Adrian did not get a jump, I dont think he is projected to hit anywhere near 30 homeruns like both these hitters - Stokes and Choi - DID.

 

If Choi works out, and I think he will, watch for Stokes to play RF.? Then, in '05 - Cabrera LF, Pierre CF, Stokes RF.? Conine, 4th OF/platoon/1B?? Gives us more options...

dude, the ranking is old. you honestly think adrian is only the #6 1st baseman now that we know who has taken a dip? if that's the case, i'd love to have a taste of your crippy.

 

oh yeah, and jason stokes was, by far, the worst hitter on his team during the fall league.

 

Stokes, Jason, 1B: .145 Avg, 18 G, 62 AB, 5 R, 9 H, 1 2B, 1 3B, 2 HR, 5 RBI, 1 BB, 22 SO, 1 SB, 0 CS, .290 SLG, .169 OBP, 4 E

 

he strikes out more than 35% of the time and has only 9 hits and ONE walk in 63 on plate appearances for a miserable .169 OBP. oh yeah, and he can't field for s***.

 

tell me he's the #3 prospect 1b out there... geez. i'll be surprised if he's ready by 2005. Well, I hope you enjoy the taste. Because let me ask you a question, since you want to pose as an expert here. Look at Stokes stats in '02 then look at his stats in '03. Then, consider that his wrist injury was significant, that he may have rushed himself back and was perhaps, never totally healthy. As the season went on, he tried to compensate, but couldnt. Then the AFL followed, he still hadnt rested, but in fact was fatigued even more because of this whole past season of struggling and compensating and not being healthy. Then tell me, where does he project?

 

If you think AD Gonzalez projects better than Stokes, fine - say it now so in 2005 when Gonzalez is batting .280 with minimal pop and Stokes is launching balls off the yard you can eat my 'told you so'.

 

Was Stokes terrible this past year, he was bad, yes. But I think you dont go from the level of production to where he went this past season without an injury. And look at Choi's numbers and tell me honestly you think AD Gon's are better. You are being ridiculous. Patience...

 

And, havent you considered the reason why his 2002 ranking is listed is to show how he has moved up/down in 2003 vs. 2002? In other words, Stokes is exactly in the same spot of the rankings that he was in '02 despite his 'terrible' numbers at the time. But I think that these writers gave credence to the effects of his wrist injury.

how am i posing like an expert? i said stokes sucked during the AFL and i backed it up with numbers.

 

his 2002 ranking is listed as REFERENCE. there is a reason why they precede the word "ranking" with the word "2002". the text in that profile is also old and had high hopes for 2003.

 

the purpose of my post was to point out that the 2002 rankings were not accurate rankings of 1B since both Stokes and Choi have dipped in stock significantly this year. the 2002 rankings were before their injuries! i also pointed out that i doubt that stokes would be ready by 2005 (after one season), ESPECIALLY considering his injury and his extremely poor play of late. no s*** he'll be good someday; i never said that wasn't the case. but if you think the guy is almost ready for the big leagues, then i think you're the one posing as an expert.

 

i don't know how my pointing out the obvious means i am "posing like an expert", but it's definitely better than someone making farfetched projections of a guy's readiness while disregarding injury and poor play.

 

if a ranking is made before a guy's serious injury, how hard is it to believe that he probably wouldn't be ranked as high today? if someone is a poser for pointing that out, then i'll gladly have to accept my poserness. Umm...try reading my posts on another thread that discussed Stoke's wrist injury. Then come back and make accusations about me saying he is ready to play now.

 

What I got from your rambling was that Adrian Gonzalez should be ranked higher than Stokes. I think you are wrong, if I interpreted you correctly. And you are wrong, if that is the case - because NEVER, EVER has AD Gon put up the numbers at ANY level that Stokes OR Choi HAVE.

 

If you have anything to say beyond that, you are starting your own, new argument. If I misunderstood you, then take into consideration that you are not clear about what you are saying. Have a point...and stick to it.

Umm...try reading my posts on another thread that discussed Stoke's wrist injury.? Then come back and make accusations about me saying he is ready to play now.?

as much as i'd love to search for some old thread, i'll quote you from this very thread:

 

If Choi works out, and I think he will, watch for Stokes to play RF.? Then, in '05 - Cabrera LF, Pierre CF, Stokes RF.? Conine, 4th OF/platoon/1B?? Gives us more options...

you said he'd be ready by 2005, and i later responded by saying i'm not so sure of that considering his injury and very poor progress. i questioned you for making projections since you questioned me for "posing" as an "expert." i never accused you of saying "he is ready to play now," so i'll ask that you work on reading for comprehension before you make your arguments.

 

If I misunderstood you, then take into consideration that you are not clear about what you are saying.? Have a point...and stick to it.

alright. i guess i'm poor at expressing myself, just as your ability to understand the viewpoints of others is impeccable.

 

since it appears that you're starting petty arguments with me on multiple threads, i'd guess that you take exception when people respond to your posts with disagreement, and i've probably wounded your ego recently. if you'd prefer, i'll just skip over your posts, just as you believe everyone else does.

 

in any case, i think i'll end this particular debate since i don't really see it going anywhere.

It's clear ADRIAN>>Stokes.

I hate to agree with the braves fan.

You cant Make a Decision on who is better untill Both Become Major Leaguers. Its fun to debate it while there in the minors but you will never know untill they both reach the Majors.

You cant Make a Decision on who is better untill Both Become Major Leaguers. Its fun to debate it while there in the minors but you will never know untill they both reach the Majors.

I get a headache trying to read that teal font. Can you choose a darker color font?

Sigh...I just wish people could make their arguments without getting all emotional about it. You, alkazoid, have yet to answer my question. And to add to the confusion, it is you who seems to need a lesson in comprehension.

 

You said:

but if you think the guy is almost ready for the big leagues, then i think you're the one posing as an expert.

I said that I never said he was ready now. I said by 2005, and I dont see why that is such a longshot given he comes back this season (2004) healthy. He has this whole offseason to get back into shape and get the rest he needs.

 

But you said:

you said he'd be ready by 2005, and i later responded by saying i'm not so sure of that considering his injury and very poor progress. i questioned you for making projections since you questioned me for "posing" as an "expert." i never accused you of saying "he is ready to play now," so i'll ask that you work on reading for comprehension before you make your arguments.

 

If you never said that I said he is ready to play now, then what do you mean? Because now would indicate opening day, 2004, and you didnt accuse me of that. When at the earliest, you could argue that I said opening day 2005 - because I said 2005 Stokes will be ready. So if you didnt say that I said he was ready to play now, than what exactly are you trying to say? It would seem, seem if you could get around YOUR hurt ego, that you would agree with me. Because if you arent saying he is ready now, and neither am I, then you have to agree that in the future he will be ready - which I have said as much too. We both dont think he is ready to play in the big leagues this upcoming season - 2004. Fact. So tell me, what are you trying to say? What are you disagreeing with here?

 

The other point that you made, in which you have yet to really answer, is regarding Stokes vs. Gonzalez. You seem to think that his 2003 ranking is not right because it should (you feel) have him ranked lower than Gonzalez due to Stokes' injury. That might be so, but I dont think you have given a good look at stats:

 

Gonzalez: 449ABs 121H (.269AVG) 20 2B, 4 3B, 5HR, 51RBI, 39BB, 77K

Stokes: 462ABs 119H (.258AVG) 31 2B, 3 3B, 17HR, 89RBI, 36BB, 135K

 

Tell me, are you wanting to rank AD Gon higher because of less K's? Ok, that is your choice...but make an argument and use stats not just to disprove a point, but to prove a point. The stats for Stokes and Gonzalez are similar except in 3 basic areas - K's, 2B's and HRs. All of which Stokes has a lot more of than Gonzalez.

 

So again, I disagree with you - Stokes had an off year, but due to injury and still was able to rebound with a solid performance. That said, I dont see why his ranking in '03 should be any lower than '02 because no one surpassed him - including especially Gonzalez (who had to get demoted from AAA by the way).

AAA > A

 

There a difference from being low A ball (FSU league)

compared to

 

Tripple A

Sigh...I just wish people could make their arguments without getting all emotional about it.

funny you should say that. you take a number of smug, prickish jabs at me after i tell you i disagree with your assessment of gonz vs. stokes considering the quoted ranking was from 2002. personally, i find it humorous that i bother you this much.

 

You, alkazoid, have yet to answer my question.? And to add to the confusion, it is you who seems to need a lesson in comprehension.

nice comeback.

 

You [alkazoid] said:

but if you think the guy is almost ready for the big leagues, then i think you're the one posing as an expert.

 

I said that I never said he was ready now. and you say >>I

AAA > A

 

There a difference from being low A ball (FSU league)

compared to

 

Tripple A

yup... HUGE difference

So the rankings are old, as of 2002. Why would you bring up that point unless you were trying to say Gonzalez is better than Stokes? You STILL have yet to be clear that this is what you are trying to say, so I will help you - who do you think right now is a better 1B, Stokes or Adrian Gonzalez? And please state why.

 

Secondly, you never said that I said Stokes was ready now. I will concede that as long as you try not to argue your way out of something you shouldnt have to argue about. But I dont think you know what you are trying to say. I said Stokes should be ready by 2005, you seem to agree with me by saying he is not ready now and that you are concerned about his injury. Why you continue to argue over the point, I have absolutely no idea.

 

You can say I am being uncivilized, but it is you who are on the defensive here which only indicates you are frustrated. And seeing you have yet to say anything of substance, it must be attributed to your lack of a good point.

 

Let me save you some time - should we be worried about Stokes injury? Yes. But looking at his 2003 stats, it seems that he can still produce while being not totally healthy. Hopefully, he will rebound and put together a good 2004 - if that is the case, you see him in Sept, before expected.

 

But still, make a case for why you want to rank Gonzalez higher than Stokes, if that is your point. (As I asked you in this post)

 

And finally, AAA is greater than A. But Gonzalez got demoted from AAA to AA, which is still better than A. But I will be patient and see who puts together the better numbers. Stokes is still very young and so is Gonzalez, but I dont see Gonzalez putting up the power numbers Stokes will. I also dont see Gonzalez being a better hitter because he has yet to put up better stats - or near comparible stats - that Stokes has put up.

i'm clear. you're correct.

 

the yankees are the 2003 world champions.

i'm clear. you're correct.

 

the yankees are the 2003 world champions.

No, your wrong, The Marlins won the World Series - they beat the Yankees in 2003.

i'm clear. you're correct.

 

the yankees are the 2003 world champions.

No, your wrong, The Marlins won the World Series - they beat the Yankees in 2003. damn! jonny proves me wrong again! :banghead

I have to agree with the naysayers on this topic. Stokes couldn't break a .320 OBP at A-ball. Since that article was written mid-season, I think that BA overreacted to a hot month and ranked him #3 based on his '02 potential more than his '03 performance. I think had the article been written now, there's no way that Stokes would even make the top 10. So far, Gonzalez has shown himself to be better than Stokes, but neither one of them is any good. I'd take Choi over either one of them. Unlike Stokes and Gonzalez, Choi has nothing left to prove at the minor league level. A .621 SLG at AAA is just sick!

ADRIAN is also younger than Stokes, isn't he? And at a higher level.

I have to agree with the naysayers on this topic. Stokes couldn't break a .320 OBP at A-ball. Since that article was written mid-season, I think that BA overreacted to a hot month and ranked him #3 based on his '02 potential more than his '03 performance. I think had the article been written now, there's no way that Stokes would even make the top 10. So far, Gonzalez has shown himself to be better than Stokes, but neither one of them is any good. I'd take Choi over either one of them. Unlike Stokes and Gonzalez, Choi has nothing left to prove at the minor league level. A .621 SLG at AAA is just sick!

i think pretty much everybody on this thread agrees with you.

I have to agree with the naysayers on this topic. Stokes couldn't break a .320 OBP at A-ball. Since that article was written mid-season, I think that BA overreacted to a hot month and ranked him #3 based on his '02 potential more than his '03 performance. I think had the article been written now, there's no way that Stokes would even make the top 10. So far, Gonzalez has shown himself to be better than Stokes, but neither one of them is any good. I'd take Choi over either one of them. Unlike Stokes and Gonzalez, Choi has nothing left to prove at the minor league level. A .621 SLG at AAA is just sick!

So, the ranking was composed this year for 2003? Or is it from 2002?

So, the ranking was composed this year for 2003? Or is it from 2002?

 

It was composed for '03. The '02 ranking was shown for sake of comparison. Still this ranking was done mid-season. Had they done the ranking in late September, I guarantee you Stokes wouldn't have ranked that high.

So, the ranking was composed this year for 2003?? Or is it from 2002?

 

It was composed for '03. The '02 ranking was shown for sake of comparison. Still this ranking was done mid-season. Had they done the ranking in late September, I guarantee you Stokes wouldn't have ranked that high. That is what I thought...they listed the 2002 ranking to show a drop/rise in stock.

 

Perhaps you are right about Stokes being ranked lower if the rating was done later, but I dont think Stokes had all that bad of a season considering he played with a significant injury. Even if you compare his numbers this season head to head with Gonzalez, I dont see any reason why AD Gon would be ranked ahead of Stokes:

 

Gonzalez: 449ABs 121H (.269AVG) 20 2B, 4 3B, 5HR, 51RBI, 39BB, 77K

Stokes: 462ABs 119H (.258AVG) 31 2B, 3 3B, 17HR, 89RBI, 36BB, 135K

 

At least, that was the point of the debate between me and alkazoid - I think...but he never addressed it.

At least, that was the point of the debate between me and alkazoid - I think...but he never addressed it.

everybody on this thread disagrees with you about your horribly flawed comparison of stokes' and gonzalez's seasons, and yet you continue to call me out. i suppose we can afford vlad, too, right?

 

i think my 2nd post on this thread pointed out how horrendous stokes was in the AFL. i'll stop there.

I think stokes is better than Gonzalez. He played the whole year with a bad wrist and still put up pretty good numbers. Also in the AFL the wrist probably was hurting him alot and he was playing with pitchers from higher levels. You have to think about that. This offseason he has said he's going to work on getting that wrist strong again so that he could be ready for next year.

well, stokes put up those numbers at A ball while gonzalez put up his at AAA ball. there's a HUGE difference there. the numbers jonny listed are misleading and scuttle his argument. AFL numbers, on the other hand, compare apples to apples in the present, which is our objective here.

 

stokes did VERY poorly (with the bat and the glove) in the AFL, while gonzalez was pretty good. i agree with you that stokes has a lot of potential considering the pop in his bat, but at the moment, nobody knows for sure how he'll come back. a few years from now, i'm sure he'll be tearing it up. i'll love having him play for us.

 

gonzalez, on the other hand, is a standout right now with the glove and with the bat. he's much more prepared for the big leagues than stokes, who will clearly need more than a season to get ML-ready considering his current progress.

well, stokes put up those numbers at A ball while gonzalez put up his at AAA ball.? there's a HUGE difference there.? the numbers jonny listed are misleading and scuttle his argument.? AFL numbers, on the other hand, compare apples to apples in the present, which is our objective here.

 

stokes did VERY poorly (with the bat and the glove) in the AFL, while gonzalez was pretty good.? i agree with you that stokes has a lot of potential considering the pop in his bat, but at the moment, nobody knows for sure how he'll come back.? a few years from now, i'm sure he'll be tearing it up.? i'll love having him play for us.

 

gonzalez, on the other hand, is a standout right now with the glove and with the bat.? he's much more prepared for the big leagues than stokes, who will clearly need more than a season to get ML-ready considering his current progress.

I dont think anyone is saying Stokes will be ready next year, and Adrian struggle early on in AAA. (dont know what level he played in texas) and even in AA he numbers werent that good. Which is why the marlins traded him. Yes, adroian outplayed Stokes in the AFL but keep in mind that he played all season with a bad wrist. Going into the AFL that wrist probably was worn out which is why he may have put such horrible numbers. Yes, i agree with you Adrian is more prepared for the majors then Stokes hes being playing at a higher level for two plus years now. But I dont think it would be fair to judge stokes by this year alone. I would still rate Stokes ahead of Adrian.