Using Greg Halman to Remind People that Park and Age Matter
by Matthew on Sep 9, 2010 12:00 PM PDT
in Seattle Mariners Stats
Email
PrintDave Cameron recently posted a piece on Brock & Salk's blog concerning Greg Halman's strikeout rate. I know Dave is a self-admitted non-believer in Greg Halman and I know it was written for Brock and Salk's blog and so has a limit on how in depth it can be and still keep a reader's attention. Still, I felt there were an important two pieces missing from the comparison of Halman's strikeout rates to those of other noted whiffing sluggers.
First off, I care very little about career rates, especially in the Minors. I prefer to focus only on Double-A and above but will occasionally pay heed to High-A numbers when I think they say something interesting. Of course, looking only at Halman's numbers in West Tenn and Tacoma would seem to make the matter worse as his strikeout rate at those two levels has been higher than his overall career rate.
Which brings me to my first point. Parks matter and Halman has by and large played in parks that --according to my park factor figures-- increase strikeouts to right-handed hitters. West Tenn has a RHB K factor of 103 and Tacoma's in 108. Park adjusting Halman's strikeouts reduces them slightly. He still has horrible rates that track like this:
High-A 282 PAs, 28% Ks
Double-A 762 PAs, 32% Ks
Triple-A 465 PAs, 34% Ks
Counter to Halman's experiences, noted slugger Ryan Howard played in a more neutral and sometimes favorable (to reducing strikeouts) environments. When park adjusting his line, Howard's progression looks like:
High-A 533 PAs, 28% Ks
Double-A 433 PAs, 30% Ks
Triple-A 384 PAs, 27% Ks
The big divergence between the two being their performance in Triple-A. That leads into my second point. Howard was 23 in High-A, 24 in Double-A and mostly 25 in Triple-A. Halman on the other hand was 20 while batting in High-A, 21 while at West Tenn and 22 for most of this season at Tacoma. He just two weeks ago turned 23.
This is not a disproving of Dave's skepticism by any means. I agree that Halman has a big problem with strikeouts. I agree that very few players in the historical record have managed such high strikeouts in the minor leagues and gone on to have big league success. However, I think the gap is a little closer than might be perceived and I think we have to keep in mind Halman's young age as a reason to hope that he can improve upon his current rates in the future.
103 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I love that something positive could finally be said about Greg Halman.
Well, not necessarily positive, but I like that you’ve given me a little bit more hope for him. Is it true he has to be on the 25-man by the end of next season or we risk losing him?
He has one option remaining.
So 2011 is his opportunity to prove something and then 2012 is when the hammer comes down.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 9, 2010 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions
I would think he's got a decent chance to at least make the 2012 team as a backup outfielder.
He’s good enough to defend in all three spots at an average or above average level.
Liked the article
Halman is a decent defensive player. Is he good enough to be an average CF with the glove?
I don’t hate the strikeouts so much but I’d like him to walk more. If he was walking around 10% of the time I could live with the strikeouts better.
He's good enough to be at least average.
He was the Rainiers defensive player of the year, for whatever that’s worth, but regardless, he’s probably the best CF in system.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 9, 2010 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Sure, but that's only true because Ezequiel Carrera's gone.
M's fan in PA, soon to be LA
by perfectstrat on Sep 9, 2010 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions
I kinda think a lot of Carrera's defensive reputation came from him sharing his name with a Porsche
that’s basically why I thought he was really fast and agile.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, but Porsches come with a lot of (horse)power, and Carrera's probably the most likely player to post a negative ISO.
M's fan in PA, soon to be LA
by perfectstrat on Sep 9, 2010 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
They don't come with a lot of horsepower compared to other sportscars
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Halman's glove > Carrera's glove
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 9, 2010 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Really? I'd always thought Carrera was the best in the system defensively.
M's fan in PA, soon to be LA
by perfectstrat on Sep 9, 2010 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions
That was probably an inference because Carrera was playing CF over Halman for a while.
Halman’s numbers were better and he was playing CF when both he and Carrera were in Tacoma this year.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 9, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Carrera's reputation...
had a lot to do with defensive reputation often being inversely proportional to offensive ability. People saw he didn’t have a huge bat, knew Z traded for him, and assumed he was an Endy Chavez clone.
The comparison was certainly made.
