Cubs Top Prospect Lists (BA top 30, Sickels top 21, BP - 11)

[Guest]

Why Ceda and Huseby over Hernandez?

 

Projectability of stuff (and the [unlikely] hope that Ceda could stick in the rotation). I know Oneri has been quoted as saying Hernandez can eventually get it to mid-90s but I don't believe it.

 

I do have Hernandez at 11.

 

ETA: I think a lot of the national publications are really missing out on Hernandez.

[Mephistopheles]

BA's is:

 

#1 Josh Vitters

Then these nine guys in an unknown order

 

? J Ceda

? J Samardzija

? G Soto

? T Colvin

? T Thomas

? D Veal

? S Gallagher

? J Donaldson

? K Hart

[Guest]

Hart? Meh. Guess I shouldn't be surprised, it fits with BA. I think Colvin is a sure-fire #2 for them.

 

Is that a guess or actual, meph?

[Mephistopheles]

actual

 

the pictures are uploaded onto their site. Vitters is the bigger one, so hes the #1. All the other nine are the same size so theyre the 2-10.

 

Pattersons bat makes up for his defense IMO. He isnt Ryan Braun bricklike.

[Guest]

Pattersons bat makes up for his defense IMO. He isnt Ryan Braun bricklike.

 

But when the Cubs act like he's a utility guy and the Cubs are BA's best source, that's all you need to know. BA can be very predictable.

[craig]

Sorry, long.

1. Soto: he’s already shown he can hit, with both power and walks. And he can catch and throw. Given how hard it is to find catchers who can both defend and hit, no other player has a better chance to be an asset relative to league average at his position as does Soto. He may not have the MVP/HOF ceiling we’d like for #1. But no reason why he shouldn’t be an asset regular for a long time. To get a solid-fielding catcher who might prove to be a very solid #6 hitter, that’s good enough for #1 on my list.

2. Colvin: He’s very young, but he can hit, hit with power, and defend. I project him with good power, I think I project his power higher than many of you do. We all know the big red flag: too many K’s, way too few walks.

3. Ceda: Hard to rank a future reliever who’s so wild this high. But his stuff is the best the Cub system has had since Cruz and Prior, maybe since Wood. Excellent chance to become a really useful reliever. Red flag: walks, walks, and more walks.

4. Samardzija: Sorry, it’s just my list. And it’s based on who’d I’d least want to trade. He may have no past success, but I’m looking future. He throws hard enough and with sink, I think he’s got a chance to be an innings-eating big-league starter. Obviously no ace potential without any K-stuff. But I think he can get better, and he’s got a fair shot to become a perfectly satisfactory middle-of-rotation pitcher. Those guys are valuable. Perhaps even better. The critics will say this is lame, but I think when some scouts are really plus on a guy, there are some reasons. And, I also think that opportunity counts. There are lots of good relievers who could be good starters had they had enough opportunity, but that didn’t happen. Sam’s fastball and bonus and the scouting support will be to his advantage in getting the opportunity required to become a big-league starter. Red flag: Breaking ball and control (hence the low K’s.)

5. Vitters: With Vitters, as with Samardz, I rate him as high as I do in part because the scouts do. I’m humble enough to defer, to some extent, and know I don’t know enough to say they are all wrong. Big hitters are invaluable, and they say he could be a big hitter for power, contact, and average. But I admit I don’t have a good feeling. He already seems to profile as probably-not for 3B, and he didn’t hit in HS, rookie, or fall ball this year. Red flag: poor 3B defense and concerns whether he can actually hit.

6. Kevin Hart: He should still be eligible, right? He looked very good in September. I know it was small sample, but nothing wrong with his stuff, that cutter looked very good. He had the velocity and the cutter to be an effective big-league pitcher, didn’t need to nibble, had a pitch he could attack with, consistent groundball guy. And while the big-league sample was small, the success sample wasn’t really that small. He was good for Iowa (3.45 in August in AAA is solid), and he was 6-1, 2.70 with strong splits over his last ten AA starts. He’s already gotten over the big-league hurdle, too. I think he’s got a chance to be a solid rotation pitcher (non-ace, but solid), or the kind of effective reliever he already showed himself to be. Red Flag: Stuff looked good when his control was on. But can he sustain the control needed? And will his stuff get whacked if his control slips even a little bit?

7. Gallagher: He’s had success at every level short of the majors. To my eye, neither his fastball nor his curve had ace electricity in his Cub appearances. But he’s smart, resourceful, and has shown enough fastball velocity and location to think that his fastball could be an effective pitch even without more movement. How good he can be will depend on the consistency and command of his breaking stuff. Has a good chance to be a good rotation pitcher. Red flag: None, really. Just hasn’t clearly shown an individual pitch which is knockout good, a putaway pitch. I think that may be why he tends to run high pitch counts.

8. Donaldson: He can hit, walk, and hit with power. If he can do it defensively, he has a chance to be a huge asset player relative to his catcher position. Could be really good, and could bypass everybody on this list. Red flag: Teams expect a lot defensively from a big-league catcher. Will he really be able to make it at catcher? 2nd, will he be able to hit the breaking ball, often enough?

9. Huseby: has a chance to be a good 3-pitch control pitcher. Phil’s AFL reports were very positive about how smooth he looked. Obviously very young, lots of projection possible. But projection needed for his fastball to be asset fast. Red flag: Not fast, young, and lots of injury opportunities between now and success.

10. Rhee: May be premature. But he got paid like a serious prospect, and I’m a believer that first impressions mean something. Phil said he has a good fastball right now, with age-based projection, looks smooth, and had a dandy breaking ball. Red flag: Not exceptionally fast, and lots of injury opportunities between now and actual success.

11. Robert Hernandez: His results per age perhaps look better than his stuff. Throws well, with reasonable control and some good results for age. Red flag: hasn’t shown an especially good or consistent breaking pitch yet, and flyball oriented. As hitters get stronger than A-, that’s a question mark.

12. Veal: I assume BA will have him higher, as do most of you. Has a good arm. But so, so wild, with no sign of progress. My limited interest is perhaps colored by my friend, who saw him several times and views him as nothing but a thrower, no breaking ball that he could throw for strikes on the days he saw him. I have major trouble envisioning him as more than a lefty reliever. He could be a good one if he can get some control, but his clock is ticking. Will he come up with enough control to ever be better than a will Ohman type? Red flags: No breaking ball, no control, and nothing that he can get any groundouts with. HR’s could be a problem.

13. Fuld: Hard to know where to place a guy like this. No star potential, probably a utility outfielder. But he’s always made contact, has been a steady .370+ OBP guy, and has typically been a .400 slugger even before his big AFL. No power, but may not have any hitting holes for superior pitchers to expose; production may not drop as much in majors as is true for most players. Good fielder, smart. Sometimes teams without good starters need to turn to utility players. A chance that Pie will flop, and Fuld will get an extended opportunity sooner rather than later. If he does well, I don’t want to look back and say “I knew he had a good shot to be a solid if unspectacular player, but I didn’t think being a competent non-superstar was good enough for my list.” Red flags: No power, so opportunity beyond utility won’t come easily, unless it comes soon.

14. Roquet: Maybe deserves higher. Good arm, good slider. I think his stuff may be already be ready to be a good reliever. Red Flag: Control? Health?

15. Patterson: Got a chance to develop into a functional utility guy, if he can make himself into defensive CFer. I thought his key was proving he could play big-league 2B, and most people don’t believe that’s in the cards anymore. Now the same question applies to how good he’ll be defensively in CF.

16. Billy Petrick: His stuff looked really good last summer. Looked like he could be a straightforward effective reliever. Those are invaluable. Red Flag: I’m out of the loop. Is his arm shot again? Or is there a chance that his arm will be just fine with some additional rest?

17. Thomas: Cubs saw enough for 3rd round money, and he was pretty good for Boise. But I’m not that high on him. Don’t expect his basestealing to carry up. Currently and seemingly according to projection, doesn’t have the power to justify all the K’s or supposedly mediocre defense. Red Flag: Defense, K’s, and power.

