Community Prospect #59
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:43 PM EST
Email
Print
With 23.1% of the vote, Todd Frazier is elected Community Prospect #58.
1. Jason Heyward - 51%
2. Stephen Strasburg - 76%
3. Buster Posey - 20% (43% runoff)
4. Michael Stanton - 20% (54% runoff)
5. Jesus Montero - 20% (45% runoff)
6. Brian Matusz - 21%
7. Pedro Alvarez - 23%
8. Desmond Jennings - 29%
9. Carlos Santana -37% (50% runoff)
10. Neftali Feliz -37% (50% runoff)
11. Justin Smoak - 46%
12. Domonic Brown - 23% (59% runoff)
13. Madison Bumgarner - 30%
14. Martin Perez - 28%
15. Dustin Ackley - 31%
16. Chris Carter - 33.6%
17. Jeremy Hellickson - 29.4%
18. Michael Taylor - 36.9%
19. Alcides Escobar - 37.0%
20. Christian Friedrich - 29.0%(53.2% runoff)
21. Logan Morrison - 45.6%
22. Ryan Westmoreland - 24.7%
23. Aroldis Chapman - 32.0%
24. Wade Davis - 40.8%
25. Fernando Martinez - 30.5%
26. Aaron Hicks - 33.3%
27. Kyle Drabek - 34.0%
28. Lonnie Chisenhall - 24.5%
29. Jenrry Mejia - 18.8%(51.6% runoff)
30. Yonder Alonso - 25.5%
31. Matt Moore - 19.0%(70.7% runoff)
32. Brett Wallace - 24.3%
33. Dan Hudson - 20.2%
34. Freddie Freeman - 17.4%
35. Jhoulys Chacin - 21.2%
36. Casey Kelly - 27.8%
37. Casey Crosby - 29.8%
38. Starlin Castro - 27.5%
39. Brett Lawrie - 18.4% (42.9% runoff)
40. Derek Norris - 17.3% (42.9% runoff)
41. Tyler Flowers - 20.2%
42. Tyler Matzek -22.7%
43. Jacob Turner - 23.0%
44. Michael Montgomery - 30.8%
45. Dee Gordon - 22%
46. Julio Teheran - 19.4%
47. Grant Green - 24.4%
48. Hector Rondon - 20.9%
49. Josh Bell - 22.4%
50. Jaff Decker - 22.3%
51. Michael Saunders - 22.6%
52. Chris Withrow - 19.4%
53. Aaron Crow - 21.2%
54. Jason Castro - 18.8%
55. Tanner Scheppers - 23.2% (60.9% runoff)
56. Jordan Lyles - 23.2%(39.1% runoff)
57. Jake Arrieta - 28.0%
Players will get 1 round on the poll as a tester, if they fail to draw 5% they will then be removed and sit out up to 3 rounds.
Players off the poll(will sit out up to 3 rounds): Jay Jackson(#58-3.8%), Michael Main(#58-1.3%), Ethan Martin(#58-2.6%), Donovan Tate(#57-0%), Miguel Sano(#57-0%), Shelby Miller(#57-2.4%), Alex Colome(#57-2.4%), Wil Myers(#55-2.1%), Simon Castro(#55-4.2%), Jarrod Parker(#55-3.2%), Josh Vitters(#55-4.2%), Thomas Neal(#55-3.2%), Mike Trout(#55-3.2%), Ryan Kalish(#55-0%), Mike Moustakas(#54-1.3%)
Tester pool: Josh Reddick, Ike Davis, James Darnell, Eric Hosmer,
The candidates with previous round vote %:
Jiovanni Mier 5.1%
Tim Beckham 12.8%
Arodys Vizcaino 12.8%
Brett Jackson 5.1%
Zach Wheeler
Zach Britton
Zach Stewart 6.4%
Jared Mitchell 14.1%
Matt Dominguez 9.0%
Over 130 AB/50 IP cutoff for eligibility
Please vote using the +1 system, not the rec system. Rec'd votes will not be counted in this poll, only actual posts with +1.
200 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Vote with a +1 here for Mike Leake
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:46 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
Vote with a +1 here for Wilson Ramos
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:47 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
+1
Lets go get Adrian Gonzalez..... how do you say holy shit! - ~en espanol ?
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Feb 19, 2010 3:25 AM EST up reply actions
Vote with a +1 here for Jiovanni Mier
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:47 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
Vote with a +1 here for Tim Beckham
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:47 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
+1
www.pbfantasysports.com
^^ check it out
by Preston Barclay on Feb 18, 2010 12:19 PM EST up reply actions
+1
The 2008 Rogelio Moret League Fantasy Baseball Champions!
by The Congo Hammer on Feb 19, 2010 9:50 AM EST up reply actions
Vote with a +1 here for Arodys Vizcaino
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:48 PM EST reply actions 5 recs
+1
I don’t want to throw my vote away on a tester, but out of the tester pool I’d easily take Castro, Neal, Kalish, Parker, Moustakas, and Myers over anyone on the poll. I like Vizcaino’s ceiling a helluva lot but think this is way early. I just don’t see a clearly better choice.
+1
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results.
by biggentleben on Feb 18, 2010 2:15 PM EST up reply actions
Vote with a +1 here for Brett Jackson
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:48 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
Vote with a +1 here for Zach Wheeler
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:48 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
Vote with a +1 here for Zach Britton
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:49 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
+1
Even atheists believe in Matt Wieters
by wickedwitch on Feb 18, 2010 12:53 PM EST up reply actions
Vote with a +1 here for Zach Stewart
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:49 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
Vote with a +1 here for Jared Mitchell
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:49 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
The only other people on this poll I could even consider voting for are
Vizcaino and Dominguez, and I think Mitchell is clearly the choice of the three. Everybody else shouldn’t be in the discussion.
I think history will prove this statement to be incorrect
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 12:28 AM EST up reply actions
why?
I think Beckham, Vizcaino, and Jackson are the only other ones who come close to Mitchell’s ceiling.
maybe Wheeler, but he is a high school arm who hasn’t pitched at all yet.
