Tim Alderson or Madison Bumgarner, Discussion
I am away on family matters this weekend, so here is a discussion question to keep you busy.
Of the two young Giants pitchers drafted in 2007, who would you rather have now for your own organization? Tim Alderson or Madison Bumgarner?
Alderson is 7-3, 3.13 with a 71/27 K/BB in 86 innings for San Jose in the California League, with 79 hits allowed, just one homer given up, and a 1.11 GO/AO. He's extremely polished and is thriving in a full-season advanced A league one year out of high school.
Bumgarner has been even better, 8-2, 1.77 with an 86/14 K/BB in 76 innings with 61 hits allowed for Augusta in the Sally League, three homers allowed, 0.90 GO/AO. He's not as polished as Alderson and is pitching at a lower level, but he's been dominant and has shown a better breaking ball (the big question for him on draft day) this year, granted the scouting reports I have indicate it still needs some work. The polish issue is relative: Alderson is still more advanced, but Bumgarner has turned out to have more polish than anticipated.
So, who do you go with here? Bumgarner has a higher physical upside. Does that clinch it for you? But it's not like Alderson is a soft-tosser, his stuff is above average, too. And success in the Cal League at age 19 is a big positive.
Who would you rather have for your farm system? And if you were the Giants, how quickly are you willing to move each of them up? Perhaps a comparison would be easier if Bumgarner gets promoted to San Jose and pitches alongside Alderson for awhile. Is Alderson ready for Double-A? Or would that be too much too fast? Lots to consider here, lots to discuss. Have at it.
0 recs |
34
comments
Comments
Giants would have been more wise to Draft Heyward and Alderson
Heyward is looking like the best prospect in baseball now.
by Bravesin07 on Jul 5, 2008 12:05 PM EDT 0 recs
Top 10...
Maybe as low as Top 15, but I don’t see him being the best prospect in baseball. Not even that close to it. I am a Heyward fan, but I am also a realist.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on
Jul 5, 2008 12:23 PM EDT
up
0 recs
yeah, 'best prospect in baseball' is pretty kooky
..that said, I wanted Heyward, too. Viz http://www.minorleagueball.com/2008/4/12/392174/prospect-discussion-topic#4503276
by wcw on
Jul 5, 2008 1:59 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I know of on tout
who just put him 3rd on his midseason top 50. Id say hes up there with Weiters, and co.
Check out my baseball analysis blog FANalytics
by jbluestone on
Jul 6, 2008 1:15 AM EDT
up
0 recs
*facepalm*
You know how the Reds probably aren’t that annoyed they traded Josh Hamilton because they got an ace (Edison Volquez) back? Yeah, same thing.
Getting back on topic, I don’t really know which way to go between these two because I honestly don’t know very much about them. However, based on my admittedly little knowledge, I think I’m going to have to lean towards Alderson. I’ll be perfectly honest and say that this is a matter of instinct. I’ve been very, very high on Alderson since he was drafted and I would be shocked to see him up in the majors AND producing by age 20 (next season). I do worry about Alderson’s mechanics, and anybody with any insight on that would be very appreciated.
It’s hard to argue against what Bumgarner’s doing, and there’s certainly no shame in preferring him over Alderson. Going strictly on numbers AND scouting, I think you’re more or less forced to take him. Generally, in these sort of debates, I take the guy with the higher upside, but I think Alderson’s combination of good stuff AND extreme polish are a little too much to pass up. He reminds me a bit of Phil Hughes, and that’s a very good thing. Hopefully, he can avoid the injury issues and become a front line starting pitcher.
