At this point, he's clearly better than Hazle in that he is significantly younger and thus has more growth potential, particularly with respect to power.

However, Hazle had 18 BB to go with his 134 AB, whereas JF has yet to take four pitches out of the strike zone.  

Hazle struck out 15 times in those 134 AB.  JF is above this rate, but not badly (19 in 105 going into tonight).

Hazle was, well, probably a mediocre OF (I imagine someone could give a meaningful report...I can't other than looking at the stats), but JF appears to be quite good at this point (good arm, at the absolute least).

So, JF's performance suggests great potential, but the current performance is (a) hardly without precedence in the annals of baseball, and (b) does anything but guarantee greatness.

This is not something newly developed to hate on Jose Reyes or Jeff Francouer.  It simply helps to point out the extreme nature of the situation.  What JS has done is look at the success of those who have walked sparingly in the past to see if this type of success is sustainable.  History seems to think not.  That's not to say that it's not out of the realm of possibilities, but he will will definitely be an outlier and a case for deeper study if he does sustain such success without improving his walk rate if his batting average ever dips.

What I also find about BP is that they don't rule out the idea that someone could be a whole new breed.  Just like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, it's almost impossible to find comparables to project future success (or lack thereof).  However, for Jeff there currently are comparables that have come on to the scene similarly to how Jeff has.  It would be silly not to look at them to try to gain some information don't you think?

Personally, I'm a huge Braves and JF fan, but don't want to hear all day about how great someone is.  I can see how great he is.  I want to question his success and learn more.  Because of the track records of people with low walk rates in the past, I'm very excited to see how Francouer's past pans out.  My susupcion is that long term success may require some bit of patience at the plate, but would be thrilled to see him succeed otherwise.  

In fact, I bet sabremetric-minded GM's are pulling for JF, so that, other GM's who think like you do, will throw out the millions of stats and counterexamples out the door because of one outlier.  Thus propagating poor valuations of players who lack patience who, historical have shown they don't succeed nearly as much as those who do.  

That's the thing about BP, it's not about hating.  It's about watching, learning and adding to the pile of information you have to draw upon for better understanding.  Extreme outliers like JF are sure to be a hot topic since I imagine we all will learn something from what becomes of his career.  

While I'm on the topic.  You always hear the scouts vs stats debate.  The odd things is, I rarely hear statheads discredit the value of scouts.  What I do hear (and maybe it's just the Scout's honor guy and Joe Morgan) is scout minded guys discredit statheads.  For the majority of people, the two scouting and searching statistics for patterns go hand in hand, not against each other.  

Francoeur is excellent defensively, but I have to agree he is probably not ready offensively long term.  Next year starting in right field, I expect Francoeur to post an OPS around .750, maybe lower, with a too low OBP

I'm too lazy to do the research - what's his P/PA right now?