ashbury

Our batters have an above average Babip in aggregate, while our pitchers have one that is below. FIP is also well above ERA. I'm enjoying it while it lasts, A LOT, but we'll need further infusions from the prospect pipeline to make this a sustainable level of performance.

Send them down to AA to fatten up their numbers.

It's hard to say what "this forum" says about any player, particularly Hicks. You can find opinion all over the map. Indeed, you are on this forum, and seem to be implying you lean toward the failed prospect camp. I don't get this comparative assessment at all, as to who is a bona fide prospect. Compare their age 20-22 seasons (different calendar years of course), as a measure of their stature as prospects. They both were in single-A at 20, and had nearly equal OPS. At 21, Rosario had a better year split between high-A and AA than Hicks did at high-A. At age 22 the reverse happened at AA for both, with Hicks having the much better OPS. I don't know how their defenses were viewed at these steps in their progression, but as prospects, they seem to me actually pretty closely matched, all in all. I don't see why you would laud one and flush the other. Their paths diverged at age 23, of course, with Hicks being rushed to major league duty and floundering horribly, while Rosario at age 23 in AAA hasn't done so hot himself (OPS in the .600s) but was out of the glare of the spotlight and apparently is getting a pass on that. Eddie got an outstanding introduction to major league pitching of course, the other night. But right now I believe he's at 2-for-7 overall, nearly the ultimate in Small Sample Size; he's one Ofer from the Mendoza line, one multi-hit night from Hurricane Hazle. Hicks meanwhile is putting up highly acceptable numbers in AAA. We know Hicks did not make good use of his age-24 season. That's not a mark in his favor. But his good performance so far this year isn't suddenly out of character with the first part of his progression through the minors. We may well look back and decide 2013-14 were the aberration. And I say that as someone who was thoroughly disgusted with Hicks's performance this Spring (particularly on defense) and wanted to see him spend time in Rochester. There's a chance both Hicks and Rosario will have significant major league careers.

Yeah, I've noticed that a lot here.

Or, if they're still on the horizon, it's still not quite the time yet.

I'll have what Paul's having, but half as much.

His eye-test performance in March had me thinking "potential bust", even. / which is one more bit of evidence that I Am Not A Scout And Never Will Be

For some technical reason that you'd have to ask Brock to explain, the Forum version of articles lack some of the features of the full article. That's why at the end there is always "Click here to view the article." Something to keep in mind when reading something here and feeling as though some visuals (still photos or video) are missing.

Like I said, access to stats we don't have. I thirst for them, but not enough to pay what the subscription would cost.

I'm a stats guy by nature. But, I would not make a decision on a young ballplayer by the stats in this case. As others have stated, there is no question about his game where it comes to defense, base running, etc. It comes down to the bat. And with the bat, it comes down to pitch recognition, evaluation of which requires either direct scouting or else access to stats that none of us has (and which amounts to the same as direct scouting). I want to know how well he is recognizing the pitches the pitcher wants him to swing at, which he will see more and more of in the majors, and that he is laying off. I want to know how well he spots the occasional mistake pitch, which he will see fewer and fewer of in the majors, and that he punishes them. I want to know how well he adjusts to tough pitches in the strike zone, which he will see more of in the majors, and that he takes them the other way or otherwise turn into opportunities. It's hard to hit .400 for a period of time without these good things going on. But I still want to know the fundamentals, if I'm the one making a franchise-shaping decision. I do not want to bring him up, and then find out he was feasting in AA on 1-0 meatballs by pitchers still learning their craft.

I did. But not the same.

Chief's not here, I didn't see it said, and it needs to be:WINNAH!

I guess it could be, uh, worse or something. http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wBcc2O9X8LM/hqdefault.jpg Because then we'd have only two outfielders.

Amazing win. Very frustrating for me when the Twins play the A's, because I get blacked out of watching them on mlb.tv - hey what's 200 miles among friends?

Torii grounds into another DP. Stick a fork in him.

Mudcat Grant was a big part of the team's mid-60s success, yes.

Looks like Buxton just won a game with a 2-run homer in the bottom of the ninth.

Or carpet.

Come, let me clutch hit thee.

And then later that night, "beige. I think it should be beige."

Tuned in just in the for the Grannie. Maybe I should invoke that Abe Simpson animated GIF yet again.

I never tried the stuff, but a friend told me he once saw Daffy Duck driving a semi passing him in the next lane, and he decided maybe it was time to pull over for a while. http://s.pikabu.ru/images/big_size_comm/2013-06_5/13721008983686.jpg

Since this is billed as a Get To Know article, I'd just like to add that during Spring Training I had the pleasure of chatting with his fiancee during one game. She confirms some of the things you said, such as his taking pride in his defense at first base. I have little doubt of Watkins' characterization of him as a good kid, either, just from talking with her. That kind of spring training experience causes a fan like me to want to follow his progress.

Someone went to the trouble of compiling a dictionary a couple of decades ago, and I had it out for another purpose earlier tonight so it was at hand here. The Dickson Baseball Dictionary has this: "Journeyman, n.: A veteran ballplayer who is reliable but not a star; consistent rather than colorful. Because it contains the word journey, it is often applied to those who have played for several clubs." I take that phrasing to suggest that the last meaning is common but flawed. In the trades, the word journeyman has nothing to do with moving around geographically. The derivation refers to a day's work.

Close game. Never would have guessed it in the first inning. G'night all.