Cubs Top Winter Prospects Rankings: #7 Ben Brown

One thing with Brown I'm not sure how to interpret is that his walk rate didn't explode until AAA.  Sure the hitters are better there, but his walk rate more or less doubled from High A and AA.  Feels like the ABS is probably a big factor here.  There's some control risk for sure, but I'm mostly not worried about Brown from a performance standpoint.

What I am worried about are the injuries.  He's 24 and hasn't eclipsed 104 innings in a season.  That's not a death knell, Justin Steele was 26 the first time he crossed the 100 inning threshold, but it probably portends a future in relief.  At a minimum it means we need to play games to give his arm a breather for the next two years.

I hope Brown doesn't get traded, we could use more high octane stuff on the MLB club.  But he's valuable and just far enough away you can't pencil him into any specific MLB expectations for 2024, so he makes sense as trade bait.

Brown doesn't make it easy to predict where he'll end up.  On the one hand, he has elite level stuff that makes it easy to dream on his upside.  If a guy like that is capable of starting and giving you 175+ IP, it's easy to picture him as a #1/#2 in the Cubs' future rotation, even taking guys like Horton and Farris into account.  Considering his injury was a lat strain and not an elbow injury, it's easy enough to discount his injury as a freak thing and he likely would have ended the season with around 130 IP.

That being said, it's also incredibly easy to see where the downsides come into play.  Even if he's healthy for the rest of his career, he'll likely have stretches of time where his stuff gets away from him, which could be a problem even if he moves into the pen.  You'd also hate to tinker too much with his mechanics in pursuit of consistency.  On top of everything else, he still needs to prove he has the stamina to make it through a full season as a starter.

If the Cubs decide to hang onto him, I'd want them to give him every opportunity to stick at SP.  However, I also can see a possible universe where he gets a midseason call-up to the major league pen in 2024 and ends up being the Cubs' closer come opening day 2025.

I like him better from the stretch than his hurry-up wind-up. He's more in control of his body. 

22 minutes ago, Bertz said:

One thing with Brown I'm not sure how to interpret is that his walk rate didn't explode until AAA.  Sure the hitters are better there, but his walk rate more or less doubled from High A and AA.  Feels like the ABS is probably a big factor here.  There's some control risk for sure, but I'm mostly not worried about Brown from a performance standpoint.

What I am worried about are the injuries.  He's 24 and hasn't eclipsed 104 innings in a season.  That's not a death knell, Justin Steele was 26 the first time he crossed the 100 inning threshold, but it probably portends a future in relief.  At a minimum it means we need to play games to give his arm a breather for the next two years.

I hope Brown doesn't get traded, we could use more high octane stuff on the MLB club.  But he's valuable and just far enough away you can't pencil him into any specific MLB expectations for 2024, so he makes sense as trade bait.

Yeah, I had said in another thread that it's probably really easy today to want to move someone like Brown over Wicks (who I really like!) because Wicks impacts the 2024 Cubs in a more concrete and obvious way. But the stuff is so good here that in a single years' time, if the control gets improved...singing a different song there wouldn't be very surprising. The upside is huge with Brown. It's just hard to be confident in it.

An out of character loss of command is often correlated with an incipient injury, as well. His loss of command in AAA could be that simple.

3 minutes ago, Tim said:

An out of character loss of command is often correlated with an incipient injury, as well. His loss of command in AAA could be that simple.

I'm not sure it was out of character. The walk rates weren't bad in AA, but the work with the fastball was still needed. His fastball placement has always been a bit of a concern. I think AAA hitters were just better at not getting dominated by it like AA hitters were.

I like the features on the prospects. I feel like I can get a feel for the dramatic shift in development strategy. So many of the prospects mentioned really have an extremely strong, singular skill, with average surrounding factors. I believe the baseball world would refer to these as "toolsy."

The walk rate could be as simple as AAA hitters seeing more spin than AA, leading to walks on his feature pitch when Fastball command disappeared. 

I have become a bit of a prospect hoarder and I have not wanted to see anyone leave. However, as mentioned in the comments, I am more comfortable with the floor of a Wicks vs Brown's upside. 

14 minutes ago, CandidCubs said:

I like the features on the prospects. I feel like I can get a feel for the dramatic shift in development strategy. So many of the prospects mentioned really have an extremely strong, singular skill, with average surrounding factors. I believe the baseball world would refer to these as "toolsy."

The walk rate could be as simple as AAA hitters seeing more spin than AA, leading to walks on his feature pitch when Fastball command disappeared. 

