craig

Looks like the opening rosters won't have as many surprises as last year. (I recall being surprised with McDaniel and Searle at Daytona rotation, with Shafer and Flaherty starting at Peoria, and the Guyer to AA bit...) Rotation-wise, I think things look pretty deep. Most of the teams will have interesting pitching rotation prospects, good depth. Tenn probably the least jazzy. Cashner and Rusin are the most high profile, but when your next three are taken from the pool of Muschko, Bibbens-Dirx, Chen, Patton, Pabelbon, Carillo, and Blackford, that could be a relatively low-ceiling pool of so-so guys. Muschko was really good at Daytona last half, so I'm hopeful that he'll emerge in the rotation and somehow sustain that success, however it was he did it. Peoria rotation is always a surprise, and of course they often do some piggy-back stuff. It's also the rotation most likely to be supplemented by drop-downs. It doesn't seem that often that rotation starters drop from Tenn to Daytona during the last few days. But it's pretty common that Daytona guys do. If all three of McNutt, Rhee, and Raley were to drop to Peoria, then with Antigua they'd have plenty of name starters. But if all three of those arms did stay with Daytona, and I expect at last Raley to do so, then there will be quite a few rotation openings. Jung, Ronny Morla, Nick struck, Whitenack, Suarez, Yohan Gonzalez, Jon Nagel, it's hard to guess. Especially in A-ball where even if I know a guy is relief-guy long-term, they may still want to start him for innings early. But it looks like we could get a lot of interesting pitching. Hopefully a fair number of the guys I'm interested in now will still be interesting in June.

Agree, Iowa is generic for minors for Lou. I also like it. I think expecting too much too soon from Castro is dangerous. And he did seem to continue to make errors this spring. Keeping him one level further away might make it easier to keep people, himself included, from thinking about callups to the majors.

Arizona Phil with updated camp rosters following the big-league roster finalization. This is a lot closer than the earlier versions, because there aren't 15 guys from big-league camp waiting to push everybody else down. It is probably most useful for specifying where guys are who at one point were considered for a higher level, and who aren't likely to get bumped down another level. Still, there are 14 more guys in AA/AAA than will end there, so the trickle-down for Daytona and Peoria is still likely to be substantial. http://www.thecubreporter.com/2010/03/31/updated-minor-league-camp-rosters?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TCRfeed+%28The+Cub+Reporter%29 OK, so here are some of the interesting guys, who some projected might start higher: Lee at Peoria Cashner at AA Castro at AA (Lou and all the camp buzz had made Iowa a possibility, I think...) Vitters at Daytona Rafael Dolis at Daytona Searle and Leverton at Daytona Heh, we can't complain that any of those seven are being rushed. Some other guys who some projected might start lower than where they are currently listed. Some may still shift down a step when more send-downs happen. Jackson and Coleman both with Iowa. Flaherty at AA. I expect he'll stay. There isn't obvious competition for his spot at AA or in the AAA cut-down candidates. With castro at SS, Flaherty won't play there, and I expect Flaherty will be full-time 2B, which is good for me. If he's going to be an asset starter, 2B is his most likely spot. If he can prove he's capable defensively, he might hit well enough to be a strong value at 2b. Rusin, Patton, Bibbens, Sommer, and Buchter are all listed with AA. They surely won't all stay there. Hopefully that reflects favorably on Buchter and Rusin's performance this spring if they've hung in there this long. Rusin hasn't gotten much buzz. He went 0-4 in short season, he's old, he allowed more than a hit per inning, and scouted as low velocity. But while 4th round doesn't mean "supertalent", I don't think they spend a 4th round pick on a guy unless they think he has big-league potential, even if it's more 5th than 1st starter potential. Anyway, it would be pretty interesting to double-step him all the way from Boise to AA. He may still get bumped down to Daytona; but my guess he really will start in AA. AA doesn't seem to have many appealing rotation starters competing, I don't expect Iowa to send many rotation guys down, and Daytona has a ton of rotation names already. So I'm guessing Rusin really will start at AA. He's 23, plenty appropriate age-wise. Breaking balls are harder to hit than fastballs. So if he can get his breaking stuff over, and his fastball sinks even if it's slow, I don't see why he might not be fairly successful. I'd guess he might be project like Marshall with even less velocity but more sink and perhaps fewer HR? Daytona currently lists Vitters, Lake, and Lemahieu for infield. Certainly some bench infielder(s) will get bumped down. Will be interesting to see how Lake and Lemahieu divide the SS/2B duties. Lake can move off later. As with Flaherty, I'd be happy if Lemahieu were full-time 2B. If he's ever going to be an asset starter, that's going to need to be his spot and he's going to need to defend it satisfactorily. Daytona has not only Archer, Cabrera, and Dolis for rotation (those three aren't going to bump down lower.) But they also have McNutt, Raley, Rhee, Searle, Shafer, Leverton, and Martinez listed. Which is why I don't expect Rusin to bump down and take one of the spots. My guess is that some from Shafer, Leverton, and Martinez will go to relief or get released. I expect one, two, or all three from McNutt, Raley, and Rhee to end up dropping a step to Peoria. But I never know. Last year I certainly didn't expect McDaniel and Searle to open in the rotation. Hopefully still hanging on with Daytona means that mcNutt, Raley, and Rhee have looked good in camp? Those are three critical swing prospects. Young pitchers who are in the 12-25 group of the top 30, any can become top-10 guys with good seasons, I'd think. Peoria currently lists not only Lee but also Jung and Ha. Nice to see that Jung is back; after he returned to Korea mid-season last year, I wondered if he was quitting for good. His results at Boise were very pedestrian, so I'll be curious to see whether he survives the cuts, whether they use him in rotation, and whether he shows any progress. Ha is also a surprise and may be dropped; OBP'ing at an incredibly low .264 with a sub-.600 OPS and switching positions isn't necessarily the recipe for a promotion. But maybe they'll just stry to keep those Koreans together for social reasons, too. Assuming Rhee drops down to Peoria, that could be four. Kirk is already down with XST. Other than Lee and Watkins in the infield, and Antigua in rotation, Peoria is really a mish-mash of who-knows-what. Lots of late-round draft picks and Latins with mixed previous success. I expect an awful lot of the guys Phil lists at Peoria will bump down to XST soon enough, and the pitching staff will be enriched by some Daytona bumpdowns.

