Who is Redszone's #7 prospect?

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

I agree that Francisco isn't very good at third, but his arm makes up for much of that. Too, the Reds like him enough to keep him there and to move Frazier to LF (which is his likely major league position). That tells me one of two things:
1) Either they think Francisco is trade bait and they're shining him up for trade at his most attractive defensive position. This option makes little sense with the way Cincinnati has played him, however, as they've basically bounced him along the I-71 shuttle last season, rather than letting him destroy AAA pitching.
2) They like Francisco at third and think Frazier profiles in a less defined role playing around the diamond. This makes sense, as Frazier played three defensive positions and eventually settled on playing him in left field. Since Sweet and Cincinnati had both Francisco and Frazier as options for 3B/LF and went with Francisco, it stands to reason they think the kid can play there.

As to not being much at the next level, that's been said about Francisco for three years now. Next year at a new level, he's sure to struggle, Redszone experts have said. Yet, year after year, he not only doesn't struggle, he improves.

Francisco's OPS has gone 718 to 763 to 799 to 847 to 890.

Meanwhile, Frazier's OPS has gone from 943 to 853 to 832 to 781.

I think the Frazier-to-left thing was a fail safe to either lacking a LF or if he was successful, to get him on the field quicker. Even with his playing LF primarily, he still played 35 games at third this season. The Reds even hinted that Frazier could probably be fully transitioned to third base relatively hassle-free if they desired, so I don't think his playing left was as much as an indictment against him as perhaps other motives.

Which does beg the question you ask: are they simply seeing something in Francisco at third that some of us (like me for instance) aren't or are they trying to polish him as trade bait? As you said, it wouldn't seem likely the latter is true, given the way they've used him, but because he was already on the 40-man roster and the timing of his usage, it's possible that was more of a necessity than anything else.

The good news is that even if Francisco can't or at least wont' stick at third, the Reds aren't losing a ton of development time by not moving him. After all, moving to left won't require a ton of additional seasoning. So I have no problem with the time spent playing him at that position. I just don't think he'll make it there, ultimately.

[Scrap Irony]

Frazier played most of his third base only after Francisco was hurt. Too, after Francisco came back from Cincinnati at the beginning of the AAA season, he went straight to third, not LF.

That they picked Francisco to play that position and Frazier to ultimately play the less demanding positions of 1B and LF should tell you what you need to know, IMO.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

Frazier played most of his third base only after Francisco was hurt. Too, after Francisco came back from Cincinnati at the beginning of the AAA season, he went straight to third, not LF.

That they picked Francisco to play that position and Frazier to ultimately play the less demanding positions of 1B and LF should tell you what you need to know, IMO.

What it tells me is that Francisco is fat and can't run, so he only has two options (first and third), while Frazier can run and is more athletic and so he can play more positions, including the one that requires running (left).

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

Frazier played most of his third base only after Francisco was hurt. Too, after Francisco came back from Cincinnati at the beginning of the AAA season, he went straight to third, not LF.

That they picked Francisco to play that position and Frazier to ultimately play the less demanding positions of 1B and LF should tell you what you need to know, IMO.

But that's the thing, I don't think they've made a decision yet. Like I said, I feel like Frazier could be moved to third full time without much more development if that's the route they want to go. Francisco is (at best) still very raw and he's going to need more development.

Because the Reds have only one option left on Francisco, wouldn't it make more sense to continue getting him all the time at third they can get until they're sure he won't make it? To me, since his clock is further along than Frazier and he's further behind in development, it makes a lot of sense to continue playing him there ahead of Frazier until/unless they're convinced a move is in order.

Perhaps they've already made the decision...but I don't think we can say they have based on this. It would make a lot of sense that they're still up in the air since there's no rush to move Francisco to left if that's something that could be done at a later point in his career. If he develops even into an average defensive third baseman, I think his bat will have much more wiggle room. So from that standpoint, I am fine with giving him more time in rank at third to prove himself.

[Scrap Irony]

Further behind in development?

Francisco's the one whose OPS is 100 points ahead and climbing.

Francisco's the one who's played in the majors. Twice.

Perhaps doug is right and Francisco is only at third because he's fat and can't play left. (Though fatter have played LF regularly.) However, at the beginning of the year, Alonso was at AA and the Reds and Rick Sweet were faced with a choice of who played what position(s).

Francisco could indeed have played any of the three. So, too, could have Frazier. But Francisco went to third base and Frazier went to 1B, then LF/3B as Alonso came up and Francisco got hurt.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

Further behind in development?

Francisco's the one whose OPS is 100 points ahead and climbing.

Francisco's the one who's played in the majors. Twice.

Perhaps doug is right and Francisco is only at third because he's fat and can't play left. (Though fatter have played LF regularly.) However, at the beginning of the year, Alonso was at AA and the Reds and Rick Sweet were faced with a choice of who played what position(s).

Francisco could indeed have played any of the three. So, too, could have Frazier. But Francisco went to third base and Frazier went to 1B, then LF/3B as Alonso came up and Francisco got hurt.

I was talking development defensively. But I don't agree with the "climbing" aspect because the time spent in the Majors this season counts too, and if anything, he looked woefully bad. He struck out 20 times in 59 plate appearances and walked just four times. That still counts.

Still, I don't disagree with the concerns on Frazier, but I'd still take his bat right now at the major league level more than Francisco. I'm telling you, Francisco is going to have to do a lot to make it in the bigs with those peripherals. That walk/strikeout rate he had, even this year in AAA, would have been the absolute worst of all regulars in the Majors this season. And since we saw how overmatched he was in the Majors, I don't see his success translating.

He has the tools. He's got the power, the arm, the bat speed, etc. But a lot is going to have to change.

For all the concerns about Frazier (and as I said, I share them), I like his chances of being a steady contributor more than Francisco.

[Scrap Irony]

Francisco hit 273 in the majors, with a 322 obp. While he didn't slug much at all this season, his two year major league average is .316 .381 .447 .828 (84 ABs).

He may not have looked good doing it, but Francisco looked better than Alonso did. And with more walks.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

Francisco hit 273 in the majors, with a 322 obp. While he didn't slug much at all this season, his two year major league average is .316 .381 .447 .828 (84 ABs).

He may not have looked good doing it, but Francisco looked better than Alonso did. And with more walks.

His OBP in Louisville this year was only .325, so that doesn't bode well for him. It's going to be hard for him to slug in the Majors the way he did in AAA given his propensity to chase pitches, swing at balls outside the zone, etc., because Major League teams & pitchers will know he is susceptible to that. Which is probably why the guys like Robert Petagine, Kevin Barker, etc. are career 4-A players.

Francisco had an OPS of .704 this year in Cincinnati. You're darn right he didn't look good in doing it. That's not gonna' cut it.

As far as Alonso... I said several times late in September he looked bad. But that's got nothing to do with Francisco's development, quite honestly.

I mean, bad or badder? It doesn't inspire confidence.

[Scrap Irony]

In two years (and 84 ABs) in the majors, Francisco has OPSed 828. Cherry-picking from a smaller sample size to "prove" major league struggles seems less than honest, Brutus.

Too, while his obp has always been (and likely always will be) low, his 550 slugging should make him a fairly valuable piece at the major league level. After all, a 325 obp and a 550 slg still makes his OPS 875, does it not?

You may be right in that he could struggle to slug that high in the majors. Then again, we've heard that now for three years. Francisco is sure to struggle at the next level. Yet, level after level, he continues to improve.

Does he have warts? Sure. I'd love to see his obp at a higher level. But he's clearly been better than Frazier at the same level, he has more tools, and he's younger and more likely to improve going forward.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

In two years (and 84 ABs) in the majors, Francisco has OPSed 828. Cherry-picking from a smaller sample size to "prove" major league struggles seems less than honest, Brutus.

Too, while his obp has always been (and likely always will be) low, his 550 slugging should make him a fairly valuable piece at the major league level. After all, a 325 obp and a 550 slg still makes his OPS 875, does it not?

You may be right in that he could struggle to slug that high in the majors. Then again, we've heard that now for three years. Francisco is sure to struggle at the next level. Yet, level after level, he continues to improve.

Does he have warts? Sure. I'd love to see his obp at a higher level. But he's clearly been better than Frazier at the same level, he has more tools, and he's younger and more likely to improve going forward.

How am I cherry picking? I've pointed out several times how awful his OBP, K/BB rates, etc. are from his entire minor league career. It's not just this year in the majors... it's a lot of things.

This year is no better/worse a sample than last year. The difference, though, is that this year's sample is more indicative of what he's done throughout his minor league career.

His peripherals... they won't cut it. They suggest a guy that, unless he starts shaping them together, won't make it in the majors.

I think people are burying their heads in the sand. The OPS at triple-A looks nice on the surface, but there are a lot of 30-year old guys in triple-A that have been putting up those numbers that can't hack it in the majors for the exact reasons Francisco may be facing.

This isn't just a 'wart', scrap. This is something that has showing with a tremendous degree of accuracy, to be something that doesn't lend itself to Major League success.

You can't strikeout four times more than you walk and expect to live to tell about it. Even if you do have tremendous power, but especially if your defense is already bad to boot.

[Scrap Irony]

Wouldn't you want to use more ABs rather than less?

Is there a clear upswing throughout his minor league career, showing a propensity to improve as he ages?

Is he young enough to likely improve even more?

