One thing that trips me up when evaluating a minor leaguer is an exceptional or horrible late-season move up to the next level. For example, Stephen Drew was amazing in the hitter-friendly Cal League and terrible in the Southern League. I think Baseball America said he was tired, but how do they really know? Travis Denker was great in low-A and then fell apart in his brief time at High-A. Many are chalking it up to his flaws being exposed at a higher level, with fatigue not mentioned as a factor. On the other hand, Blake Dewitt wasn't that great in low-A and then had a fantastic 31 at-bats in Vero Beach. I've never been on the Dewitt bandwagon, but now I'm wondering if I should be.
The question: How much stock should one put in these brief trials? When is a failed trial important (as it is to those who've abandoned Denker) and when should it be irrelevant because of small sample size (Drew).