Mid-Season Top 10 or 20 prospects list

[Cubway]

Pie has all the tools and all the experts say that he is a can't miss, but we must remember that he still has to prove himself. He has a hard time with the off-speed pitch (which is not uncommon for young ball players) and his recent injury may set him back for a while. But one thing I have learned over the years, that the experts DO know what they are talking about and that a player does not have to tear up a league before he is considered a real prospect.

[rawaction]

Erm you guys do know Angel Guzman is still alive, don't you?

 

Injured or not, there is no way you can make a top prospect list for the Cubs and not have him somewhere near the top of it. The kid's still just 23 and his stuff, control, makeup, polish are off the charts compared to some of the prospects you're ranking ahead of him. Some of you are seriously saying you'd take the likes of Nolasco over Guzman? If Guzman gets healthy, he has a bright major league future. Nolasco doesn't even have a major league future. I'll take the chance on Guzman then.

 

Is it even that big a gamble? Guzman's been injured twice. He tore his labrum in 2003, and he's had this nagging injury this year, which the Cubs diagnosed as having something to do with a childhood injury. You're going to write off Guzman on the basis of two injuries? Fair enough, but I'll write off Dopirak and Harvey on the basis of their all or nothing approach probably making them less likely to reach the big leagues than Guzman even. And where will that get me? Not far. This system isn't anywhere near deep enough that you can ignore potential impact pitchers just because they miss a few months with injury or they strike out a bit too much. We don't do can't miss prospects.

 

2 injuries? A few months? Whether he's had 40 injuries or 1, the fact is the dude has pitched 48 innings in the last 23-24 months. He's yet to got thru an entire minor league season uninjured. He's never thrown more than 94 innings in a season. Who knows if he will even pitch this year? He will be 24 at the end of this year, and still hasn't pitched above AA (outside of spring training). By the time he is completely recovered from this injury, he'll be 24. By the time his arm strength is where it needs to be he's 24.5. By the time the Cubs can reasonably expect his "bright major league future" to benefit them, he's 25.

 

Nolasco has a much better shot at a ML future than Guzman. There are a lot less talented pitchers around than Nolasco. Guzman has the talent, but what's the point if he can't pitch?

 

Holding out hope that Guzman will be healthy enough to one day reach his potential is similar to holding out hope that Brownlie will throw 95 again someday. It may happen, but nothing has been shown to suggest it will.

[JC]

 

Holding out hope that Guzman will be healthy enough to one day reach his potential is similar to holding out hope that Brownlie will throw 95 again someday. It may happen, but nothing has been shown to suggest it will.

 

Ouch. :cry:

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Erm you guys do know Angel Guzman is still alive, don't you?

 

Injured or not, there is no way you can make a top prospect list for the Cubs and not have him somewhere near the top of it. The kid's still just 23 and his stuff, control, makeup, polish are off the charts compared to some of the prospects you're ranking ahead of him. Some of you are seriously saying you'd take the likes of Nolasco over Guzman? If Guzman gets healthy, he has a bright major league future. Nolasco doesn't even have a major league future. I'll take the chance on Guzman then.

 

Is it even that big a gamble? Guzman's been injured twice. He tore his labrum in 2003, and he's had this nagging injury this year, which the Cubs diagnosed as having something to do with a childhood injury. You're going to write off Guzman on the basis of two injuries? Fair enough, but I'll write off Dopirak and Harvey on the basis of their all or nothing approach probably making them less likely to reach the big leagues than Guzman even. And where will that get me? Not far. This system isn't anywhere near deep enough that you can ignore potential impact pitchers just because they miss a few months with injury or they strike out a bit too much. We don't do can't miss prospects.

 

2 injuries? A few months? Whether he's had 40 injuries or 1, the fact is the dude has pitched 48 innings in the last 23-24 months. He's yet to got thru an entire minor league season uninjured. He's never thrown more than 94 innings in a season. Who knows if he will even pitch this year? He will be 24 at the end of this year, and still hasn't pitched above AA (outside of spring training). By the time he is completely recovered from this injury, he'll be 24. By the time his arm strength is where it needs to be he's 24.5. By the time the Cubs can reasonably expect his "bright major league future" to benefit them, he's 25.

 

Nolasco has a much better shot at a ML future than Guzman. There are a lot less talented pitchers around than Nolasco. Guzman has the talent, but what's the point if he can't pitch?

