Minor League Ball: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Check out our NFL Scoreboard: scores, schedule and blogs Bar-right-arrows

2007 Tampa Bay Devil Rays Prospects

Napoleon_tiny by John Sickels on in News

2007 Tampa Bay Devil Rays Prospects

  1. Delmon Young, OF, Grade A (Seven Skill player)
  2. Reid Brignac, SS, Grade A- (Breakthrough season with the bat)
  3. Evan Longoria, 3B, A- (plate discipline an issue?)
  4. Jacob McGee, LHP, B+ (breakthrough lefty increased velocity)
  5. Jeff Niemann, RHP, B+ (can he stay healthy?)
  6. Wade Davis, RHP, B+ (I still love him)
  7. Elijah Dukes, OF, B (Grade A if not for attitude)
  8. Jeremy Hellickson, RHP, B (breakthrough for 2007)
  9. Mitch Talbot, RHP, B (nice find from Astros)
  10. Joel Guzman, INF-OF, B (status has slipped but still very young)
  11. Matt Walker, RHP, B- (great arm but mixed results)
  12. Juan Salas, RHP, B- (hasn't received much attention but looks solid)
  13. Justin Ruggiano, OF, B- (sleeper outfield prospect)
  14. Josh Butler, RHP, B- (nice arm from `06 draft)
  15. Andrew Sonnanstine, RHP, C+ (promising control artist)
  16. Jason Hammel, RHP, C+ (should be decent starter eventually)
  17. James Houser, LHP, C+ (intriguing southpaw from Cal League)
  18. Shawn Riggans, C, C+ (decent catcher if he stays healthy)
  19. Sergio Pedroza, OF, C+ (power and patience)
  20. Elliot Johnson, 2B, C+ (I don't have a great feel for him but a lot of people like him.
Others of Note: Nevin Ashley, C; Wes Bankston, 1B; Jon Barratt, LHP; Alex Cobb, RHP: Desmond Jennings, OF; Chris Mason, RHP; Mike McCormick, 3B; Ryan Owen, LHP; Fernando Perez, OF; Chris Seddon, LHP; Wade Townsend, RHP; Eric Walker, RHP; Mike Wlodarczyk, LHP.

The Devil Rays in One Sentence: This system is very strong.

Not much else to say, other than this organization has a lot of potential talent if they can find a way to use it right.

ALL GRADES ARE PRELIMINARY. If you hate a grade, feel free to make a case for me to change it, though remember that cases phrased respectfully using logic and facts are more likely to be viewed positively than those featuring insults and invective.

There is a lot of slack in the B-/C+/C range and players may move up and down depending on how my thinking progresses. Feel free to make comments, point out sleepers I may have missed, etc. Note that there is only a limited amount of space in the book, and the max I can do is 35-36 players per team.

And, as always, there is the helpful reminder to Buy My Book, which will lay out reports for all these guys (and more) in detail.

0 recs | Comment 145 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

7 Skill?
Plate discipline surely isn't one of them. He walked once in 100+ ABs in the majors, 15 in 345 ABs in AAA, and his P/PA in the majors was the lowest among those with 100+ ABs. That approach is only going to go so far

by PooNani on Dec 29, 2006 12:35 PM EST   0 recs

Thank you...
seriously I'm starting to think that Young is becoming one of the most overrated prospects of all time.

The guy is going to be a good player, but his game is seriously lacking. I love his swing, and the ball screams off his bat, no doubt those are all pluses. Unfortunately negatives like a whiny attitude, a body type that gains weight easy, and horrible plate discipline are scary.

I've seen why people love Delmon whenever I see him play. Still I can't get the hype because he doesn't have the skills of certain guys.

Elijah Dukes has the same scary tool set, a better work ethic, and more refined skills but is usually knocked severely for his attitude. Young lacks Dukes' drive, has lesser baseball SKILLS, and has the attitude of someone who thinks he should be handed anything he wants, yet is considered the best prospect in the game by many.

I just don't see it in anything bus his potential. And other things like his makeup make me think he'll never reach that ridiculous cieling.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 29, 2006 2:26 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Reality check
I'd love to see statistical proof that Dukes is a better prospect than Young.

by The Rocc on Dec 29, 2006 2:31 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Don't know the results, but like looking...
so, I normally measure a hitter by his %XBH because that tells me how hard he's hitting the ball, and by BB/PA because that tells me how his batting eye is. I also look at overall OPS and K/PA, so lets check it out.

I'll list it as age, level, %XBH, BB/PA, K/PA, OPS

Dukes 2003: 19, A, 29.7%, 9.5, 3.29, 709
Young 2003: n/a

Pretty weak season overall for Dukes, but his PD wasn't bad.

Dukes 2004: 20, A/A+, 35.9%, 9.5, 4.3, 791/956
Young 2004: 18, A, 34.1%, 10.7, 4.7, 922

Even tho Dukes season was slightly superior, statistically speaking, you have to give the nod to Young for putting up a great year in A ball at 18.

Dukes 2005: 21, AA, 34.3%, 10.9, 5.9, 833
Young 2005: 19, AA/AAA, 33.5%, 20.4, 5.9, 968/750

Again, Young is doing it at such a young age that even tho Dukes' year is superior, you still have to give the nod to Young.

Dukes 2006: 22, AAA, 36.1%, 7.4, 7, 889
Young 2006: 20, AAA/Maj, 31.8%, 30.3, 5.4, 815/812

2006 is the only year where Dukes clearly outperformed Young across the board. The AAA/Maj splits aren't significant for Young. not only that but Dukes appears to be trending in the right way, improving his walk rate and strikeout rate from 2005 to 2006.

And Dukes averaged 22.75 Sbs a year, and Delmon had 25. So both show some speed.

Looking at all of this, it appears Young is trending the wrong way with PD, and %XBH, while Dukes appears headed in the right direction, statistically speaking. His %XBH has held steady, his PD is improving. But you can't ignore that he's doing all of this 2 years ahead of Dukes.

So, I think, statistically, it's closer than some want to admit. I think year to year, Dukes does outperform Young, but at this point, Young is the better prospect because of his age, not his numbers.

I think Dukes shows the ability to catch and pass Young in terms of maj production because of his advanced PD, but Young is still young enough to learn that skill.

by beastball on Dec 29, 2006 3:33 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Although it can't be proven
Many Rays fans watching Young in 2006 noticed some changes in Young. He was told by the organization to work on his improving his OBP, which he technically did without even walking much.

There's also rumblings that he pouted for most of the season and loafed because of his standing in the organization as the proverbial "golden child". When he returned from his suspension, his power miraculously returned and he really cranked it up.

Delmon, when he was called up, stopped his "spoiled" brat act and was a respectable teammate, which Maddon termed as "boyscout"-like.

We'll see the "real" Delmon in 2007, I believe.

by The Rocc on Dec 29, 2006 5:11 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Oh yeah, I'm still a big Delmon fan...
mainly because of what he was doing in full season at 18. So I think the potential is there, for sure. And I'm sure the off-field issues contributed to his performance decline. The 2005 walk rate is a little disconcerting, but he's so young, that he could easily turn it around.

However, I was more impressed by Dukes, whose trend is impressive as he cut his K rate down every year, and then significantly improved his walk rate in 2006 (we'll see if that's for real or not). Meanwhile he maintained a good %XBH every year, even his worst stat year.

I think both Young and Dukes could really bust out this year, if they both keep their noses clean, and if the DRays give Dukes a shot at 1b out of spring.

by beastball on Dec 29, 2006 5:22 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Proof, bah! :)
re: "I'd love to see statistical proof that Dukes is a better prospect than Young."

"Proof" when it comes to prospects is always going to be impossible.  That said, my handy MLP system shows the composite minor league records of these two indicating potential (as in "normal season" rate stats) of:

Dukes: 1486 AB, .257/.336/.407, 24% K%
Young: 1413 AB, .277/.325/.472, 20% K%

The AB are the total minor-league AB I had to work with.  I'm thinking that if either one does as poorly as these indicate, a LOT of people will be disappointed.

by BobbyMac on Dec 29, 2006 3:48 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Um...
what about recent trends for both?

Dukes has improved at every level, and has not been old for any.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 29, 2006 4:18 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

hmm
whiny attitude, body type that gains weight easily, and plate discipline. well lets see, kirby puckett matches two of those traits, especially the weight part, albert belle and manny ramirez match all three. those are the names that came to mind less than 2 seconds after reading that. sure those are less than desirable traits, but it is NUMBERS that gets you into the Hall, and Delmon, despite his problems has what it takes to get there. Now, I can predict the future, he could end up a bust, but he's got more talent than 99.9% of other prospects. Elijah Dukes has a ton of talent as well, but I still wouldnt put him on Delmon's level

by rangersfan24 on Dec 29, 2006 2:32 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Okay Mikey, I'll bite...
I'm fairly pro-Delmon, and will ignore the attitude and weight issues for now, chalking one up to youth and ignoring the other because of his athleticism for his size.  

