Eric Surkamp's Fast Start in Richmond and His Stock as a Prospect

If you have to give a pitcher of the month award for pitchers in the Giants system, Eric Surkamp probably deserves the award. He's been absolutely dominant in the Eastern League in his first six starts with the Richmond Flying Squirrels.

After a bit of a slow start where he didn't pitch past five innings, Surkamp has had three quality starts in a row and has had ten strikeouts in each of his last three outings (against Trenton, New Britain and Altoona, the EL affiliates of the Yankees, Twins and Pirates, respectively). Surkamp has had four 10 strikeout games this year in his six starts (he had 10 Ks in 4.0 IP in his EL debut this year), and has shown good control, walking 3 or less in five of his six starts. The lone start where he had some control issues was an April 20th start where he went 4.1 IP and had five walks, six strikeouts and allowed 3 runs on six hits, including one home run. (I wonder if he was celebrating the "holiday" a little too much that day? Just kidding.)

This excellent start to the season really shouldn't be a surprise to anybody who has followed the Giants' minor league system or Surkamp's career closely. Here's a look at Surkamp's overall career in the minors:

Year	Age	Tm	W	L	ERA	G	IP	WHIP	H/9	HR/9	BB/9	SO/9	SO/BB
2008	20	2 Teams	0	2	5.71	7	17.1	1.615	11.9	0.5	2.6	11.9	4.60
2008	20	Giants	0	0	2.70	2	3.1	0.900	8.1	0.0	0.0	18.9
2008	20	Salem-Keizer	0	2	6.43	5	14.0	1.786	12.9	0.6	3.2	10.3	3.20
2009	21	Augusta	11	5	3.30	23	131.0	1.282	8.9	0.4	2.7	11.6	4.33
2010	22	San Jose	4	2	3.11	17	101.1	0.997	7.0	0.4	2.0	9.6	4.91
2011	23	Richmond	2	2	1.65	6	32.2	1.194	6.6	0.6	4.1	14.1	3.40
4 Seasons			17	11	3.19	53	282.1	1.190	8.1	0.4	2.6	11.2	4.33

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 5/9/2011.

As you can see, Surkamp has been very consistent over the course of his career, sans a bumpy 14 inning stint in the Northwest League. The keys to Surkamp's success in the minors have been his good strikeout rates (career 11.2 K/9), solid control (2.6 BB/9) and excellent command (4.33 K/BB ratio).

Many scouts and writers though have questioned Surkamp's ability to transition his minor league success to the Major League level. Minor League baseball analyst John Sickels only has him graded as a C+ prospect, and Surkamp is considered a "finesse" lefty because he doesn't have a power fastball or stuff in general. According to the blog "When the Giants Come to Town," Surkamp's fastball tops out in the high 80's and he has an average changeup (though he has a good curve ball, which is his best and most effective pitch, according to reports; Quick hat tip to Splashing Pumpkins for their post which made this info easier to find.)

However, to those who think Surkamp doesn't have the ability to garner any Major League success, I would point to another tall Giants lefty who dominated in the minors: Madison Bumgarner. Here's a glance at Bumgarner's minor league numbers.

Year	Age	Tm	W	L	ERA	G	IP	WHIP	H/9	HR/9	BB/9	SO/9	SO/BB
2008	18	Augusta	15	3	1.46	24	141.2	0.932	7.1	0.2	1.3	10.4	7.81
2009	19	2 Teams	12	2	1.85	25	131.1	1.020	6.9	0.4	2.3	6.3	2.71
2009	19	San Jose	3	1	1.48	5	24.1	0.986	7.4	0.0	1.5	8.5	5.75
2009	19	Connecticut	9	1	1.93	20	107.0	1.028	6.7	0.5	2.5	5.8	2.30
2010	20	Fresno	7	1	3.16	14	82.2	1.331	9.6	0.5	2.4	6.4	2.68
3 Seasons			34	6	2.00	63	355.2	1.057	7.6	0.4	1.9	8.0	4.09

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 5/9/2011.

Bumgarner had superior control (a 1.9 BB/9 is pretty darn impressive) and his ERA and WHIP numbers are better than Surkamp's (and he did so out of high school, while Surkamp posted his good numbers out of college). However, Surkamp's command is actually comparable with Bumgarner's (Surkamp has a better K/BB ratio in the minors) and Surkamp was a lot more dominant against Eastern League hitting when it came to striking guys out. Surkamp's K/9 with Richmond is almost three times Bumgarner's K/9 in Connecticut in 2009 (and Richmond is a more hitter friendly park than Connecticut), and his K/BB ratio is 1.10 points better than Bumgarner's 2.30 K/BB ratio in Double-A. (Of course, Surkamp has to maintain these numbers over the full course of a season in the Eastern League, so we'll have to wait and see if Surkamp will indeed have a better Double-A campaign than Bumgarner.)

Now, am I saying Surkamp is better than Bumgarner? Absolutely not. Bumgarner had better tools (Bumgarner's stuff is a lot better, including his fastball, which averages 92.6 MPH this year) and his ceiling is higher than Surkamp's (he's two years younger than Surkamp, and Bumgarner has No.1/No.2 starter potential). Also, Bumgarner has pitched in the majors and in the playoffs, while Surkamp hasn't pitched above Double-A.

That being said, on a statistical note, Surkamp is comparable and that should be a sign that Surkamp could maybe hold his own at the Major League level. Is he going to be a future No. 1 starter? Probably not unless he's playing for the Pirates. However, with Barry Zito hitting a wall, and Jonathan Sanchez's career as a Giant very uncertain (he's always constantly in trade talks), Surkamp might be given a chance with the big league club in the near future. (I wouldn't be surprised if he makes the 40-man next year or even some point this season if we waive someone.)

His first six starts in the Eastern League (and his entire minor league career in general) illustrate that the Giants wouldn't be crazy to lean on the tall, lanky lefty sooner rather than later.

OTF's 32 Most Interesting Prospects: No. 23, Conor Gillaspie, 3B

Conor Gillaspie's road as a prospect has become an up and down rollercoaster of sorts. Drafted in the supplemental round of the 2008 draft, Gillaspie came with some hype when he was drafted out of Wichita State. In his junior year with the Shockers, Gillaspie hit .419 with an 1.197 OPS. He smacked 11 home runs, drove in 82 RBI, scored 71 runs and stole 16 bases on 18 attempts. With the selection of Gillaspie and Buster Posey as their first two picks of the draft, many Giants fans felt that the Giants brass had two players on their hands that were well-developed and close to being Major League-ready very soon.

Gillaspie got on the fast track in the Giants system. He was placed on the Giants 40-man roster his first year in professional baseball and after 24 games and 105 plate appearances in Rookie League and the Northwest League, he got a late season callup when the Giants expanded the roster. While his tenure with the big league club was a brief one (he had only seven plate appearances), he still managed to get a hit and two walks. The feeling amongst Giants fans was that if Gillaspie could have a solid year in the minors in 2009 and move up quickly, he would be called up again and perhaps given a more extended shot.

Unfortunately, his 2009 didn't go as stellar as many expected. While Gillaspie didn't strike out much (14.5 strikeout percentage) and showcased a good plate approach in San Jose (he had a BB/K ratio of 0.81), he didn't show any power (.100 ISO, .756 OPS) and he had a lot of issues defensively (.908 fielding percentage; 2.29 RF/G). Considering the California League is considered a hitter's league, Gillaspie's lack of extra base hits was a bit surprising. Sure, nobody expected him to be a 20-home run hitter or 1.197 OPS hitter like he was in college, but Giants fans and management expected more considering how polished a hitter he was in college.

Despite the down year in San Jose, Gillaspie made some progress last year in the Eastern League. He showcased a little bit more power, as his slugging, OPS and ISO numbers all improved (his slugging went up to .420, his OPS was .754 and his ISO was .132, all improvement from the previous seasons) despite playing in a pitcher's league and park. Furthermore, his defensive skills improved as well, as his fielding percentage (.946) and range (2.46) went up as well. The only real concern about Gillaspie was the fact that he didn't draw as many walks in Richmond. After walking 55 times in 2009, he only garnered 37 free passes in 10 more plate appearances in Double-A. That being said, he did double his home runs (eight in comparison to four), quadrupled his triples (eight in comparison to two), and garnered more total bases (206 to 181), so his lack of walks was more than made up for. Furthermore, he still was able to make contact consistently, as his strikeout percentage actually went down in Double-A (from 14.5 to 13.6 percent), so his BB/K ratio wasn't affected too badly (0.55, which is still good).

Minor League Ball blogger and prospect analyst John Sickels had some good things to say about Gillaspie after his improvement in the Eastern League in 2010.

"Jumping up to Double-A Richmond this year, he hit .287/.335/.420, which doesn't look much better on the surface. His OPS improved a bit to +3 percent. However, Richmond is sort of the opposite of High Desert: it's a tough environment. He hit just .253/.303/.378 at home, but a much more impressive .320/.365/.460 on the road, which is more like what the Giants were looking for when they drafted him out of Wichita State...

I still don't know if Gillaspie will have enough of a bat to be a regular third baseman, but he made enough progress to go from a Grade C to a C+."

This year, Gillaspie earned a promotion to Fresno and he is producing good numbers going into today's game. He is continuing to improve his power (he has a .422 slugging and a .780 OPS), and his defensive abilities are still developing (career high 2.74 RF/G this year in the PCL). Also, his OBP and BB/K ratio have gotten back to his San Jose levels (.358 OBP; 0.78 BB/K ratio), so it seems like he's finally getting everything all together offensively now at Triple-A. The scouting reports have also been good on Gillaspie, as reports say he's been hitting a lot of line drives with the Grizzlies, which is a good sign.

The problem with Gillaspie may just be the fact that he plays at a position where more power is expected. Third basemen are expected to be major run producers and right now, Gillaspie hasn't necessarily showcased the power in the minors that makes scouts or analysts think he'd be worthy of being an everyday Major League third baseman. I would counter with the fact that his plate approach, good contact ability and ability to get on base make him a viable option to any MLB club, and he could be an everyday third baseman (or at worst, a utility infielder) on the right team. We have seen players like Daric Barton and Bill Mueller become very solid Big League contributors despite lacking power at positions where power is traditionally expected (i.e., third base and first base).

I think Gillaspie will need to be flexible with his position if he wants to break in with the Giants anytime soon, which I think is possible (though there are issues and questions in terms of his ability to perhaps play second base; a position where many Giants fans felt he might need to move to). Furthermore, if he can continue his development defensively, he may allow Pablo Sandoval to move to first, considering Sandoval has had defensive issues in the past (however, Sandoval is in shape and has played solid defensively this year, though Sandoval's erratic arm may prevent him from playing the position long term). The only problem with this scenario is first baseman Brandon Belt, who would keep Sandoval at third. If Belt breaks into the Majors again soon (which is highly likely considering how well he is hitting in Fresno), then it will be a challenge to find Gillaspie in the Giants lineup.

Gillaspie's stock has been a little erratic over the course of his minor league career, and I don't know if he'll be a major contributor to this Giants team mainly because of the solidity at the third base, and even second base position with Sandoval and Freddy Sanchez. That being said, Gillaspie has rebounded nicely after a disappointing 2009 in San Jose, and he certainly is more than capable of developing into the "Bill Mueller-esque" player that many scouts and expected envisioned him to be when he was drafted in 2008.

Are Giants Fans Overhyping Darren Ford?

This is a post I originally wrote for "The Crazy Crabbers," A Giants-centric blog I occasionally contribute to. You can read the original post here. (Support Scott and his work; he's got a great thing going at TCC.)

The excitement surrounding Darren Ford's callup has been an interesting one. His speed has helped the Giants win games, and has made him a minor celebrity in San Francisco Giant fans twitter circles (type in #darrenfordissofast and you'll get a bunch of "Chuck Norris-esque" lines).

Furthermore, his speed and athleticism have also convinced a lot of Giants fans, bloggers, writers and talk show callers that he is worthy of some extended playing time on the Major League roster (e.g. beyond a pinch runner).

I would say that would be a mistake...for now.

To be honest, I am as big a fan of Ford as the next Giants fan. He has been one of the more interesting players in the Giants system since he was acquired in the Ray Durham trade in 2008. That being said, here are a few reasons why Ford should be sent back down to Fresno when Andres Torres is finally healthy and comes off the disabled list (which looks to be soon).

1.) The outfield is too crowded for Ford to get much playing time: When Torres and Mark Derosa come off the DL, the outfield will be logjammed with those two, Pat Burrell, Aaron Rowand, Nate Schierholtz, and Cody Ross. That's six outfielders competing for three spots. There's no way Ford can compete, simply because he doesn't have the pedigree those other outfielders have. Athletically, you could argue he may be the best of the bunch. But baseball is not just a game of athleticism, and that unfortunately leaves Ford as the odd man out here.

2.) Torres is the better option: Giants fans have complained about the Giants' "station-to-station" approach and I can admit, it can be frustrating to watch. With Torres returning though off the DL, the Giants will have that speed threat they have missed so dearly the past few weeks. Furthermore, Torres has proven himself at the Major League level, while Ford still has a long way to go (he only has 11 plate appearances in the Majors). For a team looking to repeat as NL West Division champions and perhaps World Series champions, the Giants need to go with the proven commodity and Torres is that, while Ford is not.

3.) Ford still has to prove himself and develop more in the minors: Ford was feasting on Pacific Coast League pitchers before his callup (he had 10 hits, 1 home run, 6 runs scored, 6 RBI, and 7 SB in 7 games and 33 plate appearances), but to be honest, that was such a small sample and he didn't exactly tear the Eastern League apart (.313 wOBA, 37 stolen bases, 0.37 BB/K ratio). The biggest problem of Ford's in the minors has been his strikeout problems as he has accumulated 665 strikeouts in 2,569 at-bats over seven seasons in the minors (which accumulates to a 25.9 strikeout percentage). That is not a good quality for Ford to have, especially considering he hasn't advanced above Double-A until this year (I'm not counting his callup to the Giants when they expanded their roster last year) and he is expected to be a leadoff hitter. Even though he has a decent walk rate in the minors (10.3 percent), it is still not high enough to make up for his high volume of strikeouts (0.46 BB/K ratio).

I think Ford could compete for a spot in the Giants lineup eventually. I just don't believe it's this year (and that's not a bad thing considering he's only 25 years old). Ford would benefit from a full season in the PCL, where he could continue to develop his plate approach and tools (base stealing and speed, especially), and gain confidence by playing every day. If he builds on the momentum from his hot start with the Grizzlies (he needs to excel in the PCL over a full course of the year) and hype he's received from Giants fans, he certainly could compete for a spot in the starting lineup next Spring when a couple of spots open up in the Giants outfield (Ross, Burrell and Derosa will all be free agents and I can guarantee at least two, probably all three, will not be re-signed by the Giants).

OTF's 32 Most Interesting Prospects: No. 24, Steve Edlefsen, RHP

Steve Edlefsen to me is one of those "under the radar" arms that has done well in the minors despite low expectations. Drafted in the 16th round of the 2007 MLB Draft by the San Francisco Giants, Edlefsen came out of Nebraska after only really pitching full-time for one year. After transferring from Barton Community College (he underwent Tommy John surgery in 2005, missing his entire sophomore season), he was originally a utility infielder primarily, batting .260 with a .695 OPS in 70 AB his junior year. His senior year, he was mostly used in a relief role, as he pitched 26.1 innings and struck out 25 and walked 27, producing an ERA of 4.10 and a WHIP of 1.82.

Nonetheless, the Giants took a waiver on him despite his lack of innings in college (probably not a bad thing since his arm didn't have too many miles on it) and he hasn't disappointed. In Salem-Keizer in 2007, he pitched 33.1 IP and posted an ERA of 1.62, a WHIP of 0.90 and a 7.0 K/9. His K/BB ratio and FIP weren't exactly impressive (1.60 and 3.35, respectively), but it was certainly a surprise considering he didn't "wow" anybody his senior year with the Huskers.

In 2008, Edlefsen showed some more improvement, pitching 77.2 Innings and posting an ERA of 3.36, a WHIP of 1.40 and a K/9 of 8.9. The hits increased (8.9 H/9), but his slight improvement in his K/BB ratio (2.03) over more innings pitched (44.1 specifically)  was a promising sign that his tenure int the Northwest League wasn't just a fluke.

His third year in the minors proved to be huge in Edlefsen's development. He played at three levels in 2009, starting the year in San Jose and finishing in Fresno. On a stacked San Jose team, Edlefsen dominated, posting an ERA of 0.96, a FIP of 2.20 and a K/9 of 12.9 in 28 innings pitched. He was promoted to Connecticut midway through the year, and while he regressed a little (11.1 IP, 10 hits allowed, 1.00 K/BB ratio) in the Eastern League, he still showed enough for the Giants organization to promote him to Fresno. With the Grizzlies, he finished the year strong, striking out 24 in 30 innings pitched, and sported an ERA of 2.40.

His second year in Fresno proved to be better than the last, as he pitched 64.1 IP, had an ERA of 2.38, a K/9 of 7.0 and earned a spot on the PCL All-Star team as well. Additionally, the good year in Fresno earned Edlefsen a spot on the Giants 40-man roster this Spring. Edlefsen is struggling his third go-around in the Pacific Coast League this year (4.70 ERA, 1.50 WHIP, 11.7 H/9), but he does have a BB/9 of 1.8 and a K/BB ratio of 3.67, all career bests.

Edlefsen is known for his slider and his sidearm delivery (in a post by Bay City Ball, Edlefsen's slider was graded as the best slider in the Giants system in 2007). However, control has been an issue, as his BB/9 in the minors is 4.4 and his K/BB ratio is 1.84. Furthermore, his FIP numbers have been pretty pedestrian over his professional career. Sans the 2009 California League campaign and this year, he has never had a FIP under 3.35, and that was his first year in Salem-Keizer.

He may not be an "elite" prospect by any means (though he was an honorable mention on John Sickels' Top-20 prospect list this year). That being said, Edlefsen could have a good career in the Majors as a middle reliever or perhaps even as a setup man. His slider and arm slot could give Major League hitters problems (similar to Javier Lopez). While the Giants bullpen is set as of now (I don't see Edlefsen replacing anybody at this point), he could be a solid option this year if somebody gets injured, or next year when some relievers become free agents (Guillermo Mota and Lopez will be free agents next year). If he can get his walk issues under control (and he's starting show some progress this year, though the hits allowed is a little discouraging), he could be a guy Giants fans may need to pay attention to in the near future.

Minor League Park Factors, League Run Environments, and Evaluating Giants Players' Stats Part II: Richmond and the EL

I looked at Part I last week where I looked at Fresno. This post, I'm going to look at Richmond and the Eastern League.

(For the record, I got the statistical information from Baseball Think Factory and The Hardball Times.)

Weighted Park Factors for The Diamond: 0.97 run factor, 1.00 hit factor, 0.96 doubles factor, 0.91 home run factor, 0.99 walk factor), 1.01 strikeout factor.

Run Environments for the Eastern League: 4.5 R/G, 4.5 BsR/G, 2.0 HR percentage, 8.7 walk percentage, 8.0 SBA percentage.

I only looked at one year mainly because the Giants' Double-A affiliate has only been in Richmond for one season. That being said, a lot of the same trends from Connecticut proved to be the same: the ball park favors the pitchers more so than the hitters. While Richmond is not as much as a pitcher's park as Richmond (the run factor was 0.91 in Connecticut), it's safe to say that you're going to see a regression in home run numbers for hitters who make the transition from the California League. (Though Richmond is not as bad on hitters when it comes to home runs, as Connecticut had a home run factor of 0.81).

The Diamond's dimensions are pretty normal by Minor League parks standards. It's 330 in right and left and 402 in center. Hence, while it isn't exactly too cavernous, there aren't any short porches or deep alleys that hitters can take advantage of.

In terms of the league, the Eastern League is a notorious pitcher's league. From 2007-2009, the league average batting average was .261 and the league average OPS was .727. While you could factor in the parks and environments of the teams in the Eastern League, the biggest key to the numbers favoring pitcher's is just the fact that the pitcher's are just a lot better than what you see in High Single-A or Triple-A. Most high end prospects make some kind of jump from Single A to Double A, so for the most part hitters face the best pitchers organizations have to offer and not retreads who are repeating levels (though you do see this sometimes as Osiris Matos is currently pitching in Double A).


What does this mean for Flying Squirrels Players?

I think the biggest sign of how a prospect will develop and turn out is how well they do in Double A. You see a lot hitters have great years in the California League, only to dramatically have down years in the Eastern League. Granted, you have to take their "down" years with a grain of salt. I think guys like Conor Gillaspie, Brandon Crawford and Darren Ford, players who had down seasons in Richmond in 2010 after good years in San Jose in 2009, are players who still performed well enough to maintain their status as "good" prospects. However, guys like Roger Kieschnick and Nick Noonan put their statuses in jeopardy in Richmond because they looked massively overwhelmed by the pitching (as evidenced by high strikeout rates and low walk rates and OPS numbers).

When you see hitters show power in the Eastern League, it usually turns out to be a pretty good sign. Brandon Belt for example put up incredible slugging numbers in Richmond (.623 slugging percentage in 201 plate appearances), which just goes to show you that he's a legitimate prospect with legitimate power. He wasn't benefiting from hitter's parks and he was facing the best pitchers organizations had to offer. Belt's stats in Richmond to me are confirmation that he will find success eventually at the Major League level despite his slow start with the Giants this year.

As for pitchers, the numbers are going to favor them, just because of the parks and environments. Much like any pitcher at any level, you want to see how he's walking guys and how well he's striking guys out. Furthermore, the Eastern League and Double A in general seems to be a prime point in evaluating a pitcher's development. Is he developing his secondary pitchers? Is his fastball continuing to have as much life as it did when he broke into Rookie League? How is his command faring and developing? Guys in Double A usually have one to a few years of professional experience when they arrive to the Eastern League, so it's a nice forum to see how they have improved or regressed since they first broke into the league.

To use an example, Madison Bumgarner's strikeout rates went down when he went to Connecticut, but he developed as a pitcher mainly because he minimized his walks (2.5 BB/9), hits (6.7 H/9) and took advantage of the park environments and defense around him (.236 BABIP). Tim Alderson on the other hand (the other Giants pitcher who was taken in the first round in 2007), has struggled because he has been extremely hittable (9.9 H/9 in 3 seasons in the Eastern League) and he doesn't have the stuff to blow guys away like he did in the California League (5.7 K/9 in three seasons in Double-A). It just goes to show you how the Eastern League can be a good indicator of which pitchers are ready to make the jump to the Show (e.g. Bumgarner) and ones who still have a lot more developing to do (e.g. Alderson).

Overall, you have to keep two things in mind when evaluating players in Richmond:

1.) Don't get discouraged too much if players aren't hitting well in the Eastern League (like I said, pitchers will have the advantage and the ones that do succeed are usually "elite" prospects anyways that are going to succeed at any level). They still can be good prospects and develop into good Major League players, they just need a little more time and that's okay as long as the numbers aren't too bad. That is why Crawford, Gillaspie and Ford earned promotions to Fresno even though their numbers were down in comparison to what they did in San Jose in 2009.

2.) Double A is a good indicator of which pitchers are going to develop into studs and which ones are going to struggle. And unlike hitters, multiple years in Double A for pitchers usually isn't a good thing, especially if they don't show improvement in multiple years.

OTF's 32 Most Interesting Prospects: No. 25, Nick Noonan, 2B

Nick Noonan is another prospect (much like Henry Sosa, No. 26 on the list), who's stock has taken a considerable plunge over the past couple of seasons. Unlike some experts who think Noonan probably won't live up to the hype he garnered when he was drafted No. 32 in the 2007 MLB Draft, I still think Noonan has a chance to carve out a good professional career in the future. He just won't be the "high-ceiling star" a lot of Giants fans christened him to be early on in his career.

Noonan was drafted out of high school, playing ball in the San Diego area (a very competitive region for high school baseball...then again, most of California is). Scouts had a lot of praise to say about Noonan, especially offensively, as chronicled in a 2007 post by Obsessive Giants Compulsive.

Here is what a couple of NL scouts said in their reports about him:

"Every time you watch him, you get a better appreciation for him and what he can do. He does everything smooth and easy..."

[One NL Scout] considers Nick one of the top high school hitters in Southern California: "I've seen him hit 95 MPH like it's 75 MPH. He has a quick bat and exceptional knowledge of the strike zone. Nothing fazes him. He's just a cool customer - a true baseball player...."

When the Giants got him at No. 32 in the supplemental round, it was considered a steal of sorts. Yes, Noonan was still young and had a lot of development to do as a player. That being said, the Giants could afford to wait, and Noonan seemed to have the tools to succeed.

Noonan came onto the scene fast, hitting pretty well in the Arizona Rookie League. In 224 plate appearances in 2007, he hit .316 with an .809 OPS and three home runs, 40 RBI and had 18 stolen bases on 21 attempts. The impressive campaign by the 18-year-old in the 52 game stretch only added to the hype surrounding Noonan, as the second baseman was on most Giants writers and bloggers Top 10 prospects lists going into the 2008 season.

While he didn't excel like he did in the Rookie League, his time in the SALLY still proved to be a respectable stint for Noonan statistically. While his BB/K ratio fell from an impressive 0.60 in Arizona to 0.23 in Augusta, and his OPS dipped from .809 to .730, Noonan did hit nine home runs, drove in 48 RBI, and stole 29 bases on 33 attempts in 119 games in 532 plate appearances. While the high number of strikeouts (19.6 percent strikeout rate) and low walks (4.3 walk percentage) did alarm some scouts, many felt that his offensive upside, decent power and ability to swipe bags at efficient rate boded well for his future. Futhermore, the fact that he did this as a 19 year old was even more impressive, and the thought was that Noonan's plate approach would get better as he acquired more at-bats and more professional experience.

Unfortunately, 2009 in San Jose didn't exactly prove to be kind to Noonan. While playing on a team stacked with talent such as Buster Posey, Madison Bumgarner, Conor Gillaspie, Thomas Neal and Darren Ford, Noonan didn't exactly stand out in a crowded pool. He hit only .259 with a .727 OPS and seven home runs and 64 RBI. What was most concerning was his dip in stolen bases, as he had only 9 on 14 attempts after swiping 29 in the SALLY. (Of course, he probably wasn't needed to steal bases with Ford on the roster, but nonetheless...the dip was big, especially considering he played five more games in San Jose than Augusta.)

Much like his 2008 campaign in Augusta, many fans remained positive about Noonan's potential, citing his age, an improvement in BB/K ratio (0.49) and a strong finish in the California League (he hit .292 in August and .310 in September) as promising signs that made up for his regressing OPS, slugging and stolen base numbers from the previous seasons.

In 2010, the Giants organization decided to move up Noonan to Richmond along with Neal, Gillaspie, Ford, Brandon Crawford and Roger Kieschnick. The move was a bit rash, since Noonan statistically didn't show anything in San Jose that merited a promotion to Double-A. As expected, the Eastern League proved to be overwhelming for the 21 year old as he hit .237 with a career low .584 OPS and three home runs and 26 RBI in 406 plate appearances with the Flying Squirrels. The improvement he also showed in plate approach in San Jose went out the window as well, as Noonan had a 0.30 BB/K ratio and a career low .266 wOBA. The lackluster season in Double-A killed Noonan's rankings with experts, as John Sickels, who had him ranked as the 13th best player in the Giants system going into 2010, left him off the list completely going into 2011.

This year, Noonan's back in Double-A, and he is off to an okay start (thanks to a big game last night, where he hit a home run in each game of a double-header with New Britain). Currently, he is hitting .246 with a .701 OPS and two home runs and seven RBI in 70 plate appearances. Noonan still has some issues at the plate (he has struck out 15 times this year), but the showing of power this early is nice, and hopefully he can continue to build upon this with a year of the Eastern League already down his belt.

In my opinion, there is still a lot to like about Noonan. There was a whole lot of "Chase Utley" comparisons early-on in his career, and to me, those expectations seemed to be quite lofty and perhaps unfair. Noonan, while inconsistent with the bat, has flashed good defensive skills in the minors, as he has a career fielding percentage of .969 and range factor of 4.74 in 392 games in the minors. If he can be at least "replacement level" offensively (or better yet, slightly above, though I'll settle with "replacement level"), then he could have a future as a utility player in the Mike Fontenot mold because of his defensive ability. As far as developing beyond that comparison though is questionable at best.

Sure, Noonan is still young (he just turned 22 on May 4th), so he has that going for him. That being said, he needs to have a massive change offensively (both in approach and production) if he ever wants to recapture that promise he garnered after his solid AZL campaign in 2007. Considering how he's done so far in 115 games in Double-A, it's probably unlikely he'll bounce back to that "top 20 Giants prospect" status again (though I certainly wouldn't rule it out completely).

Farm Watch: Belt, Gillaspie, Surkamp, Kieschnick, Noonan, Marte, Escobar, and Concepcion

I figured it'd be good to take a look in the minors and see how things were faring amongst the Giants affiliates. Let's take a look at things level by level:

Fresno Grizzlies (14-13 after May 4th)

The Grizzlies have been bolstered by some solid hitting, which is making up for their relative pitching woes (5.80 team ERA, 1.605 team WHIP and 2.01 team K/BB ratio). The biggest performer lately has been Brandon Belt, who has been mashing PCL pitching since being demoted to Fresno a couple of weeks ago when the Giants activated Cody Ross off the disabled list. In 11 games and 45 plate appearances, Belt is hitting .471 with an OPS of 1.342. He has hit two home runs, 11 RBI, scored 9 runs, drew 10 walks and is 3-for-3 on stolen base attempts.

While Belt's numbers are comforting (and a sign of why Giants fans shouldn't panic about Belt's slow debut with the Giants), another player who has somewhat rebounded this year in Fresno is Conor Gillaspie. Picked in the Supplemental Round of the 2008 draft, there was a lot of hype surrounding Gillaspie, as many experts felt that the Giants plucked two "Close-to-Major League Ready" players in the former Wichita State third baseman and Buster Posey. While Posey has lived up to the hype, Gillaspie's defensive and offensive struggles has set him back the past couple of seasons.

This year, Gillaspie is showing some promise in the PCL. He is hitting .280 with an OPS of .808, and he has 14 walks, 19 RBI and two home runs to boot. Gillaspie's plate patience has always been solid in the minors (that was the one plus aspect scouts raved about his hitting when he was drafted) until last year in Richmond, when his OBP dipped to .335 and his BB/K ratio fell to 0.55 (it hadn't been lower than 0.69 previously). Granted, Gillaspie's lack of power (his career slugging in the minors is .402) and defensive inefficiencies are concerning. Then again, his better power numbers (.440 slugging this year) and his efficient plate approach (0.82 BB/K ratio this year) might be a sign that all is not lost on Gillaspie just yet.


Richmond Flying Spiders (11-14 after May 4th)

The record is not good, and they have the lowest R/G of any affiliate in the Giants system (3.56...but that is typical considering the Eastern League tends to favor pitchers more). However, Eric Surkamp has continued to flash his potential as an under-the-radar prospect in the Giants system.

In five starts, Surkamp has pitched 26.1 innings and has an ERA of 2.05, a FIP of 2.67, a WHIP of 1.29 and a K/BB ratio of 3.42. Surkamp has continued his trend of maintaining high K/9 numbers (11.1 per career, 14.0 in Richmond), while minimizing his walks (career 2.5 BB/9; 4.1 this year). And, his BABIP has been high so far (.364), so once his BABIP starts to fall back to earth, Surkamp's numbers will look even better and his win-loss record (1-2 currently) will start to reflect his other numbers (Of course, it would work to his benefit if the Flying Spiders could generate some more runs).

On the offensive side of things, once heralded prospects Roger Kieschnick and Nick Noonan continue their struggles at the plate in their second go-around in the Eastern League. They flashed some promise in San Jose a couple of years ago, but they had dismal years in 2010 and things haven't changed much  to start off the year in 2011. Kieschnick is currently batting .194 with a .513 OPS and isn't showcasing any of the power he showed when he broke in as a professional in the California League (23 home runs, .532 slugging in San Jose). He is walking more (0.53 BB/K ratio), but it hasn't made up for his 171 point drop in ISO (Isolated Power)  from 2009 to now.

Noonan started off the year injured, but the struggles from 2010 (.237 average, .584 OPS) continue. He is hitting .222 with a .541 OPS in 62 plate appearances and he has only one extra base hit. It is possible Noonan is still recovering from injury and he's bound to turn it around as he gets more at-bats, but right now, things aren't looking bright for the 22-year-old former first round pick.


San Jose Giants (17-10 after May 4th)

The best affiliate in the Giants system the past few seasons continues that trend this year, as they have the best record of any Giants affiliate. The offense has been carried by first round pick Gary Brown, who has an .832 OPS and 17 stolen bases in 127 plate appearances. Wendell Fairley has also had a positive impact on this Giants team, as he currently is posting an .834 OPS in his second season in San Jose. No wonder the Giants generate the most runs per game (6.04) out of any Giants affiliate.

While a lot of the attention gets placed on the hitters in San Jose and in the California League in general, the Giants pitching shouldn't be swept under the rug. They have the lowest R/G (3.52) numbers of any Giants affiliate and the rotation has been the anchor to the Giants' pitching success. Zach Wheeler and Craig Westcott are the ones getting the most buzz out of the South Bay (and they should be, especially Wheeler who has a 3.78 K/BB ratio), but one guy who's been interesting to follow is Kelvin Marte.

Marte this year is 3-1 with a 0.94 ERA a 1.15 WHIP. However, though he did get a little bit of pub in an article by Baseball Evolution.com, for the most part Marte has been a guy who hasn't really impressed too much since he broke into the league in 2007 out of the Dominican Republic. Marte has a decent fastball (92 MPH) and he works off his changeup, but he needs to develop his secondary pitches (especially his curveball) to become more effective, according to BE writer Richard Van Zandt. Furthermore, Van Zandt's concerns are probably legitimate as well, since many of Marte's advance numbers (.250 BABIP, 1.60 K/BB ratio, 86.3 strand rate, 3.94 FIP) suggest that he is not really developing as a pitcher, but just going through a lucky patch. It'll be interesting to see how Marte will maintain his numbers as he garners more starts.



Augusta Green Jackets (8-18 after May 4th)

The Green Jackets have had serious problems with their pitching, and their 6.3 R/G allowed proves it. Youngsters Edwin Escobar and Edward Concepcion have really struggled in the SALLY, battling issues with their control and command. Escobar has appeared in four games, and has started two, but he has only pitched six innings total. He has given up 15 hits and 15 runs, and his ERA currently sits at 18.00 and his WHIP is 3.33. Furthermore, his K/BB ratio is one, so Escobar is getting guys on the basepaths (7.5 BB/9) and that has only killed him so far this year.

Concepcion has many of the same struggles as Escobar, but walks really stand out in his case. While Concepcion has struck out 13 batters in 13.1 IP, he has also walked a whopping 15 batters and has given up 16 hits and 11 runs as well. These walk issues are familiar territory for Concepcion, as he posted a 6.5 BB/9 and a 1.24 K/BB ratio in 63.1 IP  last year in the Northwest League. While it's still early in the year and you certainly hope Concepcion can revert to the form he showed in the Arizona Rookie League in 2009 (he posted a 2.69 K/BB ratio and an 11.5 K/9), it seems like he hasn't really figured out the problems that plagued him with the Volcanoes a year ago.

Both Escobar and Concepcion aren't the sole problems with this Green Jackets pitching staff. Mario Rodriguez, Seth Rosin and Justin Schumer have all had issues on the bump. That being said, you would have hoped for a bit better start out of two high-ceiling guys like Escobar and Concepcion, who are both young and both have live arms.

OTF's 32 Most Interesting Prospects: No. 26, Henry Sosa, RHP

The ceiling on Henry Sosa is one that has declined sharply in a short period of time. Once considered a sleeper prospect in 2007 when he made the All-Star Futures game, Sosa has had a hard time finding consistent success in his journey through the Giants system. While he may still have a future as a middle-reliever of some kind (and that isn't necessarily a bad thing to have), it's safe to say that Sosa probably won't live up to the hype he garnered back in 2006 and 2007, when he burst onto the scene in the Arizona Rookie League, SALLY and California League as a 20 and 21-year-old.

When Sosa broke into the minor leagues at 20 years old, Sosa was known for a lively fastball and for striking guys out in bunches (his K/9 was 11.4 his rookie year in the AZL). When he advanced to the SALLY and California League in 2007, he had some issues with his control, as he posted high walk numbers (61 walks in a 125.2 IP between Augusta and San Jose).  That being said, he still maintained good strikeout numbers (11.0 K/9 in 63.2 IP in San Jose; 8.9 K/9 in 62.0 IP), so there wasn't too much panic about Sosa's control, especially considering he was only 20 years old

2008 was supposed to be a big transition year for Sosa (especially considering the hype he garnered by making the Futures game). Here is what Obsessive Giants Compulsive said about Sosa before Spring Training that season:

"...Our rotation could get very crowded with top of the rotation throwers in a couple of years. We have Zito, Cain, Lincecum, Lowry, and Correia currently plus Sanchez and Misch in the wings, but Sosa, Bumgarner, and Alderson could be ready in the 2010-2011 timeframe to come up and start in the majors, though I would say that there is an outside chance that both Sosa and Alderson could make the majors in 2009 - as Sabean said Alderson could on draft day - if the Giants advance them aggressively, much like they did with Sanchez, bringing them up to relieve initially..."

Unfortunately, Sosa didn't transition to the Majors as fast as Giants fans would have hoped as injury issues kept him in the lower minors for another season (he had surgery to repair a torn tendon in his left knee). After pitching 125.2 IP in 2007, Sosa only pitched 57.2 IP in 2008 and didn't show much improvement in his second go-around in the California League. His ERA was 4.31 and he allowed 62 hits and 18 walks in 56.1 IP in San Jose. While he did strike out 58 batters, his 9.3 K/9 was a 1.7 point decline from the previous season.

The health problems and regression from 2007 to 2008 probably should have been a red flag and a sign of things to come. However, the real warning signs came during his 2009 season in Double-A Connecticut. Despite posting good "traditional" numbers to start out the year (6-0, 2.36 ERA), Sosa was shut down after 14 appearances and 72.1 IP due to "arm fatigue" issues. While the arm issues were an obvious scare, what was even more concerning was his 5.5 percent strikeout rate in the Eastern League, an almost four percent decrease from 2008 and a five and a half point decrease from 2007.

Sosa bounced around between being a starter and reliever last season in Fresno, but eventually found himself regulated more to the bullpen over the course of the year. Despite his role-change, the numbers didn't change much in the Pacific Coast League: his K/9 rate only improved to 6.5 and his K/BB ratio was 1.51, the lowest ratio of his minor league career (until this year where it is 1.19, but it is only the start of the season so I won't rush to judgment too quickly).

In many ways, Sosa's career path almost resembles that of Merkin Valdez. Granted, Valdez was a higher-rated prospect than Sosa. Valdez ranked No. 40 and No. 58 according to Baseball America in 2004 and 2005. Sosa never cracked any of Baseball America's Top-100 lists. (Though in retrospect, the Giants system was so shallow that Valdez was really just the best of a meager bunch, and hence, his ranking was inflated in response. The Giants system was a lot better when Sosa arrived, and hence, he went under the radar with Madison Bumgarner and Tim Alderson commanding all the attention.)

If you look past the "rankings" though, Sosa and Valdez have had very close career paths. Valdez broke in as a raw pitcher with serious gas, but injury issues (he missed the entire 2007 season due to Tommy John surgery) and never developing as a "pitcher" (e.g. just being a "thrower" who relies on his fastball) prevented him from capitalizing on the early hype he garnered in the minors. The same could almost be said of Sosa. He had a great arm, but he's been plagued by injuries, and his command has been questionable since his knee surgery.

If you don't buy the Valdez-Sosa comparison, check out their Minor League numbers (Sosa and Valdez) and you'll see that they have had eerily similar statistics (lower K/BB ratios and lower K/9 numbers the higher they climbed in the minors). Does that mean Sosa is the second coming of Valdez? Not exactly, but I don't see Sosa faring much better than Valdez considering where he's at and how he's pitched lately, especially this year with the Grizzlies (8.59 ERA, 2.52 WHIP in 14.2 IP).

Of course, Valdez did pitch 68.1 IP in the Majors over four seasons and 69 games. If the Giants can get that out of Sosa, he may still prove to be valuable to this Giants organization. Bullpen depth is never a bad thing to have (especially considering how inconsistent middle relievers can be), and it's always nice to bolster that depth as cheaply as possible and within the system (Sosa satisfies both factors).

Callup Profile: Ryan Rohlinger, 3B/2B/SS

With Pablo Sandoval the latest Giant to find himself on the Disabled List with a broken wrist (and he's expected to be out 4-6 weeks...yipee), the Giants called up Grizzlies third baseman Ryan Rohlinger.

This will be Rohlinger's fourth stint in the Majors with the Giants, as he saw some "cups of coffee" with the Big League club at various time from the 2008-2010 seasons. Rohlinger has played 45 Major League games and has a .197 wOBA in 71 plate appearances in that time span.

Despite the pedestrian numbers though, Rohlinger will be expected to compete for the Giants' starting third base position with Sandoval sidelined. Mike Fontenot and Mark Derosa (once he gets off the DL) will also be competing for the position as well until Sandoval comes off the DL.

As a prospect, Rohlinger is a player in the "Frandsen-mold." He has produced a decent career in the minors, but it's safe to say he's not flashing on any experts' or blogs top-25 Giants prospects anytime soon. It's understandable. He's currently 27 years old (and he's only had 71 plate appearances at the Major League level), he was a 6th round pick in 2006 out of college (he went to the University of Oklahoma), and he has had a lot of players at his position(s) ahead of him at the next level (Sandoval, Freddy Sanchez, Edgar Renteria, Juan Uribe, and Miguel Tejada have all been roadblocks from him getting a serious shot at the Majors).

Rohlinger isn't a bad player by any means though. If you look at his numbers, he's actually shown great improvement as he's advanced up the Giants minor league system. After posting a .690 OPS and .320 wOBA with three home runs, 34 runs scored and 28 RBI in the Northwest League his rookie season, his numbers went up at every level for the most part. Though he didn't hit well for average in 2007 (he only hit .236) with the Green Jackets, he did hit 18 home runs, drive in 78 RBI and posted an OPS of .747 and a wOBA of .336.

In 2008, Rohlinger's numbers really took a big jump, especially in terms of batting average, which started to get Rohlinger noticed. After hitting .252 and .237 in 2006 and 2007, respectively, Rohlinger's average jumped to .285 in San Jose in 73 games and .296 in Connecticut in 44 games. Rohlinger still showcased his surprising pop for a utility infielder (his wOBA was .358 and .378 in San Jose and Connecticut, respectively), only now he was getting a little more lucky when it came to batting average.

The jump to Fresno for Rohlinger proved to be seamless. In a 126 games and 535 plate appearances in Fresno in 2009, Rohlinger hit 16 home runs, drove in 78 RBI, had an OPS of .819 and a wOBA of .360. The following year in the PCL also proved to be a great campaign as well, as he hit 11 home runs, 51 RBI and posted an OPS of .900 and a wOBA of .388 in almost 201 less plate appearances than 2009.

The best aspects of Rohlinger's game seems to be his surprising pop and plate patience. In the minors, Rohlinger has never had a BB/K ratio under 0.47 ( and he never had a BB/K ratio under 0.65 from Salem-Keizer to Connecticut). While he's didn't hit well for average in his first 20 games this season in Fresno (he was hitting only .194), his BB/K ratio (1.56) and his power (he has four home runs and his ISO is .203) made up for his shortcoming on the batting average end (and his .167 BABIP probably had a lot to do with that .194 average).

The biggest problem for Rohlinger hasn't been the minors. The biggest problem he has had is transitioning his skills and stats to the Major League level. Even though he has been patient at the plate in every stint in the Giants minor league system, he has been far from that with the Giants (career 0.21 BB/K ratio with the Giants). Furthermore, he hasn't shown much, if any power (career 0.61 ISO) and he seems to be overwhelmed by big league pitching if you look at his advanced plate discipline numbers in the majors (78 career contact percentage; 11.2 swinging strike percentage).

Rohlinger is a valuable player to the Grizzlies roster and if the Fresno squad wants to have a shot at winning that elusive PCL title, then he will be paramount to their success. As a prospect though, Rohlinger doesn't offer much and doesn't have much of a history at the Major League level. To make matters worse, he won't get many opportunities either, as the Giants management has a lot of money invested in other Giants players at the positions he plays at.

Is Rohlinger just a classic "Four-A" player? (Too good for the minors, not good enough for the Majors.) It's hard to say because 71 plate appearances is a very small sample, and you can't really judge a player properly on such little data. At this point in his career though, unless something dramatic happens during this fourth callup to the Big League club (he would need a really outstanding hot streak, not to mention time some extended playing time, which both seem unlikely), he'll probably end up closer to the "Four-A" player track than the "serviceable MLB player" one.

Minor League Park Factors, League Run Environments and Evaluating Giants Players' Stats Part I: Fresno and the PCL

When it comes to evaluating the stats of minor league players, that can be a heated and touchy debate. Many people like to use numbers to project a players' chances of success at the Major League level, and there isn't anything wrong with doing that as long as you know which stats are important and ones that should be taken with a grain of salt. For example, John Bowker absolutely tore it up in the Pacific Coast League. However, as any Giants fan will tell you, Bowker's minor league success never really translated to the Major League level.

So what should Giants fans do in terms of determining whether Giants minor league player stats are for real or not? Well, two things should be kept in mind:

1.) Which leagues and levels tend to favor the hitters and which ones tend to favor pitchers?
2.) Which parks are hitter's parks and which ones are pitcher's parks?

Therefore, I wanted to take a look at each level and each park and see the park factors of each ballpark and run environments of each league in the Giants system. Of course, these numbers aren't sure fire. You still have to keep in consideration the plate approach of certain players (hitters with good BB/K ratios and pitchers with good K/BB ratios can overcome certain parks for example). That being said, I think looking at the park factors and run environments can be a telling sign of which players are having true success that can translate to the Major League level and which ones may struggle as they advance through the system or in the Majors.

Because of the length of this post, I decided to split it up into multiple parts. In this first part, I'm going to look at the Fresno Grizzlies, Chukchansi Park and the Pacific Coast League (and how it stacks against the International League), and what we should be looking for when it comes to evaluating Grizzlies players' numbers.

(For the record, I got the statistical information from Baseball Think Factory and The Hardball Times.)


Three-year weighted Park factors for Chukchnasi Park: 0.97 Run factor, 0.98 Hit factor, 0.93 Double factor, 1.13 Home Run factor, 0.98 Walk factor, 0.98 Strikeout factor.

Run environments for the Pacific Coast League (2007-2009): 5.1 runs per game, 5.0 base runs per game (base runs = baserunners * basesrunner scoring rate * home runs), 2.5 home run percentage, 8.5 walk percentage, 2.1 error percentage, 7.9 stolen base attempt rate (SBA/OPP).

Surprisingly, the run factor is actually below average at Chukchansi Park, which would suggest it's a pitcher's park. However, the home run factor at 1.13 is one of the highest factors in Triple-A. How is this so? Well, just judging by the dimensions of Chukchansi Park, it's not exactly a cavernous yard. So, while home runs may go out easier than most "average" Triple-A parks, other extra base hits are going to be harder to come by because of the smaller dimensions (hence the 0.95 double factor, which is below the 1.00 average).

In terms of the run environments of the Pacific Coast League, this really shouldn't be too much of a surprise. Since it's the last step for a player before he hits the Majors, the numbers are closer to what you would see in the National and American League rather than other leagues (mainly because players are more skilled, with most having some Major League experience). However, the PCL is a bit more of a hitter's league than it's counterpart, the International League, which tends to be more of a pitcher's league and favors "small ball."

To compare, the R/G average in the PCL was 5.1 and the BsR/G was 5.0, and the HR percentage was 2.5 and the stolen base attempt rate 7.9 from 2007-2009. In the International League, R/G and BsR/G was 4.4 and the HR percentage was a lot lower at 2.1. The biggest upgrade though came in stolen bases, as the SBA percentage was 9.5 percent, a 1.6 difference from the PCL.

There are a variety of factors in the differences between the International League and the PCL. Probably the biggest factor to the difference is the fact that the PCL is mostly situated in the West Coast and western part of the Midwest, where the weather is a lot drier. Weather and humidity factors aren't going to keep the ball in the park like in some parks in the Southeartern or Northeastern parts of the United States (where most clubs in the IL are located). Another big factor is the fact that the clubs with affiliates in the Pacific Coast League simply have more talent in Triple-A than the International League (the IL is lower than PCL in batting average, on-base percentage and slugging). It makes sense though, as most International League teams spend a ton of money on free agents to make up their roster and have most of their talent in the lower minors (like the Mets, Yankees and Red Sox) . There are some exceptions to the rules (Tampa Bay, Minnesota and Atlanta for example), but the PCL has more teams that rely on their own talent to stock their Major League rosters, and hence, there is going to be deeper talent at Triple-A (because guys are going to go up and down all the time).


What Does this Mean for Grizzlies Players?

I think you have to take a couple of things into consideration when evaluating talent on the Fresno roster: age is huge and hitting stats have to be taken with a grain of salt. In terms of the first point, it's one thing for a guy to dominate in Fresno, but guys in their late 20's or early thirties really are more four-A players rather than legitimate prospects. If you play long enough in the minors or the PCL, you're going to do well. That's a given. But can they do well at the Major League level? If they have been in the minors long enough, then there is probably some serious flaws in their game that prevents them from sticking to the 25-man roster, which just goes to show that stats can't be the sole component to evaluating a Grizzlies player.

In terms of point two, hitter's are going to have an advantage in the PCL because of the park factors and the fact that most pitchers in Triple-A are of the "four-A" mold. Just look at the Grizzlies rotation and you'll see that none of those guys are "elite" prospects by any measure. Most "elite" pitching prospects tend to bypass Triple-A all together and make the jump from Double-A to the Majors, so while the pitching in Triple-A isn't terrible, it isn't exactly stellar either. With these factors favoring hitters, offensive stats for Grizzlies (and most PCL) players are going to be inflated by some measure.

When looking at a Grizzlies offensive players, I would put less weight in stats like slugging and average and more salt into numbers like OBP and BB/K ratio. Because of the nature of Chukchansi, home runs are going to fly easier for hitters than they would at AT&T Park (simply because of the dimensions and weather factors), so to think power is going to "absolutely" translate from the PCL to the MLB level is usually unlikely (though the good hitters will translate it, but they also hit at other levels as well; guys who don't show power or consistency with their power until Triple-A are usually the ones you throw red flags at).

As for plate approach though, that is something that translates a little better. Do guys work the count and get on-base or are they wild swingers who don't walk much? And how much do they strike out? If they are striking out a lot in the PCL, how is that going to translate to the National League? It probably won't turn out good for that player when they get to the Giants roster. (Unless they are high walk guys as well, but even then, that's not a guarantee as some, like Bowker, didn't transition their impressive walk numbers to the Giants, but still flashed the same strikeout problems.)

When it comes to looking at Grizzlies players, yes the home runs and RBI and batting average numbers can be tempting, but it's important to not get too fooled by that. Like I said, while it could be a sign of a guy continuing to showcase power as they transition level to level, guys who suddenly have power outbursts in the PCL after not showing such skills in Double-A and lower are probably benefiting more from the League and Park rather than actually developing skills.

As for pitchers, most of the pitchers in Triple-A don't have much ceiling simply because most good pitching prospects spend little to no time in Triple-A (unless they are working some things out). If you are going to look at a pitcher, looking at strikeouts and K/BB ratio is probably the most important indicator of how they will perform at the Major League level. For the most part, guys who strike out a lot of batters, minimize balls in play and minimize their walks are the ones that succeed the most in the PCL (mainly because it's such a hitter's league and most BABIP numbers for pitchers are higher than the .300 average). Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of Grizzlies pitchers (or PCL pitchers in general) who sport these qualities, and the ones that do don't seem to stay in the PCL very long.

The reason? They are good pitchers and good pitchers make it to the Majors. They don't stick in Triple-A.