I have become a bit of a prospect hoarder and I have not wanted to see anyone leave. However, as mentioned in the comments, I am more comfortable with the floor of a Wicks vs Brown's upside. 

Appreciate the kind words on the features. 

I agree, the system has come a long way. This isn't a system stocked with pitchability and safe players. We're very upside driven. We haven't even seen some of our biggest "tools" guys yet. Nazier Mule is coming off TJS and is a two way player (though almost assuredly a P long term) and I really like Jaxson Wiggins more than others (he's got a bit of similarities to how the Cubs got in on Horton on the "ground floor"), JP Wheat, as well, is another recent TJS guy the Cubs have. There's a few really fun pitchers the Cubs should start seeing.

4 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

...When Brown was on, his plus-plus curveball would be on feature. A big aspect of work the Cubs put in on Brown this year was separating his slider from his curveball. It wouldn't be the craziest thing for one to give Brown a 70 grade on his curveball. It's that good. The slider has come a long way, and these pitches generate ugly swings and misses out of the zone. When Brown was off, his fastball command would wane, both in and out of the zone. At times, you could tell Brown was forcing his fastball in the zone, resulting in poorly placed pitches and lots and lots of contact. ...

2024 Season Outlook and ETA
.... Even if his fastball command remains spotty, Brown has leverage reliever stuff that should help any bullpen in baseball. However, where Ben Brown ultimately ends up, in the rotation or the bullpen, will largely be determined by that fastball command. When Brown has his fastball, he is a legitimate top-of-the-rotation type. Hitting the high 90s with those elite breaking balls, it's very difficult for opposing hitters to touch the man. When he doesn't, however, Brown is quite hittable. ...

Q's/Notes:

1. Is it your perspective that the slider worked, and was used heavily?  Or is that still a once-in-a-while, work-in-progress pitch that most days he can't control and doesn't trust?  I'm wondering if being a multi-pitch starter really makes sense for him, or whether he's going to end up better off as a mostly 2-pitch reliever? 
2. Did he benefit from the tacky ball?  0.45 ERA in AA-tacky, 5.33 in Iowa. 
3. I'd love to keep him and give him another healthy run at Iowa to see how he progresses.  For teams that end up with happy endings, often uncertain things turn out favorably.  I'd really love to hope that he's a turns-out-in-our-favor guy, we need some of those.  Given the upside, not interesting in trading him for a rental.  
4. Unfortunately I'm not very confident that he will turn out favorably?  Cubs have shown zero capacity to fix wildman; guys who can't control their fastball, when does that ever get fixed?  Would be nice if Brown becomes the novel exception, but odds aren't great.  
5. Control still matters in relief.  A guy who can't control his fastball consistently will have problems with walks, consistency, and whacked-mistakes in relief too.  
6. I project Brown will probably eventually settle out as a relief guy.  The fastball/curve blend in relief might work pretty well.  I don't say that to devalue him.  Good relievers are invaluable, if he can become good in that role.  

10 minutes ago, craig said:

Q's/Notes:

1. Is it your perspective that the slider worked, and was used heavily?  Or is that still a once-in-a-while, work-in-progress pitch that most days he can't control and doesn't trust?  I'm wondering if being a multi-pitch starter really makes sense for him, or whether he's going to end up better off as a mostly 2-pitch reliever? 
2. Did he benefit from the tacky ball?  0.45 ERA in AA-tacky, 5.33 in Iowa. 
3. I'd love to keep him and give him another healthy run at Iowa to see how he progresses.  For teams that end up with happy endings, often uncertain things turn out favorably.  I'd really love to hope that he's a turns-out-in-our-favor guy, we need some of those.  Given the upside, not interesting in trading him for a rental.  
4. Unfortunately I'm not very confident that he will turn out favorably?  Cubs have shown zero capacity to fix wildman; guys who can't control their fastball, when does that ever get fixed?  Would be nice if Brown becomes the novel exception, but odds aren't great.  
5. Control still matters in relief.  A guy who can't control his fastball consistently will have problems with walks, consistency, and whacked-mistakes in relief too.  
6. I project Brown will probably eventually settle out as a relief guy.  The fastball/curve blend in relief might work pretty well.  I don't say that to devalue him.  Good relievers are invaluable, if he can become good in that role.  

1. So he uses his slider a lot, but it's hard to sometimes tell what's a slider and what's a curveball. The separation between the two has been hard to distinguish and something he's been working on. Shape and velocity wise, they have similar profiles. 

