What type of players do you want in the system?

[davell]

And obviously, I don't mean "good ones" to be an answer here. :D But, with the graduations of some guys and the trade for Garza, we've lost quite a bit obviously. And it appears as if we've got lots of depth left, but not anyone that has "star" written all over him either, or possibly even the potential to become one, in all likelihood.

 

The draft is very good this year, both in quality and in depth. There's always going to be INT FA's each year as well, although I've not read anything on whether this is a good year for that as of yet.

 

But, with the Cubs signing Silva and Cabeza, it got me to thinking: None of us appeared all that thrilled with the signings, even though the Cubs just went out and spent 1.7 mill on a couple of guys. And that's something that all of us ARE glad about. (same with the extra mill thrown to Szczur) For me, it was the scouting reports I read and I figure that it was the same for most of us. They just don't appear to have the ability to become anything special, from the brief stuff we've read.

 

So, what type of players would you target? Do you care about position, for instance, or do you mainly just care about the bat? How much do you take into projectability? Do you want more athletic types that have speed and the ability to move around? Do you want polished guys or toolsy guys? Do you prefer guys with big arms or guys that have better command and seem to know how to pitch? Does it make much difference to you as far as whether or not a pitcher is right or left handed and does it make one more valuable than the other in some cases?

 

I think Hendry has told Wilken to get him MLB players before. And maybe Wilken has taken guys that are safer instead of the boom or bust types for this reason. With more(hopefully) emphasis on the minors, is it possible that this strategy could be in the midst of changing some? Instead of going after "up the middle, athletic guys", could they start looking more for specialty type guys, who can hit a ton, even if they're not all that athletic possibly?

 

At any rate, I'd like to see us target a couple of prolific bats. Whether it's projection or not, doesn't matter to me. I think the system needs a bigtime influx of guys that have power added to it. Granted, that's why I was happy with getting Burgess back in the Gorz deal, because he fits what I'm looking for. At least the type anyway. Maybe we can find a couple of these guys through the draft or in Central America? In fact, I'd basically say I'd look more towards the High Schoolers than College for this, since it's fairly likely that the college power comes off the board earlier through the draft anyway. I'm not going to be picky as far as what positions they play either. In fact, our system needs some corner guys, if you ask me, so if they're whats available, I'm not going to care whether or not they're probably not going to be able to change positions a bunch.

 

As for pitching, I'd love to target a guy who's got the chance to become a true ace. We'll have that opportunity in the 1st round of the draft or maybe through IFA. But, there's definitely going to be the opportunity to take a guy who's got this ability through the draft. I'd concentrate on hitting after that, but I think we need a true bigtime arm. Once again, unless one of Cole, Purke, or possibly Gray falls to us, I'd go the High School route here as well. I guess I'd prefer a lefty, but it doesn't really matter to me. I just want the big projectable guy that throws serious heat.

 

In the end, I want us to take more chances. Yeah, some of these guys will have some definite negatives as well and probably aren't nearly as safe as some other guys. But, I want the shot at having some future stars on the team. And if we're truly going to be spending more money in this area, I think this is the year to do it, with the strong draft class and also the likelhood that this may be the last draft without some sort of true slot system as well.

 

So anyway, what type of players do you want to see added? Any positions in particular you want to see addressed? Do you prefer the safe approach or the riskier one? Just curious as to what you guys think as far as this goes.

[Guest]

Your argument is essentially why I'm higher on Lake and Vitters than most. Even though they could both flame out miserably, they're the highest upside bats we have in the system, imo. Though Burgess may now qualify there, as well.

 

I agree with most everything you said. I think a good system has a mix of player types. What I think we're missing for the most part are the big power / patience guys to play corners. If we go for a bat early in the draft, I'd want someone who could project as an all star at a corner position. We're stocked with up the middle, athletic guys even after losing HJL.

 

As for pitching, I trust the Cubs a fair amount there. It's tough to find the #1 starters further down in the draft unless guys add serious velocity after signing.

[illiniguy]

I'd like a lot of really talented players in the system.

[Outshined_One]

Hmmm...interesting question...