But the plate discipline is an issue.  And comparing his approach to that of Ramirez is ignoring all the facts.  Manny put up a .311/.409/.595 line in the minors and has been a .314/.411/.600 hitter in the bigs.  

And while Belle isn't as patient his career .295/.369/.564 line, with 683bb in just under 5900ab's is probably the best case for Young.  The upside here is that his power and patience regressed some in Durham and Tampa from his lower level numbers, so there may still be some hope that he'll improve to a "reasonable" level.  

by deweyforthehall on Dec 29, 2006 2:51 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

first of all
its attitude ISSUE, not ISSUES. he is not elijah dukes. and weight issue? he ways 205, since when is that overweight?! as far as comparisons to Manny- Manny didnt make it to the bigs until he was 21(still really good tho), and didnt hit over .300 until he was 23. Manny has always had poor playe discipline in terms of k's. What I dont understand is how a .295 career avg is best case scenario for Delmon. Where do you get that from? What about his career so far suggests that? I really would like to know

by rangersfan24 on Dec 29, 2006 3:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Don;t know what you all are debating...
but saw Manny's name thrown in there, so decided to look at his final minor league season.

He was 21, played over AA and AAA. He had 46% of his hits go for extra bases, which is other worldly. You don't really have to look any further. But he also had a walk every 7.6, which is really strong, better than most on our list. And he struck out once every 5.4 PAs, which isn't pretty good for a power hitter.

I don't think there's a good Manny comp around right now. Gordon, our current #1, is the closest, and he was in AA at 22, and had 43.7% XBH, 7.75 PAs/BB, and 4.9 PAs/k.

by beastball on Dec 29, 2006 3:43 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

What?
K's in isolation doesn't matter to me. I'm not a fan of hitters like Young and Soriano who K like 10 times for every 1 walk (exaggerated or not).

by SenorGato88 on Dec 29, 2006 4:22 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Yes...
now check the skillset each of them had.

All of them took a decent amount of walks, and none of them K'd a huge amount. Young does the opposite.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 29, 2006 4:20 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

really?
young strikes out once every 5 AB's, Manny once every 4.5 AB's. Ya, Young sure does the opposite huh. and ya, that was a bit of an exaggeration there buddy- delmon k's 3 times per walk. there is a big difference between 3/1 and 10/1. but i guess delmon gets no credit for the fact that hes in the pros as a 20 year old, and in all actuality should have been there as a 19 year old, but no, we wont cut him any slack on the k's now will we

by rangersfan24 on Dec 30, 2006 12:11 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Hm...
Manny also averages 80 walks a season, probably more.

Young has never shown that kind of skillset. Manny's a guy who usually has a .100 IsoD. Young will be lucky to have a .030 iso next season IMO. That discipline really fell apart since the second half of '05.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 30, 2006 2:45 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

so then what youre saying is
delmon gets cut absolutely no slack for being a 20 year old in the majors? ok well, if thats the way you feel, then im done with this argument. You are expecting all-star numbers from a 20 year old and cutting him absolutely no slack. When you start going to crap like IsoD to start showing how delmon isnt any good, im out

by rangersfan24 on Dec 30, 2006 12:28 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Plate discipline
Is a skill that often matures last.  I would say that his plate discipline is definitely a concern, but no more than that right now.  

To project that he'll still be having a very low walk rate when he is 25 or 30 is an unwarranted inference.  Certainly, we'd all be much happier if he already showed the plate discipline of Brian Giles, but Delmon has PLENTY of time to straighten that out.

As for his performance compared to Dukes, yes, Dukes has outperformed him by a slight margin overall, but Delmon being two years younger at the same level really is a big deal and makes Delmon clearly the better prospect.

by BaseballBrain on Dec 30, 2006 12:43 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Couple things...
  1. How many guys significantly improve their plate discipline as they get older? I've already brought this up but I don't think that got any replies.
  2. I think age is being a little overrated. When you look at performance, Young wasn't ready for AAA.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 30, 2006 1:01 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

DY
I have addressed this a few times, actually. His plate discipline is not poor, and by discipline, I mean ability to see pitches and swing at strikes, not pitches out of the zone. His approach is fairly poor, as he swings at pretty much any pitch over any part of the plate, probably because he feels lie he can crush anything. As he matures, he will learn that he cannot hit anything and everything and that he will have to target specific pitches in specific zones. Plate approach CAN be adjusted, and I'm fairly sure Delmon will.