I think I said that it was a similar offensive skillset, just likely better than Chavez’ and accompanied by worse defense.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 9, 2010 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Well if he can play average CF the bar for his offensive production is set a lot lower
Do you think he could be a +5-10 run CF or is average pretty much where he is going to stay?
by Edgar for Pres on Sep 9, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions
He's at least average and probably plus.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 9, 2010 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I haven't read Dave's piece yet and this is not to counter your point at all, because your point is a good one,
but I am going to go ahead and guess that Howard’s walk rates in the minors were something like double or triple what Halman’s have been.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 12:17 PM PDT reply actions
Huh Halman actually walks at a half decent rate
I guess the numbers are always simply dwarfed by his K numbers
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Half decent rate?!?
2008: ~6%
2009: 5.7%
2010: 8%
That’s not what i would call half decent.
"you ain't never been no virgin kid you were f@$%ed from the start"
by BW Kropotkin on Sep 9, 2010 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions
It is for a guy with his contact skills
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Even if you give him 8% BB percentage
which is beyond generous considering the jump to the majors, he’d be one of the worst 30 in the league in walk percentage and his B/KK would be twice as bad as the worst major league hitter.
"you ain't never been no virgin kid you were f@$%ed from the start"
by BW Kropotkin on Sep 9, 2010 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh I see I thought you were saying his walk rates were better than half decent
I was going off 10% being decent and half decent being literally half of that.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Phrases like "half decent" are annoying
“one half of decent” > half decent (oftentimes called halfway decent) > decent > good > awesome.
by yuniform on Sep 9, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Giving him an 8% walk rate would make him an exactly average qualified MLB hitter.
I don’t know where you pulled this worst 30 thing, but it’s completely false.
I don't know where I did either :/
"you ain't never been no virgin kid you were f@$%ed from the start"
by BW Kropotkin on Sep 9, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
There are a total of 23 qualified MLB hitters with a walk rate at or above 12%. That's more than a "decent" rate
Come on people, this takes five seconds to look up on FanGraphs.
Why I do believe I'll link to this later.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
Hey...
If you want to do the USSM commentary, that’s fine. I was just going to link it and say “hey, look at this” when I go over tonight’s game.
You’re awfully edgy for a guy who just got back from vacation.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 9, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm edgy BECAUSE I just got back from vacation.
(p.s. i love you)
Thank you
Don’t forget that he brings defensive value that guys like Howard and Branyan couldn’t sniff.
I understand the discussion is whether he can be a big league hitter, but his defense and speed are going to give him chances to prove that he can. Combined with his youth, he’s going to get a few looks at some point with somebody.
Park factors & K rate
Can someone explain why different parks would yield different K rates? It doesn’t make sense to me that you can develop reliable/meaningful park factors around an outcome that does not involve batted balls. Are there differing park factors for walks? HBP? Wild pitches?
It seems to me that the park factors for K rates are probably result of the quality of the home team’s pitching staff, not some feature of the park which makes batters K more (batter’s eye maybe?).
Please enlighten me…thanks!
Batter's eye is the huge determinant
but beyond that pitchers feel more comfortable being up in the zone in bigger parks. Pitching up in the zone has two main effects – whiffs and long fly balls. If a park plays big enough to hold most of the latter, you’re going to see more of the former.
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Batter's eye would probably be a factor, and I'd imagine that a lot of things about park factors are interdependant.
What Bearskin Rugburn says below is a significant factor I’d imagine, and I’d also guess that parks that favor pitchers lead to lower pitch counts which is going to affect the way pitchers go after batters.
by Aaron Campeau on Sep 9, 2010 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions
There are plenty of park-specific things that could affect things like strikeout rate.
Mostly pertaining to lighting/visibility. The cardinal direction the stadium is facing would affect where the sun is in relation to the batter’s line of sight to the pitcher. A stadium that faces exactly due west would likely increase strikeouts during the evenings/sunsets as the batter would have to stare in the direction of the sun to see the pitch. Similarly, a stadium with a tall, plain undecorated CF wall likely decrease strikeouts when compared to a stadium with a CF wall with colorful advertisements on it or a low wall with seats right against the field, as it’s easier to pick out the movement of the ball against a solid background, whereas with a more elaborate background the batter has to play “where’s waldo” with the ball a little bit more.
