Ian Gardeck, RHP. DOB: 11/21/1990. 6'2", 215 lbs. B-R, T-R.
Short Season: 2-2, 4.20, 30 IP, 24 BB, 45 K's, GO/AO= 1.56, BAA= .196.
Ian Gardeck was drafted by the Giants in the 16'th round of the 2012 draft for his arm, pure and simple. His BA pre-draft scouting report says he was highly touted coming out of JUCO ball. He was drafted in the 8'th round, and was projected to be Alabama's top prospect. He sported a fastball that reached 98 MPH and a "plus-plus slider." He proceeded to fall flat on his face at Alabama and pitched just 12 innings with 12 BB and 16 K's.
The Giants showed some faith in him by assigning him to Salem-Keizer instead of Arizona. While he still had control issues, he pitched pretty well. I believe he profiles strictly as a reliever. If he can harness his stuff, he could turn into a fast mover.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
He sounds like he could be a really interesting prospect next year. It will be curious to see if they start him in a rotation to get his arm slot more consistent and try and work on his command.
ReplyDeleteMy fear with him, as with most power arms that profile as relievers, is that he will be fast tracked as a closer. I think this would be awful for him as a prospect, considering how much work he needs on his command. I would like to see him getting some innings in as a starter at Augusta to try and work out his issues, and then making him a reliever later in his minor league career. Maybe start half of the season, then move to SJ and Richmond later as a reliver
I tend to agree that the closer track is not an ideal way to develop future closers, but we also have to recognize that there are only so many starting rotation slots available, even in the minors.
DeleteYeah that makes sense. I'll be interested to see who's in the Augusta rotation next season
DeleteWell, Mizenko got almost all the save opps with SK, Gardeck did not have one save, so that suggests that closer track is not in his immediate future.
DeleteI recall a lot of talk about SJ's great rotation, but don't recall who are the potential candidates for Augusta, does anyone have an idea who'll be there?
I think Mizenko is a pretty interesting sleeper as well OGC.
DeleteI may have overlooked Mizenko. I might take another look at him and think about adding him to my HM list.
DeleteMaybe Gardeck gets the "Wild Thing" label because he might need to wear glasses. (half serious). Or maybe he gets the "Wipe Out" nickname because of his wipeout slider. First pick of the third day, they must have had a big discussion on how to go to start it off!
ReplyDeleteFangraphs has an interesting piece on the Cards, how they have some older prospects who are now hitting the majors. Food for thought in our youth obsessed prospectin' times. BA also brought out the Cards top ten. Can't wait to see what they have to say about the Giants, but we'll have to wait for the bitter end, we're last.
I wrote up a Draft preview on MCC if you want to check it, scoped some interesting corner guys I like for 2013.
I don't go over to MCC much anymore, but I'll definitely check out your draft preview.
DeleteBTW, BLF's latest mock draft has the Giants taking HS LHP Jonah Wesley which would be OK with me.
DeleteI like Wesley a lot. Profiled him in my Lefties post. And they had Kaminsky going next! And this Andy McGuire character after that!
DeleteYep, I have to say MCC is populated by far too many debbie downers. Re-evaluating that 2012 draft, there really are some unrealistic expectations placed on the Giants.
In this corner bat profile, I was searching for the exact quote from Sabean about developing our own power hitters because of FA/PacBell what not. I can't find it, but it did lead me to Schulman's blog. Hank might troll a bit on twitter for the saber crowd, but he is a very reasonable and connected guy. It's interesting to read back to the 2008-9 stories. One that stood out to me is during the Renteria signing, the Giants were upset that Hank used outside scouts opinions instead of asking their internal guys. They referred him to Jeremy Shelley, who does, gasp, statistical presentations for ownership/management and even... the press! Right there, 2009. This is roundly ignored, as are the efforts of Yeshayah Goldfarb. Instead, huge amounts of vitriol are dumped at Sabean's doorstep. Now I love a Razr joke as much as the next fella, and the picture of Sabean in front of his laptop never fails to make me laugh. But come on, the Giants have some cutting edge stuff going on, they just don't want to share that info. Which is smart. Hella smart. The bash the Giants crowd has been proven completely wrong. I don't think they're very happy about that.
