Cubs 2015 #9 Prospect

[Tim]

Make your choice for the Cubs 2015 #9 prospect.

 

Later on, we'll move to a system of multiple votes, but I think it makes sense at the top to just vote for a single player.

 

If you want to have a player added to the list, please say so.

 

#1 Kris Bryant

#2 Addison Russell

#3 Jorge Soler

#4 Kyle Schwarber

#5 CJ Edwards

#6 Billy McKinney

#7 Gleyber Torres

#8 Albert Almora

[ctcf]

porn guy ftw

[jersey cubs fan]

Sands should be removed from consideration due to proposing in Wrigley Field this winter.

[Guest]

Oh thank goodness Johnson is out to a huge lead on Underwood, my sanity is maintained.

[Guest]

Oh thank goodness Johnson is out to a huge lead on Underwood, my sanity is maintained.

I'm probably going to go for Stinnett over Underwood, too.

[toonsterwu]

I'm voting for Underwood, although I think Underwood/Johnson/Stinnett are all close (to be clear, I may go with a position player to break up that trio).

 

I like Johnson. I kept arguing last year that whatever ceiling advantage that Johnson had on CJ Edwards was minimized enough by Johnson's better frame and, IMO, suitability to be a starter at that point, and as such, I didn't think there was a huge gap between the two.

 

I like Stinnett too. He's a fascinating, somewhat raw college arm in many respects, somewhat reminiscent of some of the guys from 2008. I think there's a case for him ahead of Johnson, but for now, I lean against it, as I'm not sure his ceiling is better than Johnson's and we know Johnson's pitches, even if he lacks the command, can play in AA. I sort of want to see how Stinnett's stuff shows this year before I jump on that. Most reports seem to place him as a mid-rotation ceiling, so it's hard for me to push him ahead of Johnson without a better ceiling.

 

So, why Underwood over Johnson? I certainly get that Underwood's overall numbers weren't great. His command is still iffy. It's very possible that once he hits AA, Underwood could go the way of Johnson and have his command collapse. Johnson's command, though, was bad all year (sure it was horrid at the start, but it wasn't like he was good at the end). I think I'm wiling to buy the idea that Underwood is trending upwards due to how he finished the year, his age, and the indications that he showed better work ethic. Perhaps it all collapses and he comes back out of shape, but I guess, for now, I buy the idea that he's a kid maturing. Oh, the most important reason to top it off? I simply think Underwood has the best starting pitching ceiling in the system, and Johnson simply isn't polished enough as a starter for me to overlook it (to be clear, I think Pierce could probably step into the big league pen right now ... just his overall repetoire and command as a starter isn't there yet, IMO).

 

There are never any perfect comps, but I view the Underwood situation more akin to Chris Archer, a youngster slowly putting it together, and I wonder, much as I like Pierce Johnson, if he may be more akin to someone like Chris Carpenter, another college arm with two plus pitches but lacked the command to stick. To be clear, I think Pierce is better than Chris, but I have enough nagging doubts on Pierce.

 

I think my next four would be Underwood, Johnson, Caratini, and Stinnett as of now. I'm still of the opinion that Caratini has a bit more pop than he's shown, but he certainly has to show it next year.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Tseng.

[Guest]

Underwood did progress as the year went along, but you can say similarly optimistic things about the alternatives:

 

Underwood's finish to the season: 55 IP, 38 H, 55/16 K/BB, 7 HR

Johnson's finish after returning from injury: 65 IP, 42 H, 69/30 K/BB, 6 HR

Tseng for two months before wearing down in his 1st season: 53 IP, 35 H, 50/8 K/BB, 4 HR

 

If Underwood can keep up that finish to start 2015 I'd move him up a ways, but until then it's a hot streak in a career to date that's not had a particular strength. For m he's behind Johnson, Stinnett, Tseng, maybe Sands and/or Steele too.

[Guest]

Not really constructive but my view with all of these pitchers is to just toss them all in the same hat and see who ends up being good. They're basically all the same to me as far as how I value them - just the closer guys are bumped up over the more recent draftees. But all these names are just raffle tickets who some will turn out and some won't to me.

 

Guess I shouldn't have given Kyle all that crap about mixing up Blackburn and Underwood.

[jersey cubs fan]

Not really constructive but my view with all of these pitchers is to just toss them all in the same hat and see who ends up being good. They're basically all the same to me as far as how I value them - just the closer guys are bumped up over the more recent draftees. But all these names are just raffle tickets who some will turn out and some won't to me.

 

That is my feeling. I cannot get excited about any of them and while I assume one of them probably slots it at this spot, I have no idea who it should be.

[rawaction]

Not really constructive but my view with all of these pitchers is to just toss them all in the same hat and see who ends up being good. They're basically all the same to me as far as how I value them - just the closer guys are bumped up over the more recent draftees. But all these names are just raffle tickets who some will turn out and some won't to me.

 

That is my feeling. I cannot get excited about any of them and while I assume one of them probably slots it at this spot, I have no idea who it should be.

 

I look at them similar also. And I have Johnson ahead of the pack because he's at the highest level. But I wouldn't say I see them as lottery tickets per se or that I'm not excited about them. This is exactly what this organization wanted. A bunch of guys that project to be middle of the rotation starters. And MOTR guys are pretty valuable these days. But I'm convinced one of these guys could be an Arrieta and exceed his projections with something clicking, more maturity, or a new pitch developing.

 

I can see a legit argument for Pierce as a top 80 prospect. And I can see any of the names mentioned in that same vein by the end of 2015.

[jersey cubs fan]

Not really constructive but my view with all of these pitchers is to just toss them all in the same hat and see who ends up being good. They're basically all the same to me as far as how I value them - just the closer guys are bumped up over the more recent draftees. But all these names are just raffle tickets who some will turn out and some won't to me.

 

That is my feeling. I cannot get excited about any of them and while I assume one of them probably slots it at this spot, I have no idea who it should be.

 

I look at them similar also. And I have Johnson ahead of the pack because he's at the highest level. But I wouldn't say I see them as lottery tickets per se or that I'm not excited about them. This is exactly what this organization wanted. A bunch of guys that project to be middle of the rotation starters. And MOTR guys are pretty valuable these days. But I'm convinced one of these guys could be an Arrieta and exceed his projections with something clicking, more maturity, or a new pitch developing.

 

I can see a legit argument for Pierce as a top 80 prospect. And I can see any of the names mentioned in that same vein by the end of 2015.

 

I'm happy about the group and think one or two will turn into something, I'm not particularly excited about any individual though.

[Guest]

Not really constructive but my view with all of these pitchers is to just toss them all in the same hat and see who ends up being good. They're basically all the same to me as far as how I value them - just the closer guys are bumped up over the more recent draftees. But all these names are just raffle tickets who some will turn out and some won't to me.

 

That is my feeling. I cannot get excited about any of them and while I assume one of them probably slots it at this spot, I have no idea who it should be.

 

I look at them similar also. And I have Johnson ahead of the pack because he's at the highest level. But I wouldn't say I see them as lottery tickets per se or that I'm not excited about them. This is exactly what this organization wanted. A bunch of guys that project to be middle of the rotation starters. And MOTR guys are pretty valuable these days. But I'm convinced one of these guys could be an Arrieta and exceed his projections with something clicking, more maturity, or a new pitch developing.

 

I can see a legit argument for Pierce as a top 80 prospect. And I can see any of the names mentioned in that same vein by the end of 2015.

 

I'm happy about the group and think one or two will turn into something, I'm not particularly excited about any individual though.

 

Exactly.

[rawaction]

See, I think people are all jaded because these guys are the "best" the organization has to offer. But the point of this whole thing was not to throw too much into big armed projectable overthrowers and have a quantity of guys like this. I guess I look at it "glass half full". Better to have 6-7 guys without huge ceilings than to have 1-2 with huge ceilings and recovering from elbow surgery.

