Josh Vitters

by John Sickels on May 25, 2007 3:54 PM EDT in News Comment 78 comments

Thinking about Josh Vitters

Ranked as the top high school hitter in the class this year by Baseball America, Vitters is a product of Cypress High School in California, and has been a monster on the showcase circuit the last year. I like his size at 6-3, 195 pounds: not too small, but not so large that his strike zone gets unmanageable. He has plus power to all fields, and scouts expect he'll be able to hit for average as well. No one questions his bat; about the only doubt is if he's a 20 homer guy or a 30+ homer guy in the long run. His swing isn't long and he handles both breaking stuff and fastballs well according to scouts.

Physically, his speed is just average. He has a strong arm but has to keep working on his defense at third base; it should be OK in the long run as long as his legs don't get thick. He could end up as a right fielder if hot corner defense becomes an issue.

Trying to think of some comps here....Best Case : Chipper Jones without the steals early in his career.. Medium Case: Mike Cuddyer. Worst Case: hmm....someone who gets injured or tops out as a Triple-A slugger.

Rumor has the Cubs hard on Vitters with the third overall pick. This is logical, considering that the D-Rays and Royals are set at third for the foreseeable future. I very much doubt he'll get past the Pirates at four.

0 recs | Comment 78 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I wish I could see more of him

but, from what i've seen...I'm not sure about him.

.352 as a Junior and .371 as a senior. I could be wrong but, is there ANY examplaes of guys who went on to become great big league hitters who hit for those averages in HS? I know he got sick and all that but, that just isn't getting enough results man.

It seema as though much of his reputation is based on excelling in All-Star matchups and in BP, where he looks real smooth and easy. He looks great doing everything but, for the life of me I can't see why anybody would think he's a better player than Beau Mills. Just my opinion.

Anybody out there who has WATCHED Vitters and thinks he's great? I'd like to hear more of that but, right now I just don't see him as as great ofa oprospect as some think.

casedog

by casejud on May 25, 2007 4:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm with ya

Sounds like a 5 O'clock hitter to me. Henry Blanco can put on a show in BP. Big deal. So Cal competition is really good, but not where a guy with the "Premium Bat' of the entire H.S. draft can't hit a solid .450+.

This could be a case of Billy Beane all over again. And given my beloved Cubs penchant for lousy drafts and no luck, he seems like the perfect fit at #3 overall.

I'd still lean towards Weiters if I were the Cubs, but I'll put a little faith in Wilken and trust his judgement.

by So Cal Bob on May 25, 2007 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

stats

where do you find vitters prep stats?

by npurcell on May 25, 2007 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Take HS Stats....

with a HUGE grain of salt.

Just off the top of my head, Johnny Damon hit under .300 as a HS senior. Vitters had a nasty case of pneumonia this season and was out for 2 weeks. Even after he came back, it was obvious he had lost around 10-15 pounds.

Vitters has proven himself time and time again over the years, whether it was at PG National last year, winning the MVP at the Cape last summer, or hitting 3 doubles off 3 different stud preps in the Aflac game (i'm thinking it was Porcello, Main, and maybe Harvey?).

On top of all of this, he is still extremely young - he is a full year younger than Mike Moustakas. I have no doubt Vitters will hit for average and power at the big league level, and will easily stick in a corner OF position if he is moved off 3rd.

Founder of the Rowdy Hardy Fan Club

by eazyb81 on May 25, 2007 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

let's keep this in perspective

the lower down you go in the minor leagues, the less important stats are compared with scouting. college stats are a big jump down even from rookie ball stats. now we want to judge a draft prospect based on his high school stats? why don't we just let the scouts do their jobs. they've seen the kid mash against the top prep competition in america. maybe they know a little something?

by jpahk on May 25, 2007 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would

Trust anybody who earned the trust but, some scouts are good, some arent as good AND some people on here are good scouts themselves. the proof is in the record and mistakes happen OFTEN and EVERY draft.

BTW, College stats are NOT a drop down from Rookie ball stats. College players are BETTER than rookie-ball players, of course.

casedog

by casejud on May 25, 2007 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

um

no
they really aren't

by nms on May 28, 2007 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

high school batting averages

one good reason to care about showcase performances more than HS season batting averages is the pitch-around factor. vitters might just be hitting .370 because he's swinging at a bunch of garbage because all of the other high school kids are afraid of him. you really can't tell.

by wily mo on May 26, 2007 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sounds like a Billy Beane

Everyone was so obsessed with his tools, no one noticed the lack of results.

by royalsfan7 on May 25, 2007 4:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Comparison..

Anyone else get a Glaus vibe from him in the field/movesments. Possibly better/quicker swing, but thats the guy who he immediately reminded me of.

by hybrid on May 25, 2007 5:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

What's important is

he's hit with wood against elite competition. I couldnt care less about what he did in High School. If you've seen him hit, you cant help but think that bat is going to be special.

by Thinkblue on May 25, 2007 6:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Not A Ringing Endorsement

I'm sensing that John isn't totally sold on Vitters. Conventional wisdom has had Vitters as the top HS hitter for some time now. He seemed to stand alone at the top with the second tier being made up of Moustakas, Heyward with Michael Burgess stock dropping. The guy we don't seem to hear too much about is Matt Dominguez.

I haven't seen video of Vitters or Dominguez, but Out of the others, I would rank them Heyward, Moustakas with Burgess a distant 3'rd. Again, haven's seen Vitters, but I love Heyward.

I would be interested in John's, or anyone else's opinion as to where these HS hitters will be drafted vs where they should be drafted.

by DrBGiantsfan on May 25, 2007 6:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

astute

You are very astute, Dr.BGiantsfan....I like Vitters a lot but I'm not 100% sold that he's as good as everyone seems to think.

by John Sickels on May 25, 2007 7:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Why?

In your story, you list 5/6 reasons why everyone thinks that he'll be a star. Yet, here you are saying that he's overrated without saying why. No offense intended, I would just like to know why you have some concerns about his hitting. Mahalo

Matt

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.

by WayneCampbell05 on May 27, 2007 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Theory

John can speak for himself, but I got the impression that John didn't think he was a bad prospect necessarily, just that he might not really be worthy of a top 4 pick or the "best hitting prospect" label that most seem to have assigned him.

Hopefully John will clarify though.

by knightgalt on May 27, 2007 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

vitters

Oh, I think he's a really good prospect...but I'm not sure why everyone says he's CLEARLY the BEST high school hitter available this year. I'm still studying the issue.

by John Sickels on May 28, 2007 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Vitters

The kid has the tools, nobody should be getting too worried about his stats at 17 years old. HS players are not finished products. Its about projection with HS players, if your looking for a finished product in HS you'll never find him.

by GoldenSpikes24 on May 25, 2007 11:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

That is just dumb to me

What if he hit .152? Would you stay that still. I would say it is meaninless if a player hits .558 because we dont know how good he really is as compared to Major Leaguers but, I think if we are projecting a kid to be a ML star we can expect he would dominate HS competition most the time.

casedog

by casejud on May 26, 2007 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

.152 no biggy

If there was a hyper athletic outfielder who only hit .152 but it seemed like he was always hitting the ball hard and he had all the tools scouts like I would take him no problem. A high school season is short, Vitters got sick lost 10-15 pounds and had to build back up his strength. At one point this year his BA was over .400 before he got sick. Over such a short season a lot of things can affect performance. In High school players I think you should evaluate them about 90% scouts and 10% performance

by Kanst42 on May 26, 2007 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Math

What's the difference between hitting .370 and .400 with 80 ABs? 2 more hits

The difference between .370 & .450? 6 hits

Why do I have the feeling that you all are over-reacting like alot of guys from this site did after Justin Upton's year at low A ball?

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.

by WayneCampbell05 on May 26, 2007 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

I dont care AT ALL about high school stats. One its a very small sample size. Two its not hard competition. Look at Justin Upton he was bored last year and thus his production wasnt great, who knows if Vitters is just bored in high school right now. He was hitting .402 before he got sick which is nothing to laugh at.

I also cant find his actual stats from last year so I really cant comment on the other things.

by Kanst42 on May 26, 2007 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Upton hit

.569 as a senior in HS....58 abs 8 homers and 30 steals!

Im not talking about overreacting to a season of pro ball. I am talking about projecting a guy to be a major league star when he didnt PUNISH High School pitching enough.

casedog

by casejud on May 28, 2007 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Upton

didn't get sick and lose 15lbs. I seriously don't think you understand what that takes out of you physically. If you lose that much weight over a short period of time, you lose a huge amount of strength and stamina. Pneumonia kills people, obviously not 17-18 year olds usually, but still. It's a serious virus.

I got a virus that made me sick for a week 3 years ago during my sophomore year in college and lost 15 lbs, and I had was winded after legging out a double in slow pitch softball the next week. Now obviously I'm not a prospect or even close, but I was not in bad shape, and was working out regularly, and it took me a month to get my legs back under me. I guess my point is it takes a ton out of you. He was sick for 2 weeks in a short season. It could have, and appeared it did affect his performance and overall numbers. Given the circumstance, I don't think it's much to worry about. Especially considering what he's done on the showcase circuit against top competition.

by Tyler on May 28, 2007 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

HMM

Personally i dont consider .400 a magic # at HS. Im not concearned he didnt hit .400...Im concearned he didnt hit .552 in HS which is a few more than 2 hits away.

casedog

by casejud on May 27, 2007 11:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Pirates at #4?

"I very much doubt he'll get past the Pirates at four."

Never assume anything with the Pirates. (though I hope they take Heyward)

by Willie on May 26, 2007 7:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Pirates

From what I've seen in the local media, the Bucs are focusing on Vitters. I'm with you on Heyward maybe being a better pick (particularly for the Pirates, since he already draws walks and they won't be able to screw that up too much), but I think he's the pick at #4 if he's there.

I still bet he's going to go at #3 to the Cubs, though, which will leave the Pirates taking a Polished College Lefty or reaching for someone like Mills. Yuck!

by Vlad on May 27, 2007 6:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heyward would be perfect for the Yankees.

by NYYLover1000 on May 27, 2007 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Trust me

dude. I know you wont but, taking Mills at #4 would be one of the few real smart thibngs the pirates have done in recent years. No reach at all. he is onwe of the 5 best players out there.

casedog

by casejud on May 27, 2007 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Video

Finally saw a video of Vitters over on milb.com. The closest thing I can come up with in terms of build, swing, etc is he kind of reminds me of Troy Glaus.

Dominguez looks very similar except he's just a tad smaller.

by DrBGiantsfan on May 26, 2007 12:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

RE: Video

where did you find the video?

by royalsfan7 on May 26, 2007 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Link

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/mlb/events/draft/y2007/index.jsp

PS. As of 5/23, he's batting .403. You guys happy now?

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.

by WayneCampbell05 on May 26, 2007 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I read...

...that he finished at .371 and NO....403 is not any more impressive than that.

casedog

by casejud on May 27, 2007 11:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good

Someone else see's it, thought I was the only one heh.

by hybrid on May 26, 2007 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm

Couldn't say becsause i can't see how far the ball is flying when he hits it. His SWING reminds me of Josh Phels myself.

casedog

by casejud on May 27, 2007 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

aaa

You realize that Josh Phelps swing is normally described as long and that he has a lot of holes in it...not a good swing to be reminiscent of.

John any chance you could do a Thinking About Mills, Id be really interested in your opinion on him.

by Kanst42 on May 28, 2007 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I really like

his extension through the ball. Short to contact, long after, solid approach. I didn't like that he watched the ball he crushed in batting practice near the end, tells me that excited him. He's young though.

Defensively he looks raw and sloppy. Fields alot of balls right of center. Plenty of time to clean it up though.

Lex clavatoris designati rescindenda est.

by HuskerBob on May 29, 2007 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Last year...

Chris Parmelee was considered one of the best pure hitters in the draft and he hit .371 his senior year. Chris Marerro hit .375.

I'm betting Vitters was getting pitched around a lot. Maybe he was pressing, chasing bad pitches because he was frustrated. But putting so much into high school stats really doesnt make sense.

by Thinkblue on May 28, 2007 2:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think

That putting a lot into High School stats when they are GOOD isnt a good idea but, expecting a great hitter to have great stats isnt. Its not the end all be all but, it is still a concearn to me. Marerro and Parmalee arent good examples because we talking about projecting MAJOR LEAGUE performance and the jury is out on them too.

I wish I had a solid database for High School numbers but I see a lot of .500's and .600's for guys who are good in the big leagues. Not every time but, in general. I think HS numbers are somewhat meaningful.

casedog

by casejud on May 28, 2007 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

expecting .500's isnt fair

A-Rod in high school hit .505 with 9 HR and 35 RBI...he also stole a bunch of bases.

A-Rod is one of the best prospects to ever be drafted out of high school you cant expect people to hit .500.

I could understand being concerned if a prospect is only hitting .250...since you expect him to hit well. But .360 is a very solid season, he also has shown very good power and is striking out very infrequently.

Batting average is one of the most useless stats around, and without more in depth statistics you cant analyze it properly. We cant know if Vitters has a really low BABIP or if there are any other things dragging the BA down a little. That being said he was sick for a good chunk of year, and in a high school season being week and losing like 10 hits you otherwise would have had is the difference between .450 and .350.

by Kanst42 on May 28, 2007 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dont know dude

Shop around. Just a cursory list shows .500 to be kind of a byline for GREAT hiters which is what vitters is supposed to be right. Agee that you cant just judge by one short seaon of below .400 aerage but, he hit .352 in his junior season as well. one example given is Butler hiutting around .420 his last year but he walked 50 times. i cant find walk totals on Vitters his season but he walked 11 his Junior year and Butler hit .612 his Junior season with 10 homers 50 rbi.

Mauer hit over .600 his enior season

Adrian Gonzalez near .600

Justin Upton .569

maybin .500

not saying ANY of this PROVES anything about Vitters just that i think .500 in HS is about average for a guy who goes on to hit big league pitching effectively within a few years (like A-Rod). I think hitting under .400 for 2 years and them beating good coollege players to the big leagues might be kinda rare. I would LOVE it if anybody can show mesome players lie this who were all-star by the time they were 22-23 or ever.

casedog

by casejud on May 28, 2007 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

MAYBE

but the problem there is that hitting .500 in HS is NOT UNUSUAL or rare occurance. MOST top prospects do it...even the ones who dont hit well professionally. A-Rod's .500 isnt an incrdibe number.

casedog

by casejud on May 28, 2007 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If his average was a concern...

why arent any services reporting scouts being down on him? Why has pretty much everyone who has seen him this spring believed he's the top hitter in the class? Re-reading BA.com's scouting report, this may be something to consider when looking at his high school stats:

"Vitters' hand-eye coordination and ability to make contact are almost too good, because at times he swings at pitches he should let pass, rather than waiting for one he can punish with his all-fields power."

So he may have been chasing bad pitches instead of waiting for a good pitch (Unlikely that he would have seen one anyway). That and his bout with pneumonia could explain his unimpressive numbers.

by Thinkblue on May 28, 2007 10:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Because

SCOUTS ARE WRONG ABOUT A PLAYERS ABILITY TO HIT ...EVERY...DRAFT!!!!! MORE THAN ONCE....EVERY ROUND..ALL THE TIME...SINCE THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE DRAFT!!! THEY UNDERATE HITTING ABILITY...ALWAYS!

casedog

by casejud on May 28, 2007 10:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

How often are scouts wrong

compared to how often they are right? High school hitters that scouts identify as legitimate high draft picks are rarely busts; most of the obvious first-round errors are college players and/or pitchers.

I saw the same scouting video of Vitters. Frankly, I don't see how anyone can tell much of anything about Vitters's potential from that video, because of the angle from which it was taken. I much prefer either a behind-the-backstop video or a center-field shot, because then you can see how the pitches are moving.

Mike Emeigh http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/minor_key/

by MikeE on May 29, 2007 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I might tend to disagree

Say what you want about Matt Bush regarding signability and who made the Padres taken but he was taken FIRST and CANT PLAY. Just one of those is enough to make one sceptical.

It isnt the clip as much as the stats I have to admit. I LIKE parts of his clip. He looks nice up there..

Its the Juniour year hitting .352 with 11 walks and 9 ks. Great hitters just dont hit like that. I havent heard ONE yet. Ive seen a LOT of guys who cant hit big league pitching do it but, no great hitters like Vitters.

I hit .372 my swenior tyear and 4 I was 5th on my team...no big leaguers! We were good though.

casedog

by casejud on May 29, 2007 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Junior Year

Of all the stats that you have had thrown at you in all of these discussions, no one has shown us the junior year stats of anybody. Every stat that has been displayed in these threads has been the senior year numbers for various players. Just because someone wasn't overwhelmingly good in their junior year doesn't mean that they didn't improve physically and skill-wise in the past year or so.

For all you know, several of the examples that have been provided of All-Star caliber players who hit .500+ during their senior years in HS may have hit .320 during their junior year.

