Add new comment

French, Fister, and Fodder isn't a poor scrubs grouping.  In point of fact, it is an absolutely, fantastically amazing scrubs group!  Why?  Because scrubs, BY DEFINITION, are not about "potential".  You NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER win the "scrubs" approach by "picking the good scrubs".  EVER.
You win the scrubs contest by having lots and lots of scrubs, and being able to quickly identify and develop the one Cracker Jack *SUPRISE* from the box when he shows up.
The scrubs game is roulette - and you do NOT win by placing all your chips on 17.  You win by having ENOUGH chips to place a bunch of bets at once -- because when ANY bet pays off, it KEEPS paying off.
The Marlins reload with specs like Hanley, Jacobs, Hermida, Having highly regarded specs doesn't hurt.  But, they make leap forward quickly when guys like Uggla step in an hit .800 as rookies.  Hermida remains a disappointment.  Anibel Sanchez can't get healthy.  Maybin and Andrew Miller haven't produced, (yet).  But, there's a DRASTIC difference in having one roll to make your point - versus getting 3 or 4 or 5 different attempts before you have no more dice to throw.  (as I crash my gamling metaphors near the exit ramp).
The obvious counter to this is -- "if ALL of your prospects are dead meat, numbers don't matter."  I would say - if *ALL* of your prospects are dead meat, then the odds of you developing anyone, regardless of talent, is the problem - and until THAT is solved, having "good" prospects versus "bad" ones isn't going to make any difference.  Pineiro and Meche didn't exactly light the world on fire in Seattle, did they? 
I think what pains me the most is that Morrow (24), continued to get tons of support about the possibility of him learning and growing into a decent pitcher right up to the day he left.  But French (23), Olson (25), Vargas (26), Snell (27) are doomed to be scrap heap trash for eternity.  And, I suspect, if Fister has a month with a 7.00 ERA, he'll get the same label from the masses. 
There were many who said Aardsma (27) in 2009 was just more spaghetti, and that he'd never solve his control problems.  Heck, he wasn't even MENTIONED in most of the "who will close" threads before the '09 season began.  Even today, the general talk of Aardsma is "dump him while we can."  Yeah, he could collapse.  But, if you actually look at his entire career, you can see the BIG change in 2009 wasn't his walk rate, (which had been in the 4s during both '06 and '07).  The BIG change was in the HR rate, which has gone, in consecutive seasons:  1.5 -- 1.1 -- 0.7 -- 0.5.  Does that LOOK like a fluke -- or like a trend? 
Anyone want to guess what Tom Glavine's early HR/BB/K rates were?  He had ONE gift immediately apparent -- he avoided the gopher ball.  But take a look at his first 50 inning stint:  0.9 / 5.9 / 3.6 -- That's almost 6 walks a game.  He started 34 the next season and finished with:  0.6 / 2.9 / 3.9.  -- he went 7-17.  Okay, he was only 22.  But you've got a young arm with a K-rate -- in the NL -- that makes HoRam look like Koufax.  It would take him two more years to climb up to SILVA level Ks.  Is there ANYONE who is going to look at a guy who posts a 1.0 / 1.9 / 4.4 line in his 3rd full season and go -- "Oh, THIS GUY is the one headed to the Hall of Fame?"  Anyone? 
Who is going to solve their gopher problem first?  That's really the simple question.  If ANY of the F-troop figures out THEIR game enough to reduce their HR/9 numbers to 1.0, (or lower), then given the best defense in baseball, (if it stays that way), almost anything is possible.