Will Drew Stubbs be a bust?

[SMcGavin]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

Just b/c you don't agree with the logic doesn't make it poor logic.

No, I'd have to say it's still poor logic. If you want to say "If Stubbs isn't ready by March 2009, he would have to do a lot after that for him not to be a bust" (basically what edabbs said), that's a stance you can defend. Saying the rest of his career is irrelevant if he's not ready by March 2009 is poor logic. The Reds have a big need for a right handed, good fielding CF. If Stubbs gives them that with league average offensive production from 2010-2013 (or even 2011-2013), he is most definitely not a bust. He'd likely save the organization tens of millions of dollars that they would have spent getting that CF from out of the organization.

You can think Stubbs is a long shot at this point and I don't disagree with you there, but putting out an ultimatum like "everything is irrelevant if he's not ready by March 2009" doesn't make a lot of sense.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by SMcGavin

The Reds have a big need for a right handed, good fielding CF. If Stubbs gives them that with league average offensive production from 2010-2013 (or even 2011-2013), he is most definitely not a bust. He'd likely save the organization tens of millions of dollars that they would have spent getting that CF from out of the organization.

He would definitely be a bust in this scenario, if he is merely league average.

1) Way, way late to the show. If you think he saved them millions by producing in those years, fine. But he also cost them millions and some wins by toiling in the minors for so long.

2) Top 10 picks should not spend that much time in the minors. He would have to be a top tier CFer in those years for him to reverse the damage of his late arrival.

[dougdirt]

All I am saying is that right now, the Reds have a guy that Baseball America just listed as a Top 100 (albeit exactly at 100) prospect and some on here are referring to the guy as a bust. Something isn't right there.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

All I am saying is that right now, the Reds have a guy that Baseball America just listed as a Top 100 (albeit exactly at 100) prospect and some on here are referring to the guy as a bust. Something isn't right there.

Doug, let's not make this so black and white. Like you, I think bust is a backwards looking label that can only be applied at the end of his career. However, denying that Drew Stubbs has been a disappoint relative to what most people have expected from him is just ignorant.

I simply don't believe that you take a 21 year old Big 12 position player in the first round and then expect him to take 5+ years to reach the majors.

No, he's not a bust. By definition, in my mind, it's not possible for him to be a bust yet. But there's no harm in admitting that he's not performed as well as the Reds had hoped/expected he would when he was drafted. Heck, let's go back to the development path you expected from him -- did you have him in high A in 2008, without having any significant success in 2006 or 2007?

Just look at the guys drafted around him. Sure, they all have different trajectories -- but most have had more success and are more highly rated. This isn't determinism. Stubbs isn't yet a bust and could very well become a great major leaguer. But look at his corhort and just try to make the case that he's not among the least promising given his age, level of success, and rankings of two organizations which take very different approaches. Of the guys drafted around him (6th to 17th), the 3 guys who are ranked lower than him, are 18, 19, and 19 respectively. Everybody else is ranked more highly, or is ineligible for ranking due to their success. The 4 guys who are as old or older than him have all had more success and are more highly ranked.

Pick 	Name		Pos	Age 	Highest Level	BP100 	BA100 
6	Andrew Miller	SP	22	MLB		XX	XX		
7	Clayton Kershaw	SP	19	AA		5	7
8	Drew Stubbs	OF	22	A		--	100
9	Billy Rowell 	3B	18	A		--	--
10	Tim Lincecum	SP	23	MLB		XX	XX	
11	Max Scherzer	SP	22	AAA		90	66
12	Kasey Kiker	P	19	A		--	--
13	Tyler Colvin	OF	21	AA		--	75
14	Travis Snider	OF	19	A		7	11	
15	Chris Marrero	1B/OF	18	A+		28	27
16	Jeremy Jeffress	SP	19	A		--	--	
17	Matt Antonelli	3B	22	AA		39	50

Let's not let this discussion get lost in the semantics. It is fully undeniable that Stubbs, as of today, has not lived up to his draft slot like his peers have. He might pan out, he might not. The potential is still there and I don't think many people on this board, even the biggest doubters deny the possibility Stubbs lives up to his potential. Until he clearly fails, he's not a bust in my book. But it's not looking good so far and I simply cannot see how you continue to deny that.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

However, denying that Drew Stubbs has been a disappoint relative to what most people have expected from him is just ignorant.

I have not said anything like that.

I simply don't believe that you take a 21 year old Big 12 position player in the first round and then expect him to take 5+ years to reach the majors.

Neither do I. I give him 3 years. Mid to late 2009 MLB debut. I put him on pace for Sarasota/Chattanooga this year and starting 2009 in Louisville.

Heck, let's go back to the development path you expected from him -- did you have him in high A in 2008, without having any significant success in 2006 or 2007?

