Not a Rookie: Julio Borbon
by John Sickels on Feb 17, 2010 2:45 PM EST
Email
PrintI don't mean to go all-Rangers on you, but I do find Julio Borbon to be a fascinating case. Here is my take on him.
Not a Rookie: Julio Borbon
Julio Borbon was drafted by the Rangers in the supplemental first round in 2007, from the University of Tennessee. Highly-regarded for his speed and athleticism, he was considered somewhat raw for a college player, especially with his plate discipline. He hit .345/.370/.506 in 40 games for the Volunteers, missing the early part of the season recovering from a broken ankle. He stole 10 bases in 13 attempts, but drew only six walks against 20 strikeouts in 174 at-bats. He got into nine games as a pro, two rookie ball contests and seven games for Spokane in the Northwest League, hitting .189/.250/.216. I gave him a Grade C+ in the 2008 book due to his athleticism and draft position, but I was somewhat skeptical about his bat. I wrote "I don't have a good intuitive feeling for Borbon, and personally I think he's going to be more of a fourth outfielder type" than a regular.
I tend to trust my intuition about such things, not for any mystical reason but because "intuitive feelings" are (in my opinion) often a form of subconscious pattern recognition and information processing. In college, Borbon looked to me like a guy who was getting by on sheer talent, but lacked the refinement and polish for his tools to translate well to the pro level. However, in this case it looks like my intuition was wrong.
Borbon began 2008 with Class A Bakersfield in the California League, hitting .306/.346/.395 in 66 games with 36 steals in 43 attempts. His walk rate wasn't great with just 15, but he fanned only 30 times in 291 at-bats while hitting 20 doubles. Promoted to Double-A Frisco at mid-season, he hit .337/.380/.459 in 60 games with 17 steals in 28 attempts. His plate discipline wasn't much better in Double-A, but he showed more power.
Borbon went to the Arizona Fall League that year and worked hard to improve his strike zone judgment, focusing on working the count. This was obvious: he looked like a much different player in Arizona compared to Frisco in terms of approach: he wasn't swinging at everything and was doing a better job laying off junk he couldn't hit. Statistically this resulted in 17 walks in 96 plate appearances in Arizona, a huge improvement. I gave him a Grade B in the '09 book, writing that while he needed another year in the minors, "I see him now as a regular major league center fielder, not just a fourth outfielder" due to the improved strike zone judgment.
Borbon began '09 in Triple-A Oklahoma City, hitting .310/.370/.388 in 96 games, with 25 steals in 32 attempts. He maintained some of the discipline he developed in Arizona, drawing 33 passes against 40 strikeouts in 407 at-bats. . .not a great walk rate, but better than before. Promoted to Texas for the stretch, he hit .312/.376/.414 with 19 steals in 23 attempts, drawing 15 walks against 28 strikeouts in 157 at-bats.
The 48-game sample size in the majors shows some interesting data; including a hard platoon split (.333/.401/.447 against right-handers, .125/.125/.125 against lefties). He had a sharp platoon split in the minors (.805 OPS against right-handers, .675 against lefties in 984 career at-bats), so the major league data wasn't a total fluke. I think this is something that may improve in time, but it's possible that he'll need a platoon partner if it doesn't. He also had a big home/road discrepancy (.400/.440/.514 at home, 241/.327/.333 on the road) in the majors. However, given the sample sizes involved I'm not sure we can draw any really broad conclusions about the home/road split.
Fangraphs indicates positive performance against fastballs and sliders, but some struggles against curves and changeups. His strikeout rate rose in the majors, but his walk rate was okay and the K-rate didn't get out of bounds in absolute terms. On defense, the major league sample size is too small for the UZR numbers to mean much, but in the minors he posted outstanding Total Zone numbers, which matches scouting reports about terrific range.