P.S. I actually am interested in why you think Heyward is the best prospect in the game. I’d go with Kershaw, personally.
by GuyinNY on
Jul 5, 2008 12:32 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Alderson's mechanics
People describe his motion as quirky, but all his quirks are in his lower body. He has a leg kcik that looks like a lefty who is trying to deceive a baserunner at first. His upper body remains still though, and his arm motion is fluid. He’s got that contained yet explosive arm action that was unique to Brad Radke. I would be more concerned about Bumgarner’s mechanics, because of the arm slot, however I don’t see it as being a high-risk problem. He is consistent with it, much like Jonothan Sanchez. But for comparison’s sake, Bumgarner is more cause for concern than Alderson in the mechanics department.
by StickRat on
Jul 5, 2008 5:24 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I've actually heard concerns about both of their mechanics
Bumgarner, I’ve heard recently, has been throwing often with his elbow below his shoulder, which was looked upon as an injury risk. Alderson, obviously, has a jerky motion, and pretty much the only videos I’ve seen of him were from his high school days. He did have a slight quirk in his arm action, I believe, pointed out on the hardball times IIRC. Can’t argue with their performances right now, though.
Less arm, more talk. Raisingcain is a GAMER.
Adopted Giant: Henry Sosa
by raisingcain on
Jul 5, 2008 7:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I don’t see a problem with Bumgarner’s arm angle. He throws with a consistency that is loose and fluid, and most of the stress is on his shoulder. If Sanchez threw from an upright posture, his elbow would be below his shoulder too. If Bumgarner’s arm action becomes that much of a concern, his posture can be modified with some bend at the waist as well, to keep his arm up, while his slot stays consistent.
Only hitch in Alderson’s arm is his draw, which like Tim Lincecum’s, is very low. When he brings it over the top though, he stays square and compact. He varies arm angles, which could be problematic. But, his movement isn’t dependent on it, so if it all becomes an issue, it can probably be eliminated.
by StickRat on
Jul 6, 2008 2:24 AM EDT
up
0 recs
So true
we all know that if a player performs well in low A ball than he will definitely perform as well or better in the majors.
Founder of the Rowdy Hardy Fan Club
by eazyb81 on
Jul 5, 2008 2:24 PM EDT
up
0 recs
You didn't know that?
Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.
by doublestix on
Jul 5, 2008 3:00 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I didn't realize Heyward was a better prospect than Price,
or LaPorta or Gamel or well you get the point…
"When Justin Upton faces Lincecum, I think Christ might appear in the heavens, and the world will end." -JakeFree
by JT12340 on
Jul 7, 2008 10:06 AM EDT
up
0 recs
.
Alderson is certainly the “safe” pick here, because of his pinpoint control and ability to get batters out with his above average stuff.
Most people get caught up in “shiny new toy” syndrome, and that’s exactly what Bumgarner is showing. Now I’m not saying he isn’t unbelievable right now, but I’d like to see some higher level success.
For most organizations who already have a young ace (ala Giants with Lincecum), I’d probably rather take the safer bet to make it as an above average SP over the POTENTIAL stud.
by smk1363 on Jul 5, 2008 12:20 PM EDT 0 recs
The giants do have many low upside pitchers with very good stats throughout the minors, especially around the a-ball level. I’d actually say in this case you could go with the high upside guy, just because depending on who pans out, they could have a rotation full of studs – imagine Lincecum, Cain, Sanchez, then some mix of Bumgarner, Alderson, and Sosa. (and of course Zito’s still around). Then there’s Jesse English, Clayton Tanner, and more relatively low upside guys like Cowert, Snyder, Pucetas, etc. Maybe Lowry can return, too. Basically, they have so many pitchers with the potential to turn into decent starters, I would say a high upside guy may be more valuable for them.
Less arm, more talk. Raisingcain is a GAMER.
Adopted Giant: Henry Sosa
by raisingcain on
Jul 5, 2008 7:49 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I'd take Bumgarner
I agree with what everyone has said about Alderson, and Id be happy to have either in my organization (and the point about already having lincecum is a good one). Bumgarner is dominating low minors with a greaet fastball.. he is commanding that fastball, and to me having great comand of your fastball is a big time key to success in the majors.
Johan Santana, has a great fastball with great command, and one other plus pitch (his changeup.. actually probably plus plus, Josh Beckett is another guy with a very difficult fastball to hit, and his has a ridiculous curve). But these guys are great because of their fastbal and ability to command it.
There are many prospect who’s throw heat but just cannot locate it. Obviously Bumgarner will have to develop a breaking ball or changeup.. and that is why hes higher risk, because he doesnt have that, but they are about the same age, and I think Bumgarner has Ace level potential, where alderson has #2, 3 level potential.
