#22 Rafael Rodriguez, OF. 6'5", 198 lbs. BD: 7/13/1992. B-R, T-R.
Low A: .236/.284/.297, 1 HR, 1 SB, 6 CS.
You don't like to be in the position of having to defend or make excuses for your prospects, but that's exactly what I'm going to do here with RafRod. He had a rough 2011, no way around it. On the other hand, he didn't turn 19 until mid-season. The Sally League is tough on most hitters. From Fred Stanley's interview with Joe Rizo on sjgiants.com, it sounds like Raffy will be back in Augusta where he will still be on the young side for the league. Way too early to give up on RafRod!
PS: He missed some time here and there during the season, so I'm guessing he battled some nagging injuries.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Didn't Francisco Peguero repeat the Sally? He is so young and I am not too worried about RafRod yet.
ReplyDeleteRafRod was 4 years younger than the pitchers there, so I have no problem with him repeating. I think he did OK given his disadvantage in age and experience over him. The good thing was that he was not totally schooled by the pitchers there, his contact rate was 81% there, not good, but not bad considering the difference in experience, age, and development. The only problem is that the ball didn't do much when he put it into play, that will need to improve greatly in 2012 for him to keep his prospect status alive, I think, though I would probably give him another 6 seasons before I call that dead.
ReplyDeleteSay, DrB, I saw someone somewhere arguing that the small samples of spring training should not count at all in determining who should make the 25 man roster. I say sure, if all they are doing is trying to judge the players by the stats they compile, but isn't this where the scouts value comes in and try to help the team judge who to start and who not to?
More generally I am puzzled by many bloggers' assumption--and I don't mean on this site--that the on-field performance that they can see is also all that managerial staff, coaches, and scouts can see. Such bloggers enjoy deriding decisions that they assume emerge simply from small samples of on-field play in spring training or the regular season. For them, apparently, no information exists unless it's accessible to them. Like OGC, I assume something quite different: that such publicly visible information (stats) is amalgamated with what happens when skilled eyes watch players in batting practice, assess development in terms of previous strengths and weaknesses, and figure players' likely roles on the team.
ReplyDeleteOGC and Campanari,
ReplyDeleteI tend to lean toward the notion that most roster decisions should be made long before spring training starts, and I think that is usually how it turns out. I do know the attitude of some bloggers you are referring to and I do think it goes to an extreme. I think there is value in having 1, 2 or 3 spots open for competition in spring training. I also agree that the coaching staff/scouts probably see things that the fans/bloggers don't see and don't show up in the stats.
I think all of us bloggers have a tendency to take an idea with some truth and carry it to an extreme. It's something we have to guard against. There has to be a balance between taking a strong position and being an extremist and sometimes it's a fine line.
So how did you feel about the Schierholtz vs. Bowker competition previously in spring training? I was fine with that being settled in spring.
DeleteAnd that harks to this spring's competition, essentially Schierholtz vs. Belt for a starting position. I'm OK with that too. I assume the staff wants to see something different in how Belt handles himself and whether that translate to how he approaches each AB. I also assume they don't want to see a meltdown on Nate's part.
he's off the steroids
ReplyDelete