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work... I want to achieve it through not dying.
by Terminator X on Sep 9, 2010 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Do they place fields with the batter facing west?
Maybe there are some in the minors, but I always thought they oriented them with the batter facing away from the sun.
by nathaniel dawson on Sep 9, 2010 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Not directly toward the sun no,
but there are stadia, including Safeco, where you would can end up with the mound in shadow and home plate in day light depending on the time of day.
No they don't as far as I'm aware,
I was just using the most extreme scenario to give a vivid visualization of how much external factors (like lighting) can affect strikeout rate. I probably assumed other people would deduce that this applied in more subtle, more plausible scenarios as well. Like if you put a dumb hill in centerfield that casts dumb shadows on the grass.
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work... I want to achieve it through not dying.
Also more than just batter's eye
If the park is big it will give up less home runs. This allows pitchers to throw high heat more often since they don’t need to worry about home runs as much. This increases the strikeout rate.
by Edgar for Pres on Sep 9, 2010 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Everything is interdependent.
Generally, in pitcher’s parks, hitters are aware that it is difficult to produce offense by hitting and so take more pitches trying to work walks. Taking more pitches leads to both more walks and more strikeouts. You see this in Safeco.
Parks with big amounts of foul ground can cut down on strikeouts because more foul balls are caught. You see this in Oakland.
Parks have varying batters’ eyes. That has an obvious effect on all things hitting.
Every factor affects other factors.
Another important factor is air density.
Denser air makes pitches move more, basically making them more “nasty”. This is probably one reason why Safeco Field tends to induce more strikeouts than other parks, and why you see a park such as Coors Field having the opposite effect.
by nathaniel dawson on Sep 9, 2010 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Plus, to clarify
it has nothing to do with the quality of the home team’s staff, really. These things are determined by comparing how many strikeouts the home team gets at home vs. on the road, and how many times the home team’s hitters strike out at home vs. on the road. The process isn’t perfect — it essentially produces an average, assuming that differences between datasets and between players who are affected to different degrees will come out in the wash, and so applying a single park factor to individual players is effectively to assume that all types of players are affected the same way — but it doesn’t have the flaw you think; different pitching staffs aren’t being compared to each other, but to themselves.
by The Ancient Mariner on Sep 10, 2010 6:28 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I am going to bold and say that, with his power potential and defensive ability, Halman will be a quality major leaguer.
by Kirk on Sep 9, 2010 12:30 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Halman currently has a park-adjusted wOBA of .391 per statcorner, good for a 111 wOBA+
You’d think that even though his strikeouts will only be exploited at the next level, he can still be semi-productive at the plate. To be honest, I’d rather watch him hit that half the team at this point.
M's fan in PA, soon to be LA
The ability to make contact and hit breaking balls is very important and as a deficit is wildly exploitable at the MLB level.
If you have giant holes in your swing, pitchers will find it. Chris Davis owned minor league pitching, came up and mashed for a bit and now looks hopeless.
One Michael Saunders comes to mind
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions
True, but
Davis is a 3B/1B type, not a legit CF. Halman would make an unusual fourth OF, but even if he hits .200/.250/.400, he plays the field well enough to contribute off the bench.
by The Ancient Mariner on Sep 10, 2010 6:41 AM PDT up reply actions
You clearly didn't watch him face MLB-quality pitching at the last WBC.
Watching Halman take his hacks against pitchers with good secondary offerings and solid FB control is not fun. It’s actually quite brutal. I’m not sure my TV would survive a week of Halman in the majors.
While true, remember when that took place
Halman had come off of an abysmal year, his confidence was in tatters, they were about to send Roger Hansen to Haarlem to talk to his parents… and he was facing fringy-MLB quality pitching. He would’ve been worse in AAA in Feb/Mar of 2009.
It should be apparent that he’s not the same hitter now that he was then. This is different from saying that he wasn’t MLB quality then and IS now; he’s improved, albeit not enough.
Wasn't Halman coming off the year that saw him rankned #1 in the M's org by BA?
by Graham MacAree on Sep 9, 2010 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions
I believe so.
I think the awful WBC showing preceded the awful year.
Also I just thumbed through the book with the same article and they said he could contend for a job in 2010. Looks like that didn’t work out so well.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 9, 2010 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions
He may have improved...
but the numbers suggest he’s hacking just as much as usual. I’m not saying he can’t get better, just responding to the idea that he’d be more entertaining than the current Ms guys. Halman’s ABs in the WBC were cringe-worthy.
