craig

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.

Yes. I think Truffle's point makes me wonder, though. .300/4HR looks nice. But if the .300 is largely BABIP, how sustainable will it be? If he hits .273 the rest of the way, with 2-3 HR per month, will that qualify as real breakout? I hope he can hit .300 with power the rest of the way. I still think relying on a .395 BABIP will be hard, and if he does sustain .300 average, it will probably mean that his HR-rate is going up and/or his K-rate is going down, so that he no longer needs to depend on BABIP-ing near .400 to hit .300. Indeed. I think that contributes to his chance to his a useful number of HR's as a position player, or to become an athletic power pitcher. The Soriano comp may be apt. Two thoughts: 1. Soriano was a megaprospect as a minor-league SS with speed, rocket, athleticism, and power. But his story is a reminder that a rocket arm and athleticism do not guarantee defensive aptitude at SS even with experience. Nor guarantee that switching from SS to 2B or 3B will result in defensive aptitute, either. 2. Soriano's offensive value and stats are heavily dependent on hitting HR's. The same is likely for Lake. But if Lake can get even close to maturing into Soriano's HR output, he's going to play in the majors. I hope he's breaking out permanently, or that leadoff has triggered some breakthrough for him. Will be interesting to track with time whether his recent success at the top is just a BABIP fluke. That's a good approach. One finesse point, I think, is that we're trying to develop players for major-league function. If batting leadoff and playing SS is the best way for Lake to develop into a useful major leaguer, leave him there. Certainly his development should take precedence over the interests of some fringe player like Watkins. But if Lake plays for the Cubs in the majors, it probably won't be at SS or as a leadoff hitter. (Since if he hits enough HR's to have a decent average, he'll probably not be hitting leadoff...) So at some point, as with Vitters and Lemahieu and Flaherty, I assume they'll start diversifying him position-wise. Certainly it sounds like he's got some attitude and coachability issues. I don't think problems with running out balls, keeping track of outs, or keeping track of the ball or of outfielders are defiance-related, though. And they almost sound more lazy/slacker/passive than "aggressive" in nature. It will be interesting to see how his career goes. I admit I'm not at all concerned about him blocking people, though, at least not for a while. And I think that if he gets far enough to be in AA, they'll start to bop him around positionally. I just hope he can progressively keep improving his HR output, which I think is essential to his future as a useful hitter. Or else that they switch him to pitcher sooner rather than later.

Fun with numbers: 1. Keep Lake's seasonal numbers, give him a robust .335 BABIP instead of .395. Batting average drops to .266. 2. Keep Lake's seasonal numbers, give him a better-than-mlb-average .305 BABIP instead of .395. Batting average drops to .244. 3. Keep Lake's May numbers, at .335 BABIP: May batting average = .263 4. Lake's May numbers, at .305 BABIP: May batting average = .252 Conclusions: he's living largely on a high BABIP. April was a fluke month walk-wise, Batting average may be overrated, but it's central to both OBP and OPS. If the average is 40 or 60 points padded by flukish BABIP, both OBP and slugging get padded accordingly. So the OPS gets padded by at least double. (A lucky single is a base for slugging and an on-base for OBP, so essentially it gets double-counted towards OPS). Thoughts: 1. Maybe he'll always be a high BABIP guy. 2. His one consistency at each stop in minors has been the very high K-rate, he K's like a slugger. The K-rate >25% has been pretty reliable. 3. Realistically, I think his offensive future is going to depend heavily on the HR's. K's, HR's, and BABIP are the input factors for batting average. Some quick numbers, assuming a fixed 25% K rate and 600 big-league AB's per year (to give the HR values context): .305 BABIP: 5HR ->.235BA; 10HR ->.240BA 15HR ->.246BA; 20HR->.252BA; 25HR->.258BA .335 BABIP: 5HR ->.257BA; 10HR ->.262BA 15HR ->.268BA; 20HR->.273BA; 25HR->.279BA I think it will be hard for him to K at less than 25% in the majors, and a .335 BABIP in majors is rather remote. So I think you probably need Lake to really emerge as a guy. If he's a 20+ HR guy, then he should be able to hit .250 or better. A .250BA/20HR guy can make some millions, I think. But if he doesn't hit HR's, I think his average is going to be problematic. And I'm not sure his attitude, clubhouse chemistry, IsoD, or middle-infield defense are going to be positive enough to overcome a low average. But some HR's raise average, OBP, slugging, OPS, and make teams a lot more patient. I also think being an asset HR-guy will also be necessary position-wise. If he moves to 3B or OF, that's only OK if he hits HR's. And if he stays as an error-prone SS, a defense-problem SS is only acceptable if the guy hits a lot. He's gotta hit the HR's.

I think Truffle has a fair point. Lake is still whiffing 25% of his AB, his K/HR rate is still 43/4, and his K/BB rate is 43/6. Hard to support a consistently good average when so many AB's are K's and when the volume of HR's is too low to neutralize the K's. And 12 errors in 43 games, that's still terrible, although his XBH are starting to pull well ahead of his errors. But his error rate hasn't improved that much. They always talk about Jeter and other big-league SS's who made multiple errors in A-ball, but the good ones didn't keep doing it the way that Lake is in his 3rd round of A-ball. Plus, the reports are that attitude/hustle/attention-wise, if you watched him every day he might be worse than Soriano or Bradley. But, his BABIP isn't really that ridiculous. It's .395, and obviously that's not sustainable, but it's not that crazy for a fast minor leaguer. I think there's the chance that his HR output could grow with time, and if his K/BB ratio wasn't so stinky in future, he wouldn't need as much BABIP to keep his average afloat. But I'm pretty low on him. When a guy has so much trouble with both contact and errors, and is a slacker head-case, it's hard to be very confident in projecting a successful big-league future.