Why can we produce great pitchers, but not great hitters?

[badger1679666666]

Our Minor league system has produced a plethora of very good pitchers in the past 8 years.

 

Woody (Allow me to argue when healthy, he's awesome)

Prior (Same argument)

Zambrano

Marshall

Garland

Guzmann/Hill (Jury out, but look to have pretty darn good stuff)

Willis

Pinto/Nolasco (seem to be pretty good)

Marmol/Ryu (A stretch right now)

 

(I might even be missing a few)

 

Even with some of the question marks/unknowns, that's a pretty good track record there.

 

How come we've produced ONE position player of worth in the past 8 years?

 

Cedeno

 

Dubois, Choi, Hill, Kelton, Harris have all sucked wherever they've gone.

 

(Jason Smith is playing well for the Rockies, but I don't know when we let him go).

 

Why are we so good at producing pitchers, but so bad at producing position players. Is it our scouting? Our coaches? Our pitching philosophy vs. hitting philosophy?

[Shilzzz]

 

Why are we so good at producing pitchers, but so bad at producing position players. Is it our scouting? Our coaches? Our pitching philosophy vs. hitting philosophy?

 

it has to be the hitting philosophy. i just don't think they realize the reason pitchers fail is the same reason hitters succeed(ie; taking pitches, working counts, getting pitchers out of the game early). same reason why murton has been so successful. he didn't come up in our system, and in the red sox system they first off scouted players who have an ability to wait for their pitch, then nuture them moreso in that manner as they progress. if corey patterson is not a prime example of what is wrong with the cubs farm system as far as hitting goes, i don't know what is.

[MPrior]

 

Why are we so good at producing pitchers, but so bad at producing position players. Is it our scouting? Our coaches? Our pitching philosophy vs. hitting philosophy?

 

it has to be the hitting philosophy. i just don't think they realize the reason pitchers fail is the same reason hitters succeed(ie; taking pitches, working counts, getting pitchers out of the game early). same reason why murton has been so successful. he didn't come up in our system, and in the red sox system they first off scouted players who have an ability to wait for their pitch, then nuture them moreso in that manner as they progress. if corey patterson is not a prime example of what is wrong with the cubs farm system as far as hitting goes, i don't know what is.

 

I second this - it's undeniably true. But it's probably equally, if not moreso, due to our drafting philosophy. We take a lot of pitchers in the draft, especially with our top picks. I guess that's just the Cubs sticking to what they know best.

[Shilzzz]

 

Why are we so good at producing pitchers, but so bad at producing position players. Is it our scouting? Our coaches? Our pitching philosophy vs. hitting philosophy?

 

it has to be the hitting philosophy. i just don't think they realize the reason pitchers fail is the same reason hitters succeed(ie; taking pitches, working counts, getting pitchers out of the game early). same reason why murton has been so successful. he didn't come up in our system, and in the red sox system they first off scouted players who have an ability to wait for their pitch, then nuture them moreso in that manner as they progress. if corey patterson is not a prime example of what is wrong with the cubs farm system as far as hitting goes, i don't know what is.

 

I second this - it's undeniably true. But it's probably equally, if not moreso, due to our drafting philosophy. We take a lot of pitchers in the draft, especially with our top picks. I guess that's just the Cubs sticking to what they know best.

 

i think hendry thinks that he can trade whatever excess pitching he has for hitting, which is fine - until you have jacque jones in right field(for three years no less), then you know you went wrong somewhere.

[soccer10k]

I'm not really sure. I have noticed that what MPrior said is true that we do seem to take a lot of pitchers in the draft. Maybe we just have scouts that can recognize good pitchers but not good hitters. It does baffle me though.

[EricG]

Because it's more exciting to lose 1-0 than win 7-6. :roll:

[TheDude]

There are assumptions made in this thread that all good young hitters are like Murton when it comes to plate discipline. That is a gross assumption. Murton is the exception. Most young hitters do not have that level of plate discipline.

 

Some organizations promote a better hitting philosophy than the Cubs system, this I won't deny. But that doesn't mean that orgainzations notorious for better plate discipline in recent years, or notorious for producing hitters that succeed at highest level are producing bunches of hitters with that level of discipline year after year.

 

I think best answer to the original thread question is that the Cubs as an organization draft pitching first and hitting second.