 

There's a lot to like about the current methods the Cubs use as far as the draft and international scouting go. They have done a very good job of targeting players who, while they might not have the upside of a true ace or top-tier #3 hitter, should provide this team with a lot of quality depth and production for a reasonable cost. Even after the Garza trade, there are a lot of players in this system who have very good floors and reasonably high ceilings.

 

On top of that, I think the Cubs have taken a very good approach to scouting pitching, be it in the draft, through signings, or through trades. The Cubs have done a very good job of developing pitchers with varying backgrounds, ceilings, experience, etc. Now, granted, the Cubs haven't had a true ace prospect in a long time, but to be frank, those sorts of prospects are few and far between. I don't think I'd change much about how the Cubs have handled the pitching side of things.

 

Hitters is where I start to get mixed feelings. I think the Cubs have done a very good job of drafting and signing guys with relatively high floors, but, in my opinion, there are only three hitters in this system who have legitimately exciting upsides (Burgess, Lake, Vitters). While it was nice to see the Cubs sign Szczur to a big money deal, I really think the Cubs need to start diverting more resources to hitters who drop for signability reasons; especially high school hitters. I know this system has had issues with developing raw young hitters, but those are (usually) the hitters with the highest ceilings.

 

Plus, the depth of hitting prospects in the lower levels of this system is pretty bad. Among hitters likely to start in Peoria or lower next season, Szczur and Golden are pretty much the only noteworthy names.

[Rob]

I've always preferred high-ceiling guys, rather than low floor, especially given the way the market has shaken out over the last 5 years. With long contracts being handed out to young superstars (Longoria, Braun, etc.), it would seem that the real marquee players... the franchise building blocks... are only going to be hitting free agency later and later in their careers, making them a less attractive long term investment. It's only going to get harder to build a competitive team using cost-controlled role players and having to acquire our superstars through free agency and trades. I'd much rather draft a bunch of boom or bust guys, hope one or two boom, and use free agency to fill in the gaps.

[davell]

Here's a good axample of a player as to whether or not we'd want him in the system: Dan Vogelbach- He's a high school senior with a commitment to Florida. That said, he's a 1B with light tower power(has hit 500 foot homers), a lefty, solid plate discipline and has average speed for a 1B. But, he's 5'11 and weighs 280 pounds. Is this a guy you'd take in the 2nd-4th rounds and give an overslot bonus to? Since we're definitely weak in the system at the position and with power hitters in general? Just curious what you'd do. I think we need a huge influx of power personally, so I think I'd roll the dice on a guy like this if there aren't many other options out there myself. Even if it's possible he winds up weighing more than half the Bears O-Line. Out of the first 3-4 rounds, I kind of hope we get 2 or maybe even 3 guys that have some serious power potential.

[Outshined_One]

Here's a good axample of a player as to whether or not we'd want him in the system: Dan Vogelbach- He's a high school senior with a commitment to Florida. That said, he's a 1B with light tower power(has hit 500 foot homers), a lefty, solid plate discipline and has average speed for a 1B. But, he's 5'11 and weighs 280 pounds. Is this a guy you'd take in the 2nd-4th rounds and give an overslot bonus to? Since we're definitely weak in the system at the position and with power hitters in general? Just curious what you'd do. I think we need a huge influx of power personally, so I think I'd roll the dice on a guy like this if there aren't many other options out there myself. Even if it's possible he winds up weighing more than half the Bears O-Line. Out of the first 3-4 rounds, I kind of hope we get 2 or maybe even 3 guys that have some serious power potential.

 

Vogelbach Profile

 

 

Wow.

 

His weight is an issue, but the guy has a really nice swing, hustles, and moves reasonably well for his size. The fundamental tools are there. If the Cubs put him on a diet and exercise regimen to keep his weight under control, I have to think he'd still have prodigious power with improved speed and athleticism.

 

Yeah, I'd like to see the Cubs draft him between Rounds 2 and 4 if his stock stays where it is. There's some very good potential there.

[TruffleShuffle]

i wouldn't do it. if he's that fat as a high school kid, i have no faith in him staying in shape as he gets older.

[Outshined_One]

i wouldn't do it. if he's that fat as a high school kid, i have no faith in him staying in shape as he gets older.

