him as one of the top 3-5 overall CF's in the game by next season.

Sea Ray
04-09-2010, 10:35 PM
Mr. Stubbs is quickly becoming my favorite player.

I agree. Who knows what his numbers will look like in Sept but one thing's for sure: the guy's a talent. Probably neck and neck with Jay Bruce as the most talented everyday player on this roster. It continues to amaze me how much flak he takes around here although I do realize that criticism comes largely from one person.

My advice is for folks to quit studying his OBP and SLG and just sit back and enjoy him. He's a fun player to watch and he can truly do it all.

The only thing I'd like to see him improve on is his base stealing. I hope Eric Davis and Barry Larkin worked with him this Spring on that.

Benihana
04-09-2010, 10:54 PM
Granted the sample size, but who would have ever thought Drew Stubbs would have a higher major league career OPS than Jay Bruce? Certainly not me...



...Nor do I think he will a few months from now, but that's beside the point. I like what Stubbs is doing, and I think Bruce will bounce back.

Will M
04-09-2010, 11:01 PM
1. Doug defended him endlessly in the waves of "He's terrible & we passed on Linecum" criticisms. Kudos to Doug for seeing his talent & keeping the faith.

2. I still don't understand how he only hit 3 homers in AAA last year but the power he has shown in the bigs seems legit.

3. We have all been looking for a player to have a breakout year. Candidates have been Cueto, Bailey & Bruce. We all know the Reds need more than just one star player (Votto) to win. Maybe we have been looking in the wrong place?

LoganBuck
04-09-2010, 11:01 PM
The only thing I'd like to see him improve on is his base stealing. I hope Eric Davis and Barry Larkin worked with him this Spring on that.

Last year I noticed that he was much more aggressive on the bases the second time he saw the pitcher.

reds44
04-09-2010, 11:02 PM
I agree. Who knows what his numbers will look like in Sept but one thing's for sure: the guy's a talent. Probably neck and neck with Jay Bruce as the most talented everyday player on this roster. It continues to amaze me how much flak he takes around here although I do realize that criticism comes largely from one person.

My advice is for folks to quit studying his OBP and SLG and just sit back and enjoy him. He's a fun player to watch and he can truly do it all.

The only thing I'd like to see him improve on is his base stealing. I hope Eric Davis and Barry Larkin worked with him this Spring on that.
I'm just not sure how his numbers were so mediocre in the minors. He has power, he has speed, he plays great defense, and he has a great approach at the plate.

Caveat Emperor
04-09-2010, 11:08 PM
Jay Bruce set the world on fire at first too -- I think we all need to take a step back. Enjoy what Stubbs is doing, but let's remember that he's a young player who will have his peaks and valleys.

It's nice to know the peaks look this good, though.

Mario-Rijo
04-09-2010, 11:12 PM
I'm just not sure how his numbers were so mediocre in the minors. He has power, he has speed, he plays great defense, and he has a great approach at the plate.

Well his defense has never been in question. Watch him long enough and like anyone you will see his flaws. To this point it's not readily apparent what his mechanical issues have been throughout his career.

KronoRed
04-09-2010, 11:14 PM
Jay Bruce set the world on fire at first too -- I think we all need to take a step back. Enjoy what Stubbs is doing, but let's remember that he's a young player who will have his peaks and valleys.


Knock that off, he's going to the Hall Of Fame

;)

OnBaseMachine
04-09-2010, 11:24 PM
Knock that off, he's going to the Hall Of Fame

;)

Nobody said he's going to the Hall of Fame. I just think people are excited that he's played so well in the major leagues so far. Not sure what's wrong with that. He's taken a lot of flack around here when he struggled at times in the minors and now that he's playing well, naturally people are going to be excited.

Brutus
04-09-2010, 11:58 PM
Jay Bruce set the world on fire at first too -- I think we all need to take a step back. Enjoy what Stubbs is doing, but let's remember that he's a young player who will have his peaks and valleys.

It's nice to know the peaks look this good, though.

Your point is absolutely correct, but I do see a big difference: Bruce came up hacking and his discipline (or lack thereof) caught up with him. Stubbs, if anything, has been accused of being too patient and too selective. I think he's now finally seeing the ball well and going after the good pitches to hit.

Philosophically I agree with your comment. I do find there to be a difference in their situations, though.

Guacarock
04-10-2010, 12:49 AM
Is it too early for us to petition the Hamilton County Court to change Stubbs' last name to Stud?

dougdirt
04-10-2010, 01:08 AM
I just want to thank Drew Stubbs for making my birthday celebration better. I had some friends over to celebrate my 26th tonight. I stopped them during the game as he walked to the plate and said "When he hits this grand slam, I will be going streaking". Fortunately for me, they did not hold me to my statement. Fortunately for all of us, Drew Stubbs made me look like a psychic.

Cedric
04-10-2010, 01:10 AM
Nobody said he's going to the Hall of Fame. I just think people are excited that he's played so well in the major leagues so far. Not sure what's wrong with that. He's taken a lot of flack around here when he struggled at times in the minors and now that he's playing well, naturally people are going to be excited.

Just be glad you aren't a bitter person man!

Plus Plus
04-10-2010, 01:36 AM
I just want to thank Drew Stubbs for making my birthday celebration better. I had some friends over to celebrate my 26th tonight. I stopped them during the game as he walked to the plate and said "When he hits this grand slam, I will be going streaking". Fortunately for me, they did not hold me to my statement. Fortunately for all of us, Drew Stubbs made me look like a psychic.

The best birthday present a Reds fan could ask for- a grand slam to win the game, and over the Cubs, no less. Happy birthday, Doug! Hope your 26th is a great one!

:birthday:

KronoRed
04-10-2010, 01:45 AM
Just be glad you aren't a bitter person man!

Or someone with an agenda ;)

WVRedsFan
04-10-2010, 01:52 AM
For all the "logical" explanations on why Dickerson should be starting or why Stubbs should be sitting, the truth of the matter is Stubbs brings something that Dickerson or anyone on this team can bring--crack fielding and a bat that not only has pop, but the unexplanable ability to be clutch. Play him until he flames out. I've seen more from Stubbs in his stint at the end of 2009 to now than I've ever seen from the anointed one, Jay Bruce. That's not a slam at the anointed one, but it is reality. My money's on Stibbs being a star long before Bruce. Being a Reds fan and wanting the best for the team, I hope I am wrong on Bruce, but the proof is in the performance. So far, that's the story and Stubbs has done more in little time than Bruce has done in more time.

Let the bashing begin. Oh yeah, I forgot. Bruce is young.

Ron Madden
04-10-2010, 02:00 AM
I'm thrilled when any Cincinnati Red does well, I'm very thrilled with Drew Stubbs so far :thumbup: and I hope and pray he remains productive.
There is good reason for the Fans in Reds Country to be excited about the young talent in the organization.

Let's just enjoy that fact without turning against these kids if they fail to live up to our lofty expectations.

reds44
04-10-2010, 02:01 AM
Your point is absolutely correct, but I do see a big difference: Bruce came up hacking and his discipline (or lack thereof) caught up with him. Stubbs, if anything, has been accused of being too patient and too selective. I think he's now finally seeing the ball well and going after the good pitches to hit.

Philosophically I agree with your comment. I do find there to be a difference in their situations, though.
Yep. He's looked the best and most expierence hitter on the team through the first 4 games. I want to see him and Dickerson at the top of the lineup eventually. They'll make pitchers work.

reds44
04-10-2010, 02:03 AM
For all the "logical" explanations on why Dickerson should be starting or why Stubbs should be sitting, the truth of the matter is Stubbs brings something that Dickerson or anyone on this team can bring--crack fielding and a bat that not only has pop, but the unexplanable ability to be clutch. Play him until he flames out. I've seen more from Stubbs in his stint at the end of 2009 to now than I've ever seen from the anointed one, Jay Bruce. That's not a slam at the anointed one, but it is reality. My money's on Stibbs being a star long before Bruce. Being a Reds fan and wanting the best for the team, I hope I am wrong on Bruce, but the proof is in the performance. So far, that's the story and Stubbs has done more in little time than Bruce has done in more time.

Let the bashing begin. Oh yeah, I forgot. Bruce is young.
Bruce has a career .760 OPS.
Stubbs has a career .758 OPS.

I'm not sure why you felt the need to grind an axe with Bruce in this thread.

Ron Madden
04-10-2010, 02:08 AM
I just want to thank Drew Stubbs for making my birthday celebration better. I had some friends over to celebrate my 26th tonight. I stopped them during the game as he walked to the plate and said "When he hits this grand slam, I will be going streaking". Fortunately for me, they did not hold me to my statement. Fortunately for all of us, Drew Stubbs made me look like a psychic.

Happy Birthday! :birthday:

WebScorpion
04-10-2010, 02:24 AM
Bruce has a career .760 OPS.
Stubbs has a career .758 OPS.

I'm not sure why you felt the need to grind an axe with Bruce in this thread.

I don't think he was grinding an axe...In fact, he said it was not a slam at him. He said he's 'seen' more from Stubbs and I'd tend to agree. If I watch any two players play I don't think I could tell you who has the higher career OPS, so I'm not sure where that comes from...did someone say, "I've crunched the numbers and Stubbs is better than Jay Bruce." No, someone just called it like he saw it.

Anyway, I think Stubbs may be a bit like Votto in that things didn't really all come together for him until he hit the Show. I hope he continues to work perfecting his craft like Votto too...Joey's done nothing but improve since he hit the big club. :thumbup:

On a side note: Dickerson laid down a perfect bunt today and ran it out...it was a thing of beauty. Too many good players is really not a problem. :D

reds44
04-10-2010, 02:26 AM
On a side note: Dickerson laid down a perfect bunt today and ran it out...it was a thing of beauty. Too many good players is really not a problem. :D
I would give an arm and leg for Dusty to bat Stubbs and Dickerson 1-2.

fearofpopvol1
04-10-2010, 02:32 AM
I would give an arm and leg for Dusty to bat Stubbs and Dickerson 1-2.

If only they batted from the same side of the plate. Can't see Dusty going for that.

KronoRed
04-10-2010, 02:38 AM
If only they batted from the same side of the plate. Can't see Dusty going for that.

Dickerson leading off with Stubbs 2, l/r split before Votto the lefty and Phillips the righty.

Never happen of course.

reds44
04-10-2010, 02:44 AM
Dickerson leading off with Stubbs 2, l/r split before Votto the lefty and Phillips the righty.

Never happen of course.
If only one of them played SS...

KronoRed
04-10-2010, 02:47 AM
If only one of them played SS...

Forget the SS, we just go with 4 OF's and play one really shallow :D

Ron Madden
04-10-2010, 02:50 AM
Forget the SS, we just go with 4 OF's and play one really shallow :D

You'd still have a SS and he'd bat in the two hole.

Sea Ray
04-10-2010, 08:20 AM
The difference between Stubbs and Bruce is clear: It's that Stubbs has continued to improve. This also explains why his major league numbers are better than what he showed in the minors. Some players like Willie Greene or Austin Kearns peak in their early 20s. Let's hope Bruce isn't one of those but kudos to Stubbs for continung to improve his game

Caveat Emperor
04-10-2010, 05:31 PM
I would give an arm and leg for Dusty to bat Stubbs and Dickerson 1-2.

Dickerson and Stubbs would be the kind of 1&2 that would annoy the everliving crap out of me as an opposing fan.

They're both highly selective at the plate, the both have the power to knock one out on a mistake pitch, and they're both incredibly fast on the bases.

