Susan
Slusser's
piece
today
has
a
lot
of
praise
for
Matt
Chapman,
including
from
Marcus
Semien,
Bob
Melvin,
and
Trevor
Plouffe.
Some
wild
comparisons
are
bandied
about
(by
the
A's,
not
Slusser),
though
of
course
not
in
a
"he's
this
good
now"
way.
(Plouffe
is
specifically
quoted
with
that
caveat.)
One
of
those
comparisons
is
to
Nolan
Arenado,
which
is
natural
because
they
were
high
school
teammates.
What's
interesting
about
the
Arenado
comp,
though,
is
that
the
Rockies
star
was
a
bat-first
player;
sure,
he
was
a
high
school
shortstop,
but
what
prospect
infielder
wasn't?
His
2011
BP
Annual
comment
referred
to
his
defense
as
"solid";
in
2012
his
glove
was
"nothing
special";
then
he
hit
the
big
leagues,
where
he's
put
up
eye-popping
defensive
numbers
in
every
metric,
not
to
mention
the
eye
test.
(To
be
clear,
this
wasn't
a
BP
blind
spot:
Baseball
America
in
those
years
said
he
could
move
to
first
base
due
to
a
lack
of
athleticism
and
slow
feet,
and
then,
after
he
dropped
20
pounds,
called
his
range
"average.")
Chapman,
by
contrast,
has
the
98
mph
arm
and
good
feet,
which
he
pairs
with
power
potential
and
serious
questions
about
his
hit
tool.
A
.300
ISO
in
Triple-A
is
cool
and
all,
but
if
you're
a
.197
hitter
at
that
level,
you're
not
a
big-leaguer.
Obviously,
85
plate
appearances
of
.197
hitting
doesn't
mean
you're
a
.197
hitter,
but
the
fact
is
that
Chapman
hasn't
so
far
proven
that
he's
going
to
make
enough
contact
in
the
majors
for
his
glove
to
play,
even
with
the
power.
I'm
not
saying
he's
not
a
good
prospect,
and
we
can't
solely
scout
the
stat
line,
but
it's
worth
noting
that
there's
still
plenty
of
crash-and-burn
possibility
here.