[CubbieRich]

How about average pitchers with high expectations. As low as the Cubs picked in the draft all these years, you would think they would have developed alot more than average pitching. But they choose injured arms like Bobby Brownlie for some unknown reason.

 

As far as everyday players are concerned, the results are equally poor. Bobby Hill, Luis Montanez, Corey Patterson, etc.. shows me that Hendry and his talent evaluators are bad. I just hope Ryan Harvey and Eric Patterson develop into everyday players up here in the next 2 years.

 

Hendry is very over-rated as a GM.

[Andy]

Because the coaching staff can't screw up good pitchers as much as they can screw up good hitters

[badger1679666666]

How about average pitchers with high expectations. As low as the Cubs picked in the draft all these years, you would think they would have developed alot more than average pitching.

 

Zambrano. Great Stuff. Check.

Prior. Great Stuff when healthy. Check

Wood. Great Stuff when healthy. Check

Dontrelle. Great Stuff. Check

Marshall. Great Stuff so far. Check

Gooz/Hill. Great Stuff in the minors. Check.

Garland. Great stuff/poor control til last year. Check.

 

Do you ever get tired of being wrong? None of the above are "average" pitchers though Wood and Prior have had average careers due to injury. This thread isn't about you ridiculously dumping on the Cubs starters because you enjoy it. It's a discussion about why we can produce GREAT PITCHING TALENT, but not produce the same offensively. Which we do, regardless of what you say.

 

In FACT, the reason why many Cubs fans are dissappointed, is because Wood hasn't lived up to how good of a pitcher he actually is. So he would be considered a very good pitcher with high expectations that has failed to live up to them.

 

Further this thread is about the Minor League process.

[goonys evil twin]

It's a combination of many things. I would say it's mostly due to their hitting philosophy, which boils down to swing early and swing often. It's partly about the draft, which has focused on pitching. But they've also spent some high picks on guys like Patterson, Montanez, Kelton, Harvey, Dopirak etc. In that Harvey draft they also selected a bunch of catchers and SS. In some of those late 90's drafts they selected a bunch of bats relatively early as well. Last year's draft was probably the most pitching centric of the group. It's also about the type of player they look for, which is the toolsy player that is high risk high reward. They seem to try and hit the lottery with athletes instead of just supplying the roster with productive baseball players. When you play the lottery, you usually lose. I also have doubts about the quality of their scouts, or at least the ability of those scouts to scout hitters. And I question the ability of the organization to develop hitters, both due to that philosophy which promotes a bad approach, and with the quality of coach.

[CubbieRich]

How about average pitchers with high expectations. As low as the Cubs picked in the draft all these years, you would think they would have developed alot more than average pitching.

 

Zambrano. Great Stuff. Check.

Prior. Great Stuff when healthy. Check

Wood. Great Stuff when healthy. Check

Dontrelle. Great Stuff. Check

Marshall. Great Stuff so far. Check

Gooz/Hill. Great Stuff in the minors. Check.

Garland. Great stuff/poor control til last year. Check.

 

Do you ever get tired of being wrong? None of the above are "average" pitchers though Wood and Prior have had average careers due to injury. This thread isn't about you ridiculously dumping on the Cubs starters because you enjoy it. It's a discussion about why we can produce GREAT PITCHING TALENT, but not produce the same offensively. Which we do, regardless of what you say.

 

In FACT, the reason why many Cubs fans are dissappointed, is because Wood hasn't lived up to how good of a pitcher he actually is. So he would be considered a very good pitcher with high expectations that has failed to live up to them.

 

Further this thread is about the Minor League process.

 

Sorry Badger, once again you are wrong. There are no GREAT pitchers on your list. Unless you see Jon Garland as GREAT PITCHER. Dontrelle Willis is very good, but then he's not here. The others are great potential, possible high ceilings..but not GREAT. Your boy Kerry isn't even in the discussion, as it's hard to be GREAT when you are on the DL all the time.

 

I hope that Marshall, Guzman and Hill continue their development and I like what I see. I also hope that BigZ straightens everything out and Prior comes back strong. But I judge talent based on performance inactual MLB games, not some towel drill or simulated games.

 

Given the Cubs low position in the amateur drafts over the 10 years of the Hendry talent search disaster, I expect alot more.

[CubinNY]

How about average pitchers with high expectations. As low as the Cubs picked in the draft all these years, you would think they would have developed alot more than average pitching.

 

Zambrano. Great Stuff. Check.

Prior. Great Stuff when healthy. Check

Wood. Great Stuff when healthy. Check

Dontrelle. Great Stuff. Check

Marshall. Great Stuff so far. Check

Gooz/Hill. Great Stuff in the minors. Check.

Garland. Great stuff/poor control til last year. Check.

 

Do you ever get tired of being wrong? None of the above are "average" pitchers though Wood and Prior have had average careers due to injury. This thread isn't about you ridiculously dumping on the Cubs starters because you enjoy it. It's a discussion about why we can produce GREAT PITCHING TALENT, but not produce the same offensively. Which we do, regardless of what you say.

 

In FACT, the reason why many Cubs fans are dissappointed, is because Wood hasn't lived up to how good of a pitcher he actually is. So he would be considered a very good pitcher with high expectations that has failed to live up to them.

 

Further this thread is about the Minor League process.

 

Sorry Badger, once again you are wrong. There are no GREAT pitchers on your list. Unless you see Jon Garland as GREAT PITCHER. Dontrelle Willis is very good, but then he's not here. The others are great potential, possible high ceilings..but not GREAT. Your boy Kerry isn't even in the discussion, as it's hard to be GREAT when you are on the DL all the time.

 

I hope that Marshall, Guzman and Hill continue their development and I like what I see. I also hope that BigZ straightens everything out and Prior comes back strong. But I judge talent based on performance inactual MLB games, not some towel drill or simulated games.

 

Given the Cubs low position in the amateur drafts over the 10 years of the Hendry talent search disaster, I expect alot more.

 

How many other teams have produced more and better ptichers?

 

To say the Cubs haven't done a decent job producing ML quality arms is a little over the top. I cannot think of a single organization that has produced more than a handfull of top quality major league pitchers including the Cubs, so I think your standards are a bit high.

 

Sergio Mitre, Jon Koranka, Rynell Pinto, Jermaine Van Buren, Ray King and Juan Cruse, all the starting pitchers already mentioned and some guys I am sure I am forgetting is pretty darn good.

[badger1679666666]

How about average pitchers with high expectations. As low as the Cubs picked in the draft all these years, you would think they would have developed alot more than average pitching.

 

Zambrano. Great Stuff. Check.

Prior. Great Stuff when healthy. Check

Wood. Great Stuff when healthy. Check

Dontrelle. Great Stuff. Check

Marshall. Great Stuff so far. Check

Gooz/Hill. Great Stuff in the minors. Check.

Garland. Great stuff/poor control til last year. Check.

 

Do you ever get tired of being wrong? None of the above are "average" pitchers though Wood and Prior have had average careers due to injury. This thread isn't about you ridiculously dumping on the Cubs starters because you enjoy it. It's a discussion about why we can produce GREAT PITCHING TALENT, but not produce the same offensively. Which we do, regardless of what you say.

 

In FACT, the reason why many Cubs fans are dissappointed, is because Wood hasn't lived up to how good of a pitcher he actually is. So he would be considered a very good pitcher with high expectations that has failed to live up to them.

 

Further this thread is about the Minor League process.

 

Sorry Badger, once again you are wrong. There are no GREAT pitchers on your list. Unless you see Jon Garland as GREAT PITCHER. Dontrelle Willis is very good, but then he's not here. The others are great potential, possible high ceilings..but not GREAT. Your boy Kerry isn't even in the discussion, as it's hard to be GREAT when you are on the DL all the time.

 

I hope that Marshall, Guzman and Hill continue their development and I like what I see. I also hope that BigZ straightens everything out and Prior comes back strong. But I judge talent based on performance inactual MLB games, not some towel drill or simulated games.

 

Given the Cubs low position in the amateur drafts over the 10 years of the Hendry talent search disaster, I expect alot more.

 

Sorry man, you're wrong and being obtuse. I should know better than to engage you on discussions of pitching.

 

The point of this thread is that we can develop pitchers (which we've done) but can't develop hitters.

[Hacking Out Machine]

I think Goony is all over this, as usual.

 

It has a lot to do with how they draft. They like tools. They like "red a$$es" who'll hold their breath and clench their fists and scream " I wanna win" until their heads explode a lot better than actual good hitters. Look at the stats of the position players they draft. Ryan Harvey never walked in HIGH SCHOOL. What would make anyone think he'd ever be disciplined in pro ball, especially with this organization? If you look at the stats of the college guys they've drafted, most if not all have OBPs about 20 pts higher than their batting averages and weak SLG%.

 

Hendry and his scouts have proven to be very good at finding the next Freddie Bynum, or the next Jamey Carroll or the next Joe Borchard. They might want to think about drafting guys that are actually good at hitting a baseball, rather than someone who "brings atheticism", or "gives us flexibility"

 

Throw in the fact that the organization obviously doesn't know the importance of the walk and completely overvalues the importance of the single, and you've got a lot of players who have little or no chance of succeeding. Unless of course, baseball changes it's rules to award runs for making weak contact.

[neely crenshaw]

please tell me who is great on that list?

 

there is difference between being great and having great talent or stuff.

wood has great stuff....he has never, ever been great even when healthy for more than a start or two. a 14 game winner is not great in my book.

prior- same thing he has great stuff and might end up being great. he has one great season out of 3 but that does not make him great. also we had 0 to do with him developing..that would be thanks to usc...he spent what 3 weeks in our system before coming up...don't think we did much for that one

willis left us in single a ball...i think the marlins get credit for that one

garland has had one year..and that was more like half a year. off the top of my head wasn't he 12-0 and then finished 18-10? it was something like that.

5 starts for marshall is a little soon to annoint him great. especially when he had a 6.oo era before facing the pirates and marlins...

hill and guzman do not belong on any list of great pitchers. they end up being very good or even great but they are years from that!

 

when i think of great, i think of hall of fame caliber pitchers. right now there is not a halll of famer on that list. i think of cy young winners. i think of 20 game winners.

i think what we should ask is why can we draft very talented pitchers and we do not draft as many very talented hitters?

[Careless]

There are no GREAT pitchers on your list. Unless you see Jon Garland as GREAT PITCHER.

number of seasons where Garland has had a better ERA than wood's career ERA: 1 Number of seasons that Zambrano, Wood, and Prior have pitched at least 150 innings with a better ERA than Garland's career ERA: 9. 13 if you lower IP to 110 (hey, still a lot more than relievers pitch)

Conclusion: Garland is nothing close to a great pitcher.

Oh, since you brought up Dontrelle: Willis's 3 seasons have been so much better than Garland's BEST 3 seasons, it's a joke.

[MPrior]

please tell me who is great on that list?

 

there is difference between being great and having great talent or stuff.

wood has great stuff....he has never, ever been great even when healthy for more than a start or two. a 14 game winner is not great in my book.

prior- same thing he has great stuff and might end up being great. he has one great season out of 3 but that does not make him great. also we had 0 to do with him developing..that would be thanks to usc...he spent what 3 weeks in our system before coming up...don't think we did much for that one

willis left us in single a ball...i think the marlins get credit for that one

garland has had one year..and that was more like half a year. off the top of my head wasn't he 12-0 and then finished 18-10? it was something like that.

5 starts for marshall is a little soon to annoint him great. especially when he had a 6.oo era before facing the pirates and marlins...

hill and guzman do not belong on any list of great pitchers. they end up being very good or even great but they are years from that!

 

when i think of great, i think of hall of fame caliber pitchers. right now there is not a halll of famer on that list. i think of cy young winners. i think of 20 game winners.

i think what we should ask is why can we draft very talented pitchers and we do not draft as many very talented hitters?

 

What's being missed is that no one (except maybe CubbieRich) suggested that these pitchers were great, or that that was even the issue at hand. What was being suggested was that the pitching talent that the Cubs farm system has produced is well above average - sometimes even exceptional - major league pitching. No one is saying that, in the past 5 years, the Cubs farm system has produced a bunch of sure-fire hall of famers. That would be STUPID. That's why no one said it.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

What's being missed is that no one (except maybe CubbieRich) suggested that these pitchers were great, or that that was even the issue at hand.

 

The title of the thread disagrees with you.

[badger1679666666]

What's being missed is that no one (except maybe CubbieRich) suggested that these pitchers were great, or that that was even the issue at hand.

 

The title of the thread disagrees with you.

 

The originator of the title wishes to have creative freedom.

 

I incorrectly used the word "great". The main point of this is that we can produce good - great pitchers in our system or select good - great pitchers in our system, but we can't even produce good major quality position players.

 

Our pitching development/scouting has been exceptional, our health in that area has not. Or hitting development/scouting has been piss poor crap. Why is there a dichotomy?

