Sean Marshall traded: T Wood +prospects Sappelt &Torreys p21

[Guest]

How does one pronounce Torreyes?

 

looks like a mish mosh of torres and reyes

 

so i'd go with tor-reyes

[toonsterwu]

On Torreyes - Some folks had mixed reports about his glove.

 

In what way? He doesn't even have the error totals you normally see from young international infielders.

 

Someone said it on twitter today. Not sure who off the top.

[RynoRules]

So Sappelt is essential Tony Campana, but a year younger and with more power. Ronald Torreyes is a 2b. He looks like he's got a good eye and a solid glove, overall it looks like a solid return for Marshall.

 

Sappelt is better than Campana. Campana has more speed, but Sappelt has a more rounded offensive game, which is more valuable unless your sole goal is speed.

 

Sappelt is one year removed from hitting 53 XBH in a season at AA and AAA.

 

Tony Campana has exactly 53 XBH in his entire professional career spanning more than 400 games.

 

I guess if we stipulate that "More power" means "A whole lot more power" then I can see the comparison.

 

Yeah, I don't see how he is comparable to Campana in at all. Looks to me like his ceiling is more like Fukudome's (at least at the plate).

[CUBZ99]

I have to think Torreyes immediately becomes a top 5 prospect in the system.

 

Heck no. top 5? I mean, I can understand KG's optimistic take of 11th in the system, but top 5? Baez, Brett Jackson, Szczur, McNutt, Rhee Maples, Wells, and etcetera would easily top him for me. He's not that much more advanced than Marco Hernandez, and hernandez has a better shot to stick at short, so I'd take Marco over him.

 

Our system isn't terrible. Even almost all of the key analyzers out there have acknwoledged that we aren't terrible. Below average, yes. But for a Jose Altuve type to be top 5 would mean a terrible system.

 

I agree, I think the prevailing thought that the Cubs system is terrible, is dead wrong. The biggest problem with the system though is that most of the really promising players are still at the lower levels of the system. Torreyes will fit in nicely with all of the lower level infield prospects and give the Cubs more room for error in hoping that they can develop some of those guys into useful players. Between DeVoss, Hernandez, Watkins, Baez, Watkins and Torreyes the future middle infield is looking promising.

[toonsterwu]

I have to think Torreyes immediately becomes a top 5 prospect in the system.

 

Heck no. top 5? I mean, I can understand KG's optimistic take of 11th in the system, but top 5? Baez, Brett Jackson, Szczur, McNutt, Rhee Maples, Wells, and etcetera would easily top him for me. He's not that much more advanced than Marco Hernandez, and hernandez has a better shot to stick at short, so I'd take Marco over him.

 

I think you have to give more weight to the Midwest league if you're comparing him to Hernandez.

 

Sure, I'll give him credit for doing what he did there, but I'll also give Marco plus "points" for better tools, better positional value, and better upside. In the end, considering how far away both are, and how low Torreyes ceiling is (I mean ... he's essentially mini-DJ LeMahieu offensively), for me, I'd take Marco over Ronald without a 2nd thought.

 

But to each their own with prospect rankings.

[pccubfan]

A Cain, Hamels, Wood, Cashner/Shark, and pitcher (Garza return)/McNutt would make a competitive rotation. Add Fielder to Castro, DeJesus, Soto, Bjax, Barney and a corner outfielder (Garza return) and the offense could be improved enough to be very competitive.

 

The rotation would look pretty good, but that offense is kind of bad. Prince and Castro are the best two hitters - and the only legitimately good ones - and then you have a 31 year old Soto, a developing BJax, an aging DeJesus, and Barney. That corner OF better be really good if we're going to be very competitive for anything other than .500.

 

If I were trading Garza, I'd be looking for a pitcher with the potential to replace or be better than Garza, and a potential stud 1B/RF/LF. If the Cubs have signed Fielder then it would be a corner outfielder.

 

Looking at what Latos and Gio returns were, I'd think that getting two players that meet the criteria mentioned is doable.

[toonsterwu]

On Torreyes - Some folks had mixed reports about his glove.

 

In what way? He doesn't even have the error totals you normally see from young international infielders.

 

Someone said it on twitter today. Not sure who off the top.

 

I might've been mistaken about this. I thought I saw someone semi-important mention it on twitter this morning/earlier, but I can't find it right now.

 

Okay, I confused things. Someone on redszone said Goldstein didn't like his defense. I know Goldstein wasn't high on his defense in early 2011, not sure how he feels now.

Edited December 23, 2011 by toonsterwu

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Jose Altuve as an 18 year old hit .284 .320 .433 in rookie ball.

 

Torreyes as an 18 year old hit .356 .398 .457 in regular A ball, two levels up.

 

Altuve had (and has realized, to some degree) much better power and discipline upside, but Torreyes' hit tool looks to be significantly better.

[dew1679666265]

If I were trading Garza, I'd be looking for a pitcher with the potential to replace or be better than Garza, and a potential stud 1B/RF/LF. If the Cubs have signed Fielder then it would be a corner outfielder.

 

Looking at what Latos and Gio returns were, I'd think that getting two players that meet the criteria mentioned is doable.

