Sorry...Buxton is a flop

[Mike Sixel]

So I shouldn't expect Buxton to be even good as a hitter this year?

[gunnarthor]

 

Not once have I said he's a flop. And I'm not sure how it could be considered trolling by simply asking how long one should expect a top 2 prospect over the last 3 years to either come close to his potential or be considered a flop?  

 

Also, what kind of player/level of play is acceptable for guy like him to not be considered a flop?

Sure, perhaps I misread your intent.  I read it as you playing up his prospect status while ignoring the amount of playing time he has which separates him from pretty much every other person that would fit into his grouping that you created.  

 

Generally, I think a flop is a guy who can't make it in the majors.  Delmon Young or Francour, for instance, were crappy players but not flops.  Andy Marte was a flop.  Brandon Wood, Jesus Montero = flops.  But clearly that's not what is being thrown around.

 

Based on his prospect ranking and what was written about him, I think if he doesn't become one of the top 10 players in baseball, people here will label him a flop.  And, I think he will be one of the top 10 players in baseball.

[alarp33]

 

So I shouldn't expect Buxton to be even good as a hitter this year?

 

I haven't seen anyone say that?  

 

I don't think he will reach his full potential this year, but I think he will be very productive in the 2nd half. 

[jimmer]

What grouping did I create exactly?

[gunnarthor]

 

What grouping did I create exactly?

"three time top 2 prospect".  Which, of course, is a nearly empty class (Buxton literally might be the only one).  The obvious implication (as I saw it) was that you were trying to suggest that Buxton, like other highly regarded prospects, should have nearly immediate impact based on how he was ranked while ignoring how many games or at bats he's had.  But perhaps you weren't trying to imply such comparisons.

[mikelink45]

This is the biggest over-reaction I have read.   Come back when he is at least 24 and tell me we were wrong, for now, there are enough other problems to be concerned with including TR's signing of Murphy as some patch on the leaky inner tube.

[jimmer]

 

"three time top 2 prospect".  Which, of course, is a nearly empty class (Buxton literally might be the only one).  The obvious implication (as I saw it) was that you were trying to suggest that Buxton, like other highly regarded prospects, should have nearly immediate impact based on how he was ranked while ignoring how many games or at bats he's had.  But perhaps you weren't trying to imply such comparisons.

I was asking how long is long enough to evaluate whether a guy ranked so high as a prospect for so long should be considered a flop?  I never said he was a flop, at all. Not once.  I do think a guy as hyped as he is should be doing a little better though and I don't think it's out of line to think that that a prospect as highly touted as he is not look completely over-matched like he does.

 

If he turns out to be just a serviceable 2-3 WAR player, that, to me, will be a disappointment.

[Dantes929]

As was mentioned earlier Trout is a unique player that can be compared to Mickey Mantle rather than as some kind of standard for top prospects.     I think McCutcheon is a reasonable and high standard and as has been pointed out wasn't even in the majors at this point.     Keep in mind also that not only is Buxton younger he lost a whole year to concussion and who knows what lingering effects that has.    I haven't even given up hope that the 2016 Twins are not a flop.   I certainly am not going down the road of thinking Byuxton will be.    

[Dantes929]

 

The book is still out, but it was pretty obvious this spring that he was not ready to go.

 

The Twins would have done better to give him time at AAA, and give him more at bats. Buxton isn't ruined, but this season may be.

Sorry, hard to find the stats but my memory is that he started out very slow and in the neighborhood of .150 and worked his way back to near .250 by the end.     ST stats are not all that meaningful but I would say a similar progression is reasonable to expect going forward.

[mazeville]

I'm as frustrated by Buxton's early-season performance as anyone. But can we really call him a flop this fast? 

 

And let's make no mistake: This entire team is playing terribly. Only two regulars -- two! -- have batting averages above .200. So it's not like Buxton is badly underperforming the players he's surrounded with.

 

Frankly, I don't want him sent down at all. The Twins' season is likely a lost cause -- yes, I know it's early, but find me a team that started 0-9 and sniffed the playoffs -- and so I'd just much rather keep plugging away with young kids. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Through 1200 plate PA McCutcheon was just reaching AAA (2007) , where he would spend the entire next season (2008), and 1st half of the following (2009)

What are you responding to in my quoted post?  Really not sure here.

