The Review....
If it were my pick, I would have picked Justin Smoak. The switch-hitting power, combined with the the ridiculously high success rate of first-round college first basemen, would have been too much to pass up. That's not even considering how exciting it would be in the short term to see Smoak try and crack the lineup in 2009.
With that out of the way, I'm giddy to have Buster Posey in the organization. Giddy. College-polished catchers of this caliber don't pop up in every draft. There have been hitting-first guys like Jeff Clement or Matt Wieters in recent drafts, or high school projects like Ben Davis or Neil Walker, but it's rare to have a defensively sound catcher who would probably still have been a first-rounder if he were a third baseman. Jason Varitek might be a good comp, but that was almost 15 years ago, and Varitek wasn't quite as heralded as Posey is right now on either side of the ball. These guys aren't around every year. Dig through Baseball Reference's draft database, and try to find a good comparison for Posey. It's tough.
Some folks are trying to downplay Posey's offensive ceiling -- Josh Bard is one name I've read in a couple of places. I don't want to sharpen the hyperbole katana quite yet, but that seems way, way, way too glib. We all know that college stats are unreliable -- aluminum bats, small parks, inconsistent competition -- but that doesn't mean that Posey's success is irrelevant. He leads the NCAA in batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage, and he has more walks than he does strikeouts. He was still considered a first-round pick entering this season, even though he only hit three home runs last season. All he did was up the total to 24. Those extra 21 homers are why every dollar that every reader on this site has ever spent on tickets, beer, malts, and foam fingers will go into Posey's pocket. That's alright. I'll make the sacrifice and pay his per diem for a couple of weeks. The boost in power might not translate perfectly to the pros, but it's nice to know that he isn't as punchless as a mid-'00s Jason Kendall.
The Jason Kendall comparison comes up a lot, too. Stop thinking of the 30-something Kendall, and try to remember the mid-20s Kendall, who was one of the best players in baseball, providing solid defense while hitting .321/.411/.473 at his peak. That was a Craig Biggio-career track until Kendall's ankle shattered into a million pieces. Hell, I'm going to bring up Biggio as a comp, too. Less speed, similar versatility, similar on-base wizardry...
...Buster Posey will have over 3,000 hits, but he'll provide Gold Glove-defense from behind the plate...Bill James will wax rhapsodic about Buster Posey, and call him the "best player of the 10s"...Posey will eventually have a big buddy at first base who will help him solve crimes, just like Jeff Bagwell....
Sorry. I figured I needed to balance out the anger from the initial draft thread. Love this pick, though. I was going to rewrite Young MC's "Bust a Move" for the occasion, but I got as far as "He's dressed in orange/he says..." before realizing that nothing rhymes with "orange."
The rest of the draft was fantastic, as well. Conor Gillaspie is an advanced college bat with a limited (but nice) upside, but the safeness of that pick is balanced by the toolsy high-upside of Roger Kieschnick, who was a top-50 prospect according to Baseball America. While the Gillaspie pick was perfect for an organization without a dependable option at third base, my favorite pick of the day (non-Posey division) is the fourth-rounder, Brandon Crawford. Crawford was ranked in Baseball America's preseason list of top-30 prospects, but he struggled this season. He was the anti-Gordon Beckham, as his 2008 performance moved him to the back of the first day instead of the front of the first round. There's about a 10% chance that Crawford ever makes an impact at the major league level, but that can be said of any fourth-round pick. Few are as highly thought of at any point in their careers as Crawford was before this season, though.
Sure bets, wild chances, no limited-ceiling pitchers early...I'm enamored of this draft. We won't know for a few years how it actually turns out, but that's alright. I plan to overdose on heroin before then. So for the moment, I'm feeling that weird, tingly sensation of...of...hope?
Hope.
It'll do for tonight. Tomorrow, Rich Aurilia will ground into a quadruple play. We'll deal with that then.
1 recs |
125
comments
Comments
Congratulations to you and your team Mr. John Barr
While I appreciate pitching very much this was a very good start to a team building draft. Posey will play well in the community, clubhouse and on the field. Gillaspie reminds me of both Wade Boggs and Bill Mueller. What’s not to like about a toolsy OF? Not as high as Grant is on Crawford but if he can revert to form he could surprise. And finally some pitching.
