Why is there so many position player flops?

[Kyle]

Over the past 5 years(or longer) we've witnessed flop after flop of some of our top position players. I was wondering what you guys think the reason for it is. Is it that our instructors simply can't develop position players, or is it because we simply don't know how to draft good position players? Personally I think its a little of both, but I believe its because we don't have a good eye for talent when it comes to position players. What do you guys think? Hopefully the hiring of Wilken will really help.

[CubsMinorLeagueReport]

I believe that our scouting and drafting of some of these players may have played a roll into some of the failures, however; it is a little premature to say that some of the players in the system right now are failures. I still think that Dopirak, Harvey and, of course Cedeno have a nice shot at contributing in the majors. Another prospect to watch is Scott Moore (from Detroit), he is coming around quite nicely. A move to AA this year will benefit him greatly.

 

I cant wait to see what the future brings under the new regime of Tim Wilken, he is a tremendous addition to the Cubs.

[Diffusion]

A move to AA this year will benefit [scott Moore] greatly.

 

Why'd you think that?

[CubsMinorLeagueReport]

A move to AA this year will benefit [scott Moore] greatly.

 

Why'd you think that?

 

He has spent the last two years in the pitcher friendly parks of the Florida State League. Dopirak will see the same kind of improvement in the SL. Some people forget that Moore is an extreme talent and at one point in his career had a huge upside. I have seen Moore numerous times and he is a solid prospect and a huge sleeper in this system. Remember Moore was so highly thought of at one point that he was taken #8 overall in 2002. That is in front of both Hermida and Francouer.

[Diffusion]

A move to AA this year will benefit [scott Moore] greatly.

 

Why'd you think that?

 

He has spent the last two years in the pitcher friendly parks of the Florida State League.

 

And he'll spend next year in the pitcher friendly parks of the Southern League, right?

[Tim]

A move to AA this year will benefit [scott Moore] greatly.

 

Why'd you think that?

 

He has spent the last two years in the pitcher friendly parks of the Florida State League. Dopirak will see the same kind of improvement in the SL. Some people forget that Moore is an extreme talent and at one point in his career had a huge upside. I have seen Moore numerous times and he is a solid prospect and a huge sleeper in this system. Remember Moore was so highly thought of at one point that he was taken #8 overall in 2002. That is in front of both Hermida and Francouer.

The SL is not much more of a hitters' league than the FSL. Also, Pringles is pretty hard on hitters, in particular. I'm not sure either Moore or Dopirak will get that much of a boost by moving there. That's not to say that they won't do better in 2006, it's just that I don't think the move itself is going to do it for them.

 

Both of those guys can make huge strides if they can increase their contact rate. Both have pretty high potential and are still young enough to reach it. I would be a bit more optimistic for the two of them in 2006 if Von Joshua were still there at AA.

[CubsMinorLeagueReport]

A move to AA this year will benefit [scott Moore] greatly.

 

Why'd you think that?

 

He has spent the last two years in the pitcher friendly parks of the Florida State League.

 

And he'll spend next year in the pitcher friendly parks of the Southern League, right?

 

I never said that the SL isn't pitcher friendly. The point I was trying to make is that being in an environment like that for two full years is tough. He will see a promotion this year and that will surely help...Tim makes a good point about Von Joshua being gone however.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Moore had a pretty good year last year, putting up a .281/.358/.485/.843 line at 21 in a pitcher's league is nothing to be ashamed of. He can improve upon that if he got his walk rate back to '04 levels. The thing is, he set a new high in IsoP and had a very high BABIP to go with it. In order to avoid some regression, he'll need to make better contact. So, the difference comes down to walks and better contact, neither of which will be impacted by ballpark.

[Outshined_One]

The number of errors Moore had last season at 3B is what worries me the most about him. He put up good offensive numbers last season (that goes without saying), but if he is going to require a move to another position, those numbers won't look nearly as good as they do now.

[CubsMinorLeagueReport]

Moore had a pretty good year last year, putting up a .281/.358/.485/.843 line at 21 in a pitcher's league is nothing to be ashamed of. He can improve upon that if he got his walk rate back to '04 levels.

 

You are right, last years season is nothing to be ashamed of, but his walk rate in '04 was not a ton better than '05.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Moore had a pretty good year last year, putting up a .281/.358/.485/.843 line at 21 in a pitcher's league is nothing to be ashamed of. He can improve upon that if he got his walk rate back to '04 levels.

 

You are right, last years season is nothing to be ashamed of, but his walk rate in '04 was not a ton better than '05.

