RynMan wrote:Yoda wrote:AussieDodger wrote:Yoda wrote:AussieDodger wrote:This is how it is....
#1 Hughes. (2006 AA) 116.1 IP , 32 BB , 5 HR , 138 Ks. Outstanding. Number one pitching prospect at this stage.
#2nd Equal Gallardo & Bailey. Both had nearly identical AA stats in 2006.
Lincecum is disqualified at this stage through not having enough innings to judge from. (31.2 A innings in 2006 and 31 AAA innings in 2007 - not enough)
Also Lincecum and Bailey get points off for being on teams with half-wit front offices.
I love posts like this... Critics have been harsh on Lincecum no matter how awesome his stuff is or even puts up eye popping numbers. There will always be something to nitpick about him. Guys who can throw 100 MPH with a plus plus curve don't exactly grow on trees but anyway.
I'm not a critic , 60 odd pro innings (and half of them A level) is a very small sample size. I'm neutral on Lincecum through lack of innings , not negative at all. If he throws 100-150 AAA innings and keeps it to the same standard then I can start dribbling over him.
It's always something. He's too small. Weird, unpredictable mechanics. Small sample size. His competition is weak, etc, etc, etc... Yet all he does is put up beyond ridiculous numbers across the board every start. He's given up 1 ER and 0 HRs in 5 starts at PCL. And faced a team back to back and they still couldn't touch him. Do you even realize how hard it is to accomplish what he is doing right now?
Agree with Yoda here. Although the sample size is small, he has been retarded. His peripherals are off the charts, and it's not like he is doing it with smoke and mirrors.
I see it like this:
I agree with these rankings and I don't think there is much out there that will change my mind.