 

Holding out hope that Guzman will be healthy enough to one day reach his potential is similar to holding out hope that Brownlie will throw 95 again someday. It may happen, but nothing has been shown to suggest it will.

 

Nitpick, but Guzman threw 156 innings in 2002, 62 at Lansing and 94 at Daytona.

[sporrer17]

With Guzman failing to really do much of anything the past two seasons, it makes it *REALLY* hard to keep him in a top 10 list during a midseason review. Midseason reviews are probably the hardest evaluations...the guys who are struggling, you dont want to dismiss them because of a half of a season...and those who are doing well you want to move up because you think they've figured it out...

 

Guzman is pretty much an afterthought to any Cubs top 10 list because of his failure to stay healthy the last 2 years. I'm sorry, but take ANYONE basically out of the game for 2 years, bring them back and see if they are still considered as valuable as when they left.

 

When healthy, he's easily a top 5 in our system. But he's not healthy.

[cubweiser03]

Im not too crayzy about my list. Pie at #1 was pretty easy. After that its real close between players.

1. Pie

2. Marshall

3. Murton

4. Moore

5. Harvey

6. Patterson

7. Hill

8. Pinto

9. Pawelek

10. Dope

 

I cant believe moore is outperforming dope, i know this is a repeat for moore but they are only 1 month apart, thats why i give the edge to moore plus dope's defense is awful. He's got DH written all over him and that limits his value. I gotta put the kid pawelek somewhere. Im not crazy about harvey, his numbers havent been impressive, im only going on what ive heard on his tools. Ryu is making a nice comeback but not enough to crack the top 10 again

[Outshined_One]

Some responses to a few things posted around here...

 

1) Eric Patterson is doing quite a good job in Peoria this season, don't get me wrong. However, there are a few knocks I have against him. As it already has been mentioned, he's playing in a league that's at or slightly below the level of talent he faced in college. I'd like to see him at Daytona by season's end to see how he's doing there.

 

Secondly, if he were a SS and projected to play there effectively in the majors, I'd be MUCH higher on him. But as a 2B? Ehhhhhhh...it's a bit easier to be a crappy defensive player with a good bat (see: Kent, Jeff). My understanding is that Eric's defense at second is only above average, but I might be mistaken.

 

He's a top 20 guy for me and he could shoot into the Top 10 if the Cubs move him up to Daytona and he keeps up his performance.

 

2) Angel Guzman has such a special and incredible upside...but come on, this entire season he's been "7-10 days away" from returning. I'd love to see him pitching this season, but until that happens, he's been passed by a good number of pitching prospects on my list.

 

3) I loved that episode, too. :D

[Diffusion]

2 injuries?

 

Yes, two. Two injuries, one very serious (torn labrum), and this one.

 

A few months?

 

Yes, in that a few months ago, in Spring Training, the optimism here regarding Guzman was enormous. He even ranked 3rd in the pre-season rankings here at NSBB.

 

The fact is the dude has pitched 48 innings in the last 23-24 months.

 

Not debating that, Raw. Well, 56.1 if you include ST. All the same, it is pretty hard to get over.

 

He's yet to got thru an entire minor league season uninjured. He's never thrown more than 94 innings in a season.

 

As has been pointed out, that's not true. He threw 156 innings in 2002.

 

Who knows if he will even pitch this year? He will be 24 at the end of this year, and still hasn't pitched above AA (outside of spring training). By the time he is completely recovered from this injury, he'll be 24. By the time his arm strength is where it needs to be he's 24.5. By the time the Cubs can reasonably expect his "bright major league future" to benefit them, he's 25.

 

He suspect that if he gets healthy before the end of the year, he'll pitch Winter Ball and Spring Training. He's out of options next year, and so will need to make the big league team. Put him in the back of the bullpen, break him in the Earl Weaver way.

 

Nolasco has a much better shot at a ML future than Guzman. There are a lot less talented pitchers around than Nolasco.

 

Really don't see that at all. Yes, there are a lot less talented pitchers than him. There are enough more talented that I don't see him ever becoming more than a fifth starter. I'm take the gamble on a pitcher with greater upside than I'll take a surer thing fifth starter.

 

Holding out hope that Guzman will be healthy enough to one day reach his potential is similar to holding out hope that Brownlie will throw 95 again someday. It may happen, but nothing has been shown to suggest it will.

 

The situations aren't even remotely comparable.

Edited July 20, 2005 by Diffusion

[TruffleShuffle]

My turn!

