Prospect Smackdown: Dustin Ackley vs. Brett Lawrie
Prospect Smackdown: Dustin Ackley vs. Brett Lawrie
Earlier this month we did a poll question on two second base prospects, Dustin Ackley of Seattle and Brett Lawrie of Milwaukee.
This resulted in spirited (and informative) debate in the comments section. The poll itself was incredibly close: out of 1004 votes cast, 506 went to Lawrie (50.4 percent) and 498 went to Ackley (49.6%). I can't think of a previous Minor League Ball poll that came out so close, with that many votes.
Several readers have asked me who I preferred myself, so this seems like a good thing to hash out in a Prospect Smackdown.
Background and Intangibles.
Ackley: Although he was known to scouts, Dustin Ackley was undrafted out of high school in Winston-Salem, North Carolina in 2006 due to injuries and positional concerns. He ended up on campus at Chapel Hill, seizing control of a starting job as a freshman in 2007 and never looking back. His college performance was outstanding: .402/.448/.591 in '07, .417/.503/.597 in '08, then .417/.517/.763 with 22 homers in '09. He was ACC Player of the Year and rated as the best pure hitter in the '09 draft by most experts, going second overall. His work ethic and personality are well-regarded.
Lawrie: Lawrie hails from Langley in British Columbia, but he was head-and-shoulders above other Canadian high school hitters, playing for the Olympic Team as a high school senior in 2008. He thrived on the showcase and touring circuits, demonstrating excellent potential with a wooden bat and earning a scholarship to Arizona State. The Brewers drafted him in the first round in '08, 16th overall, buying him out of college. Lawrie has a reputation as a hard worker as a hitter, but is also something of a mercurial personality, once described to me by a scout as an "intense red-ass player." He didn't show much interest in defense as an amateur.
Comparison: Sort of an apples/oranges thing here, given the difference in age and backgrounds, Ackley's college breakthrough against Lawrie's superior performance as a high school player despite his Canadian background. Ackley is a more mature personality at this point, and I'll give him a slight edge here, although I don't think there is anything wrong with Lawrie that growing older won't fix.
Physicality, Health, and Tools
Ackley: Ackley is a 6-1, 185 pound left-handed hitter and right-handed thrower, born February 26, 1988. His best physical tool is above average speed; his overall athleticism is also above average, although he doesn't have huge raw power. His hand-eye coordination is considered exceptional. Ackley had Tommy John surgery as after his sophomore year in college, and while it didn't keep him off the field much as a junior, his throwing arm is now below average and isn't expected to improve much.
Lawrie: Lawrie is a 6-0, 213 pound right-handed hitter and thrower, born January 18, 1990. Although he has a short/strong body type, he is actually a good athlete with slightly above average running speed and a fine throwing arm. His legs look a bit thick visually and some scouts expect he'll lose speed as he gets older. He is physically stronger than Ackley and has more raw power. His hand-eye coordination is excellent and he has terrific bat speed. He has had no significant injury problems.
Comparison: Ackley looks more athletic to the naked eye, but Lawrie is no slouch himself, has more strength, is younger, and has a better health record. I'll call this one even.
Performance and Polish
Ackley: Ackley is considered extremely polished as a hitter, with excellent contact ability and very good plate discipline. He got off to a slow start in April, hitting just .147/.289/.227 for Double-A West Tennessee, but has hit well since then, (.922 OPS in May, .838 in June) and earned a promotion to Triple-A this month, very impressive just one year out of college. On the season he's hitting .266/.383/.388 with 59 walks and 50 strikeouts in 407 plate appearances. The BB/K ratio is very sharp and augers well for his future, and he's shown gap power. He's hit just three homers, however, and while he's been efficient as a stealer (8-for-10), he hasn't been especially aggressive. A first baseman and outfielder in college, he's learning second base this year with mixed results. Given his lack of experience, his error rate isn't bad (.961 fielding percentage), but his range factors were below average for the Southern League, granted minor league defensive stats aren't that reliable. Scouts indicate that his defense is decent considering his lack of experience, and should continue to improve in time. He's working hard at it.
Lawrie: Lawrie hit .274/.348/.454 last year in the Midwest League and is at .287/.350/.453 in the Southern League this year, quite impressive for a 20-year-old. He's streaky and needs some additional polish with his plate discipline, but his explosive bat speed has held up well against older competition. He's hit just six homers after knocking 13 last year, but with 24 doubles and 13 triples to his credit, scouts expect more homers will come in time. He's swiped 27 bases but has been caught 12 times. On defense, Lawrie doesn't look like a second baseman physically, and many scouts still think he'll end up as a right fielder, not liking his footwork. But his defensive stats aren't bad; his fielding percentage is OK and his range factors are actually above average for the Southern League.
