Minor League Musings

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Jim Callis took a stab at what the MLB.com top 10 would look like after next season. Eloy came in at 7 (Gleyber at 5).

 

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/202749152/projecting-mlbs-top-10-prospects-of-2017/?topicid=151437456

[TruffleShuffle]

forearm soreness after one start? not great bob.

[Thrilho]

Sickels comment on Slappy Almora:

 

I think he could start for a few years for someone who loves his glove, but I don't think the bat will improve much beyond where he is currently.

 

So, sometimes-starter, sure. 10-year starter? I doubt it.

 

He also says Paredes is "perhaps" a top 20 Cubs prospect, but not top 10 today, and that he'd probably have Clifton in the low 100's as a prospect.

 

10 year starter is a pretty tall bar to clear. Either way I'd take Slappy Almora's .162 MLB iso, 29% hard hit, and 33 UZR on my playoff roster. And he doesn't need to improve much past the current .276/.296/.438 line to be pretty valuable (pacing for 4.6 fWAR/600). Seems like a lot of teams could run with a guy like that hitting 7/8. Now if he thinks the bat is what we saw in AAA then different story. I'd guess the career line looks like a slightly goosed up version of this MLB line though.

[Thrilho]

Well yeah, Almora on this year's playoff roster should be a given, I don't think anyone would argue that.

 

I didn't chime in earlier in the season, but I've envisioned him on it consistently over the last couple months. I'd think there's a spectrum of feelings from people on how valuable he'll be and how much to trust his bat, and I'm probably well on the confident end. For instance, I don't think the .162 iso is a fluke.

 

OTOH trying to sell that .162 IsoSLG (career MiL over 1700+ PAs is .126 including .113 and .128 in AAA and AA) and a 33 UZR over all of 108 PAs and 217 innings (making him far and away the best defender in baseball) will be the norm...Well, that just sounds like a load of hooey.

 

I didn't say his .162 iso was the norm; I said I'd take it on the playoff roster. I said that "a slightly goosed up" version of his current MLB line is what I'd expect out of his career. I'd guess something like .280/.320/.430. I didn't actually try to justify this in the post but if I had I'd probably use some stuff on his age, raw power, and how improved plate approach helps unlock power.

 

On the 33 UZR being the norm, I'm guessing you got that from where I said he's pacing for 4.6 fWAR this year. I don't know if he's actually worth 33 UZR going forward, but I'd bet it's consistently over 25. He'd be the best outfielder by UZR this year with 33, but last year there were three outfielders over 35 and 2 over 40. So even if I did expect a consistent 30 out of him it doesn't make him the far and away best defender in baseball.

 

So I guess I'll just say I disagree with a Sickles that knows way more than me in thinking he's just a fringy guy that'll only be an opening day starter for a couple years. But for the playoffs this year, I'm looking forward to some consistent contact against both lefties and righties, and some solid (.150+) slugging.

[Thrilho]

- Last year the highest UZR was 30 and that guy was 10 runs better than the next. http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=fld&lg=all&qual=0&type=1&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=23,d

 

Horsefeathers. I don't know what I was looking at with that. Something on fangraphs listed Keiermayer, Heyward, and Pillar over 35...but not what I meant to be looking at. So yeah, that 4.8 fWAR with a 113 wRC+ isn't going to happen unless he's peak Keiermayer. Still that wasn't what I was trying to project from him. If it were then I'd be selling him a lot harder. He could start on an awful lot of teams as a 3 win player though and based on the eye test of his defense, his bat wouldn't have to improve a lot from his current talent level to get and keep him above that.

 

- Sickels neither calls him fringy nor says he'll only he an OD starter for a couple years. .

 

I interpret " he could start for a few years" and "sometimes-starter" as fringe starter. Call it third division starter, whatever. If he has an 8-10 year career and starts for a few of them he's a pretty fringy starter.

 

- Base seems to be the playoffs thing here, but Almora on the playoff roster is kind of a duh move. It's handing him a starting job on the idea that there's basically ~5 WAR player with pushing historic defense and above average career IsoSLGer off of 108 PAs and 217 innings that confounds, even with contact being such a useful skill. I can buy that he could put together a handful of years in this upcoming 23-27 window, particularly between 23-25, that are better than he's shown in the minors.

 

- Who's handing him a starting job. All I've ever said I'd commit to him for 2017 is 200-300 PAs based on roster construction. Plenty of room to work him in at 23.

 

- The iso is again not based off 108 PAs. It's based off witnessing him crush doubles and home runs, and the knowledge that power sometimes develops slowly. You should jump on board the train. It's not too late to think he can maintain a .150< OPS through his peak years.

[Thrilho]

Oh also, since I lost my mind on that original post and had the UZR scaling all wrong...let me say I feel confident he's consistently at least a 20 UZR player rather than 25. It's elite level, but I see no reason why he can't hit it at least until his late 20s or some injury derails him. He gets some nice jumps.

[Thrilho]

Last revision to my post, I'm changing that .280/.320/.430 line to pre-30 rather than career. Just looked up Jeter as an idea of a ~.150 iso guy and man that tumble down your 30s really takes a toll on the batting line. So I guess I'm vouching for Almora as a guy who remains a pretty good (~95 wRC+) MLB player up to 30 but nothing beyond that. That still does seem like an awful lot to vouch for right now, but luckily enough age 29 Almora means a hill of horsefeathers to the Cubs.

[Thrilho]

I definitely believe there's more value in trading Almora than having him sit on the bench the majority of next year. This is not a case like Baez where the Cubs had an elite minor league hitter who played SS, had experience at 2B and 3B, and the athleticism to maybe throw in the OF in an emergency situation. The opportunities to play Almora will be less, and players who can do that job are cheap. That he can start for plenty of teams works in the Cubs' favor when it comes to trade value as well.

 

Sure they could trade him and if they get a stud pitcher back then maybe that's the best way to get value for 2017. But there are other years than 2017 to consider. Baez only got sparing work his first couple years and he's worked himself into what I think is a really valuable piece.

 

I'd patient with Almora, work him in, and my guess is that "established MLB hitter" Almora will be more valuable than whatever he's seen as now. And the Cubs don't need any starting pitching til 2018, so I don't see the rush.

 

"Witnessing him crush doubles and HRs" sounds a little smoke and mirrors around that 108 PAs, and I'm not so sure about that power claim. What is in his favor is that he's heading into a window (23-25) where power peaks for the vast majority of players

 

Totally, you're entitled to be skeptical of his power. I'll look at his triple from last night and some of the other balls he's hit on a rope and say he's got some raw power he can tap into. I've put some numbers to it, in that I think he's a .150 iso type player for at least his peak years. I'll even say I expect him to hit that for 2017. Seems like that's going out on a limb.

 

If we were doing a gentleman's bet on 2017, what would you project his iso to be?

[Thrilho]

Sure they could trade him and if they get a stud pitcher back then maybe that's the best way to get value for 2017. But there are other years than 2017 to consider. Baez only got sparing work his first couple years and he's worked himself into what I think is a really valuable piece.

 

I'd patient with Almora, work him in, and my guess is that "established MLB hitter" Almora will be more valuable than whatever he's seen as now. And the Cubs don't need any starting pitching til 2018, so I don't see the rush.

 

Totally, you're entitled to be skeptical of his power. I'll look at his triple from last night and some of the other balls he's hit on a rope and say he's got some raw power he can tap into. I've put some numbers to it, in that I think he's a .150 iso type player for at least his peak years. I'll even say I expect him to hit that for 2017. Seems like that's going out on a limb.

 

If we were doing a gentleman's bet on 2017, what would you project his iso to be?

 

- Baez was a way better prospect than Almora and played a more valuable position with a more valuable skillset. That's why he was afforded patience at the ML level. Even then Almora has in the org only one year less than Baez, they've shown lots of patience.

 

- They shouldn't and likely won't be waiting for 2018 to buy SP.

 

- They can find glove first OFs post-2017 as well, I assume.

 

- All that raw power to tap into and you'd go out on a limb for below average power at peak (including age 23 2017)? League average IsoSLG this year is .162.

