Jeff Francoeur Called Up: Braves forced to consolidate minor league teams due to lack of players

Wow

If they make the playoffs, bobby cox should be given the world series title on principal alone.

Bob Abreu for Kevin Stocker....I'll take it-Chuck Lamar

by Tyler on Jul 6, 2005 9:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Maybe Chuck James will be here soon enough.......

Chuck James will probably end up pitching some innings this year too. LOL. As long as Andruw is in the middle of the OF - they will be OK out there. I am amazed how many balls he gets to.

Remember...it was a 19 year old Andruw Jones that played in the 1996 series I think....

Maybe this year he takes K. Johnson, R. Langerhans and Kyle Davies to the World Series.

by slickwdb on Jul 6, 2005 9:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Ive been very skeptical of jeff francoeur. I just cannot imagine him being any better than garrett anderson, at best, with that miniscule walk rate. The only way anderson gets away with it is because he makes contact so consistently, of course fracouer strikes out a ton. How many corner outfielders have been successfull striking out 23% of the time AND have a walk once for every 3 1/2 k's? Id keep in AA until he makes more consistent contact and/or becomes more selective.

by sanchez101 on Jul 6, 2005 10:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

So

He won't be better than a perennial 300 Hitter and an all star, I think the Braves would take that.

by SoCalSoxFan on Jul 7, 2005 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well If we are going to use percentages.

True Francoeur does strike out a good bit. At least now he does. When he was in Low A Rome He struck out only 69 times in 500+ at bats. That is not an extreme amount at all esp for a power hitter. True his strike outs have risen slightly since then somewhere around 4-5% but his walks have also increased slowly also. They have risen about 2% since two years ago. Now I'm not saying he has a great plate discipline, but he has improved with extended time at each level while still being young for the level and he has never really "struggled" anywhere either. I've seen the kid and talked with him. I can see why the Braves are so in love with him. He's physically imposing and just looks like a baseball player. THey often compare him to dale Murphy, and really if his numbers play out from the minors to the majors he looks like him statistically. Murphy struck out a BUNCH. But no one doubts he was productive and if not one of the two or three best players in the league for 7 years or so. Now im not saying Franc is going to go nuts or be great, but i just have a hunch with this kid (and i think the braves do too) that there is something more to him than the numbers. We'll see soon enough

by yondaime4 on Jul 7, 2005 12:09 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Atlanta

Francouer has his strong points, im just saying that i would like to see some significant progress. His walk rate has increased somewhat, but not enough to believe his ready for the majors. As soon as major league pitchers realize hell swing at anything, francoeur will be helpless at the plate, why would they give him anything to hit. I sorry but, he "just looks like a baseball player" and "i just have a hunch" is not meaningfull analysis. Im sure brad pitt would look great in a uniform, in fact he kind of looks like chipper jones, but i wouldnt want on my team. He has great power, he just needs to become more selective to tap into that power, because if he can't, he's juan encarnacion.

by sanchez101 on Jul 7, 2005 12:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Meaningful analysis?

I think you're missing the point. I don't think looking at a guy's stat line and basing your entire "analysis" on his K/BB, K/AB, or BB/AB (or whatever you deem to be important) is meaningful analysis.

If you've seen Francoeur play, if you've listened to scouts about him, if you've personally witnessed his improvement in ALL areas of his game, then you have some meaningful analysis.

This is the problem with interpreting things from stat lines - anybody can do it.

Francoeur has five tool abilities. He has a GREAT bat, good speed, and is exceptional defensively. There is no denying that he is very aggressive at the plate. He certainly needs to tighten up his strike zone, but he is getting better. In 2003, he would flail at anything on the outer half of the plate. His plate coverage now is much, much better. Breaking balls will give him fits, but how many 21 year-olds don't struggle against breaking balls from time to time?

If you've seen Francoeur, the first thing you'd notice is his bat speed. He has phenomenally quick wrists and he'll never be fooled by a fastball. His swing mechanics are sound and he'll easily hit 30+ HR in the big leagues at his peak.

If you're comparing him to Garret Anderson, that's fine. I'll take Anderson on my team any day. I personally think Francoeur has a higher ceiling than that given his power potential, but if he "only" gets to the level of Anderson, that's fine by me.

There is only one player in the minors I'd take over Francoeur - Delmon Young.

by Spooneybarger on Jul 7, 2005 5:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm

Does Francoeur remind anyone else immensely of Rocco Baldelli? Just curious, especially since it seems like he could be running into the same types of problems (outside of the injuries)...

by Brickhaus on Jul 7, 2005 8:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Francoeur

Tools are great, the foundation of any star ballplayer, but, and im sure john sickles would agree with me here, a player has to turn those tools into actual production. Im not going to debate his tools, because hes probably the "toolsyest" player in minors. But what separates him from joel guzman or jeremy hermida?
Garret Anderson is a fine ballplayer, but a corner outfielder with a career .329 obp cannot be considered a star. Moreover, anderson has made much better contact than francoeur has yet to exhibit. If anderson is francoeur's ceiling, he doesnt belong in the same sentence as delmon young. Luckily for francoeur, Atlanta is probably the best scouting and instructional organization in baseball, and i believe they will be able to teach him to tap into his abilities,(look at the progress the dodgers have made with guzman this year) but until he actually exhibits major league plate discipline to go with those tools, he'll never be the star atlanta needs him to be.

by sanchez101 on Jul 7, 2005 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

what?