by rmande09 on Dec 30, 2006 1:12 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Comparing manny to delmon will be dissapointing
Guys.. i think the main point was that someone tried to compare manny ramirez's strike #'s to Delmons... but the issue is its not about how many times one strikes out, but how many times they walks compared to how many times they strike out.  If you want to compare ages.. when manny was 20 years old he had 45 walks to 74 ks or a ratio of .61 which is very very strong.  Delmon this year in AAA had a 15 to 65 bb to k ratio or .23 which is very weak.  In the majors he had a 1 to 24 walk to K ratio in 30 games... Manny when he first got called up (yes he was older, but had less seasoning in the minors)had a 2bb to 8 ks ratio in 22 games.  So while manny was a free swinger when he came up, he made a lot more contact.

For manny's career he has a very strong .72 bb/k ratio. In the minors it was .73, so his career as a MLB player was similar that way to his minors. Delmon so far in his minor league career is .34...

So i would be very careful before i compare those two,  because right now delmon will never come close to being manny.

By the way Delmons .300 batting avg as a 20 year thaat you are so impressed by was the results of a 40% hit rate... meaning almost .400 babip.. the norm for a major leaguer lies around 30%.  which means that given a normal hit rate would've produced 31 hits instead of 40.. which brings that .317 avg down to .245... which is why sample size is so improtant.. 9 hits make a 70 point different in his batting avg.

"You also must admit, that outside of the facts, I made a compelling argument!"

by jbluestone on Dec 30, 2006 1:31 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

this is too funny
teh things some people will say to try and knock down a player. I guess that is the beauty of living in America, we are free to say what we want, free to choose what and who we say it about, and free to be total hypocrites for not applying the same philosophy to everyone. Lets face it, I bet you wouldnt try to do that sort of math for every player in the minors would you? No, not the players you really like, because that just wouldnt be any fun. It's ok man, we all do it to some extent

by rangersfan24 on Dec 30, 2006 2:12 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

He might not, but I do...
I saw this Young-Manny comp before, and it just doesn't stick. Manny's final year in the minors was head and shoulders better than Young, and it was better than anyone on our list. But that's not fair, Mannys don't come around every day.

I was in the middle of comp'ing Young to Soriano. Vlad, and Tejada. Vlad clearly outperforms, while Tejada is closer to what Young did. But none of them had the poor walk rate. On the bright side, Young isn't striking out at an alarming rate, so he's making contact, it's just he's not walking. Even Soriano walked more than Young did in his final year.

Look, there's no reason to get defensive about it because not everything is revealed by the stats, but by the same token, the numbers don't lie. Young's %XBH and walk rate were exceptionally poor in 2006, and comparing him to the major league elite just doesn't hold water right now, as most of them outperformed him in their final year in the minors.

As I said before, I'm a Young fan, I believe he'll turn it around. He was showing solid walk rates early in his career, and just degenerated over the past couple. He could've been pressing, it could've been anything. It's not waht you like to see, but it's not the end of the world.

however, there's no reason to argue the numbers because, as I said, the numbers are what they are, and they should Young trending the wrong way.

And as I said, I like to break down the numbers for all players, guys I like or guys I don't like. For me, the bottom line is that I want the best guys on my fantasy team regardless of who I root for as a normal baseball fan. So doing the numbers can't do anything but help me win the league.

by beastball on Dec 30, 2006 2:52 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

you kinda came in at the wrong time
i was only comparing him to those other guys saying that the defficiencies delmon supposedly has does not necessarily make them a lesser ballplayer, as in the cases of manny, kirby, and belle

by rangersfan24 on Dec 30, 2006 3:29 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Sorry about that...
but I do like digging on numbers to check things out.

However, there are few elites that Young's 2006 season compares to, mainly because of the walk rate. But, lets check out Kirby and Belle's final minor league seasons.

Now let me say, that while I was a fan of Puckett's, I didn't think he was a great player, not an elite guy, not in my book. He was always just hovering around 900 OPS, but to each their own. In his final year, 26% XBH, 12.9 PA/BB, 9.6 PA/K. But, really, Kirby was a better real player than fantasy player, and if Young emulates Kirby's career and brings a championship to TB, then fans will be happy, and fantasy managers will be disappointed.

You know, Belle never really spent a full season in the minors, ever. So, I'll take 1989, cause he spent half a season in the minors then. He had a 45% XBH, 10.75 PA/BB, 3.9 PA/K. His %XBH was ridiculous, and his walk rate was ok. His K rate was poor tho. But it's how many extra base hit he had in half a season which tells you something. And it really outclasses Young.

Not that you asked for it, but I like digging in on things like this.

by beastball on Dec 30, 2006 3:38 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

no thats fine
i was only using those guys bc they had the same supposed problems that was listed for delmon- poor plate discipline, whiny attitude, and body prone to putting on weight. and yet they had very successful careers despite them(tho kirby didnt have a whiny attitude)

by rangersfan24 on Dec 30, 2006 3:55 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

This your way of saying...
you have no real counterpoint?

by SenorGato88 on Dec 30, 2006 3:02 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

that was my way of saying
that im sick of people coming up with all sorts of goofy crap to knock down certain players but choose not to do the same for their favorite players

by rangersfan24 on Dec 30, 2006 3:30 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Exactly
That's exactly what it means.
I don't get enjoyment out of reading baseball books. I'd rather watch a sci-fi movie on TV. -Joe Morgan, Emmy winning BASEBALL analyst

by gatling on Dec 30, 2006 3:32 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

One reason....
this swing first mentality bothers me is because major league pitchers will adjust to Young far quicker than he will to them.

I do agree with people who said Young tends to swing at strikes, but like I said Francoeur got the same thing said about him a year ago. That might have been because everyone threw the rookie strikes.

I'd like to see him after guys start messing with him this year. Its how he adjusts at the ML level that could tell us alot about him.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 30, 2006 1:19 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

DY
There's no question that Delmon will probably go through a rough spell before he is successful, unless, like I said, he adjusts his approach before he fails.

Whoever said Francoeur swings at just strikes is crazy. He notoriously swung at anything within a foot of the strike zone in the minors, and, as you can see, loves swinging at balls in the dirt. Fortunately for Francoeur, his power is unreal and his hand-eye coordination is unreal, which allows his to hit a lot of those pitches very hard. Delmon has ALWAYS swung at strikes rather than pitches out of the zone, ever since his early minor league days at 18. Like I've said, his approach is the problem. Major League pitchers who think they are going to exploit Delmon by throwing breaking balls out of the zone are going to be thoroughly disappointed, because it won't work - throw him offspeed pitches on the black, and they should be successful. But Delmon definitely has the ability to adjust, without question, it is whether he will let his maturity - or lack thereof - get in the way.

by rmande09 on Dec 30, 2006 1:46 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

that could, and should
be said about EVERY single prospect that breaks into the majors, whether it is a hitter or a pitcher. The adjustment takes place on both ends

by rangersfan24 on Dec 30, 2006 2:09 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

plate discipline
almost always improves as players get older. that doesnt mean they will have hawk eyes or anything but its practically common sense- as they adjust to the pitching, and get used to seeing the pitches, they will get better at strike zone judgement. now, EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, you have guys that dont improve at all. i.e. juan gonzalez- he'll be swinging at that low and away slider 95% of the time, and hell whiff on it 99% of the time. Delmon hit over .300 as a 20 year old in the majors. His power was decent, basicall 1 hr/10 games, but that will improve as he matures

by rangersfan24 on Dec 30, 2006 2:08 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

No proof...
whatsoever in your first statement.

And your second statement involved less than 200 ABs.

Hell, he didn't even have 130 ABs.

Do you see him hitting .317 over a full season next year?

by SenorGato88 on Dec 30, 2006 3:32 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Again, jumping in late...
But, lets look at a few star players, see if they're PD improved as they got older. If you had anyone particular in mind, we can look at them. I was just going to use Vlad, Tejada, Manny, and Soriano. Just cause they've been talked about to this point. But lets throw some others into the mix, like M Cabrera, Beltran, Ortiz, and Hafner.

I'll compare their rate in their final year in the minors and their rate last year. This is listed as PA (plate appearances) per walk.

Vlad: 10.2 in 1996; 13.1 in 2006. Actually regressed some.

Tejada: 11 in 1997; 15 in 2006. Regression.

Manny: 7.8 in 1993; 5.5 in 2006. 2006 was his highest rate in a while, he was at 7.9 in 2005, and 7.9 in 2004. So no change.

Soriano: 13 PAs/BB in 1999; 10.7 in 2006. I have to say that 2006 stands way out of bounds for Soriano. He was at 20.3 in 2005, 19.4 in 2004. So again, looks like regression.