[jersey cubs fan]

See, I think people are all jaded because these guys are the "best" the organization has to offer. But the point of this whole thing was not to throw too much into big armed projectable overthrowers and have a quantity of guys like this. I guess I look at it "glass half full". Better to have 6-7 guys without huge ceilings than to have 1-2 with huge ceilings and recovering from elbow surgery.

 

Not sure what you mean by jaded. I have been 100% on board with the pitching via depth idea with more of a focus on hitters, and have been pushing for it since the Prior/Tex days. All I'm saying is that I believe a pitcher probably belongs at this spot, but I have no idea which pitcher it should be. Nobody screams out as obvious.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Tseng, Underwood, Johnson, Edwards, and Stinnett all belong in the same tier for me.

[Guest]

See, I think people are all jaded because these guys are the "best" the organization has to offer. But the point of this whole thing was not to throw too much into big armed projectable overthrowers and have a quantity of guys like this. I guess I look at it "glass half full". Better to have 6-7 guys without huge ceilings than to have 1-2 with huge ceilings and recovering from elbow surgery.

 

I'm not down on the group's upside at all. I'm just saying no individual prospect piques my interest. It's the group as a whole and I have a decent amount of optimism that a TORP type might even spring out of the group. That's the whole point of going with quantity after locking some degree of certainty with an early 1st round bat.

[toonsterwu]

Underwood did progress as the year went along, but you can say similarly optimistic things about the alternatives:

 

Underwood's finish to the season: 55 IP, 38 H, 55/16 K/BB, 7 HR

Johnson's finish after returning from injury: 65 IP, 42 H, 69/30 K/BB, 6 HR

Tseng for two months before wearing down in his 1st season: 53 IP, 35 H, 50/8 K/BB, 4 HR

 

If Underwood can keep up that finish to start 2015 I'd move him up a ways, but until then it's a hot streak in a career to date that's not had a particular strength. For m he's behind Johnson, Stinnett, Tseng, maybe Sands and/or Steele too.

 

Look, don't get me wrong, I like Johnson. I also get the idea of voting for Johnson. That said, those numbers, would, though, be somewhat my point as to why I have a hard time voting Johnson - his "improvement" still led to a 4+ walk rate, and last I checked the game logs, it wasn't like the 2nd half of the year was tilted walk wise (that is, it's not like he had several games with monster walk rates and some with none). Can he live with a high 3 to low 4 walk rate? The stuff is probably good enough that he can probably get a couple year's look with it as a starter, but long run, seems tough. Is it possible he develops like say, Chris Tillman did (a fairly decent comp, I think) than Chris Carpenter? Again, possible. Overall, though, I simply think Underwood has better upside (and I didn't follow that close this year to know if these reports are that accurate, so maybe those who followed a bit more have a better grasp and can argue against that notion), and Johnson just doesn't seem like he took a major enough step for me when he's what, 3 years older than Underwood?

 

Everyone views things their own way, but I think Underwood's ceiling is better than Stinnett, Tseng, Sands, Steele, and he's had some performance record in the minors, so I think Underwood is a clear notch or two ahead of that foursome for me. Stinnett's the closest, but having watched him a few times at Maryland - I think there might be a bit more ceiling than most are acknowledging, but admittedly, he was erratic at times. He's a raw college senior, which makes it tough. Can his secondary stuff take a tick forward? My gut feeling on his final season at Maryland was that he caught a lot of people by surprise with his velocity and solid stuff, but it didn't feel like blow-away stuff, and watching his 2 games against UVA closely, it just didn't seem like plus stuff (yes, he notched, uh, 9 or 10 K's in that first one, but it never felt to me like the UVA hitters were definitely over-matched).

 

Tseng's a prove it guy for me, much as I want to be biased in his favor for personal reasons. It seems like there's enough consistency in reporting that his stuff is fairly mediocre. He may end up being Hendricks to these guys with higher ceilings, but he's going to have to prove it up the ladder for me to justify a high ranking. I was that way about Hendricks, and it's a similar vein to my thinking on guys like Torreyes. That's just me on certain guys with certain profiles.

 

Sands/Steele - haven't seen many people suggest huge ceilings for either guy, so I just can't put them ahead of Underwood when I think he has a better ceiling and has some performance record to go back on. Steele was also coming off, uh, back problems? Would like to see a full-season out of them before pushing them hard up the rankings. You may be right in a year - maybe Underwood has flamed out/maybe Sands/Steele have taken major steps forward (I mean, gut feeling ... I think Sands is a solid top 10 prospect next season on account of improvement (and not just graduations)).. I just have a hard time justifying placing guys that, as of now, I view as having lower ceilings ahead of a guy I view as having a better ceiling and at least some positive minor league performance records (and age-wise, is about the same ... off the top, isn't Underwood roughly Sands age?).

[Guest]

I went Tseng. The next one will be my last attempt to rank the prospects, I just am not familiar enough to go beyond 10.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I'll go with Johnson. But while it likely won't enter the picture until 15-20, am I wrong in thinking that Torrez and Zagunis should be above Candelerio and some of the lower level guys among the choices?

[toonsterwu]

Someone who followed more can probably make a better determination on Torrez (I'm assuming this is Daury we are talking about). My gut feeling is that I would rank Candelario higher on account of upside.

 

On Zagunis, I think there's a solid case for him ahead of Candelario, particularly if you buy him as a backstop. Candelario's upside, if he taps into it, would blow both guys away, but last year didn't do him any favors. Zagunis lacks the ceiling, but probably has a higher floor, and if you buy him sticking behind the plate, a case could be made that his value there would trump Candelario for now until Candelario shows that he's taking steps forward.

[Clem Fandango]

I like Zagunis a lot. I think he's a sleeper candidate to improve his stock this year big time.

[abohnhoff]

Nearly went Johnson but ended up going with Tseng. The walks are a bit alarming for Johnson IMO. At 20, Tseng more than held his own in his first season minor league ball. Nearly 6:1 K to BB ratio in 105 IP.

[CubsWin]

Underwood did progress as the year went along, but you can say similarly optimistic things about the alternatives:

 

Underwood's finish to the season: 55 IP, 38 H, 55/16 K/BB, 7 HR

Johnson's finish after returning from injury: 65 IP, 42 H, 69/30 K/BB, 6 HR

Tseng for two months before wearing down in his 1st season: 53 IP, 35 H, 50/8 K/BB, 4 HR

 

If Underwood can keep up that finish to start 2015 I'd move him up a ways, but until then it's a hot streak in a career to date that's not had a particular strength. For m he's behind Johnson, Stinnett, Tseng, maybe Sands and/or Steele too.

 

Look, don't get me wrong, I like Johnson. I also get the idea of voting for Johnson. That said, those numbers, would, though, be somewhat my point as to why I have a hard time voting Johnson - his "improvement" still led to a 4+ walk rate, and last I checked the game logs, it wasn't like the 2nd half of the year was tilted walk wise (that is, it's not like he had several games with monster walk rates and some with none). Can he live with a high 3 to low 4 walk rate? The stuff is probably good enough that he can probably get a couple year's look with it as a starter, but long run, seems tough. Is it possible he develops like say, Chris Tillman did (a fairly decent comp, I think) than Chris Carpenter? Again, possible. Overall, though, I simply think Underwood has better upside (and I didn't follow that close this year to know if these reports are that accurate, so maybe those who followed a bit more have a better grasp and can argue against that notion), and Johnson just doesn't seem like he took a major enough step for me when he's what, 3 years older than Underwood?

