2008 Cubs Picks Thread

[illiniguy]

Vitters does have me excited.

With what? His ability to flatten his hat bill?

[salukifudd]

Vitters does have me excited.

With what? His ability to flatten his hat bill?

 

Come on, at least just ask why.

[badnews]

Why is "average" good enough though? That 2006 draft doesn't look average to me. The problem is I think this board has always liked certain guys, like Josh Lansford, better than I have.

 

I didn't literally Wilken talked like that, but I was referencing the idea that it's not unreal to think if any team is going to pass up an awesome "bad body" hitter for a flashy athlete with zero baseball playing acumen, it's the Cubs.

 

What I don't like about what you're saying is this: The Cubs had well-rated drafts and they didn't work out so let's just give up on the idea of doing anything by the book any more. I don't care for that thinking. How about we keep having well-rated drafts and hope they work out.

 

If he projected Colvin to be a better player than Snider when no one else in the known universe would have thought that what does it say about him? Sorry, you're cutting these guys too many breaks. Wilken picks the guy nobody else would over the surefire bet and then has to blah blah blah about how he's the next Alex Rios and what, this is just a shrug? I can't shrug off what looks like incompetence and foolishness to me that easily.

[illiniguy]

Vitters does have me excited.

With what? His ability to flatten his hat bill?

 

Come on, at least just ask why.

Ok, but he hasn't hardly played in two years now. That alone is worrisome. I just don't see what he could have done to get anyone excited.

[UK1679666180]

Over the last year and a half, Vitters has been steadily gaining steam toward his current status as the top draft-eligible player in California . His raw ability with the bat alone makes him a first-round pick. His bat speed and strength combine to give him prodigious power that clearly profiles at the hot corner. However, Vitters has evolved from a raw talent into a very polished, young “professional hitter” that now is projected to be a top five pick overall in the first round—possibly even the first position player selected. His pitch recognition is very good; he knows what he wants to hit, and what he can and cannot hit. When Vitters’ brain says swing, his hands do it and it is a very impressive thing to see. He does need to improve on defense like most young players, but has the tools to be at least an average defensive third baseman, and may even be better than that

 

This...

 

Of course, you probably believe that he has all of a sudden become a bust and the statement above never existed that it's a figment of an imagination.

 

B/c two months into his professional career that a 18-19yo kid will be deemed a bust.

 

Let me guess, in '01 you were pissed the Cubs selected Prior instead of Tex?

 

With hindsight, you can't be wrong.

[illiniguy]

Over the last year and a half, Vitters has been steadily gaining steam toward his current status as the top draft-eligible player in California . His raw ability with the bat alone makes him a first-round pick. His bat speed and strength combine to give him prodigious power that clearly profiles at the hot corner. However, Vitters has evolved from a raw talent into a very polished, young “professional hitter” that now is projected to be a top five pick overall in the first round—possibly even the first position player selected. His pitch recognition is very good; he knows what he wants to hit, and what he can and cannot hit. When Vitters’ brain says swing, his hands do it and it is a very impressive thing to see. He does need to improve on defense like most young players, but has the tools to be at least an average defensive third baseman, and may even be better than that

 

This...

 

Of course, you probably believe that he has all of a sudden become a bust and the statement above never existed that it's a figment of an imagination.

 

B/c two months into his professional career that a 18-19yo kid will be deemed a bust.

 

Let me guess, in '01 you were pissed the Cubs selected Prior instead of Tex?

 

With hindsight, you can't be wrong.

But, now he has missed almost two years of development time. As for Prior and Tex. Good comparison there. Vitters has three games above rookie ball at the same point Prior was leading the Cubs to the playoffs.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Vitters does have me excited.

With what? His ability to flatten his hat bill?

 

Come on, at least just ask why.

Ok, but he hasn't hardly played in two years now. That alone is worrisome. I just don't see what he could have done to get anyone excited.

 

He played short season ball after he signed, and he's only 18, so playing short season ball this year isn't stalling him, and still puts him on pace to make the majors at a younger than normal age.

[illiniguy]

Vitters does have me excited.

With what? His ability to flatten his hat bill?

 

Come on, at least just ask why.

Ok, but he hasn't hardly played in two years now. That alone is worrisome. I just don't see what he could have done to get anyone excited.

 

He played short season ball after he signed, and he's only 18, so playing short season ball this year isn't stalling him.

How many years after he is drafted should I start looking forward to seeing him reach Daytona? 5? At that point should I start to worry?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Vitters does have me excited.

With what? His ability to flatten his hat bill?

 

Come on, at least just ask why.

Ok, but he hasn't hardly played in two years now. That alone is worrisome. I just don't see what he could have done to get anyone excited.

 

He played short season ball after he signed, and he's only 18, so playing short season ball this year isn't stalling him.

How many years after he is drafted should I start looking forward to seeing him reach Daytona? 5? At that point should I start to worry?

 

Vitters was a young high school draftee who signed late. Having him in short season ball for his first full season(so to speak) isn't unusual, or worrisome. I was disappointed that he couldn't start the year in Peoria, but it's hardly time to push the panic button with him. He has plenty of time on his side, so he's got quite some time before people can rationally put a death knell on his pro career(as disappointing as that might be to some).

[illiniguy]

Vitters does have me excited.

With what? His ability to flatten his hat bill?

 

Come on, at least just ask why.

Ok, but he hasn't hardly played in two years now. That alone is worrisome. I just don't see what he could have done to get anyone excited.

 

He played short season ball after he signed, and he's only 18, so playing short season ball this year isn't stalling him.

How many years after he is drafted should I start looking forward to seeing him reach Daytona? 5? At that point should I start to worry?

 

Vitters was a young high school draftee who signed late. Having him in short season ball for his first full season(so to speak) isn't unusual, or worrisome. I was disappointed that he couldn't start the year in Peoria, but it's hardly time to push the panic button with him. He has plenty of time on his side, so he's got quite some time before people can rationally put a death knell on his pro career(as disappointing as that might be to some).

We all want him to do well, but most of us wanted Weiters because he was much better. Now it is a year passed the draft, Weiters is raking and Vitters has hardly played at all. It should be easy to see where the frustration comes from.

[UK1679666180]

Why is "average" good enough though? That 2006 draft doesn't look average to me. The problem is I think this board has always liked certain guys, like Josh Lansford, better than I have.

 

I didn't literally Wilken talked like that, but I was referencing the idea that it's not unreal to think if any team is going to pass up an awesome "bad body" hitter for a flashy athlete with zero baseball playing acumen, it's the Cubs.

 

What I don't like about what you're saying is this: The Cubs had well-rated drafts and they didn't work out so let's just give up on the idea of doing anything by the book any more. I don't care for that thinking. How about we keep having well-rated drafts and hope they work out.

 

If he projected Colvin to be a better player than Snider when no one else in the known universe would have thought that what does it say about him? Sorry, you're cutting these guys too many breaks. Wilken picks the guy nobody else would over the surefire bet and then has to blah blah blah about how he's the next Alex Rios and what, this is just a shrug? I can't shrug off what looks like incompetence and foolishness to me that easily.

 

Average isn't good enough. Of course, when it hasn't been two years that players have been in the system, bias is more likely to take control rather than objective thinking if you're unable to factor that it isn't been more than two years.

 

I don't give crap about what BA writes, I respect their work, but they had the Twins with the best draft in '04 and were way off, the Tigers before that, and they've been right as well (LA in '03).

 

History will dictate which teams will have better draft success than BA, that history is created by quality scouting directors, good scouts, and productive player personnel. Some of the better Scouting Directors reside in LA, Washington, MIL, and in my opinion Cubs. Wilken has had a better track record of drafts than BA.

 

What is by the book anyways? LA's drafting philosophy? Oakland's? What Baseball America writes? This is just your opinion of what you think it should be rather than some book.

 

I'm cutting Wilken a break b/c it hasn't been two years yet, you seem completely unable to factor the roles of other scouts, player development, etc. and mention Snider/Colvin.

[UK1679666180]

But, now he has missed almost two years of development time. As for Prior and Tex. Good comparison there. Vitters has three games above rookie ball at the same point Prior was leading the Cubs to the playoffs.

 

You expected the Cubs to be psychic and predict that he would get injured in his 1st year?

[UK1679666180]

Sometimes I think the ability to think rationally loses out to the ability to be the armchair GM (or scouting director in this case).

[Transmogrified Tiger]

We all want him to do well, but most of us wanted Weiters because he was much better. Now it is a year passed the draft, Weiters is raking and Vitters has hardly played at all. It should be easy to see where the frustration comes from.

 

Wieters is over three, three!, years older than Vitters, of course he's going to be further along. There's your point of reference though, if Vitters isn't past Daytona or doing well there by 2012, it's time to worry.

[illiniguy]

We all want him to do well, but most of us wanted Weiters because he was much better. Now it is a year passed the draft, Weiters is raking and Vitters has hardly played at all. It should be easy to see where the frustration comes from.

 

Wieters is over three, three!, years older than Vitters, of course he's going to be further along. There's your point of reference though, if Vitters isn't past Daytona or doing well there by 2012, it's time to worry.

Fair enough, but I doubt that Vitters ever does was Weiters has this year. I think his entire body of work is pretty iffy. He was terrible his senior year, then been bad(although hurt) in the minors, but ok in some all star thing over two years ago.

[badnews]

Why is "average" good enough though? That 2006 draft doesn't look average to me. The problem is I think this board has always liked certain guys, like Josh Lansford, better than I have.

 

I didn't literally Wilken talked like that, but I was referencing the idea that it's not unreal to think if any team is going to pass up an awesome "bad body" hitter for a flashy athlete with zero baseball playing acumen, it's the Cubs.

 

What I don't like about what you're saying is this: The Cubs had well-rated drafts and they didn't work out so let's just give up on the idea of doing anything by the book any more. I don't care for that thinking. How about we keep having well-rated drafts and hope they work out.

 

If he projected Colvin to be a better player than Snider when no one else in the known universe would have thought that what does it say about him? Sorry, you're cutting these guys too many breaks. Wilken picks the guy nobody else would over the surefire bet and then has to blah blah blah about how he's the next Alex Rios and what, this is just a shrug? I can't shrug off what looks like incompetence and foolishness to me that easily.

 

Average isn't good enough. Of course, when it hasn't been two years that players have been in the system, bias is more likely to take control rather than objective thinking if you're unable to factor that it isn't been more than two years.

 

I don't give crap about what BA writes, I respect their work, but they had the Twins with the best draft in '04 and were way off, the Tigers before that, and they've been right as well (LA in '03).

 

History will dictate which teams will have better draft success than BA, that history is created by quality scouting directors, good scouts, and productive player personnel. Some of the better Scouting Directors reside in LA, Washington, MIL, and in my opinion Cubs. Wilken has had a better track record of drafts than BA.

 

What is by the book anyways? LA's drafting philosophy? Oakland's? What Baseball America writes? This is just your opinion of what you think it should be rather than some book.

 

I'm cutting Wilken a break b/c it hasn't been two years yet, you seem completely unable to factor the roles of other scouts, player development, etc. and mention Snider/Colvin.

 

Two years is enough to see that Samardzija, Colvin, Lansford, all the rest, look bad to me. I'm not going to wait 10 years on a draft before I make any comment on it whatsoever. This reminds me of all the years on here we got chastized for saying anything bad about Ryan Harvey. "He's young, blah blah blah, let's all sit on our hands and pretend like this isn't a bust for another 7 more years and hopefully by then those who could see this coming will have moved on due to boredom."

 

Wilken has the better track record like Dusty Baker had a winning record as a manager. Now you're being apologist. This guy isn't drafting anything like his successful drafts. I thought you were more objective than this. That's why I cite Dusty Baker here - all people are talking about is some useless track record from way back when instead of what's happening now. A guy who takes Colvin over Snider is out of touch, no matter what the track record says, just like a guy who bats two sub-.300 OBP players ahead of a Triple Crown candidate is out of touch, no matter how many wins he has.

 

By the book is the more or less consensus of the experts.

 

You say we can't be wrong in hindsight but then you don't like when people make observations too quickly.

[badnews]

PingHitter, I keep saying this but you don't want to acknowledge this: It's possible to make the logical choice at the time and still have things turn out not great. That's where Teixeira vs. Prior doesn't work for me. That decision was a good one then. And the extenuating circumstances of Prior's 130+ pitch games are ignored, I see.

 

And why is it you guys never say "It's too soon to tell" when a guy looks awesome early in his career but when he stinks out loud it's too soon? Last year when Donaldson looked great everyone was all "Wow, Wilken's redeemed himself!" There was also some jeering (maybe it was another board) about somebody who wanted Canham instead of Donaldson (the "look who's wrong now, LOL" type of jabs).

 

But it takes someone stinking in geologic time for anyone here to get a license to critique the player. This is a blatant double standard. And let's not try and pretend people weren't all over Tony Thomas and Donaldson last year, and Rhee in, what, 4 starts this year? It's not too soon to have a man-crush on Rhee, but it's soon to say "Gee, this is going like crap for Vitters?" Come on. What is this?

[craig]

...

I didn't literally Wilken talked like that, but I was referencing the idea that it's not unreal to think if any team is going to pass up an awesome "bad body" hitter for a flashy athlete with zero baseball playing acumen, it's the Cubs.

....

 

To be honest, I think the awesome "bad body" hitter versus the flashy athlete thing doesn't apply at all to the Cub recent drafts.

 

Vitters was not at all a "flashy athlete", he was taken for bat, bat bat. Cerda and the Cinci kid this draft are not "flashy athletes", they are drafted as hit-first. Flaherty similiar, he's no flashy athlete, or an NFL wide receiver or any of that stuff. The same applies to last year in addition to Vitters. Donaldson, Thomas, the Oklahoma State guy who's at Daytona, Marques Smith, these guys were all taken for their hitting, at the expense of "flashy athlete" tools. Nobody says Thomas is a flashy athlete gold-glove base-stealing burner; all of these guys were hit-first, and hope they can be average or a little better defensively. Clevenger was the same kind of deal two years ago, nobody said he was fast or a flashy fielder, they just thought he could hit.

 

If anything, I think the complain that they are going too light on "flashy athleticism" might be more justifiable at present.

 

So I think the "trend" that I see is a focus on hitting skills (hitting for contact in particular) above all. That actually seems to apply to Colvin as well, they said they saw him as a pure hitter.

 

Obviously not everybody drafted to hit actually does. So I can certainly share the logic that drafting for hitting is fine, but if your scouting stinks so that the guys you drafted to hit can't actually hit it's lose-lose-lose. I'm still hopeful that some of the guys that haven't hit that well will do so (Vitters, Thomas, and perhaps even Colvin and Donaldson).

[badnews]

"Flashy athlete" could give the wrong impression, but the point being, Colvin was more athletic and toolsy. If they saw Colvin as a pure hitter then they're worse off than I thought, if you looked at Baseball America's college All-Star team that year, Colvin was, by far, the guy with the worst K/BB ratio. He struck out more than you wanted from a batting average guy, didn't walk enough, didn't hit for enough power, didn't steal enough bases to compensate, wasn't a fantastic Stubbsian defensive outfielder or anything, so what now? I'm glad the Giants took Lincecum three spots ahead, it's be worse if we had passed on him.

 

I don't know why the Cubs blatantly waste picks. Ten seconds after they took Mike Billek everyone knew it was a wasted pick. Even if you look on this site, whoever wrote the report on Billek on this site was "What the hell?" The Cubs treat 3rd round picks like most teams treat 17th round picks: "Who the hell cares, let's throw darts at a list of names."

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I think there's a distinction between "All right! Rhee's off to a good start!" and "Rhee looks like a surefire prospect". One is the actual reaction, and the other is the opposite of the criticism that's being told is "too soon".

[Guest]

No, it was assumed that they had Vitters as the BPA.

Well then that was a terrible chart they were using.

 

Really? I'm sure you extensively scouted both of them.

[Clem Fandango]

Who needs Matt Wieters when you have this dapper gentleman behind the dish?

 

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/images/2006/03/17/NvdExj6W.jpg

[illiniguy]

No, it was assumed that they had Vitters as the BPA.

Well then that was a terrible chart they were using.

 

Really? I'm sure you extensively scouted both of them.

Yeah you are right, it is obvious that he is a much better prospect than Matt Wieters. Thank you so much for setting me clear on that one. I can't wait until he hits his first professional homer or collects his tenth hit.

Furthermore you express your opinion on the draft at all times, do you scout all the players you talk about?

[CUBZ99]

The thing I don't get is the comparison to stuff like Colvin. The Cubs draft so far isn't bad even when you go by 3rd party. Cashner was a consensus to go around our pick. Shafer's rankings were better than where he was picked. Flaherty was ranked in the 60's-70's, but on the other hand Carpenter cracked the top 50 for some people. The more I think about the Cerda pick the more I like it. He torched California HS ball, and he'll be a decent to above average defender at 2B when he moves there. I'm meh on Bristow, and I hate the Harrison pick, but I hardly think that's cause for ranting on the draft as a whole. Carpenter and Shafer may not be the impact potential players you were hoping for, but they are not Mark Holliman or Billy Muldowney. Don't lump together terrible picks with picks that are different than your personal ideal.

 

Agreed, this draft has the potential to be a very good draft. Wilken has drafted some very intriguing prospects.

[Guest]

Over the last year and a half, Vitters has been steadily gaining steam toward his current status as the top draft-eligible player in California . His raw ability with the bat alone makes him a first-round pick. His bat speed and strength combine to give him prodigious power that clearly profiles at the hot corner. However, Vitters has evolved from a raw talent into a very polished, young “professional hitter” that now is projected to be a top five pick overall in the first round—possibly even the first position player selected. His pitch recognition is very good; he knows what he wants to hit, and what he can and cannot hit. When Vitters’ brain says swing, his hands do it and it is a very impressive thing to see. He does need to improve on defense like most young players, but has the tools to be at least an average defensive third baseman, and may even be better than that

 

This...

 

Of course, you probably believe that he has all of a sudden become a bust and the statement above never existed that it's a figment of an imagination.

 

B/c two months into his professional career that a 18-19yo kid will be deemed a bust.

 

Let me guess, in '01 you were pissed the Cubs selected Prior instead of Tex?

 

With hindsight, you can't be wrong.

But, now he has missed almost two years of development time. As for Prior and Tex. Good comparison there. Vitters has three games above rookie ball at the same point Prior was leading the Cubs to the playoffs.

lol - last year's draft was now two years ago?