Wilkens being extended?

[Vinestal]

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6338/will-ricketts-extend-scouting-directors-deal-next

Oh yeah let's cement the entire Hendry regime after we fire him but before we hire a new GM. makes perfect sense. For the record I like Wilken, but I don't get signing all these people before signing a GM.

[TruffleShuffle]

Darwin Barney, Andrew Cashner, Casey Coleman, Jeff Samardzija, Tyler Colvin and farm-system jewel Brett Jackson are just a few of the Cubs’ signings since Wilken took over the amateur and pro scouting job in December of 2005.

 

wow that's quite a haul in nearly 6 years of work

[Little Slide Rooter]

Darwin Barney, Andrew Cashner, Casey Coleman, Jeff Samardzija, Tyler Colvin and farm-system jewel Brett Jackson are just a few of the Cubs’ signings since Wilken took over the amateur and pro scouting job in December of 2005.

 

wow that's quite a haul in nearly 6 years of work

 

Yeah, that list isn't at all impressive. May as well pad the list with Tony Campana and James Russell.

[idakepps]

This makes me think of Oneri's extension in a different light.

 

Like Fleita, Wilken will have a number of teams interested in his services. If the Cubs decide to make a further commitment to Wilken, the next general manager will have two vital positions in place when he takes over. There will, however, be some flexibility for Ricketts and his next general manager to make changes to those spots in the near future. Fleita’s deal (and a possible one for Wilkens) will be structured creatively with buyouts and options to benefit both the team and the executives.

 

Sounds like Ricketts is just trying to keep his options open, and will be willing to let the new GM do what he wants. It's a strong recommendation in a sense, but if both contracts are full of options and buyouts...well, that's actually pretty smart.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

For the most part this is a good thing. The idea that the team wants to hold onto their talent is something that I like to see.

[Vinestal]

This makes me think of Oneri's extension in a different light.

 

Like Fleita, Wilken will have a number of teams interested in his services. If the Cubs decide to make a further commitment to Wilken, the next general manager will have two vital positions in place when he takes over. There will, however, be some flexibility for Ricketts and his next general manager to make changes to those spots in the near future. Fleita’s deal (and a possible one for Wilkens) will be structured creatively with buyouts and options to benefit both the team and the executives.

 

Sounds like Ricketts is just trying to keep his options open, and will be willing to let the new GM do what he wants. It's a strong recommendation in a sense, but if both contracts are full of options and buyouts...well, that's actually pretty smart.

 

These details make me feel much better about Oneri's contract especially.

[Outshined_One]

This makes me think of Oneri's extension in a different light.

 

Like Fleita, Wilken will have a number of teams interested in his services. If the Cubs decide to make a further commitment to Wilken, the next general manager will have two vital positions in place when he takes over. There will, however, be some flexibility for Ricketts and his next general manager to make changes to those spots in the near future. Fleita’s deal (and a possible one for Wilkens) will be structured creatively with buyouts and options to benefit both the team and the executives.

 

Sounds like Ricketts is just trying to keep his options open, and will be willing to let the new GM do what he wants. It's a strong recommendation in a sense, but if both contracts are full of options and buyouts...well, that's actually pretty smart.

 

This makes me feel better about those deals, but they still annoy me.

[Magnetic Curses]

For the most part this is a good thing. The idea that the team wants to hold onto their talent is something that I like to see.

 

i don't understand what wilken has done that would qualify him as "talent"

 

i keep hearing how great he is but i don't see any great players at all. i see a few players who have had some decent years here and there, but are totally up and down because their peripherals are terrible.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

For the most part this is a good thing. The idea that the team wants to hold onto their talent is something that I like to see.

 

i don't understand what wilken has done that would qualify him as "talent"

 

i keep hearing how great he is but i don't see any great players at all. i see a few players who have had some decent years here and there, but are totally up and down because their peripherals are terrible.

 

That sucks. Maybe you don't know enough about Senor Wilken:

 

"During his 27-year career, Wilken has seen a distinguished list of players signed and ushered into the big leagues, including: Derek Bell, Chris Carpenter, Carlos Delgado, Ryan Freel, Shawn Green, Roy Halladay, Steve Karsay, Billy Koch, Josh Phelps, Alex Rios, Vernon Wells and Michael Young. While with the Blue Jays, he contributed to the club's streak of seeing 11 straight first-round draft picks reach the major leagues."

 

Those are some pretty awesome players. Just because his drafts here haven't born fully ripe fruit yet doesn't mean all that much.

[Magnetic Curses]

For the most part this is a good thing. The idea that the team wants to hold onto their talent is something that I like to see.

 

i don't understand what wilken has done that would qualify him as "talent"

 

i keep hearing how great he is but i don't see any great players at all. i see a few players who have had some decent years here and there, but are totally up and down because their peripherals are terrible.

 

That sucks. Maybe you don't know enough about Senor Wilken:

 

"During his 27-year career, Wilken has seen a distinguished list of players signed and ushered into the big leagues, including: Derek Bell, Chris Carpenter, Carlos Delgado, Ryan Freel, Shawn Green, Roy Halladay, Steve Karsay, Billy Koch, Josh Phelps, Alex Rios, Vernon Wells and Michael Young. While with the Blue Jays, he contributed to the club's streak of seeing 11 straight first-round draft picks reach the major leagues."

 

Those are some pretty awesome players. Just because his drafts here haven't born fully ripe fruit yet doesn't mean all that much.

 

halladay and carpenter were nothing special until someone actually taught them how to pitch, and those are the two biggest feathers in his cap. he may have drafted them, but what he saw in them wasn't what made them great pitchers.

 

you'd think there'd be more over 27 years if he such a great evaluator of talent. what he's done for the cubs is next to nothing, and that's the key point here.

[Clem Fandango]

How does Wilken compare to those who held his job in the organization prior to him?

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

halladay and carpenter were nothing special until someone actually taught them how to pitch, and those are the two biggest feathers in his cap. he may have drafted them, but what he saw in them wasn't what made them great pitchers.

 

you'd think there'd be more over 27 years if he such a great evaluator of talent. what he's done for the cubs is next to nothing, and that's the key point here.

 

Yes, Halladay and Carpenter did need coaching, as any and all young players do to hit their ceiling. He took Halladay 17th overall in the '95 draft and Carpenter with the 15th pick in '93, so he must have seen something, and look where they are now. What does "what he saw in them wasn't what made them great pitchers" even mean? Both were very touted prospects who like many young players didn't come right in and set the baseball world on fire. Big deal. He saw the talent, he picked them in the first, they go on his resume.

 

The way you're looking at this you can literally make the argument that no scouting director is worth it. After all players often take years to reach their ceilings, often they have to be coached (which scouts and farm directors don't do themselves), and by the time they make it what made them noticeable as prospects might have changed (though Halladay and Carpenter's huge size (both are 6'7 2something, moving fastballs, and plus breaking balls didn't...w/e).

 

What he's done for the Cubs is help put together an underrated farm system that has depth and upside despite lacking the super prospects everyone dreams of having. He's helped put together one of the most touted drafts of 2011. I know the contributions should be in our face right now and these guys should be the driving force behind our currently winning teams, but just because that isn't currently happening does not mean he's contributed nothing and will contribute nothing. That's such a cheap process to me...Not to mention the first of his first round picks came up and hit 20 HRs last year with an .811 OPS...sure he then crapped the bed this year, but at 26 it's not like that kid is done here or in professional baseball.

 

Why should the Cubs be opening up so many FO jobs anyway? Why would the new GM want to fill so many significant holes in the organization, or even be expected to right off the bat? Aren't there much bigger fish to try and catch this offseason afte filling the GM hole, or should the Cubs waste their time bringing in new scouts, a farm director, and head scout (a whole 5 years after overhauling the scouting department with the Wilken hire)?

[Magnetic Curses]

halladay and carpenter were nothing special until someone actually taught them how to pitch, and those are the two biggest feathers in his cap. he may have drafted them, but what he saw in them wasn't what made them great pitchers.

 

you'd think there'd be more over 27 years if he such a great evaluator of talent. what he's done for the cubs is next to nothing, and that's the key point here.

 

Yes, Halladay and Carpenter did need coaching, as any and all young players do to hit their ceiling. He took Halladay 17th overall in the '95 draft and Carpenter with the 15th pick in '93, so he must have seen something, and look where they are now. What does "what he saw in them wasn't what made them great pitchers" even mean? Both were very touted prospects who like many young players didn't come right in and set the baseball world on fire. Big deal. He saw the talent, he picked them in the first, they go on his resume.

 

it means whatever you want it to mean, man. listen, halladay was a piece of junk, he was finished in the league, saying that he "didn't come right in and set the baseball world on fire" is an understatement. he was on his way out of baseball when someone got ahold of him and changed everything about him, everything except his height and youth, maybe. isn't his 2000 season one of the single worst seasons in history? in any respect, he was the worst pitcher in the game at that point.

 

The way you're looking at this you can literally make the argument that no scouting director is worth it. After all players often take years to reach their ceilings, often they have to be coached (which scouts and farm directors don't do themselves), and by the time they make it what made them noticeable as prospects might have changed (though Halladay and Carpenter's huge size (both are 6'7 2something, moving fastballs, and plus breaking balls didn't...w/e).

 

carpenter maybe, i'm not familiar with his story pre-cards except for him being a relatively middling 5th starter. but the book on Halladay was that he could throw hard, but his fastball didn't move, and curveball didn't curve. and he got bombed. we're talking a complete overhaul. afterwards, he had a breaking ball and a moving fastball.

 

 

What he's done for the Cubs is help put together an underrated farm system that has depth and upside despite lacking the super prospects everyone dreams of having. He's helped put together one of the most touted drafts of 2011. I know the contributions should be in our face right now and these guys should be the driving force behind our currently winning teams, but just because that isn't currently happening does not mean he's contributed nothing and will contribute nothing. That's such a cheap process to me...Not to mention the first of his first round picks came up and hit 20 HRs last year with an .811 OPS...sure he then crapped the bed this year, but at 26 it's not like that kid is done here or in professional baseball.

 

colvin is like rios or wells: talented, but bad peripherals that can only predict inconsistency.

 

Why should the Cubs be opening up so many FO jobs anyway? Why would the new GM want to fill so many significant holes in the organization, or even be expected to right off the bat? Aren't there much bigger fish to try and catch this offseason afte filling the GM hole, or should the Cubs waste their time bringing in new scouts, a farm director, and head scout (a whole 5 years after overhauling the scouting department with the Wilken hire)?

 

our organization is bad. we spend more per win than any organization in the league. most of the prospective GMs that are desireable are also very involved with drafting and scouting players, meaning they'll be working very closely with the scouting director. wilken has already essentially been dismissed by one stat-guy, assumingly because he wanted to draft on looks and not substance. ricciardi seems like a pansy compared to beane, friedman, or epstein. if we are lucky enough to get one of those three despite ricketts taking it upon himself to retain fleita and wilken, it will be a miracle, and neither of those guys will be arounf very long.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

carpenter maybe, i'm not familiar with his story pre-cards except for him being a relatively middling 5th starter. but the book on Halladay was that he could throw hard, but his fastball didn't move, and curveball didn't curve. and he got bombed. we're talking a complete overhaul. afterwards, he had a breaking ball and a moving fastball.

 

He did get completely overhauled. I'm still not sure what the significance of that is. He struggled, everyone around him (including him) acknowledged it, and he and the Blue Jays set about changing that. Good for them. I'm not sure how that reflects on Wilken. He still thought highly enough to take this guy in the first round, which is his job (not the coaching part).

 

Carpenter was a disappointing but mostly above average pitcher in the AL who was closer to a #3 than a #5. He was disappointing because he was a first round pick who was a top prospect who didn't hit the ground running in the big leagues. If he held the 5 role, and I don't remember it perfectly, it's because he was very young and still not a finished product.

 

colvin is like rios or wells: talented, but bad peripherals that can only predict inconsistency.

 

I'd be pretty happy if he turned out like either, as there's far worse to become. Both of those guys have had productive major league careers and individual seasons.

 

our organization is bad.

 

A greatly exaggerated claim IMO. It's more like they're not having any major successes right now. It's something I feel they've acknowledged and have been working towards changing, and personally I like what they've done even if it hasn't changed the tide instantly or close to it.

 

we spend more per win than any organization in the league.

 

Now we do. A couple years ago when the veterans were playing up to their talent level this wasn't so out there. That team fell apart, but their contracts remained. Those contracts and therefore those players are going away within the next 3 years.

 

It's basically a product of the team winning less, which is something that can't really be helped without pouring more money into it. Depending on your beliefs, you may think that spending money on the team again would be a good idea. Ricketts has chosen another (and IMO wiser) direction by not pouring more money into a team he didn't even have a part in building.

 

most of the prospective GMs that are desireable are also very involved with drafting and scouting players, meaning they'll be working very closely with the scouting director. wilken has already essentially been dismissed by one stat-guy, assumingly because he wanted to draft on looks and not substance. ricciardi seems like a pansy compared to beane, friedman, or epstein. if we are lucky enough to get one of those three despite ricketts taking it upon himself to retain fleita and wilken, it will be a miracle, and neither of those guys will be arounf very long.

 

1. That GM would be extremely lucky to have someone as experienced and proven as Wilken at his job.

 

2. Wilken actually left the Blue Jays willingly based on disagreements with the FO. In that sense, Ricciardi probably is a pansy if you want to think that way. Wilken instantly found work with the new front office of the Rays. Your assumption is wrong, and that FO for the Blue Jays was gone quickly itself. That FO was not and has not been praised for it's talent evaluation skills.

 

3. Friedman shouldn't be mentioned in Beane or Epstein's class. He's been a co-GM (though the title he carries is GM) for almost 6 years. Beane's done it for double that and then some and Epstein's accomplishments have been greater. Friedman's better than Ricciardi as a GM, I believe that, but personally I'm starting to think there's no more overrated FO head out there. He's an image...The young, savvy, energetic GM on the young, savvy, energetic Rays...it fits the direction the franchise wants to go. I'm more impressed by Hunsicker, who is finally being acknowledged as an architect over there in Tampa after building some very interesting (and successful) Astros teams....where he pulled off major deals for young superstars like Carlos Beltran and Randy Johnson when his team needed it.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Jim Hendry pulled off some major deals for young superstars Aramis Ramirez and Rich Harden when his team needed them. Lets sign him.

[Magnetic Curses]

He did get completely overhauled. I'm still not sure what the significance of that is. He struggled, everyone around him (including him) acknowledged it, and he and the Blue Jays set about changing that. Good for them. I'm not sure how that reflects on Wilken. He still thought highly enough to take this guy in the first round, which is his job (not the coaching part).

 

then what did wilken draft him on, his size? a straight fastball? the guy's a genius to know that some coach at A ball was able to catch that after he had been demoted and was almost out of baseball and completely changed him into something that no one could have predicted.

 

Carpenter was a disappointing but mostly above average pitcher in the AL who was closer to a #3 than a #5. He was disappointing because he was a first round pick who was a top prospect who didn't hit the ground running in the big leagues. If he held the 5 role, and I don't remember it perfectly, it's because he was very young and still not a finished product.

 

carpenter's era+ with the blue jays? 89, 106, 113, 81 (led AL in earned runs while pitching 175 innings), 113, 88.

 

i don't consider that "mostly above average". he was a bad pitcher and a reclamtion project. but more of a clamation project because he wasn't ever any good until he hit st louis.

 

I'd be pretty happy if he turned out like either, as there's far worse to become. Both of those guys have had productive major league careers and individual seasons.

 

2 of the worst contracts in baseball due to their absolute fluctuation from year to year? i hope not. in rios's case he's just a guy and has been since the age of 28.

 

A greatly exaggerated claim IMO. It's more like they're not having any major successes right now. It's something I feel they've acknowledged and have been working towards changing, and personally I like what they've done even if it hasn't changed the tide instantly or close to it.

 

it hasn't changed anything. the only thing different is that we aren't producing pitching prospects that get hurt before reaching the bigs and never play for us. now we're producing positional prospects that aren't very good.

 

Now we do. A couple years ago when the veterans were playing up to their talent level this wasn't so out there. That team fell apart, but their contracts remained. Those contracts and therefore those players are going away within the next 3 years.

 

what foresight by the guys in charge. give em raises!

 

It's basically a product of the team winning less, which is something that can't really be helped without pouring more money into it. Depending on your beliefs, you may think that spending money on the team again would be a good idea. Ricketts has chosen another (and IMO wiser) direction by not pouring more money into a team he didn't even have a part in building.

