Cuts for 2012

[mul21]

Baker crushes lefties, plays multiple positions, and isn't very expensive. I have no earthly idea why you want to get rid of him when he's a very useful player. If he was making $5 million, okay, but he's not. Stop trying to get rid of players who are very productive when used properly. It's dumb and makes the team worse.

[Guest]

Coleman doesn't have value because he shouldn't crack the Top 10 list of SP options for next year, and he's without any additional upside or value as a reliever.

Not at all curious if he can maintain the increased strikeout rate while reducing the bb and he rates?

 

No. He doesn't have the history or the stuff, and there's no indication that there's been an appreciable change in the latter. He's the exact opposite of raw, and he doesn't have the pitches to get out MLB hitters.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Baker crushes lefties, plays multiple positions, and isn't very expensive. I have no earthly idea why you want to get rid of him when he's a very useful player. If he was making $5 million, okay, but he's not. Stop trying to get rid of players who are very productive when used properly. It's dumb and makes the team worse.

 

Sorry, I just don't see him in the future plans. Castros already a part of them, probably Barney. I'm assuming that we'll have a full time 1B of some kind, and after that, we have LeMahieu, Flaherty, Vitters, and Lake, possible Watkins. All of these guys should be major league ready within the next 2-3 years and some already are. I fully understand why Baker is useful and wouldn't be at all upset if he stayed around, but on the other hand, I also understand why he could be viewed as expendable.

[davearm2]

He's also slated to make 2 mil in 2012. Especially if they decide that 2012 is to be more of a building year than a go for it year, wouldn't you rather spend that 2 mil on either the draft or international? In baseball dollars, 2 mil is nothing, but if we have 2 guys that could step in and fill the role Baker does even though they don't mash lefties like Baker, wouldn't you want to give them the job? Whatever happens, Baker isn't a part of the Cubs plans so I'd definitely prefer either save the 2 mil and non tender him or see what we could get in trade, and even if we just get a 20 year old high ceiling A ball pitcher for him I'd be all for it. LeMahieu clock is already ticking and Flaherty's about to be 26 and will have to be rostered anyway for Rule 5 purposes, and he's a guy that a team would take and hide at the end of the bench if nothing else, so as far as I'm concerned they can take Baker and DeWitts spots and find some kind of cheap 3B stop gap through FA or trade while we wait and see if either of them or Vitters can take over full time in the next few years.

 

To try to say this with any kind of certainty is just dumb and something you can't possibly know.

We know that Baker can't hit righties, and something like 75% of the season's ABs are against righties.

 

Given those facts, we should all hope that Baker isn't a part of the Cubs plans. He's a bench player or the short half of a platoon. Those guys are easily replaceable and imminently expendable.

Baker hits lefties well enough that having him on the bench changes late game strategy. Opposing managers have to hesitate bringing in a lefty against someone like Colvin because they wouldn't want their lefty facing Baker. Players that can consistently put up? 850 on either side of the platoon do not grow on trees. He'd certainly have more value on the other side, but he is worth what he makes right now.

I didn't mean to suggest Baker doesn't have value... he does. It's just limited. His value is on par with a guy like Reed Johnson. He can contribute, but he won't be a starter on the next great Cubs team.

 

Someone like Flaherty or LeMaheiu might be... we can't know yet, because they haven't had much of a chance.

 

That's why I'd prefer to give the playing time to those younger guys. The Cubs need to find long-term solutions, and Baker isn't one. I won't really care one way or the other if Baker is on the team or traded away, so long as nobody in charge is thinking he's "part of the plan" in the big-picture sense.

[XZero771679666304]

Baker crushes lefties, plays multiple positions, and isn't very expensive. I have no earthly idea why you want to get rid of him when he's a very useful player. If he was making $5 million, okay, but he's not. Stop trying to get rid of players who are very productive when used properly. It's dumb and makes the team worse.

 

Sorry, I just don't see him in the future plans. Castros already a part of them, probably Barney. I'm assuming that we'll have a full time 1B of some kind, and after that, we have LeMahieu, Flaherty, Vitters, and Lake, possible Watkins. All of these guys should be major league ready within the next 2-3 years and some already are. I fully understand why Baker is useful and wouldn't be at all upset if he stayed around, but on the other hand, I also understand why he could be viewed as expendable.

 

There's a big difference between viewing a player as expendable and trying to unload him. If someone wants to offer the Cubs something of value for him, that's great. But no way should we be out actively trying to give him away.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Baker crushes lefties, plays multiple positions, and isn't very expensive. I have no earthly idea why you want to get rid of him when he's a very useful player. If he was making $5 million, okay, but he's not. Stop trying to get rid of players who are very productive when used properly. It's dumb and makes the team worse.

 

Sorry, I just don't see him in the future plans. Castros already a part of them, probably Barney. I'm assuming that we'll have a full time 1B of some kind, and after that, we have LeMahieu, Flaherty, Vitters, and Lake, possible Watkins. All of these guys should be major league ready within the next 2-3 years and some already are. I fully understand why Baker is useful and wouldn't be at all upset if he stayed around, but on the other hand, I also understand why he could be viewed as expendable.

 

There's a big difference between viewing a player as expendable and trying to unload him. If someone wants to offer the Cubs something of value for him, that's great. But no way should we be out actively trying to give him away.

 

I think it depends largely on the plans for 2012. If they do go out and make the necessary moves to contend, then yes, you want the best 25 guys you can put together. On the other hand, if they view 2012 primarily as a year to build and the new front office to evaluate the organization, then I think that Baker, Byrd and DeWitt are guys who should be shopped agressively while we put Flaherty and LeMahieu on the big league roster while they evalaute what they can do and what the long term needs are going to be. As of now, I think that the only current position player that we have that's guaranteed a starting job next year is Starlin Castro, and probably Geo although theres an outside chance that he can be traded. Sorianos pretty likely as well, but who thought that the Blue Jays would be able to unload Wells as easily as they did. After that, there are plenty of options.

[Conky]

But wouldn't you rather find a way to acquire a full time 3B rather than a platoon in which the guy who get the majority of the playing time is so-so against righties and the guy who gets much less mashes? If this is a building year, I still say let both Baker and DeWitt go and see what the younger guys can do. I have nothing against Baker, but unless the feel he's part of the future, see what he's worth in trade.

 

Who is this theoretical full time 3B? If you can get a real one, sure, but that's a lot easier said than done. You also have bench spots to fill, and you might as well fill them with people who do something useful, like mash lefties and play multiple spots.

 

 

The fact that somebody might not be a part of this team in 3 years is no reason to get rid of them today. You put the best players you have in 2012 on the 2012 team.

 

There are really only 4 spots for infielders on a team. Castro is 1. Barney is 2, although I'd prefer he be the backup MI than starting 2B. Then, there are 2 spots leftover for DeWitt, Baker, LeMahieu, and Flaherty, with Vitters and Lake hopefully a few years away. My choice would be to give LeMa and Flaherty to opportunity to see what they can do for now and save 3-4 mil between both Baker and DeWitt. Baker could potentially stay on as he can also play 1B and a bit of outfield as well, and he does mash lefties where as the majority of the bench options (DeWitt, Flaherty, Colvin, LaHair, Campana) are lefites, so I guess that if it were to come down to Baker or DeWitt, that would give Baker a leg up but I'd just as soon see what we can get for him.

 

Basically, there are 4 bench spots available beside the backup C. There will be a lot of guys competing for those jobs, unless 1 or 2 end up as starters which I'd really rather not see unless it's at 2nd.

 

How many more years does Vitters get to show something? This guy is just languishing in the Cubs system or so it appears. Never seen him in person, so I have no frame of reference. Looking at his numbers, I wonder what people see in him? He was supposed to be ready or even push A-Ram at some point. Ram is gone now. If Vitters can't play, I don't really see the reason for keeping him in conversations regarding the future. What am I missing?

[Guest]

How many more years does Vitters get to show something? This guy is just languishing in the Cubs system or so it appears. Never seen him in person, so I have no frame of reference. Looking at his numbers, I wonder what people see in him? He was supposed to be ready or even push A-Ram at some point. Ram is gone now. If Vitters can't play, I don't really see the reason for keeping him in conversations regarding the future. What am I missing?

Apparently, you missed that he played at age 21 this year.

[davell]

Theo has a tough choice to make with Vitters. And not a lot of time to do it. On top of that, he has very limited data on him, from how sparse our scouting system has been. We could go with a stopgap, one year solution at 3B next year, because Vitters is definitely a guy that needs a full year at AAA. But I can't really see him getting any more time than that, even with him being as young as he is. I think he's going to have to make significant progress next year in working counts for him to be given the reigns at 3B for us.

[Conky]

How many more years does Vitters get to show something? This guy is just languishing in the Cubs system or so it appears. Never seen him in person, so I have no frame of reference. Looking at his numbers, I wonder what people see in him? He was supposed to be ready or even push A-Ram at some point. Ram is gone now. If Vitters can't play, I don't really see the reason for keeping him in conversations regarding the future. What am I missing?