 

1. Eric Patterson

2. Felix Pie

3. Sean Marshall

4. Ryan Harvey

5. Matt Murton

6. Rich Hill

7. Brian Dopirak

8. Mark Pawelek

9. Gallagher the Watermelon Smasher

10. Reynel Pinto

11. Brandon Sing

12. Ronny Cedeno

13. Angel Guzman

14. Billy Petrick

15. Geo Soto

[Transmogrified Tiger]

My turn!

 

1. Eric Patterson

2. Felix Pie

3. Sean Marshall

4. Ryan Harvey

5. Matt Murton

6. Rich Hill

7. Brian Dopirak

8. Mark Pawelek

9. Gallagher the Watermelon Smasher

10. Reynel Pinto

11. Brandon Sing

12. Ronny Cedeno

13. Angel Guzman

14. Billy Petrick

15. Geo Soto

 

Patterson only gets one spot on the list? Disappointing.

[Outshined_One]

Can we refer to Gallagher's curve as "The Watermelon Smasher" from here on out?

[Holy Cow]

Can we refer to Gallagher's curve as "The Watermelon Smasher" from here on out?

 

I don't know, a watermelon sounds really hittable. And I'm really gonna have to keep track of your sigs, because thats another great episode. I've laughed out loud the first time I saw both your last 2 sigs.

[TruffleShuffle]

Patterson only gets one spot on the list? Disappointing.

 

Well he's only at Low A-ball right now... didn't want to overdo it :lol: But seriously, if I were placing him among the Cub prospects I'd put him at #2 behind Pie. That's how highly I think of him and his potential to be an above-average second baseman in the majors. I'm kind of hitching my reputation around NSBB on the kid... hope he comes through for me!

[sporrer17]

But seriously, if I were placing him among the Cub prospects I'd put him at #2 behind Pie. That's how highly I think of him and his potential to be an above-average second baseman in the majors.

 

lol, I'm sorry, but this statement just made me laugh. His potential to be an "above average" second baseman (above average 2nd baseman, thats probably a step down from Todd Walker...I consider Walker "good") is what would make him our #2 prospect?

 

Not that I don't like Patterson...and its not that I don't think he could be our #2 prospect...but to base it on his "potential to be above average" is a little odd. Ryan Harvey and Brian Dopirak have potential to be good for their respective positions, as do plenty of others. I don't think potential to be "above average" is cause for tremendous excitement...

 

PS...I think Patterson can be a very good 2b as long as he gets on base at or above .350 consistently...with his speed and decent pop, he'll be a threat. The kid's got his brothers speed, the patience Corey never had, and plays a position of need (2b that can hit well aren't a dime a dozen). Here's to a bright future for EPatt...

[burnt out cubbie fan]

I believe that Harvey has the chance to be a great right fielder.

[RyCubsFan]

I have a hard time comparing pitchers with position players in my rankings, so I did two separate rankings. Here's mine!

 

Pitchers

1. Marshall

2. Guzman

3. Gallagher

4. Pawelek

5. Hill

6. Petrick

7. Wellemeyer

8. Pinto

9. Marmol

10. Johnson

 

Honorable Mention: Aardsma, Wylie, Nolasco, Van Buren

 

Position Players

1. Pie

2. Harvey

3. Murton

4. Dopirak

5. Patterson

6. Moore

7. Cedeno

8. Sing

9. Fontenot

10. Greenburg

 

Honorable Mention: Theriot, McGehee, Reed, Soto

[TruffleShuffle]

I believe that Harvey has the chance to be a great right fielder.

 

I do too, but I also believe there's a better chance Harvey washes out in the minors than Patterson. My high opinion on him is based on the chance that he reaches his potential as well, which I believe is a lot more likely than Harvey or Dopirak.

[TruffleShuffle]

But seriously, if I were placing him among the Cub prospects I'd put him at #2 behind Pie. That's how highly I think of him and his potential to be an above-average second baseman in the majors.

 

lol, I'm sorry, but this statement just made me laugh. His potential to be an "above average" second baseman (above average 2nd baseman, thats probably a step down from Todd Walker...I consider Walker "good") is what would make him our #2 prospect?

