It took me a while to write this. Not because of research or anything like that, but simply because I was so steamed about the Buster Posey injury from last night. I'm kind of going through the seven stages of grief right now, and if anything, I'm probably just past the anger stage. That's how tough this day has been and how hard I've taken this Posey setback (much like most of Giants nation).
That being said, Posey is out for an extended period of time (most likely the year), and the Giants will have to make it through. I'll have a profile on catcher Chris Stewart at some point, but the real story of the day other than Posey's injury is the callups of Brandon Belt and Brandon Crawford (other minor news was Ryan Rohlinger and Henry Sosa being designated for assignment to make room for Crawford and Stewart; Sosa was No. 26 in my list). Belt was an expected callup, simply because he was hitting very well in Fresno, but the Crawford promotion comes as a surprise. After all, he started the season on the disabled list, and while he was putting up good numbers in San Jose, it was only High Single-A. I figured it was more of a rehab stint before he got the eventual callup to Fresno (where he was expected to start the year prior to injury). However, with Mike Fontenot joining Posey and Darren Ford on the disabled list, the need for depth in the middle infield was huge, and the Giants made the decision to call up Crawford along with Belt and Stewart.
In terms of Belt, the promotion was obvious: the Giants desperately need offense, and Belt has been hitting well in Fresno. The Giants managed to garner only three hits today against Anibal Sanchez, and Aubrery Huff and Cody Ross haven't exactly lit it up with the Giants this year. Belt showed some nice strides in Fresno. In 31 games and 132 plate appearance, Belt hit .337 with a .994 OPS and added four home runs and 21 RBI in his tenure with the Grizzlies. The strongest aspect of Belt's game in Fresno was his strong ability to draw a walk and get on base, as he posted an OBP of .470 and had a BB/K ratio of 0.87. Additionally, Belt showed some versatility with the Grizzlies, as he played left and right field and first base, with a majority of his playing time coming in the outfield (he played 26 games total in the outfield). Thus, he brings a lot of utility defensively, which is good since it was obvious in the beginning of the year that Huff was probably more suited for first base only.
Belt though was far from perfect in Fresno. He struck out 31 times, a 30.6 percent rate. Furthermore, his contact rate wasn't very impressive at 69 percent (you read that right). While Belt wasn't overpowered or overwhelmed by the Pacific Coast League pitching, it was obvious that his plate patience was his worst enemy at times. Belt seemed to be almost too selective, and he ended up helping pitchers by getting behind in counts early and often in many of his at-bats. Now, I don't think Belt will be a 69 percent contact hitter in the Majors. In his short tenure with the Giants earlier this year, he posted a contact rate of 77.7, so his low contact rate may have just been a stretch where he was figuring out the pitching and what he could hit for power and what he could lay off of. Nonetheless, Belt probably needs to show more aggressiveness at the dish this time around in the Majors, for he is needed to spark this Giants offense, and MLB pitchers won't make as many mistakes as PCL hurlers.
Another issue for Belt is the decrease in power from a year ago. After posting slugging percentages of .623 in Richmond and .563 in Fresno a season ago, Belt's slugging dipped to .525 this year. Also his ISO fell to .188 with the Grizzlies, the first time it had ever been under the .200 mark in his minor league career. Still though, Belt does offer a lot of offensive upside, even with the power numbers down, and if you look at his competition, Belt doesn't need to be incredible offensively (Huff has a slugging of .337 and Ross has a slugging of .378). If he can be in the mid-to-high .700 (or even low .800) range in terms of OPS for the remainder of the year in San Francisco, and if he can continue to display his solid eye at the plate (he did produce a BB/K ratio of 0.62 in the Majors this year), then Belt certainly will be a boost to this inconsistent Giants offense (and it is possible in my opinion, as his Major League Equivalent from a year ago produced an OPS of .896).
As for Crawford, he is coming off a very promising stint in San Jose this season, as he .312 with a 1.005 OPS. He also added three home runs and 15 RBI, and looked very much like the hitter he was two years earlier in the California League. That being said, the California League is the California League, and considering Crawford spent the past two years in Double-A Richmond, it shouldn't be surprising to anyone that he hit as well as he did in in San Jose.
The big question for Crawford will be how he will adjust in the Majors after relatively struggling in the Eastern League the past two years. His Major League Equivalent from a year ago produced a .226 average, a .303 OBP, a .347 slugging, a .650 OPS, a contact rate of 77 percent and a BB/K ratio of 0.47. Those numbers aren't exactly on par with what Giants fans saw from Crawford this year in San Jose. Nonetheless, Crawford may be okay if he can post those numbers this year, or perhaps perform slightly above. Crawford is a solid defender who has gotten good reports from scouts and the Giants brass. An OPS in the .700 range would be a luxury for this Giants team considering his defense, and even an OPS in the mid .600 range would be tolerable. After all, he hasn't played beyond Double-A, so there is going to be a learning period for Crawford at the plate, and the Giants management and fans need to be patient as he develops.