Overall, from looking at the numbers and from watching him play over the last three years, I think Borbon's improved polish since college is legitimate. His swing hasn't changed much that I can detect; he's just a bit more selective now about what he swings at. I expect that he'll be a consistent .280-.300+ hitter, with plenty of steals, gradually improving his plate discipline and walk rate, and excellent outfield defense. If he was still a prospect I'd give him a B+. This is a player who added some skills to go with his tools.
64 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
He had like 19 AB's vs. LHP in the bigs.
"I was going to say, 'You’re gay for Elvis.' But then I realized that I, too, am gay for Elvis." ~Adam J. Morris.
right
right…small sample size. But it fits with his sharp minor league platoon split.
by John Sickels on Feb 17, 2010 2:56 PM EST up reply actions
The Rangers have spoken very positively
about his work ethic. I think the improvements are real, though he’s still not going to be a monster bat anytime soon. He doesn’t walk as much as I’d like, but he also doesn’t strike out a lot, and he seems to accept who he is and not beat himself at the plate.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
Nice!
Thank you sir.
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
Anyone else?
Does anyone else feel like Curtis Granderson could be a good comp for Borbon if his power develops a little more? CF playing good defense, medium speed, sharp platoon split? Sort of a .275/.340/.470 type player.
no
no chance he ever has that kind of power.
i’m highly skeptical he even can be a good starter. he iso’d .78 in the PCL! awful!
baseball rules.
I think he can be a nice table setter ideally
Good defense, good speed, improving approach.
That said, I dont love his approach and his hit tool isnt anything special. He has zero power. He’s one of those guys who will be heavily dependent on having a high AVG to have value, and that could lead to some really ugly years.
it's the lack o power that scares me
to me his upside on offense looks like Scott Podsednik. and even he has more power than Borbon.
baseball rules.
I would think of Juan Pierre with a better glove is a good comp.
Hopefully with more 360+ OBP seasons like Pierre’s ’03 and ’04.
He's no big bopper
You do realize he had a 2 HR game for the Rangers last year right? I don’t see him ever breaking 20 or even 15 bombs in a year, but he has some decent pop. He is much more than a Juan Pierre type.
can someone tell me why he cant be jacoby ellsbury?
i mean the guy should be able to hit roughly 10 or so hr’s a year in that park (maybe not this year), steal over 40 bags a year, score over 100 runs batting in the leadoff spot…really, whats not to love assuming he improves against lefties?
Ellsbury isn’t a slap hitter. Ellsbury has no platoon split. Ellsbury is a legit .300 hitter.
That’s why. I wish people would stop using Ellsbury as a model for this type of player. I know Ive been through this like 15 times, but Ellsbury’s HR power is actually hurt by Fenway and he loses a number of HR’s to the deep RF. He also doesn’t have the oppo power to use the wall in LF that helps so many LHH there. Ellsbury has a swing plane that generates backspin and loft. Borbon/Gardner/The flavor of the month slap hitting speedy OFer does not.
Though if you meant for fantasy purposes...sure, they could be similar.
But the difference between 70 and ~40 SBs is nothing to sneeze at…
19 SBs In 48 Games
40 SBs a season over a career might be a good number for Borbon, but is production projects to 60+ over a full season.
So, 60+ and ~70 actually is pretty similar.
by usmccowboysfan on Feb 17, 2010 9:04 PM EST up reply actions
And
you can’t say that Ellsbury is a annual ~70 SB guy when in his first full season he went for ~50. Their ability on the basepaths is very similar and I can’t wait to watch Borbon all season!
by usmccowboysfan on Feb 17, 2010 9:13 PM EST up reply actions
why so excited for borbon
he isnt any better then juan pierre… and every dodger fan hates pierre
Texas hasn't had a table-setter with Borbon's potential in a long time.
We’ve had big bats forever and our park lends itself easily to HRs.
But steals? You’ve never seen a fanbase get more excited over stolen bases than Rangers fans this past season. We haven’t had a true base stealer (60+) in a long, long time.
I am Jurickson Profar son of judeska and chesmond.. And I was born ready! ready to play baseball!!- Jurickson Profar 2/15/2010
by Aquaman, Esq. on Feb 17, 2010 9:50 PM EST up reply actions
Dodgers Fans
I’d be pissed if we signed a 29 year old, light hitting CF for $44 Million too. I’m pretty sure that when Pierre came up with Colorado they weren’t complaining. Your statement also has nothing to do with the value, comp or the current ability of Borbon.
I love the combination of Andrus and Borbon up the middle for years to come.
by usmccowboysfan on Feb 17, 2010 9:56 PM EST up reply actions
I Don't Know
if you noticed, but his reply was to you…I don’t know if that was his intention, but FYI.
by usmccowboysfan on Feb 18, 2010 10:37 AM EST up reply actions
The Real Deal
maybe you don’t notice the differences because of your bias for Ellsbury, but Borbon is everything that Ellsbury was 2 seasons ago. Making the solid/fun to watch Ellsbury, a perfect comp for Borbon.
by usmccowboysfan on Feb 17, 2010 9:10 PM EST up reply actions
Depending
on what category you are saying that Ellsbury is better than Borbon in, then I would agree.
Ellsbury has proven over 2 1/2 seasons that he can hit for a solid .280 – .300 avg and steal a lot of bases, therefore has the edge on Borbon, but that wasn’t my argument.
I believe that Borbon can/will put up similar numbers and progress similarly to Ellsbury. I haven’t seen a single piece of evidence to the contrary.
by usmccowboysfan on Feb 18, 2010 12:02 AM EST up reply actions
other than the fact that Ellsbury hit for more power (in far more pitcher friendly parks) and walked more throughout his minor league career? that’s not a “single piece of evidence?” come on.
baseball rules.
Common On, What?
Look at their 1st seasons in the majors and explain to me how you come to the conclusion that they don’t compare favorably. That’s all I’ve said and all I’ll keep saying until I see something to the contrary.
Ellsbury put up 8 walks in 116 ABs while Borbon put up 15 walks in 157 ABs. I can’t believe that we are arguing that one guy is better at getting on base than the other as a reason for one of the them being superior when the difference is so minute.
My opinion is that they are equal, with Ellsbury only edging out Borbon due to having already proven in 2 1/2 seasons that he can be successful.
by usmccowboysfan on Feb 18, 2010 9:41 AM EST up reply actions
I think what USMC is saying
Is that Ellsbury and Borbon have similar ceilings. As a Rangers fan I believe Jacoby will probably have a better career than Julio, but the ceilings are similar.
Borbon’s ISO in AAA – .079
Ellsbury’s ISO in AAA – .083
Borbon’s ISO in Majors – .102
Ellsbury’s ISO in 2008-09 – .114
Now it’s true Ellsbury showed higher ISO in the lower minors than did Borbon but in both cases the sample size of at-bats was quite small.
As to Ellsbury’s HR powere being hurt by Fenway, he’s hit more homers at home (11) than he has hit on the road (9). And Fenway has been a great help to his ability to hit extra bases — he’s hit more than twice as many doubles (39 to 17) and his ISO at home has been .142 versus .095 on the road.
And when Ellsbury isn’t playing in Fenway, his OBP for his career is .333, which doesn’t exactly scream out lead-off hitter. (it’s been .367 n the road)
Now I’m not saying that Borbon will develop along the lines that Ellsbury has — Ellsbury has shown respectable power, at least in Fenway, and it’s true that most slap hitters don’t develop in that manner — you may be correct about Ellsbury’s swing but I wouldn’t know myself.
But the one wildcard with Borbon is that he has shown a lot of improvement quickly, and given that trajectory, I wouldn’t rule out an improvement in power.
There are major scouting differences between the two.
and those ISO’s are just mixes and matches of small samples.
This happens every year. The next Slappy McSpeedy gets comp’d to Ellsbury. Before Ellsbury it was Carl Crawford. People were here arguing last year that Brett Gardner was the next Ellsbury.