It's a good bet
3 guys versus all remaining prospects? Odds are someone else will end up having been a better choice, I’d imagine. Who that will be I don’t know. I am voting Neal. I can see a lot of ways in which Mitchell has more tools. I just think Neal will be a better hitter. But Neal is just one guy. There are lots of other guys left.
I really don't care for Neal that much.
He’s kind of a fastball/mistake hitter with bad defense. I wouldn’t be shocked to see him have to end up at 1B. Not only that, but his power is nothing special.
He’s way too much of a hit tool only kind of guy who controls the strike zone well. Im really not nearly enough impressed by his bat in a corner OF with minus defense. He’s not a top 100 prospect for me.
Neal/Mitchell
I understand that it isn’t a popular choice. More a bit of a flyer on my part. I have not heard bad defense. I have heard he may switch to first, which may be partly because of the Giants first base deficit.
Yes, a high babip last year. And he isn’t a Howard-esque slugger by any mens. he still had a very good iso in san Jose.
Mitchell walked a lot, very fast, great D supposedly. And struck out a ton. With no homers. He may not walk as much at higher levels if he doesn’t hit some homers, understanding he wasn’t in a homer league. Ike Davis had no homers in ss in 2008 and he then hit a decent amount last year (not comparing the 2, but I do understand some folks think Mitchell has homer potential).
I would prefer that the Giants had sent Neal to AA mid-season like they did with Kung Fun Panda in 2008. We’d have a better read.
People seemed to ignore Michael Taylor last year, as I have mentioned previously in my push for Neal. Taylor got on at 121 in last year’s poll. Neal may not be quite as good, but I have a similar feeling about him. Sorry to bring up feelings. But a batting average-driven, decent power year in high A at a fair age relative to league for guy who people had thought of as an underachiever/left-fielder. I wanted taylor on earlier last year, was kind of persuaded he didn’t belong top 50, and regretted not pushing him harder. So this year I am pushing Neal.
My point mainly was that, given all the prospects out there, the chances that it HAS to be Mitchell or Dominguez won’t be borne out in the long run. Someone will likely be better. It is just an odds thing. Especially for a guy who strikes out 36% of the time with no homers in low A.
Below you suggest history cannot prove you incorrect. I suppose literally that is true, but we all know what that means is just that the guy thinks in the long run someone else will have a better career than Mitchell. Sure, that doesn’t mean you were wrong to prefer Mitchell now based on available evidence. But like chicken soup, it sure doesn’t hurt.
Mainly, I was taking exception with the quotation: " everybody else shouldn’t be in the discussion." We ought to cut down on the number of players in the poll if that is the case.
Neal's Fielding
+14 total zone rating in left field last year, for whatever limited value that has, per minorleaguesplits (but he was negative on the road). And 5th best left field minor league arm per Hardball Times (which is not league or park adjusted, etc.). Per Sean Smith his total zone run score was 11. I understand this info isn’t all that persuasive, but it doesn’t back up suckitude in left.
Law said he is nothing special in the outfield. He seems to be working hard at improving his throwing. he isn’t that fast so he can’t improve all that much besides his reds I guess. Law also saw some wholes in his swing against fringey sliders. But I have heard other folks say he was ok-good in the field actually. John liked him in AFL.
Law, John, everyone wants to see how he does in AA. naturally. I’m gonna hop on now and cross my fingers.
To go off the fielding topic., the number of leftfielders who have hit 20 home runs has averaged about 12 per season over the last 5 years. Hitting over 20 puts you above the middle of the pack. If Neal can do that and bat .300, he will be an above average left fielder if his fielding is ok.
As for Mitchell, niot many guys who averaged over 30% Ks in the Sally the last 4 years are major prospects. Brandon Allen and Snyder. Maybe if Mitchell’s first name was Brandon. And he hasn’t shown much power. Yet. wait, Mike Stanton too. he definitely doesn’t have that power. This is midwest league, but Maybin k’d 30% of the time in A ball. he didn’t walk nearly as much. And he hit 9 homers in midwest.
Micthell is certainly interesting. Doubles power which coud bloom to homer power, a lot of walks, and despite the Ks a decent average. Plus the speed and fielding at a premium position. A lot to like. I completely understand someone preferring him to Neal. Or anyone else left. Just that it is certainly debateable.
You bring up some valid points
As for Mitchell, niot many guys who averaged over 30% Ks in the Sally the last 4 years…
You realize we’re talking about like, 35 games, right? Following him playing college football all season and then an extended college baseball season, going all the way to the Championship, – where he showed plenty of power (albeit with metal bats).
Mitchell:
plenty of raw powerhttp://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9776
plenty of raw power
http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=8915
plenty of power potential
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=8764
When [Carl] Crawford got the ball in the air, he displayed really good gap-to-gap power. As he grew into his body, his power developed further.
Mitchell looks like that kind of player. His skills eventually should be off the charts.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/blog//name/ncaabaseball/id/4271203/jared-mitchell
Mitchell, with legit 25-homer power and plus-plus speed, could be that multi-tooled centerfielder Sox GM Kenny Williams has long sought.
http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/MLB_Draft/tag/13168/Jared%20Mitchell
While football has occupied most of Mitchell’s time and his baseball skills are raw as a result, he does have a quick bat and can drive the ball to all fields. He needs to learn to turn on pitches, and he has shown the ability to make adjustments by incorporating a trigger into his swing. He does have raw power, though he probably won’t hit many homers early in his pro career.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/draftdb/2006state.php?st=LA
big-time raw power
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/college/chat/2009/267834.html
Ted (Houston,TX)
How much upside does Jared Mitchell have?
John Manuel (3:15 PM)
Loads of it, for me. He has plenty of room to get better; he’s almost too patient for his own good and has to learn when to pounce on hitter’s pitches. But he’s athletic, strong and has some plate discipline; count me in.
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/30879/mlb-with-john-manuel
Ted (Houston, TX)
How high of a ceiling does Jared Mitchell have?
Jim Callis (2:00 PM)
Huge ceiling, potential superstar, though he’s raw and has a lot of rough edges to polish.
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/30426
Jonathan (Chicago)
Jared Mitchell, is he closer to Carl Crawford or Brett Gardner?
Jim Callis (2:49 PM)
Carl Crawford, easily.
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/29549/mlb-with-jim-callis
quotations
ever at the ready. He obviously does have power potential, and it was a sss.
I agree with alskor
I disagree with the order, but I think those three are clearly the best on the poll.
you are referring to the future
not history. it is a mistake many people make.
by auclairkeithbc on Feb 18, 2010 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
think about it...
who is the person most associated with that phrase in recent american history at least? you sound about as smart as him when you say it.
by auclairkeithbc on Feb 18, 2010 1:22 PM EST up reply actions
what's the big deal?
Now it’s the future. By the time it has any relevance as to the presience of current predictions, it will be history.
James Buchanon?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Buchanan
In 1866 Buchanan published Mr Buchanan’s Administration on the Eve of the Rebellion, the first published presidential memoir, in which he defended his actions; the day before his death he predicted that “history will vindicate my memory”. Buchanan died June 1, 1868, at the age of 77 at his home at Wheatland and was interred in Woodward Hill Cemetery in Lancaster.
Nevertheless, historians continue to criticize Buchanan for his unwillingness or inability to act in the face of secession. Historians in both 2006 and 2009 voted his failure to deal with secession the worst presidential mistake ever made. Historical rankings of United States Presidents by scholars considering presidential achievements, leadership qualities, failures and faults, consistently place Buchanan among the worst presidents, if not the worst, in U.S. history.
:)
by acerimusdux on Feb 18, 2010 2:40 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe you should look up "will prove"
You know, the future indicative tense of the verb “to prove”?
by acerimusdux on Feb 18, 2010 2:05 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Regardless of your interpretation of my statement
You are vastly overrating Mitchell. Sure, the tools are enticing, but there is a reason he lasted until the 23rd pick (and it wasn’t signability). There are some real concerns with the bat, and they were not answered with a 34 game debut in the Sally League. He has 4-tool potential (with arm being the tool he does not possess), but there are a lot of toolsy guys still out there.
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 1:39 PM EST up reply actions
For the Record
Mitchell only played baseball last year.
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 1:39 PM EST up reply actions
Im pretty sure he was on the team last year.
Depends what you mean by last year
He played on the 2008 team and played a bowl game at the beginning of 2009, but he obviously didn’t play on last year’s team (the 2009 team) as he was busy starting his professional baseball career last summer/fall.
I'm assuming "the extra work on the diamond paid off"
means that in his third season he did not play football
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 1:56 PM EST up reply actions
Ok
He took spring practice off, not the season. Objection retracted.
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 2:06 PM EST up reply actions
Not according to BA
He joined the baseball team after spring football practice in his first two years, and got permission from Tigers football coach Les Miles to focus on baseball last spring. The extra work on the diamond paid off, not just with a natioal title but also with Mitchell going 23rd overall
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 1:53 PM EST up reply actions
That's not what that says.
This is the chronology
Fall 2008 he played football
Spring 2009 he played baseball and skipped spring football activities
June 2009 he got drafted
He played football last season, 2008-2009, and as nixa37 says, he even played in the bowl game.
Well no that's not what I was saying
He did play on the 2008 football team (I can’t think of any college fan calling it the 2008-2009 team), but I don’t consider that last year’s team. I consider the 2009 team he didn’t play on to be last year’s team.
And to clarify, I don’t know if he played in the bowl game or what, I was just mentioning that he played on a team that had a single game in 2009, so I could see understand why you though he played on last year’s team.
That's not what I was saying.
You’re saying the same thing as me. I was just referring to the season that just ended as “this season” and 2008 as "last season. To me, I won’t call 2009 “last season” until late summer when I start hearing about college football again.
Either way, Mitchell played football the last time he could. He never took a season off. He missed spring practices – which, if you follow college football you know arent a whole lot. Theyre limited by NCAA rule. He also did that b/c it was assumed he was going to be a high pick in the MLB draft in June.
Guess you don't live in SEC country
The 2010 season started the day after Bama won the title and now that signing day has passed and we’re closing in on spring practices the season is almost in full swing.
I think you're vastly underrating him.
Obviously there are some concerns with the bat. He’s a prospect.
As for draft slot – obviously that’s not a completely accurate measure of quality. I dont think this even needs to be addressed. Are you advocating I should vote for Tony Sanchez or Matt Hobgood instead of Mitchell?
He was the considered the best college outfielder in the draft and the best college athlete.
Yes
I don’t know enough about Sanchez to compare the two, but I would certainly take Hobgood over Mitchell. My biggest pet peeve among prospect buffs, is the revisionist history that comes after the draft. Here is Klaw’s mock draft:
http://proxy.espn.go.com/mlb/draft2009/insider/news/story?id=4245401
You’ll notice that he doesn’t have Mitchell going in the first round, while Hobgood goes 12th.
Here is KLaw’s final top 100 ranking for the draft:
http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/draft2009/insider/news/story?id=4245128
Hobgood 18th, Mitchell 36th. I’m not trying to treat these rankings as gospel, but they are good example of why I think Mitchell is overrated. Suddenly, after 34 games, Mitchell was suddenly the best college outfielder available and a better prospect than Hobgood? I don’t see it.
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 2:06 PM EST up reply actions
Mock Drafts are not rankings
They’re prediction on how teams will pick. Mike Minor, Tony Sanchez and Matt Hobgood were significant overdrafts.
Here were their rankings (as in best player) prior to the draft:
BA (5-27-09):
Mitchell: 27
Sanchez: 32
Jackson: 34
Minor: 35
Hobgood: 40
PGCC (6-5-09):
Mitchell: 19
Sanchez: 29
Jackson: 38
Minor: 14
Hobgood: 25
And quite a bit has changed since these rankings were released. Poythress, for example, ranks pretty high on both lists and it seems that pro scouts are unimpressed
I included the Mock Draft
To show that Hobgood was in consideration for the Rockies at 12. Indicating that he was a top 15 guy for multiple teams. That is not an insignificant piece of evidence.
As far as the rankings, you’re making my point for me. KLaw has Hobgood ahead of Mitchell, BA has Mitchell ahead of Hobgood, and PGCC has the two rated similarly. From those three rankings, there is no way you can definitively say that Mitchell was the higher rated prospect on draft day. Yet, we’re going to vote Mitchell on this list as the 59th prospect while Hobgood stays off. Because of what, 34 games? Pro scouts have had a very limited look at both Mitchell and Hobgood. Until we have a bigger pro sample to go on, it would be more prudent to follow the amateur reports for both players.
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 3:20 PM EST up reply actions
Signability?
He got paid twice as much as Mitchell.
Yeah, it’s slot for #5, but no one gets $2.4M just for being signable.
More signable than Purke, maybe, but certainly they could have had Chad James, Kyle Gibson, or any of these college outfielders for slot money at that spot.
he was the pick before
Not saying these were great picks, but the teams that drafted them picked them because they were the guys they liked.
And Sanchez is a plus defensive catcher who outhit all of these guys this year. Not as much ceiling, but they probably thought he was the safer pick.
So, in your opinion, Draft picks go strictly in order of what teams like, with safety a consideration?
You’re saying signability isn’t a gigantic factor?
I really don’t think you want to make this case. Its pretty clearly a losing argument. Signability is obviously a gigantic factor in the MLB draft.
certianly signability matters
But the guys I think they should have taken, who were harder to sign, were Turner, Matzek, and Green. Those guys are already on our list.
Of guys left, only a couple of the HS pitchers, like Zach Wheeler or Shelby Miller, might have been tougher signs.
Certainly, all of the college outfielders who we are discussing here were easier signs than either Sanchez or Hobgood.
He was a signability pick
Anytime a guy signs almost immediately for slot after being drafted, you can be sure that it was a signability selection.
Do you have Keith Law's pre draft rankings?
I don’t have insider so I don’t know if he released them. All you’ve provided are mock drafts which factors in signability.
Keith Law in his top 100 put Mitchell at #95 and didn’t include Hobgood so there’s no reason to think that Hobgood is ahead of Mitchell in Law’s mind.
As for where he should rank, this is from Callis’s chat:
[quote]
Bill (Naperville):
Will Jared Mitchell be in the top 100? if so in what range? ex. 40-50 etc.
Jim Callis (2:28 PM):
For me, in the 51-75 range. Not sure where the BA consensus will peg him.[/quote]
Fixed quote
Bill (Naperville):
Will Jared Mitchell be in the top 100? if so in what range? ex. 40-50 etc.
Jim Callis (2:28 PM):
For me, in the 51-75 range. Not sure where the BA consensus will peg him.
Again, add BP to that
Hobgood was a 3 star while Mitchell was a 4 star, so Mitchell is top 100 but not Hobgood.
Law 95
and Callis as far down as 75.
OK. And Law is an upside guy, right?
yesh, not a ceiling guy
I guess.
Hell, he has Michael Brantley at 71. Ike Davis is 31 spots ahead of Mitchell. We’re at 59. he has daryl Jones at 59 (I think Jones is being docked a bit too much due to injury, but 59?) Wow, he has triunfel at 44. Still has Anderson higher than this, Rizzo, Conger, Trout, not to mention all the othyer guys ahead of Mitchell.
Actually his list is a little weird.
yes
So that has an upper limit of 75, like I said, and Law had him 95. I was just saying, we had a lot of positve quotations from law and callis on mitchell, but they might not rank him this highly.
Law’s list is flat out bizarre. He ranks Brantley 71, well ahead of Mitchell. Then in the chat says unless he can play the hell out of center (a weird comment since most reports is he is fast but really doesn’t get good reads), he isa 4th outfielder.
So he thinks Brantley is likely a 4th outfielder, but puts him well ahead of Mitchell. I suppose this is more a floor list or how close they are list then.
OK, now I see none of alskor’s quotations above come from Law.
Oh well. It’s just that if Law had him 95, I hardly thought that means he is a cut and dried 59 for this poll. Certainly i like him ahead of Brantley, who I actually think could be an interesting player.
uh-oh
in the middle os the chat where he talks about Brantley, he has some comment about the Nats OF logjam, and says they have to keep Milledge and Dukes because they could be young building blocks. WTF? Milledge is a Pirate since mid-season. But there’s the Brantley line as well, and he definitely has Brantley at 71. And Mitchell down at 95.
No way I should think Law’s list should in any way influence me as tyo Mitchell. It’s all over the place.
The things you stumble on
Callis said in a chat that Jaff Decker has a higher ceiling than Travis Snider. Hmm. he also said Neal is a potential solid regular, not a star.
I don't think it's bad
He’s continually improved his plate discipline as he’s moved up and has shown good power. His BABIPs were absurdly low in AA and the AFL and considering the sample size, I’m willing to completely dismiss them.
He may never hit for a great average, but I think he’ll have good power and patience. Combine that with his defensive abilities and I think you have one hell of a prospect.
You're missing out then
Forget the AA stint, he was an overmatched 19 year old kid. In the FSL he improved his BB rate, cut his K rate compared to 2008. Yeah, his ISO was down but Jupiter is ridiculously hard on hitters, every Marlins prospect suffers a drop in ISO there, even Stanton dropped 35 points off of his ISO there. Dominguez has 25 HR potential, solid plate discipline and is a plus defender at an important position. The only thing not to like is his average, but even then with everything else he has the ability to be a 3 win player if he never hits more than .250 or so.
RIP Nick Adenhart
Feliz
I kept thinking that comparison but he walks more and he doesn’t k much if his power is masked by park. feliz, even with the glove, was never a 3 WAR player. I still see him a little lower than here.
2.8WAR and 2.6WAR in 2007 and 2005
with those horrible walk rates for Feliz. Dominguez should be able to hit 3 wins because he’s not allergic to talking a walk.
RIP Nick Adenhart
Not saying you're wrong about Hobgood over Mitchell
but be aware its a very lonely opinion.
BA had Mitchell the ChiSox’ top prospect. BP had him 2nd.
He also had one more star than Hobgood, who was a 3 star – indicating he won’t be a top 100 guy for KG.
Mitchell was rated #17 overall on BP’s list, the top college OFer (again assuming we’re not counting Ackley, obviously, who is a 2B now and played 1B in college last year, but would clearly be #1 if qualified). Next is Tim Wheeler at #25.