 

I don't know his personal background, but he might not have the money to afford personal trainers, nutritionists, etc. I'm guessing any team that drafts him will immediately put him on a diet and training regimen, complete with access to team physicians, facilities, etc. Given his age, he should be able to shed that weight rather quickly.

 

I think it's worth the risk, especially considering he has a rather impressive bat for someone his age.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'd like to stop drafting exclusively up the middle athletes

[TruffleShuffle]

i wouldn't do it. if he's that fat as a high school kid, i have no faith in him staying in shape as he gets older.

 

I don't know his personal background, but he might not have the money to afford personal trainers, nutritionists, etc. I'm guessing any team that drafts him will immediately put him on a diet and training regimen, complete with access to team physicians, facilities, etc. Given his age, he should be able to shed that weight rather quickly.

 

to me, it doesn't matter if he doesn't have money to afford personal trainers, nutritionists, etc. for most guys who are high-level athletes, their metabolism and work ethic are enough to keep them slim through at least high school. the fact that he's this big already tells me that he doesn't work hard at his fitness and/or he has a very slow metabolism.

 

i'd like the cubs to start drafting more corner OF and 1B who profile as middle of the order hitters, but that doesn't mean i want them drafting guys who are already obese in high school.

[Guest]

i wouldn't do it. if he's that fat as a high school kid, i have no faith in him staying in shape as he gets older.

 

I don't know his personal background, but he might not have the money to afford personal trainers, nutritionists, etc. I'm guessing any team that drafts him will immediately put him on a diet and training regimen, complete with access to team physicians, facilities, etc. Given his age, he should be able to shed that weight rather quickly.

 

to me, it doesn't matter if he doesn't have money to afford personal trainers, nutritionists, etc. for most guys who are high-level athletes, their metabolism and work ethic are enough to keep them slim through at least high school. the fact that he's this big already tells me that he doesn't work hard at his fitness and/or he has a very slow metabolism.

 

i'd like the cubs to start drafting more corner OF and 1B who profile as middle of the order hitters, but that doesn't mean i want them drafting guys who are already obese in high school.

I don't agree. They need to draft kids who are good at baseball. If this kid (or anyone really) can hit and play defense they should draft him, especially in a lower round. Baseball is unlike any others sport in the sense that good athletic qualities that people normally think about are secondary to other skills.

 

His weight only becomes an issue if it interferes with his ability to hit and play defense.

 

But to answer the question: I think the Cubs draft reasonably well, it's player development where they lack. Dopirak and all those other kids who crapped out had known flaws in their abilities when they were drafted and the Cubs we're not able correct the flaws.

[TruffleShuffle]

I don't agree. They need to draft kids who are good at baseball. If this kid (or anyone really) can hit and play defense they should draft him, especially in a lower round. Baseball is unlike any others sport in the sense that good athletic qualities that people normally think about are secondary to other skills.

 

His weight only becomes an issue if it interferes with his ability to hit and play defense.

 

i can pretty much guarantee you that his fatness interferes with his ability to play defense. i am fine with drafting kids like this in the lower rounds, but people are talking about grabbing him in the 2nd-4th round and then giving him above slot money to buy him out of his florida commitment. i'm not fine with giving supplemental first round money to a guy who already is fat in high school. for every prince fielder there are dozens of guys who bust because their poor physique inhibits their bat speed.

 

there's also this, by BP's rany jazayerli:

 

High school catchers get all the bad publicity, but high school first basemen have actually been a worse value for the dollar over the entire 16-year draft study, and whereas teams seem to have learned how to avoid making mistakes behind the plate, they have shown no improvement here.

 

In total, 39 high school first basemen have been drafted in the first 100 picks from 1984 to 1999. Just one of them--Derrek Lee--achieved stardom. The results of the second round are particularly grisly--of the 16 first basemen drafted in the second round, the most valuable proved to be the immortal Tim Hyers. Let's put it this way: Chris Weinke was one of the data points.