Anyway, Hank has a couple pleas for some sanity sprinkled in his archives. Before I started down the blog/comment board path, I only glanced at it. The level of anger and criticism is completely over the top. I thought I was cutting edge being upset about Michael Tucker's punt picks and wanting Vlad... Oh dear, I'm a complete amateur on the lunatic fringe front.
OK, I always wondered if it was me or what. Yeah, an ocean of debbie downers, remember, Grant credits EEEEEEEEE as his spiritual grandfather, or something like that, and that guy was a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE debbie downer at the old Usenet chat board for the Giants. The only difference I can tell between the Usenet and MCC is that instead of a regular crowd of commenters, MCC is scaled up to a much larger volume, like from local to, not state, but national levels.
DeleteYeah, that's why your rants haven't bothered me that much about old Tuck, for you, my dear fellow, are a much more reasonable person.
Sabean has said that many times. Standard scripts are: power era ending soon, so defense and speed are keys; pitching, pitching, pitching; bullpen; develop own power since FA hates the Bell; keeping the kimono closed; kicking the tires.
Yeah, I like Hank. He or somebody using his name would comment on Usenet, never could really tell, but seemed to pass good info regularly, though might be just repeating what Hank said before. I missed that about Hank and the Giants and the scouts, thanks for pointing out.
Yeah, and Bowtie also made that very clear early on in his short tenure, talking up that the Giants have the cutting edge stuff, just that it isn't talked about much. But there are articles about the new FieldFX technology and how the Giants are one of the first to get it because of their work on defense and interest in the system, don't know what more people want from their team.
No, the Bash the Giants/Sabean crowd is not happy about that. I've noted Grant's recent "More on Sabean" post noting his play on words with the title and how he still likes that. He was also not very flattering in the BP article about the Giants, being very grudgingly positive but still giving a very negative tone. The more he keeps that up, the more that title applies to his work there.
If he doesn't start acknowledging things are better at the Giants, his corporate overlords will start thinking of finding a new leader of the pack, which I've noted before could be sooner than later, as Rob Neyer is the face of Baseball Nation, and the Giants are just making a mockery of the negatiive stuff that is being posted at MCC. They are not going to take looking like fools or totally oblivious for very long. That's the way the business world works.
Speaking of the business world, yes, that is exactly that, it is very smart to keep your secret sauce behind the kimono, as Sabean loves to say. That's why there are patents and patent wars in tech and most other businesses. But in baseball, there is nothing patentable. Once an idea gets out there - like the whole Moneyball OBP thing - the competition catches up.
DeletePart of me has wondered if I should lay off writing about the Giants, for if I'm right about this, other teams could possibly run across my blog and try to follow the same strategy. But I'm not writing genius stuff. The vast majority of what I have put together, I've found from other places, only my draft study is solely my content, and while most people still refers to BP's study (sadly lacking from my view, though some good points), I've seen some people look at it from my angle.
And it only makes sense. The BP analysis mostly treated picks like they are hits and looked only at the batting average. What I tried to do is identify the homeruns versus the singles, as that is what is most important in drafting, singles are nice, but prospect hounds love the longball. And really, teams are built around the stars, the good players, not the useful players who are average and nice, but really more complementary players, not players who will lead you to the promise land. What is more important, knowing that the 5th pick overall averages 10.9 WAR, or knowing that of the 48 players, 84% of that WAR came from only 7 of those 48 players (all 7 had WAR of 25.6 and higher). And that only 9 of those 48 players have more than 10.9 WAR in their careers? (Though those additional two, Posey and Weiters, most likely will join the 7 and be much higher) Those are slim odds. And that's the for 5th pick overall!
Yeah, I've seen Hank's pleas for sanity. On. deaf. ears. The boards for all the Giants beat-writers (Chron, Merc, MLB) are filled with over the top zaniness. That's why I don't bother much to read through them or to comment there. Even worse for my blood pressure than reading MCC, there were at least some positive people there, though so few that I regularly got pleas for me to comment and contribute something positive when I was a regular. I have no problems with complaining, there are legit things to complain about, but you have to have balance or they are just a crowd with pitchforks storming the castle. And maybe that is why such images and archtypes survive in the movies and books, maybe that is just human nature to have mass hysteria like that.
