For a while I’ve been wanting to go back and compare Bruce and Szymanski to Kearns and Dunn when they were at Dayton.Ã‚Â The pair has reminded me of each other somewhat and I wanted to see how the numbers between them faired.Ã‚Â Bruce and Kearns seemed to be the more fluid, natural baseball ability types, whereas Szymanski and DunnÃ‚Â appear to beÃ‚Â the raw physical tool, project types.Ã‚Â Take a gander at the single A Dayton numbers for the four players.Ã‚Â Dunn and Kearns were there in 2000 by the way.
Name Age G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS OBP SLG AVG Kearns 20 136 484 110 148 37 2 27 104 90 93 18 5 .415 .558 .306 Dunn 20 122 420 101 118 29 1 16 79 100 101 24 5 .428 .469 .281 Bruce 19 67 259 42 75 24 5 10 46 22 58 6 5 .346 .537 .290 Szymanski 23 65 242 41 56 14 2 12 39 26 97 16 6 .310 .455 .231
These numbers illustrate just how special Kearns and Dunn really are.Ã‚Â Kearns had a monster season in 2000.Ã‚Â The thing that stand out about these two is the patience they displayed at this level as 20 year olds.Ã‚Â Their walk totals are amazing.
The first thing that stands out with Szymanski, is his age.Ã‚Â He has been hampered by injuries, but is still two levels shy of where he should be for his age.Ã‚Â The other item to stand out is his BA.Ã‚Â He is definitely a project, and a middling prospect at best.
Bruce on the other hand appears to be Kearns lite.Ã‚Â The only thing keeping Bruce from being in the same class with Kearns and Dunn is his plate discipline.Ã‚Â Not to say that it is bad, his BB totals are merely average.Ã‚Â Which makes them pale in comparison with Kearns and Dunn who excelled in that respect.Ã‚Â Bruce appears to have a chance to be a pretty good player for the Reds in the future.
It will interesting to see if they split Bruce and Szymanski up this season and give Bruce a taste of the next level at A+ Sarasota.