It is going to feel as if the Giants got a bonus pick when Wendell Fairley finallty steps on the diamond at S-K.
by wilriv21 on Jun 5, 2008 10:22 PM PDT 0 recs
I love love love
Kieschnick. a lot.
and I’m very glad we got Brandon Crawford where he was. Not so sold on conor Gillaspie’s swing. And the lack of power kinda doesn’t make me do wonders.
Pure and simple though, Posey was the wrong pick. It should have been smoak.
BROCK BOND LIKES HIS MARTINIS PUNCHED IN THE FACE, NOT STIRRED.
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on Jun 5, 2008 10:40 PM PDT 0 recs
doesn’t make me do wonderous tricks and other such tomfoolery. I really should finish my sentences.
BROCK BOND LIKES HIS MARTINIS PUNCHED IN THE FACE, NOT STIRRED.
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on
Jun 5, 2008 10:43 PM PDT
up
0 recs
third
cousin, to be exact.
BROCK BOND LIKES HIS MARTINIS PUNCHED IN THE FACE, NOT STIRRED.
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on
Jun 5, 2008 11:29 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Blorange is a word.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 5, 2008 10:52 PM PDT 0 recs
Posey vs. Smoak
two points on this
1. You can prefer Smoak, or anybody else for that matter, but there is no way anybody can call Posey a bad pick (as many people did at the time). Posey was ranked in the top 3 of every list and was strongly considered for the #1 pick, he is a great talent to get with the 5th pick.
2. I know that a lot of you are convinced the Giants front office is run by a bunch of complete idiots who know nothing about baseball. But after the Giants passed on Smoak, the Marlins, Reds (who actually opted for a different 1B), White Sox, Nationals, and Astros all passed on him too. So unless all of those organizations are also run by complete idiots then maybe the Giants were on to something here. I liked Smoak a lot myself, but it seems to me if we passed on Jesus himself as many people seemed to think at the time, then he would have gotten snapped up within the next couple of picks.
by FluLikeSymptoms on Jun 5, 2008 10:55 PM PDT 0 recs
The Astros are run by complete idiots who know nothing about baseball...
...but your larger point stands.
This reminds me of the 2005 draft. Would the Rockies trade Troy Tulowitski for Jay Bruce or Ryan Braun right now? Maybe. Are the Rockies kicking themselves every night because they passed on Bruce and Braun? Probably not. I’d hate to think that Smoak will hit .300/.400/.550 while Posey hits .280/.360/.450, and people will think Posey is a failure of a pick.
by Grant on
Jun 5, 2008 11:00 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Unfortunately
Smoak will probably put up ridiculous numbers if and when he gets to Arlington—numbers he couldn’t put up in SF. So folks might bitch and moan about that.
But if Posey’s defense continues to improve, even moderately stupid fans will recognize the value of having a G-G caliber catcher who can contribute meaningfully with the bat. I hope.
Bengie: Like an Aurilia kidney stone, slow-moving and tough to get out.
by juanboy on
Jun 5, 2008 11:07 PM PDT
up
0 recs
it will also be alot easier for the Giants to fill a hole at first base then it would be to fill a hole behind the plate via the trade or FA market. If both Smoak and Posey hit their ceilings, Posey will be a far more valuable player than Smoak. I know you draft the best player available instead of drafting for need, but if Angel Villalona becomes the player they expect him to be the Giants might have had a dilemma in a couple of years.
Brian Sabean's new dad: Firm believer in corporal punishment
by rxmeister on
Jun 6, 2008 6:36 AM PDT
up
0 recs
it will also be alot easier for the Giants to fill a hole at first base then it would be to fill a hole behind the plate via the trade or FA market.
This seems to be conventional wisdom, but I think it’s completely wrong. Sluggers with little defensive value are hugely overpriced in baseball.
A couple of years ago, the Giants signed a middle-of-the-pack catcher for 3 years/$16 million. How much would it cost to sign a comparable first basemen—a Morneau or Kotchman or Konerko? At least twice as much, I suspect.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 8:02 AM PDT
up
0 recs
but you don't have to sign the overpriced ones
Picking out the biggest-name, highest-priced, most-mediocre FAs to target is how you get the Zito contract. Yes, it’s what you expect from Sabean, but it’s stupid. You could have picked up Frank Thomas at 1B for the league minimum this year, but alas—Sabean lacks the imagination to do that sort of thing. All he’s hitting for Oakland is .319/.417/.516.
