Let's reach into the mailbag and see what is there.

Eric S. writes: In your latest mailbag you said "Seth (McClung) is Tampa Bay's best pitching prospect, but I want to see how he holds up in Double-A." So, you've got him ahead of Dewon Brazelton, then? Is McClung just more polished at this point, or is there something else I'm missing?

I knew when I wrote that that it would be controversial; I should have written that he was equal to Brazelton. Stuff-wise, they rank pretty much equally. They both have hot fastballs, timed in the low-to-mid-90s. Brazelton has a better changeup, but McClung's curveball is better. Brazelton is probably a better athlete and has a looser arm. He also may have a better feel for pitching, but his overall ceiling may not be as high as McClung's, and that's saying something since Brazelton has a high ceiling himself. McClung is bigger, should throw harder in the long run, is a year younger, and is pitching a bit better right now. Both are in Double-A now, so we'll be better positioned to make a direct comparison later this year.

Curtis G. asks: You wrote last week that Pirates left-handed prospect Sean Burnett has exceptional control, has a solid curveball and changeup, and is exceptional at changing speeds. I have also read that his fastball is in the 88-92 mph range. Considering all you hear from color commentators during games (we have two great ones in Bob Walk and Steve Blass) is how important it is to change speeds and stay away from the middle of the plate in order to have success at the major-league level.

That said, why would you think that a guy with three good pitches and excellent control may not be able to get out of Double-A? Even if he has peaked physically, I would think that a pitcher like that already has good enough stuff to be successful in the majors if he can continue to improve his ability to "pitch."

The information I have is that Burnett usually throws 87-90 mph, with occasional peaks at 91. No one questions his changeup or breaking stuff, or his understanding of the craft of pitching. He is now 7-0 with a 1.19 ERA in nine starts for Class A Lynchburg, with just eight walks in 53 innings. But he also has just 27 strikeouts, a low total for that many innings pitched.

It's obvious that he is too good for A-ball. The point I was trying to make last week was that, while he is getting people out extremely easily right now, Double-A will be the true test of his ability if history is any guide. Historically speaking, few pitchers with strikeout rates that low prosper at higher levels. I'm not saying that Burnett will fail; I'm not saying he is not a good prospect. What he's done is highly impressive, and frankly if I were the Pirates, I would promote him to Double-A right now to find out exactly how good he is. But as much as I'm impressed with his ERA, his changeup, and his control, the fact remains that, no matter what their ERA is, few pitchers with strikeout rates that low succeed in the major leagues. Many of them fail in Double-A.

Burnett has a lot of things going for him, but I'm not ready to pronounce him a future ace until he proves that his changeup will work on Double-A and Triple-A hitters. I make no prediction either way; I'm just trying to lay out what the test will be for him from an historical perspective.

Daniel N. writes: I was wondering what the demotions of rookies Hank Blalock and Carlos Pena mean for the two of them. Both were highly-touted, yet their teams decided to give up (this year, at least) on them fairly quickly. Do you think that they are better off taking their lumps in the majors or that some more seasoning in the minors is for the best? Do the demotions hurt their futures? I understand that both Oakland and Texas are disappointed with their records, but it still seems like they are overreacting -- not everyone hits like Albert Pujols right off the bat.

	Pena

	Blalock

In the long run it shouldn't have an impact on either, and both should be back in the major leagues relatively soon. Blalock is hitting .333 with a .606 slugging percentage since getting sent down to Triple-A. Pena already has a year of Triple-A under his belt, so I don't think he really needs much seasoning. If the Athletics had been playing better, I doubt he would have gone down, despite his current slump. My wild unsubstantiated guess is that he'll go down to Triple-A, take about three weeks to get back on track, and be back in Oakland's lineup just before the All-Star break.

Are these cases of scapegoating and overreacting? Perhaps. Nobody in Oakland is playing well right now, but Pena's numbers aren't appreciably worse than Jermaine Dye's or Terrence Long's. But Pena is the rookie, so it's easy to send him down, especially if they are worried about him losing confidence during the slump. Blalock fanned 33 times in 100 at-bats before his demotion, a very high rate for him, but he did have eight doubles and 12 walks, and was showing some signs of snapping out of it.

Personally, based just on what I know, I wouldn't have made either move. But I'm not in the GM's chair, and I don't have all the information that A's GM Billy Beane and Rangers GM John Hart have. There could be psychological or clubhouse factors involved in the decisions that we are not privy to. The bottom line is that, in the long run, both Pena and Blalock are going to be outstanding players, and that the "long run" still has a good chance to start later this year, for both of them.

Robert G. asks: Blue Jays 2001 first-round pick Gabe Gross had a great debut last year, showing good power, plate discipline and the ability to hit for a good average. However, this year, he just hasn't hit at all, and while he is still drawing walks, it isn't at the rate he displayed last year. Have you heard of anything being wrong with him, or is he just in a prolonged slump?

Gross hit .287 in 46 games after signing last year, with good power and a high on-base percentage. He got off to a horrible start this season, hitting around .140 just a few weeks ago. He's pushed that up to .182 now in 43 games for Double-A Tennessee, but still has just one double and two homers.

What happened? He's maintained his strike zone judgment, so that hasn't been the problem. I'm told that there is nothing physically wrong with him. It apparently started off as just a classic "Hit-Line-Drives-Right-At-People" bad luck slump. Nothing is as discouraging for a hitter as seeing an ugly ".143" batting average on the scoreboard, especially when you're hitting the ball well. And as the season progressed and the slump didn't end, Gross started to press, messing up his swing in the process. This of course just made things worse.

Will he pull out of it? He's dug a big hole for himself, and it will be hard for him to post top-notch numbers this year unless he really catches fire. We'll monitor the situation. I gave him a strong recommendation in my book, and I still think he's going to be a fine player, but he needs to relax, forget about the slump, and go back to his regular approach. Much easier said than done, of course.

John Sickels is the author of the 2002 STATS Minor League Scouting Notebook. He is currently writing a biography of Bob Feller. He lives in Lawrence, Kansas, with his wife, son, and two cats. You can send John questions or comments at JASickels@aol.com, or you can visit his homepage at hometown.aol.com/jasickels/page1.html.