 

I totally understand giving some prospects extra slack for age or a lack of experience.  But I'm not sure Buxton is a terribly extreme case in that regard -- for example, at age 22 years and 4 month, over 3.5 pro seasons, McCutchen had 2117 pro PA.  Buxton, same age, same number of seasons, has 1511 pro PA.  It's not like he just stepped of a raft from... Georgia.

 

It's not a big enough difference, to me, to completely discount his rather extreme poor results in MLB so far.  He's not a flop, he's not doomed -- but I think it's fair to consider downgrading a future projection for him.

[jimmer]

 

I'm as frustrated by Buxton's early-season performance as anyone. But can we really call him a flop this fast? 

 

And let's make no mistake: This entire team is playing terribly. Only two regulars -- two! -- have batting averages above .200. So it's not like Buxton is badly underperforming the players he's surrounded with.

 

Frankly, I don't want him sent down at all. The Twins' season is likely a lost cause -- yes, I know it's early, but find me a team that started 0-9 and sniffed the playoffs -- and so I'd just much rather keep plugging away with young kids. 

At this point, not only would I continue to play the kids, I'd call up even more.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

As was mentioned earlier Trout is a unique player that can be compared to Mickey Mantle rather than as some kind of standard for top prospects.

The Trout comp here, as I understood it, wasn't an absolute performance comparison, it was simply presented as an example of another top prospect who apparently struggled in his first taste of MLB.  But if you look at his rate stats and his progression, Trout didn't really struggle to any great degree.  He controlled the strike zone, showed some good power.

 

Again, if anyone knows of one, I'm all ears -- has a top prospect struggled to the extent that Buxton has in MLB so far and rebounded to even McCutchen level stardom?  Buxton could be the first, of course, but I'm not sure I'd want to project/expect that, so I'd love to hear some examples of others.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Again, and I can't emphasize this enough: in no way do I endorse the use of the term "flop" to describe Buxton at present time, or even for my projection/expectations of him going forward.  My participation in this thread has not been based on Buxton being a "flop" but instead considering a modest downgrade in those projections/expectations based on his current, rather extreme, struggles at the plate in MLB.

[twinsfanstreif]

A good comp is what we saw from Carlos Gomez (note: I think Buxton is way more talented that Gomez ever was). Gomez was way over matched in his time here and had trouble putting things together, it wasn't until he was 26 and in his 3rd year with Milwaukee that he started to put things together. Buxton was a much better minor leaguer and has a better skill set than Gomez had, it might take him a bit to put things together at the ML level but I think he'll get there sooner. Remember that Span was left for dead in the minors (prompting the Gomez trade) until he was 24 and then he put things together and came out of nowhere to be one of the most consistent CFers in MLB over the past 8 years. Will he be Griffy Jr or Trout like he was unfairly touted to be? Probably not, but he could be as good as Torri Hunter (who wasn't really a threat with his bat until he turned 25 and didn't bat over .300 until he was 36) eventually, give him some time

[jimmer]

Trout's BABIP in 2011 with the Angels was .247.  That had a lot to do with his numbers and it was easy to project that a guy who hits the ball as hard as he does wouldn't continue to have such a low of a BABIP, and that he'd see better results once that improved.

 

Buxton's BABIP as a Twin is around .320ish between last year and this year?  So if he can cut down on the strikeouts and put the ball in play more, that'd be a good thing, but his numbers can't be excused away by bad luck.

[Minniman]

 

I'm as frustrated by Buxton's early-season performance as anyone. But can we really call him a flop this fast? 

 

And let's make no mistake: This entire team is playing terribly. Only two regulars -- two! -- have batting averages above .200. So it's not like Buxton is badly underperforming the players he's surrounded with.

 

I get what you are saying, but one cannot ignore his performance because he is on a bad team. If we were talking about him not getting RBIs or not getting good deep count pitches, I could see that, but swinging at pitches in the dirt and not swinging at pitches over the plate cannot be excused by being in a bad lineup.

 

It is a bad situation for many of these players because their is no veteran leadership presence on this team. This is not a mix of quality veterans and a few young players; it is a team with young or suspect players up and down the lineup card.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Again, if anyone knows of one, I'm all ears -- has a top prospect struggled to the extent that Buxton has in MLB so far and rebounded to even McCutchen level stardom?  Buxton could be the first, of course, but I'm not sure I'd want to project/expect that, so I'd love to hear some examples of others.

Moustakas is an interesting comparison. He held his own right off the bat but then went into a deep slump for quite some time. His OPS+ by year (including his start to 2016):

 

86, 91, 77, 75, 120, 139

 

Obviously, that's not the route we want to see Buxton take but Moustakas was a consensus #10-ish prospect for a couple of years.

[Dantes929]

 

Maybe I should have said if he turns out to be a bust, then the twins will be to blame for bringing him and leaving him up when he wasn't ready.

I believe this is the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc.    X happened after y so therefore x was caused by y.    There are basically 2 possibilities if he is a bust.   1.  He will be a bust because of the way the Twins have handled him or 2. He was going to be a bust no matter what.     If he is a success there is a similar thread.  1.   He was going to be a success no matter what.    2.   He was going to be a bust but being given this opportunity at this time helped him be successful.      If he does turn out great I doubt anyone will give the Twins credit even though it might be deserved.     If he turns out to be a bust there will be plenty that will blame the Twins even though it might be undeserved.    We will never know the cause no matter what the result.   

 

People blame the Twins for how they handled Hicks but as far as I am concerned the only thing they should be blamed for is allowing him to work on switch hitting in the first place.   

 

Same thing with Ortiz.    We know the Twins tried to teach him to use all fields.and that he went to Boxton and had a HOF career.    If he had been taught to swing for the right field fences from the start who knows if he would have had that same great career so either the Twins helped him have his HOF career or they had no impact one way or the other.    He should maybe be thanking the Twins.   He definitely shouldn't be criticizing them.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Moustakas is an interesting comparison. He held his own right off the bat but then went into a deep slump for quite some time. His OPS+ by year (including his start to 2016):

 

86, 91, 77, 75, 120, 139

 

Obviously, that's not the route we want to see Buxton take but Moustakas was a consensus #10-ish prospect for a couple of years.

Yeah, and there have been other guys that followed the Moustakas type path, maybe even with more initial struggles.

 

Carlos Gomez OPS+ by year:

 

55 (Mets debut), 77, 65, 76, 82, 101, 128, 129

 

Buxton was at 55 last year, and has somehow managed to drag it lower so far this year.  That seems unusual?  Maybe his path/upside/volatility will be more like Gomez's overall, rather than like McCutchen who progressed like this:

 

121, 121, 130, 162, 157, 166, 145

 

And of course Cutch has been the pinnacle of health and durability...

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Yeah, and there have been other guys that followed the Moustakas type path, maybe even with more initial struggles.

 

Carlos Gomez OPS+ by year:

 

55 (Mets debut), 77, 65, 76, 82, 101, 128, 129

 

Buxton was at 55 last year, and has somehow managed to drag it lower so far this year.  That seems unusual?  Maybe his path/upside/volatility will be more like Gomez's overall, rather than like McCutchen who progressed like this:

 

121, 121, 130, 162, 157, 166, 145

 

And of course Cutch has been the pinnacle of health and durability...

Yeah, Buxton has started off worse than anyone else I remember but really, that doesn't worry me as much as the non-stop injuries.

 

It's hard to be a good player if you're rarely on the field and then banged up a good portion of the time you are on the field.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Yeah, Buxton has started off worse than anyone else I remember but really, that doesn't worry me as much as the non-stop injuries.

 

It's hard to be a good player if you're rarely on the field and then banged up a good portion of the time you are on the field.

Agreed.  Which is another factor in my downgrade -- it might take him a while to adjust simply because it takes him that long to accumulate at-bats.  And even if/when he does succeed, his success might be more volatile (up and down) than one would like (i.e. seasons of ~100 OPS+ sprinkled among a few 120-130's).

[alarp33]

 

What are you responding to in my quoted post?  Really not sure here.