It makes me sad that there are Giants fans who have not enjoyed the past four seasons the way they could have had they had a more positive attitude about it, but that's water under the bridge now, much under. And eventually, they will be right again (hey, it took like 18 years, but the Braves finally had another losing season!), but hopefully Sabean can keep the line moving, finding the players (and signing the players) who can keep the Giants growing dynasty to last deeper into the 2010's.
I think he can, but the key is signing the key players who can enable that. We got Cain and Bumgarner done. Now we need Sandoval and Posey done before the season starter, then maybe Lincecum and Pence sometime in 2013. I also would not mind a long-term deal with Belt if he's willing to sign one, not a big money deal, but you stretch it out, like we did with Sandoval and Bumgarner, it will be a lot to him while economical for the Giants. And if we can add a year to Vogelsong's contract, I would not mind that either, somewhere in the $7-9M range would be cool.
Supporting players can come from a variety of sources. As we discussed at length, I thought the Giants needed to get creative winter 2011 and make trades, not go sign the Coco Crisps or David Dejesus' of the world. And they did, they packaged up spare parts and got athletic OFs. I've long been an advocate of Marco Scutaro as a solid glue player. Well, that turned out way more spectacular than expected.
DeleteI think what a lot of fans don't realize is that once a core is built, Sabean is one of the best in the game at the fill-in. The 97-02 teams were constantly supplemented with that established vet, in extremely lopsided trades. The Giants have a demonstrated 4 year track record with the reclamation project, its not just a fluke.
But your base, your backbone, has to come from the core built on first round draft picks. And that's the most important part. Hitting on Cain/Timmy/MadBum/Posey, holding them against all poachers, and then supplementing.
I see a very smart, cagey organization that is comfortable doing something completely different than the rest of MLB. I think its wise they don't reveal much about it. They seem to only react when something really grates - the Beltran/Ross saying they didn't have any contact, or this Renteria thing. One thing I've been very impressed with is their contract discipline, after the Benitez/Alfonso disasters and the Rowand/Zito overspends, they tightened up huge on the years offered, because they were short timing it waiting for their farm talent to arrive. And look at the confidence they've placed in their drafting: Belt, Crawford, Sanchez. Is it always smooth and pretty? Nope, sure its not. Bochy and Sabean are prove-out guys. But what twitterers don't realize is that games and the chance to win are a manager's most precious commodity.
Home sick today with sick kids. Could be miserable, but MLB network is airing the 2012 World Series Film. Sweet.
OGC, why would you stop writing about the G's?
DeleteIf the forces-that-be (friend and foe) are picking info off from you, they'd do well to hire you.
It's their job to know more and ferret out the next undervalued moneyball assessment. I enjoy your analysis. Team-focused quality is tough to find on the interwebs. (God bless FanGraphs and all of that, but they go a little too saber for my abilities)
Shank, thanks for the 2012 WS film update. Going to DVR the Saturday rerun.
Kelly - lots of great moments, I think my favorite is the rally throw to gun Fielder at the plate. That was just straight up redemption for Posey's injury. The other favorite is Barry's Game 5 in St. Louis. Straight up redemption as well.
DeleteI am not familiar with MCC, but if it makes anyone unhappy, he/she should leave the place and join us here.
DeleteThose who enjoy MCC, they can visit here. Those who don't like its negativity, they should leave it there. I mean, leave it (the negativity) there, not just leave it (the site)...what's the point of bringing it here by mentioning too often or at length about it (the site) or its negativity.
I would also say what matters is your own connection to the team. You have no control over what your fellow fans do or say, or how they feel. It's not a profitable path to pursue. It's enough to know fans, being humans, are all different and a happy person makes allowance for that.
Thank you.
What annoys me most about MCC isn't negativity per se, BLSL, but arrogance; and the negativity then emerges from the arrogance, for if one trusts in one's own (borrowed) knowledge of some SABR stats and maxims, one can show it off by pitting it against the people actually responsible for the team, and one can vent one's frustration that one is impotent to change the team's path, although one is so supremely clever that one knows exactly what that path should be. To people who have professions or training which actually involves knowing something--DrB's medical training or OGC's business training, for example--the display of disdainful pseudo-knowledge may be irritating, BLSL. If it is among the dunces who write on the boards for the Giants' beat-writers, as OGC says, however, it's easier to ignore than when among the MCC bloggers, precisely because MCC is perhaps the most informative site for Giants' fans, because of its diversity of opinions and its standards of evidence for factually based arguments. I visit this site more than I visit MCC, but I don't know of other sites that change daily and that are so valuable (amid loads and loads of dross). I'm quite surprised, BLSL, that as a Giant fan and a commenter on this site, that you aren't familiar with it. Like this site, it can alter "your own connection to the team"--hence the frustration when instead of doing what it can do and could do, it so often alters one's own connection with one's fellow fans, and not for the better.
DeleteI have visited MCC a few times a few years ago, but I have not been there since, thus the unfamiliarity. I stopped because it took forever to load a thread. I suppose it's understandable to get frustrated if one has given one own's time and energy, as I had responded (and still do) that way, but I chose avoiding engaging myself as a fan that way, as much as possible. If you're surprised that I am not familiar with MCC, maybe others are surprised by that too. So, I should say that at this time of my life, that's all I can do, which is to come to this site, comment here, and read maybe only sfgate and csnbayarea and not much else. There are many levels to enjoy the game and the team. Being more knowledgeable than others is not that critical for me...most of time, maybe a little, but not that much. If, sometimes, I see things a little differently, I might say something. But if people disagree, well, that's fine by me. Once in a while, I might dwell on an issue a little too long, or a little too passionately, but that's something I am working on to improve.
DeletePeople are all different, so nothing really surprises me, such as when a group of people spend a certain amount of time together, it can be taxing. If you choose to confront it there, it's fair. People may have a chance to respond. If you elect to leave that place, why not leave 'it' all there?
Well Campanari, I have to say one of the worst conceits on the interwebz is that the Giants don't understand hitting, or that they ruin their own prospects. This has been rampant the last few years. I don't recall any big stinks from 1997-2004, but that Vlad/Fringe thing did happen to coincide with blogs, moneyball and a decline phase for Los Gigantes.
DeleteI also have to say that the standards of evidence for factually based arguments... That just isn't around much because there just aren't many getting presented. The place is a ghost town, except for the main page discussion of the day. It reminds me of South Park, the Goth kids who sit around. Really, it does.
There are about 20 fun loving posters I enjoy there. But I'm getting tired of the constant negativity in the middle of this golden period for the franchise. The simple fact is, the Giants braintrust proved out, as did Big Head Bochy. Brandon Belt is their triumph, not some whiny bloggers and twitterers. The bullpen is their triumph. The kick ass trades are their triumph. And while the ownership group does have its issues, the management group really seems to go out of their way to respect players. Hopefully Baer keeps the LP in order and the money flows all over the organization. And that is something that doesn't get acknowledged at MCC. Its all about the accidental DFA of Sergio Romo, and running down the marginal lists of blunders. Well, how many years ago was that now? How long ago did Rowand sign that contract? That they won 2 championships with? The 2nd chances the Giants have given players, and the response... This is a fun team to root for. And that's what we're doing, we're rooting for them. The wannabe GMs and the accountant eyeshades... Bleh.
I brought it up, I apologize. I guess I'll have to go get my own damn blog. I like interaction and discussion though. And OGC has some gripes that he's still dealing with. So there's that as well. I respect your saying leave "it" there BLSL, and that is a good point. But its also a forum that DrB and OGC were a part of, and Campanari and I post on from time to time. So its a mixed bag. Anyways, good time to be a Giants fan, and its gonna be hard for all these relievers to compete with one another. So I guess its sort of a good time to be a Giants reliever, but its also a hard time to be a reliever, cuz cracking the 25 is tough, rough bidness.
Well, it's not just MCC and the Giants. Did anyone else catch the meltdown on Fangraphs over Dave Cameron's article on John Jaso and the 3 way trade the Mariners made with Oakland and Washington? OMG! Now THAT was some serious bridge jumping! And over something pretty trivial, if you ask me. Cameron and Jeff Sullivan, who also write over on Fangraphs, run USS Mariner and Lookout Landing(I think that's the name) which are also on SBNation. I think most of the SBNation blogs are fairly negative and snarky about their teams except Athletics Nation. They're too busy dumping on the Giants. LOL!
DeleteWell, you want some more laughs, go read my post, and the comment section. I'll go glance at the freakout at fangraphs, but to be honest, Dave Cameron's insight is pretty lacking these days, as its been for a while.
DeleteWorst still is the MLB Giants Board. Total joke of a board. Very little baseball content and maybe 3 or 4 posters who know anything about the game. Terrible. Thank you again Dr B for this site!
DeleteShankbone, I understand better now.
DeleteLet me just say Dr. B's site is great and is great on its own without having to reference others (hopefully not too often, but we are not perfect and the need to vent will come from time to time).
Kel, let me clarify: I would have stopped writing about their strategy for being better than other teams, their competitive advantage. Just try to stop me writing about the Giants! :^) But seriously, my stance has been that I write on things I don't see elsewhere that is something interesting to me, a question to answer, and when I find a blog like that, I would stop. But I don't think there will ever be a blog like that, I think I'll always have something that is not being covered by others.
DeleteBLSL, understand your point, but my worry (and perhaps I'm overly worried) has always been that the Giants might take MCC to heart in some way and do something based on what is said there. So I feel the need to remind people that there is a lot of biased distorted views there, and just plain wrong. I mean, really, he posts that Sabean was stupid to draft Posey over Smoak, at the time of the draft, and then recently he had the gall to joke about the word play of "More on Sabean"? The moron is the ones who wanted Smoak over Posey, that was self-evident to me then (I was crossing all my extremities tightly as each team ahead of us failed to draft Posey) as it should be to anybody with a brain today.
I have not read the stuff on Fangraphs about the Jaso three-way, but I did read the one on Beyond the Box Score, and that author made the good point about what the A's gave up to get Jaso. Cole is a really good pitching prospect, really good, top of the rotation good, and the only way Jaso makes up for that is to hit like he did in 2012, but he had a fluke year hitting at home in 2012 vs. his career, and he's also moving to a pitcher's park in Oakland, so I think his career numbers are more realistic than 2012's marvelous year. I'm thinking that this trade will be up there with Beane's trade for Holliday (and all the subsequent trade downs after that). What do you all think?
I'm really seriously wondering about Beane's ability to GM (and to evaluate and value talent) with each bad trade he makes. Seems more like he trades to make trades, like throwing jello at the wall and see what sticks. A's fans might be in for a fall in 2013, they were 7 games above .500 in 1-run games, 2 games over Pythagorean, and assuming he regresses to the mean, that should drop them to 90 wins: if they were .500 in 1-run games, they would have been 90-72 instead (assuming they end up 3-4 in those 7 games)
OGC - Beane has a compulsion to mess, but in this case I think he is going for winning this coming year, and punting the future development. Its funny the Nats get their guy back. Also, the A's have some nice pitching, I'm sure Billie rolled his eyes as they talked about the players girl friends, but they did some good work. He has collected quite a lot of CFs (a trend that is definitely picking up steam in MLB) and needs to fill lineup holes. He did good last year, but his frenetic level of activity is scary. Same with Towers for that matter. I think the Mariners fans (and their vocal bloggers) are realizing that Jack Z might not be the answer. But a platoon catcher who had a good year isn't the end of the world for sure. I guess his vaunted UZR defense is going the way of the dodo in pursuit of offense.
DeleteOn the MCC front, well, here it is: I'm giving it up. Enough with the mock apologies which was actually a greatest hits of Sabean's PR blunders. Enough with a mea culpa that includes, of course, the Bloomquist non-signing. And enough with SBNation and the corporate overlords. I gave it a shot, trying to contribute something positive. I got burned out with people taking what I'm saying, chipping out a small piece unrelated to the main point, and rolling that into a blockquote. Even in the prospect threads, I have folks running me down, because I'm mainly positive about the Gigantes. Yes, a well-known curmudgeon set me over the edge, but it was coming for a while. The Giants are contending for a repeat title, with a very fun and good squad. I'm not wasting any more of my time defending them or being surrounded by a bunch of weary cynics who seem to be rooting for the Giants to fail so they can be right about Sabean finally. Done.
Also, one thing you alluded to, the spirit of blogging - linking to other blogs - that has been completely eliminated at sbnation. Well, here it is: MCC is a ghostland. There is no analysis. Its Grant and his (very poor writing) sidekick, taking potshots at management as they have for years. Well, they've run out of material. I'm dead serious about those inane and mind numbing front page conversations. Its the Goth kids in South Park. Too cool for school, completely vapid and empty. I'll miss the 20 or so posters I look for, but I'm glad to be done. No more MCC conversation from me, here or elsewhere. Not really interested in Minorleagueball that much either, although that mock draft was fun last year. We'll see about that.
one last thing: the curmudgeon took a shot at DrB in my last fanpost there, I'll post it for the hell of it: Do you remember Dr.B's reaction the first time he saw Pablito in person? He was apoplectic. I’m sure it did much more damage than throwing himself down the stairs.
My reply: Maybe DrB, upon seeing not only MadBum’s success in the minors as well as Pablo’s explosion on the scene, decided the Giants were going to be OK. And that its OK to be wrong about an opinion. Because the Giants were onto something, and its blossomed into true greatness. I find this, like a lot of your comments, extremely petty and negative. Its part of the reason I’m packing bags from this joint.
And with that, enough about other blogs. I'm going to spring training (tickets in hand, hotel and car booked, friends ready to rock). After that I'll kick it into gear and get my blog going. As DrB said one time, just want a place to write what I want to write. I don't feel like contributing to that community anymore. So I'm done.
I would not describe my reaction to seeing Pablo(I think it was actually a picture rather than in person) as being "apoplectic". Shocked, yes, apoplectic, no. I did write some comments that I doubted he would make it as a prospect unless he could control his weight better and that has proven to be true to some extent. I was pretty upset that the Giants drafted MadBum rather than a hitter in that draft, but have admitted I was wrong about that many times over. In fact, it was in the process of admitting I was wrong about MadBum that I realized that Sabean was, in fact, doing a pretty darn good job of GM'ing and the future for the Giants was a lot brighter than most people were giving it credit for. So, Shankbone, your response to Curmudgeon was very close to how I would have described it.
DeleteAbout Jaso/Beane, I understand the winning now argument but the BtB post noted that the A's have already traded for a catcher, so either they determined that they made a mistake with the first trade and needed Jaso or made a mistake getting Jaso, for he is both a platoon hitter and likely to regress from 2012's lofty heights. Either way, a mistake was a made.
DeleteAnd on the 1-run thing, I would like someone's opinion of which way to go, I go both ways and now I'm not sure which to go. The A's were 94-68 and 7 games above .500 in 1-run games. Above, I took the 7 games and made them 3-4, resulting in a 90-72 season. I justified making the last game a loss because we are trying to see how 2013 looks like, so I swung the pendulum in the other direction. The old way I did it, I just took the 7 wins away, forcing it to .500, leaving the A's, in this case, 87-68 or .561 winning percentage or 91-71 in a 162 game season. Which way makes more sense?
As DrB has been noting, prospects down this low has a lot of warts. Ian's is his control.
ReplyDeleteThere are some very good points though. While his ERA is 4.18, his FIP is 2.41 and SIERA is 3.34. League is 3.80 ERA, so he is not very far from average, plus, as a reliever, subject to a lot more issues regarding his ERA than starters do, due to low sampling plus high reliance on the pitchers behind them. His FIP and SIERA suggests that he had a lot of bad luck with regards to the relievers behind him.
Very high GB% and low LD%, though low sampling due to being reliever. Huge split, H vs R, 3.45 ERA at home, 5.11 ERA on road. But FIP is 2.24 H, 2.63 R, both great; SIERA 3.17 H, 3.50 R, still good. While very high walk rate and something to watch, that's usually OK if the pitcher can keep his K/BB at 2.0 and above. He's not quite there but close enough for me at 1.88.
Overall, great in most phases of pitching, just was bad at keeping down the walks. Will be a guy to watch for breakout in 2013 I think, and he should be much higher in rank in 2013 if he can keep a modicum of control on his walks, while continuing all the other good stuff he's doing. Very encouraged that his K-rate is so very high, that's a great sign that hitters can't figure out his pitches, so he just needs to trust his stuff, give up some velocity to get more control.
One reason Johnny Sanchez could exist on the edges of effectiveness is he didn't give up a lot of hits to go with all the walks. Dialing it down, through age taking its toll, or trying to lessen the BBs ultimately made him pretty hittable. Its a fine line. I think the Gints will need to modify Gardeck's mechanics some, but he has a lot of potential.
DeleteA huge part of the low H/9 is that when your K/9 is so high, as long as your BABIP is normal, the H/9 is lowered since there are less BIP. I had calculated before that his K/9 was so high that he roughly removed one hit from his results line while adding a walk, and that is a tradeoff anyone would take.
DeleteAnd that's basically the same with Ian too, high K/9, low H/9, though I would note that his BABIP was much higher than .300, but I'm not sure what the NW BABIP average is. The league looks more like a hitters league, so that could be more a league affect than his talent.
But yeah, a fine line. Cain was able to manage that fine, but he seems to be one of a kind, eh? :^) Yes, I totally agree, a lot of potential, his stat line is pretty good, he just needs to really work on the walks.
Speaking of Dirty, has he landed yet? Boras must have having a hell of a time making a marketing binder for him. Good for him, make him earn his money for once.
DeleteNow he has the injury risk on his jacket as well. Sanchez never did take conditioning seriously at all. I thought that was a huge difference between him and Cabrera last year, realizing that he might fail out of MLB didn't cross Johnny's mind. Melky... he took a different tact!
DeleteOT, but while looking for Ian's stats, I ran across a hot HS prospect name from the past, Matt Graham. Now 22, he pitched in SK but only had 21 K's in 27.2 IP while also walking 21. So his 2.28 ERA is very deceiving.
ReplyDeleteGetting HS draftees is exciting but this is the downside that people forget about while beating the drum for high school prospects. I remember all the excitement over getting him to sign, he was coming in on high hopes, from what I recall. But he has been unable to either control his pitches or to fool the hitters enough to strike them out a lot either, a deadly combination for any pitcher.
I would note that he fits in with BP's research that found that on draft day, the older prospects at the same level tend to be overrated, and while high schooler, he was already 19 YO. I would also note that this factor has not seemed to matter to Wheeler, who has continued to do well.
I actually recently did a post on my website about this. It's an interesting subject, and I would say the Giants have been very good at picking high school prospects with great potential and just the right amount of risk.
DeleteGints in "advanced negotiations" with Brandon Lyon. Well alright. I've always liked Lyon, but he is rough around the edges. Interesting look. I think he'd provide good coverage and fit in well.
ReplyDeleteOne of the complications of signing Lyon is not just Wilson, but that we have all these relievers in camp competing for a spot, but Lyon would take the last spot, unless there is a trade: Romo, Affeldt, Lopez, Casilla, Kontos, Mijares, Lyon gives us seven guys who look like sure things. This would mean that, if they are actually competing, then it is Kontos spot that is up for grabs, as everyone else has big contracts. Which does not seem right to me, he did pretty well for us last season, though he could have been better, perhaps that is it. The only other possibility I can think of is if Lopez is traded, or if the Giants trade someone at the end of spring training.
DeleteTalking to his family they have not assigned him for the 2013 season as of yet.
ReplyDeleteIan Gardeck AKA EEEEEEEEEEEE! will bring morality and the importance of
ReplyDeleteTEeeeeeeeeeeeAM work to any number of young men with talent. Giving any talented young man the opportunity to try out is a real start on tomorrow. Some make it; some let it make them. Ian will be better off for the opportunity and baseball will be a bit better somewhere because the impact Ian had on his teammates. I expect Ian to make his mark; hopefully in an upcoming world series game. I wish we could become the Tim Tebow of baseball.
UM