 

I think he will turn out as good as Todd Walker. If we had someone in the minor league system who could get on base as effectively as Todd Walker, hit for just slightly less power but provide better speed and defense, I think that merits being the #2 prospect in the system. I have seen enough guys with boatloads of "potential" fall by the wayside... personally I like the guy with a polished approach at the plate and a better chance to reach his projected ceiling.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

But seriously, if I were placing him among the Cub prospects I'd put him at #2 behind Pie. That's how highly I think of him and his potential to be an above-average second baseman in the majors.

 

lol, I'm sorry, but this statement just made me laugh. His potential to be an "above average" second baseman (above average 2nd baseman, thats probably a step down from Todd Walker...I consider Walker "good") is what would make him our #2 prospect?

 

I think he will turn out as good as Todd Walker. If we had someone in the minor league system who could get on base as effectively as Todd Walker, hit for just slightly less power but provide better speed and defense, I think that merits being the #2 prospect in the system. I have seen enough guys with boatloads of "potential" fall by the wayside... personally I like the guy with a polished approach at the plate and a better chance to reach his projected ceiling.

 

The polished approach doesn't mean as much if the player is in low A. Especially when he's coming out of a big time college program.

 

While Eric is more likely to reach his projected ceiling, his projected ceiling is much lower than higher potential guys like Pie, Harvey, Dopirak and Pawelek. I like to combine the likelihood of reaching a projected ceiling with how high that projected ceiling is - I think it makes for a better judge of a prospect's chances.

[sporrer17]

I agree, I think the "polished" player is something that we have been sorely lacking (Murton's one...Greenberg) over the past seasons.

 

However, I don't know if Patterson can be labeled as "polished" just quite yet. First off, he's in Low A ball, and he's 22, having played 3 years at a major college program. He still K's 22% of the time, but he does walk 13% of the time as well, which helps a little bit.

 

I've heard some say they question his ability to be anything more than an average defender, but I'll take that.

 

I just don't know if the "polish" that Patterson is showing in Low A ball can make him the #2 prospect over the upside of a Harvey, Dopirak, someone like that.

[TruffleShuffle]

I agree, I think the "polished" player is something that we have been sorely lacking (Murton's one...Greenberg) over the past seasons.

 

However, I don't know if Patterson can be labeled as "polished" just quite yet. First off, he's in Low A ball, and he's 22, having played 3 years at a major college program. He still K's 22% of the time, but he does walk 13% of the time as well, which helps a little bit.

 

I've heard some say they question his ability to be anything more than an average defender, but I'll take that.

 

I just don't know if the "polish" that Patterson is showing in Low A ball can make him the #2 prospect over the upside of a Harvey, Dopirak, someone like that.

 

Patterson was first team All-ACC in each of his three years at Georgia Tech, and it's not his fault that the Cubs have him at Low A. I think he should be in Daytona by now, but all he can do is play well at the level they stick him, and so far he's been beating up on that level. His walk rate was strong all through college and has remained solid in pro ball.

 

My concern about guys like Dopirak and Harvey has everything to do with plate discipline. I have seen what poor plate discipline can do to guys who can't figure it out. Dopirak sported a BB/K ratio of 80/226 in 229 games coming into this year... this year he's cut down on his strikeouts and has a slightly lower walk rate (26/77). The big question is, what has happened to all that power he showed last year?

 

Harvey's numbers are even more of a problem for me. Before this season he had a BB/K of 26/98 in 72 games... the walk rate was OK but the strikeout rate was atrocious. This year he has played 77 games and his strikeout rate is a little lower, but so is his walk rate (19BB/84K). Good pitchers. I take a wary view of guys who beat up on mistake pitches at the minor league level. Big league hurlers will throw fewer hanging curves, and harder and more accurate fastballs. Guys who strike out so frequently at the minor league level clearly have a problem, either in their swing or in their approach. If Harvey doesn't learn how to make better contact or at least draw more walks, I don't see him being successful down the road.

 

So I guess my opinion is based mostly on my bias toward guys who have better plate discipline. I believe in the long run, Eric Patterson will be a better major leaguer than either Dopirak or Harvey, but I freely admit that if either of those guys reaches their ceiling, they will be better than him. I am just guessing that they will fall well short of expectations.

[sporrer17]

I'd say it's probably a fair assumption that one or both will probably end up well below their potential ceiling...which is sad because both are so talented that they could be great.

 

I can definately see where you're coming from...but I still put Harvey ahead of Patterson just because he's showing some good power, and he's still got tons and tons of untapped talent.

[goonys evil twin]

My concern about guys like Dopirak and Harvey has everything to do with plate discipline.