 

His .099 IsoD in '04 is noticeably better than the .077 he put up in '05.

[CubsMinorLeagueReport]

Moore had a pretty good year last year, putting up a .281/.358/.485/.843 line at 21 in a pitcher's league is nothing to be ashamed of. He can improve upon that if he got his walk rate back to '04 levels.

 

You are right, last years season is nothing to be ashamed of, but his walk rate in '04 was not a ton better than '05.

 

His .099 IsoD in '04 is noticeably better than the .077 he put up in '05.

 

Thats fine...I am not big on your Isolated Discipline stats (and I understand why you use them)...I see that he walked 6 more times in 75 more ABs.

[Diffusion]

A move to AA this year will benefit [scott Moore] greatly.

 

Why'd you think that?

 

He has spent the last two years in the pitcher friendly parks of the Florida State League.

 

And he'll spend next year in the pitcher friendly parks of the Southern League, right?

 

I never said that the SL isn't pitcher friendly. The point I was trying to make is that being in an environment like that for two full years is tough.

 

Your point is still completely lost on me. He spends one year in a pitcher friendly environment (Lakeland, FSL West, 2004), he spends another year in another pitcher friendly environment (Daytona, FSL East, 2005), now he's going to spend yet another year in yet another pitcher friendly environment (West Tennessee, SL North, 2006). Why is moving from one pitcher friendly environment to another to another supposed to help him?

 

He will see a promotion this year and that will surely help.

 

Again, why? If anything, because Scott Moore is now going to start encountering with much more regularity pitchers with better control of better and more varied stuff, pitchers capable of pitching rather than throwing, I suspect that, considering that he struck out 134 times last season at High-A, a level he was repeating, tough times could easily be ahead. You saw a lot more of him than I did, so can the guy hit breaking stuff at all? If he can, then why the whiffs? They're worrying, for they'll limit him to hitting just .260 if he doesn't cut down on them. If he doesn't draw a lot more walks, or he can't stick at third base, all of a sudden you've not got much of a prospect.

 

Just quickly, regarding the fact that he was once thought of as better than Hermida and Francouer, that's great, but it's also completely irrelevant now. Drew Meyer was also drafted ahead of those two prospects. That was three and half years ago now. Things have changed.

[Diffusion]

Moore had a pretty good year last year, putting up a .281/.358/.485/.843 line at 21 in a pitcher's league is nothing to be ashamed of. He can improve upon that if he got his walk rate back to '04 levels.

 

You are right, last years season is nothing to be ashamed of, but his walk rate in '04 was not a ton better than '05.

 

His .099 IsoD in '04 is noticeably better than the .077 he put up in '05.

 

I too really don't care for IsoD, particularly not when you use it like that. In the exact same number of at-bats, a .223 hitter and a .281 hitter both draw the exact same number of walks, hit by pitches, sac flies, sac bunts. Which has the higher IsoD? The .223 hitter. If Moore had shown exactly as much plate discipline in 2005 as in 2004, and that plate discipline had translated to the numbers in exactly the same way, that's roughly 8 points of IsoD down the drain for Scott Moore in 2005 just by virtue of him being a better hitter. As for the other 14 points, plate discipline doesn't always translate to the numbers at all well. What, for instance, if Moore in 2004 saw an extra couple of pitchers on wild days, or the umpires on a couple of extra occasions had a slightly smaller zone, they called that a ball when it was a strike, or Moore fouled off a 3-0 pitch in 2004 before taking ball four that in 2005 he'd had crushed for a home run, etc. Finally, based on the rate at which Moore was hit by pitches in 2004, he ought to have been plonked an extra 6 times in 2004. Take into account all of those factors, and the difference in IsoD's could easily mean absolutely nothing, or it could be something, or it could mean the opposite. You just can't really say based on the numbers alone.

[CubsMinorLeagueReport]

He will see a promotion this year and that will surely help.

Your point is still completely lost on me. He spends one year in a pitcher friendly environment (Lakeland, FSL West, 2004), he spends another year in another pitcher friendly environment (Daytona, FSL East, 2005), now he's going to spend yet another year in yet another pitcher friendly environment (West Tennessee, SL North, 2006). Why is moving from one pitcher friendly environment to another to another supposed to help him?

 

I think psychologically it will be good for him to move to AA, he is 21 yrs old and his first 3 years were a flop for being the #8 pick. That in itself can take a toll on a young guy. Also, he was given up on by his original team, and has been given another oppurtunity to prove himself. Now that he is showing improvement he may show more confidence which was surely lacking.

 

You saw a lot more of him than I did, so can the guy hit breaking stuff at all? If he can, then why the whiffs? They're worrying, for they'll limit him to hitting just .260 if he doesn't cut down on them. If he doesn't draw a lot more walks, or he can't stick at third base, all of a sudden you've not got much of a prospect.

 

I think that we need to have a little patience with him at 3B considering he is a natural SS. I dont know his exact fielding stats, but I think he can only improve at 3B. He does have some issues hitting the curve but I think he is also learning the game a lot more now. In HS he was able to get away with skills alone, now he is finding that to be different. We may be on different sides about Moore, which is fine, but I still believe (call it a hunch of mine) that he is a sleeper prospect that could have a breakout year this year.

 

Just quickly, regarding the fact that he was once thought of as better than Hermida and Francouer, that's great, but it's also completely irrelevant now. Drew Meyer was also drafted ahead of those two prospects. That was three and half years ago now. Things have changed.

 

Point well taken, I agree.

[stitchface]

Over the past 5 years(or longer) we've witnessed flop after flop of some of our top position players. I was wondering what you guys think the reason for it is. Is it that our instructors simply can't develop position players, or is it because we simply don't know how to draft good position players? Personally I think its a little of both, but I believe its because we don't have a good eye for talent when it comes to position players. What do you guys think? Hopefully the hiring of Wilken will really help.

 

More prospects flop than succeed? I think the biggest change is that we now know all about prospects when 20 years ago we knew nothing. I'm not denying the Cubs have failed to develop hitters, just pointing out that the increase in flops is largely due to the internet and our new awareness of prospects. I would also add that we largely over-value prospects because we are looking at the wrong stats or just ignoring relevant stats based on scouting reports.

[Diffusion]

He will see a promotion this year and that will surely help.

Your point is still completely lost on me. He spends one year in a pitcher friendly environment (Lakeland, FSL West, 2004), he spends another year in another pitcher friendly environment (Daytona, FSL East, 2005), now he's going to spend yet another year in yet another pitcher friendly environment (West Tennessee, SL North, 2006). Why is moving from one pitcher friendly environment to another to another supposed to help him?

 

I think psychologically it will be good for him to move to AA, he is 21 yrs old and his first 3 years were a flop for being the #8 pick. That in itself can take a toll on a young guy. Also, he was given up on by his original team, and has been given another oppurtunity to prove himself. Now that he is showing improvement he may show more confidence which was surely lacking.

 

What confused me was that originally you tried to argue that the promotion would be good for him because he'd be getting away from the pitcher friendly stadiums of the FSL. Now you're arguing that the promotion will be good for him on psychological grounds, he'll feel like he's actually getting somewhere, and that'll only give him more confidence. That's a fair enough argument, I suppose. All the same, Moore can feel as confident as he likes, but that will only help him get the most out of what he's got. If he hasn't got it, then the confidence isn't likely to help it. Confidence doesn't hit a curveball and all that.

 

Merely for the record, he's now 22. But he was 21 for all of last year, so he's still young, and he'll be young for the Southern League.

 

You saw a lot more of him than I did, so can the guy hit breaking stuff at all? If he can, then why the whiffs? They're worrying, for they'll limit him to hitting just .260 if he doesn't cut down on them. If he doesn't draw a lot more walks, or he can't stick at third base, all of a sudden you've not got much of a prospect.

 

I think that we need to have a little patience with him at 3B considering he is a natural SS. I dont know his exact fielding stats, but I think he can only improve at 3B.

 

Well, he was moved to third base over the 2002/03 offseason, because he lacked the speed, footwork and hands weren't good enough, so whether he was ever a natural shortstop is debatable. Certainly he's had to learn to play third base, but he's had three years at the position now.

 

He does have some issues hitting the curve but I think he is also learning the game a lot more now. In HS he was able to get away with skills alone, now he is finding that to be different.

 

Well, it's about time.

 

Regarding Drew Meyer, incidentally, the pick was always seen as a bit of a stretch, whereas the same can't really be said of Scott Moore's pick. According to the scouting reports from way back when, Moore was supposed to not only show power and patience, which, belatedly, he has done, but also to be a high average good contact hitter. That's where he's fallen badly short, and that and his defence at third are the biggest problems for his prospect status. They're two pretty big problems. I'm particularly fearful that breaking stuff at Double-A and above is going to be the death of him. 134 strikeouts at High-A just doesn't bode well.