Cabrera: 9.6 in 2003, 7.7 in 2006. Nice progression.

Beltran: 8.8 in 1998; 6.4 in 2006. Should be noted  he was a 11.4 in 2005, but he was at 7.4 in 2004. So clearly he improved.

Ortiz: 13 in 1997; 5.7 in 2006, and 6.9 in 2005. Dramatically improved.

Hafner: 6.1 in 2002; 5.5 in 2006. Was always good at it, and has held steady.

Looks like about an even split between progression and regression.

Do you remember anyone else who had a terrible walk rate in the minors, but had success in the majors? If so, we can look at them too.

by beastball on Dec 31, 2006 12:22 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

I'm kinda having a hard time...
Finding an established star player who really had a poor walk rate in the minors. Ortiz is the only one, and of course, in that season, he went from A+ to AAA, so it wasn't a great sample to use.

I was just going through the 3-year average point leaders for our fantasy league, not the greatest way to do it, but whatever.

Anyway, if someone can think of some names of guys who are established stars (like 3 years of all-star performances) but had a poor walk rate in the minors, then let me know. I'd be interested in taking a look at them.

by beastball on Dec 31, 2006 12:36 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

If I remember correctly
Sammy Sosa's walk rate stunk in the minors, but Baseball Cube is down at the moment so I can't confirm...

by Brickhaus on Jan 2, 2007 10:25 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Yeah, I skipped Sosa...
mainly cause I think he's a juicer, and if you look at his walk rate, it really didn't rocket until he started hitting homers at an abusrd rate.

His career high in BBs before he hit 66 homers in 1998 was 58 in 1995. So his best rate in the majors pre-juice was 10.7, his rate in his final full year in the minors was 15.5 in 1988.

But beyond 1995, which seems like an aberration, he really didn't improve. He was at 18 PA/BB in 1994, and 15.6 in 1996. He was at 15.3 in 1997.

So before he hit 66 homers, his walk rate really didn't improve from the minors. After that absurd homerun total, his walk rate jumped because people were pitching around him because he was hitting homers at a historic rate, but I don't count that because I don't think that homerun spike is part of normal development.

by beastball on Jan 2, 2007 11:56 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

and you certainly have no business
even throwing "whiny attitude" into that equation if you want to sit there and defend Dukes. I mean why is it that people condemn Delmon for ONE thing, but yet EVERY year, people talk about "Dukes has so much talent, if only he could stay out of trouble," yet EVERY year Dukes finds a way to f&%k up

by rangersfan24 on Dec 29, 2006 2:39 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Lordy
Lefty is voicing an opinion - not very defensible to tell him he has "no business" to think that somethign downgrades Young in his mind.  Jeez.  

Lefty's posts are invariably really insightful and worth thinking about.....certainly more informative than the responses in this thread.  Seems pretty arrogant to state he has "no business" posting something, especially given his track record.

by siddfynch on Dec 29, 2006 2:51 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

ok, i suppose that sounded wrong
so let me reword it so that lefty does not take offense- You should not condemn Delmon for one attitude mishap but then excuse it for Elijah. I was not trying to be a prick lefty

by rangersfan24 on Dec 29, 2006 3:03 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

One?
I'm pretty sure DY has had more than 1 attitude "mishap"(I assume you are referring to hitting the ump with his bat?).  

by cooper7d7 on Dec 29, 2006 3:52 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Also...
the constant complaining about not being called up when he was clearly not ready annoyed me.

But I could concede that thats a little nitpicky.

And this is going to sound borderline retarded to even me because I come off as a guy who thinks like...logically...anyway:

I realize BJ Upton did the same thing.

But for one thing, Upton's game was way ahead of Delmon's as far as being polished.

Another thing is that Young's attitude has always been questioned, while BJ has always had at least solid makeup.

He might be a prospect I underrated severely, but I doubt that because I still think he can be pretty good. I just don't like his skillset, or his makeup.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 29, 2006 4:29 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Lefty
Just a word of advice...you're tone is coming off a tad arrogant in this thread.  Maybe I'm misreading it - or maybe you feel very strongly about DY vs. ED...either way it is not very characteristic of your normal posts, so I noticed it.

Anyhow, I would disagree that Dukes has a better work ethic than DY.  I have heard numerous complaints about Young, but most people  acknowledge that he is an extremely hard worker.