This is one time where I think Jocketty needs to tell Dusty what to do.

LoganBuck
04-10-2010, 09:28 PM
Dickerson and Stubbs would be the kind of 1&2 that would annoy the everliving crap out of me as an opposing fan.

They're both highly selective at the plate, the both have the power to knock one out on a mistake pitch, and they're both incredibly fast on the bases.

This is one time where I think Jocketty needs to tell Dusty what to do.

+1

Remember the old Indians lineups Lofton, Vizquel, Alomar, then the power. So annoying to watch, and the pitch counts would mount quickly. It made listening to that clown with the drum up in Cleveland, unbearable.

RedEye
04-10-2010, 11:32 PM
This is one time where I think Jocketty needs to tell Dusty what to do.

Is there reason to believe that Walt is singing this tune? I had the impression that he was generally good with Dusty's lineups. Maybe I'm wrong.

OnBaseMachine
04-11-2010, 09:37 PM
From Hal McCoy:


Stubbs didn’t have any power Sunday, but he showed his other side when he reached base in the sixth. It wasn’t a solid day for him. He struck out the first two times then messed up a sacrifice bunt attempt and forced a runner at second. Then he stole second and he stole third as easily as a burglar walking through an open door to a bank with all the employees at lunch.

“I was the same way,” Baker added. “I didn’t start hitting home runs until I got to the big leagues. I got stronger, bigger. I got my tonsils out and immediately gained weight, got stronger. I had like one in Little League, one in Pony League, two in Gold League, two in American Legion.


http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/cincinnatireds/entries/2010/04/11/cincinnati_drew_stubbs_display.html?cxtype=feedbot

flyer85
04-11-2010, 09:41 PM
one thing to remember on Stubbs and Bruce is that Stubbs is 2.5 years older than Bruce ... and each still have their issues as hitters.

OnBaseMachine
04-13-2010, 12:04 AM
MIAMI -- The visiting clubhouse was nearly empty on Monday afternoon, but center fielder Drew Stubbs was in the video corner watching some of his swings. In Sunday's win over the Cubs, Stubbs struck out three times and could not execute a sacrifice bunt.

"The last couple of days, I haven't felt great at the plate," said Stubbs, who finished the weekend batting .250 with one home run, five RBIs and two steals. "[On Sunday], in particular, I saw that my head was moving a little bit when I was swinging and causing me to swing through some balls. You see that and want to get back to the basics and fundamentals of your swing and restart."


http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100412&content_id=9254420&notebook_id=9254586&vkey=notebook_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin

oregonred
04-13-2010, 01:02 AM
one thing to remember on Stubbs and Bruce is that Stubbs is 2.5 years older than Bruce ... and each still have their issues as hitters.

Except Bruce is supposed to eventually become the 1.000 OPS stud anchoring the middle of the lineup while if Stubbs approaches an .800 OPS as a ledoff hitter with his other tools then most of us will be ecstatic.

TRF
04-13-2010, 10:09 AM
A whole lot of gushing for the first week of ball and the guy has really had 1 1/2 good games. Not that Dickerson has been any good either. Or Bruce. Or Phillips. Or Gomes. Or Cabrera.

In fact, Only Rolen and Hernandez are really hitting. Stubbs has the third best OPS of the regulars, but .736 should never be the 3rd best OPS. And it won't be over the long hall.

It's been a week. Before we anoint him a budding superstar, lets see that OBP creep over .300 and away from Willy Taveras country. Right now he's on pace for 200+ strikeouts too.

And for the record, I'm not saying it won't. Maybe he is the next big thing. A guy that will completely outperform his minor league career. But it is very early in the season. Let's see where that OBP is come May 1.

RedEye
04-13-2010, 10:49 AM
A whole lot of gushing for the first week of ball and the guy has really had 1 1/2 good games. Not that Dickerson has been any good either. Or Bruce. Or Phillips. Or Gomes. Or Cabrera.

In fact, Only Rolen and Hernandez are really hitting. Stubbs has the third best OPS of the regulars, but .736 should never be the 3rd best OPS. And it won't be over the long hall.

It's been a week. Before we anoint him a budding superstar, lets see that OBP creep over .300 and away from Willy Taveras country. Right now he's on pace for 200+ strikeouts too.

And for the record, I'm not saying it won't. Maybe he is the next big thing. A guy that will completely outperform his minor league career. But it is very early in the season. Let's see where that OBP is come May 1.

Who is anointing him a budding superstar? What I've seen is people expressing positive thoughts about what Stubbs has done so far. While I appreciate your constant line of expectation management, I do think it is time to admit that Stubbs' floor at this point is as a VERY useful fourth outfielder for the Reds--and his ceiling is much, much higher than that. No, he's not Tim Lincecum and never will be, but he's one of the better first round draft values from his class.

TRF
04-13-2010, 11:22 AM
It's very early in the season, but this dates back to last season: Drew Stubbs looks like a budding star. He crushed the ball four times tonight, he could have very easily hit for the cycle. He tripled off the right field wall in his first atbat. Second AB he hit a rocket down the 3B line that Aramis Ramirez made a diving catch on. Next atbat he grounded out sharply to 3B, and then of course the grand slam, which was an absolute bomb to center field. He's been the Reds best player since the start of spring training.


In addition to the power (which regardless of what he did in the minors, looks absolutely legit at this point), he's delivering some very good plate appearances so far this season. I think you're right - he looks like a budding star. I would not at all be surprised if we're talking about him as one of the top 3-5 overall CF's in the game by next season.


1. Doug defended him endlessly in the waves of "He's terrible & we passed on Linecum" criticisms. Kudos to Doug for seeing his talent & keeping the faith.

2. I still don't understand how he only hit 3 homers in AAA last year but the power he has shown in the bigs seems legit.

3. We have all been looking for a player to have a breakout year. Candidates have been Cueto, Bailey & Bruce. We all know the Reds need more than just one star player (Votto) to win. Maybe we have been looking in the wrong place?


For all the "logical" explanations on why Dickerson should be starting or why Stubbs should be sitting, the truth of the matter is Stubbs brings something that Dickerson or anyone on this team can bring--crack fielding and a bat that not only has pop, but the unexplanable ability to be clutch. Play him until he flames out. I've seen more from Stubbs in his stint at the end of 2009 to now than I've ever seen from the anointed one, Jay Bruce. That's not a slam at the anointed one, but it is reality. My money's on Stibbs being a star long before Bruce. Being a Reds fan and wanting the best for the team, I hope I am wrong on Bruce, but the proof is in the performance. So far, that's the story and Stubbs has done more in little time than Bruce has done in more time.

Let the bashing begin. Oh yeah, I forgot. Bruce is young.

To name a few. So they said star instead of superstar.

All I am saying is, it's been a week. 7 games. He's got a sub .300 OBP, one GS, one triple and really nothing else. Again, its not to say he's being outplayed by anyone else either. Only Rolen seems to have shown up so far. But he's had 1 1/2 good games in the first week of a long season and he's tied for the team lead in K's while drawing only 2 BB's as the team's leadoff hitter.

I hope the power continues to develop. I hope it leads to some pitchers being a little more careful around him. I hope he sees that, takes advantage and walks a little more. I also hope the rest of the offense starts to wake up.

Homer Bailey
04-13-2010, 11:34 AM
It's been a week. Before we anoint him a budding superstar, lets see that OBP creep over .300 and away from Willy Taveras country. Right now he's on pace for 200+ strikeouts too.

I think we both know it's kind of silly to use the "he's on pace" thing at this point in the season. He's also on pace for 46 steals and 115 RBI's.


To name a few. So they said star instead of superstar.

All I am saying is, it's been a week. 7 games. He's got a sub .300 OBP, one GS, one triple and really nothing else. Again, its not to say he's being outplayed by anyone else either. Only Rolen seems to have shown up so far. But he's had 1 1/2 good games in the first week of a long season and he's tied for the team lead in K's while drawing only 2 BB's as the team's leadoff hitter.

I hope the power continues to develop. I hope it leads to some pitchers being a little more careful around him. I hope he sees that, takes advantage and walks a little more. I also hope the rest of the offense starts to wake up.

You're point is a good one. His offense has not been great so far this season, and I would certainly like to see him make better contact and reach base more often. However, I most impressed with the attention he commands on the basepaths so far. Some may say I'm crazy for saying this, and I know that I have no possible way of proving it, but I think Stubbs had a LOT to do with both home runs that Orlando Cabrera hit, as both times the pitcher appeared to be very very concerned with what Stubbs was doing at first base. I obviously agree that he just needs to be on first base more often. Heck, I love watching the guy hit a ground ball and just seeing exactly how close he gets to beating it out.

I still love watching him run the outfield, and get excited every time he comes up to bat.

lollipopcurve
04-13-2010, 11:44 AM
Heck, I love watching the guy hit a ground ball and just seeing exactly how close he gets to beating it out.

I still love watching him run the outfield, and get excited every time he comes up to bat.

Amen.

Of course, aesthetic considerations are to be considered weak and useless. One must value only results, especially those achieved over long stretches of time, whereby we enter the land of Statistical Significance, land of absolute truth, the only beauty.

RedEye
04-13-2010, 12:09 PM
To name a few. So they said star instead of superstar.

All I am saying is, it's been a week. 7 games. He's got a sub .300 OBP, one GS, one triple and really nothing else. Again, its not to say he's being outplayed by anyone else either. Only Rolen seems to have shown up so far. But he's had 1 1/2 good games in the first week of a long season and he's tied for the team lead in K's while drawing only 2 BB's as the team's leadoff hitter.

I hope the power continues to develop. I hope it leads to some pitchers being a little more careful around him. I hope he sees that, takes advantage and walks a little more. I also hope the rest of the offense starts to wake up.

Okay, point taken. You are clearly the flag-bearer for the camp of "realistic" Drew Stubbs appraisals. That has value on this board, no question.

Stubbs is already playing superb defense and providing a nice power-speed combo at the top of the lineup. With these qualities in mind, here are some questions for you:

At what point will Stubbs become a player that we can legitimately get excited about? What, for you, would constitute the necessary conditions for enthusiasm about a player you have, to this point, derided consistently throughout his brief career?

TRF
04-13-2010, 12:23 PM
Okay, point taken. You are clearly the flag-bearer for the camp of "realistic" Drew Stubbs appraisals. That has value on this board, no question.

Stubbs is already playing superb defense and providing a nice power-speed combo at the top of the lineup. With these qualities in mind, here are some questions for you:

At what point will Stubbs become a player that we can legitimately get excited about? What, for you, would constitute the necessary conditions for enthusiasm about a player you have, to this point, derided consistently throughout his brief career?

Lets make one thing clear. I hated the Stubbs pick. I know some of you were confused by that. He wasn't the BPA. He was an older player, but considered raw, despite playing in the Big 12 conference. And he was a player being added to an organization that had depth in the OF while lacking in pitching.

But what I really hated was how the Reds handled him. I don't think he ever got a chance to develop as a hitter. The tools are there to be sure, but mentally, his approach, not so much. He's streaky, very streaky, an easy strikeout, and has never displayed power prior to September of last year. And all of that is on how the Reds have developed him, or rather not developed him.

What would get me excited? .370 OBP. He'll have to show the potential for some pop for that to happen, so 10+ HR's might do it. 15 would be better. GABP will help him there (7 of his 8 HR came at home.) And he'll have to do it against someone other than the Pirates playing out the string (3HR vs PIT, 2 vs HOU). I don't believe you can be a 150+ strikeout guy and post a high OBP if you lack power. Guys that do are outliers.

