Where would you rank Starling Peralta in the Cubs Top 50?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

When we started our top 50 polls, Starling Peralta was still with the Diamondbacks. Now that he has been returned, please pick a spot where you'd rank Peralta and everyone below him will move down a spot. If you think he should be in this list's top 15 or below 40, please point out what spot.

 

Here is the current list we have come up with:

 

#1: Javier Baez

#2: Jorge Soler

#3: Albert Almora

#4: Arodys Vizcaino

#5: Dan Vogelbach

#6: Brett Jackson

#7: Juan Paniagua

#8: Christian Villanueva

#9: Dillon Maples

#10: Josh Vitters

#11: Pierce Johnson

#12: Junior Lake

#13: Jeimer Candelario

#14: Duane Underwood

#15: Matt Szczur

#16: Arismendy Alcantara

#17: Ronald Torreyes

#18: Marco Hernandez

#19: Gioskar Amaya

#20: Alberto Cabrera

#21: Logan Watkins

#22: Rob Whitenack

#23: Barrett Loux

#24: Ben Wells

#25: Paul Blackburn

#26: Hector Rondon

#27: Tony Zych

#28: Jae-Hoon Ha

#29: Trey McNutt

#30: Steve Bruno

#31: Michael Jensen

#32: Trey Martin

#33: Tayler Scott

#34: Jose Arias

#35: Ryan McNeil

#36: Jose Rosario

#37: Shawon Dunston Jr.

#38: Nick Struck

#39: Austin Reed

#40: Reggie Golden

#41: Carlos Penalver

#42: Marcus Hatley

#43: Frandy de la Rosa

#44: Daury Torrez

[Guest]

I voted #22, bumping Whitenack lower.

[davell]

I've slotted him at 24 on my personal list. Behind Wells, Blackburn, and Rondon, but ahead of Cabrera, Whitenack, and Loux.

[craig]

36. (Heh, with Rosario's injury, I'd bump him out of the top 45 altogether, but that's a different point...)

 

Peralta has a serious arm, though, so I can see why you guys would vote him into the 20's. Seems kind of wild to me, though. But I'm going to put him right behind Scott, Arias, and McNeil.

[toonsterwu]

Raisin ... man we think alike on some things. 22 was the number I looked at as well, but ... that's more because I'd have Whitenack ahead. I have him around 20 on my own list.

 

I like Peralta better Loux. A lot of you are far higher on Loux than I am, though, so I imagine that, if we go by votes, Peralta will come in lower. That said, Peralta's ceiling is that much higher. A mid-90's fastball, a slider that flashes plus potential, and if Kevin Towers is to be believed, a very good change-up (there was an article on mlb.com about that). Now ... admittedly, a lot of that is based on the high end, and I don't ever anticipate a player hitting all the high notes ... but still ... his ceiling is that high.

 

As for Whitenack, while I think Peralta's ceiling is higher, I think if Whitenack's consistency is back, he'll be ready to help far sooner, and Whitenack at his best has more than end of the rotation potential.

[Rob]

I think he definitely belongs with that Whitenack, Loux, Wells grouping. And I think I like him just a tick better than Whitenack, so 22 works for me.

[toonsterwu]

36. (Heh, with Rosario's injury, I'd bump him out of the top 45 altogether, but that's a different point...)

 

Peralta has a serious arm, though, so I can see why you guys would vote him into the 20's. Seems kind of wild to me, though. But I'm going to put him right behind Scott, Arias, and McNeil.

 

craig, I get the concerns on Peralta (he really might be more Alberto Cabrera - not physically, but just a guy in the lower levels that looks to have the potential to start, but is never consistent enough (although stuff wise, there's some similarities between the two)), but my 2 cents on it is that he's ... shown something at full season ball, and shown the potential to have two plus pitches. While McNeil/Arias might show similar or better upside (very debatable), neither has done anything in full-season, and hence, why I have Peralta a clear notch ahead of that grouping.

 

On paper, his combination of level, adequate performance, and upside seems to put him more in the mix with the arms in the mid-20's.

[craig]

toonster, Cabrera is exactly the guy I was thinking of. Big arm, but somehow the actual effectiveness hasn't added up to the velocity.

 

But, who knows, hopefully he'll improve and get better than Cabrera has.

[toonsterwu]

Don't get me wrong, I'm excited about Peralta but excited only because of the potential he offers, not that I really buy into Peralta developing into a stud starter. I think he's a bit ahead of Cabrera at the same stage, with a better third pitch, but he has a lot of work to do in regards to consistency on his slider and change, and he has to sharpen his command. Betting money would still be more on a late inning arm, but the potential is fascinating. Ranking him in the 22/23 range (willing to switch mine to 22 if 3 votes will give a clear win there, rather than some murky 2 vs. 9 1 vote ties) is an upside nod, an acknowledgment of his improved stuff this year (he's the only one from that crop of Latin American arms that really made it ... Amaury Paulino, who some argued was better, is still working his way back, Willengton Cruz is long gone, and Luis Liria's stuff declined), with credit given to flashes of ability in the low levels and hope that "this time" it works. It's not a nod to how much I believe in his potential to become a good starting pitcher. I have hope, but not a ton, in that regards.

 

As a total side note, Peralta is bigger than that listed 180 ... so physically, I hadn't realized it until looking it up, he's actually fairly similar to Cabrera, size wise.