For league minimum.
by wcw on
Jun 6, 2008 8:13 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Frank Thomas hasn’t played first base regularly in ten years, and he was probably the worst first baseman in the game when he did. He hasn’t played there at all in four years. There may be good cheap solutions out there, but Frank Thomas isn’t one of them.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 8:23 AM PDT
up
0 recs
on this team?
If the Giants had infield defense to match their three-center-fielder outfield, you’d have a point. But they’re starting adequate-but-leaden-gloved Ray Durham, graceful-but-aging Omar Vizquel and oh-that’s-why-they-call-it-the-hot-corner Juse Castillo on the infield. I’d slot Thomas right in there and live with his bad range.
by wcw on
Jun 6, 2008 8:33 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I don’t know if I could watch Big Frank play 1B every day at this point, and I really have questions if his body could actually do it. That said, didn’t the A’s claim him on waivers, so it’s a moot point anyway?
by tyrannoman on
Jun 6, 2008 8:40 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I suspect you’d die with his bad range instead. But Frank Thomas isn’t really the point … Of course you’re right that paying market rates for a Konerko or a Morneau is usually foolish. You get much more bang for the buck by liberating a Dan Johnson or Paul McAnulty instead. My argument is that it’s not any easier to do that at first than at catcher, or anywhere else on the diamond. There’s always a Ramon Castro or Chris Coste sitting around somewhere looking for a chance.
But when you want to pay the premium and get the best - which sometimes you have to do - you’d save a lot of money if you already had Mark Teixeira in your organization and went out to buy Russell Martin rather than the other way around. Right? Teixeira and Martin are probably about equal in baseball value, but if they were on the free agent market at the same time, the slugger would get a lot more money.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 8:50 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I do like to get the best
..which is why I mentioned Pujols. But historic talents are fanboy fantasy, so let’s just look at Martin vs Tex. In terms of both wins and dollars I think the preferred strategies are drafting and keeping Martin > drafting and trading Tex > drafting and keeping Tex. It’s precisely because no-defense sluggers can be overvalued that drafting and keeping up-the-middle players is my preference.
Here I have to get back to historic talents, though. I don’t care where a Bonds, Pujols or A-Rod plays. If he’s available in any way, I want him.
by wcw on
Jun 6, 2008 9:17 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I don’t want to make too much of this, since it’s really just a theoretical issue, but: Stipulate that Smoak and Posey attain their reasonable-upside projections of Teixeira and Martin. Now consider the following catcher/first base combos:
1. The first six years of Posey’s career + a good free-agent first baseman
2. The first six years of Smoak’s career + a good free-agent catcher
The two packages deliver more or less the same production on the field, but the second is going to save you several million dollars that can be spent elsewhere.
Now, once the six years are up, the salary system works against you, in that Smoak will cost more to retain than he will be worth. But I’d cross that bridge when I came to it. And it’s possible (likely, even) that the overvaluing of low-defense sluggers will have ceased by then.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 9:51 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Good point about sluggers being overvalued, but I jsut don’t get the Dan Johnson idea. You may be getting more bang for the buck, but it ain’t a lot of bucks or bangs.
by tyrannoman on
Jun 6, 2008 9:33 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Dude’s hitting .311/.421/.541 in AAA. He could lose quite a bit in translation back to the majors and still be a useful bat.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 9:52 AM PDT
up
0 recs
True
and JR Phillips raked at AAA, too (sorry JR!). . Some guys are AAAA players, and to me Dan Johnson has proven to be one.
by tyrannoman on
Jun 6, 2008 2:25 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I used to think that Phillips raked in AAA, but then I looked up his stats, and they weren’t ever that impressive until he got to Colorado Springs.
Wait, that’s not right. He had about 100 games of AAA bludgeoning in 1994, but that was it. He was never really that good. And look at those stats for his first few seasons! That’s as awful a start to a career as I’ve ever seen.
by Grant on
Jun 6, 2008 2:32 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Funny part is, I was going to use Linden as an example, but I like to make fun of JR Phillips. I still think Dan Johnson is an excellent AAA player and not worth a roster spot on a ML team.
by tyrannoman on
Jun 6, 2008 2:35 PM PDT
up
0 recs
That would be interesting.
