Cubs trade Scott Williamson to the Padres...

[Outshined_One]

Now that I think about it, what good prospects has Hendry acquired via trading during his tenure?

 

Matt Murton

Scott Moore

Richard Lewis (for a year)

...

 

Any others?

 

Also, on a similar tangent, what the heck happened to Cliff Bartosh?

[RonnieWooWooSanto]

Just out of curiousity, I wonder who Schuerholz and the Braves offered or would have offered for Williamson.

 

The Braves' acquisition of closer Bob Wickman didn't end their pursuit of bullpen help. The team would like to acquire another reliever, preferably a left-hander. However, the Braves would settle for a righty who can get lefties out.

 

The Marlins' Joe Borowski fits that description — and so does the Cubs' Scott Williamson, who was traded to the Padres on Saturday for two minor leaguers. Left-handed hitters are batting .172 against Williamson, .180 against Borowski.

 

The Braves asked about Rockies Class AAA lefty Steve Collyer, possibly offering right-hander Jorge Sosa. But the Rockies might need Collyer to replace Ray King, whom they nearly traded last week to the Red Sox for right-hander Julian Tavarez.

[texascub]

Just out of curiousity, I wonder who Schuerholz and the Braves offered or would have offered for Williamson.

 

The Braves' acquisition of closer Bob Wickman didn't end their pursuit of bullpen help. The team would like to acquire another reliever, preferably a left-hander. However, the Braves would settle for a righty who can get lefties out.

 

The Marlins' Joe Borowski fits that description — and so does the Cubs' Scott Williamson, who was traded to the Padres on Saturday for two minor leaguers. Left-handed hitters are batting .172 against Williamson, .180 against Borowski.

 

The Braves asked about Rockies Class AAA lefty Steve Collyer, possibly offering right-hander Jorge Sosa. But the Rockies might need Collyer to replace Ray King, whom they nearly traded last week to the Red Sox for right-hander Julian Tavarez.

 

IMO Wickman was more valuable than Williamson, and all the Indians got was one decent low-A prospect.

[JGalt73]

The Padres gave up very little to get Scott Williamson, who'll help them a little but isn't any kind of savior for their bullpen. The Cubs, meanwhile, got two live arms who are both a long way away from being a long way away from being prospects...

 

In exchange, the Cubs got two pitchers who are struggling in the Midwest League. The interesting one is Fabian Jimenez, a 19-year-old right-hander signed out of Colómbia (where baseball is quite popular in the relatively quiet northern region) in 2002. Jimenez is repeating the league and still hasn't shown great results, but he has a plus fastball and an average curve and he's young, so he's worth a flier.

 

Joel Santo also has a plus fastball, but he's already 22, is also repeating the Midwest League, lacks a second pitch, and has shown even less progress than Jimenez. Both are Rule 5 eligible this winter.

 

I'm surprised this is the best package the Cubs could get for Williamson, given some of the deals we've seen so far, but perhaps the market sees Williamson as I do, as a brittle guy whose control isn't coming back.

[RynoRules]

if the Cubs were going to get two projectable A ball players, I much rather it would have been hitters.

 

the system is loaded with projectable pitchers.

 

Agreed.

 

And those of you who are killing JH for not getting enough for Scott Freakin' Williamson need to chill out. If he traded someone with actual value and got hosed I might agree, but Williamson has an ERA over 5.00 and a WHIP over 1.50. He's not very valuable; maybe one of the guys he got will pan out. No one can say at this point, but I think we can say with confidence that Williamson won't be his former self ever again, and his control has left him.

 

Relievers are fickle, prior to today Williamson's WHIP was in the 1.3's.

 

The fact that relievers are fickle is common knowledge, which is why 30 year old middle-men with inconsistent control and coming off not one but two Tommy John surgerys don't fetch much in the trade market. I know we all have a bone to pick with Jim, but this is over the top.

[oldcubsfan]

Williamson quote:

 

""I've been traded before, and it worked out really well,'' Williamson said. "I can't say anything but good things about [Hendry]. Jim's been tremendous to me. He gave me an opportunity to come back from the second Tommy John surgery and didn't really rush me. He's probably by far the best GM I've been associated with. He not only cares about you as a ballplayer, but as a person."

[Hacking Out Machine]

You act like we gave up Howry. This should open a slot for a young pitcher. williamson was not doing anything. How do you know the prospects won't help down the road?

 

Because they are terrible, like I explained in the original post. I'm not expecting top flight stuff for Williamson, just not the garbage we ended up getting.

 

If the roles were reversed and the Cubs were in contention and had just given up 2 of their top 20 prospects for a pitcher with equivalent numbers to Williamson people would be ripping Hendry.

 

Hendry has been shopping Williamson for a while now and if there was a better deal out there I am sure he would have taken it. To assume a strong market exists for a middle reliever that has an era over 5.00 and a questionable elbow is quite a reach.

 

Those guys are top 30 prospects because San Diego's system is a joke. They're terrible, and if we had given up players with their numbers and their careers to get a reliever for a pennant chase, everyone would've been plenty fine with it because no one would miss Todd Blackford and Carlos Perez.

 

that system may be garbage Tiger but you'd have no idea...

 

 

I hope I don't offend anyone, but this kind of response bothers me.

 

Professional members of our forum are owed a level of respect for choosing to post here. They bring a perspective that regular fans like us don't have. (Bruce Miles being the best example). For that, I am very grateful, as I'm sure everyone on the board is.

 

However, generally, these "professional" members refrain from any back and forth nitpicking or any direct negative comments to any posters. In my opinion, when they do this, as Nathan has here, they are, to me, just another poster here and the level of respect given to them as a result of their position goes out the window. If you make a comment like that, you have to back it up with some sort of baseball acumen, not just a high and mighty attitude of "I call play by play for the Chiefs and you don't".

 

Just because someone watches a lot of baseball doesn't mean that they have any clue what attributes make a good baseball player, or what strategies contribute best to winning.

 

As far as evidence of baseball acumen goes, I think TT has contributed a ton more good thoughts here than most posters. As I mentioned before, I am very grateful to have the play by play voice of the Chiefs with us on this forum...it's just that this last comment really rubbed me the wrong way..

[Soul]

The Padres gave up very little to get Scott Williamson, who'll help them a little but isn't any kind of savior for their bullpen. The Cubs, meanwhile, got two live arms who are both a long way away from being a long way away from being prospects...

 

In exchange, the Cubs got two pitchers who are struggling in the Midwest League. The interesting one is Fabian Jimenez, a 19-year-old right-hander signed out of Colómbia (where baseball is quite popular in the relatively quiet northern region) in 2002. Jimenez is repeating the league and still hasn't shown great results, but he has a plus fastball and an average curve and he's young, so he's worth a flier.

 

Joel Santo also has a plus fastball, but he's already 22, is also repeating the Midwest League, lacks a second pitch, and has shown even less progress than Jimenez. Both are Rule 5 eligible this winter.

 

I'm surprised this is the best package the Cubs could get for Williamson, given some of the deals we've seen so far, but perhaps the market sees Williamson as I do, as a brittle guy whose control isn't coming back.

 

Yeah, so what? That's his opinion.

 

Williamson was bad. He fetched little because he was worth little.

[Hacking Out Machine]

The Padres gave up very little to get Scott Williamson, who'll help them a little but isn't any kind of savior for their bullpen. The Cubs, meanwhile, got two live arms who are both a long way away from being a long way away from being prospects...

 

In exchange, the Cubs got two pitchers who are struggling in the Midwest League. The interesting one is Fabian Jimenez, a 19-year-old right-hander signed out of Colómbia (where baseball is quite popular in the relatively quiet northern region) in 2002. Jimenez is repeating the league and still hasn't shown great results, but he has a plus fastball and an average curve and he's young, so he's worth a flier.

 

Joel Santo also has a plus fastball, but he's already 22, is also repeating the Midwest League, lacks a second pitch, and has shown even less progress than Jimenez. Both are Rule 5 eligible this winter.

 

I'm surprised this is the best package the Cubs could get for Williamson, given some of the deals we've seen so far, but perhaps the market sees Williamson as I do, as a brittle guy whose control isn't coming back.

 

Yeah, so what? That's his opinion.

 

Williamson was bad. He fetched little because he was worth little.

 

28.1 IP 27 H 32 K.

 

Williamson struggled because he walked too many guys, but a smart organization will find a spot for a guy who gives up less than a hit an inning and strikes out more than a guy per inning. Those guys don't grow on trees, and can definitely a help a team. Williamson was a good pickup by Hendry for little cost. The ability to strike out anyone that steps in the box against you is a valuable asset, especially in a relief role.

[jjgman21]

Now that I think about it, what good prospects has Hendry acquired via trading during his tenure?

 

Matt Murton

Scott Moore

Richard Lewis (for a year)

...

 

Any others?

 

Also, on a similar tangent, what the heck happened to Cliff Bartosh?

 

Fontenot.

 

why, when people ask this or a similar question, do they not ask "where are the guys the Cubs traded away?"

 

I'd like Hendry to turn water into wine too, but the players he's traded away weren't all that good. Sosa is done and had a terrible year last year. Cruz had one decent year under Mazzone anbd remains inconsistent. Farns had a decent year and is back to his old ways. before yesterday and his 5 for 5, Corey was at .308/.413.

 

when the Cubs start trading away good players, they will start getting good prospects in return.

[Soul]

The Padres gave up very little to get Scott Williamson, who'll help them a little but isn't any kind of savior for their bullpen. The Cubs, meanwhile, got two live arms who are both a long way away from being a long way away from being prospects...

 

In exchange, the Cubs got two pitchers who are struggling in the Midwest League. The interesting one is Fabian Jimenez, a 19-year-old right-hander signed out of Colómbia (where baseball is quite popular in the relatively quiet northern region) in 2002. Jimenez is repeating the league and still hasn't shown great results, but he has a plus fastball and an average curve and he's young, so he's worth a flier.

 

Joel Santo also has a plus fastball, but he's already 22, is also repeating the Midwest League, lacks a second pitch, and has shown even less progress than Jimenez. Both are Rule 5 eligible this winter.

 

I'm surprised this is the best package the Cubs could get for Williamson, given some of the deals we've seen so far, but perhaps the market sees Williamson as I do, as a brittle guy whose control isn't coming back.

 

Yeah, so what? That's his opinion.

 

Williamson was bad. He fetched little because he was worth little.

 

28.1 IP 27 H 32 K.

 

Williamson struggled because he walked too many guys, but a smart organization will find a spot for a guy who gives up less than a hit an inning and strikes out more than a guy per inning. Those guys don't grow on trees, and can definitely a help a team. Williamson was a good pickup by Hendry for little cost. The ability to strike out anyone that steps in the box against you is a valuable asset, especially in a relief role.

 

Like you said too many walks. He's had plenty of time to get his control back. It hasn't happened because it isn't going to happen. His WHIP wasn't all that great, he's in his 30's, and his arm is double-post-op.

 

What were you expecting to get for him, out of curiosity? We picked him up for a bag of beans because nobody wanted him.....

 

As for the strikeouts, I watch the guy pitch. He gets K's because he goes deep into counts on every hitter. I don't view that as necessarily an indicator of dominance. Just an indicator that he has little control, and gets into trouble. I watched Scotty struggle & struggle. That's what I saw. And I'm pretty sure that's what other teams around the league saw as well.

 

Maybe I'm wrong. It's all about opinions.

[ChiefsVoice]

You act like we gave up Howry. This should open a slot for a young pitcher. williamson was not doing anything. How do you know the prospects won't help down the road?

