Heisey/Stubbs

[membengal]

Disclaimer at the outset:

This is NOT a thread in any way to bash Drew Stubbs, who I hope against hope catches fire, and soon, if only to be an asset in a deal this summer.

Now, on to the show. They were drafted in the same year, do I have that right? One the first rounder with all the expectations, and the other far later, the guy flying below the radar?

As the years have unfolded, I think we can agree that Heisey has outperformed Stubbs (or at least matched him), and the contrast to the start of their 2009 campaigns could not be more stark.

My question is an organizational one: If Heisey has rocketed past Stubbs as a prospect, and one could make the argument that he has, is there a psychological barrier to an organization, say, the Reds, admitting that and allowing themselves to view the lesser heralded and lower drafted Heisey as being more of a propsect than the more heralded Stubbs?

Is Heisey a better prospect than Stubbs at this point? They have Heisey at a level lower, but, man, in all fairness, perhaps those two ought to be switched.

Have at it, folks.

ETA:

Heisey's stats:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/mi...d=heisey001chr

Stubbs' stats:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/mi...d=stubbs001and

[dougdirt]

Here is how I lay this out twice a week over on my website.

Chris Heisey is a better hitter right now than Drew Stubbs is. Drew Stubbs has the potential to be a better hitter than Chris Heisey because of the power potential he has that Chris simply doesn't have. Drew hasn't shown that he can consistently use that light tower power the does possess, but its the thing that Heisey just isn't likely to gain.

Drew is the better defender of the two, but Chris is still a fine centerfielder. Ultimately though, Drews power potential is what makes him the better prospect for now though.

I used to feel that Chris Heisey was a Chris Denorfia type of guy. I am beginning to think I am selling Heisey a little short with that comparison.

[membengal]

Career stats (through end of 2008) summed up for each:

Heisey (born Dec. 14, 1984):

.291/.365/.433 for a .799 OPS (1345 plate appearances) 25 HR 65 SB (13 caught stealing)

Stubbs (born Oct. 4, 1984):

.269/.367/.415 for a .783 OPS (1375 plate appearances) 25 HR 75 SB (28 caught stealing)

I hear you on Stubbs' power potential, Doug, I guess, but at this point, shouldn't Heisey be viewed as having similar power potential, based on what we have seen and are seeing? Their plate appearances and counting stats are remarkably similar to this point, only now Heisey is going nuclear, and the power appears to be setting in...

[thorn]

From my understanding, a "Prospect" ranking can't be determined by numbers alone. So I can't really say Heisey is a better "Prospect" than Stubbs because I'm not a scout and I don't watch them play. Having said that, if it's based on numbers, Heisey is clearly a better player and I will say this, if Stubbs had put up the numbers Heisey has, he'd be a #1 prospect and already with the Reds.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by membengal

I hear you on Stubbs' power potential, Doug, I guess, but at this point, shouldn't Heisey be viewed as having similar power potential, based on what we have seen and are seeing? Their plate appearances and counting stats are remarkably similar to this point, only now Heisey is going nuclear, and the power appears to be setting in...

Power Potential has very little to do with actual power numbers. Stubbs is a solid 60 on the raw power rating in the scouting scale. Heisey is more like a 40-45. Basically, Stubbs has the potential to be a 25 HR guy in the majors... while Heisey is more like a 10-15 HR guy. Potential is the key word of course, but the difference in their potential is quite big.

[camisadelgolf]

Stubbs' and Heisey's OPS numbers are similar, but anyone who has seen the two will tell you that Stubbs plays better defense. Based on those two things alone, I'd say they're pretty equal, but Stubbs has much more room for development, which makes him a better prospect in my mind.

[membengal]

Ever see a prospect for whom the power potential in terms of the scouting number is simply off on the low side? For instance, perhaps Heisey has turned into more of a "solid 60" as he has developed than the scouts might have foreseen? Mind you, I am just asking questions out of genuine curiosity. There has to be some point where some players turn out to be "more" (for lack of a better word) than scouts foresaw in terms of skill-set etc?

[camisadelgolf]

If Heisey ever develops to that point, I think we'll see a big decrease in his range.

[mace]

Wow, the similarity in stats is striking. When you combine that with the fact that they both play a great center field, they both run extremely well, they're both the same age . . .

If Stubbs were currently putting up Heisey's numbers, I fully suspect that he'd be a very hot topic, and folks would be pushing him for the big leagues. The nature of the beast is that Heisey will have to prove himself longer and stronger to get the same shot. But he appears to be doing that. What's really exciting about Heisey is that, as well as he's playing, the best part of his game is said to be the stuff that doesn't show up in the stats.

One other note on their relative power: The power numbers for their minor-league careers are nearly identical. Granted, Stubbs can hit the ball farther. But is that what matters? Isn't what matters the frequency of the power, as opposed to the length of it? Add to that the fact that Heisey's power seems to be on the rise at the moment.

I'm with membengal in that I'm pulling for Stubbs, and recognize that he's playing in a tougher league. I still like his upside. But I'm pulling for Heisey, too. I like his everything.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by membengal

Ever see a prospect for whom the power potential in terms of the scouting number is simply off on the low side? For instance, perhaps Heisey has turned into more of a "solid 60" as he has developed than the scouts might have foreseen? Mind you, I am just asking questions out of genuine curiosity. There has to be some point where some players turn out to be "more" (for lack of a better word) than scouts foresaw in terms of skill-set etc?

Sure, that does indeed happen from time to time. That said, I don't really think Heisey has developed that type of power. His swing just doesn't have that 'power' in it. He is a gap to gap hitter who makes a lot of solid contact.

[membengal]

That's a heckuva nice power stroke he has entered 2009 with. Or does Carolina play as an extreme hitters park?

[lollipopcurve]

One of the things that has impressed me about Heisey over the last couple of years is how consistent he is. The peaks and valleys are really ironed out. He just does not hit the skids for like a week, like a lot of players do (Stubbs being one of them). His major improvement as he's ascended through the minors has been in his plate discipline. With that growth, as we know, comes other offensive gains, which may be starting to evidence themselves. You cannot ignore the fact that Heisey is out of Messiah College, while Stubbs is out of Texas -- thus the learning curve for Heisey has been more challenging, skewing the statistical totals in his favor, I'd say.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by lollipopcurve

You cannot ignore the fact that Heisey is out of Messiah College, while Stubbs is out of Texas -- thus the learning curve for Heisey has been more challenging, skewing the statistical totals in his favor, I'd say.

I can't buy into that simply given how raw Stubbs was coming out of college. He has made two major changes to his swing since being drafted out of Texas. I can't say the same for Heisey. To me, Heisey has likely had to make fewer adjustments as far as his natural swing than Stubbs. Heisey had a swing coming out of college that was suited for wooden bats. Stubbs didn't really. Sure, Stubbs saw better pitching at Texas, but I don't think that is really something that caused the adjustment period to sway one way or the other.

[membengal]

Anyone with any guesses as to the psychologic component that an organization might have to go through in a situation where a lesser known prospect is passing a higher drafted prospect? It really is asking at what point do you wonder if your scouts got it wrong...

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by membengal

Anyone with any guesses as to the psychologic component that an organization might have to go through in a situation where a lesser known prospect is passing a higher drafted prospect? It really is asking at what point do you wonder if your scouts got it wrong...

You are asking the wrong question. Players aren't drafted for what they are, they are drafted for what they can be. Your scouts measure a lot of things, but mostly its tools. Your coaches have to be able to take those tools and turn them into skills.