Apparently, you missed that he played at age 21 this year.

 

I guess my point is that he is apparently never going to fulfill the expectations of a high first round pick. Looking forward, why discuss the future Bakers and Dewitts of the Cubs system? He is young, but he has had 4 full years in pro ball without the distractions of college. I would love to see him "flip the switch" as many hope every year with Vitters. Sadly, I just see that ship as having sailed. Maybe I'm too down on him, though.

[Cubswin11]

But wouldn't you rather find a way to acquire a full time 3B rather than a platoon in which the guy who get the majority of the playing time is so-so against righties and the guy who gets much less mashes? If this is a building year, I still say let both Baker and DeWitt go and see what the younger guys can do. I have nothing against Baker, but unless the feel he's part of the future, see what he's worth in trade.

 

Who is this theoretical full time 3B? If you can get a real one, sure, but that's a lot easier said than done. You also have bench spots to fill, and you might as well fill them with people who do something useful, like mash lefties and play multiple spots.

 

 

The fact that somebody might not be a part of this team in 3 years is no reason to get rid of them today. You put the best players you have in 2012 on the 2012 team.

 

There are really only 4 spots for infielders on a team. Castro is 1. Barney is 2, although I'd prefer he be the backup MI than starting 2B. Then, there are 2 spots leftover for DeWitt, Baker, LeMahieu, and Flaherty, with Vitters and Lake hopefully a few years away. My choice would be to give LeMa and Flaherty to opportunity to see what they can do for now and save 3-4 mil between both Baker and DeWitt. Baker could potentially stay on as he can also play 1B and a bit of outfield as well, and he does mash lefties where as the majority of the bench options (DeWitt, Flaherty, Colvin, LaHair, Campana) are lefites, so I guess that if it were to come down to Baker or DeWitt, that would give Baker a leg up but I'd just as soon see what we can get for him.

 

Basically, there are 4 bench spots available beside the backup C. There will be a lot of guys competing for those jobs, unless 1 or 2 end up as starters which I'd really rather not see unless it's at 2nd.

 

How many more years does Vitters get to show something? This guy is just languishing in the Cubs system or so it appears. Never seen him in person, so I have no frame of reference. Looking at his numbers, I wonder what people see in him? He was supposed to be ready or even push A-Ram at some point. Ram is gone now. If Vitters can't play, I don't really see the reason for keeping him in conversations regarding the future. What am I missing?

He's still only 21/22, has only played 5 seasons (4 full) and is in AA where he has had some success (.770 OPS this year). He also has been on the young side in every league he has played in and he should see some time in AAA this year. I think people forget sometimes that he was only 17 his first year in the minors and he was only 18 for his first full year. Sure he hasn't shot through the system, but he isn't languishing in it either.

[Guest]

How many more years does Vitters get to show something? This guy is just languishing in the Cubs system or so it appears. Never seen him in person, so I have no frame of reference. Looking at his numbers, I wonder what people see in him? He was supposed to be ready or even push A-Ram at some point. Ram is gone now. If Vitters can't play, I don't really see the reason for keeping him in conversations regarding the future. What am I missing?

Apparently, you missed that he played at age 21 this year.

 

I guess my point is that he is apparently never going to fulfill the expectations of a high first round pick. Looking forward, why discuss the future Bakers and Dewitts of the Cubs system? He is young, but he has had 4 full years in pro ball without the distractions of college. I would love to see him "flip the switch" as many hope every year with Vitters. Sadly, I just see that ship as having sailed. Maybe I'm too down on him, though.

You're not alone in being down on him, though you seem more down than most. However, we're talking about a kid who at a pretty young age handled AA pretty well. He cut his strikeout rate significantly. He's showing flashes of his potential power stroke. Realistically, he has two big hurdles remaining: Defense and patience. If he can make strides on each of those this season, he still stands a very realistic chance of reaching the majors and being an above average regular at 3B starting in 2013.

[CUBZ99]

How many more years does Vitters get to show something? This guy is just languishing in the Cubs system or so it appears. Never seen him in person, so I have no frame of reference. Looking at his numbers, I wonder what people see in him? He was supposed to be ready or even push A-Ram at some point. Ram is gone now. If Vitters can't play, I don't really see the reason for keeping him in conversations regarding the future. What am I missing?

Apparently, you missed that he played at age 21 this year.

 

I guess my point is that he is apparently never going to fulfill the expectations of a high first round pick. Looking forward, why discuss the future Bakers and Dewitts of the Cubs system? He is young, but he has had 4 full years in pro ball without the distractions of college. I would love to see him "flip the switch" as many hope every year with Vitters. Sadly, I just see that ship as having sailed. Maybe I'm too down on him, though.

You're not alone in being down on him, though you seem more down than most. However, we're talking about a kid who at a pretty young age handled AA pretty well. He cut his strikeout rate significantly. He's showing flashes of his potential power stroke. Realistically, he has two big hurdles remaining: Defense and patience. If he can make strides on each of those this season, he still stands a very realistic chance of reaching the majors and being an above average regular at 3B starting in 2013.

 

You have to wonder if Vitters is the case of the Cubs actually doing the right thing with him for development sake, and not necessarily for the sake of his prospect status.

 

It would be interesting to see what his prospect status would be if they would have continued to let him demolish the leagues he was successful in rather than be so aggressive with the promotions. At 18 he OPS'ed .863 in the NWL, at 19 he OPS'ed .886 at A- prior to being promoted, at 20 he OPS'ed .795 prior to promotion. Granted .795 is not demolishing the league, but it is pretty impressive for a 20 year old and there is no telling how much better his numbers would have been if he had spent the whole season there.

 

The positive aspect of the early promotions is that it has clearly challenged him to get better. His stats show that he has continued to improve in each league he has been promoted to and to date he has not stalled out at any level. I'm looking forward to next year, and seeing how he handles the PCL league pitching. I think based upon how hitter friendly the league has been in the past, he has the ability to put up some great numbers.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

How many more years does Vitters get to show something? This guy is just languishing in the Cubs system or so it appears. Never seen him in person, so I have no frame of reference. Looking at his numbers, I wonder what people see in him? He was supposed to be ready or even push A-Ram at some point. Ram is gone now. If Vitters can't play, I don't really see the reason for keeping him in conversations regarding the future. What am I missing?

Apparently, you missed that he played at age 21 this year.

 

This is an example of how prospects who are drafted out of high school (and at only 17, in Vitters' case) tend to be underrated after awhile because people just don't get how long it takes.

[Little Slide Rooter]

How many more years does Vitters get to show something? This guy is just languishing in the Cubs system or so it appears. Never seen him in person, so I have no frame of reference. Looking at his numbers, I wonder what people see in him? He was supposed to be ready or even push A-Ram at some point. Ram is gone now. If Vitters can't play, I don't really see the reason for keeping him in conversations regarding the future. What am I missing?

Apparently, you missed that he played at age 21 this year.

 

This is an example of how prospects who are drafted out of high school (and at only 17, in Vitters' case) tend to be underrated after awhile because people just don't get how long it takes.

 

This is also an example of the short sighted all or nothing mindset of Cubs fans. Since he was drafted 3rd overall with a lot of hype surrounding him, if he doesn't become a superstar, he's a bust. Who cares that most of his peers are still facing college pitching.

[Conky]

This is also an example of the short sighted all or nothing mindset of Cubs fans. Since he was drafted 3rd overall with a lot of hype surrounding him, if he doesn't become a superstar, he's a bust. Who cares that most of his peers are still facing college pitching.

 

This post makes very little sense. I merely said that he is apparently never going to fulfill expectations of a high first round draft choice. Seems to be the same thing you are admitting with the bold. I said at this point I didn't see a reason to expect to rely on Vitters in future plans. That could always change.

 

My question was how much longer should he be given to show return on investment? The way I see it, the Cubs are not looking at playing "serviceable" players at key offensive positions moving forward. If the ceiling for Vitters is now "serviceable", then I see a #3 overall pick that was wasted, yes. That would mean he has become a disappointment, not necessarily a "bust".

 

This is an example of how prospects who are drafted out of high school (and at only 17, in Vitters' case) tend to be underrated after awhile because people just don't get how long it takes.

 

I don't see how you think I underrate Vitters at all. By all accounts, he is no longer seen as an elite talent. Is he now seen as having the potential to be an average MLB 3B? I think that is debatable, but certainly not what he was drafted to become.

 

I hope Vitters does turn it around, as I said. I just happen to think the holes in his game are in critical areas with questions surrounding his lack of position (glove), plate discipline, and lack of power for any position he might be capable of playing. Drafting high school players is always a crapshoot, as we know. It is understood that they may take longer to develop. In cases like Jason Heyward, or Starlin Castro, they bloom early. That is always the hope. That being said, kids drafted out of high school are players seen as having the athleticism, skills, and frame to develop ahead of the curve.

 

That hasn't happened here. In fact, Vitters has arguably regressed in comparison to his peers. His peers are no longer high school or college players. They are professional players in the Cubs and other organizations. Vitters has now had his 4 years (equivalent to a college career) to grow physically and develop mentally. He has been a part of a professional organization for 4 years focused entirely on baseball. Let's hope the new regime can get coaches in place quickly enough to help him turn it around before it's too late.

[Little Slide Rooter]

This is also an example of the short sighted all or nothing mindset of Cubs fans. Since he was drafted 3rd overall with a lot of hype surrounding him, if he doesn't become a superstar, he's a bust. Who cares that most of his peers are still facing college pitching.

 

This post makes very little sense. I merely said that he is apparently never going to fulfill expectations of a high first round draft choice. Seems to be the same thing you are admitting with the bold. I said at this point I didn't see a reason to expect to rely on Vitters in future plans. That could always change.

 

My question was how much longer should he be given to show return on investment? The way I see it, the Cubs are not looking at playing "serviceable" players at key offensive positions moving forward. If the ceiling for Vitters is now "serviceable", then I see a #3 overall pick that was wasted, yes. That would mean he has become a disappointment, not necessarily a "bust".

 

 

 

How many more years does Vitters get to show something? This guy is just languishing in the Cubs system or so it appears. Never seen him in person, so I have no frame of reference. Looking at his numbers, I wonder what people see in him? He was supposed to be ready or even push A-Ram at some point. Ram is gone now. If Vitters can't play, I don't really see the reason for keeping him in conversations regarding the future. What am I missing?

 

You just seem to be a bit too down on him. Not every top 10 pick is going to become a supserstar. If he can be a bit more diciplined at the plate, then he could very well end up a mid .800s OPS guy as the extra base power has been there all along, and these days that's pretty good for a 3B. Also, at age 22 it's far from out of the question to expect him to develope that home run power that was originally projected.

[mul21]

 

I don't see how you think I underrate Vitters at all. By all accounts, he is no longer seen as an elite talent. Is he now seen as having the potential to be an average MLB 3B? I think that is debatable, but certainly not what he was drafted to become.

 

I'm not sure where you're getting this, but he's still seen as a guy who can be a pretty good ML player. Yeah, he's got work to do, but that's why he's still in the minors.

 

 

I hope Vitters does turn it around, as I said. I just happen to think the holes in his game are in critical areas with questions surrounding his lack of position (glove), plate discipline, and lack of power for any position he might be capable of playing. Drafting high school players is always a crapshoot, as we know. It is understood that they may take longer to develop. In cases like Jason Heyward, or Starlin Castro, they bloom early. That is always the hope. That being said, kids drafted out of high school are players seen as having the athleticism, skills, and frame to develop ahead of the curve.

 

That hasn't happened here. In fact, Vitters has arguably regressed in comparison to his peers. His peers are no longer high school or college players. They are professional players in the Cubs and other organizations. Vitters has now had his 4 years (equivalent to a college career) to grow physically and develop mentally. He has been a part of a professional organization for 4 years focused entirely on baseball. Let's hope the new regime can get coaches in place quickly enough to help him turn it around before it's too late.

 

Between how young he was when drafted, illness, injury, and just the amount of time it takes to figure out how to play professional baseball, I have no idea why you're so down on the guy. Also, do you realize that guys who went to college are probably still mostly in the minors? As has been mentioned, he's been young for every single level he's been at in the minors, has had an adjustment period and then figured it out.

 

Not to mention that fact that you're calling a first round draft pick a disappointment if he ends up as an average major league 3B? How many 1st round picks flame out before they get to the majors? Or even AA?

[Splendid Splinter]

Someone finally mentioned the injuries that Vitters seem to get every single year and it usually happen during one of his hot streaks.

 

Also... does anybody know what the average age for a MLB rookie? Just curious, but I wanna guess that it's around 24 yrs old... Vitters still has a couple more years left before he hits that age. Heck even 24 is still young for a MLB player. This is the same reason why Castro should be playing at SS for the next several years instead of trying to move him off to 2B/3B. They're both still young enough to improve their game.

Edited November 8, 2011 by Splendid Splinter

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

It's way to early to say this with completely confidence obviously, but I think I like Vitters moving forward more than I like Jackson. I expect big things from Vitters next year.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It's way to early to say this with completely confidence obviously, but I think I like Vitters moving forward more than I like Jackson. I expect big things from Vitters next year.

 

If Vitters puts up an .869 OPS next season across AA and AAA, that would be 99 points of OPS higher than he's ever managed beyond low-A.

 

At that point, he'd have taken a humongous leap forward offensively and he'd still just have matched what Brett Jackson just did at almost exactly the same age as Vitters would be. And he's still a significantly worse defender who is further down the defensive spectrum than Jackson.