Stubbs Promoted to AAA!!!

[podgejeff_]

Yeah, I just noticed that. Even so, I didn't think he'd go off that well in his first AAA game.

[TRF]

You are absolutely cherry picking stats.

You removed his best game, then you immediately followed up by minimizing his final 19 at bats in Chattanooga. You claim he had a hot start in April and then sucked for 2 1/2 months, yet his numbers in Chattanooga certainly didn't suck .... unless you cherry pick all of his bad games and throw the good ones out.

If you are going to eliminate his best games, you have to eliminate his worst games too. If you eliminate all of Albert Pujols multi-hit games from his record and keep all the goose-eggs, he's going to look like a bum too.

Nope. Not cherry picking at all. I didn't eliminate his best games, just his first one. I looked at his largest body of work in AA minus his first game. His stats after his first game discounted what he did. I didn't pick random games or weeks of what he did at A+, it was 200 straight AB's of .630 OPS ball. I doubt Pujols ever had 2 weeks like that much less 2.5 months.

As for his numbers at Chatt, he gets an incomplete. A hot start followed by him not hitting until his last 7 games before the bump. Did he make an adjustment? Was it just a hot week? His development has been skewed by his draft slot. He's very similar to Dickerson except Dickerson had to prove himself at every level, and Stubbs has yet to prove he can sustain success at ANY level.

[kpresidente]

He's very similar to Dickerson except Dickerson had to prove himself at every level, and Stubbs has yet to prove he can sustain success at ANY level.

Ironically, I'm sitting here defending Stubbs and I see him as very similar to Dickerson as well, which is why I can't seem to see why so many are hailing Dickerson as our next starting CF, but a so down on Stubbs. The truth about both is that they're mediocre propects.

There is a rush job going on with Stubbs that Dickerson didn't get, but my guess is that it has a lot to do with the needs of the big-league club. CF wasn't totally a void a couple seasons ago when Dickerson was making his way through the lower minors.

[kaldaniels]

Nope. Not cherry picking at all. I didn't eliminate his best games, just his first one. I looked at his largest body of work in AA minus his first game. His stats after his first game discounted what he did. I didn't pick random games or weeks of what he did at A+, it was 200 straight AB's of .630 OPS ball. I doubt Pujols ever had 2 weeks like that much less 2.5 months.

As for his numbers at Chatt, he gets an incomplete. A hot start followed by him not hitting until his last 7 games before the bump. Did he make an adjustment? Was it just a hot week? His development has been skewed by his draft slot. He's very similar to Dickerson except Dickerson had to prove himself at every level, and Stubbs has yet to prove he can sustain success at ANY level.

Why would you discount his first game just on the basis that it was the first game.

Answer this...if Stubbs had gone 0-2 with a walk his first game would you still remove it.

Should we remove the first game from every players statline after they advance a level? I don't mind analysis and explanations to show your point of view...but it comes off kinda comical that your explanation is that you are deleting his first game just because it was the first game. Face it, if he went 0-2 you would include that in your numbers.

Just because Drew Stubbs best (or one of the best) games he had came in game #1 at Chatt...that does mean it should be stricken from the record and erased from his total stat line there. Johnny Cueto's major league debut still should count in his stat line, right?

[dougdirt]

So now we are trying to compare Drew Stubbs to Pujols? Whenever you compare anything anyone does to Pujols, whoever else loses. Thats a silly argument. Stubbs is in the minor leagues for a reason. To refine and develop his game. He is still learning to hone in his skills.

As long as he just keeps doing what he has been, he will be fine. Walks, line drives and his current strikeout rate will be fine. Just keep doing what you are doing Drew, it will work.

[11larkin11]

So now we are trying to compare Drew Stubbs to Pujols? Whenever you compare anything anyone does to Pujols, whoever else loses. Thats a silly argument. Stubbs is in the minor leagues for a reason. To refine and develop his game. He is still learning to hone in his skills.

As long as he just keeps doing what he has been, he will be fine. Walks, line drives and his current strikeout rate will be fine. Just keep doing what you are doing Drew, it will work.

I disagree Doug. Ryan Howard is MUCH better at striking out than Pujols

[TRF]

Why would you discount his first game just on the basis that it was the first game.

Answer this...if Stubbs had gone 0-2 with a walk his first game would you still remove it.

Should we remove the first game from every players statline after they advance a level? I don't mind analysis and explanations to show your point of view...but it comes off kinda comical that your explanation is that you are deleting his first game just because it was the first game. Face it, if he went 0-2 you would include that in your numbers.

