Corey Patterson traded to Balt. (per Levine)

[CubinNY]

Given Pie's injury and his terrible Winter I hope the Cubs are not banking on him anytime soon.

 

I don't think they are though, given that Hendry handed out a mulit-year contract to Jones and has talked as if he'd like Slappy to stick around for a while.

[stitchface]

I have a great deal of respect for Joshua and Zisk (both would do a better job than Matthews or Clines, IMO) as you know, but a player like Pie is going to need just as much coaching as the ML level, if not more.

 

I have little confidence that Pie would progress as a player during his rookie season as he would if he played his rookie year with ATL.

 

Once the League adjusts to a player, that's when the coaching at the ML level kicks in.

 

If Pie struggles at the start, would you be more confident with Baker handling it or Cox?

 

That's an obvious choice for me.

 

Overall, I think Braves have better instructors though in the minors and that includes Joshua and Zisk, which isn't being critical of those two, just praise for the way the Braves operate.

 

I am very interested to see how Francoeur makes out this year in the context of this discussion and the one with goony.

[TXCubsFan]

So if Pie were, say, a Braves prospect, would they be considering him for a mid-season replacement in 2006 like we are?

 

That's a good question, I'd feel more confident in ATL making that decision. Pie would've had better instructors during his ascent to the majors as well as having more confidence in their decision makers as far as him being ready compared to the Cubs making that same decision. Once he got to the majors, you have Bobby Cox compared to Baker, Cox dwarfs Baker as a manager and ATL has better instructors at the Major League level as well.

 

Comparing the track record of the Cubs and Braves as far as position players, is a model of success vs. a model of futility as far as drafting and developing quality position players.

Is it that you don't think much of Zisk + Joshua or do you just think that much of the Braves instructors?

 

I always though UK loved Zisk. The cubs players seem to start to fade high in the minors - this is very troubling.

 

I don't think it's solelyCubs coaching. Cedeno is doing very well at a young age. Choi has been with two other teams and hasn't improved much. Bobby Hill hasn't done much either.

[UK1679666180]

I am very interested to see how Francoeur makes out this year in the context of this discussion and the one with goony.

 

He'll have to draw more walks, he's still very aggressive, but his strike out rates haven't prohibited his production, yet.

[dalgreen]

So if Pie were, say, a Braves prospect, would they be considering him for a mid-season replacement in 2006 like we are?

 

That's a good question, I'd feel more confident in ATL making that decision. Pie would've had better instructors during his ascent to the majors as well as having more confidence in their decision makers as far as him being ready compared to the Cubs making that same decision. Once he got to the majors, you have Bobby Cox compared to Baker, Cox dwarfs Baker as a manager and ATL has better instructors at the Major League level as well.

 

Comparing the track record of the Cubs and Braves as far as position players, is a model of success vs. a model of futility as far as drafting and developing quality position players.

Is it that you don't think much of Zisk + Joshua or do you just think that much of the Braves instructors?

 

I always though UK loved Zisk. The cubs players seem to start to fade high in the minors - this is very troubling.

 

I don't think it's solelyCubs coaching. Cedeno is doing very well at a young age. Choi has been with two other teams and hasn't improved much. Bobby Hill hasn't done much either.

 

I have been pretty skeptical of any Cub position prospect for at least ten years now. I agree, I don't think it's solely organizational coaching (although I do place a great deal of blame on them), but I've always wondered if our scouts just aren't up to par as well.

[Bgbird68]

Bingo. If the Cubs cannot produce position players, then the scouts who originally tag them as potential big league players have to be a big part of the problem also.

[stitchface]

Bingo. If the Cubs cannot produce position players, then the scouts who originally tag them as potential big league players have to be a big part of the problem also.

 

I don't think scouts are expected to always be right. in fact, they are mostly wrong.

[UK1679666180]

Bingo. If the Cubs cannot produce position players, then the scouts who originally tag them as potential big league players have to be a big part of the problem also.

 

I don't think scouts are expected to always be right. in fact, they are mostly wrong.

 

83% of the players who sign pro contracts never make it to the majors, the Lucadellos of the world are very rare and a thing of the past.

[Tim]

I have a great deal of respect for Joshua and Zisk (both would do a better job than Matthews or Clines, IMO) as you know, but a player like Pie is going to need just as much coaching as the ML level, if not more.

 

I have little confidence that Pie would progress as a player during his rookie season as he would if he played his rookie year with ATL.

 

Once the League adjusts to a player, that's when the coaching at the ML level kicks in.

 

If Pie struggles at the start, would you be more confident with Baker handling it or Cox?

 

That's an obvious choice for me.

 

Overall, I think Braves have better instructors though in the minors and that includes Joshua and Zisk, which isn't being critical of those two, just praise for the way the Braves operate.

I was primarily responding to your statement that Pie would have had much better instruction on his way to the bigs. I do know your respect for Zisk & Joshua, so I was curious to hear what you'd have to say to explain that.

[UK1679666180]

I was primarily responding to your statement that Pie would have had much better instruction on his way to the bigs. I do know your respect for Zisk & Joshua, so I was curious to hear what you'd have to say to explain that.

 

Despite Zisk and Joshua, I think Pie would likely be in a better position to succeed and rec'd better instruction.

[cubfanfromoz]

From my readings in the Minor League forum, it appears the PCL is a strong hitters league? This begs the question do other PCL teams experience the same Major League fall off as our 'can't miss' prospects?

If not, logically, we have some holes in our coaching at that level.

[CUBZ99]

I have a great deal of respect for Joshua and Zisk (both would do a better job than Matthews or Clines, IMO) as you know, but a player like Pie is going to need just as much coaching as the ML level, if not more.

 

I have little confidence that Pie would progress as a player during his rookie season as he would if he played his rookie year with ATL.

 

Once the League adjusts to a player, that's when the coaching at the ML level kicks in.

 

If Pie struggles at the start, would you be more confident with Baker handling it or Cox?

 

That's an obvious choice for me.

 

Overall, I think Braves have better instructors though in the minors and that includes Joshua and Zisk, which isn't being critical of those two, just praise for the way the Braves operate.

 

I don't understand your disdain for the cubs major league hitting coaches i.e. Matthews and Clines.

 

Over the last three or so years they have taken some players and improved them significantly.

 

For instance, before Aramis Ramirez came to the Cubs he had one season in Pitt in which he had a OBP above .300. Since coming to the Cubs he has put up seasons of .358 OBP and .373. That is a significant improvement. Lee's OBP was 40 pts higher than it has ever been in his career, and those numbers came with Clines as hitting coach. Barrett has improved significantly since coming to the Cubs. Grudz put up great numbers coming to the Cubs. Murton put up great numbers last year in limited time.

 

I am interested to see what your explanation is, as to why these players can excel once coming to the Cubs. Why can Clines or Sarge have such an effect on these guys but yet be horrible with players coming through the Cubs system.

 

To me it seems like more of a problem with the Cubs inability to develop position players at the lower levels and wouldn't that failure fall on Zisk, Listach and Von Joshua? If not do you blame the Cubs scouts for selecting sub par players?

[UK1679666180]

I have a great deal of respect for Joshua and Zisk (both would do a better job than Matthews or Clines, IMO) as you know, but a player like Pie is going to need just as much coaching as the ML level, if not more.

 

I have little confidence that Pie would progress as a player during his rookie season as he would if he played his rookie year with ATL.

 

Once the League adjusts to a player, that's when the coaching at the ML level kicks in.

 

If Pie struggles at the start, would you be more confident with Baker handling it or Cox?

 

That's an obvious choice for me.

 

Overall, I think Braves have better instructors though in the minors and that includes Joshua and Zisk, which isn't being critical of those two, just praise for the way the Braves operate.

 

I don't understand your disdain for the cubs major league hitting coaches i.e. Matthews and Clines.

 

Over the last three or so years they have taken some players and improved them significantly.

 

For instance, before Aramis Ramirez came to the Cubs he had one season in Pitt in which he had a OBP above .300. Since coming to the Cubs he has put up seasons of .358 OBP and .373. That is a significant improvement. Lee's OBP was 40 pts higher than it has ever been in his career, and those numbers came with Clines as hitting coach. Barrett has improved significantly since coming to the Cubs. Grudz put up great numbers coming to the Cubs. Murton put up great numbers last year in limited time.

 

I am interested to see what your explanation is, as to why these players can excel once coming to the Cubs. Why can Clines or Sarge have such an effect on these guys but yet be horrible with players coming through the Cubs system.

 

To me it seems like more of a problem with the Cubs inability to develop position players at the lower levels and wouldn't that failure fall on Zisk, Listach and Von Joshua? If not do you blame the Cubs scouts for selecting sub par players?

