Diffusion

Why is it being assumed that just because Krivsky used to work alongside someone that didn't own a true power hitter for a good number of years that Adam Dunn is all of a sudden going to be put on the trading block? Has it already been established that the Twins purposefully avoided power, as opposed to them just finding it hard to come by? And, if so, has it been established that Krivsky endorsed such a policy? Short of those grounds being established, my suspicion is that this is actually going to make Adam Dunn even harder to acquire if we should desire. Krivsky can hardly be worse than O'Brien, and if he does a good job and looks to be on the right track, moving the Reds back towards competiton again, Dunn could be more inclined to at some stage sign a deal that keeps him with the Reds beyond looming free agency after 2007. Furthermore, I think there's every reason to think that O'Brien undervalued Adam Dunn, looking probably too predominantly at his average and his strikeouts. Bringing in some new, whoever it is, carries with it the risk that that will change, and that the Front Office will come to a better evaluation of the value Dunn holds, which is pretty considerable. After the Sean Casey trade the Reds also no longer have a surplus of starting outfielders, what with Dunn moving to first base. Out there they'll now lineup Kearns, Griffey and Mo Pena. If anything, given Griffey's fragility, not to mention his God-awful defence that really ought to necessitate a trade to a team where he can DH, plus the uselessness of their farm system, the last thing the Reds ought to be doing is moving a player like Dunn that can passably defend an outfield position, not unless they're getting a Gold-Glove centre-fielder, a replacement starting first baseman and a stack of pitching in return for him. Especially pitching, especially of the high impact variety.

Papelbon and Lester are targeted for the bullpen. Not in the long term. Lester is a starter, and he could be ready mid-season. Papelbon it's not so clear, there's a decision to be made there, but he's ready now. Perhaps. But I don't think it's looking as safe a bet as it once was. But the bullpen is crammed enough as it is, so Wakefield to the bullpen shouldn't happen. Clement trade, quite possibly. Yes, that damn Mark Prior, massive injury risk, his stupid genetic predisposition to middle infielders and line drives.

Beckett, Schilling, Clemens, Clement, Arroyo, Wells, Wakefield, Papelbon, Lester?

Phew, that's lucky, bets are still on because I think Ramirez is going to post a .378 OBP this year! :P

In a keeper league that does a reasonable job of approximating overall offensive value but doesn't park adjust, in which order would you rank the following...? CATCHER A) Varitek (BOS, 33 on Opening Day): hit .283/.369/.494 over the last three years, will turn 34 not long after Opening Day, probably widely overvalued, so could be easily traded on for value. Given his age, injury candidate? B) Barrett (CHC, 29): has been in a .280/.340/.480 niche over last two years, and I have no idea what to expect from him in future. A lot younger than Varitek C) Ramon Hernandez (BAL, 29): hit .279/.332/.461 over last three years in pretty extreme pitcher's parks, now moving to the much more hitter friendly Camden Yards in AL East, but that involves a change of leagues D) Brian McCann (ATL, 22): elite catching prospect that the Braves traded Estrada away to make room for, hit .277/.337/.487 as a 20-year old in High-A and .265/.359/.476 as a 21-year old in Double-A, both in pitcher friendly environments, very decent in majors last year too. Power is for real, patience is okay with potential, average should definately come with time, defensively excellent so should stick behind plate. However, perhaps one to two years away from ceiling, and Braves have another elite catching prospect in Jarrod Saltalamacchia that's, oh, perhaps one or two years away (and I like Salty more). FIRST BASE E) Morneau (MIN, 24): before 2004, hit .311/.377/.511 at age-appropriate levels in the minors. In 2004 hit .289/.359/.576 as a 23-year old splitting time between Triple-A and majors, with 41 HR, 40 2B, 60 BB, 101 K in 638 PA. But in 2005, really wasn't quite as impressive with the Twins in 2005. F) Casey Kotchman (LAA, 23): career .323/.405/.491 in the minors, always young for his level but in hitter friendly parks. Hit a pretty disappointing .289/.372/.441 in 2005 repeating Triple-A (though he was still young for the league), but recovered to post .278/.352/.484 in 143 PA in callup to the majors. Natural hitter for average with good plate discipline, should eventually hit 20-25 HR. G) Konerko (CHW, 30): hit .280/.367/.534 over last two years, big time power, plays in hitter's park, but wrong side of thirty now H) Sexson (SEA, 31): hit .266/.371/.547 over last three years, even older than Konerko, even more powerful, but strikeouts out an awful lot and now plays in a pretty extreme pitcher's park. So, in which order would you rank the catchers, and in which order the first basemen?

No, at that point you have to ask yourself the question, "how on earth is that other teams have been able to acquire impact players this winter without anyone as good as Mark Prior changing hands?". And a good part of that does boil down to the Cubs having a very unusual roster in that they have stars that the Cubs shouldn't be thinking about dealing, veterans that only the Cubs seem to really want, and prospects that other teams don't seem interested enough in, partially because they're unproven, and partially because we don't have much impact level prospect talent in our system, not enough that the Cubs feel comfortable putting any of it out there on the table. Now whose fault is that? Whose fault is it that the farm system's not that strong? Whose fault is that we persist in signing and playing cruddy veterans, forcing prospects that are actually ready into the periphary? It's our own fault. What little talent we have actually developed we've hardly given the chance to actually prosper and flourish and become decent at the major league level. We've blocked them with the likes of Neifi, Hairston, Macias, Maddux, Rusch, Koronka, Wellemeyer, Bartosh and so on, none of whom have any real value to anyone. If Andy Sisco was still with the Cubs, not for the sake of there being anyone more talented ahead of him, he'd probably be heading back to Double-A this year. The other part of it is that Hendry has recently been showing no creative faculty whatsoever, no willingness to think outside the box a little, nothing. He's seemingly run out of ideas to the extent that he brings up Mark Prior's name in trade discussions.

He's always given credit for those moves. In the space of the eighteen months up to the Nomar trade, Hendry overhauled the roster and had extremely impressively delivered the team to the verge of the big time. Why people are frustrated with Hendry is because he's since done very little of note, and the Cubs' situation since 31st July 2004 has deteriorated, not improved. That's why people are fed up.

Remind me again how Hendry acquired offensive "difference makers" named Lee, Ramirez, and Garciaparra (and, hopefully, Pierre). A fair point, but the trouble is that the last and least profitable of those deals was pulled off over 18 months ago now. Garciaparra has since walked, and the offence now has nothing to really commend itself besides Lee and Ramirez. I can see why other people may have their concerns about Walker, Barrett, Murton and Cedeno, individually and collectively, but personally I was reasonably happy with the prospect of those four all being in this year's lineup on one condition: the Cubs filled the two remaining positions, right field and centre field, with one solid above average player and one proper impact player. Three big bats in the middle of the order, supported by three above average bats, plus the two wild-card rookies, that would have given the Cubs the kind of lineup to really put themselves in which a good shot at the World Series. Instead, Hendry went out and he got for himself a pair of mediocrities in Juan Pierre and Jacque Jones. Now we have two offensive stars, two above average bats with questionable defence, two average bats, and two wild-cards. That's not a recipe for any kind of success: instead, if we're going to succeed, it'll be because we got away with heavily relying on the rookies and the starting pitching, things we should have learnt not to do last winter when putting a lot of eggs in the Dubois, Wood and Prior basket didn't turn out to be such a profitable move.

I had Chavez last year. He got off to a horrendously slow start, but had a decent 2nd half. Yep, he was hitting .190/.264/.268 through May 15th. The rest of the year he hit .292/.348/.524, pretty much in line with what he hit 2000-03. 2004's walk spike doesn't look like it's for real.

Moved it to a new thread.

It doesn't necessarily invalidate your point, but, after 2004, BA ranked the Angels' top nine as Kotchman, McPherson, Aybar, Mathis, Morales, Wood, Santana, Kendrick and Callaspo. Wrong order maybe, but that's that's a nice bundle. I know BJ Upton and Edwin Jackson aren't rookie eligible any more, but neither's broken into the big leagues really, so as far as I'm concerned they're still prospects. Include those two, plus BA's top eight from this year, Delmon Young, Jeff Niemann, Jason Hammel, Reid Brignac, Elijah Dukes, Wade Davis, Wes Bankston and Chad Orvella, plus Chuck Tiffany, and that is one amazing farm system. The Dodgers have simply ridiculous depth. I mean, check out some of the players that didn't even make their top 10 this year (and they were all eligible). Chuck Tiffany, Justin Orenduff and Delwyn Young. Hong-Chih Kuo. Willy Aybar. Cory Dunlap. Luke Hochevar could still sign. James Loney's star has fallen but he's still a decent prospect, Greg Miller likewise. And there's my personal favourite: Travis Denker, the second baseman that aged 18 hit .311/.372/.556 in the Pioneer League, and aged 19 hit .310/.417/.556 in the Sally League, yet still can't get any love just because he's short. Anyway, there you have it, ten Dodger prospects that'd crack the top 10 of just about every other major league team, if not the top 5 in some cases. Ridiculous.

Because he's expensive ($29m/3yrs left on his deal), not very good(career .288/.345/.399, .276/.335/.385 last year, indifferent defence), and the wrong side of thirty. I said last year that the Red Sox would live to regret signing Renteria to a $40m contract. Turns out I was wrong, because it ended up effectively allowing them to buy the rights to Coco Crisp off the Indians for $22m. That might seem like a lot when you consider that on top of that they'll have to pay Coco salary, but it'll still probably work out a lot better through 2009 than giving Johnny Damon a $52m contract.

The bolded part of the quote is the best summary of this whole issue. Answer 2 questions - 1) From all we can tell, is the player eventually a major league player? If yes, then ask question 2, would his odds of making the transition be increased by additional minor league play? If no, then you have to make a commitment to getting him through the transition period, with realistic expectations of the associated difficulties. Even if the transition struggles produce sub-Neifi results, it's an investment worth making. The transition period needs to be thought of in investment terms - unavoidable short term pain for a possibility (there's no guarantees) of long term gain. Exactly. Very well put. That's why I personally don't expect Cedeno will be much better than Neifi this year, if at all, and yet at the same time I want the Cubs to play the youngster everyday at the major league level. Of course, an interesting third question is, how long do you give a young player before you tire of any struggles? Look how long it took some of the current position players on the Cubs' roster to become major league hitters... Derrek Lee hit just .227/.305/.384 through his first 812 plate appearances (aged 21-23) Aramis Ramirez hit .239/.290/.364 through his first 613 plate appearances (aged 20-22) Todd Walker hit just .244/.286/.345 through his first 260 plate appearances (aged 23-24) All were considered top prospects, with Ramirez and Walker once ranked by Baseball America as the 5th and 7th best prospects in the game, Lee topping out at 15th.

I can't take Kobe seriously until he averages 81 points a game.

It took them eight full years to figure out, and only with the help of a focus group or two, that a two word nickname, one of the words being "devil", may have an association with the devil? Sorry, but I think that says it all for that organisation.

I just can't possibly agree with that. Ronny Cedeno is a prospect, therefore it's possible. More precisely, he's a prospect whose long-term ceiling with the bat is probably no more than .300/.350/.450. It's going to take him a while to be able to post those kind of numbers. His short-term ceiling is probably closer to .290/.330/.400. But few prospects, particularly young prospects, are able to make a smooth transition to the major leagues, living up to any kind of ceiling straight away. If Cedeno is one of the few, excellent. If not, he's got Neifi's .270/.300/.380 in his rear view mirror, and Neifi at this point probably plays the more reliable defence. I don't know how, at this point, you can say which he is. This numbers certainly don't lend themselves to putting him in the few prospects category - he's far too batting average on balls in play driven, it represents a dangerously large portion of his game right now. The fact that Cedeno had an okay 89 plate appearances in the majors last year almost certainly will have little bearing on whether or not he succeeds or fails this year. For starters, it's 89 plate appearances. When every single hit is worth nearly 12 points of average, when getting hit by a pitch boosts your on-base percentage by over 10 points, when an extra home run would mean 50 points more slugging, and so on, numbers are pretty meaningless. Yes, certainly, beyond the numbers Cedeno still looked pretty good, a few defensive mistakes aside, but what does that really mean? He was confident, in a groove, he'd been torching Triple-A, so on. What if he gets into a slump? We haven't seen that Cedeno yet. And until we see that Cedeno, it's impossible to say what he can and he can't do at the major league level. So for now the safest thing to assume is that he can indeed be as bad as Neifi, if not worse, and plan for that happening, which anything better from Cedeno being a bonus.

Both Murton and Walker were far more selective than Cedeno when choosing what pitches to swing at. Cedeno's take/swing ratio was 0.98, compared to 1.11 for Murton and 1.16 for Walker. Cedeno really wasn't any more effective with his swings, either. Walker made more contact than Cedeno -- Walker made contact in 89.8% of his swings compared to 88.4% for Ronny -- while Murton hit with far more power than either of them, though his contact ratio was lower. Patience-wise Ronny's numbers were far more like Neifi's than anyone else on the team, though Cedeno's were a tad better. I'm waiting to actually see if Dusty starts Nefi more often than Cedeno. Can you imagine Nefi in the 2 hole???? No, I really can't. It's just unfathomable. No major league manager would ever do that.

Possibly, but his strikeout rate was pretty poor during his time in the bullpen, pretty much identical to what it was in his first rotation stint.

I can't come up with an order to put Barrett, Lee, Walker, Ramirez, Cedeno, Murton, Pierre and Jones in that I like, and I don't think anyone can.

I don't see what's to be gained from moving Williamson. Healthy, he's the best reliever in our bullpen, and Tommy John recovery rates are good.

Could someone once and for all set the story straight for me on just what on earth happened with Brownlie's velocity last year? I've heard this, that, the other, the opposite, the opposite again, and frankly I don't really have a clue what to believe. Here are Brownlie's numbers though... Up until 26th May, in the rotation 49 IP, 47 H, 7 HR, 24 BB, 30 K, 5.88 ERA From 19th June to 30th July, in the bullpen 21.1 IP, 9 H, 1 HR, 8 BB, 13 K, 1.27 ERA From 2nd August to end of season, back in the rotation 34 IP, 42 H, 3 HR, 10 BB, 30 K, 5.29 ERA Odd.

I think psychologically it will be good for him to move to AA, he is 21 yrs old and his first 3 years were a flop for being the #8 pick. That in itself can take a toll on a young guy. Also, he was given up on by his original team, and has been given another oppurtunity to prove himself. Now that he is showing improvement he may show more confidence which was surely lacking. What confused me was that originally you tried to argue that the promotion would be good for him because he'd be getting away from the pitcher friendly stadiums of the FSL. Now you're arguing that the promotion will be good for him on psychological grounds, he'll feel like he's actually getting somewhere, and that'll only give him more confidence. That's a fair enough argument, I suppose. All the same, Moore can feel as confident as he likes, but that will only help him get the most out of what he's got. If he hasn't got it, then the confidence isn't likely to help it. Confidence doesn't hit a curveball and all that. Merely for the record, he's now 22. But he was 21 for all of last year, so he's still young, and he'll be young for the Southern League. I think that we need to have a little patience with him at 3B considering he is a natural SS. I dont know his exact fielding stats, but I think he can only improve at 3B. Well, he was moved to third base over the 2002/03 offseason, because he lacked the speed, footwork and hands weren't good enough, so whether he was ever a natural shortstop is debatable. Certainly he's had to learn to play third base, but he's had three years at the position now. Well, it's about time. Regarding Drew Meyer, incidentally, the pick was always seen as a bit of a stretch, whereas the same can't really be said of Scott Moore's pick. According to the scouting reports from way back when, Moore was supposed to not only show power and patience, which, belatedly, he has done, but also to be a high average good contact hitter. That's where he's fallen badly short, and that and his defence at third are the biggest problems for his prospect status. They're two pretty big problems. I'm particularly fearful that breaking stuff at Double-A and above is going to be the death of him. 134 strikeouts at High-A just doesn't bode well.

Adrian Gonzalez, Ben Johnson and Paul McAnulty. Gonzalez is a career .303/.365/.467 hitter in 1030 plate appearances at Triple-A. He first reached the PCL in 2003 as a 21-year old, and he superficially struggled, hitting .216/.286/.288 in 154 plate appearances, though his plate discipline was strong (just 25 strikeouts, 14 walks) and what held him back most, besides the lack of power (just 1 home run), was a .254 average on balls in play. In 2004, at 22 still very young for the league, he hit .304/.364/.457 in 508 plate appearances with a , though his plate discipline deteriorated a little (39 walks, 73 strikeouts) and he showed mainly doubles power (28 doubles, 12 home runs). In 2005, fed up with being blocked by Mark Teixeira at the major league level, he tried to force the issue, hitting .338/.399/.561 in 368 PA, with a very nice 32 walks to 44 strikeouts and with real power (17 doubles, 18 home runs). Now he's basically done with the minors, and, ridiculously, though it seems like he's been at Triple-A forever, for now, he's still only 23 years old. He needs to be entrusted with a full-time major league job. Given a decent enough chance, stuck with through thick and thin, he ought to become a really fine first baseman. The Padres though don't have the guts to tell Ryan Klesko to get lost, so Gonzalez seems destined to spent a lot of time this year on the bench, getting the odd bit of playing time here and there. Gonzalez was acquired from the Rangers along with Chris Young and Terrmel Sledge for Adam Eaton, Akinori Otsuka and Billy Killian this winter, but he can actually came from the Marlins originally, the first pick of the 2000 draft no less. Ben Johnson, a corner outfield, doesn't quite have the same pedigree or track record as Gonzalez, but he hit a mighty .312/.394/.558 at Triple-A last year, with 51 walks to 88 strikeouts in 472 plate appearances (27 doubles and 25 home runs, really formidable power). Though he was 24, and therefore getting a little old for Triple-A, it was his first crack at the level, in spite of the fact that he was actually a 1999 draftee out of High School. Picked in the fourth round by the Cardinals, he was traded to the Padres in 2000 along with Heathcliff Slocumb for Carlos Hernandez, who only ever managed 58 plate appearances in a Redbirds uniform. Thanks to Dave Roberts, Johnson doesn't figure to get much time to prove his worth at the major league level this year, though he too is clearly done with the minor leagues. And Paul McAnulty, a first baseman/corner outfielder, drafted in the twelveth round in 2002. Though he's always been a little old for his league, he's a career .304/.400/.485 hitter in the minors, and he's just turned 25 in the last few days. Last year he hit .303/.377/.490 between Double-A and Triple-A in 509 plate appearances, with 50 walks, 95 strikeouts, 32 doubles and 16 home runs. He too doesn't figure to get a real opportunity to play this year. Really, I'm extremely surprised by the fact that the Padres have held onto Klesko, Roberts, Johnson AND McAnulty this winter, while adding Adrian Gonzalez via trade and re-signing Brian Giles. They've now got enormous depth at the 1B/OF position, and yet I'll say they really ought to be focusing on improving their pitching, because after Peavy, Chris Young, Hoffman and Linebrink, the rest of their staff really doesn't look particularly impressive. Chan Ho Park? Shawn Estes? And Woody Williams? In the same rotation? Another position of weakness is third base, where Vinny Castilla can pick it, but wow are his numbers with the bat this year going to be absolutely horrid.

You are right, last years season is nothing to be ashamed of, but his walk rate in '04 was not a ton better than '05. His .099 IsoD in '04 is noticeably better than the .077 he put up in '05. I too really don't care for IsoD, particularly not when you use it like that. In the exact same number of at-bats, a .223 hitter and a .281 hitter both draw the exact same number of walks, hit by pitches, sac flies, sac bunts. Which has the higher IsoD? The .223 hitter. If Moore had shown exactly as much plate discipline in 2005 as in 2004, and that plate discipline had translated to the numbers in exactly the same way, that's roughly 8 points of IsoD down the drain for Scott Moore in 2005 just by virtue of him being a better hitter. As for the other 14 points, plate discipline doesn't always translate to the numbers at all well. What, for instance, if Moore in 2004 saw an extra couple of pitchers on wild days, or the umpires on a couple of extra occasions had a slightly smaller zone, they called that a ball when it was a strike, or Moore fouled off a 3-0 pitch in 2004 before taking ball four that in 2005 he'd had crushed for a home run, etc. Finally, based on the rate at which Moore was hit by pitches in 2004, he ought to have been plonked an extra 6 times in 2004. Take into account all of those factors, and the difference in IsoD's could easily mean absolutely nothing, or it could be something, or it could mean the opposite. You just can't really say based on the numbers alone.

Why'd you think that? He has spent the last two years in the pitcher friendly parks of the Florida State League. And he'll spend next year in the pitcher friendly parks of the Southern League, right? I never said that the SL isn't pitcher friendly. The point I was trying to make is that being in an environment like that for two full years is tough. Your point is still completely lost on me. He spends one year in a pitcher friendly environment (Lakeland, FSL West, 2004), he spends another year in another pitcher friendly environment (Daytona, FSL East, 2005), now he's going to spend yet another year in yet another pitcher friendly environment (West Tennessee, SL North, 2006). Why is moving from one pitcher friendly environment to another to another supposed to help him? Again, why? If anything, because Scott Moore is now going to start encountering with much more regularity pitchers with better control of better and more varied stuff, pitchers capable of pitching rather than throwing, I suspect that, considering that he struck out 134 times last season at High-A, a level he was repeating, tough times could easily be ahead. You saw a lot more of him than I did, so can the guy hit breaking stuff at all? If he can, then why the whiffs? They're worrying, for they'll limit him to hitting just .260 if he doesn't cut down on them. If he doesn't draw a lot more walks, or he can't stick at third base, all of a sudden you've not got much of a prospect. Just quickly, regarding the fact that he was once thought of as better than Hermida and Francouer, that's great, but it's also completely irrelevant now. Drew Meyer was also drafted ahead of those two prospects. That was three and half years ago now. Things have changed.