The Slav's Baseball Blog - BASEBALL 24-7-365
The Slav's Blog about anything relating to the great game of baseball
- and other less important issues from outside the diamond.
The best baseball blog that you have never heard of.
The problem the Giants are knee-deep in right now is a function of the organizations inability to to roll up prospects, mostly everyday players. They have had some success with pitchers lately, notably Cain, Lincecum and Sanchez, but the addition of Brian Wilson as a closer is a huge plus.
Most teams have solid 3-4-5 guys, we really have nobody who fits securely in those slots. Rowand is a top of the order hitter, Molina is ideally a 6-7 guy. Randy Winn is a top of the order guy. All three are being asked to do too much on the offensive side.
The only problem here is, it's starting to feel like 1974-78 era mediocrity, with pitchers being the focus and the team transitioning from Bobby Bonds to Dave Kingman prior to settling down with the Clark boys as anchors of solid batting orders. This team is so far away from being a good offensive unit, it's not funny.
The 1974 team had one of my personal favorites, John D'Acquisto flash like a meteor, with a 12-14 record. Ed Halicki debuted at 1-8. Jim Barr was the staff ace, by the way at 13-9. Mike Caldwell from the Brewers was the fourth starter.
The next year, 1975, the team added John "The Count Montefusco (15-9) and Pete Falcone (12-11) as Halicki improved to 9-13, while D'Acquisto fell to 2-4. Falcone was later trade to the Cardinals for 3B Ken Reitz. Jim Barr finished 13-14.
In 1976, Barr was 15-12, Montefusco 16-14, Halicki 12-14 but D'Acquisto again stumbled at 3-8. The aces but still not enough.
The 1977 team added Bob Knepper debuting at 11-9, Barr finished 12-16, Halicki 16-12 and Montefusco dipped to 7-12. Mediocre. Mediocre. Mediocre.
The Giants finally found an ace across the bay in Vida Blue. I wish Zito could at least give them the cache Blue brought to that team and he had more mileage on him than Zito.
The problem for this era has been the inability to capitalize on having Bonds as the anchor, the loss of premium picks via the signing of free-agent to surround Bonds, the inability of the organization to develop hitters over the last ten years. Aurilia and Pedro Feliz are the only two the organization has developed on their own.
If you look at the drafts by years, beginning in 2003, you can see why.
In 2003, RHP David Aardsma was the first round pick out of Rice. HS pitcher Craig Whitaker from texas gave them nothing. The 2nd round netted Nate Schierholz from CA JUCO system, they need to see him in the bigs and begin to close the books on 2003. Olympian (Canada) Brooks McNiven was a fourth rounder but he's pretty far down the prospect list. The fifth rounder was wasted on Mike Wagner out of U. of Washington. Later picks netted Pat Misch (7th) Brian Wilson (24th) and not much else. If the later rounds didn't bail them out, this years draft is a garbage can.
In 2004, Giants had no 1st rounder, wasted on one of the Geritol gang. Eddy Martinez-Esteve OF from Florida State is till around, one of those 25 year old AA guys. OF John Bowker was the 3rd rounder from Long Beach State. After that, not much. Kevin Frandsen 2B (12th round), Eugene Espineli LHP from TCU (14th round) Johnathan Sanchez was a surprise in the 27th round out of Ohio Dominican College. Again a late rounder keeps this from being a total toilet bowl of a draft.
In 2005, NO PICKS IN THE FIRST THREE ROUNDS. A ballsy strategy, but maybe not so much considering the prior couple of years outcomes. The fourth round yields OF Ben Copeland from Pitt, a 25 year old stuck in AA Connecticut. Where have I heard that before? The 5th round brings RHP Daniel Griffin from Niagara, a 6-7 closer candidate, who has not really advanced rapidly so far. The later rounds yield Nick Pereira RHP from U. of San Francisco (10th round) Alex Hinshaw LHP from San Diego State (15th round) Sergio ROmo RHP from Mesa College (28th round) and Antoan Richardson OF from Vanderbilt (35th round) another 25 year old AA player. We do have plenty of those.
These three lost years have helped greatly to put the Giants in the woeful position they are in today. Later on we'll take a look at the next three years drafts, which are still in limbo. They could make the future or they could break the future of the franchise.
He plays for the the Florida State Seminoles.
And they're going to OMAHA.
That's like the World Series for college players, dude.
So he's playing in the College World Series.
And Buster's not his for-real name, it's like a nickname, but it's kind of cool.
And he's like 6-2, 200 lbs, OMG. 6-2.....
And he plays all nine positions on the field.
Which, like, pisses off Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon.
Which, incidentally, is another reason to like him, OMG.
SEE PTI RANT - I USED TO LIKE THIS SHOW - BUT NOT ANYMORE
These guys are just jealous because they can't play nine positions
like Buster Posey can
And they're not 6-2 and 200 lbs.
like Buster Posey is
And they're not in the College World Series.
like Buster Posey is....
So, I think I (heart) Buster Posey, already, and technically, he's not even a Giant.
OMG, do you think he likes us???
I hope so.
I hope we sign him.
I heard he wants $12 million dollars, just to sign.
OMG, I think we should give him like, $12 hundred million dollars.
I hear that, he was going to be the very first pick, by the Devil Rays, but they didn't have $12 million dollars, do they tried to find someone who would work cheaper.
WAY TO GO DEVIL RAYS!!!!
THEY'RE SO STUPID!!!!
It's weird, when I see FSU play now and Posey comes to bat, it's like this song becomes the soundtrack in my head:
I hope that doesn't make me GAY!!
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
I mean, we are talking about Buster Posey, right?
I think my wife is getting angry and jealous already.
Or maybe that "Why don't you just change your name to Mrs. Buster Posey?" crack was meant to be a joke.
Or maybe I am mentioning his name a bit too much.
OMG, I wasn't always this mental, but being a Giant fan lately is killing me.
It used to be so easy. I mean we always had a superstar player to hold onto. So even though we weren't winning World Series--which is the whole point of playing, I'm told--we could always point to that one guy and say "yeah, but we have (fill in the blank)". And now we don't have that guy anymore. Let's review:
GIANTS HISTORY OF STARDOM IN MY SPORTS FANATIC LIFETIME:
1965-71 Willie Mays
1972-74 Bobby Bonds
1975-76 Bobby Murcer (traded for Bonds-WTF were they thinking-drinking?)
1977-84 Jack Clark
1985 Jeffrey Leonard (One Flap Down)
1986-93 Will "The Thrill" Clark
1993-07 Barry Bonds
2008 NOTHING, NADA, BUPKUS
If you look at it, this is only the third year in the last FORTY TWO or FORTY THREE YEARS I've been a fan, that we didn't have a bona-fide, every-day player as a hitting star.
OK, so maybe I'm on the rebound as a fan. Feeling like a middle-aged, newly-minted divorcee, thrust back into the dating pool, after the Bonds years. Maybe I don't know how to act anymore, or what to look for. Am I being to easy, or should I play hard to get?
I don't know any of THE RULES anymore. This sucks, life is SO HARD.
Oh, don't get me wrong, Aaron Rowand is so cute and bless his heart, he'd run through a wall for you. He's going to make some fan REALLY, REALLY happy someday. But he doesn't scare anybody with his bat. And neither does Bengie Molina. And I need a super-star who carries a big bat....wait a minute, let me re-phrase that....Aw hell, you know what I mean.
You know, from 1965 to 1971, we had Willie Mays. As a fan, how would you like to be walking down the street with that on your arm, huh? The ultimate shut-up to the other teams front-running fans. Those were great years. We were all so happy.
Then Willie left, he had to go to New York. He didn't really want to go and we didn't want to let him go either, but Horace Stoneham was drunk one night or had some financial problems or something and like a really evil step-dad, he sold Willie to the Mets....3,000 miles away....so we couldn't see him anymore. And all we got was some cash and Charlie Williams, a two-bit pitcher in return. CHARLIE WILLIAMS!!! I can't be seen with a Charlie Williams. And the cash part just made being a Giant fan feel dirty or something. Selling our best players for money to the rich teams, like we were a bunch of two-bit whores.
But we did have Bobby Bonds. The next Willie Mays, we were told. And boy did he look it...at first. I mean he could run and throw and hit and field pretty much like Willie.
And did you see the body on that guy?
OMG, dude was chiseled.
And this was before baseball dudes were supposed to be chiseled.
But you always got the feeling something was wrong. Maybe we were in denial and somewhat on the rebound then as well... still not quite over Willie....so we didn't quite see the signs....or we ignored them in the name of convenience....Like when you were dating that hot chick and you kinda sensed she was psycho....but the SEX was wild so you ignored the fact that you just might wake up some morning with a screwdriver driven into your neck or a hatchet embedded in your skull.
So eventually, Bobby had to go too....to another team, the Yankees....for Bobby Murcer.....Tell me that wasn't humiliating? But Bobby was never the same as when he was with us. Which is a form of redemption, but it still was painful to see him struggle.
And all we got back was Bobby Murcer. Bobby Freaking Murcer. Don't get me wrong, great guy and OMG he tried so hard to please, but he brought his over-inflated 30 HR per year stats, hitting half the time into the short porch in RF that was Yankee Stadium, into real-man sized ballparks and the guy couldn't break 10-15 homers per season. Qu'elle disappointment!!!!!
Life was messed up then, we were kind of confused. The only thing we had to hold onto was the pitching staff. We had Montefusco and D'Acquisto and Halicki. But damn it boys, these guys were pitchers.
Who's the guy we're going to root for every day?
Where was the big stick in the lineup?
This was the team of Mays and McCovey.
Hell, we might have settled for another Jim Ray Hart.
1975 and 76 were some pretty sorry years to be a Giant fan, I can tell you that. Much like today.
Then along came Jack Clark. The way he hit, they called him "Jack the Ripper". Now that's the kind of guy, with the kind of nickname, that you could just wrap your arms around and hold onto for a few years.
And all was well from 1977-1984...
With Jack....
But then Jack left. I'm not sure where Jack went. But I do remember he had some good years with the Cardinals, and that was nice. We were actually kind of happy for him really. But when he went to the Dodgers, and I knew he wasn't coming back. Good riddance.....we couldn't take him back after he'd been with THEM!!!
So in 1985, we had a brief but productive fling with Jeffrey Leonard, who took us to the playoffs.....titillated us with his "One flap down" home-run trot...and then he was gone....quicker than a one night stand really.....But it was OK.... Really, it was. Because he was just keeping the seat warm for the new kid.
Will "The Thrill" Clark came to the big club from Mississippi State, to take us through the 80's and into the 90's. From 1986 to 1993, with that sweet-swinging Cajun, all was right again as a fan.
Will sure gave us some good years, boy...
he could really hit.....
but once he started to lose it...
he just didn't fit in amongst cosmopolitan San Francisco anymore....
Somehow his Cajun, tobacco-spittin' ways stood out like a sore thumb....
Funny, didn't seem so weird when he was hitting well.....
And so....The Thrill...was soon gone....
Once again, we tried to to find the ultimate hitting machine. And we did, in Pittsburgh, toiling for the Pirates, but longing to come home and make his name with the Giants....BARRY LAMAR BONDS.
So briefly in 1993, we actually had Barry Bonds and Will Clark in the same lineup. Can you believe it? BARRY BONDS AND WILL CLARK. At the same time.
But you knew it couldn't last....
It's like a three-some with you and two red-hot, super-models.....
who used to be gymnasts.....
great while it lasted, but you knew it wasn't going to last for long...
something had to give.....
So old Will had to go play for Texas and later, the Cardinals.
He never really looked the same in those uniforms as he did when he was with us though.
He really didn't hit that well, either.
Seemed kind of old and used up.
HEHEHEHEHE.
The last fifteen years (has it really been fifteen years?) were some of the best years a Giant fan ever had, in spite of what the outside world tried to make us think.
A World Series appearance, a near decade long dominance of the Dodgers.
Oh yes, that was such sweet icing on the cake.
Everything but a World Series Championship, I suppose.
And so, as Giants fans, we keep looking...
You see, something about being a Giants player...
there's a history of greatness....
A legacy to uphold and build upon.
Which brings us back to Draft Day and Buster Posey.
Do you think Buster Posey will fit into this legacy?
Apparently his college coach thinks so, this from FSU coach Martin on Poseys' chances of making it in the bigs:
"I've never been so sure of something in my life," Martin Jr. said. "He is a classic inside-out hitter, a Derek Jeter type, who really gets inside the ball and makes a lot of solid contact. That's what I tell people, he's Jason Varitek behind the plate and he's Derek Jeter as a hitter, and I really believe that."
HOLY HOT HANNAH!!!! PART JASON VARITEK, PART DEREK JETER????
Regarding the issues brought up by the factually challenged Curt Schilling (ie: Why Didn't Barry Sue?) on the vertically challenged Bob Costas HBO show recently. I have to believe Costas himself accepts the sentiments expressed by Schilling and the legal logic expressed therein, since he certainly didn't challenge the statements and they appeared on the show that bears his name.
As counter evidence I would cite the position of Howard Wasserman, whose credentials are as follows:
Howard Wasserman is Associate Professor of Law, having joined the College of Law faculty in 2003. He graduated magna cum laude from the Northwestern University School of Law, where he was an associate articles editor of the Law Review and was named to the Order of the Coif. Following law school, he clerked for Chief Judge James T. Giles of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and Judge Jane R. Roth of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Prior to coming to FIU, he spent two years as a Visiting Assistant Professor at Florida State University College of Law. Professor Wasserman teaches civil procedure, evidence, federal courts, civil rights, and First Amendment; his scholarship focuses on the freedom of speech and procedure in public-law civil litigation. His recent work has examined the conflation and distinctions between judicial jurisdiction and substantive rights in federal litigation. He also is writing on the intersection between sports and free expression; he has presented on this subject at the Cooperstown Symposium on Baseball and American Culture at the National Baseball Hall of Fame. Professor Wasserman is a loyal Chicago Cubs fan.
Mr. Wasserman appears to have a strong background in both law and baseball.
I summarize the key points noted by Mr. Wasserman at the end of the page.
However, I would like to note special emphasis on the following quotes because they speak to one of the few remaining arguments the sanctimonious media "mental midgets" like Mr. Costas have left. We still hear the media bird-brains continue to chirp on incessantly "Why Didn't Barry Sue the Authors?- Why Didn't Barry Sue the Authors?".
A separate question is why Bonds has not sued the authors and publisher for defamation. Some have claimed that this failure is tantamount to an admission that the book is accurate. But this is too simplistic.
This is an extremely difficult standard for a plaintiff to satisfy. But the Supreme Court has held that the First Amendment demands it--to allow "breathing space" for discussion of public issues in which some error is inevitable and to avoid the risk of media self-censorship. Thus, even if he could prove falsity, Bonds would have a difficult time prevailing on a defamation claim, such that the lawsuit may not be worth the cost and effort.
So let's review. First off, he did sue. In the only manner he and his attorney felt they were best likely to prevail. And apparently Wasserman agrees.
Second, Wasserman states that the nexus of the argument on the surface is "too simplistic". I find this ironic because Mr. Costas chastised Rob Parker, a Detroit reporter who dared to suggest to Bob that he was making too big a deal of the steroids issue on the surface given that fans are voting with their wallets and telling MLB that they really don't care (at least not as much as Bob Costa does about the issue).
Costas diverted the argument by making a ridiculous comparison to baseball's "growth" in popularity after WWII but prior to integration by Jackie Robinson and the Dodgers. In other words, baseball was popular then, but still flawed due to the stain of segregation.
Costas strongly challenged the premise of Parker’s claim with the following history lesson:
After World War II, baseball had a tremendous surge in attendance. Baseball was essentially segregated then. A few teams had a few Black players but no one in their right mind would say, ‘well, baseball remained popular so we don’t have to move with greater speed toward justice when it comes to integration of the game.’ I loved baseball in the fifties and sixties growing up; that doesn’t mean that Curt Flood and Marvin Miller weren’t on the side of justice and didn’t have principle on their side because something in the game needed to be corrected and I was able to separate those two things. Baseball was flawed and it was unjust and it needed to be reformed in terms of players rights, but at the same time I loved the game.
What little Bobby failed to mention is, any increase in attendance at the point he references was measured against deflated numbers in prior years due to the troops being overseas fighting the actual war. Even those that remained on the mainland had to have their attentions somewhat diverted by more pressing issues than baseball.
Second, the integration train had clearly already left the station. Baseball owners knew at that point that they had to integrate to expand their audience and they did it. Some parts social justice, some parts economic reality and survival. It may be a rewriting of history, but I understand the Negro Leagues were actually outdrawing the Major Leagues during the war, so it may have been more of an economic decision than anything else. MONEY TALKS.
To compare this current made-up "social issue" (steroids) to segregation would be laughable if it weren't so demeaning. Maybe Mr. Moral Compass needs a check-up from the neck up. Shouldn't take too long.
Let's see 1942, we enter WWII and attendance goes down 10%. By comparison,after the 1994 World Series cancellation, attendance fell almost 30%. So baseball did three times the self-inflicted damage as a major World War.
In 1945, the war ends and in 1946 attendance does jump, however most historians would attribute this jump in attendance to the return of the troops, the euphoria of the ending of the war and increased leisure time and purchasing power. Also, 1946 is the year the Dodgers signed Jackie Robinson.
So in reality, baseball jumps back to almost pre-war attendance levels and then segregates. It was hardly "popular" on a relative basis if the Negro Leagues were outdrawing them from a smaller population base.
Again, HISTORY REPEATS. FOLLOW THE MONEY. In spite of occasional bouts or moral indignation and selective recall/faulty reciting of history.
BASEBALL BECAME MORE POPULAR AFTER WWII BECAUSE OF INTEGRATION. THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE LIKED THE BLACK SO MUCH AT THE TIME, THEY MAY HAVE HAD TO BE DRAGGED KICKING AND SCREAMING INTO INTEGRATION (Not so much leading, as baseball historians would romantically like you to believe, but following the military) BUT THEY SURE LOVED THE GREEN.
I would think that someone who was as knowledgeable as Costas tries to make himself appear wouldn't be aware of the confluence of all these events and not distort history to support his current point of view. Or would he?
I don't know, my take on the thing was he was upset almost to the point of whining and crying that Parker would dare challenge his pearly wisdom. I thought he made a poor response and I was surprised Mr. Parker didn't jump right down his throat.
And this guy wanted to be Commissioner? Don't let your hatred get in the way of the facts, Bobby-boy. Maybe everyone else's heroes should be as flawless as the Mick. Yeah, right.
Baseball, the Law, and the Rules, Part III: Barry Bonds Takes on the First Amendment,
Attempting to Use Grand Jury Secrecy Rules to Attack the New, Controversial Book Alleging His Steroid Use
By HOWARD WASSERMAN
Bonds has responded with a legal assault against Game of Shadows. But the First Amendment is likely to prove a more-than-worthy adversary for the baseball star.
Bonds launched his legal offensive on two fronts. First, he filed a lawsuit in California Superior Court against Fainaru-Wada, Williams, and their publisher, Gotham Books. He also named as defendants the San Francisco Chronicle, which published Fainaru-Wada and Williams' stories on Bonds' grand jury testimony, and Sports Illustrated. which published excerpts of Game of Shadows prior to publication. Bonds sued under California's Unfair Competition Law (Business and Professional Code § 17200), which prohibits "any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice."
Second, he sent a letter to United States District Judge Susan Illston, who is presiding over the BALCO grand jury proceedings. The letter requests that she initiate contempt-of-court proceedings against the authors and publishers violating rules requiring secrecy in grand jury proceedings. Judge Illston already has conducted one hearing regarding leaks in this case.
In both cases, Bonds claims that Game of Shadows is based on sealed and secret grand-jury testimony and evidence. He argues that, as a witness before the grand jury, he received guarantees that his testimony and all other evidence would be confidential. And he says that Fainaru-Wada and Williams' use of this information as the basis for their book deprived him of these guarantees, and deprived the public of its faith and confidence in the confidentiality and integrity of the grand jury system. As a result, the book is both an unfair or unlawful business act under state law and contemptuous of the federal court overseeing the grand jury proceedings.
Going After Profits Alone Does Not Obviate the First Amendment Problem Here
Bonds and his attorneys, seeking to avoid First Amendment problems, focus not on publication of the book, but on the profits that the authors and publisher stand to earn from sales of the book.
The letter to Judge Illston requests a narrow contempt order requiring disgorgement of profits derived from the use of the sealed and leaked grand jury evidence (as opposed to, for example, an order jailing the journalists for their misconduct). Bonds and his lawyers insist that "we do not wish to stifle public debate about steroid use by professional and amateur athletes."
Similarly, the Unfair Competition lawsuit seeks an injunction preventing the defendants from retaining any profits from the book, but does not in any way seek to restrain publication or sale. As one lawyer told the California Superior Court, "They can speak as much as they like on this topic. They just can't make a profit."
Courts recognize that placing a financial burden on a speaker functions as a disincentive to speak--or, in this case, to write or agree to publish a book--that would, if permitted, threaten to reduce the sum total of available reporting on what even Bonds concedes is a matter of great public concern worthy of discussion and debate.
The First Amendment thus subjects laws that financially burden speech to the same rigorous scrutiny as laws that directly prohibit or restrain speech.
Morever, even if Fainaru-Wadu and Williams did not break the law in obtaining the grand jury evidence, the First Amendment does not automatically protect publication. The Supreme Court has explicitly refused to hold that the publication of truthful, lawfully obtained information on a matter of public import never can be punished. Of course, the Court never has found any interest of a sufficiently high order to outweigh free-expression interests, meaning Game of Shadows likely will be protected, as well.
The Legal Path Not Taken: Defamation
A separate question is why Bonds has not sued the authors and publisher for defamation. Some have claimed that this failure is tantamount to an admission that the book is accurate. But this is too simplistic.
In order to prevail on a defamation claim, Bonds must do more than prove the statements in the book were false (a substantial burden in itself). Under the First Amendment, a public figure (which Bonds surely is) also must prove (by the elevated standard of "clear and convincing evidence") that the false statements in question were published with actual malice--that is, with knowledge that they were false, or with reckless disregard for whether they were true or false.
This is an extremely difficult standard for a plaintiff to satisfy. But the Supreme Court has held that the First Amendment demands it--to allow "breathing space" for discussion of public issues in which some error is inevitable and to avoid the risk of media self-censorship. Thus, even if he could prove falsity, Bonds would have a difficult time prevailing on a defamation claim, such that the lawsuit may not be worth the cost and effort.
Ultimately, Bonds likely will find, in both the lawsuits and legal challenges he has brought and those he has chosen not to bring, that the First Amendment is a tougher opponent than most major league pitchers.
Might still be the greatest all around baseball player of all time. ESPN's Peter Gammons interviewed him for last night's Giants-Phillies broadcast and Mays brought up an interesting point. When Gammons asked him if had Willie played in more favorable hitters parks than Candlestick and the Polo Grounds, would he have hit possibly 800 HR's, Mays reminded him that he lost nearly 2 years to a stint in the Army that may have cost him 70-80 HR's. I'll leave it to the SABR crowd to calculate the park-adjustments, but Mays certainly never played in a park that was nicknamed "The Launching Pad".
Absolutely, one of the most awesome packages of speed and power in the history of the game. Along with Barry and Bobby Bonds, Ricky Henderson and even Joe Morgan.
One of the best qualities about Mays was he had an infectious joy for playing the game. In his earlier years in New York, it was one of his more admirable and marketable qualities. It didn't seem like he had as much fun in the game in his later years, for a variety of reasons.
Given the circumstances (1954 World Series), one of the greatest catches of all-time, and the throw afterward to keep the runner from scoring makes this catch an even more remarkable defensive play.
Always seemed poised to deliver a big strike, a big play, whether it be at-bat, on the bases or in the field. I loved watching him play. To me, like Ted Williams, Mays is baseball royalty. As far as RH hitters: Mays, Frank Robinson and Aaron were the best I've ever seen. LH Hitters: I'd rank Bonds, Ruth and Ted Williams in whatever order you'd like. Among switch hitters: Mickey Mantle and Ricky Henderson. All were great all-around players as well.
1. Joey Bart 6-2, 215 C Power arm and a power bat, playing a premium defensive position. Good catch and throw skills.
2. Heliot Ramos 6-2, 185 OF Potential high-ceiling player the Giants have been looking for. Great bat speed, early returns were impressive.
3. Chris Shaw 6-3. 230 1B Lefty power bat, limited defensively to 1B, Matt Adams comp?
4. Tyler Beede 6-4, 215 RHP from Vanderbilt projects as top of the rotation starter when he works out his command/control issues. When he misses, he misses by a bunch.
5. Stephen Duggar 6-1, 170 CF Another toolsy, under-achieving OF in the Gary Brown mold, hoping for better results.
6. Sandro Fabian 6-0, 180 OF Dominican signee from 2014, shows some pop in his bat. Below average arm and lack of speed should push him towards LF.
7. Aramis Garcia 6-2, 220 C from Florida INTL projects as a good bat behind the dish with enough defensive skill to play there long-term
8. Heath Quinn 6-2, 190 OF Strong hitter, makes contact with improving approach at the plate. Returns from hamate bone injury.
9. Garrett Williams 6-1, 205 LHP Former Oklahoma standout, Giants prototype, low-ceiling, high-floor prospect.
10. Shaun Anderson 6-4, 225 RHP Large frame, 3.36 K/BB rate. Can start or relieve
11. Jacob Gonzalez 6-3, 190 3B Good pedigree, impressive bat for HS prospect.
12. Seth Corry 6-2 195 LHP Highly regard HS pick. Was mentioned as possible chip in high profile trades.
13. C.J. Hinojosa 5-10, 175 SS Scrappy IF prospect in the mold of Kelby Tomlinson, just gets it done.
14. Garett Cave 6-4, 200 RHP He misses a lot of bats and at times, the plate. 13 K/9 an 5 B/9. Wild thing.
2019 MLB Draft - Top HS Draft Prospects
1. Bobby Witt, Jr. 6-1,185 SS Colleyville Heritage HS (TX) Oklahoma commit. Outstanding defensive SS who can hit. 6.4 speed in 60 yd. Touched 97 on mound. Son of former major leaguer. Five tool potential.
2. Riley Greene 6-2, 190 OF Haggerty HS (FL) Florida commit.Best HS hitting prospect. LH bat with good eye, plate discipline and developing power.
3. C.J. Abrams 6-2, 180 SS Blessed Trinity HS (GA) High-ceiling athlete. 70 speed with plus arm. Hitting needs to develop as he matures. Alabama commit.
4. Reece Hinds 6-4, 210 SS Niceville HS (FL) Power bat, committed to LSU. Plus arm, solid enough bat to move to 3B down the road. 98MPH arm.
5. Daniel Espino 6-3, 200 RHP Georgia Premier Academy (GA) LSU commit. Touches 98 on FB with wipe out SL.
2019 MLB Draft - Top College Draft Prospects
1. Adley Rutschman C Oregon State Plus defender with great arm. Excellent receiver plus a switch hitter with some pop in the bat.
2. Shea Langliers C Baylor Excelent throw and catch skills with good pop time. Quick bat, uses all fields approach with some pop.
3. Zack Thompson 6-2 LHP Kentucky Missed time with an elbow issue. FB up to 95 with plenty of secondary stuff.
4. Matt Wallner 6-5 OF Southern Miss Run producing bat plus mid to upper 90's FB closer. Power bat from the left side, athletic for size.
5. Nick Lodolo LHP TCU Tall LHP, 95MPH FB and solid breaking stuff.
