School's Out; Free For All Mailbag's In!
It’s the off day — well, sort of! As you’ll see at the bottom of today’s other post (Stats Review!), we actually had four games yesterday. But it’s as “off” as things get for most of the rest of the summer. So let’s not waste time with prologues and get right to mailbagging!
(After this quick word from our sponsor — which is me!)
Ok. Question and answer time. Let’s see what’s in the ol’ mailbag this week:
Thanks for doing these mailbags, Roger—what a great addition this season! I’d like to know how you see Blake Sabol among the potential next-wave players, guys who could impact the Giants for years. I understand that he isn’t really in the purview of There R Giants since he isn’t a home-grown player and he’s been on the MLB club throughout his brief tenure in the organization. But Sabol is young at 25, his high minors offensive performance is among the very best in the org and the brass has shown it really believes in him, including by Kapler batting him in the middle and top of the order lately. So, where might Sabol fit in an updated Top 50 of yours, and what do you see as his most likely outcome and ceiling?
Roger, can you clarify the position with Blake Sabol's R5 timings. By my reckoning 90 days on the active roster is about the end of June. Can he be optioned or IL'd after this point without the Giants being penalized? I'm sure both the Giants and Sabol wouldn't mind him having a break, given the rigors of the majors for a rookie - by my reckoning only Davis hasn't had time off this year from a position player perspective.
Ah, I hear the bell tolling for me. As many of you know, I essentially side-stepped the conversation back in the winter when I pulled out my “Get out of Rule 5 Free” card to avoid slotting him into the Top 50, but let’s fix that omission right now.
Let me answer Mike’s question first, since that’s pretty straight forward. As a Rule 5 pick, Sabol cannot be optioned during the 2023 season under any conditions. He CAN, however, be put on any number of non-active assignments. Besides the obvious Injured List (IL), there are a number of other types of leave that take players off the Active Roster without being optioned: Family Leave, Bereavement List, Concussion List, etc. And, if he has any trips to the IL or Concussion list, there is the possibility of sending him to Sacramento on rehab assignments for 20 days. He has to spend at least 90 days on the Active Roster (without being optioned) to be released from Rule 5 Purgatory — and that would extend into future seasons if, for instance, he had an injury that required surgery. But if he spends 90 days on the Active Roster — without ever being optioned down to Sacramento — by the time we get to the end of the year, the Giants will have unfettered control of him (I tried to think of a non-icky word for that, but there really isn’t one) for the future.
As for how he fits into the youth wave, I’m reminded of a comment that a baseball employee made to me recently: that a player’s ceiling is ultimately defined by his game power. If you look at things from that specific lens, you might be able to make a case that Sabol is the most important member of this current wave of prospects. His game power is almost certainly greater than Casey Schmitt’s, Patrick Bailey’s, or Luis Matos’, all of whom could possibly end up as more 12-15 HR types, rather than 20-25.
The fact that Sabol has been able to survive some really rough times and even thrive a bit while striking out at incredibly high rates has been truly impressive — though I would say it’s an open question as to whether that 110 wRC+ or the 35% K rate is more telling about the kind of hitter he’ll ultimately be. He certainly has power that will play in the big leagues, but there are enough limits to his game between his K rate, his platoon splits, and his defensive struggles, to make it hard to see him ever being an everyday player on a good team.
It’s really a testament to him that he’s still here at all — there are so many other ways this season could have gone that didn’t include him making it into June. Just imagine, for instance, a season where Roberto Perez stays healthy, and Mitch Haniger and Austin Slater are both back on the team during the first couple of weeks of April. Would the Giants really have been able to keep Sabol around in that multiverse? Even now, it’s going to be a challenge keeping him on the roster, with Joc Pederson coming back and Joey Bart near ready. Do they really want to go into the middle of summer with Sabol as the only backup catcher on the team? So, there are still many forks this path can take. It’s a long, long season, and we aren’t even close to the Days of Attrition yet.