[CubbieRich]

What's being missed is that no one (except maybe CubbieRich) suggested that these pitchers were great, or that that was even the issue at hand.

 

I said that the Cubs minor league pitching is bad, that Hendry and his talent scouts has not produced even average pitching for our Cubs. The system islong on potential and short on results. I believe it was Badger, drinking his blue kool-aid.

 

None of the above are "average" pitchers though Wood and Prior have had average careers due to injury. This thread isn't about you ridiculously dumping on the Cubs starters because you enjoy it. It's a discussion about why we can produce GREAT PITCHING TALENT, but not produce the same offensively. Which we do, regardless of what you say.

 

All I can say is the truth. Beltran, Blasko, Brownlie, Christensen, Cruz, Farnsworth, Hagerty, Jones, Mitre, Sisco, Smyth, Szuminski, Wellemeyer, etc... And if you add in a struggling Big Z, injured Mark Prior and of course, the porcelain horse-Kerry Wood, something needs to change.

 

[/b]

[badger1679666666]

What's being missed is that no one (except maybe CubbieRich) suggested that these pitchers were great, or that that was even the issue at hand.

 

I said that the Cubs minor league pitching is bad, that Hendry and his talent scouts has not produced even average pitching for our Cubs. The system islong on potential and short on results. I believe it was Badger, drinking his blue kool-aid.

 

None of the above are "average" pitchers though Wood and Prior have had average careers due to injury. This thread isn't about you ridiculously dumping on the Cubs starters because you enjoy it. It's a discussion about why we can produce GREAT PITCHING TALENT, but not produce the same offensively. Which we do, regardless of what you say.

 

All I can say is the truth. Beltran, Blasko, Brownlie, Christensen, Cruz, Farnsworth, Hagerty, Jones, Mitre, Sisco, Smyth, Szuminski, Wellemeyer, etc... And if you add in a struggling Big Z, injured Mark Prior and of course, the porcelain horse-Kerry Wood, something needs to change.

 

[/b]

 

And to those I would say, Prior, Wood, Zambrano, Marshall, Garland, Willis, Marshall,

 

We can't even get the above-like Major league "READY" position players. At least the above made it to the ML and have had at least one great season (not including marshall). We can't get a position player to even sniff the field except cedeno.

 

This thread is taking a tangent for which I did not intend CubbieRich. It's not about debating whether the pitching is now average or whether it has talent etc. It's about the fact that we've been infinitely more successful in producing ML-ready talent with respect to our pitching, than with respect to our hitting.

 

At least one great season by all listed above, except Marshall. Zero great position player seasons in the last 10 years at least.

[NCCubFan]

I said that the Cubs minor league pitching is bad, that Hendry and his talent scouts has not produced even average pitching for our Cubs. The system islong on potential and short on results. I believe it was Badger, drinking his blue kool-aid.

No need to be condescending like that. You could have omitted the bolded part of your response and still gotten your point across.

[Outshined_One]

I can't exactly say I'm thrilled with the current crop of positional prospects the Cubs have down on the farm. I don't think there's a single can't miss guy down there at the moment.

 

The top positional prospects, through 5/2 (Dopirak omitted due to injury):

 

Felix Pie (AAA) - 92 AB, 5 2B, 4 3B, 1 HR, 18/8 K/BB, 4 SB, 1 CS, .272/.337/.446

Eric Patterson (AA) - 100 AB, 3 2B, 3 3B, 2 HR, 25/8 K/BB, 10 SB, 4 CS, .260/.312/.410

Ryan Harvey (High A) - 83 AB, 1 2B, 0 3B, 5 HR, 24/6 K/BB, .181/.236/.373

 

I grant you, 80-100 ABs is not a great way to evaluate a player, but there is a common theme among these three guys that is cause for concern. I can't say I'm too thrilled with the inability to take a walk with these guys, ya know?

 

With the pitchers, I can point to a number of exciting guys who have a terrific combination of makeup and stuff. We've seen alums of the Cubs farm system listed throughout this thread; we know they're really good at churning these guys out. We know there are more of them coming down the pipe, with names like Sean Gallagher and Mark Pawelek raising eyebrows around this board.

 

Are there teams that are the exact opposite of the Cubs, who can turn out amazing position players, but stink at developing pitchers? The Diamondbacks seem to be on that road, but most of their big guns have not been tested for a significant period of time at the major league level yet.