I fully expect that given more MLB PAs, Stubbs' OBP will improve (hopefully well North of .350), while his SLG will regress to probably the .375 range. It's also not out of the realm of possibility that his OBP will be better than his SLG.Originally Posted by Homer Bailey
The best thing about Drew Stubbs? He's not Willy Taveras.
Let me spell it out for very simply, since you did not understand.Pretty radical argument to say that he was bored in the minors and sucked something awful offensively as a whole(his OBP was respectable, but that's it), so let's promote him to the MLB club.
I am not saying that these intangible factors were the case. Only that they could have contributed.
I am also saying that if such factors were at play, it stands to reason that a more aggressive promotion schedule may have worked well. Certainly his performance in the majors so far indicates he was ready, and I am certain you would have contended he was not.
The problem with your analysis is that it is based on the assumption that Stubbs' development has been more or less static, going all the way back through his minor league career. It hasn't been -- he's been coached to do different things (choke up, hit the ball on the ground more, etc.). It's a learning process, because the competition gets tougher each year, too.
To say that Stubbs "is what he is" fails to identify *when he became that* -- because you can't. He is still a work in progress, which should be crystal clear to you and other detractors, especially, since he is doing things now that you never would have thought possible.
Last edited by lollipopcurve; 09-18-2009 at 11:44 AM.
One has to explain to me why, if minor league numbers (begging the question of "which numbers?") are reliable predictors of major league success why each and every team isn't just crunching the numbers for minor leaguers and picking the top performers by position? I say that because the entire presupposition of the "Stubbs Bust" framework is his minor league track record.
That's a good question. The answer just might be they have the ability to do so better than he does. He started hot at Sarasota, then pitchers figured him out. Started hot at Chatt, same thing. Stayed hot at Louisville last year, but was ice cold in the AFL.How is it that these pitchers, regardless of level, are able to adjust, yet Stubbs is considered to be in some kind of static state where he never changes?
And his offense, minus the SB's which are impressive didn't really show up. He seems to be a streaky hitter, prone to prolonged slumps. doug mentioned he isn't aggressive enough on pitches in the zone, and quite frankly I don't think he's got the power to force pitchers to pitch around him. MLB staffs will get a solid book on him, and unless he learns to adjust accordingly, something he hasn't really demonstrated in the past, they will OWN him. just like the pitcher at High A did. And that was just over a year ago.
Dubito Ergo Cogito Ergo Sum.
Let's not forget that Stubbs hasn't made a great adjustment to using a wooden bat.
That's a pretty big component of Stubbs' lack of stick.
For the Reds the problem is not his OPS(you can survive with a good defensive CF giving 750 OPS). The problem is that he is likely another lower in the order hitter, which pretty much describes every Red not named Votto.
The Reds need guys that can get on base at a decent clip.
It's possible that Stubbs could be one of these guys.
Right now, unfortunately, he's not.
I specualted before he came up that he was likely to boost his SLG% before he got a decent OBP. His K rate combined with lack of power in the minors made it pretty easy to conclude the BBs were going to dry up. Only if he keeps slugging will the OBP possibly start to rise.
I think this is pretty true. Right now what Stubbs will end up being could probably be captured by anything between Endy Chavez and Mike Cameron from a player worth standpoint.
It's futile to debate which pole he'll end up being closer too IMHO. For the answer, it's just going to take time (more data). Personally, I think there is a more compelling case that he'll be closer to Chavez than Cameron but it's not like either side can talk in absolutes on this issue.
Last edited by jojo; 09-18-2009 at 01:19 PM.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
I agree with this -- lotta ways he could go. That's why you stick him out there and get him ABs. Better chance he hits the higher mark, and better chance you make the right call as roster decisions arise.Right now what Stubbs will end up being could probably be captured by anything between Endy Chavez and Mike Cameron from a player worth standpoint.
the problem is that it is hard to see how he turns into Cameron. He has never shown the pop that Cameron did at a much younger age in the minors.
True. I think it's generally acknowledged here that Cameron is the best case scenario, not the most likely one.the problem is that it is hard to see how he turns into Cameron. He has never shown the pop that Cameron did at a much younger age in the minors.
Almost regardless of the pitching, it's easier to hit a homerun in GABP than most of the leagues Drew Stubbs has played in. His power might not be as fluky as one would think.
That doesn't mean he doesn't have that kind of pop though, something that some continue to overlook. His scouting reports have had his raw power at 65 since being drafted. 65 is generally thought of as 30 HR in the major leagues. Scouts have seen him as having the potential to be Mike Cameron in the power department since the day he was drafted. Sometimes it takes guys longer to hone in their 'tools' and turn them into skills. Maybe Drew has or hasn't done that yet, but we are certainly seeing a glimpse that he certainly could.
As for TRF's 'he starts hot everywhere then gets cold because people figure him out'.... you really need to get over that. Stubbs minor league OPS by month looks like a roller coaster. In the FSL his two highest OPS months were the first and the last. In AA, he had a better August than he had a July. Your argument just doesn't hold water.
If the Reds were smart (little indication of that) they would project Stubbs to what is most likely based on a combination of things ( what he did in the minors being the most important). If he gives your more than that then it is a bonus but at least you can do a better job of forecasting the likes of 2010 and 2011 and also determining what his proper role is.
In the end, Stubbs will be what he turns out to be. Successful teams do a better job of figuring who players really are than the teams that are the perennial losers.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