The best college athlete in the draft by a milehttp://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9017
Toronto would like an up-the-middle athlete, and the best one in the college crop is Louisiana State’s Jared Mitchell.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/draft/mock-draft/2009/268312.html
The best college athlete in the draft
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/draft/draft-preview/2009/268278.html
The best college athlete in the 2009 draft
http://www.baseballamerica.com/online/prospects/rankings/league-top-20-prospects/2009/268936.html
Terrance (Naperville)
Lightning round — Brett Jackson or Jared Mitchell?
Jim Callis (2:49 PM)
Let’s kick off the lightning round . . . Mitchell.
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/28218/mlb-with-jim-callis
…with the power potential and the baserunning ability, the upside is so much better than Pollock.
Highest ceiling
I think it’s fair to say Mitchel was considered to have the highest ceiling of that group. Jackson would be close, and Wheeler not far off either, but seen more as a corner OF.
Pollock and Davis (and Kipnis) had less upside, more polish.
i'm pretty sure
that Callis indicated that he would put Jackson ahead of Mitchell right now. I know he said that Jackson would go in his top 100 list around 50, iirc.
In the book...
Callis has neither top 50. But Will Lingo has Mitchell #28 and John Manuel has Mitchell #39, with no Jackson.
i did
i’m pretty sure callis made a comment, after they started doing the org/league lists. I’ll try to take a look when I get a chance – my memory may be slipping me.
I know he’s noted a couple times that he’d have Jackson around the middle of a top 100 list, but that isn’t the exact thing I was thinking of.
Not to mention Ackley
Ackley was obviously the best college OF.
But after that, you’re right Pollock was taken next, and Mithcell was taken 8 spots ahead of Jackson, who was taken one spot ahead of Tim Wheeler. And 7 spots later, Kentrail Davis. All of those guys would have been in the discussion.
http://coedmagazine.com/2009/05/27/top-10-college-prospects-for-the-2009-mlb-draft/
http://fantasybullpen.com/minor-leagues/2009-mlb-draft-top-21-prospects/
http://prospectinsider.com/view/mocking-the-2009-mlb-draft/
http://projectprospect.com/article/2009/06/09/lincolns-2009-mlb-draft-board
Not that I consider any of the above especially authoratative, just a quick google search confirming my memory that there was a lot of disagreement, with guys like Davis, Wheeler, Jackson, Pollock, even Kipnis having supporters.
Ah... I see what you're saying
Totally forgot Pollock went before him.
Fairly sure Ive seen that phrase used before, though. Mitchell was certainly up there, got a bonus just slightly less than Pollack’s, and then post draft he exploded and his stock flew up.
Which phrase?
http://prospectsplus.baseballamerica.com/draft/2009/267546.html
If you mean best college athlete:
BEST ATHLETE: For pure athleticism, it’s OF Jared Mitchell (32), who is also a wide receiver on Louisiana State’s football team, with which he won a national championship in 2007. OF Eric Decker (77), another wide receiver, has broken Minnesota’s single-season record for receptions in each of the last two years. For athleticism translated into all-around baseball skills, it’s OF Brett Jackson (16), who could go in the middle of the first round if he continues to improve with the bat. OF Kentrail Davis (10) has the best combination of raw power and speed among the top college prospects, though his below-average arm and defensive instincts may relegate him to left field in pro ball. Grant Green (2) is a shortstop with four plus tools and solid-average range, making him the top position player in the draft.
BEST PURE HITTER: 1B Dustin Ackley (4) hit .402 as a freshman, .417 as a sophomore and .415 in the Cape Cod League last summer. One crosschecker said Ackley has the best bat control he ever has seen. OF A.J. Pollock (12) won the Cape MVP award and finished second in the batting race (.377). Both could enhance their value if they show they can handle more challenging positions, center field for Ackley and second base for Pollock. Other hitters of note include Green and OF Marc Krauss (42).
BEST POWER: No one has more raw power than 3B Chris Dominguez (45), though he strikes out so much that scouts wonder how usable it would be in the major leagues. His 21 homers last year are tied for the most among returning college players. Davis also has a lot of raw power, though his line-drive, all-fields approach cuts down on his home run totals (13 as a freshman in 2008). 1B Rich Poythress (21), who combines strength and plate discipline, might have the most reliably consistent power in this college draft class.
FASTEST RUNNER: Mitchell is the fastest player on our College Top 100, though he’s still raw as a basestealer. So, too, are Davis, Decker and Jackson. Pollock and OFs Matt den Dekker (17) and Jason Kipnis (31) know how to use their plus speed, with den Dekker going 20-for-20 swiping bases last spring. Ackley is a plus runner who has been clocked better than that by some scouts, hence the interest in seeing him move to center.
Some arguments there for any of Mitchell, Jackson, or Davis amongst the OF. And of course Pollock if you prefer the better pure hitter to upside.
"Post draft he exploded and his stock flew up"
This is what my criticism stems from. With 34 games in the books have we really seen enough of Mitchell for him to have clearly surpassed Hobgood, Miller, or any other high pick in last year’s draft? Not in my opinion.
An argument can be made that Mitchell is a better prospect than those guys, but I think putting him at 60, and likely leaving guys like Hobgood off the top 100 completely overstates the difference between the two.
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 7:32 PM EST up reply actions
plus the College World Series.
You guys win. You can keep your little marked-out piece of internet territory. Spend your days communicating via keyboard with people too ugly for the real world and too nerdy for anyone to care, anyway. Your piece of land is here. Do the rest of civilization a favor and stay within its limits. You bore me. Have fun with your nightly sobs and screams into your pillow over your inability to attract a good mate, Radiohead. ~The Hooligan
by Daniel Berlyn on Feb 18, 2010 8:28 PM EST up reply actions
For me, we saw plenty in the College World Series
Which occurs AFTER the draft and is what I was referring to. Mitchell was voted Most Outstanding Player and raised his stock considerably.
Look, I like Hobgood and have been one of his strongest defenders on this site – people are way too hung up on where he was drafted vs. him living up to it – but he doesnt belong in front of Mitchell.
[The Orioles] raised a lot of eyebrows with their selection of him with the fifth overall pick in June.