I hear your frustration
As for me, I don’t tend to compare prospects to established players in any case, though I know some people enjoy to.
Why Wouldn't You
compare prospects to “established players”, it gives an idea of what the prospect may become.
The fact is that both Ellsbury and Borbon are Slappy McSpeedy. When Ellsbury hits 15+ HRs, then I’ll defer, but that hasn’t happened so let’s just realize that neither is a power guy.
They both fit perfectly on their clubs as solid contact/speed guys at the top of the order and are quite similar in their production so far.
Calling Borbon the next Brett Gardner is your opinion, a wrong opinion, but whatever. To each, his own.
by usmccowboysfan on Feb 17, 2010 11:56 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, I wouldn't call Borbon the next Brett Gardner at all
Im sure Gardner is an excellent defender with more speed than Borbon.
What's the hate-on with Gardner all about?
Gardner is a fantastic defender, has good on-base skills, is a great base-stealer and he’s still has time to get better – we probably agree.
It seems that if a prospect isn’t ranked at the top, was never the flavor of the day and didn’t enjoy unqualified success at first, that too many write them off.
The difference between Gardner and Borbon is an exaggerated version of the difference between Borbon and Ellsbury IMO
Hit Tool - His ability to hit for AVG is even less than that of Borbon’s. Ellsbury is a .300 hitter. Borbon close to league average (.280 maybe) while Gardner seems to be below average.
Power – Gardner’s swing is strictly that of a slap hitter. He does not drive the ball at all.
Platoon Split – His platoon split looks like its going to be even worse than Borbon’s. He was used in a fairly strict platoon with Melky last year (Only 55 ABs against LHPs) and that still only got his AVG to .270. He actually had a decent AVG against LHPs- but its all SSS, and by his usage you can tell even the Yanks don’t buy it for a second.
As for his defense, yes, he looks very good, but I dont think anyone actually thinks he’s going to be +7 wins with the glove and the greatest defender of all time. Sounds like a 4th OFer ideally.
The stats tell a very different story
Power:
(1) Gardner’s ISO last year was .109 while Ellsbury’s ISO the past two years has been .114. That’s hardly a difference. So if Gardner is a slap hitter, then so is Ellsbury
(2) Removing the influence of their home parks, in away games last year, Gardner’s ISO was .120 while Ellsbury, in his career, has an ISO of .090 — and that is a pretty big gap. So if Gardner doesn’t drive the ball at all, why is his ISO in road games 33% higher than Ellsbury’s?
OBP
(1) I’m more concerned about OBP than batting average, especially for a leadoff hitter. While a single is worth more than a walk, the difference is marginal, especially compared to the gap between walk and an out.
(2) Gardner’s OBP last year was .345 overall and .350 on the road. Ellsbury’s OBP overall the past two years was .350 overall and .333 on the road. That’s a virtual dead heat and I think Gardner has more upside.
Platoon Split —
(1) Gardner was not in a “fairly strict platoon” with Melky Cabrera. Gardner batted 22% of the time against lefties while Cabrera batted 32% against lefties.
(2) Against lefties Gardner batted .291 with an OBP of .381 and an ISO of .109.
(3) In the minors, Gardner batter better against left-handers than against right handers in three of his four years: 2005, 2006 and 2008. In that last year, in AAA, his OPS against lefties was .902 compared to an OPS against righties of .809.
(4) Ellsbury has batted 357 times against lefties in the majors, has hit 3 homers and has an ISO of .090. He also had a pretty big platoon split in AAA and AA, though he hit lefties well in the low minors.
Youve made a decent little case on its face. I dont buy it for a second, though. The suggestion Gardner has more upside is kind of ridiculous to me. Some of the arguments you’ve made you must already know the answers to.
Quickly:
-You’ve chopped up a lot of statistical slices from small samples (especially from the minors) and are giving them weight they shouldn’t be accorded, IMHO.