 

My concern with Dopirak and Harvey is that Dopirak's numbers (.242 .298 .363; 339 AB, 71K, 26 BB) are very bad, and have been bad all season, while Harvey's (.262 .314 .489; 313 AB, 84K, 19BB) have not been very impressive for such a high pick and highly rated prospect at such a low level. The only thing Harvey is doing exceptionally well is hitting homeruns, and HR totals in and of themselves, do not impress me. I'd feel much more comfortable if the supposed best hitting prospects not named Pie were actually hitting the ball. Nobody can claim they have been impressed by either of these guys' production this year.

 

I haven't listed my top 10 yet. Basically ever since I saw this thread I've been thinking of a way to drop these guys down the preseason list. They have been that disappointing. However, it's been pretty difficult to find guys worthy of leaping them (and that is incredibly disappointing). Outside of Pie, nobody impressive and without an asterisk stands out. To me, EPatt is a guy who has raced up the list, however, he's doing it at a low level, and there are still questions about his limited defense, and upside. I can't put him #2. I'd much rather see an age appropriate AA player putting up solid numbers take that spot. And while the Cubs do have some AA players putting up numbers, they are either somewhat old, or repeating the level, or both. The two guys that somewhat fit that bill are Cedeno and Murton. Despite Ronny continually proving me wrong, I still have questions about his upside as well as his ability to even be a mediocre regular. And as a corner OF, I don't see Murton ever being a star, or close to it, so it's really difficult to accept either at 2nd. But I think I'd have to put those guys 2/3 if I did a list, if only for the fact that they've proven much more at higher levels than the supposed stars in waiting.

[TruffleShuffle]

there are still questions about his limited defense

 

Where are all these questions coming from? He's made only 7 errors at 2B this year, and Baseball America said "his athleticism makes him a potential plus defender at second base."

 

And while the Cubs do have some AA players putting up numbers, they are either somewhat old, or repeating the level, or both. The two guys that somewhat fit that bill are Cedeno and Murton.

 

I don't think that really describes either one of those guys. Murton is 23, which isn't too old for a college guy in AA. Cedeno is 22 and actually fairly young for AAA. This was their first season at WTenn and Iowa, respectively. Your concerns about them are valid, though. I think Murton could put up numbers comparable to those of Mark Kotsay in the big leagues, with a ~.350 OBP and a little bit of pop... the problem, like you noted, is the subpar offensive ability for a corner outfielder. If the Cubs had someone like Jim Edmonds or Carlos Beltran in CF, it'd be easier to take, but the Cubs don't have that. My main worry about Cedeno is his low walk rate... I can't find his stats from this season at Iowa to know if it improved at all this year. The added power was a nice surprise, but I know the batting average down there was somewhat fluky.

 

Part of the reason I'm saying that I don't expect Harvey and Dopirak to reach their ceiling is based the little emphasis that I feel the Cubs organization places on plate discipline. We've all seen prospects fly through the system without learning the importance of selectivity at the plate. The guys that the team goes after in free agency and in the draft also suggests to me that plate discipline is not a big deal to the current regime. The question is, what comes first, the chicken or the egg? Do teams like the A's draft guys who have good patience, or do they drill it into them after they sign? I would guess it's a combination of the two.

[goonys evil twin]

there are still questions about his limited defense

 

Where are all these questions coming from? He's made only 7 errors at 2B this year, and Baseball America said "his athleticism makes him a potential plus defender at second base."

 

And while the Cubs do have some AA players putting up numbers, they are either somewhat old, or repeating the level, or both. The two guys that somewhat fit that bill are Cedeno and Murton.

 

I don't think that really describes either one of those guys. Murton is 23, which isn't too old for a college guy in AA. Cedeno is 22 and actually fairly young for AAA. This was their first season at WTenn and Iowa, respectively. Your concerns about them are valid, though.

 

When I said they somewhat fit the bill, I meant as possible #2 guys, not old AA players repeating the level. Sorry for the poor layout.

 

I've never seen Patterson play. I've just read multiple times that he's only average defensively, and his faults might be exposed as he climbs the ladder. If he was a fabulous, flawless defensive 2B, it might be a little easier to bump him up. However, you have to remember that to date, all he's done is perform very well at low A at the age of 22, while the guy you want to leapfrog performed exceptionally well at low A, at age 20. I have a hard time moving a guy up when something like that stands in the way.

 

 

And I completely agree with your plate discipline concerns.