Right now his sample is just too small. It was too small at every step of his career after Low A. 2009 saw significant time at AAA and well, he didn't light the world on fire there did he.

And I blame that on the Reds too.

Brutus
04-13-2010, 12:44 PM
Okay, point taken. You are clearly the flag-bearer for the camp of "realistic" Drew Stubbs appraisals. That has value on this board, no question.

Stubbs is already playing superb defense and providing a nice power-speed combo at the top of the lineup. With these qualities in mind, here are some questions for you:

At what point will Stubbs become a player that we can legitimately get excited about? What, for you, would constitute the necessary conditions for enthusiasm about a player you have, to this point, derided consistently throughout his brief career?

As an interesting aside, I went through and got the 3-year averages for all current starting centerfielders (sans Austin Jackson who had not played prior to this season) based on OPS. The average for the period for the current starters was .771.

Here's how the list looks:


Carlos Beltran 0.884
Jayson Werth 0.870
Grady Sizemore 0.845
Torii Hunter 0.839
Matt Kemp 0.836
A. McCutchen 0.836
Nate McLouth 0.822
Marlon Byrd 0.819
Denard Span 0.819
Aaron Rowand 0.796
Alex Rios 0.785
Rick Ankiel 0.785
B.J. Upton 0.785
Jacoby Ellsbury 0.769
Drew Stubbs 0.759
Adam Jones 0.751
Nyjer Morgan 0.750
Chris Young 0.748
Dexter Fowler 0.747
F. Gutierrez 0.746
Cameron Maybin 0.745
Vernon Wells 0.745
Rajai Davis 0.727
Colby Rasmus 0.714
Brett Gardner 0.684
Tony Gwynn 0.679
Michael Bourn 0.675
Carlos Gomez 0.636
AVERAGE 0.771


Assuming only another 40 points on Stubbs' OBP, closer to what he would be expected to perform, based on current power only he's in the 800 OPS range - putting him in the top 8-10 CF in baseball. That's before defense is even considered. And clearly, he has a chance to be one of the top defensive outfielders in baseball... no one really denies that aspect of his game.

RedEye
04-13-2010, 12:59 PM
TRF-

First, thanks for your candid response to my questions. It makes much clearer what you expect on the offense side of Stubbs' game. However, given Brutus the Pimp's interesting follow-up to your post, would you be inclined to alter your performance threshholds given his superb D in the OF? Franklin Gutierrez, for instance, is a pretty phenomenal overall player, and his stats to me look eminently attainable for Stubbs even if he barely improves his current approach.

Your claims here seemed curious to me:



But what I really hated was how the Reds handled him. I don't think he ever got a chance to develop as a hitter. The tools are there to be sure, but mentally, his approach, not so much. He's streaky, very streaky, an easy strikeout, and has never displayed power prior to September of last year. And all of that is on how the Reds have developed him, or rather not developed him.


How do you know what the Reds did to develop Stubbs? Are you referring to his brief flirtation with choking up on the bat, or something else? What mental approach does he lack that you think could have made him better?

I've seen Stubbs compared to Hanley Ramirez before. Despite the different positions they play, this seems interesting. Hanley was always a toolsy type, highly regarded by scouts but lacking in performance--and specifically in power--at the minor league level. This likely contributed to Boston's willingness to deal him in the Beckett trade--and we all know the outcome for Florida from that.

TRF
04-13-2010, 01:03 PM
As an interesting aside, I went through and got the 3-year averages for all current starting centerfielders (sans Austin Jackson who had not played prior to this season) based on OPS. The average for the period for the current starters was .771.

Here's how the list looks:


Carlos Beltran 0.884
Jayson Werth 0.870
Grady Sizemore 0.845
Torii Hunter 0.839
Matt Kemp 0.836
A. McCutchen 0.836
Nate McLouth 0.822
Marlon Byrd 0.819
Denard Span 0.819
Aaron Rowand 0.796
Alex Rios 0.785
Rick Ankiel 0.785
B.J. Upton 0.785
Jacoby Ellsbury 0.769
Drew Stubbs 0.759
Adam Jones 0.751
Nyjer Morgan 0.750
Chris Young 0.748
Dexter Fowler 0.747
F. Gutierrez 0.746
Cameron Maybin 0.745
Vernon Wells 0.745
Rajai Davis 0.727
Colby Rasmus 0.714
Brett Gardner 0.684
Tony Gwynn 0.679
Michael Bourn 0.675
Carlos Gomez 0.636
AVERAGE 0.771


Assuming only another 40 points on Stubbs' OBP, closer to what he would be expected to perform, based on current power only he's in the 800 OPS range - putting him in the top 8-10 CF in baseball. That's before defense is even considered. And clearly, he has a chance to be one of the top defensive outfielders in baseball... no one really denies that aspect of his game.

No one should deny the defensive aspect. But there are two questions to be answered. Can he gain that 40+ (yes 40+) points of OBP, and is the power legit. Is he a .460 SLG guy or a .400?

The answer is we don't know, but his SLG trended down as he moved up in the minors. I'll give him a pass for the FSL, but he was headed for waht looked like a truly abysmal season there. Suddenly he's on a Jay Bruce/Adam Dunn plan without the results. If the adage defense doesn't slump applies, then why not develop his bat properly?

westofyou
04-13-2010, 01:16 PM
Speed + Power + Great Glove + Cheap = Gonna Start all year get used to it

Brutus
04-13-2010, 01:17 PM
No one should deny the defensive aspect. But there are two questions to be answered. Can he gain that 40+ (yes 40+) points of OBP, and is the power legit. Is he a .460 SLG guy or a .400?

The answer is we don't know, but his SLG trended down as he moved up in the minors. I'll give him a pass for the FSL, but he was headed for waht looked like a truly abysmal season there. Suddenly he's on a Jay Bruce/Adam Dunn plan without the results. If the adage defense doesn't slump applies, then why not develop his bat properly?

I certainly won't claim he will maintain the slugging aspect, as I just can't say for sure. I do think his power looks absolutely legit - you don't hammer the ball 450 feet in BP and in games on occasion without having some legit power. But that's most definitely still to be determined.

I do think, however, as he's only had a .319 OBP in the majors thus far, it's perfectly reasonable to expect him to carry at least .350 - .360 (40 points plus) based on his ability to work the count and what looks like will wind up being an above-average BABIP because of his speed.

If he does carry a .360 & .460, then suddenly he's a top-5 centerfielder by almost any measure.

RedEye
04-13-2010, 01:55 PM
I certainly won't claim he will maintain the slugging aspect, as I just can't say for sure. I do think his power looks absolutely legit - you don't hammer the ball 450 feet in BP and in games on occasion without having some legit power. But that's most definitely still to be determined.


Certainly his power is legit, but the question is whether not it will translate to hitting HR in games. So far at the major league level, it looks like it will. But, as you say, the jury is still out.

TRF
04-13-2010, 02:16 PM
TRF-

First, thanks for your candid response to my questions. It makes much clearer what you expect on the offense side of Stubbs' game. However, given Brutus the Pimp's interesting follow-up to your post, would you be inclined to alter your performance threshholds given his superb D in the OF? Franklin Gutierrez, for instance, is a pretty phenomenal overall player, and his stats to me look eminently attainable for Stubbs even if he barely improves his current approach.

Your claims here seemed curious to me:

How do you know what the Reds did to develop Stubbs? Are you referring to his brief flirtation with choking up on the bat, or something else? What mental approach does he lack that you think could have made him better?

I've seen Stubbs compared to Hanley Ramirez before. Despite the different positions they play, this seems interesting. Hanley was always a toolsy type, highly regarded by scouts but lacking in performance--and specifically in power--at the minor league level. This likely contributed to Boston's willingness to deal him in the Beckett trade--and we all know the outcome for Florida from that.

Apples and Oranges when compared to Ramirez. Stubbs was older as a minor leaguer, but is only a year younger than Ramirez. Also he's been a regular major leaguer since the year Stubbs was drafted. I wouldn't trade Ramirez for three Drew Stubbs. Ramirez is an elite player because of his offense. Stubbs might be a good player because of his elite defense, IF he becomes an average offensive player.

As for how he was developed, simple. I think he was rushed. I don't think he was given the opportunity to learn properly from failure. I don't think he had the chance to learn how opposing pitchers adjusted to him and the adjustments he needed to make. Had he been tearing through the system, or displayed the SLG/OBP combination of Dunn or Ramirez, and Hanley did display flashes Stubbs hasn't come close to, then sure, let him rocket through the system. But he didn't.

I looked at last year's numbers for CF's. Looking at the top 10 only BA qualified CF's sorted by OBP, only 2 SLG'd under .400; Michael Bourn and Nyjer Morgan. Expand this to the top 20 and you add B.J. Upton to the list, and I think he rebounds. The lowest OBP of the top 20 was Vernon Wells. His line: .260 .311 .400 .711. I can see Stubbs producing the same line. Now ask yourself if you want Vernon Wells leading off for the Reds. As for Gutierrez, Last year was by far his best season, and he's entering his 4th season as a major league player. He's 1 1/2 years older than Stubbs. He just posted his highest OBP of .339, 20 points higher than his previous high mark. Maybe he's developing. He sure is off to a torrid start. Stubbs isn't. And Gutierrez is considered an elite defender as well. Look at Guttierez' 2008 season. Not so phenomenal. That was only slightly worse than Stubbs 2009 at AAA. The floor is pretty low for both players.

It doesn't mean the floor is where his career will bee though. And could applies to all players. But right now I see a lot of outs at the top of the order.

TRF
04-13-2010, 02:19 PM
I certainly won't claim he will maintain the slugging aspect, as I just can't say for sure. I do think his power looks absolutely legit - you don't hammer the ball 450 feet in BP and in games on occasion without having some legit power. But that's most definitely still to be determined.

I do think, however, as he's only had a .319 OBP in the majors thus far, it's perfectly reasonable to expect him to carry at least .350 - .360 (40 points plus) based on his ability to work the count and what looks like will wind up being an above-average BABIP because of his speed.

If he does carry a .360 & .460, then suddenly he's a top-5 centerfielder by almost any measure.

He's contact challenged. WMP could hit the ball 500 feet in BP but couldn't touch it during games. Stubbs bat misses the ball a lot. And he's never been much of a SLG guy in the minors. He's potential power based on his frame, but the results suggest something else.

Brutus
04-13-2010, 02:34 PM
He's contact challenged. WMP could hit the ball 500 feet in BP but couldn't touch it during games. Stubbs bat misses the ball a lot. And he's never been much of a SLG guy in the minors. He's potential power based on his frame, but the results suggest something else.

But being contact challenged does not have a high correlation to slugging. If you can hit the ball hard and hit it far, you're still going to carry a good slugging even if you strikeout a lot.

Clearly he displays the ability to carry a high slugging. I realize he didn't consistently do so in the minors, but as I've posted in the past, there are a lot of guys who display raw power but it doesn't manifest itself until 5-6 years of being a professional player.

He currently has a .440 career slugging in the majors. Quite honestly, I don't see it dipping below that based on what he's displayed thus far.

TRF
04-13-2010, 02:39 PM
But being contact challenged does not have a high correlation to slugging. If you can hit the ball hard and hit it far, you're still going to carry a good slugging even if you strikeout a lot.

Clearly he displays the ability to carry a high slugging. I realize he didn't consistently do so in the minors, but as I've posted in the past, there are a lot of guys who display raw power but it doesn't manifest itself until 5-6 years of being a professional player.

He currently has a .440 career slugging in the majors. Quite honestly, I don't see it dipping below that based on what he's displayed thus far.

I'd look at the context of that SLG. Most of it came against expanded rosters of bad teams with bad farms. PIT, HOU etc. His sample is just too small and he doesn't have the track record of a high SLG guy.

Brutus
04-13-2010, 03:08 PM
I'd look at the context of that SLG. Most of it came against expanded rosters of bad teams with bad farms. PIT, HOU etc. His sample is just too small and he doesn't have the track record of a high SLG guy.

You're severely overstating the differential between his minor league and major league numbers.

Doubles rate - 2.3% in the majors, 5.2% in the minors
Triples rate - 1.0% in the majors, 0.9% in the minors
Home Run rate - 4.1% in the majors, 1.5% in the minors
XBH rate - 7.4% in the majors, 7.6% in the minors

So literally, the only difference thus far from minors to majors is that he's turning doubles into homers.

What's that old saying? Minor League doubles become Major League homers?

TRF
04-13-2010, 03:20 PM
You're severely overstating the differential between his minor league and major league numbers.

Doubles rate - 2.3% in the majors, 5.2% in the minors
Triples rate - 1.0% in the majors, 0.9% in the minors
Home Run rate - 4.1% in the majors, 1.5% in the minors
XBH rate - 7.4% in the majors, 7.6% in the minors

So literally, the only difference thus far from minors to majors is that he's turning doubles into homers.

What's that old saying? Minor League doubles become Major League homers?

His home park will help him with HR's. It suppresses all other SLG. He hits in a division that helps HR's too, so he does have that going for him. He never faced a pitcher like Carpenter in the minors though. He really didn't face too many aces last year at the MLB level either.

Like i said, the sample is too small either way, so all we have is his minor league numbers. and due to the poor way he was developed, those are erratic at best.

Brutus
04-13-2010, 03:28 PM
His home park will help him with HR's. It suppresses all other SLG. He hits in a division that helps HR's too, so he does have that going for him. He never faced a pitcher like Carpenter in the minors though. He really didn't face too many aces last year at the MLB level either.

Like i said, the sample is too small either way, so all we have is his minor league numbers. and due to the poor way he was developed, those are erratic at best.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that GABP suppresses slugging. While homers are clearly above average, the doubles and triples factors have been a hint above average each of the past three seasons. It certainly won't be unfavorable to Stubbs.

Yes, his MLB numbers are a small sample. But even if you go off of what he did in the minors (and this has always been the crux of my support of his being a terrific MLB CF), based on the trajectory of many players increasing their HR rates in the majors, if Stubbs only keeps his minor league rates but hits some of those doubles as homers instead (which is very common and is already in the process of happening), he will be an above-average centerfielder at the Major League level.

The "poor development" is completely unsubstantiated and nothing more than an opinion. There's really no basis for that.

Bumstead
04-13-2010, 03:29 PM
His home park will help him with HR's. It suppresses all other SLG. He hits in a division that helps HR's too, so he does have that going for him. He never faced a pitcher like Carpenter in the minors though. He really didn't face too many aces last year at the MLB level either.

Like i said, the sample is too small either way, so all we have is his minor league numbers. and due to the poor way he was developed, those are erratic at best.

There's that and the fact that TRF hates him...:p: If all minor league players hit the same in MLB as they did in the minors there would be no mystery to prospects...yet, amazingly, there are plenty of prospects that provide better hitting in MLB than they did in the minors and even more that can't do anything close in MLB to what they did in the minors...could be why scouts exist, people who can actually see talent and not just measure it in statistics.

Bum

RedEye
04-13-2010, 03:36 PM
As for how he was developed, simple. I think he was rushed. I don't think he was given the opportunity to learn properly from failure. I don't think he had the chance to learn how opposing pitchers adjusted to him and the adjustments he needed to make. Had he been tearing through the system, or displayed the SLG/OBP combination of Dunn or Ramirez, and Hanley did display flashes Stubbs hasn't come close to, then sure, let him rocket through the system. But he didn't.


I was only mentioning Hanley as a well-known example of a player whose was generally "toolsy" but whose overall offensive game didn't fully develop until he reached the majors. I agree that Drew is not in his class as an overall hitter.

Stubbs certainly is an interesting case. His skills are unevenly distributed, that's for sure. Since I've followed this discussion for awhile, I know this topic has already been debated ad nauseum by you and others in the minor league forum, so I'll try to be brief. Anyway, as I understand it, the main issue is whether or not his set of already MLB-plus skills (notably speed, baserunning and defense) merited his rapid promotion and eventual place on the big club. Perhaps on another team or in another system they would not have done so. However, on a club like the Reds--where Willy Taveras and Corey Patterson are recent incumbents--I tend to think that the CF position greatly benefits from a player like Stubbs, regardless of his perceived flaws. So far, he seems like a guy who can learn while in The Show.

Sea Ray
04-13-2010, 04:13 PM
We all are in agreement that Stubbs is a work in progress but my question to TRF is why aren't you cutting him more slack? We are getting reports that he's studying his ABs on video and really working to improve his game. What's not to like about that?

I think last year compares very nicely with Eric Davis' first year.

In 200 PAs Davis had 10 HRs batted .224, slugged .466 and struck out 48 times


In 196 PAs Stubbs had 8 HRs, hit .267, slugged .439, struck out 49 times.

All indications are that he's still improving his game. I think that's encouraging.

I think he's an exciting player who does have the potential to be an All Star. How many All Stars has this team had recently? If he falls short so be it. Right now this team has a greater need for leadoff/CF type than a starting pitcher

flyer85
04-13-2010, 04:18 PM
I think last year compares very nicely with Eric Davis' first year.

In 200 PAs Davis had 10 HRs batted .224, slugged .466 and struck out 48 times


In 196 PAs Stubbs had 8 HRs, hit .267, slugged .439, struck out 49 times.

the elephant in the room is that Davis was three years younger than Stubbs when he began his major league career.

RedEye
04-13-2010, 04:24 PM
the elephant in the room is that Davis was three years younger than Stubbs when he began his major league career.

Isn't it possible that players have different learning curves, and that they aren't always attributable to age?

westofyou
04-13-2010, 04:25 PM
the elephant in the room is that Davis was three years younger than Stubbs when he began his major league career.

The elephant in the room now is two back to back years of FA signings that cost dollars and wasted ab's and gave nada back.

At low cost a Stubb's experiement gives you a glove, HR power and speed. If he doesn't work out then it doesn't work, but the had wringing over his prescence is laughable considering the track record over the last few years and the cash that was flushed because the Reds felt trying to fix it from the outside was the only path.

I'd prefer to see an Eddie Milner type of season (league average or a tad below) and a great glove then go through 800 Willy or Corey threads each day.

lollipopcurve
04-13-2010, 04:42 PM
At low cost a Stubb's experiement gives you a glove, HR power and speed. If he doesn't work out then it doesn't work, but the had wringing over his prescence is laughable considering the track record over the last few years and the cash that was flushed because the Reds felt trying to fix it from the outside was the only path.

Absolutely.

You have to give the kid a chance to develop his tools. He's still on an upward trajectory.

flyer85
04-13-2010, 04:45 PM
Isn't it possible that players have different learning curves, and that they aren't always attributable to age?possible but not probable. At what age a player reaches the major is a critical factor in how successful they are likely to be.

Because of his age the time for Stubbs is now, the Reds need to find out what they have. Heck I would love to see Heisey out in LF to go along with him (sorry just not that enamored with Dickerson and Gomes). Heisey actually has a track record of being a better hitter than Stubbs and he is at an age where he needs to get up here. Same is true with Frazier. All of these guys have a decent approach as hitters and after a few months of producing in AAA they will be ready for the big show.

Sea Ray
04-13-2010, 04:53 PM
According to baseball reference Eric Davis was 22 when he started his big league career and Stubbs was 24.

I think players generally develop quicker when they are drafted out of high school as opposed to college

I'm not saying that Stubbs is going to be Eric Davis so if he falls a little short is that a big deal?

Brutus
04-13-2010, 04:55 PM
possible but not probable. At what age a player reaches the major is a critical factor in how successful they are likely to be.

Because of his age the time for Stubbs is now, the Reds need to find out what they have. Heck I would love to see Heisey out in LF to go along with him (sorry just not that enamored with Dickerson and Gomes). Heisey actually has a track record of being a better hitter than Stubbs and he is at an age where he needs to get up here. Same is true with Frazier. All of these guys have a decent approach as hitters and after a few months of producing in AAA they will be ready for the big show.

Actually there are a lot of studies that suggest physical maturation occurs at 27-29 and if you continue to improve, provided you have the skills to get to the majors, it doesn't matter what age you get there. In the case of Drew Stubbs, he's still 25 years old - nearly a year and a half before he even reaches "peak" age. Quite honestly, age in the minors is hugely overrated when projecting what players will do going forward (as opposed to what they've done relative to their peers).

TRF
04-13-2010, 04:57 PM
Stubbs biggest asset offensively is speed. His frame however concerns me. He starts to fill out and that speed starts to diminish. He's lanky so maybe he doesn't bulk like Dunn did.

As woy points out, he's low cost, and developed within. I do like that. But IMO he wasn't developed properly, the crux of my argument. Yeah my initial bias against him was the pick itself. Yeah on this board he is forever tied to a pitcher with two CY Young's, but I haven't made that comparison in quite a while.

I worry that he develops at the plate at the same rate as a Gutierrez. If three full seasons have to go by before he posts an OBP over .340 then he's a bust, because I don't think he has Gutierrez' power at all. In fact every player he's been compared to in this thread was much, much younger than Stubbs when he made his MLB debut, sometimes younger than when Stubbs was drafted.

TRF
04-13-2010, 05:01 PM
Actually there are a lot of studies that suggest physical maturation occurs at 27-29 and if you continue to improve, provided you have the skills to get to the majors, it doesn't matter what age you get there. In the case of Drew Stubbs, he's still 25 years old - nearly a year and a half before he even reaches "peak" age. Quite honestly, age in the minors is hugely overrated when projecting what players will do going forward (as opposed to what they've done relative to their peers).

horsehockey. Peak age physically means nothing compared to peak age talent wise. Some guys get very late starts like Nelson Cruz or Ryan Ludwick. The difference is they have power that Stubbs has never displayed. How many burner/no power types really hit their peak AFTER 27? Freel and.... I got nothing. Speedy types like him are often in the league at an earlier age. One Willy Taveras springs to mind. And had the Reds looked at Taveras and said Stubbs could be that guy but with a good bat, then they should have taken the time to mature his skills properly.

Brutus
04-13-2010, 05:11 PM
horsehockey. Peak age physically means nothing compared to peak age talent wise. Some guys get very late starts like Nelson Cruz or Ryan Ludwick. The difference is they have power that Stubbs has never displayed. How many burner/no power types really hit their peak AFTER 27? Freel and.... I got nothing. Speedy types like him are often in the league at an earlier age. One Willy Taveras springs to mind. And had the Reds looked at Taveras and said Stubbs could be that guy but with a good bat, then they should have taken the time to mature his skills properly.

Peak age is considered the point in which players traditionally reach their top level of production, so no, it's not "horsehockey." Tom Tango has done (as many others have) a ton of research on this. There's a lot of truth to guys reaching their utmost production at that age.

Speed peaks at 24 and sustains until 28-29. You're right about that. But that doesn't mean just because Stubbs has speed the rest of his game won't continue to develop. It's almost as if you're suggesting he has to be either a speed guy or a power guy but not both.

