Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

[GOYA]

I went for Yorman. Lot's of good choices here but his age and skillset won out. We're going to have some seriously good players not make the top ten.

[mace]

Still not really getting the Alonso love. I can appreciate the merits of a player who's already near-ready, but in Alonso's case there are any number of items that give me pause.

1. He's slow.
2. He's limited positionally.
3. He has a very long swing
4. with a discernible hitch in it.
5. His production in the minors has been somewhat tempered
6. by injury.
And 7. His famous plate discipline, although in an extremely small sample, has not yet shown up at the big-league level.

Also, does it maybe seem slightly significant that, while a couple months older than Francisco, he's slightly behind according to the Reds' schedule (going by such as call-ups and playoff roster)?

Yorman, meanwhile, offers a compelling blend of tools, production, position value and advanced youth. I don't really see the contest.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by mace

Still not really getting the Alonso love. I can appreciate the merits of a player who's already near-ready, but in Alonso's case there are any number of items that give me pause.

1. He's slow.
2. He's limited positionally.
3. He has a very long swing
4. with a discernible hitch in it.
5. His production in the minors has been somewhat tempered
6. by injury.
And 7. His famous plate discipline, although in an extremely small sample, has not yet shown up at the big-league level.

Also, does it maybe seem slightly significant that, while a couple months older than Francisco, he's slightly behind according to the Reds' schedule (going by such as call-ups and playoff roster)?

Yorman, meanwhile, offers a compelling blend of tools, production, position value and advanced youth. I don't really see the contest.

Responses:

1. A ding to his resume, but not a dealbreaker
2. He only needs to stick at one position if he becomes a 900 OPS bat
3. There are a lot of big time Major League hitters with long swings
4. Correctable
5. somewhat tempered...coming off surgery to the wrist
6. Exactly
7. As you said, sample

I think you're letting 29 plate appearances at the Major League level play too heavily in No. 3, No. 4 and No. 7

[camisadelgolf]

Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp

I think you're letting 29 plate appearances at the Major League level play too heavily in No. 3, No. 4 and No. 7

We might as well get used to it; that's how these things go. Just look at how much more optimistic people were about Juan Francisco after September, 2009.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

We might as well get used to it; that's how these things go. Just look at how much more optimistic people were about Juan Francisco after September, 2009.

True. There's no doubt these September call-ups are effecting the votes for better or worse. I liked your Danny Dorn comments. Frankly, what you say about him is true. If he goes 4-for-9, everyone would be calling for him to start LF. If he goes 2-15, we may hear nary a peep about him.

[Homer Bailey]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

It was the Reds Bill Bavasi.

Why would you throw cold water on my parade?

[mace]

It's one thing to base your opinions on September numbers, which can obviously be misleading. It's another to base them on September observations. On that score, it's certainly conceivable that a young player may deviate from his normal MO in a quick intro to the big leagues, and that could easily account for Alonso's comparative lack of patience with the Reds. But a swing is a swing, isn't it? I'm not so sure that a pronounced hitch is so casually correctable.

But wait a minute. This appraisal of Alonso was not based on anything that happened in September (other than point 7, of course). What his September did was fall short of alleviating these concerns.

As for points 1 and 2: Yes, those drawbacks can be absorbed if a guy is a major producer with the bat--a Prince Fielder type, for instance. But that's what I haven't yet seen out of Alonso.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by mace

It's one thing to base your opinions on September numbers, which can obviously be misleading. It's another to base them on September observations. On that score, it's certainly conceivable that a young player may deviate from his normal MO in a quick intro to the big leagues, and that could easily account for Alonso's comparative lack of patience with the Reds. But a swing is a swing, isn't it? I'm not so sure that a pronounced hitch is so casually correctable.

But wait a minute. This appraisal of Alonso was not based on anything that happened in September (other than point 7, of course). What his September did was fall short of alleviating these concerns.

As for points 1 and 2: Yes, those drawbacks can be absorbed if a guy is a major producer with the bat--a Prince Fielder type, for instance. But that's what I haven't yet seen out of Alonso.

Its generally a bad idea to use observations of a guy as a pinch hitter every other game who is used to playing every day IMO.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by mace

It's one thing to base your opinions on September numbers, which can obviously be misleading. It's another to base them on September observations. On that score, it's certainly conceivable that a young player may deviate from his normal MO in a quick intro to the big leagues, and that could easily account for Alonso's comparative lack of patience with the Reds. But a swing is a swing, isn't it? I'm not so sure that a pronounced hitch is so casually correctable.

But wait a minute. This appraisal of Alonso was not based on anything that happened in September (other than point 7, of course). What his September did was fall short of alleviating these concerns.

As for points 1 and 2: Yes, those drawbacks can be absorbed if a guy is a major producer with the bat--a Prince Fielder type, for instance. But that's what I haven't yet seen out of Alonso.

