Re: 2010 Cubs Top Prospect Lists

[craig]

One really solid spending spree during the draft could change that though. I really hope to see a few more boom or bust type picks going forward. The more Reggie Golden type guys we take, the better chances we have on getting one or two of them right.

 

But that doesn't really fit Wilken's style.

 

Yeah, I know. I think Wilken is damn good at getting guys who can contribute too. Which is hells better than most scouting directors. I know he believes in taking "up the middle" types, which kind of takes the power quotient away right off the bat in most cases. And this upcoming draft appears(too early to tell probably) to be pitching heavy moreso than hitting. Which is fine with me too, if we get a guy who can profile as an ace.

 

In the end, I guess I'm hoping that since we are very strong up the middle now, maybe he'll start swaying from that philosophy a tad anyway.

 

1. I wonder how many "boom or bust" guys actually ever boom? Maybe it's just my experience as a Cub fan, but it seems like anybody who's ever been tabbed as "boom or bust" busted. I suppose Archer might be the exception, as it stands now. There are guys who have high "boom" ceilings, and that's good. But it often seems that if they already have "bust" concerns from the beginning, it's almost a lock that the "bust" flaw will kill them.

 

A couple of thoughts on Wilken and up-the-middle orientation.

1. A good team needs to get some quality, asset middle-of-the-order hitters. Doing nothing but going after #2 and #7 hitters, that doesn't make for a winner. I was trying to think about this in the context of Ron Santo's death. Since Santo was signed in 1959, what middle-of-the-order players have the Cubs ever signed as amateurs, who have contributed as middle-of-the-order guys for the Cubs? In draft, pre-draft, or internationally? I think in 50 years, Colvin might be the 2nd best one? Mark Grace (who really should have been batting 2nd on a good team) the best. Joe Carter and Rafael palmeiro, who got traded before they became asset middle hitters for the Cubs. After that, Colvin, a few weeks of Corey, Brooks Kieschnick? Maybe Rick Wilkins for a year and Soto, even though as pokey catchers neither batted in the middle often?

 

2. Given the cost of acquiring quality middle-of-the-order producers as free agent or in trade, it's really critical that we come up with some through the system. Hendry struck magic by acquiring Aram and Lee via trade, which resulted in the best stretch of Cub rosters in my lifetime. But it's hard to get them that way. Would be nice to produce some ourselves, and get some cheap years, and have them willing to resign at stay-at-home price instead of the Soriano/Werth need to drastically outbid anybody else in FA.

 

3. I don't think Wilken's "middle" stuff is too extreme. He's drafted plenty of guys who projected for power. Vitters was certainly no shortstop, he was drafted for his bat and power. Golden is no CF, he's drafted with a shot to be a middle hitter. Colvin wasn't viewed as a power guy, but Wilken correctly foresaw, and now we see that he's got plenty of power, it's just a question of whether he can hit enough. And Colvin was a 1B/corner type in college. Flaherty was a SS, but he's supposedly grown very big and is now perhaps sized more as a LF/1B than even a 3B or 2b. That catcher we traded for harden, he was a power-producing prospect. Guyer wasn't a SS/CF either, and was drafted with hopes he'd blossom into a middle-of-the-order bat.

 

So I don't really think that Wilken's draft's have been too prioritized on skinny SS's who will remain skinny SS's. His position picks have usually seemed to have plenty of value for guys who might end up with HR power if they could just hit the ball. The catcher we traded, Flaherty, Colvin, Guyer, those all seem like picks who had pretty high-ceilings as HR hitters. I believe there was also a report that the Cubs called a HS bat in the 2009 draft and wanted to draft him in the 2nd round, but he said he wouldn't sign so they went to Lemahieu.

 

One might argue that some of the pitcher moves have also been rather boom-or-bust hope-you-get-lucky. Chris Huseby for sure. samardzija, those were both shoot-for-the-stars picks, that of course haven't worked. I think Carpenter was, too; Cashner, as a reliever with limited inning but a big arm. Shafer is another shoot-for-the-stars pick in round 2; with his curve and finesse, imagine how starry he might look if he'd regained the 93-96 velocity that seemed well possible pre-surgery?

 

Even Simpson, Wilken says he was throwing a lot of 96's, with a four pitch arsenal and promising command. If you get a four-pitch control pitcher with a good head and a 96-97 fastball, that seems pretty shoot-for-the-stars to me, too.

 

But, shooting for the stars works only if you hit on some of those shots. We need to see some of these non-conservative gamble picks work out sooner or later.

[davell]

I've looked over alot of early lists of the top players in next year's draft. It doesn't look like there are all that many power hitting guys who should go that early, from what I can tell. You have Rendon going 1st most likely. Then, you have Travis Harrison and George Springer and that's about it(Bradley could go top 10, but he's not really a power hitter. Neither of whom I think of as better bets than some of the pitching that'll be available when we pick.

 

I guess I hope we'll take an ace type prospect in the 1st, then follow it up with 3 or 4 Reggie Golden type picks.

[Guest]

Unless Springer makes some drastic changes his junior year, I want no part of him in the first round.

[Outshined_One]

The NSBB prospect list should be done by Sunday. My new job's managed to keep me busy, but most of it's done.

[Rex Buckingham]

moderately related to top prospects... Matt Szczur had a monster game today for Villanova football in the 1-AA playoffs; 5 total TDs, including at least one rushing, passing, and receiving

[toonsterwu]

Didn't really have any place to put this, but I really like the Gorzelanny deal (for both teams actually). Burgess is a good gamble to make, Morris is a polished middle relief pen arm. The guy that really intrigues me is Graham Hicks, as he has intriguing raw potential, a good frame, has dabbled with enough pitches, but is far away.

[craig]

Yes, I agree with that. I like both pitchers, and I think to get three guys who were on Washington's top-20 list last year isn't bad.

 

I don't like Burgess much; when a guy can't compute breaking pitches in low-minors and whiffs 29% of the time there, it's almost certain that he's just missing something in the mind/eye that good hitters have, and that he'll never hit big-league breaking balls well enough to be useful. But you never know, maybe he'll surprise me and as a 3rd piece that's a shot worth taking. And with HR's and walks, he can afford some K's.

[Sammy Sofa]

I don't like Burgess much; when a guy can't compute breaking pitches in low-minors and whiffs 29% of the time there, it's almost certain that he's just missing something in the mind/eye that good hitters have, and that he'll never hit big-league breaking balls well enough to be useful. But you never know, maybe he'll surprise me and as a 3rd piece that's a shot worth taking. And with HR's and walks, he can afford some K's.

 

That, and he's a power-hitting lefty, so that's worth taking a shot on. It was mentioned in the trade thread, but I wonder if he'd benefit being moved to 1B.

[illiniguy]

I don't like Burgess much; when a guy can't compute breaking pitches in low-minors and whiffs 29% of the time there, it's almost certain that he's just missing something in the mind/eye that good hitters have, and that he'll never hit big-league breaking balls well enough to be useful. But you never know, maybe he'll surprise me and as a 3rd piece that's a shot worth taking. And with HR's and walks, he can afford some K's.

 

That, and he's a power-hitting lefty, so that's worth taking a shot on. It was mentioned in the trade thread, but I wonder if he'd benefit being moved to 1B.

His arm is one of his biggest strengths, and he plays decent defense according to BA. Why move him?

[CubsWin]

Yes, I agree with that. I like both pitchers, and I think to get three guys who were on Washington's top-20 list last year isn't bad.

 

I don't like Burgess much; when a guy can't compute breaking pitches in low-minors and whiffs 29% of the time there, it's almost certain that he's just missing something in the mind/eye that good hitters have, and that he'll never hit big-league breaking balls well enough to be useful. But you never know, maybe he'll surprise me and as a 3rd piece that's a shot worth taking. And with HR's and walks, he can afford some K's.

I don't know if he has improved on hitting breaking balls since being drafted, but his K/AB ratio has improved every year while his walks have remained basically the same, maybe with minimal improvement. The K/AB ratio still isn't good, but if he keeps improving it like he has been, it soon will be.

 

But, you're right, if he indeed does struggle and continues to struggle with breaking pitches, then he'll have a hard time continuing the trend of improved Ks per ABs.

[Guest]

I'm gonna throw this in here since it doesn't really deserve its own thread.

 

MLB.com's Top 10 OF prospects: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110119&content_id=16467568&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

 

1. Mike Trout

2. Bryce Harper

3. Dominic Brown

4. Desmond Jennings

5. Aaron Hicks

6. Brett Jackson

7. Guillermo Pimentel

8. Raymond Fuentes

9. Ben Revere

10. Engel Beltre

[davell]

I still don't see the infatuation with Hicks personally. He needs to start producing if he's going to stay this high on lists, if you ask me.

[craig]

..

I don't know if he has improved on hitting breaking balls since being drafted, but his K/AB ratio has improved every year while his walks have remained basically the same, maybe with minimal improvement. The K/AB ratio still isn't good, but if he keeps improving it like he has been, it soon will be. ....

 

Including AFL with his regular summer stats, his 2010 K-rate was still 26%. Not sure I'm that buzzed about progress like that.

[illiniguy]

I'm gonna throw this in here since it doesn't really deserve its own thread.

 

MLB.com's Top 10 OF prospects: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110119&content_id=16467568&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

 

1. Mike Trout

2. Bryce Harper

3. Dominic Brown

4. Desmond Jennings

5. Aaron Hicks

6. Brett Jackson

7. Guillermo Pimentel

8. Raymond Fuentes

9. Ben Revere

10. Engel Beltre

I like Mike Trout a lot, but no way is he a better prospect than Bryce Harper.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I'm gonna throw this in here since it doesn't really deserve its own thread.

 

MLB.com's Top 10 OF prospects: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110119&content_id=16467568&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

 

1. Mike Trout

2. Bryce Harper

3. Dominic Brown

4. Desmond Jennings

5. Aaron Hicks

6. Brett Jackson

7. Guillermo Pimentel

8. Raymond Fuentes

9. Ben Revere

10. Engel Beltre

 

They also have Vitters as number 7 for 3rd baseman. Tomorrows pitchers seperated by LHP and RHP. I wonder if Archer or McNutt have a shot.

 

1. Mike Moustakas KC

2. Lonnie Chisenhall CLE

3. Brent Morel CWS

4. Matt Dominguez FLA

5. Miguel Sano MIN

6. Bobby Borchering ARI

7. Josh Vitters CHC

8. Zack Cox STL

9. Kaleb Cowart LAA

10. Nick Castellanos DET

[Guest]

Sickels put up some excerpts from this year's book, and Chris Rusin was one of them.

 

Chris Rusin, LHP, Chicago Cubs

Bats: L Throws: L HT: 6-2 WT: 185 DOB: October 22, 1986

2010: Grade C.

 

Rusin was a fourth round pick in '09 from the University of Kentucky. He doesn't impress radar guns, working at just 86-89 MPH, but his fastball has excellent sink, his breaking ball has some bite, and hitters just chop them into the ground. He posted a 2.41 GO/AO last year, along with excellent component ratios across the board. Since he was a college senior, he is a bit old for a guy just reaching Double-A at age 24, but his sense for pitching is very advanced. His lack of plus velocity keeps him off most prospect lists, but I think he needs to be watched closely, and could contribute in the majors sooner than people think. Grade C.

[craig]

Chris Rusin, LHP, Chicago Cubs

Bats: L Throws: L HT: 6-2 WT: 185 DOB: October 22, 1986

2010: Grade C.

 

Rusin was a fourth round pick in '09 from the University of Kentucky. He doesn't impress radar guns, working at just 86-89 MPH, but his fastball has excellent sink, his breaking ball has some bite, and hitters just chop them into the ground. He posted a 2.41 GO/AO last year, along with excellent component ratios across the board. Since he was a college senior, he is a bit old for a guy just reaching Double-A at age 24, but his sense for pitching is very advanced. His lack of plus velocity keeps him off most prospect lists, but I think he needs to be watched closely, and could contribute in the majors sooner than people think. Grade C.

 

Thanks much, TT. I don't think I've really gotten any scouting reports since the rather brief draft ones, which tended to basically follow the "senior, old, had surgery, doesn't throw hard, but polished" kind of formula. He wasn't in last year's B book. So this is helpful, even though I admit I'd hoped that i'd read that he doesn't work at high velocity but he can hit 92 at times, and has a great curveball, or something like that. 86-89 comes across bad, of course, but that's basically where Marshall works. 87 with sink and command is presumably a lot more useful than 90-94 that's kind of wild and kind of straight.

 

Does anybody have any idea of what kind of an arm slot he has, or his splits versus lefties? Would he project particularly well as a situational lefty, or not really? I'm kind of hoping that he can end up being kind of a Marshall-type pitcher, who is pretty good without being noticably fast.

[KingCubsFan]

Chris Rusin, LHP, Chicago Cubs

Bats: L Throws: L HT: 6-2 WT: 185 DOB: October 22, 1986

2010: Grade C.

 

Rusin was a fourth round pick in '09 from the University of Kentucky. He doesn't impress radar guns, working at just 86-89 MPH, but his fastball has excellent sink, his breaking ball has some bite, and hitters just chop them into the ground. He posted a 2.41 GO/AO last year, along with excellent component ratios across the board. Since he was a college senior, he is a bit old for a guy just reaching Double-A at age 24, but his sense for pitching is very advanced. His lack of plus velocity keeps him off most prospect lists, but I think he needs to be watched closely, and could contribute in the majors sooner than people think. Grade C.

