Comments on: Craig vs. Freese http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/ Baseball's Future in the Gateway City Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:31:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU hourly 1 By: Lon http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-13420 Lon Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:33:52 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-13420 We produced Plácido Polanco who did some time at 3b. He ended up being World Series MVP and is a good player. We produced Plácido Polanco who did some time at 3b. He ended up being World Series MVP and is a good player.

]]> By: Bob http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12403 Bob Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:26:01 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12403 I like Craig as a future corner outfielder rather than 3rd baseman (his minor league defensive numbers frighteningly echo those of iron glovemen Ryan Braun and Kevin Kouzmanoff, the two most destructive defenders in all of MLB last year, according to Clay Davenport's Fielding Runs Above Average system). On the other hand, Craig's hitting for average and power in the FSL was exceptional--at just one year old for the league. It's almost impossible to evaluate Freese's hitting potential, since he was so old for his league. Arnoldi Cruz, however, as others have mentioned, could be a real diamond in the rough. At an age-appropriate 20 in the Midwest League, Cruz posted a .759 OPS v. the league average of .696; moreover he had a solid 17/25 BB/K ratio, and judging by his very fine DP's versus errors (as well as his superb range factor), his leather looks good so far. At 5' 11", Cruz may be just a bit undersized for the hot corner, but imagine if he could eventually put up an MLB line of .280/.350/.450 with solid glovework...at *second* base. Intriguing. I like Craig as a future corner outfielder rather than 3rd baseman (his minor league defensive numbers frighteningly echo those of iron glovemen Ryan Braun and Kevin Kouzmanoff, the two most destructive defenders in all of MLB last year, according to Clay Davenport’s Fielding Runs Above Average system). On the other hand, Craig’s hitting for average and power in the FSL was exceptional–at just one year old for the league.

It’s almost impossible to evaluate Freese’s hitting potential, since he was so old for his league. Arnoldi Cruz, however, as others have mentioned, could be a real diamond in the rough.

At an age-appropriate 20 in the Midwest League, Cruz posted a .759 OPS v. the league average of .696; moreover he had a solid 17/25 BB/K ratio, and judging by his very fine DP’s versus errors (as well as his superb range factor), his leather looks good so far.

At 5′ 11″, Cruz may be just a bit undersized for the hot corner, but imagine if he could eventually put up an MLB line of .280/.350/.450 with solid glovework…at *second* base. Intriguing.

]]> By: sportsman http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12342 sportsman Tue, 18 Dec 2007 02:55:52 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12342 must be the case or marti would be long gone, if ever signed must be the case or marti would be long gone, if ever signed

]]> By: easy http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12340 easy Tue, 18 Dec 2007 01:26:12 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12340 It's interesting to note that both of the young acquisitions by the Cardinals this off season have been players who were drafted and started their pro careers at relatively advanced ages. Barton and Freese will each be 25 this year. Barton only had a cup of coffee in AAA and Freese hasn't seen AA yet yet each has put up very good numbers at the lower levels. It may be that Luhnow and company are ignoring age as a factor in determining potential or that they have insight that age, by itself, is not a major factor in determing potential. If you look at their stats they are actually really impressive if you ignore their age and concentrate on their pro experience. What must one do if you're 23 and find yourself in class A ball to prove that you're a prospect? Could it be that their drafting teams recognized their talent but concentrated too much on their age at the lower levels and underrated them enough to let them go? Those of us who follow the minor league prospects closely usually rate the age of a prospect compared with his performance at a certain level as a key to evaluating potential. The Cards seem to be saying that performance compared with a prospect's experience is more important and they may feel that they've stolen a couple of really good talents. It'll be interesting to watch how these guys actually pan out. This appears to be a test of how much the stat geeks in the organization can contribute to the cause. I, for one, am cautiously optimistic particularly about Barton. It’s interesting to note that both of the young acquisitions by the Cardinals this off season have been players who were drafted and started their pro careers at relatively advanced ages. Barton and Freese will each be 25 this year. Barton only had a cup of coffee in AAA and Freese hasn’t seen AA yet yet each has put up very good numbers at the lower levels. It may be that Luhnow and company are ignoring age as a factor in determining potential or that they have insight that age, by itself, is not a major factor in determing potential. If you look at their stats they are actually really impressive if you ignore their age and concentrate on their pro experience. What must one do if you’re 23 and find yourself in class A ball to prove that you’re a prospect? Could it be that their drafting teams recognized their talent but concentrated too much on their age at the lower levels and underrated them enough to let them go? Those of us who follow the minor league prospects closely usually rate the age of a prospect compared with his performance at a certain level as a key to evaluating potential. The Cards seem to be saying that performance compared with a prospect’s experience is more important and they may feel that they’ve stolen a couple of really good talents. It’ll be interesting to watch how these guys actually pan out. This appears to be a test of how much the stat geeks in the organization can contribute to the cause. I, for one, am cautiously optimistic particularly about Barton.