-You didn’t translate the minor league numbers or adjust for league, park or ARL.
-Why did you selectively ignore the influence of their home parks again? Gardner’s ISO is bad at home even though its a park that is ideally suited to boost his power as a LHH. Further indication there are major SSS issues.
-Ellsbury career vs. LHP: .311/.364/.401
-There is a pretty big scouting difference between the two.
-The small samples you’ve given contradict the scouting evidence strongly. Google “Brett Gardner” and “slap hitter.”
-Power is the last thing to develop and Ellsbury is still coming into his. There is very little reason to think Gardner will hit for power. Again, this is a scouting difference.
-Melky had 157 ABs against LHPs compared to Gardner’s 65.
-Ellsbury faced both LHPs and RHPs – Gardner’s overall line is inflated by mostly facing RHPs and sitting against tougher LHPs.
YMMV. I guess we’ll see.
(1) I didn’t write that Gardner has more upside generally but rather that he has more upside in OBP. I say that because he already shows better plate discipline, swinging at 17% of pitches out of the strike zone last year compared to 24% by Ellsbury.
(2) You make an argument about a platoon split based on 55 AB and then question me looking at all of Gardner’s at bats in the majors and minors to better understand the issue. Gardner has play five seasons as a professional. In four of them, he hit better against lefties, including last year. That’s not slicing and dicing the stats; that’s his record.
(3) The only reference I made to minor league numbers was to rebut your claim that Gardner couldn’t hit lefties. While there’s no doubt his overall minor league numbers are affected by the leagues and parks he played in, on what basis would you suggest that they would also affect platoon splits? Do you have any evidence that Gardner played in leagues or parks that make it much easier to hit left-handers than to hit right-handers?
(4) I never suggested Ellsbury couldn’t hit singles off left-handers; I just pointed out he’s shown no power with an ISO of .090 in his career against them.
(5) I never said Gardner would develop more power; I just pointed out that unless Ellsbury develops power, there’s little difference between the two in power.
(6) Melky also had a lot more at-bats against righies; the stats I provided fairly show the difference: Gardner batted 22% of the time against lefties while Cabrera batted 32% against lefties.
(7) In his career of only 375 at-bats, Gardner has faced Roy Halliday 18 times, Josh Beckett – 10 times, Matt Garza – 9 times
Edwin Jackson – 8 times, AJ Burnett – 7 times, Scott Kazmir – 7 times and Cliff Lee – 6 times. That’s nearly one in five at-bats against some tough pitchers, including two lefties.
(8) I’m not questioning the scouting reports. Time will tell if they are correct,
batted 37 times against Halliday, Beckett and Garza, 13% of his at-bats against three of the toughest pitchers in the league. He also faced Cliff Lee twice and Scott Kazmir and Derek Holland
I'm guessing you're mixing up my response and alskor's response
Since I never called Borbon the next Gardner, I would never compare someone to Gardner as a criticism because I think he has untapped potential and I never defended Ellsbury as a guy with power.
But your confusion over our posts demonstrates one reason I don’t tend to compare prospects to more established players — it doesn’t add something meaningful to the discussion and has the potential to confuse.
My take is different than yours: Neither Ellsbury or Borbon are perfect top-of-the order guys because neither have great OBP much less elite OBP. Nor do either work count as much as I like to see a leadoff hitter do.
As for Borbon, his success of failure will depend on how much more he develops his plate discipline and improves defensive play which in a limited number of appearances last year in Arlington caused some concern. IF he becomes a decent or even god fielder and if he improves his on-base skills than he is a very good fit for the Rangers. The fact that he’s improved in those areas since college is encouraging; let’s see if he can keep it up.
You can go ahead and compare Borbon to others but it doesn’t clarify where he is now as a player and what he’ll have to become to be successful.
Ellsbury is a case in point — he’s not that great in one of two areas Borbon needs to improve most; making the comparison obscures the fact the Borbob needs to work counts better and get on base more.