18. Maestri: Kept getting people out, throws a good fastball, good control. Results guy.

19. Wellington Castillo: Some good defense talent, hit alright for a guy with little experience. Red flags: Scouts don’t seem to rave, so apparently his hitting doesn’t project that well.

20. Clevenger: Catchers who can hit are valuable. No power, but a guy who always makes contact, that’s an unusual attribute and can take a guy a long way.

21. Acosta: He sounds like he could be pretty good. As young as he is, if they liked him enough to pay him 4th round money, and if he’s started as favorably as people say, there’s something good there.

22. Russell: They liked enough to give 3rd round money, and in brief sample he did well. Control pitcher with a good change, may not need overwhelming stuff. But still young enough and with enough mixed scouting reports, maybe his stuff is or will be better than we expected?

[Guest]

Veal

Red flags: No breaking ball, no control, and nothing that he can get any groundouts with. HR’s could be a problem.

 

Got to disagree on "no breaking ball." It's extremely inconsistent, maybe your friend saw him on the days he had nothing with the secondary pitches? The curve is good when it is on, but that was about half the time last season.

[craig]

Hart? Meh. Guess I shouldn't be surprised, it fits with BA. I think Colvin is a sure-fire #2 for them.

 

Is that a guess or actual, meph?

 

Cal, in what way is that a "fits with BA" choice? And why are you so disinterested?

 

Obviously he doens't have a long history of success, but which prospect pitchers do? After mid-May, he was really good for AA, clearly head-and-shoulders better than Veal or Holliman. And I thought he was better at Iowa than anybody, Gallagher included. And obviously he was effective in his brief show with the Cubs.

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=Kevin%20Hart&pos=P&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=453954

 

Not sure if these stats are completely correct, the last date seems weird. But I recall he was really a machine in a bunch of his late AA games, and in a couple of his Iowa games. But if this game-log is accurate, it shows him as not allowing any earned runs in 4 of his last 5 AA starts. What's wrong with that?

 

In my view, his stuff looked big-league caliber in September. He threw it hard enough, comfortably in the 90's, and the cutter looked like a pitch that could carry him a long way.

 

I'm not putting it all on his 11 big-league innings, although I don't think we should ignore them. But it's not just an 11-inning fluke. He was mostly quite a good picher, albeit still with a couple of bad games mixed in, over September-August-July-June. That's four months. Why dismiss that?

 

This may sound silly. But I also think his kind of stuff is stuff that translates well to the majors. The movement on his cutter seems like it might not give him K's, but that it's a pitch he can throw to the strike zone even in the majors without being scared. Not sure he'd need to change his approach as much as some guys need to do.

[craig]

Veal

Red flags: No breaking ball, no control, and nothing that he can get any groundouts with. HR’s could be a problem.

 

Got to disagree on "no breaking ball." It's extremely inconsistent, maybe your friend saw him on the days he had nothing with the secondary pitches? The curve is good when it is on, but that was about half the time last season.

 

Correct. My friend said he saw him throw a couple of curveballs each game that were awful, so then it was just high fastball, high fastball, high fastball, with a couple of equally wild and bad-looking changeups thrown once in a while.

 

Given how few excellent games he threw, I wonder how many games he had when the curve really was on, for more than a couple of innings at a time?

 

Heh, my friend said that Samardzija's breaking ball looked way, way superior to Veal's when he saw them both during the same week. As you say, maybe just a couple of fluke bad games. (Not that hard to find, since Veal had plenty of them.) But I guess given how little enthusiasm we've rightfully heard regarding Sam's breaking ball, I thought it was perhaps telling about where Veal's stands that my friend thought Veal's was much worse.

 

I may be jaded by a rotten season and a few bad games my friend saw. But I do have some concerns that Veal is going to end up no better than Felix Sanchez did. But, hopefully he'll turn it around.

[Guest]

Cal, in what way is that a "fits with BA" choice? And why are you so disinterested?

 

It's not that I don't like Hart (I have him in my top 15), I just feel it's a safe choice vs. guys like Huseby or Burke who are high-ceiling guys (and were on BA's radar for getting first round money) but are obviously riskier. I feel BA tends to go safe choice near the big leagues towards the bottom of the top 10 vs. a high ceiling guy lower (a strategy they don't use earlier in their top 10 - again, just my opinion).

[jersey cubs fan]

Interesting list, nice read.

 

I just find this quote very amusing.

5. Vitters:

Red flag: poor 3B defense and concerns whether he can actually hit.

 

But other than that he's perfect!

 

I've got no feeling on Vitters, and really I've barely begun to draw an opinion on most of these guys. Can't believe how little I pay attention to the prospects now.

 

There seems to be a significant amount of good, but not great bats, who may have trouble sticking at the positions that would make them really valuable. And a good chunk of the top pitching prospects sound like relievers. I think you're list really points out that the Cubs have a lot of depth, for useful parts, but seriously lack the true blue chip prospects. I like being able to call-up guys from the minors to fill holes, but this just shows how important it's going to be for management to go out and get stars from other teams, which is extremely expensive.

[Guest]

Veal

Red flags: No breaking ball, no control, and nothing that he can get any groundouts with. HR’s could be a problem.

 

Got to disagree on "no breaking ball." It's extremely inconsistent, maybe your friend saw him on the days he had nothing with the secondary pitches? The curve is good when it is on, but that was about half the time last season.

 

Correct. My friend said he saw him throw a couple of curveballs each game that were awful, so then it was just high fastball, high fastball, high fastball, with a couple of equally wild and bad-looking changeups thrown once in a while.

 

Given how few excellent games he threw, I wonder how many games he had when the curve really was on, for more than a couple of innings at a time?

 

Heh, my friend said that Samardzija's breaking ball looked way, way superior to Veal's when he saw them both during the same week. As you say, maybe just a couple of fluke bad games. (Not that hard to find, since Veal had plenty of them.) But I guess given how little enthusiasm we've rightfully heard regarding Sam's breaking ball, I thought it was perhaps telling about where Veal's stands that my friend thought Veal's was much worse.

 

I may be jaded by a rotten season and a few bad games my friend saw. But I do have some concerns that Veal is going to end up no better than Felix Sanchez did. But, hopefully he'll turn it around.

 

Interesting comparison - to me it seems like both Samardzija and Veal have the potential for plus breaking pitches (curve for Veal, slider for Samardzija) but their biggest problem is actually mechanics (release point for Veal and I forgot what exactly it was with Samardzija). Jeff's slider supposedly improved big time after his pen visit in Daytona.

[Guest]

I'll go 11-20 too since others have. It gets tough in the 20s to really distinguish between prospects.

 

1. Vitters

2. Soto

3. Colvin

4. Samardzija

5. Veal

6. Gallagher

7. Donaldson

8. Ceda

9. Huseby

10. Thomas

 

11. Hernandez

12. Burke

13. Patterson

14. Suarez

15. Hart

16. Petrick

17. W. Castillo

18. R. Acosta

19. Rhee

20. Cabrera

[craig]

Thanks, Cal. I forgot Burke. Not sure where I'd put him. I think he'd break my top-30. Not sure about top-20. So many K's against low-minors and Hawaii pitching, he'll need to fix that or else hit an awful lot of HR's.

 

Cal, I think I asked this before and you didn't know. Do you know anything about the extend of Cabrera's arm injury? Did he have surgery yet, or not sure?

[Guest]

Thanks, Cal. I forgot Burke. Not sure where I'd put him. I think he'd break my top-30. Not sure about top-20. So many K's against low-minors and Hawaii pitching, he'll need to fix that or else hit an awful lot of HR's.

 

Cal, I think I asked this before and you didn't know. Do you know anything about the extend of Cabrera's arm injury? Did he have surgery yet, or not sure?

 

Both times it was shoulder "soreness." As far as I know, he only needed rest but am not 100% sure.

[nilodnayr]

Without the hype and contract, I'm not sure what there is to like about him. Sure it was his first full season, but it's not like he looked great but wore down. He pretty much stunk from day 1. I didn't need him to shred anybody. But it would have been nice if he didn't stink.

 

Actually, he started out poorly, but promptly turned around and put up significantly better numbers in AA.

 

3-3, 6 GS, 3.41 ERA, 34.1 IP, 8 HR, 20/9 K/BB, .250 BAA

 

Based on those numbers, I wouldn't say he stank. Those are pretty good numbers for a 22 year old in AA.

 

Sadly his GO-AO and HR numbers tanked at AA. 5.24 K/9 still not great. But yeah, I have him in my top 5.

 

202 BABIP as well.

[badnews]

I wouldn't be surprised if BA had Gallagher ahead of Veal and Samardzija.

[JeffH]

I wouldn't be surprised if BA had Gallagher ahead of Veal and Samardzija.

 

Almost certainly ahead of Veal, probably behind Samardzija.

[Mephistopheles]

1. Josh Vitters, 3b

2. Geovany Soto, c/1b

3. Tyler Colvin, of

4. Jose Ceda, rhp

5. Sean Gallagher, rhp

6. Donald Veal, lhp

7. Josh Donaldson, c

8. Jeff Samardzija, rhp

9. Tony Thomas, 2b

10. Kevin Hart, rhp

 

Best Hitter for Average Tony Thomas

Best Power Hitter Josh Vitters

Best Strike-Zone Discipline Sam Fuld

Fastest Baserunner Leon Johnson

Best Athlete Tyler Colvin

Best Fastball Jose Ceda

Best Curveball Casey Lambert

Best Slider Alessandro Maestri

Best Changeup James Russell

Best Control Mark Holliman

Best Defensive Catcher Welington Castillo

Best Defensive Infielder Josh Lansford

Best Infield Arm Josh Lansford

Best Defensive Outfielder Sam Fuld

Best Outfield Arm Kyler Burke

[Mephistopheles]

The Future: Soto has raised his ceiling from likely backup to potential all-star. He'll be the Cubs' regular catcher in 2008 and eventually should become their best all-around catcher since Jody Davis two decades ago

 

JODY!

[CuseCubFan69]

Interesting list, nice read.

 

I just find this quote very amusing.

5. Vitters:

Red flag: poor 3B defense and concerns whether he can actually hit.

 

But other than that he's perfect!

 

I've got no feeling on Vitters, and really I've barely begun to draw an opinion on most of these guys. Can't believe how little I pay attention to the prospects now.

 

There seems to be a significant amount of good, but not great bats, who may have trouble sticking at the positions that would make them really valuable. And a good chunk of the top pitching prospects sound like relievers. I think you're list really points out that the Cubs have a lot of depth, for useful parts, but seriously lack the true blue chip prospects. I like being able to call-up guys from the minors to fill holes, but this just shows how important it's going to be for management to go out and get stars from other teams, which is extremely expensive.

 

I don't get what Craig wrote when he said Vitters hasn't hit at any level he has been at but yet he's #1? I suppose I'd like to know what hasn't hit means.

[JeffH]

I wouldn't be surprised if BA had Gallagher ahead of Veal and Samardzija.

 

Almost certainly ahead of Veal, probably behind Samardzija.

 

Ahead of both, actually. Good for him!

[Mephistopheles]

there isnt much concern on whether he will hit or not.

[Guest]

Wow to Ceda at 4.

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/online/chat/chat.php?id=2007111901

 

Callis will chat at 1 pm ET.

[craig]

I found it interesting that Maestri was listed as best slider. I understood his fastball was fine, but hadn't gotten the impression it was exceptional. Now we know. Fastball/slider, that's the easiest combo to throw for strikes. 0.86 WHIP is pretty good, even if over only 84 innings in relief. There are numerous useful fastball/slider guys in bigleague relief.

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=Alessandro%20Maestri&pos=P&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=493256

 

Sometimes its fun to look at the "last ten games" data. For Maestri: 10games/14IP/20K/1BB/3hits.

 

He was obviously pretty grooved in by the end. Wonder if he'll just step up to Daytona, or will skip right to AA at age 22 next spring.