]]> By: Merry Crasmus http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12333 Merry Crasmus Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:07:18 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12333 Freese has about a 1-1.5 year window and has several levels to jump. He doesn't really have the time to have to endure any lengthy adjustment periods. He may be able to handle that, but I'd say he has a battle against time much moreso than Craig. I'd say Craig has 2-2.5 years left and can afford a setback or adjustment period. So for that reason, I'd give Craig a clear edge as far as prospect status. Freese has about a 1-1.5 year window and has several levels to jump. He doesn’t really have the time to have to endure any lengthy adjustment periods. He may be able to handle that, but I’d say he has a battle against time much moreso than Craig. I’d say Craig has 2-2.5 years left and can afford a setback or adjustment period. So for that reason, I’d give Craig a clear edge as far as prospect status.

]]> By: BigJawnMize http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12332 BigJawnMize Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:46:18 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12332 Yes, but the only people that I think you can annoit the "Position of the Future" is Rasmus as "CF of the Future" and maybe Perez as "Closer of the Future" as they have all-star potential in these roles. Otherwise you are always looking to upgrade positions to all-star level performances. Although I have hope for Cruz...It is blind hope though. Yes, but the only people that I think you can annoit the “Position of the Future” is Rasmus as “CF of the Future” and maybe Perez as “Closer of the Future” as they have all-star potential in these roles. Otherwise you are always looking to upgrade positions to all-star level performances. Although I have hope for Cruz…It is blind hope though.

]]> By: Toddy http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12331 Toddy Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:22:14 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12331 I'll bet a grape gatorade that either Craig, Freese, or Cruz has a big year and becomes the annointed "3B of the future". I’ll bet a grape gatorade that either Craig, Freese, or Cruz has a big year and becomes the annointed “3B of the future”.

]]> By: azruavatar http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12330 azruavatar Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:20:28 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12330 People are vastly overestimating Barden's abilities here. He's a 26 year old in AAA who has shown below average power for a corner infielder. He doesn't walk enough to compensate for his lack of power and he's not toting around a Scott Rolen like defense. He might make for an adequate utility player a la Scott Spiezio but he is in no way a regular everyday player. The Cardinals got him off of waivers in the middle of the year. This isn't a player that's in high demand. People are vastly overestimating Barden’s abilities here. He’s a 26 year old in AAA who has shown below average power for a corner infielder. He doesn’t walk enough to compensate for his lack of power and he’s not toting around a Scott Rolen like defense. He might make for an adequate utility player a la Scott Spiezio but he is in no way a regular everyday player. The Cardinals got him off of waivers in the middle of the year. This isn’t a player that’s in high demand.

]]> By: erik http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12328 erik Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:42:44 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12328 I'd give freese a 40/60 shot at being a regular. barden 15/85. context is important. barden has played in some bandboxes, which have inflated his stats. i'll look at it again to make sure i'm not mistaken, though. i think freese has a decent shot at a mike lamb type career. I’d give freese a 40/60 shot at being a regular. barden 15/85. context is important. barden has played in some bandboxes, which have inflated his stats. i’ll look at it again to make sure i’m not mistaken, though. i think freese has a decent shot at a mike lamb type career.

]]> By: fewgoodcards http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12327 fewgoodcards Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:40:39 +0000 http://futureredbirds.com/2007/12/16/craig-vs-freese/#comment-12327 i agree that craig is the better prospect. he put up bigger numbers in arguably the worst hitters' league in the minors while freese didn't even slug .500 as a 24 year old in the hitter happy california league. it will be very interesting to see what they do with them next year as it appears that both still need some work at 3rd, but they will likely be splitting the duty unless one of them is moved to the outfield. whatever happens, this organization really needs one of the these guys to turn into a quality regular at the hot corner, but at this point it doesn't seem likely that either will. i agree that craig is the better prospect. he put up bigger numbers in arguably the worst hitters’ league in the minors while freese didn’t even slug .500 as a 24 year old in the hitter happy california league. it will be very interesting to see what they do with them next year as it appears that both still need some work at 3rd, but they will likely be splitting the duty unless one of them is moved to the outfield. whatever happens, this organization really needs one of the these guys to turn into a quality regular at the hot corner, but at this point it doesn’t seem likely that either will.

]]>