Just because Drew Stubbs best (or one of the best) games he had came in game #1 at Chatt...that does mean it should be stricken from the record and erased from his total stat line there. Johnny Cueto's major league debut still should count in his stat line, right?

I might not have. I just think he's a meh prospect that is all glove but no bat. I said I thought he'd start off hot at AAA, like I said he'd start off hot at AA. I was right in that's what happened. But pitchers seem to adjust real quick to Stubbs game, and he's slower to make his follow up adjustment. It's happened at two levels this year, and because he hasn't had ANY SUSTAINED SUCCESS at any level, it's hard to project him as a future major leaguer. But if this year is any indication, when he doesn't post good SLG numbers, his OBP suffers greatly. That turns him into a CF version of Anderson Machado.

What the Reds need is a little better version of Dickerson, and younger. Right now that just isn't what I am seeing from Drew Stubbs.

So now we are trying to compare Drew Stubbs to Pujols? Whenever you compare anything anyone does to Pujols, whoever else loses. Thats a silly argument. Stubbs is in the minor leagues for a reason. To refine and develop his game. He is still learning to hone in his skills.

As long as he just keeps doing what he has been, he will be fine. Walks, line drives and his current strikeout rate will be fine. Just keep doing what you are doing Drew, it will work.

I didn't make the comp, just responded to it. Comparing anyone to Pujols is silly.

[M2]

I'm glad Stubbs is in AAA and I hope he has a hot finish to the season, maybe even a cup of coffee in the majors in September.

Then trade him.

[kpresidente]

I'm glad Stubbs is in AAA and I hope he has a hot finish to the season, maybe even a cup of coffee in the majors in September.

Then trade him.

I wonder if Stubbs has much value. Major-league scouts and GMs don't follow BAs top-100 list. I remember last year when WK was looking for a starter, a lot more teams wanted Cueto than Bailey. They knew the deal with Homer, even though he had all the media hype. I don't think anybody's going to be fooled by Stubbs.

[dougdirt]

I wonder if Stubbs has much value. Major-league scouts and GMs don't follow BAs top-100 list. I remember last year when WK was looking for a starter, a lot more teams wanted Cueto than Bailey. They knew the deal with Homer, even though he had all the media hype. I don't think anybody's going to be fooled by Stubbs.

Hate to break it to you.... but the information you get from BA, they get from MLB employeed scouts. The guys that work there aren't scouts, they just talk to scouts. So in a sense, MLB scouts are the ones who help make up the BA top 100.

[Steve4192]

I wonder if Stubbs has much value. Major-league scouts and GMs don't follow BAs top-100 list.

I'm pretty sure Jim Bowden uses the BBA top 100 as his gospel. He snaps up every washout who has ever appeared on that list.

[traderumor]

While it was his best game, it wasn't a random game. It was his FIRST game in AA. his next 89 AB's just weren't all that good. Especially his next 70. He did have a good week just before the bump to AAA.

I'm not cherry picking his stats. He had a hot start in early April, followed by 2 1/2 months of pure suckitude. I don't care what his LD% is. a .630 OPS over 2 months is awful.

Gee, but if they left him down there two more days, he could have had a 6 for 8 with 2 homers and three doubles and bumped it right back up.

This just isn't a valid way to analyze statistical information in this game.

[TRF]

or gone 0-8.

Thing is, Stubbs has a pretty recognizable pattern right now. Hot for a short time, then dominated for a considerable length of time. He never re-adjusted in the FSL. He might have been doing that in AA, but we'll never know. Guess we'll see how he handles AAA.

[reds44]

Stubbs will 24 in less than two months, so he's actually closer to 24 than 23 (if we are going to get picky).

I agree with Oxilon. Nothing wrong with challenging a high pick out of college, especially a non-pitcher.

So he's 23.

[kpresidente]

Hate to break it to you.... but the information you get from BA, they get from MLB employeed scouts. The guys that work there aren't scouts, they just talk to scouts. So in a sense, MLB scouts are the ones who help make up the BA top 100.

You're not going to convince me that media hype doesn't influence their lists. What about my example of Bailey and Cueto last year? BA had Bailey top-10, but it didn't take long for me to realize everybody wanted Cueto. I'm sure the scouts feed them a bone from time to time, but I don't believe for a second that what they put out is a mirror reflection of the thinking that's going on within the organizations.