TRF
04-13-2010, 05:22 PM
Peak age is considered the point in which players traditionally reach their top level of production, so no, it's not "horsehockey." Tom Tango has done (as many others have) a ton of research on this. There's a lot of truth to guys reaching their utmost production at that age.

Speed peaks at 24 and sustains until 28-29. You're right about that. But that doesn't mean just because Stubbs has speed the rest of his game won't continue to develop. It's almost as if you're suggesting he has to be either a speed guy or a power guy but not both.

I'm not suggesting he has to be either. I'm saying has has been a speed guy and not a power guy. I'm also suggesting that if he follows a Franklin Gutierrez career path, that his peak will start around age 28 just as his speed will start to decline. I'm suggesting the Reds had NO CLUE as to how to develop him and changed his hitting approach from level to level. I think he could have been a 5-tool 3 hole hitter if they had emphasized his power potential and let the speed take care of itself. He's not a leadoff hitter.

I think the Reds screwed the pooch on the pick, but made it worse in what followed.

Bumstead
04-13-2010, 05:34 PM
I'm not suggesting he has to be either. I'm saying has has been a speed guy and not a power guy. I'm also suggesting that if he follows a Franklin Gutierrez career path, that his peak will start around age 28 just as his speed will start to decline. I'm suggesting the Reds had NO CLUE as to how to develop him and changed his hitting approach from level to level. I think he could have been a 5-tool 3 hole hitter if they had emphasized his power potential and let the speed take care of itself. He's not a leadoff hitter.

I think the Reds screwed the pooch on the pick, but made it worse in what followed.

I'm not sure what Franklyn Gutierrez' development has to do with Drew Stubbs' development other than they are both CF's. Stubbs has a lot more speed and has more power potential than Gutierrez; both are plus defensive CF's but the comparisons are really off at that point. If Stubbs doesn't develop past Gutierrez, that may be close to his worst case scenario; his best case scenario is as a 25/40 guy with plus defense and a good walk rate.

Sure, Lincecum was taken after Stubbs...who cares already? It's done. Stubbs can only be the player he is and that can be very good for the Reds indeed (not to mention one of the better players in his draft class).

westofyou
04-13-2010, 05:39 PM
Sure, Lincecum was taken after Stubbs...who cares already? It's done.


Yep, talking about it is a waste of time, the game is full of guys that your team and the other team passed on, The Reds passed on Babe Ruth, Johnny Mize and traded Curt Flood and Frank Robinson, should we dredge that up until the end of time too?

They passed on him, it's a fact and not an exuse to keep kicking the mans game.

Brutus
04-13-2010, 05:44 PM
I'm not suggesting he has to be either. I'm saying has has been a speed guy and not a power guy. I'm also suggesting that if he follows a Franklin Gutierrez career path, that his peak will start around age 28 just as his speed will start to decline. I'm suggesting the Reds had NO CLUE as to how to develop him and changed his hitting approach from level to level. I think he could have been a 5-tool 3 hole hitter if they had emphasized his power potential and let the speed take care of itself. He's not a leadoff hitter.

I think the Reds screwed the pooch on the pick, but made it worse in what followed.

What tangible evidence do you have that Stubbs had his hitting approach from level to level? I'm not even sure there is any, other than your wanting to find a way to stick to your guns and blame the Reds for a pick you didn't agree with from the start.

As I have shown, as of today, Stubbs is essentially a virtually average starting centerfielder offensively with a LOWER rate of acquiring extra bases than he had in the minors - and nearly 45 points lower of an OBP than he had in the minors. Considering he won't even reach peak production, statistically speaking, for about two more seasons, I would say Stubbs has a very good chance of development. Your suggestion that he has shown "no power" is not really accurate. His power had not necessarily translated to homers in the minors, but those doubles have carried over to home runs - and that's actually very common.

I'm sure you're familiar with the term warning track power? When guys with "no power" hit homers in the majors, it's usually in the form of fence-hugging homers. When Stubbs hits a homer, he leaves no doubt about it. Guys with "no power" don't do that. It's clear this kid does have power and it's time to drop the label suggesting otherwise. I'm not saying that means he'll hit 30 homers, but he clearly will be a double-digit guy in terms of homers each season.

TRF
04-13-2010, 05:52 PM
I'm not sure what Franklyn Gutierrez' development has to do with Drew Stubbs' development other than they are both CF's. Stubbs has a lot more speed and has more power potential than Gutierrez; both are plus defensive CF's but the comparisons are really off at that point. If Stubbs doesn't develop past Gutierrez, that may be close to his worst case scenario; his best case scenario is as a 25/40 guy with plus defense and a good walk rate.

25 HR's. ok. I don't see it as he's NEVER hit more than 12 in 4 professional seasons, but ok. In his minor league career, 1588 AB's he has 28 HR's. you want him to now equal that in 1/3 the AB's. That's a big step.

If he steals 40 and gets caught 10 times is that ok? Last year his SB% was 71% His minor league SB% is 77%. For all his speed, his SB game isn't refined yet. He could take a big step forward this year though.

I can read all the posts about his potential all day long, but I prefer to base it on what he's actually done and how he's progressed as he moves up. His SB% is a detriment. He's displayed very little power on a consistent basis. And after a week, posters are declaring him a future star.

I hope they are right.

Bumstead
04-13-2010, 05:56 PM
25 HR's. ok. I don't see it as he's NEVER hit more than 12 in 4 professional seasons, but ok. In his minor league career, 1588 AB's he has 28 HR's. you want him to now equal that in 1/3 the AB's. That's a big step.

If he steals 40 and gets caught 10 times is that ok? Last year his SB% was 71% His minor league SB% is 77%. For all his speed, his SB game isn't refined yet. He could take a big step forward this year though.

I can read all the posts about his potential all day long, but I prefer to base it on what he's actually done and how he's progressed as he moves up. His SB% is a detriment. He's displayed very little power on a consistent basis. And after a week, posters are declaring him a future star.

I hope they are right.

You will not find anywhere where I suggested he would be a future star; I really haven't seen anyone say that but then again maybe I don't pay enough attention. I stand by my ceiling and floor and to be honest minor league stats aren't going to tell you much about Drew Stubbs IMHO. Keep clinging; we shall see. Have you seen any of the HR's he has hit? If so, you are still going to tell me he has no power?

Bum

TRF
04-13-2010, 05:57 PM
What tangible evidence do you have that Stubbs had his hitting approach from level to level? I'm not even sure there is any, other than your wanting to find a way to stick to your guns and blame the Reds for a pick you didn't agree with from the start.

As I have shown, as of today, Stubbs is essentially a virtually average starting centerfielder offensively with a LOWER rate of acquiring extra bases than he had in the minors - and nearly 45 points lower of an OBP than he had in the minors. Considering he won't even reach peak production, statistically speaking, for about two more seasons, I would say Stubbs has a very good chance of development. Your suggestion that he has shown "no power" is not really accurate. His power had not necessarily translated to homers in the minors, but those doubles have carried over to home runs - and that's actually very common.

I'm sure you're familiar with the term warning track power? When guys with "no power" hit homers in the majors, it's usually in the form of fence-hugging homers. When Stubbs hits a homer, he leaves no doubt about it. Guys with "no power" don't do that. It's clear this kid does have power and it's time to drop the label suggesting otherwise. I'm not saying that means he'll hit 30 homers, but he clearly will be a double-digit guy in terms of homers each season.

My proof? talk to doug. At one point he was tried lower in the order. There was the choking up on his bat experiment. doug himself has said they have reworked his swing on more than one occasion. No, there was no consistent approach on his development, and I'm not sure anyone can say there was. It probably didn't help that he had an issue with his foot in 2006/2007, but 2007 was the last time he showed power. He was supposed to see a bump in his SLG after leaving High A. didn't happen at AA. He did get hot for Louisville for a short time.

The Reds weren't consistent with him. Todd Frazier has had the same issue, but defensively. They left his unorthodox swing alone. It's an issue they have had for a while.

TRF
04-13-2010, 06:00 PM
You will not find anywhere where I suggested he would be a future star; I really haven't seen anyone say that but then again maybe I don't pay enough attention. I stand by my ceiling and floor and to be honest minor league stats aren't going to tell you much about Drew Stubbs IMHO. Keep clinging; we shall see. Have you seen any of the HR's he has hit? If so, you are still going to tell me he has no power?

Bum

No CONSISTENT power. Absolutely not. It isn't his game, but it should be. Blame the Reds for that.

Votto has power. Bruce has power. Gomes has power. Stubbs could have power, but he wasn't developed in a way that PRODUCES power. Pitcher's in the minors had no fear of Stubbs, because when he did hit, it was NOT for power. Hence the low SLG.

BTW, my 10,000th post sure as hell better not be about Drew Stubbs.

Brutus
04-13-2010, 06:01 PM
My proof? talk to doug. At one point he was tried lower in the order. There was the choking up on his bat experiment. doug himself has said they have reworked his swing on more than one occasion. No, there was no consistent approach on his development, and I'm not sure anyone can say there was. It probably didn't help that he had an issue with his foot in 2006/2007, but 2007 was the last time he showed power. He was supposed to see a bump in his SLG after leaving High A. didn't happen at AA. He did get hot for Louisville for a short time.

The Reds weren't consistent with him. Todd Frazier has had the same issue, but defensively. They left his unorthodox swing alone. It's an issue they have had for a while.

There's more than one way to skin a cat. If a player doesn't easily get frustrated and is 'coachable' so to speak, trying different things with him is not necessarily a bad thing. Consistent doesn't necessarily mean right. You can try one approach with a kid but it doesn't make it the right approach.

Personally, I think it's better they tried different things. If you try one approach, you'll never know if a different method will work better.

What you're saying is not proof of anything. So they tried a lot of approaches, reportedly? That doesn't mean they mismanaged him.

TRF
04-13-2010, 06:02 PM
A .379 SLG at AAA says his stroke produces no power. Maybe Jacoby can fix that.

I almost typed that with a straight face.

Brutus
04-13-2010, 06:10 PM
A .379 SLG at AAA says his stroke produces no power. Maybe Jacoby can fix that.

I almost typed that with a straight face.

Who cares what he did in the minors?

The point of a minor league system is to develop a player to produce at the Major League level. Right now, despite having obvious things he can improve on, he's hitting like an average starting centerfielder.

Those homers that were not being hit in the minors are now starting to be hit in the majors.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the ideal development cycle?

There was an announce the other day that said, and I 100% agree with this, (paraphrasing) "it's better that a kid doesn't develop his power stroke much in the minors and instead work on patience, selection, approach and his ability to swing the bat. It's ideal you work on those things first and if you have any power at all, that can come later in the majors. You won't often survive in the majors if it's the other way around."

Stubbs is not a finished product, but he works the count and has a decent ability to recognize the pitches coming at him. He currently seems to struggle with the low offspeed pitches, but that will come over time. Bottom line is that he's been smoking mistake pitches, and that's a real good sign with a young hitter.

TheNext44
04-13-2010, 06:37 PM
I'm not worried about Stubb's power. That will come. How much is in question, but he clearly has enough power to stay in the bigs.

What I'm worried about is his K's. Currently he has 58 K's in 223 PA's. Over 162 games, that's 192 K's. That is way too many for a guy with his speed.

A player as fast Stubbs should put the ball in play as often as possible. We've all seen him beat out routine grounders to SS. If he cut his K's down by just 15 so far in his career, he easily would have 4 more hits, maybe more, and that would raise his OBP by 15 points.

