#7 Roger Kieschnick. OF. B-L, T-R. BD: 01-21-1987. 6'3", 215 lbs.
2009 Stats: High A- .296/.345/.532 with 23 HR, 37 doubles, 8 triples, 9 SB, 1 CS.
Roger Kieschnick has a major league pedigree. He is the cousin of Brooks Kieschnick who a Pitcher/OF who played both ways at Univ. of Texas and in MLB. He showed atheticism and power in college at Texas Tech, but he fell to the 3'rd round of the 2008 draft due because his BA slipped from .359 his freshman season to .301 and .305 the next two, which is not very good for a college hitter using metal bats. Roger's first professional competition was in the Hawaiian Winter Baseball League where he seemed to fit the mold by hitting several HR's but struggling to make contact and keep his BA up. The Giants were aggressive with him and assigned him to high A ball in San Jose where he stayed all season, probably for the same reasons Thomas Neal stayed. He responded with the expected power, but the BA of .296 was a nice surprise. His K rate is still somewhat of a concern, but 23% is not impossibly high, especially for a power hitter. Moving up to AA will be a big test, but Roger looks like he has the power to hit balls into the Bay, and the speed and athleticism to cover RF in AT&T Park in the not too distant future.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think Roger went to Texas tech and not TCU. Anyways, I like this guy but have an Ortmeier feeling with him. I really hope that I'm wrong on this read because I haven't actually seen him play in person, but the stats are similar.
ReplyDelete-Clint
I think Ishikawa and Bowker actually had as good if not better year/s in the minors than Kieschick, Crawford, and Neal. Fransen and Nate also had solid minor league careers. So why do we think this new group is going to be better than the last group?
ReplyDeleteYes, Texas Tech is right for Roger Kieschnick's alma mater.
ReplyDeleteIshikawa and Bowker had great years in the minors, but not until after years of struggling with sudden breakthroughs late.
Neal has always hit well when healthy. When you look at him play in person and analyze his numbers, he's just a much more complete hitter than Ish, Nate or Bowker.
Crawford and Kieschnick are a bit more iffy, but both have shown much better numbers earlier than Giants hitting prospects to date. Ditto for Kieschnick vs Ortmeier.
I guess you are right that the main difference is that Ishikawa and Bowkers were "failures" until they suddenly figure things out. I am not sure that's a bad thing. I think I rather have guys like this than the overhype prospect who does well in the lower levels but hit a hard wall as he approaches the majors (Dallas MacPherson comes to mind).
ReplyDeleteAlso, how much does coaching plays into this. Is it a coincidence that the one position player who carried success in the minor leagues to the major was tutored mostly by Decker? Probably a coincident. But I get the feeling this next group will have been better coached by the time they get to the majors.
I don't really know, but I have the feeling that the Giants have significantly upgraded their player coaching and player development in the last 2-3 years. One piece of evidence, with only 1 or 2 exceptions, the Giants prospects are showing far better walk rates than they have ever shown in the past.
ReplyDelete