Warpticon

You don't think a 9% jump in K rate at the same level stands out at all? Where did that happen?

Funny, DeRosa is exactly the guy I think of when I try to come up with a MLB comparison for Tim Saunders.

There was a massive ton of reasons to think that his 2012 wouldn't be much like his 2010. All of which we hashed out in the pre-season Stewart discussions. 1) Wrist injuries frequently linger for a lot longer than just a year, or even two. 2) High K players are prone to falling off a cliff. 3) His 2011 suckiness pre-dated the wrist injury. 4) He wouldn't be playing 2010 in Colorado. Michael Barrett is a nice pull, though. "Massive ton?" Are you trying to make it harder to take you seriously? 1) Apparently you chose to ignore the "if healthy" part of the post you were replying to. 2) This means next to nothing. 3) His 2011 suckiness also covered a whopping 145 plate appearances. 4) Stewart's splits were better on the road than at home, so that's a bad argument. At best, your "massive ton" of reasons amounts to something like 1 and a half points of contention. Nobody was, or is, saying it wasn't a risk. Everybody knows it was a risk. What is ridiculous is your repeated characterization of that risk as some sort of impediment to progress. There was a weak 3B free agent class and nobody in the system who was major league ready. There was no opportunity cost in acquiring Ian Stewart. At worst, it took a few PAs from Valbuena. Boo hoo.

Anger? David DeJesus and Paul Maholm were good at baseball even when they were at their low. Ian Stewart has only ever been good at baseball during his brief high. It's a pretty important distinction. "Using up your starting 3B slot?" So, this is fantasy baseball now? Yes, his "brief high" which was reached at 25 years old, as he was entering his prime, as compared to 30-year-old Maholm and 32-year-old Dejesus. I can't imagine why anyone would have thought he, if healthy, might contribute similar production, other than, you know, that sort of thing happening frequently throughout the history of baseball. Ok, I'm game. Give me some examples of what you consider to be comparable gambles that paid off. I'm not talking about "comparable gambles," I'm talking about a players entering their primes sustaining an established level of performance (injuries notwithstanding). In short, there wasn't a lot of reason to think that, if healthy, a Stewart entering his prime wouldn't produce closer to his 2010 than his 2011. And, considering there wasn't much of anything "using up the starting 3B slot," I don't understand your insistence that his acquisition was robbing the Cubs of some irreplaceable asset. And if I had actually meant "gambles that paid off," you wouldn't have to think more than a minute or two or even look beyond the Cubs to come up with examples. Michael Barrett? Matt Clement?

Anger? David DeJesus and Paul Maholm were good at baseball even when they were at their low. Ian Stewart has only ever been good at baseball during his brief high. It's a pretty important distinction. "Using up your starting 3B slot?" So, this is fantasy baseball now? Yes, his "brief high" which was reached at 25 years old, as he was entering his prime, as compared to 30-year-old Maholm and 32-year-old Dejesus. I can't imagine why anyone would have thought he, if healthy, might contribute similar production, other than, you know, that sort of thing happening frequently throughout the history of baseball.

You don't think a 9% jump in K rate at the same level stands out at all?

Wow, 74/88 BB/K this year. Impressive .402 OBP to go along with a .298 Average. Great speed (though he gets caught stealing too much) and good defense. Trade some BA for some pop and he and Zeke DeVoss are basically the same guy.

Yeah. The guy lapped the field in the PCL in strikeouts, then is striking out even more in the majors, but I'm just blowing it out of proportion. Yep, because that's exactly what I was talking about. Nobody--not one single person--has suggested that his strikeout spike isn't a concern. As I said before, and you apparently chose to ignore, there is an enormous difference between being concerned about his strikeout rate and projecting a MLB-record-setting sustained 40+% rate that has no precedent. "Lapped the field" doesn't help your case for not being hyperbolic, by the way.

I wonder what happened on Geno Smith's 3 incompletions so far.

And I don't see why people are having so much trouble seeing it. Brett Jackson K'd in 34% of his AAA plate appearances this season. The list of players who have done that and gone on to be successful hitters is very, very scant. He has since K'd in 40% of his MLB appearances, which I think is pretty in line with his AAA performance (MLB pitchers being better at exploiting holes than AAA pitchers and all). The list of players who can strike out at that level and still perform well at the MLB level is even slimmer than the AAA list. People want a high OBP, take-and-rake guy in the offense so badly, they are willing to ignore the fact that this specific take-and-rake player does not appear to have the skill set to hit MLB pitching at an acceptable level in the long term. or, people could just be taking issue with you being so hilariously hyperbolic about it.

I find it funny that Arkansas went all in on recruiting one 6-6 wide receiver and fell short, and now they end up starting a completely different 6-6 freshman wide receiver. Also, 6'3" Cobi Hamilton is their shortest starting receiver now.

He had six Ks in his last four games going into today. You can have a lot of fun with arbitrary endpoints, but it's not as if the Ks had stopped in his recent hot streak. He was just getting something out of almost every non-K, which is completely sustainable. And in those same last four games, he had 16 plate appearances, making his K rate 37.5%, which is still less than 40%. Also, there are roughly 1.6 universes of difference between the K's stopping altogether and a sustained 40% K rate. By the way, Jackson would have to K 4 out of his next 8 plate appearances to end his first 100 PAs at over a 40% K rate.

I wouldn't take the over on 40% K rate for the next 100 PAs. Hell, I wouldn't take the over on his FIRST 100 PAs with the way he's going now.

I don't recall ever seeing a game in which each of a team's outfielders had an assist. All to different bases, too.

....wow.

Um...I'm pretty sure Tim Saunders didn't just get caught stealing for the 14th time...what was that supposed to be?

Love the attitude. That's what it's going to take to get him righted.

Easy to get spoiled when watching a prospect's development every single day.

What "garbage" are you referring to?

Not on the Cubs side of the matchup, but I just feel the need to point out that Joey Gallo's stats are video game stupid.

Yep, this low-A pitching is definitely too challenging for Vogelbach right now.

According to BA, he's already lost 30 lbs since high school.

Yeah, the version of the deal I saw earlier that included Gasol and had the Lakers taking back Harrington looked really bad.

Even if he hits .500 and OPSs 2.000, unless the NL is granted a DH, he's ultimately trade bait. Which has exactly nothing to do with his buzz as a prospect.

I don't think it's unreasonable he could get down to, say, 220 in 3 or 4 years.