Other than that - most of your points are valid.

by Dfarth on Dec 29, 2006 5:51 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Well...
in my defense...I'm not the one telling people they have "no business" posting something like I posted.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 29, 2006 7:05 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

true
but i don't pay much attention to what the nonregulars post...

i do read yours

by Dfarth on Dec 29, 2006 10:26 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

he also hit .317
as a 20 year old in the majors. does that not count for anything??

by rangersfan24 on Dec 29, 2006 2:40 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Aye...
two words:

Sampe. Size.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 29, 2006 4:30 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Overused
People use "sample size" way too much, especially when they don't have a clear-cut argument in their favor.

by The Rocc on Dec 29, 2006 5:19 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

OK
Jeff Francoeuer is the same kind of hitter Young is. High K, low BB, lots of line drives, lots of power.

Jeff Francoeur in his major league callup:

.300/.336/.549 - 257 AB (Note: His average fell almost .100 per month)

11 BB 58 K's

Francoeur 2006:

.260/.293/.449

The concept of sample size is very simple.

Flip a coin 1 time and you might get heads or tails. Will you get heads every time after if you got it the first time?

No. As the sample size gets larger, things will start to even out.

Arguing sample size is not some copout by people who "don't have a clear-cut argument." It's a legit point that a suprising amount of baseball fans fail to understand.

 

by SenorGato88 on Dec 29, 2006 7:10 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

subject
I love your post but your coin flip example is wrong. odds are it will come out tails more then heads. Something in the weight of the coin.

There you have it folks your stupid fact of the day.

by Josh on Dec 29, 2006 9:22 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Batting average doesn't count for anything...
not for me. I'm not going to trash Young because I still have high hopes for him, but his high batting average doesn't really tell me anything.

His maj numbers were pretty poor, in general, like one walk in 127 PAs. But because of his age, I'll give him a pass for now.

by beastball on Dec 29, 2006 9:16 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Two Cents from a Lurker
Hey guys, how's it going? I've never posted before (maybe once or twice), I mainly lurk because I enjoy John's articles/opinions and I like reading the thoughts of knowledgeable fans like yourselves. I actually have something to contribute (hopefully intelligent), so here goes:

I would first like to address the attitude problem of Young. I fully understand to be a bit "turned-off" by some of the problems Delmon has caused in his few years as a professional. But there are a few things that have to be taken into consideration. For one, he is very young. Obviously, we would like to see an 18, 19, 20 year old who can handle himself in every situation. Unfortunately, most of the time, experience brings maturity. At just 20 in AAA (and the spotlight), things are going to happen. Throwing the bat at the ump is inexcusable - I expect he learned his lesson from that and nothing of the sort will happen again. But things like whining and what-not do come with the age and maturity level. He was portrayed, from day one, as the 'future' of baseball. It is tough, as a teenager, not to let that go to your head. I believe Delmon gained a whole lot of maturity this year with everything that went wrong off the field (well, I guess the bat-throwing incident is on the field... I digress), and this is evidenced by his behavior in his stint with the Big League club. He is, by no means, out of the doghouse yet, but I believe that his attitude will not be an issue from here on out.

Next order of business is the statement that he has a frame that "gains weight easily." This statement is ludicrous. Why? Because his brother was extremely lazy? Or is it because he is an absolute monster? Or is it because he came into professional baseball still underdeveloped with a bit more fat on his body than you would like to see? As long as his work ethic (which is excellent) continues to be what it is, he will be fine.

Plate discipline is a big issue with Delmon Young's projection. Whenever he is brought up, the first thing someone will say is, "He has zero plate discipline because he does not walk!" Uh, have you ever seen the kid play? He rarely swings at pitches out of the zone. Rarely. I know it would be impossible to track this, but I would love to see how often he swings at bad pitches. His problem is not discipline, it is his approach. Whether it is because he still feels like it is high school, or A, or A+, or because of his immaturity, it seems rather apparent that he feels like he can hit any pitch that goes over the plate out of the yard. He does not take strikes. He does not take breaking balls. He takes balls, but anything over the plate he hacks at. And when I say hack, I mean he swings out of his shoes. So there is a few problems with this:

  1. He swings at a lot of 0-0, 1-0, even 2-0 breaking balls, something a good hitter does not do (unless it is hung).
  2. He swings at a lot of pitches that are not in "his" zones. They may be strikes, but even the greatest hitters have their weak spots.
  3. Even with two strikes, he swings out of his shoes rather than shorten up. A guy of his size and power will still be able to drive the gaps with if he shortens the stroke - taking huge cuts with two strikes results in quite a few strikeouts.
I would love to see how many strikeouts he takes looking.

