Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Zombies

Kris Bryant - 3B CHC

Recommended Posts

Floor: .240/.300/.430/15/5 in 400 PAs

Ceiling: .290/.380/.550/35/10 in 620 PAs

I think his floor is higher than that, but the trend seems to be people are down on him now because of the strikeouts (gun shy because of Baez?), so I'm likely in the minority there. I also think if we're talking about his ceiling he's capable of hitting 40+ HRs, especially playing half of his games at The Friendly Confines.

We're very close. Those are conservative just a tad, but probably smartly so. The ceiling isn't an absolute max. I definitely will take the over on the mid point of my projections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Floor: .240/.300/.430/15/5 in 400 PAs

Ceiling: .290/.380/.550/35/10 in 620 PAs

I think his floor is higher than that, but the trend seems to be people are down on him now because of the strikeouts (gun shy because of Baez?), so I'm likely in the minority there. I also think if we're talking about his ceiling he's capable of hitting 40+ HRs, especially playing half of his games at The Friendly Confines.

We're very close. Those are conservative just a tad, but probably smartly so. The ceiling isn't an absolute max. I definitely will take the over on the mid point of my projections.

People are down on his contract rate, not necessarily his strikeout rate. Strikeout rate is one thing, but he has a hard time making contract on balls in the strike zone, especially inside. When he makes contact, it goes out, but he isn't very good at making contact.

Bryant's 2014 MilB performance was nearly identical to George Springer's 2013 (contact rate, strikeout rate, power). Their AAA performances nearly identical from a detailed view.

Springer, Bryant and to a degree Baez (his walk rate and contact rate outside the zones are worse) are all good players to compare. They were top rated prospects with huge power, but some of the weakest contact rates in professional baseball. All or nothing players.

I haven't seen anything different that makes me think otherwise. Normalizing Bryant's BABIP and assuming his contract rate stays steady next year, having him bat above .240 in 2015 seems unlikely without some significant adjustments.

Not saying he can't one day be an all-star, but it is unfair to think he is going to be anything more than 2014 George Springer in 2015. If he improves his contract rate a bit, he can be the next Troy Glaus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Floor: .240/.300/.430/15/5 in 400 PAs

Ceiling: .290/.380/.550/35/10 in 620 PAs

I think his floor is higher than that, but the trend seems to be people are down on him now because of the strikeouts (gun shy because of Baez?), so I'm likely in the minority there. I also think if we're talking about his ceiling he's capable of hitting 40+ HRs, especially playing half of his games at The Friendly Confines.

We're very close. Those are conservative just a tad, but probably smartly so. The ceiling isn't an absolute max. I definitely will take the over on the mid point of my projections.

People are down on his contract rate, not necessarily his strikeout rate. Strikeout rate is one thing, but he has a hard time making contract on balls in the strike zone, especially inside. When he makes contact, it goes out, but he isn't very good at making contact.

Bryant's 2014 MilB performance was nearly identical to George Springer's 2013 (contact rate, strikeout rate, power). Their AAA performances nearly identical from a detailed view.

Springer, Bryant and to a degree Baez (his walk rate and contact rate outside the zones are worse) are all good players to compare. They were top rated prospects with huge power, but some of the weakest contact rates in professional baseball. All or nothing players.

I haven't seen anything different that makes me think otherwise. Normalizing Bryant's BABIP and assuming his contract rate stays steady next year, having him bat above .230 in 2015 seems unlikely without some significant adjustments.

Not saying he can't one day be an all-star, but it is unfair to think he is going to be anything more than 2014 George Springer in 2015.

Springer doesn't have a two-strike approach and tries to leave earth on every swing. There are definitely similarities with their batting profiles, I'll admit, but Bryant doesn't have to swing out of his shoes to hit the ball a long way. Easy, easy power to all fields. At the end of the day, he's more of a refined hitter than Springer. It would not surprise me in the least to see Bryant hit around or above .250 as a rookie. Could easily duplicate Goldschmidt's slash line from his cup of coffee in 2011.

I'm convinced Bryant will be a lot closer to Goldschmidt and Stanton than Springer and Baez.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long term, possibly.

Stanton and Goldy had success with lower BABIPs and better contact rates in the minors. Historically that translates better.

Bryant has insane BABIPs to support his average and has poor contract rates. Historically these guys have very high bust rates.

But I am a believer that Bryant can become an all-star at some point. But over the next year or two there might not be a big difference between Bryant and Baez/Springer. Long term I think he will make the adjustments to survive.

Addison Russell had a good contact rate with a low (for AA) BABIP last year. That puts him near Arenado raw hit tool level, and I would expect a similar transition for Russell to Arenado (maybe a little more power for a slightly lower average.)

Bryant's contact rate should be a bit alarming. It was the worst of any top prospect in AAA that I can remember. Anybody wanting to buy him in a dynasty league should wait until the 2015 offseason in my mind.

Edit - J.P. Arencibia and Mike Zunino (strangely both catchers) were the two closest players I found that had similar power/K%/Contact rates at the MiLB level that were top 50 prospects over the last 5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so it's clear, BP has Bryant #2 behind Russell - and in the writeup, they even specifically acknowledge that Russell isn't even the best fantasy prospect on their team - Bryant is. Gotta keep in mind that BP, like many other sites, doesn't speak only in fantasy terms, but in real-life evaluation, too - which matters little to owners, but certainly can explain their rankings quite easily, with that context.

I wonder what %o of people are buying BP for fantasy vs non fantasy. I always assumed it was significantly greater than 50%. Anyway, I like Baseball HQ since it's more fantasy geared.

BP is still a great publication. Some people just destroy their dynasty teams drafting straight off of their rankings. Baseball HQ is a bit more fantasy geared but again isn't entirely based around fantasy and they like BP refuse to take a risk with rankings and favor MLB readiness far too much.

But the truly be good at fantasy baseball you have to understand real baseball. That's the problem I'm seeing with a lot of people on these boards. Everything is fantasy to them. Everything is a stat and it seems like no one even watches games anymore.

So would you say everyone is become just another.... statistic

Haha. Well my new signature says it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last year his AA and AAA his strikeout rates and contact rates are VERY similar to Baez, in fact contact rates are almost identical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always thought Bryant was Troy Glaus. When you adjust for era and offensive context that's a pretty damn good player.

If Russell is Larkin 2.0 then yes, he's better than Bryant. I'm not willing to say he's Larkin yet though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always thought Bryant was Troy Glaus. When you adjust for era and offensive context that's a pretty damn good player.

If Russell is Larkin 2.0 then yes, he's better than Bryant. I'm not willing to say he's Larkin yet though.

Russell has more power than Larkin but less speed.

Bryant has a better hit tool than Glaus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always thought Bryant was Troy Glaus. When you adjust for era and offensive context that's a pretty damn good player.

If Russell is Larkin 2.0 then yes, he's better than Bryant. I'm not willing to say he's Larkin yet though.

Russell has more power than Larkin but less speed.

Bryant has a better hit tool than Glaus.

What makes you say that. Curious for your rational...and if you say Milb Batting average. I'm going to ignore you for giving me a lack of depth response. As that is just too cookie cutter. Glaus was in the minors only 1 year and he started out in AA.. Wanna he some solid reasoning for say that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy Glaus was a super prospect coming up. Man, he was awesome too. Great comp IMO. Spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always thought Bryant was Troy Glaus. When you adjust for era and offensive context that's a pretty damn good player.

If Russell is Larkin 2.0 then yes, he's better than Bryant. I'm not willing to say he's Larkin yet though.

Russell has more power than Larkin but less speed.

Bryant has a better hit tool than Glaus.

What makes you say that. Curious for your rational...and if you say Milb Batting average. I'm going to ignore you for giving me a lack of depth response. As that is just too cookie cutter. <LOL WTF???> Glaus was in the minors only 1 year and he started out in AA.. Wanna he some solid reasoning for say that.

Yes MiLB batting average is a huge part of it. No not because it's higher than Glaus' or anything to do with what Glaus did in the minors. But what Bryant's resume projected into the bigs to me says he will hit for a much higher average than Glaus. I've seen Bryant a lot of him and he is legit. He is breaking into the league with as much opposite field power as anyone in the game!

From low A ball and beyond as a 21 and 22 year old Bryant has gone 202 / 614 for a batting average of .329, I'm sorry but it would be foolish to project a player with that type of resume to hit less than .254 (Glaus' career average).

You also want to compare their college careers? Well consider that Bryant matched Glaus in a far more competitive environment against far better pitching on average and he used a BBCOR bat. Please look up what a BBCOR bat is. No better yet, go buy a non BBCOR & a BBCOR bat same length and weight and take BP. You will instantly be able to tell the difference.

Yeah Bryant K's a lot, but that's because he drives the ball like a maniac. Much like my man Paul Goldschmidt another guy I was all over well before he got any mainstream hype.

Danny Santana hit .319 with a 22.8% K%.

Jose Abreu hit .317 with a 21.1% K%.

J.D. Martinez hit .315 with a 26.3% K%.

Corey Dickerson hit .312 with a 21.1% K%

Paul Goldschmidt hit .300 with a 23% K%.

So while I do expect Bryant to K at a higher frequency than these guys breaking into the big leagues, we are talking 5 young players with higher than normal K rates all who hit over .300 last season. I don't expect Bryant to hit .300 as a rookie but I could see .280+ even with a 25% - 26% K rate as a rookie.

So what makes you say differently? You're the one contesting my assessment, so instead of putting me on trial why don't you say why you think the other way?

Also if you have a main point to make, and you use that in your argument I'm going to ignore you for being cookie cutter. Makes me sound like a total brat to say something so ignorant, doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always thought Bryant was Troy Glaus. When you adjust for era and offensive context that's a pretty damn good player.

If Russell is Larkin 2.0 then yes, he's better than Bryant. I'm not willing to say he's Larkin yet though.

Russell has more power than Larkin but less speed.

Bryant has a better hit tool than Glaus.

What makes you say that. Curious for your rational...and if you say Milb Batting average. I'm going to ignore you for giving me a lack of depth response. As that is just too cookie cutter. <LOL WTF???> Glaus was in the minors only 1 year and he started out in AA.. Wanna he some solid reasoning for say that.

Yes MiLB batting average is a huge part of it. No not because it's higher than Glaus' or anything to do with what Glaus did in the minors. But what Bryant's resume projected into the bigs to me says he will hit for a much higher average than Glaus. I've seen Bryant a lot of him and he is legit. He is breaking into the league with as much opposite field power as anyone in the game!

From low A ball and beyond as a 21 and 22 year old Bryant has gone 202 / 614 for a batting average of .329, I'm sorry but it would be foolish to project a player with that type of resume to hit less than .254 (Glaus' career average).

You also want to compare their college careers? Well consider that Bryant matched Glaus in a far more competitive environment against far better pitching on average and he used a BBCOR bat. Please look up what a BBCOR bat is. No better yet, go buy a non BBCOR & a BBCOR bat same length and weight and take BP. You will instantly be able to tell the difference.

Yeah Bryant K's a lot, but that's because he drives the ball like a maniac. Much like my man Paul Goldschmidt another guy I was all over well before he got any mainstream hype.

Danny Santana hit .319 with a 22.8% K%.

Jose Abreu hit .317 with a 21.1% K%.

J.D. Martinez hit .315 with a 26.3% K%.

Corey Dickerson hit .312 with a 21.1% K%

Paul Goldschmidt hit .300 with a 23% K%.

So while I do expect Bryant to K at a higher frequency than these guys breaking into the big leagues, we are talking 5 young players with higher than normal K rates all who hit over .300 last season. I don't expect Bryant to hit .300 as a rookie but I could see .280+ even with a 25% - 26% K rate as a rookie.

So what makes you say differently? You're the one contesting my assessment, so instead of putting me on trial why don't you say why you think the other way?

Also if you have a main point to make, and you use that in your argument I'm going to ignore you for being cookie cutter. Makes me sound like a total brat to say something so ignorant, doesn't it?

No need to get defensive dude, you a reading into my post all wrong

I was looking for an honest assessment. I though you knew something about his swing/approach that you could share with use that made you believe that was the case. Was looking for information from a poster (yourself) that has shown in the past to break things down beyond the surface stats.

I think just saying Milb BA by himself is lazy. Since it was just 1 year of Glaus Milb numbers to compare and we are talking about projecting a career. Sure hitters have some control of BABIP..I don't deny that..but in the majors BA can fluctuates a lot from year to year..and I just take Milb BA with a grain of salt. I was looking for you to explain WHY he was having higher BABIPs and is his skill set actually going to translate, or is just being fluffed by inferior pitching and defense?

The Common comp as been Glaus, you made a statement that was different (I.E. he had a better hit tool) I wanted to know why. It was a bit caddy on my part to call Milb BA lazy..but that is my opinion and I was hoping you saw something I wasn't seeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im just throwing it out there. If he puts up Glaus' steroid numbers not on steroids, I'll be very happy. Glaus only gets a bad rub because his prime wasn't long and he was lost in the shuffle of the most roided up era ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say he will put up Jeromy Bernitz numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say he will put up Jeromy Bernitz numbers.

112 career OPS+ with 315 HR and a career WAR of 20 was pretty solid. Burnitz would have easily hit 400 career HR if he had gotten a full-time gig at age 23 or 24 rather than only at age 28.

In fact, Burnitz and Glaus have extremely similar career offensive numbers. Glaus was better because of his positional value.

If the Cubs can get that out of a 3B, they should be at least modestly pleased. I think Bryant has a bit more raw power, but still, Burnitz is a solid low-end comp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say he will put up Jeromy Bernitz numbers.

112 career OPS+ with 315 HR and a career WAR of 20 was pretty solid. Burnitz would have easily hit 400 career HR if he had gotten a full-time gig at age 23 or 24 rather than only at age 28.

In fact, Burnitz and Glaus have extremely similar career offensive numbers. Glaus was better because of his positional value.

If the Cubs can get that out of a 3B, they should be at least modestly pleased. I think Bryant has a bit more raw power, but still, Burnitz is a solid low-end comp.

Yeah I picked him because per baseball-reference.com he was the number comp to Glaus. :) I was throwing another name out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say he will put up Jeromy Bernitz numbers.

112 career OPS+ with 315 HR and a career WAR of 20 was pretty solid. Burnitz would have easily hit 400 career HR if he had gotten a full-time gig at age 23 or 24 rather than only at age 28.

In fact, Burnitz and Glaus have extremely similar career offensive numbers. Glaus was better because of his positional value.

If the Cubs can get that out of a 3B, they should be at least modestly pleased. I think Bryant has a bit more raw power, but still, Burnitz is a solid low-end comp.

Yeah I picked him because per baseball-reference.com he was the number comp to Glaus. :) I was throwing another name out there.

I had no idea that BR had Glaus as a numbers comp for Bryant. My comp was based on watching them both in college a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all remember last summer's anticipation for him to be called up, which never ended up happening. The good news is he's 23 years old, arguably the first or second top prospect, and is part of a shallow Cubs team as of right now to nab that starting 3B spot by opening day.

Here were his insane stats from his season last year in the minors between AA and AAA:

.325 AVG, 43 HR, 110 RBI, 118 R, 15 SB, 1.098 OPS, with 162 K in 138 games

What should people expect in his first season in the bigs?

I don't think it would be quite outlandish to say he makes the opening day roster and post numbers like .285, 30 HR, 80 RBI, 70 R, 10 SB, .900 OPS, but probably with 175 K. He should immediately enter the rookie of the year conversation, and if he does have a good year this year, I would expect great things for the 2nd overall draft pick.

Let the raking begin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope he makes the opening day roster or at least gets called up after a quick 3 - 4 week stint in the minors. But we'll see what happens there.

He has to be the favorite for NL Rookie of The Year. By a wide margin too.

Let's see if the mods allow this thread to even stay. As technically Bryant is a minor leaguer right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The powers totally legit but with that K rate theres no way he produces a decent average right off the bat. Something like .250 would be expected id say. But remember rookies are rookies and therefore meant to struggle initially at the big league level. Predicting 30 homers is bonkers, rookies just dont manage that noawadays. Over 20 bombs would be a solid rookie season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The powers totally legit but with that K rate theres no way he produces a decent average right off the bat. Something like .250 would be expected id say. But remember rookies are rookies and therefore meant to struggle initially at the big league level. Predicting 30 homers is bonkers, rookies just dont manage that noawadays. Over 20 bombs would be a solid rookie season.

this, exactly.

That ML K rate was insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The powers totally legit but with that K rate theres no way he produces a decent average right off the bat. Something like .250 would be expected id say. But remember rookies are rookies and therefore meant to struggle initially at the big league level. Predicting 30 homers is bonkers, rookies just dont manage that noawadays. Over 20 bombs would be a solid rookie season.

Between him a Baez the Cubs could have 400K's in that lineup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites