Add new comment

Some respectful partial disagreements, Spec.
1. By the time Saunders was up in '10, he had spent 4.5 seasons getting there. One might argue that he should have started in Rookie ball, rather than A-, but his numbers that year (.270-.363-.474) don't indicate a guy who was overmatched at that level. (Interestingly, those A- numbers were almost exactly what I suggested he might be able to sustain, year after year, in the Majors).
After that season he struggled at A ball, in '06, and then got better as he moved up the ladder. There was no indication he was overmatched. His AAA numbers in '09 suggest he was ready for a MLB shot. Even his K rate was down. Lots of needy teams would have given him the call. He struggled in Seattle that year, certainly, but I don't know if that was any less valuable than another 60 games in Tacoma. There is no clear proof it was.
In '10 he showed considerable MLB improvement. He was getting better. As a guy who was A + defender, he was showing he was a MLB player. His Eye and Power jumped upwards from the previous MLB year. He wasn't Trout or Harper, but he was improving. One might say dramatically.
'11 is the weird year. Something went wrong in the Majors. he appeared to be completely, totally, abysmally lost at the plate. His Eye collapsed and his K rate shot up again. Knowing what we know now, I'm tempted to say that it was his outlier year. He was lost AND he was unlucky (.212 BABIP). He certainly banged away at AAA throwers again that year. It may be that his MLB weakness had been exposed, to some degree. If so, it was bound to happen.
In '12 that BABIP was back up to .297. And he was a real MLB bat, which along with the + defense made him a real valueable guy. This year he's conslidated all that and made the next step forward.
I see a guy who regressed for one year, '11. And that was a small sample really (MLB-wise).
In '12 he did what any talented, thinking athlete would do, he eliminated he biggest weakness (the over-long loopey swing) and found himself. He got shorter and got gooder....or something like that.
The old swing was his, he owned it. He had had it a lifetime. It was always going to have trouble, of some degree, in the majors. He fixed it. That's what solid pros do, when a hole is exposed. It would have happened eventually. Given that he was smacking AAA guys around with that swing, it is unlikely that further exposure to AA or AAA pitching would have resulted in the fix. He needed MLB types to challenge him to improve AND prove it was needed. He responded.
I don't think his lack of "grooming" had much to do with it. His physical talent got him to Seattle in a hurry. His discipline and drive got him better. It is an age old process. The way it should be.
When a guy has the physical talent to be at this level, he generally ought to be here. The learning curve will be more painful (because your failures are more exposed) but it is a curve that must be navigated.
2. Talent is "real" regardless if it was groomed young or not. No modern athlete was more "groomed" than Tiger Woods. A rapid rise didn't seem to expose any lack of talent. The way of the modern athlete is to specialize. I actually think it harms development, but it is the way it is. A guy like Franklin's has talent that exists, you can't fake it for very long at the AAA level. The question is whether that talent (and his drive/desire/ability to adapt) translates to the majors. You can't/won't know until he gets there. Which should have been yesterday.
As an aside, Wedge said the other day that he would rather moved a guy up late than early (or words to that effect). He knows more about baseball than I, but I'm in the other camp. Once a guy was established a significant skill set at one level, hurry him to the next. If he has the skills AND can adapt, then you have a winner. but watching a guy beat up a level he's already conquered (to some degree) makes little sense and allows for little growth.
Some guys, especially some pitchers, are not very athletic to begin with. I remember a quote about David Clyde one time (remember him) in which one scout said (after the fact) that he was a tremendously terrible athlete, who happened to be able to throw a ball hard. The first skill doomed the second, regardless of a quick promotion or not.
Robin Yount hit .285-.370-.409 at A- as a 17-yr old. Saunders was .270-.361-.474 at the same level as an 18-year old. Yount jumped directly to the majors the next year becoming a fulltime MLB starter at 18. OPS+ed 79, 90, 76, 94 in his first 4 years. Never hit more than 8 homers. Then he became Robin Yount the HOF'er. Would three more years of MiLB ball have made a difference? Unlikely. That route isn't correct for all, certainly. But the guys that survive it are better for it.
Saunders survived because he made the change he would have had to make eventually anyway. MLB pitchers made that abundantly clear. A demotion to AAA didn't harm him.
Franklin's ready right now. Is he a finished product? Not at all, but 2 more years of feasting on New Orleans Zyphers' pitchers isn't getting him there, either.
Now is his time. Wedge is messing this one up.
moe