Look at Rizzo's stats from his ML debut at the age of 21. All of a sudden Baez looks much better.
Not really. Rizzo was at 13.7%/30.1% bb/k rates with a .141/.281/.242. Baez is at 4.4%/44.4% with a .198/.233/.465. Additionally, consider that Rizzo was playing in Petco for his home games vs wrigley which is hitter friendly especially for someone with Baez's sort of power. Perhaps you can argue that Baez's triple slash looks better but if you're looking for future indicators a 44.4% K rate is astronomical. Brett Jackson who was notorious for that in his stint in the majors was at 41.5% over about 50 more PAs. Olt who many are ready to cast away was at 32.5% in his first stint and is 39.6% this year. Both had far superior walk rates. Even if you want to be positive on him and say he's the next Giancarlo Stanton, at 20 when he came up he was at 8.6%/31.1%.
I hate beating a dead horse but to act like it's no big deal is naive. The difference between someone like Rizzo and Baez is even if Baez knocks off 10% in K's like Rizzo has he's still at 34% which is horrible. To get where Baez needs to be in order to be effective isn't a small incremental change. He basically needs to cut off 20% off his K's and preferably more. That's not to say that it's impossible for him to change but it's not an encouraging sign. Even if you look at historically great/good high K players like Jim Thome, Sammy Sosa, Mike Cameron, Jay Buhner, Danny Tartabull, Adam Dunn, Dan Uggla, Justin Upton, Mike Napoli, Ray Lankford, Jose Canseco, B.J. Upton, Matt Kemp, Gorman Thomas, and Dave Kingman none of them ever posted a season(even partial) at 40% or higher K rate and most didn't post 35% or higher.
Seriously, take a look at this list of players.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.as...rost=0&age=0&filter=19508&players=0&sort=11,d
This is a list of players who've posted more than 30% K rate since 1994 who are not pitchers and have minimum of 70 plate appearances. The best positive comparison I see is Jose Bautista(2004 age 23 7.3%/41.7% with .205/.263/.239). Bautista was a player who disappointed for 6 seasons and finally broke through. There's a couple of other potential star level players on there in Dunn a few times, Bo Jackson, Chris Davis, Mark Reynolds, Ray Lankford, and Ryan Howard but keep in mind this wasn't a small selection of data. It's 20 years and most of those players had seasons at the lower end of the 30% scale. Even if you go back to 1950 and just look at rookies, Dave Duncan(47.2%) is the only player who had a higher K rate than he currently has and only Duncan, Baez, Brandon Hicks, Ron Karkovice, Jose Bautista, Brett Jackson, Jackie Warner, Dave Nicholson, Jack Cust, and Billy Bryan have had k rates over 40% with minimum 70 PAs. I guess my point here is this isn't just normal rookies being rookies. It is historically high. And if that doesn't worry you then I'm not sure what does.
As an aside, Bo Jackson seems like an interesting comparison I've not heard many people make. Jackson was more of a spectacle but Baez is probably going to be a must watch type because you never know when he'll hit a ridiculous homer. Bo Jackson's rookie season was 91 PAs, 7.7%/37.4% with .207/.286/.329. I feel like if you want to talk top end on Baez that Jackson's 1989 season where he hit .256/.310/.495 with 7.0%/30.7% walk/k rate, 32 homers, 26 SB and 105 RBIs is what you should expect. Maybe you talk about a tick or two more homers and a few less SB as Jackson was a phenomenal runner and Baez isn't quite that good SB wise.
That being said, the path between where Baez is and that season isn't a short sail. You're gambling that like Bo Jackson Baez becomes that player and not the numerous other players on that list that you've probably never heard of or don't care about because they were busts. When I talk about trading Baez or about him negatively at all it's not that I don't see the possibility that he could be someone like Bo Jackson. What I see is the vast list of players who haven't succeeded as that type of player. And when you talk about the current trade value he has and what he could potentially net you in a trade that are likely far less risky it just seems like it might be a smarter play to me even given Baez's top end especially when you consider the more than adequate options the cubs have to replace him.
