Cubs Minor League First Half Discussion

[Outshined_One]

Now that the All Star Game is over and done with, I figured it was time to start a thread looking back on the first half of minor league baseball in the Cubs organization. In this thread and in ensuing posts, I'll be going over a variety of happenings in the Cubs' farm system, good and bad. I will hand out random awards, make up various lists, summarize players, and basically provide the analysis you've come to know and love from this site. :D

 

I'll begin momentarily with my first award...feel free to join in the fun!

[Outshined_One]

BEST STARTING PITCHER OF THE FIRST HALF

 

For those of you wondering, I'm using the MLB ROY eligibility rules to determine who gets these spots and who doesn't. Hill and Marmol are indeed eligible. Kudos to Raisin for the BAA stats.

 

Candidates

 

LHP Rich Hill (13 GS, 6-1, 84.2 IP, 1.81 ERA, 54 H, 107/19 K/BB, 2 HR, .86 WHIP, .175 BAA at AAA)

LHP Donald Veal (18 GS, 7-3, 98 IP, 2.11 ERA, 60 H, 103/51 K/BB, 4 HR, 1.13 WHIP, .204 BAA between Low A and High A)

RHP Sean Gallagher (18 GS, 8-1, 108 IP, 2.33 ERA, 99 H, 111/38 K/BB, 5 HR, 1.27 WHIP, .234 BAA between High A and AA)

RHP Mitch Atkins (17 GS, 7-3, 92.2 IP, 2.72 ERA, 75 H, 80/39 K/BB, 7 HR, 1.23 WHIP, .212 BAA at Low A)

LHP Chris Shaver (18 G, 16 GS, 5-5, 102.2 IP, 2.02 ERA, 85 H, 95/34 K/BB, 3 HR, 1.16 WHIP, .216 BAA between High A and AA)

RHP Randy Wells (16 G, 15 GS, 7-3, 84 IP, 2.25 ERA, 66 H, 72/17 K/BB, 4 HR, .99 WHIP, .208 BAA between AA and AAA)

RHP Juan Mateo (15 G, 14 GS, 6-4, 75.2 IP, 2.50 ERA, 63 H, 54/22 K/BB, 6 HR, 1.12 WHIP, .217 BAA at AA)

RHP Carlos Marmol (11 GS, 3-2, 58 IP, 2.33 ERA, 42 H, 67/25 K/BB, 1 HR, 1.16 WHIP, .217 BAA at AA)

 

It's my thread, I can nominate as many guys as I want. :P

 

Analysis

 

Well, once again, the Cubs system has the great fortune of having a number of good pitching prospects emerge this season. Marmol's and Hill's numbers are a bit smaller than everyone else due to their stint in the majors thus far, but as you can plainly see, these guys have done quite a bit to earn their spots thus far into the season. Granted, this list is not all-encompassing, but these guys are among the best at their respective levels. As you can see, each full season class is represented among these pitchers.

 

After a bit of a down year last season, it's great to see the pitching once again back up on its feet. However, among all of these guys, one stands out head and shoulders above the rest. This is no slight to any of the other guys, who have all done an incredible job in their own right. I'm giving my award to:

 

LHP Rich Hill

 

It's hard to argue with the results he's gotten at AAA. In fact, his numbers are outright insane. Major league struggles aside, this guy has absolutely nothing left to prove at the minor league level. Between his sub-.90 WHIP (1) and his 11.43 K/9, this man has completely dominated some of the best hitters in the minor leagues.

 

Tomorrow I'll get to the hitters and possibly the relievers.

Edited July 12, 2006 by Outshined_One

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Kudos to Raisin for the BAA stats.

 

:pats self on back:

 

Tomorrow I'll get to the hitters and possibly the relievers.

 

The relievers, ok. The hitters weren't that fun to look at. :(

 

Hill is the clear cut winner here. I think the battle for second is more interesting. I think Veal has had the second best season and Wells the third.

[NorthsideAvenger]

Kudos to Raisin for the BAA stats.

 

:pats self on back:

 

Tomorrow I'll get to the hitters and possibly the relievers.

 

The relievers, ok. The hitters weren't that fun to look at. :(

 

Hill is the clear cut winner here. I think the battle for second is more interesting. I think Veal has had the second best season and Wells the third.

 

I like Hill, and I still think he will be dealt, but IMO, considering the lack of hype, and "prototype" stuff, I actually like Gallagher's season better then Wells and Veal. Veal and Wells has the stuff, so there numbers are not really all that surprising. Now in comparasion that his stuff, Gallagher simply gets it done, he keeps pitching and pitching, and defying the logics.

 

I would give Gallagher my first half award....with

 

Veal, Wells, and Hill in that order.

[TruffleShuffle]

Harvey has rendered himself completely useless as a position prospect.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Kudos to Raisin for the BAA stats.

 

:pats self on back:

 

Tomorrow I'll get to the hitters and possibly the relievers.

 

The relievers, ok. The hitters weren't that fun to look at. :(

 

Hill is the clear cut winner here. I think the battle for second is more interesting. I think Veal has had the second best season and Wells the third.

 

I like Hill, and I still think he will be dealt, but IMO, considering the lack of hype, and "prototype" stuff, I actually like Gallagher's season better then Wells and Veal. Veal and Wells has the stuff, so there numbers are not really all that surprising. Now in comparasion that his stuff, Gallagher simply gets it done, he keeps pitching and pitching, and defying the logics.

 

I would give Gallagher my first half award....with

 

Veal, Wells, and Hill in that order.

 

Uhh, Gallagher has better stuff than Wells. Gallagher has more (better) pitches than Veal.

 

And Hill has the best stats - the question was who was the best pitcher was in the first half, I didn't take into account age, league, stuff - just who had the best first half.

[Outshined_One]

And Hill has the best stats - the question was who was the best pitcher was in the first half, I didn't take into account age, league, stuff - just who had the best first half.

 

Yep, that's how I did mine. As well as Gallagher did, Hill just mowed down the competition.

 

Although, I do have Hill above Gallagher on my prospect list. :D

[texascub]

By level I think that Petrick wins for Boise, Atkins for Peoria, Veal for Daytona, Gallagher/Shaver tie at West Tenn, and Hill wins for Iowa. Overall I think the top pitcher is Hill, with Gallagher and Veal in a dead heat behind him. If Petrick gets moved up soon and continues his dominance as well, he's up here too.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

By level I think that Petrick wins for Boise, Atkins for Peoria, Veal for Daytona, Gallagher/Shaver tie at West Tenn, and Hill wins for Iowa. Overall I think the top pitcher is Hill, with Gallagher and Veal in a dead heat behind him. If Petrick gets moved up soon and continues his dominance as well, he's up here too.

 

I'd put Gallagher ahead of Veal in Daytona because I don't Veal has enough IP there. Same for Gallagher not having enough IP at West Tenn. And I'd rate Veal's performance over Atkins' at Peoria. Don't forget Pina out in Boise.

[ChiefsVoice]

Atkins pitched better as a starter here in the first half than Veal did...So i'd pick him.

 

Campusano was our best overall pitcher of the half but you guys arent to relievers yet! :D

Edited July 13, 2006 by ChiefsVoice

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Atkins pitched better as a starter here than Veal did...So i'd pick him.

 

How do you figure?

[karenmac]

In the first half, Atkins was much more consistent throwing strikes. Veal walked a lot of guys and was consistently in trouble, especially at the beginning of the season.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

In the first half, Atkins was much more consistent throwing strikes. Veal walked a lot of guys and was consistently in trouble, especially at the beginning of the season.

 

If we stop consideration at the time Veal was promoted, Atkins had just started to struggle while Veal had come on strong. Veal had reduced his BB numbers, had the advantage in WHIP, BAA and Ks and the ERA gap had really been decreased.

 

Atkins started out hot while Veal struggled in April, but ever since, I'd say Veal has had the advantage.

[Outshined_One]

Also, this is all my opinion. I may post on NSBB, but I am in no way speaking for the rest of the site, including some of the great minor league contributors (T2E, Bob's Keeper, UK, craig, Tim, Raisin, etc...).

 

I'm doing this for fun and to give people an easier read on the top guys in this organization. I get the feeling that a number of people on this site would really like to know more about the prospects in the Cubs' system, but don't have much in the way of access to scouting reports, statistical compilations, and so on.

 

Along with hitters and relievers, I'll also be listing guys whose prospect statuses have been skyrocketing, sleepers for the second half/next year, guys who need to rebound, a quick breakdown of the 2006 draftees & their performances so far, a top ten list, and possibly a statistical breakdown of the guys on that list along with comments and a summary based on what I've seen and heard.

 

I'm looking forward to this. :D

[ChiefsVoice]

Atkins pitched better as a starter here than Veal did...So i'd pick him.

 

How do you figure?

 

um lets see.

 

1. More wins

2. lower era

3. less walks

4. less hits allowed

5. lewss homers allowed

6. more ground ball outs

7. more team wins in his starts

8. much more consistent

 

is that enough or should i keep going for you?

 

oh and obviously our staff and the rest of the MWL must agree since Atkins was an All-Star and Veal wasnt even on the ballot....

 

and i strongly believe it was right to promote Veal and leave atkins here based on age and experience. i think both are veery even prospect wise though NO ONE talks about atkins like they do veal.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Atkins pitched better as a starter here than Veal did...So i'd pick him.

 

How do you figure?

 

um lets see.

 

1. More wins doesn't matter

2. lower era incorrect

3. less walks

4. less hits allowed incorrect

5. lewss homers allowed incorrect

6. more ground ball outs

7. more team wins in his starts doesn't matter

8. much more consistent

 

is that enough or should i keep going for you?

 

Veal gave up fewer runs and baserunners, and struck out many more. He walked more, but his K/BB ratio was better too. You can see the numbers here.

[Outshined_One]

and i strongly believe it was right to promote Veal and leave atkins here based on age and experience. i think both are veery even prospect wise though NO ONE talks about atkins like they do veal.

 

I think Veal is talked about moreso for a few reasons. For one, he's lefthanded...that tends to go farther with pitchers. Two, his scoreless streak at Daytona vaulted him into the spotlight. Three, he was a much higher draft pick than Atkins, which lends itself to more hype and more in-depth scouting reports. Finally, Atkins didn't establish his prospect status until this season. Veal's prospect status was well above Atkins last season due to where he was drafted and some of the numbers he put up at Boise.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

and i strongly believe it was right to promote Veal and leave atkins here based on age and experience. i think both are veery even prospect wise though NO ONE talks about atkins like they do veal.

 

I think Veal is talked about moreso for a few reasons. For one, he's lefthanded...that tends to go farther with pitchers. Two, his scoreless streak at Daytona vaulted him into the spotlight. Three, he was a much higher draft pick than Atkins, which lends itself to more hype and more in-depth scouting reports. Finally, Atkins didn't establish his prospect status until this season. Veal's prospect status was well above Atkins last season due to where he was drafted and some of the numbers he put up at Boise.

 

Also (though this of course is related to a few things you mentioned like his draft spot and his quicker promotion), Veal has better stuff.

[ChiefsVoice]

Atkins pitched better as a starter here than Veal did...So i'd pick him.

 

How do you figure?

 

um lets see.

 

1. More wins doesn't matter

2. lower era incorrect

3. less walks

4. less hits allowed incorrect

5. lewss homers allowed incorrect

6. more ground ball outs

7. more team wins in his starts doesn't matter

8. much more consistent

 

is that enough or should i keep going for you?

 

Veal gave up fewer runs and baserunners, and struck out many more. He walked more, but his K/BB ratio was better too. You can see the numbers here.

 

apparently i should have qualified my answer with WHEN VEAL LEFT.....or maybe you have seen all their starts this season....?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Atkins pitched better as a starter here than Veal did...So i'd pick him.

 

How do you figure?

 

um lets see.

 

1. More wins doesn't matter

2. lower era incorrect

3. less walks

4. less hits allowed incorrect

5. lewss homers allowed incorrect

6. more ground ball outs

7. more team wins in his starts doesn't matter

8. much more consistent

 

is that enough or should i keep going for you?

 

Veal gave up fewer runs and baserunners, and struck out many more. He walked more, but his K/BB ratio was better too. You can see the numbers here.

 

apparently i should have qualified my answer with WHEN VEAL LEFT.....or maybe you have seen all their starts this season....?

 

I can't check right this moment (I will check later), but I'm pretty sure Veal had fewer hits and a better WHIP when he was promoted.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Atkins pitched better as a starter here than Veal did...So i'd pick him.

 

How do you figure?

 

um lets see.

 

1. More wins doesn't matter

2. lower era incorrect

3. less walks

4. less hits allowed incorrect

5. lewss homers allowed incorrect

6. more ground ball outs

7. more team wins in his starts doesn't matter

8. much more consistent

 

is that enough or should i keep going for you?

 

Veal gave up fewer runs and baserunners, and struck out many more. He walked more, but his K/BB ratio was better too. You can see the numbers here.

 

apparently i should have qualified my answer with WHEN VEAL LEFT.....or maybe you have seen all their starts this season....?

 

When you are trying to figure who was best in the entire first half, why randomly cut off Atkins' numbers? We're already ignoring that Veal went to the next level and didn't give up a run for 20 IP(or whatever it was). There's no point in disregarding Atkins' performance after Veal was promoted.

[Outshined_One]

When you are trying to figure who was best in the entire first half, why randomly cut off Atkins' numbers? We're already ignoring that Veal went to the next level and didn't give up a run for 20 IP(or whatever it was). There's no point in disregarding Atkins' performance after Veal was promoted.

 

I understand Nate's argument, though. At the time of Veal's promotion, he and Atkins were similarly rated. Veal and Atkins both had their upsides at the time...but Atkins is a year younger. Things are different since then, but at the time, Nate's got a good argument.

 

Regarding my choice, I was evaluating performance more than anything else, though.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

When you are trying to figure who was best in the entire first half, why randomly cut off Atkins' numbers? We're already ignoring that Veal went to the next level and didn't give up a run for 20 IP(or whatever it was). There's no point in disregarding Atkins' performance after Veal was promoted.

 

I understand Nate's argument, though. At the time of Veal's promotion, he and Atkins were similarly rated. Veal and Atkins both had their upsides at the time...but Atkins is a year younger. Things are different since then, but at the time, Nate's got a good argument.

 

Regarding my choice, I was evaluating performance more than anything else, though.

 

But why use the "at the time" argument when we're talking about the entire season to date?

[Brian]

I don't know, but for me, I'd take chiefsvoice's opinion first.

 

But why use the "at the time" argument when we're talking about the entire season to date?

 

Because he wasn't responding to best first half, he was responding to who was the best SP at each level

[karenmac]

when I was thinking of Atkins vs Veal, I was thinking about 1/2way through the Chiefs season, which was a couple of weeks ago. As of the MWL all-star game, Atkins had been better. Perhaps I didn't draw my line in the right place...he has certainly struggled in the 2nd half and Donnie's been great.