Top Cubs' prospect

[Mephistopheles]

The season is over, so I guess it is time to start ranking them. With not a lot of that and not a lot of bickering, this is what I came up with:

 

1. B+ Donald Veal (Mark Langston)

2. B+ Felix Pie (Mike Cameron)

3. B+ Mark Pawelek (Sam McDowell)

4. B Sean Gallagher (David Bush)

5. B Eric Patterson (Tadahito Iguchi)

6. B Scott Moore (Eric Chavez)

7. B- Mitch Atkins (Aaron Harang)

8. B- Tyler Colvin (Mark Kotsay)

9. B- Ryan Harvey (Raul Mondesi)

10. B- Brian Dopirak (Paul Konerko)

11. C+ Jake Fox (Josh Willingham)

12. C+ Adam Harben (Kyle Lohse)

13. C+ Mark Reed (AJ Pierzynski)

14. C+ Jose Ceda (A lot!/ Roberto Novoa ::shudders:: )

15. C+ Chris Huseby (Chris Carpenter)

16. C+ Billy Petrick (Derek Lowe)

17. C Geovanny Soto (Hank White)

18. C Jeff Samardzija (Scott Proctor)

19. C Scott Taylor (A lot!/ Jeff Suppan)

20. C Chris Robinson (Hank White)

 

The comparisons are tough. Especially with our power lefties w/ curveballers. There aren't too many out there. Most power lefties throw killer sliders. CC Sabathia is another one close to them, Rick Ankiel too. And I want way old-school with Pawly. But I a lefty with three pitches? I could only think of McDowell, of course there are others. The comparisons are not meant to be how good they will be, but similar skillsets.

 

And obviously I know I am going to get the The Sean army against me. And you can bitch about the comps, I know you will.

Edited September 13, 2006 by Mephistopheles

[Handlebar McSkullet]

6. B Scott Moore (Eric Chavez)

 

I was thinking the same thing comparision wise. He has a simular looking swing, at least from what I have seen of him.

 

But, I have also been too busy watching Grossman throw that touchdown pass to Berrian, over and over.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Yay, someone who has Dope in their top 10. Obviously most will disagree (same for Harvey, who I'm less inclined to keep in the top 10). Why do you rate Huseby as a C+? I think Petrick is too low, but I understand why you'd rate him there.

 

Sam McDowell? :shock:

[Mephistopheles]

Well how many lefties with a mid 90s fastball (at least down the road for pawly), a good curve and a good change can you think of? I could have given the Mark Langston one again I guess but most of your power lefties have power sliders and splitters, not curves. Rick Ankiel fits too I guess, though he had no change.

 

With Huseby we haven't seen him pitch enough to be ranked higher, sure he's got a high upside but he's pitched what? 25 innings this season including high school? I guess you could say I have a double-standard with him and Mark Pawelek I guess...

 

The Harvey and Dopirak rankings have more to do with the Cubs' system than them. I just can't justify anyone below them to go ahead of them. Even though they regressed the Cubs prospect status has graduated on a lot of players this season including Sean Marshall, Ronnie Cedeno, Carlos Marmol, Rich Hill, Angel Guzman, and Juan Mateo. This has in turn made their relative ranking go up, because simply the Cubs haven't added much - hello no draft picks.

 

Technically speaking Jae-Kuk Ryu is still gonna qualify, I should have ranked him. He's probably right ahead of Colvin. And a comp for him might be say Brett Tomko with less velocity and overall stuff. I say Tomko because of the decent deep repetoire. Im sure there is a better comp but I am tired.

Edited September 13, 2006 by Mephistopheles

[Laura]

And obviously I know I am going to the The Sean army against me.

 

Right. And obviously the Sean Army does not equal anyone involved in ranking players.

 

I'm ok with waiting on the results rather than the predictions.

[Guest]

6. B Scott Moore (Eric Chavez)

 

I was thinking the same thing comparision wise. He has a simular looking swing, at least from what I have seen of him.

 

But, I have also been too busy watching Grossman throw that touchdown pass to Berrian, over and over.

 

hopefully he has a better eye at the plate and plays defense the same.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Well how many lefties with a mid 90s fastball (at least down the road for pawly), a good curve and a good change can you think of? I could have given the Mark Langston one again I guess but most of your power lefties have power sliders and splitters, not curves. Rick Ankiel fits too I guess, though he had no change.

 

With Huseby we haven't seen him pitch enough to be ranked higher, sure he's got a high upside but he's pitched what? 25 innings this season including high school? I guess you could say I have a double-standard with him and Mark Pawelek I guess...

 

The Harvey and Dopirak rankings have more to do with the Cubs' system than them. I just can't justify anyone below them to go ahead of them. Even though they regressed the Cubs prospect status has graduated on a lot of players this season including Sean Marshall, Ronnie Cedeno, Carlos Marmol, Rich Hill, Angel Guzman, and Juan Mateo. This has in turn made their relative ranking go up, because simply the Cubs haven't added much - hello no draft picks.

 

Technically speaking Jae-Kuk Ryu is still gonna qualify, I should have ranked him. He's probably right ahead of Colvin. And a comp for him might be say Brett Tomko with less velocity and overall stuff. I say Tomko because of the decent deep repetoire. Im sure there is a better comp but I am tired.

 

I have no problem with the Sam McDowell comp (outside of the whole making me read up a bit on him part). Pawelek vs. Huseby is not much of a double standard, given (as you mentioned) he didn't pitch much his senior year. I'm just saying I'd have rated him higher.

[karenmac]

I think a B- is low for Mitch Atkins. As such a quiet guy, he's not getting the notice that he should. He was considerably more consistent than Donnie was in Peoria and while not as overpowering as Sean was last year, seemed to confound opposition regularly.

[Mephistopheles]

He's a lot like Gallagher was last season. Good results, but his stuff doesn't blow you away. He's going to have to duplicate his results at at least Daytona and probably West Tenn before he gets a status boost - or he could improve his stuff ala Gallagher.

 

Veal's a different case for two reasons, 1 he has the stuff and 2 he dominated the FSL, a higher league.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

What are the chances the Cubs will let Pawelek throw his split or slider anytime soon? They did hold back Gallagher's full arsenal of pitches until this season.

[WeberJazz]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

[TXCubsFan]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

 

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

 

Guzman, Marmol, Marshall and Hill have gotten enough innings to be considered rookies and no longer prospects. Mateo is close to reaching the limit too.

 

In terms of Guzman's performance...this is his first season completely back. He's still rusty and doesn't have the control or command that he had back in 2003. He's been disappointing, but I think his performance next season will be a better gauge.

[WeberJazz]

Thanks, that info. should be considered when evaluating Guzman's performance.

 

He has seemed to struggle since being called up, but he had that nice start against Philly toward the end of Aug. where he gave up one run in six innings while striking out eight. I was hoping at that point that he could turn the corner and finish out the season strong with some solid outings. However, that hasn't seemed to have happened.

 

I guess we'll get a better gauge on him next year as he continues to regain his health and confidence. I was encouraged to see that his FB is back in the mid 90's.

[Jehrico]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

 

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season.

Could fatigue be a problem (one factor among a few anyways) for Angel? It's been a loooong time since he's been healthy enough to pitch this late in the season. The fact he's still healthy at this point (and that Dusty hasn't had him throw any 130+ pitch games yet, knock on wood) is encouraging.

[CubinNY]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

 

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season.

 

Confidence is not a problem, throwing strikes is the problem; or rather not throwing them. Confidence is an outcome, not a cause. Guzman has struggled not becuase of what is between his ears, same with Hill.

[TruffleShuffle]

Eric Patterson is more of an A++ guy

[TXCubsFan]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

 

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season.

 

Confidence is not a problem, throwing strikes is the problem; or rather not throwing them. Confidence is an outcome, not a cause. Guzman has struggled not becuase of what is between his ears, same with Hill.

 

I'll concede the point in part, but often Guzman gets hammered trying to overthrow a fastball instead of trusting his breaking stuff.

[CubsWin]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

 

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season.

 

Confidence is not a problem, throwing strikes is the problem; or rather not throwing them. Confidence is an outcome, not a cause. Guzman has struggled not becuase of what is between his ears, same with Hill.

If you talk to any coach, they will tell you that a player's performance is directly impacted by how confident they are in what they are doing. Can confidence be impacted by good execution and good performance? Of course. But confidence can also be created, generated in a player's mind and it can enable a player to perform at their peak. Michael Jordan was a supremely confident performer at the end of a game. He wanted the ball. Yet he still had several failures at converting a game winning shot. The thing that he did was mentally relive the times when he was successful during the timeout before taking the court to hit the game winning shot. He believes, and I agree with him, that he was more successful because of his mental preparation.

 

I agree that Guzman's struggles are probably mostly due to the fact that it takes an extended period of pitching without interruption to have the control necessary to succeed at the higher levels and he hasn't had that because of recent injuries.

 

But the same is not true for Hill. Hill has had extended periods of healthy and success and the higher levels. But he wasn't performing well at the major league level. The mere fact that he went from sucking to performing at a Cy Young level is evidence that his problem was mental in origin. According to everyone who has first hand knowledge of Hill success, the origin of his major league struggles was completely mental. His lack of confidence in the majors affected his ability to execute pitches. He simply had to give himself the freedom to be himself and do what he was doing with such regularity at the AAA level. His extended period of success there made it easy for his muscles to remember what they were doing at Iowa and do the same thing with Chicago. It also made it easier for Rich to generate the confidence necessary to go from a terrible first outing in July against the Cardinals to a great one his next time out.

[CubinNY]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

 

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season.

 

Confidence is not a problem, throwing strikes is the problem; or rather not throwing them. Confidence is an outcome, not a cause. Guzman has struggled not becuase of what is between his ears, same with Hill.

If you talk to any coach, they will tell you that a player's performance is directly impacted by how confident they are in what they are doing. Can confidence be impacted by good execution and good performance? Of course. But confidence can also be created, generated in a player's mind and it can enable a player to perform at their peak. Michael Jordan was a supremely confident performer at the end of a game. He wanted the ball. Yet he still had several failures at converting a game winning shot. The thing that he did was mentally relive the times when he was successful during the timeout before taking the court to hit the game winning shot. He believes, and I agree with him, that he was more successful because of his mental preparation.

 

I agree that Guzman's struggles are probably mostly due to the fact that it takes an extended period of pitching without interruption to have the control necessary to succeed at the higher levels and he hasn't had that because of recent injuries.

 

But the same is not true for Hill. Hill has had extended periods of healthy and success and the higher levels. But he wasn't performing well at the major league level. The mere fact that he went from sucking to performing at a Cy Young level is evidence that his problem was mental in origin. According to everyone who has first hand knowledge of Hill success, the origin of his major league struggles was completely mental. His lack of confidence in the majors affected his ability to execute pitches. He simply had to give himself the freedom to be himself and do what he was doing with such regularity at the AAA level. His extended period of success there made it easy for his muscles to remember what they were doing at Iowa and do the same thing with Chicago. It also made it easier for Rich to generate the confidence necessary to go from a terrible first outing in July against the Cardinals to a great one his next time out.

 

And any coach that said that would be full of rah, rah, BS.

[FergieJ31]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

 

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season.

 

Confidence is not a problem, throwing strikes is the problem; or rather not throwing them. Confidence is an outcome, not a cause. Guzman has struggled not becuase of what is between his ears, same with Hill.

 

I usually agree with your posts, CubInNY, but I have to say this one is way off. Read Maddux's favorite book,

http://www.amazon.com/Mental-Game-Baseball-Guide-Performance/dp/1888698543/sr=8-1/qid=1158282278/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-8502880-0459841?ie=UTF8&s=books and see if it changes your mind. It's a fantastic book.

[chopsx9]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

 

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season.

 

Confidence is not a problem, throwing strikes is the problem; or rather not throwing them. Confidence is an outcome, not a cause. Guzman has struggled not becuase of what is between his ears, same with Hill.

 

I usually agree with your posts, CubInNY, but I have to say this one is way off. Read Maddux's favorite book,

http://www.amazon.com/Mental-Game-Baseball-Guide-Performance/dp/1888698543/sr=8-1/qid=1158282278/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-8502880-0459841?ie=UTF8&s=books and see if it changes your mind. It's a fantastic book.

 

I have to agree. Lack of confidence will CRIPPLE you in any walk of life, especially in a pro sport where you play infront of 30,000 fans. Just ask Ankiel.

[CubsWin]

Is Guzman too old to be considered a prospect at this point? He's not on your list. I have to say that I have been mighty disappointed in his recent performances.

 

I think his main problem is confidence, not unlike Rich Hill earlier this year. Guzman has nasty stuff. Let's hope he can put it together next season.

 

Confidence is not a problem, throwing strikes is the problem; or rather not throwing them. Confidence is an outcome, not a cause. Guzman has struggled not becuase of what is between his ears, same with Hill.

If you talk to any coach, they will tell you that a player's performance is directly impacted by how confident they are in what they are doing. Can confidence be impacted by good execution and good performance? Of course. But confidence can also be created, generated in a player's mind and it can enable a player to perform at their peak. Michael Jordan was a supremely confident performer at the end of a game. He wanted the ball. Yet he still had several failures at converting a game winning shot. The thing that he did was mentally relive the times when he was successful during the timeout before taking the court to hit the game winning shot. He believes, and I agree with him, that he was more successful because of his mental preparation.

 

I agree that Guzman's struggles are probably mostly due to the fact that it takes an extended period of pitching without interruption to have the control necessary to succeed at the higher levels and he hasn't had that because of recent injuries.

 

But the same is not true for Hill. Hill has had extended periods of healthy and success and the higher levels. But he wasn't performing well at the major league level. The mere fact that he went from sucking to performing at a Cy Young level is evidence that his problem was mental in origin. According to everyone who has first hand knowledge of Hill success, the origin of his major league struggles was completely mental. His lack of confidence in the majors affected his ability to execute pitches. He simply had to give himself the freedom to be himself and do what he was doing with such regularity at the AAA level. His extended period of success there made it easy for his muscles to remember what they were doing at Iowa and do the same thing with Chicago. It also made it easier for Rich to generate the confidence necessary to go from a terrible first outing in July against the Cardinals to a great one his next time out.

 

And any coach that said that would be full of rah, rah, BS.

No, they wouldn't. Is Jordan full of BS when he talks about his envisioning making the shot and remembering all of his previous successes helping him generate the confidence necessary to make the next game-winning shot? Was Jack Nicklaus just full of it when he admitted envisioning his putt going in the cup before he stroked it? Positive visualizations are down for one reason and one reason only. So that you can perform with confidence during a pressure situation. Are you one of the many Cubs fans that believe they have rushed prospects to the majors in the past and ruined them in the process? If so, ask yourself what that is all about.

 

I work in a performance field. I am also a coach. I coach others how to succeed in a competitive situation in which they must perform to succeed. From my own life's experiences, from the experiences of every coach I have ever talked to and from numerous books, like Jordan's, that I have read on the subject, confidence can be generated and most definitely impacts a player's performance. It also can work the other way around where a player has a physical breakthrough, starts performing better and then gains confidence.

 

But don't listen to or believe someone like me, just read Rich Hill's own comments...

Cubs.com[/url]"]"I don't think confidence is an issue any more," Hill said. "After you have some success, you build on it, you start to learn that you can pitch here. It's going out and winning and getting the job done now."

In other words, confidence was the issue when he first came up, but on September 1st, the day of that article, he had worked through his lack of confidence. Then there's his pitching coach at AAA, Alan Dunn.

Cubs.com[/url]"]"We always wonder what it is, confidence or success, which one comes first. I think he's starting to figure some things out and feeling confident when he goes out there, and it's about executing pitches. His stuff has always been there. Now he's taken that to a different level where he can execute it."

Apparently, Alan Dunn thinks it can be both also. Sometimes success comes first, sometimes its the confidence. And finally, Dusty Baker...

Cubs.com[/url]"]"He's more confident," Baker said. "He's popping that fastball inside. Left-handers who can throw that fastball inside are going to be tough."

 

You're off on this one, CubinNY.

[Mephistopheles]

Oh Boy more saber vs traditional rambling.

 

I don't think confidence breeds success but I do think lack of confidence may lead to not-having success. In other words the ability to come through in the clutch more than normal doesn't but the ability to fail in the clutch more than anticipated is true.

 

I don't think Guzman's issue has anything to do with confidence in his stuff, but more or less the execution. He's had Blanco and Barrett call the game through Larry's gameplan. All Guzman has to do is throw it where they call it. He might not "trust" his stuff and is more catious, but this would lead to the walks but not the not the pitches down the middle. He could trust his stuff too much and challenge everyone down the middle, but this wouldn't lead to walks.

 

The simple fact is right now Angel is doing two things and not doing one.

 

He IS:

1.) Throwing the ball down the middle.

2.) Throwing the ball off the plate for balls.

 

He IS not:

3.) Throwing the ball on the black or outerhalf with consistency.

 

Guzman will dominate one hitter, then look like crap to the next. His inconsistency from at-bat to at-bat has little to do with confidence or anything in his head. It's simply execution of his pitches.

 

Guzman has NO idea where the hell the ball is going when he throws it.

 

He MIGHT be overthrowing too much, which is probably the cause of the poor command but this has more to do with his approach than his confidence, I think.

 

EDIT: Why should i trust a quote from Dusty Baker. He'll tell you walks clog bases. My point is just because someone in the business says it, it doesn't make it true. In fact there are a lot of psychologists who think that athletes at this level don't choke or whatever. Probably because the ones who don't have what it takes mentally get weeded out WAY before the reach the Majors.

[Chris]

Why should I trust a quote from Dusty Baker. He'll tell you walks clog bases.

 

=D>