 

Are they going to be that good by 2013, though? That'd be a massive scalping if we got two players in the Garza deal who are good enough to have a major impact on the 2013 season. And with that offense, the bat we got would absolutely have to make a major impact for us to have a chance.

[pccubfan]

I have to think Torreyes immediately becomes a top 5 prospect in the system.

 

Heck no. top 5? I mean, I can understand KG's optimistic take of 11th in the system, but top 5? Baez, Brett Jackson, Szczur, McNutt, Rhee Maples, Wells, and etcetera would easily top him for me. He's not that much more advanced than Marco Hernandez, and hernandez has a better shot to stick at short, so I'd take Marco over him.

 

Our system isn't terrible. Even almost all of the key analyzers out there have acknwoledged that we aren't terrible. Below average, yes. But for a Jose Altuve type to be top 5 would mean a terrible system.

 

I agree, I think the prevailing thought that the Cubs system is terrible, is dead wrong. The biggest problem with the system though is that most of the really promising players are still at the lower levels of the system. Torreyes will fit in nicely with all of the lower level infield prospects and give the Cubs more room for error in hoping that they can develop some of those guys into useful players. Between DeVoss, Hernandez, Watkins, Baez, Watkins and Torreyes the future middle infield is looking promising.

 

The problem with the Cubs' system, as I see it, is that right now there aren't any stars. There are a lot of guys who probably make it to the big leagues but it lacks star power.

[Guest]

 

Yeah, I don't see how he is comparable to Campana in at all. Looks to me like his ceiling is more like Fukudome's (at least at the plate).

 

Huh?

 

I don't see that even a little bit.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

More fun with Torreyes stats:

 

K/PA percentage, minor league career

 

Torreyes 5.4%

Fuld: 9.5%

Castro: 11.0%

Vitters: 21.5%

 

The pure contact tool here is insane.

[toonsterwu]

I have to think Torreyes immediately becomes a top 5 prospect in the system.

 

Heck no. top 5? I mean, I can understand KG's optimistic take of 11th in the system, but top 5? Baez, Brett Jackson, Szczur, McNutt, Rhee Maples, Wells, and etcetera would easily top him for me. He's not that much more advanced than Marco Hernandez, and hernandez has a better shot to stick at short, so I'd take Marco over him.

 

Our system isn't terrible. Even almost all of the key analyzers out there have acknwoledged that we aren't terrible. Below average, yes. But for a Jose Altuve type to be top 5 would mean a terrible system.

 

I agree, I think the prevailing thought that the Cubs system is terrible, is dead wrong. The biggest problem with the system though is that most of the really promising players are still at the lower levels of the system. Torreyes will fit in nicely with all of the lower level infield prospects and give the Cubs more room for error in hoping that they can develop some of those guys into useful players. Between DeVoss, Hernandez, Watkins, Baez, Watkins and Torreyes the future middle infield is looking promising.

 

The problem with the Cubs' system, as I see it, is that right now there aren't any stars. There are a lot of guys who probably make it to the big leagues but it lacks star power.

 

Definitely fair. The "star" potential is largely in the lower levels.

[toonsterwu]

More fun with Torreyes stats:

 

K/PA percentage, minor league career

 

Torreyes 5.4%

Fuld: 9.5%

Castro: 11.0%

Vitters: 21.5%

 

The pure contact tool here is insane.

 

He does have a good contact tool. What was LeMahieu's number? Curious how those two stack up on their contact ability.

[Guest]

More fun with Torreyes stats:

 

K/PA percentage, minor league career

 

Torreyes 5.4%

Fuld: 9.5%

Castro: 11.0%

Vitters: 21.5%

 

The pure contact tool here is insane.

 

He does have a good contact tool. What was LeMahieu's number? Curious how those two stack up on their contact ability.

 

11%

[pccubfan]

If I were trading Garza, I'd be looking for a pitcher with the potential to replace or be better than Garza, and a potential stud 1B/RF/LF. If the Cubs have signed Fielder then it would be a corner outfielder.

 

Looking at what Latos and Gio returns were, I'd think that getting two players that meet the criteria mentioned is doable.

 

Are they going to be that good by 2013, though? That'd be a massive scalping if we got two players in the Garza deal who are good enough to have a major impact on the 2013 season. And with that offense, the bat we got would absolutely have to make a major impact for us to have a chance.

 

I'd want the bat closer to the majors than the arm. My imagined rotation had the pitcher either slotted as the #5 in 2013 or even using McNutt as the #5.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

More fun with Torreyes stats:

 

K/PA percentage, minor league career

 

Torreyes 5.4%

Fuld: 9.5%

Castro: 11.0%

Vitters: 21.5%

 

The pure contact tool here is insane.

 

He does have a good contact tool. What was LeMahieu's number? Curious how those two stack up on their contact ability.

 

11.0%

 

As an 18 year old in the Midwest League, Torreyes just struck out 19 times in 308 PAs

As a 20 year old in the Midwest League in 2009, LeMaheiu struck out 22 times in 168 PAs

[pccubfan]

I have to think Torreyes immediately becomes a top 5 prospect in the system.

 

Heck no. top 5? I mean, I can understand KG's optimistic take of 11th in the system, but top 5? Baez, Brett Jackson, Szczur, McNutt, Rhee Maples, Wells, and etcetera would easily top him for me. He's not that much more advanced than Marco Hernandez, and hernandez has a better shot to stick at short, so I'd take Marco over him.

 

Our system isn't terrible. Even almost all of the key analyzers out there have acknwoledged that we aren't terrible. Below average, yes. But for a Jose Altuve type to be top 5 would mean a terrible system.

 

I agree, I think the prevailing thought that the Cubs system is terrible, is dead wrong. The biggest problem with the system though is that most of the really promising players are still at the lower levels of the system. Torreyes will fit in nicely with all of the lower level infield prospects and give the Cubs more room for error in hoping that they can develop some of those guys into useful players. Between DeVoss, Hernandez, Watkins, Baez, Watkins and Torreyes the future middle infield is looking promising.

 

The problem with the Cubs' system, as I see it, is that right now there aren't any stars. There are a lot of guys who probably make it to the big leagues but it lacks star power.

 

Definitely fair. The "star" potential is largely in the lower levels.

 

Very low levels.

[KingCubsFan]

I have to think Torreyes immediately becomes a top 5 prospect in the system.

 

Heck no. top 5? I mean, I can understand KG's optimistic take of 11th in the system, but top 5? Baez, Brett Jackson, Szczur, McNutt, Rhee Maples, Wells, and etcetera would easily top him for me. He's not that much more advanced than Marco Hernandez, and hernandez has a better shot to stick at short, so I'd take Marco over him.

 

Our system isn't terrible. Even almost all of the key analyzers out there have acknwoledged that we aren't terrible. Below average, yes. But for a Jose Altuve type to be top 5 would mean a terrible system.

I have to disagree with you, here. Other than Baez, Jackson and Sczcur, I don't think there's many comparable with Torreyes combination of age and accomplishments. Rhee has some promise, but he's basically got one half season of good performance following a year and a half of mediocrity following his injury. Hernandez still hasn't played in a full season league, and Ben Wells projects to be a middle of the rotation innings eater with average K rates. I think you can group in Torreyes with a lot of our prospects, but his performance thus far makes me rank him above a lot of the other guys. If it wasn't for the fact that he was short, he'd be getting Howie Kendrick comparisons right now. And given that he just slugged .457 at Dayton, I'll wait to see how much of a detriment his size will really be for a second baseman.

[YearofDaCubs]

Not a bad haul. Somebody ranked Torryes as 11th in our system. So for him a 5th starter and a 4th OF for Marshall sounds like a pretty good deal.

[toonsterwu]

I have to think Torreyes immediately becomes a top 5 prospect in the system.

 

Heck no. top 5? I mean, I can understand KG's optimistic take of 11th in the system, but top 5? Baez, Brett Jackson, Szczur, McNutt, Rhee Maples, Wells, and etcetera would easily top him for me. He's not that much more advanced than Marco Hernandez, and hernandez has a better shot to stick at short, so I'd take Marco over him.

 

Our system isn't terrible. Even almost all of the key analyzers out there have acknwoledged that we aren't terrible. Below average, yes. But for a Jose Altuve type to be top 5 would mean a terrible system.

I have to disagree with you, here. Other than Baez, Jackson and Sczcur, I don't think there's many comparable with Torreyes combination of age and accomplishments. Rhee has some promise, but he's basically got one half season of good performance following a year and a half of mediocrity following his injury. Hernandez still hasn't played in a full season league, and Ben Wells projects to be a middle of the rotation innings eater with average K rates. I think you can group in Torreyes with a lot of our prospects, but his performance thus far makes me rank him above a lot of the other guys. If it wasn't for the fact that he was short, he'd be getting Howie Kendrick comparisons right now. And given that he just slugged .457 at Dayton, I'll wait to see how much of a detriment his size will really be for a second baseman.

 

Fair enough. To each their own with prospect rankings. I thought Altuve was one of the more over-hyped stories this year (and talking to some folks, they felt he was an average starter at best in the bigs), and I think Altuve is a better talent than Torreyes.

 

I went through my current list, and personally, I wouldn't put him top 15. Granted, a lot of people are bunched after the top 5 or 6. His ceiling isn't high enough for me, and I noted my argument for Hernandez ahead of Torreyes above.

 

I'm still more bullish on Wells than most. He's flashed a good breaking ball before, and if he gains consistency on that, he might move past the mid-rotation innings eater label that he gets right now.

[danonwaveland]

Not important, but. . .

 

Assuming we re-sign Kerry Wood, one uni should say "T WOOD" on the back and Kerry's should just say "WOOD."

 

Merry Christmas!

[Guest]

Neither should have an initial as they already have different numbers and nobody should have any trouble discerning between the two.

 

The initial thing always annoyed me.

[imb]

they should just say Kerry and Travis like a 6-year old little league team

[pccubfan]

they should just say Kerry and Travis like a 6-year old little league team

 

How about Big Wood and Little Wood.