Who is the Cubs #10 Prospect?

[craig]

Absolutely, there are no sure things here. Either a guy has some injury worries (Olt, Viz), some talent limitations (Hendricks, Z?), little permanence record at meaningful levels (Candy, Z, Blackburn, Rivero, or at the far extreme Eloy…), or something. No perfect profiles here. But out of this pool I think there will eventually come some productive major leaguers, plural.

 

I think it's fun to try to make our best guesses as to which guys it will be.

[Guest]

Really, really surprised that Hendricks isn't in Raisin's next three. He got my one and only vote with little hesitation

[Guest]

I'm the weirdo with one of my votes going to Blackburn.

 

I'm still buying into the crazy good control he exhibited early last year plus the few ticks he added to his FB.

[Guest]

Really, really surprised that Hendricks isn't in Raisin's next three. He got my one and only vote with little hesitation

 

I'm a bit lower on Hendricks than most. I do tend to value ceiling and potential more than most around here.

[davell]

Blackburn will be in my top 15. I'll probably be the first to try and make a case for Jimenez though. But not inside my top 15. Edited January 27, 2014 by davell

[Guest]

I'm the weirdo with one of my votes going to Blackburn.

 

I'm still buying into the crazy good control he exhibited early last year plus the few ticks he added to his FB.

 

Blackburn is fourth on my list right now.

[Bilbo161]

I'm the weirdo with one of my votes going to Blackburn.

 

I'm still buying into the crazy good control he exhibited early last year plus the few ticks he added to his FB.

 

I heard a lot of good things about Blackburn last season. One guy I respect said he kept hearing "stud" mentioned when Blackburn's name came up. I probably will put him in the next 6 picks or so, but not because I'm a scout or anything. Just what I've heard others saying.

[craig]

I think Blackburn's ceiling is hard to gage right now. We heard reference to hitting 95 once, so that suggests high velocity ceiling, to go with the control and curveball and finesse. I admit I haven't gotten the sense that many scouts see his with power-fastball potential, though, even with physical maturation/projection. Plus he's going to have the injury concerns, I'm not entirely confident that a guy who had a sore arm this summer will just rest that back to 100%? Or is that crazy, and there is no arm-trouble carryover from one year to the next?

 

But he's next on my list, at least the list I made up in October. I actually had all three of the 3B's behind a bunch of pitchers.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Blackburn had that amazing start and amazing finish last year, with the ugly middle part. He could easily be in the top 10 if there was a legit/fixable reason he fell apart in the middle like that. I've got him 15th right now more based on the level of competition he's faced so far than anything.

[davell]

If I remember correctly, Blackburn had an oblique injury or something like that. Maybe it was his back. But I think it was explained that it affected him once he came back from it for a while.

[Thrilho]

My next three are: Candelario, Olt, and Blackburn.

 

I think Candelario will tap into his power potential because of his

approach. He had 35 doubles and 11 HRs this season, but his power was

pretty down in the first half of the season. It looks from the splits that he started out with a patient approach in April, got bad results all around (.669 April OPS), then lost some

patience. In the second half of the season the approach got better

and he turned on the power.

 

IsoP BB%

Apr .084 17.0%

May .124 7.9%

Jun .110 9.1%

Jul .206 12.6%

Aug .178 13.0%

 

Although, a part of the increase in IsoP was that he hit 8 HRs in July

and August vs 3 in April-June. His XBHs by month were 7, 11, 7, 12,

10. Pretty consistent, so maybe the above approach/power correlation

isn't as strong as I'm suggesting.

 

I voted for Villanueva at 9, because of the power he showed

this year, the defense, and proximity to the majors. But choosing

number 9 was the hardest choice yet, because I think Candelario's

approach is really going to help his power play up.

 

 

Regarding Blackburn, BP wrote about him last week as an "on the rise"

guy in their Cubs top 10 article, and they think his fastball "has the potentional to develop into a true plus plus offering." I don't have a BP subscription, but here's the writeup on bleachernation:

 

http://www.bleachernation.com/2014/01/23/baseball-prospectus-releases-its-top-cubs-prospects-list-for-2014/comment-page-1/

 

 

Also, here's an article from Arguello on July 29 that says he was

"regularly hitting 95." Good read. Arguello calls him our 7th best

prospect in the midst of his July/August tailspin.

 

http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/2013/06/paul-blackburn-has-all-the-tools-to-be-an-impact-starter-in-the-majors/

 

 

I'm not putting him at 12 because I necessarily buy the potential for a plus plus fastball, but if he was regularly hitting 95 you put that together with the rest of his

repertoire and frame and he looks like a pretty high potential guy.

His strikeout to walk ratios early and late in the season show

potential for some pretty good command. 20K vs 2BB in June and 12 IP

5H 1R 1BB 17K in the playoffs.

 

I don't know what was going with him in July and August, but I'm

giving him a pass based on the rest of his profile. If it was an

injury he seemed to come out of it pretty well for the playoffs. And you'd think they wouldn't have let him pitch 7 innings in the first playoff game if they had concerns. This is an easy thing to say, but they may have had him working on something in particular in the middle of the season and that's why he sucked.

 

I'd go into why I prefer Blackburn to Hendrix, but it's mostly that at this time next year I think I'll be happy I took Blackburn.

[CubsWin]

I'm the weirdo with one of my votes going to Blackburn.

 

I'm still buying into the crazy good control he exhibited early last year plus the few ticks he added to his FB.

I'm the 2nd weirdo who voted for Blackburn. I lean towards upside in my rankings and of those that are left Candelario, Vizcaino and Blackburn have the most upside in my opinion.

[Guest]

My next three are: Candelario, Olt, and Blackburn.

 

I think Candelario will tap into his power potential because of his

approach. He had 35 doubles and 11 HRs this season, but his power was

pretty down in the first half of the season. It looks from the splits that he started out with a patient approach in April, got bad results all around (.669 April OPS), then lost some

patience. In the second half of the season the approach got better

and he turned on the power.

 

IsoP BB%

Apr .084 17.0%

May .124 7.9%

Jun .110 9.1%

Jul .206 12.6%

Aug .178 13.0%

 

Although, a part of the increase in IsoP was that he hit 8 HRs in July

and August vs 3 in April-June. His XBHs by month were 7, 11, 7, 12,

10. Pretty consistent, so maybe the above approach/power correlation

isn't as strong as I'm suggesting.

 

I voted for Villanueva at 9, because of the power he showed

this year, the defense, and proximity to the majors. But choosing

number 9 was the hardest choice yet, because I think Candelario's

approach is really going to help his power play up.

 

 

Regarding Blackburn, BP wrote about him last week as an "on the rise"

guy in their Cubs top 10 article, and they think his fastball "has the potentional to develop into a true plus plus offering." I don't have a BP subscription, but here's the writeup on bleachernation:

 

http://www.bleachernation.com/2014/01/23/baseball-prospectus-releases-its-top-cubs-prospects-list-for-2014/comment-page-1/

 

 

Also, here's an article from Arguello on July 29 that says he was

"regularly hitting 95." Good read. Arguello calls him our 7th best

prospect in the midst of his July/August tailspin.

 

http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/2013/06/paul-blackburn-has-all-the-tools-to-be-an-impact-starter-in-the-majors/

 

 

I'm not putting him at 12 because I necessarily buy the potential for a plus plus fastball, but if he was regularly hitting 95 you put that together with the rest of his

repertoire and frame and he looks like a pretty high potential guy.

His strikeout to walk ratios early and late in the season show

potential for some pretty good command. 20K vs 2BB in June and 12 IP

5H 1R 1BB 17K in the playoffs.

 

I don't know what was going with him in July and August, but I'm

giving him a pass based on the rest of his profile. If it was an

injury he seemed to come out of it pretty well for the playoffs. And you'd think they wouldn't have let him pitch 7 innings in the first playoff game if they had concerns. This is an easy thing to say, but they may have had him working on something in particular in the middle of the season and that's why he sucked.

 

I'd go into why I prefer Blackburn to Hendrix, but it's mostly that at this time next year I think I'll be happy I took Blackburn.

That was very informative. Thanks. I'm really starting to have hope on the pitching side of the Cubs prospects. Now if Maples can find some control.

[craig]

Yes, easy to get enthused about Blackburn from his early and late starts. And from the reports of some 95's. I don't remember that well; who else remembers the injury stuff? I thought it was more than oblique, and there was report of a forearm strain, or something very arm-specific. Am I wrong there? I hope so.

 

If indeed his fastball reaches "plus plus" value, that would help a lot. I'd kind of had the thought that his fastball wasn't likely to be much faster than average, even if control and curveball might enable a guy with an average fastball to be well above average anyway. He'll definitely be one of the most interesting guys to watch this year.

[craig]

Somebody yesterday brought up Hendricks and randy Wells. I think they are quite different in many ways (personality, actual stuff, minor-league success….) But obviously those differences are incidental to the poster's point, I think: Wells was a guy with a somewhat limited arm and he didn't end up very successful. Hendricks might be another guy with a limited arm who is likewise not going to end up being very successful.

 

Hendricks may very well be overwhelmed by the talent and power of big-leauge hitters. That said, though, I'm not sure that Wells really demonstrates the principle. Wells was quite good as a rookie, with a 3.05 ERA. I think his arm wasn't the same thereafter. I think he's more an example of how a guy with limited margin really can't afford any arm problems. But I'm not sure that had he stayed healthy, that he might not have been a reasonably useful pitcher.

 

Wells is probably Hendricks-ish in that he had anti-awful HR rates when he had his successful rookie year, and they were still OK the next year when he was OK. But by his 3rd year, his HR's had elevated to 23HR/135 innings. Disaster level. At the minor-league level, Hendricks has had solidly limited HR-allowance rates, even though scouts don't seem to quite understand how or why. If he can keep his HR's at a modest rate, I expect he'll be good, since he's not going to walk a lot. But if he fails, I expect we'll see that his HR-rate will be way worse in majors than it's been in minors. Which seems to often happen with limited-stuff guys.

[Guest]

Yes, easy to get enthused about Blackburn from his early and late starts. And from the reports of some 95's. I don't remember that well; who else remembers the injury stuff? I thought it was more than oblique, and there was report of a forearm strain, or something very arm-specific. Am I wrong there? I hope so.

 

If indeed his fastball reaches "plus plus" value, that would help a lot. I'd kind of had the thought that his fastball wasn't likely to be much faster than average, even if control and curveball might enable a guy with an average fastball to be well above average anyway. He'll definitely be one of the most interesting guys to watch this year.

 

He had a dead arm.

 

http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=chicagocubs&id=19877&city=chicago&src=desktop

[mul21]

 

Hendricks may very well be overwhelmed by the talent and power of big-leauge hitters. That said, though, I'm not sure that Wells really demonstrates the principle. Wells was quite good as a rookie, with a 3.05 ERA. I think his arm wasn't the same thereafter. I think he's more an example of how a guy with limited margin really can't afford any arm problems. But I'm not sure that had he stayed healthy, that he might not have been a reasonably useful pitcher.

 

 

I think this is something people tend to forget about Wells. He really didn't ever have the same life/sink on his pitches after that seemingly minor injury and was just bad after that happened.

[craig]

...He had a dead arm.

http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=chicagocubs&id=19877&city=chicago&src=desktop

 

Thanks, Cal.