Final 2010 Top Ten

[Guancous]

This community has the best minds about the Cubs minor league system. Has anyone changed their mind since August 31st?

 

Who would you say has the highest potential even if their odds of reaching it is lower? Besides Vitters.

[CubsWin]

I'm going with Junior Lake. Very toolsy. Put it together for two months in the second half this season. In those months his numbers were eye-popping, but huge questions remain as to whether he can put it together and keep it together, much less do so at higher levels.

[Wrigley Rat]

Here is BA's take:

Miller (Vegas): Long term...Archer or McNutt? Which one has higher upside and which one is the safer bet to be a solid big league starter?

 

J.J. Cooper: Archer, but both are pretty impressive. I'd put Archer as higher upside and safer bet, largely because he's already shown he can do it at Double-A, something McNutt will have to prove in 2011.

I tend to agree that Archer seems to have the highest upside since he has two solid pitches, but is working on improving his changeup and is still trying to command his pitches and improve his control. If everything works out, I'd say he could be a #1 starter some day.

[toonsterwu]

I think that the top 3 is going to be some order of Archer/McNutt/BJax. I tend to lean towards BJax a tiny bit still, although I can see cases for any order of the top 3. These would be high B, B+ types.

 

After that, there's a group of about 4 guys. That would be Vitters/Lee/Carpenter/JJax. These guys are likely B- to B types, although some might argue C+ for a couple of them. I think, as of now, that I am leaning slightly to Carpenter at 4, with Lee at 5. I like Carpenter's strong finish, and he seems far safer right now. Could see an argument for Lee. I'm not sure who is ahead between Vitters or J Jax.

 

The top 6 or 7 guys will likely be the same for most people. Starting at 8 is when there might be a level of discussion. I think there's around 10-12 guys in the system that you could make a case for as a C+-ish type guy, which will likely start around 8. I mean, some possibilities starting at 8, for me, would be Junior Lake, Ryan Flaherty, Robinson Chirinos, Brandon Guyer, Hayden Simpson, Reggie Golden, Rafael Dolis, Jae-Hoon Ha, Chris Rusin, and so on. For now, I think my 8-10 would be Junior Lake, Reggie Golden, and Hayden Simpson in some fashion.

 

So ...

 

1-3 BJax/Archer/McNutt

4-7 Carpenter or Lee/Vitters or J Jax

8-10 Lake, Golden, or Simpson

 

Still contemplating.

[davell]

I agree with Toonster on the top 7, order may change a tad from what he's got, but it's the same 7 guys anyway. Same top 3 as well. And as he said, positions 8-10 are a cluster, depending on what you want to emphasize. There are probably 10-12 guys who will show up on different people's lists.

 

Personally, Hayden Simpson won't be in my top 10, unless he shows up really soon at Instructs and dominates while he's there. From everyone I've read talk about him, no one saw him as anything more than a middle of the second round type and even then, it was only one or two other teams. Most saw him as a 4th-5th rounder, so to me anyway, he's going to have to prove to be more than that, before I rank him.(in the top 10) I feel comfortable with Wilken's talent evaluation, but Simpson is a little too unknown for me to rank him that highly. But, I definitely see why people would rank him in their top 10's as well, based on prior reports on his stuff. I just want to see something from him now that he's signed a professional contract to put me more at ease.

 

As far as who has the MOST upside? Kind of hard not to go with Archer. If things come together, he could become an ace of your staff. The other guy I'll throw out there though, is Robinson Lopez. The more I've read about him, the more I like. He's my odds-on favorite to be our break out prospect next season. 19 year olds who can get it up to 95 aren't all that common and he's already got an above average curve and a solid changeup as well. He just needs experience, so while he's extremely far away, his upside is quite high at this point.

 

I'll also throw out Reggie Golden. Not a HUGE surprise here, but in the little bit he's played to this point, he's shown some very solid power and has a good eye too supposedly. He's very raw, but those are two excellent things to have going for you. Plus, from all accounts, he's extremely coachable.

[Cubs Fan Dan]

I'll also throw out Reggie Golden. Not a HUGE surprise here, but in the little bit he's played to this point, he's shown some very solid power and has a good eye too supposedly. He's very raw, but those are two excellent things to have going for you. Plus, from all accounts, he's extremely coachable.