Guzman's 3 to 1 K/BB is progress? That was a bad comp, but your point about "turning tools into production" is 100% right on the money.

This is why I am so frustrated with Corey Patterson!

by So Cal Bob on Jul 7, 2005 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

progress

in 2004 it was closer to 4 to 1 k/bb, with a significalty higher walk rate, is progress, even if it is still pretty bad

by sanchez101 on Jul 7, 2005 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Meaningful analysis?

No doubt, an all-numbers approach will not reveal everything about a player.

However, if Francoeur has made the dramatic strides you suggest, wouldn't there be evidence of said strides SOMEWHERE in his performance record?

Put in another way, if all of those improvements don't result in any change in produciton, has improvement really happened?

by superpriebe on Jul 7, 2005 9:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

stats only provide us with outcomes. they dont tell the whole story. Paul Depodesta in moneyball talks about how people can focus too much on outcomes, and not on the process that produces those outcomes. It think thats a good lesson in looking at stats. For example Francoeur strikesout a lot, but why? That is where i think good scouting and instruction comes in to fill the gap. To ignore stats, to view them as something that has little relationship to the truth, is as wrong as ignoring the scouts.

by sanchez101 on Jul 8, 2005 1:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yea...

I also think he needs a bit more time.

by SenorGato88 on Jul 7, 2005 2:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Garrett Anderson

Like being Garret Anderson would be a bad thing

Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen.

by Phil Gurnee on Jul 7, 2005 2:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

My thoughts...

Exactly. ONLY a Garrett Anderson type? Darn, and I was hoping for the next Ted Williams.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Jul 7, 2005 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Too Bad

A career .300 hitter still hitting over .300 at age 33 with over 200 HR's and 1000 RBI's would be a real shame. Man..that would really suck for the Braves.

by slickwdb on Jul 7, 2005 9:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Francoeur vs Marte

Who do you think will have a better major league career, Jeff Francoeur or Andy Marte? Different minor league sites have them rated differently, and I am curious what you think. I do not have enough information in front of me to really make a decision.

by dbimberg on Jul 7, 2005 9:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

MF

I'm kind of skeptical about both. Though not as much for Marte. I like Marte more. I think he'll put stats up similar to Eric Chavez.

I think it's a mistake promoting Francoeur; I don't think he's close to ready.

by ultxmxpx on Jul 7, 2005 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

F vs. M

I'm a big believer in Marte, Francoeur I'm somewhat skeptical of.

...NJASDJDH...

by Fabian on Jul 7, 2005 11:21 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

John Shuerholz

IS AMAZING. They do this year and year and with different parts.

I agree with Fabian as I'm not sold on Francouer either. Given that he's moving to a pitcher's park will not help his offense.

Not to step on an earlier post, but Billy Beane "looked like a baseball player" too. That's why statistical analysis is important. I like Spooney's first-hand report and I feel better about him, but still have concerns.

As for the G.A. comp, WOW!!!!!!!!!! That's saying a lot and not to be negative, but Francouer will not be as productive as G.A. He has been an exceptional hitter and Francouer has never been labeled an exceptional hitter. If he is, then ATL will be incredibly happy.

by So Cal Bob on Jul 7, 2005 12:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Philosophy

The Braves are a scout/tool organization and it's hard to argue they haven't been one of the 2-3 best organizations in baseball over the last decade plus. Some organizations are much better at developing toolsy players (atlanta) than others (Oakland).

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Jul 7, 2005 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Beane

yeah but the whole idea on why Beane failed was he had bad makeup (couldn't deal with failure, etc) while Francoeur is the poster boy for the Braves in terms of makeup (their execs have been quoted as saying they think he could be bigger, in terms of star impact, on and off the field, then Chipper was)

by abravesfan on Jul 7, 2005 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Garret Anderson...

is quite possibly the most overrated "underrated" player in baseball.

No offense to him, he seems like a nice guy and he's pretty damn consistent. But a corner OFer with a career OPS barely over .800 doesn't scream great hitter to me.

And right now, I could see Franceour being a Anderson-esque in that he won't get on base alot. But I think he'll have more power, though he'll K more and hit for less average.

I would take a few guys over Franceour, starting with Hermida and Young.

by SenorGato88 on Jul 7, 2005 2:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs