Drew Vs. Tulowitzki - Who do you pick and Why?

Drew for me

It isn't even close. Drew's numbers at some levels were just ridiculous (his stats in Lancaster, his stats in the AFL). Tulowitzki has been solid, but hasn't dominated like Drew has.

by delmonfan on Aug 14, 2006 11:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well

I'm in the IBC trying to trade Tulo for Drew, so I obviously think that Drew is better. But so does BA, so does the scout they asked to rate them, etc., etc.

by Brett Perryman on Aug 14, 2006 11:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Really

the scout likes Drew better than Tulo??

Take a look at the tools grades each gets:
Fielding: Tulo 65, Drew 50
Arm Strength: Tulo 65, Drew 60
Hitting: Tulo 50, Drew 70
Speed: Tulo 50, Drew 50
Power: Tulo 65, Drew 55

That doesnt look like Drew is better than Tulo, with Drew beating him in only ONE category, hitting for average. Speed is a wash, and Tulo wins in Power, Arm Strength, and Fielding.

The scout also quotes in saying when you watch Tulo, you KNOW and see him working to get better, while Drew takes plays off and looks lackadaisical at times.

Give me Tulo anyday...theres NO way somebody can say because Drew is doing well in the majors right now that this is not a fair question. There's no way to know what Tulo would be doing right now. Drew has a half a season in AAA in his belt...so he's EXPECTED to do well. But given both in their primes, I'll take Tulo.

by bballfanlvnv on Aug 15, 2006 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

re: grades

Yeah, but the hit tool is the most important tool. A gap of 20 on that tool is quite wide. If you had benchmarks for each of those tools (i.e. names of 5 players with grades of 50 and 70 on the hit tool) you would get a better sense of what they mean. As numbers sometimes the meaning is diminished.

Also, more than just tools matter. There are also the 7 skills. Drew is said to be above Tulo by a decent margin in the plate discipline/pitch recognition skill.

Tulo is a fine prospect. I just think that SS that can hit .300/.400/.500 in a neutral park are very rare. Drew may be able to achieve this. John's crystal ball seems to suggests he believes it is possible.

by natsfan2005 on Aug 15, 2006 7:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Umm

It's not real fair to compare their numbers at the same level. Last year in High-A, Tulow was injured and Drew was 22. Similarly, it's not fair to compare Drew's AA numbers last year to Tulow's AA numbers this year (where Tulow's are much better) because it was still Drew's first season and a small sample. Since all the scouts say Drews bat is more advanced, I think most people would take him. At the same time, most scouts say Tulow will probably hit for a little more power, and have a better glove. Of course for fantasy purposes the glove doesn't matter so I'll say Drew but it's pretty close...

by Dfarth on Aug 15, 2006 1:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

re

Drew is tearing up the Bigs. Tulo is in AA. Why is this even a question right now?

by ScottAZ on Aug 15, 2006 2:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Aside

from me trying to validate my own sanity - I thought it would be interesting discussion. Take their level of play out of the equation(i.e MLB vs AA).. take each for face value, future projection, etc - who do you take and why?

For me, its Drew hands down. Tulo is a great SS prospect, but to me theres Tulo who's very good, and then theres the head of the class for SS prospects(Drew, Wood).

by cincyinco on Aug 15, 2006 3:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

really?

I think a serious factor should be defense....

Wood will likely move to 3B and its unlikely that Drew will play the majority of his career at SS....

Meanwhile, there is no doubt that Tulo will stick at SS.

Ability to stay at SS should factor into the "best SS prospect" discussion.

by sg8335aa on Aug 15, 2006 7:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Drew at SS

IMO Drew has played an excellent SS, and the numbers back it up (Rate2 = 109)... not sure why there is so much doubt about his ability to stick there. Of course, sample size rules do apply, but so far, so good.

by jc3 on Aug 15, 2006 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

From all accounts I've read Drew's Defense was vastly underrated going into the year. Either that or he's made great strides in his game.. I think Drew will stick at SS for the majority of his career.

by cincyinco on Aug 15, 2006 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's a very good

question, Scott. I'd like for some others to have to answer that.

by Brett Perryman on Aug 15, 2006 3:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Less than 100 AB

We have this thing called sample size. I can't believe anyone even needs to point this out anymore.

by ian on Aug 15, 2006 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yup

Just ask Chris "The Whammer" Shelton

The picture painted is also quite different than reality. The trade in question is not Tulowitzki for Drew, it's Tulowitzki and Anthony Reyes for Drew.

God rested one day out of 7, Felix rests 4 out of 5.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Aug 15, 2006 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

We're also not

talking about just one side of the deal being better than the other. We're talking about one being so much better that you veto, despite both being established owners in the league with very good rosters built.

So when most people have a clear preference for Drew, there is a difference of opinion between you and the whole of the readers on this site right there, because you said you don't see there being one.

You vetoed based on an opinion in which you are in the minority.

by Brett Perryman on Aug 15, 2006 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And you

Are making an assumption which you have no basis to build upon, namely that I don't think Drew is a batter prospect than Tulowitski. I agree that he is a better prospect, that doesn't mean Tulo is a bad prospect though or that a young talented SP, in a league where starting pitching is at a HUGE premium, is necessary to balance out the difference between two prospects for whom the difference in value is more akin to a molehill than a mountain.

God rested one day out of 7, Felix rests 4 out of 5.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Aug 16, 2006 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Quote

"I don't see much of a difference between Tulowitzki and Drew, value wise"

And tell me what you base Reyes' value on? Certainly not just a few major league innings. BA rated Reyes the #41 prospect in the offseason and all you have to build his value off of that is his small major league experience, which I can also quote you as saying, in capital letters, means NOTHING.

So the informed, mainstream view is that the difference between Drew and Tulo is noticeable (that is clear from these results), and you are so certain that that is wrong, that the #41 prospect in baseball is enough to VETO, not just say he's getting the better side, but VETO.

Put another way, BA rated, at midseason, Drew as the #1 prospect in baseball, and Tulowitzki as #8.

Even if we completely ignore Drew's stellar ML performance, which has more concreted him than Reyes' has him, your contention, presumably, is that I should not be allowed to, if I choose to, trade #8 and #41 for #1. How can you defend that logic? I'm pretty sure that you can't.

by Brett Perryman on Aug 16, 2006 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

First

The IBC isn't BA. BA doesn't value pitching as highly as batting because pitching tends not to pan out. In our league, Pitching is very, very valuable as you know. So you have two prospects who are incredibly close in value at the same position being exchanged but on top of that there's a pretty good young starting pitcher going one way. Reyes is going practically as a freebie.
Your perspective on Drew is HORRIBLY distorted. You said, of this deal "Do you think that I'm supposed to just ask guys to hand over the most valuable players in the game for "fair value"?"
One of the most valuable players in the game.
This is the injury-prone Stephen Drew that you're describing as one of "the most valuable players in the game". If you honestly believe that Stephen Drew is one of the most valuable players in the game, then I would seriously question your baseball sanity.

God rested one day out of 7, Felix rests 4 out of 5.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Aug 17, 2006 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tulo

I think everyone is forgetting that Stephen Drew is JD Drew's brother. The guy is practically guaranteed to miss huge chunks of the season throughout his career with those genes. Give me Tulo for that reason alone.

by Pawtucket Pat on Aug 15, 2006 9:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by that logic...

Tulo's comp coming out of college was Bobby Crosby. So I guess Tulo's going to miss tons of games too and hit .230.

See how silly that is?

by natsfan2005 on Aug 15, 2006 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Comp" doesn't equal "genes"

there's a big difference between "comp" and blood relation.....

Just because players are similar, doesn't garuntee the same outcome. HOWEVER, same genes often mean that Stephen is more likely to have similar injury problems (though far from garunteed)

by sg8335aa on Aug 15, 2006 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

especially since

Stephen has already had his share of nagging things since college

by PooNani on Aug 15, 2006 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So

Because Tulo doesn't have a ball player brother that we can base his future health on he will be healthy and Drew will be injury prone?

I've got no problem if someone wants to point to the injuries Stephen had @ FSU and AA to suggest he may have injuries in the future. But projecting all of JD's warts on him is over the top and unwarranted. Is everyone on this site a carbon copy of their relatives - I'm definitely not...

by natsfan2005 on Aug 15, 2006 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

re: So

He doesn't need to be a carbon copy to be derailed by injuries. If he has half the injury problems JD did (and still does) then I don't think he'll be as good as Tulo.

You may not be a carbon copy of your relatives, but I'm willing to bet you're pretty similar. I don't want to get into a discussion of DNA and double helixes on a minor league baseball website, but suffice to say that being a Drew will almost certainly have an effect on how often Stephen is injured, as we've already seen from his past injury history.

by Pawtucket Pat on Aug 15, 2006 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Billy Ripken

Went on the DL in August 1990, July 1994 and 10 (!) other times in his major league career. While some of these may be marginal player roster moves, some of them were probably real.

Drew's injury history is relevant. His gene pool should not be.

Obviously, 1 anecdote either way is meaningless...

by BIgMax on Aug 15, 2006 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

Seriously, this is like saying Stephen won't be successful because his brother Tim was a bust.

by yoda1 on Aug 15, 2006 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

re: yep

No one is saying Stephen won't be successful. The question is will he be better than Tulowitzki, and I'm saying he won't be given his injury history and genes. JD Drew is still a very good, if inconsistent, performer and I think that, at worst, Stephen will be the same. However, I think Tulo will be better long-term.

I don't think anyone is saying Drew will flame out and be a bust.

by Pawtucket Pat on Aug 15, 2006 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

re: injuries

so how many games has Stephen missed during his college and pro career due to injuries?

by yoda1 on Aug 15, 2006 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Greg Maddux....

....is just a poor man's Mike Maddux.

by southboundpachyderm on Aug 15, 2006 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You definitely should not get into that discussion

Genetics is far too complicated to say that two brothers will share an injury history any more than one brother's greatness will ensure another's - see the great example of Ripken. Others could be the Alous, or Vlad vs the "other" Guerrero.

It's just too complicated. Plenty of better things to use as an assessment.

by siddfynch on Nov 12, 2006 5:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

hey now.

"Because Tulo doesn't have a ball player brother that we can base his future health on he will be healthy and Drew will be injury prone?"

captain, a box of logic is flying out of the nebula on an intercept course... it's hailing us. no, tulo's brotherlessness does not mean he WILL be healthy. nobody said that, and it's a very bad attempt at a summary of what people have been trying to argue. tulo's future healthiness is an unknown. but stephen is the third drew brother to be a first-round draft pick, and the first two have both turned out injury-prone. one was a pitcher, and pitchers are just injury-prone as a species, but still, he did get hurt. that increases the likelihood that stephen will have similar characteristics. it's not 100% - nothing is, in heredity, or in baseball, or in predicting the future in general. but it increases the odds, so it's reasonable to consider it a knock on stephen realtive to tulo's blank slate.

by wily mo on Aug 15, 2006 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Whoa, there, Captain Logic

Has someone out there discovered the baseball injury gene? Because that really would be news...

In an unrelated matter, this five-tool business is silly, because it obscures the fact that contact ability and plate discipline are the most reliable metrics for judging prospects. Power develops unpredictably, and often in the late 20's (though obviously that's not a worry for Drew, and probably not for Tulo either.) Speed fades early. And defense is just not nearly as vital as hitting ability to a player's value, and I mean real-world value, not just fantasy. So to me Drew's advantages are obvious at this stage, though I like Tulo too. I drafted Drew 5th overall in a new 15-team league's draft, then snagged Tulo in third round and dealt him in midseason.

by igreen01 on Aug 15, 2006 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

LOL

seriously, this whole injury/gene theory is completely getting out of hand. You'd think that we have some genetic research has been done to prove that this is how it actually works.

Get real people.

by yoda1 on Aug 15, 2006 7:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

baseball injury gene

i'm not saying there's a baseball injury gene, per se. but, to me, it seems reasonable to suspect that a player's injury-proneness or lack thereof is at least in some part a function of the physical construction of their body - tendon strength and thickness, things like that. which i have to think are strongly influenced by heredity. i know my girlfriend, for example, has pretty weird joints - she's double-jointed, and she can't really run for long distances or it screws up her ankles - and she got all that from her dad.

it'd be one factor among many, of course, so none of this is a 100% guarantee of anything, as i was careful to point out. i'd be interested to see some kind of systematic study along these lines. maybe it's not the case at all - that's certainly possible. i wasn't trying to say that logic proves stephen drew will be injury-prone, and i agree that the original statement that stephen is "practically guaranteed" to miss huge chunks of time because of JD is too strong. but then we had two howlers in a row there (first equating the tulo-crosby comps with the drews' family relationship, and then acting like people were saying tulo would definitely be healthy because he didn't have a brother) so i had to say something.

by wily mo on Aug 15, 2006 8:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree with you

on everything except that fielding is not as important as hitting. at some positions i think you are right...but, for me, SS is not one of them...

by Dfarth on Aug 15, 2006 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

Both Giambis turned out to be Juicers and both Cansecos turned out to be losers...

God rested one day out of 7, Felix rests 4 out of 5.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Aug 15, 2006 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

True.

