Offseason Rumors & Transactions Thread

[Guest]

this team has two top 5 in the game prospects in its system right now and just graduated one and another that should be right around there

 

Corey Patterson, Juan Cruz, Hee Seop Choi, Mark Prior.

Did you miss the f pitchers part?

 

and the [expletive] you for including juan cruz part

[Guest]

Patterson got Baylor'd

Prior got Dusty'd

Guzman was made of glass

Choi broke his wrist

 

I don't really have a point here. I'm more hopeful that this group has better coaching, but this thread is bringing me down, man

 

it shouldn't. that farm (that wasn't as good) yielded some really good things despite all that terrible luck that we've brought up. it should be encouraging if anything.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

this team has two top 5 in the game prospects in its system right now and just graduated one and another that should be right around there

 

Corey Patterson, Juan Cruz, Hee Seop Choi, Mark Prior.

Did you miss the f pitchers part?

 

I practically invented it.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

this team has two top 5 in the game prospects in its system right now and just graduated one and another that should be right around there

 

Corey Patterson, Juan Cruz, Hee Seop Choi, Mark Prior.

Did you miss the f pitchers part?

 

And what am I missing with him continually bringing up Choi? Who was ranking Choi like David is talking about? Didn't he top out in the 20's?

 

Higher than Soler, whom I think was being included in the current group.

[Sammy Sofa]

this team has two top 5 in the game prospects in its system right now and just graduated one and another that should be right around there

 

Corey Patterson, Juan Cruz, Hee Seop Choi, Mark Prior.

Did you miss the f pitchers part?

 

And what am I missing with him continually bringing up Choi? Who was ranking Choi like David is talking about? Didn't he top out in the 20's?

 

Higher than Soler, whom I think was being included in the current group.

 

Yeah, he's the "should."

 

I guess it works if you think Soler isn't going to be stay healthy.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I mean, I like Soler plenty. But there's some revisionist history going on too to try to differentiate very comparable piles of prospects.

[Guest]

this team has two top 5 in the game prospects in its system right now and just graduated one and another that should be right around there

 

Corey Patterson, Juan Cruz, Hee Seop Choi, Mark Prior.

Did you miss the f pitchers part?

 

And what am I missing with him continually bringing up Choi? Who was ranking Choi like David is talking about? Didn't he top out in the 20's?

 

Higher than Soler, whom I think was being included in the current group.

 

Choi's highest BA ranking was 22. I can't as easily find where he placed on other lists but that feels about right for how he was thought of.

 

Soler is presently ranked 19 by BP and 14 by Law. BA's list hasn't come out yet. Sickels has Soler in the top 10.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So like 10 spots between Soler and Choi means everything is super-different and not even a little comparable?

 

lol

[Guest]

So like 10 spots between Soler and Choi means everything is super-different and not even a little comparable?

 

lol

 

considering the two guys who were really in that tier weren't actually busts and one of them was immediately an elite player, i'm not sure what your point is.

 

but i like how you didn't address that what you said 5 minutes ago was completely wrong and you pulled it out of your ass.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So like 10 spots between Soler and Choi means everything is super-different and not even a little comparable?

 

lol

 

considering the two guys who were really in that tier weren't actually busts and one of them was immediately an elite player, i'm not sure what your point is.

 

but i like how you didn't address that what you said 5 minutes ago was completely wrong and you pulled it out of your ass.

 

I looked at Soler on Baseball-Reference. It's not updated for this year. I didn't think much of it.

[Sammy Sofa]

I mean, I like Soler plenty. But there's some revisionist history going on too to try to differentiate very comparable piles of prospects.

 

Is there? A good chunk of that first class hinged on pitching prospects.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I mean, I like Soler plenty. But there's some revisionist history going on too to try to differentiate very comparable piles of prospects.

 

Is there? A good chunk of that first class hinged on pitching prospects.

 

Sure, that's a difference. If you look hard enough, you can always find differences.

 

But in total quality, it was completely comparable.

[SouthSideRyan]

Maybe I'm an idiot who is screwing with people?

 

Sure, it was a special combination of incompetence and bad luck that caused that generation of prospects to flame out so hard, but every guy I listed was No. 68 or higher on the 2002 BA list.

 

And the kneejerk reaction is always that prospect lists were totally dumb back then and are super-smart now, but here's some guys who have been top 100 since 2012:

 

32. Brett Jackson

64. Matt Szczur

83. Arodys Vizcaino

100. Christian Villanueva

 

Pierce Johnson's about one bad season from joining that list as well.

 

And yes, I know, Theo Epstein is a magical prospect whisperer so obviously it's different.

 

Here are some guys who were top-100 for Boston from 2009-2011:

 

17. Lars Anderson

21. Ryan Westmoreland *

24. Casey Kelley

67. Anthony Ranaudo

83. Michael Bowden

 

 

The early 2000s Cubs system was completely amazeballs awesome, and it busted out. That doesn't mean that this one will bust out, but it's revisionist history to act like it wasn't the best system in baseball for a three-year period.

Last I remember, every system that was ranked #1 by BA since 2000 (including the Cubs) had a realistic shot at the world series.

 

It's not a bad thing.

 

also, f pitchers.

 

The Diamondbacks had the #1 system in 2006. And the Rangers and Rays ('07-10, 12)are probably the worst teams in their respective divisions.

Edited February 10, 2015 by SouthSideRyan

[Sammy Sofa]

I mean, I like Soler plenty. But there's some revisionist history going on too to try to differentiate very comparable piles of prospects.

 

Is there? A good chunk of that first class hinged on pitching prospects.

 

Sure, that's a difference. If you look hard enough, you can always find differences.

 

But in total quality, it was completely comparable.

 

Well, that's a hilariously convenient way of looking at things.

 

"If you ignore the ways they're different, they're practically the same!"

[Guest]

keep including choi in that tier if you want. soler is definitely underrated because scouts and effort BS and choi was probably overrated (especially considering he was a 1B). even if you deny that, there's still another top 5 in the game prospect and that matters a lot. and the depth behind those guys is probably better too.

 

there's really no debate as to which is better and it's silly that you're pretending otherwise, especially when you're doing it while pretending that the outcome of the early 2000s one was some sort of disaster and cautionary tale, which is not the case at all.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Well, that's a hilariously convenient way of looking at things.

 

"If you ignore the ways they're different, they're practically the same!"

 

The convenient part is the "hey, there's a difference, so obviously there's no way they could possibly be considered comparable."

[Guest]

So like 10 spots between Soler and Choi means everything is super-different and not even a little comparable?

 

lol

 

considering the two guys who were really in that tier weren't actually busts and one of them was immediately an elite player, i'm not sure what your point is.

 

but i like how you didn't address that what you said 5 minutes ago was completely wrong and you pulled it out of your ass.

 

I looked at Soler on Baseball-Reference. It's not updated for this year. I didn't think much of it.

 

you really had no general recollection of where he stood (pretty damn high while being knocked for stupid things) on lists that came out in like the last 6-8 weeks? with the amount of time you spend discussing cubs baseball on the internet?

 

the [expletive] man?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

keep including choi in that tier if you want. soler is definitely underrated because scouts and effort BS and choi was probably overrated (especially considering he was a 1B). even if you deny that, there's still another top 5 in the game prospect and that matters a lot. and the depth behind those guys is probably better too.

 

there's really no debate as to which is better and it's silly that you're pretending otherwise, especially when you're doing it while pretending that the outcome of the early 2000s one was some sort of disaster and cautionary tale, which is not the case at all.

 

ur wrong

[Hairyducked Idiot]

you really had no general recollection of where he stood (pretty damn high while being knocked for stupid things) on lists that came out in like the last 6-8 weeks? with the amount of time you spend discussing cubs baseball on the internet?

 

the [expletive] man?

 

I try to avoid thinking too much about prospect lists because holy hell I am so sick of them. I only take notice if it's bad news because bad news is fun.

[Guest]

keep including choi in that tier if you want. soler is definitely underrated because scouts and effort BS and choi was probably overrated (especially considering he was a 1B). even if you deny that, there's still another top 5 in the game prospect and that matters a lot. and the depth behind those guys is probably better too.

 

there's really no debate as to which is better and it's silly that you're pretending otherwise, especially when you're doing it while pretending that the outcome of the early 2000s one was some sort of disaster and cautionary tale, which is not the case at all.

 

ur wrong

 

which part?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

keep including choi in that tier if you want. soler is definitely underrated because scouts and effort BS and choi was probably overrated (especially considering he was a 1B). even if you deny that, there's still another top 5 in the game prospect and that matters a lot. and the depth behind those guys is probably better too.

 

there's really no debate as to which is better and it's silly that you're pretending otherwise, especially when you're doing it while pretending that the outcome of the early 2000s one was some sort of disaster and cautionary tale, which is not the case at all.

 

ur wrong

 

which part?

 

It is a cautionary tale and while this farm system is a bit better, the early 2000s one was awfully close.

[Sammy Sofa]

Well, that's a hilariously convenient way of looking at things.

 

"If you ignore the ways they're different, they're practically the same!"

 

The convenient part is the "hey, there's a difference, so obviously there's no way they could possibly be considered comparable."

 

Lots of differences.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Well, that's a hilariously convenient way of looking at things.

 

"If you ignore the ways they're different, they're practically the same!"

 

The convenient part is the "hey, there's a difference, so obviously there's no way they could possibly be considered comparable."

 

Lots of differences.

 

They were both the top farm system in the game. That's the important part, the rest is details.

[Cubswin11]

It's probably more fair to compare the current system to the Brewers in the years Weeks/Hardy/Fielder/Braun/Hall/Hart/Gallardo were coming through more than it is to compare it to the early 2000 Cubs. If we are looking for fewest differences.

[Guest]

keep including choi in that tier if you want. soler is definitely underrated because scouts and effort BS and choi was probably overrated (especially considering he was a 1B). even if you deny that, there's still another top 5 in the game prospect and that matters a lot. and the depth behind those guys is probably better too.

 

there's really no debate as to which is better and it's silly that you're pretending otherwise, especially when you're doing it while pretending that the outcome of the early 2000s one was some sort of disaster and cautionary tale, which is not the case at all.

 

ur wrong

 

which part?

 

It is a cautionary tale and while this farm system is a bit better, the early 2000s one was awfully close.

 

It's not really much of a cautionary tale - the outcome was still pretty good despite a lot of awful luck (some of which was more "f pitchers" than "f prospects") - and if you definitively say it's a bit better then you agree that it is clearly better and not debatable (even when you view the 2000s one in as positive a light as you are by claiming revisionist history on some of the counters).

 

denying cruz's standing in that tier, btw, is history that needed to be revised because the age thing was huge. including him is kind of silly (though i guess if you want to be a big jerk you can say the same concern exists for soler or something).

 

on that note, i've spent enough time on this. gonna watch better call saul and go to sleep.