looking at all of the Giants prospects lists

MadBum crept up on everyone who thought Porcello was the top gun in that draft class.

Nice usage of cromulent.

Though it does make you seem like a Simpsons snob…

after i read your first line i prepared a snarky response

but that reflected more the improved quality of the G’s system rather than a significantly worse assessment of Sosa (although the injuries didn’t help).

Good point, Wil. Let’s hope that team rocks.

There is nothing disingenuous about this. I’m only stating a fact, both Lincecum and Burriss would be among our top prospects right now under regular circumstances for prospects, they normally don’t make the majors that fast, draft picks don’t make the majors that quickly normally. Nowhere did I compare them, get your facts straight before you throw out a charge like that.

But what can I expect, it’s an A’s fan. :^)

I was trying to keep my post shorter, but I agree with most of what you say.

I would also add that the vast majority of prospects don’t ever make the majors, let alone be a starter, even top picks like Posey, the success rate of finding a good starter there is under that of a coin flip.

Per other comment, I mention Lincecum and Burriss because they normally would be in the minors at this point. Only the best prospects make the majors and get significant playing time in under 3 years, typically. And Burriss only got his chance because of all the problems at SS, he normally would not have made the majors at this point, he would be in AAA.

While the Giants might be disappointed with Posey if not up by 2010 (and I probably would be too), still, that’s not a normal thing for prospects, even top picks. Lets look at the 2006 draft with Lincecum. Most just made the majors in 2008, let alone win the Cy Young. Obviously, some had great years too, Longora, Kershaw, but mostly others struggled or got little playing time, even the college players, or were still in the minors.

I think Posey’s disappointment, should it happen, comes more from him being a possible #1 and not doing well quickly. The #5 or #6 pick is not always a Top prospect who makes the majors in two years, for example, Vitters is still a great prospect but he’s not making the majors in 2009 and that won’t be a disappointment, he’s young still (though I will admit he has been disappointing, but he wasn’t expected to make the majors so quickly). And I don’t think Beckham is expected to make the majors in 2010.

Similar with Gillaspie, he thought he would be drafted much earlier than where we got him, and his bat looks ready, he just don’t have enough power to profile anywhere well or particularly good defensively anywhere.

About Alderson and Bumgarner, some might not remember, but both Sabean and Tidrow, when interviewed right after the picks, said that both were on the fast track and that they thought that the two of them would be in the majors after two seasons, which I took to mean after two full seasons, which in this case would be 2008 and 2009, meaning they make the majors in 2010.

Yes, very intriguing pipeline of talent coming to us over the next 4-5 seasons. That’s why I’ve been supportive of Sabean, there is a lot of talent coming up soon, already up here, and he deserves the chance to see what he can do with that group. Switching GM now would just give the new guy a mandate to blow things up and push out our recovery another year or two, which would just lead to trading Cain away, whereas if we compete going forward, he would be part of our core with Lincecum.

Taking Bullington over Upton would be a historically bad pick, if they hadn’t sailed way over the bar just a couple years later by choosing Moscos instead of Wieters in a clear and present signability move. That decision has a great chance at being looked at as the worst pick in MLB history in the future.

Still, his max ceiling is what, a better Tyler Walker? I think he’s far more likely to be just a middle reliever. Also, I didn’t see the death slider when he was up.

For example, nobody would question that Bonds and Randy Johnson were elite players, but that Bonds was better than Randy. So to sharksrog point, Bumgarner can be very elite while Posey can be merely elite.

So the apparent inconsistency is probably in regards to what each projected role is seen to be, I would wager. My guess is that he has Bumgarner as a #1 starter in the 2009 book (his projected role was #2 starter in 2008 book, under Baumgarner). And ace type pitchers are much more rare than good starting catchers, as Posey looks to be, though good starting catchers are still pretty elite too.

I’m not as worried about Villalona’s strikeouts as others are. He’s a 17 year old facing 21-23 year olds with 4-6 years of pro and college experience. Heck, you could probably also add that they played in regional tournaments when in high school, I doubt Villalona got to face elite competition like that in the DR. They will know tricks to get him out that he’s never faced before. The key thing is whether he progressed during the season, and he did, his BABIP increased monthly and he did really well in August after plateauing in the middle months.

And even with that disadvantage, he was still one of the better players in the league in OPS, and one of the leading players in HR hit. When the pitchers made mistakes, he made them pay for it.

Meanwhile, as nicely as Alderson did in San Jose, it was not like he dominated the hitters there, his K/9 was very low. It was his great K/BB that helped him do well. But his MLE for that drops his 7.5 K/9 actual rate to a lowly 5.9 K/9 MLE. That’s fringey at best in the majors.

Now, of course, he was in a similar situation as AnVil, he was 19 facing 22-24 year old batters with 4-6 years of pro/college experience over him. He also improved during the season, though he had a disturbing drop in K/9 in his last month, I am hoping that is due to fatigue, though it should be noted his BB/9 rate almost fell to zero that month, so perhaps he was just trying something different with the way he approached hitters.

Still, Bumgarner had a K-rate well above 9 and he was an 18 year old facing 21-23 year old batters with 3-5 years pro/college experience. He was able to exceed while handicapped similarly.

So I find Alderson’s lack of ability so far to strike out hitters at a high rate to be more disturbing than Villalona’s strikeout rate and lack of walks. Alderson will need to figure out another pitch that will get him over the hump, much like how Lincecum figured out how to throw a changeup and mix it into his other pitches. Villalona clearly can hit mistakes and he got better as the season progressed, he just needs the experience of facing better pitchers and figuring out each level’s best stuff.

Alderson, unless he develops another key pitch (as sharksrog noted, a change up; but that’s true of almost any pitcher who is just that far away from the majors, many never figure out how to throw that extra pitch), looks to be a tweener between a #2 and #3 starter, OK, perhaps good but not great.

Villalona is already blasting out homers at a prodigious pace and been figuring out pitchers enough to hit .293/.334/.461/.795 in his last two months there, with a .327 BABIP and a 30 AB/HR pace, and a strike rate of 20.7% or, to use Shandler terminology, contact rate of 79.3, which is actually OK, almost average; the best hitters can keep that above 85. As he noted in last year’s book about AnVil: “Centers ball with good contact, which should give him a solid BA despite lackluster plate discipline.” In addition, he should be a plus defender, whether at 1B or 3B.

That’s why I rate Villalona over Alderson, his package overall is pretty good. He should hit better with more experience (which he can get, whereas Alderson will need to figure out a new pitch that is good, and there’s no guarantee that’s ever going to happen), he has plus power which he’s already showing and he will be a plus defender.

No idea. He’s got ‘Very Good Minor League Numbers’™ but his ceiling is pretty tiny.