To my knowledge, this is the first time you have admitted that it really is primarily the stats that are causing you to question Vitters as a top draft pick. To base that opinion on his junior year stats and his senior year, illness-tainted stats, is a little silly. I don't have an opinion about his draft status. I don't claim to be an expert in these matters. But I had a lot more respect for your opinion when it sounded like it was based more on what you saw in his video and less on some high school stats that are very difficult to interpret (what was the level of competition? how much was his BA affected during his illness? did his BA drop during his illness or was it steadily in the .370 range even when he was healthy? etc)

by knightgalt on May 29, 2007 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Junior year stas are hard to find but, several players have their CAREER totals listed.

It is just as resonable to expect a player to be good his juniour years as his senior year.remember we are talking about a future big leaguer here.

casedog

by casejud on May 29, 2007 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

RE: I agree

OK, even with their career stats, without a breakdown, you don't know if they hit .380 their junior year and .575 their senior year to average in around .460, or whatever.

And also, remember, we are talking about kids that are 16, 17, 18 years old here. Talent develops over time. If some 16 year old kid has trouble hitting the ball consistently to the gaps as a junior in high school, it doesn't mean that he has lost all chance of ever being capable of doing it when he's 23.

Saying that their junior year is eessntially no different than their senior year is like saying that we should expect every ML rookie to hit just as good as a rookie as he will in his second, third, fourth years in the league.

Really, your opinions on these matters aren't terribly logical. I don't have an opinion on Josh Vitters one way or the other, but your defense of your reasoning is feeble.

by knightgalt on May 29, 2007 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No REASONING at all

Just logic. Almost EVERY hitter who is great in the bigs was better than the fellow 16, 17, 18 he played against by a large amrgin. just amkes sense and its also true.

casedog

by casejud on May 29, 2007 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

RE:

OK, your defense of your logic is feeble. Call it what you want. It's weak. Way to ignore most of my comment and only comment on one sentence.

by knightgalt on May 29, 2007 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The logic is

that good hitters hit for good averages! Evenwhen they are 8 years old dude! I didnt say that a player doesnt develop from his Junior year to Senior year...yes! You are right. Im saying there are amny more exam,ples of a player hitting BETTER in his Junior year than his Senior year because if they are great they get avoided.

Whats the point anyways? Vitters DIDNT hit much better his senior year than his Junior year.

I dint ignore any porrtin of your comment buddy.

i heard ya.

casedog

by casejud on May 29, 2007 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

matt bush

Say what you want about Matt Bush regarding signability and who made the Padres taken but he was taken FIRST and CANT PLAY. Just one of those is enough to make one sceptical.

i'm not going to try to argue that there are no examples of busted high school hitters, but i don't think matt bush is a very good example. he wasn't really a hitting prospect so much as a guy who was supposed to be some ozzie smith with the glove and scouts thought he would hit "enough". there's a big difference between being that and being the #1 prep slugger in the class, travis snider style, and i think the slugger does bust less often.

by wily mo on May 31, 2007 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thats a good point

Still an idiotic selection though but, I see your point. Kinda undermines the whole IDEA of drafting "toolsy" in the middle of the diamond theory though. I agree that the expectaions with the bat for Vitters are much higher but, they couldnt have thought that he cant hit.

casedog

by casejud on Jun 1, 2007 8:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just me and you buddy

You are the only one who sees waht i am saying at least. Just that there are reasons to have questions about the guy.

casedog

by casejud on May 29, 2007 2:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So...

all the scouts who have seen him tons of times over the years are wrong and you're right because you looked at his high school stats and a 90 second scouting video?

by Thinkblue on May 28, 2007 10:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Sorry

Call me crazily egotistical but, i liketo think i could have seen that Howie Kendrick could hit a baseball and matt Bush could n't if i had seen them in High School.

I wasn't saying ANYTHING about Vitters. I SAID that I hadnt seen him enough. Just saying that what I have seen...combined with scouts error rate makes me have doubts about him as the #3 player in the draft. Thats it man. Dont know how clearer i can be buddy. the proof is in the draft record go look for yourself.

I asked a simple question really and everbody jkeeps saying there is a good reasdon he hit .372 as a senior and the .352 Junior season doesnt matter an...who knows?...mayne that is correct. i just wanted to know if any other "next David Wright" or whover all-star Vitters resembles hit something like that in HS.

casedog

by casejud on May 28, 2007 11:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i guess

my biggest problem with your argument is it doesnnt work both ways. I am of the opinion that High School stats have little or no correlation to pro stats. The problem is that lots of random people hit over .400 in high school so it really doesnt matter. There are plenty of guys who hit over .400 who never amount to anything and that is why I will always tend to trust the scouts. They have seen the guys enough to have a better clue of who is for real and who isnt.