But I think, in answer to Scott’s question, I’ll repeat what someone who is around the Altoona club (where Sabol started his impressive 2022 season) told me recently. Sabol’s path to a big league career is to play OF a couple times a week, DH a couple times a week, and catch on Sundays — all while mashing right-handed pitching. Which might make him an Austin Slater for the next gen Giants, a piece that fits into the greater puzzle — assuming he makes it through 2023.
Hi Roger. Can Keaton Winn be a solid MLB starter with just his fastball-splitter combo (like we saw with Kevin Gausman), or does he need a consistent third offering? What development do you need to see from his slider to be confident that he'll stick as a starter? Also, do you envision the Giants employing Tyler Fitzgerald at more positions (maybe playing some outfield) in order to maximize his profile? If so, I can see him being a solid utility piece for us next year and going forward.
This is a really fascinating question, which I addressed — though not with respect to Winn — in my Top 50 piece on Mason Black. And it’s one you hear discussed around baseball these days — as less and less is asked of starting pitchers, do they need as many weapons to accomplish it? There are still plenty of people in the game who will state steadfastly that you have to have three average or better pitches to be a big league starter — that’s certainly the majority opinion. But there are those who are paving different ways. Spencer Strider is the most obvious example. He throws two pitches — but they are two truly elite pitches.
Even with Gausman, whose fastball and splitter were two of the most effective pitches in baseball for big stretches of 2020-21, we saw the limits to that approach during the second half of 2021, when teams were able to start laying off his splitter, making the two-pitch mix far less effective. His response was to crank up the usage of his slider in 2022 — using it 15% of the time in his first season with the Blue Jays, nearly three times more often than he had with the Giants.
As I’ve been writing, while Winn’s splitter is a “right now” big league weapon, the fastball has, I think, more questions attached to it. Eno Sarris’ Stuff+ model has it as a below major league average pitch at 95.5 Stuff+ with 96 Location+. There are starting pitchers in the majors with fastball numbers that look like that right now (that mixture is actually better than the Nats’ Josiah Gray’s, and not too much different from Chris Bassitt’s), but I don’t think that’s the foundation of a successful two-pitch mix.
The last thing I’ll say here is that this isn’t a question for Winn alone. It’s hard to think of anybody in the system who really has three average or better major league pitches. I think Kyle Harrison does, but he’s been extremely reticent about using his changeup over the years. Carson Whisenhunt’s curve is certainly a step back from his fastball and change. Black is focusing right now on repeating the fastball and slider, and is rarely throwing the change. There are some (like Winn) who mix two fastballs and a hard breaking ball, but that’s not quite as effective as having a change of pace pitch — especially for dealing with opposite side hitters. Coming up with three “average” pitches for the majors is incredibly challenging — it’s why so few succeed at it and most ultimately move to other roles.
As for Fitzgerald, yes I think it’s entirely possible to play him in the outfield — and he thinks so, too! That said, I wouldn’t entirely rule out the possibility that he might be the best answer to the post-Crawford shortstop situation, either.
Watching the NBA playoffs, I've thought a lot (as I'm sure many others have, as well) about how the Miami Heat have done so well and gotten so far with undrafted talent. Obviously, the hope for any professional sports organization is for linear and predictable development from everyone, but it is so multivariate. Roger, you have access to players and I assume can get some sense of them off the field, you have a sense of what kind of culture/system this organization is trying to cultivate, and you've gotten to see which players get promoted and how far they go. Given all that, if you put on your player development hat and you fully exclude the physical aspect of development/performance, have you noticed any particular traits or similar backgrounds/experiences of players who have gotten promoted within this organization and done well vs those that don't? Is there a "type" of individual that would thrive in the Giants' current system/culture, when considering mental make-up?
I’m not sure that player development in baseball and basketball compare particularly well, given the NBA’s two-round draft format. But let’s settle into the meat of this question.
First off, one thing I don’t think I can say enough is that the Giants really have made targeting high character individuals an organizational priority. That “no pricks” mantra that Mauricio Dubón famously voiced goes well beyond the major league roster. I am consistently awed by the quality of kids that are on these rosters up and down the organization seemingly every year, and I know that’s no accident. Scouting Director Michael Holmes said, after last year’s draft, that they feel it’s more important to correctly evaluate a kid’s character and makeup than it is to correctly evaluate his skills.
That’s important for a couple of reasons. One is that, in any work environment, people tend to be more productive when they’re happier — there are plenty of work environment studies that confirm this basic fact. Developing at the highest levels of baseball is incredibly hard, and a positive mindset is crucial to work. Positive mindsets are easier when most guys are getting along and helping each other.
And then secondly, the Giants place a tremendous importance on preparation. If you want the blueprint of the type of player who will thrive, it’s probably Mike Yastrzemski, and I think that has a lot to do with the mutually beneficial intersection of his desires to prepare and the Giants’ desire to give their players prepatory materials. Being willing to put in all the work, mental and physical, is a huge part of this game, so the Giants really focus on guys with positive attitudes and work ethic. When you hear anybody in the organization talk about Vaun Brown, for instance, you’ll hear them say a lot of positive things before they get around to talking about his game skills or tools. He’s a really impressive person — and that matters (hey, which leads me to a tease … look for yet another podcast featuring Brown coming out later today). The same is true of Reggie Crawford — people are blown away by his personality and makeup.
None of which is breaking new ground, I suppose. Talent, character, focus, preparation…. these things really do lead to success in nearly any context.
I would like to add, however, that I think Andy Baggarly raised a very important issue in his recent interview with Farhan Zaidi — statistical analysis can often lead to equity issues. The more teams rely on the relative security of college stats or even showcase ball stats (in the case of high schools), the more they are potentially shutting the door to players from backgrounds that don’t, or can’t make use of those avenues. I was very happy to see Baggarly raise the question, and also quite happy to see Zaidi admit that it’s a knotty issue that they think about internally quite a bit. We tend to value what we can measure — which means we need to think very carefully about how we measure things.
Does it seem to you that Matos, Luciano, and Brown will be the next batch of rookie position players, and if so, how do you see these players being incorporated into the existing lineup? In particular, the IF of Wade, Estrada, Schmitt, Davis, Flores seems pretty solid and doesn't leave a lot of space for Luciano..
The quick answer here is that time sorts things out. In 2011, the Giants had the league’s most enviable starting rotation, with four extremely talented young home-grown arms, ranging in age from 21 to 28. “No need to acquire any young pitching for the next decade” fans might have smugly thought, “we’re set!” In fact, they’d never get any two of that quartet to have great seasons together ever again (and only get two good ones from Cain and Bumgarner one more time). Things change quickly!
And beyond that, if you’re suggesting that Luciano or Brown will be shoe-horning their way into the 2023 lineup, I’d suggest a slightly slower roll. Both are just getting their seasons started, and have plenty of adjustments and improvements to make to conquer the Double A level. Matos is closer in proximity, but I don’t know that he’s going to force the issue without injuries opening up an opportunity for him, especially with Pederson returning to make the situation even more crowded (and returning to the top question, the outfield situation clearly impacts Sabol’s ability to stay the entire year).
As we move into the 2024 time range, then some of these things might come to a head — depending on who stays, who goes, who else gets brought in. But if Luciano and Brown and Matos develop as the team believes they will, they will find their opportunities soon enough — and could even impact the kind of moves the Giants make in the winter. As for Luciano, I don’t think that getting forced out of the infield would really change his potential value to the club, though I also don’t think the shortstop situation for the future has been clearly defined as of yet (as I suggested in my Fitzgerald answer above).
I'm a regular poster on Together We're Giants, a wonderful Giants fan blog. A couple of us are wondering about the status of Seth Corry. He was a top five prospect before the shoulder surgery that cost him more than a year of MiLB service time. Do you think we will see him pitch this year, and in your opinion will he be able to climb back into the top 20-25 prospects in the organization?
Hi Roger. I saw your note about Will Bednar today, but what’s going on with him is still a but of a mystery (to me, at least). Is it still his back? Does the org seemed concerned? Do people think he can still be an impact starter once he’s healthy and gets his velocity back? I assume his struggles last year were health related.
These are timely questions, as both Corry and Bednar popped up on the Giants’ ACL rosters yesterday — just as I predicted they would in my Rookie League Preview that I hope you all saw:
Both of these talented arms will get back on the mound — and then we’ll see. I can tell you that Corry actually was in action last night, and if you check out the Weekly Stats Review (which will hit your Inbox in another hour), you’ll find some detailed scouting reports of his outing.
As we’ve heard from Farhan Zaidi, Kyle Haines, and others over the years, if guys can’t get on the field, then it’s impossible to evaluate their progress or help them get better. Certainly the Giants are invested in both of these players. They believe in them and see a lot to like. But Corry is coming off major shoulder surgery — and basically spent a year before that not being able to throw strikes — and Bednar has been plagued by back issues virtually his entire pro career. I talked with a scout who saw Bednar in a game in extended spring a week or so ago and had him at 91-93 with the fastball. That’s where he’s stubbornly been since spring of 2022 when he’s been on the mound, and a significant tick down from where he was when he plowed through the College World Series back in 2021. Hopefully, he’s just ramping up after a long delay and we’ll see a better version of him this summer.
As for their prospect status — pitchers’ status changes all the time with the quality of their stuff. If they can get back to the best version of their stuff, their prospect status will rise accordingly. Of course, only the first of those things is actually important and meaningful. So, we’ll see.
Roger, I want to know how the kids from the last two crops of international signings are doing. In your opinion, which five are most likely to make it to the bigs? Could you rank them and give us a little info about each: best case scenario on the Giants (35 to 80 scale), strengths, weaknesses, areas of improvement needed? Thanks brutha, keep up the amazing thing you do.
Goodness, Jason! A ranking of the five best IFA guys from the past two years — including players who have just one professional game on their resume (again, check out the Stats Review for more on debuts)? That’s asking a lot!
Without much to go on as of yet, I would say that I have to follow the evaluations of the Giants’ international scouting staff — and mostly those evaluations are expressed, currently, in dollars. Now that’s not entirely true! International Scouting Director Joe Salermo has talked on the podcast about the international market being like stocks — you want to get the best value for the least money. And there are definitely some players they really believe are steals at five figure costs (Cuban shortstop Anthony Tandron and Mexican catcher Jorge Ramirez, for instance).
But with the obvious caveat that there will likely (or hopefully) be some Alex Canario or Camilo Doval types who will emerge from the rosters in time, for now, I’d have to stick with the big money signings:
Rayner Arias
Ryan Reckley
Juan Perez
Yosneiker Rivas
Dennys Riera
There are several other really interesting hitters in these classes, however — so I’ll just recommend you look at that rookie primer again. Last year’s class was unfortunately devastated by injury, so it’s almost like both classes are starting anew this season. We will see who proves out as the top quality of the group.
If the giants were to apply last year’s draft strategy where they targeted players who were hurt and suspended in the first two rounds, who might they target in this year’s draft? And tangentially, do you think that strategy was used because they were picking in the bottom of the draft?
Looking across all levels and seeing areas of need, have you gotten any indications of what the Giants’ draft strategy will be this year or what kind of players they are looking for (e.g., best player available, college bats, high ceiling high schoolers, other)?
Yes, draft season approaches, and the time for anticipating new talent is nigh. So let me combine these two questions and see if I can work my way to one answer. First of all, Kam, yes absolutely, the high risk strategy employed last year was directly related to picking at the bottom of the draft. They spied the opportunity to get a couple of top of the first round talents without having a pick in that position, and they rolled the dice. Things look good so far with that gamble!
As for this year, well let me answer Andy first. I’ve seen a series of mocks from extremely well-informed writers all suggesting that college position player will be the way the Giants go this year — and there are certainly some interesting choices if they do, including my fellow Terp Matt Shaw, who really can hit (though how exactly he’ll fit in defensively as a pro is an open question). That said, I’m going to go out on a bit of a limb and suggest that their mid-round position this year puts them in a great place to nab a high school bat. The normal way of things as drafts approach is for college bats to move up boards and high school players to slip down them — as the upper echelons of decision makers get involved, the greater certainty that comes from college track records is appealing when execs start talking about multi-million dollar bonuses. As a result, that 14-15-16 area can be where the best of high school talents can be scooped up — think Corbin Carroll (16th pick in 2019) or even a kid like James Wood (26th pick) who quickly blossomed into a key piece of the Juan Soto deal.
Personally, that has me penciling names like Georgia infielder Colin Houck, Florida shortstop Arjun Nimmala, the two way kid who lives down the road from me, Bryce Eldridge, or — to circle back around to Kam’s question — Florida’s Ethan Miller, who missed his senior spring season due to a broken hammate bone. If you wanted to nail me down a month out, I’d say Houck’s their guy if he gets to them.
Hi Roger. Excepting Wade, who are the future 1B prospects to keep an eye on. I'm not seeing many options in your top 50 unless they are converted outfielders or lefty infielders. Carter Aldrete and Victor Bericoto are interesting but right-handed hitters. If you have an infield of Schmitt/Villar, Luciano and Estrada, wouldn't you need a lefty at 1B? Logan Wyatt?
Well, first off Curt, I do want to point out that LaMonte Wade, Jr. has been exceptional for the Giants since coming over from Minnesota, and should be the answer at 1b for the next three years at least. So he really is the solution you’re looking for. I know you wanted to leave him aside as a thought exercise, but as my fellow Terp, I am duty bound to defend his honor!
The second thing I guess I should say is that 1b generally aren’t that highly regarded as prospects for, I think, obvious reasons. The best athletes tend to make the best prospects, and 1b don’t tend to be the best athletes. It’s why you see guys like Wade convert to the position at some point. The Matt Olsons and Freddie Freemans of the prospect world are few and far between — Olson hit 30 HR in high school and nearly put up 40 more in his Cal League season to put himself on the map. Then you have freakily athletic Cody Bellinger, who was always too much of an athlete to play 1b, and ultimately didn’t.
All of which is to say, as I noted in my 1b Depth Chart post last winter, that while the Giants’ prospect depth at 1b is pretty thin, it’s probably the best position to be thin at when it comes to prospects.
And yes, as you have noted, some of the better bats that profile as 1b do bat right-handed, like David Villar and Victor Bericoto. The best left-handed options would be Luis Toribio who has done a good job of cutting down his strikeout rate and returning to more of an all around hitter this year, or possibly 2019 2nd rounder Logan Wyatt, who has had a tough time with injuries in his career. If you want real sleepers after that, I’d look to the ACL, where Jediael Maduro and Guillermo Williamson will likely be playing first sack this year.
Reggie Crawford pitched 2 innings last night on his build up. Has there been any indication of when or how often he might DH? Assume first and foremost they want him to pitch/build his pitch count but wouldn't want him to lose his timing etc from lack of hitting
If you listened to yesterday’s podcast with Joe Ritzo, he mentioned that the plan was to have Crawford avoid hitting, even in BP, on the days before or after pitching. So that’s three days out of every week that he’s off-limits for DHing. My guess is that hitting is a once or twice per week thing for Crawford this year, and we’ll see where it goes from there. As for pitching, I think the 30 pitches/2 innings mark is where he’s going to stay for a significant chunk of the season. Crawford barely pitched at all during his college career for a variety of reasons, so the Giants will be extremely cautious in bringing him along. The goal this year is to get him on the mound and allow him to get his competitive juices flowing again — and get him through the year healthy. That’s it!
Richmond and Eugene both seem to have lost their mojo recently. Are they just playing like most minor league teams and I'm just spoiled from recent success at those levels? Or what?
Indeed, it does seem about time to round up the kids from Halloweentown and go in search of lost mojo. I can see the Disney+ special now! No doubt some evil wizard from another dimension is to blame.
As you can imagine, I’ve spoken with several of the members of the Richmond team and staff about this lately, and all of them have given me some version of the same answer: this is baseball, it’s what comes from the long season, sometimes you’re up and sometimes you’re down, and you have to approach every day with a positive mindset. And that really is the answer — at some point hopefully they’ll start playing better (both pitching and hitting) and the mojo will return to them.
Thinking about the Giants' signing of guys like Vaun Brown, Carter Howell, more recently Turner Hill, as well as to a lesser extent Matt Higgins or Wade Meckler. That is, D-II or D-III (or in Meckler's case, a guy who walked on to a D-I program) who have athleticism or standout tools. Do you think this is a conscious effort by the Giants to try to gain a competitive advantage? Is this a "market inefficiency" that the Giants are exploiting? And in relation to that, in your experience watching and covering minor league baseball, how prevalent are D-II and D-III guys now compared to 10, 20, or 30 years ago?
My friend Brian Recca, who does a great job with draft coverage over at Prospects Live, is a big believer that D2 and 3 guys get slept on badly in the scouting world. You can understand how it happens. As I noted above, there is a tendency to focus on the showcase world for evaluating high school talent. That’s where you find the high round high school draftees and the scholarship kids to the best schools. Other players, whether due to finances, or simply geography, have more limited choices in where they play and what schools they can get into. But the kids that made the big impressions when they were 17 or 18 in those pay for play contexts will continue to make big impressions in their D1 days or big conference tournaments etc. Other players, those who develop physically later, or simply lock into their coordination and game skills a little later, can get shunted off to a wayside and have to make their way through more circular routes.
And those guys, be they Villar or Brown or whoever, are often the names you hear called on the third day of the draft. The fact that the draft is now capped at 20 rounds — rather than the 40 or 50 that it used to be — means a lot more of those players are available as undrafted free agents. So, is looking for small school kids a strategy of the Giants? I suspect that’s a strategy for most organizations and most scouts! Every scout loves to find the guy everyone else missed. And certainly some of these small school kids do make it. While I’d never heard of LeMoyne before the Giants drafted Ryan Murphy, one of Murph’s teammates at the tiny New York school was Josiah Gray. Tyler Cyr recently raced his teammate, Zac Grotz, from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical School to the majors (Grotz got there first). While the top rounders and big school grads will always be the biggest names in the sport, there are small school victories scattered around if you look for them.
Hi Roger, what's your take on Vaun Brown and what his ceiling/floor is? He was able to put up pretty great numbers in 2022, but I took that with a grain of salt given his age compared to the competition. However, it seems like he can keep up the production even going up the levels, so how excited should we get for him?
My take on Vaun? He is a very impressive person and I hope he makes his way to his best outcome! The amount of swing and miss is a little concerning, but I think there really is a Hunter Pence outcome potential there. Hopefully, the knees cooperate this year.
Now let me use this as yet another excuse to tell you that I’ll have a second podcast out later today featuring my conversations with Brown and his Richmond teammate Carson Seymour — who I promise will say something very surprising to many of you!
Reaching around in the bottom of the bag — that’s all I can find for now. If you have any more questions for me, they’ll just have to wait until next week’s edition.
See you at the ballyard!
Great mailbag, Roger. Thank you for keeping us Giants fans in the know regarding our MiLB prospects. There Are Giants is well worth the annual fee, especially given the plethora of content you publish.