Why is Elbert that high? His stats were fairly pedestrian last season. I know he was bouncing back from injuries, did he look better than the numbers would indicate?

His stuff warrants it being that high.

Pedestrian numbers from Elbert in 2009? He was in his age 23 season, and between Double A, Triple A, and the majors the southpaw had 146 K's and 51 BB's in 115.2 IP.

What was Randy Johnson doing at age 23? Spent the whole year in Double A: 168 K's and 128 BB's in 140 IP. And to think some people say Elbert doesn't have good enough control to ever start in the majors.

And I just love how the professional prospect analysts are going on about Elbert's injury history and fragility. One injury -- one! -- since he was drafted in 2004, and he completely recovered from that a year and a half ago.

A lefty starting pitcher (a starter in the minors) with a low-to-mid 90's fastball, a plus slider, and a change-up, Elbert is one of the most underrated prospects in baseball right now.

Man, this list would look a lot better with Carlos Santana at the top.

What was Randy Johnson doing at age 23? Spent the whole year in Double A: 168 K's and 128 BB's in 140 IP. And to think some people say Elbert doesn't have good enough control to ever start in the majors.

No pitcher should be expected to take Randy Johnson's path to the majors, and certainly no pitcher should be expected to take Randy Johnson's path to the Hall of Fame.

There was a post a while back that compared Robinson Cano's first couple seasons in the majors to Roberto Alomar's and found Cano superior. Of course, Roberto Alomar wasn't a great player because he was merely averagish in his first couple seasons - Roberto Alomar was a great player because he became a perennial All-Star a couple years into his career.

We need a name of this form of failed argument. It's sort of a version of "my dad can beat up your little brother" - that is, you know, Maury Wills had more stolen bases than Ralph Kiner, or something.

Matt Clement, I don't think anybody is making the argument you think, least of all me. If Elbert had walked 128 batters in 140 innings last year, I would not be saying Elbert is an underrated prospect, or even any kind of prospect at all, notwithstanding that Randy Johnson went on to a Hall of Fame career after walking so many batters in Double A at the not-exactly-young-for-Double-A age of 23. My point in citing Johnson's numbers was a very narrow one: young power pitchers with some control issues are not doomed. Their control can still improve, and even if it doesn't improve, other, positive, attributes may be more than enough to compensate for the negative. And obviously Johnson's control problems were extreme and not at all comparable to Elbert's much milder problem. Anyway, at the end of the day, I think strikeout rate is the best number to look at in assessing a pitching prospect. Elbert K'd 146 batters in 115.2 IP, from Double A through the majors. Is that consistent with the claim of "Brian" that Elbert's numbers were "pedestrian?"

The problem with that type of argument for Elbert is it doesn't represent the most likely scenario. Sure, Elbert could turn into Randy Johnson, but he's much more likely to turn into Shawn Hillegas. This is the same reason why the Blake Dewitt-Chase Utley comparison is a weak one -- sure, there's like a 1% chance that DeWitt will turn into an Utley-caliber player. It is theoretically possible. It's just extremely unlikely.

Stephen Strasburg is more likely to end up like Shawn Hillegas than Randy Johnson. That is the nature of pitcher attrition. So you are not saying anything relevant with that. (Oh, but just for kicks: Hillegas minor league K rate: 5.8/9. Elbert minor league K rate: 10.5/9.) Again, nobody seems to be understanding what argument I am making. And I never said anywhere that DeWitt has any chance to end up like Utley. One day, on another site, I picked Utley's record at random to show somebody Utley's MATURATION rate, to make the point that just because DeWitt is still a work in progress before age 24 doesn't mean is is crap. Which is to say, Utley at age 23 was very far from looking special.

My point in citing Johnson's numbers was a very narrow one: young power pitchers with some control issues are not doomed.

To the degree that was your point, I obviously agree.

To the degree the Randy Johnson example was supposed to support your claim that Elbert is "one of the most underrated prospects in the game", under your new articulation of your argument, it doesn't do that.

But the thing about Johnson had NOTHING to do with the claim in the first paragraph. I started a second paragraph for a reason: I was moving on to a completely new point that I wanted to make -- that Elbert's control is NOT too poor for him to project as a major league starter, as I often hear people say. Frankly, Johnson's control in Double A was too poor for him to project as a major league starter, but he improved. I brought up Johnson just for the benefit of people who really don't know what wild looks like if they think Elbert is unacceptably wild or has no chance to improve his control with more experience.

I was referring to his MLB stats: 78 ERA+, 19 hits in 19.2 IP .... his K/BB was actually good at 21/7 but nothing screams star here.

21/7 in 19.2 innings does nothing to suggest that the guy can't become an adequate big-league starter, though.

...after walking so many batters in Double A at the not-exactly-young-for-Double-A age of 23. My point in citing Johnson's numbers was a very narrow one: young power pitchers with some control issues are not doomed. Their control can still improve, ...

Another thread yesterday had caused me to look up the minor league records of Dick Hughes, a Cardinal pitcher of the 1960's. He was in AAA at age 23, but up to and including that age he was walking 6 or more batters per 9 innings. Starting the next year, he began to get the walks under control, and he turned in a very good year in AA/AAA at age 25 - but for the next several years, he was constantly being bypassed for other prospects - often younger ones - in a Cardinal organization that was deep in prospects. Happenstance and staff injuries gave him a chance for a pennant-winning 1967 team. As a 29-year old rookie, he finished 2nd to Tom Seaver in the Rookie of the Year vote and he got some down-ballot MVP votes. His 222 IP at an ERA+ of 123 was the team's best performance that year, and he even had the lowest walk rate among that year's Cardinal starters.

He was great at 29 - a ROY in a typical year (without a Seaver); he was a below-average relief pitcher at 30, and that was the end of his career.

21/7 in 19.2 innings does nothing to suggest that the guy can't become an adequate big-league starter, though.

True, but taken as a whole he seems closer to pedestrian than "one of the most underrated prospects in baseball right now."

Of course, that may be why he is underrated.