 

this is neither here nor there and completely beside the point. the team won less because they were high-paid, bad players and haven't produced much talent on the farm.

 

1. That GM would be extremely lucky to have someone as experienced and proven as Wilken at his job.

 

tell them that.

 

2. Wilken actually left the Blue Jays willingly based on disagreements with the FO. In that sense, Ricciardi probably is a pansy if you want to think that way. Wilken instantly found work with the new front office of the Rays. Your assumption is wrong, and that FO for the Blue Jays was gone quickly itself. That FO was not and has not been praised for it's talent evaluation skills.

 

ricciardi came from a tree that has been and continues to be praised for their ability to evaluate and produce major leaguers on the cheap. beane would fire him right away, epstein would fire him right away. friedman would most likely fire him right away. none of these guys want old scouts running their drafts.

 

3. Friedman shouldn't be mentioned in Beane or Epstein's class. He's been a co-GM (though the title he carries is GM) for almost 6 years. Beane's done it for double that and then some and Epstein's accomplishments have been greater. Friedman's better than Ricciardi as a GM, I believe that, but personally I'm starting to think there's no more overrated FO head out there. He's an image...The young, savvy, energetic GM on the young, savvy, energetic Rays...it fits the direction the franchise wants to go. I'm more impressed by Hunsicker, who is finally being acknowledged as an architect over there in Tampa after building some very interesting (and successful) Astros teams....where he pulled off major deals for young superstars like Carlos Beltran and Randy Johnson when his team needed it.

 

thank you for that, whatever it was.

[Magnetic Curses]

i looked it up, rios's OPS+ this year is 56 in 496 plate appearances. compare that to his salary of 12 mil and you have, maybe, the least efficient player year that ever was. that is, until vernon wells' 2011, 81 OPS+ in 445 plate appearances, 23 million in salary this year.

 

i really really hope that colvin doesn't become like either of them.

[Guest]

i looked it up, rios's OPS+ this year is 56 in 496 plate appearances. compare that to his salary of 12 mil and you have, maybe, the least efficient player year that ever was. that is, until vernon wells' 2011, 81 OPS+ in 445 plate appearances, 23 million in salary this year.

 

i really really hope that colvin doesn't become like either of them.

I hope like hell that Colvin becomes what Wells was in his prime. And I hope like hell that the Cubs don't make the mistake of the insane contract.

[Magnetic Curses]

i looked it up, rios's OPS+ this year is 56 in 496 plate appearances. compare that to his salary of 12 mil and you have, maybe, the least efficient player year that ever was. that is, until vernon wells' 2011, 81 OPS+ in 445 plate appearances, 23 million in salary this year.

 

i really really hope that colvin doesn't become like either of them.

I hope like hell that Colvin becomes what Wells was in his prime. And I hope like hell that the Cubs don't make the mistake of the insane contract.

 

wells is not good and he's not old.

[Guest]

i looked it up, rios's OPS+ this year is 56 in 496 plate appearances. compare that to his salary of 12 mil and you have, maybe, the least efficient player year that ever was. that is, until vernon wells' 2011, 81 OPS+ in 445 plate appearances, 23 million in salary this year.

 

i really really hope that colvin doesn't become like either of them.

I hope like hell that Colvin becomes what Wells was in his prime. And I hope like hell that the Cubs don't make the mistake of the insane contract.

 

wells is not good and he's not old.

In the four seasons he was aged 24-27, he averaged a 117.5 ops+. If we got that from Colvin in his pre-FA years, I'd be thrilled. Don't confuse Wells being overpaid now with him being a very productive and valuable player pre-obscene-contract.

 

---- ETA

 

During those same years, he averaged ~4.1 WAR and was paid a total of just under $9M according the B-R.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

then what did wilken draft him on, his size? a straight fastball? the guy's a genius to know that some coach at A ball was able to catch that after he had been demoted and was almost out of baseball and completely changed him into something that no one could have predicted.

 

I'm still not sure what you're trying to do with the Halladay situation. I'm thinking he drafted him on size, fastball velocity, ability to spin a breaking pitch, mechanics, and whatever else he'd factor in. The coaches did their jobs with the talent he picked, and Halladay did his job. This is no different from what usually happens to make a successful player.