 

Why the terrible performance? It's pure speculation, but if you're playing first base on your high school team, you're probably not the most athletic player in the world. No doubt almost all of these players were drafted for their bats, but athleticism has a lot to do with whether that bat develops, particularly since even the best high school hitters need a lot of refinement before they're ready for the major leagues. It's not a surprise that Lee, the best player in this group, is a remarkably good athlete for a first baseman, what with his Gold Glove defense and 15 steals a year. It's that athleticism that has helped him continue to improve as a player into his late 20s.

 

But most high school first basemen, by definition, have "old players' skills." It's a well-established point of baseball analysis that players with old players' skills--players who take'n'rake but lack speed or defensive aptitude--peak earlier and decline faster than other players. An 18-year-old with old players' skills is generally not a winning combination. (The picture is very different at the college level. Very, very different. More on that later.)

[fromthestretch]

 

In total, 39 high school first basemen have been drafted in the first 100 picks from 1984 to 1999. Just one of them--Derrek Lee--achieved stardom. The results of the second round are particularly grisly--of the 16 first basemen drafted in the second round, the most valuable proved to be the immortal Tim Hyers. Let's put it this way: Chris Weinke was one of the data points.

 

I'm not necessarily arguing the point he's trying to make here, but I find it odd that he used 1999 as his cutoff, considering that Adrian Gonzalez was drafted first overall in 2000.

[MSG T]

 

In total, 39 high school first basemen have been drafted in the first 100 picks from 1984 to 1999. Just one of them--Derrek Lee--achieved stardom. The results of the second round are particularly grisly--of the 16 first basemen drafted in the second round, the most valuable proved to be the immortal Tim Hyers. Let's put it this way: Chris Weinke was one of the data points.

 

I'm not necessarily arguing the point he's trying to make here, but I find it odd that he used 1999 as his cutoff, considering that Adrian Gonzalez was drafted first overall in 2000.

 

 

But, did Gonzalez play 1B in high school? I would assume, considering how obvious he would be, that he play another position in HS.

 

I will say that truffle's second argument, the study, is a better argument than talking about some HS 1B being fat now, so he would be fat later. The latter I don't care about.

[Northside Blues]

 

In total, 39 high school first basemen have been drafted in the first 100 picks from 1984 to 1999. Just one of them--Derrek Lee--achieved stardom. The results of the second round are particularly grisly--of the 16 first basemen drafted in the second round, the most valuable proved to be the immortal Tim Hyers. Let's put it this way: Chris Weinke was one of the data points.

 

I'm not necessarily arguing the point he's trying to make here, but I find it odd that he used 1999 as his cutoff, considering that Adrian Gonzalez was drafted first overall in 2000.

 

Well, in those 16 years there were 39 high school 1B, in the 11 since there have only been six drafted in the first thirty picks. They are

 

Stars

Adrian Gonzalez

Prince Fielder

 

MLB Starters/Bench

Casey Kotchman

James Loney

 

Prospects:

Eric Hosmer, a top 10 prospect overall

Christian Yelich (2010 draftee).

 

That's gotta be the best success rate of first rounders at any position. Granted, teams probably learned in the late 90s that drafting high school firstbasemen was a bad idea unless they were really good, hence the lower percentage of 1B drafted in the first round. Also, Gonzalez, Hosmer, Kotchman and Loney aren't terrible athletes. They'd all probably play 3B or RF if they were right-handed, especially Loney and his mid 90s arm. If I am not mistaken, Hosmer, Kotchman and Loney were all OF in HS who were drafted as a 1B. Yelich played 3B/OF in high school. The only one who is unathletic would be Prince.

[Northside Blues]

But, did Gonzalez play 1B in high school? I would assume, considering how obvious he would be, that he play another position in HS.

 

He's left-handed. He'd be able to play 1B or LF.

http://mt.nesn.com/.a/6a0115709f071f970b0147e1952059970b-500wi

 

 

Top row, third from the right. Certainly not fat.

[ScrubMD]

Adam Lind was a 1B when I played against him in high school. That's somewhat related to the conversation, right?

[Northside Blues]

Adam Lind was a 1B when I played against him in high school. That's somewhat related to the conversation, right?