Can Anyone Tell Me About His Defense?
I thought I read somewhere that he was a plus defender, but can’t find it. I also checked Fangraphs but there is no UZR data availible. If he is good enough to be a great defensive outfielder, he could be extremely valuable and maybe we could use him or swap prospects with some team.
by Thurston24 on Sep 9, 2010 12:46 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Reading is soooo last millennium
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Capitalizing Everything In The Subject Is The New Cool Thing To Do
by Eyebrows on Sep 9, 2010 1:07 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
EVERYTHING?
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions
The comments in this thread do not tell me much
I see that one or two people I do not now believe he is a good defender. I do not know their basis for said belief. Unfortunately, I’m pretty new to the site and don’t know the commentors well enough to trust their take. For all I know they could be the best scouts around or blind guys who don’t know what Halman looks like who are laughing at those who are listening to them. If Jay, Matthew, or Jeff said that he was a plus defender, I know you guys know what your talking about, otherwise I’m ignorant.
by Thurston24 on Sep 9, 2010 1:05 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Some bloggers are so poor they have to sell the vowels out of their own names.
by Eyebrows on Sep 9, 2010 1:08 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 7 recs
Nah, that's just from his last name
which gave him plenty of consonants to sell, too.
by The Ancient Mariner on Sep 10, 2010 6:29 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is Truth.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
Never Mind, I'm retarded.
Sometimes you wish you could delete your own comments.
by Thurston24 on Sep 9, 2010 1:09 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
No I'm not Joe Thurston
But I saw him playin Yakima once.
by Thurston24 on Sep 9, 2010 3:30 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
It's okay. I took it for granted that everyone knew that and was more snarky than I intended.
Asking questions is almost always a good thing
Half the people here think that you're Jeff
never assume!
by pdb on Sep 9, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
I had to scroll up after reading the piece. I thought it was Jeff... :(
"Tell my tale to those who ask. Tell it truly, the ill deeds along with the good and let me be judged accordingly. The rest is silence." ~ Dinobot
I wonder if it'll work in person to.
Jeff, I’m out to steal your accolades and free beer.
Jeff snubbed me in SD, I'd get you a beer over him any day.
It's hard to convince people to let you eat them if you're an asshole. - Thingray
Halman is the most toolsy Mariner farmhand since Adam Jones
He can do everything but recognize an off speed pitch. It’s probably half the reason he swings at everything. He probably thinks he can hit everything.
eh...
remember, one of the five tools is a “hit” tool. Halman’s hit tool sucks.
He's not even the strikeout king of the Mariners organization...
Ladies and Gentlemen, Denny Almonte:
http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?pos=OF&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=518401
192K’s in less than 500 ABs. And – 25 walks. Albeit with 22 bombs, and he’s 21.
Gregory Halman Jr.?
On the other end of the spectrum, I know its High Desert, but Johermyn Chavez (Who is only 20) seemed to improve over the course of the season with a post ASG OBP of .410 and 29 BB to go with 59 K’s in his last 69 games… Still a little high on the whiffs, but not a killer. I’ll be VERY interested to see what he does next year.
I AM SO MAD THAT HE'S NO LONGER AT 50%
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 9, 2010 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions
I looked at a list of the leaders in K% in all of the minors for hitters with more than 300 PA at one level
There are 36 players with over a 30% strikeout rate. There are 6 players in the Mariners org with 30+% strikeout rates.
Teams with 6 30%+ players: 1 (Seattle)
Teams with 5 30%+ players: 0
Teams with 4 30%+ players: 0
Teams with 3 30%+ players: 1 (Baltimore)
Teams with 2 30%+ players: 7 (Minnesota, Detroit, Milwaukee, Toronto, St. Louis, Atlanta, and Pittsburgh)
Teams with 1 30%+ players: 13 (LA Dodgers, Kansas City, San Diego, Houston, Chicago White Sox, New York Mets, Colorado, San Fransisco, Texas, Philadelphia, Florida, Cincinnati, Oakland)
Teams with 0 30%+ players: 8 (Everybody else)
The M’s list consists of Kalian Sams (43.7%), Denny Almonte (36.6%), Gregory Halman (36.2%), Joseph Dunigan (35.3%), Carlos Peguero (32.2%), and Matthew Cerione (31.0%).