 

Plus Reggie Golden just sounds like a good baseball players name.

[toonsterwu]

I could see Robinson Lopez breaking out. As for ranking him, I think, if he makes my top 30, it'll be in the 20's. He'll probably make my top 30 - just haven't had time to go through a final list, but I can't go too high on him. After all, what exactly does he offer that makes him more intriguing than the more polished Alberto Cabrera and Rafael Dolis? All three are hard mid-90's guys with spotty secondary pitches, but Cabrera and Dolis have both done it at higher levels.

 

I say this because on a thread over at Sickels a few weeks ago, several folks were pushing a B- for Lopez, and other than "Braves pedigree", I just don't see how that's justified.

[davell]

I think that his age is one of the most intriguing things about him, which will definitely have him higher on my list than Cabrera(I think Lopez seems to have a little better velo than him as well, doesn't he?) and Dolis(who I think will be at or around the 20ish area for me). I wouldn't go B- on Lopez right now, but he seems like one of those guys that this time next year could catapult himself to a B+ if things go right for him. I'll definitely have him in my top 15 personally, but that's one of the better things about our system right now, is the fact that it IS getting deeper. To the point where I can do a top 50 and have at least some semblance of hope for everyone that makes the list.

 

On the other hand, I guess it could be construed as a negative that we'll have such a differential of players being ranked from the bottom end of our top 10 all the way through 30 or so.

[toonsterwu]

Unless I'm mistaken, Cabrera can also run the 4-seamer in there at around 95/96. He might sit a touch more around 92-94, but I think the same holds true for Robinson as well. His age is certainly a plus, but Alberto Cabrera was also 19 when he first reached Low A, putting up some similar peripherals to what Robinson Lopez did.

[davell]

Unless I'm mistaken, Cabrera can also run the 4-seamer in there at around 95/96. He might sit a touch more around 92-94, but I think the same holds true for Robinson as well. His age is certainly a plus, but Alberto Cabrera was also 19 when he first reached Low A, putting up some similar peripherals to what Robinson Lopez did.

 

 

You could be right about Cabrera's velo, I'm honestly not sure. It raises a fair question though: One of which there isn't a right or wrong answer to actually. How do you rate these types? Do you rate someone higher BECAUSE he's younger? Or do you rate the guy who is closer to the bigs higher, even if he's older or possibly(not talking Cabrera vs Lopez here) even if he's not quite as talented ? Personally, I think I tend to rank guys in the lower levels higher than most do, just based on future potential, that seems to lose some luster the higher they go, in alot of cases anyway.

[jersey cubs fan]

Who would you say has the highest potential even if their odds of reaching it is lower? Besides Vitters.

 

So it's just assumed that Vitters has the highest upside? How high is that upside now? I know people raved about his raw abilities and how even though he might not walk a lot he might put together one of those rare high average, high power, low walk careers. But we know he's not going to be Vladdy. He's not even going to be Aramis. What is his upside, and is there really nobody else in the system that's higher? Is he a worse hitting Adrian Beltre without the defense? There's no question he has to stick at 3B to be considered to have any chance at upside, right?

[toonsterwu]

I think highest upside has to be split into two categories, one for pitchers and one for hitters, because it's awful hard to compare the two.

 

Pitcher - Chris Archer. It's close between Archer and McNutt, but Archer's better stuff wins out. He has better movement on the fastball, the breakinig ball is sharper, and the changeup is further along. Sure, there's issues with command/control that, as of now, McNutt doesn't exhibit, but raw potential, Archer is higher.

 

Positional Player - Junior Lake. The potential for a power hitting shortstop ... well, I think that's awfully tempting potential. Sure, Vitters has a nice swing, and sure, BJax could be a solid everyday OF, but on pure potential, I'd go with someone like Lake ... or Reggie Golden.

[toonsterwu]

Unless I'm mistaken, Cabrera can also run the 4-seamer in there at around 95/96. He might sit a touch more around 92-94, but I think the same holds true for Robinson as well. His age is certainly a plus, but Alberto Cabrera was also 19 when he first reached Low A, putting up some similar peripherals to what Robinson Lopez did.