 

Yeah but he was a college 1B, which is a lot different. All of the "bad" high school 1B, in theory, get weeded out in college against tougher pitching and three more years of working on (or not on) their fat. Lind is also a lefty. I wonder if there is a big difference between lefties and righties. A lot of lefties play 1B, but if they were righties they'd be able to play 3B or C, or possibly even 2B or SS. In a lot of HS coaches minds an athletic defensive 1B is a huge plus and they might prefer to have someone like Loney at 1B, than a "hiding" him in RF or LF.

 

Looking at the 2nd and sandwich rounds since 2000 we have our first R/R 1B. The list of all is

Jason Stokes ®

Brian Dopirak ®

Hendry Sanchez ®

 

Mike Stanton ®

Freddie Freeman (L)

 

Hunter Morris ®*

 

 

*Did not sign

[fromthestretch]

But, did Gonzalez play 1B in high school? I would assume, considering how obvious he would be, that he play another position in HS.

 

He's left-handed. He'd be able to play 1B or LF.

http://mt.nesn.com/.a/6a0115709f071f970b0147e1952059970b-500wi

 

 

Top row, third from the right. Certainly not fat.

 

Considering that he has only played ONE professional game anywhere other than 1B, including the minors, I'm going to wager that he primarily played first as a high schooler. If he had played mostly outfield in high school, I'd think they would have tried to keep him out there, eventually moving him to first if he couldn't cut it defensively in the outfield.

[Northside Blues]

There are a lot of high schoolers who played one position in high school that are drafted at another position and are never given a chance to stick there. A lot of right-handed throwers play SS in HS and are drafted as an OF, 2B, 3B and never play a game at SS. There are also a lot of guys who caught in HS, drafted somewhere else, who never played a game at catcher. If the Marlins thought that Gonzalez's eventual position was 1B, a position he may never have played in HS, it's probably a good idea to get him there as soon as possible to learn how to become a good defensive one. Also, even if he was not a terrible athlete in HS, there's still a pretty good chance that his coaches desired him playing 1B over the OF. A lot of high school, select, and little league coaches hide guys in the OF, and as a good baseball player overall who throws lefty, the only place they could stick him in the infield was first.

 

Not saying that this is what happened to Gonzalez (he isn't even an average runner), but it's certainly something that happens to lefties in general.

[fromthestretch]

There are a lot of high schoolers who played one position in high school that are drafted at another position and are never given a chance to stick there. A lot of right-handed throwers play SS in HS and are drafted as an OF, 2B, 3B and never play a game at SS. There are also a lot of guys who caught in HS, drafted somewhere else, who never played a game at catcher. If the Marlins thought that Gonzalez's eventual position was 1B, a position he may never have played in HS, it's probably a good idea to get him there as soon as possible to learn how to become a good defensive one. Also, even if he was not a terrible athlete in HS, there's still a pretty good chance that his coaches desired him playing 1B over the OF. A lot of high school, select, and little league coaches hide guys in the OF, and as a good baseball player overall who throws lefty, the only place they could stick him in the infield was first.

 

Not saying that this is what happened to Gonzalez (he isn't even an average runner), but it's certainly something that happens to lefties in general.

 

I'm well aware of that. I probably just phrased my earlier post poorly.

 

With first base being the lowest end of the defensive spectrum though, I would think that if there was any thought he could even be passable defensively in the OF, they would have given him a shot there first. So either 1) he played OF in high school and the immediate thought was there was no way he was going to stick there or 2) he primarily played first base. Either way, he should probably qualify for this list (had it been extended beyond 1999), as he was drafted out of high school to play first base.

[davell]

I guess in a perfect world, you draft some corner outfielders and some 3rd basemen, then due to being talented at those spots, you move one of them to 1st.

 

I don't think Wilken will totally abandon the drafting of athletic, low floor types. They do hold value and has set our system up as one of the absolute deepest in all of baseball.

 

But, with us having such a deep system, this is why I think we will take more chances this year than most. He's kind of gotten us to the point where we can afford to.

 

I could see us taking more high schoolers than usual too. Especially if we take a college guy in the 1st round.

[craig]

I'd like to get some premium hitters with power. And I hope that there are some available that Wilken can grab, and that work out. Good hitters last and are hard to find.