The Angels aren’t afraid to spend, but I’m not sure they’ll bypass talented and more signable California high school pitchers Matt Hobgood and Tyler Skaggs
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/draft/draft-preview/2009/268298.html
And this is a BA draft preview where Hobgood goes 27th:
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/draft/draft-preview/2009/268298.html
Hobgood was widely considered an overdraft by most analysts
http://mlbbonusbaby.com/2010/02/03/2010-draft-review-baltimore-orioles/
Baltimore eyed young pitching all along, but in the end, they decided that the top guys weren’t worth the coin as they take Matt Hobgood, A guy most people saw as a mid-to-late first-round kind of talent
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9037
Hobgood may very well be there when the M’s come around at 27
http://prospectinsider.com/view/m%27s-draft-candidates-v.-1.0/
On the BP draft preview Mitchell was #17 and Hobgood #23:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9017
You are being seduced by a SSS
College World Series + 34 games shouldn’t drastically influence an opinion on a player.
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 8:46 PM EST up reply actions
Did you even read what I wrote?
Pretty much every analyst had Mitchell above Hobgood predraft, and lots of people called the pick of Hobgood an overdraft.
Mitchell THEN went out and looked dominant in the remainder of the college world series. No one questioned his tools, but they did question his skills and polish – and he looked extremely skilled an polished.
YMMV, but I love Mitchell.
Mitchell may very well be the better prospect, but I do not think a reasonable argument can be made to justify the separation, that this site seems to think there is, between the two. Where would Hobgood come in if we went past 100? I think it would probably be in the 120 range. A 60 spot difference between the two?
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 8:50 PM EST up reply actions
I actually have him #112
Which is 79 spots lower than I have Mitchell – and I believe it is fully justified. Im higher than Mitchell than most – but also higher than Hobgood than most.
Again, YMMV – and apparently they do. Nothing wrong with that – as long as you back it up with a good though process.
I think BA probably will agree with you
…given how highly both Lingo and Manuel have him. But BA tends to like these tools guys.
I think you are exaggerating a bit on opinion pre-draft though. I don’t think Mitchell stood out that much pre-draft. In the June 8 Mock you linked to with Callis and Manuel that had Mitchell at #23, Callis took Tim Wheeler at #13 saying “He has the best bat/power combo of the athletic college outfield crop that also includes Notre Dame’s A.J. Pollock, Louisiana State’s Jared Mitchell and California’s Brett Jackson.”
And of the Hobgood pick at #27 he says he probably won’t fall that far and" Everyone keeps telling me he’s going in the first 20 picks, certainly the first 25, though I still can’t figure out what his destination will be."
So on draft day at least, I don’t think there was much separation either way. He took Mitchell at #23 there because “Kenny Williams loves athletes”.
Mitchell and Jackson both have obviously seen their stock rise with strong debuts. Hobgood was OK, but was sill ranked behind Julio Teheran, Jiovanni Mier, and Wilking Rodgriguez by observers in the Appy.
Mitchell did impress in the CWS. On the other hand, Mitchell in the SAL was ranked 3 spots behind Tim Beckham.
As competitive as a top 100 list is, those differences matter. I still give Jackson the edge over Mitchell, I just believe in his power more. But Hobgood is probably still at least 30 spots behind Mitchell for me.
+1
"I was going to say, 'You’re gay for Elvis.' But then I realized that I, too, am gay for Elvis." ~Adam J. Morris.
by Kinslerhomer on Feb 18, 2010 12:32 AM EST up reply actions
+1
What you fail to understand in your joyless myopia is that baseball is the key to life-- the Rosetta Stone, if you will. If you just understood baseball better all your other questions your, your... the, uh... the aliens, the conspiracies they would all, in their way be answered by the baseball gods.
+1
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
Vote with a +1 here for Matt Dominguez
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:49 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
Vote with a +1 and name for anyone not listed above
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 17, 2010 10:49 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
Case for Britton
Britton’s slider/sinker combo is very, very good. His slider is above-average and his sinker in the 87-91 mph range. He is the perfect pitcher for Camden Yards because he gets strikeouts, groundballs and keeps the ball in the park.
The case against Britton is that he hasnt pitched at AA or AAA yet. His performance already is still impressive. If he followers up 2009 with another spectacular year, he could be considered a top 25 prospect by most.
Thoughts?
by Jordan Tuwiner on Feb 17, 2010 11:05 PM EST reply actions
You are not doing justice to his FB/sinker
it sits in the low 90s, and his 4 seamer can touch 94
by BrosbeforeShaincoes on Feb 18, 2010 12:29 AM EST up reply actions
Jackson, then I think Britton, or Vizcaino for me
I like Mitchell, but I really don’t see him as a better value than Jackson at the moment. The scouting reports support the idea that Jackson isn’t a wild hacker, and there’s enough positive reports to suggest that his discipline will improve enough. Jackson’s a better defensive CF and has more power potential. I like Jared Mitchell a heck of a lot, but I really don’t see any way I could vote for him before Jackson. I know full well someone might say, “Cubs fan” but it’s not as if I’ve been pushing for my Cubs in this poll. Here’s my comment/question – a lot of assumptions are being made on Jackson, but what exactly is Jared Mitchell, at this point in time? A dominant top of the order guy? Eh. It could happen, but there’s a whole heck of a lot of work. A dominant defensive CF? A lot of work to do on that end. For all the risk on Jackson’s discipline, I’d argue that he’s safer defensively with a potentially higher value in regards to ceiling, due to his potential 20-25 HR power, and that his scouting reports aren’t hugely negative on the discipline/strike zone awareness front, along with the fact that he’s shown situational ability to adjust at the plate. No, he’s not going to have elite discipline, but the question is, can he balance it out enough so that the rest of his tools can show? I’d guess yes as of now (or as close to yes as I am willing to on any prospect, since they are all risks). For all the talk about his problems with discipline in his junior year,
a) He was emerging into his power. Some guys need some adjustment time.
b) I don’t recall the reports from Northwoods or Cape ever being hugely negative on him.
Britton’s a nice arm, and I am a huge fan … but I’m hesitant to really push for him as I’m not sure his ceiling is anything more than a mid-rotation guy. That’s alright for this area of the poll, but it’s not enough to force me to have to vote for him. Love Vizcaino’s upside, but he’s awful far away. As noted in the last poll, I prefer Jackson to Dominguez.