He Can
be Ellsbury, great, top of the order CF.
by usmccowboysfan on Feb 17, 2010 9:08 PM EST up reply actions
I think he’s Ellsbury-lite. If you project his numbers with Texas from last year over a full season in the Bigs, we are looking at 90 runs, 12 HR, 60 RBI and 60 steals!
Remember that a lot of that was hitting down in the order, too.
He’ll bat leadoff against RH’ers every day this season.
I am Jurickson Profar son of judeska and chesmond.. And I was born ready! ready to play baseball!!- Jurickson Profar 2/15/2010
by Aquaman, Esq. on Feb 17, 2010 10:05 PM EST up reply actions
I believe he can
….not to say he will. But I believe indications are that they have a very good chance of similar paths. My question on Jacoby, if he’s that great why couldn’t he hold the CF job in Boston
"The key to winning baseball games is pitching, fundamentals, and three run homers."
by fourfingerwoo on Feb 19, 2010 5:34 PM EST up reply actions
The Red Sox' internal metrics have Ellsbury as about average or a little above in CF according to comments by Theo.
Which is much more in line with how scouts perceive him. He has the potential to be a plus defender but needs to improve his reads on balls hit at him.
UZR isn’t a very good measure of his abilities/performance… first off, if we take a three year sample size (which is needed to stabilize UZR) he actually comes out average, too. Secondly, UZR also has trouble dealing with the dimensions of Fenway and the strange wall angles. Balls are counted as catchable that come off the Monster, for instance. Its a known issue with UZR.
Mike Cameron is simply a superior defender to Ellsbury at this point in time. This was not a panic move where Mike was brought in because they didn’t like Ellsbury in CF. They have explicitly said Ellsbury is a CFer and will move back there in the future. In fact, they also said they weren’t sure where they were going to play Cameron initially. There are indications they hadn’t decided on a specific alignment when they signed him – they simply felt he was a value replacement for Bay (and in fact, Cameron has been a more valuable player than Bay in each of the last three season and 5 of the last 7 seasons going back to when Bay was a rookie). Cameron is a player they have coveted for a while now.
Fwiw, Ellsbury has looked phenomenal defensively in LF as well, and they think he can be a dynamic LF for them in 2010 – they have brought up Carl Crawford as a comp a lot already.
I enjoyed the expanded responce
don’t get me wrong but.“and in fact, Cameron has been a more valuable player than Bay in each of the last three season and 5 of the last 7 seasons going back to when Bay was a rookie” can I take that to mean that now that mike is in fenway he is more valuable then jason Bay. your kidding right, Bay’s OPS is an astoundingly 117 points better over the past three years. I don’t care if he’s willie mays hayes, he’s not making that up in the field.
"The key to winning baseball games is pitching, fundamentals, and three run homers."
by fourfingerwoo on Feb 20, 2010 3:44 PM EST up reply actions
He more than made it up in the field. Mike Cameron is one of the most underrated players in baseball the last decade.
Whereas Jason Bay’s knees are pretty much shot. He hits for power and is a patient hitter, but that’s really all he brings. Cameron does everything else better than Bay – and to a significant degree, except hitting for AVG, where Bay’s projections going forward aren’t a whole lot better than Cameron’s. To wit, Mike Cameron is a better baseball player than Jason Bay and has regularly been more valuable to his team than Bay was.
WAR totals
2003
J.Bay: 1.1
Cam.: 4.6
2004
J.Bay: 2.3
Cam.: 3.2
2005
J.Bay: 6.4
Cam.: 2.0
2006
J.Bay: 5.6
Cam.: 4.4
2007
J.Bay: 0.0
Cam.: .2.2
2008
J.Bay: 2.9
Cam.: 4.1
2009
J.Bay: 3.5
Cam.: 4.3
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1717&position=OF
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1070&position=OF
Ladies & Gentleman – Omay Minaya.