2. Yes. Big power sweeper and curve? He almost assuredly got even extra run. With that said, he was near a 13 K/9 in 2022 too, so I think it was minimal. His breaking stuff is so good that the added break probably wasn't necessary

When it comes to relief, you can mitigate the impact of walks. Relievers carry BB/9's in the mid 4's and are consistently among the best in the game. Four of the top-10 fWAR'd relievers have walk rates over 4.30 per 9.Mostly because they carry absurd K numbers. Brown would be that type if possible. But yeah there's RP risk here and it's more likely that's where he ends up. He's not the type who's going to settle in as like, a#4. So he's either a TORP or a BP guy because he either figures out the fastball...or he doesn't. 

11 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Ending his year with an injury, it'd be easy to forget the highlights of Ben Brown's 2023 season.

author-tracker.gifauthor-tracker.gif

However, there is a good chance that the lanky righty doesn't stay in the Cubs organization. The Cubs look likely to make at least one, or possibly more, trades to impact the parent team this offseason, and Ben Brown will likely be a name bandied about. As the Cubs are poised to keep high-end-prospect Cade Horton, others such as Jordan Wicks, Javier Assad, and Brown will be names teams like the San Diego Padres should have interest in, for example, in a Juan Soto trade. It would be easy to see Brown as an acceptable loss because of how his 2023 ended, but we can't forget how it began. Brown has real upside, and it wouldn't be shocking to see him go on to have a career at the top of a rotation, regardless of the inherent risk. 

 

I don't have the same confidence the Cubs are so gung ho about Horton being The Guy and untouchable. Heck, I'd say he is the "most" movable between he, Brown, and Wicks, being somewhat "redundant" with Brown on the depth chart while having more trade value. The thing with Horton is inside MiLB-MLB a RHP with SP dreams, some velo, some spin, a Developing changeup, a TJ, meh (or developing) command, and lighter pitching background said to have upside is not the hardest prospect to come by and he's not really really so far along despite being in the upper minors already (as Theo said on the way out and we've seen all over including Swanson, Happ: players are also developing at the ML level). Heck, Horton was a surprise 7th pick like 53 NCAA innings and a 5+ ERA off a TJ just 18 months ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Jaxon Wiggins makes a similar rise in the org, if not the overall rankings, next year off a TJ recovery largely spent while signed with Cubs and it's next guy up

Tom you have some interesting takes 

50 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

Tom you have some interesting takes 

The Wiggins/Horton/Brown parallel seems almost obvious tbh. RHPs, TJs, velo, spin, SP potential, questions about control, command, workload etc....Horton was a surprise 1st round pick after TJ with uninspiring for that slot college stats but featuring velo and a standout offspeed, Wiggins a surprise 2nd for Cubs just after a February TJ featuring maybe even a little more velo and a changeup

My perception is that Horton projects better control/command, particularly with fastball, than Brown or Wiggins.  Fastball velocity/movement, I think if anything he's probably got less than either Brown or pre-surg Wiggins.  But control is to his advantage.  

38 minutes ago, craig said:

My perception is that Horton projects better control/command, particularly with fastball, than Brown or Wiggins.  Fastball velocity/movement, I think if anything he's probably got less than either Brown or pre-surg Wiggins.  But control is to his advantage.  

Horton is in his own tier of pitching prospects, IMO. I'm a monster fan of Horton. Ben Brown has TORP upside, Horton is much closer to that upside than Brown today.

21 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

...When it comes to relief, you can mitigate the impact of walks. Relievers carry BB/9's in the mid 4's and are consistently among the best in the game. Four of the top-10 fWAR'd relievers have walk rates over 4.30 per 9.Mostly because they carry absurd K numbers. Brown would be that type if possible. But yeah there's RP risk here and it's more likely that's where he ends up. He's not the type who's going to settle in as like, a#4. So he's either a TORP or a BP guy because he either figures out the fastball...or he doesn't. 

It's true that relievers are allowed to carry higher walk rates, and are often effective while doing so. But walk rate and control/command are not the same thing.  If you can't control the fastball, that leads not only to more walks, more unfavorable counts, more mis-located pitches that are easy to hit and get whacked, and more inconsistency and unreliability from outing to outing.   

The same guy with the same level of control will have a higher walk-rate in relief because relievers throw more chase pitches, and are often less willing to get as much of the strike zone, so walks naturally go up. 

Getting an out in relief is like getting an out in rotation:  being able to locate the fastball helps whether it's inning 2 or inning 7.  If he can't, it's going to hurt him.  Pitching is pitching.  