 

Thanks much, TT. I don't think I've really gotten any scouting reports since the rather brief draft ones, which tended to basically follow the "senior, old, had surgery, doesn't throw hard, but polished" kind of formula. He wasn't in last year's B book. So this is helpful, even though I admit I'd hoped that i'd read that he doesn't work at high velocity but he can hit 92 at times, and has a great curveball, or something like that. 86-89 comes across bad, of course, but that's basically where Marshall works. 87 with sink and command is presumably a lot more useful than 90-94 that's kind of wild and kind of straight.

 

Does anybody have any idea of what kind of an arm slot he has, or his splits versus lefties? Would he project particularly well as a situational lefty, or not really? I'm kind of hoping that he can end up being kind of a Marshall-type pitcher, who is pretty good without being noticably fast.

Not sure if Marshall is a good comparison, just because he has a plus pitch (curveball) that makes him an effective reliever, while Rusin doesn't appear to have any plus pitches. Best case scenario for Rusin is that he somehow improves his value (either in the majors or minors) to the point where we can trade him for something useful with a little more upside.

[imb]

I still don't see the infatuation with Hicks personally. He needs to start producing if he's going to stay this high on lists, if you ask me.

 

the walks are nice, though

[craig]

Chris Rusin, LHP, Chicago Cubs

Bats: L Throws: L HT: 6-2 WT: 185 DOB: October 22, 1986

2010: Grade C.

 

...his breaking ball has some bite, and hitters just chop them into the ground. ...

 

... I'm kind of hoping that he can end up being kind of a Marshall-type pitcher, who is pretty good without being noticably fast.

 

Not sure if Marshall is a good comparison, just because he has a plus pitch (curveball) that makes him an effective reliever, while Rusin doesn't appear to have any plus pitches. Best case scenario for Rusin is that he somehow improves his value (either in the majors or minors) to the point where we can trade him for something useful with a little more upside.

 

Rusin's breaking stuff will obviously need to be plus for him to become a successful big-leaguer. But my best-case scenario is that it does emerge as a plus pitch. That is has enough bite so that major leaguers just chop them into the ground. Or whiff on them absolutely. He had 99K/110 IP, so his breaking stuff must have been good enough to make minor leaguers miss. Not likely that his breaking ball is as good as Marshall's, but that's what I'm hoping for.

 

There are a lot of useful lefty relievers who aren't quite as good as Marshall, too. So even if it isn't quite as good as Marshall's, he might still be useful anyway.

 

It isn't easy to be a consistent pitcher when you're living on the breaking ball. So being able to snap some sharp ones is important, but that doesn't do it without some degree of consistency. That Rusin had a 99K/19BB ratio in 110 innings suggests that his control must have been pretty good. If you have a pretty good breaking ball and you can control it pretty consistently, I think you've got at least a chance to make some millions in the majors.

[Guest]

Sickels does a Prospect Smackdown: Archer v. McNutt

 

I don't think I appreciated how dominating McNutt was last year. A near 4 K/BB with a 2.87 BB/9? That's pretty insane.

[ScrubMD]

I didn't like Archer being included in the deal for Garza but I've been a bigger fan of McNutt. They have about the same ceiling but McNutt doesn't have the command issues and seems like more of a safe bet.

[Cubs Fan Dan]

Jackson lands at #46 on MLB.com's top 50 prospects.

[Guest]

Another book excerpt from Sickels

 

Junior Lake, SS, Chicago Cubs

Bats: R Throws: R HT: 6-2 WT: 200 DOB: March 27, 1990

 

One of the toolsier players in the Cubs system, Lake has some power potential and an extremely good throwing arm. He is unreliable defensively at shortstop and will end up at either third base or, perhaps, right field in the long run, which will increase the pressure on his bat. Although he is still raw at the plate, he made huge strides with his strike zone judgment last year, improving it from unbearably awful to mediocre. I don't mean to be sarcastic; it was real progress, and he did it playing in the Florida Sate League, not an easy place for hitters. Lake is young enough to have a real breakout in the next year or two, although Double-A will be a big test for him in '11. Grade C+.

[Cubs Fan Dan]

Keith Law's organization rankings:

 

20. Chicago Cubs

A top-10 system before the Garza trade, the Cubs probably would place more guys in the 101-150 range than any organization except the Royals. They're loaded with high-floor players who have the potential to be above-average or better big leaguers but aren't there yet. Considering all the picks they've given up to sign free agents, it's remarkable how strong the system still is after the giant trade with Tampa Bay.