 

- You're not getting my point on Baez. It's not that Almora is going to be as good or a comparable player, it's that sometimes you work guys in gradually and get better results than if you'd just traded them. You're looking at Almora's horsefeathers MiLB iso with skepticism. My guess is some of the other goons that GM around the league right now will too. A year of quality production could net the Cubs way more.

 

- Maybe they wait maybe they don't. But there are plenty of other guys to trade who are actually blocked or who are pitchers. Candy + Happ seems like a solid starting spot. No reason to trade a guy who might be good at a position where you have room to at least rotate guys in.

 

- This is just where we disagree on role and talent level. If you want centerfield Kawasaki then sure you can find that but you wouldn't want him playing much. If I'm in the camp that sees Almora as a 3+ WAR/150 player who could get 200-300 PAs next season and more in 2018 pending roster construction then I think we're just talking about 2 different things.

 

- You're calling him Slappy Almora and this is what you've got when I ask a pointed question of what you see his iso at in 2017? Yeah with the raw power he's exhibited I see a probable .150 iso. Just under league average. I'd assume anyone with nickname of Slappy would have to be pretty far off league average right? What's your number?

[davell]

Calling him Slappy is just trolling. There's literally zero reason for it.

 

He's an ideal 4th OF for us. He's very comparable to Javy in SOME ways. He's got holes offensively and he's excellent defensively. Both are going to get time to work thru the holes and both have shown signs of being able to do just that.

 

We're just as much about run prevention as we are about scoring runs. We love versatility, therefore both guys have lots of chances to get into games.

 

You're kidding yourself if you think Almora is going to bring back a stud pitcher as the lead piece. You're also cutting seriously into our valued depth if you trade him in a deal where he's NOT the lead piece. He's more valuable to us than he is in a trade. He's got versatility, potential for a decent bat, is excellent defensively, and is cheap as hell. Which becomes super valuable once KB, Addy, and others start to cost real money. In fact, he's set up perfectly, because his skill set isn't even likely to ever make him super expensive.

 

I really want to keep Dex, use Almora as the 4th OF and trade Soler for whatever the best pitching package he'll bring back. Almora is just a better fit for us than he is. Neither brings us a stud pitcher by themselves. But I've got plenty of confidence that our guys can maximize the return and find a nice fit.

[craig]

I definitely believe there's more value in trading Almora than having him sit on the bench the majority of next year. ..... The opportunities to play Almora will be less, and players who can do that job are cheap. That he can start for plenty of teams works in the Cubs' favor when it comes to trade value as well...... What is in his favor is that he's heading into a window (23-25) where power peaks for the vast majority of players:

....but even then playing him sporadically next year is probably not the way to reap the benefits of that.

 

1. If the Cubs include him in a trade, I'll look forward to what the Cubs get.

 

2. I don't see many trade targets to use him for, myself.

*The rotation has Hammel #5 and Montgomery #6 under club control. Unless they trade Hammel, I don't really see a present rotation spot.

*Perhaps as more likely than trading Hammel is simply not resigning Fowler.

 

3. I think Almora's usage next year and behind is interlinked with Fowler. If Fowler ends up back, not that much role for Almora. But if the Cubs don't invest what it takes to keep Fowler, then there is opportunity for Almora.

 

4. If so, I envision Maddon doing mix-and-match. If Almora hits well, he'll play a lot, as much as his performance deserves. If he doesn't, Heyward can perhaps pick up a lot of CF starts. Almora, Heyward, Zobrist, Bryant, Soler, Schwarber, possibly Coghlan or Szczur, Maddon will have an ample collection to choose from. But without Fowler starting and leading off almost every day, if Almora produces he'll get used.

*If he does hit well enough to stay in the lineup a lot, that will improve an already historically-great defense even further.

*But even if he doesn't, Heyward in center with Bryant or Zobrist in at least one of the corner spots won't be a bad defensive outfield. And could be really good offensively.

[David]

Calling him Slappy is just trolling. There's literally zero reason for it.

 

He's an ideal 4th OF for us. He's very comparable to Javy in SOME ways. He's got holes offensively and he's excellent defensively. Both are going to get time to work thru the holes and both have shown signs of being able to do just that.

 

We're just as much about run prevention as we are about scoring runs. We love versatility, therefore both guys have lots of chances to get into games.