 

carpenter's era+ with the blue jays? 89, 106, 113, 81 (led AL in earned runs while pitching 175 innings), 113, 88.

 

i don't consider that "mostly above average". he was a bad pitcher and a reclamtion project. but more of a clamation project because he wasn't ever any good until he hit st louis.

 

Not mostly, tied. Either way, he was a reclamation project because he tore apart his shoulder and elbow, not because he was considered a non-talent or bad when he left Toronto.

 

2 of the worst contracts in baseball due to their absolute fluctuation from year to year? i hope not. in rios's case he's just a guy and has been since the age of 28.

 

What does their contract have to do with someone the Cubs are currently developing who isn't even making half a million this year?

 

it hasn't changed anything.

 

It hasn't changed anything yet.

 

the only thing different is that we aren't producing pitching prospects that get hurt before reaching the bigs and never play for us. now we're producing positional prospects that aren't very good.

 

Like Castro, Soto, and Barney, or just the ones who suck?

 

what foresight by the guys in charge. give em raises!

 

Ah. You possess that foresight? What's the secret?

 

this is neither here nor there and completely beside the point. the team won less because they were high-paid, bad players and haven't produced much talent on the farm.

 

They haven't produced much in the farm because much wasn't invested in the farm. Making the major league team better usually does that to a farm system, and for a while there the farm system helped this major league team win some games. Those days aren't even that long ago, and obviously that and more isn't some far off, impossible to achieve goal.

 

tell them that.

 

The track record will tell them that. The lauded 2011 draft will tell them that. The depth in the farm system will tell them that.

 

Even then, if this pretend issue becomes an actual issue then just buy out the contract.

 

ricciardi came from a tree that has been and continues to be praised for their ability to evaluate and produce major leaguers on the cheap. beane would fire him right away, epstein would fire him right away. friedman would most likely fire him right away. none of these guys want old scouts running their drafts.

 

1. Your Riccardi line not only has nothing to do with his time as a ML GM, but it's not even all that true. What stud has come out of Oakland in the past decade even?

 

2. A big jaw dropping wow to the rest of this. Friedman's boss was one of those "old scouts," and a damn good one. Epstein employs former bomb of a GM for the Royals Allard Baird in his FO.

[Guest]

Just for easy reference...Colvin's at a career -0.7 WAR so far.

 

I REALLY hope he improves enough to match Wells in his early years. That would lock down one good OF spot for us for the next several years at a great price.

[Magnetic Curses]

I'm still not sure what you're trying to do with the Halladay situation. I'm thinking he drafted him on size, fastball velocity, ability to spin a breaking pitch, mechanics, and whatever else he'd factor in. The coaches did their jobs with the talent he picked, and Halladay did his job. This is no different from what usually happens to make a successful player.

 

halladay had no ability to "spin a breaking pitch". maybe fastball velocity and height. he drafted the worst pitcher in the league for the team and got lucky someone knew how to turn him into a completely different pitcher than the one wilken drafted.

 

Not mostly, tied. Either way, he was a reclamation project because he tore apart his shoulder and elbow, not because he was considered a non-talent or bad when he left Toronto.

 

he, again, was one of the worst pitchers in the AL. if not for Halladay's legendarily bad year in 2000, he would have been THE worst. it took the worst year by any starting pitcher ever to eclipse his badness.

 

What does their contract have to do with someone the Cubs are currently developing who isn't even making half a million this year?

 

one of the pitfalls of drafting on looks, not substance, of ignoring peripherals. you get a few good years out of a naturally talented player sandwiched between years of struggle, one of them has a great contract year and then boom, you're paying them way more than they're worth and your team is panicking to get rid of the one-time jewels of their system. wells and rios are fool's gold.

 

It hasn't changed anything yet.

 

you know, it's remarkably hard to tell if you're falling or flying when you don't have wings.

 

the only thing different is that we aren't producing pitching prospects that get hurt before reaching the bigs and never play for us. now we're producing positional prospects that aren't very good.

 

Like Castro, Soto, and Barney, or just the ones who suck?

 

barney sucks and soto was not signed on wilken's watch. I fail to see your point.

 

Ah. You possess that foresight? What's the secret?

 

as if it's my job and not theirs.