 

I totally understand giving some prospects extra slack for age or a lack of experience.  But I'm not sure Buxton is a terribly extreme case in that regard -- for example, at age 22 years and 4 month, over 3.5 pro seasons, McCutchen had 2117 pro PA.  Buxton, same age, same number of seasons, has 1511 pro PA.  It's not like he just stepped of a raft from... Georgia.

 

It's not a big enough difference, to me, to completely discount his rather extreme poor results in MLB so far.  He's not a flop, he's not doomed -- but I think it's fair to consider downgrading a future projection for him.

 

I thought it was fairly obvious what I was responding to.

 

You said he's not "THAT raw -- 22 years old, 4 pro seasons, 1200+ pro PA", and then concluded based on last years ~140 at bats and this years 24 at bats that he can't be McCutcheon.. I then pointed out where McCutcheon was when he reached that threshold of PA.  

[alarp33]

 

 

Buxton was at 55 last year, and has somehow managed to drag it lower so far this year.  That seems unusual?  

 

Can you just step back from the Buxton-hate for a moment and re-read this a few times... He has had 24 at bats in 7+ games! No, it doesnt seem unusual AT ALL, because it has been a freaking week and a half. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I thought it was fairly obvious what I was responding to.

 

You said he's not "THAT raw -- 22 years old, 4 pro seasons, 1200+ pro PA", and then concluded based on last years ~140 at bats and this years 24 at bats that he can't be McCutcheon.. I then pointed out where McCutcheon was when he reached that threshold of PA.  

Well, this is where grey area and interpretation takes hold of the argument.

 

Do PAs matter? Absolutely.

 

Does age matter? Absolutely.

 

What does it mean that Buxton has half of McCutcheon's PAs at the same age and is posting abysmal MLB numbers?

 

I have no idea.

[jokin]

 

Yes you are right, not a flop but just not what he has been hyped to.

 

How can anyone possibly write the book, case-closed, on how Buxton's career is going to play out?

[jimmer]

 

Can you just step back from the Buxton-hate for a moment and re-read this a few times... He has had 24 at bats in 7+ games! No, it doesnt seem unusual AT ALL, because it has been a freaking week and a half. 

perhaps anyone who is describing spycake's post as Buxton-hate should step WAY back.  

 

And, BTW, it's been longer that a week and a half.  Last year counts too.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Can you just step back from the Buxton-hate for a moment and re-read this a few times... He has had 24 at bats in 7+ games! No, it doesnt seem unusual AT ALL, because it has been a freaking week and a half. 

It's probably unusual for a player, on the verge of McCutchen level success as gunnarthor predicted earlier in this thread, to regress to the point of 4-for-24 with 13 K's and zero walks.  No hate here, it's just an unusual step.  Hopefully he steps out of it pretty quickly.

[alarp33]

 

Well, this is where grey area and interpretation takes hold of the argument.

 

Do PAs matter? Absolutely.

 

Does age matter? Absolutely.

 

What does it mean that Buxton has half of McCutcheon's PAs at the same age and is posting abysmal MLB numbers?

 

I have no idea.

 

He was an older high school senior, who missed practically a whole year of development due to injury.  I think it means he may be a tad bit behind, but I personally don't think it means a damn thing going forward.  

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I thought it was fairly obvious what I was responding to.

 

You said he's not "THAT raw -- 22 years old, 4 pro seasons, 1200+ pro PA", and then concluded based on last years ~140 at bats and this years 24 at bats that he can't be McCutcheon.. I then pointed out where McCutcheon was when he reached that threshold of PA.  

I didn't "conclude" anything like that.  I've repeatedly said it is still possible for Buxton to achieve McCutchen like success.  But I'm not sure if we can project/expect that -- it's becoming more "best case scenario" as time goes by and he struggles so much.

 

With that and your comment about "Buxton hate" I think you are taking this discussion as a lot more absolute that it really is.  There are still a wealth of possibilities for Buxton's future MLB career.  My point is, the longer he struggles at this rather extreme level, the odds of those different possibilities need to shift.  The probably haven't shifted a ton yet because it's not a big sample, but I think they have shifted enough where a McCutchen career path is less likely for him now than it was for him a year ago.  I don't think that's "hate."