 

Because they are terrible, like I explained in the original post. I'm not expecting top flight stuff for Williamson, just not the garbage we ended up getting.

 

If the roles were reversed and the Cubs were in contention and had just given up 2 of their top 20 prospects for a pitcher with equivalent numbers to Williamson people would be ripping Hendry.

 

Hendry has been shopping Williamson for a while now and if there was a better deal out there I am sure he would have taken it. To assume a strong market exists for a middle reliever that has an era over 5.00 and a questionable elbow is quite a reach.

 

Those guys are top 30 prospects because San Diego's system is a joke. They're terrible, and if we had given up players with their numbers and their careers to get a reliever for a pennant chase, everyone would've been plenty fine with it because no one would miss Todd Blackford and Carlos Perez.

 

that system may be garbage Tiger but you'd have no idea...

 

 

I hope I don't offend anyone, but this kind of response bothers me.

 

Professional members of our forum are owed a level of respect for choosing to post here. They bring a perspective that regular fans like us don't have. (Bruce Miles being the best example). For that, I am very grateful, as I'm sure everyone on the board is.

 

However, generally, these "professional" members refrain from any back and forth nitpicking or any direct negative comments to any posters. In my opinion, when they do this, as Nathan has here, they are, to me, just another poster here and the level of respect given to them as a result of their position goes out the window. If you make a comment like that, you have to back it up with some sort of baseball acumen, not just a high and mighty attitude of "I call play by play for the Chiefs and you don't".

 

Just because someone watches a lot of baseball doesn't mean that they have any clue what attributes make a good baseball player, or what strategies contribute best to winning.

 

As far as evidence of baseball acumen goes, I think TT has contributed a ton more good thoughts here than most posters. As I mentioned before, I am very grateful to have the play by play voice of the Chiefs with us on this forum...it's just that this last comment really rubbed me the wrong way..

 

I didn't mean to rub you the wrong way and I'm definitely not offended by what you post. I wasn't trying to get high and mighty at all. My only point to Tiger or anyone else is that you shouldn't call another system garbage when you haven't seen any of their players in person. If they are garbage, why are they 6-2 against us this season, the 2nd best team in the Midwest League???? I love how all the people here automatically call guys crap/garbage because of either their numbers or what other publications *cough* Baseball America *cough* say about them. Watch them in person first. Then form an opinion. That was my ONLY point. Santo has beaten us twice this season. I posted that and Tiger jumped all over me for it. Yes I've seen him. Yes he beat us. Thats it.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

OK, I haven't read the entire thread. Is this a joke? That's the best we could do for Williamson? Highly sought after, my ass.

[CP_414]

You act like we gave up Howry. This should open a slot for a young pitcher. williamson was not doing anything. How do you know the prospects won't help down the road?

 

Because they are terrible, like I explained in the original post. I'm not expecting top flight stuff for Williamson, just not the garbage we ended up getting.

 

If the roles were reversed and the Cubs were in contention and had just given up 2 of their top 20 prospects for a pitcher with equivalent numbers to Williamson people would be ripping Hendry.

 

Hendry has been shopping Williamson for a while now and if there was a better deal out there I am sure he would have taken it. To assume a strong market exists for a middle reliever that has an era over 5.00 and a questionable elbow is quite a reach.

 

Those guys are top 30 prospects because San Diego's system is a joke. They're terrible, and if we had given up players with their numbers and their careers to get a reliever for a pennant chase, everyone would've been plenty fine with it because no one would miss Todd Blackford and Carlos Perez.

 

that system may be garbage Tiger but you'd have no idea...

 

 

I hope I don't offend anyone, but this kind of response bothers me.

 

Professional members of our forum are owed a level of respect for choosing to post here. They bring a perspective that regular fans like us don't have. (Bruce Miles being the best example). For that, I am very grateful, as I'm sure everyone on the board is.

 

However, generally, these "professional" members refrain from any back and forth nitpicking or any direct negative comments to any posters. In my opinion, when they do this, as Nathan has here, they are, to me, just another poster here and the level of respect given to them as a result of their position goes out the window. If you make a comment like that, you have to back it up with some sort of baseball acumen, not just a high and mighty attitude of "I call play by play for the Chiefs and you don't".

 

Just because someone watches a lot of baseball doesn't mean that they have any clue what attributes make a good baseball player, or what strategies contribute best to winning.

 

As far as evidence of baseball acumen goes, I think TT has contributed a ton more good thoughts here than most posters. As I mentioned before, I am very grateful to have the play by play voice of the Chiefs with us on this forum...it's just that this last comment really rubbed me the wrong way..

 

I didn't mean to rub you the wrong way and I'm definitely not offended by what you post. I wasn't trying to get high and mighty at all. My only point to Tiger or anyone else is that you shouldn't call another system garbage when you haven't seen any of their players in person. If they are garbage, why are they 6-2 against us this season, the 2nd best team in the Midwest League???? I love how all the people here automatically call guys crap/garbage because of either their numbers or what other publications *cough* Baseball America *cough* say about them. Watch them in person first. Then form an opinion. That was my ONLY point. Santo has beaten us twice this season. I posted that and Tiger jumped all over me for it. Yes I've seen him. Yes he beat us. Thats it.

 

I could not disagree more. Who among us has seen every team's minor league prospects play in person? Of course we rely on numbers and BA (who has seen far more than any of us). It seems foolish to me that we can't judge a player based on numbers and scouting reports. Also, Tiger called the San Diego system garbage, not jus the single A team. Being 6-2 against one team on one level doesn't make a system. The Cubs have a winning record against the Cardinals this year, but the Cubs are garbage. I never saw Jose Macias play before we got him, but based on his numbers and scouting reports I could tell he wasn't going to help us at all.

[dvdd127]

Williamson quote:

 

""I've been traded before, and it worked out really well,'' Williamson said. "I can't say anything but good things about [Hendry]. Jim's been tremendous to me. He gave me an opportunity to come back from the second Tommy John surgery and didn't really rush me. He's probably by far the best GM I've been associated with. He not only cares about you as a ballplayer, but as a person."

Williamson had it in for Dust Bag... not Jimmy Boy

[jjgman21]

 

I could not disagree more. Who among us has seen every team's minor league prospects play in person? Of course we rely on numbers and BA (who has seen far more than any of us). It seems foolish to me that we can't judge a player based on numbers and scouting reports. Also, Tiger called the San Diego system garbage, not jus the single A team. Being 6-2 against one team on one level doesn't make a system. The Cubs have a winning record against the Cardinals this year, but the Cubs are garbage. I never saw Jose Macias play before we got him, but based on his numbers and scouting reports I could tell he wasn't going to help us at all.

 

the bolded part is the operative sentence. the return on the trade doesn't look great to me, but noone on this board is in a postion to accurately assess these young pitchers. the farther down in the minors, the less likely the numbers will reflect what kind of a prospect the player is. judging low level ball players based on their stats and the published scouting reports is rather foolish. it's even a problem judging higher level prospects. no amount of stats would have told you that Jason Dubois couldn't recognize or hit a curveball, but the stats and BA sure made it seem like he could be a force at the major league level.

 

it takes a combination of both in my opinion and the guys at BA often talk about their inability to fully cover all minor leaguers because of their lack of staff.

[Monco]

Even the people defending this move aren't suggesting they got anything of value. Basically they are taking a wait and see approach.They have eras over 5 and this is their second year at the same level,and both are rule 5 eligible. The fact is that this was done 9 days before the deadline. I can't believe waiting couldn't have gotten anything less. But Hendry said "they're projectible". When your era is over 5 the second year of A ball,what does that project to at the major league level?

[RynoRules]

 

I could not disagree more. Who among us has seen every team's minor league prospects play in person? Of course we rely on numbers and BA (who has seen far more than any of us). It seems foolish to me that we can't judge a player based on numbers and scouting reports. Also, Tiger called the San Diego system garbage, not jus the single A team. Being 6-2 against one team on one level doesn't make a system. The Cubs have a winning record against the Cardinals this year, but the Cubs are garbage. I never saw Jose Macias play before we got him, but based on his numbers and scouting reports I could tell he wasn't going to help us at all.

 

the bolded part is the operative sentence. the return on the trade doesn't look great to me, but noone on this board is in a postion to accurately assess these young pitchers. the farther down in the minors, the less likely the numbers will reflect what kind of a prospect the player is. judging low level ball players based on their stats and the published scouting reports is rather foolish. it's even a problem judging higher level prospects. no amount of stats would have told you that Jason Dubois couldn't recognize or hit a curveball, but the stats and BA sure made it seem like he could be a force at the major league level.

 

it takes a combination of both in my opinion and the guys at BA often talk about their inability to fully cover all minor leaguers because of their lack of staff.

 

Agreed - stats are huge, no doubt, but I think you have to see a guy to have a truly fully informed opinion. I always appreciate the impressions of DJaxx and the other guys in the Minor League forum who have seen our porspects play and can therefore can lend their prospective.

[abuck1220]

My only point to Tiger or anyone else is that you shouldn't call another system garbage when you haven't seen any of their players in person. If they are garbage, why are they 6-2 against us this season, the 2nd best team in the Midwest League????

 

because how one organization's teams (out of six) did against one team over the course of eight measly games tells you absolutely nothing about their system as a whole. sorry, but if reputable scouting/minor league publications say their system, as a whole sucks, that holds more weight than the fact that you've seen their low A team play decent ball over an eight game span against the chiefs.

[RynoRules]

My only point to Tiger or anyone else is that you shouldn't call another system garbage when you haven't seen any of their players in person. If they are garbage, why are they 6-2 against us this season, the 2nd best team in the Midwest League????

 

because how one organization's teams (out of six) did against one team over the course of eight measly games tells you absolutely nothing about their system as a whole. sorry, but if reputable scouting/minor league publications say their system, as a whole sucks, that holds more weight than the fact that you've seen their low A team play decent ball over an eight game span against the chiefs.

 

I don't think he that his sole point was that those guys are good b/c they have beaten up on the Chiefs; I thought he was saying that he has seen the two prospects in person and that they looked good (see his earlier posts in this thread).

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

I could not disagree more. Who among us has seen every team's minor league prospects play in person? Of course we rely on numbers and BA (who has seen far more than any of us). It seems foolish to me that we can't judge a player based on numbers and scouting reports. Also, Tiger called the San Diego system garbage, not jus the single A team. Being 6-2 against one team on one level doesn't make a system. The Cubs have a winning record against the Cardinals this year, but the Cubs are garbage. I never saw Jose Macias play before we got him, but based on his numbers and scouting reports I could tell he wasn't going to help us at all.

 

the bolded part is the operative sentence. the return on the trade doesn't look great to me, but noone on this board is in a postion to accurately assess these young pitchers. the farther down in the minors, the less likely the numbers will reflect what kind of a prospect the player is. judging low level ball players based on their stats and the published scouting reports is rather foolish. it's even a problem judging higher level prospects. no amount of stats would have told you that Jason Dubois couldn't recognize or hit a curveball, but the stats and BA sure made it seem like he could be a force at the major league level.

 

it takes a combination of both in my opinion and the guys at BA often talk about their inability to fully cover all minor leaguers because of their lack of staff.

 

Here's the thing about that though. Like the Dubois example you gave, there are many players that are statistically sound yet have flaws not revealed by their production that prevents them from repeating that at higher levels. On the flipside, how many players are statistically horrid and then make some adjustment to completely change their performance? I'd wager there are significantly fewer that fall into the latter than the former.

 

As it pertains to these specific players, Santo is in his 4th pro season with over 320 IP, and no longer is young for his league. Jiminez is young for the MWL, but he's never had any sort of success in his pro career and is getting overwhelmed this year(more walks than K's, eek). I think the degree of how poorly they've performed is being lost.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

My only point to Tiger or anyone else is that you shouldn't call another system garbage when you haven't seen any of their players in person. If they are garbage, why are they 6-2 against us this season, the 2nd best team in the Midwest League????

 

because how one organization's teams (out of six) did against one team over the course of eight measly games tells you absolutely nothing about their system as a whole. sorry, but if reputable scouting/minor league publications say their system, as a whole sucks, that holds more weight than the fact that you've seen their low A team play decent ball over an eight game span against the chiefs.

 

I don't think he that his sole point was that those guys are good b/c they have beaten up on the Chiefs; I thought he was saying that he has seen the two prospects in person and that they looked good (see his earlier posts in this thread).

 

I think his point was that we can't trust stats and scouting reports from publications like BA to give us a picture of the state of a farm system, which I find ridiculous.

 

No one is going to see every team and evey minor leaguer play. However, a publication or organization that forms contacts with scouts that watch a number of these teams will give us an insight that is likely better than what one individual who watches the same team play over and over can give.

 

Are the assessments always correct? No, but I think they are more accurate than not.

[soccer10k]

Have fun with a contender Scott.

[ChiefsVoice]

My only point to Tiger or anyone else is that you shouldn't call another system garbage when you haven't seen any of their players in person. If they are garbage, why are they 6-2 against us this season, the 2nd best team in the Midwest League????

 

because how one organization's teams (out of six) did against one team over the course of eight measly games tells you absolutely nothing about their system as a whole. sorry, but if reputable scouting/minor league publications say their system, as a whole sucks, that holds more weight than the fact that you've seen their low A team play decent ball over an eight game span against the chiefs.

 

Hey I was just giving an informed opinion on the two guys in the deal THAT I HAD SEEN PITCH IN PERSON. ...I really don't care how they stack up prospect wise or if the Cubs got enough in return for Williamson...im not a Cubs fan. I just work in Peoria which happens to be a Cubs affiliate....I hope they pitch well in a Chiefs uniform the rest of this season and help us win as many games as possible and hopefully a MWL Championship. All I can do is comment on what I see....But hey, feel free to drive to Peoria, or WEst Michigan or wherever we are and watch all their games....or follow us on online broadcasts....

 

Nathan

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

My only point to Tiger or anyone else is that you shouldn't call another system garbage when you haven't seen any of their players in person. If they are garbage, why are they 6-2 against us this season, the 2nd best team in the Midwest League????

 

because how one organization's teams (out of six) did against one team over the course of eight measly games tells you absolutely nothing about their system as a whole. sorry, but if reputable scouting/minor league publications say their system, as a whole sucks, that holds more weight than the fact that you've seen their low A team play decent ball over an eight game span against the chiefs.

 

Hey I was just giving an informed opinion on the two guys in the deal THAT I HAD SEEN PITCH IN PERSON. ...I really don't care how they stack up prospect wise or if the Cubs got enough in return for Williamson...im not a Cubs fan. I just work in Peoria which happens to be a Cubs affiliate....I hope they pitch well in a Chiefs uniform the rest of this season and help us win as many games as possible and hopefully a MWL Championship. All I can do is comment on what I see....But hey, feel free to drive to Peoria, or WEst Michigan or wherever we are and watch all their games....or follow us on online broadcasts....

 

Nathan

 

That's probably the key difference. We do care. We care more about how they stack up as prospects than we do if Peoria, West Tenn, Iowa, etc produce winning teams. While it is nice for the minor league affiliates to have success, and I do want them to win, I more want them to produce valuable players for the Cubs, whether by contributing themselves or becoming a commodity to trade for a player who will help the Cubs win.

 

Nathan,

 

Thank-you for being a part of the community here. I do appreciate what you and Ron and others bring from your perspective. I also think there is great value in what the scouting reports and publications bring as well.