2016 NSBB Cubs Top 50 Prospect Discussion

[toonsterwu]

Was toying around with trying to make a list while I was at the airport the other day, and I found it to be the hardest thing to do. Part of it is I've been a touch out of it, but part of it is, after Gleyber, I really think you can make a case for a lot of different orders. I slammed out 20, but this isn't the thread for it. I surprised myself, as I kept pushing Mark Zagunis higher each time I looked over it (I find myself thinking a Zagunis-type would be the perfect depth OF on the main roster - a good approach guy who can spray the ball around, and play a bit of each OF spot (and act as uh ... the 4th catcher) and, if developed, be utilized at the top of the lineup. He's got solid athleticism, enough to make me wonder if we should give him some IF time to develop him as a utility guy. In all honesty, I almost talked myself into Zagunis at 2, despite the glaring issue.)

 

We're deep ... I mean, the guy at 2 is not demonstrably that much more valuable than the probable options in the mid-teens, and that's a testament to the system, not a huge knock on who's at 2. Still, depth will only go so far in trade discussions.

[craig]

...

We're deep ... I mean, the guy at 2 is not demonstrably that much more valuable than the probable options in the mid-teens, and that's a testament to the system, not a huge knock on who's at 2. Still, depth will only go so far in trade discussions.

 

Good point on trade comment.

[davell]

While you're right, I think that we could find a solid deal by dealing some depth away. This isn't "depth" like we tried to find deals with back in 2010, it's higher upside types, with some solid floor mixed in. That said, I still think you're selling it short a bit. While I too am having difficulty figuring out who is 2 for me as well.....I think we'll have 3-4 guys show up in most of the top 100 lists. And it very well may be different groups. Torres is a lock obviously. If Contreras isn't a lock, he's awfully close. McKinney is going to make some(maybe most). Underwood is going to make some(maybe all). It won't shock me if Almora sneaks onto a list. Same with Happ. For that matter, Candelario seems a decent possibility to do the same.

 

Couple those guys with extremely high upside types like Jimenez or Cease, plus ready for a trial run types in PJ, CJ, and Villanueva, it'll come down to a team's preference. But the fact we've got so much depth, it makes it much more likely that a team is going to really like multiples out of our system.

 

Again, this doesn't even take into account that we've got the best group of 25 and unders in all of MLB that's already in the majors. Of which it looks like we'd be open to deal from as well.

[Bobson Dugnutt]

While you're right, I think that we could find a solid deal by dealing some depth away. This isn't "depth" like we tried to find deals with back in 2010, it's higher upside types, with some solid floor mixed in. That said, I still think you're selling it short a bit. While I too am having difficulty figuring out who is 2 for me as well.....I think we'll have 3-4 guys show up in most of the top 100 lists. And it very well may be different groups. Torres is a lock obviously. If Contreras isn't a lock, he's awfully close. McKinney is going to make some(maybe most). Underwood is going to make some(maybe all). It won't shock me if Almora sneaks onto a list. Same with Happ. For that matter, Candelario seems a decent possibility to do the same.

 

Couple those guys with extremely high upside types like Jimenez or Cease, plus ready for a trial run types in PJ, CJ, and Villanueva, it'll come down to a team's preference. But the fact we've got so much depth, it makes it much more likely that a team is going to really like multiples out of our system.

 

Again, this doesn't even take into account that we've got the best group of 25 and unders in all of MLB that's already in the majors. Of which it looks like we'd be open to deal from as well.

 

Does EJM factor into these lists, or no since he hasn't actually played professional ball in the US yet? The variation on him is huge, so he won't even come close to sniffing some lists, but given Law's comments on him, I'd have to believe he'd be on his list and maybe a couple others.

[davell]

While you're right, I think that we could find a solid deal by dealing some depth away. This isn't "depth" like we tried to find deals with back in 2010, it's higher upside types, with some solid floor mixed in. That said, I still think you're selling it short a bit. While I too am having difficulty figuring out who is 2 for me as well.....I think we'll have 3-4 guys show up in most of the top 100 lists. And it very well may be different groups. Torres is a lock obviously. If Contreras isn't a lock, he's awfully close. McKinney is going to make some(maybe most). Underwood is going to make some(maybe all). It won't shock me if Almora sneaks onto a list. Same with Happ. For that matter, Candelario seems a decent possibility to do the same.