http://www.thecubreporter.com/2010/03/19/sweet-sixteen-gets-rushed-cubs?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TCRfeed+%28The+Cub+Reporter%29 Az Phil, with his comments on a) Wagner Mateo, b) yesterday's Fitch action c) his listing of what the current rosters are. (Again, most guys will drop a level once the extras at the higher levels go down.) d) His "Limited Activity Only – injury rehab" guys, which include: Chris Carpenter Justin Bristow Dylan Johnston Marcus Hatley (TJ) Casey Lambert (TJ) Thoughts: 1. Disappointed that Carpenter and Bristow are hurt, again. 2. Cal, if you have a chance to ask anybody, please ask about Carpenter and Bristow and what's up? Insignificant short-term thing, bumped a toe last week and will be back on Tuesday? Versus something serious, or surgery rehab, or whatever? bristow was a possible emergence candidate, so if his arm is bad again, that's disappointing. Carpenter obviously is also one of our premium pitching prospects; if his arm is bad yet again, that would be really, really, really disappointing. (As has been Cashner's super-wild spring.) 3. Do we ever know what is up with Dylan Johnston? He switched to pitcher ages ago, it seemed. Given that he wasn't a pitcher, was the wildest wildarm from SS in recent memory, and has been hurt for ages now, I wonder how long they can stick with him as a longest-of-long-shots in the first place? 4. I don't remember; had we know that Lambert had TJ? I'd like to hope that he may have been pitching with problems for a while, and that if he were to come back with an actually healthier and stronger arm, perhaps he'll get back into worth-watching again? 5. Phil was really gushing on Cabrera, "dominating". Cal, at this point are these guys just throwing fastballs, and his was very fast? Or was he working some offspeed in, too?

I'm not seeing this roster. Are you referring to one he posted on 3/14, http://www.thecubreporter.com/2010/03/14/minor-league-camp-roster-update or has he posted a newer one somewhere? At that time, they still had over 50 guys in big-league camp. When about 25 of them go down, that's basically a full team worth, so most guys can shift down a level after that. Or has he posted another one since Sunday? Perhaps so, since in his Sunday roster he had Huseby on Daytona, but CUBZ99 makes reference to Huseby being listed on Tenn... As cal notes, these things always change, a lot.

Back and forth A. Sandberg bunts too much. B. Sandberg is trying to teach prospects fundamentals A. Bunting is not an important fundamental worth teaching. B. It is. A. 3rd and 4th place hitters will never bunt, so it won't be important to them. B. Guys who bat 3rd or 4th in the minors often bat 2nd or 7th or 8th in the majors, so it may be important. A. Bunting is almost worthless. B. The manager/GM set the job requirements. If they want a potential employee to bunt, it helps if the job-seeker can bunt. Even if it's dumb or counterproductive or rare that the manager will actually ask the prospective employee to do so in a games.

Yeah. I'd figure he'll play in full season, perhaps Daytona, or else if he's not worthy of that he'll be released in camp. The latter would seem very possible. I'd think that might be a little high if anything, but that might be a fair range. $250K, that's comparable to what, slot money for a 4th or 5th round draft pick? And a draft pick has no leverage, whereas Serrano had a free agent market, so if anything I'd guess his potential is somewhat less than your normal $250K draft pick. $250K or a 4th-8th round draft area is a range where I'm always interested and think a guy has a chance to emerge into a meaningful prospect if things go right. So hope is there, rightfully. But certainly most don't succeed, so expectations shouldn't really be there.

When I was 12, I would have wished he'd get called up. If he was good, I'd have liked it, and if he wasn't then I could call him "Smelly". I was actually surprised that BA put him on their LF list. Outside the top-30, but he was notable enough to get listed on the LF depth chart. It's possible he was in DSL rather than US for visa reasons. Obviously to have such unspectacular numbers 7 promotions from the majors isn't too thrilling, though.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=362735&src=152 "Piniella said this spring Cashner's future likely is as a starter. " Cashner: "I'd say the command of my fastball is getting better," he said. "I've always got room to work on the slider. My slider is one of my better pitches, but my changeup's come a long, long way. I rely on it a lot now. I feel like I'm able to throw it for strikes a lot, and that's what I use against lefties a lot."

Personally, I agree with this. My preference is that Castro would return to AA. Nothing to do with Barney, just because I'd keep Castro at AA longer for some of the Castro-focused reasons that you and jersey have mentioned. But I don't think the Cubs will do that. I think the cubs believe that he's special; that he might be ready soon if not already; that they want to challenge him; and that Iowa will be better for him than AA. Also, Lou doesn't control where minor leaguers go, but in one Castro-related conversation, he specifically stated that he expected him to start at Iowa. All kinds of things pop out of his mouth, so that might be wrong or generic for "minors" without caring where. But it might also reflect what he's heard from the organization, too. Well said, and I agree. I think you are mostly arguing for why you think he'd be better at AA, and I'm persuaded. I'm just not confident the Cubs will agree. But I do agree, that if it's totally an on-the-fence decision, I have no problem having the Barney consideration tip the balance that way. (I need to mix more metaphors, I think...) But I really don't think the Barney factor should have much if any significance. I still think the Cubs will put Castro at Iowa, as I mentioned above. And while it might not be my first choice, I think there may be some merit to that. It is sometimes reasoned that some guys do go straight from AA, and that the talent in AAA isn't any better. But I think there are more breaking balls in AAA than in AA, and for a lot of kids that's what they need to see more of. And for a lot of kids I think that helps to expose them as not so special. Patterson, Kelton, Hill, Choi, Pie were all kids who put up some good to extremely good numbers in AA, but were exposed by the breaking stuff in AAA.

jersey and kaiser, your points are well taken. If it's reasoned that AA is best for Castro, then return Castro to AA absolutely. (Whether that be because you prefer the weather; or think he needs to work on things there; or think that going straight from AA to majors is better than using time at Iowa, etc..) My "holding back" point had the following Ryno quote in mind, in which his assignment of Castro to AA was "simply due to having Barney at Iowa": My view is that you shouldn't make decisions about a top prospect based on the interests of a lesser prospect. Castro is by far the better prospect, Barney by far the lesser. So send Castro where it's best for Castro, and then deal with what that means for Barney. If you think it's best to hold Castro back at AA, because he needs more practice there, or the pitching is easier, or the weather better, by all means repeat him at AA. Personally I'd prefer that they did so until/unless he was relatively dominant there. If the decision is that Iowa is better for him, then don't hold him back on account of Barney. I think the same for Vitters. I have many doubts about him, but I still view him as a higher prospect than any of the other non-Castro infielders. If the Cubs think AA is the best place for him, then send him there. But assuming that Daytona is more appropriate (as I think is the case), don't rush Vitters up to AA on account of Lemahieu or Flaherty or Lake.

Agree, Colvin at Iowa. Lou says he's added 25 pounds, and looks great. This has been his first summer to build himself up. 06, after long draft spring/summer, went home and chilled out. 07, went to Japan and got hurt. 08, had surgery and rehabbed surgery. So this has been the first offseason when he's been healthy and focussed on baseball strength. Hopefully he'll add more power, although as a .524-slugger at AA last year, he's got a pretty good platform to build from. I think Castro will go to Iowa. You don't hold back an elite prospect for the welfare of a darwin Barney. And since Barney isn't going to reach the majors as an every-day starting SS anyway, he'll be well served to take utility training, including time at 2nd and 3rd. Might make sense for Castro to play some 2nd, too. Another Iowa 1B possible is the 4A slugger from Seattle, Bryan LaHair. He hit 26 HR and had an .883 OPS in AAA last year at age 26. Vitters is a wildcard. I'd rather leave him in Daytona until he proves he's too good for the league. (Which was certainly not the case last year.) And I'd like to see them leave Lemahieu at 2B for a while. He's got a chance to defend fine at 2B, and to be a very strong bat for a 2B. At 3B, not so clear that he'll have the power or bat that you'd want for a regular.

Cal, I was trying to remember what catcher Kweon got. Do you know? I thought he was pretty pricey...

It's not "just" scouting. It's both, but the scouting is a major factor. If he had the same numbers, but the scouts didn't say that he had a great arm, good defensive potential, a quick and really promising stroke, strong wrists, and the frame with potential to add power, his OPS wouldn't have him rated as enthusiastically as many of the major do. If he'd hit .210 in AA, he wouldn't be raved as much, either, or if he'd K'd 25% of his AB's. He got his singles and didn't strike out, and that's good. But if the scouts didn't like his swing, his frame, and that he "looks" like a player, I don't think he'd be so consistently getting listed as one of the top-50 prospects in the game. It's both. That's an opinion, and it's yours more than mine. I have no reason to think the scouts and BA and Law type people are wrong to rank him where they do. I have a lot of respect for their experience and insight and sources. But I also know that there are lots of prospects who get rated that high who don't turn out, and that if he doesn't improve on a lot of areas that he won't either. But I don't think it's just his low-K-singles performance last year that has scouts so buzzed. I think they see qualities common to many good big-leaguers beyond the ability to hit singles and not strike out. Is he going to be an "impact player" star? I don't know, and as you say it's a matter of likelihood. Most guys who are ranked where he is do NOT become "impact players" or stars. Some do; some become good but not special; some become average; some never become even that; and some bust entirely. I hope he ends on the favorable end of that spectrum. But every player is unique, and some stop improving at younger ages than others. For Castro to become a good regular, he's going to need to keep improving. His errors, his power, his walks, those are three obvious areas that need improvement to become useful. If he stays what he is, a high-error singles hitter who doesn't walk, he's not going to be very valuable. He needs to improve. I think that's very likely, but it's not certain and how far he'll improve I can't claim to know. I think the projections of the scouting community are better than my own. I'm hoping he becomes really good, so I'm more concerned that he'll just be average then that he'll bust entirely. Neifi and Cesar Izturis were very good fielders who didn't K and hit singles, and who started a lot of games and made a lot of money. I want Castro to hit with a lot more power and reach base more often than they did. I think players like that kind of represent his floor. (Neither was in AA at his age; and neither is as tall. So it's not like they his equals as 19-year-old prospects.) I think this is only partially true. Not striking out is an inherently good quality, and it manifest the inate ability to put the bat on the ball, including breaking balls. Many players don't have that and never get it. To have such good recognition/response ability to handle AA-pitching at age 19 is very rare. There are plenty of older players in A+/AA whose power and walks gave them much higher OPS than Castro had; but who don't have that gift. And I think if a guy has that gift, and later adds more strength, that could enable substantial upgrade in IsoP down the road.

I agree with Cubsin, it seems there have been a lot of very favorable reports on his SS defensive tools. I think the 2b-move stuff relates to three factors: Theriot is more stable than Fontenot, so for now it would be easier for Castro to beat out or share time with Fontenot than Theriot. 2nd, there are many who see Lee as a pure defensive SS, without power; and if you assume both guys end up being a long-term DP combo, it's easy to figure the stronger Castro could better fit the 2B profile. 3rd, there are some who expect Castro to get significantly bigger. This obviously varies from source to source. I seem to recall callis or somebody projecting Castro to perhaps end up at 6'3" 210 or something. Not sure that view is very widely held, but you can't have it both ways. If he's going to grow into a lot more size, thus facilitating a major boost in power, that isn't likely to happen without involving some reduction in both baserunning and defensive speed. But my understanding is that most people think he has very good defensive tools. And can make spectacular defensive plays. It's just that at present he makes errors, and he'll have to reduce those to be a quality big-league SS. I think we have to remember that for any players, there are routinely a wide variety of scouting opinions. The scouting sources don't always see a guy all that much. That some rave about his defense and others say average now and will move later, that's not unusual. That some may say below-average arm while most say really good arm, that kind of range of opinion is routine. That somebody thinks he could end up 210 with 25-HR power, and others don't think he'll ever be more than 190, that's normal.

Sure. Perhaps every .734-OPS high-errors singles hitter generates as much excitement as Castro, if they do it as his age and level. My subjective impression is that the expectations and projections seem a little beyond what is normally expected for a high-errors .734-OPS singles hitter, even a young one. So I think scouting evaluations are making a significant impact on his reputation beyond just the existing statistical record.

Dave, your list was great. Caveats: it's always hard to know how management feels about some guys. Ten things that I never know, variables that can throw things off: 1. Who knows about the lower levels? 2. Who knows about piggy-backs, as you mentioned? 3. Who knows when their is a reliever that they've decided has a good arm, and has little future in rotation, but who they might start in order to give more innings and to develop secondary pitches? (In recent years Ceda, Mateo, Lambert, and Maestri have all opened in rotations, even though they were all understood to be relief prospects.) 4. Who knows when a prospect who's been starting and has some talent will be switched to relief, because they know that's his eventual role? Leverton might be at that stage. 5. Injuries always shuffle things. 6. Who knows about personality factors? Non-confident guys, i think they go slower to avoid ruining their confidence; arrogant guys, I think they may be more willing to move faster; either the guy can handle it, or perhaps he'll learn some humility? (Might this have factored in Searle starting at Daytona last spring?) 7. Who knows how camp impacts? The minor league camp is **way*** shorter than big-league camp, and I think there is a wider variance in how ready or not kid prospects are when they arrive. One or two bad outings versus one or two really sharp outings can perhaps influence where a guy opens and in what role? 8. Who knows to what degree they value having some lefties in minor league rotations? 9. There are always just wild surprises. Who knew last February that Searle and MacDaniel would open in Daytona's rotation, and Lambert, Jackson and Coleman in AA rotation? Certainly not me! 10. Who knows how much they value winning? Fleita and managers both like farm teams to win. Do they start guys like Bibbens-Dirx, Muscho, and Mathes or some younger guys with perhaps higher ceilings? *Muscchko was 2.63 with an 0.88 WHIP and a 0.32HR/9IP ratio as a starter. If he was a 3rd round draft pick or we had scouting that he touches 96, we might have him in some top-15 lists. Does management start him until he fails, because that is just good practice and there is nobody compelling to try anyway? Or is he a roster filler who happened to string 10 good starts together, but management is too long-sighted to get deluded by that? Or do they think his stuff is pretty good, that he might become the next Randy Wells, and that he throws hard enough (88-92?) to be effective with the movement, offspeed, deception, and command that he showed? I have no idea. I'm going to steal from Dave, without the quotations just because it's easier: Dave's Iowa: Coleman Cashner J Jackson Atkins Diamond (this leaves off JR Mathes) Thoughts: Coleman is the one sure thing, IMO. Jackson, almost as sure. But his AA time is still limited; and with his attitude/maturity issues who knows what kinds of lessons they may be wanting to teach him. He was also awfully slow out of the gate last year; so if he again starts rough (this time in camp), an AA start isn't impossible. Cashner likely (I hope); but he might perhaps return to AA, might even possibly win a Cubs spot, or might already be moved to relief, whether in Chicago or in Iowa to prepare him for a summer recall. Caridad might factor; if he doesn't make the Cubs, will they now relieve him at Iowa, or might he go back to rotation to continue to develop his offspeed stuff? Samardzija is certaintly still a possibility. What if he does have a nice camp, but Silva and Gorzellany also do well and Lilly is almost ready from the gate? Send the options guy down to try to refine and sustain something and be ready when needed. James Russell might also still be in the picture, although I assume he's relief for good now. My guess: Coleman Jackson Diamond Cashner Samardzija Dave's Tennessee: Carpenter, Leverton, Searle(although I'd like to see him back at Daytona, since he's still relatively young for the league), Dolis, Bibens-Dirkx Thoughts: This clearly appears to me to be the weakest level. Carpenter seems the lock (although given his stuff, a great spring might even make Iowa. And given his history, a DL might also be well possible.) Dolis also seems a lock. After that, anything goes. Bibens-Dirkx seems a good bet. Chen was 2.86 after the all-star break; he's in the picture. Muschko was great at Daytona; he's in the picture. Leverton and Searle weren't that good at Daytona, so either could repeat or get bumped to relief. But they weren't that bad either, so both might get the normal step and a chance to show improvement. And then there is still Papelbon, if Sandberg just wants to fill and wants a lefty. My Tenn guess: Carpenter Dolis Searle Muschko Bibens-Dirkx Dave's Daytona: Shafer Archer Bristow Antigua(I think that he will be "challenged") Hernandez Thoughts: Massively uncertain here: These names are all in the mix. I wonder if Shafer might be getting bumped to relief sooner or later? You've gotta fill this rotation somehow, so either some guys in the AA mix are held back, or these or some other Peoria candidates get pushed up. Archer seems the one lock. I'm pretty confident on Archer and Cabrera, and much expect Rusin to start here rather than Peoria. My guess is Rhee stays Peoria, given his lack of experience, unless concerns about arm and cold weather make Daytona preferable for arm reason. Also in mix: Shafer, Bristow, Oswaldo Martinez, Raley, Antigua, Searle, Bibens-Dirkx, Hernandez. Raley threw strikes in an elite college conference, and the Cubs liked him enough to pay him a lot. I'm going to guess he gets the edge and starts here. My guess: Archer Cabrera Rusin Bristow Raley Peoria thoughts: If Daytona is hard, Peoria is worse, and as Dave said, with piggy-backing, not sure rotation means much. Raley and Rusin are obvious candidates, but I'm guessing both straight to Daytona (Raley maybe 50-50, though). I'm guessing Kirk may do Boise. I think Morla, the kid from Oakland, is very probable. I wonder if Mincone is even healthy, much less ready to start in full-season? My best (and meaningless) Peoria guess: Antigua Rhee Morla Hernandez McNutt

Fun discussion. Blues has some very fair points: Castro to date has been a no-walk singles hitter with a lot of errors. Optimism about his future performance is based on projection and scouting: he might get stronger and add some IsoP, he might become more disciplined and add some IsoD, he might improve as much as his level of competition and hit for as high an average in better leagues as he has in low leagues, he might mature defensively and cut way back on his errors, he might get physically a little taller and a lot stronger. all of those are possibilities. But this isn't the first time that a young infield prospect has been in that situation. Some do improve in some/many of those areas; Ramirez and Jeter are extreme examples. Many do not improve enough to become premium players. As the Hanley example shows, it's also obvious that improvement is not always a smooth and steady thing. Guys who go from one place and end up at a much higher place, the time for getting there can vary greatly, and in many cases there are relapses or plateaus along the way. I look at stats a ton. But I do think we can go overboard in ignoring scouting observations. It seems that there are hitting observations regarding Castro that suggest he has: balance, bat quickness, and the ability to hit breaking balls. Sometimes guys whose stats might seem to be comparable or superior are lacking in one or more of those areas. Some of those qualities remain advantageous into the future, and perhaps make it easier to sustain performance against better pitching, or to maintain the ability to hit fast-moving pitches even after you add some muscle or perhaps try to swing a little harder?

Great list. I think I'll come back and think about this better later. But I think Cabrera will be on the scene, very possibly at Daytona, although perhaps again at Peoria. BA had him as their #31, as a guy with a chance to step up significantly, and I suspect their scouting is at least partially reflective of what Cub contacts are telling them. Second, one guy who pitched rather well last year was Muschko. He might be in the mix for AA, option for Bibbens-Dirx, or if/when some of the intended get hurt, or if Leverton is moved to relief or Searle or Leverton repeat Daytona. Third, I'm guessing to flip Rusin and Antigua. Rusin is pretty polished, and I have a guess that sometimes they like the Latin kids to experience pitchng in the cold midwest, this could be Antigua's only opportunity to experience that.

Using BA's top-30 list: From the top 10, everybody is potentially good enough, and has enough chance to disappoint, that each of the first 6-7 are of premium interest. Any of the front 7 could emerge as premium prospect or a very good big-leaguer right this very year. And any of those front 7 could put in a "Man, why was I so enthused about that guy?" year, too. In the second ten, the three I'm most curious about are Rhee, Dolis, and Antigua, the young pitchers. Young rotation pitchers like that in the teens, with a good year and perhaps a step forward in stuff can come out of the year as a top-5 prospect; or with a blah year can be off the top-30 and be nothing. In the third ten, Raley and Coleman. Again with good years, I think they could be sitting as top-ten prospects not far from a shot at a big-league rotation job. In both cases that will probably require that after an offseason of growth and focus on pitching, that their fastballs step up a bit. I guess I can see that in the top ten, I'm pretty interested in everybody. After the top ten, given that we don't have any HS position prospects after Watkins and Burke, I'm more interested in the could-become-good-starting-pitcher-if-everything-works-out than the could-be-good-utility-player or could-be-usable-reliever type prospects.

I think you might be right. I actually had him #8 on my list, before getting much post-season feedback. He's got a chance to throw strikes, have offspeed stuff, and throw hard enough to be a good all-around pitcher. I hope.

Of BA's top 30, ten are internationals. Nine signed by Cubs (Mateo acquired in trade, so he doesn't really credit to the international scouting operation.) 1. castro 6 Lee 12 Rhee 13 Dolis 19 Antigua 22 Caridad (somewhat special case...) 24 Mateo (not really an international scout and sign...) 26 Chirinos 27 Castillo 29 Lake 31 Cabrera Obviously a lot of those are back-end guys. But that's a better dose of internationals than was true a few years go. And I believe is closer to the distribution that strong organizations tend to have. Nice to see some progress there. That could go either way a year from now. Other than Caridad, Castro is the only guy with good chance to graduate, and that is not strongly probable IMO. One could easily envision this list next year again having Castro high; Rhee, Lee, Dolis, and Antigua all have a chance to be much more highly respected. Castillo, Cabrera, Searle, some of the recent Korean dollar signs, who knows which Latins, there are candidates to emerge more strongly. Might also go the other way, of course. If they don't step up, Cabrera, Lake, Castillo, they could all be totally forgotten. If Dolis doens't show much, and when it comes to the real season is just an ineffective wildman who is throwing 92 more often than 98, he might be way back. Castro probably isn't likely to have as much "list" value; if he has a great season, fair chance that he'll have graduated and not be included in lists like these. And if he doesn't have a season good enough to graduate, he won't be as valued a prospect. If Rhee's stuff/feel doesn't come back; if Lee keeps making errors, having zero power, and striking out as often, he may have less list value too. Regardless, it's very good to see the international efforts showing up in this list, and I'm hopeful that a fair dose will work out and that next year the value of our international prospects will be even stronger.

"The Cubs apparently believe he can be a mid-rotation starter, and his fastball is around 89-94." Cabrera is 6'4", 21. 94H/6HR/73K/54BB/96 innings. Nothing very outstandingly good or bad or eye-catching there. Seems fairly typical for the young prospect with good velocity, so-so fastball command, and unrefined breaking ball. Walks are the only thing that is too high. If the command of everything gets better, the K's will rise and the walk decline. Kind of like the #10 prospect situation; for a #31, you're guessing and projecting either way, whether you're putting Cabrera or Searle or Justin Bristow or one of those kinds of guys there.

A friend passed on some of the BA book comments on some guys. Pretty gushy about Dolis's stuff, and claimed that Rhee supposedly was looking good in instrux, good velocity back and close to getting his feel back. Had Alberto Cabrera as the #31 guy.

By spot 10 it's kind of a reach regardless. Law has Raley; BA includes Watkins and Lemahieu; on my personal list I'd included Antigua; IIRC some posters had included Rhee or even Archer. Seems like whoever we put at the back of our top ten, there's going to be a lot of projecting and guessing involved, since this type players have little or no strong success in full-season.