We would feature the two slowest players in all of baseball with both Thomas and Molina. Talk about clogging up the bases.
by WilliamVanLandingham on
Jun 6, 2008 9:43 AM PDT
up
0 recs
just imagine those two on a double steal! I’d bet they’d get away with it the first tim on pure shock value.
by tyrannoman on
Jun 6, 2008 2:26 PM PDT
up
0 recs
for the record
I too was amazed by the stupidity of the Astros pick, but still (I love using “yeah, but still…” when trying to make a point) that leaves 4 other teams.
by FluLikeSymptoms on
Jun 5, 2008 11:17 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Jesus himself
but it seems to me if we passed on Jesus himself as many people seemed to think at the time, then he would have gotten snapped up within the next couple of picks.
Jesus wasn’t that good a hitter. Lifetime OPS+ under 100, unlike Matty and Felipe.
by achiappanza on
Jun 5, 2008 11:12 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Yep, well
As one of the pro-Smoak street team, I am a tad disappointed. That said, I’ve backed off the ledge and am OK with Posey and absolutely thrilled with the next three picks.
With the first two picks, we got two college position players who are about as sure to have meaningful major league careers as you can get in the draft. So we get a mid-90s Jason Kendall and a Bill Mueller…can you say “All-Star” and “Batting Champ”? (Yes, Smoak is pretty close to a sure thing, too…shut up little voice in my head).
Big props to Barr, who in one draft took a long step toward changing the culture of a team seemingly afraid or unable to draft college bats. As much promise as Bumgarner and Alderson have, this is a franchise that needs to expedite the restocking of the major league hitting cabinet (hwah?). You know what I mean. Don’t pretend you don’t. And, I’ll leave you with some thoughts by Kevin Goldstein of BP from the chat today:
Kevin Goldstein (4:24:28 PM PT): bravoatoc (Tulsa): So, I know we aren’t near being done, but what are your initial views on who had the best draft and who had the worst? Actually who is having the best draft, the Astros ARE having the worst.I haven’t had time to digest it all, but as weird as this sounds. I really like the Giants draft.
Yeah, weird.
Bengie: Like an Aurilia kidney stone, slow-moving and tough to get out.
by juanboy on Jun 5, 2008 11:00 PM PDT 0 recs
Players I would like to see taken on Day 2
Eric Thames-OF Pepperdine really advanced bat with good patience at the plate, Athlete
Brett Hunter-SP- Pepperdine throws HARD. mid to upper 90s but battled the injury bug
Cole St. Clair-RP- Rice good talent big lefty reliever
Jack Britton-SP-Middlebury Collge Huge curve ball with a good 12-6 action and uses his change up well
Mitch Harris-SP- Navy – got good stuff, but worry about military commitment
Xavier Scruggs-1b-UNLV- big bat with some pop
by krukkuipandclint on Jun 5, 2008 11:04 PM PDT 0 recs
I'm with you on Thames
I love buying low on a guy that is hurt (especially in the 7th round)
by FluLikeSymptoms on
Jun 5, 2008 11:18 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Nice list
I would like to see the Giants go for more position players early in Day 2, and then unearth the pitching gems in the later rounds as they have shown talent for in the past. One player that comes to mind who was touted earlier in the year but whose stock has fallen somewhat is Jordan Danks. The tools are still there, just need to be refined.
by baseballjunkie on
Jun 6, 2008 12:12 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I would like to see the Giants go for more position players early in Day 2, and then unearth the pitching gems in the later rounds as they have shown talent for in the past.
This seems like the ideal strategy for any team, but especially for the Giants.
Relatively few pitchers were taken at the top of the draft this year, which suggests that other organizations may be catching on to this strategy as well.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 8:06 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Thames
I don’t know nothing about nothing inre: these players, but I read some good things on Thames and was surprised to see him go undrafted on the first day. Did he suffer some debilitating injury that I don’t know about?
Noonan. Nooooonan!
by Giant Fan in Singapore on
Jun 6, 2008 2:23 AM PDT
up
0 recs
My buddy has talked to thames
thames said that he will resume work outs 1 month from now, but should be fine.
Go get him Barr
by krukkuipandclint on
Jun 6, 2008 7:10 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Mimicking the relationship between Pavlov and his dog, every time Grant writes the word “hope”, Josh reflexively posts this link. (And speaks in the third person, apparently.)
"I been waitin' a long time for this! I been waitin' since the f**kin' amateurs!" --WILL "THE THRILL" CLARK
by Josh from Hollywood on Jun 5, 2008 11:10 PM PDT 0 recs
OMG HE'S GOING TO KILL HIMSELF LIKE BROOKS!!!!
WAIT, WHAT DOES HE WANT THAT GUN FOR?????
Phew. It all works out.
Love that damn movie.
by Grant on
Jun 5, 2008 11:11 PM PDT
up
0 recs
The best, Jerry. The best!
"I been waitin' a long time for this! I been waitin' since the f**kin' amateurs!" --WILL "THE THRILL" CLARK
by Josh from Hollywood on
Jun 6, 2008 12:54 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I like it so far....
the position players anyway. Posey looks like a future all-star, Gillaspie as a solid contributer (who will post good OBP’s to make up for his relative lack of power to the position), and Kieschnick and Crawford should be at least good bench options, if not decent starters
by baetown415 on Jun 5, 2008 11:19 PM PDT 0 recs
Kieschnick
reminds me a bunch of hunter pence for some reason. awkward swing, good speed, surprising pop.
hopefully he comes without the douche-iness.
BROCK BOND LIKES HIS MARTINIS PUNCHED IN THE FACE, NOT STIRRED.
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on Jun 5, 2008 11:31 PM PDT 0 recs
I believe douche-iness is acceptable in reverse proportion to one’s production.
See: Bonds, Barry L.
"I been waitin' a long time for this! I been waitin' since the f**kin' amateurs!" --WILL "THE THRILL" CLARK
by Josh from Hollywood on
Jun 6, 2008 12:58 AM PDT
up
0 recs
hopfully without the humpback, too. Never seen such a young guy look so much like Igor in the field.
by tyrannoman on
Jun 6, 2008 8:44 AM PDT
up
0 recs
So what do the Giants' top 10 prospects look like now?
Goldstein said he’d rate Posey over Anvil by a “nosey” (har har) but where would Gillaspie fit into our top prospects for now? Obviously this is ridiculously early, but speculation is neat!
Just throwing this out there…
1. Posey
2. Villalona
3. MadBum
4. Sosa
5. Alderson
6. Schierholz
7. Gillaspie
8. Noonan
9. Tanner
10. Fairley?
I’m not too good at this, any idea where the new kids fit in?
Adopted Giant: Travis Denker. Good?
by scotterduder on Jun 5, 2008 11:35 PM PDT 0 recs
I’m ecstatic that we picked Crawford. I just hope he pans out for us.
Proud adoptive parent of Tim Alderson.
by Anticon23 on Jun 5, 2008 11:35 PM PDT 0 recs
I’m more or less ecstatic about the draft – the Giants took the available player I wanted them to take most at both picks and the next two prompted these comments from two people whose opinions I respect a great deal when it comes to prospects:
Kevin Goldstein: Believe it or not, the Giants are kicking ass and taking names.
Bryan Smith: The Giants pop Brandon Crawford here in the fourth, and I think it’s a fabulous selection. Crawford is incredibly raw for someone his age, but he has some really nice tools. After going for sure bets in Buster Posey and Conor Gillaspie, Crawford is the perfect type of complement. Throw in Roger Kieschnick, who was once considered a first round right fielder, and it’s possible - not likely, but possible - the Giants just filled half their future.
Even with the Rangers absolute steal of Smoak (I still liked Posey better at #5) it can be argued that the Giants had the best draft of any team this year.
Barry Zito: Mike Hampton with a guitar
by JakeS on Jun 5, 2008 11:41 PM PDT 0 recs
You can't
ground into a quadruple play, silly. There are only three outs in an inning!
by SnowLeopard on Jun 5, 2008 11:49 PM PDT 0 recs
I hate to nitpick, but it’s technically possible to ground into a quadruple play. Observe…
Situation: Bonds on first, Williams on second, Clark on third, Aurilia at the plate, no outs.
Aurilia grounds to shortstop. They throw home to force Clark, then to first to force Aurilia (two outs). Bonds takes too wide a turn around second, so the first baseman throws behind him and they get him into a rundown. Before they can tag him out, though, Williams has rushed around third and charged home to, apparently, score a run. However, the opposing team notices that Williams missed third base on his mad dash. After tagging out Bonds, everyone stays on the field, they appeal to third base, and Williams is called out for a quadruple play.
www.sportingnews.com/darnott
by David Arnott on
Jun 6, 2008 5:37 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I can totally see this happening. Good thing we don’t have those bums Clark, Bonds, and Williams anymore.
I was THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME (for 3 days in 1995).
by Mike Benjamin Hit King on
Jun 6, 2008 9:57 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Wait, two good drafts in a row?
Yeah I know it’s only the first day. But the disproportionate value of the first means I don’t feel like waiting.
Seriously, two good drafts in a row? This might be a trend? The Giants can has farm system?
Only 913 games until the end of Zito's contract
by thehavenot on Jun 6, 2008 12:01 AM PDT 0 recs
2007 was not a very good draft
As I posted in the draft-day thread: http://www.mccoveychronicles.com/2008/6/5/546737/open-draft-day-vii#6602755
2007 was a real disappointment to me. A good draft last year would have given us Heyward, Porcello, Brackman or Smoker, Noonan (the year’s one good pick), Justin Jackson, and Nick Hagadone. Instead, we have half or less of that sort of potential.
by wcw on
Jun 6, 2008 6:59 AM PDT
up
0 recs
My ideal draft matched your almost right down the line, but at this point you can’t argue that it would be an improvement. Bumgarner is dominating the Sally League to exactly the same degree Heyward is. Alderson has been a disappointment, but Porcello has been a much greater one. Brackman and Smoker haven’t accomplished anything more than Wendell Fairley has. Noonan is outplaying Justin Jackson. The choice of Jackson Williams over Canham will always rankle, but whatever.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 8:10 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Alderson is a disappointment?
Your 2011 SF Giants: the 2008 Augusta Greenjackets!
by Lyle on
Jun 6, 2008 8:15 AM PDT
up
0 recs
A mild disappointment, yeah. 51 strikeouts in 63 innings just isn’t very impressive in A ball, no matter how young he is. He’s getting better lately.
Porcello’s performance has been much worse, though: 36 k’s in the almost the same number of innings.
They’ll probably both be fine, and of course Porcello is still the better prospect, but if I were a Tigers fan, I’d be nervous.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 8:27 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Seriously disagree on Alderson
A K/9 of 7.3, while being 4-5 years younger than his competition in a hitter’s league, in his first full season of pro ball is not, by any stretch of the imagination, any degree of “disappointment” unless you thought Alderson was going to be a #1 starter for the Giants in 2010. Sorry, but your expectations have to be completely out of whack to be in any way disappointed with his performance so far.
Delaying the disappointment: I adopt Hector Sanchez because he's only 17.
by tedfordfan on
Jun 6, 2008 8:44 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Not expectations, hopes. Alderson was a high draft pick and had a brief-but-stellar pro debut, so yeah, I had high hopes, though not really that he would be a #1 starter in two years.
And I still have high hopes. But a K/9 of 7.3 really isn’t that good, especially when coupled with disappointing control. Look up the numbers of the better starting pitchers in baseball; you won’t find many that had a weaker K rate for long in the lower minors, no matter how old they were.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 9:59 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Missing the larger point
He’s 18 years old. He’s 4 or 5 years younger then the hitters he’s facing. He has 2 months of professional experience and is facing batters that have 2-3 years of professional experience on average. Take that into consideration when you look at his numbers, which are objectively solid, but, as you say, not spectacular.
The rate at which 1st round draft picks fail to make any kind of impact on the ML level is something like 50%. It’s much higher for the second half of the first round.
Despite these enormous factors weighing against him, Alderson is producing, which is a major victory. We should be ecstatic right now.
If his numbers never improve over time, then we should perhaps worry. But the absurdly early returns even show improvement:
April: 27 IP / 17 K
May: 31.1 IP / 30K
Walks and hits allowed are increasing in May, which is a concern, but that’s expected. He’s learning. I’m actually happy he’s getting knocked around a bit. I’m anxious to see how he responds. If he goes through a rough patch and pitches stronger down the stretch, that’s not just a good thing, that’s a friggin’ awesome thing, because it shows he learned, adjusted and became a better pitcher.
I have similar views for Culberson & Tanner. Culberson had a putrid April, and then a decent May while being significantly younger and less experienced than many of the pitchers he is facing. Progress – that’s good. Be hopeful. Tanner got seriously roughed up for a stretch of 4 or 5 games and worked through it, putting up several quality outings in a row. Hopefully he grew by working through the rough patch and became a better pitcher. Wait and see. But so far so good.