I may be underrating Stewart, but I still can’t wrap my head around him for some reason. Fully acknowledge that with a guy like Arrieta on, Stewart should come off the board soon. The difference is … what? I’m not real sure. I just gotta see something more with Wheeler. Whether that’s fair or not, well, that’s how I am. Beckham/Mier are both too raw and far away for me to go with here. I know some Twins fans feel otherwise, but I really don’t see Ramos as a top 100 guy.
That leaves Leake, and admittedly, I’m not sure what to think their either.
I really like Mitchell's swing
I don’t think 20 HR is out of the question for him at all… I daresay he’s got 25-30 ceiling
Eh...
a combination of a high K-rate and low HR power is a troubling sign. He already has to cut back on his swing. It’s going to be hard for him to shorten his swing and add power at the same time, even if he adds the typical amount of strength you expect for an athlete in his early 20s.
he's pretty filled out
I really don’t know how much strength you could anticipate, because unlike most baseball prospects, he’s done football weight work in the recent past. I mean, I’m sure he’ll physically mature some more, but I’m not sure I’d expect a significant difference in Jared.
It goes both ways
just by his frame alone, I could see 20+ home run seasons, and that’s without him getting bigger, which everyone does. If he learns how to adjust his swing, this is very reasonable considering he hasn’t even focused on baseball full-time.
by Daniel Berlyn on Feb 18, 2010 9:32 AM EST up reply actions
we really don't have much data to go off of
So yeah, but such is prospect evaluation.
by Daniel Berlyn on Feb 18, 2010 3:33 PM EST up reply actions
if Mitchell has 25-30 HR power
as a ceiling, then yes, I’d vote him here. I just don’t see his swing and overall skillset as one that will be more than a 15 HR guy that might pop an occasional 20 HR season. I guess there’s a shot he develops into Granderson-ish, so I won’t rule it out. If you really think he’s got that ceiling, then heck yes, you have to vote him here. I just don’t. Overall, I think most expectations are that Brett will have more power. I know someone (Fleita?) in the Cubs organization thought that Brett could have 25+ HR power, but I’m not completely sold on that (but that may be the pessimist in me). As a side note, I fully understand people not voting for Brett here, but I’m simply comfortable enough with the scouting reports to be not that extremely worried about his discipline just yet.
I agree with you on Brett
Both of these guys have strikeout rates that are a bit high. In Jackson’s case, the xbh rate was a bit low as well, especially considering the strikeouts. But of the xbh he did hit, half were HR. Mitchell at this stage hit only doubles.
I’m not sure that Jackson will be the better defender, but it certainly seems he should stick in CF. And Mitchell may have a bit more speed, but also has a below average arm.
Overall, while strikeouts raise some uncertainty, everything else is there. Both guys had good walk rates. and in Jackson’s case, the over the fence power is already there. So with Jackson you have a CF with power and plate discipline. He also has plus bat speed, which makes the xbh and SO rates maybe less a concern in a small sample first look at pro ball. The bat speed, strong hands, and athleticism should make it easier for him to adjust as he does move up to better pitching.
Jackson also apparently wowed observers in both the Northwest and Midwest Leagues, while Mitchell only finished 8th in the managers coting in the SAL (though that’s still very good and it was a loaded league).
I can see the case for Mitchell, as possibly having an even higher ceiling if you really think the over the fence power will develop, but Jackson seems the safer bet to me. A glance at MLEs also confirms that his stat line translates better to higher levels.
I'm not sure why you think Jackson is safer
Jackson didn’t have a good junior year and only hit 12 collegiate HRs in his career at Cal. Mitchell hit 20 (11 of which came in his junior season). Jackson simply doesn’t walk as much as Mitchell and he has a similar problem with the strikeouts. Mitchell made tremendous progress when he stopped playing football to focus on baseball and I don’t see any reason for that to stop. Jackson may be the better defender of the two, but that’s really the only place where I’d give him the edge.
The SAL was much deeper than the Midwest or Northwest League (as you alluded to) so it’s not really fair to compare the league rankings. Jackson is a very good prospect, and I’ll be voting for him in about 10 or so rounds, but I think he’s the inferior prospect.
Jackson v. Mitchell
Jackson at least has a power stroke. It’s a sweet uppercut swing that generates plenty of backspin and makes the ball go very far when he connects. Mitchell needs to revamp his swing to both cut down strikeouts AND add power. That’s a lot harder than doing only one of those things.
I can't analyze a swing
It’s completely over my head so I usually don’t tread into those areas. BA’s write up mentions this in the weakness portion:
Sox coaches are working to smooth out some uppercut in his swing, and he strikes out more than he should because he takes hittable pitches while trying to work counts.
And every scouting report that I’ve read has mentioned Mitchell’s plus raw power. Jackson’s power gets similar descriptions.
Mitchell/Maybin
It seems from the numbers alone in k rate and bb rate that he takes a lot of pitches. Micthell that is. And Maybin didn’t show that much patience. As a hopeful sign, though, Maybin Kd at a 30% rate in low A, but a shade under 20% last year in AAA.
Yeah
The Ks certainly aren’t a positive, but I don’t consider them overly pernicious just yet. The improvement he made from his sophomore to junior season in that area is staggering:
2008: 175ABs 15BBs 49Ks
2009: 226ABs 57BBs 64Ks
I haven't heard every scouting report suggest
plus raw power on Mitchell, tbh. Heck, Maineri himself suggested what Mitchell had was line drive power. I don’t recall pgcrosschecker ever saying plus power – just that he’d generate some more power. I could be wrong and don’t have time to go through their files right now. As a side note, interesting to read one of their report on Mitchell, wishing he would be more lean to try and improve the arm strength. The MLB draft thing indicated average raw power that could develop.
Yes, I know some places have indicated plus raw power.