 

 

You could be right about Cabrera's velo, I'm honestly not sure. It raises a fair question though: One of which there isn't a right or wrong answer to actually. How do you rate these types? Do you rate someone higher BECAUSE he's younger? Or do you rate the guy who is closer to the bigs higher, even if he's older or possibly(not talking Cabrera vs Lopez here) even if he's not quite as talented ? Personally, I think I tend to rank guys in the lower levels higher than most do, just based on future potential, that seems to lose some luster the higher they go, in alot of cases anyway.

 

I don't have any specific guideline through which I make my decisions, but I'm sure others might. For me, it's a case by case situation. In this case, the reports on Lopez's fastball are good, but the reports out of SAL this year on his secondary stuff were pretty bad. On the other hand, there were decent reports on the secondary stuff of both Dolis and Cabrera at times, so when you add in that both are pitching at a higher level and age-appropriate, it's hard for me to go with Lopez ahead of either. I'll acknowledge that there may be a case for Lopez to have the most potential of the three - as good as Dolis and Cabrera's fastballs can be, the reports on Lopez's seems to suggest a bit higher potential on the fb, in particular, with respect to movement, but there's a lot of work to be done. I'm not sure if he'd be a C+ or a C prospect ... I had Cabrera as a C a few years back when he reached Low A, though.

[Outshined_One]

Who would you say has the highest potential even if their odds of reaching it is lower? Besides Vitters.

 

So it's just assumed that Vitters has the highest upside? How high is that upside now? I know people raved about his raw abilities and how even though he might not walk a lot he might put together one of those rare high average, high power, low walk careers. But we know he's not going to be Vladdy. He's not even going to be Aramis. What is his upside, and is there really nobody else in the system that's higher? Is he a worse hitting Adrian Beltre without the defense? There's no question he has to stick at 3B to be considered to have any chance at upside, right?

 

I'd disagree that Vitters' upside is the highest in the system, but I'd put him in the top 5 for that (behind guys like Lake and Archer). Vitters' stock is down, but he was very young for AA and the Cubs' handling of him has me wondering whether we'd be talking about him as the top prospect in the system had the Cubs left him in the FSL. Moreover, while his plate discipline leaves something to be desired, he's always had a good eye...but an impatient trigger to go with that eye. It's also worth remembering that he is the best power hitting prospect in this system by a good margin. His upside is probably somewhere in the Aramis Ramirez range, maybe a tick below that, depending on whether he becomes more selective.

 

If he moves to 1B or the OF, his upside diminishes. I think his athleticism should be good enough to make him an above average defender at those positions, plus his bat should be roughly league average at those spots.

[davell]

By the way, something I'm pondering on Junior Lake(who definitely has serious upside).......Here's his totals for July: .302/.362/.604 with 7 homers and 24 RBI in 96 at bats. Here's his totals for the rest of the season: .252/.311/.332 with 2 homers and 24 RBI in 298 at bats. His walk rate was up from last season obviously, but this could easily just be that he got really hot for a spurt and hasn't exactly had anything remotely close to a break through yet. I'm going to have him pretty high on my list, but he's not definitely going to be in my top 10. It's possible, but after the other 7 guys, I'm thinking Guyer and Rusin are probably going to wind up in mine and I'm fairly likely to have Golden in there, if he continues to impress at Instructs.

[toonsterwu]

Rusin's on the border for me. I like him a lot, and a good, end of the rotation lefty has value. That said, his ceiling is quite limited.

 

Unless there's been some substantial change in the Guyer scouting report, it's just hard for me to rank a guy seems like a 4th OF as a Top 10 prospect, even when accounting for his monstrous 2nd half.

[Guest]

By the way, something I'm pondering on Junior Lake(who definitely has serious upside).......Here's his totals for July: .302/.362/.604 with 7 homers and 24 RBI in 96 at bats. Here's his totals for the rest of the season: .252/.311/.332 with 2 homers and 24 RBI in 298 at bats. His walk rate was up from last season obviously, but this could easily just be that he got really hot for a spurt and hasn't exactly had anything remotely close to a break through yet. I'm going to have him pretty high on my list, but he's not definitely going to be in my top 10. It's possible, but after the other 7 guys, I'm thinking Guyer and Rusin are probably going to wind up in mine and I'm fairly likely to have Golden in there, if he continues to impress at Instructs.

 

Remember the FSL is the most pitcher-friendly league in baseball. I also heard that Lake finally fixed a mechanical problem that had previously not allowed him to see the ball at all times during the pitch.

[jersey cubs fan]

His upside is probably somewhere in the Aramis Ramirez range, maybe a tick below that, depending on whether he becomes more selective.

 

If he moves to 1B or the OF, his upside diminishes. I think his athleticism should be good enough to make him an above average defender at those positions, plus his bat should be roughly league average at those spots.

 

I'm not seeing Aramis. Ramirez has a free swinging approach, but he struck out less frequently and almost walked as often as he Kd. Ramirez gets away with his flawed approach in a way that Vitters has not come close to demonstrating.

[Outshined_One]

I'm not seeing Aramis. Ramirez has a free swinging approach, but he struck out less frequently and almost walked as often as he Kd. Ramirez gets away with his flawed approach in a way that Vitters has not come close to demonstrating.

 

Ramirez's years in Pittsburgh tell a very different story, though. In the minors, it is true that he had good plate discipline and K/BB, but during his time with Pittsburgh, he racked up quite a few Ks while having trouble drawing walks. It wasn't until 2004 that he started getting a handle on his Ks in the majors.

 

Vitters has yet to demonstrate the ability to keep Ks down while drawing a respectable number of walks over a consistent stretch, but the question was about pure upside, rather than what realistically can be expected of him.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm not seeing Aramis. Ramirez has a free swinging approach, but he struck out less frequently and almost walked as often as he Kd. Ramirez gets away with his flawed approach in a way that Vitters has not come close to demonstrating.

 

Ramirez's years in Pittsburgh tell a very different story, though. In the minors, it is true that he had good plate discipline and K/BB, but during his time with Pittsburgh, he racked up quite a few Ks while having trouble drawing walks. It wasn't until 2004 that he started getting a handle on his Ks in the majors.

 

Vitters has yet to demonstrate the ability to keep Ks down while drawing a respectable number of walks over a consistent stretch, but the question was about pure upside, rather than what realistically can be expected of him.

 

But what Ramirez did as a 21 year old in the majors really doesn't matter when comparing what Vitters has done to date and what Ramirez had done to date. Vitters hasn't shown anything that would remotely indicate he can pull off what Ramirez pulled off. They can both be described as free swinging hitter who relies on contact and power, but Ramirez walked more and struck out less, which is a pretty big dividing line when trying to pretend that Vitters has his upside.

 

He doesn't.

[Outshined_One]

But what Ramirez did as a 21 year old in the majors really doesn't matter when comparing what Vitters has done to date and what Ramirez had done to date. Vitters hasn't shown anything that would remotely indicate he can pull off what Ramirez pulled off. They can both be described as free swinging hitter who relies on contact and power, but Ramirez walked more and struck out less, which is a pretty big dividing line when trying to pretend that Vitters has his upside.

 

He doesn't.

 

You're right. He's an abject failure who will never amount to anything.

 

My bad.

[jersey cubs fan]

But what Ramirez did as a 21 year old in the majors really doesn't matter when comparing what Vitters has done to date and what Ramirez had done to date. Vitters hasn't shown anything that would remotely indicate he can pull off what Ramirez pulled off. They can both be described as free swinging hitter who relies on contact and power, but Ramirez walked more and struck out less, which is a pretty big dividing line when trying to pretend that Vitters has his upside.

 

He doesn't.

 

You're right. He's an abject failure who will never amount to anything.

 

My bad.

 

Why do people insist on this nonsensical BS response when Vitters is brought up? I think it's a big stretch to say his ceiling is Aramis Ramirez because he doesn't do what Ramirez has done to make up for a bad approach. And your idiotic take on that theory is I think he's an abject failure. Seriously that is very dumb of you and speaks very poorly of your ability to reasonably discuss what a real upside is for the guy.

[davell]

I wouldn't even call myself a fan of Vitters at this point, but his upside is still that of an All Star 3rd baseman. .300 hitter, 25ish homers or so. No, I don't think he'll get there, but he DOES have a chance. He DEFINITELY needs to be left alone and spend all of 2011 in AA, that's for sure.

 

If I had to guess as to what he becomes, it'd probably be more of a Jeff Franceour type hitter, which in the end, isn't something we're going to enjoy watching. But, considering he just turned 21 and will be that age almost all of next season in AA, he certainly can turn things around in a hurry. Moustakas went from a borderline top 100 guy last year to a possible top 10 guy in a single season. Hosmer went from further back to a definite top 10 guy. To at least have hope that Vitters' plate discipline takes a step up and some of those weak grounders he's hitting off of pitchers' pitches turn into him squaring up better on the ball and driving some of them on a pitch he'd rather have to hit, isn't all that much of a stretch to me. Just because he's lost quite a bit of his luster from when we drafted him, doesn't mean that he can't get it back.

[Outshined_One]

Why do people insist on this nonsensical BS response when Vitters is brought up? I think it's a big stretch to say his ceiling is Aramis Ramirez because he doesn't do what Ramirez has done to make up for a bad approach. And your idiotic take on that theory is I think he's an abject failure. Seriously that is very dumb of you and speaks very poorly of your ability to reasonably discuss what a real upside is for the guy.

 

I insist on this response because I have actually seen Vitters in person and I have had the pleasure of speaking to people who know way more about baseball than I do about Vitters. In the times I saw Vitters, I rarely saw him extend his zone and chase bad pitches. He clearly had enough knowledge of the zone to keep from swinging at pitches in the dirt. From my understanding, as I did not see him in the FSL or SL, his problem has been with borderline pitches and good pitches in the zone. As Vitters has advanced and adapted, he has become much better about recognizing those pitches. However, we have only seen short stretches of that because of the Cubs' insistence on rushing the guy for whatever reason.

 

I will whole-heartedly agree that, at a similar age, Aramis Ramirez was a better prospect than Josh Vitters. Ramirez had a fantastic season in AAA and a nondescript cup of coffee in the majors. At 20/21, Ramirez was more advanced than Vitters is when it came to plate discipline. However, also like Vitters, Ramirez was rushed, jumping from High A to AAA to the majors in one season. I am willing to argue that Ramirez's struggles in the majors were much like Vitters' struggles in the minors; both men had difficulty adjusting to a higher level of competition and needed time to make those adjustments. Given time, both men were able to adapt their games and succeed. Vitters' problem is that the Cubs have rushed him to the point where it's difficult to tell from a statistical standpoint whether or not Vitters had a hot streak or whether he finally figured things out. In my opinion, when he was with Peoria over his hot month, he had figured things out at that level.

 

My firm belief is, while Ramirez was more advanced than Vitters at the same age, Vitters has the comparable raw tools he needs to become an Aramis Ramirez-like hitter.

 

For clarification purposes, realistically speaking, I have an enormously difficult time seeing Josh Vitters become Aramis Ramirez. Defensively, the nagging injuries and the way the Cubs are handling him in instructs and in the AFL lead me to believe he'll be moving to the OF or 1B. I think he's a good enough athlete to play 3B effectively, but for whatever reason his reflexes and footwork seem kind of...off to me. As a hitter, there's enough to like to make me think he could be a league average bat at 1B or in the OF, but there's enough to dislike to make me wonder whether he'll end up being a RH power hitter off the bench.

 

With that out of the way, though, I believe he still has the physical and mental tools needed to do what Aramis Ramirez has done. The odds of him developing those tools to reach that point are minuscule...but there's still a chance.

[jersey cubs fan]

Why do people insist on this nonsensical BS response when Vitters is brought up? I think it's a big stretch to say his ceiling is Aramis Ramirez because he doesn't do what Ramirez has done to make up for a bad approach. And your idiotic take on that theory is I think he's an abject failure. Seriously that is very dumb of you and speaks very poorly of your ability to reasonably discuss what a real upside is for the guy.

 

I insist on this response because I have actually seen Vitters in person and I have had the pleasure of speaking to people who know way more about baseball than I do about Vitters.

 

Sorry Joe Morgan but that doesn't come close to justifying your asinine comment.