The big issue with Crawford is his plate discipline, as he has had a tendency to strike out a lot and not draw a lot of walks to boot. In 2009, he posted BB/K ratios of 0.31 and 0.20 in San Jose and Connecticut, respectively. Last year, his BB/K ratio improved to 0.51 in Richmond, but he still struck out 26.5 percent of the time, which is uncomfortably high. This year in San Jose, he struck out 22 percent of the time, so even despite the low level for his age, he continued to have issues in terms of making contact at the plate. However, his 0.69 BB/K ratio was the best number in his minor league career, and one can hope that Crawford can transition that confidence and approach to the Majors this year.
Crawford may have been called up prematurely because of the dire need for depth in the Giants infield with Fontenot and Pablo Sandoval on the DL. That being said, this stint with the Giants will be very telling for Crawford. If he can hold his own somewhat, it'll give the Giants even more incentive to hand him the starting position next year. If not, then one could see the Giants management panic and look to deal for Jose Reyes, which would cost the Giants a lot of money in addition to some valuable prospects. I'm not expecting the world from Crawford in this callup. But if he can be a replacement-level player offensively, he could be of some value to this Giants roster because he still has room to grow and develop as a player, and he's an obvious upgrade over Miguel Tejada defensively at shortstop.
Showing posts with label Brandon Crawford. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brandon Crawford. Show all posts
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
The Shortstop Prospect Argument: Crawford or Adrianza?
With Miguel Tejada most likely a one-year rental at the most, the big concern for the Giants right now seems to be the future of their shortstop position. In the minors, there are two prospects that have gained a lot of noise the past few years: Brandon Crawford and Ehire Adrianza. Both prospects offer significant upside with their gloves and are probably Major League ready defenders, but there have been some questions with the bat, which is probably why Tejada was signed to a one-year deal when Juan Uribe left town for a three-year contract from the Dodgers. That being said, this year is a critical season for the both of them, as they may be thrust into the starting mix next year should the Giants not acquire any big name players in the next couple of months (mainly Jose Reyes, whom I'm not a fan of because he's going to be a free agent and his history of injury problems).
So, who is the better prospect? Who has more of a future with the Giants? And who has a better shot at the starting position in the next couple of years? Let's take a look at both guys.
The Case for Crawford
Offensively, at this point, it's not question that Crawford is the superior option in comparison to Adrianza. A 4th round draft pick out of UCLA in 2008, Crawford wasn't known for hitting much power in his tenure with the Bruins. However, in a 25-game stint with the San Jose Giants in 2009 (his first full season in professional ball), Crawford went on a tear, as he hit six home runs, drove in 17 RBI, and posted a batting average of .371 and OPS of 1.045 in 119 plate appearances. Impressed by the gaudy numbers in the California League, many people figured that Crawford was a sleeper of sorts, and that he was an offensive shortstop that was a far cry from light-hitting shortstop prospects such as Brian Bocock.
However, his season in the Cal League was far from perfect. He struck out 32 times and walked only 10 times, good for a BB/K ratio of 0.31. Furthermore, there was some consensus that Crawford was benefiting from the hitter friendly environments of the Cal League, as evidenced by his .493 BABIP. When Crawford made the transition to Double-A Connecticut later that season, he proved to be more mortal, as he hit only .258 with an OPS of .659. Despite more plate appearances in the Eastern League (he had 423 plate appearances0, his home run total dipped to four and he continued to swing and miss and show questionable plate discipline with the Defenders as he struck out 100 times and posted a BB/K ratio of 0.20. Of course, he was only 22, and the Eastern League (Connecticut especially) is known to sap hitters' power, so some kind of regression in his slugging numbers was to be expected. That being said, the worries that Crawford's sketchy strike zone recognition would be a problem as he climbed up the Giants system was fully evident in his Double-A stint in 2009.
In his second season in the Eastern League (this time in Richmond), Crawford struggled through injury and ineffectiveness at the plate. His batting average was worse this time around (.241) in 79 games and 342 plate appearances with the Flying Squirrels, and he still struck out in bunches (26.5 percent). However, there were some positive signs in his second go-around in the EL. He showed more power (he hit seven home runs and his ISO jumped up to .134; his ISO was .107 the previous year in Double-A) and his plate approach improved, as his walk rate climbed up to 11.4 (a career high) and his BB/K ratio improved to 0.51 (another career high). The contact rate was still a bit sub-par (0.74), but until he broke his hand in July, many thought Crawford was making the necessary developments in 2010 to earn a shot at the starting Giants shortstop position in 2011 or 2012 at the latest.