Anyhow, as noted, if you think Mitchell has enormous power potential, then yes, you should vote for him. For me, Mitchell is simply that much more risky. I believe he has more power (though as noted, I’ll believe it when I see it), but he has to rework his swing. It’s made strides, but by almost all accounts, there’s a decent amount of work to do, unless something happened this winter that I didn’t catch. He has to get leaner than thicker, which is a tougher process than acknowledged (but considering his management of 2 sports in college, I believe he can). He has to show that he can adjust to CF and excel. For all the expectations that he can, it’s still a work in progress. With Jackson, yes, there’s a big concern on discipline, but like Mitchell and his flaws, there are positive reports on Jackson’s pitch recognition, strike zone awareness, and he’s shown an ability to play situational ball.
Only time will tell.
Here's PGCC's write up
I’m pretty sure this content is free content if you click on the right link:
UPDATE (5/15): Mitchell’s hitting skills showed a marked improvement this spring, re-igniting much of the first-round talk that surrounded him as a high-school senior. The two areas of his game that progressed the most were his base-running instincts and his ability to put backspin on balls, which resulted in greater carry off the bat, and more power. Mitchell is an exceptional athlete, possibly the best in this year’s college crop, and has frequently been compared to Tampa Bay Rays outfielder Carl Crawford for his combination of raw speed and compact strength. Many scouts believe that Mitchell has just begun to show his true potential after three years of splitting time with football. His package is still not without holes, though. He has a somewhat-rigid approach at the plate and strikes out far too much, especially against lefthanders, for a player whose game is centered on speed. Mitchell’s walk-vs.-strikeout numbers actually look at lot more like big-league sluggers Adam Dunn or Jim Thome as he also walked 47 times while striking out on 58 occasions in his first 184 official at-bats this spring, though he did manage to hit .326-8-40 with a team-high 30 stolen bases-DAVID RAWNSLEY
It doesn’t mention plus power in the write up, but it is fairly optimistic on his power potential. You can look at alskor’s post above if you want to see the plus power potential talk that I alluded to.
On draft day
http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2009/06/live_blogging_t_4.php
Mitchell is a high-energy, fast-twitch player, especially on the base paths. He’s incredibly athletic and stronger than he appears on first glance; he also plays college football. Mitchell displays raw strength with the bat, but it may never develop as usable power. He’ll also need to eliminate the upper cut in his swing and he strikes out far too much for a top-of-the-order hitter. Despite his gifted running abilities, Mitchell has a weak throwing arm and does not get good read on balls. As such, he’s going to end up in left field unless he significantly improves. In left, his bat will relegate him to a platoon or fourth outfielder role. He was drafted out of high school in the 10th round by the Twins but went to school when the team failed to meet his price tag (reportedly $1 million).
There were doubts on draft day whether Mitchell would have that much in game power at the pro level. Seeing as he has yet to hit his first pro HR, I don’t see how those doubts are fully answered.
Also, BA called Mitchell the best college athlete, but then added that Jackson was the best for “athleticism translated into all-around baseball skills” and that Kentrail Davis had “the best combination of raw power and speed”.
For me, I don’t necessarily go for the best absolute upside, the guy who has near as good tools, but has better baseball skills, ranks higher.
i'm not questioning that some folks have suggested plus power potential
I’m simply saying that I don’t think it was as universal an opinion as your previous post suggested, whereas Brett Jackson’s plus power potential was largely considered to be true, with the only major question on Brett’s game being his discipline. Certainly, there is still work for Brett to do, and we are projecting on both players. That said, the most negative comment this winter on Brett JAckson has basically been “can he keep it up?”. Sure, there are still some concerns on discipline, but most of the reviews have been rather positive on him, with the only reservation being that he had issues his junior year and people want to see some more.
I’m not really getting my point across that well, I think. Short of it is, whereas, pre-draft, most scouting reports had big questions on Brett Jackson’s bat, there haven’t been any huge negative on the scouting reports of him post-season. Add in what I perceive to be higher power potential and better defense, and I just think Brett is easily better than Jared Mitchell right now as a prospect.
That said, as noted, if you believe Jared has big time power potential, then I can definitely understand that vote. I just don’t see it.
"easily"
You guys win. You can keep your little marked-out piece of internet territory. Spend your days communicating via keyboard with people too ugly for the real world and too nerdy for anyone to care, anyway. Your piece of land is here. Do the rest of civilization a favor and stay within its limits. You bore me. Have fun with your nightly sobs and screams into your pillow over your inability to attract a good mate, Radiohead. ~The Hooligan
by Daniel Berlyn on Feb 18, 2010 8:29 PM EST up reply actions
yes, i did use that word
and i’ve made my case above why, even though i am very big on mitchell, that I think Brett is easily above him for me. I’m not that hugely concerned about the one big issue with Brett – his discipline. I think he’s better defensively with better power potential, which, despite Mitchell’s tools, makes me believe that Brett’s ceiling is as high, if not better. Mitchell’s arm strength, swing, overall defensive ability are all concerns I have.
I am a huge fan of Mitchell. In fact, I was hoping he’d slip to the Cubs when the draft was happening. But based off what we know, based off very little negative reports on Jackson post-season, it isn’t even an issue for me.
Now, I imagine most people will vote Mitchell ahead of Jackson. I’m simply making my case as to why I just can’t, much as I love Mitchell. I’d put Mitchell on fairly soon … I actually don’t think too far ahead so I can’t tell you how soon, but I imagine within 15 or so spots, I’d be willing to vote for him. But
a) Show me you are a CF
b) Show me what type of bat you are
That said, as I’ve noted, if you truly buy the idea that Mitchell has 25+ power potential (someone posted that above), then yes, I can understand a vote for him here, and I might be inclinded to vote for him here if he had that type of power potential.
Just to be clear, by easily, I’m not suggesting that Jackson is light year’s ahead. I’m simply suggesting that it isn’t much of a thought for me. They are close, but most of they key check marks, imo, go with Jackson.
College stats
On walk rates, Jackson walked in 12.4% of PA as a pro, so I don’t really see a problem there, though you’re right, not as good as Mitchell.
As for the college numbers, per Boyds, the TPF (Weighted average park factor for all stadiums the team played in in 2009) for the two schools last year:
118 – Louisiana State
89 – California
So I really don’t think you can say for certain Mitchell had the better Jr. year overall, with that considered. But, you do have a point about his walk rate being very strong, at 19.7% of PA that college season, and 16.5% as a pro.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