What the heck is going on? Do we not give a fuck about strikeouts compared to everybody else?
Tools!
De Gutibus non disputandum est
by Bearskin Rugburn on Sep 9, 2010 6:55 PM PDT up reply actions
That's an artifact of
The old Bavasi administration. Presumably, the new administration will care more about those things, and we’ll see some change over time.
Bavasi hated strikeouts
I think the MLB team had one of the lowest strikeout totals in the league
by Edgar for Pres on Sep 9, 2010 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Cerione is one of Mac's draftees
and Sams, Halman and Peguero were Engle’s international signings; Almonte and Dunigan came from Fontaine’s ‘07 draft, but they’re the only ones of whom you could really say that the Bavasi M’s took this type of player as opposed to a different type of player. Seems to me this speaks more to player development under Bavasi than to what type of player he wanted.
by The Ancient Mariner on Sep 10, 2010 6:39 AM PDT up reply actions
Its also some of the player development under the current org too though
They’ve had two years and if they wanted to change these guys approaches they could have. I’m sure plenty of the other orgs would have.
by Edgar for Pres on Sep 10, 2010 7:35 AM PDT up reply actions
You're assuming a certain level of coachability, or ability in general.
It’s not that easy to take guys who have not only been playing baseball most of their lives but have a few years of pro ball under their belts and say “do this thing completely differently from what you’re accustomed to”.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
These players are not in the majors primarily because they are striking out so much
I’m sure they have been told that they need to cut down their K% (I hope….) in order to make it to the majors. At some point these guys need to change. Somebody better be trying to change them.
by Edgar for Pres on Sep 10, 2010 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions
They probably tried with Kalian Sams
but Kalian Sams can’t figure out why he isn’t in the big leagues, so….
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 10, 2010 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions
We're also hitting for more power than any other farm system by a wide margin.
DINGERS
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 9, 2010 11:43 PM PDT up reply actions
So our minor league teams are going to the playoffs and hitting home runs
They are so much more interesting.
by Edgar for Pres on Sep 10, 2010 7:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Are you saying we have the minor league Blue Jays?
M's fan in PA, soon to be LA
by perfectstrat on Sep 10, 2010 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions
Boy howdy.
Except for the fact that the only launching pad we have is Mavericks Stadium, which is still more of a launching pad than most other launching pads.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
One thing...
is that of that group, only Halman and Cerione are remotely prospects at this point.
Almonte has crazy tools, and Sams, Dunigan, and Peguero all have crazy power, but I think it’s safe to say none of those four are even remotely in the Ms plans at this point. They’re just too fundamentally flawed to be considered future major leaguers. Halman and Cerione probably are too, but Halman’s young and close enough and Cerione’s far enough away that they can’t yet be totally written off.
Also, four of the six are international guys (Almonte was born and raised in the DR before coming to the U.S. for high school), and two of them spent their formative years in the Netherlands against not great competition.
Unfortunately...
Guillermo Pimentel might get added to that group of hacks next year. His 58:5 K:BB in 51 rookie-ball games this year wasn’t exactly inspiring.
Pass.
Dominican prospect in his first year.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Sep 10, 2010 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions
The same sentence applies to all of them
They would be great prospects if they could substantially reduce their strikeout rate. If they are unable to reduce their strikeout rate they will not get much more than a cup of coffee in the majors.
by Edgar for Pres on Sep 10, 2010 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't agree.
Kalian Sams wouldn’t be a great prospect if he reduced his strikeout rate. He wouldn’t even bee a good prospect. Or even a prospect, really. He’s a 1B/DH masquerading as an OF who can swat a mistake pitch a mile. Even with dramatically reduced K’s you’re talking about a guy whose upside is Greg Pirkl.
Peguero and Dunigan are a little less extreme than Sams, but if they cut the K’s down considerably, neither of them is still much better than a left-handed Mike Wilson. Neither of them are good defenders, and they’re both getting pretty old in prospect years.
Almonte would be interesting, but he’d still need to learn to take a walk. If he did that, he’d be a pretty good prospect since he can handle CF.
Halman’s the only one who would be any kind of real prospect just by substantially reducing his K’s.
by slamcactus on Sep 11, 2010 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Lookout Landing
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