 

Couple those guys with extremely high upside types like Jimenez or Cease, plus ready for a trial run types in PJ, CJ, and Villanueva, it'll come down to a team's preference. But the fact we've got so much depth, it makes it much more likely that a team is going to really like multiples out of our system.

 

Again, this doesn't even take into account that we've got the best group of 25 and unders in all of MLB that's already in the majors. Of which it looks like we'd be open to deal from as well.

 

Does EJM factor into these lists, or no since he hasn't actually played professional ball in the US yet? The variation on him is huge, so he won't even come close to sniffing some lists, but given Law's comments on him, I'd have to believe he'd be on his list and maybe a couple others.

 

Yeah, he will. If Law doesn't hear anything negative about his plate discipline, I'd bet he's top 50 for him based on his comments. That's the one thing Law hasn't seen yet and he'll likely see him again prior to his list coming out.

 

He's likely not got a chance with anyone else though as most of these guys stick relatively close to their initial thoughts for a while anyway.

[Tedward]

Latest from Klaw on Willson in the AFL

 

• I only got to see the Cubs' Wilson Contreras hit but not catch, unfortunately, so I can't speak to his defensive abilities. But I can tell you his swing was one of my favorite right-handed swings in the AFL with a clean path and tremendous body control throughout. He loads back by his right shoulder and explodes forward to the ball with excellent hand strength that allowed him to adjust well to changing speeds and to pitches on the outer third. If he can catch as well as the Cubs believe he can, the decision to convert Schwarber to another position becomes even easier.

[Guest]

BA is releasing their Cubs top 10 prospects next Friday. I've been trying to come up with a top ten prospect list of my own and am starting to struggle to keep Contreras from the #1 spot.

[davell]

Mine changes all the time......

 

10. Eddy Julio Martinez- I'm going off Law optimistically until I have reason not to.

9. CJ Edwards- I think he's a very prominent member of the pen next year.

8. Jeimer Candelario- Put himself back on the map obviously, I'd have him even higher if not for mixed reports on defense.

7. Bil!y McKinney- I'll likely be the low guy on him, but I'm concerned the pop doesn't show up, even with his age being a giant positive.

6. Ian Happ- If he proves he can handle 2B, he skyrockets in my eyes.

5. Albert Almora- I'm a sucker for his second half. If he's THAT guy, he may actually be 1st for me.

4. Eloy Jimenez- Too high, but I think he breaks out in a large way at South Bend.

3. Duane Underwood- Don't care the K's are low for his stuff. I think once he's working on command and process much more than results and the stuff is excellent.

2. Willson Contreras- I think he's our future C. I hope the bat is THIS good. Have some doubts still.

1. Gleyber Torres- Love him, especial!y since the D looks to be better than advertised.

[Vinestal]

I like Chesny Young better than McKinney. He lacks power like Billy but its hard to ignore a .394 obp and a .321 avg the guy can get on base and he can play all over the diamond without being a liability anywhere. Maybe most people are thinking his hit tool will fizzle at AA? I dunno I like the guy though. I guess Billy is younger and he is a level ahead so that makes him more advanced but in the end Young might have more value at the major league level.

[Aaron_Kennelly]

I like Chesny Young better than McKinney. He lacks power like Billy but its hard to ignore a .394 obp and a .321 avg the guy can get on base and he can play all over the diamond without being a liability anywhere. Maybe most people are thinking his hit tool will fizzle at AA? I dunno I like the guy though. I guess Billy is younger and he is a level ahead so that makes him more advanced but in the end Young might have more value at the major league level.

 

Chesny Young had a .066 ISO as a 23-year-old in high-A and A-ball. He has no hope of adding power, and he can't play shortstop. That's about all that needs to be said about his prospect status. It's nice that he has done well. And maybe he ends up as, like, a 6th-infielder, 25th-man-on-a-roster type. But, that's his best hope.

[Vinestal]

I like Chesny Young better than McKinney. He lacks power like Billy but its hard to ignore a .394 obp and a .321 avg the guy can get on base and he can play all over the diamond without being a liability anywhere. Maybe most people are thinking his hit tool will fizzle at AA? I dunno I like the guy though. I guess Billy is younger and he is a level ahead so that makes him more advanced but in the end Young might have more value at the major league level.

 

Chesny Young had a .066 ISO as a 23-year-old in high-A and A-ball. He has no hope of adding power, and he can't play shortstop. That's about all that needs to be said about his prospect status. It's nice that he has done well. And maybe he ends up as, like, a 6th-infielder, 25th-man-on-a-roster type. But, that's his best hope.

