Balance of hitting and pitching prospects

[Bull]

Back in the days of the birth of this board, the prevailing thought was that developing pitchers was preferable to developing hitters. I think I recall someone had the signature "grow the pitchers, sign the hitters".

 

The obvious flaw,in retrospect, in this thought process is injury. Although with the 2002-2005 cubs, the devastating injuries came after they reached the major leagues (prior, wood) often times they don't (tinstaapp).

 

My questions are: what was the reasoning behind this thought process (develop pitchers instead of hitters)? Was it flawed theory or just destroyed by the dusty baker factor? What has changed to make developing hitter more preferable? When it is time to trade hitting prospects for pitchers, what makes us think teams are going to give up less injury averse pitchers to us than we could have developed? All leading to the final question: With the Cardinals having 5 pitchers in their top ten prospects, does that make them more balanced than us, or move fragile, or both?

 

Thanks for your input.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I assume it was because the dominant team in the 1990s was the Braves, and we were trying to copy them. Similar to how we're trying to duplicate the Red Sox' success now.

[Bull]

I assume it was because the dominant team in the 1990s was the Braves, and we were trying to copy them. Similar to how we're trying to duplicate the Red Sox' success now.

I'm looking for real reasons YOU think one approach or the other is/was better, not cynical reflections on possible flawed reasons the respective front offices employed each. Particularly your original thoughts on the final question.

[Backtobanks]

Maybe it's just drafting the best player(s) available at the time. If all of your best prospects are hitters (Cubs), obviously you have to go in the direction of developing hitters and sign (or trade for) pitchers. I think the theory of developing pitchers is preferable because the pitcher (with few exceptions) is the player that most affects the outcome of the game. Obviously the time is near for the Cubs to think about trading hitting for pitching because the offense potentially looks to be very good within a year or two while the pitching looks to be below average. As for the Cardinals, they look to be at the top of the NL Central for awhile because of their pitching prospects in addition the balance of youth and experience on the ML roster.

[ConstableRabbit]

I honestly think a lot of it has to do with scarcity. Now that power is so scarce, developing it on your own is so important.

[davell]

Hitters success rates are much higher. Which leads to taking the surer thing with the top pick. Which lends to the team being hitter heavy. Of course, it's followed up by taking tons of arms inside the rest of the top 10 rounds. It's a really solid formula. With the prevailing thought being finding power in today's game being the single hardest item to find.

 

In the end, it's all currency and can be moved for whatever holes we see fit to fill thru trade. For those that don't follow the amateur draft, this year will certainly put this to the test, as its a really pitching heavy top end of the draft.

[Guest]

Hitters success rates are much higher. Which leads to taking the surer thing with the top pick. Which lends to the team being hitter heavy. Of course, it's followed up by taking tons of arms inside the rest of the top 10 rounds. It's a really solid formula. With the prevailing thought being finding power in today's game being the single hardest item to find.

 

In the end, it's all currency and can be moved for whatever holes we see fit to fill thru trade. For those that don't follow the amateur draft, this year will certainly put this to the test, as its a really pitching heavy top end of the draft.

 

This.

[ConstableRabbit]

Well said.

[wekim81]

Hitters success rates are much higher. Which leads to taking the surer thing with the top pick. Which lends to the team being hitter heavy. Of course, it's followed up by taking tons of arms inside the rest of the top 10 rounds. It's a really solid formula. With the prevailing thought being finding power in today's game being the single hardest item to find.

 

In the end, it's all currency and can be moved for whatever holes we see fit to fill thru trade. For those that don't follow the amateur draft, this year will certainly put this to the test, as its a really pitching heavy top end of the draft.

You can honestly say the top 6 talents in this draft are pitchers. Which is why i really think you'll see the Cubs reverse course, and go best player available and take one vs. reaching (to me anyways) for Turner or Gatewood.

[Guest]

Hitters success rates are much higher. Which leads to taking the surer thing with the top pick. Which lends to the team being hitter heavy. Of course, it's followed up by taking tons of arms inside the rest of the top 10 rounds. It's a really solid formula. With the prevailing thought being finding power in today's game being the single hardest item to find.

 

In the end, it's all currency and can be moved for whatever holes we see fit to fill thru trade. For those that don't follow the amateur draft, this year will certainly put this to the test, as its a really pitching heavy top end of the draft.

You can honestly say the top 6 talents in this draft are pitchers. Which is why i really think you'll see the Cubs reverse course, and go best player available and take one vs. reaching (to me anyways) for Turner or Gatewood.

 

For me right now it's Kolek, Aiken, Rodon, Jackson, Beede

 

But I don't know a lot. Just what I've read the last few weeks.

[rawaction]

Interesting topic. I think both pitcher heavy then and hitter heavy now are/were the correct approaches. Things go in cycles. In the 90s and early 2000s, the league was very hitter friendly. You had steroids or whatever and good hitters were a dime a dozen. Now, you aren't seeing the huge offensive numbers any more. So, basically its about scarcity. There seems to be more guys with mediocre stuff putting up good numbers now. But I think that's because of a lack of good hitters. So if u can develop good hitters. .....

[Guest]

I assume it was because the dominant team in the 1990s was the Braves, and we were trying to copy them. Similar to how we're trying to duplicate the Red Sox' success now.

I prefer the Yankees comp with Jeter, Posada, Williams, and Soriano.

[Guest]

Also, I like that the Cubs have taken the best position prospect in the first and then went volume with pitching in the next rounds.

[RynoRules]

I assume it was because the dominant team in the 1990s was the Braves, and we were trying to copy them. Similar to how we're trying to duplicate the Red Sox' success now.

I prefer the Yankees comp with Jeter, Posada, Williams, and Soriano.

 

The other roadmap the Yanks laid out, IMO, was to have 4-5 core guys who you keep at all costs (Jeter, Posada, Williams, Pettite and Rivera). Everyone else is fungible. Yeah, Pettite was in Houston for a couple of years, but you get my drift.

 

Now that I think of it, the fact that they let Pettitie walk in his 30's goes to show that keeping the hitters around is a more likely scenario for sustained success.

[RynoRules]

Also, I like that the Cubs have taken the best position prospect in the first and then went volume with pitching in the next rounds.

 

Agreed. Pitchers - no matter how high-end their talent is - have less room for error.

[RynoRules]

What's the name of that catcher who is supposed to be the second-coming of Mauer? If he's there (doubtful) you grab him.

 

EDIT: Nevermind - Alex Jackson.

[Cubswin11]

What's the name of that catcher who is supposed to be the second-coming of Mauer? If he's there (doubtful) you grab him.

 

EDIT: Nevermind - Alex Jackson.

There isn't a player like that in this draft. At least I haven't heard anyone say that about Jackson.

[RynoRules]

What's the name of that catcher who is supposed to be the second-coming of Mauer? If he's there (doubtful) you grab him.

 

EDIT: Nevermind - Alex Jackson.

There isn't a player like that in this draft. At least I haven't heard anyone say that about Jackson.

 

I was being hyperbolic, but from what I have read he's the most polished hitter in the draft and is a catcher. That's a pretty rare combo, hence the Mauer reference.

[Guest]

What's the name of that catcher who is supposed to be the second-coming of Mauer? If he's there (doubtful) you grab him.

 

EDIT: Nevermind - Alex Jackson.

There isn't a player like that in this draft. At least I haven't heard anyone say that about Jackson.

 

I was being hyperbolic, but from what I have read he's the most polished hitter in the draft and is a catcher. That's a pretty rare combo, hence the Mauer reference.

 

There are a lot of questions on whether he'll stay at catcher in pro ball.

[RynoRules]

What's the name of that catcher who is supposed to be the second-coming of Mauer? If he's there (doubtful) you grab him.

 

EDIT: Nevermind - Alex Jackson.

There isn't a player like that in this draft. At least I haven't heard anyone say that about Jackson.

 

I was being hyperbolic, but from what I have read he's the most polished hitter in the draft and is a catcher. That's a pretty rare combo, hence the Mauer reference.

 

There are a lot of questions on whether he'll stay at catcher in pro ball.

 

I've read that as well. I guess I am thinking his value is maximized by staying at catcher, but it makes sense that you'd want to preserve him in RF or at 3B based on his size. Supposedly he has the arm to stay behind the dish though.

[imb]

here's a general rule, if there are already questions about if an 18-year-old is gonna stick at catcher, he's not going to stick at catcher.

 

with the way offense is trending down, the catcher position is gonna end up being the fat guy version of the shortstop position imo

[RynoRules]

here's a general rule, if there are already questions about if an 18-year-old is gonna stick at catcher, he's not going to stick at catcher.

 

with the way offense is trending down, the catcher position is gonna end up being the fat guy version of the shortstop position imo

 

You're probably right, just fantasizing about what having a decent catcher with a great hit tool would look like....

 

Ummm...perhaps I should have chosen my words more carefully.

[dcvalpo]

here's a general rule, if there are already questions about if an 18-year-old is gonna stick at catcher, he's not going to stick at catcher.

 

with the way offense is trending down, the catcher position is gonna end up being the fat guy version of the shortstop position imo

 

You're probably right, just fantasizing about what having a decent catcher with a great hit tool would look like....

 

Ummm...perhaps I should have chosen my words more carefully.

 

LOL!!!! That was like one of those amazing, and real, auto-corrects you see online!

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/lol.gif

[neely crenshaw]

I think you need to develop whatever top talent you can get(obviously) but then you have to be ready to trade your strength to fill your weaknesses. I think Hendry failed at this terribly, seemingly overvaluing his guys.

 

It is such a crap shoot to sign the top guys, whether it be a middle of the order bat or top of the rotation arm. They are usually older, very possibly heading for diminishing outcomes and signing for huge dollars for huge years.

 

I think the FO is working at getting the best players that will be ready during the same 2-3 year window allowing them flexibility to get what they are missing. I would fully expect we grab the best College pitcher available at our slot. Thinking he should be ready in the 1-3 seasons, about the time when most of our hitters will arrive- obviously a couple will arrive before that.

[Gmoney08]

I'm a big fan of the quantity pitching approach and using your 1st round picks on the best hitters.

 

 

That being said if the pitching talent is clearly better than the hitting talent, I want the best player available.