______________
And, even with that horrid plate discipline, he still found a way to OPS almost 900. Will that continue? You insist it's impossible. Yet, we've heard that missive before. About A+ ball. And AA. And AAA. Now, he's a sure-fire 4-A player despite his career-long 84 ABs that indicate just the opposite.

In the end, I suppose we'll see.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

Wouldn't you want to use more ABs rather than less?

Is there a clear upswing throughout his minor league career, showing a propensity to improve as he ages?

Is he young enough to likely improve even more?

______________
And, even with that horrid plate discipline, he still found a way to OPS almost 900. Will that continue? You insist it's impossible. Yet, we've heard that missive before. About A+ ball. And AA. And AAA. Now, he's a sure-fire 4-A player despite his career-long 84 ABs that indicate just the opposite.

In the end, I suppose we'll see.

When did I ever say anything was impossible? I've said unlikely, but never said impossible.

It's true he's been improving year over year. He's gone from about 7-1 K/BB to about 5-1. Problem is... that's still an extremely long way to go from here. But again, I never, at all, said it was "impossible" so I'm not sure why you used that terminology. That feels like an intentional misrepresentation.

I don't doubt the tools, but I do doubt the follow-through. I've just seen so many journeyman 4-A guys put up impressive OPS at Triple-A, it's hard to get excited about someone that doesn't possess the likelihood of his peripherals translating into the majors. So far, I see very little evidence, at least as he currently is, that big league pitching won't eat him alive. The reason I pointed out this year is because clearly they were showing signs of figuring him out after looking decent late last year in his cup of coffee.

Some want to say Francisco is clearly a better bat than Frazier. Yet it's Frazier that will have a much better chance of sticking as, if nothing else, a solid utility guy off the bench where Francisco's current trajectory is 4-A. Francisco has unbelievable upside. And as I emphasized already, I never said further development is impossible. But the odds are still very much stacked against it.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

And, even with that horrid plate discipline, he still found a way to OPS almost 900. Will that continue? You insist it's impossible. Yet, we've heard that missive before. About A+ ball. And AA. And AAA. Now, he's a sure-fire 4-A player despite his career-long 84 ABs that indicate just the opposite.

In the end, I suppose we'll see.

Here is the difference, other guys have been able to do it in the minor leagues as well. Here is the list of guys in the majors with 2000 MLB at bats and a 4-1 or higher K/BB ratio since 1960 and their quad slash line:

Player	         Avg	OB%	Slg	OPS	K/BB
Olivo, Miguel	.243	.278	.423	.701	6.97
Paquette, Craig	.239	.274	.411	.685	5.17
Thomas, Andres	.234	.255	.334	.589	5.10
Dunston, Shawon	.269	.296	.416	.712	4.93
Patterson, C	.252	.290	.404	.694	4.62
Armas, Tony	.252	.287	.453	.740	4.62
Duncan, Mariano	.267	.300	.388	.688	4.54
Snyder, Cory	.247	.291	.425	.716	4.39
Smith, Charley	.239	.279	.370	.649	4.35
Abbott, Kurt	.256	.305	.423	.728	4.29
Espinoza, Alv	.254	.279	.331	.610	4.26
Casanova, Paul	.225	.252	.319	.571	4.26
Jackson, Bo	.250	.309	.474	.784	4.21
Presley, Jim	.247	.290	.420	.710	4.09

Not a single player with an OPS at .800. We have to go 30 players deep before we get to a player over an .800 OPS and it is Alfonso Soriano with a 3.51 K/BB rate. Andres Galarraga is the 31st worst of all time and he is at .844. There were 1178 players who met the criteria between 1960 and 2009 of 2000 career at bats. Only 14 had a K/BB of 4.00 or worse. Francisco has work to do. I believe there is a chance he can do it, but he has to do it because if he doesn't, his current approach just isn't going to work. It never has for anyone else in the history of the game.

[mace]

I respect those numbers. They represent an impressive level of support for a school of thought. That said, I'd submit three mitigating factors.

1. Of the players on that list, a quick glance sees only three guys (Armas, Snyder, Jackson; maybe Presley) with power anything like Francisco's. (And none of those guys hit left-handed.)

2. The extremely small sample size. The fact is, there just aren't that many players who profile that way. (Granted, that also points to the fact that not many guys with those profiles even make the major leagues.)

3. Francisco's exceptional and conspicuous improvement curve.

[GOYA]

Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp

Some want to say Francisco is clearly a better bat than Frazier. Yet it's Frazier that will have a much better chance of sticking as, if nothing else, a solid utility guy off the bench where Francisco's current trajectory is 4-A. Francisco has unbelievable upside. And as I emphasized already, I never said further development is impossible. But the odds are still very much stacked against it.

No, some DO say it and repeatedly. Anyone that has seen Francisco for any length of time since he came to AAA can see he just keeps getting better and better. His further development is not only possible, it's just a continuation of what he's been doing. He's very good as he is and he keeps getting better.