 

1. I don't really have a fault with the drafting approach, though. I think that the drafting has been quite good for the last several years, extremely good. I do hope that they find some position guys, for sure.

 

2. I think the philosophy of taking the best prospect available, BPA, is the way to go. When Cashner, or Carpenter, or Golden, or Simpson, or Jackson, are the BPA's on your board (BPA's of those you can sign, obviously), take that guy. If your BPA happens to be a pitcher when I wish the BPA was a power hitter, take the BPA pitcher. If the BPA guy happens to be Cerda, rather than a taller more power-oriented guy, take Cerda. I think they've been pretty good about balancing pros and cons for each individual player.

 

3. I think they have been case-by-case perceptions of BPA. I don't see any rigid "philosophy" that defines what kind of guy they take. Vitters, Cashner, Jackson, Colvin, Simpson, etc., seems like plenty of variety to me.

 

4. I don't think I share the view that the draft approach has avoided corners, power, or ceiling. It's not what you played in HS or college, it's what you project to play and be in the majors that's involved in the ceiling. Projection. Colvin, Vitters, Donaldson, Flaherty, Lemahieu, Golden, I don't believe that any of these was taken with the anticipation that they'd play SS or CF in the majors, and probably not 2B either. Colvin is a corner with serious power. In retrospect I'd think he looks like a very high ceiling pick, with the true power that he has. The fact that he doesn't walk or hit breaking balls enough to support a higher BA/OBP/contact-rate is why he's shy of the ceiling. But given his power and stroke, which I think Wilken foresaw, his ceiling must have looked limitless. Vitters was totally taken as a high-ceiling hitter, contact plus power possibilities, with no speed or SS to speak of. Donaldson for his power potential, as a catcher that gave him a very high ceiling. Flaherty I'm sure they projected that he'd get a lot bigger, I don't think they had any expectation that he'd play SS in the majors. But he seemed to have quite a high ceiling, it's just turned out that despite his size and BP power, to date he just can't quite hit the ball or get the lift necessary to turn his size into HR's. When you draft for ceiling, obviously most guys don't reach their perceived ceiling. High risk-high reward, not often you're going to catch the max reward. Lemahieu, they knew he'd not be a SS, he was maybe 2B/probably corner pick. But again, they knew he was young and skinny, and had lots of strength to add which might ceiling to power. Golden a corner power guy. In the Lemahieu draft, they would have drafted some other HS outfielder if he'd indicated he'd be signable. Jackson was perceived as a high risk-reward, high-ceiling pick, plenty of power ceiling, and likely to spend most of his career in a corner. He'll likely whiff to much to ever live at his ceiling, but with his power potential I think his ceiling was plenty high.

 

5. I'm very desirous of some productive-power middle-lineup guys. But I do think that being a good hitter is essential to having productive power. If I think a prospect doesn't have the bat speed or the gift to make some contact, I don't care how far he hits batting practice or HS HR's. I think if a good scout sees that a Harvey just doesn't have the tools to hit, I don't care how much raw power he has. I would prioritize the "hitting" tool over the "power tool", because the latter is worthless without the former. And the number of HR's is a function of frequency of solid contact as well as of raw power when the contact is made.

 

All that being said, I certainly agree that I wish we had more position prospects. I hope Golden is golden, but I'd sure love to see a pick (or multiple such) in which a guy has a chance to have both the hitting tool and the power tool combined.

[TruffleShuffle]

 

In total, 39 high school first basemen have been drafted in the first 100 picks from 1984 to 1999. Just one of them--Derrek Lee--achieved stardom. The results of the second round are particularly grisly--of the 16 first basemen drafted in the second round, the most valuable proved to be the immortal Tim Hyers. Let's put it this way: Chris Weinke was one of the data points.

 

I'm not necessarily arguing the point he's trying to make here, but I find it odd that he used 1999 as his cutoff, considering that Adrian Gonzalez was drafted first overall in 2000.

 

the study was done during the 2004-05 offseason, so he probably used 1999 as the cutoff because players drafted from 2000 onward probably hadn't reached a point where you could evaluate how they turned out. if there is a more recent study that's available online, i'm not aware of it.