 

Ramirez has had plenty of major league as well as having previous experience doing very well. He spent an injured '02 and came back in '03 and hit well in '04 and '05.

 

Same goes Barrett, he was oft-injured in Montreal and had previous seasons of success.

 

Neither of them have had any success at developing a young hitter, one with great tools like Patterson or minimal like Hill.

 

There would be a track record of them developing young hitters, god knows Matthews and especially Clines would have had developed a hitter in their career as HC.

 

I think it's a different mindframe and approach dealing with young players w/minimal experience and dealing w/veterans.

 

As far as Murton, the test will be when he struggles, he's going to struggle, he's going to go in a severe slump. When he does, I'd like to see how they handle the slump.

 

I watch Kelly Johnson start off his career in a major slump, the Braves handled it much different than I'd expect the Cubs.

 

The Braves know how to handle young in-house position players, the Cubs have not shown that.

[Yeti]

i'll be paying closer attn to the O's this year

[NorthsideAvenger]

Corey joins this list, unfortunately:

 

Alex Escobar

Chad Hermansen

Joe Bourchard

Marlon Byrd

Reggie Taylor

Josh Hamilton

Dave Krenzyel

Ricky Ledee

Shane Spencer

Jay Payton

Jose Cruz, Jr

 

Every player on this list was a FORMER top prospect who was an OF, just like CPatt. It shows that the Cubs don't have a patent on being "stupid" with their developments. The difference THO, is that most of these teams were able to acquire BIG LEAGUE talent (ie Burrell/Abreu for the Phils, Floyd/Beltran for the Mets, Matsui/Sheffield, Ichiro/Ibanez, Jenkins/Lee) to cover up for the organization mistake with a former top prospect. What big league talent did the Cubs acquire to omake up for the mistake that is Corey Patterson?

[Bgbird68]

Bingo. If the Cubs cannot produce position players, then the scouts who originally tag them as potential big league players have to be a big part of the problem also.

 

I don't think scouts are expected to always be right. in fact, they are mostly wrong.

 

But to go 0 for everybody in regards to position players? Since I have been watching the Cubs, about thirty years ago, I can think of only one top-notch position player drafted by the Cubs: Bill Madlock. Who was let go over money, of course.

 

If I've left anyone out, please list.

 

I know scouts aren't "expected to always be right", but for the love of God, the Cubs track record is abysmal. And just because scouts "are mostly wrong" excuses the Cubs ability to target everyday successful big leaguers?

 

I'd like to see just ONE guy in my lifetime. I guess I'll just wait to see the next "golden boy", Felix Pie. Given the Cubs success, I have my doubts.

[Tim]

Bingo. If the Cubs cannot produce position players, then the scouts who originally tag them as potential big league players have to be a big part of the problem also.

 

I don't think scouts are expected to always be right. in fact, they are mostly wrong.

 

But to go 0 for everybody in regards to position players? Since I have been watching the Cubs, about thirty years ago, I can think of only one top-notch position player drafted by the Cubs: Bill Madlock. Who was let go over money, of course.

 

If I've left anyone out, please list.

 

I know scouts aren't "expected to always be right", but for the love of God, the Cubs track record is abysmal. And just because scouts "are mostly wrong" excuses the Cubs ability to target everyday successful big leaguers?

 

I'd like to see just ONE guy in my lifetime. I guess I'll just wait to see the next "golden boy", Felix Pie. Given the Cubs success, I have my doubts.

Rafael Palmeiro

Mark Grace

[entbird79]

Because it is that simple. For decades players who don't take walks and strike out a lot have failed to be successful in major league baseball. Corey would benefit greatly from putting the ball in play more frequently but he strikes out a ton. Therefore his batting average is always going to be low. Since he doesn't take walks, his obp will always be low. He can't recognize a pitch he can drive so his slugging will always be low. Corey does not have the tools to be a star major league player. sure, he'll be better than 2005, but he will never be a star. To blame Dusty or Baylor or the cubs is a cop-out. The organization is to blame for not recognizing his weaknesses and trying to correct them before he reached the majors, but to use his batting order spot as an excuse is a desperate plea by someone who cannot believe he failed. All the signs have pointed to his eventual failure for several years. Could I be wrong? Sure. But decades of baseball players indicate chances are Corey will never amount to much and it has nothing to do with Dusty Baker.

 

I disagree with people saying it's all Dusty and the Cubs' fault. But I think you're just as wrong for saying Dusty shares no blame. The leadoff thing played a huge role. It was an example of the Cubs obviously not noticing his weaknesses, and putting him in a spot that would shine a light on his faults and ignore his favorables. Obviously you are wrong when you say his average will always be low and his SLG will always be low. His OBP will always be low, but in 2003 his .298 AVG and .511 SLG showed they didn't always have to be low. Corey could be a guy who hits .280/.320/.500 without changing a whole lot. He could still rack up the Ks. You're allowing his 2005 to completely erase his others years, when in fact, a happy medium between 2003 and 2004 is both very possible and acceptable. But the Cubs wanted him to hit .300 at the expense of power, which makes no sense because a lot of his ability to hit for some average despite the K's is his ability to hit homeruns.

 

They completely went back on their original plan not to ask him to be a slap hitter. They screwed him up. Maybe he would have screwed himself up eventually. And I definitely never liked his approach in the first place. But when the team already stresses such an approach, it's tough to fault a guy for failing to fix his problems.

 

I failed to see a difference no matter where he hit in the line up. It was the same old Corey flailing away at curves that bounced before the plate, and at balls that were above his eyes. I never saw him act like a lead off hitter. Did you ever see him shorten his stroke to put the ball in play? What was his swing like with 2 strikes, did he try to take that outside pitch and dump it into left field, or was he trying to put it in the RF bleachers?

Maybe it was the move to lead off that screwed him up, but it appeared to me that he was already on that slippery slope, and the move to lead off was another bump in his road. Corey seemed more than willing to move to leadoff. I think he would have done anything at that point to reverse the direction that he was already headed.

That said I would have liked to keep him and use him off the bench in a platoon and for a defensive replacement. There is no way that his value could have been lower than it was at the trade. He will do better this year with the O's; there is hardly a way that he couldn't.

[Fred Hornkohl]

But to go 0 for everybody in regards to position players? Since I have been watching the Cubs, about thirty years ago, I can think of only one top-notch position player drafted by the Cubs: Bill Madlock. Who was let go over money, of course.

 

If I've left anyone out, please list.

 

I know scouts aren't "expected to always be right", but for the love of God, the Cubs track record is abysmal. And just because scouts "are mostly wrong" excuses the Cubs ability to target everyday successful big leaguers?

 

I'd like to see just ONE guy in my lifetime. I guess I'll just wait to see the next "golden boy", Felix Pie. Given the Cubs success, I have my doubts.

 

Bill Madlock came up through the minor league system of the Washington Senators (Now the Rangers). He was part of the trade for Ferguson Jenkins after the 1973 season.

 

As Tim pointed out above, there was Grace and Palmeiro in the 80's. You could possibly add Shawon Dunston from that same time period, although many would question him.

 

Going back before that, you have Brock, Hubbs, Williams & Santo from the early 60's..... and that about sums it up for the last 45 years. [sigh]

[RockTheIvy]

I have a great deal of respect for Joshua and Zisk (both would do a better job than Matthews or Clines, IMO) as you know, but a player like Pie is going to need just as much coaching as the ML level, if not more.

 

I have little confidence that Pie would progress as a player during his rookie season as he would if he played his rookie year with ATL.

 

Once the League adjusts to a player, that's when the coaching at the ML level kicks in.

 

If Pie struggles at the start, would you be more confident with Baker handling it or Cox?

 

That's an obvious choice for me.

 

Overall, I think Braves have better instructors though in the minors and that includes Joshua and Zisk, which isn't being critical of those two, just praise for the way the Braves operate.

 

I don't understand your disdain for the cubs major league hitting coaches i.e. Matthews and Clines.

 

Over the last three or so years they have taken some players and improved them significantly.

 

For instance, before Aramis Ramirez came to the Cubs he had one season in Pitt in which he had a OBP above .300. Since coming to the Cubs he has put up seasons of .358 OBP and .373. That is a significant improvement. Lee's OBP was 40 pts higher than it has ever been in his career, and those numbers came with Clines as hitting coach. Barrett has improved significantly since coming to the Cubs. Grudz put up great numbers coming to the Cubs. Murton put up great numbers last year in limited time.

 

I am interested to see what your explanation is, as to why these players can excel once coming to the Cubs. Why can Clines or Sarge have such an effect on these guys but yet be horrible with players coming through the Cubs system.

 

To me it seems like more of a problem with the Cubs inability to develop position players at the lower levels and wouldn't that failure fall on Zisk, Listach and Von Joshua? If not do you blame the Cubs scouts for selecting sub par players?

 

Ramirez has had plenty of major league as well as having previous experience doing very well. He spent an injured '02 and came back in '03 and hit well in '04 and '05.

 

Same goes Barrett, he was oft-injured in Montreal and had previous seasons of success.

 

Neither of them have had any success at developing a young hitter, one with great tools like Patterson or minimal like Hill.

 

There would be a track record of them developing young hitters, god knows Matthews and especially Clines would have had developed a hitter in their career as HC.

 

I think it's a different mindframe and approach dealing with young players w/minimal experience and dealing w/veterans.

 

As far as Murton, the test will be when he struggles, he's going to struggle, he's going to go in a severe slump. When he does, I'd like to see how they handle the slump.

 

I watch Kelly Johnson start off his career in a major slump, the Braves handled it much different than I'd expect the Cubs.

 

The Braves know how to handle young in-house position players, the Cubs have not shown that.

 

Also, despite Lee's monster season, he still didn't set a career high in walks, again showing our organizations love/hate relationship with the free pass (Hate- hitters who walk/Love- pichers who walk hitters).

[Careless]

Also, despite Lee's monster season, he still didn't set a career high in walks, again showing our organizations love/hate relationship with the free pass (Hate- hitters who walk/Love- pichers who walk hitters).

:shock: (really, I hadn't noticed he didn't get his high, that's astonishing)

[RockTheIvy]

Also, despite Lee's monster season, he still didn't set a career high in walks, again showing our organizations love/hate relationship with the free pass (Hate- hitters who walk/Love- pichers who walk hitters).

:shock: (really, I hadn't noticed he didn't get his high, that's astonishing)

 

In '02 and '03 he walked 98 and 88 times respectively. Last year, only 85 walks. The Chubbs really do hate the walk.

[Bull]

Also, despite Lee's monster season, he still didn't set a career high in walks, again showing our organizations love/hate relationship with the free pass (Hate- hitters who walk/Love- pichers who walk hitters).

:shock: (really, I hadn't noticed he didn't get his high, that's astonishing)

 

In '02 and '03 he walked 98 and 88 times respectively. Last year, only 85 walks. The Chubbs really do hate the walk.

 

I usually want a guy to try to work the count for walks. But if a guy is seeing the ball and hitting like Lee was last year, if he gets a pitch he can handle I want him to drive it. I guess I'm saying I'd rather see his OBP go up with a double than with a walk.

 

Bottom line is: its about OBP not walks, and his OBP was a carreer high.

[Careless]

Also, despite Lee's monster season, he still didn't set a career high in walks, again showing our organizations love/hate relationship with the free pass (Hate- hitters who walk/Love- pichers who walk hitters).

:shock: (really, I hadn't noticed he didn't get his high, that's astonishing)

 

In '02 and '03 he walked 98 and 88 times respectively. Last year, only 85 walks. The Chubbs really do hate the walk.

 

I usually want a guy to try to work the count for walks. But if a guy is seeing the ball and hitting like Lee was last year, if he gets a pitch he can handle I want him to drive it. I guess I'm saying I'd rather see his OBP go up with a double than with a walk.

 

Bottom line is: its about OBP not walks, and his OBP was a carreer high.

It's still shocking that as well as he was hitting he wouldn't have enough PAs where the pitcher had no interest in throwing a strike to top his best

[Bull]

Also, despite Lee's monster season, he still didn't set a career high in walks, again showing our organizations love/hate relationship with the free pass (Hate- hitters who walk/Love- pichers who walk hitters).

:shock: (really, I hadn't noticed he didn't get his high, that's astonishing)

 

In '02 and '03 he walked 98 and 88 times respectively. Last year, only 85 walks. The Chubbs really do hate the walk.

 

I usually want a guy to try to work the count for walks. But if a guy is seeing the ball and hitting like Lee was last year, if he gets a pitch he can handle I want him to drive it. I guess I'm saying I'd rather see his OBP go up with a double than with a walk.

 

Bottom line is: its about OBP not walks, and his OBP was a carreer high.

It's still shocking that as well as he was hitting he wouldn't have enough PAs where the pitcher had no interest in throwing a strike to top his best

 

But that's still not evidence of the Cubs' hitting philosophy not valuing walks. (not that we need that peice of evidence for a conviction).

 

Its evidence that either the league continued to think Lee would slow down, or that since their was no one on base and often no threat behind him, that they weren't that worried if he gapped a double. I'm going with 2.