It is his plate approach that needs to be refined. That is something that WILL come, and is often the reason why hitters have trouble with high-K, low-BB totals in their early seasons. Plate discipline is not something you can be taught, but approach is something you can learn. I don't think it is a question of "if" Delmon will learn he cannot get by with his current approach, but when; he is very confident about his abilities, and I think it is going to take a bit of failure before he realizes he cannot take every single pitch thrown over the plate over the wall.

And please, do not compare Young with Francoeur. Francoeur has a plate discipline issue - anything that starts near the plate he swings at. He cannot lay off breaking pitches down in the dirt. Delmon does not have issues with that. They may have similar BB, K numbers, but that is where the similarities end.

by rmande09 on Dec 30, 2006 2:07 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

This:
I would love to see how many strikeouts he takes looking.

is what gets me.

People said the same thing about Francoeur. At one point it was even said about Alfonso Soriano. Being aggressive is good to a point, just like being paitent.

The fact is age does not garauntee better plate discipline. How many players can you name that have dramatically changed their plate disicpline throughout a career? Sammy Sosa is often cited, but how many others? Sammy was the exception, not the rule.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 30, 2006 3:00 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Ooops
Sorry, it was late. My actual intentions were to say, "I would love to see how many times Delmon Ks swinging at pitches outside of the strikezone."

by rmande09 on Dec 30, 2006 12:19 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Thank you
It's about time someone who actually WATCHES baseball decided to post an opinion on Delmon Young.

Anyone who WATCHES Delmon Young knows that the guys has an AMAZING batting eye. The problem, as stated above, is his approach.

The guy not only swings at nearly everything in the zone, but he makes consistent contact unless it is an absolutely nasty breaking pitch.

The comparison to Jeff Francouer is terrible IMO since Francouer has contact issues to go along with a terrible batting eye.

Also, why are people really complaining about an A grade? The guy is universally seen as a top 3 prospect and has been #1 on most lists for the last 2 years. At 20 years old, he has every tool imaginable (and BATTING EYE is the tool, not walks which is a statistic).

Rays in '08....

by youALREADYknow on Dec 30, 2006 4:03 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Vocal minority
It's generally the same people every time in both the cases of Delmon and Dukes. Some people really like Dukes and say it over and over. Some people really dislike Young and say it over and over. Creates the feeling that there are more than there really are in each case.

by zywica on Dec 30, 2006 9:44 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

subject
I'm not sure people are complaining about the A grade for Delmon, but the B grade for Dukes.

John stated Dukes was an A talent but marked down for his attitude. Delmon did hit an ump with a bat, so the Delmon lovers should expect others to point out his problems when reading this.

It appears to me Delmon kept his A grade because he is a top 3 prospect, but a guy like Dukes gets downgraded because he doesn't have the hype Delmon does. It is Johns list, but it is a double standard.

If you look at only the numbers Delmon is a freak. At the same time Dukes numbers are right there, and even better this year. Some will point to age, but Dukes was more Raw when he started. Delmon was groomed for what he is doing. This is a case for me where age doesn't tell the whole story.

by Josh on Dec 30, 2006 10:15 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

YEA!!!
I don't WATCH baseball!! Hell, I don't even LIKE IT!!

It's obviously true, I had the audasity to question THE Delmon Young.

I admit my criticism of Young might be too much, seeing as he has been a very good hitter in the minors.

But the loss of discipline and power in AAA is a problem. Especially since it's been about a year and a half. Young has drawn 20 (!) walks in 696 ABs above AAA, is that not a problem?

Sorry, but all the truly elite hitters in baseball draw their fair share of walks, because believe it or not there is value there. Young does not have that skill, though his batting eye at the plate is something I underrated. He looks like he'll hit for high average, but because of his approach his OBP and even power will be hurt by it.

Still, why is it that fans who question the greatness of Delmon Young are people who don't watch baseball?

As far as my Dukes thing, I just find it weird that a guy who has improved all facets of his game  and increased his performance as he moved up gets so underrated. As far as being a baseball player Dukes is more polished than Young, and looks just as impressive on the field. Young, at least to me, seems like he has a huge sense of entitlement. Thats a bit of a turnoff for me in people.

by SenorGato88 on Dec 30, 2006 11:05 AM EST to parent up   0 recs