[anemic offense]

Over the past 5 years(or longer) we've witnessed flop after flop of some of our top position players. I was wondering what you guys think the reason for it is. Is it that our instructors simply can't develop position players, or is it because we simply don't know how to draft good position players? Personally I think its a little of both, but I believe its because we don't have a good eye for talent when it comes to position players. What do you guys think? Hopefully the hiring of Wilken will really help.

 

Drafting and instruction. My gut feelign tells me most of it has to do with instruction.

[Kyle]

Over the past 5 years(or longer) we've witnessed flop after flop of some of our top position players. I was wondering what you guys think the reason for it is. Is it that our instructors simply can't develop position players, or is it because we simply don't know how to draft good position players? Personally I think its a little of both, but I believe its because we don't have a good eye for talent when it comes to position players. What do you guys think? Hopefully the hiring of Wilken will really help.

 

Drafting and instruction. My gut feelign tells me most of it has to do with instruction.

 

You could be right. Bobby Cox constantly praises his minor league instructors for how good their farm system is, and how they give him so many players that are ready to compete at the major league level right away. If instruction is the primary reason, then that's unsettling. Wilken can't help in that area, but he can help us draft better players then the ones we've been drafting.

[Kyle]

Over the past 5 years(or longer) we've witnessed flop after flop of some of our top position players. I was wondering what you guys think the reason for it is. Is it that our instructors simply can't develop position players, or is it because we simply don't know how to draft good position players? Personally I think its a little of both, but I believe its because we don't have a good eye for talent when it comes to position players. What do you guys think? Hopefully the hiring of Wilken will really help.

 

More prospects flop than succeed? I think the biggest change is that we now know all about prospects when 20 years ago we knew nothing. I'm not denying the Cubs have failed to develop hitters, just pointing out that the increase in flops is largely due to the internet and our new awareness of prospects. I would also add that we largely over-value prospects because we are looking at the wrong stats or just ignoring relevant stats based on scouting reports.

 

I agree that more prospects flop than suceed, just saying as you pointed out we don't produce the kind of hitters that other top minor league systems do. I can't complain about the pitchers this organization has been producing though. Between the two I'd rather have an organization better at producing pitchers than position players, but It would be a big help if we could produce more hitters.

[Scotti]

Over the past 5 years(or longer) we've witnessed flop after flop of some of our top position players. I was wondering what you guys think the reason for it is. Is it that our instructors simply can't develop position players, or is it because we simply don't know how to draft good position players? Personally I think its a little of both, but I believe its because we don't have a good eye for talent when it comes to position players. What do you guys think? Hopefully the hiring of Wilken will really help.

 

Simple. Since Andy took over the Cubs have focused on using high round picks on pitching. The Cubs have used their top picks for pitching 8X to only 3X for hitters. If you include the extra 1st round picks of a couple years ago you add more pitchers (Hagerty, Blasko and Clanton). That's 11 to 3.

 

The system HAS produced Hinske (who spent the majority of his games in the Cubs system) and Cedeno. Murton has also blossomed as a Cub. Other players (Choi, Harris and Hill) were dealt for some very good players (Lee Nomar, and Ramirez).

 

The Cubs believe that you can always use more pitching (Hill, Guzman and Marshall are getting ready for the call) and that you can trade pitching for hitting (Mitre, Nolasco and Pinto for Pierre). Regardless of whether you agree with their philosophies it would be silly to expect ice cream from a butter churn.

[goonys evil twin]

Over the past 5 years(or longer) we've witnessed flop after flop of some of our top position players. I was wondering what you guys think the reason for it is. Is it that our instructors simply can't develop position players, or is it because we simply don't know how to draft good position players? Personally I think its a little of both, but I believe its because we don't have a good eye for talent when it comes to position players. What do you guys think? Hopefully the hiring of Wilken will really help.

 

Simple. Since Andy took over the Cubs have focused on using high round picks on pitching. The Cubs have used their top picks for pitching 8X to only 3X for hitters. If you include the extra 1st round picks of a couple years ago you add more pitchers (Hagerty, Blasko and Clanton). That's 11 to 3.

 

The system HAS produced Hinske (who spent the majority of his games in the Cubs system) and Cedeno. Murton has also blossomed as a Cub. Other players (Choi, Harris and Hill) were dealt for some very good players (Lee Nomar, and Ramirez).

 

The Cubs believe that you can always use more pitching (Hill, Guzman and Marshall are getting ready for the call) and that you can trade pitching for hitting (Mitre, Nolasco and Pinto for Pierre). Regardless of whether you agree with their philosophies it would be silly to expect ice cream from a butter churn.

 

Yep. The Cubs can't develop position prospects because they focus so heavily on pitchers, and when they do go with hitters, they overwhelmingly favor the toolsy, often high school age player over a lower ceiling but greater chance of reaching it type of player. And, they can't develop them worth a crap (probably due to both a bad organizational philosophy, and weak coaching). They keep trying to find the next Vlad Guerrero, diamond in the rough, prospect, and never even think of just signing that player when he is proven, available and still young enough to be great for a considerable length of time.

[CubDad4Ever]

Goony, i probably agree more with you in this area ,than any other. Something is going wrong in the chain of dev. for positional players. The Braves make the pitching first , high ceiling, scout driven thing work to a tee. The Cubs have got to be breaking down in the scouting , coaching or both. It amazes me given their ability to draft and bring along pitching. Its got to improve or they will pay in spades in the long run. Coach L

[craig]

Scotti has suggested there is no problem, since the Cubs have mostly drafted pitchers, and the draft production of position guys simply follows the pitching emphasis.

 

Some thoughts:

*Cubs have only drafted 3 1st round players during the ten years since Hendry took over the draft. But all three were top-6 picks. I think it's reasonable to be hope for more than Nate Spears out of three top-6 picks.

*Over that ten years, the Cubs have taken 16 position players in rounds 1-3. Thanks to compenation picks they've have a little more than 30 selections over rounds 1-3 during those ten years, but position players have absorbed almost half of the rounds 1-3 picks. Having taken almost half of the picks during rounds 1-3, and all three of the top-6 picks, I think it's fair to be disappointed in the position oucome.

 

Why hasn't it been better?

*I think luck has something to do with it. Corey didn't work out, he could have. Montanez was a weak draft. Things went wrong for Hill and Kelton.

*I think the Cubs prioritize high-celing guys who are strong in non-hitting tools. They have focussed their high-round position picks on players with notable tools outside of the pure-hitting tool: speed (Corey, Hill, Mallory), power (Corey, Dopirak, Harvey, Mallory), perceived athletic ability (Corey, Kelton, Harvey, Mallory, Nic Jackson, Bobby Hill), throwing arms (Mallory, Kelton, Harvey, Montanez...).

 

I believe that rather than compromise on ceiling and settle for some guys who look like hitters but have some tools limitations, they want the athletic toolbox guys and hope they'll be able to hit, thinking that if they turn out to have the hitting tool, that they have big-star potential.

 

I believe they tend to think that hitting can be learned, and also that plate discipline and pitch recognition are learnable skills that can come with time and experience.

 

As a result I think they tend to prefer more toolsy guys, relative to guys who may look stronger in terms of pure hitting and pitch recognition but are more limited in terms of throwing/running/power tools.

 

For example, I don't think the Cubs would have burned a top-35 pick on a guy like Murton. The Cubs would have preferred somebody else, rather than spend such a high pick on a player they could already see wouldn't run well enough to steal bases or play CF; a player they could already see didn't have much of a throwing arm and certainly couldn't play RF; and a player they could see didn't have knockout power.

 

So I think it's because the Cubs have placed such a high empashis on high ceilings and on having strong marks in non-hitting tools, they probably haven't been so successful in getting pure-hitting players.

 

I personally believe that to a large degree hitters are born, not made, and that there are some inherent tools in the brain required to read and respond to big-league pitching, tools that go beyond the more easily scouted power and bat speed. So I think the Cubs have too strongly assumed that talented athletes will learn how to recognize pitches and learn how to hit and learn plate discipline if only given enough time and added experience.

 

I also think that "tool" is hard to scout. When scouting a HS Corey or Kelton, how can you tell whether they'll ever learn to put the bat on the ball? How can you tell whether he'll center the ball and hit for excellent contact, or always have trouble swinging through pitches and striking out? How can you learn whether hitting the breaking ball is beyond their talents, or is well within their talents but they just haven't seen many yet? How can you tell whether with experience a guy will have a good eye and will be able to project shortly after a pitcher throws whether the ball will cross the plate in a hittable zone, or will slide a foot off the plate and be a pitch you should take? When Hendry drafted corey, I recall he made some comments that suggeested he thought Corey had a good command of the strike zone! It's not easy to scout, that's for sure.

 

I don't actually believe it's a developmental problem. I think the development people do emphasize selectivity and all that. I just don't think the Cubs have drafted guys who had the inherent tools to be good contact hitters and good selective hitters. [/i]

[Outshined_One]

In the time that Jim Hendry has been in charge of drafting, how many college position players has he taken in the first three rounds?