Did those observations take into account you had a kid in his first 20 at-bats in the Major Leagues trying to overswing and make an impact in a team's playoff chase? As Doug said, getting one at-bat a game, in the midst of a playoff race no less, might cause a young player to get a little over anxious in his first several Major League appearances. I'm not sure that limited sample tells us virtually anything, even physically.

A hitch is always correctable. Even a slight adjustment of the hands an inch higher or lower can make all the difference in the world in a player's swing. And that's assuming there is a "hitch" more than perhaps just an observation that Alonso was swinging too anxiously.

I think it's fair to say the jury is still out on Alonso, but he's shown glimpses this year, especially the second half of the schedule, of being able to hit. Next year will probably be a lot more telling, though it might not be in the Reds' system.

[mace]

For what it's worth, Chris Welsh said the same thing. (Or was it Brantley? Sorry, I'm not sure.) Said he'd have to cut down his swing if he's going to hit major-league pitching.

Maybe he did use a different swing, but if so, I never saw the real one. So I certainly can't evaluate him on something I can only imagine. Meanwhile, the hitch was not an insignificant little thing. At the start of each swing, he'd pull the bat straight up in a way that made me think he'd never get around on the ball and would never be able to adjust to off-speed pitches. To his credit, he did get around on a few. But, to me, it was a simple case that his swing did not inspire confidence. That said, I'm not a hitting coach, so my eyes certainly aren't definitive. But, watching him hit, I simply didn't have the impression that he is on track to be a difference-making first baseman in the National League.

Look, I'm not dissing the guy as a prospect. By most informed accounts, he's an impressive hitter. It's just that, by following his minor-league performance and watching him for a short while in the majors, I have enough reservations that I can't put him ahead of a lights-out prospect like Yorman Rodriguez. Or, for that matter, Hamilton or Cozart or even Francisco.

[Kc61]

The issue with Alonso as a first baseman is that he had 15 home runs in 507 minor league official at bats this year. And a similar record previously.

Perhaps it's injury related. But it raises the question if he will hit for enough power for a first sacker.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Kc61

The issue with Alonso as a first baseman is that he has 15 home runs in 507 minor league official at bats.

Perhaps it's injury related. But it raises the question if he will hit for enough power for a first sacker.

He slugged .591 in 240 plate appearances in the second part of the AAA season in a park that depresses power. I don't expect him to do that in the majors, because hardly anyone slugs .590 in the majors, but I wouldn't be concerned with his power given that for a year he was coming back from a hamate injury.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

He slugged .591 in 240 plate appearances in the second part of the AAA season in a park that depresses power. I don't expect him to do that in the majors, because hardly anyone slugs .590 in the majors, but I wouldn't be concerned with his power given that for a year he was coming back from a hamate injury.

It could be the injury, I said that.

But from what I've seen, and following his record, he seems like a singles and doubles hitter without speed.

Good plate discipline. Uses the whole ballpark. But hasn't shown home run power.

I'd like to see the home run power before agreeing that he's a top first base prospect.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Kc61

It could be the injury, I said that.

But from what I've seen, and following his record, he seems like a singles and doubles hitter without speed.

Good plate discipline. Uses the whole ballpark. But hasn't shown home run power.

I'd like to see the home run power before agreeing that he's a top first base prospect.

Again though, half of his minor league career has been spent with that injury that you acknowledge could be an issue. During the futures game this year, among all of the elite prospects there, his power stood out to the scouts. I really wouldn't worry about it.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by mace

For what it's worth, Chris Welsh said the same thing. (Or was it Brantley? Sorry, I'm not sure.) Said he'd have to cut down his swing if he's going to hit major-league pitching.

Maybe he did use a different swing, but if so, I never saw the real one. So I certainly can't evaluate him on something I can only imagine. Meanwhile, the hitch was not an insignificant little thing. At the start of each swing, he'd pull the bat straight up in a way that made me think he'd never get around on the ball and would never be able to adjust to off-speed pitches. To his credit, he did get around on a few. But, to me, it was a simple case that his swing did not inspire confidence. That said, I'm not a hitting coach, so my eyes certainly aren't definitive. But, watching him hit, I simply didn't have the impression that he is on track to be a difference-making first baseman in the National League.

Look, I'm not dissing the guy as a prospect. By most informed accounts, he's an impressive hitter. It's just that, by following his minor-league performance and watching him for a short while in the majors, I have enough reservations that I can't put him ahead of a lights-out prospect like Yorman Rodriguez. Or, for that matter, Hamilton or Cozart or even Francisco.

A hitch isn't always a bad thing. While it's something scouts will write up in their reports, and it's something analysts will spend countless times criticizing, there are guys that can pull it off successfully if they have the necessary bat speed. A hitch is usually a timing mechanism, and while it can most definitely expose a hitter to greater velocity, or even cause more weak pop-ups, it also generates more power in many cases.

I wouldn't spend too much time worrying about a hitch. Some guys needed that kind of thing adjusted. Others can pull it off. Barry Bonds had a hitch and look how good (steroids or not) he was. It might not be insignificant, but it also might be nothing at all.