You’re right that Alderson’s numbers aren’t mind-blowing. I just don’t think that given the surrounding circumstances of those numbers we have any reason to be concerned about him.
Delaying the disappointment: I adopt Hector Sanchez because he's only 17.
by tedfordfan on
Jun 6, 2008 10:46 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I agree with pretty much all of that, and I’m still a huge Alderson fanboy. Remember, this started off as me defending the 2007 draft.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 10:54 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Well, huh...
you were, indeed. Imagine that… :)
Delaying the disappointment: I adopt Hector Sanchez because he's only 17.
by tedfordfan on
Jun 6, 2008 10:56 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Porcello has a pretty insane groundball ratio though. More K’s would be nice, but it’s not the only determining factor of how well he’s performing.
Adopted Giant: Travis Denker. Good?
by scotterduder on
Jun 6, 2008 9:51 AM PDT
up
0 recs
see also
http://www.projectprospect.com/article/2008/05/30/sullymetrics-dominance-factor
Certainly no be-all, but by that measure Porcello is outperforming Bumgarner.
by wcw on
Jun 6, 2008 11:30 AM PDT
up
0 recs
nice link
Cahill is beastly so far. Makes it even more impressive that San Jose roughed him up a little bit.
Adopted Giant: Travis Denker. Good?
by scotterduder on
Jun 6, 2008 1:38 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Oh come now. That is, without exaggeration, the single silliest stat I have ever seen.
by Evan on
Jun 6, 2008 8:41 PM PDT
up
0 recs
the silliest?
It’s pretty silly, especially the age adjustment, but anything that has Cahill #1 works for me.
by wcw on
Jun 6, 2008 9:19 PM PDT
up
0 recs
always take the bat over the arm
I’d trade Bumgarner plus any B-level prospect in the system for Heyward right now.
Neither Alderson nor Porcello is a disappointment to me. Alderson is top-10 in the Cal League in FIP against much older competition. Porcello is not, but he’s also young and is sporting a 66% GB rate. While Alderson is outperforming now, I still expect Porcello to be the better bet long-term.
Smoker’s the one I wanted over Fairley, though I saw Brackman as the next Brian Wilson, needing surgery but with real potential. Smoker struck out every third batter he faced in short-season ball last year; I wouldn’t call that less than Fairley.
The Giants could have had Noonan and Jackson. They took Williams instead of Jackson.
I’d forgotten about Canham. Yeah, he’d have been an even better pick than Hagadone (what can I say, I like ground balls), and much, much better than Culberson.
Now, I don’t call 2007 a bad draft. The Giants got a lot of talent. It was, however, a disappointment, considering how much talent they left on the board in that first round.
by wcw on
Jun 6, 2008 8:30 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Alderson disappointment???
You are nuts Evan, Alderson is pitching outstanding.
by SF Fan on
Jun 6, 2008 10:29 AM PDT
up
0 recs
What you wanted would have been an unbelievably fantastic draft
What the Giants had was a good draft. Your standards for a good draft are insanely high (and loaded with hindsight, it seems).
I don’t like appealing to authority, so of course I am about to do just that. But many people who do this sort of stuff for a living felt the Giants had one of the best, if not the best, drafts last year.
As for myself, I’m happy with Bumgarner, Alderson and Noonan. I also still hold out hope for Fairley, Culberson (as bad a pick as he was), and D’Allesio. Pretty good, I’d say.
Also, the Giants couldn’t have gotten Heyward, Porcello and Brackman. Heyward 10, Porcello 22 but Brackman went before the Giants’ third pick. Same with Smoker, I believe (I must admit I’m too busy to look it up at the moment.)
As for your complaints about Jackson and Hagadone (or others) instead of Culberson and Williams. They are legitimate. Those two picks weren’t very good.
The Giants still had a good draft.
Only 913 games until the end of Zito's contract
by thehavenot on
Jun 6, 2008 10:56 AM PDT
up
0 recs
hindsight, my left nut
http://www.mccoveychronicles.com/2007/6/6/122010/0646#1195901
http://www.mccoveychronicles.com/2007/6/5/16427/10788#1194764
I was wrong about which players would be available (Mills was, LaPorta wasn’t), but I was right about which players I loved (LaPorta and, espe