This year, Marc Hulet of Fangraphs ranked Crawford as the ninth best prospect in the Giants organization. He had this to say about him in his January writeup:
Crawford started the year on the disabled list, and has spent a short stint in San Jose for Rehab. This is pretty much expected since a.) he didn't go through much Spring Training and b.) you want to make sure he's totally healthy, and it's better to figure that out at a lower level where he won't get his confidence shot. So far, if anything, he's been gaining confidence in this Cal League rehab stint, as he is hitting .296 with an .897 OPS and two home runs and 12 RBI. It's only a matter of time really before he earns that promotion to Fresno, where he was expected to start the year prior to landing on the disabled list.
In terms of comparing him to Adrianza, Crawford certainly is more Major League ready. Adrianza hasn't played over High-A at any point in his career, while Crawford has already had two stints in the Eastern League. While Crawford's upside defensively is not as high as Adrianza's, there's no question that he is more than capable of handling the position (he has a career fielding percentage of .974 and a RF/G of 4.85 in the minors). The only question is how Crawford's hitting approach will hold up in the Majors. There is some power upside (though it certainly comes in streaks), and I think he'll be able to draw walks at a decent rate, but he whiffs a lot, and his power or walks may not be strong enough to make up for the amount of strikeouts he could have in a full year of Major League ball.
Crawford may be the best solution in the short term, and it would be nice to give him a shot sometime this year, just so the Giants know what they have on their hands. Of course, it is important to see how Crawford transitions to the PCL. If he can hit well there (and I expect him too considering the PCL is a hitter's league), then I think it wouldn't be out of the question to see a Crawford callup sometime in late July or August.
The Case for Adrianza
The big problem with Adrianza is not his defense or his tools. Scouts love his range and fielding ability, as some tout him as having "Gold Glove" potential. He is that good and that spectacular in the field, though he does have a tendency to misplay the routine balls from time to time (as evidenced by his career .958 fielding percentage in the minors). Here is what Mike Newman of "Scouting the Sally" said in a game report about Adrianza a couple of seasons ago:
Additionally, he has some decent speed on the basepaths, as he has stolen 68 bases in his minor league career, including 33 last year in San Jose (in comparison, Crawford has only stolen 17 total in his career).
Defensive tools and base stealing aside, the bat is just a big question mark in Adrianza's future. He has never hit above .258 in any full stint (I didn't count any stint in 2008 as a full stint, since he didn't play more than 15 games at any level that year, though he did show some promise in a 2 game stint in Fresno), and he has a career OPS of .663. Adrianza pretty much is a slap hitter, who hits a lot of groundballs and not with much power. That's fine if he's doing that at the Majors and getting on base, but considering he's doing this against Single-A pitching, well...it doesn't bode well for future projection offensively.
Adrianza is more disciplined at the plate than Crawford. Unlike the UCLA product, strikeouts are not an issue with Venezuelan prospect. In 2009 in the Sally and 2010 in the Cal League, he posted strikeout percentages of 17 and 19.6 percent, respectively, which are both more tolerable numbers than Crawford's rates. Furthermore, in San Jose last year, Adrianza posted a BB/K ratio of 0.54. When you compare it to Crawford's rate in San Jose in 2009 (0.31), you would think Adrianza's plate approach and understanding of the strike zone would fare better and benefit him more than Crawford as he transitions up the Giants system.
Still though, Adrianza struggles to hit for high average, and that is always is a concern if you don't have the power to back that up. The silver lining is that scouts have noticed that he has a short compact stroke, and he has always made contact well in the minors (he has never had a contact rate below 80 percent). At the same time though, he just doesn't hit extra base hits. While his frame doesn't suggest a lot of home runs (he's six-foot, one-inch tall, 155 pounds), you would still think he'd be able to stretch a lot of singles into doubles considering his speed and athleticism. That hasn't been the case, as he had just an ISO of .092 last year and .070 the previous year in the Sally.
He is still relatively young (21 years old), but he hasn't advanced as quickly in the system as Giants fans have hoped, mainly because his bat didn't improve significantly in the jump from the pitcher-friendly Sally to the hitter-friendly Cal League. Baseball America likes Adrianza more, as they rank him the fifth-best prospect in the Giants system going into 2011 (Crawford is ranked sixth), but Gordon of the MLBA ranked Crawford (9th best Giants prospect) ahead of Adrianza (12th) in their team rankings (though Gordon rated the both of them 8D prospects).
While he may not be as close to Major League-ready as Crawford, and doesn't offer the power ceiling either, Adrianza is a more disciplined hitter who has significant defensive upside and some growing potential because he has been playing up for his age most of his career. I'm a bigger fan of Adrianza personally, mostly because of his plate discipline, glove and athleticism. I think in a couple of years, he really could develop into a special shortstop, though he certainly is more high-risk for the Giants in comparison. As for now though, it's neck and neck, and I would be perfectly content if Crawford can earn and hold the starting job in 2012.
So, who is the better prospect? Who has more of a future with the Giants? And who has a better shot at the starting position in the next couple of years? Let's take a look at both guys.
The Case for Crawford
Offensively, at this point, it's not question that Crawford is the superior option in comparison to Adrianza. A 4th round draft pick out of UCLA in 2008, Crawford wasn't known for hitting much power in his tenure with the Bruins. However, in a 25-game stint with the San Jose Giants in 2009 (his first full season in professional ball), Crawford went on a tear, as he hit six home runs, drove in 17 RBI, and posted a batting average of .371 and OPS of 1.045 in 119 plate appearances. Impressed by the gaudy numbers in the California League, many people figured that Crawford was a sleeper of sorts, and that he was an offensive shortstop that was a far cry from light-hitting shortstop prospects such as Brian Bocock.
However, his season in the Cal League was far from perfect. He struck out 32 times and walked only 10 times, good for a BB/K ratio of 0.31. Furthermore, there was some consensus that Crawford was benefiting from the hitter friendly environments of the Cal League, as evidenced by his .493 BABIP. When Crawford made the transition to Double-A Connecticut later that season, he proved to be more mortal, as he hit only .258 with an OPS of .659. Despite more plate appearances in the Eastern League (he had 423 plate appearances0, his home run total dipped to four and he continued to swing and miss and show questionable plate discipline with the Defenders as he struck out 100 times and posted a BB/K ratio of 0.20. Of course, he was only 22, and the Eastern League (Connecticut especially) is known to sap hitters' power, so some kind of regression in his slugging numbers was to be expected. That being said, the worries that Crawford's sketchy strike zone recognition would be a problem as he climbed up the Giants system was fully evident in his Double-A stint in 2009.
In his second season in the Eastern League (this time in Richmond), Crawford struggled through injury and ineffectiveness at the plate. His batting average was worse this time around (.241) in 79 games and 342 plate appearances with the Flying Squirrels, and he still struck out in bunches (26.5 percent). However, there were some positive signs in his second go-around in the EL. He showed more power (he hit seven home runs and his ISO jumped up to .134; his ISO was .107 the previous year in Double-A) and his plate approach improved, as his walk rate climbed up to 11.4 (a career high) and his BB/K ratio improved to 0.51 (another career high). The contact rate was still a bit sub-par (0.74), but until he broke his hand in July, many thought Crawford was making the necessary developments in 2010 to earn a shot at the starting Giants shortstop position in 2011 or 2012 at the latest.
This year, Marc Hulet of Fangraphs ranked Crawford as the ninth best prospect in the Giants organization. He had this to say about him in his January writeup:
"Crawford had a reputation as a good fielding shortstop with a weak bat in college. His profile changed a bit when he got off to a strong start in high-A ball in ‘09. His bat wilted with a promotion to double-A. Back at the same level in 2010, Crawford struggled offensively once again and produced a triple-slash line of .241/.337/.375 in 342 plate appearances. Strikeouts are one of his biggest weaknesses, posting a strikeout rate of 26.5 K%...He has a nice quiet stance but could stand to use his legs more. Crawford also pulls his head off the pitchers at times. Despite his limitations, his work at shortstop could earn him a regular gig at the MLB level but his ceiling could be that of Adam Everett or perhaps J.J. Hardy with less power."
Crawford started the year on the disabled list, and has spent a short stint in San Jose for Rehab. This is pretty much expected since a.) he didn't go through much Spring Training and b.) you want to make sure he's totally healthy, and it's better to figure that out at a lower level where he won't get his confidence shot. So far, if anything, he's been gaining confidence in this Cal League rehab stint, as he is hitting .296 with an .897 OPS and two home runs and 12 RBI. It's only a matter of time really before he earns that promotion to Fresno, where he was expected to start the year prior to landing on the disabled list.
In terms of comparing him to Adrianza, Crawford certainly is more Major League ready. Adrianza hasn't played over High-A at any point in his career, while Crawford has already had two stints in the Eastern League. While Crawford's upside defensively is not as high as Adrianza's, there's no question that he is more than capable of handling the position (he has a career fielding percentage of .974 and a RF/G of 4.85 in the minors). The only question is how Crawford's hitting approach will hold up in the Majors. There is some power upside (though it certainly comes in streaks), and I think he'll be able to draw walks at a decent rate, but he whiffs a lot, and his power or walks may not be strong enough to make up for the amount of strikeouts he could have in a full year of Major League ball.
Crawford may be the best solution in the short term, and it would be nice to give him a shot sometime this year, just so the Giants know what they have on their hands. Of course, it is important to see how Crawford transitions to the PCL. If he can hit well there (and I expect him too considering the PCL is a hitter's league), then I think it wouldn't be out of the question to see a Crawford callup sometime in late July or August.
The Case for Adrianza
The big problem with Adrianza is not his defense or his tools. Scouts love his range and fielding ability, as some tout him as having "Gold Glove" potential. He is that good and that spectacular in the field, though he does have a tendency to misplay the routine balls from time to time (as evidenced by his career .958 fielding percentage in the minors). Here is what Mike Newman of "Scouting the Sally" said in a game report about Adrianza a couple of seasons ago:
"Adrianza’s lapse of concentration in booting a routine ground ball overshadowed an otherwise impressive defensive performance. On other chances, Adrianza showed above average range, solid hands, footwork, and impressive arm strength. Of shortstops I’ve seen this season, he and Red Sox prospect Oscar Tejeda were the two best defenders hands down. However, all of Adrianza’s value is currently tied to his staying at shortstop which adds quite a bit of risk to his prospect status."
Additionally, he has some decent speed on the basepaths, as he has stolen 68 bases in his minor league career, including 33 last year in San Jose (in comparison, Crawford has only stolen 17 total in his career).
Defensive tools and base stealing aside, the bat is just a big question mark in Adrianza's future. He has never hit above .258 in any full stint (I didn't count any stint in 2008 as a full stint, since he didn't play more than 15 games at any level that year, though he did show some promise in a 2 game stint in Fresno), and he has a career OPS of .663. Adrianza pretty much is a slap hitter, who hits a lot of groundballs and not with much power. That's fine if he's doing that at the Majors and getting on base, but considering he's doing this against Single-A pitching, well...it doesn't bode well for future projection offensively.
Adrianza is more disciplined at the plate than Crawford. Unlike the UCLA product, strikeouts are not an issue with Venezuelan prospect. In 2009 in the Sally and 2010 in the Cal League, he posted strikeout percentages of 17 and 19.6 percent, respectively, which are both more tolerable numbers than Crawford's rates. Furthermore, in San Jose last year, Adrianza posted a BB/K ratio of 0.54. When you compare it to Crawford's rate in San Jose in 2009 (0.31), you would think Adrianza's plate approach and understanding of the strike zone would fare better and benefit him more than Crawford as he transitions up the Giants system.
Still though, Adrianza struggles to hit for high average, and that is always is a concern if you don't have the power to back that up. The silver lining is that scouts have noticed that he has a short compact stroke, and he has always made contact well in the minors (he has never had a contact rate below 80 percent). At the same time though, he just doesn't hit extra base hits. While his frame doesn't suggest a lot of home runs (he's six-foot, one-inch tall, 155 pounds), you would still think he'd be able to stretch a lot of singles into doubles considering his speed and athleticism. That hasn't been the case, as he had just an ISO of .092 last year and .070 the previous year in the Sally.
He is still relatively young (21 years old), but he hasn't advanced as quickly in the system as Giants fans have hoped, mainly because his bat didn't improve significantly in the jump from the pitcher-friendly Sally to the hitter-friendly Cal League. Baseball America likes Adrianza more, as they rank him the fifth-best prospect in the Giants system going into 2011 (Crawford is ranked sixth), but Gordon of the MLBA ranked Crawford (9th best Giants prospect) ahead of Adrianza (12th) in their team rankings (though Gordon rated the both of them 8D prospects).
While he may not be as close to Major League-ready as Crawford, and doesn't offer the power ceiling either, Adrianza is a more disciplined hitter who has significant defensive upside and some growing potential because he has been playing up for his age most of his career. I'm a bigger fan of Adrianza personally, mostly because of his plate discipline, glove and athleticism. I think in a couple of years, he really could develop into a special shortstop, though he certainly is more high-risk for the Giants in comparison. As for now though, it's neck and neck, and I would be perfectly content if Crawford can earn and hold the starting job in 2012.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)