 

Everyone views things their own way, but I think Underwood's ceiling is better than Stinnett, Tseng, Sands, Steele, and he's had some performance record in the minors, so I think Underwood is a clear notch or two ahead of that foursome for me. Stinnett's the closest, but having watched him a few times at Maryland - I think there might be a bit more ceiling than most are acknowledging, but admittedly, he was erratic at times. He's a raw college senior, which makes it tough. Can his secondary stuff take a tick forward? My gut feeling on his final season at Maryland was that he caught a lot of people by surprise with his velocity and solid stuff, but it didn't feel like blow-away stuff, and watching his 2 games against UVA closely, it just didn't seem like plus stuff (yes, he notched, uh, 9 or 10 K's in that first one, but it never felt to me like the UVA hitters were definitely over-matched).

 

Tseng's a prove it guy for me, much as I want to be biased in his favor for personal reasons. It seems like there's enough consistency in reporting that his stuff is fairly mediocre. He may end up being Hendricks to these guys with higher ceilings, but he's going to have to prove it up the ladder for me to justify a high ranking. I was that way about Hendricks, and it's a similar vein to my thinking on guys like Torreyes. That's just me on certain guys with certain profiles.

 

Sands/Steele - haven't seen many people suggest huge ceilings for either guy, so I just can't put them ahead of Underwood when I think he has a better ceiling and has some performance record to go back on. Steele was also coming off, uh, back problems? Would like to see a full-season out of them before pushing them hard up the rankings. You may be right in a year - maybe Underwood has flamed out/maybe Sands/Steele have taken major steps forward (I mean, gut feeling ... I think Sands is a solid top 10 prospect next season on account of improvement (and not just graduations)).. I just have a hard time justifying placing guys that, as of now, I view as having lower ceilings ahead of a guy I view as having a better ceiling and at least some positive minor league performance records (and age-wise, is about the same ... off the top, isn't Underwood roughly Sands age?).

Well said, toonster. This is basically how I feel as well.

 

Look, all of these guys have question marks. Only Johnson and Underwood have extensive playing time as a professional (Tseng has just over 100 IP, while the rest have just gotten their feet wet). Underwood is 20 and will be pitching in A+ this season. Johnson will be 24 in two months and just finished up AA last season. Underwood was drafted as a raw athletic pitcher with all the tools to be a TOR/MOR, he just needed to develop. It appears he is doing just that. The scouting reports and his numbers across the board have gotten better every season. Johnson was a more polished college pitcher with very strong present day skills/stuff and a bit of an injury-history. Johnson's control had a setback last year but he turned it around in the 2nd half. Both are good. For me, Underwood has the higher upside, greater developmental arc with more time to still develop, no injury history to date and is showing noticeable improvement every year. Johnson is closer to the majors but is also closer to his developmental arc flattening out. He struggled with his command last season, plus, he's had a major arm injury in the past. If I had to choose, and that's the whole point of playing this prospect ranking game, I think the choice, while close, is still pretty clear.

 

I'll take the over 3 years younger, higher upside, improving every year Duane Underwood over the very talented but possibly plateauing, almost 24 year old who struggled with his command last season Pierce Johnson.

[craig]

I voted Johnson, but I totally get the concerns and the advocacy for others. To my view this was the first time he's really had control problems. He hadn't the previous year or during his college draft year I don't think?

 

His stuff was really good in AA already. So I think that *if* there was a correctible reason for the wildness, and *if* he can improve that significantly, I think he could come on fast. When a guy already has 90 successful innings in AA (2.54 ERA), he may not be that far away.

 

His "ceiling" seems plenty high, his stuff is very good. Fastball movement, velocity, slider, and the cutter are all quite good. So if he could emerge with the consistency/command, I don't see much reason why he couldn't be a very solid rotation guy. Being two levels ahead of Tseng and Underwood also means less time within which to get injured prior to big-league contribution.

 

I'm hoping that after coming back from injury, that his delivery was a little messed up, so he was wild. But that if he can come back fine and healthy this spring, and go through regular camp with everybody else and start on schedule, that perhaps the control will show up a lot better. If so, you might have a guy who is really close, if they needed somebody.

 

Stuff-wise, I think his ceiling is really pretty good. Maybe Underwood is a little higher, I understand that view. But it's not like Johnson is a soft-tossing back-of-rotation guy or anything like that. He's got plenty of stuff and velocity.