We've had plenty of Justin Grimms, Carlos Marmol guys in days past.  "Too wild in rotation?  Put them in relief..." who were still too wild in relief.  Palencia, Wesneski this year, their wildness in relief made them hard to use in real games.  

It's a too-common fallacy to say "Too wild for rotation?  Put them in relief."  Most guys too wild for the one will also be too wild to excel in the other.  I hope that doesn't prove true for Brown. 

On 11/17/2023 at 12:35 PM, 1908_Cubs said:

..... But yeah there's RP risk here and it's more likely that's where he ends up. He's not the type who's going to settle in as like, a#4. So he's either a TORP or a BP guy because he either figures out the fastball...or he doesn't.

Just for the sake of discussion, I want to perhaps contest the "not the type who's going to settle in as like, a#4."  I get it, of course; we talk about "stuff" being TORP or BORP.  

But in terms of actual productivity, every pitcher's composite stats are a composite of multiple outings, at best and less than best.  Every 4.3-ERA starter is better than that most outings; but has the ERA heavily swollen by his 3-5 worst outings.  

An average 4.3-ERA #4 starter can have modest stuff and never dominate; or TORP stuff but lacks control and consistency and has enough "off" days to have no-better-than-average composite ERA. 

For Brown, it's entirely possible that his stuff is good enough so that on good days he'll be good, but there will be enough off days so that the composite is kinda #4-starter production.  It's kind of a shooting-percentage thing between the good and the bad days.  

I kinda suspect many (most?) guys who end up being kinda #4 guys were perceived as having serious TORP potential as young prospects, but just never quite have the command or consistency that TORP guys display and TORP-ERA's require.  

The inconsistency thing isn't unique to TORP-stuff guys, of course.  Finesse guys often battle consistency issues as much or even more.  I don't perceive Smyly as having big-arm TORP stuff, but on a given day when command is sharp, he had a perfect game into the late innings.  

Often how a prospect's career will play is determined less by how good their pitches are when at their best, but on how often they aren't at their best; how often they throw mistake pitches; and on how vulnerable their mistakes are.  

9 minutes ago, craig said:

Just for the sake of discussion, I want to perhaps contest the "not the type who's going to settle in as like, a#4."  I get it, of course; we talk about "stuff" being TORP or BORP.  

But in terms of actual productivity, every pitcher's composite stats are a composite of multiple outings, at best and less than best.  Every 4.3-ERA starter is better than that most outings; but has the ERA heavily swollen by his 3-5 worst outings.  

An average 4.3-ERA #4 starter can have modest stuff and never dominate; or TORP stuff but lacks control and consistency and has enough "off" days to have no-better-than-average composite ERA. 

For Brown, it's entirely possible that his stuff is good enough so that on good days he'll be good, but there will be enough off days so that the composite is kinda #4-starter production.  It's kind of a shooting-percentage thing between the good and the bad days.  

I kinda suspect many (most?) guys who end up being kinda #4 guys were perceived as having serious TORP potential as young prospects, but just never quite have the command or consistency that TORP guys display and TORP-ERA's require.  

The inconsistency thing isn't unique to TORP-stuff guys, of course.  Finesse guys often battle consistency issues as much or even more.  I don't perceive Smyly as having big-arm TORP stuff, but on a given day when command is sharp, he had a perfect game into the late innings.  

Often how a prospect's career will play is determined less by how good their pitches are when at their best, but on how often they aren't at their best; how often they throw mistake pitches; and on how vulnerable their mistakes are.  

I would disagree with this. Ben Brown either is going to be consistent enough to stay in a rotation, or he won't. Teams don't put yo-yo guys in there. When Brown's fastball isn't there, he's just not going to be useful at the MLB level past 2-3 innings that day, and no team is going to have a SP in their rotation every 5 days with that question. With Brown, he's got legitimately, an argument for the best curveball in all of the MiLB league wide, not just with the Cubs. Pairs with a 98mph fastball and a plus slider. Guys with that stuff just aren't number 4's. Even with middling command. Brown is either going to find middling command and he'll settle in as a high K higher-walk SP or he's just not going to find even middling command and be unstartable, IMO. I really don't think there's a world where Ben Brown settles in as a #4 or something.  Some guys have that where "maybe they don't develop pitch X and it means they can't reach their full potential" type thing. With Brown, it's either the command is going to be good enough to where he'll stick in the rotation and he'll be pretty damn good, or it just won't, and he won't ever be in the rotation, from my perspective.