Here's some more on Ellsbury
While his poor Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR) was quoted and noted throughout the winter, it actually played no role in Ellsbury’s shift to left field to make room for free agent Mike Cameron in center.
The Red Sox have their own methods for measuring defense, and any way they sliced it, Ellsbury was a plus defender last year, just as he has been throughout his career.
"We see him as an above-average defensive center fielder, period," general manager Theo Epstein said. "Taking one number you found online and calling it gospel can be a dangerous thing."
The number in question is UZR, which purportedly showed Ellsbury to be 18.6 runs below average in center last year.
The Red Sox believe UZR fails to account for factors like ballpark dimensions, in-between balls that can be caught by two fielders, scorer bias and poor positioning from coaches.
…they took great pains to assure Ellsbury remains their center fielder of the future.
"This isn’t a punishment at all," Epstein said. "This is what’s best for the team. The fact that he can become an elite defensive outfielder will only help us and is a testament to his versatility. We’ve seen the weapon Carl Crawford can be defensively in left (with Tampa Bay). We think Jake can do the same thing for us for a period of time and then ultimately go back to being a center fielder."
http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view/20100221great_move_by_jacoby_ellsbury/
If we assume Ellsbury’s defense is average he was a 3.76 Win player in 2009. If he’s above average it goes up.
with the SB's
i was taking a more conservative approach, but if he is a .300 hitter and his bb rate continues to improve, like it has each year i believe, he can def. steal 60+ bags.
Here's what I wrote about Borbon on this blog last August 18
I picked him up last year, dropped him last winter because we’re only allowed 15 keepers (AL-only league), then drafted him this Spring on the cheap for my reserve team. Great speed, good contact, improving plate discipline (last year he barely walked; this year he has improved) and has shown the capacity to improve. And he’s on a team that has huge need for a leadoff hitter and a CF (the Rangers don’t want Hamilton there — safer and less strenuous in the corners).
The Rangers are fighting for a wildcard spot so as long as he is on this torrid streak, I don’t think they’ll send him down when Cruz is activated and I do think he’ll get some at-bats and steal opportunities.
IF he continues to play well the balance of the year his chance of starting in CF and leading off next year is better than 80%. In our league, we cut from 40 to 25 after the World Series, then to 15 a week before opening day. I have a very deep team of prospects, nearly two-thirds of the top 15 propects in the AL (Montero, Smoak, Jennings, Jackson, Saunders, Matusz, Tillman, Rondon, Holland, Aumont, Viciedo), While Borbon has never been ranked that highly (as the others mentioned), he is more of a sure thing for next year in terms of likely contributions than many prospects with higher ceilings, so he is definitely on my list of 25 and I’ll know by the time I cut to 15 if he’s made it.
Nice brag post
Fact is, borbon stole 8 or 9 bases in just two games. Therefore, for those extrapalating, that would be 10 stolen bases in the other 147 at bats.
Do I like borbon for stealing 40 baes in 2010? Damn right I do. He’ll be leading off all year long…
So, since John's done Not A Rookies on both guys....
Who would you rather have for fantasy purposes in a keeper league, no salary or service time constraints; Dexter Fowler or Borbon?
Specifically, in a 10×10 h2h league (r, 2b, 3b, hr, rbi, sb, tb, avg, obp, slg) where your other keeper OF’s are Nick Markakis and Jay Bruce, who would you rather have?
"Karma - there it was. The meaning of life, straight from Carson Daly's lips to my morphine-laced ears." -Earl Hickey
Fowler
He has more power and since you’re quadruple dipping on the power categories with 2B, 3B, HR, TB, and SLG power will absolutely dominate your league. Fowler will probably put up a better OBP, too.
+1
don’t know if it’s cause of fowler or if I am on Borbon so high
"The key to winning baseball games is pitching, fundamentals, and three run homers."
by fourfingerwoo on Feb 19, 2010 5:32 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Minor League Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
