Members: Login | Register | Feedback
Garko or Conor Jackson?
Posted: 28 August 2006 06:29 PM   [ Ignore ]

Going forward as first basemen in a keeper league. Right now, I have both but seldom play either. I can keep 15 players this winter, so the question is, is either a future star worth holding onto? “Neither” is also a possible answer to the question.


"There are some things a man must do for himself if he is ever to be free." - Lyle F. Delp

Posted: 28 August 2006 08:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]

I don’t think there’s any reason to think Garko’s a future star.

The cons:  He’s 25, has 65 career at-bats in the majors, and hit .247/.352/.420 in Triple-A this season.  Assuming Martinez/Shoppach is the catching tandem until Vic’s contract runs out and he signs with the Yankees/Mets/Red Sox/White Sox/Dodgers/Angels (pick one), Garko’s stuck at first base.  With Michaels, Sizemore, and Choo around, Casey Blake’s going to end up playing a bunch of first base.  With Marte around, Blake won’t play much third.  And if Kevin Kouzmanoff keeps hitting ~.380 in the minors, they’ll want to get him at-bats somewhere (3B? 1B? LF?).  All of which is sort of a roundabout way to say that barring a trade, I don’t see Garko playing well enough or often enough to be considered a future star.

The pros:  Before this season, the guy’s hit everywhere he’s ever been:  .310/.389/.511 in two pro seasons.  He’s got very good command of the strike zone.  And the organization seems to think he’s a good ‘character’ guy who works hard.

On the whole, I think Garko’s got a chance to be a pretty good ballplayer if they let him, maybe something like Brian Daubach in his prime.  (Which was actually pretty good…two seasons with an OPS+ over 120.)  I’d be shocked if he became a star, but I see him as a .270/.340/.460 sort of guy for the next few seasons.  A solid ballplayer, but nothing to freak out about.

Posted: 30 August 2006 12:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]

It all depends on who makes up the remainder of your team, but from what I got from your post I would neither.  If you decide that you have room and want to select one of them, I’d actually side with Conor Jackson. He is performing pretty well this season (.281/.365/.421) and is only 24. Garko does have a shot at becoming the player Dan described, but Jackson is the sure thing at the moment—and he has age on his side.

But if you don’t need to take either of them…don’t.

Posted: 30 August 2006 06:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]

I think that Jackson’s power will continue to develop.  For 2007 his “upside” in roto terms would probably be .300-20-90,and his down side would be similar to his rookie year, .280-15-75

I don’t see a “sophmore slump” for him because he already had a few months in the majors in 05, and he has shown during this season he can make adjustments. His style and approach are not so easily exploited that it leaves him vulnerable to extended slumps learning to lay off low and away breaking stuff…etc.

The only fear is that he feels more and more pressure to “power up” and chases high fastballs trying to turn on them and pull them down the line. I do see this tendency showing up a bit more lately. But he is a good hitter, and will only continue to get better.

I don’t know enough about Garko to comment, just wanted to give you my Jackson perspective.