I was looking back at the 2001 All-USA high school baseball team and you got guys like Danny Putnam who hit .500 with 19 HR his senior year, he has spent three years in the minors and has 33 homers in 995 at bats to show for it.

And Joe Mather who hit .478 with 17 HR and has spent the last 4 years climbing up through A-Ball for St Louis he has only hit 55 HR in almost 1700 at bats.

or Trent Pratt who in 1998 hit .576 with 10 HR he is now a 26 year old at AA and has 6 HR in 900 at bats.

And I could go on forever...if there are this many guys who mashed high school pitching and went onto nothing I think that is enough evidence that high school stats are fairly meaningless. But maybe thats just me.

by Kanst42 on May 29, 2007 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is a...

big part of my point bud.

Hitting .500 in HS is EASY! So we should expect it of a guy who is SUPPOSED to be hitting major league pitchers in about 3 or 4 years.

If he is picked 3rd in the entire draft it will be because they believe he can be a major league by, what 20-21, like most future stars and Im saying WHO KNOWS!? It just doesnt LOOK right.

casedog

by casejud on May 29, 2007 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What i am saying

Is that hitting .500 means nothing. If it did then the guys who do it would probably end up as good major leaguers. I dont think you can look at a stat and say well if he doesnt hit .500 he isnt good but if he does it doesnt mean anything. That logic makes no sense to me.

by Kanst42 on May 29, 2007 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sure it does

makes perfect sense

three qbs in college have 30tds and 5 Interception

I may be a great pro and 2 amy not

3 guys have 15tds and 15int's

None of them may be good pros.

makes perfect sense... you can use the logic with anything

4 HS have 4.0 gpa's in HS and maybe only 1 can do that in college

4 HS have 2.5 gpa's and maybe none of them can get a 4.0 in college

Not saying Vitter's HS averages PROVE anything just that they may INDICATE something.

Its to deep for y'all, obviously. never mind!

casedog

by casejud on May 29, 2007 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

then you probably

would be best served by not using josh vitters as an example.

by wildthang on May 30, 2007 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

huh?

Not sure what you're saying here. As much as I disagree with most all of casejud's other points about Vitters/the importance of high school stats/batting average, the one thing he has been all over that other people are missing is the formal logic of his proof.

In order to show that it is possible to be a great major leaguer while hitting below .400 in high school, there is but one way to disprove what he's saying: to find such a player.

Showing that never every player who hits over .400 in high school is great is a nice exercise, but it doesn't formally disprove what he's saying; the contrapositive (and, therefore, the only other true statement following from casejud's) of "All great players hit above .400" is "If you DIDN'T hit .400, you are NOT a great player."

Everyone keeps bringing up these logically meaningless examples of failed hitters from high school, but that has little bearing on the point. What DOES it say? That high school stats aren't perfectly predictive of success. To this end, you are making a small point: Scouting directors can't turn to HS stats as their North Star for drafting. I hope even casejud would agree with this.

What DOESN'T it say? That all future stars enjoy at least a minimum level of success in high school. As casejud said, the fact that some people fail despite early success should intuitively lead to no conclusions about who WON'T have success. You and I both know, for example, that not everyone who can run a good time on the 40-yard dash will be a successful NFL running back, but, of those who DON'T run a good 40-yard dash, NONE will be successful NFL running backs.

Anyway, I've avoided backing casejud up on this point, because: 1) I don't think high school stats mean as much as he does, nor that Josh Vitters CAN'T be good, and 2) I believe, with a more complete database, we COULD find stars who were mediocre in high school. (For instance, I'm really curious what Mike Piazza did back in the day.) But he's completely right on this point.

by bleedjaxblue on May 30, 2007 9:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

well, yes and no.

You're right that people keep telling him that players who do amazing in high school often don't do well in the pros... and that that doesn't disprove his point, which is that players who don't do amazing in high school cannot do well in the pros. Since obviously many more players don't make it than do make it, both of those things could easily be true.