Comparison: From a scouting perspective, Ackley is a more polished hitter at this point in terms of plate discipline and feel for the zone. Lawrie has more present distance power, and his overall numbers this year were better at the same league and level. Ackley has a much superior BB/K/PA ratio, however. Ackley currently gets better defensive reviews on tools, but Lawrie's performance metrics are superior with the glove, granted the uncertainties involved with measuring defense. You can cut Ackley some slack on his slow start given that he was jumping from college ball and learning a new position. But Lawrie also deserves some slack since he's just 20 and in Double-A. I'm going with an extremely slight edge to Lawrie here, but it is really close.
Projection
Ackley: Scouts see Ackley as a future .300+ hitter with a high walk rate/OBP, 20+ stolen bases, and the kind of player who can win batting championships. Even if second base doesn't pan out, he would still be a mainstay at the top of a major league lineup.
Lawrie: Scouts see Lawrie as a potential 25 home run hitter as he matures, with some stolen bases (at least when younger) and a decent batting average and OBP. If he fully maximizes his potential, he has enough bat speed and pop to be a .300, 30-homer hitter at the highest upside. If he stays at second base and provides that sort of hitting, he'll be outstanding; if he moves to the outfield, he would still be very valuable.
Comparison: Both of these players have the natural ability to be All-Stars, although the shape of their success will likely be different, Lawrie providing more power/middle of the order production and Ackley providing more pure hitting. Lawrie is two years younger and has more projection in the classic sense, being in a better spot on the age curve, but there is also more uncertainty about how he will develop. I will call this one even, too.
Summary
You can see why the poll results were so close. I give Ackley a slight edge on background/intangibles, call it even on physicality/tools, give Lawrie a slight edge on current performance, and call it even on future projection. If someone put a gun to my head and I had to pick one, today I would go with Lawrie since he is younger. But tomorrow I might pick Ackley.
31 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Apples to Oranges
Ackley is a pure hitter with some speed
Lawrie will be a rbi producer with some good power
Ackley will stay in the infield
Lawrie will move to the outfield
Ackley went to college and is more seasoned
Lawrie is a raw talent out of highschool
Can we stop the comparisons?
hmmmm
no one is forcing you to read or to comment
'The Writers Junction'
in Santa Monica, CA
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Jul 30, 2010 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
sorry...
my comment may have sounded a little harsh. What I am trying to say is can we stop comparing these two players to each other, and start comparing them to players that project to be comparables?
I realize that right now these two guys are competing with each other for top 2B prospect, which definitely bears reason for the matchup, but when you line up their two profiles side-by-side, which John does above, it becomes pretty clear that these are not comps. This would be like matching up Lawrie vs Bryce Harper because they both played at Catcher.
By no means I am being critical of John or anyone that compares these two guys – in fact I love reading John’s work. I am just saying that iit may be more fruitful to compare Ackley and/or Lawrie to players that actually line up appropriately.
Keep up the great work John
No one is saying...
they are alike. They are comparing things like projection and tools to see which one is better. There are different ways you can compare people.
ETHAN MARTIN!!!!
two prospects
who are known for their hitting prowess who have converted to the same classically defensive position and are accordingly experiencing growing pains making it questionable that they end up at said defensive position. yeah, these two have absolutely nothing in common.
by richieabernathy on Jul 30, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
yup
the position is one of two similarities…. the other? They played in the same league until Ackely was promoted
They both are also...
learning second base after moving from another position, are known for their offense more than their defense, and are both their teams best prospects. I am sure there are more similarities, but that is not relevant. They do not need to be similar players to compare them. I would never say ackley and Lawrie will be similar players in the majors, but there is nothing wrong with comparing their abilities against each other to make the case for one being better. That is basically what people do when they make top prospect lists. They compare the players they deem worthy for the spot and decide which one is better to place there.
ETHAN MARTIN!!!!
RE: They do not need to be similar players to compare them.
If you want to do any meaningful comparison, they should. Otherwise, you’re just contrasting their differences, not comparing their similarities. The general approach has been “who is the better prospect?” with some folks screaming about Ackley being overrated while pointing out Lawrie is underrated. There really was no reason to even begin comparing these two other than the example you gave. They’re not even remotely the same type of player.
Worse, this argument has brought about a general problem that I think people have with judging prospects. They only look at what they think makes someone a top prospect, which seems to be the alluring promise of power. I keep hearing Ackley detractors mentioning power, as if it’s the end all, be all, thing a prospect has to have.
