Who is the Cubs #19 Prospect?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

The poll will be open for 48 hours. There is a tie breaker vote at the same time for #17 and #18.

 

Results so far:

 

1. Javier Baez

2. Kris Bryant

3. Albert Almora

4. Jorge Soler

5. CJ Edwards

6. Arismendy Alcantara

7. Pierce Johnson

8. Daniel Vogelbach

9. Christian Villanueva

10. Jeimer Candelario

11. Mike Olt

12. Kyle Hendricks

13. Arodys Vizcaino

14. Paul Blackburn

15. Rob Zastryzny

16. Corey Black

17 & 18. Eloy Jimenez/Neil Ramirez

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Pineyro, Skulina, Maples.

[SouthSideRyan]

Can we please get Vitters out of the green room?

[ctcf]

Can we please get Vitters out of the green room?

 

I'll second that (or fifth it, apparently)

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Vitters is Brady Quinn.

[SouthSideRyan]

Dillon Maples is Ron Powlus

[davell]

Can we please get Vitters out of the green room?

Not too long ago, didn't you say you didn't care about Vitters and probably liked Szczur more than him?

[rawaction]

Vitters was 25 on my post season list. I don't see any reason for me personally to move him up. Haven't heard a compelling reason why I should.

 

Pineyro, Contreras, and my 3rd vote is up for sell. Someone sell me on my 3rd, Vitters included.

[Guest]

I went Vitters, Szczur and Contreras (not in that order)

[Cubswin11]

Vitters

Dunston Jr

Maples

[WrigleyField 22]

Vitters was 25 on my post season list. I don't see any reason for me personally to move him up. Haven't heard a compelling reason why I should.

 

Pineyro, Contreras, and my 3rd vote is up for sell. Someone sell me on my 3rd, Vitters included.

He has always been age appropriate or young and save an MLB stint he shouldn't have been called up for, has had varying levels of success, never being truly overmatched and eventually adapting at levels where he initially struggled, with continued PAs.

 

Now with his injury last year his clock is starting to really tick, but it's not like he's out of options. In his short stint last year he showed improved patience right at the cusp of normalizing. While he lacks the best approach he's always been a guy with pretty good hitting tool.

 

Now the move off 3B hurts as far as prospect rating goes, but there is no athletic reason he can't develop into a plus fielder at LF and I believe any other organization would still be developing him as a 3B. But at this point it's probably just better he gets a head start on his OF development. Certainly he has more pressure on the bat now but with the potential and pedigree to maybe handle that.

 

I read a lot of comments now where they just want the high ceiling low level guys at this point, but unlike someone like Watkins, Vitters ceiling isn't gone, we've just gotten to experience his struggles at a different level. He maybe doesn't still have the ceiling you'd expect out of a former number three prospect, but he still appears to be able to hit and power almost always has growth for a 24/25 year old player. His biggest black mark is a poor MLB stint. Nothing else is a major red flag that really indicates he can't be MLB player.

 

That's the best pitch I have for Vitters. The most promising thing for me is the possibility of increased walk rate he showed. Really want regular AB to see if that is for real, even if it's at AAA (would be beneficial to focus on LF reps too rather than scarce pitch hitting ABs)

[davell]

Vitters was 25 on my post season list. I don't see any reason for me personally to move him up. Haven't heard a compelling reason why I should.

 

Pineyro, Contreras, and my 3rd vote is up for sell. Someone sell me on my 3rd, Vitters included.

 

Depends on what's important to you: Upside or proximity to the majors. I go upside, for the most part. Therefore, a guy like Vitters, who I can't see being anything more than a short side of a platoon guy, doesn't factor into my thinking at all.

 

On the other hand, guys like Maples, Underwood, Torres, and others DO have legit upside, to where they still have the ability to become something more than a spare part.

 

With Jimenez off the board, Torres was considered by basically everyone to be top 3 in the class and even 1st by some. If you've voted for Jimenez at this point, voting for Torres makes sense at this point too.

 

Not to mention, Badler loves the guy. Very advanced for his age, will stick in the middle infield, hits to all fields, and has the ability to turn himself into a 15-20 HR type, with a good hit tool.

[craig]

...there is no athletic reason he can't develop into a plus fielder at LF and I believe any other organization would still be developing him as a 3B. ...

 

I like Vitters. I think he's got a good chance to become a solid platoon guy. And there's a chance he'll hit enough, and with enough power, to have some seasons where he's the primary LFer for some team. I don't think he's ever going to be an average defender at any position, though. Too slow to be an average OFer, and may not have good instincts either. (No reason to expect that he will, I wouldn't think….)

 

I'm going entirely with unproven guys. Guys who might have very serious talent, and who haven't done anything to indicate that they'll be wild or unable to put it to effective use.

 

Rivero, Tseng, Torres.

1. Torres for reasons Dave mentioned. He's been highly regarded, and I have no reason to assume without reason. As such, the chance is there to be an excellent defensive middle infielder who hits for good contact and solid power. Until I see reason to think otherwise, I'm keeping the hope that he'll turn into the complete, no-flaws player. Possibly an Almora type: complete well-rounded guy, the only constraints being speed and good-not-incredible power.

2. Tseng: Fast, sinker, arsenal, change, control. Chance to be a high-level starter with no known talent-limitations.

3. Rivero: Power arm, perhaps a deadly splitter. I expect he'll start the season as a rotation starter.

[craig]

We all have varying, and variably subjective, criteria for our preferences. Some don't want to rank guys who haven't proven success. I'm inclined towards guys who have strong scouting/tools, but who haven't given any indication that they won't be able to live up to them. Over guys who are known to have limited talents, or have shown over exposure to have performance issues. Cabrera, for example, might have tools not much less than Rivero's, but has had years to show that his performance doesn't play up to the tools.

 

Subjectively, I go with the "which guy would I most mind losing." Cabrera, Vitters don't go high for me on that. But guys who might end up becoming serious impact players, even if they haven't established that yet, I'm more reluctant to give up.

[jersey cubs fan]

Can we please get Vitters out of the green room?

or out of the organization.

[craig]

I'd like to see Rosscup added soon.

 

absolutely not a "chance to be a big-time impact star someday" guy. But with the breaking stuff to get so many strikeouts, I think he may be under-appreciated. Maybe no place for a lefty reliever on a top-30 list, given how contained his future role is certain to be, no matter how effective he might become within that role. But it may speak to the richness of the system if a guy with a very solid chance to be an effective long-term reliever isn't even in the top-30 discussion.

 

He's got a significant chance to pitch effectively in the major leagues for a lot of years.

[jersey cubs fan]

but there is no athletic reason he can't develop into a plus fielder at LF and I believe any other organization would still be developing him as a 3B.

 

What does this even mean? It's not just athleticism that makes a quality outfielder. The instincts necessary to take proper angles to the ball aren't just something born of athletic ability. And since lots of people talked about his inability to stick at 3B from the day he was drafted, I see no reason to assume they would all be trying to force him to play a position he cannot play.

[Bilbo161]

 

With Jimenez off the board, Torres was considered by basically everyone to be top 3 in the class and even 1st by some. If you've voted for Jimenez at this point, voting for Torres makes sense at this point too.

 

Not to mention, Badler loves the guy. Very advanced for his age, will stick in the middle infield, hits to all fields, and has the ability to turn himself into a 15-20 HR type, with a good hit tool.

 

Nice to know Torres is nearly as highly thought of as Jimenez. Maybe I'll move him up my list. :-)

[toonsterwu]

My initial inclination is to go, in some order, Cabrera, Vitters, Contreras. I may change it at some point, as Pineyro would be next up on that list, but I just question if his ceiling is high enough to make the move ahead of the 3. If Contreras develops into an average defensive backstop with some offensive ability, there's value in that, and hence why he made it on.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

I'd like to see Rosscup added soon.

 

absolutely not a "chance to be a big-time impact star someday" guy. But with the breaking stuff to get so many strikeouts, I think he may be under-appreciated. Maybe no place for a lefty reliever on a top-30 list, given how contained his future role is certain to be, no matter how effective he might become within that role. But it may speak to the richness of the system if a guy with a very solid chance to be an effective long-term reliever isn't even in the top-30 discussion.

 

He's got a significant chance to pitch effectively in the major leagues for a lot of years.

 

Pretty much this.

 

I really, really like Rosscup, but I can't justify putting him in the top 30.

[Guest]

I really like Rosscup, but I'm not about to vote for him at this point. Of course, he has as good/better a case than Rivero or Cabrera, so if you're considering those guys you need to consider Rosscup too. 13.4 K/9 in 90 IP as a reliever, and gets out RH hitters too.

[craig]

Yeah, I'm not sure how quickly Rosscup would get in on my list either. I'm usually going for asset starters. Thus I'm voting for Eloy and Torres and Tseng and will soon start voting for Hannemann. So voting for strictly a role guy like Rosscup wouldn't even be internally consistent for me!

