Lars Anderson

by bk11 on Jan 29, 2008 10:33 PM EST Comment 14 comments

Hey guys,
Was wondering if you could help me out a bit with some information regarding Lars. I know he it a rather promising prospect whot the Red Sox really like. I don't doubt his power potential, but does anyone have an idea on whether he'll bat for avg? He struck out a lot last yr, and I've been trying to find information if it's because of his inexperience, or maybe because his swing is too long/too much of an uppercut, or other possible factors.
Thanks in advance!

0 recs | Comment 14 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Not an uppercut guy

from what I understand. Very good contact skills. Supposed to hit for both plus plus power and average.

by alskor on Jan 29, 2008 11:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fE1VVujoOI

by smk1363 on Jan 30, 2008 12:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

...waaaa

sorry he only takes like 1 swing in this video

by smk1363 on Jan 30, 2008 12:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

still think he's underrated

I think he can become a Justin Morneau - lite. Meaning around .270 - .290 with 25-30 dingers a year if things break right for him. I think the odds are better than most other 1b prospects that he at least becomes a solid regular.

Hey fish, leave those kids alone!

by The Congo Hammer on Jan 30, 2008 1:44 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

".270 - .290 with 25-30 dingers a year"

Is that really "Morneau-lite" as much as "Morneau?"

by alskor on Jan 30, 2008 2:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think you'll see Morneau...

start to get in the 40 HR range this year.

But we'll see.

by DJSkillz on Jan 30, 2008 3:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

morneau comp

He'll also walk 2x as much as Morneau. Carlos Pena seems like a closer comp

by Galt on Jan 30, 2008 4:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Uh...

you mean minus the lost years, 2007 vintage Pena, right?

by alskor on Jan 30, 2008 6:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Simply unbelievable

that no one could be bothered to burn a 17th round pick on this guy so that the Red Sox couldn't get him.

The odds of your 17th rounder turning into a viable player are like 1/28932946th the odds that the Red Sox win a free playoff spot because they got an extra first-round pick gift-wrapped on a silver platter.

In other news, the MLB draft is a complete joke. I don't understand what the point of even having it is when the rich teams have the same ridiculous advantages there as anywhere else.

by PaulThomas on Jan 30, 2008 1:47 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

MLB Draft

i dont think its the draft so much as cheap a$$ owners not willing to pay elite prospects. I agree that it is sad that blue chippers slide multiple slots because they will cost too much...Just off the top of my head didnt the Padres take Matt Bush #1 a couple years back, passing on the likes of Verlander?

With regards to Lars...how can the guy not MASH with a name like Lars? 20 yrs old and 6'4 I think he will grow into the power worthy of a mid to upper tier 1B.

by SoCal on Jan 30, 2008 12:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Verlander

The Padres didn't pass on Verlander, in fact many people believed the Tigers reached on Verlander because he was seen as very raw.

The conventional wisdom was that if the Tigers were going to spend the money they should have taken Weaver or Drew.

Humber and Niemenan were both seen as better picks then Verlander.

I was ecstatic when the Tigers took Verlander because his potential was so great. It is truly amazing that the Tigers coaches were able to tap into his potential and fix his mechanics so quickly. I think it is a very underrated aspect of the selection and doesn't get written about enough.

We are talking about a pitcher who had a 3.49 ERA in a non power conference with a walk rate of 3.66 BB/9 and had thrown 20 wild pitches.

by NMUWildcat027 on Jan 30, 2008 12:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What I'm saying is

isn't it worth a 17th rounder EVEN IF YOU HAVE NO INTENTION OF SIGNING THE GUY just so that someone else won't get him?

If you don't sign him, he goes to college and drops off the radar for 3 years. It's not like he can turn around and sign with someone else if you don't get a deal done.

There's absolutely no excuse for not picking the best player available after the 10th round or so. Guys who sign for slot money after that point are almost never going to be MLB players. Even if you don't end up signing them, it's worth it to prevent other teams from getting their rights for free.

by PaulThomas on Jan 30, 2008 1:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs