Jason Heyward Game Report (August '08)
by Baseball Handyman on Sep 25, 2008 4:55 PM EDT
41 comments
Scouting the Sally - Jason Heyward, OF, ATL
Jason Heyward (2-7, 1 K) - Jason Heyward fell into the Braves lap in the first round of the 2007 draft and has since skyrocketed up prospect charts to the point where he will likely be a consensus top 10 overall prospect prior to the 2009 season. He posted a .323/.388/.483 line with the Rome Braves earning a late season promotion to Myrtle Beach to gain some playoff experience. Heyward struggled the evening I watched him play, but showed polish far beyond his years leaving me with the impression that the sky is truly the limit for the Braves talented young outfielder.
- Impressive physical specimen; Broad shoulders, muscular forearms, and muscular legs all leave room for additional size and strength as he physically matures
- The "Greg Oden" of MILB; Looked much older than a teen
- Looked 1" taller than Freeman when standing next to him
- Very comfortable in the batters box; calm, fluid movements
- Over aggressive and out front on a handful of fastballs
- Power should spike with improved weight transfer
- Laced first pitch fastball for a single up the middle; Ball exploded off of his bat
- Guided a ground ball single back up the middle with two strikes; VERY professional at bat
- Displayed good timing and base running instincts; Great jump from second on steal attempt
- Vintage Darryl Strawberry came to mind when seeing him chase a ball into the corner; Threw ball from RF corner to almost 3B with little effort
1 recs |
41 comments
Email
Print
Comments
yikes
I’m thinking it might be possible to phrase that compliment with a few different words…..there’s a whole host of others from which to choose!
by secondbass on Sep 26, 2008 5:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
this is just beating the point home: jason heyward is going to be really, really good at baseball in 2-3 years
Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.
by bigjoe on Sep 25, 2008 11:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
With Heyward being black you might want to chose you words wisely.
by braves790 on Sep 26, 2008 6:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Terence Moore man crush will be unbearable.
by 10-4 on Sep 26, 2008 9:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A Dave Parker comparison was made on BA. Parker was on a Hall of Famer track before he got into drugs. That’s pretty incredible.
by 17843 on Sep 26, 2008 10:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And for anyone who understands how PECOTA works, Heyward’s 50th percentile projection is to be a league average or better player in 2013 and 2014; ie in half of all projected scenarios he turns into at least a league average big leaguer. That’s pretty ridiculous.
by 17843 on Sep 26, 2008 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
voice of reason
I’m as psyched about Heyward as anyone (I’ve had him my keeper league for a year now) but I think we should all temper our expectations a bit. I’m talking about statements like “jason heyward is going to be really, really good at baseball in 2-3 years.”
He certainly has the potential to be a superstar, but for every guy like that there’s another who fails to live up to his potential. Don’t get me wrong, he has the all the physical and mental tools, not to mention what I hear is a good attitude, which indicate that he can be great, but he isn’t yet. And there’s an massive number of guys who had this makeup but didn’t put it all together at the highest level. Not to mention that he was drafted out of high school, adding a new layer of risk.
So let’s just cool it a bit and not build up these lofty expectations for a 19 year old kid.
by son.of.sourman on Sep 26, 2008 4:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Voice of reason?
I agree that he may never be a superstar, but there’s a reason why people are excited about his tools and makeup. It’s because players who’ve had his tools and makeup have a high rate of success. I also agree that some people are going a little overboard with their expectations, but that won’t effect Heyward. Frenchy doesn’t suck because everyone’s expectations were too high – he sucks because of his poor on-base skills and his inability to make adjustments. Not only does Heyward have physical tools equal to Frenchy, but he also has excellent on-base skills, apparently makes adjustments well, and is reputed to have a good work ethic. So, unlike players like Marte or Frenchy who were highly touted because of their tools and the hope that they’d develop true baseball skills, Heyward has the tools and the baseball skills (from what I’ve read/heard). Heyward’s career won’t be affected by the opinions of us here on the blog, so we might as well get excited. What else do we have to get excited about?
by buzzdeadwax on Sep 26, 2008 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Voice of reason
“Heyward’s career won’t be affected by the opinions of us here on the blog, so we might as well get excited.”
I never said don’t get excited. I just said don’t get this excited. Why? Because there is a very good chance you will get let down. For every Joe Mauer (highly touted coming out of high school) there is a Mark Farris or a Jeff Jackson. There are a thousand things that could go wrong from freak injury to simply not being who people thought he was. So yeah, let’s get excited, but “jason heyward is going to be really, really good at baseball in 2-3 years” isn’t good for anyone.
And you know what, I’m not entirely sold on the fact that this type of ridiculous hype doesn’t build up and reach Heyward in some way, which would a lot of pressure on a kid one year removed from HS. I know this argument isn’t as strong, but I think it’s a possibility at least.
by son.of.sourman on Sep 26, 2008 7:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
There is nothing wrong with getting excited about a player. The only person who can get hurt is me if I am overly excited about Heyward and he fails.
Also what else do we have to be excited about right now? We have a really good minor league system, and we have Chipper and Mac. That about sums up this season. If getting excited about Heyward is what keeps braves fans interested then say that Heyward is going to really, really good all you want.
by gopherbroke on Sep 26, 2008 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
well thanks
for echoing my statements in support of getting excited about Heyward.
but you are wrong if you don’t think there is danger in saying “that Heyward is going to really, really good.” you are simply making a gross overstatement based on factors that you can’t possibly foresee. Indeed, he can become very, very good, and has a better chance than 99% of people in the world. But it’s a logical fallacy to assume that it is also highly probably that he will fulfill that. That’s enough to get me excited, why isn’t it enough for you?
by son.of.sourman on Sep 27, 2008 12:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope we don't have that kind of power
That would make the blog less fun and more serious. But I understand your point. I don’t entirely disagree with you, I just don’t think it hurts us to get irrationally excited about a prospect. Like I said, the ML club isn’t giving us anything to cheer for, so we have to fantasize about the future greatness of the young players.
by buzzdeadwax on Sep 26, 2008 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
fair
but why can’t you get rationally excited about a prospect? and if you can’t find any joy in supporting your favorite team, be it though celebrating the 40% of so of games they win, the battle between a promising young pitcher and a superstar hitter, a perfectly turned double play, and so on, to the extent that it leads to some kind of irrational hero worship of a 19 year old that hasn’t pllayed an inning of major league ball, then I do think something is wrong.
by son.of.sourman on Sep 27, 2008 12:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It isnt like he is saying the kid is destined the be the greatest player ever. He said he is going to be really really good at baseball in a 2-3 years. It isnt irrational, it is just being a fan. An optimistic fan, and there is nothing wrong with it.
by gopherbroke on Sep 27, 2008 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
really?
Main Entry: 1ir·ra·tio·nal: not rational: as a (1): not endowed with reason or understanding (2): lacking usual or normal mental clarity or coherence b: not governed by or according to reason
I would say that claiming to know, with certainty, the future follows precisely from the definition of what is to be irrational. Insofar as the normal laws of physics hold, time moves forward, not backwards, and he doesn’t possess any form of ESP or abnormal cognition. Crazy, I know!
by son.of.sourman on Sep 27, 2008 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be irrational to say that I am going to be a really really good major leaguer in 2-3 years. It is not without understanding, or beyond reason to think that Heyward is going to be a very good major league player. Is it a gaurantee no, but that doesnt make it irrational.
Is it irrational to say that tomorrow is going to a very nice day. No it isnt, eventhough there exists a possibility that it could be cloudy, or rainy, or windy or whatever. That doesnt make the statement tomorrow is going to be a very nice day irrational.
by gopherbroke on Sep 27, 2008 5:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Tomorrow
My area’s forecast looks like this:
Sunny, High 83°F, Precip 10, Max. Humidity: 64
Now that’s not a bad forecast to most people. But, see, to me, I like it a bit colder – say maybe a high of around 55. I still want some sunshine, you know, so I can stand in patches of it if it gets too cold, but I like a general chill in the air. A night time low of maybe 35 or 40 would be okay by me, as long as I’m inside. (Do I really need to say that? Of course I’d be inside at night, especially if it was 30 degrees out!)
The advantage of having a forecast like my ideal is, specifically for myself, that I no longer have to mow the grass, a chore I absolutely detest. The yard I mow is around 2 or 3 acres. Yes I have a riding mower with a 46" cutting deck, but there are lots of spots where I have to go back with a weed eater or a push mower, and it just isn’t any fun. And before anyone goes off on my getting a zero radius turning whatever whatever mower, I looked into it. Maybe I’ll get one in a few years, but not right now. It really upsets me when people here on this blog go on and on criticizing me about my refusal to buy a zero radius turning mower! But I digress….
Now if Jason Heyward wants to come over and mow my lawn, I’d pay him maybe $50 every two weeks. That would include weed eating and all other related trimming. If he wants to bring Freddie Freeman along, he’s more than welcome to do so, but that’s his $50 to split – I’m not ponying up any more cash just to have my yard cut. It grows really fast, so I’d be broke before you know it. Besides, those two need to get used to not being side by side all the time – Jason and Freddie I mean. It’s just not realistic as they move through the levels of the minor leagues.
And when Jason Heyward makes the Hall of Fame, which he is clearly destined to do, he can quit cutting my lawn. So come on over, Jason – tomorrow’s high is above 80, so you can bet my lawn needs mowing!
I keep tuning in to this thread because the little black number saying new is sooooo inviting. I just can’t help myself. And I evidently don’t know how to turn the bold off and on.
by secondbass on Sep 27, 2008 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
are you kidding me?
"Is it irrational to say that tomorrow is going to a very nice day. "
It is completely irrational to say that!!
I’m willing to have a debate here almost anytime, but now it’s become obvious that we are coming from completely different point of views (mine is the side of logic and reason). The weather is one of the most unpredictable things in the world, hence the millions of jokes about weather forecasters. The term, “the vagaries of the weather.” The thousands of terms in climate models. And so on. No one on in their right mind would ever say that they know tomorrow is going to be a nice day. You might hear a meteorologist say there is a 80% chance of rain, or one might say, there is a good chance it will be a nice day, or I hope it will be a nice day.
I can’t have this debate anymore: it’s pointless when we have a complete disagreement about reality.
by son.of.sourman on Sep 27, 2008 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yours is the side of logic and reason?
That’s awfully condescending. The difference in the two sides, is that you’re slightly pessimistic and the other side is overly optimistic. How is that a “complete disagreement about reality”?
by buzzdeadwax on Sep 28, 2008 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To think that Heyward is going to reach his potential is not irrational thought. Just because there are several players who have had a lot of hype and failed, that doesnt make it irrational to say that someone is going to reach those expectations.
How is it not reasonable to think he is going to be a very good player. Take the 2005 BA Top 10 for example: Of those 10 players (Mauer, Felix Hernandez, Delmon Young, Ian Stewart, Joel Guzman, Casey Kotchman, Scott Kazmir, Rickie Weeks, Andy Marte, Hanley Ramirez) 8 of them have been at least average Major league players (all except for Marte, Guzman) 4 of them are aces, or all-stars (Mauer, Felix, Kazmir, Ramirez.) From 2004, 4 of the top 10 have made an all star team, in 2003 6 of the top ten made an all star team
Now show me how it isnt reasonable to say that he is going to be a very good player.
Reason: The basis or cause for some beleif, action, fact, event etc.
By reading scouting reports and listening to what people have to say about Heyward I can, with reason, say that I think Heyward is going to be a really really good major league player. Just like i could have done wih any of those top 10 prospects from 2005. That doesnt gaurantee the accuracy of my statement, but it does make it reasonable.
by gopherbroke on Sep 28, 2008 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
brewers fans would laugh at you for calling rickie weeks average, but i digress.
Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.
by bigjoe on Sep 28, 2008 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
thats funny…. On the rickie weeks note can someone explain to me how you score almost 90 runs when u strike out 120 times in less than 500 AB all the while batting 220
"We win today, that's two in a row... if we win tomorrow, that's called a winning streak. It has happened before..."
by Swo12bv on Oct 1, 2008 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes but then why does michael bourn only have 57 runs scored, in a similar amount of ABs, and a similar avg… the OBP is about 50 pts lower for Bourn, but does that really account for the 32 run differential… i understand Fielder and Braun can rake, but the Big Puma and EL Cabello arent too bad… in reality they may even be better… their OPS is much higher, as is their avg, as is their plate discipline (which i conclude would lead to more productive outs, although i admit their is no evidence for that… its purely speculation)
"We win today, that's two in a row... if we win tomorrow, that's called a winning streak. It has happened before..."
by Swo12bv on Oct 2, 2008 8:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
because rickie weeks knows how to take a walk (career OBP .352). michael bourn doesn’t (career OBP: .299)
Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.
by bigjoe on Oct 5, 2008 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
not worth discussing
besides the fact that you clearly cherrypicked a good year for the BA top 10 and regardless only about half of those guys are proven all stars, this isn’t worth discussing anymore
it’s a philosophical difference – you and your buddy are stuck with some archaic understanding of probability where you think you can tell me with 100% certainty what the future holds. It’s magic and blind faith that you hold to, and all that I protest. Nobody knows that Heyward will be a great player, all you can infer from the data is that there is a good chance that he will be a great player, a better chance he will be a good player, and an even better chance he will be an average player. For the record, you finally said something accurate at the end “By reading scouting reports and listening to what people have to say about Heyward I can, with reason, say that I think Heyward is going to be a really really good major league player. Just like i could have done wih any of those top 10 prospects from 2005. That doesnt gaurantee the accuracy of my statement, but it does make it reasonable.”
that’s fine. but before, if you read what was said above, you were trying to say that he was certainly going to do that, which you cannot know
by son.of.sourman on Sep 28, 2008 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
did you not notice how he also mentioned two OTHER years?
Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.
by bigjoe on Sep 28, 2008 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
cherrypicked that year to name players from, i mean
overall 50%, mostly college whereas heyward was from high school. so at best we are talking about a coin flip, whereas people upthread were talking about it like it’s a certainty? that’s my point, in a nutshell.
by son.of.sourman on Sep 28, 2008 6:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mauer – HS
Felix Hernandez – INTL
Delmon Young – INTL
Ian Stewart – HS
Joel Guzman – INTL
Casey Kotchman – college
Scott Kazmir – HS
Rickie Weeks – college
Andy Marte – INTL
Hanley Ramirez – INTL
mostly college my ass.
Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.
by bigjoe on Sep 28, 2008 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’m sorry, kotchman was ALSO HS. so your point is further shot to shit.
Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.
by bigjoe on Sep 28, 2008 7:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
wrong again!
college is usually more reliable b/c there is a larger sample size. it’s simple statistics. international is such a crapshoot anyway and that list happens to have the two biggest intl prospects of the last several years. not surprising b/c it’s the high ceiling, high risk (i.e., high school, international) that BA weights highly. pls stop making a fool of yourself
and how is delmon international? he went to high school in california and his been a bust most of his career btw.
by son.of.sourman on Sep 28, 2008 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
because i typoed.
Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.
by bigjoe on Sep 28, 2008 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what am i saying?
this is ridiculous. look at the list. there are least 5 guys there that are questionable at best: marte, weeks, guzman, kotchman, young. Mauer and Ramirez are studs. Felix, time will tell, with the injuries and what not. Stewart is on the cusp. Kazmir is lights out when he’s healthy. Weeks, no one know what to think about weeks.
So basically that’s exactly my point, which you keep ignoring, that BA top 10 guys are still a lottery ticket, and if you go by 2005, Heyward is a ticket with a 20% of being a superstar 40% of being above average to great and 50-60% of being average or below. Far from the 100% you are defending.
i can’t believe i’m wasting my time educating you.
by son.of.sourman on Sep 28, 2008 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
its PROBABLY because of the fact you’re being a cocky prick about this. and your original point was that a year was cherrypicked where college players were prevalent. which they werent
Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.
by bigjoe on Sep 28, 2008 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Something doesnt have to be 100% certain to be reasonable.
by gopherbroke on Sep 28, 2008 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
combine this with the MLBTR thread, and this place is spiraling out of control. must be the whole “20 games under .500” phenomenon
Following the Braves...one long hard drink at a time.
by bigjoe on Sep 27, 2008 8:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
After reading this thread, my brain is in that same spiral…
by VegasAces on Sep 29, 2008 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