And why no love for the Menendez brothers, asked their lawyer. The way I look at it is that while as his owner I'd prefer that Stephen Drew were Cal Ripken's bastard son, the fact that he's J.D. Drew's brother is not really sufficient to conclude that he's an above-average injury risk or more injury-prone than Tulo, for that matter.

And I agree that SS is an important defensive position, just as I agree that Drew's a good shortstop.

by igreen01 on Aug 15, 2006 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

re: injuries

While I don't have exact numbers at every level, he missed some time in the independent league, wore down last year at AA, and missed some time in college as well. The Diamondbacks website also mentions him as slightly injury prone:

"Like J.D., Stephen has already suffered a fair number of injuries so far in his young career. He missed seven games with the Riversharks with a leg injury and was forced to miss time in each of his three seasons with the Seminoles."

And it's also worth mentioning that Tim was the victim of injuries as well. Just like JD, Stephen doesn't seem to suffer from huge debilitating injuries, just little nicks here and pulled hammies there that keep him from being on the field as often as he should be.

by Pawtucket Pat on Aug 15, 2006 12:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

statistics

Drew will likely be a top to middle of the order hitter in a lineup with Conor Jackson, Carlos Quentin, Chris Young, Alberto Callaspo, Miguel Montero, Chad Tracy, and Gonzalez/Upton.

That means 100+ runs, 100+ RBI could be an annual thing for him, not to mention the lineup protection will help his stats.

Tulo will be in a lineup with Atkins/Stewart, Helton/Koshansky, Holliday, and Iannetta.

See the difference?

Not that it will make Drew any better of a player, but it will affect the perception of how good he is. Therefore, I foresee Drew getting more respect and putting up better counting stats than Tulowitzki in the future.

Rays in '08....

by youALREADYknow on Aug 15, 2006 3:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

rockies

holliday- 327/378/570 26yrs old
atkins- 305/383/520 26yrs old
hawpe- 297/382/518 27yrs old

the rockies have a very underrated core of young players entering their primes putting up great numbers. Tulo's going to be protected and if he hits in front of them hes going to score tons of runs.

by npurcell on Aug 15, 2006 6:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Drew

I like Tulo, but I think Drew is the easy choice. He's got average defensive tools -- with a chance to improve -- and might be the best-hitting SS within three years, providing A-Rod doesn't move back.

Then factor in how rare lefty, power-hitting shortstops are. Really, who is the best SS to fit that bill over the past 10 years? Of all time?

A snapshot: This season Drew has hung in vs. LHP, hitting .376 in the minors -- though most of his walks and power came against RHP. Tulo has done more of his damage vs. lefties (.419 with 4 of 7 HR; he's .263 vs. RHP). Of course, Drew will face more RHP than Tulo will LHP.

Hey, I'll be first to admit I didn't like the guy coming out of FSU, but I've come around on Drew. Big time.

by Mr Met on Aug 15, 2006 8:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Tulowitzki

I'll Tulowitzki for a this reason, hes is going to be playing in Coors for years to come. So those flyballs that might might not get out of other ballparks, are almost always out. Also, Drew is going to be playing Bank One(or whatever its called now), that field is huge. With the huge batters eye that is 400 plus feet away, and not to mention the fact that you have to hit the ball over the yellow line thats about 30 feet up the wall. So, with this said I see them both hitting between 20-25 homers, Drew with an average of .285 and Tulowitzki hitting .300-.315 and playing much better defense.

by Longbeach2Colorado08 on Aug 15, 2006 9:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re:

Through the Allstar break, the park factor for Arizona was 1.068, and the park factor for coors was 1.093. That difference is pretty insignificant.

Neither of these parks will inflate or deflate numbers too much. Of course, the numbers I posted above were only raw park factors, didn't include HR, average, 2b, etc.

The perception that Coors still inflates numbers is outdated, and it certainly would not make the difference between between Tulo and Drew's averages that you stated above

by Jgaztambide on Aug 15, 2006 9:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

One interesting stat

that tempers my enthusiasm for Drew is his line compared to the team line in Tucson.

Drew:

.283/.340/.461/.801

Tucson as a Team:

.289/.365/.458/.823

I meant to post this earlier this week and didn't get a chance. Now, this is not a condemning stat and maybe Drew's performance in the majors overrides it all together. But, when he's not even hitting better than team average - it's tough for me to regard him that highly. (Just to compare)

Delmon Young
.330/.354/.487/.842

Durham Bulls
.265/.329/.399/.729

by Dfarth on Aug 16, 2006 6:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs