craig

I know that we as fans usually want one or two monster superslot picks, what Maples would be in the incredibly unlikely event that we actually paid what he asked for. Or like Samardz, Huseby, and Szczur involved. But I think that there are a lot of HS/JC type teenagers who are willing to sign for 6th round type money. Last year we did the big superslots on Szczur and Ben Wells. But we also signed about ten guys to "teenage slot" deals, the kind of deal that an 8th rounder or whatever would get, that stuff in the $120K and higher range. Greathouse, Kurcz, Reed, Richardson, Hartman, Fitzgerald, Geiger, Harman, and Beeler, all of those guys were at least $120K, which I think is formally slot for 7th or 8th round. Likewise McNutt, Struck, Mincone, Burruel, Fitzgerald were all in that area two years ago. So my guess is that after paying Vogelbach superslot and paying modest HS overslots on other guys in the top ten, that if they have $3-4 million to spend after that, it's more likely to sign fifteen guys at $200K than to spend the same $3 million on Maples. If you have 15 teenagers who you view as 8th-round type talents, guys who might project into excellence, my guess is that's the direction they plan to go. If Dunston looks great and will sign for $450, and Maples looks like a stud and will sign for $1.5, maybe they'll do that to or instead, who knows.

2.Vogelbach, Daniel Bishop Verot HS (FL) 1B L/R 6'00" 250 1992-12-17 18 HS "We made a decision of what it would be worth not to go to college," said father Dan Vogelbach, whose son received a scholarship to attend the University of Florida. "We were not going to deviate, so we agreed not to go lower." Before the draft, the Vogelbachs wrote down the bonus amount they wanted, sent it to the Major League Scouting Bureau and asked that it be given to every team. Dan Vogelbach said what they asked for is a little higher than what past picks at No. 68 averaged. Those ranged from $477,000 to $1.1 million the past five years. "Four teams said it was an extremely fair number," Dan Vogelbach said. 3.DeVoss, Ezekiel Miami CF S/R 5'10" 175 1990-07-17 20 SO "The Cubs are going to be calling back in the next couple of days to discuss things," DeVoss told the Miami Herald. "I don't intend on having it be something that lasts all summer. I'll decide in the next week or two. At this point, it's really 50-50. "I would like to sign, but I wouldn't have any problem with coming back next year. 5.Scott, Tayler Notre Dame HS (AZ) RHP R/R 6'03" 165 1992-06-01 19 HS Among the Arizona recruiting class, Tayler Scott, a pitcher from Scottsdale Notre Dame, was selected in the fifth round by the Chicago Cubs. He told the Arizona Republic that he will sign a pro contract as he pursues his dream of being the first South African to reach the major leagues. 7.Gretzky, Trevor Oaks Christian HS (CA) 1B L/L 6'04" 190 1992-09-14 18 HS The 6-foot-4, 190-pound Gretzky has committed to San Diego State, but probably won't play for the Tony Gwynn-led Aztecs. "It's still early, but I want to start my pro career as soon as possible," Gretzky said. "If it works out, great. But I am going to talk to (the Cubs) in the next couple of days and see. Nothing is set in stone yet." 9.Schlecht, Garrett Waterloo HS (IL) RF L/L 6'02" 1993-02-15 18 HS "I always said when I was little that I wanted to be a professional baseball player and I finally earned my spot," he said. "I worked really hard at a it and it's a dream come true." Summary: No idea on Zych, but sounds like Vogelbach will require superslot over a million, but the Cubs knew that and are prepared to pay. Sure safe superslot, the only question is how much. Otherwise, it seems like basically all of the first ten picks will be signable. Gretzky, Taylor, Schlecht, they all sound like they'll sign assuming the Cubs give the typical HS slot prices (which are of course "overslot" relative to college players in the same rounds.) I assume Lockhart will be signable, since his Dad works for them so they should have a pretty clear grip on what the family expects, and since he's not that high-ceiling a guy they wouldn't pick him that high if they expected signability to be real challenging. No idea on the Puerto Rican catcher, and last year we whiffed on Puerto Rican DeJesus. But Rosario didn't sound like that amazing of a prospect, so you don't spend 6th pick on a guy unless you're either pretty confident he'll sign or unless you think he's so spectacular that he's worth gambling on. Maybe the latter applies, but if not, then they probably figure he's signable. It's after the first ten rounds that things get dicey, with Dunston and Maples especially. 23.Zimmer, Bradley La Jolla HS (CA) CF L/R 6'04" 185 1992-11-27 18 HS ..Both Zimmer boys value education, which for Bradley, is one reason why he wants to play in college. He knows that if not drafted high enough, it might not be worth it to him to miss out on his education. “I feel like I would be missing a chapter in my life,” Bradley said. “I have such a good offer there, my brother is there and I would love to play with him again.” The higher a player is drafted, the more money he can get with a contract and a signing bonus. Bradley is not sure where he will get drafted, but he thinks somewhere in the first 10 rounds. Note: Obviously he's not signing for 23rd round slot. But if he's thinking top 10 rounds, if you pay him 8th round HS slot it sounds like he might be signable. So I'm figuring the standard $120-200K HS slot might get fairly close. 25.Shoulders, Roderick State College of Florida Manatee - Sarasota 1B L/R 6'02" 225 1991-09-26 19 J1 He hopes to meet with Cubs officials soon to discuss a potential deal, though he added his draft position certainly wasn't what he was hoping for. "As of right now I still don't know what's going on, but I doubt they want to give me what I want that late, drafting me that late in the draft. But there's no telling," said Shoulders, who spent this past season at State College of Florida, Manatee-Sarasota. "They could do it; they could not. But worse comes to worst, which it isn't a bad thing, I go to USF. But I love that place, so it's not a bad thing to go there. Right now I feel I'm in a great situation being 19 years old with two great choices to pick from." Note: again, sounds to me like if you offer 10th round money, or teenage slot $120-250K, he'll be signable.

Thanks, Nick. Not sure how that gets him to #58, still doesn't sound that hot. But sounds like a guy you'd like to sign if he's reasonable.

Keith Law ranked him the 58th best prospect. Interesting. Perhaps reflects how widely opinions can vary. Just to read the BA report, a guy with speed that gets listed as "above average" and whose hitting potential is that he "could grow into gap power and be an average hitter", that doesn't seem like the 58th best prospect. Raw guy with gap power as his power ceiling and to become an average hitter being his hitting ceiling, that doesn't seem very exciting to me. For an outfielder, I'd think there are guys like that hanging around till round 50, usually. But, of course, every scout has his own opinions. So I assume that Law sees his speed (and CF potential) probably being better than just "above average", and I imagine projects the possibility of power that is greater than just gap power, and hitting that is potentially better than just average. I assume that if Wilken bothered to use a pick on him, knowing that he's going to be an expensive buyout, he must think the potential is there to perhaps be better than just a gap-power average hitter, too. BA: ...surprisingly raw. He is an above-average runner, which helps both on the bases and in center field..... As Dunston fills out, he could grow into gap power and be an average hitter. Scouts love his speed, passion for the game

During the draft, I noted that some of the draftniks were hoping for Dunston. The snapshot description made him seem as qualified for the 40th round as the 11th. Is he actually a serious pro prospect, better than your normal 11th rounder? And if so, what's the appeal. Power hitter? 5-tools type? Leadoff type? I didn't actually see much about his perceived baseball stuff other than family notes, and that he's really raw. Is he expected to be a big signability challenge? Probably most of them are.

Last year out of the first 30 picks, 19 were 20 or less, in other words HS, JC, or soph-eligible. So it's not that novel. But certainly WAY younger. I think Maples is a remotely long shot, unless he really pitches like a stud this summer and makes them feel like they're getting a true first rounder, AND he still reduces his demands. But basically any one of these 23 picks who are 20 or less are going to require serious money to sign, why else? They will all 20-or-under slot ($120-200K) minimum, and of course in many cases more (as was true with Wells and Szczur last year, and the guys in the first handful or rounds under any circumstances.

You've gotta love a 1B named "Shoulders".

I assume there is very little likelihood of signing Maples. If he's that good and teams thought he was a good value per his price, he'd have gone far earlier. So he's a draft-and-follow and talk pick, IMO. Right now, if anybody wanted to pay him what he was asking he'd have already gone, so right now the Cubs aren't willing to pay what he's asking. Three scenarios, after they watch him in whatever summer league he goes to. 1. He pitches great, and they decide that he's a good value as a top-ten type pick and they end up paying what he wants. Cubs become willing to pay much more than they are willing to pay now. 2. He pitches really well, so they make him a strong offer, but one still well below his price tag. Then he and his family decide if they are going to just stick on what they listed, or are going to reduce their demands. Maples becomes willing to sign for much less than he claims he is willing to sign for now. 3. He doesn't pitch well enough to get the Cubs up to his demands, and he and his Dad won't move off of his demands. No deal is made, or comes close. I expect that scenario 3 is by far the most likely, and that he won't sign. I think scenario 1, in which the Cubs pay the full demanded $3, is by far the most unlikely. Scenario 2 is where I hope it goes.

5 picks, all 20 or younger. Definitely not going for advanced older college players today, that's for sure.

Yes, I would say getting a 50th-best prospect at 129 could be very nice value, if BA knows anything. The kid will still be only 20 into August, so it's not like he's a college fossil with no time to get better.

Vogelbach sounds like he'll be a difficult sign. Interesting that the Cubs would have spent so high on a pick with those weight/1B limitations, who's still going to be that expensive/difficult to sign. I guess if he's going to be pretty pricey, and they knew that, and they took him anyway, they must like him a lot more than we might have expected.

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.