Power isn't everything and you need some guys who can set the table for power hitters. Most of his year was in high A and he'll start the season in AA. He's not 30 he's 23. I'm not expecting him to be an all-star but I believe he can be a valuable bench/utility guy. He also did play SS some and can do a solid job there when needed.

[Guest]

I like Chesny Young better than McKinney. He lacks power like Billy but its hard to ignore a .394 obp and a .321 avg the guy can get on base and he can play all over the diamond without being a liability anywhere. Maybe most people are thinking his hit tool will fizzle at AA? I dunno I like the guy though. I guess Billy is younger and he is a level ahead so that makes him more advanced but in the end Young might have more value at the major league level.

 

Chesny Young had a .066 ISO as a 23-year-old in high-A and A-ball. He has no hope of adding power, and he can't play shortstop. That's about all that needs to be said about his prospect status. It's nice that he has done well. And maybe he ends up as, like, a 6th-infielder, 25th-man-on-a-roster type. But, that's his best hope.

Power isn't everything and you need some guys who can set the table for power hitters. Most of his year was in high A and he'll start the season in AA. He's not 30 he's 23. I'm not expecting him to be an all-star but I believe he can be a valuable bench/utility guy. He also did play SS some and can do a solid job there when needed.

 

Power is not just home runs, it's also the ability to hit doubles and triples to make the job easier for the real power hitters. Young needs to hit more of those, because without it, here's what's going to happen:

 

His average is going to drop at higher levels. Young has shown some nice ability to hit for average at low levels, but you aren't going to be able to count on him being a .320 hitter at AAA and MLB. Even if we're really optimistic, he's pushing .290-.300.

 

His walk rate is going to plummet, especially at the MLB level. Pitchers who know the worst case scenario for an at bat is a single are just going to pound the zone. Young has shown a good eye thus far which is good, but he's also taken those walks at levels where there are a ton of pitchers who simply can't throw strikes consistently.

 

The end result is that the optimistic outcome for Young is a guy who puts up a .295/.330/.345 line in the big leagues, and realistically it's probably more like .270/.300/.320. That could be useful as a 25th man like Duke said, and it's not to say he'll never be a major leaguer but he is not deserving of a spot on this org's Top 20, never mind Top 10.

[craig]

1. Contreras

2. Torres G

3. Almora

4. Jiminez

5. Billy McKinney

6. Underwood

7. CJ Edwards

8. Tseng

9. Pierce Johnson

10. Cease

11. Happ

12. Eddy Julio Martinez

13. Zagunis

14. De La Cruz

15. Steele

[ctcf]

1. Contreras

2. Torres G

3. Almora

4. Jiminez

5. Billy McKinney

6. Underwood

7. CJ Edwards

8. Tseng

9. Pierce Johnson

10. Cease

11. Happ

12. Eddy Julio Martinez

13. Zagunis

14. De La Cruz

15. Steele

 

Regardless of positioning, what an absolutely fantastic Top 15 to have after graduating all the names they did last year.

[toonsterwu]

I like Chesny Young. Saw him play once this year, and he was just a solid player, for the level. Thing is, don't expect him to be much better than this, so unless he has an uptick in skill, he's pretty much, at best, a utility guy. I think he could make it up as such, but players like that profile tend not to rate highly, as they need to prove it up each level (as a side note, he could probably dabble at short in a pinch, he was a shortstop in college, IIRC).

 

I can't find where I put my list I was dabbling on, so making one right now (could completely change this by ... an hour from now)

 

1. Gleyber Torres - I get the reasons for Contreras, but as exciting as the press is for Contreras right now, I still think Torres' overall upside is a notch or two better than Contreras', and I'm not so sure he's that far behind, timeline wise, to give Contreras that much of a boost on him. I think a very good case ETA puts him knocking on the door (skill and development wise, not opportunity related) to the majors in late 2017..

 

2. Willson Contreras - If his bat is as capable, and he's solid defensively, that's a great asset at catcher. Big prove it year in 2016 - prove that last year wasn't a fluke and that he can get off to a good start. If that happens, hard not to see him making an impact in the 2nd half of 2016.

 

3. Ian Happ - This is sort of a reach for me, but sort of a recognition that I don't love the other OF's in this range enough, I have never been a fan of ranking pure relievers high unless you are certain they are elite (I get why Tom has Carl Jr. high, but I've been this way for several years now as it pertains to relievers, so even though I ranked CJ high last year, I'm sticking with how I go with things), and I don't think any of the starters deserve it here. On upside, the bat is fascinating, and you hope he can push up fast.

 

4. Albert Almora - There's a case for him at 2, I think, but I really need to see consistent development and improvement to justify that. Still ... at his age, and showing improvement offensively, and still being solid defensively? I guess I've never been huge on him, but on profile, it's deserving to be high.

 

5. Mark Zagunis - Here's where maybe I talked myself into ranking a guy far higher than a lot of other folks. My argument would be this - he has the ability to be a strong defensive right fielder (arm strength/athleticism), has great discipline/approach at the plate, and it's not like he is just a slap-hitting singles guy. He's never going to hit a bunch of home runs, but he'll drive some pitches (24 doubles in qualified Carolina League lists places him 15th overall). Now, he shouldn't be stealing bases anymore, but a potential plus defensive right fielder with a good approach and some gap power is an intriguing asset to me (a certain FA is about to make a bundle of money with a similar profile ... to be clear, I don't think Zagunis is on that leve and we have to see him prove it up the ladder). As noted, I thought about him at 2 for a long time, due to my own wariness with believing in Contreras right now.

 

6. Eloy JImenez - That was a very solid debut, with a, at least for my expectations, better than expected approach at the plate. A long way to go, but the upside and solid approach is fascinating.

 

7. Carl Edwards Jr. - I've noted Edwards already - I like his potential to be an elite closer, but I just have a hard time valuing pen arms high enough unless they are simply going to be blow-away, you know he's going to be a elite player for a long time type arm. It's just my thing on certain positions/profiles

 

8. Duane Underwood - I like his potential a ton, but even I have to be fair and note that he has to produce consistently on the mound with that type of raw stuff to justify attention/hype.

 

9. Billy McKinney - I thought about him much higher, and I think he could reach the bigs and find a role (perhaps even as a starter), but ... he's probably a LF, and he looks like the Nick Markakis of the last three years (Nori Aoki could be another comp). A LF without an elite bat is hard to justify ranking high.

 

10. Jeimer Candelario - I thought about him much higher as well, but I just want to see him prove it. Still .. at his age, improving defensively at 3rd, the improvement offensively in AA along with his offensive potential, and in AA? That's a great profile as it pertains to ranking a guy high.

 

11. Dylan Cease - There's something to be said for ceiling as it pertains to rankings, and Cease's ceiling is at, or near, the top of the list.

 

12. Pierce Johnson - I've been a big proponent of his, but I just wonder if he's simply better off in the pen, rather than slogging away as an inconsistent, but still flashes, starter.

 

13. Eddy Julio Martinez - I could go with him much higher as well, and if he's as talented as people say, no reason he isn't top 3 next year.

 

14. Victor Caratini - He improved offensively in the 2nd half, still has the profile to be a solid defensive catcher if he works at it. Offensively, power has been the question, but he did hit 31 doubles this past year, and I think, for the position, he has more than enough offense.

 

15. Dan Vogelbach - I want to rank him higher, but I just can't, at least, until he shows more in-game power.

 

16. Oscar de la Cruz - Yeah, I'm probably the high man on him, but I am absolutely enamored with the size, production, stuff, and potential. A lot of work to do, and there's a lot of intriguing young arms.

 

17. Donnie Dewees - I get why some have him ranked high, and I hope he becomes that CF who gets on base, hits for average, steals bases, and shows a solid approach. If he ends up in a corner role, not going to be that excited. Could easily see him 5-7 spots higher.

 

18. Justin Steele - I get it, the ceiling's fantastic and he seems a lot more polished than his age. I'm intrigued by it, and maybe I really should have him higher than de la Cruz, but I'm just enamored with de la Cruz right now.

 

19. Trevor Clifton - I really wanted to rank him higher, as I think he is sort of getting over-looked with the class of young arms behind him.

 

20. Jen-Ho Tseng- Really hard to find a cutoff point, but he's a lot more polished than some of the raw arms left on the board or the positional assets that could be considered. Still ... ceiling isn't huge, and polish gets you only so far in a rankings list.

 

___

 

Hard to find a cut-off point and not contemplate why I didn't go with some guys higher (namely, Bryan Hudson (sort of fell into the I want to see him prove something/produce something at Eugene before getting really enamored), and Carson Sands (very intriguing arm with a solid lefty profile, but his ceiling isn't huge, and he's not that polished)). Very deep system, with a strong mix of talent up and down the system. It's as balanced as our system has been (in terms of talent up and down the ladder) as I can recall in awhile. There will always be holes, but it feels like to start 2016, we should be able to find a few intriguing prospects in all the full-season leagues.

[davell]

I think we'll see another nice jump in our system ranking after the 2016 season the more I look at this. I figure we're somewhere in the "nice, but not elite" area that could see us in the 7-13 range currently. But with so many upside pitchers that currently sit outside of our top 10, some of them should take major steps forward. Plus, we're not likely to graduate any good hitters and we very well could add a decent amount of upside Cubans to the mix between now and then as well. My guess is we'll be firmly entrenched in the top 5 heading into 2017. Even if we deal off a couple of guys between now and then.

[craig]

I think we'll see another nice jump in our system ranking after the 2016 season the more I look at this. ...with so many upside pitchers that currently sit outside of our top 10, some of them should take major steps forward. Plus, we're not likely to graduate any good hitters and we very well could add a decent amount of upside Cubans to the mix between now and then as well. My guess is we'll be firmly entrenched in the top 5 heading into 2017. Even if we deal off a couple of guys between now and then.

 

Agree that high-ranked teams rarely stay on top, because the guys that get them ranked high either graduate or else lose their luster. Since we probably won't graduate many impact guys, we probably won't lose talent.

 

I see four top-ten guys who might leave the list. But maybe not....

1. Contreras. Good chance that if he has a good year and remains a list difference-maker, that he'll graduate this summer. But, that may depend on other contingencies. (Health for Montero and Ross; development and adequacy of Schwarber as a catcher.) It's possible that he'll have a very good season, but still last in Iowa long enough to remain listed next year.

2. Almora. Again, if Fowler is resigned, or they get some other CF who stays healthy and plays well, perhaps Almora will stay at Iowa all summer an just be a Baez-like September call up. But, not hard to imagine a situation where they go cheap and roster-fill at CF, such that IF Almora is performing at a high level at Iowa, that he'd get a summer call up and be off the lists. Obviously more likely that he doesn't hit well enough to make a compelling case for a call up, and as a result is just a guy on lists next year, and his presence or absence won't really impact much where the Cubs might rank relative to the league.

3. Edwards. Pitchers are always in short supply. With 12 big-league pitchers, somebody will get hurt or will pitch badly. If Edwards is still on these lists next year, it probably won't do much to put us into the top 5...

4. Similar for Johnson. Either he'll pitch well enough to graduate, or be mediocre enough that he'll have little impact on league listings.

[toonsterwu]

We really should have a thread labeled 2015 Cubs Prospects ...

 

I don't want to seem like the negative guy in all of this, but while I do like the system, it's also not hard to view it as

 

a) Short on ceiling in a top 20 (I mean, Gleyber Torres is viewed as a solid all-around tools guy, but nothing off the charts ... Willson Contreras is a very good offensive catcher if the development holds, but no one is expecting him to be an elite guy (as of last check) ... then there's a bunch of guys that could end up in LF without elite pop, and a CF who is still trying to find the balance between instinct/patience ... and when you do find ceiling (EJM/Eloy/Cease), it's so far away.

 

b) Arms far away always look great. It's hard not to look back at circa 2003 and the Cubs low level arms and wonder ... how did so many falter? Still ... it happens.

 

First off, rankings, as always, are only really for fan discussion, but having said that, I think, and I said this somewhere, but I think that this year, the org is borderline top 10, probably right outside for my tastes. I think it's too early to speculate on how we might rank after this year right now - you hope all the young arms succeed, but history has proven otherwise, and sometimes breakthrough years are followed with struggles as teams get a better picture on how to attack the changes you've made. To be clear, I can also see the system exploding back into a top 5 system (breakthrough years for some young arms, Candelario/Torres/Eloy/EJM having big years would certainly give us a good top tier of positional assets).

[craig]

We really should have a thread labeled 2015 Cubs Prospects ...

I don't want to seem like the negative guy in all of this, but while I do like the system, it's also not hard to view it as

a) Short on ceiling i..

b) Arms far away always look great. ...

 

Agree, I don't see why this would be a top-10 system now, or why it should become one next year unless a lot of maybe guys break through. (Which is probably true for most orgs.) But, I admit I don't know other orgs that well. Maybe I'm underestimating us.

 

But seems like nobody in Full-season who projects any star-power.

1. No TORP guys in full-season,

2. No middle-of-the-order hitters either.

 

Torres projects nicely, but nothing special, and with bad K/HR ratios thus far, he's shaky. Contreras looks nice.... for a catcher. But neither has the power nor the special defense to have any "wow" potential. When very limited guys like Almora are fitting in as high as #3 (my own list) or Zagunis as high as #5 (toonster list), or Underwood top 5, or a wild Edwards, it speaks to a lack of top-end talent anywhere close to graduating. There are guys who might contribute, but just not a lot of potential impact guys. Seem more like complementary pieces or support guys than front-line asset starter prospects.

 

Basically seems like a fairly average list to me. Which is pretty nice considering all the guys we've graduated.

 

Not sure I see much reason to expect any major jump. Eloy, Cease, Martinez might perhaps be high-ceiling guys, but that's partly because we know too little to know what their limits may be. I'm not faulting. To still be solid/average, maybe better, after so many impact graduations is pretty impressive.

[davell]

There were a ton of graduations this year. I think talent is just a bit down overall in the minors.

[toonsterwu]

I do agree that I think talent is a bit down, relatively speaking right now. I honestly didn't think, based on history, that this was a, say, top-half type system until I started looking around at the other orgs. I think there will be some orgs that will argue that they deserve to be ahead of us that I put, mentally, in the low-teens/early twenties, but the fact that we can make a case for a top half system is quite impressive considering the graduations we just went through, and speaks well to the developmental process as it compares to the rest of baseball (and perhaps to increased medical diligence? ... I can think of a couple orgs that had "impact" talent lost to injuries)... as of now.

 

I should note, and have noted, that Torres probably compares relatively well to Jurickson Profar back in the day, so far all the talk about the lack of "pop" tools, he compares fairly well to a guy who was viewed, coming up, as a very solid top overall prospect in baseball.

 

I think the start of 2016 is going to be really focused on "prove it" guys - whether or not guys can show that their somewhat surprising (in some fashion) performances a year before can carry over. I'm thinking Contreras, Candelario, Eloy, and to an extent, Caratini. If the bulk of them get off to good starts, then that'll be a very impressive sign for the developmental process.

[Guest]

I split the topic off from the thread that was two years old and fixed the sticky threads in the forum.

 

As for my top 10...it changes every single time I look at it.

[craig]

Torres is no Profar, who showed more power, patience, speed, and better plate discipline at the same age.

True. Age 18, A-ball:

Torres: .722 OPS, Profar .883

K/HR ratio: Torres 38:1 Profar: 5:1 (115/3, versus 63:12)

XBH: Torres 32, Profar 57

K/BB: Torres 3:1, Profar 1:1.

 

Torres is an excellent prospect, but looking at what Profar did at same age reminds why Profar was such a buzz back then. I guess I'd be more excited about Torres if either it was widely projected that he'd have pretty good power, or if he profiled as an excellent contact guy. Hopefully the contact will grow steadily. But early on, his K-rate has been a red flag, particularly for a modest power guy. I never really like to see 38:1 K/HR ratios. For him to tighten that up quite a bit next year will obviously be one of the things I watch for.

[davell]

In no way do I put Torres in the same class of prospect as Profar was, but I'm not concerned about an 18 year olds 21% K rate in full season ball either.

[toonsterwu]

Torres is no Profar, who showed more power, patience, speed, and better plate discipline at the same age.

 

Okay, not the greatest comparison, admittedly, but I was just more focusing on the fact that Profar wasn't a guy who had plus tools and was viewed more as a guy with good, across the board tools, as is Torres. There is still some expectation that Torres will grow into some power.

 

Edit: Not to drag this side discussion to far, but I do feel like I should clarify why I made the comparison. From a production standpoint, Torres does not, in any way, match up to what Profar did in Hickory in 2011 (Hickory is a fantastic hitter's park ... but Kane County played as a hitter's park in 2014 and I'm guessing the numbers haven't dramatically changed, although Kane County played as a pitcher's park before then). What made Profar so unique was his readiness and polish for a guy who really didn't have any plus tools. That's the comparison point I was making - Profar was viewed as a guy with across the board average tools, maybe above average, that played better because he was just more polished. Now, it's fair to say that Profar probably had a couple tools closer to plus than Gleyber does, but I wanted to give some clarity as to why I made said comparison.