what aout Carbonnel?

[sfgdood]

From what I see of the scrap heap, we should be keeping an eye on Daniel Carbonnel...not that I think he'll be a star right away but he probably will be better than any of the crap still available at this point. The only thing that bothers me is that he and Puig seem to be great buddies. I hope he doesn't pull the same lame ass antics that Puig did.

[Rog]

Randy -- From what I see of the scrap heap, we should be keeping an eye on Daniel Carbonnel...not that I think he'll be a star right away but he probably will be better than any of the crap still available at this point.


Rog -- How is it that a guy who just performed so-so in the AA post season is better than proven major leaguers who are still available? I certainly wouldn't give up on Daniel, but he had a very poor Arizona Fall League, as well. He hit .190 with a .493 OPS.

I just get the feeling, Randy, that you're bummed out about this off season and have gotten all cattywampus.
Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2638/aout-carbonnel#ixzz3MmaGLMtO

[sfgdood]

Isn't this the guy you pointed to in order to show the amazing success the Giants have had on the International FA market?

[rxmeister]

I wouldn't throw Carbonell on the scrap heap because of his poor Arizona performance, (He did have one shining moment, a 480 foot HR) but he played at San Jose last year and that's a long way from the majors. It will be interesting to see if they start him in AA or AAA this year. And you certainly know how to misquote people to make your point, don't you Randy? I'll tell you one thing though. His future is brighter than Gary Brown's at this point!

[Rog]

Carbonell is very raw. He also has skills. He's a nice prospect for the Giants. The notion that the Giants should be looking to him to start the season is as precarious as a drunk driving home with his lights off while being followed by a policeman and a CHP.

I liked Mark's point about Carbonell's being considered a better prospect than Gary Brown though. Sadly in a way, it's true.

My guess would be that Daniel ranks near the bottom of the Giants' top 10 prospects. Gary ranks below the bottom, which is sad. Gary would be a very exciting player if he could hit well enough to play.

The difficulty for Gary is that he hasn't developed. He was the Cal League player of the year in his first full minor league season. But since then he's been about a .260 hitter who walks too little and strikes out too much. Blessed with tremendous speed, Gary stole 80 bases in 94 attempts in college. But he has been unable to develop that skill, and has been in the low 60%'s in stolen bases in his two seasons of AAA ball.

I think there is a lesson in my ranking Gary much lower after San Jose than Randy did. Not that I'm brilliant, not than I'm great. Just the opposite actually.

Randy relied on what his eyes told him. As much as we'd like to think we can see as much as the scouts, they're professionals, and we're not.

Randy's eyes were wrong. I went with the scouting reports and the stats, and that is what the Giants themselves use. It's not surprising that I had a better chance of being right than he did.

The lesson here is that we're all fallible. If we go with the scouts and the stats, we're far more likely to be right than when we simply use our eyes. As much as we hate to admit it, our eyes just aren't that trained.

Think of all the young Giants players who have come up and gotten us excited to various degrees. Nick Noonan comes to mind. He was hot as a fire cracker when he first came up,, and some got excited about him. He went 7 for his first 13, certainly opening some eyes.

But he was the same guy who hadn't shown a lot in the minors. Too many strikeouts with not enough walks or power. He proceeded to go 16 for his next 92, was sent down, and never has been heard of at the major league level since. I believe the Yankees have him in their minors now.

When I first saw Nick's swing on tape right after he had been drafted, I thought it was a major league stroke. What the heck did I know? I would have liked to think I had a clue, but I didn't.

I think we overrate our ability to judge players based on what we see. We should look at the scouting reports and look at the stats. They are usually far more revealing than our own eyes.

We're human, and we're not trained.