2010 Cubs Picks & Signings Thread

[davell]

I'm certainly glad we're getting guys signed, but I sincerely hope that the Simpson pick was a Wilken special and NOT a signability type pick. The Ricketts' have said they were going to increase scouting and player development money and I was really expecting to see this happen during the draft honestly. I guess we'll spend more than last year, but we should, since we were picking higher obviously.

 

On the other hand, we DID sign Yeong Jin Kim and give him 1.2 mill already and still have the entire July 2nd International signing period to go as well, although I've not seen us linked to much down there yet either.

 

Right now, I'm a little disapointed honestly, but am going to give Ricketts the benefit of the doubt for a year or so, on these type of situations. But, I really, really hope we take Boston's approach longterm, as there draft was phenomenal, if they only get HALF of the guys signed that require overslotting, from what we've read about.......

[CUBZ99]

1. I keep seeing "prearrange" in some pejorative, negative context. I think that's over-criticized. If you're going to pick somebody, it makes sense to have pre-contacted about signability. Which includes but is not limited to money. Last year they called a HS outfielder, he said he wouldn't sign, they took Lemahieu (who himself required some superslot). They'd gotten feedback on Raley too, that he'd eventually be willing to pitch and be signable if the money was right and it wouldn't take millions.

 

Getting feedback on money is totally routine, for Cubs and every other organization. And it should be.

 

2. The concept that the Cubs had talked to Simpson and been led to believe that he'd be signable for a million, there is nothing weird or problematic about that.

 

3. I still believe that Simpson was a straight scouting pick. Wilken's comments are to that effect. After hearing him, the BA people seemed to believe that. Was it dumb scouting? Very possible, but that's a different issue. If he's a stupid scout, that's a huge problem, and is a huge issue unto itself.

 

4. Did Wilken knowingly take an inferior prospect because he was willing to sign for sub-slot and the Cubs weren't willing to pay slot? That is it's own issue. Did Wilken take an inferior guy based on money?

 

a) It's a fair question, and if the answer is YES it's really regrettable and disgusting.

 

b) For the most of you who are assuming the answer is yes, your assumption may possibly be correct. It's not an inherently illogical or ridiculous assumption. so I'm not saying you're wrong or that I can prove or persuade to the contrary.

 

c) But I don't think it's inherently illogical to believe that Wilken was drafting the guy he viewed as BPA, based on scouting stuff. (Again, this is in his perhaps clouded BPA evaluation). Wilken thinks Simpson is the best guy. Therefore he takes him. That Simpson has already expressed that he won't need $3 million to sign is coincidental frosting, not the cause.

 

I think that view c is probably simpler than view b, Occam's Razor and all that. It doesn't require that Wilken be lying or pretending. It doesn't require that the BA guys who believed he picked Simpson BPA have been gullibly duped. It fits with his comment to Jim Crawford. And it fits with his past. (He's not been a subslot drafter.)

 

I think you are dead on. I'm going to give Wilken the benefit of the doubt on this and take him for his word that he believed Simpson was the BPA. If that was the case, it was a smart move by the Cubs, and they used their leverage properly prior to signing him. If they had waited until after the draft to discuss $$, Simpson would have had more leverage.

[davell]

1. I keep seeing "prearrange" in some pejorative, negative context. I think that's over-criticized. If you're going to pick somebody, it makes sense to have pre-contacted about signability. Which includes but is not limited to money. Last year they called a HS outfielder, he said he wouldn't sign, they took Lemahieu (who himself required some superslot). They'd gotten feedback on Raley too, that he'd eventually be willing to pitch and be signable if the money was right and it wouldn't take millions.

 

Getting feedback on money is totally routine, for Cubs and every other organization. And it should be.

 

2. The concept that the Cubs had talked to Simpson and been led to believe that he'd be signable for a million, there is nothing weird or problematic about that.

 

3. I still believe that Simpson was a straight scouting pick. Wilken's comments are to that effect. After hearing him, the BA people seemed to believe that. Was it dumb scouting? Very possible, but that's a different issue. If he's a stupid scout, that's a huge problem, and is a huge issue unto itself.

 

4. Did Wilken knowingly take an inferior prospect because he was willing to sign for sub-slot and the Cubs weren't willing to pay slot? That is it's own issue. Did Wilken take an inferior guy based on money?

 

a) It's a fair question, and if the answer is YES it's really regrettable and disgusting.

 

b) For the most of you who are assuming the answer is yes, your assumption may possibly be correct. It's not an inherently illogical or ridiculous assumption. so I'm not saying you're wrong or that I can prove or persuade to the contrary.

 

c) But I don't think it's inherently illogical to believe that Wilken was drafting the guy he viewed as BPA, based on scouting stuff. (Again, this is in his perhaps clouded BPA evaluation). Wilken thinks Simpson is the best guy. Therefore he takes him. That Simpson has already expressed that he won't need $3 million to sign is coincidental frosting, not the cause.

 

I think that view c is probably simpler than view b, Occam's Razor and all that. It doesn't require that Wilken be lying or pretending. It doesn't require that the BA guys who believed he picked Simpson BPA have been gullibly duped. It fits with his comment to Jim Crawford. And it fits with his past. (He's not been a subslot drafter.)

 

I think you are dead on. I'm going to give Wilken the benefit of the doubt on this and take him for his word that he believed Simpson was the BPA. If that was the case, it was a smart move by the Cubs, and they used their leverage properly prior to signing him. If they had waited until after the draft to discuss $$, Simpson would have had more leverage.

 

 

I've came around somewhat on the Simpson pick and agree that the Cubs made a prudent move in signing him for LESS than slot. Where my problem lies though(and I will give them the benefit of the doubt this year, since we still have July 2nd and hopefully more Pac Rim signings to go) is what they did AFTER taking Simpson. I figure this is what most anyone who has voiced a dissenting opinion on our draft is thinking as well. We are a major market team and we SHOULD be acting like it. Take some chances on some of the hard to sign guys, basically, is what we were all hoping for. And with the Simpson pick, I think we were all thinking we'd get a couple of marquee type names later on, but we didn't.

 

This WAS considered a weak draft, we have already signed a Pac Rim guy for more money than we gave our 1st rounder and we still have the International signing period as well, so I'm trying to stay positive about things in this department.......

[craig]

I've came around somewhat on the Simpson pick and agree that the Cubs made a prudent move in signing him for LESS than slot.

 

I suppose if he's really the BPA, I'm sure it's more prudent to sign him sub-slot for $1 than to have gone superslot at $3 for an equivalent player. But otherwise, I think SIMPSON's bonus is not very relevant. What matters is whether he's really good or not! If he's good, his dollars won't prevent it. And if he's not good, the dollars won't change that. Obviously all else being equal, cheaper is better, because it allows more budget space for all the $100-150 and some $200-300 signings in the 10-50 range.

 

Where my problem lies though(and I will give them the benefit of the doubt this year, since we still have July 2nd and hopefully more Pac Rim signings to go) is what they did AFTER taking Simpson. I figure this is what most anyone who has voiced a dissenting opinion on our draft is thinking as well. We are a major market team and we SHOULD be acting like it. Take some chances on some of the hard to sign guys, basically, is what we were all hoping for. And with the Simpson pick, I think we were all thinking we'd get a couple of marquee type names later on, but we didn't.

 

Good point. Big market Cubs should be an aggressive, above-average spender. The debate shouldn't be about whether they are really going aggressively sub-slot cheap or are really going basically average.

 

This WAS considered a weak draft, we have already signed a Pac Rim guy for more money than we gave our 1st rounder and we still have the International signing period as well, so I'm trying to stay positive about things in this department.......

 

Unfortunately Castro is the only decent prospect we've signed in the last decade from Latin, and the organization has seemingly consciously and intentionally chosen to not spend there. I'm not confident that will change (either the spending or the ability of our latin scouts to evaluate well.) And our PacRim money, that's looking pretty worthless too. Rhee looks like a fringe junk finesser at this point, pretty low prospect. Jung looks bad, Ha looks worthless, Na is a midget with no power projection who hit .100's in XSL and is hitless in first two games at Boise, nothing prodigy-looking there. A few years ago we signed some Australians, but that was 2-3 years ago, the only one still alive is Searle, who's pitching worse following a demotion. So basically all of our Pac Rim investments, no-power error machine Lee is the one major-league prospect.

[Guest]

This was from BP's preview of the College World Series:

 

The Tigers ace, Casey Harman, performed well in the super regional opener against Alabama, giving up only one earned with nine strikeouts and no walks over 8 1/3 innings, but being tagged with the loss. Harman receives his toughest assignment of the year against Arizona State, and could prove a steal for the Cubs as their 29th-round pick (880thoverall).

 

If this rain delay in Omaha ever ends, Harman will take on ASU in the second game of today's College World Series action.

[davell]

Ha is only 19 and playing in Peoria, so I definitely think it's way too early to write him off. I'm not remotely close to giving up on Rhee either, as he's pitching decently in Daytona, with this being his first full year back from TJS. Lee has done nothing whatsoever to make us think any less of him in Peoria as a 19 year old, in fact I'll go out on a limb and say he's going to be a top 100 guy after this year is over. So, I'm still extremely encouraged by the Pac Rim pipeline. Of course, Jung has shown little, to nothing, and Dong Yub Kim can't get healthy enough to even give us a look at him.

 

It seems like we go out and get one decent bonus guy out of the July 2nd signings, last year it was Contreras, who has since been suspended(and I'm kind of curious if we even still own his rights honestly, as he doesn't show up on the restricted list for either DSL team, while the other guy who got suspended does show up)

 

 

By the way, I'm not sure Harman is going to be all that easy to pry away from Clemson. A buddy of mine, who's an alumni and knows some of the coaches down there, doesn't seem to think he'll be leaving school. No idea whether or not he's TRULY connected or not though.

[Guest]

It seems like we go out and get one decent bonus guy out of the July 2nd signings, last year it was Contreras, who has since been suspended(and I'm kind of curious if we even still own his rights honestly, as he doesn't show up on the restricted list for either DSL team, while the other guy who got suspended does show up)

 

We still have no confirmation that Contreras received the big bonus. Arrangure only said it was rumored that he got an $800,000+ bonus and BA (who is generally on top of Latin America IFAs made no mention of him).

 

By the way, I'm not sure Harman is going to be all that easy to pry away from Clemson. A buddy of mine, who's an alumni and knows some of the coaches down there, doesn't seem to think he'll be leaving school. No idea whether or not he's TRULY connected or not though.

 

Well, I hope that doesn't bite him in the rear. Andrew Clark turned down $125,000 last year as a junior, had a better senior year, ended up being drafted about 15 rounds higher and signing for $5,000.

[Outshined_One]

Ha is only 19 and playing in Peoria, so I definitely think it's way too early to write him off. I'm not remotely close to giving up on Rhee either, as he's pitching decently in Daytona, with this being his first full year back from TJS. Lee has done nothing whatsoever to make us think any less of him in Peoria as a 19 year old, in fact I'll go out on a limb and say he's going to be a top 100 guy after this year is over. So, I'm still extremely encouraged by the Pac Rim pipeline. Of course, Jung has shown little, to nothing, and Dong Yub Kim can't get healthy enough to even give us a look at him.

 

I think the problem with judging the Pac Rim prospects it, quite simply, we haven't had nearly enough time or enough players to make a judgment on how effective the Cubs have been at scouting and developing prospects signed out of the Pacific Rim since the Cubs placed a renewed emphasis on it. Dae-Eun Rhee was the first big splash, and he's only at Daytona following a setback due to TJS. Put simply, it is way too early to judge if the Pacific Rim expeditions have been fruitful for the Cubs.

[craig]

Well, I hope that doesn't bite him in the rear. Andrew Clark turned down $125,000 last year as a junior, had a better senior year, ended up being drafted about 15 rounds higher and signing for $5,000.

 

That is a great story, Cal, and a reminder of why a junior really should sign. You've got to really go nuts as a senior and be a pretty exceptional player to make your bonus go up after your senior year. A $125K bonus is a great start toward a middle-class lifestyle. How many young families wouldn't love the potential to buy a $125K house and pay it all straight with no mortgage payments!

 

On the pac rim guys, I'm normally a pretty big optimist and tend to try to understand management decisions etc, rather than just criticize everything. So I don't think I'm coming from a reflexive ripper mentality.

 

But I have to admit the returns on the pacific spendings hasn't been very encouraging. I know that every player has a unique pathway to the major leagues. But the normal scenario is a funnel: lots of guys are good, with each year and each step up attrition weeds them out, and guys who don't look good relative to low-A don't real often end up looking good relative to major leaguers.

 

Given the normal funnel, Im pretty disappointed that so many of the Korean and Australian kids look so mediocre or unexciting so quickly. I don't see any but Lee who have actually played here (the million-dollar pitcher who hasn't, who knows) looking like top-30 guys in a mediocre farm system.

[davell]

Lee is definitely in my top 5 right now and Rhee is still somewhere in that 13-17ish range, with the chance to move back into the top 10 still, depending on how his season goes from here. Of course, he could also fall obviously. Based on some of AZPhil's comments about Ha and how he's performed in limited PT since being moved to Peoria, I think he's at least someone to talk about right now as far as making the back end of a top 30 as well.

 

And I certainly don't see you as someone who just rags on our system obviously. :D I think we just appear to see differently on the possible outlooks of some of these Pac Rimmers.

 

I'm not sure where our system CURRENTLY would rank right now, in comparison with other teams, as there have been lots of graduations and not only from us already this year. And there are plenty of top guys who are struggling pretty badly as well for some other teams too. I guess I think our system is STILL slightly better than average right now, even with Castro, Colvin, and Cashner all graduating.

[toonsterwu]

As of right now, I'd venture a guess that we are probably slightly below average, maybe in the 19-25 range for teams. That said, the difference between a solid system (say, a 10-15 system) and where we are isn't that much. Right now, we really level off after our top 8-10 prospects.

 

That said, as long as the system is graduating solid guys, I'm pleased. If Cashner and Castro were eligible, we would've been a top 15, if not top 10, system, IMO.

[UK1679666180]

I've always said, if I was a parent and team offered my son at least t where he would clear 150K after taxes and advisor fees as well as a 100% scholly, it would be very difficult to not sign for slot on anything above that 150K+school.

 

I still can't believe Purke turned down 2mil, even knowing how good he is.

[davell]

I'm putting this here, although it's possible that it should have it's own thread, depending on what people think of AZPhil from TheCubReporter......(some may not even know him). That said, in his most recent comments(which appear in the Who's on Deck? comments section, he throws out a bunch of stuff. The reason I'm putting it here is because it does at least involve the draft and the minors partially. Anyway, some of the notes from Phil included the following.

 

Payroll could drop from 140ish range all the way to 110ish next season. Does not expect to see long term contracts to be given out like this regime has done.

Ricketts' are very profit oriented folks, with more of a bottom line feel than the Trib.

Ricketts wants Cubs ran as if they are the Twins(with a Red Sox feel), with emphasis on player development and scouting.

Expects Hendry to be replaced by a younger Theo Epstein type over the offseason.

Expects Sandberg to be manager next season, as Ricketts feels it will be easier for Cub fans to have him as their manager while they transition back to a 100ish mill payroll team from where they are now.

 

 

 

Anyway, I like the fact that evidently more emphasis WILL be put on player development and scouting. Maybe this means we do spend more this year on the draft than what we originally thought? I love the idea of an Epsteinian type GM. :D

 

Of course, there is tons of info in there that will cause an uproar too.

 

By the way, Phil also mentions that Harman won't be easy to sign. He was a 6-10th rounder originally, but has let it be known it will take 3rd round money for him to possibly be pried away from Clemson, which is why he fell to where he did. I asked my friend if he could tell me anything on Harman's situation and he told me that Harman's family isn't in need of money and his dad is very close friends with Clemson's coach, for what it's worth as well.

 

Like I said, sorry for not knowing where to put the majority of this info, but I didn't really want to start a thread based on AZPhil's comments. He has a wealth of knowledge on some things obviously, but really don't know exactly HOW plugged into things he is, especially on the major league level.

[Outshined_One]

BA lists 13th rounder Pierre LaPage and 37th rounder Chad Noble as signed.

[Outshined_One]

The Cubs confirmed the signing of 15th rounder Elliot Soto. Link

[Guest]

I've always said, if I was a parent and team offered my son at least t where he would clear 150K after taxes and advisor fees as well as a 100% scholly, it would be very difficult to not sign for slot on anything above that 150K+school.

 

I still can't believe Purke turned down 2mil, even knowing how good he is.

 

On Purke: http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/college/?p=3673

 

The Rangers didn't appear to make a good offer due to their financial woes. Cole is the bigger shock.

[Guest]

Micah Gibbs got a $350,000 bonus. Looks to be about slot.

[sandbergcubs]

A few years ago we signed some Australians, but that was 2-3 years ago, the only one still alive is Searle, who's pitching worse following a demotion. So basically all of our Pac Rim investments, no-power error machine Lee is the one major-league prospect.[/color]

 

I dont think 1 bad outing for searle grants that he is pitching worse?

 

Last 5 Games 2-0 2.70 ERA 23 Innings 7 ER 3 BB 19 K

 

And take away the one bad outing ERA 2.79? Nathan Baliva said that he was injured during that game, he also didnt pitch for 6 days after that and it was only a 2 inning relief outing, so it makes sense.

 

From what ive heard from the guys in daytona, cody hams is still in rookie ball.. And i think Rhee is still a decent prospect

[craig]

A few years ago we signed some Australians, but that was 2-3 years ago, the only one still alive is Searle, who's pitching worse following a demotion. So basically all of our Pac Rim investments, no-power error machine Lee is the one major-league prospect.[/color]

 

I dont think 1 bad outing for searle grants that he is pitching worse? ....

 

Yes, I phrased it badly. He had a 4.42 ERA last year in A+, this year has a combined 4.17 ERA, mostly at a lower level. So I guess that while he isn't really any better, given the lower level, that neither is he any worse than last year. I guess I'd just kind of assumed that when a young guy repeats a level (or goes backwards), he should be showing improved stats to be taken very seriously. But Searle has been good his last three starts, so maybe he's been at a plateau and is just entering a place where he's start improving noticeably. That would be pretty fun.

[davell]

Is it getting safe to say that Golden is going to be an overslot, if we sign him? I'd have thought most of the slot guys have signed by now personally.......

[sandbergcubs]

But Searle has been good his last three starts.

 

Make that 4 \:D/

[craig]

I'm putting this here, although it's possible that it should have it's own thread, depending on what people think of AZPhil from TheCubReporter......(some may not even know him). That said, in his most recent comments(which appear in the Who's on Deck? comments section, ....

 

Some of this stuff sounded interesting. Could you post a link to this?

 

I agree with your thought that Golden will be an overslot. He's HS, after all, so that goes with the territory, and there was talk that he might be sandwich or even 1st round.

 

It's interesting that the signings have basically stopped over the last week. I hope we get a lot of these guys. Last year by this time most of the slot and normal JC/HS-$100-150-slot guys had already signed. After this point, I'd guess that Lemahieu (modest overslot), Kirk, Raley, Burruel, and Struck were some who hadn't signed yet. But most of the Mincone/Springfield/Runey Davis types were in, and Burruel was the only one of the HS picks who signed later.

 

I sure hope we haul in more... a *LOT* more.

[Guest]

Casey Harman is pitching for Clemson against South Carolina in the CWS. He's gone through 6 and gave up 2.

[davell]

By the way, as far as our draft budget for this year goes, here's what we know right now.....

 

Simpson 1.060m

Gibbs .350k

Ackerman .216k

Greathouse .125k

Kurcz .125k

Fitzgerald .110k

Total 1.976m

 

We've signed 14 others as well, including Jokisch, our 11th rounder, who probably is going to get around 100k or so. Austin Reed, our 12th rounder, and Colin Richardson and Ryan Hartman, our 14th and 16th rounders were all high school pitchers, so I'd be shocked if they didn't get 100k or more themselves. Once you add in LePage, Soto, and the rest of what we've signed, it wouldn't shock me if we were pushing 3 mill right now.

 

And that doesn't include Golden, who I've read thought he was going in the top 35 or so. If that's the case, and we give him close to a mill, we're already at the 4 million mark. With some guys like Wells, Geiger, Harman, Brooks, Stites, Crum, Pinckard, Rhoderick, Cox, Harper, and Szczur left to go, of which we obviously won't sign all of them, but signing 2-3 of those guys could push us up to 5 mill or so. as it is.

 

Like I said, I'm not enthralled with this class right now, but it is POSSIBLE we spend 5 MILL+ getting them in here anyway. Which, for Ricketts first draft, wouldn't be all that bad monetarily, and could at least give us the notion he's committed to the draft. Just maybe didn't want to rock the boat TOO MUCH with his first class......

[Outshined_One]

Matt Stites sums up his future:

 

"I grew up as a Cardinal fan and never liked the Cubs," Stites said. "They were the main rival. But if they give me the money, I will become a big Cub fan."