 

I probably wouldn't actually vote for him until I'd get back to mid-20's or later with guys like Vitters and Ramirez. I view them as limited-ability limited-role guys. Vitters as a platoon guy, Ramirez as RH reliever.

 

I assume that Ramirez and and Vitters both getting enough votes to finish in the teens reflects that there are still voters who think Ramirez has a reasonable chance to be an effective starter, and same for Vitters.

[SouthSideRyan]

Can we please get Vitters out of the green room?

Not too long ago, didn't you say you didn't care about Vitters and probably liked Szczur more than him?

 

Eh not quite. It was more an off the cuff remark bout Vitters bring outside my top 20. Looking further into it I see a bunch of live arms and hitters who have done nothing.

[WrigleyField 22]

but there is no athletic reason he can't develop into a plus fielder at LF and I believe any other organization would still be developing him as a 3B.

 

What does this even mean? It's not just athleticism that makes a quality outfielder. The instincts necessary to take proper angles to the ball aren't just something born of athletic ability. And since lots of people talked about his inability to stick at 3B from the day he was drafted, I see no reason to assume they would all be trying to force him to play a position he cannot play.

Well I didn't mean to say he projects as a LF from day one (hence the word develop) but with his makeup he isn't limited from learning the position, such as someone like, Vogelbach who just has physical limitations. Even if he's a little slow and his arm is about average he could project to provide just fine defense with the right development. His issues at 3B really shouldn't carry over as they seemed to be more about the reaction/read than say arm strength. The range that's needed as a LF is not the same type as a 3B. And if we're viewing him as a prospect, we're just projecting what's possible within his toolset (again with proper development). He gets a fresh slate. Sure he needs to learn quick but it is the easiest position which benefits him.

 

The comment about him sticking at 3B in another organization I think is true. It's perhaps a moot point since he is in our system and not another system. But I kind of throw it out there because if we're looking at Josh Vitters the LF and not Josh Vitters the 3B, it's a good thing were making the switch while he's still young enough to build a defensive comfort with the position. In fact we have one whole option year to burn letting him do it in Iowa every day if we want. He's actually not in that do or die position even though he's been around so long it feels like he should be. He still has a lot of development time as a prospect. Even next year when he'll be out of options, he'll still be pretty appropriately aged as a rookie with several years of cheap pre-arb salaries in which he could provide a solid platoon/bench bat while still working on his overall game.

 

Also teams absolutely keep guys with Vitters profile at 3B well past the point of the not being able to play the spot if there's no one else there. And the exact reason is because 1Bor LF are such relatively easy positions to shirt down to in the defensive spectrum.

[jersey cubs fan]

Well I didn't mean to say he projects as a LF from day one (hence the word develop) but with his makeup he isn't limited from learning the position, such as someone like, Vogelbach who just has physical limitations. Even if he's a little slow and his arm is about average he could project to provide just fine defense with the right development. His issues at 3B really shouldn't carry over as they seemed to be more about the reaction/read than say arm strength. The range that's needed as a LF is not the same type as a 3B. And if we're viewing him as a prospect, we're just projecting what's possible within his toolset (again with proper development). He gets a fresh slate. Sure he needs to learn quick but it is the easiest position which benefits him.

 

The comment about him sticking at 3B in another organization I think is true. It's perhaps a moot point since he is in our system and not another system. But I kind of throw it out there because if we're looking at Josh Vitters the LF and not Josh Vitters the 3B, it's a good thing were making the switch while he's still young enough to build a defensive comfort with the position. In fact we have one whole option year to burn letting him do it in Iowa every day if we want. He's actually not in that do or die position even though he's been around so long it feels like he should be. He still has a lot of development time as a prospect. Even next year when he'll be out of options, he'll still be pretty appropriately aged as a rookie with several years of cheap pre-arb salaries in which he could provide a solid platoon/bench bat while still working on his overall game.

 

Also teams absolutely keep guys with Vitters profile at 3B well past the point of the not being able to play the spot if there's no one else there. And the exact reason is because 1Bor LF are such relatively easy positions to shirt down to in the defensive spectrum.

 

If you want to, go ahead, but giving a 23 year old prospect a fresh slate due to a position change forced by his inability to field his own position, is ridiculous. You can't treat him like some 18 year old coming out of high school.

 

The comment about "any other organization" keeping him at third is nearly as ridiculous. The likelihood that some other team would have done so tells us nothing. The Cubs are not some unique developmental organization. Lots of teams are doing smart things with prospects these days, including moving guys who can't play third base off of third base.