The fourteen home runs in Augusta were exciting, but at this point they just look flukish.

Like I've said before, I don't follow those stats, so I can't give you names and I don't really care if they exist or not.

All I know is Edgardo Alfonso rarely struck out while he was in SF and he was horrible.  AJ rarely struck out for another example.

Keep in mind that the regular season career ratios for the Giants trio are as follows:

Velez -- 5.3 AB/SO, 3.0 SO/BB, 12.6 SO/HR

Burriss -- 8.3 AB/SO, 1.4 SO/BB, 91.0 SO/HR

Richardson -- 4.8 AB/SO, 1.3 SO/BB, 199.0 SO/HR

Burriss likely has the best numbers of the three, since he strikes out far less often than the other two.  

Velez is the only member of the trio who has hit an even slightly significant number of home runs, and his numbers are skewed by the 14 homers he hit at Augusta in 2006, a year in which he was significantly older than his peers.  

Richardson does the best job of the three in drawing walks, and in fact is very good at that skill.

But all the non-powerful yet successful hitters I have been able to find have struck out far less often than either Richardson or Velez.  Burriss's numbers would seem to indicate a better chance than either of the other two.

And although none of these guys is young, the soon-to-be 23-year-old Burriss is the youngest of the group.

With very good prospects being an A, fair prospects a B, marginal prospects being a C and virtual non-prospects being a D, I would give Burriss a B and the other two a C.  I might even go C+ on Velez.

Maybe someone else can increase my confidence level in these guys by pointing out weak-hitting players who struck out a lot in the minors who have gone on to become valued major leaguers.  I just haven't been able to find any and don't really know where else to look.

There MUST be one or two out there.  But I can't find them.

Anyway, I AM feeling a bit better about Burriss -- although I would feel better yet if his second-season numbers had more closely approached those of his first year.  But if his strong recovery in the AZFL continues, I will consider that to be a very good time balance.

I'm sure the Giants would like Emmanuel to make it up to AA this year, and if he is strong at San Jose, I would think AAA might not even be out of the question.

We will likely learn more about Emmanuel at the AA and AAA levels.  Man, that 1.18 bases per hit just KILLS me though.  At least this fall he has gotten it up to a slightly visible 1.33 bags per knock.  And for one game he actually had it all the way up to 1.50.

As Giants fans, we have to look hard to find hitting hope.  :)

Manny, as he now seems to be called, was decent in his first season, but really fell back this past year.  He has been good in the AZFL, with nine hits in his last 15 at bats and with two walks compared to a single strikeout in 25 at bats.  Manny has struck out just once every 8.3 at bats in the regular season, which is actually pretty good.

What concerns me most about Manny is his lack of pop.  IRC he has averaged just 1.18 bases per hit in the regular season, with a fair percentage of the extra bases likely coming from his speed.  He has averaged 1.33 bases per hit in the AZFL.

The more I think about it, the more a B- seems about right for Manny.  While I see Antoan as, unfortunately, likely a non-factor and Eugenio as a likely minor (not minor league) utility player whose primary value is as a pinch runner, I see Manny as a more solid utility player or possibly even a bottom-half starter.

We should know a lot more about Manny a year from now.  In a best-case scenario, he makes it up to AA (conceivably even AAA) and does fairly well.  That type of performance would likely get him back to the B level.  Worst-case, he doesn't show tremendous improvement at San Jose and begins to move downward toward the suspect category.

At 22, Manny does have the advantage of being three years younger than Eugenio and two years younger than Antoan.  He still seems young enough for something good to possibly happen.