craig

Being only a sophomore, I wonder how polished he is. His stats profile changed completely between freshman and sophomore year. He hit 9 HR as a freshman, with 50K/211 AB, horrible. This year his BB/K went from 29BB/50K to 57BB/30K. Total reversal, really weird. With 57 walks plus 11 HBP, that was 68 free on-bases for only 215 AB. A .151 IsoD is kind of hard to get when it's built on a .340 average. Heh, I'll guess he gets with the Cubs, they encourage him to be aggressive, and he'll loses the walking, which is the one thing that stands out. I don't think the Campana analogy works very well. If Campana had a .150 IsoD, we'd totally love the guy. Second, Campana never hit 9 HR, even with metal. Obviously not a pick that's easy to love, but I guess we'll see how it works out. Some of the 3rd round type picks I liked the least (Theriot and was Barney 3rd or 4th?) have actually had some of the most big-league starts of any of the players drafted by the Cubs lately.

I've seen comments in two directions on Baez: One common view is that he's OK for SS now, but when he gets bigger as expected he'll probably need to move. Another evaluation has been that his frame is basically maxed out, so that he shouldn't grow into much more power than he has now. Either of those could end up being right, of course. Case 1: He's going to physically outgrow SS. In that case, their should be some power projection left. That could be nice. Case 2: He's as big as he's going to get, so it's foolish to project any future power growth. If so, then if he's currently fit for SS, then perhaps he'll be able to stay at SS (or 2B). That could also be nice, if he's a good pure hitter and already has pretty good power (for a middle infielder.)

I'm assuming Penalver is on DSL2 because Francisco Sanchez is on DSL1, otherwise don't see why such a highly touted kid is down on the B-squad. That said, the B-squad seems to have some high priced talent to start, with Penalver, Candelario, and Antonio Gonzalez there. Unless I'm mixing up which one is the B-squad? Penalver just turned 17 a couple of weeks ago. May 1994 birthday. 5 walks/0 K's hitting .333 thus far. 6-feet, so not a dinky guy.

I hear that Dallas Beeler has been promoted to Tennessee.

Rosscup had pitched very well at Daytona. Anybody know what's wrong with him? Is he on a surgery injury, or something more modest? Anybody know what Wallach's injury is? Ebenger stated today instead. Poor Daytona has had their surprisingly terrific rotation totally killed. Whitenack promoted/injured, Rosscup injured, Struck promoted. Wallach wasn't very good, so not a big deal if he's hurt. But losing your four of your original five starters(Kurcz being the 5th) is tough. Vitters played tonight.

1. I'm not sure exactly how risky Starling is. But it's hard to believe the risk for a highly regarded position player can compare to the risk associated with a pitcher. It seems so uncommon for a young power pitcher to hold up. 2. Totally agree on Springer. A HS who might perhaps have a contact problem eventually, that's one thing. Going for a guy who's certain to have a contract problem and be a K-king, that's another.

Szczur is a better and more important prospect than Silva. And Silva after all his Cuban play should be more experienced and advanced. Made sense to leave Szczur where he belonged, and to put the more experienced lesser prospect up. Szczur needs all the CF practice he can get. If Silva is a utility player at Daytona and plays a lot of LF/RF (because Ha is the better CF prospect than him), that's the way it goes with lesser prospects. Thus far Silva K's a lot, doesn't walk or steal much, and hasn't shown much power. Given his Cuban experience, it's harder to pass it all off as "he's never played before" inexperience. I'm not optimistic.

That's a good point. I'm not sure how often it will happen, but getting Cerda some 2B action would be nice. I think it's pretty safe to guess that he's not in Watkins class defensively, though, which may perhaps speak to his future as a big-league infielder. Seems kind of funny, now some are saying that Watkins really needs to play SS. I recall AzPhil talking about how Watkins was really a 2B and that his throwing didn't look right for SS. The Watkins/Cerda thing might be a bit of a puzzle/mistake. A fundamental farm principle is that you prioritize around better prospects, and lesser prospects get fit in as best they can around the better ones, whether that be in terms of promotion or position. How might that apply to Cerda/Watkins? If the Cubs think Watkins is the superior prospect, then Cerda should be moved accordingly. That almost looks like what happened. But at this point we kind of know that Watkins potential is pretty tiny. He has a chance to blossom into something approaching a Paul Bako type hitter, although of course Watkins' power is way less than Bako's and he strikes out a lot more. So it's probably a reach to blossom into Bako, but sometimes you get lucky and things like that can happen. But even if he did blossom into a Bako, how good of a prospect is he even then? And if he's the better prospect and Cerda the lesser, that doesn't speak well to Cerda's status. But, what if Cerda really is the better prospect? (Seems that way to me, since he's a .400+ OBP guy...) If so, then Cerda should be used where it's best for his big-league development. If that's 2B, then move lesser prospct Watkins to 3B or bench or SS or OF or Peoria or extended spring training or whatever. Move the lesser prospect for the good of the better prospect. Seems dumb of me for Watkins to have kept Cerda off of 2B.

Jackson is hitting in the mid .260's. I don't think it really makes sense to call him up. He started hot, and he had an unconscious BABIP. But his average is now more or less what you'd expect based on his K/HR, right? I think leaving him alone for a while to work things out makes a lot of sense. Anybody know what happened to Vitters? He got pulled out mid-game. He's been unusually healthy this year, so he's probably due.

With all due respect to a lot of really good posters and posters who I respect tremendously, I think this discussion has been strikingly over-reactionary even by NSBB standards! First, Bruce shared a comment but I'm not sure it was a really detailed exact quote. Seems to me that Fleita might have been meaning that Ha wouldn't necessarily get sent down. But neither was it certain that he'd stay up. He was on fire at Daytona, he started fast at Tenn and was continuing his multi-hit work there, but subsequently he's had only one multi-hit game and only two XBH since May 18. Granted I'd have preferred not to promote him in the first place, but I don't think it's a crime to promote a guy, see how he does, and then respond accordingly. Without it being guaranteed that he stays up even if he struggles, or that he goes dow even if he's thriving. Second, on the pickoff, I simply shared what the poster who was at the game wrote. It is entirely premature to assume that play is why he got sent down. There is reason to assume that to be the case at all. Third, I admit I wouldn't be that bothered if it was. And I wouldn't see why it should be "knee-jerk". Guys should understand that being a professional involves having your head in the game, and that there are consequences if you don't. If you get picked off because you're leaning or trying to steal or misread the pitcher's move, that's a risk that comes with basestealing. (I didn't see the Campana pickoff, but he is a base-stealer so I assume that his head was in the game but that he took to big a lead and a lean and got picked.) From the observer's post, it sounded like Ha simply wasn't paying attention and got picked. (Ha is not a basestealer, he's only stolen 6 and some of those were on hit-and-run rather than straight-steal steals, and he's got 9 CS. So it's unlikely he was totally into things and got caught really because he was leading/leaning to steal...) If he got sent down because he was sleeping at 1B, perhaps that's a terrific lesson and he'll pay more attention when he's on the base from now on. Fourth, beer(?) mentioned "playing scared". I can see playing scared involving taking a conservative lead and not trying to steal. BBut falling asleep at 1B and not paying attention is the antithesis of playing scared. Every professional should "play scared" of making dumb mistakes like not watching the pitcher or losing track of outs. Fifth, I think Ha's outfielding will take care of itself. My assumption is that he's pretty good there. I think he's a much better prospect than Silva, so I'd stick Silva in a corner or return him to Peoria. But if Ha plays some corner at Daytona, that seems fine.

I think they can change their minds pretty quickly as circumstances change.

From a different board: "Whitenack looked to be in some serious pain around the elbow area when he left tonights game, Cabrera is on his way to Iowa as we speak...."

Kirk stayed and started at Peoria tonight, and Lorick started for Daytona.

Walked in the second game, too. he's now walked in each of the last three games, and in four of his last five.

Not sure where Goldstein is getting his stuff. But if Rhee's fastball is "solid", that's pretty significant news. I think he was pretty much an 85-88 guy last summer.

Very surprising, I've been really disappointed in how totally mediocre he's been thus far, he'd been on my list of "could step up fast" guys. ERA is lousy, and all of his peripherals match that picture of mediocrity. (Low K's, high walks, high HR's, high hits allowed.) Nothing is awful, really. Who's left in Tenn's rotation? McNutt, Whitenack, Raley (who's been worse), Rusin (who hasn't been too hot and who's been hurt some, too...). Dolis was originally, and got replaced with Whitenack. I guess the choices are moving somebody from relief (Dolis or Carpenter as former starters, or Chen...) or else bringing somebody up. Doesn't seem like Daytona's rotation is really demanding promotions. Kurcz, Rosscup, and Struck have been their best guys, Struck the least of those three. But they are all young (20, 22, and 21), and two months of A-ball experience seems a little premature for Kurcz or Rosscup. Rosscup hasn't pitched since the 15th, so not sure what's wrong with him. Anybody know? Just a guess: daytona rotation is getting cluttered, so one (Struck?) is getting moved up. Without Struck, they could still formulate a rotation with: 1. Rosscup, if he's back from whatever has kept him out for the last 12 days. 2. Kurcz, obviously he's been good. 3. Wallach, he's been lousy but they may still want to keep trying him. 4. Rhee, if he's healthy enough now to stay in rotation and they take him seriously enough to stay in rotation. 5. Struck would make five, if he stayed. 6. Lorick has been starting, he'd make six. 7. This may be a time when they're ready to promote Kirk. So maybe if they were promoting Kirk and Rosscup was coming back, perhaps that would create enough pressure to push Struck up a level?

Clevenger with a walk and two more hits. His OBP is .441 for the season, although it's over .500 at Iowa. When you K less than you walk, it's kind of fun.

He pitched two as a freshman and two more as a sophomore. I googled earlier just to remind myself of how it was. Interestingly, had he returned to school for another year (he was only a 39th round draft pick, so his coach seemed to think he'd probably come back), the Palomar coach was planning on him for rotation rather than outfield.

True. He pitched 4 innings in college. And certainly when the Cubs drafted him, it was to be a pitcher from the start.

Hatley and Searle moved up. Hatley has 21K/8BB/15IP/0HR. From an article last week: http://www.pjstar.com/sports/chiefs/x956208349/Chiefs-hold-on-to-beat-River-Bandits “He throws harder than anybody on the team. He goes right at hitters and gets ahead in the count,” catcher Micah Gibbs said. “Then he has one of the best breaking balls in low-A that I’ve seen. Whenever he gets ahead of batters it’s tough to come back on him.” Hatley, a right-hander who throws in the low to mid 90s, ..... had Tommy John surgery in August of 2009 after pitching in 30 games, with 16 starts, for the Chiefs..... “It’s nice having that kind of velocity at the end of the game, but there’s some things he still needs to learn,” Peoria pitching coach Jeff Fassero said. “He gets a little over-amped trying to throw the ball. If he gets it figured out I think he’ll be good.” Obviously I thought the comment by Gibbs that he both throws harder and has the best breaking ball were interesting. That would seem to give him a chance. Another converted position player, relative to college. The other thing I thought was interesting was that there has been some discussion about how hard Beeler throws. If Gibbs and the pjstar were to be taken literally, it would seem that Beeler doesn't throw as hard as low-mid-90's Hatley, for whatever that's worth.

toonster, I admit I'm not too concerned about a lack of challenge for Bour. Hitting is really hard. Staying hot is really hard. Even as hot as he is, he's still making outs 2/3 of the time, and hitting a HR in a tiny fraction of his AB's. So I'm not that worried that the FSL has gotten too boring or unchallenging for his development. But I might be totally wrong.

I'm in no rush to move him up. I think the unrushed advancement is best for most guys. Heh, I think we partly want him moved up so that we can get a better look and a better evaluation; but I'm not sure it's necessarily best for his development. I'm fine if he stays in Daytona through July, even if he hits .330, slugs 1.000+, and has 25 HR's by then. I guess AzPhil commented on Bour at one point that he looks like a slugger but hits like a singles hitter, or something like that. But now with 12 HR and a .631 slugging, Bour is obviously crushing and not just singling. Bour goes up the middle and the other way a lot. His K-rate is modest. At .631 slugging, Bour is one of four FSL guys above .540. The other three all have 40-some K's, Bour has 29. 16% K rate would be excellent for a lot of non-power prospects. (IHak Lee's is still higher...). Last year he K'd 100 times in 475 AB. Of course he was under the radar. .291/12 HR /.375 OBP/100K would be nice for a projectable young toolsy guy. But as a bulky college 1B, 12 HR with 100K in low-A didn't make a big splash.

I think he probably needs at least two of those things to happen to be able to last as a low-market regular. Or else a really substantial improvement in the contact or power department. (Jumping to a 20-HR guy, that could do it. Dropping his K-rate to 18%, that could do it....)

I understand (and understood) the Soriano comp, and I see your point. I was just extending that the type of free-swinging sit-on-the-fastball type with recognition and situational problems is probably going to be a low-average bad hitter. Unless, like Soriano, he hits a goodly amount of HR's. And while Soriano was on my mind, I thought he was a perfect case to illustrate how fast rocket-armed athletes like Lake don't necessarily make good defensive infielders. If Lake "has to do the little things that win games", I don't think that bodes well for Lake. If it's smart and alert that we want, he seems to be way on the opposite end. But, I'm not sure that every contributor needs to be either a star or a "little things" player. A .265BA/18HR/.780-OPS corner player isn't a star, might be frustrating or seem like an underachiever, and might not be very good at the little things, and might not look like his head in the game. But sometimes guys like that are important contributors on winning teams. There are a lot of big-league contributors who are neither stars nor smart and alert, but still offer enough of something to be useful to a winning team. I'm maybe giving up too quickly, but I think it's probably something of a lost cause for him to be a "little things" guy; so if he's going to become useful in some fashion, I still think it will need to either be as a pitcher, or else substantially enabled by a career-enabling volume of HR's.

He was at 3B two games ago (Friday's game; he had Saturday off). With Spencer, Ridling, Flaherty and LeMahieu around, there are too many players and not enough IF spots. They all move around. The "move around" thing is more by design than necessity, I think. And I think it's smart, actually, in most cases. Most of the guys at issue are not can't-miss prospects, and are not certain to zoom straight up and be given a starting job. (Unlike Corey Patterson, Bobby Hill, HeeSeop Choi, and Felix Pie). So I think that by the time they reach AA, management intentionally plays them at several positions so that they can more easily make a major-league roster and contribute. I think it makes a lot of sense, myself. There appears to be some limit to this, though. Lemahieu, who I think was one of management's favorite prospects entering the season, has pretty much stuck with 3B/2B. Vitters 3B/1B. But Flaherty has played at 3B only once, and has instead split his starts between 2B, SS, and LF. Part of me thinks that one future scenario would have Flaherty with his power at 3B with Lemahieu with his lesser power at 2B. And since Flaherty is older and more mature, and is having a big year, that he might be a candidate to replace ARam next year. But I don't know how plausible that is, if Flaherty isn't practicing any/much 3B this year. Not sure what management's thinking is. Maybe they've seen Flaherty and Lemahieu, and know that if both of those guys end up starting, that Flaherty at 2nd with Lemahieu at 3B actually better fits them defensively. So even if we instinctively want to put the HR guy at 3rd, it really doesn't fit them best. Maybe they've seen enough of Flaherty at 3B and he doesn't project well there defensively, for whatever reason, I don't know. Maybe the decision was made during the winter, before Flaherty's bat exploded, and at the time they just wanted to focus on what was best for Lemahieu and Vitters, who at the time were viewed as much superior prospects? And they just haven't revisited that decision? But unless something changes with Flaherty's usage, we probably shouldn't include him much in projections for how to replace Aram next spring.