I didn't expect him to play hurt for two straight years either... but I figured him for Dayton/Sarasota in 2007 and Chattanooga/Louisville in 2008. He is half a season off of what I figured he would be. That said, 250 plate appearances for a prospect is a nice chunk of time for 'success'.

Let's not let this discussion get lost in the semantics. It is fully undeniable that Stubbs, as of today, has not lived up to his draft slot like his peers have. He might pan out, he might not. The potential is still there and I don't think many people on this board, even the biggest doubters deny the possibility Stubbs lives up to his potential. Until he clearly fails, he's not a bust in my book. But it's not looking good so far and I simply cannot see how you continue to deny that.

I am not worried about his peers at this point. They have nothing to do with Drew Stubbs being a bust or not (and I know where you stand on that topic).

In this thread, I have said that Stubbs has been somewhat disappointing in general terms. I have also said that has little to do with his being a bust or not to this point.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

Doug, let's not make this so black and white. Like you, I think bust is a backwards looking label that can only be applied at the end of his career. However, denying that Drew Stubbs has been a disappoint relative to what most people have expected from him is just ignorant.

I simply don't believe that you take a 21 year old Big 12 position player in the first round and then expect him to take 5+ years to reach the majors.

No, he's not a bust. By definition, in my mind, it's not possible for him to be a bust yet. But there's no harm in admitting that he's not performed as well as the Reds had hoped/expected he would when he was drafted. Heck, let's go back to the development path you expected from him -- did you have him in high A in 2008, without having any significant success in 2006 or 2007?

Just look at the guys drafted around him. Sure, they all have different trajectories -- but most have had more success and are more highly rated. This isn't determinism. Stubbs isn't yet a bust and could very well become a great major leaguer. But look at his corhort and just try to make the case that he's not among the least promising given his age, level of success, and rankings of two organizations which take very different approaches. Of the guys drafted around him (6th to 17th), the 3 guys who are ranked lower than him, are 18, 19, and 19 respectively. Everybody else is ranked more highly, or is ineligible for ranking due to their success. The 4 guys who are as old or older than him have all had more success and are more highly ranked.

Pick 	Name		Pos	Age 	Highest Level	BP100 	BA100 
6	Andrew Miller	SP	22	MLB		XX	XX		
7	Clayton Kershaw	SP	19	AA		5	7
8	Drew Stubbs	OF	22	A		--	100
9	Billy Rowell 	3B	18	A		--	--
10	Tim Lincecum	SP	23	MLB		XX	XX	
11	Max Scherzer	SP	22	AAA		90	66
12	Kasey Kiker	P	19	A		--	--
13	Tyler Colvin	OF	21	AA		--	75
14	Travis Snider	OF	19	A		7	11	
15	Chris Marrero	1B/OF	18	A+		28	27
16	Jeremy Jeffress	SP	19	A		--	--	
17	Matt Antonelli	3B	22	AA		39	50

Let's not let this discussion get lost in the semantics. It is fully undeniable that Stubbs, as of today, has not lived up to his draft slot like his peers have. He might pan out, he might not. The potential is still there and I don't think many people on this board, even the biggest doubters deny the possibility Stubbs lives up to his potential. Until he clearly fails, he's not a bust in my book. But it's not looking good so far and I simply cannot see how you continue to deny that.

Absolutely fantastic post.

[Cedric]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

Doug, let's not make this so black and white. Like you, I think bust is a backwards looking label that can only be applied at the end of his career. However, denying that Drew Stubbs has been a disappoint relative to what most people have expected from him is just ignorant.

I simply don't believe that you take a 21 year old Big 12 position player in the first round and then expect him to take 5+ years to reach the majors.

No, he's not a bust. By definition, in my mind, it's not possible for him to be a bust yet. But there's no harm in admitting that he's not performed as well as the Reds had hoped/expected he would when he was drafted. Heck, let's go back to the development path you expected from him -- did you have him in high A in 2008, without having any significant success in 2006 or 2007?

Just look at the guys drafted around him. Sure, they all have different trajectories -- but most have had more success and are more highly rated. This isn't determinism. Stubbs isn't yet a bust and could very well become a great major leaguer. But look at his corhort and just try to make the case that he's not among the least promising given his age, level of success, and rankings of two organizations which take very different approaches. Of the guys drafted around him (6th to 17th), the 3 guys who are ranked lower than him, are 18, 19, and 19 respectively. Everybody else is ranked more highly, or is ineligible for ranking due to their success. The 4 guys who are as old or older than him have all had more success and are more highly ranked.

Pick 	Name		Pos	Age 	Highest Level	BP100 	BA100 
6	Andrew Miller	SP	22	MLB		XX	XX		
7	Clayton Kershaw	SP	19	AA		5	7
8	Drew Stubbs	OF	22	A		--	100
9	Billy Rowell 	3B	18	A		--	--
10	Tim Lincecum	SP	23	MLB		XX	XX	
11	Max Scherzer	SP	22	AAA		90	66
12	Kasey Kiker	P	19	A		--	--
13	Tyler Colvin	OF	21	AA		--	75
14	Travis Snider	OF	19	A		7	11	
15	Chris Marrero	1B/OF	18	A+		28	27
16	Jeremy Jeffress	SP	19	A		--	--	
17	Matt Antonelli	3B	22	AA		39	50

Let's not let this discussion get lost in the semantics. It is fully undeniable that Stubbs, as of today, has not lived up to his draft slot like his peers have. He might pan out, he might not. The potential is still there and I don't think many people on this board, even the biggest doubters deny the possibility Stubbs lives up to his potential. Until he clearly fails, he's not a bust in my book. But it's not looking good so far and I simply cannot see how you continue to deny that.

Valuable post, but maybe not hitting an important part of his being drafted. Context of his draft pick needs to be brought into discussion also though. I know it's odd to say that a college bat drafted in the top ten shouldn't have been expected to fast track, but that was really the case when they drafted him. Is that smart business by the Reds? I'm not so sure. But that is the context. The Reds and every other team around them knew that Stubbs was still raw with the bat and many figured it would take time for him to adjust from a wood bat. If you watched him in college he had a major aluminum bat swing. I don't need to go into detail as to what that means because I'll assume with your baseball knowledge you know what that is.

I honestly think the Reds knew when they were drafting Drew that he would take longer than most college bats but they were willing because he is plus plus on speed/defense and he shows patience at the plate. I think the Reds were willing to gamble that Drew might struggle for a little while, but he would hopefully progress enough to hit at league average while showing good patience. I'm not arguing that the pick wasn't incredibly risky and possibly not smart for a top ten pick. I'm just stating that his timetable compared to others on your list isn't really an issue. The Reds saw a weak draft and had a major need for defense up the middle and a center fielder that could cover major ground. I think we all are just hoping like hell that Drew's last 250 at bats were a turning point and we are finally going to see an elite package like we hoped. The pick was a definite boom or bust and with an amazing talent like Jay Bruce it could turn into a brilliant pick.

Right now? His performance is disappointing and there is no sugar coating that. The good thing though is Drew ended last year with momentum and possibly he will have his breakout year. With his elite speed and defense we would be looking at gold. BIG if at this point though.

[Betterread]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

Doug, let's not make this so black and white. Like you, I think bust is a backwards looking label that can only be applied at the end of his career. However, denying that Drew Stubbs has been a disappoint relative to what most people have expected from him is just ignorant.

I simply don't believe that you take a 21 year old Big 12 position player in the first round and then expect him to take 5+ years to reach the majors.

No, he's not a bust. By definition, in my mind, it's not possible for him to be a bust yet. But there's no harm in admitting that he's not performed as well as the Reds had hoped/expected he would when he was drafted. Heck, let's go back to the development path you expected from him -- did you have him in high A in 2008, without having any significant success in 2006 or 2007?

Let's not let this discussion get lost in the semantics. It is fully undeniable that Stubbs, as of today, has not lived up to his draft slot like his peers have. He might pan out, he might not. The potential is still there and I don't think many people on this board, even the biggest doubters deny the possibility Stubbs lives up to his potential. Until he clearly fails, he's not a bust in my book. But it's not looking good so far and I simply cannot see how you continue to deny that.

You make compelling points about his current status compared to his draft position. However, the draft was 2 years ago. Currently, he is part of the Reds developmental system, and his true measure of success is what his employer thinks of his development. If he can sustain his late-2007 hitting improvements in 2008, I think the Reds will be satisfied with a level-a-year progress. That would display development in an area the system identified as a weak area of his game. I sincerely hope the Reds drafted him with the belief that they could get his hitting to improve. I have the sense that some posters think the Reds drafted him and paid him $2 million without this belief, rather a "hope" that he could improve on his own.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by Betterread

You make compelling points about his current status compared to his draft position. However, the draft was 2 years ago. Currently, he is part of the Reds developmental system, and his true measure of success is what his employer thinks of his development. If he can sustain his late-2007 hitting improvements in 2008, I think the Reds will be satisfied with a level-a-year progress. That would display development in an area the system identified as a weak area of his game. I sincerely hope the Reds drafted him with the belief that they could get his hitting to improve. I have the sense that some posters think the Reds drafted him and paid him $2 million without this belief, rather a "hope" that he could improve on his own.

We have to not confuse the questions. There are two debates being combined in to one here. The first is, will Stubbs eventually live up to his potential? The second is, where does Stubbs stand today in regards to question one?

