FanGraphs Baseball


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Posey is never going to play double A. Once he gets 300 ABs in san jose, they’re going to move him to triple a fresno(no link, they’ve said so on local radio).

    Comment by tom — June 7, 2009 @ 9:44 am

  2. 2008 — Crawford has improved his standing this year more than anyone else in the organization. Not even on BA’s top 30 Giants prospects list, he would now be comfortably in the top 10, perhaps as high as #5.

    Posey will likely be the Giants’ starting catcher in 2010, especially with Bengie Molina eligible for free agency this winter.

    Gillaspie has been somewhat disappointing both at bat and in the field (11 errors), but his K/BB ratio is strong. Only one homer, though, and an average in the .260’s.

    #3 Giants pick Roger Kieschnick has been a pleasant surprise, hitting over .300 with decent power.

    The Giants also signed a top Dominican prospect in outflelder Rafael Rodriguez.

    2007 — Mad Bum is still only 19, but likely could fit in as the Giants’ fifth starter right now. Both he and Alderson should be knocking at the rotation door in 2010. Bumgarner features the fastball; Alderson, the curve.

    #29 overall pick Fairley has been arguably the biggest disappointment in the organization, and #32 overall Nick Noonan has posted a poor K/BB ratio each of the past two seasons and recently saw his average this season drop to .240 in 2009. #43 overall Jackson Williams is a fine defensive catcher, has a bit of power, isn’t likely to hit for much average and is likely a backup catcher at best.

    #52 overall Charlie Culberson has had problems keeping his hits above his errors and has been moved to third base, where his bad bat sticks out even more than at shortstop. If Fairley wasn’t the worst pick the Giants made in 2007, Culberson was.

    2006 — Tim has become the e-Lincecum-ator, and Emmanuel Burriss could become the best defensive second baseman in the game — if he can hit well enough to stay in the starting lineup, which thus far hasn’t been too big a problem.

    Tanner is a Bay Area kid who has made fairly consistent progress despite spending his second season in High A San Jose.

    Domincan signee Angel Villalona is still only 18, but is playing first base and hitting for average and power at San Jose.

    2009 — Having the #6 overall pick gives the Giants a shot at another player who can perhaps be an impact player in the upcoming decade. The Giants don’t pick again until #55. #55 has been a good number for the Giants, for obvious reasons dating back to 2005. They will likely take the best prospect available at #6 and then begin to load up with position players down the line. Of course, they ALWAYS seem to take a lot of pitchers.

    2010 — Although the Giants are presently over .500, it is possible they will still have a high pick in 2010 if they fade. #10 overall might work out, since it brought them Lincecum and Bumgarner in the past.

    If the Giants draft well in 2009 and 2010, they will have built an impressive nucleus for the next decade. They may have already drafted/signed half a dozen stars or superstars.

    Comment by SharksRog — June 7, 2009 @ 2:58 pm

  3. i just don’t see Fairley being the worst pick. Jackson Williams was the mistake. Fairley was a raw high upside pick mostly based on his bat speed and fielding ability. Philosophically an acceptable pick for the back of the first round. Same with Culberson. Jackson Williams was a bad pick simply because he has no real upside; there has never been any chance that he would be a starting big league catcher.

    Nor could these picks really be called signability picks as the author of this article suggests. As far as I know all players were essentially signed for slot money. The Giants just happen to think for themselves which pays off sometimes (Lincecum) and fails others (Fairley).

    Comment by Stephen Fratus — June 8, 2009 @ 1:38 am

  4. People like to call many of the Giants picks overdrafts, and that’s fine because they do select many players earlier than other teams think, but to date, I have not seen many bonuses (other than in 2002 or 2003 if I remember right) that were below what the prevailing bonus slot for that area of the draft, so I don’t think it is accurate to parrot the prevailing thought without giving good evidence that they are actually doing this.

    You may disagree vehemently with their selection of Williams and Culberson (and many Giants fans would agree with you), but I don’t recall their bonuses being out of line compared to the other draftees around them. Williams got slot and so did most guys around him. So did Culberson. So the Giants might have overdrafted them, but that was because they thought they were worth it, not because they were trying to save a few bucks, which, ultimately, they didn’t.

    Overdraft does not mean that they did it to save money, there are teams who do that because they think they know better than the prevailing thought.

    Comment by obsessivegiantscompulsive — June 8, 2009 @ 12:00 pm

  5. But really, what DID the Giants think Jackson Williams’ upside was? Did they they think he was going to be a starter or a backup? Did they actually think that he could hit at all….?

    Comment by lmaozedong — June 8, 2009 @ 3:20 pm

  6. Not too sure how I found this blog but glad I did find it. Think I was looking for something else on google. Don’t know I agree 100% with what you say, but have bookmaked and will come back to read to see if you add any more posts. Good blog

    Comment by festoolts55 — March 15, 2010 @ 6:22 am

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Close this window.

0.280 Powered by WordPress