If you want a guy who can help you sooner, you take Alderson, if you want a guy who could potentially give you a ridiculous 1-2 punch with lincecum (and cain aint exactly chop liver either), Id take bumgarner.. but your gonna have to probably wait a bit longer.
Check out my baseball analysis blog FANalytics
by jbluestone on Jul 5, 2008 12:39 PM EDT 0 recs
I’d take Alderson. I tend to think lefties who dominate in the low minors are usually overrated because they put up such gaudy stats. I think it has to do with the fact that young hitters see so few very good lefty pitchers that when the rare guy who shows up throwing hard with solid breaking stuff/control, he dominates.
All things equal, I generally would take the righty over the lefty SP.
by Kemp on Jul 5, 2008 12:53 PM EDT 0 recs
I'm amazed that
One thing people aren’t realizing is that Alderson is practically a year older than Bumgarner.
ProjectProspect.com - Sullivan10x@yahoo.com
by sully10x on Jul 5, 2008 1:25 PM EDT 0 recs
If Bumgarner can control his fastball as well as the stats seem to indicate, he’s a pretty special pitcher. And…
aging curves are less of an issue with pitchers, all else equal
...this is important to remember. It’s great that Alderson has an advanced feel for pitching that’s allowing him to be successful in high-A, but that doesn’t mean he’ll ever have dominant stuff. He just might, but you can’t infer that just because he’s younger than his competition right now. Jerome Williams comes to mind.
by Grant on Jul 5, 2008 2:39 PM EDT 0 recs
Bumgarner, on upside and splits
Last time this topic came around (link under the Heyward subthread above), I wanted Bumgarner on upside, despite Alderson’s polish. This time we have more than the tiny sample size we had earlier, so you actually have some things at which to look. Both are about equally young for their levels, and both are doing very well. Bumgarner leads the SAL in both K% and FIP, while Alderson is top-ten in both stats in his more-advanced, hitter’s league.
Alderson does, however, pitch in San Jose half the time, which is a pitcher’s park: his OPS-against is a full 100 points higher on the road. Moreover, he hasn’t been fooling lefty batters much, giving up a 720 OPS. So despite the more-advanced batters he’s getting out, there are questions. Bumgarner, by contrast, is blowing away everyone: ~550 OPS against whether home or on the road, against lefties or righties. If you can only have one of the two, pick Bumgarner.
How quickly do you move them? I wouldn’t push either, though I would listen to the argument that if Bumgarner keeps mopping up in low A that he deserves to see high A sooner than next year. Alderson, to my mind, is in exactly the right place. Even if he does show he can handle the tough road parks in the Cal League and starts getting out lefty batters, I’d want him to do it for at least a half-year.
by wcw on Jul 5, 2008 2:51 PM EDT 0 recs
Tough choice
I see them as practically equal, with the edge going to Bumgarner because he is a lefty. Bumgarner’s IP per game are really impressive right now, because he is dropping six- and seven-inning outings so consistently. At present, he also has the better pure stuff. Both are still young though, so it is still unknown where velocity is going to normalize. Alderson could still add velocity, at which point he will be a No. 2 starter if he can maintain control.
From a team perspecive though, the comparison is really unneccesary. Where the two are diffrent in mechanicns and approach, they are both durable. If they both progress as starters, they are going to be a special one-two combination … or four-five combintation if the Giants keep a nucleus of Lincecum, Cain, and Sanchez.
by StickRat on Jul 5, 2008 5:15 PM EDT 0 recs
Kind of OT but...
If things work out perfectly (which they nearly never do) a rotation of Lincecum, Cain, Sanchez, Bumgarner, and Alderson would be maybe one of the more frightening rotations ever. I am going to hold my breath till then. Starting… now.
I am Cameron Wood and this is my son and business partner CW Culberson.
by camwoody on
Jul 5, 2008 5:41 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Ever? I would say they aren't even the most frightening
that is currently possible. I would much rather have Kazmir, Shields, Garza, Price, and one of McGee/Davis/Hellickson.
by tt68 on
Jul 5, 2008 10:57 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Yeah, there are five eras of A’s rotations that prove how difficult it is to have five pitchers, each firing on 15+ win pace. Has anyone actually done it? Closest I can find is the 1911 A’s, with four reaching the 15-win mark ahead of Harry Krause with 11 wins. Modern era I’ve got the 2001 Mariners with four 15-game winners plus John Halama with 10.
So many things have to fall into place for five pitchers to have outstanding concurrent seasons. I think all we can say at this point is the Giants have set the groudnwork for such a happening, and what makes it more profound is the Giants could do it with five homegrown pitchers.
by StickRat on
Jul 6, 2008 2:57 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Thats going to be almost impossible
With Zito still on the books for what 5 more years?
by AthleticsReign on
Jul 6, 2008 3:49 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Zito will be moved to the bullpen, cut or traded(w/ us paying salary) before he blocks any of those guys…you can count on that.
by superk1ng on
Jul 6, 2008 6:38 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Dont look now
Zito 10 ks in his last outing…. amazing how far and fast he fell.
Check out my baseball analysis blog FANalytics
by jbluestone on
Jul 6, 2008 11:31 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Actually, one could argue that Zito’s contract makes it MORE likely, being as it will inhibit the Giants’ ability to bring in other pitchers from outside the system.
by StickRat on
Jul 6, 2008 2:28 PM EDT
up
0 recs
JS
Do you mind doing this with Blake Beavan and Michael Main?
"I really think JD is probably going to be one of the best things ever to happen to the Rangers." - Longhorn, May 27th, 2007
by Longhorn on Jul 6, 2008 2:59 AM EDT 0 recs
Burngarner
Burngarner. I think he has a lot of upside. Nice problem to have….
by Stephen in the UAE on Jul 6, 2008 12:11 PM EDT 0 recs
Yeah I feel the same way about Aldernsan!!!!1!!
I am Cameron Wood and this is my son and business partner CW Culberson.
by camwoody on
Jul 6, 2008 11:35 PM EDT
up
0 recs
You got to pick Bumgarner
When he has ace upside and Alderson doesn’t. If both had ace upside but Bumgarner was still better, then I could see going for the surer thing. But you have to reach for the brass ring when player developing in the MLB.
I agree that a younger pitcher doing well in the low minors is not a sign he’s ever going to be dominant in higher levels. I would also like to note that Jerome Williams scuttled his MLB chances with his weight problems, as he did very well his first two seasons in the majors, performance indicative of how well he did in the minors. He was actually much higher rated/ranked than Brandon Webb, the dichotomy of how they have ended up couldn’t be more starkly different.
As Willams was rising up, his youth and performance against older pitchers brought up comparisons with Dwight Gooden as well as other young pitchers who flamed out. That’s the high risk and high reward characteristic of any highly rated pitching prospect, particularly ones doing well in the minors against older competition. That was aptly illustrated with the A’s and Met’s 4 Aces of the early 90’s which netted between them nothing but mediocre relievers and one good closer in Isringhausen.
Another key difference is that Bumgarner already had mid-90’s speed when he was in high school, something that Williams, that I can recall, didn’t. That can be a big difference maker as he rises through the minors, even in the majors there are not a lot of mid-90’s throwers on a consistent basis. Add to that his physical development as he gets (hopefully at least) professional care in building up his body, he should improve even more.
TINSTAAPP captures the essence of aging curves not mattering much, by stating that once one transitions from thrower to pitcher, there is no prospect stage inbetween, much like Yoda’s either do or do not, there is no try.
It is not experience or at-bats, as it is for most hitters, that will necessarily translate into making any minor league pitcher into a major leaguer pitcher. He needs to figure out how to pitch the ball, controlling location, speed differentials, “looks”, and natural “stuff” in out-smarting the hittter and getting him to do what you want. And the confidence to know that you can do all of that right and the hitter will still get hits off of you on a regular basis, and sometimes to disastrous effect, so you dust yourself off and do it over again the way you successfully done it before.
Adoptive parental unit of Kevin "Most Spectacular Pitcher" Pucetas.
"I'm a Giant now... I like watching the ball get up there" - Wendell Fairley
"I'm really proud to be on this team." - Nate Schierholtz
by obsessivegiantscompulsive on Jul 7, 2008 12:57 PM EDT 0 recs
As a Giants fan I feel fortunate to have both.
If I were a fan of another team I think I’d have to go with Bumgarner. Pitching prospects are so uncertain, that to call Alderson a safer bet, I think would be a flawed argument to make. In that context, I’d have to go with who I felt to have the higher upside. Which in that case would be Bumgarner. He is athletic, he’s left handed (they have more value), he throws harder, and if he can improve his breaking pitches, then you have a potential #1 caliber starter. He’s already seemingly exceeded expectations, especially as far as his control is concerned this year. Which I think is a pretty good sign.
As for how quickly I’d move them up, I think Alderson should stay in SJ the entire year, with him opening in AA next year. Bumgarner, I think should also stay in Augusta, and maybe be promoted for the Cal League playoffs. And then he can open the season in SJ in 09, and probably be prompted for a AA promotion near mid-season if all goes well next year for him. That would put Bumgarner on a similar track to Matt Cain, where he could maybe make the majors late in the 2010 season when he’s 20 years old.
I’m not really big on promoting guys quickly unless they’re absolutely dominating and showing they have no more learn or prove at said level. While you could make a case for both to be promoted already this year, its also their first full season of minor league ball, so I think it would be best to leave them alone, and maybe reward them with a promotion at the very end of the year, just to give them a taste of the level they will open at the following year.
by Hobbes2d on Jul 7, 2008 6:42 PM EDT 0 recs
Tough call
Was it Mike Krukow or someone else who says the best pitch in baseball is a fastball that a pitcher can spot where he wants? In any case, both Alderson and Bumgarner appear to be “pitchers” and not just “throwers” even at this early stage in their development. This bodes well for their futures. I don’t know their exact FB velocities but I recall reading Bumgarner tops out at around 97 while Alderson may touch 94 on occasion. It is possible both may be able to add a little velocity. The fact that MadBum is a lefty makes him all the more valuable. I think the further development of his secondary pitches would allow him to make the jump from good to very good or even great. It sounds as if Alderson already has pretty good secondary pitches so he is probably closer to reaching his ceiling already. Based on their upsides, I would lean towards choosing MadBum.
by baseballjunkie on Jul 7, 2008 9:17 PM EDT 0 recs
I like Mad Bum
Although I gave Tim Alderson a slight edge entering the season due to the dominance and poise he showed in his five innings in the rookie league last year, I think Madison Bumgarner has clearly gone around him this year.
I worry about both their mechanics, but I think both will become good pitchers if they can remain healthy, with Mad Bum having a shot at being a star or super star. Mad Bum has outpitched Alderson by quite a bit this season, although Timmy Two is doing it a level higher, in High A as opposed to Madison’s Low A.
Still, after a good-but-not-outstanding start, Bumgarner has really “brung” it. He has shown both dominance and control, and he actually has three pitches, albeit with secondary pitches he could have better command of.
But what blows the “race” between Mad Bum and Timmy Two wide open? Mad Bum won’t turn 19 for over three weeks. Everything he has accomplished thus far, and it hasn’t been insignificant, he has accomplished at the age of 18. Mad Bum is not only young, he’s young for his graduating class.
It isn’t inconceivable that if he remains healthy, Mad Bum could reach the majors before he can legally drink. Alderson was considered the high school player who might reach the majors first out of high school. Since Tim is nine months older than Madison, it would almost surprise me if barring health issues, Mad Bum doesn’t make the majors at a lower age than the seemingly more poised Alderson.
My son is precisely seven years older than Mad Bum. Like Mad Bum, he graduated high school at the age of 17. We might not want to forget that when Tim Lincecum was a month and a half older than Mad Bum is right now, he had just graduated high school.
Of course, Tim was also only 5-foot-9 and 135 pounds. :)
by sharksrog on Jul 9, 2008 6:44 PM EDT 0 recs






