FanGraphs Top 100 Prospects: Franco 1st 80 FV

[cavebird]

You're still whiffing completely. Hitters who are able to control the strike zone such that they are walking as much or more as they are striking out shows an advanced maturity at the plate. That gives a team *more* confidence of their ability to move quickly through the minors.

Look at Griffey, look at Vlad Jr, look at Pujols, look at John Olerud (who skipped the minors entirely), look at Adrian Beltre, look at Greg Jefferies, look at Miguel Cabrera (to a lesser extent).

The more you look the more the pattern becomes evident - young players who are successful against competition significantly older than them, who display an advanced, mature approach at the plate. They often spend much less time in the upper minors, and there's no confusion as to why - that type of mature approach against older pitchers suggests a skillset that translates.

Make fun of me for saying that they were confident all you want, if you want to giggle over the corner that's fine. But it's the truth - mature approaches for young hitters are one of the best indicators of a future superstar.

Soto had that. Acuna didn't. They were quite different as prospects. They are both superstars.

I'm not sure what the heck that has to do with you using an 8 game sample to try to prove your point, it feels like you are very likely deflecting, but even your deflection is a fail.



No it's not. Franco shows a similar mature approach. He's in A ball. You suggested we couldn't gleam that kind of information from A ball. But look at that, all the prospect evaluators are doing it. Amazing!



You whiffed on the point - he's one of the best prospects we've seen in a very long time because of his mature approach. Whether he is in the majors or not.



OK, bring out more 8 game samples buddy. Lets hear about how statistically relevant they are! Show your work please.

I mentioned his AA stats because you talked about his last two stops in the minors. AA was his last stop. You didn't say his last two long stops. You were inaccurate, factually, after stating that I was for disagreeing with your opinion about the Nats having confidence. Unless you have Nats sources that explain that they were confident promoting a guy with only 8 games in AA and none in AAA, that's just an opinion. Facts were that the Nats were trying to contend in 2018. The Braves were not in 2017. They were never going to call up Acuna---that would have been silly. They even kept him down long enough to get another year of control in 2018. As for everyone seeing it because of prospect rankings, note that Soto was #56 in Baseball America's list in 2018. Acuna was #1. Yeah, unfair comparison, but apparently those 267 plate appearances made the Nats more confident. It obviously wasn't injuries and a wing and a prayer, because my comment was "inaccurate." That means a fact, not an opinion.

My only point was that Acuna would have been called up in 2017 when he was destroying AA if the Braves were contenders and there was an injury need, just like Soto was in 2018. You said it was inaccurate because the Nats were more confident because of the more mature approach. You have that point to defend; you have not. Hence the Franco comparison---if they were the same, he would have been up last year. My main point is that the age that a top prospect comes up (and both were sooner or later) sometimes depends on team situations, not how good the prospects are. And yes, they are different prospects/players. No dispute here. But you were the one who said that a statement that Soto was called up younger than Acuna was the different situations between the Braves in 2017 and the Nats in 2018 was "inaccurate." You have not. You have just attacked a small point that I made because you said something about Soto's "last two stops" which was factually incorrect. If you had said his last two stops longer than 8 games, it would have been correct. You did not. That has nothing to do with me.

[cavebird]

Here let me help you "oops, I didn't realize his AA numbers were just 8 games, I goofed on that, honestly didn't even look at the small sample. Disregard that point, it's not a good one".

Would that be so hard? Instead of deflecting? Let's just admit that one was really silly because from thousands of posts I've seen from you I know you are much smarter than that.

Stubborn, yes (like me), but smarter than someone who would seriously try to base an argument on 8 games from a hitter? Absolutely.

I looked up all the numbers. I knew it was 8 games; it's all on Fangraphs. You said his last two stops. That was inaccurate. You haven't acknowledged that your comment in that regard was an oops, I didn't realize that he spent 8 games in AA. Why is that not your being as stubborn as you claim I am?

EDIT: And can you note that the two stops you were talking about were 16 games and 15 games? How is that so predictive?

[Ken]

I mentioned his AA stats because you talked about his last two stops in the minors. AA was his last stop. You didn't say his last two long stops.

Good Lord this discussion is insufferable. I made it this far and then honestly I couldn't continue. I hope nothing beyond this far was relevant. You could argue with a tree-stump. I seriously hope you are a lawyer. If not you missed your calling.

For what it's worth, "last two stops in the minors" was 182 plate appearances. It's a reasonable sample size to evaluate. Your numbers were gleamed from 35. Hopefully you can determine the massive difference between 182 and 35.

I'm done with this silliness. Keep posting about 8 game samples buddy!

[Ken]

I looked up all the numbers. I knew it was 8 games; it's all on Fangraphs. You said his last two stops. That was inaccurate. You haven't acknowledged that your comment in that regard was an oops, I didn't realize that he spent 8 games in AA. Why is that not your being as stubborn as you claim I am?

EDIT: And can you note that the two stops you were talking about were 16 games and 15 games? How is that so predictive?

Good Lord, last 2 years, not stops. Who cares??? Again you are arguing just to argue. Just like the damn inflation thread. You completely whiff on points and start criticizing people's grammar. This is a damn fantasy baseball forum, not a grammar forum, who the hell cares.

Are you seriously this obtuse?

You don't care about the baseball point - that Juan Soto is a completely different type of prospect than Ronald Acuna.

And you just want to argue about 8 game samples?

Enough dude. Go find a grammar forum, or spelling forum, or a typo forum.

I'm interested in BASEBALL.

These are fun topics. Stop with the bullshit.

[Ken]

Please confirm that you understand that these profiles are different types of prospects. One shows a more advanced, mature approach at the plate than the other:

Player A

2016 17 BB 29 Ks
2017 12 BB 9 Ks
2018 29 BB 28 Ks

Player B

2015 28 BB 42 Ks
2016 19 BB 29 Ks
2017 42 BB 144 Ks
2018 11 BB 25 Ks

Note, I've used as few words as possible and left out "stops", "years", "sample size" to avoid further grammar/spelling/typo critiques.

[Ken]

I'm still trying to include him in the conversation! (Although scolded for doing so b/c he's not in mlb yet, lol)

83 BB and just 54 strikeouts in leagues where he's 3+ years younger than the average competition. He looks ridiculously good, and the profile matches Juan Soto type in that regard.

Getting back to the actual point of the thread after that ridiculous aside, I honestly do this that this is the most telling feature of Franco. That kind of approach is rare, especially at his age. And the numbers align with the scouting reports, so you have both the old school and the analyticals agreeing here.

[cavebird]

I am a lawyer. It does make me accurate about facts. Maybe you should go to law school. Being inaccurate in the legal field is deadly.

[Ken]

I am a lawyer. It does make me accurate about facts. Maybe you should go to law school. Being inaccurate in the legal field is deadly.

I'm not interested in this type discussion. If you think you are "more accurate about facts", go look at a mirror and be amazed by your superior intelligence. Gloat in your majesty. Marvel in it.

Congrats on your grammar accuracy! I truly hope it comes with lots of medals you can hang on your wall and stare at for days on end.

** I spend much more time focusing on details and typos for work, where that kind of thing matters. For a hobby, like baseball, I'm interested in the content. And I don't edit for grammar.

Can we talk baseball now? Please? Pretty pretty please? (Watch out, there's a mistake in that last sentence, I left out a comma -- the inaccuracy is going to kill you). Is there a reason you interrupted the thread yet again? Please stop.

[Ken]

Trying this again...

I'm still trying to include him in the conversation! (Although scolded for doing so b/c he's not in mlb yet, lol)

83 BB and just 54 strikeouts in leagues where he's 3+ years younger than the average competition. He looks ridiculously good, and the profile matches Juan Soto type in that regard.

Getting back to the actual point of the thread after that ridiculous aside, I honestly do believe that this is the most telling feature of Franco. That kind of approach is rare, especially at his age. And the numbers align with the scouting reports, so you have both the old school and the analyticals agreeing here.

[KnuckleBalls]

Yikes! At least I discovered an awareness for Hirschsprungs disease. Let's hope this generation of smart kids spends more time researching genetics than law or baseball analytics.

[Sour Masher]

Yikes! At least I discovered an awareness for Hirschsprungs disease. Let's hope this generation of smart kids spends more time researching genetics than law or baseball analytics.

Yeah, these digressions are not super fun to watch. So many smart folks on here who give so much helpful advice that I greatly appreciate. I am biting my tongue because I put both Ken and cavebird in that category of smart/helpful and they are big boys who can fight their own battles. But we all get so much more out of their smarts and insights when stuff like this doesn't go on.

I am glad, potentially, the thread is getting back on track. Franco is a beast, but I don't fully understand why he gets an 80 hit grade when other prospects who had similar numbers did not. But scouting may be the difference there. I'm just a numbers guy, so I'm not good at eyeing footage and seeing the difference between a 70 grade hitter and that oh so rare and magic 80 grade hitter. It must be hard to do, and somewhat subjective, to project at that level. Or maybe not, maybe someone can show me in the numbers how Franco grades out higher than Vlad Jr as a hitter, for instance.

[Ken]

I am biting my tongue because I put both Ken and cavebird in that category of smart/helpful and they are big boys who can fight their own battles. But we all get so much more out of their smarts and insights when stuff like this doesn't go on.

Sorry

I am glad, potentially, the thread is getting back on track. Franco is a beast, but I don't fully understand why he gets an 80 hit grade when other prospects who had similar numbers did not. But scouting may be the difference there. I'm just a numbers guy, so I'm not good at eyeing footage and seeing the difference between a 70 grade hitter and that oh so rare and magic 80 grade hitter. It must be hard to do, and somewhat subjective, to project at that level. Or maybe not, maybe someone can show me in the numbers how Franco grades out higher than Vlad Jr as a hitter, for instance.

I can't give you a huge difference, but we are comparing 2 of the best hitting prospects in the game over the last 5 years, so in some instances we are nitpicking.

Here's what I see that may separate them very slightly in the numbers.

When comparing them at a similar age/league , Wander appears to have a slightly better approach. Similar walk rates but Franco struck out less (i.e. Franco had 35 Ks in 495 PA vs Vlad's 62 in 527). In addition, his body type / footspeed gives him a slight advantage on IF GB, so he may have a slight BABIP advantage over Vlad.

2019 Wander

11-12% BB rate
.320-.345 BABIP may be sustainable given the body type and above average speed (although not a burner).
7% K rate (elite)
.160 ISO
18-19% IFFB
6% HR/FB rate may suggest he was slightly unlucky in that dept (hard to see for sure without good batted ball profiles in the minors)


2017 Vlad

in A+ he saw his BB% peak to 17.2%, but that looks like an anomoly compared to ~9-12% at every other level
.340-.365 BABIP was slightly elevated given his lack of footspeed
10-15% K rate
.160 ISO
25-30% IFFB rate
12% HR/FB rate


To be fair, I'm pulling specifically those numbers that support the theory. There are some that would suggest the opposite. For example, Vlad had a 22% LD% vs Wander's 15%.

[Sour Masher]

Thanks for the insights, Ken! Yeah, I guess it is picking between which two supermodels to date at that level. Just interesting to be that after all the hype Vlad got as maybe a generational hitter, just this year, we have Franco graded out just a tad better by some.

[onejayhawk]

One other small difference is that Tatis spent the whole season in A ball, except for a cup of coffee at AA, which had to have been a wake up. Franco spent half the year in A ball and half in A+.

To me, Franco's numbers say future batting champion and OBA monster. Tatis is merely a very good hitter, though with better power.

J

[cavebird]

I disagree, mostly. They are certainly different types of prospects and skillsets. That being said, at the same again, in AA (counting stuff below AA is questionable due to the wildly poorer and more variable quality of pitching) Acuna had a BB rate of 7.4% with a K rate of 23.0%. Soto had (in admittedly a ridiculously small sample size) a BB rate of 11.0% and a K rate of 20.0% (which he has freakishly matched exactly in the majors in both 2018 and 2019). What the Nats had was severe injury issues in the OF and a crazy good prospect, so they rolled the dice, and it came out great. I don't think the Braves would have done anything differently with Acuna than the Nats did with Soto if they had been in the same situation.

Honestly, I am not sure what the argument even is at this point. I agreed that they were different prospects with different skillsets. I agreed that I was going on "a ridiculously small sample size." I just think that if Acuna was 19 years old at that time in the Nats organization (he was already up and on the DL for the Braves because he is a year older) and Soto was 19 and on the Braves at the same time the Braves had Acuna at that age (2017), the Nats would have called up Acuna and the Braves would not have called up Soto.

Other than my last sentence, I think we are in agreement, although Baseball Reference might disagree with both of us---it has Acuna as Soto's most similar player and vis-versa; I guess that good and that young is the best they can find. I really don't know how to figure out how it would have been if they were swapped in ages and teams; no way to do that. The Nats were desperate---the last few games before Soto was called up, the left-fielders the Nats played were Andrew Stevenson, Howie Kendrick, and Matt Adams (yikes, in left field??).

Hopefully, we can bury the sword on this. I agree that they are different---Acuna is more athletic, with far better defense. Soto has a better plate approach (not that Acuna is bad; but he does have more swing and miss in his game, certainly). I can see Soto as a Miggy and Acuna as a Frank Robinson (admittedly, I did just read the B-R comps, so I was probably influenced by them). Soto may be better, he might be worse. I have no idea about Franco; I didn't have any idea on how Soto or Acuna would play out at a similar stage in their careers. Still don't have an idea on any of the three; still so young; injuries can kill careers. Assuming no injuries, all three are probably inner circle HOFers. Hard to decide which is better among those types.