With two strikes, he needs to choke up and pound the ball into the ground. He'd OBP over .350 easy if he did that every time. And again, with his speed, each time he reaches first, it's almost like getting a double.

Forget his power, that's fine, he needs to focus on striking out less and putting the ball into play more often.

Brutus
04-13-2010, 06:46 PM
I'm not worried about Stubb's power. That will come. How much is in question, but he clearly has enough power to stay in the bigs.

What I'm worried about is his K's. Currently he has 58 K's in 223 PA's. Over 162 games, that's 192 K's. That is way too many for a guy with his speed.

A player as fast Stubbs should put the ball in play as often as possible. We've all seen him beat out routine grounders to SS. If he cut his K's down by just 15 so far in his career, he easily would have 4 more hits, maybe more, and that would raise his OBP by 15 points.

With two strikes, he needs to choke up and pound the ball into the ground. He'd OBP over .350 easy if he did that every time. And again, with his speed, each time he reaches first, it's almost like getting a double.

Forget his power, that's fine, he needs to focus on striking out less and putting the ball into play more often.

Agree with this completely. I think we're to the point it is clear, or at least should be, that the power is definitely there. He has a long swing and needs to be more efficient in shortening it up in certain situations and, not just protect the plate, but go with the pitch and put it in play.

Once he does that, cuts down on about 5% of his K's or lays off some of the pitches out of the zone and turns some of them into walks, he's going to have a very good career.

Mario-Rijo
04-13-2010, 06:49 PM
I'm not worried about Stubb's power. That will come. How much is in question, but he clearly has enough power to stay in the bigs.

What I'm worried about is his K's. Currently he has 58 K's in 223 PA's. Over 162 games, that's 192 K's. That is way too many for a guy with his speed.

A player as fast Stubbs should put the ball in play as often as possible. We've all seen him beat out routine grounders to SS. If he cut his K's down by just 15 so far in his career, he easily would have 4 more hits, maybe more, and that would raise his OBP by 15 points.

With two strikes, he needs to choke up and pound the ball into the ground. He'd OBP over .350 easy if he did that every time. And again, with his speed, each time he reaches first, it's almost like getting a double.

Forget his power, that's fine, he needs to focus on striking out less and putting the ball into play more often.

He did awful well in Dayton when he was forced to choke up, so I'm with ya in that he needs to improve his bat control. Just a hunch but long limbed guys tend to have more inconsistent mechanics in whatever they do in baseball. That may have something to do with his bat control issues. Although choking up would hurt his pop a bit and so ideally he needs to find a way to improve bat control without choking up if it's at all possible but it may not be.

TheNext44
04-13-2010, 07:35 PM
He did awful well in Dayton when he was forced to choke up, so I'm with ya in that he needs to improve his bat control. Just a hunch but long limbed guys tend to have more inconsistent mechanics in whatever they do in baseball. That may have something to do with his bat control issues. Although choking up would hurt his pop a bit and so ideally he needs to find a way to improve bat control without choking up if it's at all possible but it may not be.

Thanks for the info. No need to literally choke up.

A batter can cut down him K's simply by cutting down his swing with two strikes. Keep you hands in, and focus on making contact. The difference between a decent major league hitter and a very good one is his ability to foul off pitches with two strikes.

Stubbs just needs to change his approach with two strikes. All good hitters do this without affecting their swing during the rest of the count.

RedEye
04-13-2010, 08:02 PM
I think the Reds screwed the pooch on the pick, but made it worse in what followed.

How do you figure they "screwed the pooch" when they ended up with a major league quality CF? I'm assuming this is hyperbole.

TRF
04-14-2010, 09:26 AM
How do you figure they "screwed the pooch" when they ended up with a major league quality CF? I'm assuming this is hyperbole.

don't assume. They did, and he isn't. yet. defensively? yes, offensively? no.

westofyou
04-14-2010, 09:33 AM
Doesn't the blood from the dead horse get all over your keyboard TRF?

TRF
04-14-2010, 09:50 AM
Doesn't the blood from the dead horse get all over your keyboard TRF?

I keep handi wipes around.

dougdirt
04-14-2010, 10:10 AM
I keep handi wipes around.

And which company are you keeping in business by buying their wipes? I may need to make an investment in them today.

pedro
04-14-2010, 11:41 AM
The blood drained out of that horse long ago. I'm wondering about air freshener.

flyer85
04-14-2010, 12:00 PM
How many folks have sent applications to be the Reds next batting instructor so they can fix Stubbs?

RedEye
04-14-2010, 12:00 PM
don't assume. They did, and he isn't. yet. defensively? yes, offensively? no.

Really? If Stubbs ends up playing Gold Glove caliber CF with a .700 OPS for the Reds (both of which seem probable at this point) are you going to continue to maintain that they "screwed the pooch" on drafting him? Seriously?

TRF
04-14-2010, 12:09 PM
Really? If Stubbs ends up playing Gold Glove caliber CF with a .700 OPS for the Reds (both of which seem probable at this point) are you going to continue to maintain that they "screwed the pooch" on drafting him? Seriously?

If his line is .300 .400 .700? yep.

And remember a lot of you expecting that same .700 OPS and touting his defense also say Paul Janish has no business on a MLB roster and certainly not as a starter.

And no, I am not directly comparing the two players, just possible outcomes.

If Janish played GG caliber defense at SS with a .700 OPS would you want him hitting 1 or 2 in the lineup everyday?

RedEye
04-14-2010, 12:14 PM
If his line is .300 .400 .700? yep.

What about .350/.400/.750? And with the potential for much, much more?

I'm sorry, but the player we are outlining here with numbers is a solid, solid contributor to a ML roster no matter how you spin it. "Screwing the pooch," I would think, would mean drafting someone who doesn't even make it to The Show at all. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your criteria for the expression--but right now, it seems like "screwing the pooch" means one thing--not drafting Tim Lincecum.

Raisor
04-14-2010, 12:15 PM
If his line is .300 .400 .700? yep.

by the way, that's the line Patterson, Hairston, Freel, Bruce, Dickerson, and Hopper put up in CF two years ago where everyone and their mother wanted the Reds to upgrade, with good defense too.

RedEye
04-14-2010, 12:17 PM
by the way, that's the line Patterson, Hairston, Freel, Bruce, Dickerson, and Hopper put up in CF two years ago where everyone and their mother wanted the Reds to upgrade, with good defense too.

Patterson is the only one of that group that compares to Stubbs as a long-term defender in CF. But I take your point.

Brutus
04-14-2010, 12:18 PM
I think Stubbs' line is projecting to be more along the lines of .350/.450/.800 at this point.

And 800 OPS, Gold Glove CF? Sign me up.

TRF
04-14-2010, 12:21 PM
I think Stubbs' line is projecting to be more along the lines of .350/.450/.800 at this point.

And 800 OPS, Gold Glove CF? Sign me up.

You just made him a better CF than Mike Cameron.

no. way. no. how.

RedEye
04-14-2010, 12:21 PM
I think Stubbs' line is projecting to be more along the lines of .350/.450/.800 at this point.

And 800 OPS, Gold Glove CF? Sign me up.

Maybe I did my math wrong on the OPS. But either way, I don't think selecting Stubbs in the draft can be considered an unforgivable error at this point. I'm sick of the dog metaphor, so I'm just translate TRF's expression as "unforgivable error."

RedEye
04-14-2010, 12:22 PM
You just made him a better CF than Mike Cameron.

no. way. no. how.

Actually, I think Cameron is a good comp. Didn't he struggle to catch on with the stick until his mid-twenties as well? I think he was around Stubbs' age when the Reds traded for him...

bucksfan2
04-14-2010, 12:24 PM
Actually, I think Cameron is a good comp. Didn't he struggle to catch on with the stick until his mid-twenties as well? I think he was around Stubbs' age when the Reds traded for him...

Cameron also got a nice bump from PED's.

TRF
04-14-2010, 12:25 PM
Actually, I think Cameron is a good comp. Didn't he struggle to catch on with the stick until his mid-twenties as well? I think he was around Stubbs' age when the Reds traded for him...

Mike Cameron at AA: .909 OPS

AAA: .901 OPS (small sample)

Not really close is it?

Age 23 at AA: 563 AB's 1.002 OPS

dougdirt
04-14-2010, 12:26 PM
Maybe I did my math wrong on the OPS. But either way, I don't think selecting Stubbs in the draft can be considered an unforgivable error at this point. I'm sick of the dog metaphor, so I'm just translate TRF's expression as "unforgivable error."

So the Reds got a major leaguer out of the draft and its an unforgivable error? Please. Was it the best pick? No, it very likely wasn't. That doesn't mean it was an unforgivable error though. Lets not stretch things here.

TRF
04-14-2010, 12:28 PM
Cameron also got a nice bump from PED's.

it evens out. he certainly faced more than a few pitchers using them too.

dougdirt
04-14-2010, 12:28 PM
Mike Cameron at AA: .909 OPS

AAA: .901 OPS (small sample)

Not really close is it?

Age 23 at AA: 563 AB's 1.002 OPS

Not everyone peaks at the same time though. Cameron was a better minor leaguer. For sure. That doesn't mean Stubbs can't be as good of a major leaguer as him though.

flyer85
04-14-2010, 12:29 PM
Stubbs is pretty much the same guy that he was when he was drafted (great speed, great defense, occasional power with contact issues). Which is why teams want to draft polished hitters, because it is hard to fix.

RedEye
04-14-2010, 12:30 PM
Here are Cameron's age 24-26 seasons

.259/.356/.433 OPS .789
.210/.285/.336 OPS .621
.256/.359/.438 OPS .825

I agree with TRF that the jury is still out, but these numbers look like a reasonable bar to set for Stubbs. I could even see him pulling an age-25 slump to .621 this year (like Cameron) and then finding his feet during his age-26 season in 2011. I suppose then we'd have a year of TRF saying "I told you so"... and then a decade or so for him to eat crow. :)

RedEye
04-14-2010, 12:31 PM
So the Reds got a major leaguer out of the draft and its an unforgivable error? Please. Was it the best pick? No, it very likely wasn't. That doesn't mean it was an unforgivable error though. Lets not stretch things here.

Maybe you misread my post. I am defending the Stubbs pick--I just got sick of using the word "pooch" to debate the issue.

RedsManRick
04-14-2010, 12:33 PM
by the way, that's the line Patterson, Hairston, Freel, Bruce, Dickerson, and Hopper put up in CF two years ago where everyone and their mother wanted the Reds to upgrade, with good defense too.

Interesting. In 2008 our CF hit .249/.299/.401 and put up a collection 7.9 UZR (9th in MLB). Last year, our CF hit .256/.298/.352 with a 20.0 (2nd in MLB).

I think there's a good chance that we get better offense than 2008 (say .320/.420) and as good as or better defense than 2009 from Stubbs in 2010.

TRF
04-14-2010, 12:38 PM
Here are Cameron's age 24-26 seasons

.259/.356/.433 OPS .789
.210/.285/.336 OPS .621
.256/.359/.438 OPS .825

I agree with TRF that the jury is still out, but these numbers look like a reasonable bar to set for Stubbs. I could even see him pulling an age-25 slump to .621 this year (like Cameron) and then finding his feet during his age-26 season in 2011. I suppose then we'd have a year of TRF saying "I told you so"... and then a decade or so for him to eat crow. :)

maybe. but you seem to have ignored the part that Cameron's minor league numbers trended up. He had a sophomore slump, rebounded and has been one of the best CF's in baseball over the last decade. But he was a ROY candidate, and made his MLB debut at age 22. I've been reading this Cameron comparison for a few years now, and I just don't see it. Cameron had a fulltime MLB job with only 30 games at AAA. But mostly he was developed a year at a time unlike Stubbs.

I truly think Stubbs could have been a very good #3 type hitter. He's a better athlete than Jay Bruce. Developed properly he might have been an offensive force. right now, I can see him getting sent down if he doesn't start to turn things around.

pedro
04-14-2010, 12:39 PM
If his line is .300 .400 .700? yep.


If Janish played GG caliber defense at SS with a .700 OPS would you want him hitting 1 or 2 in the lineup everyday?

Sure. But that's never going to happen. Juan Castro was a better hitter than Paul Janish and I say that without a bit of my tongue in my cheek.

TRF
04-14-2010, 12:47 PM
Sure. But that's never going to happen. Juan Castro was a better hitter than Paul Janish and I say that without a bit of my tongue in my cheek.

hater. Janish was a spring training beast. And he's been strengthening his wrists. (i read that Dusty told him to do that). and he had 21 doubles. 21!

But here we are. and people are projecting an .800 OPS from a guy that BARELY squeaked out a .712 OPS at AAA last year. Seems backwards to me.

RedEye
04-14-2010, 12:50 PM
maybe. but you seem to have ignored the part that Cameron's minor league numbers trended up. He had a sophomore slump, rebounded and has been one of the best CF's in baseball over the last decade. But he was a ROY candidate, and made his MLB debut at age 22. I've been reading this Cameron comparison for a few years now, and I just don't see it. Cameron had a fulltime MLB job with only 30 games at AAA. But mostly he was developed a year at a time unlike Stubbs.

I truly think Stubbs could have been a very good #3 type hitter. He's a better athlete than Jay Bruce. Developed properly he might have been an offensive force. right now, I can see him getting sent down if he doesn't start to turn things around.

I don't think it really matters what Cameron's minor league numbers did--they may have taken different paths to get to age 25, but at that age they are quite comparable players.

The fact that Cameron was a ROY candidate is irrelevant to the conversation, since we all know about the fickle beast that is the MLB award system (and it has nothing to do with our conversation about their 24-26 seasons).

As I mentioned, I agree with you that the jury is out--I guess I'm just way more optimistic that they'll come back with a favorable Stubbs verdict.

Brutus
04-14-2010, 12:53 PM
hater. Janish was a spring training beast. And he's been strengthening his wrists. (i read that Dusty told him to do that). and he had 21 doubles. 21!

But here we are. and people are projecting an .800 OPS from a guy that BARELY squeaked out a .712 OPS at AAA last year. Seems backwards to me.

But he had a combined 780 the year before in three stops and a 785 the year before that. Clearly he possesses the capability of that.

He's currently at 760 in 225 MLB plate appearances. Considering his career minor league OPS was 765, I would say projecting an 800 from him when it's said and done is not really that much of a reach.

westofyou
04-14-2010, 12:53 PM
Sure. But that's never going to happen. Juan Castro was a better hitter than Paul Janish and I say that without a bit of my tongue in my cheek.

You mean the NL Champion Phillies lead off guy?

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/boxscore?gid=300412122

And they say Charlie Manual is a hitting coach!

pedro
04-14-2010, 01:01 PM
hater. Janish was a spring training beast. And he's been strengthening his wrists. (i read that Dusty told him to do that). and he had 21 doubles. 21!

But here we are. and people are projecting an .800 OPS from a guy that BARELY squeaked out a .712 OPS at AAA last year. Seems backwards to me.

Count me as one who has a hard time believing stubbs will every make contact enough to OPS that high. But I do think he'll hit enough to justify a place in the lineup, just probably not as a leadoff guy.

Spin it however you want, Janish's lifetime numbers in the high minors and major leagues speak for themself.

TRF
04-14-2010, 01:04 PM
Count me as one who has a hard time believing stubbs will every make contact enough to OPS that high. But I do think he'll hit enough to justify a place in the lineup, just probably not as a leadoff guy.

Spin it however you want, Janish's lifetime numbers in the high minors and major leagues speak for themself.

true. my tongue was firmly in cheek.

RichRed
04-14-2010, 01:04 PM
You mean the NL Champion Phillies lead off guy?

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/boxscore?gid=300412122

And they say Charlie Manual is a hitting coach!

*forehead smack*

Castro leading off for one team and Willy T. batting 2nd for the other. I'm speechless. I am without speech.

pedro
04-14-2010, 01:08 PM
true. my tongue was firmly in cheek.

Duly noted.

westofyou
04-14-2010, 01:12 PM
*forehead smack*

Castro leading off for one team and Willy T. batting 2nd for the other. I'm speechless. I am without speech.

Of course from what I've read on RZ the Reds have the only manager in MLB who doesn't follow the oracle of OB%.

Crazy isn't it?

dougdirt
04-14-2010, 01:15 PM
Of course from what I've read on RZ the Reds have the only manager in MLB who doesn't follow the oracle of OB%.

Crazy isn't it?

It does hurt my head to know that there are multiple managers out there who will do such things. In this day and age, we have proof that shows us its a poor idea.

westofyou
04-14-2010, 01:18 PM
It does hurt my head to know that there are multiple managers out there who will do such things. In this day and age, we have proof that shows us its a poor idea.

Shoot, FC Lane was dealing up proof 95 years ago and yet the wheel still rolls down hill sometimes

RichRed
04-14-2010, 01:42 PM
Of course from what I've read on RZ the Reds have the only manager in MLB who doesn't follow the oracle of OB%.

Crazy isn't it?

I know, Jim Leyland batted Neifi Perez leadoff and there are countless other examples. I don't get nearly as worked up over batting orders as I used to, but I don't take great comfort in the idea that it's ok for Dusty because "everyone else is doing it too."

"If Jim Leyland jumped off a cliff, would you do it too...?"

Chip R
04-14-2010, 01:45 PM
*forehead smack*

Castro leading off for one team and Willy T. batting 2nd for the other. I'm speechless. I am without speech.


He can't talk right now, Cotton.

TheNext44
04-14-2010, 01:50 PM
by the way, that's the line Patterson, Hairston, Freel, Bruce, Dickerson, and Hopper put up in CF two years ago where everyone and their mother wanted the Reds to upgrade, with good defense too.

I think people just wanted to get rid of Patterson who was responsible for these numbers:

.238 .344 .582 .

If Stubbs puts up those numbers, no amount of defense could justify him starting and he would be a failure as a pick.

TheNext44
04-14-2010, 01:54 PM
You mean the NL Champion Phillies lead off guy?

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/boxscore?gid=300412122

And they say Charlie Manual is a hitting coach!

Hey, the team scored 7 runs that game. Great call by Manual! :D

membengal
04-14-2010, 01:54 PM
He can't talk right now, Cotton.

Heh.

nate
04-14-2010, 02:04 PM
I think people just wanted to get rid of Patterson who was responsible for these numbers:

.238 .344 .582 .

If Stubbs puts up those numbers, no amount of defense could justify him starting and he would be a failure as a pick.

One could look at those and say "Adam Dunn" until they realize that's OBP/SLG/OPS instead of BA/OBP/SLG.

Yikes

:cool:

bucksfan2
04-14-2010, 02:28 PM
One could look at those and say "Adam Dunn" until they realize that's OBP/SLG/OPS instead of BA/OBP/SLG.

Yikes

:cool:

Yea same here. I thought Patterson was awful but those numbers looked pretty good.

TRF
04-14-2010, 02:42 PM
One could look at those and say "Adam Dunn" until they realize that's OBP/SLG/OPS instead of BA/OBP/SLG.

Yikes

:cool:

That's a low OBP for Dunn :)

Raisor
04-14-2010, 02:59 PM
I think people just wanted to get rid of Patterson who was responsible for these numbers:

..

I know people did. I also know there were people that were more worried about how the CF unit did as a whole, since I was one of those people.

Sea Ray
04-14-2010, 03:29 PM
Here are Cameron's age 24-26 seasons

.259/.356/.433 OPS .789
.210/.285/.336 OPS .621
.256/.359/.438 OPS .825

I agree with TRF that the jury is still out, but these numbers look like a reasonable bar to set for Stubbs. I could even see him pulling an age-25 slump to .621 this year (like Cameron) and then finding his feet during his age-26 season in 2011. I suppose then we'd have a year of TRF saying "I told you so"... and then a decade or so for him to eat crow. :)

I don't get the math here. How does .359 and .438 add up to an OPS of over .800?

RedEye
04-14-2010, 03:38 PM
I don't get the math here. How does .359 and .438 add up to an OPS of over .800?

My bad. According to Baseball Reference (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/camermi01.shtml), Cameron's age-26 season (his memorable 1999 with the Reds) should be the following line:

.256/.357/.469 for an .825 OPS

I miscopied it the first time.

TRF
04-14-2010, 03:51 PM
The thing Stubbs has going for him, as woy points out, is now that we are 4 years removed from his bonus, he's cheap. like a penny stock.

But he K's like Dunn or Reynolds minus the power. That means fewer unintentional-IBB's Pitchers don't have to be careful when they know he more than likely won't do damage. If he has to be in the lineup, lower in the order is better. Like 7th-8th

Brutus
04-14-2010, 04:00 PM
The thing Stubbs has going for him, as woy points out, is now that we are 4 years removed from his bonus, he's cheap. like a penny stock.

But he K's like Dunn or Reynolds minus the power. That means fewer unintentional-IBB's Pitchers don't have to be careful when they know he more than likely won't do damage. If he has to be in the lineup, lower in the order is better. Like 7th-8th

Stubbs struck out in 23.9% of his minor league plate appearances. Dunn has struck out in approximately 27% in the majors with Reynolds nearly 34%. That's still a fairly significant difference.

He needs to cut down on the K's, no question. But he's not quite in that territory.

TRF
04-14-2010, 04:10 PM
Stubbs struck out in 23.9% of his minor league plate appearances. Dunn has struck out in approximately 27% in the majors with Reynolds nearly 34%. That's still a fairly significant difference.

He needs to cut down on the K's, no question. But he's not quite in that territory.

And what was their minor league percentages?

Dunn's was 18%

Reynolds was 23%

dougdirt
04-14-2010, 04:21 PM
And what was their minor league percentages?

Dunn's was 18%

Reynolds was 23%

Not sure what caused Reynolds to jump so much, but with Dunn I think it was simple.... minor leaguers didn't have the stuff or control to exploit such a large strikezone given his height, while major leaguers do.

Side note that has nothing to do with this quote.... my plans for tonight and tomorrow if it takes that long, is to break down Stubbs with all available PFX data. I have a few theories on him and what he can and can't hit. I want to test out my theories. I will share it in a few days when I am done.

RedsManRick
04-14-2010, 06:28 PM
Not sure what caused Reynolds to jump so much, but with Dunn I think it was simple.... minor leaguers didn't have the stuff or control to exploit such a large strikezone given his height, while major leaguers do.

I'd call this the reverse Belilse effect. In a pitcher-batter match up, the batter only needs 1 good pitch to hit. Conversely, a pitcher needs to avoid making any mistakes.

From the hitters perspective, even if a guy has big holes in his swing or poor plate discipline, he's much less likely to acquire 3 strikes before getting that 1 mistake pitch he can crush. In the majors, he's going to have many more PA where he never gets that mistake pitch.