[craig]

Don't get me wrong, I'm excited about Peralta but excited only because of the potential he offers, not that I really buy into Peralta developing into a stud starter. I think he's a bit ahead of Cabrera at the same stage, with a better third pitch, but he has a lot of work to do in regards to consistency on his slider and change, and he has to sharpen his command. .....

 

You may know more details, but on the face of it Peralta seems well behind cabrera. At the same age 21, Peralta was 3.44 at Peoria, with 86K/44BB/11HR/99IP. When Cabrera was the same age 21, he was 3.28 at Daytona, so was better at a higher level, but his splits were much better: 90K/26BB/6HR/93IP. Higher league, with slightly better K-rate and walk and HR rates barely half what Peralta had. Unfortunately Cabrera hasn't seemed to get much better since then. Hopefully, Peralta will.

 

I'm interested in Peralta, for sure. If you can touch 97, that means you can probably work in the low 90's, that's good. He's sometimes had some strong GB-games; he's sometimes had low-walk games; he's had an occasional high-K game. Kind of the profile of a guy who can look very good on occasion; but he's lacked consistency. If he can pull the good stuff all together at the same time more consistently, you've got a chance for a good pitcher.

 

I admit I'm a little cautious on expecting age-based improvement on fastball-command from Latin pitchers. If an American pitcher who'd played at a small college and gotten drafted was 22, I'd figure some coaching might tune up his fastball control. But when a guy is going into his 6th season as a full-time professional pitcher, my guess is coaches have maybe done as much with his fastball as coaching can do. If your fastball is wild after 5 pro years, will another year or two of coaching likely fix that? Slider and change, that's different, because they obviously limit that for teenage Latins. If you can control your fastball, in time there's a chance that you can figure out a good breaking ball. But if you can't control your fastball, I kinda worry.

 

I'd certainly not put him ahead of a guy like Jensen, for example. But, hopefully Jensen, Peralta, and Cabrera will all end up working out much better than we can count on. The Cubs are certainly due to get some unexpected good luck.

[toonsterwu]

That probably wasn't the best phrasing. I was focusing on long-run starting potential, and hence the noted for the third pitch.

 

I should've, for the comparison, gone with

 

- At a similar age/stage, Cabrera's fastball was better (by a tiny amount probably), and his slider was more consistent.

- On the other hand, Peralta's change-up is ahead (even if we discount those comments from Towers, what I vaguely recall of Cabrera's change-up in Daytona was that it was pretty bleh, and Peralta at least has a usable one)

[craig]

That probably wasn't the best phrasing. I was focusing on long-run starting potential, and hence the noted for the third pitch.

..- On the other hand, Peralta's change-up is ahead (even if we discount those comments from Towers, what I vaguely recall of Cabrera's change-up in Daytona was that it was pretty bleh, and Peralta at least has a usable one)

 

Thanks. Having some chance at a 3rd pitch is somewhat encouraging.

 

In any event, Cabrera seemed to me like a really good prospect at that age. The fact that he never got any better makes him look like a pejorative comparison now. But if Peralta is even close to as promising as Cabrera seemed then, that's pretty good. Prospects of that caliber don't all succeed, but some will. Maybe Starlin will be one who does.

 

As to rotation, I think his chances are pretty remote there. If I could choose between having him as a good 7th inning reliever (guaranteed) versus gambling that he'd make it as an asset rotation starter (uncertain), I'd be happy to take the useful reliever and put it in the bank.

[Guest]

22, 24, 25 and 38 all have two votes, no other spot has more than 1 vote. How should we proceed?

[davell]

Take the votes, add them, divide by number of votes. Count the one vote outside the top 40 and count it as 41. Or ask that person to explain his vote, to make sure it wasn't just a troll job. Assuming its not, the average vote is 27.5. If it is a troll vote, discount it, and the average vote is 25.7. So, instead of a bunch of revoting and making people change their actual ranking, just round up and put him at 26 or 28, depending on the vote outside the top 40.

[jumbo]

I thought I posted 25, right ahead of Blackburn, but I don't see it in the comments.

[toonsterwu]

I'll switch over to 22. On my personal list, he's actually at 21, but I ended up moving Whitenack a tick ahead as well. That said, I can buy an argument for Peralta over Whitenack on starting ceiling and higher pen potential.

 

That temporarily breaks the tie and gives 22 a temporary 1 vote lead, although with so many votes spread out, davell's method may still make the most sense.

[craig]

Take the votes, add them, divide by number of votes. Count the one vote outside the top 40 and count it as 41. Or ask that person to explain his vote, to make sure it wasn't just a troll job. Assuming its not, the average vote is 27.5. If it is a troll vote, discount it, and the average vote is 25.7. So, instead of a bunch of revoting and making people change their actual ranking, just round up and put him at 26 or 28, depending on the vote outside the top 40.

 

Yes. Either take the average or the median of the votes submitted. Give a 41 to the outside of top-40 vote.

 

I don't think that's a trolling, given how many votes are in the upper 30's.

[Guest]

I will follow davell's suggestion but it'll have to wait till the evening given my workload currently.

 

With Peralta and the 3-player run off, there are only two more spots until we're done with the top 50.

 

Please let me know if there's anyone you want added to vote for #49 (I already have a request for AJ Morris).