 

You're kidding yourself if you think Almora is going to bring back a stud pitcher as the lead piece. You're also cutting seriously into our valued depth if you trade him in a deal where he's NOT the lead piece. He's more valuable to us than he is in a trade. He's got versatility, potential for a decent bat, is excellent defensively, and is cheap as hell. Which becomes super valuable once KB, Addy, and others start to cost real money. In fact, he's set up perfectly, because his skill set isn't even likely to ever make him super expensive.

 

I really want to keep Dex, use Almora as the 4th OF and trade Soler for whatever the best pitching package he'll bring back. Almora is just a better fit for us than he is. Neither brings us a stud pitcher by themselves. But I've got plenty of confidence that our guys can maximize the return and find a nice fit.

 

I'd much rather keep Soler than trade him for the crappy pitching return he'd net as a main piece. Our rotation may be getting older but it's still very good for 5 spots deep. And we have internal depth there with Montgomery as injury or insurance if one of them totally bombs (depending on whether or not they keep Hammel for that cheap option they have).

[davell]

Calling him Slappy is just trolling. There's literally zero reason for it.

 

He's an ideal 4th OF for us. He's very comparable to Javy in SOME ways. He's got holes offensively and he's excellent defensively. Both are going to get time to work thru the holes and both have shown signs of being able to do just that.

 

We're just as much about run prevention as we are about scoring runs. We love versatility, therefore both guys have lots of chances to get into games.

 

You're kidding yourself if you think Almora is going to bring back a stud pitcher as the lead piece. You're also cutting seriously into our valued depth if you trade him in a deal where he's NOT the lead piece. He's more valuable to us than he is in a trade. He's got versatility, potential for a decent bat, is excellent defensively, and is cheap as hell. Which becomes super valuable once KB, Addy, and others start to cost real money. In fact, he's set up perfectly, because his skill set isn't even likely to ever make him super expensive.

 

I really want to keep Dex, use Almora as the 4th OF and trade Soler for whatever the best pitching package he'll bring back. Almora is just a better fit for us than he is. Neither brings us a stud pitcher by themselves. But I've got plenty of confidence that our guys can maximize the return and find a nice fit.

 

I'd much rather keep Soler than trade him for the crappy pitching return he'd net as a main piece. Our rotation may be getting older but it's still very good for 5 spots deep. And we have internal depth there with Montgomery as injury or insurance if one of them totally bombs (depending on whether or not they keep Hammel for that cheap option they have).

 

I think he'd net us an interesting enough arm to take the shot. Even if its a Blair or Wisler from Atlanta. Counting on him to stay remotely healthy seems like a mistake and he's bad defensively too. I just think Almora is the better fit for us. But its a solid enough point that we can keep both next year and just let things play out.

[Thrilho]

- I totally get your point on Baez. My point is that Baez was afforded that patience because he was a much, much better prospect than Almora with a more valuable set of skills. As I already stated - one offers premium power and can play any spot in the IF and was given OF reps by the FO and CS, the other is a light hitting OF who even an arden supporter sees as a below average hitter even at his peak.

 

- Whatever the reasons were on Baez I'm preaching patience on Almora

 

- So is it that he can start for most teams in the league and relatively easily put up 3+ WAR or that other GMs need to see more?

 

- Both. This is the league where it takes Schwarber to get Miller and Inciarte is thrown into a deal for a bad pitcher. Most GMs are dumb and don't value defense.

 

- There's at least a very good chance they will buy pitching via trade before 2018 and it will likely require more than one player.

As nice as it would be to land a top quality talent for a back half top 100 prospects, it's probably not happening that way.

 

There are a lot of good prospects in the Cubs MiLB + major league pieces. So which is it? Is Almora the lynchpin to any potential deal or is the light hitting guy who started the year in the back half of your top 10 and didn't do much to distinguish himself this year?

 

- Yeah, I'm not looking for a Kawasaki nor does that guy have to be a Kawasaki equivalent. If we're regarding that role like that, isn't regulating a slam dunk 3+ WAR starting caliber player in the middle of his prime to the bench basically forcing him into being a CF Kawasaki?

 

- For 2017, my position on him is the same as it was on Javy in 2015/2016. Maybe is the 3 win player I think he could be by this year maybe he isn't. Let's give him PAs and see. If he forces a bigger role you trade him for a much better price or you move some stuff around and give him a spot. If he fails you missed out on some return. If he's as good as he has been so far this year you've got a real good trade chip and the 2017 offseason to get your SP.

 

- You're saying peak, tapping into this raw power you see and even given favorable matchups as a part timer, he's below average. I would agree with that, sounds Slappy to me.

 

- I said in my most recent post .150 by 2017, when he'll have just turned 23 with ~100 MLB PAs under his belt. I'd bet that's not his peak production. And you can spin it any way you'd like if he ends up with a .150+ iso on a substantial number of PAs in 2017 that nickname is going to sound dumb as horsefeathers

[davell]

Far from the first time you using Slappy has been mentioned. Even if it was, it still obviously annoys quite a few here, since he's being productive in the majors. Saying things you know irritates multiple people is basically the definition of trolling.

 

And by the way: He just doesn't like Almora. Its really that simple. He can spin 27 year old defense into a wondrous thing and expect it to continue. But talk about how it declines for ones he doesnt particularly like.Or talk about how power peaks much later for guys he likes than the 23-25 range he used just now on Almora. Basically, its all just BS. Which is honestly just fine. Its a message board and none of us are getting paid to share our opinions. But at least admit it, instead of dismissing others opinions that have as much validity as yours, when you're not even remotely consistent on what you say.

[Thrilho]

Ok it's cool. I think I've said my piece Almora for now. I came in prior to his big game last night to say some nice stuff about him and ended up feeding my own enjoyment of debate for while. But I think my points have been laid out about as well as I'm going to get them so I'll stop eating up space in the musings thread.

 

Cheers to all and to all a good Almora playoff run.

[davell]

You literally have no reading comprehension at all. Its not worth talking about or cluttering this place up. Please, just don't respond to ANYTHING I post. I swear I'll stay away from your horsefeathers. And I implore the others that hate getting bogged down into arguing with him to do the same. Just ignore him completely. Then a bunch of good minor league discussion that's respectful and actual give and take can go on.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

From BA's daily prospect reports the past couple of days:

 

Bryant Flete, lf, Cubs. Flete signed with the Cubs in 2012 out of Venezuela but was overshadowed by the international signings that year of Jorge Soler, Juan Carlos Paniagua, Gerardo Concepcion and Oscar de la Cruz. Flete has languished in the system, not advancing above A ball in five seasons and posting a career OPS of .689. But playing in the Venezuelan League Friday, Flete—playing left field rather than his standard shortstop or second base—had two doubles and a home run as Zulia beat Anzoategui 12-11.

 

Gioskar Amaya, 1b, Cubs. Amaya, who signed out of Venezuela in 2009, is still just 23, although he’s lost the prospect shine he had as the Cubs’ No. 21 prospect in 2012. Amaya is now a multi-positional player—catching and playing the infield—and he played first base on Saturday for Aragua in the Venezuelan League. He had three hits, including a double, in Aragua’s 6-1 loss to Magallanes. Amaya has solid on-base skills and a soft hands.

[David]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/keithlaw/status/787037582488014848[/tweet]

[David]

https://www.facebook.com/prohittingbaseball/videos/vb.354052381367079/885099691595676/?type=3&theater

[Little Slide Rooter]

Just needed something to take my mind of the current goings on. And I know there was a Rule 5 thread or a discussion somewhere, but I'm just going to update it.

 

RULE 5 DRAFT:

 

John Andreoli, OF

Pedro Araujo, RHP

Jeffrey Baez, OF

Yasiel Balaguert, 1B

Corey Black, RHP

Paul Blackburn RHP (traded)

David Bote, INF

Cael Brockmeyer, C

Stephen Bruno, INF

Victor Caratini, C

Ben Carhart, INF

Roberto Caro, OF

Erick Castillo, C

Jesus Castillo, RHP (traded)

Josh Conway, RHP

Rashad Crawford, OF (traded)

Taylor Davis, C-1B

Andin Diaz, LHP

Greyfer Eregua, RHP

Luiz Escanio, RHP

Bryant Flete, INF

Scott Frazier, RHP

Robert Garcia, OF

David Garner, RHP

Jake Hannemann, OF

Luis Hernandez, RHP

Erick Leal, RHP

Danny Lockhart, INF

Mark Malave, RHP (ex-C)

Dillon Maples, RHP

Trey Martin, OF

Jonathan Martinez, RHP

Ryan McNeil, RHP

Alberto Mineo, C

Jose Paniagua, 1B-OF

Juan Carlos Paniagua, RHP

Adonis Paula, INF

Jose Paulino, LHP

Carlos Penalver, INF

Steve Perakslis, RHP

Chris Pieters, 1B-OF (ex-LHP)

James Pugliese, RHP

Bijan Rademacher, OF

Will Remillard, C

Armando Rivero, RHP

Alexander Santana, RHP

Tyler Skulina, RHP

Daury Torrez, RHP

Duane Underwood Jr, RHP

Michael Wagner, RHP

Rob Zastryzny, LHP* (rostered)

 

Duane Underwood and Victor Caratini are almost certain to be rostered. Rademacher stands a decent chance too. He definitely fits the Guyer/Bour mold, in that it wouldn't surprise me to see him as a productive big leaguer, and would potentially pine for if not for a roster full of better players. But if a roster spot's available, may as well.

 

Corey Black, Armando Rivero, Daury Torrez, and Juan Paniagua each have as much chance of being selected as not, and probably have as much chance of making it through the season on a big league roster as not. Rivero's the most intriguing of the bunch, but as I've been saying about him, as consistent as his minor league numbers have been for us, the fact that he's yet to be mentioned as a possibility for a call up suggests that he's simply not that good.

 

Dillon Maples, Josh Conway, Ryan McNeil, Pedro Araujo: Someone with a Roster space to spare and a Rule 5 burning a hole in their pocket could take a chance. But I'll assume that there will be about 100 guys just like them available in the rule 5. On a side note, I hate that I cling to hope for Maples as a raw, high ceiling, prospect, despite the fact that he's 24, never having sniffed AA, and not particularly impressed at any level.

 

2016 MLB RULE 55 SECOND CONTRACT PLAYERS:

 

Luis Aquino, RHP (previously released by CLE)

Aaron Crow, RHP (previously non-tendered by MIA - Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Elvis Diaz, RHP (previously released by BAL)

Jack Leathersich, LHP (previously non-tendered by CUBS)

Brian Matusz, LHP (previously released by ATL)

Miguel Mejia, RHP (previously released by DET)

Drew Rucinski, RHP (previously released by CLE)

Nick Sarianides, RHP (previously released by AZ)

NOTE: RHP Cole Brocker (previously released by ATL), RHP Yan de la Cruz (previously released by HOU), RHP Miguel Estevez (previously released by CIN), and RHP Robert Severino (previously released by SEA) are Rule 55 Second Contract Players, but they are not eligible for selection in the 2016 Rule 5 Draft.

 

I would very much like to hang onto Crow and Learhersich, at least through ST.

 

Additionally, any player eligible to be an MLB Rule 55 Six-Year Minor League Free-Agent (6YFA) post-2016 who signs a 2017 minor league contract or a 2017 minor league successor contract prior to the December 2016 Rule 5 Draft will be eligible for selection, and any player eligible to be an MLB Rule 55 Second Contract Minor League Free-Agent post-2016 who signs a 2017 minor league contract or a 2017 minor league successor contract prior to the December 2016 Rule 5 Draft will be eligible for selection if the player was 18 or younger on the June 5th immediately prior to signing his first contract and it is at least the 5th Rule 5 Draft following his first qualified season, and a minor league player who was 19 years or older on the June 5th immediately prior to signing his first contract becomes eligible for selection starting with the 4th Rule 5 Draft following his first qualified season.

 

 

POST-2016 RULE 55 SIX-YEAR MINOR LEAGUE FA: There is nobody in this group that I am concerned about.

Gioskar Amaya, INF-C

Jeffry Antigua, LHP

Scott Barnes, LHP (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Frank Batista, RHP

Jake Buchanan, RHP (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Kelly Dugan, 1B-OF (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Tim Federowicz, C (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Stephen Fife, RHP (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

David Freitas, C

Ryan Kalish, OF (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Matt Murton, OF (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Kristopher Negron, IF-OF (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Manny Parra, LHP (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Felix Pena, RHP

Joel Peralta, RHP (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Starling Peralta, RHP (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Juan Carlos Perez, OF-IF (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

C. J. Riefenhauser, LHP (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

Jose Rosario, RHP

Logan Watkins, INF (Article XX-D player - can elect free-agency if drafted & then later re-claimed by Cubs)

[Tryptamine]

Anyone thought about their personal top 30 for this system? I haven't, but I just looked at Isaac Paredes' season again along with Eloy's AFL and thought about thinking about it. Getting there, I guess!

 

I was going to throw together something just shits and giggles but damn even the top 10 is going to be hard to put together this year without really going over somethings. The only slot you can't argue is #1.

[texascub]

I wasn't really sure where to post this, but I noticed today that Jacob Hanneman and Corey Black are playing for Cangrejeros de Santurce in the Puerto Rico winter league.

 

Their team has only played 7 games. Black has earned 2 saves in 4 games, Hanneman has only gone 2-25 so far.

[craig]

Manuel has Hatch as a 93-94 guy in his draft writeup for the Cubs. He's in the convo for best fastball among their draft picks, the only SP, and is the closest to the majors.

 

Thanks, Tom. Obviously they always list the top end. So probably a 93-94 guy will routinely be working 88-91. Still, it seems the reports have enough velocity to pitch with. It's usually going to location and movement that get guys out more than pure speed. And in all of the scouting stuff, it was much more for his control and pitching than his raw velocity that give Hatch his value. So, if his velocity is his weakest quality, and that's still 93-94, I think you've certainly got a guy with a chance to be a very effective pitcher. Will be fun to see how he does next season. I'll be disappointed if he doesn't have pretty good success at Myrtle.

 

In terms of "best fastball", I think Brady Clark will certainly be faster, among the new selections. Faster is one thing; "better" is another. Will be fascinating to see how next season plays out for those two guys.

 

With you, Tom, I'll be a little disappointed if Hatch doesn't start out at Myrtle, and have good success. For Clark, I'll be disappointed if he doesn't pitch well enough at South Bend to pitch his way up to Myrtle by some point during the season.

 

I may be wrong on those, though. Cubs have seemed to avoid moving guys too much during their first full pro season. And have also sometimes surprised me by starting guys lower than I expected. Regardless, really hope both of those guys have the health, and velocity, and effectiveness next season so that twelve months from now both will look like guys who will have useful major-league careers.

[JeffH]

Manuel has Hatch as a 93-94 guy in his draft writeup for the Cubs. He's in the convo for best fastball among their draft picks, the only SP, and is the closest to the majors.

 

Thanks, Tom. Obviously they always list the top end. So probably a 93-94 guy will routinely be working 88-91. Still, it seems the reports have enough velocity to pitch with. It's usually going to location and movement that get guys out more than pure speed. And in all of the scouting stuff, it was much more for his control and pitching than his raw velocity that give Hatch his value. So, if his velocity is his weakest quality, and that's still 93-94, I think you've certainly got a guy with a chance to be a very effective pitcher. Will be fun to see how he does next season. I'll be disappointed if he doesn't have pretty good success at Myrtle.

 

In terms of "best fastball", I think Brady Clark will certainly be faster, among the new selections. Faster is one thing; "better" is another. Will be fascinating to see how next season plays out for those two guys.

 

With you, Tom, I'll be a little disappointed if Hatch doesn't start out at Myrtle, and have good success. For Clark, I'll be disappointed if he doesn't pitch well enough at South Bend to pitch his way up to Myrtle by some point during the season.

 

I may be wrong on those, though. Cubs have seemed to avoid moving guys too much during their first full pro season. And have also sometimes surprised me by starting guys lower than I expected. Regardless, really hope both of those guys have the health, and velocity, and effectiveness next season so that twelve months from now both will look like guys who will have useful major-league careers.

 

Bailey Clark. Brady Clark was the Chris Denorfia of his time.