From the pitchers perspective, even if he makes frequent mistake pitches, he's more likely to get away with it and strike the hitter out, avoid the walk, what have you. But if he throws too many meatballs in the majors, he's going to get killed -- nearly every major league hitter can crush a mistake.

I like to think of it as the Matt Belisle effect.

dougdirt
04-16-2010, 11:38 AM
Here is every swing and miss that Drew Stubbs has had in his major league career that was caught by Pitch F/X (every now and again a few pitches don't register)against RHP plotted against his strikezone and broken down by pitch.
http://redsminorleagues.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/stubbsrhpswingmiss.gif

Now clearly this chart alone doesn't tell us much because it doesn't tell us how many of each he actually swung at. So here are the numbers:



Pitch Swing Miss Miss%
CH 25 9 36.0%
CU 17 5 29.4%
FB 180 32 17.8%
SL 74 23 31.1%


Now my initial thought was if you throw Stubbs a slider in the bottom of the zone, its as good as a strike because he can't hit it and he can't lay off of it. That looks to be pretty correct. However he also struggles to make contact with the change up and curveball as well, he just doesn't see nearly as many of those two pitches as he does the slider.

The one thing that I noticed with Stubbs in the minors, was that at times he seemed to be taking good pitches simply for the sake of taking pitches. I always argued that it was a bad thing for him to do because of his inability to make contact at a high rate, so he should always swing at good pitches. Given how often he puts the fastball in play, I think it would greatly benefit him to move him down in the lineup so he doesn't feel the need to 'take pitches' as the leadoff hitter and give him a better chance of not falling behind in the count so much, and thus getting more offspeed pitches thrown to him. Here is a chart of the fastballs that he has taken in his career against the fastballs he has gotten hits on in or close to the strikezone.

http://redsminorleagues.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/stubbsfb.gif

By my count, he took 32 fastballs within his 'hot zone'. We know that when he swings, he puts a fastball in play 83% of the time. Perhaps it would be much better for Stubbs to be a little more aggressive early in the count rather than consistently taking a first pitch fastball down the middle because he is expected to do so.

Homer Bailey
04-16-2010, 11:44 AM
Good stuff Doug thanks for posting.

What's interesting to me is that his o-contact % has dropped considerably (from 49% to 23%) since last year (SSS obviously). I think if we see him start to put more balls in play, even if they are outside the zone, we will see him grind out more infield singles, and get an occasional bloop to fall, which will help his OBP considerably.

RichRed
04-16-2010, 12:55 PM
I think if we see him start to put more balls in play, even if they are outside the zone, we will see him grind out more infield singles, and get an occasional bloop to fall, which will help his OBP considerably.

I think that's a good point because usually, you don't want a guy expanding his strike zone, but with Stubbs' speed, he's a threat to reach base on any ground ball. It also puts pressure on the fielder to make a perfect throw, which could result in Stubbs standing on 2nd base more often.

TRF
04-16-2010, 02:27 PM
I think that's a good point because usually, you don't want a guy expanding his strike zone, but with Stubbs' speed, he's a threat to reach base on any ground ball. It also puts pressure on the fielder to make a perfect throw, which could result in Stubbs standing on 2nd base more often.

I'd rather he hit doubles. Hoping for errors seems to be not the best way to construct an offense.

doug has indirectly made my point. It isn't his tools i object to. its his development as a hitter. He hasn't had the time to properly learn since Low A. three different hitting coaches in 2008, in a short span, emphasizing different things (ok that's a guess, but unless they were clones, they had their own spin) Some players need consistency, and maybe Stubbs is one of those players.

RichRed
04-16-2010, 02:39 PM
I'd rather he hit doubles. Hoping for errors seems to be not the best way to construct an offense.


Of course. In no way would I want to construct an entire offense around "expanding the zone" and I don't want Stubbs just hacking away at everything either, but I'd want to look for some way to exploit his speed. I'm no hitting coach though so I don't know how you go about it.

TRF
04-16-2010, 02:48 PM
Of course. In no way would I want to construct an entire offense around "expanding the zone" and I don't want Stubbs just hacking away at everything either, but I'd want to look for some way to exploit his speed. I'm no hitting coach though so I don't know how you go about it.

How about developing him properly in the first place. Teaching a guy like Stubbs to hit like Juan Pierre is just plain stupid. And yet, thats exactly what the Reds seem to want to do. Let his speed be a by product, an enhancement to his game, not the focus. He's just not a leadoff hitter IMO. But...

He potentially has power. I don't mean run into a laser straight fastball, but potentially actual power. maybe even 30+ HR power. And that is how he should have been developed. He should be Grady Sizemore. But he's being talked about like he is Juan Pierre.

dougdirt
04-16-2010, 05:00 PM
Of course. In no way would I want to construct an entire offense around "expanding the zone" and I don't want Stubbs just hacking away at everything either, but I'd want to look for some way to exploit his speed. I'm no hitting coach though so I don't know how you go about it.

Stubbs doesn't need to expand the zone, just needs to swing at more strikes. Right now he is taking a lot of strikes that he could be swinging at. Whether its because he is 'the leadoff guy' and that is his 'job' or whatever else, someone should talk to him about swinging more at strikes. As I showed earlier in the post, he is looking at a ton of fastballs in his 'hot zone' that he simply should never take.

11larkin11
04-16-2010, 05:04 PM
Stubbs doesn't need to expand the zone, just needs to swing at more strikes. Right now he is taking a lot of strikes that he could be swinging at. Whether its because he is 'the leadoff guy' and that is his 'job' or whatever else, someone should talk to him about swinging more at strikes. As I showed earlier in the post, he is looking at a ton of fastballs in his 'hot zone' that he simply should never take.

And yet all I've heard for two weeks is how no one on this team is patient besides Votto. Yet it seems to me Votto and Stubbs have been the two most patient jitters, and they're racking up Mark Reynolds K rates. Hmmm interesting

TRF
04-16-2010, 05:11 PM
And yet all I've heard for two weeks is how no one on this team is patient besides Votto. Yet it seems to me Votto and Stubbs have been the two most patient jitters, and they're racking up Mark Reynolds K rates. Hmmm interesting

No, Rolen and Votto are the guys getting all the BB's, in the two very short weeks of the season thus far. How small is the sample? BP has more BB's than Stubbs.

Even I don't think that can last.

fearofpopvol1
04-16-2010, 06:43 PM
Stubbs doesn't need to expand the zone, just needs to swing at more strikes. Right now he is taking a lot of strikes that he could be swinging at. Whether its because he is 'the leadoff guy' and that is his 'job' or whatever else, someone should talk to him about swinging more at strikes. As I showed earlier in the post, he is looking at a ton of fastballs in his 'hot zone' that he simply should never take.

This does not tell the full picture. Stubbs swings and strikeouts at a LOT of bad breaking stuff. From what I've seen, he swings at more bad pitches than he takes good ones.

dougdirt
04-16-2010, 06:48 PM
This does not tell the full picture. Stubbs swings and strikeouts at a LOT of bad breaking stuff. From what I've seen, he swings at more bad pitches than he takes good ones.

He may never see some of those bad ones later in the count if he stopped taking fastballs down broadway, you know, to 'work the count'.

TRF
04-16-2010, 07:48 PM
He may never see some of those bad ones later in the count if he stopped taking fastballs down broadway, you know, to 'work the count'.

And, this is opinion on my part, had he been developed better in the minors, none of this happens.

Brutus
04-16-2010, 07:51 PM
And, this is opinion on my part, had he been developed better in the minors, none of this happens.

Coaches don't swing the bat for you. This isn't a development issue.

fearofpopvol1
04-16-2010, 08:16 PM
He may never see some of those bad ones later in the count if he stopped taking fastballs down broadway, you know, to 'work the count'.

This is a strawman argument. Just because pitchers throw him bad pitches doesn't mean he should swing at them. Pitch recognition is the problem.

reds44
04-16-2010, 10:49 PM
Dickerson eventually has to rewarded for the fact that he continues to hit every chance he gets, right?

He's just better than Stubbs right now.

dougdirt
04-17-2010, 12:57 AM
This is a strawman argument. Just because pitchers throw him bad pitches doesn't mean he should swing at them. Pitch recognition is the problem.

Stubbs isn't having any issues recognizing a fastball, which is the only pitch I have been talking about with him. He hits the fastball often when he swings at it and he hits it well. The problem is, he takes a lot of them for whatever reason (to work the count because he is a lead off hitter, to wait for his pitch - or whatever else) and perhaps if he were more aggressive early in the count on fastballs, which he gets a lot of (as does everyone else in baseball), his numbers would look better because we know Stubbs hits the fastball well when he swings at it.

fearofpopvol1
04-17-2010, 01:51 AM
Stubbs isn't having any issues recognizing a fastball, which is the only pitch I have been talking about with him. He hits the fastball often when he swings at it and he hits it well. The problem is, he takes a lot of them for whatever reason (to work the count because he is a lead off hitter, to wait for his pitch - or whatever else) and perhaps if he were more aggressive early in the count on fastballs, which he gets a lot of (as does everyone else in baseball), his numbers would look better because we know Stubbs hits the fastball well when he swings at it.

That all makes sense. However, it's still no excuse for him to swing at slow breaking pitches way out of the zone. Just because he does take fastballs doesn't mean he should hit those fastballs early in the count. Your essentially saying that because he doesn't swing at early fastballs, pitchers throw him breaking balls causing him to strike out. Shouldn't it be his duty to have pitch recognition and NOT swing at bad pitches?

If he lays off those bad breaking pitches, he's likely to either walk or get another fastball to hit.

RedsManRick
04-17-2010, 11:21 AM
Stubbs isn't having any issues recognizing a fastball, which is the only pitch I have been talking about with him. He hits the fastball often when he swings at it and he hits it well. The problem is, he takes a lot of them for whatever reason (to work the count because he is a lead off hitter, to wait for his pitch - or whatever else) and perhaps if he were more aggressive early in the count on fastballs, which he gets a lot of (as does everyone else in baseball), his numbers would look better because we know Stubbs hits the fastball well when he swings at it.

At least 3 times I've seen Stubbs whiff on a slider in the zone to start a PA. He's not just getting behind by watching fastballs. He's virtually unable to hit any breaking pitches low and/or away in the zone (and even struggles with changeups there) and pitchers have begun to exploit it with regularity. It's up to him to adjust, and I've not seen it yet.

Benihana
04-17-2010, 11:26 AM
I'd give Stubbs through the end of the month to turn it around. Assuming Dickerson keeps performing, you have to start playing him regularly at that point.

Reds have to decide whether they want to contend in the present or be a AAAA team who's purpose is to continue development of their players regardless of their on field performance. Stubbs is old enough that he has to prove he can hit over the Mendoza line in order to earn a spot in the lineup, let alone the leadoff spot. If I were Dickerson, I'd be up in arms about not playing everyday.

Let it be a wakeup call to Jay Bruce and Homer Bailey as well. While I'm as big of an advocate of Bruce as any, and want to see all three guys succeed, I'm getting tired of valuing potential over performance.

Spring~Fields
04-17-2010, 12:48 PM
I'm getting tired of valuing potential over performance.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Be it experienced players or young

membengal
10-01-2010, 06:51 AM
Kind of a fun thread to look back on, given where Drew's year has been. Looking through it, I set the bar for Stubbs at a .700 OPS to keep his job. He's been so much better than I hoped that it is staggering to me. I am guessing he's been better than most of our expectations to a similar degree.

jojo
10-01-2010, 07:22 AM
If the batting glove fits, you must acquit.