 

The track record will tell them that. The lauded 2011 draft will tell them that. The depth in the farm system will tell them that.

 

lol, wilken's been around for what 6 drafts? and now, this last draft, a draft in which no one has proven anything yet, you're going to point to it as a job-saver for him? that's awesome.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

halladay had no ability to "spin a breaking pitch". maybe fastball velocity and height. he drafted the worst pitcher in the league for the team and got lucky someone knew how to turn him into a completely different pitcher than the one wilken drafted.

 

I think you just made that up.

 

Roy Halladay was all of 23 when he was sent down and rebuilt. I'm still not sure why you're trying so hard on this one. He threw up a 2+ WAR season (bbref) in '99 at 22, before becoming "the worst pitcher in the league" and then by 2002 made Wilken one lucky guy. Do you really find it fascinating that a HS pitcher needed coaching and development time to hit his stride as a pro? Did Halladay not become what you'd expect and then more out of a touted first round pick?

 

he, again, was one of the worst pitchers in the AL. if not for Halladay's legendarily bad year in 2000, he would have been THE worst. it took the worst year by any starting pitcher ever to eclipse his badness.

 

No, he wasn't one of the worst pitchers in the AL. Nor does Halladay's 67 bad IPs in 2000 fall under legendary either. You're putting alot of effort into discrediting Wilken here, and it's through jabs with only hints of logic. I don't buy it.

 

one of the pitfalls of drafting on looks, not substance, of ignoring peripherals. you get a few good years out of a naturally talented player sandwiched between years of struggle, one of them has a great contract year and then boom, you're paying them way more than they're worth and your team is panicking to get rid of the one-time jewels of their system. wells and rios are fool's gold.

 

I'm trying here, but like your other arguments this has little to no basis in fact and it doesn't even make sense. What creates substance? Is that the only way to create substance? Do you have any proof of peripherals being ignored? What is so bad about getting a "a few good years out of a naturally talented player?" How do you know a player was drafted solely on looks? Should physical characteristics not play a part in drafting and scouting? Should players not struggle? What in the hell does Rios' and Wells' contracts have to do with Colvin?

 

you know, it's remarkably hard to tell if you're falling or flying when you don't have wings.

 

That sounds deep. Maybe you can put that in a place where it has more siginficance like an inspirational quote book.

 

barney sucks and soto was not signed on wilken's watch. I fail to see your point.

 

1. Barney doesn't suck, but the continually baseless babble does...

 

2. That the Cubs have developed position players...Two very good ones and one who's having a solid rookie year. There's more on the way, all from under Wilken's watch (Jackson, Flaherty, LeMahieu, Szczur, Ha, etc, etc).

 

as if it's my job and not theirs.

 

So you don't know the Secret? But you're speaking as if you do...Is this some kind of hindsight based analysis that you're kind of just trying to force through the window of you being right? Seems like it.

 

lol, wilken's been around for what 6 drafts? and now, this last draft, a draft in which no one has proven anything yet, you're going to point to it as a job-saver for him? that's awesome.

 

Lol I called it a job saver? The guy doesn't need to save his job. OTOH it's yet another moment in time where his scouting has earned praise from the baseball world.

[dew1679666265]

halladay had no ability to "spin a breaking pitch". maybe fastball velocity and height. he drafted the worst pitcher in the league for the team and got lucky someone knew how to turn him into a completely different pitcher than the one wilken drafted.

 

That's some pretty strong criticism for a guy who BA rated as the 23rd, 38th, and 12th best minor leaguer in baseball from 97-99. He had some solid numbers in the minors, pitched well in very limited ML action in 98 (at 21), struggled some in 99 (at 22), and then was horrid in 67 ML innings in 2000 (at 23).

 

He did need a mechanical (and apparently psychological) overhaul in 2001, but the makings of a very good pitcher were certainly there beforehand. I wouldn't credit Wilken with drafting the best pitcher in baseball, but to give him no credit for identifying talent in Halladay, or to actually criticize him for making the pick, is over the top I think.

 

barney sucks

 

Barney's a 2-3 WAR player during his cost controlled years. I don't think he should be held up as a great success of the farm system, but he doesn't suck. As a 4th round pick, I think he was a decent selection by Wilken.