I agree, that if Stubbs succeeds, it will be because he turned over a new leaf in the late summer of 2007. That might have happened. 2008 should start to tell us. The point I'm trying to make is that, as of today, he's behind the curve. He's not as good a prospect as his draft peers. The Top 100 rankings in light of player age are great evidence of that.

Doug has attempted to make the case that the Reds understood Stubbs would be on the 5 year+ curve when they drafted him. You are saying the Reds would be fine if did make the majors until age 26. I simply can't believe that. You don't take a first rounder who you don't think will make his major league debut until he's 26. Sure there are a lot of players who follow that path. There's nothing wrong with that. But when they're drafted in the top 10, that's not the intent. That just doesn't make sense.

Let's not confuse the questions. He might pan out, he might not. There are paths and arguments for both eventualities and we can continue to make them. But when it comes to where he stands today as a prospect, he's slipped.

[Bip Roberts]

Trade him for Juan Pierre!

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

All I am saying is that right now, the Reds have a guy that Baseball America just listed as a Top 100 (albeit exactly at 100) prospect and some on here are referring to the guy as a bust. Something isn't right there.

Doug,

Couple of questions for you:

1) If you took a player 8th overall and two years later a well respected publication put out a top 100 prospect list, where would you:

a) Hope/wish that player would be ranked (realistic best case scenario)?
b) Expect that player to be ranked (realistic middle of the road scenario)?
c) See the ranking drawn between bust/non-bust discussions (realistic worst case scenario) when there is no catastrophic injury to talk about?

2) What are your thoughts if your 8th overall pick was originally ranked 88th in 2006 and then dropped to 100th the following year, even when he showed some progress in the 2nd half of 2007? Especially when taking into account the fact that the publication does give a solid amount of consideration to players who are projectable and ranking aren't determined on 100% performance.

[SMcGavin]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

He would definitely be a bust in this scenario, if he is merely league average.

1) Way, way late to the show. If you think he saved them millions by producing in those years, fine. But he also cost them millions and some wins by toiling in the minors for so long.

2) Top 10 picks should not spend that much time in the minors. He would have to be a top tier CFer in those years for him to reverse the damage of his late arrival.

I don't understand the logic of saying only 2009 and 2010 is the Reds window of contention. Aren't we trying to win in the years beyond that too? If Stubbs is the CF starter for the Reds from 2010-2013, that might be later than the Reds intended when they drafted him. I don't know, I'm not in the Reds organization. I tend to agree with Cedric in that the Reds knew what they were getting into with Stubbs, he clearly wasn't a polished product. We could debate that for a while but really none of know exactly what the Reds had planned for him.

But I disagree with the notion that anyone who gives you four years of an average bat with a plus glove at a key defensive spot is a "bust", even if he was a top ten pick.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

Doug,

Couple of questions for you:

1) If you took a player 8th overall and two years later a well respected publication put out a top 100 prospect list, where would you:

a) Hope/wish that player would be ranked (realistic best case scenario)?
b) Expect that player to be ranked (realistic middle of the road scenario)?
c) See the ranking drawn between bust/non-bust discussions (realistic worst case scenario) when there is no catastrophic injury to talk about?

You would obviously hope he would be ranked. He isn't ranked as high as one would expect, but that itself does not come close to making one bust/not bust.

2) What are your thoughts if your 8th overall pick was originally ranked 88th in 2006 and then dropped to 100th the following year, even when he showed some progress in the 2nd half of 2007? Especially when taking into account the fact that the publication does give a solid amount of consideration to players who are projectable and ranking aren't determined on 100% performance.

I think it has a lot to do with the talent that 2007 brought in more than anything Stubbs did (or didn't do) himself.

Just because one hasn't lived up to potential after 1 full season does not make one a bust. Justin Upton had a very lackluster first full season (not comparing the players, just noting that players don't always burst onto the scene) then put the tools together and had a great second season.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Just because one hasn't lived up to potential after 1 full season does not make one a bust. Justin Upton had a very lackluster first full season (not comparing the players, just noting that players don't always burst onto the scene) then put the tools together and had a great second season.

Upton is a totally different case. You can't compare the progression of a HS guy to a college guy.

[edabbs44]

I think the two sides of the argument are arguing different things. While I think that Stubbs is on the bust path and has been a bust so far, I also think he has time to turn it around.

Here's the way I see it:

While Stubbs isn't a bust, he is currently busting.

While Stubbs hasn't been a complete disaster, he hasn't lived up to anyone's expectations so far.

While Stubbs did play well at the end of last season, he was also in a league with competition much less than what he should be facing.

While he has been taking a good share of abuse due to the fact that he was selected over Lincecum, at least he has been deflecting some criticism away from Sean Watson who was taken over such top 100 guys like Brett Anderson and Justin Masterson.


Hopefully he turns it on this year. If not, I don't think Cincy will be able to project him to be an integral part of the team's future.