The problem, though, is that he was given a good counter-example to his precise point -- Damon -- but he writes it off because "Damon was sick that year." Well, VITTERS WAS SICK TOO. It's the same thing, and Damon does disprove the point that it's "impossible" to hit well in the majors unless you hit .400 in HS.

and boom goes the dynamite.

by Mean Dean on May 31, 2007 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

my argument

I know it doesnt refute the point but the fact that guys have hit .500+ in high school and then sucked in the pros, at least to me, shows that there is little correlation between high school performance and pro performance.

by Kanst42 on May 31, 2007 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Accept 1

EVERY single player who hits under .200 in HS cant hit in the pros right?

some of the guys who hit .500 can though.

There IS a corelation. Just not a deffinite one that people are comfortable with.

casedog

by casejud on Jun 1, 2007 8:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

re:

I don't really like the Damon example. I don't feel it proves much. But then again, I've never tried to claim Vitters can't become anything because of his non-descript H.S. batting averages. People want to argue the extremes on issues but I don't think the issue is extreme. I just think they may indicate his likelihood of reaching his ceiling may be a little less than I'd expect of the supposed very top H.S. bat in the nation.

Anyway, back to Damon. Johnny did achieve all-star status twice. He's definitely a good pro. But he entered pro ball at 18 and didn't have an OPS+ of > 100 until he was 25. Is that a successful draft pick? Sure, esp because his position is CF. But if I drafted someone #3 overall and it took him 7 years to become Mike Cuddyer or Pat Burrell I'd be mildly dissapointed.

Tangent: This is neither here nor there and my memory could be fuzzy after 10+ years but I actually thought I read back in the day that draft-itis was part of Damon's problem and the sick thing may have been a cover. Given what we've seen from Johnny over the years personality wise it wouldn't shock me if this was the case. Anyone read BA back in the day and agree with the draftitis thing?

sig: Karim Garcia posted dominant AAA stats at 19. So can we stop acting like ARL trumps all in every discussion...

by natsfan2005 on May 31, 2007 12:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good point!

I also NEVER argued that Vitters COULDT become anything just kinda like you said...mostly that it just dosent LOOK like a kid who is going to go "Grady Sizemore" on the league and be an All-Star within 3 years but, who knows? I know what I think but, others disagree.

Your point about Damon is DEAD-ON though. Expectations for Vitters are such that if he performed like Damon he would be a disappointment! Scouts make just enough errors on young kids like this that MAYBE, if I wasa drafting I might pass on him until later in the draft.

casedog

by casejud on Jun 1, 2007 8:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Damon IS a good example

and casejud is writing it off for little reason.

That doesn't make Terrence Long a good example though.

The Damon point would be stronger if it weren't diluted with all of these irrelevant points. Not that casejud would believe it anyway, but -- to me at least -- your position looks a lot stronger as a neutral outsider if you don't get muddled up in an irrelevant argument that seems to demonstrate that you don't understand the question at hand.

by bleedjaxblue on May 31, 2007 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No no buddy!

I NEVER wrote Damon off as an example! I mentioned it several times. I was never or WOULD never be interested in putting forth a false argument! I asked for examples and Damon was given but, it is still just ONE example. I was looking for some examples of hitters who were BETTER than Damon because if Vitters hits like Damon in the big leagues he will be A BIG, BIG disappointment to the people who like this kid. Hes a third baseman.

STILL though...I firmly accept it as an example of a good big league player who didnt DESTROY HS pitching.

casedog

by casejud on Jun 1, 2007 8:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I did NOT write it off

Thats a distortion. I mentioned it quite a few times but, I also just pointed out that Vitters bat is his #1 TOOL. It is supposed to carry him to the big leagues fierly quickly and I just thought that Damon wasnt the BEST comparison but, it works, I suppose.

My main question was whether or not there was an example of a REAL GOOD HITTER who hit less than .400 in HS? I mean everybody who likes Vitters projects him to hit more than Johnny Damon right? Not me...I meen those who agree with the scouts consensus.

The reason I buy Damon as being sick in HS might seem a bit unfair but, it has something to do with the fact that Jonny Damon is, well, Johnny Damon...it just SEEMS like if he weren't sick he might have hit .542 or something. I cant say the same for Vitters myself but, hey, I give him the benefit of the doubt...fine. It still doesnt make me sure of him as a prospect though.

casedog

by casejud on Jun 1, 2007 7:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

NEVER EVER SAID IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE!

NEVER! Not even close bro. I said "I have never seen it" and "is there anty examles of it?"

The fact that so many people are so irate about it kind shows it as well.

casedog

by casejud on Jun 1, 2007 8:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here is what I do not understand....

Casejud came out and basically said every successful major leaguer has hit over .400 in HS, and then challenged everyone to go prove him wrong. Why? He's the one saying Vitters is overrated because of his HS stats - why isn't he the one that goes and proves he is right? He's the one forming an opinion contrary to the scouts that have seen Vitters play - make him prove his point. To date, I have yet to see that happen in the 1,000 threads we've had on Vitters.

The fact of the matter is the information he is requesting is not readily available to most (or maybe any) of us. So it's easy to make a comment like that. It's like me saying "There has been no successful major leaguer in history to maintain a 'C' average in middle school. Go prove me wrong. Find one."

The whole arguement is kinda stupid. Casejud has a theory that he cannot prove, and most everyone is mashing him for it. And rather than just saying "it is a theory" and be done with it, he keeps defending it by saying "prove me wrong." I guess he and everyone else seem to love running in circles chasing their own tails.

by guru4u on May 31, 2007 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

the argument is pretty stupid...

....and the examples are difficult to impossible to find.

All I'm saying is, stick to that as your counterargument. Because saying "not everyone who did well in HS does well in the pros" is NOT an argument. And just because his theory is stupid doesn't mean you can make stupid arguments back and expect him to take them seriously. In the very least, lead by example, no?

by bleedjaxblue on May 31, 2007 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cool

Also, just a minor point but, my point WAS NOT even an argument. It was just a logical point followed by a question.

I did never say Vitters HS stats prove or dont prove anything I just said they made me sceptical of him as a "cant miss" hitting prospect

I do NOT place as much meaning on HS stats as has been inferred by some I just disagree with saying they are COMPLETELY meaningless.

casedog

by casejud on Jun 1, 2007 8:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hey

Did you take into account that it really WASNT an argument?? If the info were readily available I would have just found it myslef but, every player I loked up (and it was quite a few) hit better than that so I was just ASKING if anybody knew of a player (or MANY for that matter) who fit the criterion.

I wasnt asking anybody to do my reasearch for me I just thought there might be somebody out there who had access to a lot of major league all-star's High School stats or, even just one or two.

I think the whole OBJECTION to the idea is kinda stupid myself. What HS average WOULD cause concearn would be my next question? How about a player touted as the next Travis Hafner goes 5 for 63 in HS with 41 K's? Am I ALLOWED to question the mighty scouts then?

casedog

by casejud on Jun 1, 2007 7:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Showcases

I asked this question in another diary. But I think it's about to fall out of the top 50 diaries so I'll pose it here.

There has been mention of Vitters doing very well at the 'showcases'. If anyone could enlighten me, how many ABs would a guy get in a "showcase"? Are we just talking about a single all-star game? One weekend tournament consisting of maybe 3 games? Or are these showcases basically a summer season worth of games like a Junior Team USA or national all-star travel team kinda thing?

I'm very willing to pay even less attention to the H.S. stats if these showcases that Vitters performed well in amount to substantial at-bats. But if they are basically only 2 or 3 games then I think perhaps some may be overreacting to them. Everyone has days when they are locked in. Even Bengie Molina has his 3 hit days...

sig: Karim Garcia posted dominant AAA stats at 19. So can we stop acting like ARL trumps all in every discussion...

by natsfan2005 on May 31, 2007 12:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Correct me if I'm wrong

but I know a few players going to showcases this summer and they last about a week.

Lex clavatoris designati rescindenda est.

by HuskerBob on May 31, 2007 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

As Bob mentioned

most showcases are around a week, sometimes even just 4 days or so. However, the showcase circuit is ongoing throughout the summer, and the top players hop from one to another during this timeframe.

Vitters was nails all summer, and has been for the past couple years. The elite showcases use wood bats, and it's apparent that Vitters is more comfortable with wood than aluminum, which is great to see. I saw Vitters at two of the premier showcases this past summer, the PG National in Fayeteville and the Tournament of Stars in Joplin, and he excelled in each one.

I also read reports that he had another great appearance at the WWBA in Jupiter, and his Aflac game performance has been talked about on here quite a bit (3-4, 3 doubles off Porcello, Main, and Bumgarner). He also took home the MVP award at the Cape Cod All-Star game.

Founder of the Rowdy Hardy Fan Club

by eazyb81 on Jun 1, 2007 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs