Chat with Oneri Fleita

[mlpeel]

That was a tremendous chat. Thanks a ton, Mark. Fleita is so positive about everybody, it's hard not to filter everything accordingly, but I thought he was as direct and informative as possible. Really packed a lot of info into relatively concise answers.

 

thanks a million mark for polishing/compacting the questions so nicely.

 

Question: Had you mailed him these questions in advance, or was he just responding on the fly? Assuming the latter, he's really good at giving pretty good concise info in 1-3 sentences.

 

He responded on the fly. If you listened to the recording of Down on the Farm someone posted, that's a pretty fair sample of how he talks. For the interview, I sometimes discussed his answers with him a bit to draw out a little more info (much more so at the beginning of the intervew than the end), but usually it wasn't necessary.

 

And you do have to expect the farm director to be positive about the guys whose careers he controls. He knows these players are likely to find out about any remark he makes about them.

[rawaction]

A few things I remember being surprised by:

 

1) Alberto Albequerque will only be 18 this year. The fact that Oneri seems certain he'll start above Mesa and move quickly seems to be a very good sign. Add another positive catching prospect to the ranks.

 

2) I was a bit surprised to hear that Ryu was throwing 95 in the fall league. As Craig always questions, I wonder if that meant that he was touching 95 once or twice an appearance, or if he was working at that velocity?

 

3) I really enjoyed the emphasis on the fact that Greenberg *will* make the majors. :thumleft:

 

There was more, but those are the things that are standing out to me at the moment.

 

I was geeked right off the bat. I'm surprised he expected Valdez to be in the majors this year, before the unfortunate comebacker. Ryu's velocity is great news, but Guzman is the best news for me. If he's 100%, he'll be around early in the season. Maybe not to start, but I can't see him staying down past May.

[craig]

Fleita is super positive about everything. But I'm an optimist and I was happy about a lot of the responses:

1) Favorable Guzman health report. Particularly that he'll have no limitations this spring training.

2) Blasko and Wylie the only guys he named who wouldn't be ready for spring. I'm sure there are other perhaps lesser guys he didn't mention, and other guys who will show up to camp and not be good. But given so many arm problems in recent years, it would be really awesome if it came to be April and we'd find hardly anybody beyond Blasko and wylie with a problem.

3) Same line, I was pleased that he didn't seem to expect problems for Santana (shut down with arm stuff) or Ransom (shut down early) or Brownlie or Ryu. The note that Ryu was clocked at 95 in AFL was encouraging. He's always been projected to throw hard, but I don't think he's ever done it much with the cubs.

4) The notion that Hunton might someday be middle/upper 90's was kind of entertaining.

5) ***ONE OF MY FAVORITES*** His response to the Latin guys. He again mentioned speedster *Wilson*, who he'd also mentioned at convention. He mentioned SS *Mota*, said he should be at Boise! To skip a level is a big surprise. Interestingly, in last InfoGuide his bday is listed as June, 1987. Assuming that wasn't a falsie, he'll barely turn 18 before the short-season begins. To be in Boise at barely 18 is pretty young. Caveat: Fleita notices individual tools. So his defense is most likely the thing that is obviously outstanding. He may be the best fielder in the organization, who knows, but whether he has any more hitting potential than Carlos Rojas, not to be assumed. Having mentioned Mota and Wilson in both this chat as well as at convention, that confirms they seem like guys to remember. (Although again, one eye-catching tool might make for more memory, even if accompanied by 4 anti-tools, over a player who's well-rounded above-average in all 5 but eye-catching exceptional in none?) Most pleasing to me was that *ALBERTO ALBUQUERQUE* got mentioned, he hadn't been mentioned in the Convention chat, and he got mentioned as a fast-mover who'd likely skip Mesa. InfoGuide lists him with a 6/86 birthday. To be skipping up to Boise when he's barely 19 is also unusual, and speaks very favorably. I was especially happy to hear Albuquerque mentioned because his DSL numbers were the most impressive relative to his age. If he was posting jazzy numbers in the DSL when he started the DSL year at age 17, and if the scouts like him besides, that's a very attractive combo.

6) Tim asked a neat question about seasonal goals/objectives for players. I very much liked Fleita's answer.

7) I was pretty pleased by his catcher answers. On Soto, that he wants all-star but expects starter. (I've wondered whether he projected better than a backup...) On Reed, that he projects power. (I've wondered whether he was a contact guy, but might not project enough power to ever consider as more than a #7/#8 type hitter). And on Fox, that Fleita doesn't see his defense as necessarily being deadly bad, that with improvement he could become a reasonably rounded player and that if he hits enough, his defense might be good enough that nobody will fault his defense!

8) I also liked his Lewis answer, that he likes him a lot, again the driven/smart kind of stuff, and the notion that he doesn't believe the K-thing is a permanent, irreversible, terminal problem. Time will tell, and he may well be wrong, but we'll see.

9) I liked the reference to Ohman as a "power arm"! I know they think he's got a plus slider. But I haven't really thought about him as a power arm. That's cool, if true.

10) The enthusiasm for Marshall, as perhaps comparable to Petrick for top 5, and with already having enough stuff and already having enough fastball, was pretty cool.

11) A couple of questions I wasn't that pleased about the info. He didn't seem too buzzed about Pinto, not including him in that list of top-6 names, and almost acting as if he's relatively interchangeable with Koronka/Valdez types. I'd also hoped that he thought Hoffpauir might add a little more HR power. I'd hoped he'd be more interested in grooming Hoffpauir for a flexible bench role; while it's true that there is a place for a Grace-like hitter at 1B, I'm not sure there's a place with the Cubs. And I'm not sure it's very easy to win a bench-role behind durable Derrek if the manager doesn't think of you as a multi-position guy. Hoffpauir might become a pretty good player someday, but it's hard to see how he's going to become very valuable to the Cubs, directly or in trade. While I was pleased that he seemed to assume Ransom would be physically fine and could move fast, I was a little disappointed with the "pretty good stuff" eval, which given Fleita positivism seems lukewarm.

 

Anyway, a lot of good stuff, awesome.

[mlpeel]

1) Alberto Albequerque will only be 18 this year. The fact that Oneri seems certain he'll start above Mesa and move quickly seems to be a very good sign.

 

I was quite surprised when he said that: I wrote that part in all caps.

 

2) I was a bit surprised to hear that Ryu was throwing 95 in the fall league. As Craig always questions, I wonder if that meant that he was touching 95 once or twice an appearance, or if he was working at that velocity?

 

He wasn't specific, but gave the impression of working in the middle 90s.

 

3) I really enjoyed the emphasis on the fact that Greenberg *will* make the majors. :thumleft:

 

As long as you keep in mind that the operating reference was John Cangelosi, a career bench guy who topped 200 ABs only 3 times in a 13 season career...

[mlpeel]

2) Blasko and Wylie the only guys he named who wouldn't be ready for spring. I'm sure there are other perhaps lesser guys he didn't mention, and other guys who will show up to camp and not be good. But given so many arm problems in recent years, it would be really awesome if it came to be April and we'd find hardly anybody beyond Blasko and wylie with a problem.

 

I got a sense there'll be more, but that Blasko and Wylie were the guys he was certain couldn't make it to the starting line.

 

3) Same line, I was pleased that he didn't seem to expect problems for Santana (shut down with arm stuff) or Ransom (shut down early) or Brownlie or Ryu. The note that Ryu was clocked at 95 in AFL was encouraging. He's always been projected to throw hard, but I don't think he's ever done it much with the cubs.

 

For at least 3 outings I know of, Ryu was sitting at 93-94 at Lansing. Tae Li, his former interpreter, told me J. K. topped at 98 that year.

 

9) I liked the reference to Ohman as a "power arm"! I know they think he's got a plus slider. But I haven't really thought about him as a power arm. That's cool, if true.

 

I have Ohman topping at 94 last year, hitting 93 fairly often, and working 90-92. A major league average fastball for a lefty is 88-89.

 

10) The enthusiasm for Marshall, as perhaps comparable to Petrick for top 5, and with already having enough stuff and already having enough fastball, was pretty cool.

 

Considering that I did rate Marshall in my top 5, I didn't mind hearing that myself.

 

11) A couple of questions I wasn't that pleased about the info. He didn't seem too buzzed about Pinto, not including him in that list of top-6 names, and almost acting as if he's relatively interchangeable with Koronka/Valdez types. ... While I was pleased that he seemed to assume Ransom would be physically fine and could move fast, I was a little disappointed with the "pretty good stuff" eval, which given Fleita positivism seems lukewarm.

 

Those questions came towards the very end; he didn't sound tired, but his answers got a bit more clipped. I daresay it's a bit trying to sit for an hour answering questions over the phone...

Edited February 14, 2005 by mlpeel

[YearofDaCubs]

Excellent stuff. Reading that makes feel better about our prospects. Didn't we pick up Marshall from the tigers last year? Seems like him and Murton (Nomar trade) were good pickups for us.

[cubweiser03]

Thanks to the peeps that put this chat together and thanks to Oneiri as well!

The minor league forum on this site proves how good it is again. Its why i originally came to this site. Cant get this discussion anywhere else.

[mlpeel]

Didn't we pick up Marshall from the tigers last year? Seems like him and Murton (Nomar trade) were good pickups for us.

 

No, that was John Connolly the Cubs got from the Tigers -- but Mr. Fleita named Connolly alongside Marshall as a possible fast-mover this year. I wasn't at all surprised he named Marshall, but Connolly caught me off-guard there...

[YearofDaCubs]

Didn't we pick up Marshall from the tigers last year? Seems like him and Murton (Nomar trade) were good pickups for us.

 

No, that was John Connolly the Cubs got from the Tigers -- but Mr. Fleita named Connolly alongside Marshall as a possible fast-mover this year. I wasn't at all surprised he named Marshall, but Connolly caught me off-guard there...

Thanks.

[UBlink]

11) I'd also hoped that he thought Hoffpauir might add a little more HR power. I'd hoped he'd be more interested in grooming Hoffpauir for a flexible bench role; while it's true that there is a place for a Grace-like hitter at 1B, I'm not sure there's a place with the Cubs. And I'm not sure it's very easy to win a bench-role behind durable Derrek if the manager doesn't think of you as a multi-position guy. Hoffpauir might become a pretty good player someday, but it's hard to see how he's going to become very valuable to the Cubs, directly or in trade.

 

I like Hoffpauir a lot, but as a flexible bench player I would think Craig would be ahead of Hoffpauir, playing 3rd and 1st, switch-hitting, more power.

[craig]

I like Hoffpauir a lot, but as a flexible bench player I would think Craig would be ahead of Hoffpauir, playing 3rd and 1st, switch-hitting, more power.

 

True enough. The contact-hitting thing and defensive competence is pretty crucial, though. For a rookie to make it as a flexibench, he needs to look pretty smooth and professional, and flexible. Hoffpauir might not be great at anything, but I think he has a chance to look smooth and professional and to not embarrass himself.

 

Craig has more power and switch hits to his advantage, but I'm not sure he'll look as polished?

[craig]

A few things I remember being surprised by:

 

1) Alberto Albequerque will only be 18 this year. The fact that Oneri seems certain he'll start above Mesa and move quickly seems to be a very good sign. Add another positive catching prospect to the ranks.

 

....

 

Albuquerque turned 18 last June and will play short-season at 19 this year. And he will *not* add another positive catching prospect to the ranks. Albuquerque is the pitcher!! I think you're thinking of the catcher Mercedes?

 

I don't have final stats, but as of July 22 Albuquerque was 1.45 ERA, 28K/6BB/22H in 31 innings.

[TheDude]

What a fascinating read, particularly for a guy like me who has been a die-hard for over 20 years (since grade-school) for the big league club, but with little knowledge of the farm system.

 

The hardest part I have is not immediately turning skeptical. I just don't see but a handful of guys each year that get a chance to play (and more than just 20-30 ABs), and the Cubs of the last three years, when it comes to position players, have gone after big league talent only (with what, 3 exceptions in 3 years: Patterson, Choi, and Hill?).

 

I don't say that as a knock on Dusty Baker, as many do, but just as a general observation - the current Cubs with the fear of a closing window on cheap all-star talent, won't get any kids on the big league roster except for pitchers.

 

So with an interview like this, with so many kids touted so positively, how many will really get a chance to play for the Cubs, as opposed to a team like Tampa Bay?

[burnt out cubbie fan]

I'll give you some more names: Zambrano, Prior, Wellemeyer, Leicester, Wuertz, Beltran, Mitre. Those are all players that came through the system in the last 3-4 years that played a major part in the season. There are even more if you include players like Juan Cruz that we traded away. Mitre only got a few starts but he will get more this season. Beltran got some and then was a major part of the deal for Garciaparra. That's a pretty good amount of talent to come through any team. The Cubs are different from the Devil Rays because they don't have to rely on their farm system as much due to the higher payroll. Yet, at the same time, prospects are used in trades to acquire more experienced players. There are more ways than just playing time for a farm system to improve a team.

[Tim]

A few things I remember being surprised by:

 

1) Alberto Albequerque will only be 18 this year. The fact that Oneri seems certain he'll start above Mesa and move quickly seems to be a very good sign. Add another positive catching prospect to the ranks.

 

....

 

Albuquerque turned 18 last June and will play short-season at 19 this year. And he will *not* add another positive catching prospect to the ranks. Albuquerque is the pitcher!! I think you're thinking of the catcher Mercedes?

 

I don't have final stats, but as of July 22 Albuquerque was 1.45 ERA, 28K/6BB/22H in 31 innings.

:oops:

 

Yes, I was thinking of Mercedes. Two interesting names, to be certain. :D

[CubsWin]

I'll give you some more names: Zambrano, Prior, Wellemeyer, Leicester, Wuertz, Beltran, Mitre. Those are all players that came through the system in the last 3-4 years that played a major part in the season. There are even more if you include players like Juan Cruz that we traded away. Mitre only got a few starts but he will get more this season. Beltran got some and then was a major part of the deal for Garciaparra. That's a pretty good amount of talent to come through any team. The Cubs are different from the Devil Rays because they don't have to rely on their farm system as much due to the higher payroll. Yet, at the same time, prospects are used in trades to acquire more experienced players. There are more ways than just playing time for a farm system to improve a team.

I agree, bocf. The Cubs farm system has had a lot of impact on the major league roster and in a lot of different ways.

 

Just to be clear, The Dude did say three position players in three years so all the pitchers you listed above didn't really speak to his post. But I think breaking in one position player each year is a good ratio. Hill was given a great chance in the spring of '03, but tanked. I still think he will be a good player, but I'm glad the Cubs have Walker starting instead of him. And the fact that he was the key piece in landing Aramis just thrills me to no end. Choi was given a solid chance by Baker and the Cubs until his concussion basically ended his season. The Cubs have stuck with Patterson and we are still waiting for the payoff, but I'm confident that it is coming if you look at CPat's improvement over the last three years with drawing walks and stealing bases. This year its Dubois. I'm less confident that he will get a good chance to play unless he starts out hot. If he can get 250-300 ABs I'll be satisfied. That counts as "breaking him in". The Cubs need to know whether he can be counted on to take over LF in '06. So he needs to be given ABs and he needs to produce at a decent clip.

 

The position players are coming. If the Cubs can get Brownlie's velocity into the low 90s and keep Guzman healthy, the pitchers will be coming as well. The system is strong. And if you compare it to when Hendry took over, it is completely turned around.

[CubsWin]

As much as I soaked up every word that Oneri said in that chat, I understand that he can't say what he really thinks of his players. As he said that is "secret".

 

Naturally, he is going to talk his players up. It serves two purposes. It keeps the fan base excited and a little more positive and, in case any GMs are listening/reading, it keeps them guessing as to who the marginal prospects are in the Cubs mind. The other GMs have to do their own scouting, and if they come to the Cubs and want someone the Cubs think is low on their list, then Hendry can get as much for him as possible. The Dodgers were notorious for doing this back in the Lasorda days. They would be so high on this guy or that and then trade him for major league talent. Then they would produce the Rookie of the Year anyway and the guy they traded would fade into oblivion.

 

So I understand why Mr. Fleita does what he does and applaud him for pumping up our players, but as a fan, I'm not sure how much to really believe.

[radarluv1]

i really cant wait to see guzman, whether its just on tv in ST or may-june whenever. i've been hearing about him for so long, its about time.

[DesMoinesCub]

First, let me start by thanking Mark and Tim for getting the interview. That is why this web site is the best for the Cubs and all of Major League Baseball. Your work is appreciated by all Cub fans...

 

After reading the interview, it really got me excited about the farm. I know Fleita job is to make everyone sound great, but many of the names he mentioned over and over again.

 

The more I hear about Murton, the more I am starting to think he could be a very good major league player.

[TheDude]

I'll give you some more names: Zambrano, Prior, Wellemeyer, Leicester, Wuertz, Beltran, Mitre. Those are all players that came through the system in the last 3-4 years that played a major part in the season. ..

I agree, bocf. The Cubs farm system has had a lot of impact on the major league roster and in a lot of different ways.

 

Just to be clear, The Dude did say three position players in three years so all the pitchers you listed above didn't really speak to his post. But I think breaking in one position player each year is a good ratio...

 

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I was specifically talking to position players and not pitchers.

 

My main concern with the post was (and still is) sometimes I feel the Cubs are inching closer to Yankees territory in that every position player *has* to be an all-star or the fans get upset. Average doesn't cut it (nor a top 5 budget), and so if average doesn't cut it, a kid breaking in for his first shot in the bigs certainly won't, as his learning curve is likely to be less than average initially.

 

Personally, I'd love to see a nice mixture of kids get some time this year in the field, but I don't see it happening.

[mlpeel]

So I understand why Mr. Fleita does what he does and applaud him for pumping up our players, but as a fan, I'm not sure how much to really believe.

 

It's not too hard to read a little more between the lines. Contrast his comments on Guzman ("his future is in the rotation") with those on Ryu ("As to starter or reliever, that depends on our needs") and Hill ("In my mind he's a starter in AA this year, but he has to earn it."). Guzman's got nothing to prove to him except health; the other guys might get elbowed aside if they don't show enough.

[rawaction]

So I understand why Mr. Fleita does what he does and applaud him for pumping up our players, but as a fan, I'm not sure how much to really believe.

 

It's not too hard to read a little more between the lines. Contrast his comments on Guzman ("his future is in the rotation") with those on Ryu ("As to starter or reliever, that depends on our needs") and Hill ("In my mind he's a starter in AA this year, but he has to earn it."). Guzman's got nothing to prove to him except health; the other guys might get elbowed aside if they don't show enough.

 

I agree, Fleita is positive about everyone, but more positive about some than others. The one big thing in this respect that I noticed was that he didn't seem "more positive" about Pinto. He doesn't mention Pinto as a possible top 5 guy. He doesn't mention him as a guy who could contribute this season. And when asked if Pinto was the best lefty, he threw Koronka and Valdez in the same class.

[craig]

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I was specifically talking to position players and not pitchers.

 

My main concern with the post was (and still is) sometimes I feel the Cubs are inching closer to Yankees territory in that every position player *has* to be an all-star or the fans get upset. Average doesn't cut it (nor a top 5 budget), and so if average doesn't cut it, a kid breaking in for his first shot in the bigs certainly won't, as his learning curve is likely to be less than average initially.

 

Personally, I'd love to see a nice mixture of kids get some time this year in the field, but I don't see it happening.

 

Dude, I agree that there is a big difference between integrating a pitcher and integrating a position player. And that the Cubs have been more effective with the young pitchers.

 

It's easier for a pitcher to get in. There are 11 pitchers on the roster, and pitchers get hurt all the time, so there are constantly unplanned opportunities for replacement pitchers. Plus, the team usually has a pool of pitchers, so it's not as hard to leave one or two spots open for "competition", where a kid has a chance. Third, pitchers tend to get used once on the roster, and have an opportunity to show what they can do. Leicester wasn't a stud prospect, and began at the end of the pen. But even from there, he got a chance to show his stuff, and when he was in all eyes were on him and his stuff, so he had a chance to demonstrate his ability. A pitcher can give a pretty good idea of what he's got in only a 2-inning appearance, because he's still throwing 35 pitches.

 

For positions, for a 2B to get a crack depends on Walker getting hurt, or for a 1B t get a crack depends on Lee getting hurt. Dubois is part of a competition situation, but that's usually rare. Most often a contending team wants to have a designated starter at most or all positions, and it's not easy to have a "deep pool" of 2B's from which to draw in any given season. Further, managers don't usually like kids as bench players. And unlike a pitcher who will get innings, a bench player rarely gets opportunity to show the full range of his talents.

 

Wuertz, Leicester, Mitre all got opportunities even though none were viewed as premium prospects. That happens with pitchers.

 

But players only get a shot if they are considered good enough to start. Over the last 7 years, Patterson, Hill, Choi, Chad Meyers, and Jose Nieves all got chances.... as starting players. But Roosevelt Brown and 1998 Brant Brown are basically the only young players who were carried as reserves. (And for Brown, that was after having previously been given a starting job.)

 

Given the improvement in the team, i think it becomes increasingly difficult for a young position player to get a shot without having gold-star prospect status. If you're an A prospect, yes. But if you're a B prospect, does a contending team want to bear the uncertainty of whether you'll be good enough, and the adjustment period to getting there? Probably not very often.

 

We've got lots of B-ish players, Cedeno-Soto-Craig-Hoffpuair-Sing-Lewis-Fontenot.

 

Several of them may end up being good ml players. But I think it may be pretty tough for many of them to do so with the Cubs, or to have much value to the Cubs. Maybe not studly enough to be major trade chips. But maybe not studly enough to be given a starting job with the Cubs. And if they aren't given starting opportunities, will they get brought in as flexibenches?

 

It's partly for that reason that I *like* the fact that some of the Cub players aren't being brought along so fast. I think you need to get plenty of experience, to really know yourself as a hitter, to have seen plenty of breaking pitches in the minors, etc., and to be relatively mature as a player and a person before being brought up. If in order to help the Cubs you need to be brought in as a bench player, you need to be relatively polished so that sitting on the bench doesn't mess with swing or mind. And you need to be relatively polished so that the manager is comfortable using you.

 

That's also why I'm so concerned with players playing multiple positions. Fleita said on Hoffpauir that, well, he thinks there's room in the game for a Mark Grace 1B, and that he'll just leave it up to Quade whether Hoffpuair gets OF time. While yes, there is room for a Mark Grace 1B, I don't think there will again be room for a rookie Mark Grace 1B being given a starting 1B job with the cubs! Maybe Hoffpuair will become Mark Grace for the Brewers or in Detroit or something, but I don't see that opportunity coming with the Cubs. So I strongly believe he needs to be prepared to get introduced and used as a bench player. and to me that means he needs to be sufficiently polished as an outfielder that Dusty would feel comfortable with using him there. The same with Craig, he's not going to bump Aramis out. He needs to become sufficiently polished so that he could at least sell himself and win a job as a 3B/1B. If he could add LF to that, and look comfortable/competent in LF as well, it would be so much easier to help the team as a flexibench.

 

Ditto for the 2B's. Right now the backup 3B is Hansen or Macias. I think it would be really helpful for both Lewis and Fontenot to demonstrate that they could play 3B competently. How much easier would it be for Lewis to make the 2006 team if he can be viewed as a 2B/3B, and can be the #2 to Aramis as well as Walker or Hairston at 2B? Or, maybe Lewis could get some CF experience. Or perhaps he's got enough stuff to play some SS, not as a regular but perhaps enough to make a roster as a #2 SS?

 

Long ramble short, I think we're at a stage where for most of the position players, they're going to need to depend either on a lot of luck (right place right time, perhaps an injury to the guy in front of them...) in order to introduce as a starter, or else will increasingly need to make the team as flexibench players. I'd like to see a lot of focus on preparing them to succeed in the latter.

[cubweiser03]

That's also why I'm so concerned with players playing multiple positions. Fleita said on Hoffpauir that, well, he thinks there's room in the game for a Mark Grace 1B, and that he'll just leave it up to Quade whether Hoffpuair gets OF time. While yes, there is room for a Mark Grace 1B, I don't think there will again be room for a rookie Mark Grace 1B being given a starting 1B job with the cubs! Maybe Hoffpuair will become Mark Grace for the Brewers or in Detroit or something, but I don't see that opportunity coming with the Cubs. So I strongly believe he needs to be prepared to get introduced and used as a bench player. and to me that means he needs to be sufficiently polished as an outfielder that Dusty would feel comfortable with using him there. The same with Craig, he's not going to bump Aramis out. He needs to become sufficiently polished so that he could at least sell himself and win a job as a 3B/1B. If he could add LF to that, and look comfortable/competent in LF as well, it would be so much easier to help the team as a flexibench.

 

Ditto for the 2B's. Right now the backup 3B is Hansen or Macias. I think it would be really helpful for both Lewis and Fontenot to demonstrate that they could play 3B competently. How much easier would it be for Lewis to make the 2006 team if he can be viewed as a 2B/3B, and can be the #2 to Aramis as well as Walker or Hairston at 2B? Or, maybe Lewis could get some CF experience. Or perhaps he's got enough stuff to play some SS, not as a regular but perhaps enough to make a roster as a #2 SS?

 

Long ramble short, I think we're at a stage where for most of the position players, they're going to need to depend either on a lot of luck (right place right time, perhaps an injury to the guy in front of them...) in order to introduce as a starter, or else will increasingly need to make the team as flexibench players. I'd like to see a lot of focus on preparing them to succeed in the latter.

 

Ahh yeah. Couldnt agree more. i think this is the next step/evolution of the Cubs farm system. Now that this system is more mature these players are closer to becoming these flexibench players at the mlb level. Of the guys you listed, those are the ones most likely going to be in AAA (lewis & fotentot is good problem to have) this year. If they are successful in 05 all of these guys will have a legitmate shot to make the club next year (adios macias and your 800k!). I cant remember the Cubs being as strong in these B players as they are now. They had B players before but they fizzled or didnt develop any more once they hit AA or AAA levels. These B guys mentioned in this thread and others have been pretty successful at AA or AAA. Developing stars in the system is important but for teams to develop 'flexibench' players is very underrated.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Mark,

 

Any chance of getting an interview with John Stockstill either right before or right after the draft in June?