Random Cubs Musings

[Clem Fandango]

If the FO was gonna call up prospects because they are good players and ready for MLB, Bryant would have 20 dongs in the majors right now. It's not that I don't think Russell is ready or not, it's that I don't envision the FO calling him up halfway through the season when there's no immediate need or spot for him when holding him in the minors only allows him to develop fully and allows the team to keep him longer which is what they are apparently doing with Bryant who is so very obviously ready to face MLB pitching. If Castro and/or Baez (or Russell for that matter) start getting reps at 3B, then you can speculate on his inevitable callup, but until that happens I don't see the FO deviating from their path. So for me, Russell is a 2015 September call up unless a spot opens up for him or one of our MI starts getting reps at 3B during the season. Like others have said, all this is possible, but with the way the FO has handled the prospects I just don't really see it as likely unless those caveats happen. Edited September 3, 2014 by The Logan

[Guest]

The bottom line here is that if Russell shows he is ready, positions will change to accommodate him. No one is "blocking" him.

 

Eventually. I don't see any reason to be certain that will happen mid-season 2015.

[XZero771679666304]

Nothing is blocking him but a position change that most people are assuming will happen. So nothing, really.

 

2 of these things need to happen for Russell to have a position:

 

- Bryant moves to the OF

- Baez continues to struggle through a large part of 2015 without immediate signs of optimism

- Valbuena struggles OR the Cubs are not in the playoff hunt

- One of Bryant, Baez, Castro, and Valbuena are traded

 

Can that happen? Absolutely. Is it a formality or trivial that 2 will happen? Not at all.

 

He's valuable, but I can't possibly believe the FO would let Valbuena complicate things in any substantial way. If Russell is tearing up AAA, trading or moving Valbuena to the bench to accommodate him is something that can and likely would be done in a cold second.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

The bottom line here is that if Russell shows he is ready, positions will change to accommodate him. No one is "blocking" him.

 

Eventually. I don't see any reason to be certain that will happen mid-season 2015.

this. guys changing positions mid-season is not as easy as it sounds.

[XZero771679666304]

The bottom line here is that if Russell shows he is ready, positions will change to accommodate him. No one is "blocking" him.

 

Eventually. I don't see any reason to be certain that will happen mid-season 2015.

 

And I never once said it was a certainty. But it is Russell's performance that will dictate that, not any compunction about position changes.

[Guest]

Nothing is blocking him but a position change that most people are assuming will happen. So nothing, really.

 

2 of these things need to happen for Russell to have a position:

 

- Bryant moves to the OF

- Baez continues to struggle through a large part of 2015 without immediate signs of optimism

- Valbuena struggles OR the Cubs are not in the playoff hunt

- One of Bryant, Baez, Castro, and Valbuena are traded

 

Can that happen? Absolutely. Is it a formality or trivial that 2 will happen? Not at all.

 

He's valuable, but I can't possibly believe the FO would let Valbuena complicate things in any substantial way. If Russell is tearing up AAA, trading or moving Valbuena to the bench to accommodate him is something that can and likely would be done in a cold second.

 

If Valbuena is a 3+ win guy on the infield(he's at 3.2 fWAR per 600 PA in nearly 1200 PAs as a Cub), then I don't share your conviction that they'll willingly bench a productive player while they're chasing a playoff spot. It's too easy to keep Russell down for development reasons(he's only 21, his walk rate isn't terrific, if he's 'only' OPSing .825 at AAA or something he's not a slam dunk to be an immediate impact guy) and too important to not sacrifice production for little reason.

[XZero771679666304]

The bottom line here is that if Russell shows he is ready, positions will change to accommodate him. No one is "blocking" him.

 

Eventually. I don't see any reason to be certain that will happen mid-season 2015.

this. guys changing positions mid-season is not as easy as it sounds.

 

Which is why they're going to prep Bryant, as the FO said.

[treebird]

If the FO was gonna call up prospects because they are good players and ready for MLB, Bryant would have 20 dongs in the majors right now.

 

we aren't trying to win/put our best team on the field this year. that will not be the case next year (starting in late april, at least).

[XZero771679666304]

Nothing is blocking him but a position change that most people are assuming will happen. So nothing, really.

 

2 of these things need to happen for Russell to have a position:

 

- Bryant moves to the OF

- Baez continues to struggle through a large part of 2015 without immediate signs of optimism

- Valbuena struggles OR the Cubs are not in the playoff hunt

- One of Bryant, Baez, Castro, and Valbuena are traded

 

Can that happen? Absolutely. Is it a formality or trivial that 2 will happen? Not at all.

 

He's valuable, but I can't possibly believe the FO would let Valbuena complicate things in any substantial way. If Russell is tearing up AAA, trading or moving Valbuena to the bench to accommodate him is something that can and likely would be done in a cold second.

 

If Valbuena is a 3+ win guy on the infield(he's at 3.2 fWAR per 600 PA in nearly 1200 PAs as a Cub), then I don't share your conviction that they'll willingly bench a productive player while they're chasing a playoff spot. It's too easy to keep Russell down for development reasons(he's only 21, his walk rate isn't terrific, if he's 'only' OPSing .825 at AAA or something he's not a slam dunk to be an immediate impact guy) and too important to not sacrifice production for little reason.

 

Okay, I see the validity of that side of the argument too, but if Valbuena continues to be that valuable, Russell is kept in AAA and the team is chasing wins, I don't see how you bench him rather than move Bryant, either (which is what got this debate going). You move Bryant to LF and leave Valbuena where he is. In a vacuum, Bryant is more valuable as a 3B, but if you keep him at 3B to maximize value but sacrifice value in LF by keeping a guy like Coghlan there, it that really of any benefit to the team?

 

In a scenario where there is no trade, I just have a hard time seeing Bryant being kept on third.

[Clem Fandango]

Out of curiosity, is Valbuena not athletic enough to handle LF?

[Guest]

Okay, I see the validity of that side of the argument too, but if Valbuena continues to be that valuable, Russell is kept in AAA and the team is chasing wins, I don't see how you bench him rather than move Bryant, either (which is what got this debate going). You move Bryant to LF and leave Valbuena where he is. In a vacuum, Bryant is more valuable as a 3B, but if you keep him at 3B to maximize value but sacrifice value in LF by keeping a guy like Coghlan there, it that really of any benefit to the team?

 

In a scenario where there is no trade, I just have a hard time seeing Bryant being kept on third.

 

Like I said earlier, I can see the reasons for any number of decisions with Bryant and his position. My best guess now is that come 2016 he'll be an outfielder full time, but in the meantime I don't have a good read on if they'll give him a shot at 3B at all, maybe let him play there until Russell is ready, or give him the full season so he can convert completely to OF over an offseason.

[XZero771679666304]

Out of curiosity, is Valbuena not athletic enough to handle LF?

 

A quick look at his limited OF metrics is not encouraging.

Edited September 3, 2014 by XZero77

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

someone create a WAC stat for LF (wins above coughlan).

[Guest]

I interpret that Theo comment to mean we're not adding a high dollar OF next year. I've seen an article mention we were looking for a DeJesus type-mentor, can play multiple positions, lefty, etc.....Personally, it seems a bit redundant to me since we've got Coghlan, Ruggiano, and Sweeney.

 

Coming back to this for a moment, the only FA that would seem to fit that archetype would be Aoki. I could see him being attractive for a number of reasons(LH to counter Bryant/Soler, good approach, can play LF and RF, buddy for Wada &/or Maeda), but he doesn't quite fit the mentorship bill, and like you mention there's not an enormous difference between him and say, Sweeney.

[sneakypower]

Castro was like 2 standard deviations better than Russell at Tennessee.

Castro had 1 HR and a .400 BABIP at Tennessee; you're not allowed to say this unless you're ready to admit Lindor's a better prospect than Baez

[Guest]

Castro was like 2 standard deviations better than Russell at Tennessee.

Castro had 1 HR and a .400 BABIP at Tennessee; you're not allowed to say this unless you're ready to admit Lindor's a better prospect than Baez

 

I def had the Lindor thought.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Castro was like 2 standard deviations better than Russell at Tennessee.

Castro had 1 HR and a .400 BABIP at Tennessee; you're not allowed to say this unless you're ready to admit Lindor's a better prospect than Baez

oh snap.

[Guest]

Castro was like 2 standard deviations better than Russell at Tennessee.

Castro had 1 HR and a .400 BABIP at Tennessee; you're not allowed to say this unless you're ready to admit Lindor's a better prospect than Baez

 

He had a .400 BABIP because he has an elite hit tool and was way too good for that level, that's why he promptly got promoted to MLB where he hit .300. He also had a better walk rate and a much better K rate than Russell.

 

EDIT: Castro at AA is like 4 standard deviations better than what Lindor has done at any level.

[Guest]

I don't think you ever have a .400 babip because anything but luck

[Vinestal]

I don't think you ever have a .400 babip because anything but luck

BABIP is a wierd stat. If a player can hit line drives instead of ground outs how much of that is due to the players ability? or is it always just luck? Is the abilty to drive the ball not a skill? Is beating the ball into the ground routinely not a failure of mechanics? I'm not saying I know but it seems like the player has some control over their BABIP

[sneakypower]

it's certainly a skill, but one that probably doesn't range much beyond .340 on the high end and .270 on the low end

[Burt Macklin, FBI]

it's certainly a skill, but one that probably doesn't range much beyond .340 on the high end and .270 on the low end

 

In the majors I think that's generally true, however when a player is dominating in the minors (something that naturally involves hitting lots of line drives which will drive up BABIP) I think something like a .400 BABIP is not just fluke luck.

 

Bryant BABIP at each level: .404, .400, .440, .367

[WrigleyField 22]

Bryant should get reps in LF and 3B and play where the bat is needed more. Sign a capable CF/OF and roll with a deep lineup with positional flexibility. Russell may complicate things in 6 months but I don't think you totally move Bryant off what would be his most valuable position unless he can't hack it. But the LF/3B split needs to favor 3B since LF won't be as hard to pick up long term and makes Bryant's bat more valuable.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WrigleyField 22]

Also while I think we can improve from Coghlan, him and Valbuena would appear to have fairly similar offensive value going forward. Generally speaking, if we're just trying to replace Valbuena's value at the second easiest defensive position, I don't think that's so unattainable. So it come down to Valbuena's defense at third verse Bryant's D at third and the replacement players LF defense vs Bryant's defense.

 

Though this may depend on your views of Valbuena. Is he the .340 wOBA guy from this year or the .315 guy from last year. Or in the middle somewhere. Fangraphs seems to think it may be more middle. Can we get a 330 wOBA OF? I'd think yes, so you'd want the position flexibility having Kris Bryant as a LF and 3B offers and not pushing him to LF outright based on some combination of Russell/Valbuena.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I don't think you ever have a .400 babip because anything but luck

BABIP is a wierd stat. If a player can hit line drives instead of ground outs how much of that is due to the players ability? or is it always just luck? Is the abilty to drive the ball not a skill? Is beating the ball into the ground routinely not a failure of mechanics? I'm not saying I know but it seems like the player has some control over their BABIP

 

Hitting line drives over a career involves skill.

 

Hitting them over a season is mostly luck. See Junior Lake, 2013.