I keep trying to remind people that a 850 OPS is an 850 OPS whether it’s a .400 OBP and 450 SLG or a .300 OBP and .550 SLG. Offensive production isn’t pigeonholed into one particular stat. wOBA would also favor the former, not the latter.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Jul 30, 2010 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions
PROFILE
Position profile is key. If Ackley can play CF and be a table setter with some pop he is valauble. If Lawrie can play 2b and hit 25 and 80 rbi’s then his value is HUGE!
by swingbuilder on Jul 30, 2010 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Price of tea.
China.
Etc.
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Jul 31, 2010 2:05 AM EDT up reply actions
The Reason
I went with Lawrie in the early poll is the certainty that he stays at 2B compared to Ackley. With Two players so close I take the one more likely to wind up at the valuable position. Thats not to say Ackley wouldn’t be a valuable asset in the OF, but it definitely hurts his value.
And by certainty
I mean likelyhood. Duh. I think its more likely he stays at 2b.
Lawrie's more likely to wind up at the valuable position?
Lawrie seems unlikely to stay at 2B for all that long (he’s going to get bigger) and his next stop would be RF. Ackley has the tools to stick at 2B long term but needs more polish, and if that doesn’t work he could be a solid CF even with the below average arm (Damon’s was pretty terrible as well). I’d actually go with Ackley using the reasoning you use for Lawrie.
Next Smackdown: 3-Way Battle Royale
Mauricio Robles vs Jake McGee vs Chris Withrow
all three in Southern League, all fireballers, all have their flaws…. this would be very interesting to see
McGee, Robles, Withrow
In that order … I really really like Robles.
Power over Polish
Im taking the power and run production and a much better positional profile chance as Ackley is limited to where he will profile offensively. Its either 2b or CF and most clubs like a offensive threat there as well.
Lawrie in a landslide from my perspective.
Why though...
I am wondering why you choose Ackley if he ends up with only 10-15 HRs a year? If we are going by potential, then why would you choose a potential 310-15-15 over a 290-30-10 guy(not sure on the SBs)? They seem about even. I’m not trying to be rude, I am just curious.
ETHAN MARTIN!!!!
Lawrie could pretty easily develop more patience as his power develops.
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 Jul 30, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
There is nothing to indicate right now that Lawrie will have more plate discipline than Ackley
“he might develop it” well, Ackley already has.
Ackley also has a low amount of power displayed
It’s going to be harder to take walks if pitchers aren’t afraid of his bat. And I didn’t say more patience than Ackley, but enough to make Lawrie better as a hitter.
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 Jul 30, 2010 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Its his second season and he's being aggressively promoted
It’s not like there is a lot of something to draw from.
Dump the SB's
I’d be much more in favor of RBI’s. Lawrie 20-30 yacks a season and 100+ runs produced over a “who knows when his prime will be” leadoff hitter.
Plus his name ain’t tarheel for nothing,lol, he’s biased!
his career walk rate is 6.8% and an ISO of .078
and even with that he had a 2.3 and 3.0 WAR seasons. I’m sorry if I think Ackley outproduces those numbers, he also has more speed and better contact hitting ability.
Burroughs is the floor.
to be fair
Lots of people really, really liked Burroughs back in the day. If you could transport 2010 Ackley back in time to when Burroughs was a prospect, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if most preferred Burroughs, let alone said that Burroughs was Ackley’s floor. Burroughs was thought to be an exceptional hitter for average.
Burroughs is not Ackley’s floor. He IS an example of how a player with a similar skill set can fall on his face. Not the best comparison as there are a lot of things up in the air as far as defense goes for Ackley over the next several years, but I can see why somebody might be reminded of Burroughs in some way.
ackley/burroughs
Their body types are also dissimilar…Ackley is much more athletic than Burroughs was.
by John Sickels on Jul 31, 2010 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
With ackley if he can't hit for power or play defense what is he
I mean if he can play center, I think his ceiling is Mark Kotsay. Kotsay when drafted was suppose to be a star and he become a solid regular. I just don’t see the it factor with Ackley and while he could become a solid player. He just doesn’t scream future superstar.
Decent Comp?
Do you think Ackley’s prime could look something like Nick Markakis thusfar in 2010?
.290/.374/.434?
Markakis was born 11/17/83, Ackley 2/26/88. So, let’s say 4 years from now, is Dustin Ackley at .290/.374/.434? Over/Under?

by 