I don't think I'd agree that most guys who are #4 types were guys that people thought had top of the rotation stuff. There are some of those types, but many were always guys who were thought of as mid-rotaiton or lower and settled in right where they thought. The road to MLB status is paved with failed prospects. Ben Brown, like all is more likely to fail than succeed. Maybe more so. But I don't really think there's a world where Brown's stuff leaves him in the middle ground. He feels all boom or bust when it comes to the rotation, and moreso than others. Especially with how easy his stuff would dominate as a leverage reliever.

9 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I would disagree with this. Ben Brown either is going to be consistent enough to stay in a rotation, or he won't. Teams don't put yo-yo guys in there. When Brown's fastball isn't there, he's just not going to be useful at the MLB level past 2-3 innings that day, and no team is going to have a SP in their rotation every 5 days with that question. With Brown, he's got legitimately, an argument for the best curveball in all of the MiLB league wide, not just with the Cubs. Pairs with a 98mph fastball and a plus slider. Guys with that stuff just aren't number 4's. Even with middling command. Brown is either going to find middling command and he'll settle in as a high K higher-walk SP or he's just not going to find even middling command and be unstartable, IMO. I really don't think there's a world where Ben Brown settles in as a #4 or something.  Some guys have that where "maybe they don't develop pitch X and it means they can't reach their full potential" type thing. With Brown, it's either the command is going to be good enough to where he'll stick in the rotation and he'll be pretty damn good, or it just won't, and he won't ever be in the rotation, from my perspective.

I don't think I'd agree that most guys who are #4 types were guys that people thought had top of the rotation stuff. There are some of those types, but many were always guys who were thought of as mid-rotaiton or lower and settled in right where they thought. The road to MLB status is paved with failed prospects. Ben Brown, like all is more likely to fail than succeed. Maybe more so. But I don't really think there's a world where Brown's stuff leaves him in the middle ground. He feels all boom or bust when it comes to the rotation, and moreso than others. Especially with how easy his stuff would dominate as a leverage reliever.

Agree to disagree, which is fine.  And I'm not sure I'm really disagreeing that much.  

I'm not sure his stuff is really that overwhelmingly good that he couldn't be a a relatively average starter, a #4 guy with a 4.3-level ERA.  Good curve and 98, yes.  But he's not averaging and locating 98, most of his fastballs are NOT that fast, right?  Fastball is good, but he's not some exceptional flamethrower.   

The combination of variably above-average stuff with variably below-average control could leave a guy around average overall. Every guy's actual production is some composite result of his stuff and his control.  

There's a whole continuum between great control and awful control.  Maybe his fastball control will be prohibitively bad.  But maybe on the fastball-control continuum, he's 48th percentile or 42nd percentile?  A little below average, but not prohibitively bad like a 1st-percentile Dillon Maples?  Perhaps modest enough to prohibit being a top-of-rotation starter, but not bad enough to prevent being a #4-caliber starter?   

"Ben Brown either is going to be consistent enough to stay in a rotation, or he won't.."  Agreed.  I'm basically saying he might be consistent enough to sustain a 3.5 ERA or perhaps a 4.3 ERA, who knows?  But unless the team is stacked with good rotation guys, it might be fine with a 4.3-ERA 4th starter, and consider that consistent enough to stay in rotation.  It's not like if his ERA is slipping above 3.5, he's not giving TORP performance so he's got to get kicked out of the rotation.  winning teams rarely have 5 TORP-performance starters.  For a 150-inning starter, the difference between a 3.5-ERA guy and a 4.3-ERA guy is two bad games.  (Like, maybe one dead-arm game in June where he gives up 7 runs in 3 innings, and another 7-runs-in-3-inning outing in September.  If the other 25+ starts are 3.5-ERA, would that make Brown unacceptable to be your #4?)

I believe his destiny lies in the late innings. But I want to give him every opportunity to see if he can be a starter. 

18 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

I believe his destiny lies in the late innings. But I want to give him every opportunity to see if he can be a starter. 

100% agree, sooner or later.  

I admit for short term, I'd not mind if the Cubs rotation is so deep and great, and Brown pitching so well at Iowa, that he gets brought up this summer in relief to help a 95-win team!   Heh heh, Yamamoto is signed and pitches great :):):); Steele and Wicks are both terrific; Hendricks and Taillon are both pitching at their best.  Horton is looking like an ace prospect, and Assad is pitching excellently in whatever role.  We're just so overloaded with capable starters that Brown is blocked and gets to thrive in relief.  

22 hours ago, craig said:

My perception is that Horton projects better control/command, particularly with fastball, than Brown or Wiggins.  Fastball velocity/movement, I think if anything he's probably got less than either Brown or pre-surg Wiggins.  But control is to his advantage.  

This probably sums up the general perception, but I actually don’t see a huge gap in command btw Brown and Horton. Most it’s the nearly half decade gap btw their respective TJs, the impact on Brown’s control, but otherwise they seem pretty close with Brown having a little more current velo when healthy. I feel about Horton’s low minors HR suppression that you do/did about Wicks’ MiLB HRs, notice 15 in just 115 IP btw NCAA and the low minors

Wiggins is interesting because I view alot of the optimism towards Horton improving fastball command is in the athleticism and room to get physically stronger. Kantrovitz or the Marquee guy Brozdowski said Wiggins blew up the Cubs’  athletic testing metrics before the draft. As someone who really believes the MLB’s dream even before the pandemic opened lanes is to be the NFL but baseball and SPs are basically the sport’s athletic equivalent to pass rushers, this stuck out to me particularly since he’s the biggest of this group too and throws as hard already

Horton’s definitely the best prospect right now. Unless the Cubs see him as a super mega ultra duper omega ace, possible, then having somewhat similar profile players surrounding him…They remind me a little of the slew of TJ’d RHs the Dodgers ran through  before calling up Bobby Miller (leading a evenmore next gen of surgery free arms like Bruns and Grove). They’ve had lots of success with May, Gonsolin, etc but probably some less cap and payroll centric parts of the org and fanbase wish they’d have turned those guys into Gerrit Cole during the sliver of time it may have been possible 

On 11/19/2023 at 8:48 AM, TomtheBombadil said:

This probably sums up the general perception, but I actually don’t see a huge gap in command btw Brown and Horton. ..... I feel about Horton’s low minors HR suppression that you do/did about Wicks’ MiLB HRs, notice 15 in just 115 IP btw NCAA and the low minors

Wiggins is interesting because I view alot of the optimism towards Horton improving fastball command is in the athleticism and room to get physically stronger. Kantrovitz or the Marquee guy Brozdowski said Wiggins blew up the Cubs’  athletic testing metrics before the draft...

Agree that HR-vulnerability for Horton will be worth watching, and could be a challenge for him.  7HR/88 innings last year doesn't seem too bad, but it's not excellent.  Horton pitched most of his college draft-season without the signature slider, and was just off of surgery, so not sure how predictively-meaningful his HR-vulnerability then is?  

I'm glad that you don't see Brown's command that far behind Horton's.  Encouraging that even if it's not excellent, it may be well up the anti-awful continuum.  

12 minutes ago, craig said:

Agree that HR-vulnerability for Horton will be worth watching, and could be a challenge for him.  7HR/88 innings last year doesn't seem too bad, but it's not excellent.  Horton pitched most of his college draft-season without the signature slider, and was just off of surgery, so not sure how predictively-meaningful his HR-vulnerability then is?  

I'm glad that you don't see Brown's command that far behind Horton's.  Encouraging that even if it's not excellent, it may be well up the anti-awful continuum.  

 

I would disagree with Tom here on the idea of Horton vs Brown. Horton's command/control is a standard deviation better than Brown's IMO. If there is a concern I have with Horton it has much less to do with command, but I do think he needs to learn he can't just pipe fastballs (it's his worst habit). What Horton does on the mound is just dominate hitters, and he does so by saying "this is my fastball, you can't hit it". Professional hitters at higher levels will not allow him to get away with that, but I don't think that's a command issue, I just think it's a mentality thing. It also allows him to throw his breaking stuff a bit earlier in the count and then try to battle back by piping fastballs. I also don't think it's really much of a long term thing, either. Horton is just too good for the hitters he's seen so far. So much so, that people like Bryan Smith, who's really good when it comes to Cub evaluations, think's he's MLB ready today.  I'd like to see him in Iowa for a bit before I agree with that, but I don't think Horton is far off. 

I also don't see a vulnerability in Horton's HR-rate. Of the 7 home runs he surrendered, three came in a single game: his first start in South Bend. He gave up three his final 70 innings across multiple levels. 

I'll be more detailed in my prospect review later, but I think Cade Horton is a very, very talented pitcher. I like Brown. I like Wicks. I love Cade Horton.

Thanks, 1908.  That's helpful input.